Weekly Address: Health Care Reform as the Key to Our Fiscal Future
The President has long noted that skyrocketing health care costs will be disastrous for our long term national debt unless we pass real reform. In this Weekly Address, the President also explains how he will cover the upfront costs of reform by eliminating overpayments to Medicaid and Medicare and driving down costs contributing to governments health care expenditures across the board.
TRANSCRIPT:
Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
Saturday, June 13, 2009Last week, I spoke to you about my commitment to work with Congress to pass health care reform this year. Today, I’d like to speak about how that effort is essential to restoring fiscal responsibility.
When it comes to the cost of health care, this much is clear: the status quo is unsustainable for families, businesses, and government. America spends nearly 50 percent more per person on health care than any other country. Health care premiums have doubled over the last decade, deductibles and out-of-pocket costs have skyrocketed, and many with preexisting conditions are denied coverage. More and more, Americans are being priced out of the care they need.
These costs are also hurting business, as some big businesses are at a competitive disadvantage with their foreign counterparts, and some small businesses are forced to cut benefits, drop coverage, or even lay off workers. Meanwhile, Medicare and Medicaid pose one of the greatest threats to our federal deficit, and could leave our children with a mountain of debt that they cannot pay.
We cannot continue down this path. I do not accept a future where Americans forego health care because they can’t pay for it, and more and more families go without coverage at all. And I don’t accept a future where American business is hurt and our government goes broke. We have a responsibility to act, and to act now. That is why I’m working with Congress to pass reform that lowers costs, improves quality and coverage, and protects consumer health care choices.
I know some question whether we can afford to act this year. But the unmistakable truth is that it would be irresponsible to not act. We can’t keep shifting a growing burden to future generations. With each passing year, health care costs consume a larger share of our nation’s spending, and contribute to yawning deficits that we cannot control. So let me be clear: health care reform is not part of the problem when it comes to our fiscal future, it is a fundamental part of the solution.
Real reform will mean reductions in our long term budget. And I have made a firm commitment that health care reform will not add to the federal deficit over the next decade. To keep that commitment, my Administration has already identified how to pay for the historic $635 billion down payment on reform detailed in our budget. This includes over $300 billion that we will save through changes like reducing Medicare overpayments to private insurers, and rooting out waste in Medicare and Medicaid.
However, any honest accounting must prepare for the fact that health care reform will require additional costs in the short term in order to reduce spending in the long-term. So today, I am announcing an additional $313 billion in savings that will rein in unnecessary spending, and increase efficiency and the quality of care – savings that will ensure that we have nearly $950 billion set aside to offset the cost of health care reform over the next ten years.
These savings will come from commonsense changes. For example – if more Americans are insured, we can cut payments that help hospitals treat patients without health insurance. If the drug makers pay their fair share, we can cut government spending on prescription drugs. And if doctors have incentives to provide the best care instead of more care, we can help Americans avoid the unnecessary hospital stays, treatments, and tests that drive up costs. For more details about these and other savings, you can visit our website: www.whitehouse.gov.
These savings underscore the fact that securing quality, affordable health care for the American people is tied directly to insisting upon fiscal responsibility. And these savings are rooted in the same principle that must guide our broader approach to reform: we will fix what’s broken, while building upon what works. If you like your plan and your doctor, you can keep them – the only changes that you’ll see are lower costs and better health care.
For too long, we have stood by while our health care system has frayed at the seams. While there has been excuse after excuse to delay reform, the price of care has gone up for individuals, for business, and for the government. This time must be different. This is the moment when we must reform health care so that we can build a new foundation for our economy to grow; for our people to thrive; and for our country to pursue a responsible and sustainable path. Thank you.



7 Comments







I am getting pretty darn sick of “George W. Obama.” Not one word of specifics in this piece, whose basic premise I do actually agree with !!
The corrupt sold-out Democrats whose wives are either Republican lobbyists or health-care “executives” include Chris Dodd, Kent Conrad, Evan Bayh, and Barack Obama. They apparently intend to give us what no citizen I have ever talked to actually wants: a mandatory insurance law that provides only a third-rate “public option,” if even that much.
With a little nudging from the Baucuses, the Wydens, and Landrieu’s of the Democratic Party, it ought to pretty easy to make the “public option” so much like the Post Office that no one with any sense will choose it, and no one who chooses will like it.
That’s the recipe to make Obama a one-term President and allow the brain-dead mass media to install the Gingrich or Palin of their choice. Then the Congressional Democrats can go back to lunch with their lobbyists, and wetting their pants every time a Republican looks at them. Clearly that’s what the Congressional Democrats are comfortable with.
