Rangel, with Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Alan Krueger, tout the NYC development and jobs safeguarded by Build America Bonds.
"The health reform debate has brought together members with diverse opinions to work toward quality, affordable health care for all Americans. I am particularly pleased that today's agreement solidifies the creation of a public health insurance option that will promote competition and ensure choice."
−Congressman Charles B. Rangel
■
Return to Charlie's Blog
Washington Office
2354 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington,
DC
20515
Phone:
202-225-4365
Fax:
202-225-0816
District Office
163 West 125th
St., Suite #737
New York,
NY 10027
Phone: 212-663-3900
Fax: 212-663-4277
Let's put a single-payer plan forward. Medicare works far better than the private insurers. Let's start lowering the age for Medicare -- 55 next year, 45 in 2011, etc.
What are your views on single-payer?
It doesn't seem likely that we can go directly to a single payer, though we certainly need a strong commitment to that as an option for many who are not being covered at all.
Not only is Medicare a good plan, but so is the one that the members of Congress themselves have. And so is the one for the military. So we have long had a strong public sector plan all along. Stand up to the "conservatives" whose real agenda seems largely to do the bidding of the private insurance companies who have served so many of us so badly for so long. A good public plan will go a long way toward pressuring the private ones to give better and more affordable coverage.
We have a real chance now to get this long overdue reform of our terrible health care coverage going strong. Let's get it right and not give in to special interests.
Please ensure that a public option is included in the health care package up for a vote. I think Single Payer would be better but will compromise and accept a public option.
1. As a school board member it is horrible that our district tries to “get rid” of our older experienced teachers due to their effect on our overall benefit costs – what kind of a society gives the bums rush to loyal, dedicated workers because the are a “drain” on our budget – as the system stands, if you are old or infirm – GET OUT! Very bad for our students and community and it is immoral to boot!
2. As a board member it troubles me that our class sizes have been creeping up – why? Health care costs – pure and simple. It costs our district $1200/ mo per teacher just for health care. So we have not been hiring unless we must. Every study proves that smaller class size has the largest impact on outcome. We get grants and stimulus money – but I cannot get our district to hire more teachers, they always say that that the benefits are too expensive and is an ongoing expense. So we buy computers or something. But it is the teachers that give us better results. Help us make the right decision – help us afford to lower class size. Public option will help.
A public option will not have to be profitable. That is not competition. That is a government takeover because the insurance companies cannot compete with a "company" that doesn't have to make a profit. What is wrong with profit????? Profits = jobs!!
We urge you to put this health care reform on the shelf until you and your colleagues can demonstrate an ability to manage programs as simple as cash for clunkers, AND see some solid improvement in the economy.
Please!
Two answers to this: First, if government can’t do anything right and is always wasteful and inefficient, then why worry about it out-competing private insurance companies, with or without the need to make profits? And if the public option actually works and people prefer it (like Social Security and Medicare), then why shouldn’t they have a right to it?
Second, where the market works well we should rely on it, and where it doesn’t we shouldn’t. There are many well-known reasons why the market does not work efficiently for health care. That is why most rich (capitalist) countries have single payer public insurance and get better results than us at lower cost. Personally, I don’t like my health care being determined by insurance companies’ bottom lines.
Single payer is being ruled out not because it’s a bad idea but because of the power of the interests lined up against it. I would like to see people like Rep. Rangel – and the President – out there educating people in order to change this equation. Otherwise we’ll be revisiting the health care crisis again and again.
They can't; they can't defend it. Once WE THE PEOPLE read the bill, which they didn't of course, there was nothing they could say. It's printed; look it up. Health rationing, invasion of privacy and if this comment makes it into the blog I'll be highly surprised.
If you really read the bill, you will see that there is no "health rationing". That's a talking point of the propaganda spreaders who want to scare people into fighting the bill.
Do you have all the health care you want right now? Can you get any care you ask for, when you want it and for a reasonable cost? If so, you are very lucky and unusual.
HR 676 is the only true healthcare reform this nation can afford. Naysayers who suggest it isn't politically feasible at this time are swaying to pressure and a lack of faith in the strong need and desires of many Americans who do not want anyone profiting from their health.
Medicare works, the VA system works, and all the numbers prove out that the cheapest and most effective model is single payer.
I hope Congressman Rangel will once again fully support and advocate for HR 676, it is what those of us in his district deserve and need.
Wall street receives public support and stays competitive so can healthcare! People must come before corporations. Corporations are not human, they do not die if a error occurs. All I ask for is some compassion.
As one of your consitutents I thought I should voice my incredible displeasure with the government right now. We the people voted in a Democratic President and majority to show our displeasure with the way this country was being run. I cannot begin to describe to you how angry I am that despite having a mandate of the people, I turned on the news to see President Obama playing spindoctor and downplaying the public option and cotowing to the Republican MINORITY.
Why is it that when the Republicans were the majority they forced through bill after bill while the Democrats just sat on their hands, and now that the roles are reversed you Democrats are still getting your heads handed to you. To be blunt, the Democratic party, your party Congressman Rangel needs to get angry, grow a serious pair and force through legislation that is in the best interest of the people. This watered down bill that Obama is now shilling needs to get dumped and you all need to get behind the bill you Co-Sponsored, HR 676!
