PadminiArhant.com
American Democracy at Work
February 5, 2010
Dear Fellow Americans,
The health care legislation is being stalled in Congress by the legislators on the special interests’ payroll.
Despite being well informed on the horrendous economic liability accumulated to our national debt from the abominable health care costs and that an estimated 45,000 Americans are dying every year due to lack of health insurance, these legislators simply don’t care about these facts because they feel secure about their job.
Is American Democracy so weak that you will take a “NO” for everything that concerns your interest from the party of “NO” aka GOP, The Grand Obstructionist Party and the special interest loyalist on the democratic side?
C’mon America, show your power. Call your local representatives in the House and the Senate and demand that you want the health care legislation now.
Remember, the crying baby is the one that gets the mother’s attention.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Health Care Reform – Medicaid Program Review
January 16, 2010
By Padmini Arhant
The issues that deserve consideration from the individual state standpoint:
Reallocating the Senate offer to Nebraska nationally is a fair approach.
Increasing federal aid in the Medicaid expansion program for 50 states is necessary to deal with the vast uninsured population across the nation.
Since the President and the democratic lawmakers have appropriately incorporated the requirement, it’s constructive to ensure the coverage entirely to avoid rifts between the states.
With regard to the creation of new insurance exchanges under federally regulated marketplaces for consumer choice, it’s important to extend or re-enact the anti-trust laws in addition to the establishment of caps to curb the rising costs especially in the absence of government run insurance program.
The demand and supply determined free market is never inhibited to exercise the freedom to hike the price leading to the status quo.
There is a higher probability in the future, with the demand introduced mandatorily via 30 million and more insured through the proposed legislation. Therefore, it’s vital to close the loopholes presumed to cause the cost factor to rise exponentially.
Upon evaluating California and other states’ grievances in the national health care reform, the following options are viable to resolve the contentious details in the Medicaid program.
In this respect, the State of California is an ideal example with New York State sharing the scenario in terms of the benefits and drawbacks from the current national health care bill.
California is believed to be splitting the costs on Medi-Cal – the state version of Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor and disabled – in equal ratio with the federal government.
Raising the income threshold under the Medicaid program is a sensitive enactment that would enable the uninsured in millions to qualify for the Federal aid, a crucial component in the legislation.
At the same time, it also enhances the revenue prospects for the insurance industry represented by the health care reform opponents, thereby allowing the free market to thrive and yet vilified by the Republican Senate minority remaining steadfast against the legislation regardless, signifying partisan politics.
The republican stance in any legislation thus far, is clearly anti-populace prioritizing self-interest backed by the special interests over national progress. Similarly, the connotation is extended to the moderates and the conservatives on the democratic side weaving lanes for political security.
Given the eternal gridlock hampering progress more prevalent in the Senate than the House, the adjustment would inevitably yield the desirable result, i.e. coverage for the uninsured provided the market maintains the affordability.
Health Care bill has the federal government absorbing 80 percent of the costs of newly eligible enrollees with the entire costs being paid for the first three years upon the legislation becoming effective in 2013 or 2014.
Although, it’s a positive step in dealing with the burgeoning health care crisis, there are anomalies that could be easily addressed to satisfy the different states’ economic conditions.
For instance, in the 80 percent federal subsidy applied only to newly eligible enrollees, California is confronted with a huge number of people who are qualified for Medi-Cal, but they appear to have not enrolled.
The legitimate concern is the cost burden shifting to the state on equal basis when the compulsory health insurance purchase becomes the law.
Further, the news report titled Health Care – Painful costs of reform for state,
Medi-Cal’s broad mandate would mean greater burden under national overhaul
By Mike Zapler, San Jose Mercury News, January 16, 2010
“The legislation would offer more federal relief to states that now offer Medicaid to only the neediest people, such as Texas and Alabama, than to states that have expanded the program over the years to cover more people, such as California and New York.
California, for example, already will cover a family of four earning up to $23,373, while Texas covers a family of four earning up to only $5,733.
Put a different way, federal largesse would be concentrated on those who don’t qualify for Medicaid currently but would under the new national rules – and California has a lot fewer of them than many other states.
“It is beyond unfair,” Kim Belshé, the governor’s secretary of health and human services, said in an interview. “California is being penalized,” she added, “for having done the right things when times were good.”
Federal regulations make it all but impossible for California to scale back Medi-Cal to cover fewer people, so the state is essentially stuck with generous rules adopted during the flush economic times for it can no longer afford, Belshé, said.
John Holahan, a health care expert at the Washington D.C. based Urban Institute, agreed that it’s “inherently unfair” for the federal government to pay different shares of each state’s health care expansion costs and said it’s bound to create a bureaucratic maze.
“For every new enrollee in each state, they’re going to have to check:
Did they qualify under the old rules or the new rules?” Holahan said.”
————————————————————————————————–
Analysis with Solutions: By Padmini Arhant
Even though, the single payer or the public option at the bare minimum would have eliminated these problems, the bill should have provisions allowing the States to adopt the universal plan by preference through state legislature or on a ballot measure.
Nevertheless, in the immediate health care proposal, the practical method is to standardize the eligibility criteria to minimize the cost bearing responsibility at the State level.
Rather than conducting an audit on the qualifying enrollees based on old and new rules that would only escalate the administrative costs, it’s simpler to accept all new enrollees nationwide on federal aid.
