Tweet
The press release today:
FOLLOWING RANCOR AMONG THE RANKS,
BAUCUS ASSURES MONTANA CONSTITUENTS:
"I WANT A PUBLIC OPTION TOO"
U.S. Senator Max Baucus has finally broken his silence regarding his personal position on including a public option in health care reform legislation. Last Monday night (8/17), in an unprecedented conference call to Montana Democratic central committee chairs, the powerful leader of the Senate Finance Committee told his strongest supporters that he supported a public option.
While discussing the obstacles to getting a public option through the Senate, he assured his forty listeners, "I want a public option too!"
The conference call was groundbreaking in that none of the recipients could ever remember this kind of call ever happening before. The teleconference was set up seemingly in reaction to rising discontent among the local Democratic leaders with the Senator’s failure to take a clear position on the issue.
The discussion, which became contentious and rancorous at times, also touched upon the wisdom of creating insurance cooperatives as an alternative to a public option. When several of the county chairs objected, commenting that they did not trust the health insurance companies to police themselves and limit their outrageous corporate profits, Baucus commented, "Neither do I."
In the aftermath of the teleconference, a coalition of eighteen Montana counties in the Senator’s home state decided to move forward with their plan to issue a Unified Statement accompanied by a joint press release. The statement sends a loud and clear message to their Senator: Any health care reform package coming out of his Senate Finance Committee must contain, at a minimum, a provision for a strong public option.
The action is a show of unity not previously seen in Montana political history. The statement asserts, "Here in Montana, the need for real health care reform could not be greater. Families, small business, and small ranches and farms are suffering and being crushed by the rising cost of health care. Thousands of Montanans are uninsured, and many more are losing their homes, businesses and ranches due to exorbitant medical bills."
Calling themselves the Coalition of the United Montana Democratic Central Committees, the group’s statement announces it has "established a position in support of a strong public option as an essential element in health care reform." In specifying the necessary components needed for such a public option, they list:
• National Coverage
• Availability to all Americans
• Portability, which includes maintaining coverage even if one loses his or her job
• No exclusions for preexisting conditions, denial of coverage if one gets ill, or develops catastrophic costs
• Publicly run and administered with full transparency and accountability to congress
• No triggers
Christina Quijano, a Billings physician, is Chair of the Carbon County Democratic Central Committee. Carbon County is located in south-central Montana not far from Yellowstone National Park. Speaking for the Coalition, she pointed out, "For this number of counties from all across Montana to join together sends a strong signal to our representatives in Washington that their constituents here in Big Sky Country are unified and stand firm in their insistence that a public option be included in any health care reform bill."
Senator Jon Tester (D-Mont) has said he would not vote against a public option, while Montana’s sole US representative, Denny Rehberg (R-Mont) remains opposed to such a measure.
Max Baucus, Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, has emerged as a key player in the ongoing health care reform deliberations and, until now, has remained quiet about his personal view. In the final portion of the Coalition’s Unified Statement, Quijano emphasizes Senator Baucus’ significant role in this piece of legislation: "We are counting on Senator Baucus to use his influence and leadership to create the most meaningful legacy of our times, real health care reform. ‘Max, Montana’s Senator’, please don’t let Montana down!"
Among the other counties in the Coalition is Missoula County, where Baucus got his start in politics as a State Representative. Also joining Carbon and Missoula Counties in adopting the Unified Statement are Beaverhead County, Dawson County, Fergus County, Golden Valley County, Hill County, Jefferson County, Lake County, Madison
County, Meagher County, Ravalli County, Richland County, Roosevelt County, Rosebud County, Sheridan County, Sweet Grass County, and Teton County.
I posted the actual resolution and my take on how this happened over at http://montanamaven.com
108 Comments
Good to see you back Maven and thanks for the post. BUT I can hear Baucus also saying, ‘but I can’t get my colleagues to go along with my thoughts on a public option’.
Great post, MM!!!
Exactly. That’s what he said on the call. “I can’t sleep. I just see the number 60″
So is Baucus just stroking the rubes back home before going back to DC to sell them out? When is Baucus up for re-election? Will he run again? Or do you think he will bail for some cushy corporate lobbying group? I know there is supposed to be a delay before joining one, so maybe a “law firm” à la Daschle?
