E-mail from Senator Sherrod Brown on the health care reform legislation
This in via e-mail from the office of Senator Sherrod Brown:
You may have seen a lot of me lately. I’ve been speaking out and setting the record straight on why it’s critical that health care reform legislation includes a public option. And now that the House has passed it, it’s now up to the Senate to act.
I refuse to sit by watching families struggle to make ends meet while political pundits, ultra-conservative media talking heads, and the Republican Party blatantly spout misinformation and resort to fear-mongering. It’s not only ludicrous — it’s dangerous and will end up costing our nation dearly.
As one of my most steadfast supporters, you know how important it is that we pass meaningful health insurance reforms — which will provide each and every American with quality, affordable coverage.
We all know how difficult enacting these important changes is proving to be. At every turn, big pharma and big insurance — along with their cronies in Washington — are throwing up roadblocks and undermining our Democratic reform efforts.
I recently spoke about this very issue on MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann. Watch it here.
Including a strong public option in the Senate health care reform bill would be a major victory for taxpayers, middle-class families, and American businesses.
It will inject much-needed competition into the insurance marketplace, keep HMOs honest, and ensure that families across the country have their choice of affordable, quality health plans.
Meanwhile, the GOP is doing everything possible to derail a strong public option and cling to the status quo. They’re bending over backwards trying to protect their big-money supporters in the insurance industry, who are only concerned about their bottom line — while my Democratic colleagues and I are looking out for the best interests of our citizens.
We must deliver reform for all Americans, many of whom have lost so much already as a result of the housing crisis, the financial meltdown, and the recession in the last year.
You can help spread the word by forwarding this email to as many people as possible.
Thank you again for your support. Together we will finally put middle-class families ahead of the insurance industry.
Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown
U.S. Senator, Ohio
“Meanwhile, the GOP is doing everything possible to derail a strong public option and cling to the status quo. …while my Democratic colleagues and I are looking out for the best interests of our citizens.”
I think about 40 Democrats voted against this bill in the House. Government controlled health care will killed by the blue dog Democrats in the Senate. They do not want government controlled health care and neither does the majority of Americans. It seems to me that the majority knows what is in its’ best interest, and they have spoken. Someone just refuses to listen.
We don’t want no government control!
November 9th, 2009 at 5:50 pmyeah, like the same “majority” voted for Barack
and you refuse to listen.
Personally, I’m looking forward to these insurance prices coming down.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:31 pmYou are dreaming maxson. Totally clueless.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:46 pmA Democratic majority did support the bill in the House, one Republican voted for it, 39 Democrats voted against it.
Brown referencing his Democratic colleagues most likely refers to the Democrats in the Senate that do support the health care plan, or at least some version of it.
There are some concerns with this, but it’s not known at this point what will happen in the Senate. You have one end of the spectrum believing the current bill is amazing and another believing it will ruin the nation. It’s fairly clear that the truth is somewhere in between…
November 9th, 2009 at 7:50 pm“Brown referencing his Democratic colleagues most likely refers to the Democrats in the Senate that do support the health care plan, or at least some version of it.”
I think you are wrong, he was referring to the House. Besides that will be enough blue dogs in the Senate to block this.
November 9th, 2009 at 7:57 pmthere
November 9th, 2009 at 7:59 pmMaybe, but I don’t think he’s referencing those who don’t agree with him, whether they are Democrats or not.
It’s too early to predict if this will be blocked or if a version will come out of the Senate that the House can agree with.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:00 pmA total trashing of the system is not wanted by the majority of Americans. What is needed is tort reform and inter-state competition for insurance.
Clearly Brown wants no part of tort reform as his biggest contributors are law firms. See this.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:02 pmhttp://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=n00003535
He never mentioned a dem, he just trashed conservatives, as you know.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:03 pm“Maybe, but I don’t think he’s referencing those who don’t agree with him, whether they are Democrats or not.”
did you really say that?
November 9th, 2009 at 8:05 pmI wrote it – I didn’t say it – you don’t normally refer to someone as a colleague that doesn’t agree with you in this sort of thing even if they are your party. They focus on the other guys, the Republicans are doing the same thing.