To Whom It May Concern:
It has been with great disappointment that I've seen the resistance given the president in regard to his healthcare plan. The right to healthcare is the birthright of every American.
If one is arguing that the government should not be part of healthcare, one should ask why public education should not be privatized in America today. Obviously, the federal government and the states do subsidize education and with excellent results that all applaud (and don't call socialism). At the same time, public education may not be perfect in all eyes, and the alternative, private school education, remains available and is doing extremely well in this environment. We see no complaints from the private sector here.
The irony is that it is these public schools that educate our children from pre-kindergarten through the twelfth grade. The National Center for Education Statistics projects the total cost of a year of K-12 public school to be $8,800 for 2002, with an average pupil-teacher ratio of 16:1. The cost for thirteen years thus comes to $114,400 at 2002 estimates.
Then that same child, now an adult, enters a state college, also subsidized at the state and federal level. The average tuition at four-year public colleges and universities is $5,836 (for the 2006-07 school year) at a total cost for the four years of $23,344.
That individual thus finishes 16 years of state and federal subsidized education to become a good citizen at the cost of $137,744. But the adult perhaps goes further in his or her education to attend a state medical school costing about $10,000 per year for an in-state student--a total added cost to our public sector of an additional $40,000. To become a healthcare provider, he or she then trains in a state-run hospital in a three-year residency program to wind up as an outstanding physician, physician assistant, nurse practitioner, nurse, pharmacist, etc.
He or she has been educated by the citizens of the country and the state, to now serve the insurance company or other private entities that have not invested one penny toward any of this health care provider's education costing $177,000. The benefit simply goes at this juncture to the for-profit sector.
Today, the private-sector corporations seem to think that they alone have the interest of the patient and caregivers in mind and the right to govern within healthcare. But let us not forget that the patient is the one who paid taxes to secure the schooling that enabled the healthcare provider to achieve his or her goal. Therefore, the provider has an obligation to take care of the patient who gave him or her an education.
When the private sector companies start paying for the education of a child, then and only then can they ask to be considered as having a right to that adult's now highly skilled labor. Please note that neither UPS nor FedEx nor the postal service educate our children. The public sector does, in order to turn out aware citizens with the range of training our society requires.
So let us not forget that a public healthcare plan that covers all our citizens may be a rational result of what those citizens have first provided. The obligation of us all is in fact toward our fellow citizens. Let us first be the American Red Cross. Then we can be the for-profit Blue Cross.
Very truly yours,
Yohannes Syoum, DDS
I support health care reform wholeheartedly. I have friends who are laid off that do not have any health insurance. There are single parent families who do not have full health care coverage. Even with health insurance the costs are skyrocketing! God forbid if you have a pre-existing condition.
We need to look to protect all citizen from the rampant greed in this industry. Most importantly, we have to protect youth and families.
Jeanette Toomer
917-405-1710
Please vote against any healthcare bill that does not include a public option.
The public option is the ESSENCE of healthcare reform.
We need to protect our children from invasive big government. Where in our Constitution does it say that health care is a birth right and where does it give this government the right to mandate health care for all with fines for those he say no?
And what will you do, where will you go the first time some government bureaucrat refuses a life saving procedure for one of your loved ones.
Dear Congressman Rangel,
I am writing to urge you as my Congressman to openly support the inclusion of a strong public option in the health care reform package being debated now. I urge you to sign on to the growing list of congresspeople who are standing firm that they will not support any bill that does not include a strong public option. You should do this because it is the right public policy of course, especially for us in your district who need decent affordable healthcare and can't get jobs with good healthcare and can't afford private insurance. Plus, this has become an important symbolic line in the sand -- we voted for change in Washington, not the same old lobbyist and corporate influence peddling, and the will of the people shown by the overwhelming Democratic majority in the House and Senate is being ignored in this insane worthless and bad faith Republican mockery and pretense of bipartisanship that is being exploited to stall real reform. If you do not stand up to this NOW, it will get worse and worse. You are a respected leader, and I am proud to have you as my representative. Your strong voice on this can make a difference in ending the dithering and getting a meaningful and historic health care reform package passed, including a strong public option. I'm counting on you.
Sincerely,
Dave Britton
(Washington Heights)
Ms. Gurrentz, The problem in the school system is that principals' school budgets are fixed, and they are responsible for funding their schools within the budget, and, counterproductively, they are charged the full weight of each teacher's actual salary against that preset budget. This means that as their teachers get more experienced and go up the pay scale the school has less and less money for other things, including more teachers to lower class size and funds for art, music and extracurricular activities. If the NY Dept of Education charged principals' budgets the AVERAGE teacher salary (instead of the actual) for every teaching position then principals would have a level playing field and schools with more experienced teachers would not be discriminated against economically. This, not health benefits, is the root of the problem.
Dave Britton (SLT parent member)
I would prefer Medicare-for-all but I will take Medicare-for-all-who-want it. It's not right to leave people uninsured or let them go bankrupt for medicines and services that cost a fraction as much in other countries. It's also not right to force people to qualify for healthcare which leaves them in the position of being rejected by an insurance company, or the government if they are too young or not poor enough.