Great to hear!
Great work, Maven. I added a link to your site.
my head aches from banging it against the wall…………jeebus eHHHch Keerist
Baucus needs to be asked about this immediately. anybody have his phone number?
[g]
Hi, MM. As you know, “availability to all Americans” is not a component of HR 3200, much less the Senate HELP committee bill. It’s not a part of the line in the sand drawn by the FDL whip pledge, or the HCAN criteria for a supposedly strong public option, or the criteria for voting against a bill lacking a PO voiced by any of the 60-odd Representatives standing up to the Axis of Baucus.
Under HR 3200 the possibility — not a mandated provision, just the possibility — of extending availability of the public option to some of the millions of American with large group plans doesn’t materialize until 2015.
In short, “availability to all Americans” is as off the table in 2009 as single payer. The Congressional Progressive Caucus included it in their criteria for a robust PO, but they’ve walked away from it.
This places the Montana Democrats to the left of Obama’s “left of the left.” That places single-payer stalwarts (who, of course, are merely fighting for what 60% of Americans want) to the left of the left of the left of the left.
Back to the Montana group, what are they advocating should happen if the 2009 bill doesn’t include a PO available to all Americans? Are they saying it should be voted down? I’m on board with that (at least for the PO portion of the legislation). But I’m wondering if your friends have worked the question through.
Note, don’t forget the recent Kos poll showing Baucus taking a fair hit in home state.
here
http://www.politico.com/news/s…..26354.html
Sadly, we can’t believe this cretin. He has waffled for months and not behaved like a Democrat once. He is also on the dole to the health care industry. Anyone that takes him at his word is a fool. Where has he been when the President needed some strong voices coming out of the Finance Committee? He has been AWOL cozying up to the equally cretin Grassley. So, his voters are sqeezing him. He is likely to wessel out if the public lets him. The public needs to make it completly untenable for him not to demand a public option.
Great work, Maven. Keep his feet to the fire!
“I want a public option” or “I want a public option and world peace”? I’m guessing it’s #2, but the more they say it the harder it will be to vote against it, so I’ll take it.
I don’t trust Baucus. He’s not a Democrat in any real sense of the word.
Baucus just got elected for 6 more years. Whether real health care reform passes or not, he will have a job. What we need to do is make sure he doesn’t have a legacy. No National Forest. But maybe it is now beyond that. Maybe none of them care anymore, even about legacy.
Hugh, I adore you, but the people behind this Montana initiative are physicians, PhDs,…um really smart people and no rubes. We are doing something really courageous and scary. Help us.
ralphbon- that is a great series of questions. And, I will avidly look for the response.
My first clear thought when I was trying to figure out this mess was “the devil is in the details” (months ago)…. I have more details now, but still, the devil remains.
If he’s trust worthy or not really isn’t the point here. The point is a coalition of Montana Democrats got together and made a very strong statement affirming the need for a Public Option in their state. That had never happened before. Its a big deal.
Thanks for the news.
If I understand the post and comments right, the voters and local Democratic councils have scared Baucus into doing (or saying) something.
If the local Montana Democrats have managed to scare Baucus into getting off his backus, then you people need to send trainers out to other states and Washington DC.
No telling what he will do down the road, but this is a very positive development for now.
It’s a very big deal and they deserve kudos for doing this. I hope that Baucus listens.
Maven, what can we do to help you?
Again, Baucus needs to be asked at first opportunity about this. Get him on record, confirm or deny.
The actual quote was “I want a public option. Tool”
We’ll see who gets tooled.
Yes, it is a big deal. And, if you ever visit Billings, I bet you’d really like it as I did. But like Stephie said, ” Manhattan, (one burrough alone in NYC) has more people than Montana, and North Dakota combined. How’s this Baucus guy sticking a crowbar in the millworks?
I would add very strong Swiss/Netherlands style insurance regulation to the list : state and federal approval for rate increases above regional guidelines as negotiated by industry, government, professional and consumer groups (Dutch), and completely open insurance company books, records, data and analysis for federal audits (Swiss).
