Most voters nationwide continue to favor repeal of the national health care law, but one-in-five now believe the plan will have no real impact on the federal deficit.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 56% favor repeal of the health care law, including 43% who Strongly Favor repeal. Forty percent (40%) oppose repeal of the law, including 27% who are Strongly Opposed.

Support for repeal has changed little from last week. Weekly tracking since the bill was signed into law by President Obama last March has shown support for repeal ranging from a low of 50% to a high of 63%.

Fifty-two percent (52%) say the legislation is likely to increase the federal deficit, down six points from earlier this month. Since passage of the bill last year, the number expecting the law to increase the deficit has ranged from 51% to 63%. Only 15% expects the plan to reduce the national deficit, while slightly more (20%) say the plan will have no impact on the deficit.

The number that says the law will have no impact on the deficit is up seven points from two weeks ago and is the highest result measured in nearly a year.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 18-19, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.

Overall, 34% of voters think the health care law will be good for the country, while 55% say it will be bad. Since the plan’s passage, 48% to 56% of voters have said it will be bad for the United States. Only one percent (1%) now say the law will have no impact.

Fifty-six percent (56%) say the cost of health care will go up under the new plan, a view shared by 53% to 61% since last March. Seventeen percent (17%) disagree and expect costs to go down. Nineteen percent (19%) say they will stay about the same.

Most voters feel free market competition will do more to cut health care costs than government regulation.

Only 21% say the quality of health care will get better under the new law. Fifty-one percent (51%) say quality will get worse, while 21% predict that it will stay the same. Since last March, the number that thinks the new law will worsen health care quality has ranged from 48% to 55%.

While most Republicans (84%) and voters not affiliated with either major political party (59%) continue to favor repeal of the law, 71% of Democrats are opposed.

An overwhelming majority of Republicans and half of unaffiliated voters think the plan will increase the deficit, but Democrats are more evenly divided.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of the Political Class believe the plan will have no impact on the federal deficit, but 62% of Mainstream voters think it will increase the deficit.

Earlier polling shows that voters overwhelmingly believe the new health care law will cost more than projected.

Voters have consistently rated cutting the federal deficit in half by the end of his first term as the more important of several budget priorities the president listed early in 2009, but few voters expect him to hit his goal.

The documents the White House includes with the president’s $3.7 trillion proposed budget for 2012 project that government spending will top $4 trillion in the next two to three years, but most voters aren’t aware of that increase amidst all the talk of spending cuts.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of all Likely Voters say, generally speaking, that the president’s new budget proposal cuts government spending too little.

Then again, 70% of voters think voters are more willing to make the hard choices needed to reduce federal spending than politicians are.

Vericos veins affect 19% of men and 36% of women in the United States. Your veins are reponsible for delivering deoxygenated blood from the outer parts of the body back to the heart and lungs. When veins become abnormally thick, enlarged, or full of twists and turns, they are called vericose veins.

Leading Causes of Vericose Veins

Though many theories exist for why varicosities occur in veins, the general consensus is that defective and damaged valves within the veins are to blame. Damaged valves prevent backward flow of blood within the vein and prevent blood moving toward the heart. There are many reasons why the valves stop working. Our NJ vericose veins treatment center will explain your symptoms and give you the best possible options for treatment.

Some experts believe inherited problems cause some people to have too few valves, or valves that do not function properly. People may be born with abnormalities of the vein wall. The resulting weakness may predispose the valves to separate and become leaky. The result – poor functioning valves that reverse blood flow down the superficial veins, preventing flow towards the heart. The increased pressure in the superficial veins causes varicosities. Many factors can aggravate pressure in the superficial veins.

• Pregnancy increases blood volume. The growing uterus adds pressure on the veins in the legs. Also, the relaxation effects of the hormones estrogen and progesterone on the vein walls contribute to the development of varicose veins during pregnancy.
• Prolonged Standing
• Obesity or distended belly
• Straining. Any condition that causes you to strain for prolonged periods of time causes an increase in the forces transmitted to the leg veins and may result in varicose veins.
• Prior surgery or trauma to the leg. These events can cause an interruption in normal blood flow channels.
• Age

If you are concerned about vericose veins, Asthetic Vascular Association can help. We are the leading NJ vericose veins treatment center and have helped thousands of patients.

Vericose veins treatment in NJ at Aesthetic Vascular Association is easy. Many people with vericose veins experience uncomfortable and painful symptoms. With a simple consultations, our doctors will determine which vericose veins treatment in NJ is best for you.

Please contact Aesthetic Vascular Association for your free consultation on vericose veins treatment in NJ, today at 732-741-0970.

Nearly half of Likely U.S. Voters (47%) continue to believe that repeal of the health care law passed earlier this year is at least somewhat likely.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 39% think repeal is unlikely while 14% are not sure. The overwhelming majority express some level of uncertainty. The latest figures include only 16% who believe repeal is Very Likely and 9% who say it is Not at All Likely.

Belief in the likelihood of repeal has now edged to its highest level to date. Just after Election Day, 46% said repeal was at least somewhat likely, while 44% viewed it as unlikely.

In early April, shortly after Democrats in Congress passed the measure, 38% said repeal was likely, while 51% disagreed.