Under the existing rule and the pending health care legislation, the state – federal match on health care program is apparently based on the states’ per capita income instead of the poverty rate formula.
Realistically, the poverty rate is an accurate indicator of the uninsured in each state. That being the case, choosing the latter would mitigate the on-going health care costs in the emergency rooms at the County hospitals paid for by the taxpayers.
California’s reimbursement rates to doctors on Medi-Cal program is reportedly the lowest in the country. Accordingly, the Medi-Cal patients are declined by a majority of doctors supposedly struggling to cover the treatment costs.
Moreover, the House version of reform expected to boost Medicaid payments for primary care, whereas, the Senate bill, not surprisingly would not. Again, per the cited article, neither bill would increase reimbursement rates for specialist care.
Such predicaments leave the Medi-Cal patients and the newly insured under Medicaid with insurance coverage,
However, denying them the essential medical service choices.
Hence, the Medi-Cal and Medicaid patient dilemma beckons the network availability with health care providers across the spectrum for meaningful health care access.
Concisely, the micro adjustments on the rules pertaining to the Medicaid program would alleviate the anticipated economic plight for the respective states and pave the way for long-term achievements at the macro proportion in the national health care legislation.
Failure to rectify the inherent inequalities could potentially exacerbate the state deficits inevitably affecting the national GDP.
In this matter, it’s poignant to follow the health care principle:
Prevention is better than cure.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Why Public Option is not an option in the Historic Health Care Reform?
December 29, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
During the Presidential election campaign in 2008, despite the encouraging endorsement from the “Majority White,” electorate in Iowa, the media, the African American caucus and the Democratic Party wrote off the Obama candidacy in the wake of New Hampshire and Nevada results favoring the then formidable opponent Hillary Rodham Clinton representing the establishment in the Democratic Party.
It could be a distant memory. Nevertheless, the reality of an African-American candidate as the 44th President of the United States made possible by the average citizens from all walks of life representing the stars and stripes who came forward in multitudes with donations ranging from a dollar to an affordable amount, seeking the long overdue change in Washington.
It certainly didn’t emerge from the political realm or within the Party and various African American organizations who were cautiously observing the direction of the political storm.
Now, when it’s the payback time for the historic election’s beneficiaries to demonstrate the real commitment to the people in a democracy, the political betting is placed on satisfying the insatiable appetite in the form of bribery to the fellow democrats in the Senate caring more about their own financial gains and political future than the republic interest. The reference made to the Democrats in particular because, the Republican minority stance is to oppose not the issue but the party in a majority.
If it were the Republican administration pushing the agenda, the republican minority would not be wasting time in their innovative tactics to boycott the bill. Unlike the democrats, the party is ever united in their pledge to advance the ideology with further support from the conservative/moderate democrats evidenced in the legislations passed during the Bush administration.
The republicans have a point. In spite of the filibuster proof majority, the democrats are forced to scramble for votes in the senate and left at the mercy of the conservatives and moderates within their own party. You don’t need foes with “friends” like that suggesting the Democratic Party is merely a platform for these representatives of the special interests’ strategy to enhance the odds on both sides that guarantee them an absolute victory with every legislation.
It’s worth examining the lobbyists’ orchestrated health care bill.
For instance, the delay in the Senate voting was perceived to be a drawback for the democrats with the republican members threatening to stall the progress at the behest of none other than the same lobbyists working on both sides. Simultaneously, the over two thousand page dossier prepared by again the lobbyists’ loyalists in the finance committee, became the bone of contention for the opposition minority comparing the voluminous content to a forklift item.
Besides, the legislation is made effective a year later in the Senate bill i.e. 2014 allowing the industry to prosper with the status quo in the interim. Without effective and robust competition like the public option and the cost reduction schemes from the health care industry, the lobbyists are comfortable with the mandatory insurance on 30 million people and safety net from the federal subsidies to purchase the private insurance in the weak market place.
Having been satisfied with the Senate bill, the lobbyists win irrespective of the pace and it’s not surprising to note the pre-emptive adoption of the Senate bill against the House bill.
Are they being indifferent in any way?
Politics is only concerned about personal salvation. A few democrats’ and an independent’s (as a democrat ‘loyalist’) overt action to promote the special interests’ profit oriented plan over the general population plight only legitimize the minority power against the majority.
What’s being ignored in the undemocratic and dangerous precedence having become a tradition is that, honoring the minority’s calculated shenanigans simply boosts the special interests’ status to railroad forthcoming legislations already evident in the pending climate change and other bills.
All that matters right now is a bill to showcase on the D-Day, the “State of the Union” address and the people always expected to remain content with the politics and business “as usual” from Washington and Wall Street.
Any dissent in this respect is characterized as the die-hard liberalism’s refusal to view the big picture. Contrary to the belief, it’s the progressives who have compromised from the single payer system to the public option and other factors like Medicare buy-ins tossed out of the bill, notwithstanding the infringement on women’s rights, essentially all and any components benefiting the people and the national interest.
The irony being if not for the progressives’ iron will to stand up against the ‘Tea Party’ movement and similar grandstanding, the health care bill would be history rather than historic.
The frustration among the progressives is reaching the point of creating a third party entirely on public campaign financing to reflect the true meaning of democracy and challenge the nay Sayers once and for all that ‘Change is inevitable’ through action from the bottom up, exemplified in the 2008 Presidential election.
