The Velvet StraitJacket

After reading Fox News version of Natoma Canfield ’s plight and after getting over my disgust at the flippant skew of their story,I decided to see just what kind of people Fox news is playing to. I was sure those commenting on the piece would be as appalled as I was after reading that article tripe because who wouldn’t be? This idea that she ‘may’ get financial help for the treatment and that somehow negates her ordeal was so outrageous that even the truly heartless,mindless,GOP sycophant must be taken aback.

Oh how I was wrong.

Before  we get to the truly ugly part of our society, the part that feeds on Fox News and GOP rhetoric..Remember where this started. Natoma wrote a letter to the President explaining her situation to him, she had had insurance and had paid it’s high premiums. She explained that last year she paid “$6075.24 in premiums, $2415.26 for medical care, $225 in co-pays and $1500 for prescriptions.” For all of this, her insurance company paid out a staggering $935 to her benefit. What a wonderful return she pays over $10,000 and the insurance gives her $935. I can’t imagine anyone looking at that and saying “A yup, seems right to me”.. but, they do.

When Anthem sent Natoma a letter letting her know that after being with this company for 11 years,  in 2010, her policy would be increased over 40% to $8496.24.

Natoma had to let the insurance go.

$8500 a year,  that’s over $700 a month… for health insurance. Is this normal and satisfactory to people? Are there a lot of us out there who could afford coverage for one person  for the great cost of $177 a week?

When did this become the normal part of American life, so normal that people across the country are not outrage just at that? $177 a week.. not for food,shelter,utilities.. but health insurance on one person? What she if had to cover a family of four?

That is where Fox picks up her story and where this blogs begins. Natoma said in her letter that she was afraid to think about where she would get the money to pay her bills now that she didn’t have healthcare. A perfectly reasonable fear, a fear that even people with insurance might have just because of the emotions  and costs involved. But to Foxnews and those who champion them, this is the pit of waste they decided to swim in. Instead of going after Anthem, they set their sights on Natoma’s fears.

Natoma Canfield, the cancer-stricken woman who has become a centerpiece of President Obama’s push for health care reform, will not lose her home over her medical bills and will probably qualify for financial aid, a top official at the Cleveland medical center treating her told FoxNews.com.

Sure, Natoma might qualify for aid… might. So there you go people, nothing to see here.. move along.

Of course  gold coins might fall out of her ears tomorrow too, but that doesn’t negate another in a long,long list of examples of an insurance company profiting on the health of Americans.

Natoma could possibly be healed by a local voodoo priest laying hands upon her, that doesn’t change the fact that insurance companies have gotten out of control when it comes to their profit margin.

If this ‘probability’ stopped there, then maybe it could be seen as a ‘feel good’ piece. Ya know, a “Thank God, she has one last thing to worry about in this time of need” maybe it would be ok. But it didn’t and as the comments show, it produced the exact feeling FoxNews hoped and always hopes to provoke in people. Of course “feeling” is a loose translation of the word as you’ll see.

Before that though, there seems to be this running theme everywhere of “Well they can just get medicaid” in one breath and “We don’t need government healthcare paid for by tax-payers” in the other.  A “everyone has insurance because they can just use the ER” repetitiveness that somehow excuses the point of having to use the ER like a primary care doctor instead of a.. ya know.. emergency room. Here’s my question, who is paying for that cost when people who don’t have insurance use the ER?   Who do people think is paying for Medicaid ?  The Fairy-Medical-Mother? Do the people wiping drool off their chin from all their blathering about tax-payer government health care not understand that the medicaid they are telling Natoma to get is tax-payer paid for government healthcare?

I don’t think they do.

While we’re playing in the realm of pretend, what if she paid the extortion to her insurance company and they dropped her after she was diagnosed with leukemia? There is an equal, if not better, chance that  would have happened as there is a chance that she ‘might‘ or will ‘probably’ get medicaid or some kind of charity to pay her bill. Had she been dropped,  then what? Who cares because she could have gone on tax-payer government healthcare, but  as long as she doesn’t pay for her own government healthcare it’s ok?

The idea that anyone could say “Hey  you know what? I think you should pay out $10,000 a year, get $900 paid back and next year pay 40% more and get back less.. “ Is pretty much the stupidest thing I think I’ve ever heard. But it seems to be the common thread these days.  She is after all only a house-cleaner, it’s not like she own AIG or anything important like that.

