Bio
Welcome! On behalf of the entire community and my co-founders Elisa Camahort, Jory Des Jardins, welcome to  BlogHer.com. As BlogHer's co-founde...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

How do we make "Health Care" as sexy as "Beer Summit"? Obama Administration asks BlogHers to help. Will you?

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 51
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

"You have to help me figure out what the strategy should be because when he's [President Obama's] out there telling us it's a choice and they [the press] aren't listening - what should we do?" asked Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to President Barack Obama, in a meeting with about 20 bloggers at BlogHer '09 Friday.

As you'll read below, our conversation with Jarrett was emotional and substantive, what you'd expect from a room of policy wonks and writers. Denise Tanton live-blogged, after which Jaelithe Judy of Momocrats offered analysis and listed participants.

The blogger who captured the experience for me was Kerri Morrone Sparling, who described Jarrett's message (Sparling writes Six Until Me, a blog about her Type 1 diabetes):

"[Jarrett] listened intently. And she said she wanted to give a voice to those who might not speak up for themselves. "Often the people who need it the most don't speak up because they don't feel like they have a voice. Give the grass roots a voice, empower them, work together informing people within their communities. You can work to help them get their voice, get info that they don't have."


Photo credit: Six Until Me

This lady is important. Her cell phone rang several times during our lunch (it could have been THE PRESIDENT, for crying out loud) and she had her assistant take the call so she could focus on us. She handed out her card and scheduled phone calls between some bloggers and her staff to help with the specific health issues that these bloggers were dealing with. Sure, for them it was a matter of being in the right time at the right place, but she really listened. I've never sat in a room before with a member of high political influence who paid attention to the people more than the information on her cell phone or in her planner. (Maybe that means I've been in the room with the wrong politicians?)

It was a remarkable experience, and the room was electric with hope.

What was too "dry" for networks brought some bloggers who met with Jarrett to tears

The conversation with Jarrett was frank, even raw. Loralee of Loralee's Looney Tunes sobbed as she shared her incredibly painful medical history of being denied insurance for a high-risk pregnancy, her resulting financial challenges, and her conservative husband's distrust of the president's health care ideas. (Jarrett arranged to speak with Loralee's husband via telephone last Monday.) Kelly of Mocha Momma worried about a communications plan capable of reaching disenfranchised people who need it the most, like the families living in poverty in the school district she helps run. "Will the burden fall on the schools to communicate?" she asked Jarrett afterward.

The conversation continued...a few highlights:
- Jaelithe Judy then illustrated the communications challenge beautifully, asking Jarrett how the administration "planned to clarify the difference between a voluntary public health insurance option -- which is on the table -- and the idea of totally government-run, government-sponsored single payer health care -- which is not?"
- Liz Henry urged Jarrett to listen to ADAPT.
- PunditMom Joanne Bamberger invoked Harry Truman's speech on health care for all 60 years ago, and asked, "what has to happen to tip the balance this time to make sure we do provide health care coverage for every person who needs it?"
- Nurse Kim McAllister of Emergiblog expressed her frustration with partisan contention over his issue.

"I don't know anyone who is really happy with the status-quo," said Jarrett. "We really do want to hear what your readers think. Have them come up with a better idea. Participate in the process. Know we are going to listen. The president doesn't care if it's a red state or a blue state. It doesn't matter if you're a liberal or a conservative Republican. "What are your ideas? Send ME your ideas."

Two guesses what's top on Twitter: "Beer Summit" or "#healthcare"?

Did Jarrett mean it? Yes. Can we help? Oh yes -- one week later, two guesses which of the front page stories from last week is a top trending topic on Twitter: Beer Summit or #healthcare?

It's not even close. Beer Summit's been trending at up to 100 Tweets a minute at peak usage in the past 24 hours, while #healthcare limps along at fewer than one Tweet per minute. Now, I love beer. And I

  • 51
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Adrienne G 5 pts

Show "Sicko" as well as the Vise President of Signa and hit America with the honest truth of the matter.  Give statistics, and be sure to let the ones that are for it know what they can do to help others get informed.  Where can we get info and how can we begin to help to make more of a difference.  Expose insurance companies small writing and let the american people know what kind of insurance they really have.  I am sure that many don't realize that with the right set of circumstances just how easily there situation would change.  They need the real deal, and I don't mean what is happening to someone else but what can happen to the lot of them.   I am sure they don't think it can happen to them.  They need to know where to look and how to uncover the truth.  I need to know how to tell my family to uncover the truth about there insurance.  They know they are paying outrages premiums.  What you don't know can't hurt.  So expose them so that others can feel what needs to be done! 

A Modern Mother 5 pts

OMG, I can't believe all the hoopla about health care reform. After nearly three weeks here, and talking with family and friends about it, I have come to the conclusion that no one really understands the issues (who would, the documents run in the thousands of pages). It comes down to partisan politics and the fear of socialised medicine.

I have the unique view of living many years in the both the UK and US. Guess what? Socialized medicine is not as bad as everything thinks... ( http://www.amodernmother.com/2009/08/hey-america-s... )

Maria Niles 5 pts

Glad that I was able to help clarify. You'll note that in my health care post I linked to advocates of free market solutions, single payer and a range of approaches in between.

And, BlogHer most certainly does not share only the views of the Democratic Party. You can see that in the posts from CEs Dana Loesch ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/Dana-Loesch ) and American Princess ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/american-princess )

Also, we will have to agree to disagree but "single payer" absolutely is "a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers." That a smaller percentage (but still a majority) of respondents indicated that they wanted the same thing when it is specifically called "single payer" shows the difficulty in public opinion polling because of bias that can be introduced by question wording. The term single payer has been so demonized politically that it is not clear to many what it means functionally (though the wording "government run" is still problematic but less so when associated with the term Medicare where I understand how the pollsters are attempting to clarify intent). That is why good research asks questions in different ways and makes an effort to get beyond buzz words and labels. And that is why I linked to that specific poll ( http://www.grahamazon.com/over/2008/01/poll-shows-... ) though there are others with similar findings (especially if the question is asked as wanting "Medicare for all"). The non-profit Kaiser Foundation again has similar data and you could likely find more current support there which I suspect has only increased since 2007.

BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/maria-niles )
PopConsumer ( http://consumerpop.typepad.com/popconsumer )
Beyond Help ( http://mariax.vox.com/ )

Flightkeeper 5 pts

If you were speaking tongue-in-cheek regarding the appreciation of politicians lying and single payer being snuck in then I apologize.  I didn't realize your role as CE was only as facilitator but it was also confusing because you added your opinion to the post and I didn't know if that was also the opinion of Blogher.  In fact the origin of this post was how to help the Obama administration pass this bill which no one has really read including Obama and the Congress.  I was beginning to wonder whether Blogher was a shill for the Democratic Party, which would have been fine, I would like to have that disclosed though.

