WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is helping the nation celebrate its birthday and his daughter Malia celebrate hers.The president on Friday morning flew to Camp David, Md., for the first part of the first family's Fourth of July celebration, including daughter Malia's 11th birthday on Saturday. He set off with friend Martin Nesbitt to meet first lady Michelle Obama, who was already at Camp David.About 20 of Malia's tween-age friends will be on hand for the festivities. In an interview with The Associated Press, the president was bemused at the thought of being surrounded by so many girls. As he put it, "It's a little intimidating."The first family returns to the White House by Saturday evening to host 1,200 military families for a Fourth of July barbecue on the South Lawn.(This version CORRECTS APNewsNow; UPDATES to reflect Obama has already set off. corrects last sentence to say the Obamas are returning on Saturday not Friday.)Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is helping the nation celebrate its birthday and his daughter Malia celebrate hers.
The president on Friday morning flew to Camp David, Md., for the first part of the first family's Fourth of July celebration, including daughter Malia's 11th birthday on Saturday. He set off with friend Martin Nesbitt to meet first lady Michelle Obama, who was already at Camp David.
About 20 of Malia's tween-age friends will be on hand for the festivities. In an interview with The Associated Press, the president was bemused at the thought of being surrounded by so many girls. As he put it, "It's a little intimidating."
The first family returns to the White House by Saturday evening to host 1,200 military families for a Fourth of July barbecue on the South Lawn.
(This version CORRECTS APNewsNow; UPDATES to reflect Obama has already set off. corrects last sentence to say the Obamas are returning on Saturday not Friday.)
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
July 1, 2009, 1:16 pm Obama’s Health Care Town HallBy Jeff ZelenyDoug Mills/The New York Times President Obama embraced Debby Smith, a liver cancer patient, at a health care forum in Annandale, Va.ANNANDALE, Va. – Another week, another town meeting on health care. President Obama is set to arrive here shortly, in this suburban community outside of Washington, to continue his push to overhaul the nation’s health care system. The session is not broadcast on network television, unlike last week’s prime-time forum on ABC News, but rather on the White House Web site and a variety of social networking sites. At the Northern Virginia Community College, about 200 people in the studio audience have taken their seats. The president will take questions from them, as well as from people who submitted their queries through the White House’s official Facebook, You Tube and Twitter pages. It is the second online forum the White House has staged this year. In March, the president took questions from people via the Web as he was sitting in the East Wing. This time, he’s taken the show on the road. A video monitor here says, “The White House is Open for Questions.” Here on the East Coast, it starts at 1:15 p.m., and can be followed here . The White House is working to intensify a grass-roots push for its health care plan. With Congress on recess this week, the event here in Annandale is one of several intended to highlight the president’s urgent call to reduce costs to the health care system and lower the number of uninsured Americans. “One of the reasons the president is out there today is for people to get a better understanding of what his health plan will do,” said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, briefing reporters back at the White House on Wednesday afternoon. If you’re so inclined, tuned in. The White House show is about to begin.The Republican National Committee is watching, too, and offering a live online response
July 1, 2009, 1:16 pm
ANNANDALE, Va. – Another week, another town meeting on health care.
President Obama is set to arrive here shortly, in this suburban community outside of Washington, to continue his push to overhaul the nation’s health care system. The session is not broadcast on network television, unlike last week’s prime-time forum on ABC News, but rather on the White House Web site and a variety of social networking sites.
At the Northern Virginia Community College, about 200 people in the studio audience have taken their seats. The president will take questions from them, as well as from people who submitted their queries through the White House’s official Facebook, You Tube and Twitter pages.
It is the second online forum the White House has staged this year. In March, the president took questions from people via the Web as he was sitting in the East Wing. This time, he’s taken the show on the road. A video monitor here says, “The White House is Open for Questions.”
Here on the East Coast, it starts at 1:15 p.m., and can be followed here .
The White House is working to intensify a grass-roots push for its health care plan. With Congress on recess this week, the event here in Annandale is one of several intended to highlight the president’s urgent call to reduce costs to the health care system and lower the number of uninsured Americans.
“One of the reasons the president is out there today is for people to get a better understanding of what his health plan will do,” said Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, briefing reporters back at the White House on Wednesday afternoon.
If you’re so inclined, tuned in. The White House show is about to begin.
The Republican National Committee is watching, too, and offering a live online response
Posted: Thursday, July 02, 2009 9:17 AM by Domenico MontanaroFiled Under: Barack Obama Obama meets with business leaders at the White House privately to discuss how "they've been able to create jobs despite the economic doldrums," the AP says. Obama will speak from the Rose Garden afterward. Also, the president will sit down with the AP in advance of his trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana next week. Obama heads to Camp David at the end of his day. Ahead of the first leg of his trip to Russia, Russia's President Dmitri Medvedev urged Obama to put aside their differences. "The new U.S. administration headed by President Obama is now demonstrating readiness to change the situation, and build more effective ... relations," Medvedev said in a video on the Kremlin Web site, per Reuters. "We are ready for this. ... "Now is not the time to discover who is in a more difficult position or who is tougher. It is time to join efforts. We must improve our relations to solve multiple global problems through joint efforts." The New York Times: "President Obama returned to the familiar trappings of a political campaign on Wednesday, holding a town-hall-style meeting where he sought to heighten the urgency surrounding the health care debate and dismissed critics who say the issue is too complex to tackle during his first year in office... With members of Congress away for the week, the president had the stage to himself as he promoted his plan to lower the cost of health care and make coverage more accessible. He cast his proposal as a cost-saver, rather than a giant expenditure, saying the economy was not likely to rally without reversing 'the crushing cost of health care.'" The New York Daily News: "President Obama played the comforter-in-chief Wednesday when a woman with kidney cancer, no insurance and little hope went looking for help at his health care summit. Obama gave an emotional Debby Smith a hug and a promise, but she also may have given him a hand by making herself a living argument for his health reform." A new Quinnipiac poll has Obama’s job approval at 57%-33%. Michael Scherer has a piece in the latest issue of Time, in which he writes about Vice President Biden and his role overseeing the implementation of the stimulus. “What really haunts the White House is the fear that much of the money might be spent less efficiently than it could have been... Hanging over all these concerns is the prospect that a second stimulus bill may be needed to bail out states in late 2010 or 2011... Meanwhile, behind the scenes, Biden has ordered his staff to return any call or e-mail from states and localities seeking guidance within 24 hours.” EMAIL THIS
Obama meets with business leaders at the White House privately to discuss how "they've been able to create jobs despite the economic doldrums," the AP says. Obama will speak from the Rose Garden afterward. Also, the president will sit down with the AP in advance of his trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana next week. Obama heads to Camp David at the end of his day. Ahead of the first leg of his trip to Russia, Russia's President Dmitri Medvedev urged Obama to put aside their differences. "The new U.S. administration headed by President Obama is now demonstrating readiness to change the situation, and build more effective ... relations," Medvedev said in a video on the Kremlin Web site, per Reuters. "We are ready for this. ... "Now is not the time to discover who is in a more difficult position or who is tougher. It is time to join efforts. We must improve our relations to solve multiple global problems through joint efforts."
The New York Times: "President Obama returned to the familiar trappings of a political campaign on Wednesday, holding a town-hall-style meeting where he sought to heighten the urgency surrounding the health care debate and dismissed critics who say the issue is too complex to tackle during his first year in office... With members of Congress away for the week, the president had the stage to himself as he promoted his plan to lower the cost of health care and make coverage more accessible. He cast his proposal as a cost-saver, rather than a giant expenditure, saying the economy was not likely to rally without reversing 'the crushing cost of health care.'"
The New York Daily News: "President Obama played the comforter-in-chief Wednesday when a woman with kidney cancer, no insurance and little hope went looking for help at his health care summit. Obama gave an emotional Debby Smith a hug and a promise, but she also may have given him a hand by making herself a living argument for his health reform."
A new Quinnipiac poll has Obama’s job approval at 57%-33%.
Michael Scherer has a piece in the latest issue of Time, in which he writes about Vice President Biden and his role overseeing the implementation of the stimulus. “What really haunts the White House is the fear that much of the money might be spent less efficiently than it could have been... Hanging over all these concerns is the prospect that a second stimulus bill may be needed to bail out states in late 2010 or 2011... Meanwhile, behind the scenes, Biden has ordered his staff to return any call or e-mail from states and localities seeking guidance within 24 hours.”