The idea that anyone would champion a system  that says “Look, be happy.. after all those years of paying into this product and getting no return, now you can go on charity so quit your bitching” is not only the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard but probably the most callous. I can only hope that  Karma X3 finds the people saying this with some event that forces them to seek help from a ‘charity’. I just hope they don’t meet people like themselves at those charities who tell  them to go find help somewhere else. Or worse, tell them they’ve helped too many this month so maybe come back next month and see if they can get some help.

We’re the best country on the planet,  the only SuperPower, the beacon of all and the best we can do is.. “She might get charity to help pay for her illness and she probably won’t lose her house”?

As if that’s even a concern, after reading what the Foxnewies GOP sycophants  think.. she really deserves the loss of her home because she should have paid the insurance company their extortion fee and her mortgage and just stopped eating and watching TV, the lazy bitch.

That’s right, she made a choice folks. She should have paid her insurance instead of her mortgage and really.. she has a TV right? She chose to pay them, so there you go! She deserves everything she gets!  The stupid woman should learn to prioritize, doesn’t she know that the American Dream isn’t to grow up, work hard and buy a house. No! It’s grow up, work hard, pay your insurance even when they’re raping you.

It’s truly disgusting the level of bottom-feeder that the GOP and FoxNews has succeeding in producing. If that comment was the only one like it I would attribute it to a mutant strain of GOP, unfortunately… it’s not

How can that poor insurance company be at fault? All they did was continue to raise her rates to the point where she had to decide between them and her mortgage, shheesh.. it’s her fault for not just doubling her deductible, I mean she only paid out $10,000 in costs last year! Hello! Anthem gave her $900 worth coverage for it, what does she want.. more?

It’s gross isn’t it? I just wish that was it…

As a physician, I recommend we all just not pay our bills.. no one loses their house, no one cares that it’s on your credit and all those non-paid bills really have no affect on the system because the Fairy-Medical-Mother bibbity,bobbity,boos them away.

Are you out of your fucking mind? The solution to “paid for by everyone, shared by everyone’ Universal Health care is? We just don’t pay our bills when we incur them because it’s not like anyone has to pay for it anyway.

Fuck me! Someone shoot me if I get this stupid!

That’s right, why do all Americans have to suffer for the plight of a few..

We don’t need to end slavery, why do all Americans have to suffer for the plight of a few?

We don’t need to desegregate, I mean why do all Americans have to suffer for the plight of a few?

We don’t need to let woman vote and have a right to equal and fair treatment, why do all Americans have to suffer for the plight of a few

There are other ways than following the Progressives like Franklin, Washington, Adams, or Jefferson! We’re Americans, why do we all have to suffer for a few? Jesus! Everyone gets treatment anyway, whether they have the money or not and the great Fairy-Medical-Mother pays for it!

It just keeps getting better doesn’t it?

Do you think if someone explained that the ‘charity’ and the ‘medicaid’ might only kick in when the disease has reached catastrophic levels  and had the person had coverage before it got that bad, it might have only cost the tax payers and charity houses a few hundred dollars instead of a few million, they’d understand?

Yeah, I don’t think so either.

That floozy-trash was Natoma’s sister. John Boehner was right though, the GOP is doing everything they can to stop health reform.

I don’t know about you, but after reading the stirrings from the FoxNewies- GOP sycophants I feel unclean. More than that though, I feel frightened that one day a candidate that holds these peoples beliefs as his/her own could one day rule this country. God help us when that day comes.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Humana spent $1.3M lobbying federal gov’t in 4Q (sfgate.com)

I adore ekg.  For years she has been my liberal foil, challenging my assumptions and sharpening my arguments.  But lately, she has just seemed …off.  Like virtually every liberal worth his or her bureaucracy, she is wildly in favor of a “public option” in the current health care bill.  The more “publicky,” the better. Medicare for all is the dream, and VA care for all is the fantasy.  Yeah, I don’t get that one either.  But unfortunately, it’s a point that seems so evident to the liberal mind that any opposition seems either evil or crazy.

 

Or racist of course.  We can’t forget that one!

 

So her arguments in support of “health reform” have been of the self evident variety.  Hardly worth the title of “reasoned discussion” at all.  In discussing the case of Ian Pearl, she pulls out the familiar trope of the evil insurance company denying coverage for the wronged, ill, Christ figure.  Her blog on Ian’s plight is one part righteous anger and two parts accusatory anger.

 

But I do take her seriously and try to address her disagreements with my position:

 

Ekg, I don’t want to make you sad, so let me address your points one at a time.