Regarding the 2/3 of Americans, your information links to the 2007 associated-yahoo poll which shows that 65% wanted universal health care run by gov't and financed by taxpayers.  This does not mean that 2/3 approve single payer like you claim.  That same source says on another question that specifically asks if you support  the single payer system, only 54% did and this on a poll conducted in 2007.

I do want to point our that I said "Government can kill you" not that Government wants to kill you as you claim.  However I should have said "Government will let you die" which is more correct as pertains the Oregon case.

It's fine if you and Punditmom have a different opinion than mine, I don't expect you to change your mind either.  My concern was that you were talking out of both sides of your mouth and I am glad that you clarified that for me.

Thank you.

Peace to you and yours.

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

Maria Niles 5 pts

Flightkeeper,

The views I've expressed in response to Lisa's and your questions are my own. BlogHer is omnipartisan and welcomes and encourages sharing of all political points of view with in our community guidelines. My roll as a CE is to write posts that help serve BlogHer's mission to share what women bloggers are saying. You should wonder about BlogHer since I am a contributing editor if I am not doing that in my editor posts not because I disagree with you or fail to clearly convey the intended humorous skepticism in my comment.

In my comment about appreciating politicians lying and my glee about single payer supposedly being on the table, I would encourage you to re-read it imagining my tongue meeting my cheek in order to clarify what you perceive as "doublespeak."

Regarding the facts: Canadian doctors are not government employees (as in the British system or the VA in the United States). Their payment is consolidated into a single point through the government rather than through multiple insurance plans (much like how Medicare is administered in the United States).

This Columbia Journalism Review ( http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/health_care_homew... ) article points out some of the common errors made in describing these facts in even the most mainstream of media so it is not surprising that there is confusion about this point.

With regard to my "wishful thinking" about 2/3 of Americans wanting single payer, I would point you to my piece here at BlogHer ( http://www.blogher.com/health-care-understanding-p... ) where I explain the terminology, facts and realities and link to data around the debate.

Judging by the comments you've left on this post and Pundit Mom's ( http://www.blogher.com/health-reform-you-say-tomay... ), you and I have fundamentally different moral and philosophical positions in this debate. I have no illusions that I will change your point of view. But you asked me questions and I've answered. However, you should also not be surprised that inaccurate statements and offerings of fear mongering talking points (e.g. the government wants to kill you! ( http://www.blogher.com/how-do-we-make-health-care-... )) from those opposed to health care reform leave me similarly unpersuaded to your point of view.

Peace,
Maria

BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/maria-niles )
PopConsumer ( http://consumerpop.typepad.com/popconsumer )
Beyond Help ( http://mariax.vox.com/ )

Rita Arens 7 pts

I, for one, am sick of seeing this country run by the rich and cater only to the rich. If we're going to make improvements to our healthcare system, we can't all run around worrying only about what will happen to only us. The way to make improvements is to raise the standards for all Americans, slowly and surely.

So much of politics is special-interest groups trying to get what they want for one group of people. It makes me sick that healthcare is a for-profit business. I agree with the earlier commenter who said capitalism and healthcare don't mix. Not everything can be solved by making business decisions. It's time we showed compassion for all people with health problems, not just ourselves and our immediately family members. We should treat people in the order of urgency. We should make medicine a desirable profession again, and not a headache-inducing quagmire of insurance forms and red tape that's driving medical practitioners out of the business in frustration. 

Yes, it's true -- if we want to have healthcare available and affordable for everyone, we who can afford great insurance now might see longer wait times for nonurgent care. I can't imagine how that wouldn't happen if we were honestly treating all urgent needs instead of ignoring them or denying them based on lack of insurance. Right now we are ignoring urgency in many, many cases instead of treating it. Is that better? Is that ethical? Is it compassionate? Is it human?

This is America, and this is a country where we ignore the have-nots. This isn't the America our forefathers intended.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com ) and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak ( http://tinyurl.com/9pg62e ).

Flightkeeper 5 pts

First, you claim that Obama doesn't intend to have the single payer system now you are glad that Obama sneaked the single payer system in.

Your news item regarding that woman was pretty clear that she had to wait six months, that's not a doctor's decision, that's government process.

Two-thirds of the country do not want this health care bill.  It's wishful thinking.

You are okay with the president and politicians lying.

Since you are a contributing editor, it makes me wonder about Blogher.  Very disappointing.

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

Maria Niles 5 pts

I don't mean "free," I mean without exorbitant out-of-of pocket costs, without bills that, even for those with insurance, can leave them bankrupt, without monthly premiums in the thousands of dollars, without being locked into a job or a marriage simply for the healthcare, without being uninsured because no insurance plan will cover them because they once sneezed, without bills so steep for themselves and their employees that they are left with a choice of providing health insurance or going out of business (my current situation) and are at competitive disadvantage with businesses in every other industrialized nation because of the cost of healthcare.

The Canadian government did not make the decision, her doctor did. The Canadian government simply would not pay for that particular treatment the moment she wanted it. I know of no American doctor that will provide surgery without a wait for a non-life threatening condition if nobody is willing or able to pay for it. She was able to pay for it and so went to a doctor who was able to remove her cyst as soon as she wanted it removed. Just as would be the case in the United States.

And I'm thrilled to hear that Obama, who did not write the current proposed legislation, somehow managed to sneak in single payer past the Congress and I'm actually going to get what I and 2/3 of the country want. Yipee! Politicians should lie more often. ;)

BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/maria-niles )
PopConsumer ( http://consumerpop.typepad.com/popconsumer )
Beyond Help ( http://mariax.vox.com/ )

Flightkeeper 5 pts

if the government doesn''t have enough money instead of helping you live.  This is what I'm trying to say.  If you have insurance run by the government, you have to go by what the government says.  At last you see the light.

Peace to you and yours.

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

Flightkeeper 5 pts

allow the government to make that decision for you.  I however don't want you or the government to make that decision for me.

I am not aware of any american doctor thinking it's okay to wait SIX MONTHS to remove an "annoying tumor" that is giving you vision problems.  Sure you can wait a week or two but the news article said six months.  In that woman's case she got it quicker but she had to COME TO THE US in order to get the treatment earlier.  That is not a testament to the Canadian system.  Why shouldn't she be outraged about waiting six months to be treated.  If there are people who needed more life-threatening immediate care that means that the Canadian system have so rationed care that they don't have adequate facilities, doctors, staff or whathaveyou that the wait was six months long.  That is not a testament to any country's health care.  And just to correct you, I did not argue for on demand access I argued for the patient to have a timely treatment and not according to the government's schedule. Also Canadians are not used to free access and treatment because it's not free, they are taxed for it.  So not only do Canadians have their government mandate them paying for their health care, their government also mandates when they can get the health care.  They essentially have to pay for something that they have no say in what and when they are getting.

