Health care worth fighting for

IF THE Democrats plan to strong-arm health care reform through the use of the reconciliation process, then they should use it to pass H.R. 676--the "Expanded and Improved Medicare for All" Act.

Despite Republican opposition to most of the health insurance reform proposals coming from Congress, the president, in his already infamous compromising style, is reaching across the aisle, indicating that he is "still open to Republican ideas."

The attacks by the right wing on health care reform are just one of the factors giving a sense of foot-dragging in Washington. Another factor is the president's inability to use his party's majority in both the House and the Senate to pass meaningful reform. In Obama's latest plan, he is touting its "maximum flexibility" in order to get the most support in bipartisan fashion.

Since they are using reconciliation--a legislative process in the U.S. Senate intended to allow consideration of a contentious budget bill without the threat of filibuster--then the rhetoric coming out of Washington should be about raising taxes on the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans in order to budget for reform. President George W. Bush was able to use this process to get his tax cuts pushed through Congress multiple times throughout his presidency.

Instead, President Obama is talking about raising the threshold for taxing "Cadillac plans" to the year 2018 and reducing co-pays in Medicare by the year 2020, essentially "throwing a bone" to labor and seniors. And, on top of it all, the plan still includes a mandate to buy into private insurance with absolutely no mention of the legendary public option.

It's almost as if the administration and the insurance companies are trying to play chess with the American public.

Incidentally, as the president sheds light on his "bold" new plan, insurance companies throughout America are being reported as raising premiums by 39 percent--and as much as 56 percent in some states!

So "tough on Wall Street" President Obama is proposing a "Health Insurance Rate Authority," which will effectively add another layer of bureaucracy. This authority would annually review premium increases by the insurance giants and have the power to approve or disprove rate increases.

It is pretty clear that Washington is doing whatever it can to appease the health insurance industry and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America in his bold attempt to hold together the backwards health care system that the United States boasts is the most advanced and efficient in the world.

If this authority is anything like the Obama administration's bank oversight team, the CEOs at the private insurance companies are being sent a message to relax, and that their profits will continue to soar to new heights.

The American people deserve far better than a corporate windfall disguised as "meaningful reform." According to the World Health Organization, the United States is ranked 37th in health care delivery and outcomes. That means that there are 36 other advanced industrialized countries in the world with better health care systems than ours. These countries include: Canada, Greece, Israel, Costa Rica and the United Kingdom.

What do all these countries have in common? They all have a single-payer health care system.

In Obama's latest State of the Union address, he said, "[I]f anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses, let me know."

Dear President Obama, we're letting you know that H.R. 676, the "Expanded and Improved Medicare for All" Act, will meet all your requests.
Andy Ambler, Single Payer Action Network, Madison, Wis.