With home prices still falling, administration opens up rescue program to homeowners whose loans are 125% of their home's value.View photosNEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Obama administration is widening its mortgage refinancing program to allow more borrowers hit hard by falling home prices to take part.Borrowers whose loans are now worth up to 125% of their home's value are now eligible to refinance their homes under the Obama foreclosure prevention plan announced in February. Previously, the limit was 105%.The move acknowledges that home prices in many areas have fallen so far that many people were shut out of the program. Some 67% of homeowners in Las Vegas -- one of the hardest hit areas and where Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan announced the expansion Wednesday -- owe more than their homes are worth.More than one in five borrowers are now underwater, with homes in parts of California and Florida losing more than 50% of their value, according to Zillow.com, a real estate Web site. Some 20 million people own homes worth less than their mortgages. "The president's Making Home Affordable plan is already helping far more than any previous foreclosure initiative and with today's announcement we will extend its reach still further," said Donovan.How many more people will be drawn to the program now, however, remains a question, especially since mortgage rates are on the rise. Administration officials do not have an estimate. Refinancings slow to ramp upSome 20,000 loans have been refinanced so far, according to the Treasury Department.The initiative waives the requirement that homeowners have at least 20% equity in their home, allowing them to take advantage of today's lower rates. Homeowners must still meet other criteria, including being current on their payments and having loans that are owned or backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The administration has set up a Web site, http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/, with more information.
With home prices still falling, administration opens up rescue program to homeowners whose loans are 125% of their home's value.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Obama administration is widening its mortgage refinancing program to allow more borrowers hit hard by falling home prices to take part.
Borrowers whose loans are now worth up to 125% of their home's value are now eligible to refinance their homes under the Obama foreclosure prevention plan announced in February. Previously, the limit was 105%.
The move acknowledges that home prices in many areas have fallen so far that many people were shut out of the program.
Some 67% of homeowners in Las Vegas -- one of the hardest hit areas and where Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan announced the expansion Wednesday -- owe more than their homes are worth.
More than one in five borrowers are now underwater, with homes in parts of California and Florida losing more than 50% of their value, according to Zillow.com, a real estate Web site. Some 20 million people own homes worth less than their mortgages.
"The president's Making Home Affordable plan is already helping far more than any previous foreclosure initiative and with today's announcement we will extend its reach still further," said Donovan.
How many more people will be drawn to the program now, however, remains a question, especially since mortgage rates are on the rise. Administration officials do not have an estimate.
Some 20,000 loans have been refinanced so far, according to the Treasury Department.
The initiative waives the requirement that homeowners have at least 20% equity in their home, allowing them to take advantage of today's lower rates. Homeowners must still meet other criteria, including being current on their payments and having loans that are owned or backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The administration has set up a Web site, http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/, with more information.
By JULIE PACE – 5 days ago WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama urged all Americans Thursday to find a way to serve their country this summer.The president and first lady Michelle Obama did their part at Fort McNair, helping volunteers load 15,000 backpacks with books, healthy snacks and toys for children of the men and women of the armed forces."Serving our country is not just something that we should expect our members of our armed forces to do," Obama said, "That's something that we should expect all of us as citizens to do."The Obamas were joined by their daughters, Malia and Sasha, members of Congress and their families, and volunteers from nonprofit organizations.Promoting volunteerism and community service has been a priority for the Obamas. The president often credits his work as a community organizer in his early 20s for giving him direction in life.This week, Obama kicked off the "United We Serve" program, a service initiative led by the government-run Corporation for National and Community Service. The effort is aimed at getting people to tackle problems in the areas of education, health, energy and the environment and community renewal.Obama said community service is one way Americans can "make this country stronger."The initiative will continue through Sept. 11, which recently was designated by Congress as a National Day of Service and Remembrance.Earlier this year, the president signed a $5.7 billion national service bill that triples the size of the AmeriCorps service program over the next eight years. It also expands ways for students to earn money for college by helping those in their neighborhoods.People can find local needs and volunteer opportunities online at http://www.serve.gov. Organizations can also post service events on the Web site.Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
By JULIE PACE – 5 days ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama urged all Americans Thursday to find a way to serve their country this summer.
The president and first lady Michelle Obama did their part at Fort McNair, helping volunteers load 15,000 backpacks with books, healthy snacks and toys for children of the men and women of the armed forces.
"Serving our country is not just something that we should expect our members of our armed forces to do," Obama said, "That's something that we should expect all of us as citizens to do."
The Obamas were joined by their daughters, Malia and Sasha, members of Congress and their families, and volunteers from nonprofit organizations.
Promoting volunteerism and community service has been a priority for the Obamas. The president often credits his work as a community organizer in his early 20s for giving him direction in life.
This week, Obama kicked off the "United We Serve" program, a service initiative led by the government-run Corporation for National and Community Service. The effort is aimed at getting people to tackle problems in the areas of education, health, energy and the environment and community renewal.
Obama said community service is one way Americans can "make this country stronger."
The initiative will continue through Sept. 11, which recently was designated by Congress as a National Day of Service and Remembrance.
Earlier this year, the president signed a $5.7 billion national service bill that triples the size of the AmeriCorps service program over the next eight years. It also expands ways for students to earn money for college by helping those in their neighborhoods.
People can find local needs and volunteer opportunities online at http://www.serve.gov. Organizations can also post service events on the Web site.
By GARY MARTIN and RICHARD S. DUNHAMCopyright 2009 Houston Chronicle Washington BureauJune 25, 2009, 11:25PM Share Print Share Del.icio.usDiggTwitterYahoo! BuzzFacebookStumbleUponResources Speak outBlog: Immigration watch GraphicsGraphic: Locations of new border checkpoints MoreComplete coverage of immigration issues WASHINGTON — White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel bluntly admitted Thursday that “the votes aren’t there” to win comprehensive immigration legislation — even as President Barack Obama met with a bipartisan group of lawmakers in an attempt to jump-start stalled reform efforts.Calling it one of the most critical issues facing the nation, Obama told the lawmakers, including Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, that the U.S. immigration system is “broken and needs fixing.”But Obama and Emanuel signaled that political obstacles are likely to make it difficult to reach consensus on sticking points such as guest workers and the legal status for 12 million immigrants here illegally. “It’s going to require some heavy lifting, it’s going to require a victory of practicality and common sense and good policy-making over short-term politics,” Obama said.After meeting with 34 lawmakers and Cabinet officials in the State Dining Room at the White House, Obama said he is encouraged “that after all the overheated rhetoric and occasional demagoguery on all sides around this issue, we’ve got a responsible set of leaders sitting around the table who want to actively get something done.”Obama appointed Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to lead working groups to hash through the more politically volatile issues.GOP lawmakers called the closed-door meeting with Obama a good first step but remained skeptical that compromise could be reached quickly.“This is tough stuff. Tough politics,” said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a co-sponsor of a 2007 immigration bill that died in the Senate.Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., another co-sponsor of that bill, agreed that reaching consensus on some issues would be difficult. He cited organized labor opposition to temporary worker programs as one stumbling block that could trip up progress on overall reform.At a breakfast meeting with reporters, Emanuel said supporters of immigration reform lacked the votes to push through a comprehensive plan now — and he was not optimistic about winning approval this year, despite the president’s declaration that his administration is “fully behind an effort to achieve comprehensive immigration reform.”White House aides said a compromise could be reached that would allow Congress to pass a bill late in 2009 or early 2010.Some Republicans have criticized the president for not presenting a legislative plan to Congress.Cornyn, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, said that without a bill or legislative blueprint, the White House meeting was merely a “photo op.”Others, like Smith, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, called the White House meeting substantive but questioned the administration’s commitment to work site enforcement.Jennifer Dlouhy of the Washington bureau contributed to this report.gmartin@express-news.net richard.dunham@chron.com
WASHINGTON — White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel bluntly admitted Thursday that “the votes aren’t there” to win comprehensive immigration legislation — even as President Barack Obama met with a bipartisan group of lawmakers in an attempt to jump-start stalled reform efforts.
Calling it one of the most critical issues facing the nation, Obama told the lawmakers, including Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, that the U.S. immigration system is “broken and needs fixing.”
But Obama and Emanuel signaled that political obstacles are likely to make it difficult to reach consensus on sticking points such as guest workers and the legal status for 12 million immigrants here illegally.
“It’s going to require some heavy lifting, it’s going to require a victory of practicality and common sense and good policy-making over short-term politics,” Obama said.
After meeting with 34 lawmakers and Cabinet officials in the State Dining Room at the White House, Obama said he is encouraged “that after all the overheated rhetoric and occasional demagoguery on all sides around this issue, we’ve got a responsible set of leaders sitting around the table who want to actively get something done.”
Obama appointed Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to lead working groups to hash through the more politically volatile issues.
GOP lawmakers called the closed-door meeting with Obama a good first step but remained skeptical that compromise could be reached quickly.
“This is tough stuff. Tough politics,” said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a co-sponsor of a 2007 immigration bill that died in the Senate.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., another co-sponsor of that bill, agreed that reaching consensus on some issues would be difficult. He cited organized labor opposition to temporary worker programs as one stumbling block that could trip up progress on overall reform.