And yes, Obama does want a single payer option.  It's in his bill.  It's just not stated clearly which is why that bill is hundreds of pages long.  If you read that bill, the government basically insinuates itself into your private life in a way that has never happened before.  That is not what I want.

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

Maria Niles 5 pts

is that the government should pay for chemotherapy, right?

Common ground, yay!

Peace, love and unicorns :)

BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/maria-niles )
PopConsumer ( http://consumerpop.typepad.com/popconsumer )
Beyond Help ( http://mariax.vox.com/ )

Maria Niles 5 pts

If it means that 50 million other people can have access to basic care and treatment not die like the woman in the story I linked to in my previous comment, or not have their insurance coverage rescinded for having acne years prior once diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer and mastectomy is immediately needed ( http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/06/16/when-he... ) or so that doctors can focus on properly diagnosing a a truly life-threatening massive tumor ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ester-amy-fischer/ki... ) instead of blowing patients off.

Your argument assumes that currently everyone has access to doctors for all conditions and can receive treatment on demand and that it is only because of the single payer system that this woman was told she would have to wait. Why would you think that no person would have the same wait or lack of treatment in America? It is an absolute myth that the American system provides such access. Like the Canadian woman, you can get it if you can pay for it. It would be impossible for any system to provide unlimited access and treatment. All health care systems ration in one way or another. It is a testament to the Canadian system that someone would think it outrageous that they might have to wait a few months for treatment for a non-life threatening condition because they are used to free access and treatment for most conditions.

However, your question is moot because President Obama is not advocating a Canadian-style single payer system nor is there anywhere near sufficient political will to pursue that option. Even if that ad ( http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/realit... ) were true, it is simply a scare tactic designed to derail any kind of reform. And it is a fight that for profit companies will continue to wage even though people are dying and going bankrupt.

BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/maria-niles )
PopConsumer ( http://consumerpop.typepad.com/popconsumer )
Beyond Help ( http://mariax.vox.com/ )

Flightkeeper 5 pts

may not have had a life threatening condition.  But do you really want to function for six months with limited vision and headaches.  Do you want to go about your normal life and allow six months to go by with limited vision because that's when they can fit you in?  Don't you think it might be a hazard when you cross the street and can't see an oncoming car?

 http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

Flightkeeper 5 pts

The hospitals mentioned were municipal hospitals which means that they get all their funding from the municipal government.  They are not private hospitals which are basically run for profit and get some not most funding from the government. Yes, private hospitals turn them down for non-emergency care because they have government insurance -- medicaid or medicare. The private hospital would go out of business if they took them.  That's why they went to a government run hospital which is a non-profit, very busy, horrible health care staff that ignored those people which caused their death. Your own examples show me why I don't want government run health care as the only option.

This is different from the Manitoba man because he was not neglected he was turned away because there were no available beds anywhere in Manitobal!!!

I don't understand how you can't connect the dots since you see it in front of you during your clinicals.  Poor people have government care...they get poor care; they go to government run hospitals where they have to take whatever is given them.  Rich people actually don't need health insurance because they can pay for the care outright and go to the best hospitals in the city.  It is the middle income people who can pay for the kind of insurance that they want if they wish to.  If you want better health insurance you need to pay for it and consequently you can go to a private hospital and get better care.  That is the alternative.  Your way, you want everyone to go to the government plan, have poor care and for the government to decide where they go and what care you get.

Good grief, if the government could do better for poor people who don't have much, why isn't the government run hospital doing a better job right now?  The obvious answer is they can't do better.

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

MLOKnitting 5 pts

Oh, I think most of the people posting here realize that Obama's plan is a stealth way of destroying for-profit insurance.  It is slower and less disruptive to our already dying economy.  People are 100% right when they say more and more people will end up on the public plan.  He is setting us up for either a system akin to Japan's or one akin to France's on a slower slope than the far left want to see.  I'm a very impatient person, but even I have to admit that this is a wise course of action when dealing with the vast majority of those brainwashed by Fox News.

MLO / Melissa

Books, Movies, Games, Ovarian Cancer, and Life in General at http://www.mloknitting.com/

HeatherB 5 pts

 The cost of health care not just for the public but for the government has skyrocketed and the goal is to keep the overal cost from growing at such a fast pace. Well that and to extend coverage to more people.

So if come November this passes, we won't magically have cheaper health care. BCBS or COBRA or whatever won't suddenly be discounted. It will just keep the cost associated with cost to a minimum.

Make sense?

Heather B. 

No Pasa Nada: www.nopasanada.org ( http://www.nopasanada.org )

BlogHer: http://www.blogher.com/blog/heatherb

Femisex 5 pts

Editors of Femisex.com

How can you make Health Care Hot?

Stop lying about your plans and the cost of those plans.  This country lived through G. W.'s lies about WMDs. We do not wish to have to live through Obama's on health care.

The reasons G.W. went to war were not the ones he claimed to the American people.  Obama is making the same mistake.  Obama is laying down a roadmap to single-payer care, and he knows this but won't tell us the truth.

Dishonesty is never hot.  Yes we need oil but lies are never a good way to get there.  Yes we need changes to our current heatlh care system, but lying about the depth of those changes and our ability to pay for such changes in anything but sexy.  Lying to women may work in the beginning, but in the end we will find out.  The Red party is in trouble for lying to Americans.  Do you really think the Blue party will end up differently?  Do you care?

amommystory 5 pts

Where did it say these were all government run hospitals? Most are non-profit entities that may receive some funding from the government, but are run as individual organization with a board of trustees. That's not government-run. (Which, surpirse: private hospitals receive some funding from the government, too.) 

Also, the private hospitals likely would have turned some of these people away at the door for no insurance or the wrong insurance, sending them to other hospitals that are busier and have less ability to care for all of the people being forced in their doors by these private hospitals. How is that better? How is that any different from your Manitoba man story?

Also, the personal stories I shared? During my nursing clinicals, only 1 of the 4 hospitals I worked at was a "public" hospital. (Ohio State University Medical Center) The others were private hospital systems. And not one of the stories I shared was from OSU.

Christina
A Mommy Story ( http://amommystory.blogspot.com )

FrancineHardaway 5 pts

Karoli Kuns and I started http://www.ushealthcrisis.com to combat disinformation about health care. We both have a deep history with trying to communicate these complex issues. This crap about rationing is at leat 30 years old.

I learned about how rhetoric is used to mask the issues when my marketing company worked on the messaging for one of the first HMOs i the country in 1980.  We were a bunch of dedicated people trying to encourage prevention. Our second in command had a degree in public health. (She is now at a foundation with which I also work.)