Something for Max to tell the rubes back home
while he’s washing the foie gras down with Chateau d’Yquem.
I read a poll that over 70% of US populace still prefers a strong public option. I guess this summer’s big corporate diversions -intimidation by astroturf and media big lie campaign didn’t work. If 55% of Montana Dems don’t like Baucus’ tired old act, and the local Democratic leadership is in revolt, and everyone heard what Baucus said, I would think he would think a few times before backtracking. At least I hope so.
words. just words.
That’s exactly the point, Henk. Before this in Montana, and maybe in other states, county party officials tow the line. But this seems very much like a rebellion. If you go to my site, I expound a bit. There is a great guy in a county in Montana named Dan that compares this to the Declaration of Independence. We have written letter after letter. We have gone to the offices of Baucus, Tester, and Rehberg. They look at us like King George looked at Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin.
I don’t want to equate myself and others here in Montana yet with the Founders, but I do think that we are crossing some line here. And if I disappear, please come and find me.
That’s exactly the point, Henk. Before this in Montana, and maybe in other states, county party officials tow the line. But this seems very much like a rebellion. If you go to my site, I expound a bit. There is a great guy in a county in Montana named Dan that compares this to the Declaration of Independence. We have written letter after letter. We have gone to the offices of Baucus, Tester, and Rehberg. They look at us like King George looked at Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin…non-entities.
I don’t want to equate myself and others here in Montana yet with the Founders, but I do think that we are crossing some line here. And if I disappear, please come and find me.
Maven, are you surprised that Tester has turned out to be somewhat conservative? I am – thought he was a really good guy and with us on the issues.
Well goddamn me to hell and gone. Maybe all those emails actually had an effect on old Mad Max. Of course I will believe it when I see it, but maybe I don’t have to start looking for a primary challenger just yet.
Tester always was a mixed bag, as is common among Democratic politicians here in Montana. He is with us on some things, but not always on others (guns in the national parks for instance was imminently predictable for any Montana politician who wants to get re-elected).
Hopeless cynic that I am, I’m guessing that the Baucus version of a “public option” isn’t what most of us have in mind. I’m predicting that Obama/Emmanuel/Baucus have cooked up some half-ass scheme that will have the enthusiastic support of the healthcare industry, and they are calling it a “public option.” The devil is in the details….
If I were the Montana Democrats, I would keep looking for primary challenger! Maybe not all super loud and noisy like, since that might hurt the old so-and-so’s feelings. But just in case. Baucus deserves a case of the galloping fantods over his next election.
This post is NOT about Baucus.
It is about people making clear to those who supposedly represent them that actually doing so is not optional.
It is about people empowering themselves that they may realize a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
This is a pioneering act of courage. May people in other states take note and emulate what is being done in Montana.
Twain’s question @ 21 is the one that matters.
Thank you, montanamaven for this post, and for being in the vanguard of REAL change.
DW
When Baucus denied Single Payer advocates even one seat at the table during the testimony, I figured that we were looking at the Billy Tauzin of this “health care reform”. Two years isn’t long to wait for such a pot o’ gold.
Is this the breaking of a new dawn or are we being f’ed with again?
Well, then, Senator Baucus – provided you aren’t in fact taking orders from the President to bury the public option and/or to “write” a White House-drafted bill; orders which seem increasingly probable based on leaks about your secret Party-directed wheeling and dealing – there seems to be a simple solution to your 60-vote nightmare: Let the legislative process proceed, starting with open meetings of the full Senate Finance Committee.
How many in Montana know that the Baucus-chaired Senate Finance Committee (and its subcommittees), has yet to hold a single public meeting [as compared to sparsely-attended, testimony-gathering hearings, which ended in May] to work on a health insurance reform bill, of any kind? Is that how the public’s business is conducted in the Montana State Legislature?
There are 99 other Senators who could conceivably propose the ideal amendment to any finance committee-passed bill, so as to bring the entire Senate on board. Who knows? That’s the beauty of “crowd-sourcing” – formerly and formally known as the legislative process in a representative democracy, open to ideas from all, that may be rigorously and honestly examined and debated in the full light of day.