The inter-party name calling usually isn’t as public though at times that does leak out…
November 9th, 2009 at 8:31 pmI think part of the problem is the dems want the folks to believe that the whole country is for this monstrosity, except for the evil republicans. This kind of miss-information is evil, in its self.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:37 pmThere is a good number of the population that supports this idea, it’s why Obama was elected. As I pointed out before, most people don’t seem to realize why this was something that was promised since the late 70’s and never happened, neither side can agree on a plan, they couldn’t then and it appears they are not now.
Everyone having health care sounds great, it’s actually figuring out how to do that in a way that’s cost effective and fair that has been the hurdle.
I’m not a fan of polls, but? this one from the Washington Post shows where there is support and for what and where there is not support.
November 9th, 2009 at 8:44 pmIt has always amazed me how in statistics 1,004 people can determine what 250,000,000 people are thinking.
It is interesting to notice that the following question about supporting or opposing the proposed changes to the healthcare system, 48% (36% strongly) oppose the system while 45% (26% strongly). Of course taken in the context of the information given it appears that this group of 1,004 wants more government control in the legislation and that is why they don’t support it.
Of course without any sort of demographic information such as were 800 of these people that voted for Obama and support him die hard, I wouldn’t personally put too much faith in the survey.
November 10th, 2009 at 8:08 am“I refuse to sit by watching families struggle to make ends meet while political pundits, ultra-conservative media talking heads, and the Republican Party blatantly spout misinformation and resort to fear-mongering. It’s not only ludicrous — it’s dangerous and will end up costing our nation dearly.”
…Really? It’s dangerous to speak out against something you don’t believe in and don’t want to see happen? Maybe in China, it shouldn’t be here. Misinformation? Really? I’m sure there is some but 90 percent of the time I see or hear criticism there are section and page numbers backing it up.
“We all know how difficult enacting these important changes is proving to be. At every turn, big pharma and big insurance — along with their cronies in Washington — are throwing up roadblocks and undermining our Democratic reform efforts.”
..Good God I hope so. Why would they want to invite an entity that does not have to compete on a fair and level playing field? Government does not compete, it dominates and it can change laws at will to give itself a competitive advantage. It has unlimited funds and can do things that would put private businesses in jail. Can someone tell me the difference between Maddock and Social Security? If big pharma and big insurance is so against it where are thier commercials? Where are they protesting against it publicly? They aren’t and the only why I can think of is scary as hell. They are afraid. Afraid of the governmental repercussions if this does pass. You should fear the government if you commit crimes, not if you speak out to protect your business.
“It will inject much-needed competition into the insurance marketplace, keep HMOs honest, and ensure that families across the country have their choice of affordable, quality health plans.”
… I just stated how government is not a competitor, it is a dominator. You know, there is a much simpler way to increase competition. Drop state barriers on health insurance companies. We could add one giant competitor with unlimited funds or 5000 individual companies competing on price and service.
“Meanwhile, the GOP is doing everything possible to derail a strong public option and cling to the status quo. They’re bending over backwards trying to protect their big-money supporters in the insurance industry, who are only concerned about their bottom line — while my Democratic colleagues and I are looking out for the best interests of our citizens.”
…From what I have seen, most GOP are for reform, just not this 2000 page monstrosity that is snuck through on a saturday night. Democrats are for the people, republicans are for Big Business. Please, stop this nonsense. I’m a conservative and I’m definately not being paid by big business. For every republican getting campaign money from Phizer, there is a democrate getting funds from UAW. So no one should sling around “special interest” rocks in this glass house.
Think for yourselves people and just use some common sense. Does it make sense that a 2000 page bill is the answer? What is hidden there unread and ready to strike? Should we use the “success” of social security, medicare, and medicade as a basis for the future successs of this? I have a 401k because I was told and believe there will be no social security for me when I retire. Medicare and Medicade are not in any better of a situation. Republicans used 9/11 to put through the Patriot act and democrats rightfully faulted them for that. Is it any different to use hard economic times to push this through? Is that not also using ‘fear’ and ‘misinformation’ for a democratic agenda? Be wary of someone who starts thier conversation by trying to elicit sympathy for the down trodden. His very first sentence is a devisive tactic that only helps continue a class warfare struggle in this country.