Our message about taking responsibility for your health immediately got translated by others as "rationing" and lack of choice about your doctor--by other insurance companies that wanted to charge higher premiums --and we became, through our own success, a public company that did something we NEVER intended to do, we gave up the prevention concept.  All the original people with the mission and vision left, and the money men still run the company, which has been merged into a much larger company.

Canada does not ration care.  My son-in-law's mom has breast cancer. She lives in a small rural town in Canada.  After she was diagnosed, she was given access to specialists in Montreal immediately, and taken there for treatment.  No waiting. At least no more than an American would have today getting access to a surgeon.

Here's something most Americans don't get: providers (doctors and nurses) are leaving the curren system in droves. That's why there's no access to care.  The docs HATE the current insurance system (and not the MEDICARE part, because MEDICARE pays quickly though low) because it takes them 90 days and a big fight to get paid when they bill an insurer. Cash flow issues are driving them out of business, which means it is more difficult here to get in to see a dermatologist than, say, in Canada.

Banks, which used to look upon physicians as cherished client, won't lend to them anymore.  The reimbursement is too slow and too unpredictable. So the banks won't finance the docs who are coming out of school. The old cottage industry of medicine, where doctor and patient had a relationship,is gone.

It may not appear to be gone in your individual case, but in the aggregate it is gone, and when your doctor retires or goes out of practice or drops your insurer in disgust, it will be gone for you, too. 

I'm 68. I am the widow of a doctor. I worked for an HMO. I've seen it all historically, and I know where it's going.

Don't let reform go down. Rationing will happen with or without it. At least with reform you may be rationed by an objective committee, rather than by having the last doctor in your town quit the practice.

And BTW, the hurry is the Baby Boomers hitting the health care system. Demographically the country can't survive without health care reform.

Francine Hardaway, Ph.D
"It's not what happens to you; it's how you come to it."
http://blog.stealthmode.com, http://www.ushealthcrisis.com

Maria Niles 5 pts

It's far easier for people to form opinions and judgments about #SkipGate than #hcr. Health care reform is complex and most people have conflicting views about what they want and what they believe and what they think they are being offered. It's enough to give you hurty head and desire to drink a beer instead.

My frustration is that I don't know what the Obama administration's health care reform plan is. I hear the president setting goals and I appreciate his support for a public option but I think the White House might be taking the perceived lessons of the '90s - that Congress must not feel shut out - too far. The goals seem to slip and shift and Congress seems so ridiculously beholden to corporate health interests who have bought them outright.

I long to hear a simple, clear message about what we are trying to achieve and where we are trying to go. Americans want this and when even someone like me, who is far wonkier than the average bear, has a hard time keeping up, it's a problem. And this is why our resolve to get this done starts to weaken and dishonest messages about "government takeovers ( http://onthemedia.org/transcripts/2009/07/24/01 )" and flat out lies about Obama seeking to institute a Canadian-style system (even though 2/3rds of Americans would like the American version of the Canadian system for all - we call it Medicare) that kills people with brain tumors (and I say it's a lie because the woman in those ads did not have a life threatening brain tumor but rather an annoying cyst ( http://onthemedia.org/transcripts/2009/07/24/03 )) and fears about possibly having to wait some weeks for a knee replacement as if that's somehow more objectionable than our current system where people die because they don't have insurance. ( http://trishrobinson.com/2009/08/no-insurance-no-h... )

I could rant about this for days. But I'll say that I want the White House, Valerie Jarrett (whom I'm so bummed I didn't have the opportunity to speak with again - she's very impressive and has amazing energy) and President Obama to know that I deeply appreciate that they are listening, that they came to BlogHer, that they heard some of our stories and that they continue to solicit feedback. And if they would like any help in crafting a simpler, more impactful message - I'm available ;) Or, better yet, snatch up Karoli Kuns and Francine Hardaway who are doing great things keeping us informed through their twitter accounts and their blog. ( http://ushealthcrisis.com/ )

BlogHer Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/maria-niles )
PopConsumer ( http://consumerpop.typepad.com/popconsumer )
Beyond Help ( http://mariax.vox.com/ )

Flightkeeper 5 pts

with your devastating examples from the various news items, Christina.  All these people had health care provided from government run hospitals.  They did not receive the care that they should have gotten.  If a government run hospital could not even provide emergency care for the vulnerable people in our midst, what makes you think government run Obama care is going to be any better for the rest of us?

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

amommystory 5 pts

Perhaps the most famous:

Woman dies after waiting in emergency room waiting room for 24 hours:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/01/waiting.room.deat...

LA woman dies in waiting room after being ignored by hospital staff:

http://www.jems.com/news_and_articles/news/Los_Ang... ( http://www.jems.com/news_and_articles/news/Los_Ang... )

Illinois woman dies in emergency room waiting area:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story...

Dallas man dies after not receiving treatment in time:

http://cbs11tv.com/local/parkland.emergency.room.2...

The list goes on and on. And just during my nursing clinicals I saw far too often how no insurance or poor insurance gave you lesser care than someone with expensive insurance. People who are sent home almost immediately after surgery because their insurance won't cover letting them stay a night to make sure there are no complications.

A man with congestive heart failure who has to accept a treatment plan that isn't the best option for him, but is the only one his insurance will pay for.

A woman who was injured at work, yet can't prove her workers comp. claim. Her insurance won't cover the costs to repair her shoulder. Instead she lives in constant pain, and when she comes to the hospital, she's labeled a "drug seeker" and shuffled out the door as fast as possible. 

Or the man with a mental disorder that is a repeat offender in the psych unit, because he has no ability to pay for the bipolar drugs he needs to stay a productive member of society, and instead we the taxpayers cover his frequent inpatient stays.

I could give you a hundred stories of how people are not receiving the best care for their conditions right here in the United States. And I've been watching from a clinical setting for only two years. For-profit corporations are already making our healthcare decisions, with profit being their deciding factor. How is that a model worth keeping?

It's because of situations like these that reform needs to happen now. 

Christina
A Mommy Story ( http://amommystory.blogspot.com )

MLOKnitting 5 pts

Your sources are notorious for yellow journalism.  Further, this is not relevant to the need for coverage.  Decisions on treatment are actually a separate but related issue.

MLO / Melissa

Books, Movies, Games, Ovarian Cancer, and Life in General at http://www.mloknitting.com/

Flightkeeper 5 pts

From Britain's The Telegraph:

"Patients forced to live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for painkilling injections"

The Government's drug rationing watchdog says "therapeutic" injections of steroids, such as cortisone, which are used to reduce inflammation, should no longer be offered to patients suffering from persistent lower back pain when the cause is not known.

