Act Blue!
BMG endorses these candidates for election in 2010! Help them win - fill in a donation amount and click "Contribute" to be directed to BMG's Act Blue page.
Deval Patrick (MA-Gov) $
Mac D'Alessandro (MA-09) $
Jim McGovern (MA-03) $
Jack Conway (KY-Sen) $


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?



FREE COPY OF BOB'S BOOK Barack Obama for Beginners to every 100th Facebook Friend!

BMG on Facebook

About
About us
Rules of the road - please read!
Formatting and multimedia tips
Email us
RSS feed

BMG TRAFFIC REPORT
Blue Mass. Swag
Creative Commons License

Event Calendar
September 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 * *
<< (add event) >>

Active Users
Currently 3 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Massachusetts Left
.08 Acres
Below Boston
Berkshires Blog
Blue News Tribune
Chimes at Midnight
Eisenthal Report
Granby 01033
Health Care for All
Left in Lowell
MA lefty blogs
Marry in Mass.
Mass Engagement
Massachusetts Liberal
Michael Forbes-Wilcox
My Dedham
Progressive Mass.
Quriltai on the Shore
Ryan's Take
Someday I Will
ShrewsBuried
Talking Stoneham
The Fray
Universal hub

Differently-Winged
John Daley
Mass. Pro-Life
No Looking Backwards
Peter Porcupine
Pundit Review
Red Mass Group
Scaling the Hill 2010

Mass. Media
David S. Bernstein
Cambridge politics
CommonWealth Unbound
Globe bloggers
Herald bloggers
Hub Blog
Jon Keller
MassBeacon
MA Election 2010
Media Nation (Dan Kennedy)
Open Media Boston
Adam Reilly
Toll Talk (Mary Connaughton)
Weekly Dig Blog
Wicked Local Politics

Legal
ACS Blog
Balkinization
Election law
How Appealing
SCOTUSblog
Volokh Conspiracy

General
Accountable Strategies
Billionaires for Bush
Blue Works Better
Crooks and Liars
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton (Atrios)
Glenn Greenwald
Grist (environment blog)
Hullabaloo (Digby)
LiberalOasis
MyDD
Oliver Willis
Pandagon
Political Animal
Political Critic
Political Wire
Poor Man
Progressive Blog Digest
Real Climate
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Tapped
Talking Points Memo
Think Progress
Truth and Progress
Turn Maine Blue
Wonkette

www.BlueMassGroup.com

Health Care Reform Is Good For Massachusetts

by: John Kerry

Fri Mar 19, 2010 at 11:54:26 AM EDT


(Thanks for all you've been doing, Senator Kerry. -Charley

Bumped. - promoted by David)

Heading home to Boston this morning but wanted to circle back about a huge step forward for Massachusetts in the new health care bill - with a "just the facts" outline here - and if I sound like I'm down in the weeds, that's because, well, I'm down in the weeds - this has been a process I've been working on for a long time now, both on the Finance Committee and on the phone with the White House and our folks in Massachusetts -

So, forget the rhetoric, and enough with the misdirection and talking points we're inundated with on a daily basis -- the reality is really very simple:

This bill makes the Massachusetts health care system much, much stronger.

It strengthens Massachusetts' health insurance reforms, brings new federal subsidies into the state, and gives huge benefits to the people and businesses of Massachusetts.

John Kerry :: Health Care Reform Is Good For Massachusetts
Here's just one example: the health reform bill will provide $4.1 billion in premium tax credits and cost-sharing tax credits for residents in Massachusetts from 2014 to 2019 to purchase private health insurance. Currently, Massachusetts spends about $88 million annually to provide subsidized coverage to enrollees in Commonwealth Choice.  The new federal subsidies to 254,000 residents should lessen the amount of subsidies that need to be provided by the state.

The federal bill also strengthens the Commonwealth Connector's power to pressure and negotiate with insurance companies for the best rates. Already, the Connector's power to do that has kept the increase in premium cost in Massachusetts well below the national average. In fact, the average yearly premium cost in the individual market actually fell - from $8,537 at the end of 2006 to $5,143 in mid-2009. The federal bill allows the Connector to apply those principles even more broadly. I worked with my friend Harry Reid to make sure the Connector could negotiate with plans for lower bids, encourage plans to form select networks, and exclude plans that do not offer good value and cost-effectiveness.

This list goes on and on. I have a longer list on my website that you can read by clicking on this link to a PDF, but here are some major areas that are helped with a few examples on how they're helped:

• Medicaid/Medicare: The bill ends a system of Medicare payments that discriminated against Massachusetts hospitals, brings in $2 billion of federal aid for our Medicaid system over the next 10 years, closes the Medicare "doughnut hole" for prescription drug coverage, strengthens Medicare Advantage, provides free preventative care for Medicare recipients, and supports long-term home and community-based health care across the board.

• Exchanges/Subsidies: In addition to what I mentioned earlier about the Connector and the new federal subsidies, the bill also preserves the Connector as the exclusive exchange in the state, lowers premiums for Massachusetts residents, and provides more generous eligibility for federal premium subsidies by raising the limit from 300% of poverty level to 400%.

This bill also helps Massachusetts by reforming many areas of the health care system. It invests in primary health care, alleviating a critical shortage of providers in that area. The funding for community health centers will be dramatically expanded, helping the 52 community health centers in the state that provide high quality health care to those in need regardless of their ability to pay. It maintains the strong consumer protection we have in Massachusetts, brings $100 million annually into the state to pay for Children's Health Insurance Program ... really, there are too many things to list all the ways this bill increases the quality of our healthcare system and starts to control the costs in the system.

Mitt Romney is contorting himself into a pretzel trying to pretend it's not the case, but  in many ways, the reformed system envisioned in our bill builds on and extends the model here in Massachusetts. And not if, but when it's passed, it will strengthen what we do here in Massachusetts, and it will help tens of millions of people across the country get access to quality health care.

So - let's get on with it.  

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

ADVERTISEMENT
Question for the Senator (6.00 / 1)
I do not know the answer to this question so please accept this as an honest question. Will the House and Senate give up their insurance program and be covered under the terms of the insurance proposal being considered.

Also why no tort reform?
 


You've got to do a little homework first (6.00 / 3)
1.  Senators have BC/BS.  They will be "covered under the terms of the insurance proposal".  Their plans aren't Cadillac plans, etc.

2.  When the folks in the Congress who bang on the tort reform drum every chance they get (despite the small total overall savings) come to the negotiating table and work with the process, then we'll get tort reform.

You ought not get what you scream for just because you're stomping your feet and being petulant.  If the GOP would behave like a minority party interested in good legislation and work to shape the policy instead of just playing the NO game, we'd all end up with a better bill.

No tort reform?  Blame the Republicans for refusing to be part of the process.


[ Parent ]
English rule (0.00 / 0)
There's your process.

[ Parent ]
I know what English Rule is (0.00 / 0)
but I don't really see how it relates...


* English Rule: loosely speaking, the loser pays the winner for court costs.  In American Rule, each side pays their own costs.


[ Parent ]
The dynamic is completely changed (0.00 / 0)
The incentive to step into court to take a swing at a marginal case, in hope of securing a business-reasons settlement, would be gone.

The American Rule encourages lawyers/clients to take a shot because they have almost nothing to lose.

Widespread use of the English Rule would go a long, long way to making sure that the only cases filed are the cases that are legitimate, and that people with those cases don't lose their rights.

This would be a good first step to see if the medmal problem can be reduced.

In my view, there cannot be meaningful cost control in the system, so long as physicians are motivated, as they are presently, never to decline ordering a test, for fear of being sued for missing something.  The present incentives are thoroughly skewed to overconsumption and overspending.


[ Parent ]
I disagree (6.00 / 1)
Most personal injury cases are financed by contingency fees - no judgement for the plaintiff, no money for the attorney.

This ironically makes the greed and ambition of the tort bar a force for accountability, particularly for those who are screwed by corporate corruption, with no recourse short of the civil courts.

Whatever my opinion of many tort lawyers as individuals, they serve (on balance) a positive role in the total scheme of things.

Regarding your last paragraph: IMHO the prime generators of high health care costs are a cultural bias within the medical professions in favor of technological fixes; an overdependence on the pharmaceutical industry for drug information; top-to-bottom corporatism from insurance companies, through hospitals, to medical practices;  and a pro-specialist, anti-preventive bias on the part of doctors and medical students, consistently reinforced by peer pressure from pre-med through medical practices.