Overall, 58% favor repeal and 37% are opposed. From the beginning, those who favor repeal feel more strongly about it. Forty-six percent (46%) Strongly Favor repeal and 29% are Strongly Opposed.

These figures have held steady from the previous two weeks. In weekly tracking since the bill became law, voter support for repeal has ranged from 50% to 63%.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on November 28, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Forty-six percent (46%) of voters say repeal of the health care bill would be good for the economy. Twenty-six percent (26%) disagree and think it would hurt the economy. Fifteen percent (15%) say repeal would have no economic impact.

These findings have changed little in eight months of surveys.

Only 29% believe repeal of the law would create new jobs, and an identical number (29%) says it would not result in new jobs. A sizable 42% are undecided.

Most voters (52%) still believe the health care plan will be bad for the country and just 37% say it will be good.

Democrats and those in the Political Class continue to oppose repeal and generally view the health care plan as a good thing. Republicans, unaffiliated voters and those in the Mainstream tend to favor repeal and take a more negative view of the health care law.

Prior to the election in which Republicans regained control of the House of Representatives, voters consistently expressed anger about the policies of the federal government in general and opposition to the health care law. Just 39% of voters believe the federal government currently operates within the limits established by the Constitution of the United States.

Voters overwhelmingly believe the new Republican-controlled House is likely to vote to repeal the health care law.

But 52% think Congress should review the health care bill piece-by-piece and keep the parts it likes. Thirty-nine percent (39%) disagree and think Congress should scrap the whole bill and start all over again.

Voters are ambivalent about House Republican plans to investigate the Obama administration – unless the subject of the probe is the unpopular national health care bill.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% of Likely U.S. Voters favor having House Republicans investigate the projected costs and implications of the health care law passed by Congress earlier in the year.

Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose such an investigation. Fourteen percent (14%) more are not sure about the idea. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans and nearly two-thirds (65%) of voters not affiliated with either major party support an investigation of the costs and implications of the health care bill. Most Democrats (56%) are opposed.

Voters have mixed feelings about House Republican plans to investigate other aspects of the Obama administration’s performance to date.  GOP voters like the idea; Democrats don’t; unaffiliateds are almost evenly divided.

“Voters want Congress to focus on substance, not distractions,” observed Scott Rasmussen. “Congressional questioning about policy issues are okay for most voters, petty partisanship is not.”

Still, just a week after national elections that shifted control of the House to Republicans, the number of voters expecting more partisanship in Washington, D.C. has dropped to its lowest level since March of last year.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely U.S. Voters was conducted on November 7-8, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion polling information. We poll on a variety of topics in the fields of politics, business and lifestyle, updating our site’s content on a news cycle throughout the day, everyday.

Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade. To learn more about our methodology, click here.

Today, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the national association of health insurers, calling on their members to stop using scare tactics and misinformation to falsely blame premium increases for 2011 on the patient protections in the Affordable Care Act. Sebelius noted that the consumer protections and out-of-pocket savings provided for in the Affordable Care Act should result in a minimal impact on premiums for most Americans. Further, she reminded health plans that states have new resources under the Affordable Care Act to crack down on unjustified premium increases.

Here is the full text of the letter:

Ms. Karen Ignagni

President and Chief Executive Officer
America’s Health Insurance Plans
601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
South Building, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20004

Dear Ms. Ignagni:

It has come to my attention that several health insurer carriers are sending letters to their enrollees falsely blaming premium increases for 2011 on the patient protections in the Affordable Care Act. I urge you to inform your members that there will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases.

The Affordable Care Act includes a number of provisions to provide Americans with access to health coverage that will be there when they need it. These provisions were fully supported by AHIP and its member companies. Many of the legislation’s key protections take effect for plan or policy years beginning on or after September 23, 2010. All plans must comply with provisions such as no lifetime limits, no rescissions except in cases of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of material fact, and coverage of most adult children up to age 26. New plans must comply with additional provisions, such as coverage of preventive services with no cost sharing, access to OB / GYNs without referrals, restrictions on annual limits on coverage, a prohibition on pre-existing condition exclusions of children (which applies to all group health plans), access to out-of-network emergency room services, and a strengthened appeals process. And health plans that cover early retirees could qualify for reinsurance to sustain that coverage for businesses, workers, and retirees alike.

According to our analysis and those of some industry and academic experts, any potential premium impact from the new consumer protections and increased quality provisions under the Affordable Care Act will be minimal. We estimate that that the effect will be no more than one to two percent. This is consistent with estimates from the Urban Institute (1 to 2 percent) and Mercer consultants (2.3 percent) as well as some insurers’ estimates. Pennsylvania’s Highmark, for example, estimates the effect of the legislation on premiums from 1.14 to 2 percent. Moreover, the trends in health costs, independent of the legislation, have slowed. Employers’ premiums for family coverage increased by only 3 percent in 2010 – a significant drop from previous years.

Any premium increases will be moderated by out-of-pocket savings resulting from the law. These savings include a reduction in the “hidden tax” on insured Americans that subsidizes care for the uninsured. By making sure insurance covers people who are most at risk, there will be less uncompensated care, and, as a result, the amount of cost shifting to those who have coverage today will be reduced by up to $1 billion in 2013. By making sure that high-risk individuals have insurance and emphasizing health care that prevents illnesses from becoming serious, long-term health problems, the law will also reduce the cost of avoidable hospitalizations. Prioritizing prevention without cost sharing could also result in significant savings: from lowering people’s out-of-pocket spending to lowering costs due to conditions like obesity, and to increasing worker productivity – today, increased sickness and lack of coverage security reduce economic output by $260 billion per year.