Instead the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is ordering doctors to offer patients remedies like acupuncture and osteopathy.

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/59558...

or this from Canada's CBCNews

"Man who died in U.S. abandoned by Man. health system: family"

A 21-year-old Winnipeg man who fell ill in the United States died in a Colorado hospital because there was no room for him in Manitoba, his family said.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2009/07/30...

This is a huge fear not by a vocal minority but by a majority who don't want the government to make their health care decisions for them and doctors not having any input.

I seem to be the dissenting voice, but I don't think any kind of reform should pass until situations like above are examined and discussed.  What is the hurry?

http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com ( http://flightkeeper.blogspot.com/ )

http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com ( http://cutefuncool.blogspot.com/ )

nowickedwitch 5 pts

 Oh, and possibly reviewing the fact that Insurance Companies are exempt from Federal regulation via the  McCarran-Ferguson Act. Adam Smith is rolling over in his grave. When the free market becomes coercive it no longer serves it's purpose, it's like trading a stick for a house, someone comes out on the losing, end and it's not the insurance companies, it's not also how the  free market was inteneded to work.

They are also exempt from the Sherman Anti Trust Laws. Something I was reminded of at politics daily. ( http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/08/03/insurance-... )

( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode15/usc_sec... )

cooper

nowickedwitch 5 pts

 Your right it doesn't mix.

My insurance, BCBS in the state of Maryland went up 18 percent this year.

The other thing is, when doctors, those who are monitoring our health, and caring for us in illness, have a vested interest in the process — by owning labs, radiology facilities, and turning their offices into corporations with patient quotas and time limits on patient visits, we have a problem. My physician actually left his last practice because it was operating on that system.

When the cost for an uninsured patent to go into the Immediate care center here, receive 20 minutes of care and 4 sutures from a Physician Assistant, is $775,  and the cost they bill the insurance company if someone has insurance is half of that,  it's coercion, and we have a problem. We are forced to purchase insurance partly because of the disparity in cost, even if in the end it's the insurance company getting our money.

We need to make calls to our legislators, we need to ask questions, and examine, more deeply perhaps than we have, the whole process of health care in this country. We need to do it with full knowledge that health care is a huge domestic product, and the government isn't going to be too interested in taking the capitalism out of it, but possiblY this is something worth demandinF or at least investigating. It certainly won't be easy.

cooper

Rita Arens 7 pts

I heard on talk radio this morning a member of Congress say that the healthcare reform bill is so long he would have to read 33 pages a day during the entire break in order to sludge through the whole thing.

I thought, "And your point is?"

Our elected leaders understood the job requirements when they campaigned to be allowed to have those jobs. You have to read the bills. You have to weigh the consequences. You have to listen to your constituents. 

We want affordable healthcare for all. We don't care if you have to spend your vacation reading bills. And we will continue to produce content to that effect until you listen.

Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com ) and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak ( http://tinyurl.com/9pg62e ).

Lisa Stone 6 pts

I agree with you wholeheartedly -- especially these paragraphs:

We need to spend time on this bill, not try to rush it through. We don't need the coercive insurance companies taking part in the making of the legislation, large pharma buying off congressmen, nor do we need the equally coercive AMA taking part.

.... We need a more qualitative statistical cost and outcome between our healthcare systems and the systems in other countries, and we need to take a closer look at systems in parts of this country that work better for the people than the average system.... and it goes on.

Thank you so much for taking the time to comment here. If this issue is going to be ironed out during Congress' August recess, what can we do to help focus our representatives? Is there anything unique we can do with and on our blogs?

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News ( http://www.blogher.com/topic/politics-news ).

Lisa Stone 6 pts

Amen Rita. But check out what House Leader Nancy Pelosi said at the end of last week, as well as what's happening on the Senate committee led by Max Baucus (D - Mont.):

Democrats Find Rallying Points on Health Reform, but Splinters Remain
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic... ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic... )

With the House already gone and the Senate set to clear out by Friday, the terms of the recess battle are becoming clear. Republicans will assail the government coverage plan that Democrats and President Obama are advocating as a recklessly expensive federal takeover of health care. And Democrats will counter that GOP opposition represents a de facto endorsement of insurance industry abuses.

"We know what we're up against," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) told reporters on Friday. "Carpet-bombing, slash and burn, shock and awe -- anything you want to say to describe what the insurance companies will do to hold on to their special advantage."

....ad_icon

"How you regulate the insurance industry is as important to health-care reform as controlling costs," said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. The public plan, he said, is one of an array of measures intended to change industry behavior.

As the rhetoric against the industry heated up, the leading insurance trade group issued a statement Thursday calling for lawmakers to cool down their criticisms and redouble efforts toward "bipartisan health-care reform." Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, defended his industry, saying it had already proposed many of the changes that Congress is seeking, including those involving pre-existing conditions and ratings based on health status and gender.

Here's my question: How can bloggers who care about this question help legislators contend with lobbyists in order to avoid an Orwellian future?

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News ( http://www.blogher.com/topic/politics-news ).

amommystory 5 pts

I have to agree with Melissa - I would love to see a day when any health insurance company must be a non-profit entity. When you're trying to profit off of the health of the people, you're going to cut corners and find ways to make more money, even at the expense of the people you are supposedly protecting. Wall Street has shown us that greed is limitless.

I just finished a year of being uninsured - for the first time in my life. My husband lost his job and we could not afford the $1000 required for COBRA when we received not much more than that on unemployment. We also didn't qualify for Medicaid because we "made too much." Buying private insurance was a joke - it cost $400 a month and nearly anything we needed wasn't covered because we were honest and gave full health histories. (Although we're both fairly healthy.)

Thus we spent a year hoping we wouldn't get sick, and when we did, putting off any medical treatment unless we were in absolute agony. I had six moles removed right before my husband was laid off, and five came back as abnormal. I've watched new moles grow and change in the last year, unable to do anything but cross my fingers and hope they don't turn into skin cancer. That's not a way to manage your health.

My ideas? I believe strongly in taxing junk food to help pay for health insurance reform. A penny per ounce of soda would be a nearly unnoticable cost increase, but would generate a great deal of money for health insurance. Soda is not something we need for nourishment - and if it did go up in cost, I could stand to drink a little more water anyway, right?

I also love the idea of a health care system where individuals were rewarded for primary preventative care. You'd think people would want to be healthy without incentive, but if it takes incentives to make them attend yearly physicals, get involved in programs to lose weight, stop smoking, and improve their nutrition, so be it. Give incentives for yearly physicals, routine screenings and bloodwork, and well-child checks. The money saved by early detection or all-out avoiding some of the diseases caused by obestiy, poor nutrition and a sedentary lifestyle would more than cover an incentive program. 

