Poverty

I'm thinking about sharing more thoughts and questions here. I really think that society has the capability to solve all sorts of things if we work together to share what we know, collaborate on how to solve problems, and coordinate the solutions in our communities.

I will get more statistics later, but here are some examples.

I think we live in a world where we can figure out how to get everyone access to clean water when they wake up this morning, instead of just two thirds.

I think we live in a world where no child needs to die of hunger tonight, instead of 8,000.

I think we live in a world where 0 girls need to be prevented from attending school today, instead of 30,000,000.

With all of the ingenuity and strength and determination that society has, I think we live in a world where these problems are solvable. We've done far more impressive things.

We've travelled to the moon.

We've travelled to other planets.

We've sent space ships out of our solar system.

We've mapped out the galaxy.

We've photographed the entire earth.

We've created the technology to store nearly every piece of information electronically.

We've created a network of satellites to make nearly every piece of information available to anyone with access to a computer.

We've created societies in parts of the world where less than five percent of the economy needs to be devoted to providing for the basic needs and the other 95% can focus on whatever society puts a value on.

With so much potential that society has, I think there is plenty of room to make big changes with only a little coordination. I don't think we need new laws. I don't think we need a revolution. I don't think we need the media to scare us. I don't think we need a war to stop the problem or to fix the problem. I don't think we need economic growth. I don't think we need more debt. I don't think we need less debt.

I think we need some one to believe in us and remind us that we have so much potential.

I believe in you and you have so much potential.

Gatsby Curve

Chris Hayes on the news this morning was talking about the Gatsby Curve and the relationship between income equality and social mobility and how that relates to a progressive tax system. He then went on tho say,

"If you look at the countries that are the most equal, the thing that makes them have reduced inequality isn't the progressivity of their tax system. What it is is taxes as a share of GDP. You line up the OECD countries on one side and you rank them by how equal they are. You line them up on the other side and you rank them by what share of GDP in taxes they pay. And what you see is if everyone is paying taxes, and everyone is sharing in universal benefits, you have more equality."

Well, I was curious about how this relates to GDP per capita. Is income equality correlated with GDP per capita? If more taxes go in as a percentage of GDP, and more taxes go out to the mutual and equal benefit of everyone, then everyone will get the benefits of more income equality, but will they also get the benefit of a higher income overall per capita?

This data seems to suggest, ... kind of.

http://visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2006/01/04/gdp-per-capital-vs-gini-index

The L-shape of the data seems to put countries into 2 groups -  Countries with Gini indices below 40 and countries with Gini indices above 40. The lower group (more income equality) have GDPs per capita that span the whole range. The upper group (less income equality) tend to have only low GDPs per capita.

The US seems to be an outlier in this, with less equality, but one of the highest GDPs per capita.

What's causing this?

Fiscal cliff

I think a part of the reason why the negotiations on a budget are difficult is because people have different opinions about what is best for the economy. Your approach to a budget will probably be very different depending on what your goal is.

Is the best economy the one where the most successful individuals have the most control over what happens with the money?

Is the best economy the one where the largest number of the people have the most number of opportunities to contribute to it?

Is the best economy the one that uses the majority of it's resources on non-governmental items?

And to make things more complicated, does what is best for the economy depend on the state of the economy?

Wish I had the answer. Or at least someone did.

Representative Barickman - Weekly update 04-29-2011

Jason expands on the HMO issues a little more in this week's email:

 By some accounts, this was a short week in Springfield.  We were only in Session on Tuesday through Thursday.  That said, I gladly sat through a 5-hour hearing that started on Wednesday at 4:00 p.m.  I still made it home for supper with Kristin, although it was more like a midnight snack by the time I got home...