Those of us on the left who can actually think need desperately to get ourselves organized into a “party of intelligence.” We need to work with the Democrats when they are pretending to defend the working class, and in holding off the Republicans and bringing sense to the media, but to work against them when they sell us out. Based on their past performance, at least 80% of the Democrats currently in Congress need to be replaced with real Democrats, we must insist on that over and over and over. The smarter ones would begin to change their behavior to please us.
I have phoned Senators Feingold, Kennedy, Leahy, and my own state’s two senators with a version of these comments this week. Please do your part to let them know, we are sick of the sellouts. They can provide real reform and they can enforce the Bill of Rights, or they can get out. Now.
Barack will not fight for his own high rhetoric when it really comes down to it, we must let these clowns know we will no longer support them if they can’t support us, the intelligent ordinary citizens.
Tell me again, please, how cutting $313 billion from the budgets of Medicare, Medicaid (and other programs) is NOT burning the healthcare village in order to save it.
it’s looking like MA reform redux, where reform increased costs and that was then used to justify taking money from programs that provide healthcare for the poor and those in most need.
http://www.citizen.org/hrg/hea…..m?ID=18399
http://pnhp.org/mass_report/
are any of the reform proposals from dem leadship actually expected to bring down total costs in a semi-believable fashion? the only study i’ve seen says NO.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..-Proposals
As otherwhere’s reported.
He just won’t ‘bite the bullet’; if the Dem’s had any smarts for other than currying corporate favors (money for campaigns, etc.) they’d push thru single payer and then use the fear of such being rescinded for their re-election campaigns.
They mention Dodd’s wife serving on boards. Dodd’s income tax return shows that he is heavily invested in medical field stocks. (opensecrets PDF)
****************
” Almost 30 key lawmakers helping draft landmark health-care legislation have financial holdings in the industry, totaling nearly $11 million worth of personal investments in a sector that could be dramatically reshaped by this summer’s debate.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), for instance, has at least $50,000 invested in a health-care index, and Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), a senior member of the health committee, has between $254,000 and $560,000 worth of stock holdings in major health-care companies, including Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck.
The family of Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee drafting that chamber’s legislation, held at least $3.2 million in more than 20 health-care companies at the end of last year.
On that 22-member panel, at least eight senators have financial interests in the health-care industry worth a minimum of $600,000 — and potentially worth as much as $1.9 million. The investors include Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), a senior member of the panel, who holds at least $165,000 in pharmaceutical and medical stocks, and freshman Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), who holds at least $180,000 in investments in more than 20 health-care companies.
The hearings will be led by Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who is filling in for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), the committee chairman, who is battling brain cancer. Dodd’s wife, Jackie Clegg Dodd, serves on the boards of four health-care companies, receiving more than $200,000 in salary and stock from her service in 2008, according to the Associated Press.
Later this month the Senate Finance Committee will take up the debate, with at least a half-dozen senators on the panel holding stakes in health-care companies. Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) and his wife, ketchup heiress Teresa Heinz Kerry, hold at least $5.2 million in companies such as Merck and Eli Lilly. ”
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/06/13-0
http://pfds.opensecrets.org/N00000581_2007.pdf
” Egalitarian societies are more productive than societies in which a mere one percent owns more than some 90 percent of the rest of the population. Since 1980, US productivity declined with the dollar in a race to the bottom. The results may be seen quantified at the CIA’s ‘World Fact Book’ where the US is at the bottom of a list of nations with the world’s largest negative current account balance. It is not coincidental that America became the world’s largest net debtor nation as it joined the ranks of the most inequitable.
American politics has been hijacked by a tiny coterie of right-wing economic extremists, some of them ideological zealots, others merely greedy, a few of them possibly insane. The scope of their triumph is breathtaking. Over the course of the last three decades, they have moved from the right-wing fringe to the commanding heights of the national agenda. Notions that would have been laughed at a generation ago–that cutting taxes for the very rich is the best response to any and every economic circumstance or that it is perfectly appropriate to turn the most rapacious and self-interested elements of the business lobby into essentially an arm of the federal government–are now so pervasive, they barely attract any notice.
The result has been a slow motion disaster. Income inequality has approached levels normally associated with Third World oligarchies, not healthy Western democracies. The federal government has grown so encrusted with business lobbyists that it can no longer meet the great public challenges of our time. Not even many conservative voters or intellectuals find the result congenial. Government is no smaller–it is simply more debt-ridden and more beholden to wealthy elites. “
http://existentialistcowboy.bl…..gnuts.html
WTF? Isn’t going after the most vulnerable in society–the elderly and the poor a neocon attribute? Because going after those that have little chance of mounting a loud protest is the most politically slick move to make?
Note his reference to what’s best for businesses–an elitist view. Why does everything have to come down to what’s best for business while ignoring humanity? Do people have to go without basic healthcare so an executive can make 400% of a worker’s wages?
%#$^&*!