Although, the spiritual message emphasized on the human requirement to overcome the negative vices, it’s poignant to elaborate the qualities viz. greed, ego, envy, rage (anger) and hatred are the human beings’ vulnerabilities and centuries have gone by without the lessons being learned regardless of the human spirit’s degradation.
Contemporary practice scorns the interjection of ethics and morals in the discussions as naïve and unpragmatic. The reason being it’s inconvenient for those indulging in the activities producing short-term gains while neglecting the long-term crisis witnessed in all major national issues such as housing market, energy, health care and environment not excluding the military interventions.
Therefore, there is no bar on human conduct normally qualifying as“unconscionable.”
I respond to the requests from the honorable members of Congress Patrick Kennedy, Senator John Kerry, Senator Al Franken and the speaker Nancy Pelosi to stand by President Barack Obama in legislative matter. To them I reiterate the earlier statement that,
I extend my unwavering support to the Presidency of Barack Obama provided the White House is committed to implement the “Change” promised on the campaign trail in both domestic and foreign policy issues yielding ‘realistic’ change the people can believe and thrive in.
Unfortunately, with minor exceptions the majority decisions thus far favor the special interests i.e. the oligarchs in the financial, health and energy sectors not to mention the ongoing warfare and general foreign policy signifying the continuation of Bush-Cheney doctrine. The haphazard attempt during the climate summit in Copenhagen was quite disheartening and appropriately admitted by the President.
Regrettably, the campaign donations to the DNC, DCCC, and DSCC are invested to elect the conservatives and the moderates posing major problems in the legislative matter. It may not be a deterrent factor in fund raising as they have the special interests financing the campaigns.
However, a monumental task awaits in the coming elections convincing the betrayed electorate justified in their reluctance to support the party or the candidacy that fails to honor the democratic will.
The recent gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia serve as good examples in this regard. In addition, the mayoral race in New York with a narrow margin victory to Mayor Mike Bloomberg having outspent his opponent is yet another reminder that performance benefiting the people ultimately delivers the desirable results in the polls.
Since the political structure in Washington is laid on the Wall Street foundation through campaign financing and deal exchanges, the burden is on the people to join the movement in reclaiming democracy subverted by the power in politics and profits.
Corruption and Cronyism cannot be eradicated unless there is a concerted campaign finance reform strictly enforcing public financing and rejecting swift boating from the candidacy and/or party in the coming elections. Private financing floats to assist candidates from both parties to survive the mild and vicious campaign attacks through advertisements.
It’s noteworthy that Goldman Sachs, AIG…invested in both Senator John McCain and the then Senator Barack Obama’s candidacies. Obviously, the contributions rose sharply as one candidate’s winning prospects exceeded another along with the donors’ expectations to return the favor. Politics is amazingly trustworthy in the transfer of power from the people to the actual authorities, the corporations via the legislators. It’s visible in the health care issue and several others.
Given the prevalent system in politics, it’s imperative for the progressives to run in the coming elections with the public blessings to prevail against the special interests and the greed driven politics. I have been requesting the DNC to transform the Democratic Party with the progressives on whom the nation and the rest of the world can rely upon for the long overdue peace, progress and prosperity.
Money can buy love, trust and integrity but not truth and rationality. For rationality enables the human mind to recognize the truth behind illusion and reality. Those who are committed to the virtues decline to be a sellout at any costs. Sadly, the honorable principles of many are undermined by the dishonorable deeds of the few.
Often people who care is mistaken for rivals, the real opponent in disguise trusted to be genuine due to the veil blinding the vision, and it largely stems from fear and personal insecurity that obstructs the human intellect to accept situations with clarity.
People must rise and ensure their needs are adequately addressed from now on as the health care reform could be the beginning of the end to the self-interest dominance in Washington and Wall Street guided by the maxim “All for me and none for you.”
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
\
‘
Public Opposition to Senate Health Care Bill
December 24, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Senate health care bill is about to seal the deal with the insurance and the drug companies reportedly having invested a significant proportion of the total worth $3.3 billion in lobbying Congress. Further, according to the Center for Responsive Politics the health insurance industry spent millions of dollars on the top five senators overseeing the senate health care bill.
Had not only the Senators delivered to the insurance industry and the Big Pharma by rejecting the people’s choices of a single payer system or the public option to induce real competition ensuring a windfall for everyone of them but also,
The reports confirm that these Senators stand by the oligarchs to grant the insurance industry viz. the Blue Cross Blue Shield a tax break and fee exemptions to a tune of $15 – $20 million a year in Nebraska alone.
Meanwhile, the estimated 46 states are expected to run out of funds for the unemployment payments by 2011.
Again, while the Democrats uphold the health care “reform” as a historic process, it’s a major victory for the same groups in the status quo. It’s reflected in the insurance industry’s latest stock performance that skyrocketed upon the precipitous progress of the ‘industry authored’ senate bill.
There are editorials, television appearances and political interviews favoring the senate bill with a call to embrace the rudimentary version on the argument that some action is better than inaction by highlighting the masqueraded cosmetic benefits that deserve scrutiny.
I agree that action is necessary particularly having worked extremely hard along with millions of fellow Americans in the health care debate. Nevertheless, the real victims in the current health care system will be worse off under the proposed legislation for the following reasons.