Something has to be done, we all know it, we all believe it. But that doesn’t mean Anything shoul be done. Bad legislation can be worse than ’status quo’. Maybe instead of a gigantic 2000 page bill, we try something smaller, see if it helps and if it does, continue there.
November 10th, 2009 at 8:35 amCorrection to above: I meant Madoff. Guess I watched too much Matlock when I was younger.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:07 amJohn, that’s why I started with “I’m not a fan of polls” — yet if it is going to be stated a majority of Americans feel one way or the other, which is something all too many use to try to make it appear they are the majority, polls can suggest at a minimum the breakdown of that particular group.
Doug, most congressional bills are huge, especially for something like this, there are things that could be cut, but the problem is the inability of both sides and the various factions of both sides working together. Then there is the question of who’s actually read the bill, most haven’t…
November 10th, 2009 at 10:34 amLisa,
My point is it is too big. Saying all bills are this big doesn’t really make it ok considering there hasn’t been anything meaningfull passed in any recent memory. Federal Highway Act bill in 1956 was 29 pages long. (http://libertyslifeline.com/2009/09/15/why-do-we-have-1000-page-congressional-bills/)
EVERYONE needs to stop with these huge bills. This is the problem.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:06 pmLisa, I think we agree on polls, I was just pointing out some other interesting conclusions that could be drawn from that one as well as where it could be flawed since they either didn’t ask the demographic questions or didn’t report them. Unfortunately, like you said, that poll really is only useful in determining what those 1,004 people said without further information.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:07 pmJohn, we completely agree on polls, and I think it demonstrates the split the country is facing on this bill, it’s not possible to say all are against or even all are for.
Doug, something this indepth and detailed would be difficult to sum up in under 100 pages, I understand your point, I just don’t see it as something possible to achieve. It’s a great goal, it is something I wish Congress and even our own General Assembly would strive for, then again, I’d be happy if they would write these things in simple plain English rather than Legalese.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:21 pmIt shouldn’t be this indepth and detailed. It is possible to achieve. We need to pressure them that these bills that are this large are just unnacceptable.
If our voices are no longer heard, if we are no longer being properly represented then maybe the tea baggers are not far off in thier protests.
November 10th, 2009 at 12:38 pmI’d suggest that voices are being heard, else there would not be so much coverage and discussion. Though there has not been as much attention to facts, or what both sides do appear to agree on, hopefully that will be more of a focus. Having read the bill, I don’t disagree it could be shorter but it’s impossible to simplify something like this, there are areas that could be removed but the House Republican four page plan was only four pages because it didn’t address most of what this plan does. Though I did like the requirement that health insurance companies cover children to age 25.
I feel I am properly represented, I don’t agree with most of what the tea baggers support but they have the same rights to protest as any citizen and the same rights to lobby their congressional representatives, who then have to decide which constituents will be made happy since it’s clear no matter which side of the health care issue you are on, one side will not be satisfied. Unless the Senate manages to do a better job at being bi-partisan than the House did. My elected representatives don’t always do what I’d like, that’s the reality of the world we live in and why we have the opportunity to either return them to office or select someone new if we feel they don’t represent our needs on a regular basis.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:03 pmYes but they are trying to overhaul too much in my opinion. They are trying to control every possible outcome with this plan and THAT is what is impossible. That is why it will fail if it gets passed. No one can control everything. The more control the less freedom. I like freedom.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:56 pmThe government is trying to attack the approx 13% administration costs of healthcare that private insurance companies represent while pretty much ignoring the 87% portion that represents the costs of health services.
The house bill will continue to shield consumers of healthcare services from the true costs of health care. Who among you know how much it costs for an MRI, EKG, Office Visit, heart surgery, etc.? You’ve never cared about the cost have you? That’s the problem.