Given the importance of the new protections and the facts about their impact on costs, I ask for your help in stopping misinformation and scare tactics about the Affordable Care Act. Moreover, I want AHIP’s members to be put on notice: the Administration, in partnership with states, will not tolerate unjustified rate hikes in the name of consumer protections.

Already, my Department has provided 46 states with resources to strengthen the review and transparency of proposed premiums. Later this fall, we will issue a regulation that will require state or federal review of all potentially unreasonable rate increases filed by health insurers, with the justification for increases posted publicly for consumers and employers. We will also keep track of insurers with a record of unjustified rate increases: those plans may be excluded from health insurance Exchanges in 2014. Simply stated, we will not stand idly by as insurers blame their premium hikes and increased profits on the requirement that they provide consumers with basic protections.

Americans want affordable and reliable health insurance, and it is our job to make it happen. We worked hard to change the system to help consumers. It is my hope we can work together to stop misinformation and misleading marketing from the start.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Sebelius

Each state will be allotted up to $1 million in grants to help the states begin establishing health insurance Exchanges.

The Exchanges are set to start in 2014 and will give individuals and small businesses a greater choice of options in their healthcare.  It will also make it easier for insurance shoppers to compare the available national health insurance packages.

“With most states struggling to keep their budgets in balance, these grants will give them the resources to conduct the research and planning needed to build the health insurance marketplace of the future,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.  “We are working hand-in-hand with states as we carefully implement the Exchanges to make sure they best meet people’s health insurance needs.”

The Exchange grants will be used by states to conduct the research and planning needed to build a better health insurance marketplace and determine how their Exchanges will be operated and governed.  If a state chooses not to create its own Exchange, they can partner with other states to create a regional exchange.  If they choose not to, HHS will help establish one on their behalf.

While the programs are being developed, HHS is asking states, consumer advocates, employers, insurers and anyone else with an opinion or ideas to provide input to help HHS develop regulations for national healthcare.

The same percentage of voters as last week, 38%, continue to oppose repeal of the bill. This figure has had a little wider of a range since March, ranging from 32% to 42%.

A figure that stands out on this week’s poll is the percentage of voters who believe that government healthcare costs will go up under the new healthcare plan. Sixty-percent of voters believe the costs will rise, which is just one point below the highest level measured in mid-July. A very small amount of people-16%- believe that the costs will go down under the new plan, while another 16% expect no change.

The percentage of people who think that the plan will be bad for the country has decreased from last week, down to 52%.

The majority of voters, 52%, believe that they will be receiving a poorer quality of care under the national healthcare bill, a figure that has remained fairly steady since the bill was passed. About 20% of people each think that the quality of healthcare will improve with the Obama healthcare system or will remain as it currently is.

The party split remains a strong point of opposition or support for the bill, as 75% of Republicans Strongly Favor repeal of the bill and 50% of Democrats are Strongly Opposed. Of the voters not affiliated with either major political party, 42% Strongly Favor repeal. It seems as though the majority who favor repeal of the bill believe that healthcare costs will increase under the new plan. Only 37% of Democrats agree with this claim.

Another poll done by Rasmussen Reports last week shows that 54% of U.S. Voters disagree with the part of the government healthcare bill that requires each American to buy or obtain health insurance. Forty-three percent favor the requirement, which is being challenged in court by a number of states.

Missouri voters on Tuesday rejected the new U.S. healthcare bill, approving a measure that would forbid the federal government from penalizing people who do not buy health insurance.

With 78 percent of precincts reporting, 72.6 percent of voters supported the Health Care Freedom Act, also known as Proposition C, while 27.4 percent rejected it.

In approving the measure, Missouri won a victory in a series of planned assaults around the country against the sweeping reform, which was a major part of President Barack Obama’s domestic agenda and became law in March.

The fight over the healthcare law — and the individual mandate that requires individuals to have healthcare insurance — is expected to be a major issue in the November congressional elections as Republicans plan to make repeal a major campaign theme against Democrats.

“Proposition C will be a boon to other states that are trying to repeal the individual mandate,” said American Legislative Exchange Council task force director Christie Herrera. “Having that grassroots groundswell will give political courage to lawmakers.”

The council helped draft the legislation in Missouri and in many other states.

The Missouri measure states that no rule or law can compel an individual or business to participate in any healthcare system, and prohibits laws that level penalties against people who do not buy health insurance.

Arizona and Oklahoma will have similar constitutional amendments on their November ballots to opt out of part or all of federal healthcare reforms.

Health care Issues in the US

Similar initiatives are being pushed in several U.S. states by Republicans and groups who say the new healthcare law marks an unprecedented seizure of power by the federal government.

The effort was invigorated on Monday when a federal judge ruled that Virginia could proceed with a lawsuit that argues the federal requirement that its residents have health insurance is unconstitutional. Some 20 other states have made a similar legal challenge.

Experts said because federal law typically supersedes state laws, the state efforts could ultimately be largely symbolic, although it is likely the debate will make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Ethan Rome, executive director of Health Care for America Now, which backs U.S. reform, said the measure in Missouri is more about Republicans trying to regain power than about healthcare.