At a breakfast meeting with reporters, Emanuel said supporters of immigration reform lacked the votes to push through a comprehensive plan now — and he was not optimistic about winning approval this year, despite the president’s declaration that his administration is “fully behind an effort to achieve comprehensive immigration reform.”
White House aides said a compromise could be reached that would allow Congress to pass a bill late in 2009 or early 2010.
Some Republicans have criticized the president for not presenting a legislative plan to Congress.
Cornyn, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, said that without a bill or legislative blueprint, the White House meeting was merely a “photo op.”
Others, like Smith, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, called the White House meeting substantive but questioned the administration’s commitment to work site enforcement.
Jennifer Dlouhy of the Washington bureau contributed to this report.
richard.dunham@chron.com
1 of 1Full SizeMarket News Nikkei edges down 0.9 percent, financials retreat Wall St brakes on confidence data, but has upbeat Q2 | Video Oil falls 2 percent, U.S. consumer confidence weighs More Business & Investing News... By Nicole MaestriSAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT.N), the world's largest retailer, said on Tuesday that it supports President Barack Obama's push to require large employers to offer health insurance to workers."We are for an employer mandate which is fair and broad in its coverage," stated a letter addressed to Obama and signed by Mike Duke, the chief executive of Wal-Mart; Andy Stern, the president of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and John Podesta, the CEO of the Center for American Progress.Wal-Mart's public statement of support for employer mandated coverage comes as Obama pushes for an overhaul of the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system. He has made a healthcare plan that reins in costs and covers most of the roughly 46 million uninsured Americans one of his top priorities.While the president has left much of the details of health reform to Congress, he has told U.S. lawmakers he is open to requiring larger companies to provide coverage for employees but exempting smaller businesses.In recent years, Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, has come under fire by labor-backed critic groups that accused it of mistreating employees and not offering adequate healthcare coverage.Wal-Mart has worked to counter critics by promoting its healthcare initiatives, such as its $4 generic drug program. In 2007, it also joined with the SEIU, which has more than 1 million members, in calling for universal health-care coverage for all Americans by 2012.Wal-Mart said it supports an employer mandate that covers as many businesses as possible, as well as part-time and full-time employees. The requirement would ultimately save companies money, it added."This choice will require employers to consider the trade-off of agreeing to a coverage mandate and additional taxes versus the promise of reduced health care cost increases," it said.It also said health care reform legislation should include provisions that reduce health costs, and that the retailer would support legislation that would put a public healthcare plan in place should private health insurers fail to meet price and competition targets, also known as a "trigger" provision.(Reporting by Nicole Maestri; Additional reporting by Susan Heavey in Adelphi, Maryland; Editing by Tim Dobbyn and Richard Chang)
1 of 1Full SizeMarket News Nikkei edges down 0.9 percent, financials retreat Wall St brakes on confidence data, but has upbeat Q2 | Video Oil falls 2 percent, U.S. consumer confidence weighs More Business & Investing News...
By Nicole Maestri
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc (WMT.N), the world's largest retailer, said on Tuesday that it supports President Barack Obama's push to require large employers to offer health insurance to workers.
"We are for an employer mandate which is fair and broad in its coverage," stated a letter addressed to Obama and signed by Mike Duke, the chief executive of Wal-Mart; Andy Stern, the president of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and John Podesta, the CEO of the Center for American Progress.
Wal-Mart's public statement of support for employer mandated coverage comes as Obama pushes for an overhaul of the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system. He has made a healthcare plan that reins in costs and covers most of the roughly 46 million uninsured Americans one of his top priorities.
While the president has left much of the details of health reform to Congress, he has told U.S. lawmakers he is open to requiring larger companies to provide coverage for employees but exempting smaller businesses.
In recent years, Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, has come under fire by labor-backed critic groups that accused it of mistreating employees and not offering adequate healthcare coverage.
Wal-Mart has worked to counter critics by promoting its healthcare initiatives, such as its $4 generic drug program. In 2007, it also joined with the SEIU, which has more than 1 million members, in calling for universal health-care coverage for all Americans by 2012.
Wal-Mart said it supports an employer mandate that covers as many businesses as possible, as well as part-time and full-time employees. The requirement would ultimately save companies money, it added.
"This choice will require employers to consider the trade-off of agreeing to a coverage mandate and additional taxes versus the promise of reduced health care cost increases," it said.
It also said health care reform legislation should include provisions that reduce health costs, and that the retailer would support legislation that would put a public healthcare plan in place should private health insurers fail to meet price and competition targets, also known as a "trigger" provision.
(Reporting by Nicole Maestri; Additional reporting by Susan Heavey in Adelphi, Maryland; Editing by Tim Dobbyn and Richard Chang)
Reuters Tuesday, June 30, 2009; 3:40 PM WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Tuesday lauded the pullout of U.S. forces from towns and cities in Iraq as an important step toward a full U.S. troop withdrawal by 2012, but warned of "difficult days" ahead. "Today's transition is further proof that those who have tried to pull Iraq into the abyss of disunion and civil war are on the wrong side of history," Obama said at the White House. Obama, who has made ending the six-year-old Iraq war a top foreign policy priority, was speaking hours after a car bomb in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk killed at least 30 people and wounded 65 others. The bombing underscored the fragility of Iraq's security. The country was almost torn apart by tit-for-tat sectarian attacks in 2006-2007 that killed tens of thousands of people and displaced millions more. Despite major bombings in recent weeks, U.S. officials say overall levels of violence are down. "There will be difficult days ahead," Obama said. "We see that already in the senseless bombing in Kirkuk earlier today. And there are those who will test Iraqi security forces and the resolve of the Iraqi people through more sectarian bombings. ... But I'm confident that those forces will fail." Obama said U.S. forces had met a June 30 deadline to complete their withdrawal from urban areas and hand over full control to Iraqi security forces. All U.S. troops are due to withdraw from Iraq by 2012, after invading to topple Saddam Hussein in 2003. Obama said Iraq's future was now "in the hands of its own people," and its Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurdish leaders had to make some hard choices to resolve disputes that have been obstacles to real political reconciliation. (Reporting by Ross Colvin; Editing by Will Dunham)
Reuters Tuesday, June 30, 2009; 3:40 PM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Tuesday lauded the pullout of U.S. forces from towns and cities in Iraq as an important step toward a full U.S. troop withdrawal by 2012, but warned of "difficult days" ahead.
"Today's transition is further proof that those who have tried to pull Iraq into the abyss of disunion and civil war are on the wrong side of history," Obama said at the White House.
Obama, who has made ending the six-year-old Iraq war a top foreign policy priority, was speaking hours after a car bomb in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk killed at least 30 people and wounded 65 others.
The bombing underscored the fragility of Iraq's security.
The country was almost torn apart by tit-for-tat sectarian attacks in 2006-2007 that killed tens of thousands of people and displaced millions more. Despite major bombings in recent weeks, U.S. officials say overall levels of violence are down.
"There will be difficult days ahead," Obama said. "We see that already in the senseless bombing in Kirkuk earlier today. And there are those who will test Iraqi security forces and the resolve of the Iraqi people through more sectarian bombings. ... But I'm confident that those forces will fail."
Obama said U.S. forces had met a June 30 deadline to complete their withdrawal from urban areas and hand over full control to Iraqi security forces. All U.S. troops are due to withdraw from Iraq by 2012, after invading to topple Saddam Hussein in 2003.
Obama said Iraq's future was now "in the hands of its own people," and its Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurdish leaders had to make some hard choices to resolve disputes that have been obstacles to real political reconciliation.
(Reporting by Ross Colvin; Editing by Will Dunham)
By MICHAEL R. CRITTENDEN and JANE J. KIM WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's proposed consumer-protection agency would have broad oversight for a range of products, beefing up the government's regulation of credit cards, mortgages and gift cards, as well as expanding its authority over financial firms.Draft legislation unveiled Tuesday by the Treasury Department would for the first time make a single entity, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, responsible for writing and enforcing rules across a range of financial products used by consumers.Real Time Economics What Would Consumer Protection Agency Do? "This agency will have only one mission -- to protect consumers," Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said.Securities products overseen by the Securities and Exchange Commission and most of the insurance industry wouldn't fall under the new agency's oversight, a Treasury official said. But the agency would have subpoena power and would be funded in part by the financial-services industry.The Treasury and White House plan to work with Democratic leaders in Congress to try to move the legislation quickly.The measure is expected to draw opposition from the financial-services and business communities, which argue that the new agency would stifle product innovation and prevent firms from offering tailored products to customers."Basically, the government is deciding what every bank in every circumstance should offer," said Ed Yingling, president and chief executive of the American Bankers Association.The proposed new agency is part of the Obama administration's efforts to revamp regulation of the U.S. financial system.The new agency's reach would allow it to streamline federal mortgage-disclosure rules, and enforce recently enacted credit-card rules, Mr. Barr said. It could also potentially write rules to require banks to get permission from customers before enrolling them in costly overdraft plans.Write to Michael R. Crittenden at michael.crittenden@dowjones.com and Jane J. Kim at jane.kim@wsj.com
By MICHAEL R. CRITTENDEN and JANE J. KIM
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration's proposed consumer-protection agency would have broad oversight for a range of products, beefing up the government's regulation of credit cards, mortgages and gift cards, as well as expanding its authority over financial firms.