Additionally, more than 50% of medical claims are a result of bad personal choices – eating too much, no exercise, smoking, drinking too much, sedintary lifestyle.
The government cannot and will not inject any level of personal responsibility into this solution. Their bill will force people into some level of insurance while doing nothing to educate them on responsible utilization.
Sherrod Brown and his type want to cap private insurance premiums while removing limitiations on claims and enrollment. When your personal expenses rise dramatically and your income remains flat, what happens to your financial situation? You go belly up! The same would happen to insurance companies.
As I stated above, 87% of the private insurance costs go directly to paying for patient’s medical service claims. Adding people to the insured ranks while capping premiums and adding benefits will not do anything reduce the costs of services. The house bill completely misses the target, which leads me to believe that they are not really aiming for a solution. They are building a dependency on the Democrat party, plain and simple.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:35 pmInterestingly enough, that same statistic of 87 on the dollar being spent directly on patient’s medical costs has been used as an argument against tort reform.
I am aware of how much an MRI costs, I’m also aware that hospitals charge those who do not have insurance a higher dollar amount than those who do, since most insurance companies negotiate a lower price. Logic dictates if everyone had insurance, they would qualify for the lower prices, which some could still argue for certain procedures are higher than they should be.
It’s also not agreed upon that the premiums are paid out by that percentage as well as what this health care plan will do.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:58 pmI just saw a Gallup poll on the dobbs program, that would be CNN, that said only 29% of Americans now support the current public health care program being pushed by the house.
There is clearly no mandate for this government take over of 1/6 of our economy. Here is a Gallup poll that I found that shows 54% of the people don’t support the take over.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/124202/No-Clear-Mandate-Americans-Healthcare-Reform.aspx
November 10th, 2009 at 7:34 pmI saw that, which goes along with what I’ve stated, the country is divided, though I don’t see the 54% you are referencing, it states the most recent results as:
Thirty-eight percent now say they would advise their member of Congress to vote against a new healthcare bill this year, while 29% would advise their member to vote for it, and about a third have no opinion.
November 10th, 2009 at 7:47 pmIf this Health Care bill is to be so
November 10th, 2009 at 8:32 pmgreat why doesn’t Obama & his family,
those in the House and Senate go
on the same plan all of us are to be
on??
Sue,
November 11th, 2009 at 7:53 amDon’t forget Unions are exempt from this too. Granted I didn’t see it in the newest version but the newest version isn’t any smaller so I figure they just added to it and did not take much away.
Sue, I asked Marcy Kaptur’s office that very question. I was told the congresswoman has that option. Right, she has the cadillac of health plans paid for at the tax payer expense. It should be law they are covered by whatever debacle we face. Since they voted for it, it should be mandated they are covered by it. If it’s not good enough for them, it’s not good enough for me. Just like how they give themselves raises. We, the people should vote on that. In fact, why don’t our representatives just work full time in the district they serve. Why do they all have to work in DC. It’s far too easy to be influenced by special interest and corruption while inside the beltway. If they work full-time in their own district they are here for their constituents. With technology they don’t have to all work in DC. Our system of government has to change. It’s far too corrupt and caters to special interest instead of the citizens.
This house bill is plain and simply, UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The government can not make me buy something or force me to pay for healthcare for someone else.
November 11th, 2009 at 9:55 pmAccording to a Gallup survey released Wednesday morning, 48 percent of registered voters questioned answered that they would vote for the Republican candidate if the 2010 election for the House was held today, while 44 percent said they would back the Democrat in the race.
Hmmm, seems like folks are getting more and more disgusted with the current administration; I wonder why?
November 12th, 2009 at 12:53 pmIt does not matter what type of health
care we are on, whoever administers
it has the mentality to always look
for some reason to deny
procedures or payment.
Oh, yes, one is able to appeal, but
with the wait one can always be dead
before for a decision of an appeal.
Administrators of health care coverage
always looks for a way out and It has always been that way and will always
be that way.
Now they will be searching, looking and implementing new ways to
November 12th, 2009 at 1:37 pmdeny coverage!