What’s with your top-down death grip on this legislation, Senator Baucus? Is Obama unwilling to let our federal legislature work its will? Are you? If so, what possible justification can you have for that, except for a desire to guarantee, in advance, a particular outcome for your, and/or your Party’s, financial backers, even if that outcome thwarts the majority will of the Senate and even your own will as a representative of the people of Montana?
Why are you selfishly hoarding the bill drafting to yourself and a few of your friends, instead of involving the Senate Finance Committee’s full membership? Why won’t you let the committee you chair contribute, as they are entitled to do, in public, to the writing of a bill by their committee, never mind the potential of unfinalized legislation to eventually get a majority or super-majority of votes, post-committee, post-merging with the HELP Committee-passed bill, post floor-amendment and debate, and finally, post-conference, perhaps even post-veto? Who gave you a crystal ball to see to the end of that process, and where can we get ours?
The Senate HELP Committee has already publicly considered and acted upon hundreds of amendments from Senators of both Parties. Why are you afraid to let the Senate Finance Committee do the same?
Or is it in fact President Obama who is afraid to see the Senate work its will – and you somehow consider it worthy of your office and its public trust to play the part of the Loyal Party Man for him, publicly taking the fall for Your Leader, so as to allow him to blamelessly thwart the will of our Congress, at the expense of the Constitution’s separation of powers and the well-being of the American people?
Good point(s).
What Montanamaven and other Dems in the state are doing is a picture of courage and a thing of beauty.
You know what it is.
Well, yes, it is about Baucus, as well as the MT county chairs. Does Baucus want to be seen as going against a significant number (what–about one third as it stands right now?) of his own county democratic chairs?
Anything that shows Baucus as going against the wishes of his own constituents is very important. Would be great to get more of the counties to join the group.
Precisely so, wpf.
DW
That’s quite a post. You must have more energy than I have.
Still, and good points.
right on DW !
these people need to be identified and thanked – they need to know we have their back.
and montanamaven this is what Jane was talking about wrt to regional blogs and what their pushes are accomplishing – and that 42% JAR coming on it’s heels certainly helps to drive the point home
excellent, excellent work
Respectfully, CO;
THIS is about the people, (we, the people) Baucus is simply the fool who presumes to ignore us and dances to the tune of those too big to give a damn.
This is the herald of a sea-change in the relationship between the the people and those who would abuse their trust.
We’re moving into un-chartered waters. Democracy comes alive from the will (and actions) of the people, not as a result of the arrogance of those who love power.
DW
More than that, these include some of the largest the counties and some of the most reliably Democratic. This is a really big move and I need to see if I can hook up with maven at some point on this.
A-yep.
Baucus is used to winning by comfy margins. The results of the recent poll cannot have been pleasant reading for him.
He’s running scared for the first time in a very long time.
This declaration will have him running even more scared, since these people have real clout in the Montana Democratic Party. If they are pissed off at him, he really could get his first primary challenger in a long time.
Uncharted waters indeed–not only because of these sturdy Montanans, but the ongoing fund drive and JH’s efforts. Interesting times.
Absolutely, CO.
DW
I hope this news and the results of bottom up pressure reaches other states and we can finally get somewhere in this stalemate. We all need to get out and put pressure on our Senators and Reps. Keep calling, keep writing and show up for anything local to keep the momentum going. I think progressives got the attention of the White House and Congressional Dems this week. This is democracy in the works and we can’t just accept the status quo without a fight.
I am not without admiration for our Pres. but I also don’t blindly follow his leadership and accept an unacceptable outcome. Spread maven’s post wherever it might make an impression.
I commented with my girl friend’s computer and forgot she was signed in.
Anyway, great job, MM. I put it on dkos.
In a “Representative” democracy, linda, “the mandate” come from the people. The servants of the people, those who represent them, are morally bound to manifest that mandate exactly as the people desire.
In a genuine “Representative” democracy, THAT is the actual “top-down” “pressure”.
Clearly, everybody seems to have forgotten that.
Perhaps we should simply insist on nothing less than Participatory Democracy and cut out the “middle” men and women?
Perhaps, that is the Public Option we should really, ultimately, pursue?
DW
This rebellion is giving people hope, MM!