Draft legislation unveiled Tuesday by the Treasury Department would for the first time make a single entity, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, responsible for writing and enforcing rules across a range of financial products used by consumers.
"This agency will have only one mission -- to protect consumers," Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said.
Securities products overseen by the Securities and Exchange Commission and most of the insurance industry wouldn't fall under the new agency's oversight, a Treasury official said. But the agency would have subpoena power and would be funded in part by the financial-services industry.
The Treasury and White House plan to work with Democratic leaders in Congress to try to move the legislation quickly.
The measure is expected to draw opposition from the financial-services and business communities, which argue that the new agency would stifle product innovation and prevent firms from offering tailored products to customers.
"Basically, the government is deciding what every bank in every circumstance should offer," said Ed Yingling, president and chief executive of the American Bankers Association.
The proposed new agency is part of the Obama administration's efforts to revamp regulation of the U.S. financial system.
The new agency's reach would allow it to streamline federal mortgage-disclosure rules, and enforce recently enacted credit-card rules, Mr. Barr said. It could also potentially write rules to require banks to get permission from customers before enrolling them in costly overdraft plans.
Write to Michael R. Crittenden at michael.crittenden@dowjones.com and Jane J. Kim at jane.kim@wsj.com
ASHEVILLE — Carmen Ramos-Kennedy says she's a healthy person who takes care of herself, but her health insurance premiums do nothing but go up. credit: Leslie Boyd, lboyd@citizen-times.com « LAST1/25NEXT »WNC for Change staged a public rally for health care reform 10 a.m.-noon Saturday at Pritchard Park. About 300 people attended. Purchase this photo »Related stories• Hundreds rally for health care reform• Rally for health care reform seeks inclusion of single-payer option “I have a story like millions of other people — I am being priced out of insurance coverage,” Ramos-Kennedy said Saturday while waiting for U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler to arrive at the Westgate shopping center in West Asheville. “Right now, I'm almost at $2,000 a month. That's a mortgage payment. That's my own selfish story. I can't afford to pay much more than that.“It's got to change. It can't go one like this.”Shuler, D-Waynesville, spoke to about 50 people gathered outside the shopping center about support for health care reform legislation. The congressman told the groups it's going to take baby steps to accomplish some tasks to allow the economy to rebound.“Do I see a single-payer system at this point in time? The president told me himself, it's just not the right time,” Shuler said.Shuler said access to health care must be available to everyone. There are four counties in North Carolina's 11th Congressional District that don't have a hospital. Lawmakers must also find ways to use the health care system to encourage people to adopt healthy lifestyles, he added.“Some people will say, ‘You can't tell me to exercise, and you can't tell me what to eat,' but there are probably some ways that we could encourage you to do that,” Shuler said.WNC for Change director Paul Choi said there's strong local support for a single-payer, or government-run, health care system. Choi presented Shuler with a petition of 1,195 signatures collected since June 21 in support of health care reform.WNC for Change is a grass-roots organization that grew out of President Barack Obama's campaign.Health care, Choi said, boils down to a moral issue.“We're here to show people that it's just unconscionable to have 45 million uninsured people in this country as well as millions more who are underinsured,” he said. “Health care is a right.”Earlier Saturday, an estimated 300 people attended a health care reform rally at Pritchard Park in downtown Asheville organized by WNC for Change.Among the speakers at the event were Buncombe County Commission Chairman David Gantt, Asheville Mayor Terry Bellamy and Asheville Citizen-Times reporter Leslie Boyd, who was the keynote speaker.Several local physicians and activists spoke about the need for reform and urged voters to lobby their legislators for single-payer or a strong public option.
ASHEVILLE — Carmen Ramos-Kennedy says she's a healthy person who takes care of herself, but her health insurance premiums do nothing but go up.
credit: Leslie Boyd, lboyd@citizen-times.com « LAST1/25NEXT »WNC for Change staged a public rally for health care reform 10 a.m.-noon Saturday at Pritchard Park. About 300 people attended. Purchase this photo »
Related stories• Hundreds rally for health care reform• Rally for health care reform seeks inclusion of single-payer option
“I have a story like millions of other people — I am being priced out of insurance coverage,” Ramos-Kennedy said Saturday while waiting for U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler to arrive at the Westgate shopping center in West Asheville. “Right now, I'm almost at $2,000 a month. That's a mortgage payment. That's my own selfish story. I can't afford to pay much more than that.
“It's got to change. It can't go one like this.”
Shuler, D-Waynesville, spoke to about 50 people gathered outside the shopping center about support for health care reform legislation. The congressman told the groups it's going to take baby steps to accomplish some tasks to allow the economy to rebound.
“Do I see a single-payer system at this point in time? The president told me himself, it's just not the right time,” Shuler said.
Shuler said access to health care must be available to everyone. There are four counties in North Carolina's 11th Congressional District that don't have a hospital. Lawmakers must also find ways to use the health care system to encourage people to adopt healthy lifestyles, he added.
“Some people will say, ‘You can't tell me to exercise, and you can't tell me what to eat,' but there are probably some ways that we could encourage you to do that,” Shuler said.
WNC for Change director Paul Choi said there's strong local support for a single-payer, or government-run, health care system. Choi presented Shuler with a petition of 1,195 signatures collected since June 21 in support of health care reform.
WNC for Change is a grass-roots organization that grew out of President Barack Obama's campaign.
Health care, Choi said, boils down to a moral issue.
“We're here to show people that it's just unconscionable to have 45 million uninsured people in this country as well as millions more who are underinsured,” he said. “Health care is a right.”
Earlier Saturday, an estimated 300 people attended a health care reform rally at Pritchard Park in downtown Asheville organized by WNC for Change.
Among the speakers at the event were Buncombe County Commission Chairman David Gantt, Asheville Mayor Terry Bellamy and Asheville Citizen-Times reporter Leslie Boyd, who was the keynote speaker.
Several local physicians and activists spoke about the need for reform and urged voters to lobby their legislators for single-payer or a strong public option.