 

Now, you are saying I don’t know what I am talking about because:

 

“1st.. Ian wouldn’t die from the ‘public option’… he would die from having to live in an assisted living home…”

 

So in order to live, Ian needs 24 hour home health care that is currently provided by his health insurance.  Now Ian is about to get the boot, the boot to Medicaid, which does not provide the sort of home health care that Ian needs, according to his parents to stay alive.  So once Ian is on Medicaid, his life will be nasty, brutish, and short.  Now assisted living is how Medicaid handles Muscular Dystrophy patients in Ian’s advanced condition.  So if Ian had never been covered under a private insurance plan, he would have been dead a while ago, correct?

 

But you say Medicaid is not a public option.  But the public option is government healthcare.  Do you think he would have a better deal under another government plan?

 

Which leads us to your second point…

 

”2nd medicaid isn’t the ‘public option’ .. that is what the poorest of the poor get. which no matter how bad(and it’s not), is still better than what millions have now..
The public option is low cost private insurance and it’s only low cost to the payer because the gov’t can purchase larger ‘blocks’ and get a better deal than a single person.”

 

If you’re correct, I’ve been following this issue for several months and have never heard that the public option is really private insurance.  In fact, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong on that, so I will call bullshit until you can show me.  What I think you are getting it confused with are the private plans that will be sold through the exchange.  Those will have standardized basic benefits, prices, and will be subsidized for lower income people.  That is not the” public option.”  The public option is a government plan, not really insurance, with benefits and prices designed by the government.  Now the public option might be administered by a private company, in the same way that Tricare is administered by private insurance companies in different Tricare regions of the country, but it’s not a private insurance plan.  If there is a public option and it is administered by private health insurance companies, which seems likely, the insurance companies still win!

 

So one if us is really, really wrong on our understanding of what the public option is.  As long as we have been going over this issue, that’s pretty damn funny.  I don’t care who ya are…

 

Now I couldn’t help but notice this: 

 

“…healthcare companies pass the buck and raise the price while you cheer them on.. whether it’s because they are exempted under anti-trust laws or any other law doesn’t matter..”

 

I have not been exactly “cheering on” the health insurance companies while they raise prices.  Seeing as I’ve been in the middle of open enrollment at work, I find any cheers quite muted.  I’m trying to recall the last time I cheered price increases by health insurance companies in general and my health insurance in particular… let’s see, there was that time… no…how about… oh no… 

 

I guess no.  No cheers from me.

 

As far as anti trust laws go in general, I find them foolish, since monopolies generally require either control of a particular resource or some sort of government grant that gives a legal monopoly to a company.  Baseball has an anti trust exemption since we don’t want multiple baseball leagues bouncing around the country.  We would rather the current owners suck up all the profits.  For health insurance companies, If Senator Leahy or the President wants to pull that trigger, I say, let ‘em.  Just about everything else in the bill is designed to increase health care costs, so what’s one more? 

 

But the issue isn’t anti trust, it’s ERISA.  The federal law governing health plans gives a specific exemption from common contract law.  Under normal (and by this I mean both common and various state laws, although they may differ in specifics) contract law, a contract entered in good faith, even if there are flaws in the actual contract, such as doting the i or crossing the t , is still a valid contract.  Not so for health plans under ERISA.  The insurance company can retroactively cancel the contract of any member for any sort of contractual error.  They certainly have an incentive to dump high cost (i.e. really sick) patients if they can legally get away with it, and thanks to federal law, they can!

 

I guess lobbying really does pay.

 

Inevitably, when these hard luck rescission cases become big news, like Ian Pearl’s case or others that have become a cause celebre  for big government types such as the cases of Robin Beaton and Otto Raddatz’s, the reason they lost their health care was because of rescission; because the law allows them to.  Big government liberals easily forget the real villains in those cases:  ERISA.

 

Health Insurance II:  This time it’s personal.

 

“the quote you used was the PC/CYA reply to being asked why the VP would call someone like Ian or Chuck a fucking “dog”… which is something else you know, but chose to ignore because it doesn’t further your cause..

seriously.. how can you continue to protect an industry that would treat your wife the same way if she was diagnosed with MS tomorrow is simply beyond me..she would just be their new ‘dog’ to rid themselves of..”

 

 

Although I find myself offended at the term “dog” being used for either my wife or Chuck ( Ian I don’t know.  Sorry Ian, I’m sure you’re a nice guy and all…), the context seems to refer to the accounts, rather than the individuals.  But lets assume the worse.  The health insurance execs are meanies, they hate Ian, Chuck, and my wife and think they are dogs, and of course, hope they all die before too much money is spent on the sickly, when it could be much better spent on fabulous executive bonuses.   THIS is one of the key differences between people who trust the free market (as opposed to individual companies or executives) and people who trust the good naturedness of big government (stand by, teachable moment here): 

 

I don’t care that companies may hate me, are greedy, or that they are looking out for their own self interest.  Of course they are!  They are in business to make a goddamn buck!  Not to wipe the tears from our eyes and give us a shoulder to cry on. 