Look, Baucus is just mouthing that same empty phrase as Obama: “I support the public option.” Their unspoken subtext is: “… but I’m not going to let it see the light of day.”
Obama is more blunt. He is on record as saying that it is but “a sliver of health-care reform.” He and his subordinates have repeatedly made it clear that the public option is expendible, neither necessary nor sufficient, a possibly good idea but we’re soliciting other good ideas.
It seems quite clear that the Democratic leadership including the White House and Reid and probably, but less clearly, Peolsi have made a deal with the insurers not to let the public option go forward. The problem they face is how to do that without the fact that they’ve sold out becoming headline news.
I agree to your point of “the mandate” and “top-down pressure” and also have a clear understanding of a “Representative” democracy. I am actually agreeing with your earlier post about Democracy coming alive through the will of the people. Our usual disappointment in the representatives we voted for has become the bane of our democracy. Just because an election is over does not mean we cannot urge them to remain true to their pledges and not succumb to their love of power. I’m not particularly interested in a Participatory Democracy, sounds too difficult to get anything meaningful accomplished. Let’s just try to work within the framework we have. I remain hopeful, but I’m a glass half-full kind of gal.
Do you believe there is any chance they may be forced to change their not so subtle subversion of health care reform by recognizing the “will of the people”?
Participatory Democracy would certainly require far more thought and civic education than we have as yet experienced as a species, or, indeed, as nations.
One hopes that we may improve this “representative system” which we have sufficient to do those things which the world and our times demand of us.
To date, for the most part, and certainly over the past forty years, the extant system could hardly be said to have accomplished much of “anything meaningful”.
I confess, linda, to being a dreamer … as regards certain things. And the ability of society to thoughtfully, reasonably and intelligently determine its own future … and deal honestly with genuine crisis, when it arises … may well not be in the cards.
Yet I am hopeful that there is room and purpose for pragmatist and dreamer alike in a just, humane, and sustainable future.
DW
Hope this Baucus isn’t a dirty double-crossing four flusher like Lieberman.
Baucus needs some explaining and convincing to do.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply the people in Montana were rubes but rather that was the way Baucus was treating them. It seems odd that Baucus would only come out for the public option now. Where was his leadership on it before?
DW, I am hopeful as well. Doesn’t look as though I’ll be leaving a better world to my children and grandchildren but maybe we can begin to alter the course at least to some extent. I agree that education, and not only “civics”, would be a welcome starting point. At least I think you agree with that. I have encouraged all three of my children to reach their full potential and they are all engaged in worthy endeavors and actively participate in ethical and morally grounded professions. And now I will continue my fight for the best democracy I can imagine, always knowing it is essentially a pipe dream.
“Any chance”? Yes. Specifically, I suspect that his sudden drop in the polls among democrats has come as a bit of shock to Obama. Whether it’ll cause him to alter course, I can only hope.
I agree with all you say.
Especially as regards the world we shall be leaving to our children (I have four) and their children.
Those of us of a certain age … must understand that our principle endeavors should be centered around that concern.
A distinct pleasure, linda, to share thoughts with you this evening.
DW
Don’t forget Baucus has also seen a drop in MT. That, and a rebellion among a significant number of his party county chairs will certainly have him thinking.
I’ll believe it when I see it OUTSIDE a private conference call, frankly. His campaign coffers are far more dependent on PhRMA and Big Medicine than on a bunch of county committee chairs.
Max is a master of speaking out of both sides of his two-sided face. A walking, talking advetisement for Term Limits.
did he say that?
It IS outside the conference call. That’s what the press release did.
I dont know why these idiots havent seen this coming. The MSM wont touch it but there is strong, majority support (in both parties) for the PO. the insurance industry is slightly less popular than the IRS. The “blue dogs” must know that the republicans will tear into mandates like raw meat.
look how pissed the LIBS are, when the militia crowd whiffs that people probably will be killed.
“That’s why Senator Baucus is focused on crafting legislation that will lower costs, improve quality and get 60 votes in the U.S. Senate.”
why do the persist in that lie!!!?? when everyone knows that the co-ops
will increase, not lower costs.