I'm amazed that some resist health care reform on the basis that they don't want to pay for the problems of others. Do they not realize they already do that? Through their tax dollars, their insurance premiums, the prices they pay for prescriptions, the prices charged for each service by a doctor, hospital, etc - they're already paying for the care of others. Wouldn't they rather see reform to bring down the costs and guarantee that people are getting the care they need early to prevent more expensive problems later? 

Obviously this is an enormously important issue for me. I also have a daughter with autism who will not have any services related to her autism covered on our new insurance. Autism is considered a "non-treatable, non-curable" condition to them, and therefore not covered. (Tell that to an amputee who needs a limb, or someone needing a new liver.) How does it make sense to deny coverage for early intervention and instead cover group homes or mental insititutions for those adults who never got the early intervention they needed as children, and therefore can't live productive lives?

As you can see, I could talk about this all day long. I also just started working as an RN, and I can't begin to tell you the healthcare injustice I'm seeing at the hospital I work at each and every day.

Christina
A Mommy Story ( http://amommystory.blogspot.com )

kbojar 5 pts

 I’m worried that all the infighting between the single payer advocates and the Health Care for All Network activists is weakening the push for reform.  I think single payer makes the most sense but is not possible in this political climate.  The single payer folks say that a push from the left is essential  to get meaningful reform.  I tend to think that we should be joining forces to fight for  what’s possible—a strong public option. Any thoughts about this?

Karen Bojar

http://www.the-next-stage.com/

MLOKnitting 5 pts

This debate is coming up on bulletin boards everywhere.  Even on sports boards according to my husband.  The only people who truly don't want it are on the rabid right and the lunatic left.  These are people who either do not believe in the social contract (rabid right) or think that nothing is going to go far enough (lunatic left). 

Most people don't realize that Obama's plan is very much like one that was introduced during Bush I's time as president by a joint group of congress critters.  It was rejected then because of insurance company lobbying.  For profit insurance must be made illegal  That is the root of the problem in our society.  Once profiteering in health insurance became legal we saw the spiraling down of our health care.

On another knitting social site, a very interesting and long thread had people from around the world describing their health care systems.  In every single one where people were happy - no matter the form - the profit motive was illegal.  

Capitalism is fine and good for consumer goods.  Health care has ramifications on a societal level that most people don't bother to think about.  We have become such short term thinkers that it is impossible for the general public to pay attention long enough to understand that there are issues of economics, safety, and society that will fall apart - even crumble - if we do nothing to address this problem.

There are groups who want to push their own agendas surrounding specialized issues.  Now is not the time for that.  We have to get something through otherwise everyone will be bankrupted and no one will have health care.  It is unsustainable for insurance costs to keep going up a minimum of 10% a year.  That is markedly faster than the overall rate of inflation.  No one will be able to afford insurance at this rate.

Really, anyone who completely opposes Obama's current plan doesn't believe in the entire idea of the Common Good.  And, well, there is a significant Libertarian portion of the Republican party who really are that vicious.  I'm sorry, but it is a vicious and cruel worldview.  There are no kinder words for it.  They really don't care if someone dies an agonizing death from cancer or AIDS or anything else as long as they and theirs have means.  Soon, though, they won't have any means either.  This is a reality that they are not seeing and if they are allowed to hold sway and prevent reform, our society will collapse.

MLO / Melissa

Books, Movies, Games, Ovarian Cancer, and Life in General at http://www.mloknitting.com/

jemcelroy 5 pts

I couldn't stay a lurker when I saw this one.  I know it's been a
while since I've posted anything.  (Long story, fodder for another post
at another time.)  This is the topic that has drawn me back out. 
Below, is the comment I left.  Listen, I think this is really
important.  The reality is that our health care system is limping along
at best.  It's going to change. Whether you like what you're hearing
about that change or not, you should add your 2cent to this
conversation too.  It's the same w/voting, if you don't vote you don't
get to complain.  If you don't put out your opinions on this when
asked, then you shouldn't complain about the result. 

On this topic I had to throw in my 2 cents (I usually just lurk). I have had a long journey w/Fribromyalgia. My first severe symptoms (hospitalization required)
were 22 years ago. I was finally diagnosed 8 years ago. That is a lot
of experience (at a young age) w/many parts of the health care system.
Now you know my credentials, so here's a couple things I'd like to
throw out. Note: I don't know how to make these happen (that's the job
of the people making the reforms, right?)  I just know that these are
things that I think need to be addressed, based on my experience.

1. Cobra: (Where do I start). I have a chronic illness, thus we sign up for the best possible health care we can get through our
employers.  Yet if we lose our jobs, (and it's happened,) the Cobra
option requires us to stay w/the same level of coverage, while we're
unemployed. I've just lost my job, I'm looking to drop my costs not add
to them.  It makes no sense. Upon losing your job, there should be some
kind of interim wellness coverage available to the average person.  I
shouldn't have to choose between bankruptcy and healthinsurance each month.  There should be some sort of coverage for people in between jobs.  I shouldn't have to be completely broke to be able to get a step culture.

2.  Most of us (middle class) are one severe illness away from bankruptcy. 
That may sound ridiculous, but it's true.  Even with "good" health
coverage, a severe illness can put us all in major debt if not
bankruptcy.  There should be some way that people can be assured that
they won't lose their home because someone in their family gets sick.

3.  I hear that if we "like" what we're getting at our employers then this won't affect us.  We can stick w/that.  What if we don't like
what our employers are offering us?  What if what our employers are
offering us less than before?  Will the government fill in the gaps for
us?  It should.  I agree that those who's have no coverage need it. 
But most of us areunderinsured.  Please remember us too!

Deb Rox 5 pts

I agree, this is the most important public policy initiative and is not receiving solid public education and awareness.

The Administration's awareness has largely focused on the two most obvious arguments: that people deserve healthcare and are hurt without it, and that the economics of healthcare are burdensome on families and is in need of reform.  But these arguments drift too often into partisan response.  I would encourage them to broaden the information  put out to the press and to people by make health care the cornerstone issue for all others.

Meaning that health care has to be positioned as an economic driver, an early learning-education-future workforce issue, an issue that affects our country's competitive world status,  a community development issue, an issue adversely affecting our prosperity and economic recovery and an issue that compromises our public health and safety.

Yes, the stories of the injustice of healthcare on struggling or ill families are important, but they are preaching to the choir and unfortunately trigger fears of socialism from others. The moveable middle needs to get it that our prosperity as free capitalists is being choked by the current system, and reform will free us to create greater health and prosperity for the country. The Adminstration needs to get its wonks working on framing the issue broader.

www.debontherocks.com ( http://www.debontherocks.com/ )blog
www.3smartgirlz.com ( http://www.3smartgirlz.com/ ) consulting

LizaWasHere 5 pts

Thanks for talking about this important issue! I've met with staff from both of my Senators' offices to express my support for healthcare reform. 