First, the health care legislation is hijacked by a handful of Senators threatening to kill the bill if it includes viable options to benefit the public against the industry they are rewarded to represent. Sadly, to the democracy’s demise, the elected officials engage in gerrymandering the national issue.
This is in reference to the ‘noble’ Democrats’ stance to boycott the bill against any elements such as the ‘public option,’ and/or the expansion of the Medicare eligibility as well as the women’s health rights, all of which has been eliminated to appease the selective opponents. It’s clearly indicative of the fact that the government of the people is run by the oligarchs through the revolving door for the mutual prosperity of the ‘K’ street.
At least with the Republican minority, there is no dispute about their role in any legislation and that is to unanimously grandstand the American public rather than protect the national interest. Interestingly the opposition dissolves when the republican political tactics like the filibustering and obstructionism converges with the conservative and moderate democrats’ traits, both hired by the lobbyists, who were once the legislators or the Congressional aides.
Furthermore, the White House lack of serious commitment throughout the process to defend the public interest comprehensively is yet another disturbing factor and raises legitimate concerns about the ‘K’ street phenomenon. It exemplifies the forgotten campaign pledge regarding transparency and accountability through the ‘Change we can believe in.’
It’s important to shed light on the core values claimed by the supporters of the current bill hastily approved to fulfill the legislative formality.
Despite the decision to rush the legislation by Christmas eve, i.e. December 24, 2009, it is confirmed that the main framework will not to be effective until 2013 under the House bill and 2014 in the Senate version,
The time lag leaves approximately 45 million Americans uninsured until such time enabling the insurers to continue with ‘business as usual.’
Accordingly, the legislation is bifurcated into the immediate and later i.e. 2013/2014 Plan.
Immediate Plan:
As per the immediate plan, the taxpayers will fund a $5 billion investment to assist only the “high risk” population who are uninsured for a period of six months and denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions to purchase private insurance in the industry dominant market place.
Under the existing condition, the taxpayers are already covering the bill for patients in that category usually treated in the emergency rooms in the county and federal/state funded hospitals and medical centers.
If the notion behind introducing such plan with a taxpayer funded private insurance is to incorporate the peripheral health care providers’ service represented by the AMA, besides allowing the insurance industry to reap profit at the taxpayer expense identified in the health care costs, then it satisfies the overall health care industry criteria in this legislation,
Moreover, in the absence of legislative enforcements on premiums, co-pays and deductibles, the cost benefit ratio is unknown.
Additionally, the taxpayers would provide financial relief to the seniors for their prescription drug costs considering the Senate Rx restrictions from Canada and elsewhere to comply with the Big Pharma demand. Apparently, the globalization concept subverted to let the protectionism strategy prevail in this respect.
Insurance companies are barred from dropping patients filing medical claims. It’s good because of the continuity. However, in practicality it doesn’t set parameters in terms of insurance costs guaranteed to be hiked by the industry without robust competition in the form of single payer or public option programs.
It would inevitably create the unaffordable situation exacerbated due to the supply and demand market forces coming into play from the mandatory insurance requirement on 30 million uninsured Americans upon the legislation coming into effect in 2013 or 2014.
Similarly, the eligibility extended to dependents up to age 26 on the family insurance plan. It helps young adults with health insurance under the family plan as long as the cost factor remains within the affordable range for the groups ineligible for Medicaid and federal subsidies since it’s unpredictable in a free market.
————————————————————————————————–
Legislation Effective Period – 2013 or 2014
Barring insurers from declining adult patients based on the pre-existing health conditions is a valid piece of legislation. Again, as referenced in the immediate plan there is no specification on the cost factor, which is expected to be much higher than the other plans unlike the universal Medicare program or the public option at the bare minimum.
Eligibility expanded on the Public insurance programs such as Medicaid would reduce the uninsured numbers. This is a government insurance program and the costs would be cheaper than the private products.
Federal subsidies provision to help the lower income groups buy insurance from the private sector. It’s a taxpayer compensation to insure the lower income individuals and families with the private insurance company, enlarging the clientele for the insurance industry.
For those who are self-employed including the individuals ineligible for Medicaid and Medicare, the legislation facilitates a marketplace with choices of private insurance offers through “non-profit” organization in a co-operative style preferred by the insurance industry, as it’s easier to dominate such outlets than the meaningful government insurance program like Medicare.
————————————————————————————————–
Perspective:
It’s not a true reform but instead a makeover with imprudent measures to accommodate the health care industry agenda. It’s a travesty to witness the will of the people in a democracy seeking real changes and meaningful legislation denied over the Washington and Wall Street contrived policy subjugated for profits and political salvation of the minority signifying that politics has no soul.
The bill is entirely funded by the taxpayers at every step of the way via federal aid and subsidies with the government laid infrastructure for the private insurance, pharmaceuticals and health care givers to thrive exponentially from the large consumer base.
What it means is, the health care industry have not surrendered to cost control. The cost factor has been the crucial component that primarily led to the health care reform.
Even though the CBO confirmed the deficit neutrality and subsequent savings over a decade on the Senate bill, it’s worth remembering that the revenues are derived from the proposed Medicare spending cuts at $460 billion along with the Cadillac plan tax revenues and the payroll tax on individuals exceeding the $250,000 threshold. Nowhere in the plan, there is any cost reduction commitment upon the legislation becoming effective, from the medical industrial complex.
