Showing posts with label Joint-session. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joint-session. Show all posts

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Bipartisan Speech, Partisan Session



While the speech was a glamorous one, the behavior in congress was hardly the same case. It was evident the wear and tear from the brutal month of August has taken it's effect on congress. The joint-session was clearly divided by partisan lines, and efforts to reach out across these lines were not evident in either party--excluding the President of course. Yet, while democrats showed their partisanship in the traditional way, by clapping and handing out standing ovations every time the President said something reasonable moving, which in Obama's case was every other sentence. Out of everyone in the democratic congress, my favorite was Nancy Pelosi, who wore a gleaming smile on her face over every word Obama spoke, struggling to contain herself from clapping or standing. Of course, if you watched the speech, you realize she didn't do too fairly with her restraint. On the other hand, she did get one hell of a work out from how any ovations she gave.

While, the democratic partisanship was rather conventional, and humorous, the GOP was a different story entirely. Their partisanship was hardly conventional, and it wasn't humorous. It was hilarious. It made the whole session out to be like a bunch of teenagers in a fight.

There was of course most notably, Sen. Joe Wilson who shouted "You Lie!" in middle of the President's speech, and proceeded to distract himself from the speech and of the glaring eyes of Pelosi and the left--and even the right, with his blackberry. Some of the older members of congress, like Rep. Rosa DeLauro, claimed she had never seen anything like that in her years of congress. Unfortunately, it didn't stop there for Wilson, he has been reprimanded by both sides of the isle non-stop, and his opponent in the 2010 election raised over 100,000 dollars in less than half a day due to Wilson's outburst. Who would of thought two words, two three letter words, uttered at probably the most inopportune time, could cost an election, and possibly a career.

But while Wilson, may be the most outrageous, and doomed, of the partisan efforts, there was still plenty more inappropriate behavior to go around the GOP. From what, I, and most of you who watched the speech live could see, the Republican Party was holding up signs and a stack of papers. The signs were from Republican members such as Louie Gohmert that read "What Bill", "What Plan?", as if he were campaigning for a high school election. The stack of papers were apparently a reference that the Republican Party had a proposed bill--apparently indicating President Obama had not in fact taken their suggestions. Why we haven't heard about these suggestion until they were waved around in the President's face is beyond me. But it seems the President has some apologizing to do--after all, he hasn't really considered the plan of the GOP; a plan they had for a substantial...five minutes. And of course, the partisan nature of the session could be most seen in the discontent faces of the GOP, when ever they weren't texting of course.

If you watched live that's about how partisan it got, however, the Huffington Post reported even more efforts to be uncivil. After the President debunked the "death panel" claim, one republican mumbled loudly enough to be heard at the floor, " Read the Bill!". When the President said he had no interest of putting insurance companies out of business, he got a loud "HA!" from the right side of the isle. Then of course there was the normal, heavy sighing, agitated whispering, and groans at the presidents claims--something that actually is conventional partisanship.

Just how partisan was this session? Well, aside from Obama's speech, the two most bi-partisan moments in the whole joint-session were: John McCain giving his trademark thumbs up to President Obama after he credited McCain with an idea proposed in the bill; The Republican party hooting and hollering, and stomping on the floor as if they were cheering on their team at the Super Bowl, after the President said he was considering the mal-practice reforms the GOP had advocated for.

Woo, bi-partisanship!

Speech To Congress: Standing Ovations, Moving Words, and Screaming Congressman




Yes, it seems the joint-session health care speech to congress was all it was hyped up to be. We saw a reemergence of President Obama as he was during the election, we saw Nanci Pelosi get an amazing workout standing up every other sentence, we saw angry Republicans waiving papers around angrily, we even saw the topic of tomorrows news as Congressman Joe Wilson showed some lack of class.

The speech obviously lived up to expectations in hype but did President Obama live up to expectations in his speech?