I sit on the Higher Education Committee, and Wednesday's hearing focused on the elimination of the Health Alliance HMO under the state health insurance plan for state employees.  To anyone that isn't directly affected by this decision, it seems easy enough to ignore it.  They shouldn't.  This is an excellent example of why our state is in the financial condition it is in today.  In a nutshell, the Quinn Administration is attempting to move thousands of state employees to an insurance plan: (1) that the employees don't want, (2) that doesn't have an HMO network in place and has no plans to put it in place, and (3) that costs the employees more money.  The kicker is that this switch will cost the state millions of dollars more than the existing plan.  Why would we want to be spending more money, rather than explore opportunities to cut costs?  At the hearing, I was more than willing to advocate on behalf of the taxpayers of Illinois, as well as the thousands of constituents in my district that are directly impacted by this decision.  You can hear some of my remarks on my Facebook page.  Stay tuned for Gov. Quinn's response.

I try to reply to your personal emails at least weekly.  Please let me know what's on your mind.

Jason

I'm still not sure how this change is costing the state millions of dollars more than the existing plan. Anyone have the details?

More from Jason Barickman! Finally a politician that will answer questions!

So after Jason sent out his weekly email on 4/17/2011, I asked him the following:

I don't know much about the "Health Alliance contract." Can you tell me more about it?

Also, I strongly agree that, "if more employees made quarterly payments - rather than having their money automatically deducted from their payroll check before they "see" it - then we'd have more people arguing for lower taxes in Springfield and Washington".  Seems unlikely that we would move in that direction. Any alternatives?

He responded to the first question, but didn't mention anything about alternative methods of collection income taxes.  Here is his response:

The Quinn Administration terminated an HMO contract that effectively requires 100,000 state employees to change from an HMO plan to an Open Access Plan.  While devastating to thousands of state employees, it's also going to cost the taxpayers upwards of $40 million.  I can't believe the Guv is making this decision, impacting these people's lives in such a dramatic way, and costing us all more money.  I'm obviously opposed to it...

Thanks for the note!

 It's great to have a representative that actually responds to questions.  With my sincere hope of better understanding the issues, I replied once again:

Why is switching from an HMO to an Open Access Plan devastating and dramatic? How did you calculate the $40 million cost?

I will let you know Jason's response when I get it.

Representative Barickman - Weekly update 04-17-2011

Below is Jason Barickman's weekly email update that he sends out.  I don't know too much about the Health Alliance contract.  If anyone has more information, feel free to share.

He makes a really good point about the way taxes are collected and I strongly agree that "if more employees made quarterly payments - rather than having their money automatically deducted from their payroll check before they "see" it - then we'd have more people arguing for lower taxes in Springfield and Washington".  I do that with my county taxes, and it makes a pretty big difference. 

Scott,

Everywhere I went this week, people talked to me about the State's decision to terminate the Health Alliance contract.  I continue to believe that this was a bad decision on the State's part, especially because it will cost our State more money, and I'll continue to be a voice for those concerned about this.  As I touched on this issue last week, I'd simply encourage you to reply with any specific questions you have on this.

Tomorrow is April 18, and my taxes are due.  Being self-employed (outside my State Rep job), I pay quarterly tax installments to the IRS and the Illinois Department of Revenue.  Generally, I don't like spending money.  (Ask Kristin or anyone who knows me.)  And while I don't mind paying my fair share, writing out these checks causes me a certain amount of discomfort.  I strongly believe that if more employees made quarterly payments - rather than having their money automatically deducted from their payroll check before they "see" it - then we'd have more people arguing for lower taxes in Springfield and Washington.  You wouldn't believe how many bills the Legislature has voted voted on since January.  Rest assured, on each and every vote, I try to think of the taxpayer and my pledge to restrain government spending.  I've voted accordingly every time.

All's well at home.  Kristin spent much of the day cleaning.  She's says she's nesting.  If you're a single guy, you'll have to look up why nesting is one of the most best kept secrets for expecting husbands.  Here's a link if you want to know more: (http://facebook.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=4283b0d0b256ff99c9fb2b540&id=4d41cc6b45&e=49012b6848.

Jason

Communities and Local Politics

Great talk by Dave Meslin on ted.com about local politics. 


http://www.ted.com/talks/dave_meslin_the_antidote_to_apathy.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2011-04-12

Representative Barickman - Weekly update 04-09-2011

First weekly email from Jason Barickman:

Scott,

This week's events reminded me of the importance of a State Representative being a voice for your constituents.