Without a clue on the CPI (consumer price index) for products and services particularly the insurance and drug costs in 2013 or 2014 after adjusting for inflation, it’s hard to ascertain the real costs to be incurred by the consumer in the exclusively private health care system.
Whereas, in the government run public option, the guidelines are already available from the established Medicare and Veterans medical insurance programs to prepare the consumers from all different categories.
If the current system is considered flawed, then the one prepared by the Senate will not be a health care rather a nightmare for the American public and the economy with the insurance and the pharmaceutical industry CEO bonuses exploding beyond $700 million, otherwise history repeating itself in three to four years time from now.
When the legislation becomes effective in 2013 or 2014, the market monopoly will devour the exchange programs offered through the cooperatives evidenced in the present time. Already the forecasts of private industry dominance portends grave danger for the average consumers with minimal consumer rights, muddled state laws creating chaos in the out-of-state insurance exchange programs for California attributed to the lack of free market element, the real competition only available through government run single payer or the public option.
Upon careful review, the Senate bill benefits are minuscule compared to the drawbacks elevating the medical industrial complex as the winner without the counter force such as the government run insurance program, the public option to maintain deficit neutrality.
In the government run insurance, there will be firm negotiations with the hospital and the pharmaceutical industries paramount to mitigate costs and wasteful spending cited in the private insurance sector.
I urge the American public especially the grass roots supporters to rise to the occasion and strongly condemn the Republican minority and the conservative / moderate democrats’ threats against democracy and their deliberate failure to act in the best interest of the nation, the republic they are elected to serve with integrity, courage and solidarity.
Remember, the special interests will rein in on democracy until you let it happen. Unless every concerned citizen challenges the power and hold them accountable for defaulting on the legislative duty including campaign pledges, the human beings life standard will continue to deteriorate in the United States and the rest of the world.
It’s your civic responsibility and moral obligation towards yourself and your family burdened with the burgeoning national debts to reclaim your rights suppressed by the Washington power and Wall Street profits and demand that the following be enacted in the health care reform:
In fact, the single payer system should have been the option from the time the health care legislation was considered.
Nevertheless, the government run insurance program i.e. public option with affordable premiums to help the American public should replace the co-op exchange program that is being imposed at the insurance industry’s behest.
Medicare coverage be expanded from the age 55 onwards instead of the age 65.
Provide adequate federal funding to hospitals and medical centers across the nation treating uninsured patients as well as the lower income families who cannot afford to wait until 2013 or 2014.
Today the U.S. democracy is under siege with the health care legislation packaged by the health care industry and their paid representatives in the Senate and the House of Congress.
President Barack Obama was elected to bring about the change promised on the campaign trail.
Therefore, it’s incumbent on the Obama administration to do right by the people. The public do not support the current Senate version of the Health Care reform and it would be unconstitutional to proceed against the democratic will. If the Senate bill is passed then the demands placed on the House Bill with respect to public option should not be compromised during the conference.
Action against the democratic will would be disastrous for the democrats in the mid-term elections in 2010 and the re-election in 2012. The Congress members decision to part with the public and favor the special interests would be an inevitable political suicide rather than a political salvation.
The Senators hired by the special interests undermine the honorable principles of their colleagues in the United States Senate and the House of Congress. The unethical practices also marginalize the American public interest in the present and the future legislative process. This is the United States and not the Islamic Republic of Iran or the People’s Republic of China.
Finally, Health care reform is a matter of life and death. Politics and Profits must cease the speculative sport using the people as pawns.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
The Senate Health Care Bill – Defrauding Democracy
December 16, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Senate is moving forward to wrap up the ‘historic legislation’ as a Christmas gift to their campaign financiers, the insurance industry. Although, the sound bites deceptively imply the magnanimous favor to the American public, the hostage in the ‘so-called’ health care reform, the reality is examine worthy.
The fact of the matter is the bill cannot be any more hostile to the American people as the taxpayers, the consumers and the electorate in a democracy. It targets the employers i.e. the small businesses, medium and large corporations, the dwindling middle-class and the struggling working class forced to buy private insurance with penalty imposition on the employers and individuals along with the Medicare expansion denial to senior citizens between the age group 55-64.
There is a bizarre component suggesting that it’s not compulsory for the large corporations to cover their employees. Nevertheless, the government assistance sought by the insurance companies to levy charges against the potential offenders. Similarly eligible workers provided with federal subsidies to buy private coverage. Ironically, the government intervention at this level is appreciated by the industry and their Senate representatives but prevented from selling the government run insurance program.
Should the women be spared in this category? Apparently not and concessions seemingly made to appease the Nebraska Democrat Senator Ben Nelson seeking maximum restrictions on abortion coverage in the renewed insurance market the legislation intend to set up. In addition, the Senator’s care for the industry extended to exempt them from the anti-trust laws.
The White House cheered the version and responded accordingly.
“Congressional allies were “on the precipice” of a historic accomplishment.
It is deficit-neutral. It bends the cost curve. It covers 30 million Americans who don’t have health insurance, and it has extraordinary insurance reforms in there to make sure that we’re preventing abuse.”
Let’s dissect the bill in the appropriate context.