Our poll said 37 percent of you wanted him to be clear on the public option, another 37 percent said you wanted him to explain how he will pay for this plan, 11 percent of you wanted him to be emphatic and emotional about the strifes of the current system, and 14 percent of you wanted him to stress a bi-partisan effort. Lets take those one at a time:

Pubic Option: President Obama did, in fact advocate for a public option. And he did so forcefully. He explained the benefits of a public option, such as healthy competition and affordable insurance for everyone. He also dispelled any rumors that went along with it, such as a government take of health care. Obama clearly stated that the notion of the government taking over health care is not true. He made sure the public, and congress, knew that it would only be a option, he even quoted the Congressional Budget Committee in its estimate that only 5 percent of Americans would sign up. However, Obama, eased up a bit and did what I hoped he wouldn't do. He claimed the public option was not a necessity for health reform. While he was still adamant about the option he claimed that he would go for anything that brought costs down. Which is all good and well except for that fact it gives those opposed to reform leeway to move away fro a public option. Nothing really will bring down costs as well as a public option--and any leeway given to move away from a public option is will risk the vote of those on the far left.

Paying for the plan- Obama really scored well with the blue dogs and progressives by outlining how he is going to pay for the plan. When it came time to talk about costs, he cut right to the chase. The first thing he said probably was effective enough to win over a majority of Blue Dog democrats. He said, he will not add a dime to the deficit. Clear. Simple. Truth? Yes. He gave proof, finally. Obama stressed the idea there would be a provision in the bill that would cut spending if the savings anticipated from the reform did not materialize. Boom. There was the left jab. Obama again stresses the savings he will get the inefficiencies of medicare and medicaid, but this time goes on to claim that the rest of the plan will be paid for through the revenues of the drug and insurance companies who will stand to see millions of new customers. Another jab. Think its over? No. Obama is relentless. The reform will charge a fee for insurance companies most expensive policies, not only reducing costs, but providing the capital to pay for reform. There is the right hook. The Blue Dogs are staggering...they are backing down. But here comes the knockout.
Now, add it all up and the plan I'm proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years, less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration.
Ding Ding Ding! That ladies and gentleman is knockout. The Blue Dogs doubt are conquered. So what makes this really a knockout? Because those same centrist wing Blue Dogs voted for the Iraq and Afghanistan War, and the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. So, they should be complaining about costs any longer.

The current system: This one is easy. Obama was tugging on heartstrings from the get go with two heart breaking stories of people who were denied insurance and suffered a high price for it. Check it out:

One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn't reported gallstones that he didn't even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it.

Another woman, from Texas, was about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer had more than doubled in size.

That is heartbreaking, it is wrong, and no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.

As Obama delivered these heartbreaking stories, Nanci Pelosi was fighting to stay sitting in her chair. But pathos wasn't enough. Obama went on, forcefully, to describe what will happen if we will maintain the status quo--and the he wont stand for it. Case closed.

Bipartisanship: Though this definitely wasn't on my agenda, it was on some of yours, and it was on his. President Obama made huge efforts to be bi-partisan and despite the largely partisan nature of the session, most notably from the right, he earned a thumbs up from John McCain for his bi-partisan efforts. All in all, he reached over to the isle include provisions that the Republican party advocated on mal-practice issues, incorporated John McCain's idea, and even gave leeway, much to my disdain, on the public option.

All in all, it was a great speech, aside from the public option part. He may not of hit a grand slam...but at the very least its a home run with two on base.

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Transcript: Obama's address to congress

In case you missed President Obama's congress.... here is the full transcript:


Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, members of Congress, and the American people:

When I spoke here last winter, this nation was facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month, credit was frozen, and our financial system was on the verge of collapse.

As any American who is still looking for work or a way to pay their bills will tell you, we are by no means out of the woods. A full and vibrant recovery is still many months away. And I will not let up until those Americans who seek jobs can find them.

