Michelle Obama Enters the Health Reform Debate: The Best of the Weekend
Published September 20, 2009 @ 11:33PM PT

Every weekend, I showcase the three videos or articles that best enhanced my own understanding of the health care reform debate. After all, when you’re talking about a topic that touches each of our lives and intersects policy, politics, medicine, taxes, the legal system, our economy and budgets ranging from a blue-collar family in Pennsylvania to the federal government of the United States -- well, a fellah sometimes need a little help understanding it all!
Although I don’t normally lead off with a political story, this one is well worth it:
1.) Health Reform Watch: “Because She Said So: Michelle Obama Wants Women to Stand Up for Health Care Reform”
Fellow Change.org blogger Jen Nedau posted the First Lady’s speech on the Women’s Rights blog. During the campaign, the president had often referred to Michelle as “the closer” -- the one whose impassioned “from the heart” speeches could close the deal. The White House has determined the only way to escalate the cause of health reform over and above an address to both houses of Congress is to have the First Lady also make the issue her own. It’s not a moment too soon, writes blogger and law professor Pooja Awatramani:
One of the biggest issues Michelle Obama seemed to have with the current system was gender rating; it continues to force women to pay much higher premiums than men in private insurance plans. The actuarial argument, that women’s health care needs require regular preventive care (which in reality, women and men alike should be getting) is significantly undermined by the research which shows the ultimate cost benefits of preventive care–for both women and men. It seems both ironic and counter-productive that this justification is used to punish with higher premiums those who embark upon the proactive health maintenance which so many agree is both the key to ultimate health care cost control and one of the primary goals of health care reform. Hopefully, Obama’s optimism that such gender rating will be removed through the current reform process will prove true.
With so many challenges aligned against women, it is apparent that, as stated by the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, “The status-quo health insurance system is serving women poorly.” Perhaps this is why the Obama administration, in its drive to convince Americans that the issue of health care can no longer be pushed aside, is turning to women. A smart choice, whichever way you look at it, since women as a whole are one of the groups most strongly supporting health care reform.
Read the full analysis on the Health Reform Watch blog.
2.) Washington Post, “You Have No Idea What Health Costs”
Blogger Ezra Klein has an article in this Sunday’s paper spotlighting why it’s so hard to make those of us with employer-based benefits sit up and take notice of escalating costs. Since our employer picks up the lion’s share and the rest is usually deducted from our payroll, it’s difficult for us to realize just how unsustainably premiums are rising each year. If we did, Ezra writes, we’d be more forcefully supporting reform.
The average health-care coverage for the average family now costs $13,375, according to Kaiser. Over the past decade, premiums have increased by 138 percent. And if the trend continues, by 2019 the average family plan will cost $30,083.
Three years of slightly above-average health insurance will cost a solid six figures.
Those are numbers to marvel at. Those are numbers to fear. But they are not the numbers that loom in the minds of most Americans. And therein lies the problem for health-care reform.
Read the full article on WashingtonPost.com
3.) Movin’ Meat, “Feeling Wonkish”
When I'm not quite sure of how proposed policy changes look to someone “in the trenches” of our medical system, I often turn to this blog written by Shadowfax, an Emergency Medicine Doctor who writes eminently readable snap-analyses of health care reform. And for Shadowfax, a lazy weekend at home apparently turned into analyzing the proposed amendments for the Senate Finance Committee from the perspective of an ER doctor.
The other thing that I gained from reading this is a real appreciation of how tricky lawmaking really is. This bill, after modification to some greater or lesser degree in committee, will need to be merged with the HELP committee bill and then (one hopes) with the House bill. That's a real challenge! Sure, there will be the big partisan battles, but all the little line items are the hard parts, I think. When you come to a provision like, say the Stabenow amendments, which have no clear partisan bias and a marginal effect on cost -- and bear in mind that there may be hundreds and hundreds of these in each bill -- how do you decide which are worthy of keeping, and which get tossed? Presumably you can't keep them all, and many are probably in direct conflict. Unless the advocate for a particular bill is at the conference table, it's gotta become a little arbitrary.