Please open up Medicare to everyone who wants it, and rework part D so that we have some clout in negotiating the cost of medicines.
HR 676, Single Payer, is the most fiscally responsible, morally correct solution to America's needed healthcare reform, SO FAR.
As such, it represents the most PATRIOTIC solution to our "uniquely American" healthcare problem.
With 1/2 our national budget spent on the military industrial complex, we have to be especially prudent how we spend the other half.
I can find no redeeming reason for taxpayers to continue supporting 'health' insurance companies.
As for the insurance industry, I could go on but Billionaires for Wealthcare (.com), the video, expresses the thoughts of the majority quite succinctly.
Yes, it is time to resolve our "uniquely American" healthcare PROBLEM.
BUT, isn't it a bit of a stretch that American taxpayers be expected to put their faith in the integrity of the very legislators who have compromised their positions by accepting hundreds of thousands and millions of $$$$$$$ from the 'health' insurance industry, to solve their "uniquely American" healthcare problem equitably?
So, when our "faithful" legislators fight tooth and nail AGAINST HR 676, even refusing to discuss it, perhaps a much closer look is indicated?
HR 676 - only 40 readable pages. Have YOU read it?
Has your legislator read it?
Congressman,
You have always stood up for the people in your district. So please hear us now as we say -- health care reform without a public option is nothing but a massive giveaway to insurance companies.
A public option is already a HUGE compromise from what we really need -- universal coverage through a single-payer system.
I implore you -- if health care is to be fixed in this country, you must pledge to vote against any bill that does not contain a public option -- no triggers, no co-ops! The trigger has already been pulled, and politicians have already been co-opted. No more!
Please, give the people what they want, and do what's right. No health care reform without a public option.
Thank you.
To the person who talked about the government "pulling the plug" on old people, you are gravely mistaken. The only thing that was proposed was giving those people (and I am one) and their families the opportunity to talk about how they wanted end-of-life decisions made. Nobody would be forced to have the discussion, and like the rest of the bill (barring a mandate to have insurance), it would be totally voluntary and private.
As for the government making any decision whatever for people: Who do you think makes your healthcare decisions now? Your insurance company—if you have one. (And nobody would ask you to choose the public option. It's an option: That means you get to choose.)
People are dying, every few minutes, for lack of healthcare; people are being dropped from their health plans when they get sick; other people never can get insurance because they have a pre-existing condition—even if it doesn't seriously impact their health; others cannot afford health insurance at all. I know many like those last, and they are people who work hard and are educated, good people. Just like you. When they get sick, they must go to doctors and pay the full amount that is charged. If they are lucky enough to have doctors. Otherwise, they go to emergency rooms—sometimes, too late to treat what ails them, or at much greater expense than would be incurred if they were treated preventively. Hospitals are required to take whoever comes to them. If the person cannot pay, who pays instead? We do. That would never happen in a place where everyone paid a reasonable amount for healthcare and was treated as necessary and at the right time. (And by the way, nobody who needs urgent care in those countries is made to wait for it.)
We should not be supporting huge profits at profit-making companies where health is concerned. Maybe health is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but neither are many other things that we take as essential to our lives, including the many publicly funded services provided by our town and city, our state and federal governments. I could name a lot of those, but it would take up too much space.
Like some others who have posted to this blog, I favor a single-payer plan. I have had direct experience of such plans in countries that have sometimes been mistakenly hooted at for their healthcare. In fact, my health and the lives of some of my relatives have been saved (and not after any delay) in the United Kingdom and Canada. Those services are not perfect, but they are far more humane and devoted to healthcare than any insurance company is.
But I would settle for a truly public option at this point. That actually is in line with the basics of supply and demand that some value very highly: Competition has been stifled in health insurance; this will bring it back. There is no reason for insurance companies being allowed to do what no other business does, and make obscene profits (I know, having paid huge premiums as an individual for years before I got on Medicare), just because they can.
Read a little about this, and listen. You'll discover that there are people sick and dying, being bankrupted, their children without healthcare and much more, simply to keep insurance companies rolling in profits. Do you want those dying, sick adults and children on your conscience? Those people who, hardworking and fine individuals, must decide between health and paying their bills? Do you not worry that someday, you will be one of them? It could happen to any of us. Much too often, it does.
Please don't give up the fight for a public option!
I was very alarmed today to hear about the bill outlined by Senator Max Baucus which would compel all Americans to purchase health insurance, but which does not include provisions that would ensure that affordable insurance would be available. Is it not horrifying to hear that 13% of a person's income is being considered as a possible upper limit for the cost of an individual's health care premiums? Middle class and working families and individuals are already struggling desperately to make ends meet and most cannot spare well over one month of their earnings for this purpose. To force them to do so at the risk of a heavy fine is Dickensian and will force many into debt and poverty. This sort of reform would indeed be government tyranny! It's the worst possible idea and would benefit no one but the health insurance companies.
Please act forcefully to protect abortion coverage in public and private health insurance policies. Vote "no" on the Stupak Amendment. Thank you.