On Wednesday night, I was informed that Health Alliance would be eliminated as a state employee health plan.  Approximately 100,000 people will be impacted by this decision, including 32,500 in or around my district in East Central Illinois.  The decision to cut Health Alliance was initially suggested as a cost-savings effort; however, it is much more complicated.  I'm not convinced that any purported cost savings are real - in fact, this move may cost the State more money - and I'm very concerned about whether individuals will receive the same level of service, access and care as they're moved from one plan to another.  What's most frustrating is the process by which some have made this decision, and the failure to acknowledge the dramatic impact this outcome could have on people's lives.  I'll obviously be spending next week on this issue, and hope we can change the result.

Speaking of constituent issues, I'm doing my best to follow up on the many requests made of me, regardless of when, where or how you contact me.  A constituent was introduced to Kristin and me at Original House of Pancakes in Champaign several weeks ago, and he talked to me about a problem with the Mental Health Code.  With the help of the constituent (a psychologist) and the Public Defender's office, I sponsored House Bill 2362, which will allow court appointed psychologists to obtain the records necessary to determine if an individual is fit to stand trial.  The bill passed the House unanimously last week.

I appreciate all the well wishes with Kristin.  She's doing great.  In fact, even though she skipped a fundraiser last night, I came home to home-cooked pork chops, potatoes and carrots.  Yum!

Jason

Email from Jason Barickman

Here's an email I got from Jason Barickman and my response.

Love hearing from you.  Keep me on your list.  You seem to be doing a great job.  I love hearing about your bills that get passed unanimously. 

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of government and my hope is that we can govern things on as local a level as possible.  But, that's just my two sense.

Would love to hear your thoughts and plans for Illinois.

Scott C.

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Jason Barickman <jason@jasonbarickman.com> wrote:

Scott,

As you might suspect, being a State Representative introduces me to a number of interesting people.  Honestly, it's one of the best parts of my job, as I generally enjoy meeting new people and learning more about them.

Often people ask me to keep them up to date on legislative and political issues.  For many, having a direct and open communication line with their State Representative is an important - and often overlooked - component of my job.  Rather than sending glossy newsletters, I opt to send more of a personal e-mail.  I think it's important that you hear from me, and more importantly, that I hear from you.  My e-mails to you will be a mix of politics, legislative issues, and personal anecdotes.  I presume your responses will be similar.

I understand that you may not want to be on my e-mail list.  That's OK, and there's an easy way to unsubscribe at the bottom of all of my e-mails (including this one).  Until then, please look for updates from me from time to time, and please don't ever hesitate to contact me.  I'm proud to serve you, and I hope you're glad to have me in this role.  By the way, feel free to forward this to your friends, and ask them to join us by sending me an email at jason@jasonbarickman.com.

Jason

1990 Oil Pollution Act

I sent the following email to Senator Dick Durbin:

Does the 1990 Oil Pollution Act ring a bell?  How could you vote for something like this?  What section of the constitution gives you that kind of authority, and what line of reasoning made you think it was a good idea?

Evidently, he voted to limit the liability of oil companies back in the 90s. 

http://breakthematrix.com/latest/who-voted-to-limit-the-liability-of-oil-companies/

If he responds, I'll let you know.

David Gill on Health Care

David Gill is running for Illinois' Representative in U.S. congress.  I don't think his stance on health care is fully explained on his website (http://www.gill2010.com/issues/affordable-healthcare/), so I sent him this email.

David Gill,

Your stance on Health Care (http://www.gill2010.com/issues/affordable-healthcare/) seems unfounded and misinformed.  Can you please send me a more detailed explanation on how you came to the conclusions that you have come to?  Also, please explain to me what part of the constitution justifies your plans to create a health care system?  What would you say to the people who believe they have a right to not purchase health insurance? 

I will post your response on my blog (http://governingourselves.blogspot.com/) and share it with my friends and family in order to help you spread your message.

I will post his response if I get one.

UPDATE:  Here is David Gill's surprisingly informative response.  I'm actually very impressed.  This is the first time that I've felt like I could actually rely on someone in politics.

     Thanks for your interest in the campaign.  Your blog seems to indicate that you're a mathematician-- is that right?  I got my degree in math and worked in the actuarial field before going on to Med School.

 

     There are further details regarding my proposed health care plan forthcoming in the next 2-4 weeks-- there will be sections on the need for co-pays for non-emergencies, the need to revise EMTALA (the law which currently allows anyone to come to the E.R. for ANYTHING, including hangnails), and the need for federal malpractice reform (which my opponent opposes-- in fact, he was the only Republican in the House to vote against the GOP version of health care reform, for this very reason).

 

      But the foundation of my plan has been well-established for decades.  I would encourage you to peruse www.pnhp.org, which has a load of information regarding the financial viability of such a plan.  The overriding factor is that we should stop giving 38% of our health care dollars away for NOTHING, which is what we do with the private health insurance cartel.  We should use that money for health care, and economic growth-- a recent study sponsored by the California Nurses Association demonstrated that extending Medicare to all Americans, regardless of age, will create nearly 3 million jobs, by taking back all that money that we currently throw into a black hole.

 

     I'm not talking about "creating" a health care system-- I'm just talking about extending the current Medicare system, which is funded by taxes.  No one would be required to purchase private insurance, though I have no interest in outlawing private insurance, either.

 

Thanks,

David Gill, M.D.
www.gill2010.com

Vince LaMie and Shane Cultra

Vince LaMie is running for State Representative in Illinois.  I sent him an email asking him for a detailed plan of what he plans to do.  I will post his response if I get one.

Vince LaMie,

Can you give me a detailed plan of what you plan to do if elected as State Representative?  I'll post your response on my blog (http://governingourselves.blogspot.com/) and share it with my friends to help you get your message out. 

To be fair, I'm sending a similar message to Representative Shane Cultra:

Representative Cultra,

Can you give me a detailed plan of what you plan to do if re-elected as State Representative?  I'll post your response on my blog (http://governingourselves.blogspot.com/) and share it with my friends to help you get your message out. 

I think these are the only two guys who are running for the 105th district.  Surely there's a democrat out there some where.  Anyone know who it is?

Shane Cultra seems to be doing a fine job, so I'll probably vote for him again.  However, Vince is a fellow mathematician and I like to think that mathematicians have a logically way of looking at things and solving problems.  But hopefully, who ever wins will be more in the business of letting us solve our own problems and keeping the government out of the picture as much as possible.

UPDATE:  Below is Vince LaMie's very helpful response.  When I have some time, I'll send him a follow up email and post it as well.

I visited your blog. It is good that you expect detailed explanations to positions taken by politicians and don't seem to accept vague general comments. So, could you provide some detailed explanation to your statement that my opponent "seems to be doing a fine job, so I'll probably vote for him again." He has never had an opponent in the general election, so you haven't had the opportunity to vote for another candidate in the general election. Do you know the details of where his campaign contributions have come from, or what committees he is on?
I am sending a copy of my announcement for you and your followers to get an idea of where I stand.
The corruption in IL is so entrenched throughout the system that the only persons that have not been bought by the system can fight against it. And the system needs to be fixed before we can expect to make any real and sustainable progress. The IL Reform Commission wrote a report that contains many recommendations that would go a long way toward making our system more responsive to the people of IL and reduce the amount of corruption that is an embarrassment to our state. That report contains details of corruption that most of us were unaware. I recommend that everyone in IL get a copy.
I will check your blog for a while to see what type of responses come up.
The Other Guy,
Vince

Closed Door Meetings on Healthcare

Evidently, the democrats are having meetings on health care that are closed to the republicans and to the public. I sent an email to Dick Durbin and Roland Burris asking them why. I will post their meaningless responses when I get them.

My email to Roland Burris and Dick Durbin:

Why are you having secret meetings on health care behind closed doors where the public can't see what's being discussed?

More thoughts on Health Insurance

So we're trying to solve a lot of problems at once with all the health care debate. One of them seems to be that people can't find affordable health care. I should have done this a long time ago, but just this morning, I shopped around for health insurance for the first time. A site called ehealthinsurance came up and I no longer believe that it's not possible for people to find affordable health insurance.

Before you disagree with me, let me define a few things. By health insurance, I mean partial coverage for future, uncertain, catastrophic events. In my opinion, this is what insurance was created to do and when we try to use it for something other than it's intended purpose, we will obviously run into some problems.

Insurance wasn't designed to cover events that have already happened. You can't buy home insurance on a burning house and expect them to fix it. And you can't expect us to manage pre-exsisting conditions in the same way that we manage future, uncertain, catastrophic events.

My point is, there are a lot of issues out there and we need to look at each them individually in order to find the best solution.

I'm going to attempt to list out the separate issues that seem to be lumped together when discussing health care reform.

Increased costs
1. Increased costs due to inflation
2. Increased costs due to lifestyle
3. Increased costs due to increased coverage
4. Increased costs due to better care
5. Increased costs due to medical malpractice
6. Increased costs due to medical malpractice insurance
7. Increased costs due to doctor fraud
8. Increased costs due to patient fraud
9. Increased costs due to an increased number marginally decreasingly effective medical procedures
10. Increased costs due to uninsured patients' care
11. Increased costs due to uninsured patients' use of emergency room care
12. Increased costs due to aging and the correlated increased risk of illness
13. Increased costs due to increased out-of-pocket expenses during prolonged illnesses.
14. Increased costs due to a lower risk group subsidizing a higher risk group
15. Increased costs due to increased risk of future, uncertain, catastrophic events
16. Increased costs due to increased cost of future, certain, catastrophic events
17. Increased costs due to increased cost of future, uncertain, normal events
18. Increased costs due to increased cost of future, certain, normal events

Uninsured
1. Uninsured because they don't want insurance
2. Uninsured because of a preexisting condition
3. Uninsured because of the high cost of the desired insurance plan
4. Uninsured because they don't want a cheaper plan with less coverage
5. Uninsured because a cheaper plan with less coverage is not available
6. Uninsured because of citizenship
7. Uninsured because of loss of employment
8. Uninsured because they are no longer covered on their parents plan
9. Uninsured because their policy was canceled
10. Uninsured because their policy was not renewed when it expired

Limits
1. Limits on maximum annual payments
2. Limits on maximum lifetime payments
3. Limits on approved medical tests
4. Limits on covered events
5. Limits on out-of-pocket expenses

I don't think I've listed out every aspect of health insurance, but my point is there is no silver bullet that is going to address each of these issues. Mainly, I'm just frustrated that politicians don't approach the topic of health care in any sort of deliberate or well-thought out way.

None of their proposed solutions are linked back to the problems they are attempting to correct. And none of the politicians give an objective and intelligent analysis of the proposed solution's effect on the issues at hand. If there is a politician that is doing this, please point me in the right direction.

College interns are better at responding to emails than Senators

So, I've been frustrated with my Senators for the past few weeks. There's a lot going on with the new health care proposal, so I thought I would do what I thought responsible citizens did and read the health care bill and write a letter to my senators. So I read the bill, not all of it, but most. There's a big section on how the health care bill will affect the IRS tax code laws and I'll admit that I skipped that part.

So after reading the bill (HR 3962), I felt like I had a much better understanding of what the proposal was. Since most information you get about the bill is usually slightly biased, I'd encourage everyone to at least take a look at the actual bill for themselves.

So I read it and had some questions about some parts of it, so I sent the following email to my senators, Dick Durbin and Roland Burris. The email has 10 fairly straight forward questions. Nothing that I thought would be particularly tricky, especially for someone who's job it is to read and vote on the bill the questions were addressing. And even more so for someone who is strongly in support of the bill.

Well to say the least, I was very disappointed. Bottom line, they sent me a form letter that acknowledge that the subject of me email was health care, but nothing substantial beyond that. What are we paying these guys for? We have over a dozen college interns at my office, and all of them do a better job of responding to my emails than my senators do. I just don't get it.

Now you are probably thinking some they don't have time to do it or his staff responded, not him. I may be the only one, but I don't see how either of these things are valid excuses.