 

But it’s an observation that predates Adam Smith’s invisible hand:  Businesses and individuals in business are conducting commerce for their own ends.  However the result of that is that everyone’s interests are satisfied.  You want a widget, and a greedy company wants to make money by selling widgets.  Money and Widgets are exchanged, and voila!  Everyone gets what they want!  Contracts?  Same thing.  There is a centuries old body of law governing, “lets make a deal” between people.  As a general rule, it works pretty well.  It would probably work pretty well with health insurance too if our government allowed it. 

 

But if your thinking on private enterprise and business is totally dependent on companies being filled with nice guys and gals who think providing profits to their shareholders is less important than holding your hand and skipping through the meadow on a spring day, then you are pretty much going to hate capitalism and the free market.

 

And of course, let’s really get personal:

 

“.. you are as much of an accomplice in this as the ones who do it knowingly.. you have a president who will work with you.. but instead the GOP shat in his hand and walk over to tongue-kiss the insurance companies because they have the money to rile up the rank and inbred and to fund their re-election bid…”

 

 

 

Wow!  Me!  Personally responsible for Ian Pearl’s unfortunate condition, or responsible for the Republicans in Congress sitting on their hands and not embracing the President’s wack-a-nut health plan?  Either way, it’s a lot of responsibility to rest on my shoulders.  In any case, it was the President who spent the summer playing “wash the molars” with the health insurance companies, not the Republicans.  All the poor health insurance companies wanted was forced, mandatory requirement that everyone in the country get health insurance, a windfall worth billions to them.  That’s why they kept their mouths shut all summer and generically praised “health reform.”  Particularly after it looked like the Public Option was off the table. 

 

But a funny thing happened on the way to negotiations; the individual mandate and the fines to enforce it got weakened.  Weakened enough that suddenly the other higher costs enclosed in the health plan suddenly seem to outweigh the lesser amount of new customers the health insurance companies were expected to have the federal government  herd their way.  It is about self interest after all.  That’s what makes the world go round.  As fun as it would be to blame the Republicans for all this, or any of this for that matter, it’s strictly an inter-party squabble.  It’s Democrats versus the President.  Republicans?  They’re just out in the bleachers, yelling, “You lie” occasionally.

 

 

As for Ian, I don’t have a solution for him.  In that way, I’m no different than ekg.  I would have supported eliminating the part of ERISA that allows these situations to happen in the first place.  He would have either not lost his insurance, or if he had, his parents would have been able to sue the company in court.  That’s not an option available to him under current law.  But even if the Congress were to magically take an interest in that, I doubt it would be done in time to help Ian. 

 

Other than that, I only have Ian’s parent’s word that care under Medicaid is a “death sentence.”  I don’t know if that is their take on their son’s situation or a doctor’s opinion, but in any case, I hope they are wrong.  He’s getting the liberal dream:  government healthcare.  No greedy health insurance companies involved.   It’s government healthcare for Ian soon, and government healthcare for all of us eventually if the President has his way.  But If both Medicaid and Medicare, would have Ian die, why should this be shoved down my throat?  It’s funny that the biggest supporters of government healthcare suddenly are frightened by the thought of someone actually getting it.

Here’s another edition  of… Friday Rewind.

I think this weeks talking points, make this rewind apropos..

So without further ado,

Will you help me?

-I’m desperate and really need some help. I don’t know what to do so I am appealing to anyone who reads this. My sister is missing. We have not heard from her in a few days and it is not like her to just take off. We are organizing a search for her Monday morning in the woods around her home in Brevard County. My family and I are not wealthy and we don’t know how long we can sustain our economic livelihood during this time since the worry and stress make us unable to work, if you would like to help we have set up a fund at any Wachovia bank.-

-I’ve lost everything. I tried to evacuate but I am not a wealthy person and I don’t have a car. I don’t know what I am going to do, I have nothing. I lost my entire life in the flood, I can’t work because my job was washed away. I believe there is a fund where you can send donations, please…. Please for the love of God help me.-

-My cousin went to Aruba for graduation. She only drank a little and only did a little drugs, and went home with 3 boys she had just met. She’s missing now and we just know she was raped and murdered. I am a wealthy woman, I can afford to fly back and forth from my home to Aruba, but I don’t know how long I can do this. I will NOT leave my suite at the local 5 star hotel room where I am comp’d my meals, transportation, alcohol, and clothes, until she us found. If you would like to help me in this trying time, there is a fund set up at any local bank.-