Susan ElzeySpecial to the Register & BeePublished: June 27, 2009With 46 million uninsured people in the United States, it’s easy to find folks who agree it’s past time to reform the present health care system, but agreeing on the details and how it is going to be funded, is another question.Local health care professionals gave their opinions on the plan to overhaul American’s health care system that President Barack Obama presented before the American Medical Association on June 15. “We’ve got to do something — it’s way past time,” said Kay Crane, executive director of Piedmont Access to Health Services, which is a federal qualified community health care center. About 40 percent of PATHS’ patients are uninsured.Like other local health professionals contacted, Crane knows story after story of people who have died or come close to dying because of a lack of insurance. For Crane, one such story was that of her sister, who, lacking money for diagnosis and treatment, died of breast cancer, she said.Crane admits that Obama’s plan may not be perfect, but says it’s better than what Americans have now. “I would like people to keep an open mind and not to listen to liberals or conservatives,” she said. “This can’t be Democratic or Republican. If we don’t come up with a plan this administration, I think it’s time for people to take to the streets.”Dr. Gary Miller, an alternate delegate to the AMA, was present at the convention where Obama presented his plan.“I and many were pleased he took the time to talk to the medical profession,” Miller said. “Years ago under the Clinton administration, the medical profession got left out … Obama is trying to forge a bill with the backing of everybody. The idea is to help patients, and everybody might have to compromise.”Bearing the burdenJerel Humphrey, CEO of Danville Regional Medical Center, said that the “most critical issue facing hospitals is the growing number of uninsured patients, which puts pressure on everyone.”Danville Regional spent more than $21 million in 2008 on charity care and bad debt, he said. “Hospitals, like DRMC, face an increasing burden of uncompensated care every day,” he said. “Many of our residents are uninsured, poor or elderly. All Americans need affordable health insurance coverage, so they have access to quality, affordable health care.” Humphrey said that most people would agree the basic principles of Obama’s health care reform are worthy: reducing health care cost increases, allowing Americans to choose their own doctor and health plan and enabling Americans to have quality affordable health care.“The question is how we achieve them,” he said.Denise Buckner, executive director of the Free Clinic of Danville, which bears much of the burden of the area’s uninsured said the clinic has had many discussions regarding the new health care proposals. “We certainly hold to the belief that all citizens should have access to health care, and that is why so many free clinics have sprung up all over the nation,” she said. “The need is great, and with the declining economy, the numbers of uninsured are increasing. It is a concern for everyone.”She said that the clinic doesn’t take a political stance on issues and can’t base any current decisions on “anything other than serving the current need of this community.”Malpractice capsMiller takes issue with Obama’s announcement that he did not support caps on medical malpractice awards — the only time Obama got booed at the convention.“I personally think caps are beneficial because they lower benefits and keep physicians in business,” Miller said. “Premiums can be $600,000 to $700,000 for every physician in a practice — even those who haven’t been sued. We have a cap in Virginia at $2 million, which covers the vast majority of lawsuits.”Crane also agrees that reform is needed with malpractice insurance.“Our providers are covered under the Federal Tort Act, so when people sue, they are suing the federal government,” she said, “but if the plan could help other providers reduce their cost of malpractice insurance, doctors wouldn’t have to run every test in the book because they are afraid of getting sued.”Miller said that it’s hard to measure how much malpractice torts cost everyone as physicians order more tests every day to cover themselves if sued for malpractice.“Malpractice costs have gone up to eight times of what they were 15 years ago,” he said. Another one of Obama’s proposals Miller supports is forbidding insurance companies from denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions.“That is unpopular with doctors and patients, with everybody,” he said, “but the insurance companies will definitely fight that.”Paying for itWhile Humphrey said access to health insurance would be the most helpful of the proposed plan, he is also concerned about how the costs would be monitored as well as the plan’s effect on insurance companies.“The public option presents concern in that it would compete with private insurance, under-pricing premiums such that no other plans could be competitive and likely result in payments to hospitals that are below costs,” he said. “The government could arbitrarily — because it could — decide how much to pay the hospital and doctors and leave only a government-run ‘single-payer’ system.”Miller, however, said Obama clearly stated in his speech that he is against a single-payer, national health care plan. Crane believes the resulting competition would be one of the advantages to a public insurance option. “In our area, we have only Anthem and Gateway Health Alliance, but a national health plan would force competition,” she said. Then there is the question of how to pay for a public insurance option, which is estimated to be close to a trillion dollars.Obama pledged in his speech to the AMA that any health care reform must not add to the federal deficit and listed his ideas to fund about $950 billion through such ways as limiting tax deductions to wealthy Americans, enacting spending cuts, cutting waste and inefficiency and reducing payments to hospitals for treating uninsured patients. “Paying for it is the issue,” Miller said. “If we had the money to pay for this, we wouldn’t have opposition. Of course, every hospital is required to see indigent patients and should, so if no one is uninsured, we could take that money.” Crane sees Obama’s plan as “basic quality health care.”“If you want Cadillac care, you can still get Anthem,” she said. “The government is putting aside money for this plan, and some will come from revamping Medicare and Medicaid.”Miller worries about reducing Medicare and Medicaid payments, however, feeling that if reimbursements get any lower, even more doctors will opt out of participating in the programs.“From what I understand,” Crane said, “this plan, if people will give it a chance, will provide quality, affordable health care with the choice of keeping your own doctor, and I see it as a uniquely American solution. It is not from Canada or Germany.” Taking responsibilityObama listed as the second step in his plan to “invest more in preventative care” and urged Americans to be more responsible for their own health and the health of their children.Miller, who gets up at 5 every morning to exercise, agrees.“The American public needs to take responsibility for their health and get up off the couch and exercise,” he said. “You need to exercise 30 minutes a day four to five times a day at a minimum, and people shouldn’t eat foods known to be unhealthy, such as fried and fast foods.“If people were healthier, they wouldn’t get sick and enter the system. We should be putting money into preventative care and getting ourselves and children eating healthier and exercising. “We’ve met the enemy, and it is us.”• Contact Elzey at selzey@registerbee.com or (434) 791-7991.
Susan ElzeySpecial to the Register & BeePublished: June 27, 2009
With 46 million uninsured people in the United States, it’s easy to find folks who agree it’s past time to reform the present health care system, but agreeing on the details and how it is going to be funded, is another question.
Local health care professionals gave their opinions on the plan to overhaul American’s health care system that President Barack Obama presented before the American Medical Association on June 15.
“We’ve got to do something — it’s way past time,” said Kay Crane, executive director of Piedmont Access to Health Services, which is a federal qualified community health care center. About 40 percent of PATHS’ patients are uninsured.
Like other local health professionals contacted, Crane knows story after story of people who have died or come close to dying because of a lack of insurance. For Crane, one such story was that of her sister, who, lacking money for diagnosis and treatment, died of breast cancer, she said.
Crane admits that Obama’s plan may not be perfect, but says it’s better than what Americans have now.
“I would like people to keep an open mind and not to listen to liberals or conservatives,” she said. “This can’t be Democratic or Republican. If we don’t come up with a plan this administration, I think it’s time for people to take to the streets.”
Dr. Gary Miller, an alternate delegate to the AMA, was present at the convention where Obama presented his plan.
“I and many were pleased he took the time to talk to the medical profession,” Miller said. “Years ago under the Clinton administration, the medical profession got left out … Obama is trying to forge a bill with the backing of everybody. The idea is to help patients, and everybody might have to compromise.”
Bearing the burden
Jerel Humphrey, CEO of Danville Regional Medical Center, said that the “most critical issue facing hospitals is the growing number of uninsured patients, which puts pressure on everyone.”
Danville Regional spent more than $21 million in 2008 on charity care and bad debt, he said.
“Hospitals, like DRMC, face an increasing burden of uncompensated care every day,” he said. “Many of our residents are uninsured, poor or elderly. All Americans need affordable health insurance coverage, so they have access to quality, affordable health care.”
Humphrey said that most people would agree the basic principles of Obama’s health care reform are worthy: reducing health care cost increases, allowing Americans to choose their own doctor and health plan and enabling Americans to have quality affordable health care.
“The question is how we achieve them,” he said.
Denise Buckner, executive director of the Free Clinic of Danville, which bears much of the burden of the area’s uninsured said the clinic has had many discussions regarding the new health care proposals.
“We certainly hold to the belief that all citizens should have access to health care, and that is why so many free clinics have sprung up all over the nation,” she said. “The need is great, and with the declining economy, the numbers of uninsured are increasing. It is a concern for everyone.”
She said that the clinic doesn’t take a political stance on issues and can’t base any current decisions on “anything other than serving the current need of this community.”
Malpractice caps
Miller takes issue with Obama’s announcement that he did not support caps on medical malpractice awards — the only time Obama got booed at the convention.
“I personally think caps are beneficial because they lower benefits and keep physicians in business,” Miller said. “Premiums can be $600,000 to $700,000 for every physician in a practice — even those who haven’t been sued. We have a cap in Virginia at $2 million, which covers the vast majority of lawsuits.”
Crane also agrees that reform is needed with malpractice insurance.
“Our providers are covered under the Federal Tort Act, so when people sue, they are suing the federal government,” she said, “but if the plan could help other providers reduce their cost of malpractice insurance, doctors wouldn’t have to run every test in the book because they are afraid of getting sued.”
Miller said that it’s hard to measure how much malpractice torts cost everyone as physicians order more tests every day to cover themselves if sued for malpractice.
“Malpractice costs have gone up to eight times of what they were 15 years ago,” he said.
Another one of Obama’s proposals Miller supports is forbidding insurance companies from denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions.
“That is unpopular with doctors and patients, with everybody,” he said, “but the insurance companies will definitely fight that.”
Paying for it
While Humphrey said access to health insurance would be the most helpful of the proposed plan, he is also concerned about how the costs would be monitored as well as the plan’s effect on insurance companies.
“The public option presents concern in that it would compete with private insurance, under-pricing premiums such that no other plans could be competitive and likely result in payments to hospitals that are below costs,” he said. “The government could arbitrarily — because it could — decide how much to pay the hospital and doctors and leave only a government-run ‘single-payer’ system.”
Miller, however, said Obama clearly stated in his speech that he is against a single-payer, national health care plan.
Crane believes the resulting competition would be one of the advantages to a public insurance option.
“In our area, we have only Anthem and Gateway Health Alliance, but a national health plan would force competition,” she said.
Then there is the question of how to pay for a public insurance option, which is estimated to be close to a trillion dollars.
Obama pledged in his speech to the AMA that any health care reform must not add to the federal deficit and listed his ideas to fund about $950 billion through such ways as limiting tax deductions to wealthy Americans, enacting spending cuts, cutting waste and inefficiency and reducing payments to hospitals for treating uninsured patients.
“Paying for it is the issue,” Miller said. “If we had the money to pay for this, we wouldn’t have opposition. Of course, every hospital is required to see indigent patients and should, so if no one is uninsured, we could take that money.”
Crane sees Obama’s plan as “basic quality health care.”
