Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Populist Reform of the Democratic Party

Showing Original Post only (View all)

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)
Sat Nov 15, 2014, 07:19 PM Nov 2014

Understanding the Corporate Welfare Giveaway known as the ACA... [View all]

There are certainly significant "positives" contained in the legislation known as the ACA.

Among them are the fact that there are no longer any Americans who can be told they cannot be insured due to a "pre-existing condition."

Many Americans who previously did not find insurance affordable now have subsidies to help them afford such. Due to the fact that such individuals number in the millions, it is not difficult to realize that many lives will be saved that would have been lost.

But the actual "reform" was much more of a give away to the biggest, already most profitable business in th USA, health care insurers, than being a net gain to consumers. For instance, many poorer individuals will strive to avoid using the insurance, due to the fact that for many folks seeking a cheaper premium, the deductibles are about half or one third of their income. ($ 5,000 is a lot of money if you make less than $ 60,000. And with rent and groceries and housing prices extremely high, that $ 5,000 deductible is a lot even to someone making $ 60,000!).


Let's look at one facet of what the public wanted and then explained that they wanted in almost every poll taken between 2008 and Dec 2009, an important facet that was not realized - the public option... According to the second article I link to in this OP, "This latter provision, one of the positive elements in Obamacare, was not forced upon the insurers; they themselves had proposed it. If they had not agreed to accept patients with pre-existing conditions, the law would have had to include a “public option” to guarantee that such patients could access health insurance, thus creating public competition that would give at least some consumers a non-private insurance option.

"Whether a public option would have constituted a meaningful alternative that competed with private companies would have depended partly on the details of its design; it is certainly possible that it would have served as a place for private insurers to dump
sick customers, making it expensive and unsustainable
(especially if the already-insured were not given the public
option, as seems likely). "
13

Edward Luce, “Gloves Off in Health Reform Battle,”
Financial Times

In any case, it would inevitably have been inferior to a
system. See Physicians for a National Health Program, “The
‘Public Plan Option’; Myths and Facts,” available at
http://www.pnhp.org/change/Public_Option_Myths_and_Facts.pdf

.

Just who were the "stakeholders" that the Obama Administration was catering to? The following URL has an excellent thesis regarding the ACA, and defines the word "stakeholder" as used by the Administration. (Wanna guess the meaning of the word "stakeholder?" Let's just say it is not you or me.)
http://www.academia.edu/7048015/Healthy_Wealthy_and_Wise_How_
Corporate_Power_Shaped_the_Affordable_Care_Act



From the above linked to thesis:
(4)
The subsequent process by which the reform was shaped is
much clearer: the administration invited the key corporate
powerholders into the policymaking process from the
beginning. In the words of White House communications
director Dan Pfeiffer, the Obama strategy was to “bring every stakeholder to the table.”
(10)
Journalist Ryan Lizza makes clear that “stakeholder” referred to capitalist interests and not the general public, noting, for example, that Obama “sent his toughest political operatives — like Rahm Emanuel and Jim Messina — to cut deals with the pharmaceutical industry and hospitals.”
(11)
One major agreement that derived from this process of
negotiation promised the health insurance industry tens of
millions of new customers, who would be forced by the law to
buy plans from private insurers. In exchange, the industry
agreed to provide coverage to patients with pre-existing
conditions.
(12)
In another major negotiation, administration operatives and
Democratic Senator Max Baucus (Chair of the Senate Finance
Committee) gained assent from the Pharmaceutical Research and
Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) to the proposed law by
renouncing the government’s power to negotiate drug prices
and import lower-cost drugs.
(13)
The final product was generally deemed “a good deal” by industry
insiders (the opinion of the senior vice president of PhRMA, which actually bought ads supporting the bill).
(14)
Except for the five biggest private insurers (Aetna, Cigna,
Humana, UnitedHealth, and WellPoint), most major players in
the healthcare industry supported the reform or at least did
not actively oppose it. This assent from the industry
— a reversal of its decades of vigorous opposition —
resulted from from the shaping of the reform into a familiar
form of corporate welfare: “a big injection of public subsidy to
expand the overall size of the US healthcare market,” as the
Financial Times noted.
(15)


The corporate welfare aspect of the bill can be clearly seen
in the negotiations with America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the main health insurers’ lobbying organization.