“The Missouri vote is nothing more than a Republican straw poll with no legal force and it certainly isn’t about healthcare,” Rome said.

The federal penalty provision of the healthcare reform law does not take effect until 2014, and the Obama administration has said tax credits, subsidies and other measures will help those who cannot afford to buy insurance.

The passage of the Missouri measure angered the Missouri Hospital Association, which spent about $400,000 to try to defeat the act. The group warned voters that not requiring health insurance for all would continue to push healthcare costs higher as uninsured people tap resources.

“It will certainly be a matter for the courts to decide,” said Missouri Hospital Association spokesman Dave Dillon. ” But the message they send by their vote could be one that is costly to them.”

(Reporting by Carey Gillam; Editing by Bill Trott)

The majority of voters favor a repeal of the national healthcare bill, but almost half of voters polled believe that we won’t see this repeal, according to Rasmussen Reports.

The Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey poll done late last month shows that while 58% of Americans favor a repeal of the health care bill, 48% say that it’s unlikely that it will happen.

The latest poll results show that 58% of voters favor repeal, which includes 48% who strongly favor repeal.  Thirty-seven percent are opposed to repeal, with 28% who are strongly opposed.

More people, 44% believe that repeal of the national healthcare bill would be good for the economy while 28% believe repeal would hurt the economy, two figures that have remained stagnant recently.

Since March, 50% or more of voters have said the plan has been bad for the country and that repeal would do the country and economy better.  Though they say this, just 27% say repeal would create new jobs.

The government healthcare bill, which would help18 million of the 34 million without coverage gain health insurance though Medicaid over the next 10 years, is finding most support from Democrats.  The bill continues to be supported by more Democrats than are Republican and unaffiliated voters.

It seems that Americans are losing faith that repeal will happen.  Percentages for a likely approval are decreasing.  Early July polls show that 45% thought repeal would happen, down from 51% in April.

There is also a split in the poll between Mainstream American voters and the Political Class.  The Political Class is much more against a repeal of the bill with 95% opposing its repeal, while 70% of Mainstream voters favor repeal of the health care bill.  A majority of The Political Class, 72%, also believes that a repeal of the national healthcare bill would have a bad impact on the economy.

NEW YORK – The U.S. healthcare system comes in last for performance among seven industrialized nations, despite spending the most, according to a new Commonwealth Fund report. The researchers note that healthcare reform and uptake of health information technology hold promise for the future.

Despite having the most expensive healthcare system, the United States ranked last overall compared to Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.

The research measured five performance areas: quality, efficiency, access to care, equity and the ability to lead long, healthy, productive lives.

While there is room for improvement in every country, the United States stands out for not getting good value for its healthcare dollars, ranking last despite spending $7,290 per capita on healthcare in 2007 compared to the $3,837 spent per capita in the Netherlands, which ranked first overall.

Provisions in the Affordable Care Act that could extend health insurance coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans have the potential to promote improvements to the United States’ standing when it comes to access to care and equity, according to “Mirror Mirror On The Wall: How the Performance of the U.S. Health Care System Compares Internationally 2010 Update,” by Commonwealth Fund researchers Karen Davis, Cathy Schoen, and Kristof Stremikis.

The low marks in the quality and efficiency dimensions for the United States demonstrate the need to quickly implement provisions in the new health reform law and stimulus legislation that focus on realigning incentives to reward higher quality and greater value, investment in preventive care, and expanding the use of health information technology.

“It is disappointing, but not surprising that, despite our significant investment in health care, the U.S. continues to lag behind other countries,” said Commonwealth Fund president and lead author Karen Davis. “With enactment of the Affordable Care Act, however, we have entered a new era in American healthcare. We will begin strengthening primary care and investing in health information technology and quality improvement, ensuring that all Americans can obtain access to high quality, efficient health care.”

Earlier editions of the report, produced in 2004, 2006 and 2007, showed similar results. This year’s version incorporates data from patient and physician surveys conducted in seven countries in 2007, 2008 and 2009

The Obama administration unveils its national strategy Tuesday for fighting HIV and AIDS.

The strategy will focus on three areas: reducing the number of people who become infected, increasing access to care and decreasing HIV-related health disparities.

The announcement comes less than a week after a group of scientists published a study saying they had made a key discovery that could help in the development of an HIV vaccine.

Scientists at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said last week that they had found three human antibodies that neutralize more than 90 percent of the current circulating HIV-1 strains.

“This is significant because we’ve now found antibodies that are good templates for HIV vaccine development,” said Peter Kwong, co-author of the study published last Thursday in the journal Science.

But even with promising scientific advances, the number of people living with HIV infection in the United States is higher than ever before, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC estimates that more than 1 million people are living with HIV in the United States, and one in five of them is unaware of their infection.

More than 18,000 people with AIDS die each year in the United States, the CDC says, and more than 576,000 people with AIDS in the United States have died since the epidemic began.

The World Health Organization says AIDS accounted for an estimated 2 million deaths in 2008, and more than 33 million people are living with HIV worldwide.

Nearly one-third of all practicing physicians may leave the medical profession as a result of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, according to a recent survey published in the the New England Journal of Medicine.