“If you want Cadillac care, you can still get Anthem,” she said. “The government is putting aside money for this plan, and some will come from revamping Medicare and Medicaid.”
Miller worries about reducing Medicare and Medicaid payments, however, feeling that if reimbursements get any lower, even more doctors will opt out of participating in the programs.
“From what I understand,” Crane said, “this plan, if people will give it a chance, will provide quality, affordable health care with the choice of keeping your own doctor, and I see it as a uniquely American solution. It is not from Canada or Germany.”
Taking responsibility
Obama listed as the second step in his plan to “invest more in preventative care” and urged Americans to be more responsible for their own health and the health of their children.
Miller, who gets up at 5 every morning to exercise, agrees.
“The American public needs to take responsibility for their health and get up off the couch and exercise,” he said. “You need to exercise 30 minutes a day four to five times a day at a minimum, and people shouldn’t eat foods known to be unhealthy, such as fried and fast foods.
“If people were healthier, they wouldn’t get sick and enter the system. We should be putting money into preventative care and getting ourselves and children eating healthier and exercising.
“We’ve met the enemy, and it is us.”
• Contact Elzey at selzey@registerbee.com or (434) 791-7991.
By JAMES DAOPublished: June 23, 2009 The House approved legislation on Tuesday that is intended to prevent delays in federal financing for veterans’ health care programs, a problem that has disrupted services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs for decades, officials say. Skip to next paragraph Blog The CaucusThe latest on President Obama, the new administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.More Politics NewsThe bill, which has been a major lobbying priority of veterans’ organizations in Washington, would allow Congress to appropriate funds for health care programs one year in advance. Officials say that for 19 of the last 22 years, the department’s budget has been approved late, usually because of fiscal wrangling on Capitol Hill. As a result, veterans’ groups and officials say, the directors of veterans’ health care centers and clinics have often been unable to proceed on time with new services, staff expansions or renovations. “Our veterans pay the price with fewer doctors, longer waiting times and more restricted access for the six million veterans using V.A. health care,” said Representative Bob Filner, Democrat of California and chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs.Under current rules, if a new budget is not in place by the start of the federal fiscal year on Oct. 1, the Department of Veterans Affairs is required to operate on its previous year’s budget. Often, those budgets have lacked money to pay for even existing programs because of inflation, contractual increases and growing caseloads. Programs have often been postponed or canceled while hospitals and clinics await their new budgets, officials said. “If there were scheduled pay raises, we wouldn’t have sufficient funds to maintain the status quo, because the pay raise would have to be paid,” said Bob Perreault, a former director of veterans’ health centers in Atlanta, Philadelphia and Charleston, S.C. “That means we would not buy equipment and not do maintenance projects.” Veterans’ groups say the problem has become more troubling as caseloads have grown with veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “When you have a flat-line budget, you can’t treat the new people coming into the system, which leads to rationing,” said Peter Dickinson, a consultant to Disabled American Veterans, an advocacy group.A similar bill sponsored by Senator Daniel K. Akaka, Democrat of Hawaii and the chairman of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, has bipartisan support and is expected to pass the full Senate. President Obama has endorsed the idea of advance appropriations for veterans’ health care. In testimony before the House veterans committee in March, Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki said: “The care our veterans receive should never be hindered by budget delays. I share the president’s concern as well as his support for advance appropriations as a way to provide uninterrupted care.”In addition, the House Appropriations Committee approved a bill that appropriates $48.2 billion for veterans’ medical care in the 2011 fiscal year.
The House approved legislation on Tuesday that is intended to prevent delays in federal financing for veterans’ health care programs, a problem that has disrupted services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs for decades, officials say.
The latest on President Obama, the new administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.
The bill, which has been a major lobbying priority of veterans’ organizations in Washington, would allow Congress to appropriate funds for health care programs one year in advance.
Officials say that for 19 of the last 22 years, the department’s budget has been approved late, usually because of fiscal wrangling on Capitol Hill. As a result, veterans’ groups and officials say, the directors of veterans’ health care centers and clinics have often been unable to proceed on time with new services, staff expansions or renovations.
“Our veterans pay the price with fewer doctors, longer waiting times and more restricted access for the six million veterans using V.A. health care,” said Representative Bob Filner, Democrat of California and chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs.
Under current rules, if a new budget is not in place by the start of the federal fiscal year on Oct. 1, the Department of Veterans Affairs is required to operate on its previous year’s budget. Often, those budgets have lacked money to pay for even existing programs because of inflation, contractual increases and growing caseloads.
Programs have often been postponed or canceled while hospitals and clinics await their new budgets, officials said.
“If there were scheduled pay raises, we wouldn’t have sufficient funds to maintain the status quo, because the pay raise would have to be paid,” said Bob Perreault, a former director of veterans’ health centers in Atlanta, Philadelphia and Charleston, S.C. “That means we would not buy equipment and not do maintenance projects.”
Veterans’ groups say the problem has become more troubling as caseloads have grown with veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“When you have a flat-line budget, you can’t treat the new people coming into the system, which leads to rationing,” said Peter Dickinson, a consultant to Disabled American Veterans, an advocacy group.
A similar bill sponsored by Senator Daniel K. Akaka, Democrat of Hawaii and the chairman of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, has bipartisan support and is expected to pass the full Senate.
President Obama has endorsed the idea of advance appropriations for veterans’ health care. In testimony before the House veterans committee in March, Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki said: “The care our veterans receive should never be hindered by budget delays. I share the president’s concern as well as his support for advance appropriations as a way to provide uninterrupted care.”
In addition, the House Appropriations Committee approved a bill that appropriates $48.2 billion for veterans’ medical care in the 2011 fiscal year.
Advocates collect health care horror storiesBy MICHAEL MOORE of the MissoulianCarolyn Renman, left, gives her health care story to Ashley Parks at a Missoula downtown market on Saturday. Wearing hospital garb, Parks was one of about 25 volunteers collecting people's stories to send to President Barack Obama and congressional representatives. Photo by TOM BAUER/MissoulianMeg Sarnecki sees and hears health care nightmares nearly every day.Hardly surprising, given that she's a doctor at Missoula County's Partnership Health Center, which serves uninsured and underinsured patients.“You see something remarkable almost every day,” she said. “And not in a good way.” On Saturday morning, Sarnecki was collecting health care stories again. But this time she was doing it as part of a nationwide effort to provide information to President Barack Obama and congressional representatives working to reform the nation's broken health care system.“I see what's wrong with our system every day, and I know we can do better,” she said. “Ninety percent of the people I see don't have insurance, and they've delayed getting care for so long that they've often gotten themselves into pretty bad shape.”Sarnecki was one of about 25 volunteers who collected stories at Missoula's downtown markets Saturday morning. The event was sponsored by Organizing For America, an arm of the national Democratic Party, and was styled as the National Health Care Day of Service.“We believe everyone has a health care story,” said Jeremy Smith, a volunteer organizer for OFA. “Your story shows your stake in health care.”In fact, most folks did have a story. Even the folks who said they didn't.“I had several people who said they didn't really have much to say, but once you asked a few questions, they really opened up,” said Ashley Parks, a volunteer who works at Hellgate High School.Saturday's stories spanned the broad spectrum that is health care in America.A few stories were upbeat, told by people who had insurance that works as advertised.But most had complaints - about insurance and its associated hassles, about the inability to find a doctor and, mostly, about the inability to pay for either affordable care or insurance.Justin Burkey works for the U.S. Forest Service and has a Blue Cross plan. Sometimes it works well, sometimes not.“I think what frustrates me the most is not being able to tell why the costs are what they are,” he said. “What I'd like to see in reform is some accountability, so we know who is paying for what.”Tracy Davis, who works at a local fitness business, is bothered by paying for prescriptions.“We have a co-pay, but I have to pay upfront and then try to get reimbursed by the insurance company,” she said. “It's never easy.”Suzette Dussault's story encapsulated much of what's wrong in American health care. In 2007, she was hit by a truck while riding her bike. Her own insurance company paid 80 percent of her medical costs, and she and her insurer sued the trucking company for those costs and the remaining bill.“All of that is pretty frustrating, but I expected it to be,” she said. “What I didn't expect is that the clinic where I got treated would sue me for the unpaid part of the bill while I am trying to collect from the people who did the harm in the first place.”But that's what happened. That story left Sarnecki shaking her head.“All these stories make it really clear that we have serious problems in our country,” she said.Dussault, like many others, favors a single-payer system that would provide universal health care. What she and others seemed certain of was this: “Health insurance does not mean health care.”And that, Sarnecki said, is where Congress must focus as it wrestles with reform.“We've got to get back in the business of taking care of people before they have major problems that are costly to fix,” she said. “I've seen people who've had cancers that could have been treated, but they didn't come in because they couldn't pay. We've got to change that.”Reporter Michael Moore can be reached at 523-5252 or at mmoore@missoulian.com.