Deficit neutral – The earlier Procedural Vote Bill appeared to be neutral. However, the current version with numerous industry-biased amendments is awaiting the congressional budget office confirmation on the cost neutrality.
Bends the cost curve – Yet to realize and once again falls back on the CBO determination.
Covers 30 million Americans – Reports from reliable sources affirm 10 millions. Despite owing the benefit of the doubt to the claim, the arbitrary 30 million are mandatorily required to purchase the private insurance in the absence of government run insurance program – the public option.
It’s beyond reasonable doubt that the offer would be initially made available at a teaser rate mimicking the notorious sub-prime mortgage pattern from the Wall Street counterpart, the financial institutions and then later on, the consumers hit with an extraordinary hike as captives in the system, a kind of defibrillator treatment to reset the industry into the exorbitant profit mode.
Insurance reforms preventing abuse – Alas, there is bipartisanship in this respect to include those with ‘pre-existing’ conditions otherwise excluded in the existing protocol. Even then the agreement reached after assurance that the benefactors, none other than the insurance companies absolutely gain from the inevitable customized premiums for the substrata with the anti-trust law exemption tied to the legislation.
Simply the bill is a mockery of the victims’ plight and clearly demonstrated in the kingmakers’ unabashed flattery of the insurance giants for their guarantee to promote the individual lawmakers aka lawbreakers’ political career. Never mind the bitter truth about 45,000 people dying due to the unaffordable and inadequate health care predominantly from the lack of universal system such as single payer adapted by most developed nations around the world.
With respect to funding the bill, it’s extracted from the projected Medicare spending cuts to a tune of $460 billion to health care providers, which translates into forcing patients to accept subsidized service. Alternatively, the seniors end up paying more for better if not quality care. Other derivatives are the Cadillac plan tax revenues including the payroll tax on individuals exceeding the $250,000 threshold.
Essentially, the carefully contrived bill primarily focuses on the insurance industry’s financial interest while ensuring the legislators’ political security at the expense of the vast majority. Thus clarifying the solemn union between Washington and Wall Street as inseparable soul mates.
Whereas for the main street the deal qualifies as the ‘historic scam’ rather than the ‘historic reform.’ Unfortunately, in the contemporary politics priorities are based on the personal justification failing to serve the greater good for all. Aiming to pass a dysfunctional legislation to fulfill a formality is an explicit assault on the intelligence of the millions of Americans who shared their heart wrenching experiences since the debate onset.
The truly meaningful health care reform is the single payer system that not only simplifies the process but also replaces the more than two thousand-page dossier admittedly ignored by the opposition with the remaining members merely glancing at the relevant information in the bill.
Besides, the single payer program comprehensively satisfies the needs in every aspect through the cost effective yet efficient superior care for all Americans irrespective of the socio economic barriers.
Therefore, it’s incumbent on Congress to heed to public plea and honor the democratic will in the health care legislation by transforming the house bill to a single payer format through reconciliation process as a warning that democracy can no longer be undermined by the cohort representing the Wall Street and Washington.
U.S. democracy is increasingly revealed vulnerable to undemocratic elements dominating the political, economic and social domain. It’s a ‘nuclear’ status for the modern democracy.
Hence, Congress must move forward to limit the Senate vote requirement to 51 from the prevailing 60 to eliminate the filibuster currently misused as a threat by the opportunist legislators defaulting on their constitutional duty towards their constituents and the nation.
Evidently, the Senate bill is a cosmetic presentation with the substance designed to exacerbate the American people trials and tribulations, meanwhile contributing to the insurance industry’s further prosperity aided by the narcissistic culture in Washington.
American people should rise and protest against the biggest charade in the form of Senate legislation authored by the insurance industry and demand Congress to approve the single payer system by jamming the communication channels via telephones, text message, emails, social networking sites, blogs etc., Remember, democracy is alive when you remain alert and active in the legislative process.
The powerful is powerless without the political capital accessible only through populace vote.
In conclusion, the American citizens should peacefully dissent the carte blanche to Wall Street and Washington and release America from the reform resistant political sycophants.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Senate Preliminary Victory on Procedural Vote
November 21, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
Congratulations! To the American public, President Barack Obama, Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and the Senators casting their votes to enable the health care debate for Senate approval.
It’s encouraging to witness the commitment from the majority to improve millions of American lives.
The action was long overdue and it’s just beginning to take fruition. I have no doubt that upon the historic national health care legislation; the American electorate would reciprocate in the 2010 mid-term elections with the appropriate results.
It’s important to maintain the momentum without substantial compromise on the real benefits and rights of the American people. Again, the bill should encompass robust ‘public option’ component and other factors relevant to the women’s reproductive rights, preserving existing Medicare to senior citizens while accommodating reasonable payments to providers in the government run program . The federal deficit reduction or neutrality is equally essential in the final bill.
An extraordinary journey, nevertheless the light is visible at the end of the tunnel.
As stated earlier, I remain steadfast with my support to President Barack Obama and every member in the House and Senate in passing the necessary legislations on various national and international issues.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Senate Vote on Health Care Bill
November 20, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Senate health care bill is currently under scrutiny requiring 60 procedural votes to qualify for the Senate voting process. At present, the democrats have 58 votes in favor with two independents unclear and the remaining Republican votes unanimously opposed to the bill. I’ve confidence in the (I) U.S. Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders with his support to alleviate the suffering of millions in Vermont and across the nation.