I was laid off a year ago, and earlier this summer, launched my own small business. Although I maintained COBRA coverage for a couple of months, I haven't had insurance since the beginning of the year. 

Luckily, my partner was able to legally adopt our children, so they are covered by her insurance. Unfortunately, although her company is a large nationwide employer, they don't offer domestic partner health insurance coverage, so I can't get insurance through them. My business is still so early in the launch phase, I can't afford health insurance.

Frankly, I'm pretty nervous about it. Even though I know that if something happened, my parents and my partner's parents would help, I know it wouldn't take much to push me from financially nervous to deeply in debt. And I'm lucky enough to have that social safety net. I can't imagine how people with less education and fewer resources survive a medical and financial emergency.

I hope that the public option stays part of the mix. My grandparents were well served by Medicare, and I would love to follow in their footsteps. Additionally, I think that health insurance companies need to be kept honest -- a public option could do that. 

Liza Barry-Kessler

LizaWasHere ( http://www.blogher.com/httpL//www.lizawashere.com ) & Privacy Counsel LLC ( http://www.privacycounsel.net )

klingtocash 5 pts

Overhauling the insurance industry is a huge step. The term "government option" scares a lot of people. I think the best way to get more people on board would be to use the ideas President Obama has on Medicare, Military medical care and the VA. These programs have lots of problems and need reform.I think if the American people could see the President's ideas work to provide better care at a lower cost to those already being served by government health care programs, more people would be willing to support his legislation.

Kristin

Amka Problemka 5 pts

It isn't insurance we all need, it is Health Care. Get that? Service from doctors, hospitals, and other healthcare providers. 

Insurance is not a health care provider. 

Insurance companies are the cancer, the middle man making a profit off the fear of suffering and denying people who are suffering. 

One way to cut costs: make even people who are on medicaid pay a 5 dollar copay. This way, medicine isn't totally free, so they think before going to the ER with simple fevers. 

If we do have insurance as a lynchpin in this health care plan, they should be required to be non-profit, and not eligable to be public corporations where the profits are traded by unknowning individuals. It is inethical for parties not interested in the health of the patient and not actually providing services to make a profit from the patient's healthcare or the denial of that healthcare. 

And I believe strongly that healthcare is one of those necessities that shouldn't be denied people. So I want a healthcare plan. Just not one that puts such a souless, greedy middleman between me and my actual healthcare. 

I'm sick of how much corporations own our government. 

klynn4jc 5 pts

This has been a very important topic to me lately.  I literally spent a couple hours on the phone this week trying to figure out my health care coverage.

We pay for my personal insurance out of pocket since it's cheaper than getting it through my husband's employer (what's wrong with that picture?), but it keeps going up by $40 a year.  My insurance costs per month are almost 1/2 the price of our rent.

Here are my thoughts.  I think making health care affordable enough for everyone who wants it is important.  We shouldn't have to choose between insurance and rent.  I think you should be rewarded for doing preventative care.  I LOVE that my current insurance lets me have $400 a year for preventative care and I don't have to pay a deductible or co-pay on that.  

However, I don't think that insurance should be mandatory.  Or if it is, then you shouldn't have to pay a penalty for not having it.  I think that sounds too much like the government telling us what to do and I feel that it will create many more problems than it solves.  What kind of beauracracy would they have to set up to manage that mandate?  Make it affordable and people will want to have it.

Why don't we start with the reason health care is so expensive?  I have doctor friends who tell me that the cost of mal-practice insurance alone is enough to make them want to quit.  How about we regulate the amount that people can sue and the amount doctors are liable?  That would bring the costs down for sure.  We live in a sue-happy society and I personally think that is just wrong.

Doctors are human.  They make mistakes.  Obviously it's a lot more serious than say a mechanic forgetting to put your oil cap back on, but they're still human.  There should be procedures in place - and I know this is happening - to safeguard against mistakes.  But think about what would happen if we didn't have any doctors willing to do risky procedures at all.  You'd just be out of luck.

Doctors being sued for everything they're worth because they made a mistake is just ludicrous.  How about we change the environment that doctors work in so they're not overtired and they'd be less likely to make mistakes???

One more thing.  If your plan, Mr. Obama, leads us to a system like Canada where you have to get on a waiting list to see a doctor... I am completely against it.  I have Canadian friends.  I've heard horror stories about the beauracracy that prevents people from getting reasonable care.  Or if someone decides that a proceedure is "elective" you have to wait forever.  My dad needs a knee replacement.  He's scheduled for this fall.  What if someone decided it wasn't bad enough and he would just have to wait?  Currently it's affecting his good knee because he favors his bad knee so much.  Would they make him wait until his other knee was in such bad shape that he then needed both knees replaced?  I've heard of this kind of scenario. 

We still need free enterprise health care.  We are intelligent people and we should have choices when it comes to our health care.  I'm a teacher and I know what happens when policies get decided in some office somewhere without looking at the reality of what's going on in your classroom.  We can't let this happen in health care.  It will become all about the bottom line and not about what's best for the person.

That's my $2 worth! ;)

nowickedwitch 5 pts

 Health reform has been increasingly frustrating to. The lack of serious and substantive reporting is one, as a post I wrote last week titled in sickness and in health explained.  

 The idea of having to make the health care reform issue something more appealing and fun  is indicative of the sad state, not only this poorly thought out health care reform bill is in, we the people are in.

 I think something that needs to be made clear is that the bill is, and can be a work in progress, the people need to know that.That it won't be set in stone. The public option needs to be clearly understood and the means to pay for this option need to be spelled out even at that I  don't think this bill is good enough yet, though a month or two of work by committed legislators could make it so. Unfortunately our congress works in such a way that if the bill isn't passed immediately it is all but lost for now. This is unacceptable practice.

We need to spend time on this bill, not try to rush it through. We don't need the coercive insurance companies taking part in the making of the legislation, large pharma buying off congressmen, nor do we need the equally coercive AMA taking part.

What we do need is medical practitioners that are not part of a corporate quota based office structure, or part owners in laboratories and other diagnostic centers, nurses who practice, not administratively, but clinically, American people who have had their insurance rescinded after an illness even after paying for years and never having a previous illness. We need a more  qualitative statistical  cost and outcome between our healthcare systems and the systems in other countries, and we need to take a closer look at systems in parts of this country that work better for the people than the average system.... and it goes on.

cooper

Rita Arens 7 pts

In graduate school, I read "Marrakech," by George Orwell, one of the most powerful essays I've ever seen.

Orwell opens his essay discussing a corpse being carried to burial, sans coffin, in 1938.