The survey, which was conducted by a leading physician consulting firm based in Atlanta and Dallas, the Medicus Firm, found that a majority of physicians said the new government healthcare reform would cause the quality of American medical care to “deteriorate” and it could be the “final straw” that could send one third of  polled doctors out of medicine. More than 29 percent (29.2) percent of the nearly 1,200 doctors who responded to the survey said they would quit the profession, seek early retirement or practice medicine outside of the United States.

The medical journal published the results in its March and April edition, saying: “While a sudden loss of half of the nation’s physicians seems unlikely, a very dramatic decrease in the physician workforce could become a reality as an unexpected side effect of government healthcare.”

“Many physicians feel that they cannot continue to practice if patient loads increase while pay decreases,”  cited the study. “The overwhelming prediction from physicians is that health reform, if implemented inappropriately, could create a detrimental combination of circumstances, and result in an environment in which it is not possible for most physicians to continue practicing medicine.”

With an average education debt of $140,000, and many graduates approaching a quarter of a million dollars in school loans, being a doctor is becoming less and less economically feasible.

Under the new Obama health care system, 18 million of the 34 million people who would gain health care coverage over the next 10 years would obtain that coverage through Medicaid. But in a recent poll, 67% of primary care physicians said new Medicaid enrollees would not be able to find a primary care physician in their area.

Increasing government control of medicine via the conduits of the Department of Health and Human Services  and the Internal Revenue Service  may be the final straw that causes the physician workforce to break down.

The jubilant signing ceremony capped a political victory for Obama.   The bill has ignited a political fight that promises to entangle the bill’s future in the courts. 

Republicans are trying to come up with a strategy that will use this one-sided victory for the Democrats against them in the fall.

Tea Party Promises A Revolt

Instead of being discouraged by passage of health care reform, tea party activists across the country say the defeat is a rallying cry that makes them more focused than ever on voting out any lawmaker who supported the measure.

“We’re not going to stop. Obviously, the whole tea party movement started because we’re about smaller government and less spending and less taxes. There is absolutely no way we can pay for this,” said Denise Cattoni, state coordinator for Illinois Tea Party, an umbrella group for about 50 groups from around Illinois.

Cattoni says the health care defeat doesn’t deflate tea party activists. “We couldn’t stop it because of the shenanigans that went on in Washington,” Cattoni said. “People are definitely more driven today than they were yesterday without a doubt.”

What Are Your Thoughts – Add A Comment Below

 WASHINGTON (CNN) – Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, the Democrat who chairs one of the Senate committees tasked with developing health care legislation, promised Friday that a health care bill will be on President Obama’s desk before Christmas and will include a so-called “public option.”

“I believe we are in an irrevocable position,” Harkin said on a conference call organized by the health care reform group Families USA. “The momentum is there. We will not get stopped by the obstructionists. We will have the votes.”

Harkin became chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee after the former chairman, the late Ted Kennedy, passed away in September. His committee has already passed a more liberal version of the health care bill that includes a public option — legislation that will have to be merged with the bill that passed the Senate Finance Committee earlier this week before the Senate can vote on final legislation. Democrats need sixty votes to end debate before a vote can held.

Pointing to a Thursday meeting of Senate Democrats in which most members of the caucus expressed support for a government-run insurance plan, Harkin said only five members of his party are holding up progress toward a such a plan.

“Should the five come on board with the vast majority?” Harkin asked. “I think the answer is clear.”

But Harkin also said he was open to legislation that includes health care co-ops, as long as they are offered as a choice alongside a public option.

The Iowa Democrat estimated the final health care bill should cost $900 bill over 10 years and will mandate that all Americans purchase some kind of health insurance.

The White House responded to Tuesday’s actions with spokesman Reid Cherlin repeating both President Barack Obama’s support for a public option — and also his willingness to consider other proposals.

Obama “has said he is open to other constructive ideas of increasing choice and competition,” Cherlin said. “He will work with Congress to ensure that under health insurance reform, Americans who cannot find affordable coverage will always have a choice.”

Republicans unanimously oppose the government-run insurance option, saying it would drive private insurers from the market and eventually bring a government takeover of the health care system.

Democratic leaders reject that claim, saying the public option would provide needed competition for private insurers while making health coverage accessible to millions of people currently lacking health insurance.

Consumers are invited to speak their minds in virtual town hall meetings online at http://www.governmenthealthcarefacts.com/ .    The Pasch Consulting Group, creators of the highly popular www.cashforclunkersfacts.com site, created the non-government website was created so that consumers can have a voice to discuss national healthcare proposals and how they would affect their lives.  The website also helps clarify the plethora of information being broadcasted around the country on current and new healthcare initiatives. 

 Some of the current discussions going on now include:

•  What Are Your Biggest Fears About Healthcare Reform? 
• How To Pay For Obama’s Healthcare Plan?
• What  is on your healthcare reform short-list? 

 Consumers can join the discussion on the latest government proposals and voice their opinion.

The report on health care examined Americans who died from preventable and treatable diseases because they did not have health insurance.  One man highlighted in the report died of a ruptured Appendix at just 45 years old when he chose not to seek treatment for his symptoms due to a lack of health care coverage.

The information released by Journal of Public Health coincides with Obama’s controversial health care debate.  Obama has been battling democrats and republicans in congress over his idea to offer standardized and government controlled health care to those who lack it. 