While the Democrats laying out the facts and figures, the Republican lawmakers are meticulously scanning for flaws in their defense to block the anxiously awaited health care legislation.
Senate version of the health care bill proposes $848 billion allowing coverage for 31 million uninsured Americans with a CBO (Congressional Budget Office) assessment confirming an impressive $130 billion cost savings otherwise a massive federal deficit reduction over a decade.
In terms of public benefits, the contentious ‘public option’ substantially compromised with a state opt out plan to appease the opponents against the American interest. Women’s right related to the yet another controversial health topic viz. abortion devised differently from the House Bill. Again, a strategy adopted to lure the conservative vote within the majority.
The tax increases predominantly aimed at expensive health care policies titled as the ‘Cadillac Insurance Plan,’ with a tax imposition on minimal policies increasing the threshold to $8,500 for individuals and $23,000for family coverage. Likewise, $60 billion tax revenue generated mostly from a marginal hike in Medicare payroll tax by 0.50 percent on individual income exceeding $200,000 and $250,000 on combined household earnings respectively.
Although, there are reasons for grievances among different groups in the society, Senator Harry Reid’s challenge is understandable given the preparation in the battleground ahead of the voting session. Seeking perfection in the long anticipated health care reform would prolong the matter providing ammunition for the special interests and their paid representatives to terminate the desperately needed national health care.
I sincerely hope along with the millions of victims from the status quo that the legislators on both sides would rise to the occasion in the tough economic times by honoring the constitutional oath to protect, serve and prioritize the citizens’ plight over other demands. The only way to demonstrate that would be to cast their vote for the health care bill overwhelmingly accepted as the gateway to economic recovery.
Not only the nation’s eyes are set on the Senate’s important event but also the entire world will be watching the elected officials’ true commitment or the lack thereof to the electorate granting them power in a democracy.
I remain optimistic on the outcome and convey my best wishes to Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and other Senators for their valuable contribution towards the historic legislation.
Good Luck! to the members of the United States Senate in the health care bill approval.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
A Candid Disclosure
November 8, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
Last night the health care legislation passed by the House of Congress is a major step towards recognizing the American people’s plight in the most stressful economic times. The House members confirmed that their consolidated efforts and commitment to the American electorate could produce the desirable results in the economic, social and environmental cause.
Health care is relevant to all and no longer an individual matter.
I had recently fallen ill from women’s related health issue in the months of September and October 2009. Accordingly, I was scheduled for a major surgery on November 4, 2009 – ironically on the anniversary of the historic Presidential election date and around the special elections.
In order to deal with the health crisis, I had to suspend some activities and focus on the immediate recovery plan. It was a temporary action and not meant to avoid communication at any level. Now, I’m able to resume direct contact with the responsible authorities.
Even though, the surgery was finalized and the consent forms were handed out for signing three days prior to the operation, I experienced a sudden change with the symptoms disappearing and felt a sense of well being without any medical intervention. Therefore, I had no reason to proceed with the surgery and it was cancelled the day before the scheduled date.
I attribute the positive outcome to spirituality and enormously grateful for the grace and compassion from the ‘Almighty God.’
During my illness, I frequently thought about the people diagnosed for a medical condition but unable to undergo treatment due to the lack of affordable insurance and hence deprived of medical care. Needless to say, there are many infants, children, young adults and others who require medical attention and the families are left with hard choices in saving the lives of their loves ones.
In my case, the medical insurance is mainly used for the routine check-ups as a preventive care with the exception of a foot surgery three years ago. Despite the underutilization, the insurance company – Blue Cross Blue Shield wanted to conduct an interview with me regarding the procedure. Perhaps, the aim was to rule out the pre-existing scenario. Again, the insurance company having profited from my good health all these years had a pre-screening protocol that did not take place because the surgery was cancelled.
The Senators against public option in the health care bill owe a legitimate explanation to the millions of Americans forced to postpone decisions on life and death matter in the absence of effective competition through federal run health care against the profit oriented insurance industry.
I emphasize that health care is not a privilege but a necessity for survival. If the richest nation on earth fails to provide a decent health care plan to citizens, the achievements in other areas are meaningless with the public health in jeopardy.
I sincerely hope that the United States Senate will coordinate with the recently passed House bill without compromising the core element i.e. the federal managed health insurance program at a minimum to help the thousands of ailing Americans rightfully seeking the public option in the embattled health care reform.
As for as my health is concerned, I’m feeling fine and remain steadfast in my support to the legislative affairs and foreign policies benefiting the people of the United States and the rest of the world.
I stand by President Barack Obama and the Congress in serving the nation and humanity through legislations and strategies comprising economic growth, social justice and political fairness at home and overseas.
In compliance with the highest commandment, the purpose of my political involvement is to assist the leaderships in the United States and around the world to establish peace, progress and prosperity for all human beings besides protecting the environment.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Health Care Bill – HR 3962 – Twenty First Century Milestone
November 7, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
Heartfelt Congratulations! To the American public, President Barack Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the House members for the successful passage of the long overdue Health Care reform.
The American citizens and the members of the Congress deserve the accolades for the hard work, determination and relentless campaign to reach the milestone in the twenty first century. After several months of grueling discussions, exhaustive debates, and personal experiences shared by millions of suffering Americans, the historic reform is materialized today.