Though he was talking about race, I think his words also ring true when thinking about socioeconomics, the haves and the have-nots.

When you walk through a town like this -- two hundred thousand inhabitants, of whom at least twenty thousand own literally nothing except the rags they stand up in -- when you see how the people live, and still more how easily they die, it is difficult to believe you are walking among human beings.

When we deny people the healthcare they need to survive disease or bring their very much wanted children into this world due to financial issues, we treat them as less than human. Orwell wrote about colonialism 70 years ago, but his points are still valid.

Do we want to be the country who will pick a corpse up off the street but not help the woman who will become the corpse without health insurance?

I think not.

Rita Arens writes at Surrender Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com ) and BlogHer and is the editor of Sleep is for the Weak ( http://tinyurl.com/9pg62e ).

acamarena 5 pts

On July 16, Amy Goodman interviewed insurance exec whistleblower Wendell Potter. The interview was interesting and informative. If shock value helps debate, then this is a story worth noting.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/16/former_insur...

On topic of this discussion is also, "Health Reform Too Boring for Broadcast? : CJR". Here is a link. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/07/31-3

 Saludos, 

A.-

Lisa Stone 6 pts

...what do we do? Erin Kotecki Vest's post has some terrific suggestions on it. What do you think of EL's recommended "Sicko" house party? Do we pick one day and all email our congressional reps? Flash mob city halls? What works?

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News ( http://www.blogher.com/topic/politics-news ).

Lisa Stone 6 pts

...and while I was so sad to read this paragraph in your post, I think this is the year we will learn whether you are right:

After reading a zillion articles and watching people on the TV machine talk about the various proposals and overhearing conversations at BlogHer '09, I've come to this conclusion -- we are a nation that's more concerned about the money in our own pockets than in giving up some of it to make sure everyone has health care.

I don't want that to be true. I don't, I don't. But not matter how many times I click my heels together and try to go home, I'm terrified to hear Valerie Jarrett share how hard it is to have this complicated issue discussed substantively in mainstream media. That's why I do think bloggers need to saddle up -- as you and Blurbomat have done. So thank you!

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News ( http://www.blogher.com/topic/politics-news ).

Aurelia 5 pts

As a Canadian who spends a lot of time blogging about politics and healthcare, i know all about this debate and I know that the White House wanted to talk to Americans at lunch, but damn people I could have helped! *weeps with frustration*

And letting us help is, in effect, my suggestion. Start asking Canadians to help you argue that Health Care is sexy and amazing and the best thing that has ever happened to us. There are so many of us who love love love our health care system and can't stand when we hear the ridiculous myths.

There are millions of everyday Canadians who would gladly talk to the press to provide the positive stories that the press doesn't talk about. (Admittedly, we are a very reticent nation, generally we have such stiff upper lips we make the British look like wild people, but for this? when our national honour is at stake? Oh yeah, people, we'd speak out.)

And if you don't want everyday Canadians--why not a few celebrities, like Kiefer Sutherland, star of 24, whose grandfather Tommy Douglas invented medicare. How about Celine Dion, or Shania Twain, or any one of dozens and dozens of Canadians who would love to talk about the good side of health care.

Reality is that no system is perfect, and yes, I'm the first to moan about Doctors and paternalism, but I never moan about the fact that I never see a bill. It's wonderful, and I love it, and I never live in fear of not being able to pay for being sick. I get to see any doctor I want, anytime, and the only gatekeepers are doctors. Not bureaucrats, another myth that drives me crazy. Doctors decide based on medical evidence who gets treatment. 

FrancineHardaway 5 pts

Karoli Kuns and I started http://www.USHealthCrisis.com to raise awareness of the growing numbers of uninsured after Karoli got laid off and found out she couldnt afford her COBRA costs for her family. We decided we had to explain to people how the system works (I'm the widow of the physician and have been a managed care marketer) and we have been blogging, Twittering, and sharing information ever since.

Without any actual "marketing," the site has gained a reputable amount of traffic. If the White House wants to read back through some of the posts, the administration can find out where the pain is.

I will do ANYTHING I can to help this health care bill get passed with a public option. Not for me, because I'm on Medicare, but for all the people who will come after me who will find their health care costs rising and Medicare bankrupt if we don't.  I have seen firsthand the waste and fraud in the system, on the billing end especially, and the way the insurance companies "manage" care. My daughter just had a baby for which the hospital billed the insurance company $62,000. Insurance paid $37,00o, the hospital "ate" the rest, except for $699 my daughter paid. Inflated billing, b.s. negotiations, overcharging -- it's all right there!

When I had her, I had no insurance.  The delivery cost $600 and I put it on a credit card. In the intervening time, costs for the same procedure, childbirth, have gone up 1000%. Why? Has nature changed? It is all the middle men taking their pieces of the pie. And part of the reason we don't riot in the streets about this is because her out of pocket cost was relatively the same as mine. So the patient doesn't see the need for reform.

Don't get me started on this rant...just give me a communications assignment and I am there.

Francine Hardaway, Ph.D
"It's not what happens to you; it's how you come to it."
http://blog.stealthmode.com

PunditMom 5 pts

Lisa, I see you and I were on the same wavelength ( http://www.blogher.com/health-reform-you-say-tomay... ) today.

It was fantastic to be able to have the opportunity to meet with Valerie Jarrett. She really took all our concerns seriously and I was extra impressed when she ignored her cell phone when it rang several times.

Here's hoping that we can all make a difference on this issue. ( http://www.punditmom.com )

PunditMom
aka Joanne Bamberger ( http://www.mediabistro.com/joannebamberger )
BlogHer News & Politics Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/punditmom )

Lisa Stone 6 pts

Fantastic blogging, in chronological order:

More on Healthcare ( http://blurbomat.com/archives/2009/07/29/more-on-h... )

I wrote this piece yesterday, hoping to finish up this morning. I was waylaid by a cute baby. Most of what I’ve written will likely be moot as the debate unfolds and even this morning there is talk of a Blue Dog breakthrough (CNN, Politico, Fox). If you read nothing else, read this opinion piece in the New York Times (here) that outlines what the reform looks like right now and why, even if you have coverage now, you should want to see reform...

FINALLY, the White House turns it UP ( http://blurbomat.com/archives/2009/07/29/from-the-... ) (Um, not his real title, but I liked his entry better :)

Krugman: Health Care Realities ( http://blurbomat.com/archives/2009/07/31/krugman-h... )

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News ( http://www.blogher.com/topic/politics-news ).

Lisa Stone 6 pts

...like a very serious suggestion to me. How about in-home screening nights?

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

BlogHer is non-partisan but our bloggers aren't! Follow our coverage of Politics & News ( http://www.blogher.com/topic/politics-news ).