I would stipulate that malpractice premiums are far too high for the average competent MD, but transparency in terms of the records of bad apples within the health professions would, IMHO, go far to remedy that.


[ Parent ]
Disagree (0.00 / 0)
There are plenty, and I mean plenty of lawyers who will take something marginal on a contingent fee.  They take their shot, and the defense calculus is:  it will cost $X to defend, and they know it, and so they will go away for 3/4X, so settle because it costs less.  

Your theory only works when the plaintiff's atty invests resources of time and money to hire expert witnesses.  

Now that the bill has passed, people who use the words "corporatism" and "technological fixes" in describing how to reduce costs are frightening indeed.  My body is a mechanical thing powered by chemistry.  Fixing it when something isn't working--far more so than keeping it there in the first place--is all, all bout technology.  I would prefer that the technology be there when I need it, AND that the doctor doesn't feel compelled to use it unnecessarily for fear of being ruined by a tort judgment.


[ Parent ]
I'll Trade Ya (6.00 / 7)
I'll trade ya tort reform for a public option, with an end to insurance companies' antitrust exemption.  Those three changes combined would likely lower costs to consumers.

[ Parent ]
Thank you Senator Kerry (6.00 / 5)
I just got the letter, my health care premium will go up 25.5% starting May 15th. I will pay $866/month for this. Today we pay $690.

$866/month

My home mortgage is about $1375, including an escrow for taxes.

I am not ranting at Fallon. It is what it is and it IS what I choose. It's the system! It is upside down, against the working class.

The policy above for a Single is $286, 1+Child(ren)=$514, two adults=$614. I have the Family coverage, $866.

This must stop.  

A consensus formed from the echo of parrots, is no consensus.
I'm Jack Mitchell and I'm confused by this message.


TMI? (6.00 / 1)
I went to the 'exchange" we have here in Mass. Putting in my family specifics:
Family of 4 in Lowell, MA
Adult1: 46, Adult2: 44, 2 Children.

Picking the mid-range for each cost group, this is what I get for options.
Bronze2

Silver2

Gold2

A consensus formed from the echo of parrots, is no consensus.
I'm Jack Mitchell and I'm confused by this message.


Maybe our other Senator could rebutt? (0.00 / 0)
If he is against helping the people in Massachusetts he should tell us why.  Specifics would be nice.

Listening to Charlie Baker talk about fiscal responsibility is like getting lectured on abstinence from Paris Hilton - Tim Murray

Not so fast (0.00 / 0)
"the average yearly premium cost in the individual market actually fell - from $8,537 at the end of 2006 to $5,143 in mid-2009"

Sorry, but this is pure and utter crap.  If the individual market fell, then why did my insurance go UP 27% ($110 MORE per month)?  I don't think insurance premiums went down - I think people got less expensive plans.  I couldn't go any lower because if I had and I had gotten sick then between the co-pays, deductibles and the percentage I would have had to come up with - I would have gone bankrupt.  

It's time to stop reading the rhetoric and start looking at the actual facts.


Anecdote, (6.00 / 1)
but my BC/BS premiums were going to go up by 25% this year alone. The employer kept the premiums down by shifting more of the cost onto employees through doubling deductibles and co-pays. While that would show up in the Senator's statistic as no increase in premiums, it is definitely an increase in cost for me.

Shoe bomber, underwear bomber -- why aren't we waging war on clothes?

[ Parent ]
Thanks - this is the clearest explanation to date that I have seen as to what is positive with healthcare reform - as drafted (6.00 / 1)
And, as with most varieties of positive change, this IS about progress not perfection.

I agree - "Let's get on with it", and move on to the festering issue of job creation, retention and recreation of manufacturing capacity, and the economy.  

Deborah Sirotkin Butler
AmberPaw dot @aol.com

"Failure to plan is planning to fail."
Proverb


I call B.S. (6.00 / 1)
The voiceover doesn't cite which bill -- or which draft of that bill -- he's claiming these quotes come from.

Without that, it just isn't legit.

Thanks for playing.


[ Parent ]





The 2010 Governor's race, per Pollster.com



I support WWF

Political insider ad network Law blog ad network
Advertise Liberally









Powered by: SoapBlox