Because they’re Politico. They’re not a news organization–they’re a gossip rag meant to push discussion in certain directions…
Hugh, well his leadership was just of the “make me do it” kind, and I guess his montanans are endeavoring to do exactly that. Of course, it would be much cleaner if they him say “I support Medicare for All.” It’s a lot harder to get out of that one, than it is to pass a piece of crap and say “look it’s a PO.”
Hi montanamaven, Great post and terrific activity for you and your friends. Keep it up. In a small state (population-wise) like Montana, I’ll things are a lot more personal than they are in states with a lot more people. Baucus has a rep to uphold there, and he won’t like it much if people think he’s a lying piece of slime who talks out of both sides of his mouth. Am I right about this?
Right. I hope that this backlash against their treachery will sober up the White House and their Gang-of-Six, and Harry Reid too. They are being way too clever, too clever by half.
Great! But montanamaven, you said you were on the call. Why did you not post the news of Baucus’ comments on your blog back on 8/18? There was no mention of his comments when you posted “Mad as Hell Docs” on 8/18. Why 6 days for a press release?
Thats great about max wanting a public option, i was just thinking i’d like to have a public option too. i wish one of us were a senator
“Baucus just got elected for 6 more years. Whether real health care reform passes or not, he will have a job. What we need to do is make sure he doesn’t have a legacy. No National Forest. But maybe it is now beyond that. Maybe none of them care anymore, even about legacy.”
We should start naming cemeteries after these Blue Dogs and Republicans. Point out to them the victims of their intransigence and greed will daily be reminded of who sent their family members to the grave prematurely.
Somebody changed my title. My title was Rancor in the Ranks: Rebellion in Montana’s Democratic Central Committees. As someone above noted, this is about democracy more than Baucus. Our state officers convention is on Friday and Saturday. We will pick a new state chair and other officers. One of the candidates for state chair told me that he was good at messaging and that the Dems needed to get their message down to three clear ideas. I told him that I thought the problem was that no one knew anymore what a Democrat was. I said that a Democrat should be the one a person in a precinct goes to for help. It was about building trust. It can’t just be about pork projects.
Too many neighbors are hurting financially. Too many neighbors have dropped their health insurance because they can’t afford it even if their employer pays part of it. Too many neighbors are frightened of the future. We county officers are just saying that we will fight for our neighbors’ civil rights.
Guess I better get my body armor ready for this week’s convention.
great diary, great action. thank you.
request to mods:
please change montanamaven’s title back to the one she wrote. it’s not right to change a diary without permission of the writer and it’s irksome to the reader who thinks she is reading montanamaven’s writing (of course the exception is to comply with site rules, in which case the mod note makes clear what was done).
many thanks to all mods for the great work they do.
I’d add just a suggestion–might be worthwhile to keep this up and visible on the front page.
As a “post-script” …
Those who oppose true universal health care as a fundamental human right, because it would “cost too much”, could be likened to those who opposed ending slavery in this nation (and throughout the world) on “economic” grounds.
DW
I am chair of a small county. The lead county trying to get people unified is Carbon County (Red Lodge). It was their idea to form a coalition because we had all tried individually to have a dialogue with not much response. So they worked out the statement and got as many counties as they could to be part of the initial statement. I got the press release from Ken in Carbon County at around 5PM yesterday.
This is a comment to remember.
Need link. Cannot find this on Bacus’ web site.
Seen lots of references to “obscene” insurance company profits.
Wellpoint, the biggest, had a profit margin of 4% of income. It had return on assets percentage of 5.8% over the last five years. By contrast, Dell has 12.1%.
So, using Wellpoint as an example, eliminating profits totally would lower costs by only 4%. Eliminating ALL administrative costs and employee costs–meaning if all the insurance company employees, managers and line people worked for free and their landlords gave them free rent and the utility companies gave them free electricity, etc., you would only save about 15% in cost. About 85% of every dollar they get in re-spent to pay the bills from doctors and hospitals. So, eliminate it all, and you only get 15% or so in savings.
As we all know, the public option employees are not going to work for free and the electricity company is not going to give them free electricity.
The real “demon” is the cost of the services themselves. Not the insurance company. And why are the insurance company turning down people with pre-existing conditions, etc., something they did not do so much 10 years ago? They are doing it because the cost of the services themselves have gone up rapidly in recent years.