Until -- until those -- until those businesses that seek capital and credit can thrive. Until all responsible homeowners can stay in their homes.

That it our ultimate goal. But thanks to the bold and decisive action we've taken since January, I can stand here with confidence and say that we have pulled this economy back from the brink.

Now, I want to thank the members of this body for your efforts and your support in these last several months, and especially those who have taken the difficult votes that have put us on the path to recovery.

I also want to thank the American people for their patience and resolve during this trying time for our nation.

But we did not come here just to clean up crises. We came here to build a future. So...

So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future, and that is the issue of health care.

I am not the first president to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last.

It has now been nearly a century since Theodore Roosevelt first called for health care reform.

And ever since, nearly every president and Congress, whether Democrat or Republican, has attempted to meet this challenge in some way. A bill for comprehensive health reform was first introduced by John Dingell, Sr., in 1943. Sixty-five years later, his son continues to introduce that same bill at the beginning of each session.

Our collective failure to meet this challenge year after year, decade after decade, has led us to the breaking point. Everyone understands the extraordinary hardships that are placed on the uninsured who live every day just one accident or illness away from bankruptcy. These are not primarily people on welfare. These are middle class Americans. Some can't get insurance on the job. Others are self-employed and can't afford it since buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer.

Many other Americans who are willing and able to pay are still denied insurance due to previous illnesses or conditions that insurance companies decide are too risky or too expensive to cover.

We are the only democracy, the only advanced democracy on Earth, the only wealthy nation that allows such hardship for millions of its people.

There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage. In just a two-year period, one in every three Americans goes without health care coverage at some point. And every day, 14,000 Americans lose their coverage.

In other words, it can happen to anyone.

But the problem that plagues the health care system is not just a problem for the uninsured. Those who do have insurance have never had less security and stability than they do today.

More and more Americans worry that if you move, lose your job or change your job, you'll lose your health insurance, too. More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won't pay the full cost of care. It happens every day.

One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn't reported gallstones that he didn't even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it.

Another woman, from Texas, was about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer had more than doubled in size.

That is heartbreaking, it is wrong, and no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.

Then there's the problem of rising costs. We spend one- and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren't any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages.

It's why so many employers, especially small businesses, are forcing their employers -- employees to pay more for insurance, or are dropping their coverage entirely.

It's why so many aspiring entrepreneurs cannot afford to open a business in the first place, and why American businesses that compete internationally, like our automakers, are at a huge disadvantage.

And it's why those of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it, about $1,000 per year that pays for somebody else's emergency room and charitable care.

Finally, our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers. When health care costs grow at the rate they have, it puts greater pressure on programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

If we do nothing to slow these skyrocketing costs, we will eventually be spending more on Medicare and Medicaid than every other government program combined.

Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.

Nothing else.

Now, these are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system. The question is how. Now, there are those on the left who believe that the only way to fix the system is through a single-payer system like Canada's, where we would -- where we would severely restrict the private insurance market and have the government provide coverage for everybody.

On the right, there are those who argue that we should end employer-based systems and leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.

I have said -- I have to say that there are arguments to be made for both these approaches. But either one would represent a radical shift that would disrupt the health care most people currently have. Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn't, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch.

And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the several -- past several months. During that time, we've seen Washington at its best and at its worst. We've seen many in this chamber work tirelessly for the better part of this year to offer thoughtful ideas about how to achieve reform. Of the five committees asked to develop bills, four have completed their work and the Senate Finance Committee announced today that it will move forward next week.

That has never happened before.

Our overall efforts have been supported by an unprecedented coalition of doctors and nurses, hospitals, seniors' groups, and even drug companies -- many of whom opposed reform in the past.

And there is agreement in this chamber on about 80 percent of what needs to be done, putting us closer to the goal of reform than we have ever been.

But what we've also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have towards their own government. Instead of honest debate, we've seen scare tactics. Some have dug into unyielding ideological camps that offer no hope of compromise. Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned.

Well, the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed.

Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do.

Now's the time to deliver on health care.

Now's the time to deliver on health care.

The plan I'm announcing tonight would meet three basic goals.

It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance for those who don't. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government.

It's a plan that asks everyone to take responsibility for meeting this challenge -- not just government, not just insurance companies, but everybody, including employers and individuals.

And it's a plan that incorporates ideas from senators and congressmen; from Democrats and Republicans, and yes, from some of my opponents in both the primary and general election.

Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan.

First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the V.A., nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.

Let me -- let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.

What this plan will do is make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a preexisting condition.

As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it the most.

They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or in a lifetime.

We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of- pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick.

And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies.

Because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse.

That makes sense. It saves money, and it saves lives.

That's what Americans who have health insurance can expect from this plan: more security and more stability.

Now, if you're one of the tens of millions of Americans who don't currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. If you...

... if you lose your job or you change your job, you'll be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you'll be able to get coverage. We'll do this by creating a new insurance exchange, a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices.

Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It's how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it's time to give every American the same opportunity that we give ourselves.

Now, for those individuals and small businesses who still can't afford the lower-priced insurance available in the exchange, we'll provide tax credits, the size of which will be based on your need.

And all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned.

This exchange will take effect in four years, which will give us time to do it right. In the meantime, for those Americans who can't get insurance today because they have preexisting medical conditions, we will immediately offer low-cost coverage that will protect you against financial ruin if you become seriously ill.

This was a good idea when Senator John McCain proposed it in the campaign; it's a good idea now, and we should all embrace it.

Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those, and especially the young and the healthy, who still want to take the risk and go without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their workers by giving them coverage.

The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don't sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for these people's expensive emergency room visits.

If some businesses don't provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an unfair advantage over their competitors.

And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek, especially requiring insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions, just can't be achieved.

That's why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance -- just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.

Likewise -- likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers.

There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still can't afford coverage, and 95 percent of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements.

But...

But we can't have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees.

Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part. And while there remains some significant details to be ironed out, I believe...

(LAUGHTER)

... I believe a broad consensus exists for the aspects of the plan I just outlined: consumer protections for those with insurance; an exchange that allows individuals and small businesses to purchase affordable coverage; and a requirement that people who can afford insurance get insurance.

And I have no doubt that these reforms would greatly benefit Americans from all walks of life, as well as the economy as a whole.

Still, given all the misinformation that's been spread over the past few months, I realize -- I realize that many Americans have grown nervous about reform. So tonight, I want to address some of the key controversies that are still out there.

Some of people's concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but by prominent politicians that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens.

Now, such a charge would be laughable if it weren't so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie plain and simple.

Now...

Now, there are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms -- the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

(UNKNOWN): That's a lie.

(AUDIENCE BOOING) (ph)

That's not true.

And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up: under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.

Now, my health care proposal has also been attacked by some who oppose reform as a "government takeover" of the entire health care system.

Now, as proof, critics point to a provision in our plan that allows the uninsured and small businesses to choose a publicly- sponsored insurance option, administered by the government, just like Medicaid or Medicare.

So let me set the record straight here.

My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there's choice and competition. That's how the market works.

Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75 percent of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90 percent is controlled by just one company.

And without competition, the price of insurance goes up and quality goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly -- by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by jacking up rates.

Insurance executives don't do this because they're bad people. They do it because it's profitable. As one former insurance executive testified before Congress, insurance companies are not only encouraged to find reasons to drop the seriously ill, they are rewarded for it.

All of this is in service of meeting what this former executive called "Wall Street's relentless profit expectations."

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable.

And the insurance reforms that I've already mentioned would do just that, but an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange.

Now, let me -- let me be clear.

Let me be clear, it would only be an option for those who don't have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5 percent of Americans would sign up.

Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don't like this idea. They argue that these private companies can't fairly compete with the government, and they'd be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option, but they won't be. I've insisted that, like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums its collects.

But by avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits and excessive administrative costs and executive salaries, it could provide a good deal for consumers and would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better, the same way public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students without in any way inhibiting a vibrant system of private colleges and universities.

Now, it is...

It's -- it's worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I've proposed tonight. But its impact shouldn't be exaggerated by the left or the right or the media. It is only one part of my plan, and shouldn't be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles.

To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage available for those without it.

The public option -- the public option is only a means to that end, and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal.

And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.

For example -- for example, some have suggested that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies. Others have proposed a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan.

These are all constructive ideas worth exploring. But I will not back down on the basic principle that, if Americans can't find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice.

And -- and I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need.

Finally, let me discuss an issue that is a great concern to me, to members of this chamber, and to the public, and that's how we pay for this plan.

Now, Here's what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits, either now or in the future.

I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit now or in the future -- period.

I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit now or in the future. Period. And to prove that I'm serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promise don't materialize.

Now, part of the reason I faced a trillion-dollar deficit when I walked in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last decade were not paid for, from the Iraq war to tax breaks for the wealthy.

I will not make that same mistake with health care.

Second, we've estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system, a system that is currently full of waste and abuse. Right now, too much of the hard-earned savings and tax dollars we spend on health care don't make us any healthier. That's not my judgment. It's the judgment of medical professionals across this country.

And this is also true when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid. In fact, I want to speak directly to seniors for a moment, because Medicare is another issue that's been subjected to demagoguery and distortion during the course of this debate.

More than four decades ago, this nation stood up for the principle that after a lifetime of hard work, our seniors should not be left to struggle with a pile of medical bills in their later years.

That's how Medicare was born. And it remains a sacred trust that must be passed down from one generation to the next. And that...

That is why not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.

The only...

The only thing this plan would eliminate is the hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud, as well as unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies...

... subsidies that do everything to pad their profits, but don't improve the care of seniors.

And we will also create an independent commission of doctors and medical experts charged with identifying more waste in the years ahead.

Now, these steps will ensure that you -- America's seniors -- get the benefits you've been promised. They will ensure that Medicare is there for future generations. And we can use some of the savings to fill the gap in coverage that forces too many seniors to pay thousands of dollars a year out of their own pockets for prescription drugs.

That's what this plan will do for you. So don't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut -- especially since some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past...

... and just this year supported a budget that would essentially have turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program.

That will not happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare.

Now, because Medicare is such a big part of the health care system, making the program more efficient can help usher in changes in the way we deliver health care that can reduce costs for everybody.

We have long known that some places, like the Intermountain Healthcare in Utah or the Geisinger Health System in rural Pennsylvania, offer high-quality care at costs below average.

So the commission can help encourage the adoption of these common-sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals throughout the system -- everything from reducing hospital infection rates to encouraging better coordination between teams of doctors.

Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan. Now, much...

Much of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers.

And this reform will charge insurance companies a fee for their most expensive policies, which will encourage them to provide greater value for the money -- an idea which has the support of Democratic and Republican experts.

And according to these same experts, this modest change could help hold down the cost of health care for all of us in the long run.

Now, finally, many in this chamber, particularly on the Republican side of the aisle, have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the costs of health care.

[Cheering]

Now -- there you go.

[Cheering]

There you go.

Now, I don't believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I've talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So -- so -- so I'm proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know...

... I know that the Bush administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these ideas. I think it's a good idea, and I'm directing my secretary of health and human services to move forward on this initiative today.

Now, add it all up and the plan I'm proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years, less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration.

Now, most of these costs will be paid for with money already being spent -- but spent badly -- in the existing health care system. The plan will not add to our deficit. The middle class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of 1 percent each year -- one-tenth of 1 percent -- it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term.

Now, this is the plan I'm proposing. It's a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight -- Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.

But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it's better politics to kill this plan than to improve it.

I won't stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what's in this plan, we will call you out. And I will not...

And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time; not now.

Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it the most. And more will die as a result.

We know these things to be true.

That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed -- the ones who suffer silently and the ones who shared their stories with us at town halls, in e-mails, and in letters.

I received one of those letters a few days ago. It was from our beloved friend and colleague, Ted Kennedy. He had written it back in May, shortly after he was told that his illness was terminal. He asked that it be delivered upon his death.

In it, he spoke about what a happy time his last months were, thanks to the love and support of family and friends, his wife, Vicki, his amazing children, who are all here tonight.

And he expressed confidence that this would be the year that health care reform -- "that great unfinished business of our society," he called it -- would finally pass.

He repeated the truth that health care is decisive for our future prosperity, but he also reminded me that "it concerns more than material things."

"What we face," he wrote, "is above all a moral issue; at stake are not just the details of policy but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country."

One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom, and our healthy skepticism of government. And figuring out the appropriate size and role of government has always been a source of rigorous and, yes, sometimes angry debate. That's our history.

For some of Ted Kennedy's critics, his brand of liberalism represented an affront to American liberty. In their minds, his passion for universal health care was nothing more than a passion for big government. But those of us who knew Teddy and worked with him here -- people of both parties -- know that what drove him was something more.

His friend, Orrin Hatch, he knows that. They worked together to provide children with health insurance. His friend, John McCain, knows that. They worked together on a patients' bill of rights. His friend, Chuck Grassley, knows that. They worked together to provide health care to children with disabilities.

On issues like these, Ted Kennedy's passion was born not of some rigid ideology, but of his own experience -- the experience of having two children stricken with cancer.

He never forgot the sheer terror and helplessness that any parent feels when a child is badly sick. And he was able to imagine what it must be like for those without insurance, what it'd be like to have to say to a wife or a child or an aging parent, "There is something that could make you better, but I just can't afford it."

That large-heartedness, that concern and regard for the plight of others is not a partisan feeling. It's not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character.

Our ability to stand in other people's shoes. A recognition that we are all in this together, that when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand. A belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play. And an acknowledgement that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise.

This has always been the history of our progress.

In 1935, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it.

In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down.

They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind.

You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom.

But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, the vulnerable can be exploited.

And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter -- that at that point we don't merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.

That was true then. It remains true today.

I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road, to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.

But that is not what this moment calls for.

That's not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it's hard.

I still believe...

... I still believe that we can act when it's hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things and that here and now we will meet history's test, because that's who we are. That is our calling. That is our character.

Thank you. God bless you and may God bless the United States of America.

Sneak Peak at Obama's Speech




Today the White House released exerts of President Obama's speech. Lets see if his speech is up to par with the guidelines we have coined as a necessity. Keep in mind, these are just excerpts, there are many more to come.

1) Does he reprimand the GOP for their scare tactics, and does he dispel all rumors about Health Care?

But what we have also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have toward their own government. Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics. Some have dug into unyielding ideological camps that offer no hope of compromise. Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned.

Well the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together, and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do. Now is the time to deliver on health care.


2) Does he provide us with details of his plan?


Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan:

First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.


We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies — because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse.


Now, if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage. We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange – a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It’s how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it’s time to give every American the same opportunity that we’ve given ourselves."


3) Does he talk about the dangers of the current health system?

Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true.


4) Does he call for rational bipartisanship?

"This is the plan I'm proposing. It's a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight — Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.
But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it's better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what's in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.



So far, it is a good start. He hits on almost all of the things he needs to talk about, just in excerpts alone. However, lets hope there is much more of the same in the speech. Also, it is important to note, there is no description of what the public option is in his speech-- we will be looking for that description in his speech.


Stay tuned tonight for his speech to congress and let us know what you think!