Americans have been split over the idea of creating a government controlled health care reform and many have taken to the Internet to learn the facts and voice their opinion.  To help consumers understand and make sense of government health care initiatives, a new website has been created for public use.  The website is designed to allow consumers to discuss national and local healthcare issues by way of virtual town hall style meetings.

Consumers who would like to share their thoughts and concerns over the current state of health care coverage for Americans are encouraged to speak up at http://www.governmenthealthcarefacts.com/

Whether Americans are for or against government healthcare reform, one thing they can all agree on is that change must come and it must come fast.

Obama assured the crowd of students, “We will get this done,” he said, “In the United States, nobody should go broke because they get sick.”

Democrats and Republicans have agreed on one thing; they both want to vote for a health care bill that would ultimately pass.  Deciding which one is a whole different story.  Not only are politicians at odds over which healthcare would best serve the American people, the public is also at odds.  Consumers have been sharing their thoughts and feedback online at a new website that provides virtual town hall meetings on the subject of national and local health care issues. 

As health care reform continues to remain at the forefront of Obama’s agenda, consumers are invited to visit http://www.governmenthealthcarefacts.com and join discussions on today’s hottest health care topics.

 American Enterprise Institute analyst Norman Ornstein recently told CNN, “Kennedy’s departure may in fact increase the chances that we get a more sweeping health care bill.”  According to Ornstein, “The possibility the Democrats have of getting a bill with 60 votes now — which requires compromising and getting Republicans — has just gone down.”   The result may be that the democrats now try to pass healthcare reform in a filibuster-proof reconciliation bill.  (Read the full CNN article on healthcare at http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/27/kennedy.health.care/index.html )

 Reconciliation in the Senate requires only 51 votes to overcome a filibuster, compared to 60 votes needed for most legislation.  With only 51 votes needed, the Democrats could still outnumber the republicans, even with Ted Kennedy’s voice silenced.  In an attempt to pass the bill through reconciliation, the bill may be changed to reflect a more partisan bill, increasing its chances of success in the Senate. 

 In his interview with CNN, Ornstein remarked, “If Democrats nevertheless resort to reconciliation they would be “sorely tempted” to include the kind of government-funded public health insurance option favored by Kennedy and the rest of the party’s liberal base.”  Ironically, after many years of battling the Senate, Ted Kennedy’s battle may finally be helped by his untimely death. 

 The Wall Street Journal is also buzzing about a possible reconciliation attempt by the democrats.  In a recent article online, the WSJ reports that, “The White House and Senate Democratic leaders, seeing little chance of bipartisan support for their health-care overhaul, are considering a strategy shift that would break the legislation into two parts and pass the most expensive provisions solely with Democratic votes.”    According to the WSJ article, many Republicans are outraged.  Sen. Olympia Snowe (R., Maine) said, “At a time when we need to bolster the public’s confidence in whatever we do with health care, I don’t think the reconciliation process will serve the purpose of providing affordable health security for all Americans.” To read more of the Wall Street Journal article, visit http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125072573848144647.html

 Should Democrats attempt a reconciliation in order to pass their proposed healthcare reform?

Sen. Max Baucus revealed a health care reform plan that does not include a public option but mandates coverage.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus unveiled a summary of the legislation after months of contentious negotiations conducted against the backdrop of often heated town hall forums across the country.

The proposal would cost $774 billion over 10 years while reducing the federal deficit by $49 billion in that period, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Baucus, a Montana Democrat, put the price tag at $856 billion. Finance Committee aides attributed the different totals to accounting methods rather than any variation in the final overall costs.

The plan would require all Americans to have health insurance, but lacks a government-run public health insurance option favored by most Democrats and President Obama. The CBO review estimated the proposal would leave 25 million people uninsured by 2019 — about a third of them illegal immigrants — compared to 46 million people currently without health coverage. 

Bi-Partisan Effort

Baucus emphasized the plan includes input from both Democrats and Republicans on his committee who have been negotiating for months on the issue. He called it a pragmatic proposal with a realistic chance of passing the Senate, rather than something favored by one side or the other.

“This package may not represent all of our first choices,” Baucus said. “This is a good bill. It is a balanced bill. It can pass the Senate.”

However, the plan came under immediate criticism from Republicans, including three members of Baucus’ Finance Committee who participated in months of negotiations with him and two other committee Democrats. Some liberal Democrats also dislike it for dropping the public insurance option.

“How can we give all these consumers to the health insurance industry with no accountability?” asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California.

Baucus, however, noted the proposal was similar to a framework for health care legislation laid out by Obama during his speech to Congress last week. On Wednesday, the White House welcomed the plan as a step forward in the health-care debate.

The plan would create health insurance exchanges to make it easier for small groups and individuals to buy insurance. Instead of the public insurance option to provide competition for private insurers, the proposal calls for the creation of nonprofit health care cooperatives that would negotiate collective insurance coverage for members.

However, the CBO analysis said the cooperatives as proposed were “unlikely to establish a significant market presence in many areas of the country.”

As with Democratic proposals already before Congress, the plan would bar insurance companies from dropping a policyholder in the event of illness if that person had paid his or her premium in full. It would add new protections for people with pre-existing conditions and establish tax credits to help low- and middle-income families purchase insurance coverage.