The insurance companies are the wrong bogey man here. The skyrocketing cost of health care–one of the big reasons cited for the need for reform–is due to the skyrocketing cost of the services themselves.
The public option is a pipe dream of benefits (other than taking everybody in–which will increase the number of people chasing the same supply of help–further driving up costs) if the real cause of the sharp increase in costs is not pinned down and solved.
The Medicare solution is simply to establish price controls. “We will only pay for so much for that procedure.” That works when you have other private fund paying customers who can subsidize it.
As we know, Medicare has not increased its payments rates in the last 5 or 6 years while the costs of delivering the services has gone up 25%. Maybe one reason for the skyrocketing costs recently for private insurance consumers has been that the doctors and hospitals have had to increasingly subsidize the Medicare patients by charging those with private insurance more.
A public option will only increase this problem.
But, the real question is “Why are the services themselves going up so quickly in cost?”
cregan, have you an opinion on this? Fee-based system would be one element, don’t you think?
Of course it is not on his website.
It is a press release from Democratic County Central Comittees.
Baucus told them it, but he may not mean it.
He is facing a rebellion from Montana Democrats.
what value does the Health Insurance industry add to the US economy? They don’t build or design anything, the don’t add to scientific understanding or improve transportation or telecommunication.
what am I missing? What does the Health Insurance industry add to the US economy?
I think the insurance companies lost money in bad business investments and paying their CEOs too much and they want their hands on the 47 million uninsured many of whom are healthy. Just a thought.
Good heavens to Murgatroyd!
Sufferin’ dog hairs!!!
jrubin22, it would seem that you are suggesting that those who pick up the garbage are more productive than any number of very wealthy and respected members of the upper crust./sssssssssssssssnark
The sheer gall (on whose part, I shall not say) of “it” all.
DW
Must Read:
While apologists argue that cost controls might ruin “1/6th of our economy”, their argument begs the question–”why is one-sixth of our economy based on ripping off the american people?”
Excellent, CO.
Both the “catch” and the comment.
DW
I think cregan’s points are well taken. The fee for service model (among many other factors, I’m sure) helps to drive our costs way beyond anything that can be called “reasonable”. So Big Insurance is not the only problem, by a long-shot.
Completely agree, CO.
This wider discussion should have been carefully initiated and sustained by the Democratic party … as long ago as the run-up to the Clinton’s very half-hearted “try”. The D party seems to have been more interested in itself, however, and they seem slow learners even now.
DW
I’m new here, this is my first comment… bear with me as I learn the ropes!
Anyway, I’ve lived in Billings, MT now for about 17 years. It’s been a frustrating place to live because it’s rather conservative. But this “rebellion” has given me some hope. A few weeks ago my wife and I met Ray Tracy, chair of the Yellowstone County Democrats, at a MT Conservation Voters cookout. We had a good conversation with Ray and this morning we both e-mailed him asking him to support this initiative. Let’s hope he does that.
hi paulw, I’d be interested in hearing what comes of your email.
Welcome Paul W. And thanks for contacting Ray. He needs to hear from you about this. He thinks Max “is doing the best he can”. He said in an email to chairs
Ray heard Jon Tester give a speech at a fundraiser where he gave the conventional MT line that we need to unite behind our leaders who know what they are doing. I respectfully disagreed with him. Jon has voted against bankruptcy reform and against caps on usury interest rates. So, no, I won’t listen to him about trusting Max because he knows more than we do. Nuh uh. I’m not being Charlie Brown to Max or Jon’s Lucy anymore.
maven, has there been any MT press on this today?
MM, I live in Oregon and only know Montana through about six vacations to Glacier NP over the last nine years, and the drives to and from there via Kalispell and Missoula. I have found the Montanans I’ve encountered to be polite and open; looking around it seems like a moderate Republican state, with working class leanings and a love of the beautiful country there (which may, if I read correctly, have lead to the elections of Sen. Tester – a Blue Dog in sentiment if his votes are to be believed – and Gov. Schweitzer, despite the close loss dealt to Obama).
What can non-Montanans do to help?
