Healthcare reform faces hurdles, but industry may be backing it finally

Friday, February 20, 2009

Before the recession began, 46 million Americans didn't have health insurance. Now, according to a report released yesterday by the liberal Center for American Progress, 14,000 Americans are losing health-care insurance every day. It's dire, but a consensus on health care may be taking shape. Many of the leading figures in the nation’s long-running health care debate have been meeting secretly to discuss the need for universal health care. For the details on these meetings, we are joined by Robert Pear, reporter for the New York Times.

For more, read Robert Pear's article, Health Care Industry in Talks to Shape Policy, in today's New York Times.


Robert Pear

Comments [5]

Robert L. Weinmann, MD

In my previous comment about the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), I mentioned that the total annual salary of the 15 political appointees will be $2,475,000. President Obama and Governor Romney did not have much of an idea about how the ACA and IPAB would work (see previous comment and newsletter from which the comment was derived). The relevant sections of the ACA are Sections 3403 and 10230.

Robert L. Weinmann, MD, Editor,

Oct. 19 2012 07:38 PM
Robert L. Weinmann, MD

It wouldn't hurt if President Obama understood the Affordable Care Act (ACA) better. If he did, he might avoid such errors as saying that the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) would be composed of "doctors et cetera." In fact, there is no provision in the ACA that requires physicians to be appointed to the IPAB. Governor Romney failed to catch this slip and missed another chance to correct the president. The appointees to the IPAB will be paid annual salaries of $165,000. The total cost will be $2,475,000. Could this be one of the steps the president has in mind to bolster employment?

Oct. 19 2012 07:27 PM

Is listening to NPR a "right" or a "privilege"? Are the salary levels at NPR a right or a privilege? Can vendors supplying goods or services to NPR expect to be paid as a matter of "right" or a matter of "privilege"?
Please limit your response and reason to the limits of this comment system.

Feb. 20 2009 09:54 AM

The choice, as offered (a "right" vs. a "privilege") is false, and is dishonestly designed to confuse and disguise the issues involved.
How these issues are defined is important because those definitions will create the laws/rules that control all of our actions.
If you have a "right" to medical care, who has the obligation to fulfill that right? Say "the government" has the obligation if you like. What powers are you granting the government to fulfill its obligation?
Say that the government's obligation extends to "paying" for medical care. Who will decide what is a fair / reasonable price?

While President Obama demagogues about his cancer stricken mother, would he require medical personnel to provide care on terms set by the government?
Why not just think of medical care as a service that all have a "right" to purchase?

Feb. 20 2009 09:34 AM
David Nocella

If most of healthcare costs are spent on indivduals in in the later years of their life and if most individuals are Medicare recipients during those years, are the following conclusions valid:

1. The United States by-in-large already provides socialized medicine and
2. Private health insurers by-in-large cover the low risk, profitable portion of the population?

Wouldn't our current socialized medical system be more cost effective if risk can be spread across the entire population?

Feb. 20 2009 09:32 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.