Share this Post
Related Posts
-
The Public Option: Popular Everywhere But the U.S. Senate
-
Barack Obama Is the Anti-Frank Luntz
-
Hitting the Road and Hitting the Fan
Comments (9)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Tim has been an online organizer and blogger on health care policy for the Obama for America campaign (during the primaries) and currently for the Committee of Interns and Residents/SEIU Healthcare, a labor union for intern and resident doctors. Views expressed here are Tim's, and don't represent the positions of CIR or SEIU.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Email


















Sunday's San Francisco Chronicle 9/20/2009 publishes an article on Health Care "Political donations flow to key lawmakers" listing health care money going to lawmakers by Joe Garofoli, Staff Writer (www.sfgate.com for full article)
(I'm not sure where to put this post; I hope everyone notices.)
Posted by Patricia Hunt on 09/21/2009 @ 09:34AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
another great way to quickly see contributions to lawmakers is to go to:
http://www.opensecrets.org
the site's really easy to use and works great.
Posted by CherokeeGirl for Change on 09/22/2009 @ 10:59AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
We must win this fight the first of many. To regain control of our great country now in the hands of the greedy...
CFJ
Posted by Cherokee Fred Jesus on 09/21/2009 @ 12:00PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Tim, you probably think me crazy already, so I may as well tell you. My Tarot cards predicted Michelle Obama would get involved in the Healthcare reform debate. They also said we can get this done with a lot of hard work and making the bill work for the American people. The cards warned of greedy liar cheaters, bigots, etc fighting the president, as well as hidden enemies that he must break away from. The cards said that he should not abandon the youth that got him elected.
The cards said the senate are selfishly dithering.
That was a really good reading. I needed it during a Sunday when CNN was cozying up to the Tea Party Express.
I get better info from my cards than I do from the MSM!
Posted by CherokeeGirl for Change on 09/21/2009 @ 04:42PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I hate news channels. I have time to get online though. I like Michelle. She woiuld make a great president.
Posted by Scott Flannigan on 09/21/2009 @ 05:14PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Michelle- Please get involved with the health care debate. It is acceptable if you slap around Joe 'Lover Of Sheep' Wilson. You have what many Democrats lack: guts and a spine! Please remember that public option is a must...and that your husband's massive support base matter more than small fringes from the far right. Yes You Can! Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta
Posted by Rev Bookburn on 09/21/2009 @ 08:46PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Congress doesn't want people to realize the value of their employer-provided plans. Otherwise, they'd put in some simple provisions like required benefit statements and make the monies paid in premiums convertible to an equivalent pre-tax wage value if employers drop plans or decrease their contributory amount. Every increase in employee contributions or decrease in employer-paid benefits is a decrease in wages. Is there anything, in any of the bills, that addresses this?
The minority of those without access is a travesty but we cannot ignore those who have it through employment in the reform process.
The wage issue is common sense, even if most Americans are willfully ignorant of their full compensation. I'm sure that Congress ignores this issue in obedience to the insurance lobby in order to suppress the volume for reform. At a time in our history when employers are dropping benefits and Americans hoping to return to work will obtain jobs at significantly lower wages due to the loss of employer-provided benefits, this is a discussion long overdue.
Posted by Harold Lewis on 09/22/2009 @ 11:03AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Hey Harold, what do you think about refundable coverage? If you don't use it, you get a rebate when you change or cancel?
Posted by CherokeeGirl for Change on 09/22/2009 @ 11:08AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
All for it but I don't see how it could work since the premiums go toward all of the insurer's customers' expenses, not just my own.
I'd like to see some benefit for someone who's carried insurance for years without filing a major claim or some penalty paid by an insurer or employer to alter coverage.
But my main focus is to scrap insurance entirely.
Posted by Harold Lewis on 09/22/2009 @ 12:01PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.