Advocates collect health care horror storiesBy MICHAEL MOORE of the Missoulian
Carolyn Renman, left, gives her health care story to Ashley Parks at a Missoula downtown market on Saturday. Wearing hospital garb, Parks was one of about 25 volunteers collecting people's stories to send to President Barack Obama and congressional representatives. Photo by TOM BAUER/Missoulian
Meg Sarnecki sees and hears health care nightmares nearly every day.Hardly surprising, given that she's a doctor at Missoula County's Partnership Health Center, which serves uninsured and underinsured patients.“You see something remarkable almost every day,” she said. “And not in a good way.”
These critics are looking at it backwards, say researchers at the liberal Economic Policy Institute: Including a public plan will actually reduce the overall costs of health care:While a public plan would indeed likely raise the level of federal government health spending, it is just as likely to reduce total national health spending. Independent research evaluating proposals produced by EPI and other sources has consistently found that a public plan would save money and result in better health outcomes by providing all Americans regular access to health care.Indeed, they point out, one independent analysis found that having a public plan could actually save the US up to $1 trillion over ten years, while providing health care to all. Some of the elements of the plan contributing to that figure include increased competition among health care providers and lower administrative costs.It’s a compelling argument, and one that deserves to have a more central place in this debate, lest we nickel-and-dime ourselves into an anemic health care plan that ends up costing us more in the long run, while abandoning the goal of health care for the currently uninsured.Posted by David Futrelle June 28, 2009 3:14 pm
These critics are looking at it backwards, say researchers at the liberal Economic Policy Institute: Including a public plan will actually reduce the overall costs of health care:
While a public plan would indeed likely raise the level of federal government health spending, it is just as likely to reduce total national health spending. Independent research evaluating proposals produced by EPI and other sources has consistently found that a public plan would save money and result in better health outcomes by providing all Americans regular access to health care.
Indeed, they point out, one independent analysis found that having a public plan could actually save the US up to $1 trillion over ten years, while providing health care to all. Some of the elements of the plan contributing to that figure include increased competition among health care providers and lower administrative costs.
It’s a compelling argument, and one that deserves to have a more central place in this debate, lest we nickel-and-dime ourselves into an anemic health care plan that ends up costing us more in the long run, while abandoning the goal of health care for the currently uninsured.
I If you watch television news, you may have seen President Barack Obama’s impressive display of focused presence this past week, as a very large fly insistently buzzed around his head during a taping of a CNBC interview by veteran journalist Jim Harwood, who also writes for The New York Times. Not all outlets played the slightly longer segment that offers a bit more context. In the longer version, Obama is answering a question in his typically thoughtful, measured way. When it becomes clear that the fly would not be waved away, Obama smiles, calmly interrupts himself and signals the crew that he’ll stop, where he wants to pick up when the taping resumes, and then puts his attention on addressing the distraction. He becomes very quiet and still, and in seconds kills the fly with a swift single movement of his hand. It wasn’t so much that the President of the United States happened to kill a fly with his bare hands in front of a television crew for what’s advertised as the leading business news cable channel. It was the way it happened. The serenity, the fluidness of his shift in attention, his movement and even the lightness of his mood was what struck people as worth comment, even if broadcasters did not clearly articulate that. This leader demonstrates a disciplined ability to focus his full attention and then shift that focus, his entire being, in a public environment in a manner that is reminiscent of an accomplished martial artist’s – if not a samurai’s -- many years of practice. It’s something we can all learn from. Many of us are experiencing escalating demands for our attention, even as we are challenged with what’s next for us personally and for our organizations. There is much to distract us, and even cause fear and paralysis.Obama effortlessly modeled how we can address such challenges. In the moment and one at a time.Obama is said to work out daily, and as president, eat breakfast and dinner with his family most days. Self-care, a focus on what really matters, rituals with loved ones, and a sense of humor ground us so we can continuously bring our full selves to one moment after another, to access our creativity and wisdom in the midst of uncertainty.One way to recognize we’re not fully present, and therefore, limited in the ability to act is to notice when attention is on that which we don’t want, or what “shouldn’t” be happening. Focusing on a negative is a clear sign we are not in the moment. We are “with” our assessments, not the moment, where we have the power to take focused action. We can use this as a cue to reclaim the full range of our gifts – and our power-- and bring complete focus to the moment at hand.What practices and self-care ground you?
If you watch television news, you may have seen President Barack Obama’s impressive display of focused presence this past week, as a very large fly insistently buzzed around his head during a taping of a CNBC interview by veteran journalist Jim Harwood, who also writes for The New York Times. Not all outlets played the slightly longer segment that offers a bit more context. In the longer version, Obama is answering a question in his typically thoughtful, measured way. When it becomes clear that the fly would not be waved away, Obama smiles, calmly interrupts himself and signals the crew that he’ll stop, where he wants to pick up when the taping resumes, and then puts his attention on addressing the distraction. He becomes very quiet and still, and in seconds kills the fly with a swift single movement of his hand.
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama will meet Pope Benedict for the first time on July 10 during a visit to Italy to attend a G8 heads of state meeting, a Vatican source said Wednesday.Obama has angered many American Catholics with his support for abortion rights for women and his decision to lift restrictions on stem cell research.The Vatican source said Obama would hold a brief audience with the Pope in the afternoon, after the conclusion of the July 8-10 summit of the Group of Eight industrialized nations.A Vatican spokesman declined to confirm or deny the timing of the meeting.The Vatican and Italian Church leaders condemned Obama's decision in March to lift restrictions on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research put in place by his predecessor George W. Bush.His subsequent invitation to speak at Notre Dame, a premier U.S. Catholic university, sparked criticism last month. While some heckled Obama during his speech, his appeal for a "fair-minded" discussion on abortion was received with several standing ovations. The G8 summit is due to discuss a response to the ongoing international economic crisis and global warming. It will take place in the central Italian city of L'Aquila, which bore the brunt of an earthquake in April that killed nearly 300 people.(Editing by Lin Noueihed)
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama will meet Pope Benedict for the first time on July 10 during a visit to Italy to attend a G8 heads of state meeting, a Vatican source said Wednesday.
Obama has angered many American Catholics with his support for abortion rights for women and his decision to lift restrictions on stem cell research.
The Vatican source said Obama would hold a brief audience with the Pope in the afternoon, after the conclusion of the July 8-10 summit of the Group of Eight industrialized nations.
A Vatican spokesman declined to confirm or deny the timing of the meeting.
The Vatican and Italian Church leaders condemned Obama's decision in March to lift restrictions on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research put in place by his predecessor George W. Bush.
His subsequent invitation to speak at Notre Dame, a premier U.S. Catholic university, sparked criticism last month. While some heckled Obama during his speech, his appeal for a "fair-minded" discussion on abortion was received with several standing ovations. The G8 summit is due to discuss a response to the ongoing international economic crisis and global warming. It will take place in the central Italian city of L'Aquila, which bore the brunt of an earthquake in April that killed nearly 300 people.