Sunday, September 6, 2009

The Bare Neccisities Of Obama's Address to Congress



After two months of having his health care reform propositions be muddled, twisted, and turned in every which direction, the president is ready to take matters into his own hands. It is about time. Frankly, it has taken him to long to take initiative on the health care issue--and he has quite the mountain to climb to make up for his passiveness. As history has proved, a home run speech in front of congress simply won't do the trick to pass an effective health care reform bill--Obama needs a grand slam. Anything short, will be ineffective. Here is what Obama needs to do in his speech to be effective.

First thing, dispel all rumors quickly and decisively. Obama, to put it bluntly, has let the GOP walk all over him with their fear mongering tactics. Aside from a few defensive comments, he really hasn't done much battling these rumors-- really it has been the media doing the dirty work for him. The first thing he needs to do, before getting into the plan itself, is let everyone know, in an authoritative, commanding, almost aggravated fashion that these rumors about "death panels", veteran health insurance, gov. take over of health care, all of it...is nothing but false. However, because he has done such a poor job battling these rumors in the past months, dispelling these false notions won't be enough to get the job done. He is not only trying to win congress, but the American people as well. He needs to reprimand those elected politicians who encourage the rumors--let everyone know that anyone who has progressed these rumors are doing so for political reasons. Point out the hypocrisy in the rumors. Get the message across, these far fetched ideas have no place in the health care debate, and anyone who introduces them should be ashamed.

Second, clearly,concisely, and emphatically address the problems with the current health care system. Make sure everyone understands the problem with the health care industry is the private insurance companies. Too often the President glosses over this section of the argument, leaving the question to many conservatives, who have this notion of American infallibility, that there really is nothing wrong with the health care system. Part of this explanation should be emphatic. President Obama recently gave a speech on health care where he showed more emotion than I have ever seen him show, and it was incredibly effective. When he talks about the horrors of the health care system today, he must, MUST, utilize his incredible charisma, arguably more than any other part in his address to congress. The reason is because congress really already knows a lot of he details in bill--they are writing it. This is for the American people. It seems that of those who understand what the bill proposes, the majority supports it. The chunk of nay-sayers are people who don't understand the need for reform, and don't really understand the bill. These type of people are not going to be persuaded by by facts, or by a clear cut plan. They will be persuaded by rhetoric filled with the pathos of an ailing nation in dire need of reform. Obama's charisma, if used effectively, has the potential to sell this idea to reform to Americans, who simply don't, and really will not, understand the contents of the bill that is being proposed.

Thirdly, clearly address the details of the proposed plan. Most importantly, Obama needs to be clear, crystal clear, on what he wants in a plan, and how he plans to pay for it. This is more for Congress than for the American people, but it definitely wont hurt to have the public hear his plan. He needs to be stone cold on the idea that a public option is must. No more of this wishy washy, maybe co-op, maybe public option crap. We need a public option. That's what we want. That's what you are going to give me. That's the attitude the President needs to take. When it comes to details of the plan, so far, Obama has done a pitiful job explaining. When asked about competition between private sectors and the public option, or about costs or raising taxes, he has either beat around the bush or sugar coated it. He needs to make up for that Wednesday. Give congress a clear cut answer on why private insurance company will be able to compete with the public option. Most of all, explain how he plans to pay for his proposed health care plan. In gaining votes this is the most important part of his speech. If he can effectively produce a rational answer to come up with the 1 billion dollars needed to fund this thing, he will be able to win over the moderate democrats, and maybe even a 1 or 2 republicans.

In short what needs to happen, is the timid, passive, Obama that has shockingly emerged for these last two months needs to disappear. He needs to show the American public and congress, with the confidence and authority he had campaigning that he has full faith in the public option. Any speech that doesn't radiate confidence is a failed one. Any speech that doesn't address these three steps is a failed one. Obama has dug this whole through his passiveness, lets see him get out of it.

I invite anyone to give us what you think is necessary for Obama to do in his speech. I am interested to see what everyone thinks.