So, here is an open plea to my senators. Please, please, please pay attention to us. We're the people you are representing. We're relying on you to help us govern the country so that we don't have to govern ourselves. Part of me thinks we would be better off with out you guys. Part of me thinks we would be better off governing ourselves. Please, please, please, show me that I'm wrong. Please show me that I can count on you. Please show me that you know that you really are working for us and that you still realize that we are the ones that are paying your salary and that it's ok for us to expect something in return.

My email:

I have a few questions about the public health care option.

1. What will the limits on coverage be under the public option? Since we obviously can't spend an infinite amount of money curing every disease, how much coverage will each person have under the public option?

2. If the premium is less than the expected costs (such as the limitations proposed in section 213 of HR 3962 and section 222.a.3), where will the remaining premium come from?

3. In section 222.a, paragraph 5 and paragraph 3 seem to be in contradiction. Can you please explain this?

4. What is the difference between the Health Insurance Exchange and the Public Health Insurance Option?

5. From reading the bill, it looks like the Basic Plan of the Health Insurance Exchange will offer the same benefits as those outlined in title II. With no limitations on annual or lifetime benefits, how will this type of unlimited coverage be paid for? Will we spend an unlimited amount of money on health care claims? If not, what will the limits be?

6. What problems are the proposals in title I and title II attempting to solve? How will Title I and Title II solve those problems? What are the pros and cons of these solutions?

7. What are the health insurance Cooperatives in Section 310?

8. Section 322.a.1.b.i says that the premiums for the public health insurance option will fully finance the costs? How will individuals that can't afford health insurance benefit under the current systems benefit from a public option that still requires them to pay the entire premium?

9. Section 343 seems to say, basically, that the premium will be lowered depending on the households income. Am I understanding this correctly?

10. It doesn't seem like there will be enough money to pay for this public health insurance plan. Can you explain that part to me?

Dick Durbin's Response:

Thank you for contacting me about proposals to give Americans the choice of a public health insurance option that will compete with private insurance plans.

I believe Congress should work to bring meaningful health care reform to American families. Health care reform should reduce costs for families, businesses and government; protect people's choice of doctors, hospitals and insurance plans; and assure affordable, high-quality health care for every American.

We are crafting a reform bill with these goals in mind. Those who like the health insurance they have will be able to keep it. However, a public option will provide a valuable alternative to today's private health plans for those who do not like their current plan or cannot afford coverage.

Too many Americans cannot afford the health plans offered by today's for-profit insurance companies. A public option will provide competition that will hold private plans accountable and help moderate the price of health insurance. No one will be forced to join a public option - it will be a voluntary choice available in addition to existing plans.

I will continue to work for a reform plan that provides stable and secure coverage, stable and affordable costs, and better quality care.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch.

Sincerely,

Richard J. Durbin

United States Senator

RJD/kg

Roland Burris' Response:

Thank you for contacting me about healthcare reform. I appreciate the benefit of your views.

As your United States Senator, one of my top priorities is to ensure that my constituents have access to affordable, quality healthcare. Today, nearly 3.5 million Illinois residents, 30.8% of the under 65 population, lack health insurance. Those who remain covered face rapidly rising premiums. A Kaiser Family Foundation report found that average insurance premiums have more than doubled in the past nine years, and the New America Foundation projects that, by 2016, coverage costs for an average Illinois family could top $25,000 a year.

In the face of these challenges, I support reforms aimed at improving efficiency and access while reducing cost. A focus on prevention and primary care will help Americans avoid getting sick, saving billions on costly specialist and emergency treatments. Increasing competition in the insurance market, through a public option, will put pressure on insurers to reduce administrative costs, marketing, and high profit margins. This will result in a higher percentage of premiums spent on treatment and a better overall value for consumers. Expanded access to health insurance, provided through affordability credits, will eliminate the $1,200 “hidden tax” that the average insured Illinois resident pays in additional premiums to subsidize expensive emergency care for those who currently cannot afford insurance and bring premium costs within reach for millions of middle class families.

The pending reform effort has received the support of many of the nation’s most prominent medical, consumer, and senior groups. The American Medical Association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the American Federation of Hospitals, Families USA, and the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) all support reforming our health system, because they know that we face a crisis. As costs skyrocket, more people lose the coverage they need. Patients suffer, and businesses lose productivity. Insurers, hospitals, and doctors lose customers, and the entire healthcare system begins to break down. Currently, 14,000 people lose their insurance every single day. This is not acceptable in America.