(Editing by Lin Noueihed)
Obama Condemns Iran’s Iron Fist Against Protests Brendan Smialowski for The New York TimesPresident Obama held the first afternoon press conference of his presidency on Tuesday at the White House. By HELENE COOPER and DAVID E. SANGERPublished: June 23, 2009 WASHINGTON — President Obama hardened his tone toward Iran on Tuesday, condemning the government for its crackdown against election protesters and accusing Iran’s leaders of fabricating charges against the United States.Skip to next paragraph Social Upheaval in Iran RelatedCrackdowns on Protesters Drape Tehran in Silence (June 24, 2009) Canada and Newsweek Seek Release of Reporter Detained in Iran (June 24, 2009) Blog The CaucusThe latest on President Obama, the new administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.More Politics NewsIn his strongest comments since the crisis erupted 10 days ago, Mr. Obama used unambiguous language to assail the Iranian government during a news conference at the White House, calling himself “appalled and outraged by the threats, beatings and imprisonments of the past few days.” He praised what he called the courage and dignity of the demonstrators, especially the women who have been marching, and said that he had watched the “heartbreaking” video of a 26-year-old Iranian woman whose last seconds of life were captured by video camera after she was shot on a Tehran street.“While this loss is raw and extraordinarily painful,” he said, “we also know this: Those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history.”Yet beyond muscular words, Mr. Obama has limited tools for bringing pressure to bear on the Iranian government, which for years has been brushing off international calls for it to curb its nuclear program. After the news conference, administration officials said there was little they could do to influence the outcome of the confrontation between the government and the protesters. And more so now than even a few days ago, they said, the prospects for any dialogue with Iran over its nuclear program appear all but dead for the immediate future, though they held out hope that Iran, assuming it has a stable government, could respond to Mr. Obama’s overtures later in the year.At home, Mr. Obama has been under intense pressure, especially from conservatives, to align the United States more forcefully with the protesters. On Tuesday, he dismissed suggestions that he had changed his tone toward Iran in response to critical comments from Senator John McCain of Arizona and other Republicans.In sometimes testy exchanges with reporters at the news conference, Mr. Obama defended himself, contending that even the moderate tone he had struck previously had been twisted by Iran’s government to suggest that the protests had been engineered by the United States.“They’ve got some of the comments that I’ve made being mistranslated in Iran, suggesting that I’m telling rioters to go out and riot some more,” Mr. Obama said, referring to accounts that the White House said surfaced late last week and over the weekend. “There are reports suggesting that the C.I.A. is behind all this. All of which is patently false. But it gives you a sense of the narrative that the Iranian government would love to play into.”But after the crackdown over the weekend that left an untold number of protesters dead — and after the wide dissemination of the video of the last moments of Neda Agha-Soltan, the Iranian woman who appeared to lock eyes with the camera as she died after being shot — White House officials decided that Mr. Obama had to take a tougher stand. “The situation looked very different on Saturday than it did when he first spoke in the Oval Office a week ago,” one of Mr. Obama’s media advisers said.“It was the bloodshed” that led to the change in tone, he said. While Mr. Obama did not rule out the possibility of engaging with Iran over the nuclear issue, administration officials and European diplomats say that the door to talks has all but closed, at least for now. “I think that under these circumstances, no one is going to be able to pursue anything because there is nothing to pursue,” said Trita Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council, who has been consulting with White House officials “on a daily basis,” he said, about the unfolding situation in Iran. Mr. Parsi said that all past assumptions about where Iran was headed had been cast aside by the disputed election results and the response of the protesters. Administration officials acknowledged that after reading reams of intelligence reports, watching videos of the street demonstrations and absorbing the trickle of intelligence from Iran, they were unable to predict how the protests might turn out.During the news conference, Mr. Obama maintained that he had been consistent in his tone toward Iran all along. “As soon as violence broke out — in fact, in anticipation of potential violence — we were very clear in saying that violence was unacceptable, that that was not how governments operate with respect to their people,” Mr. Obama said.But the language Mr. Obama used on Tuesday was more forceful and less ambiguous than his previous statements. In an interview with CNBC and The New York Times last week, he said that as far as America’s national interests were concerned, there was not much difference between Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and his challenger, Mir Hussein Moussavi.In his first public comment on the situation on June 15, Mr. Obama said he was troubled by the postelection violence and called on Iran’s leaders to respect free speech and the democratic process. The next day, on June 16, he said he had “deep concerns” about the elections but also said that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling.” In the internal discussions at the White House about how to handle Iran, Mr. Obama’s aides are clearly struggling with how to reconcile two different goals: supporting a nascent, unpredicted movement in the streets that could weaken the country’s top clerics, and following the diplomatic mixture of pressure and diplomacy that Mr. Obama settled on months ago as a strategy to halt Iran’s nuclear work.The protests, administration officials said, create the first possibility in 30 years that the mullahs’ grip on Iran might be loosened. Even if the street protests are put down, one official said, “a fissure has opened up that cannot be completely closed.”Clearly those events took the administration by surprise: none of the possibilities for the election that were laid out for Mr. Obama a month ago, one official said, included the possibility of a violently disputed election.Yet in the long run, Mr. Obama’s aides say, they are not certain that the protests will change the fundamental calculus about the risks Iran poses to its neighbors or the United States. One of Mr. Obama’s strategists noted that “one has to be concerned that while all this is happening the centrifuges are still spinning,” a reference to the machines used to enrich uranium. Sign in to RecommendNext Article in US (8 of 33) » A version of this article appeared in print on June
Obama Condemns Iran’s Iron Fist Against Protests
Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times
President Obama held the first afternoon press conference of his presidency on Tuesday at the White House.
WASHINGTON — President Obama hardened his tone toward Iran on Tuesday, condemning the government for its crackdown against election protesters and accusing Iran’s leaders of fabricating charges against the United States.
Crackdowns on Protesters Drape Tehran in Silence (June 24, 2009)
In his strongest comments since the crisis erupted 10 days ago, Mr. Obama used unambiguous language to assail the Iranian government during a news conference at the White House, calling himself “appalled and outraged by the threats, beatings and imprisonments of the past few days.”
He praised what he called the courage and dignity of the demonstrators, especially the women who have been marching, and said that he had watched the “heartbreaking” video of a 26-year-old Iranian woman whose last seconds of life were captured by video camera after she was shot on a Tehran street.
“While this loss is raw and extraordinarily painful,” he said, “we also know this: Those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history.”
Yet beyond muscular words, Mr. Obama has limited tools for bringing pressure to bear on the Iranian government, which for years has been brushing off international calls for it to curb its nuclear program.
After the news conference, administration officials said there was little they could do to influence the outcome of the confrontation between the government and the protesters. And more so now than even a few days ago, they said, the prospects for any dialogue with Iran over its nuclear program appear all but dead for the immediate future, though they held out hope that Iran, assuming it has a stable government, could respond to Mr. Obama’s overtures later in the year.
At home, Mr. Obama has been under intense pressure, especially from conservatives, to align the United States more forcefully with the protesters. On Tuesday, he dismissed suggestions that he had changed his tone toward Iran in response to critical comments from Senator John McCain of Arizona and other Republicans.
In sometimes testy exchanges with reporters at the news conference, Mr. Obama defended himself, contending that even the moderate tone he had struck previously had been twisted by Iran’s government to suggest that the protests had been engineered by the United States.
“They’ve got some of the comments that I’ve made being mistranslated in Iran, suggesting that I’m telling rioters to go out and riot some more,” Mr. Obama said, referring to accounts that the White House said surfaced late last week and over the weekend. “There are reports suggesting that the C.I.A. is behind all this. All of which is patently false. But it gives you a sense of the narrative that the Iranian government would love to play into.”
But after the crackdown over the weekend that left an untold number of protesters dead — and after the wide dissemination of the video of the last moments of Neda Agha-Soltan, the Iranian woman who appeared to lock eyes with the camera as she died after being shot — White House officials decided that Mr. Obama had to take a tougher stand.
“The situation looked very different on Saturday than it did when he first spoke in the Oval Office a week ago,” one of Mr. Obama’s media advisers said.
“It was the bloodshed” that led to the change in tone, he said.
While Mr. Obama did not rule out the possibility of engaging with Iran over the nuclear issue, administration officials and European diplomats say that the door to talks has all but closed, at least for now.
“I think that under these circumstances, no one is going to be able to pursue anything because there is nothing to pursue,” said Trita Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council, who has been consulting with White House officials “on a daily basis,” he said, about the unfolding situation in Iran.
Mr. Parsi said that all past assumptions about where Iran was headed had been cast aside by the disputed election results and the response of the protesters.
Administration officials acknowledged that after reading reams of intelligence reports, watching videos of the street demonstrations and absorbing the trickle of intelligence from Iran, they were unable to predict how the protests might turn out.
During the news conference, Mr. Obama maintained that he had been consistent in his tone toward Iran all along. “As soon as violence broke out — in fact, in anticipation of potential violence — we were very clear in saying that violence was unacceptable, that that was not how governments operate with respect to their people,” Mr. Obama said.
But the language Mr. Obama used on Tuesday was more forceful and less ambiguous than his previous statements. In an interview with CNBC and The New York Times last week, he said that as far as America’s national interests were concerned, there was not much difference between Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and his challenger, Mir Hussein Moussavi.
In his first public comment on the situation on June 15, Mr. Obama said he was troubled by the postelection violence and called on Iran’s leaders to respect free speech and the democratic process. The next day, on June 16, he said he had “deep concerns” about the elections but also said that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling.”
In the internal discussions at the White House about how to handle Iran, Mr. Obama’s aides are clearly struggling with how to reconcile two different goals: supporting a nascent, unpredicted movement in the streets that could weaken the country’s top clerics, and following the diplomatic mixture of pressure and diplomacy that Mr. Obama settled on months ago as a strategy to halt Iran’s nuclear work.
The protests, administration officials said, create the first possibility in 30 years that the mullahs’ grip on Iran might be loosened. Even if the street protests are put down, one official said, “a fissure has opened up that cannot be completely closed.”
Clearly those events took the administration by surprise: none of the possibilities for the election that were laid out for Mr. Obama a month ago, one official said, included the possibility of a violently disputed election.
Yet in the long run, Mr. Obama’s aides say, they are not certain that the protests will change the fundamental calculus about the risks Iran poses to its neighbors or the United States. One of Mr. Obama’s strategists noted that “one has to be concerned that while all this is happening the centrifuges are still spinning,” a reference to the machines used to enrich uranium.
By Lisa Wangsness Globe Staff / June 16, 2009 Email| Print| