Consider for a moment all of the teachers, policemen, firemen, soldiers, veterans and municipal employees making a government paycheck. Think of all the people working in city halls, statehouses and federal buildings in Washington. These people are all government employees, and just as their salaries are paid with taxpayer funds, their health care premiums are also paid out of the public purse.
In this way, the public sector already provides good health care to workers and their families – as well as all our seniors and the disabled every year through Medicare. And this public sector insurance (like Medicare and military health care) and hundreds of state and local government agreements with private insurers accounted for 46 percent of America's total health spending in 2007.
If citizens are already footing half the bill for the good health care provided by the public sector to public employees and seniors, shouldn't they have this kind of opportunity as well if they choose? And if instead they want to keep private insurance, at the very least they should be given greater power to weigh in on their own coverage - on both the cost they pay and the quality of care that they receive.
Reign in costs
First, we need to acknowledge that it is time that Congress and the President reign in health care costs and hold health insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies accountable to the people they're supposed to serve. Burgeoning health care costs continue to reel in more of Americans' paychecks. Over the last nine years, health insurance premiums have grown at three times the rate of wages. People are having to choose between filling their prescriptions at the pharmacy and filling their cars with gasoline. The exponential growth in health care prices is not going to end any time soon. Per capita medical costs are expected to rise 71 percent over the next decade.
It's a well-known fact that America spends more money than any other nation on health care, but Americans are actually less healthy than citizens of other countries. It seems only natural to ask where all of that money is going if Americans are not any healthier for it?
It's time that we demand more from insurance companies and find ways to ensure that hard-earned taxpayer dollars are going toward the provision of quality and cost-effective care. The public option will be a system that seeks to contain costs, but provides the type of important, medically-necessary treatments that people desperately need. The public option will not force a government takeover of health insurance. On the contrary, with a focus on keeping Americans healthy - not increasing profits - the public plan will give a healthy dose of competition to private insurers.
I have heard some expressing concern that under health reform, they believe that they would see rationing of care. But it is time that we wake up and realize that our care is already being rationed by insurance companies whose primary interest is their bottom line. These companies are in business to make money for stockholders, and so naturally they make decisions that oftentimes deliver healthy profits, but not always healthy patients. We hear the President talk about people he's heard from with terminal illnesses, who spend their dying days fighting with insurance companies that have denied them life-saving procedures. This type of rationing absolutely must end.
When insurance companies first started denying legitimate claims, Americans weren't in a position to ask why. They could not ask why when these same insurance companies started charging higher premiums based on gender, health history or occupation. When monthly premiums started to skyrocket and co-pays increased, those who could afford to pay higher prices begrudgingly kept forking over more of their salaries. Those who couldn't pay had to give up their access to care. We've had a system that has rationed care for decades - those of modest means have had to go without as costs kept rising.
If we do nothing, this disparity will continue to grow as more of the "haves" join the ranks of the "have nots."
Help small businesses
Foes of health care reform recite the plight of small businesses under the proposed legislation. But, already, small businesses are paying 18 percent more per worker for health insurance than large firms. In this faltering economy, there is no way that these small employers will be able to keep pace with the growth in health spending that is projected over the next decade.
Health care reform will not affect those Americans who currently have health insurance and like the coverage they have. Those people will be able to keep their doctors, dentists and pharmacists. However, these Americans are more likely to eventually face real adverse changes if we do nothing and allow health care prices to continue to soar. The oft-cited 46 million without coverage now is certain to grow as individuals can no longer afford their premiums and co-pays, large firms go belly-up and small firms have to shut their doors because the cost of health care has driven them out of business.
Equally important to ensuring that America is getting its money's worth on health care is the creation of the Health Insurance Exchange, an open marketplace where the public plan and private insurance companies can compete for individuals and small businesses looking to purchase insurance.
The Exchange will clearly lay out the competing benefits offered by each policy, as well as their costs. This will enable consumers to "comparison shop," and the increased ability of consumers to shop around will incentivize private insurance companies to ensure their policies are about maximizing health outcomes, not just their bottom line. With easily-accessible information, consumers will be allowed to choose the plan that works best for themselves, their families and their businesses.
This is the type of change we need - a change that empowers consumers and small businesses and puts a healthy America ahead of the interests of big insurance firms and pharmaceutical companies.
U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) represents Wisconsin's 4th Congressional District.




8 Comments
First of all, it's not a surprise to see that Gwen has decided to take the 3X5 index card "talking points" from Nancy Pelosi without adding any original content or insight. As a small business owner in Oak creek (Health care industry), with a few people on our health care insurance plan, Gwen suggesting that universal health Care is the ONLY answer to bring down small business costs is just deceptive and ridiculous, how about just letting us pool with other small businesses without a lot of governmental control or oversight?
And even worse, to suggest that our "health care" system is somehow responsible for the poor health of many Americans... LOL, that is the most dishonest and perverse argument I have heard yet. How exactly, Gwen, does treatment have anything to do with true "health"? You know, as does the rest of America, that we are "unhealthy" simply because of our poor diets and lack of exercise. I would LOVE to hear how universal health care is going to make Americans more "healthy". But Gwen knows this and instead chooses to use rhetoric and ideology to make her case. Shame on you Gwen.
Gwen, you can keep your Government sponsored health care (which would still be better than the one you would give to the people) to yourself, and just leave us ALONE!
Zeus Rodriguez, President
Hispanic Commonweal
Oak Creek
ZUES: WHY WOULD ANYONE NOT WANT EVERY HUMAN BEING TO BE HEALTHY. IS THAT NOT THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY? Society has more problems than
Email I received from a friend: ---------------My inbox has been flooded with emails spreading crazy rumors about health reform so I wanted to share some facts from AARP about what's really going on. Please join me in forwarding these facts to everyone you know. Print them out and pass them around at your social gatherings and other places where people are discussing the issues of the day.
FACT #1: Medicare will not be ended, and no benefits or services will be cut.
Your services will not be ended, nor will your benefits be cut. AARP's position on this could not be clearer. And we have sent this message loud and clear to Congress. While the current proposals include savings in Medicare by cutting out fraud, abuse, waste, and inefficiency, we're standing up and making sure benefits for Medicare recipients are not only fully protected, but are improved.1
FACT #2: No legislation currently in Congress would mandate the rationing of care. Period.
Our staff has read all of the legislation circulating in Congress and there are no provisions in these bills that would ration care for our members. None. If any ever did, we would vigorously fight to stop that legislation.2
FACT #3: There is no provision of any piece of legislation that would promote euthanasia of any kind.
The rumors out there are flat out lies. Right now Medicare does not cover counseling for end-of-life care. The portion of the bill in question would simply provide coverage for optional end-of-life consultations with doctors, so that the patient can be aware of all of the treatment options on the table. It is not mandatory and it has nothing to do with euthanasia.3
FACT #4: We have not endorsed President Obama's plan.
In fact, we haven't endorsed any plan. We are supporting reform of our health care system, something that AARP has pushed for many years. We're working closely with Republican and Democratic members of Congress to lower health care costs and to ensure quality affordable coverage for older Americans – and we want reform legislation passed and signed by the president this year.4
So what is AARP fighting for in health reform?
Stopping insurance companies from charging older Americans unaffordable premiums because of their age.
Ending the practice of excluding people from insurance because of pre-existing conditions.
Holding down health costs and making insurance coverage more affordable for all Americans.
Making prescription drugs more affordable by narrowing the Medicare doughnut hole, bringing generics to market faster, and allowing Medicare to negotiate better drug prices.
VF LaRoosh
Artefacto Inc.
That representatives would champion a take over of a sixth of the economy when none even know fully what they are proposing is beyond scary. Zeus is right in following the party line in lock step leading us all down the path of suckling or the teat of the largesse.
As more realize the extent to which this plan takes away rights and destroys freedom of choice hopefully we will see the fortunes turn on the Statists intent on destroying our liberty.
Kent McKelvey
Businessman
Walkers Point
First off- if Gwen Moore is for something, 95% of the time I would run away from it- this health care fiasco is clearly part of the 95%.
If this government sponsored health care program is so good why are the politicians, government employees and other union members exempt from it? Shouldn't these groups be required to subscribe to the plan not only for economies of scale, but also for the purpose of being democratic? Or is this government plan only for the little people?
PS- AARP is a leftist toadie organization- they are more concerned about their leftist agenda then their members. See the following: http://www.breitbart.tv/aarp-reps-cancel-listening-session-after-participants-refuse-to-keep-their-comments-quiet/
Rep Moore _ thank you for this insightful viewpoint. Clearly you have overturned the rocks under which the likes of Mr. Marsh reside. He has - as is his pattern - arisen yelling "run away" and "leftist" and "toadie." This is what we sadly have these days as the loyal opposition. Rep. Moore, stand in there. Don't let the insurance and big pharm bucks back you down. The time for change has come.
Bob, open attacks aside, has it ever occurred to you that much like the 'big pharm' and insurance; there are opposite influences such as attorneys, Weac, government union, politicians, etc.
If you take a moment to think about the big picture; I believe you'll see two sides viing to keep thinking people too occupied to realize we're being pulled around by our emotionally charged noses.
Further, has it ever occurred to you that both sides are clearly in the wrong because they are working their agenda. Not what is best for the people they serve.
Give it some thought....
Mr. Welke- I always find it laughable that you criticize me for using words such as leftist or socialist within the same paragraph you accuse me of such things as residing under a rock. At least you are consistently inconsistent.
I would be startled if you could reasonably justify why politicians and government employees are to be exempt from the Big O's and Gwen Moore's health care fiasco. Instead of "time for change" platitudes- lets hear some reasoning- please explain why the exemption. I dare you to come up with a good reason.
PS- I'm not affiliated or beholden to big pharma, big insurance, or big government. Gwen Moore cannot claim the same.
Mr. Marsh - you get the rock analogy because your pattern is always the same: fling buzz words at ideas you don't like, like "socialist, "fiasco" and "toadie." We're supposed to be discussing what to do about health care. At present, there is no finalized bill that has cleared the house and senate. Rep. Moore is putting forth a reasoned point of view. Mr. Johnson has a good point in that both sides are working their own agendas and not always thinking what's best for the people. For me, we learned the hard way what the tobacco and auto industries were all about.
Now we're seeing what the insurance industry is all about. I'll be happy to discuss opinions.
But name calling should go back where it belongs: under a rock.