A number of groups that profit from the current inefficiencies have spread false rumors about reform. I would like to take this opportunity to correct some of the misinformation.

“Government Takeover”: Some believe that a public insurance option will mean the end of private health insurance. On the contrary, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports that if insurance reform passes with a public plan option, the number of people covered by private, employer-sponsored coverage will actually increase.

Rationing: Rationed care will not happen with reform. In fact, the bill takes a number of steps to prevent insurance companies from making your coverage decisions. Insurance reform will restore your doctor’s ability to treat patients properly, without deferring to insurance company bureaucrats who deny coverage and treatments.

Medicare: Rumors abound that reform jeopardizes existing Medicare coverage. The truth is, cutting waste, fraud, and abuse will assure the security of the Medicare trust fund for years to come. In addition, insurance reform will end cost sharing for preventative care, cut the prescription drug “doughnut hole” in half, and lower Medicare premiums.

Abortion: None of the reform proposals being considered would mandate coverage of abortions. Current federal law preventing government funded abortions; except in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother; will remain unchanged. All versions of reform include a “conscious protection” clause, which allows doctors the right to refuse to perform an abortion, if doing so conflicts with their values.

Federal Employees: The Senate reform bill requires all Members of Congress and their staffs to enroll in the public insurance exchange. I fully support this proposal, as I believe that we Senators should have a personal stake in the reforms we propose.

Cost: President Obama has repeatedly stated that any reform must not increase the federal budget deficit and must control growth in medical spending. The Senate reform bill reduces our federal budget deficit by more than $100 billion over the next ten years, and takes important steps toward paying for quality, not merely volume of service, in our healthcare system.

Investing in reform now will ensure stability in coverage. President Obama has made very clear that reform will protect Americans’ right to keep their current health insurance policy, but changes will slow the rate of increase in premiums, offer protection and options for those who lose their jobs, and help those who cannot afford insurance.

I will continue to listen closely to what you and other Illinoisans have to say about matters before Congress, the concerns of our communities, and the issues facing Illinois and the nation. My job is not about merely supporting or opposing legislation; it is also about bridging the divide that has paralyzed our nation's politics.

Sincerely,

Roland W. Burris
United States Senator

As you can see from their responses, it's clear that they didn't read my email. I'm not sure, but they could have used the same approach when they decided to support HR 3962. It's frustrating that nothing in their response makes me confident that they have actually read the bill that they support.

Durbin's Reply to 11-8-09 post on Health Care

His reply to my email about how our interns could put together better proposals than congress can. I don't think he really addressed that concern, but here is his response anyway:

Thank you for contacting me about the health plans available to other federal employees and me. I appreciate hearing from you.

Senators have the same health insurance options as other federal employees. The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) offers a menu of health insurance plans, and federal employees can choose the plan that is best for them. Senators have the same choices and pay the same premiums and co-payments as any other federal employee.

I have been working to give all Americans a similar opportunity. Two years ago, I introduced legislation that offers small businesses the same range of choices available to me and other federal employees. President Obama has proposed to extend the choice of private health insurance plans to millions of individuals who have few options today.

Too many Americans cannot afford the health plans offered by today's for-profit insurance companies. A public option will provide competition that will hold private plans accountable and help moderate the price of health insurance. No one will be forced to join a public option - it will be a voluntary choice available in addition to existing plans.

If health care reform gives Americans a chance to choose the public option, I believe federal employees also should be given that option. Since the public option is intended to be a voluntary choice, no one should be forced into it. Any federal employee who does not want to choose the public option should have the right to remain in the private plan of his or her choice.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch.

Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator

RJD/kg

More Health Care questions for Senators

Below is an email I sent to both our senators.

I have a few questions about the public health care option.

1. What will the limits on coverage be under the public option? Since we obviously can't spend an infinite amount of money curing every disease, how much coverage will each person have under the public option?

2. If the premium is less than the expected costs (such as the limitations proposed in section 213 of HR 3962 and section 222.a.3), where will the remaining premium come from?