Agree about the mods changing the title of MM’s post. There is a sometime tendency here at FDL to personalize political issues (in this case make it about Baucus instead of the Dem party rebellion in MT).
This shows a shallow reading of human nature, and a desire to demonize, also an ultimately and provably failed long-term strategy.
(snark) Let’s not copy the Fox approach, OK? We’ll lose advertisers… ( /snark )
You are right. And we should get rid of those home insurance companies and auto insurance companies while we are at it.
Or at least require the auto insurance companies to accept people no matter how many accidents they have had or how many drunk driving tickets they have received. They are just like many in the health field who didn’t know that eating fat, getting no exercise and smoking might cause them to have health problems that might get them turned down for a policy.
While we’re at it, get rid of the life insurance companies too! I mean life is a basic birthright, what reason should those insurance companies make money off of life.
And, by the way, what do you do, and why don’t you do it for free? I am sure some of your friends and neighbors could use what ever you do for free.
CO, I have only opinions about why the cost of health care services have gone up radically. I don’t know enough about it to say for sure. I was hoping some insiders who work in doctors offices might have some idea. Or, someone else with the inside story.
The costs are out of control, but they don’t get that way by magic or bogey men. With a few exceptions, dishonesty can raise prices for a short time, but not for the long period shown.
You need the real “why.” In other words, there are real reasons for the sharp rise. There may be more than one. Generally, you might look for what changed when the rise began.
Insurance companies existed long before the sharp rise began. And they don’t dictate raising prices anyway. If anything, they dictate lower prices if they dictate anything at all.
In a certain way, we can mark off some items that are NOT the reason.
1. insurance companies for the reason above
2. “Capitalism” since many markets using capitalist principles do not have sharp rises. Capitalism is not per se the cause, though the principles of supply and demand might have something to do with it. Also, the health care market operated under capitalism for many years with no sharp, sustained price raises.
3. drug companies since drugs are a very small part of the bill for a $100,000 operation
You might also say the fee for service model since that also has been around many years without causing a sharp price rise.
There is SOMETHING causing it. But what? Find that, and fix that.
My guesses, and they are only guesses, are a few. Lawsuits and the additional wasted services they engender. Subsidizing Medicare reimbursement shortfall by billing private care patients more in general.
But, those are only guesses.
There has been no press so far that I know, but look for a story by John Adams of the Great Falls Tribune because he is internet savvy and saw the story here on firedoglake and got a hold of me and I directed him to the guy in charge of the press release, Ken, who is a Carbon County Democrat. I would imagine the stories may appear tomorrow.
And I want to thank Selise for questioning changing my title. My post was not an attack on Max, but a call to arms as to what our jobs as citizens are. I thought the campaign proposed by the Carbon County dems deserved my support. The chair is a doctor and cares about this issue passionately and deeply. In a very conservative county they often have between 20 and 40 people attending their monthly meetings. This is a county of 9,552 people, so that is an active group. They did the impossible and got a Democrat elected to the state legislature and I think that is a first or at least in decades. So they were feeling good about themselves and believed the refrain that if we elected Democrats we would get health care.
FYI, my county is the size of the state of Rhode Island, has not one stop light, and has 3500 people.
Thanks for the revealing response.
Sounds pretty good to me!
montanamaven: no word from Ray yet. I’ll sure let you all know when and if I do. (I’m new to this site… how do I get to this thread from the home page? I’ve had to log on, then Google on the phrase “firedoglake montanamaven” to get here. I shouldn’t have to use Google, should I? As I said, I’m new here!)
I know a few folks at the Billings Gazette. Do you supposed it’d be ok for me to send them this release? But this release surely must have gone out to all the MT papers. Good that the Great Falls Trib may pick up on it. They’re not a Lee paper as in the other major MT cities, they seem to have a little more leeway. I’d also like to see it on CommonDreams.org, my favorite website. I’m a paying supporter to that site.
So you’re in Sweetgrass Co.? Beautiful place, I have some family there.
I remain encouraged by this conversation!
BTW, MM, before this thread scrolls off the page, I am so heartened and impressed by your posts and the work of Montana progressives. Hope my comment @10 wasn’t so analytical as to imply criticism.