Though AHIP never formally endorsed the bill, it agreed to
the basic framework and did not mobilize its legislative weight against it. The law’s central component— the individual mandate
in exchange for “no pre-existing condition exclusions”—
was precisely what AHIP and the right-wing Heritage
Foundation had previously proposed, and which

65 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
K&R nt Mnemosyne Nov 2014 #1
K&R peacebird Nov 2014 #2
K & R L0oniX Nov 2014 #3
The things health insurance industry had, that the government did not and GOP would not approve Hoyt Nov 2014 #4
Although I find logical the majority of yr post , the end statement truedelphi Nov 2014 #13
I hear you, but here's the thing. You can buy health insurance that covers any hospital, Hoyt Nov 2014 #16
Well, as I understand it, when the Government administers Medicaid, the overhead is 3%. But now that sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #25
Government doesn't administer most of Medicare, private insurance companies do. Hoyt Nov 2014 #26
Dems defect because of weak leadership. That should not happen if we had strong Democratic sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #27
I wish you success in straightening the mess out with all your answers. Hoyt Nov 2014 #28
The answer is obvious. The Dem Party needs to represent the people who elect them. sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #29
Exactly just like Social Security has a low overhead (6% I think). And they want to privatize that jwirr Nov 2014 #50
My daughter has been on Medicaid for many years and here in MN it has almost always been jwirr Nov 2014 #48
To bad no government program has ever changed after it was first passed. jeff47 Nov 2014 #5
Oh btw BlindTiresias Nov 2014 #6
There's talk of the governor re-entrenching. jeff47 Nov 2014 #12
Except I wasn't arguing that position BlindTiresias Nov 2014 #17
healthcare without profit?! redruddyred Nov 2014 #8
heritage care does not need to "change". it needs to be undone. Doctor_J Nov 2014 #19
That is what people are doing now. Realizing they have no voice in DC, people are focusing on sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #30
In this I and my family are some of the luckiest people in the world. MN has MNCare. Most of us opt jwirr Nov 2014 #49
the ACA was definitely a compromise redruddyred Nov 2014 #7
The first step is to end corporate brainwashing -- aka consolidated media propaganda RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #10
Corporate brainwashing. I absolutely agree. Maineman Nov 2014 #20
Close to 90 percent of Californians supported GMO labeling at the outset RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #23
oh that's such a shame redruddyred Nov 2014 #57
The problem is that what little media we do have are know only by people like us. The closest we jwirr Nov 2014 #51
Start with Pacifica RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #52
Okay that is a start but how do we get the ordinary voter to listen to them? I considerate it an jwirr Nov 2014 #53
The people DID vote, in 2008. Did you forget that we worked hard and WON? There was a mandate sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #31
It looked like this.... Enthusiast Nov 2014 #36
I remember, Dems had so much support to do what needed to be done as fast as they could. sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #39
Just imagine how effective a bully pulpit could have been at that moment. Enthusiast Nov 2014 #42
Yes, completely squandered. The question is 'why'? sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #44
I won't say it. Enthusiast Nov 2014 #45
Good post (nt) Babel_17 Nov 2014 #38
and yet it passed the senate by a single vote. redruddyred Nov 2014 #58
K & R. Totally agree with the quote about the public option, too. RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #9
The politics of fear. 'Let's not try something because they will destroy it even if we succeed.' sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #40
How did you figure to get it through Congress otherwise? aquart Nov 2014 #11
How did FDR get the legislation he wanted passed to go truedelphi Nov 2014 #14
FDR's congress was LOADED with Democrats. There simply is no comparison. NYC_SKP Nov 2014 #24
You are re-writing history. Obama got in back in 2008, and was inaugurated in 2009. truedelphi Nov 2014 #32
Exactly, and I remember Jan, 2008. There were high hopes that Dems would move swiftly on sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #37
Thank you, truedelphi. Enthusiast Nov 2014 #35
And Enthusiast, thank you too. I was actually a bit truedelphi Nov 2014 #56
d'you think obama could've been elected redruddyred Nov 2014 #59
Obama = Goldman Sachs. truedelphi Nov 2014 #63
opensecrets says that UC was his biggest donor. redruddyred Nov 2014 #64
Until two years ago, Richard Blum, Sen Di Feinstein's husband, truedelphi Nov 2014 #65
Did any Republicans vote for the ACA? sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #41
Correct and it also involves having the facts at hand and making sure they are the right facts. From jwirr Nov 2014 #47
By Democrats simply doing their job. When I don't do my job, I get fired. Zorra Nov 2014 #62
I highly recommend Wendell Potter's 'Deadly Spin' on the subject. n/t Triana Nov 2014 #15
Me too! Maineman Nov 2014 #21
Corporations are always going to make out like bandits. I would rather have them make out while kelliekat44 Nov 2014 #18
That's one of the main reasons for starting this group— Enthusiast Nov 2014 #34
And I would rather we stop them from making out like bandits, which is what they are. And helping sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #43
The exact plan that the fascists rolled out in 1994 Doctor_J Nov 2014 #22
Kicked and recommended! Enthusiast Nov 2014 #33
No real arguement. However I think the Medicaid expansion is a real positive. Many of the people jwirr Nov 2014 #46
Here is why, jwirr truedelphi Nov 2014 #54
I had forgotten that aspect. Now I understand. My reasoning was that Medicaid pays for everything jwirr Nov 2014 #55
Kicked & Reed /nt demwing Nov 2014 #60
Kicked for visability /nt demwing Nov 2014 #61
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Populist Reform of the Democratic Party»Understanding the Corpora...»Reply #0