3. In section 222.a, paragraph 5 and paragraph 3 seem to be in contradiction. Can you please explain this?

4. What is the difference between the Health Insurance Exchange and the Public Health Insurance Option?

5. From reading the bill, it looks like the Basic Plan of the Health Insurance Exchange will offer the same benefits as those outlined in title II. With no limitations on annual or lifetime benefits, how will this type of unlimited coverage be paid for? Will we spend an unlimited amount of money on health care claims? If not, what will the limits be?

6. What problems are the proposals in title I and title II attempting to solve? How will Title I and Title II solve those problems? What are the pros and cons of these solutions?

7. What are the health insurance Cooperatives in Section 310?

8. Section 322.a.1.b.i says that the premiums for the public health insurance option will fully finance the costs? How will individuals that can't afford health insurance benefit under the current systems benefit from a public option that still requires them to pay the entire premium?

9. Section 343 seems to say, basically, that the premium will be lowered depending on the households income. Am I understanding this correctly?

10. It doesn't seem like there will be enough money to pay for this public health insurance plan. Can you explain that part to me?

HR 3962 - Affordable Health Care for America Act

A letter to Senator Durbin:

Senator Durbin,

We have college interns where I work and we give them research projects to work on. The projects have a clear, well-defined problem that need to be solved and these college students provide us with well-documented research that provides us with all the information about the problem. Then the students put together a clear proposal that outlines the pros and cons of choosing that solution and give us an explanation as to why they have come to conclusion that the solution they chose will best meet our objectives. Why is it that college students are better at putting together proposals than our congress is? You and the rest of congress are so loyal to your respective political clubs, that you seem to have forgotten that it's your job to develop the best solutions to problems that meet the needs of the entire country. But instead, you vote on the first bill that you think will please slightly more than half your constituents and the rest of the members of your political club. Before you vote for HR 3962, please provide me and the rest of your constituents with a proposal that is as good as (but hopefully better than) what our college interns could do. If our college interns proposed solutions like congress did, they'd all be fired.

I'll let you know if he repsonds.

Dick Durbin's Response

Here is Dick Durbin's response to that last email I sent him:

Thank you for writing to express your concerns about health care reform. I appreciate hearing from you.

Millions of Americans face difficult choices between paying high premiums for health insurance coverage and meeting other basic needs of their families. Since 2000, health insurance premiums have gone up 73 percent. The high cost of insurance keeps dependable, quality health care coverage out of reach for many of Illinoisans. More than 46 million Americans are without health insurance today, including 8.5 million children, and millions of middle class families who do have coverage are one step away from losing it in this troubled economy.

We need reforms that give middle-class families the assurance of stable and secure coverage, stable and affordable costs, and better quality care. The reforms we are considering in Congress would help achieve these goals. We will put an end to discrimination based on preexisting conditions. Insurance companies will be prohibited from refusing you coverage, or dropping you, because of your medical history or because you get sick. There will be no annual or lifetime caps on the coverage you can receive if you need it, and no one will be charged more because of their gender.

To help keep costs manageable, insurance companies will have to abide by yearly caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses. Basic preventive care, which can reduce costs in the long run, will be provided without charge. We are also working on reforms that will reduce costs for families, businesses, and the government by paying providers for the quality of the care they provide rather than the quantity.

If you like what you have today, you can keep it. But for the millions of Americans who have no security in today's health care market, these are some of the key steps needed to fix what is broken while we protect what works. People who are uninsured or unsatisfied with their coverage will be able to choose a plan that better addresses their needs.

I believe most Americans share my commitment to these goals of health care reform. I will keep your concerns in mind as I work for an approach that provides secure and stable coverage, affordable costs, and better quality care.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch.

Sincerely,

Richard J. Durbin

United States Senator

RJD/kg

He didn't really answer my questions, but I guess I should be grateful for getting a response, right?

New Health plan

Senator Durbin,

I have 4 questions.

1. What are the details of the new proposed health insurance plan?
2. Why is it a good idea?
3. What are the pros and cons?
4. What part of the constitution allows for it?

Your Constituent,
Scott