The tax credits are aimed mostly at those at or below 300 percent of the federal poverty limit, which would be annual income of roughly $66,000 for a family of four.

Insurance companies also would be barred from imposing annual caps or lifetime limits on coverage. At the same time, Americans would be required to have health coverage, and those failing to comply would face fines of up to $950 annually for individuals, and $3,800 for families.

Insurers providing the most expensive insurance plans — or so-called “Cadillac” plans — would be hit with a tax of 35 percent of the amount that a plan’s cost exceeds thresholds of $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families.

Baucus said the idea was to get the insurance companies — “those who profited the most” — to be “part of the solution.”  Watch Sen. Max Baucus talk about his health care reform compromise proposal »

He explained one particular compromise, saying his plan lacks a mandate for employers to provide health coverage for workers, but includes tax credits to encourage small businesses to do so.

In addition, Baucus added language to a previous summary of the proposal to address a range of hot-button issues for conservative opponents of health care reform, including abortion, illegal immigration, and medical malpractice.

According to the summary unveiled Wednesday, the bill would not pre-empt state laws banning or requiring abortion coverage. Federal tax dollars, as under current law, would not be used to pay for abortions unless a pregnancy results from rape or incest, or if the life of the mother is in danger.

The measure aims to prevent illegal immigrants from using health-care tax credits or accessing insurance exchanges in part by requiring each potential beneficiary to submit a range of personal information that would need to be verified by Social Security Administration data.

Stricter enforcement was a demand voiced by Republican Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina, who yelled out “You lie!” when Obama said in his speech to Congress that his outline would prevent illegal immigrants from getting taxpayer-funded health coverage.

In another nod to conservatives in the Baucus plan, states would be encouraged “to develop and test alternatives to the current civil litigation system” as a way to help reduce skyrocketing malpractice costs.

The Senate Finance Committee is the last of five congressional committees needed to approve health-care proposals before the topic can be taken up by both the full Senate and the full House of Representatives.

Various forms of the legislation proposed by Democrats have already cleared three House committees, as well as the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

None of the Republicans in the Finance Committee negotiations — Sens. Olympia Snowe of Maine, Charles Grassley of Iowa and Mike Enzi of Wyoming — have backed the Baucus proposal, but all three said they were willing to continue working for a compromise measure. Baucus said he expected changes to his plan when the Finance Committee debates it next week.

“There will be amendments offered. I suspect some of them will be very good amendments,” Baucus said, later adding: “There are no real policy deal-breakers. It’s more getting more comfortable with what all this is.”

Also Wednesday, Obama met privately with several senators to continue his lobbying effort for a health-care agreement, according to senior administration officials.

The president met with Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, and Bob Bennett, R-Utah, who have opposed Democratic proposals so far, after an earlier talk with with Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-West Virginia, a critic of the Baucus proposal, the administration officials said.

Rockefeller, who wants a public insurance option, said he and Obama agreed on the goals of health-care reform. He called rhetoric over the issue political posturing, and predicted both sides will eventually reach agreement on a bill

The address to Congress is being met with mixed opinions and we would like to know how many Americans plan on watching and then commenting on the address.  On Wednesday we will open a new forum especially for the Wednesday address so consumers from across the USA can comment in real-time.

Obama plans to give lawmakers a more specific prescription for health care legislation than he has in the past, aides said. Congress technically returns to Washington on Sept. 8, the day after Labor Day. But many members had planned Sept. 9 as their first workday, so Obama is seizing the first moment when he will have maximum impact.

Will You Be Watching?

I attended a recent forum that focused on human behavioral patterns and it made me consider how much do Americans willfully contribute to their failing health, regardless of the long term costs to our healthcare system.  If Americans are eating, drinking and smoking themselves into poor health, what can we do to change public indifference?

Learning From Designated Drivers

I thought about a recent discussion I overheard from a group of high school seniors that were planning to attend a party. They included in their discussion who would be the designated driver.  It hit me just how much has changed since I was in high school when the suggestion of a designated driver would have been a foreign thought, if not mocked.

It has taken years to achieve, but continual education, TV, radio and online campaigns have raised the awareness of drinking and driving to such a level that teen behavior is changing.  Stiff fines and revoked driving licenses have added to the seriousness of DWI charges.

On a separate path, wearing seats belts are an automatic thought today for many drivers.  Education, advertising and fines have helped to shape consumer behavior on the importance of wearing seat belts.  Today, when I drive my 1969 Super Bee, its inferior lap belts make me feel unprotected; a reflection of a time not so long ago when passenger car safety was not taken as seriously as it is today.

Invest More In Educating Our Youth

I would like to see,as part of the healthcare reform we invest, additional funding being used to educate our youngest Americans toward a path of Self-care. We need to help them make better decisions on how to take care of their bodies.  

Yes, we have to address our current needs without a doubt. However, if we fail to change our complacency of caring for self through better eating and exercise, then we haven’t tackled a major contributor to the future continuance of rising healthcare costs.

How would you suggest we change the behavior of Americans in regards to Self-care?

On a recent video played on CNN, President Obama took a series a questions from consumers and outlined a few basic requirements for a healthcare reform bill that he could sign.  His goals include:

1. A bill that is deficit neutral
2. A bill that has to bend the cost curve; reduce healthcare inflation
3. A bill that has insurance reforms
4. A bill that include health exchange options

View the video yourself and respond on what minimum requirements that you think should be in a healthcare reform bill. 