-My 82 year old maid will be signing autographs today, there will be a donation bowl on the table. Thank you for making an old woman’s day.-

-My father was killed in a terrorist attack. I don’t know what I am going to do with out him. Please send money to help me thru this trying time.-

Please help me, my job does not offer healthcare, my husbands job does offer it but the monthly premiums are over $800 for a family of four. I have some medical issues that I really need to see a doctor about. Neither of my kids have seen a doctor for a well-check in over 4 years. When they are sick or injured, even if it is just a case of strep throat I have to take them to the ER because I cannot afford to pay the doctor visit at the time of service. If my kids would only get sick or injured before I pay the mortgage and utilities things would be a lot easier. My husband and my combined income is over $50k a year so we do not qualify for any Medicaid and we are not old enough for Medicare.. Is there anything, anything at all you can do to help me?

Which one of these will get the most help? Which will get the least? If we banded together as a race of humans, which would help all of us more in the long run? Which one will we just roll our eyes and tell the person to get a better job and stop asking for the government to supplement you?

Why is that? Why can we, as Americans, be so giving when see or hear of a disaster?

Tsunami a world away? No problem we can band together and donate 100’s of millions.

9/11 attack? Oh my god how horrible, and NO Timmy you can’t have an ice cream today because I have to send money to those poor people who had families in the buildings.

Your child is missing? How can I help? I can take some days off work and drive over to your county to help you search anytime I can.

Yet be so Goddamn stingy when it comes to helping people who didn’t have a building fall on them.
No healthcare? Well get a job you dead-beat subhuman.

The one thing we can help everyone in the country on is the one thing we will complain about giving money to. It’s Charity for the unworthy, it’s Socialism at its finest, it’s taking my hard earned money and giving to the lazy drunks of the world.

We’re not unfeeling. We give when there is a cause to give. Just look at this list and see how giving we can be

• September 11th Victim Compensation Fund paid out approx $7 billion to the families

• September 11th Fund collected and dispersed an additional $534 million from more than two million donors

• $950m from the US Government to the Tsunami victims

• An additional $515m donated by the private sector for the Tsunami relief fund

• $800m for hurricane Katrina relief in just the first 2 weeks

• $7m donated to Virginia Tech Memorial Fund after the shootings

And a rumored $20m donated to the Natalie Holloway Fund for her mother, friends, family, searchers and friends of searchers. Even though they were all comp’d everything from their plane tickets to Aruba to the bathing suits and the Gucci sunglasses they needed.

See, we’re not heartless…

So why is it ‘Welfare’ when we want to help a single mother and ‘Socialism’ when we want to help anyone who is a part of this country? If you added up all of those donations it seems to be you would have nice start to paying for Universal Healthcare.

Cuba doesn’t have a car newer than 1965 or anything but corrugated metal roofs on their hut homes… but they have universal healthcare.

France, Italy, Britain, Canada…. All have universal health care. The argument here against it, is that healthcare would decline if we switched. Well, the World Health Organization already ranks us 37th in healthcare, which is below places like Costa Rica, Columbia and Dominica. When we’re ranked below a place such as Columbia does it matter if we decline any more? What’s the worst that can happen? That we only rank up there with Canada (30)? Or that we rank below Slovenia (38)?

France is number 1 and Italy is number 2 on the WHO’s list. Sure they pay more taxes to be number 1 and 2, but is that such a big deal? We donated $20m to a mother who lost her daughter when she went out and got shit-faced and went home with 3 men she had never met. We paid $7 million to people affected by a shooting in Virginia. We don’t seem to mind when we pay for stuff like this, so what the hell is wrong with paying for a universal healthcare plan that will improve everyone’s health?

It’s not Socialism or Welfare when we give when we want to. It’s the Christian thing to do. So why isn’t Christian to help some of the 45 million people in this country without healthcare?

What’s the worst that can happen? Will homes suddenly be foreclosed on in record numbers? Will gas prices suddenly rise? Will milk go up to $4.89 a gallon? Will one pain pill cost $60? Will the cost of an MRI go up over $2400 or will a hospital ER visit take longer? What’s the worst that can happen???? Besides the insurance and pharma companies making $2B in profit instead of $3B and the middle class living a healthier life….what IS the downfall to making sure every American has the right to Life, Liberty and a Free pap smear and colorectal exam?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Providing free medical care (medicineandtechnology.com)
• Top Dem Defies Obama Health Care Deadline (cbsnews.com)
• Costs v Coverage: Krugman gets it–Brooks is almost quite close (thehealthcareblog.com)