Despite threats, ultimatums and partisan politics the achievement is indeed remarkable and praiseworthy. Now, it is dependent upon the Senate members to meet with the national expectations in completing the legislative requirement for President Obama’s signature.
Surely, it was the most contentious battle in the legislative affair and predictably emerged resilient against the anti-progress forces in Washington and Wall Street. There are other equally important issues confronting the nation and the health care legislation has paved the pathway for the ‘Cap and Trade Bill’ and many more to follow in the immediate future.
Again, the sick and the frail population’s voices heard in the Capitol Hill.
I hope that the regulations in terms of ‘pre-existing’ conditions, unaffordable premiums…will be effective immediately to allow the urgent caring and medical attention for the vulnerable members in the society.
Finally, America is on the road to recovery with the health care costs incrementally declining over a decade and simultaneously the approximate 36 million uninsured Americans guaranteed medical coverage that was declared a far-fetched dream by the opponents not long ago. The other factors in the bill will be dissected and critiqued accordingly.
Nevertheless, the dedication by the individuals across the nation contributed to the phenomenal success of the health care legislation.
Hope is turning into a reality and Change is inevitable with this new beginning.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant
Health Care Legislation
October 21, 2009
By Padmini Arhant
The Congress is engaged in the Medicare payments to doctors as part of the broader aspect of the health care legislation. Despite the opposition’s insinuations against the government run successful Medicare program, it’s imperative for the lawmakers to sustain the viability of the Medicare and the Medicaid by honoring the providers’ legitimate request for payments increase that would substantially reduce the health care costs currently incurred by the taxpayers through payments to private insurers.
As stated earlier, the conservative and the moderate Democrats’ unwillingness to support the public option is contributing to the stalemate in the health care legislation. Even though, the recent Washington Post/ABC Poll confirmed that an impressive 57 percent of the American population is overwhelmingly in favor of the ‘public option’ plan, some Democratic legislators’ reluctance to join the majority on this issue is disappointing and deserve a valid explanation for their position that is detrimental to the national interest.
It’s important for the Democrats opposing the public option to realize that, any skepticism on the viable proposal is a rejection of the long established Medicare with a proven record of reducing the health care costs while simultaneously providing coverage for a significant population, a core objective of the historic health care legislation. The ambiguity on the part of these legislators is justified if the status quo not draining the economy besides hurting the national future which is dependent upon the children, the youth and the baby boomers with inadequate coverage or none at all.
Whatever may be the reasons for the Democrats resting on the fence, the health matter is a test of the human character to expend the entrusted power for the public welfare against the political gains. The prolonged health care legislation is a strong indication to the American electorate to recognize and distinguish between the legislators’ actions or the lack thereof that should essentially prioritize the people over the special interest represented politics.
Accordingly, the 2010 mid-term election will determine the voter satisfaction or frustration in this regard. Those lawmakers in favor of the federal public option display commitment to serve the people electing them to power in a democracy.
The insurance industry has offered the yet another ‘less competitive’ alternative to the federal public option i.e. the state run program and that too only for those unable to afford the ‘insurance industry declared affordable’ payments. Not surprisingly, those in opposition to the ‘average’ American well-being embraced the idea as a brilliant reform when the states’ contemporary performance has been a dismal failure with California being the torchbearer in the dysfunctional event.
The citizens’ request for a public option is not a favor to them from the elected representatives in a democracy. On the contrary, it’s a constitutional duty of every elected official to work towards the national goals and safeguard the interests of every American representing the stars and stripes.
Again, democracy is subject to scrutiny during the legislative matters such as health care and the elected officials pledging to defend the public interest are expected to rise to the occasion by demonstrating their true service to the constituents and others nationwide.
In California, Senator Barbara Boxer believed to be on board with the democratic counterparts on the health care legislation enacting the federal run public option. However, Senator Dianne Feinstein is reportedly wavering on the ‘public option’ component of the bill. The long serving Senators from California are due for re-election in 2010 and the public opinion rely upon the voting records of their elected representatives to the House and the Senate.
Senator Boxer is presently leading the ‘climate change’ bill and the California Senator’s unequivocal approval of the public option enhances the legislative achievements for the feisty representative.
Since the concerned health care advocates do not have the absolute assurance from Senator Dianne Feinstein on the ‘public option’ component of the bill, it’s a sincere hope that Senator Feinstein will not hesitate to be remembered as a key reformer in the historic health care legislation.
The national deficit is the contentious issue for the Republican legislators against any progress. Although, they may have the best intentions in their opposition to the government run public option, it’s rather intriguing to view the self-deprecating legislators from across the aisle in their criticism of the public institution employing them to deliver the service for the greater good of all.
Apparently, these lawmakers have no issues with the guaranteed income, health care benefits and opportunities to compromise ethics for economics with the special interests in Washington. Ironically, the ‘so-called’ fiscal conservatives are also in the frontline pushing for the economically and strategically disastrous troops increase in Afghanistan. All carried out for the sake of ‘political’ opposition.
Indeed, politics is complex and the simple solutions are often ignored in the embattled power struggle.
Health care legislation is a serious matter imploring due diligence, rationale and fortitude for the desired outcome to benefit the present and the future generation. It’s possible only with the federal run public option with an inevitable costs trimming and coverage expansion, the essence of the health care reform.
Thank you.
Padmini Arhant