Post Your Comments Below

The news media is reporting that many town hall meeting have erupted into shouting matches and angry protests.  The fear of the unknown has driven formerly passive American citizens to action. The fear of losing our excellent healthcare standards are at the heart of the passionate outcries of American citizens.

Facts, rumors and outright lies have filled the minds of Americans so that the truth is hard to distinguish from fear mongers. 

What do you fear the most from proposed healthcare reform?  Let’s see if this forum can separate fact from fiction.

Some have proposed taxing America’s wealthiest consumers and others have added that streamlining waste, implementing paperless technology and documenting best practices will reduce healthcare costs significantly.

How would you propose to pay  for massive healthcare reforms?  Share you comments below:

The question is how long will this bill take to pass and is it even possible to appease all the American people?  The public has demanded a bill focused on affordability, cost controls and extended coverage and no clear plan seems to be forthcoming.  Will the confusion continue to reduce public backing for Obama’s healthcare reform plan?

Republicans opponents have stated that the possible response to the outbursts and reactions of the people at town hall meetings is due to the Democratic efforts to rush through a very important piece of legislation. many consumers feel that this rush to action is equivalent to a government takeover of the healthcare system.

Once concern is a health care system that limits treatment based upon the individual’s wealth and overall ability to contribute to society.

When the “Gang of Six,” composed of six Republican and Democratic senators met to speak about the proposal, they too remained dedicated to the idea of a bipartisan bill.

The rift in the both parties is the clear roadblock that threatens the likelihood of the bill being passed. According to the New York Times Mr. Obama stated, “I think early on, a decision was made by the Republican leadership that said, ‘Look, let’s not give him a victory.”

This comment alone pushes the idea that this bill will not be passed in its current form.  Obama needs a miracle bipartisan bill but his current nationwide tour is not making that seem any more likely.

As the healthcare debate continues we will be creating a formal dictionary page that we will add to on a regular basis.  This will be a doosy of a list when all is said and done.

Healthcare Lexicon

Blue Dog coalition: The Blue Dog coalition is a group of 52 fiscally conservative Democrats in the House. The Blue Dogs insist that health care reform should preserve patient choice and maintain competition in the marketplace without adding to the national deficit. They’ll play a critical role in getting a bill through the House.

Co-op: Nonprofit health cooperatives, or “co-ops,” are being proposed as an option to compete with the private sector and as an alternative to a government-sponsored public health insurance option. Co-ops are owned and governed by the same people they insure.

Doughnut hole: The Medicare Part D “doughnut hole” refers to a gap in coverage for seniors. After seniors reach a certain spending limit, they must pay the full cost for prescriptions. The House’s health care bill contains a provision to discount medications for Medicare beneficiaries when their benefits reach the gap. The bill eventually would close the doughnut hole.

Electronic records: President Obama wants to computerize all records within five years as a way to increase quality of health care and decrease costs. Under his plan to modernize health care, all health records would be standardized and electronic.

End-of-life counseling: The current version of the House bill contains a provision for end-of-life counseling for Medicare beneficiaries who want it. The House bill allows for coverage of such appointments as long as an individual has not had an end-of-life care or advance care planning consultation within the last five years. The idea has been a sticking point in the health care debate, as critics have likened it to a step toward euthanasia and “death panels.”

Gang of Six: The Gang of Six is a group of members of the Senate Finance Committee who are trying to craft bipartisan health care legislation. The group is made up of Democrats Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and Kent Conrad of North Dakota. The Republicans are Michael Enzi of Wyoming, Charles Grassley of Iowa and Olympia Snowe of Maine.

Health insurance exchange: Obama says any health care bill he signs must have a health insurance exchange, which he defines as a “one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans — including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest — and choose what’s best for your family.” The term refers to the marketplace of the health insurance options.

Health care rescission: Health care rescission is the process by which insurers cancel coverage, often after finding that a person omitted pertinent information on his or her application. Some companies have been accused of improperly rescinding policies as a way to avoid paying for expensive treatments.

Mandated coverage: Some lawmakers have proposed mandated coverage, which would require all Americans to get a minimum amount of insurance. The mandate could be enforced with a tax penalty.

“Obamacare”: A term used, often derogatorily, to describe Obama’s health care proposals.

Private insurance: Private insurance is coverage offered by a company other than the government.

Public option: A public option is a government-funded, government-run health care option, similar to Medicare. Under the plan, people would pay premiums 10 to 20 percent less than private insurance. Some Democrats have said it will be impossible to pass a bill without a public option, but some Republicans have called the idea a deal-breaker.

“Rationing” care: Critics of Obama’s health care proposals claim that his plan will lead to a rationing of care, by which care would be distributed according to need. Obama insists that his plan will expand access, not decrease it.

Senate HELP committee: The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions drafted the one health care reform plan that has been introduced in the Senate.
Single-payer: Under a single-payer system, the financing system relies on one “payer” — which could be a government-run agency — to fund all health care costs billed by doctors, hospitals and other health professionals.

“Socialized” health care: Critics charge that Obama’s health care proposals will lead to a government takeover of health care. They fear that private insurers would be driven out by a public option, leading to health care system run entirely by the government.

Make your vote and voice count.  Speak up and let’s hear from America on this very important topic.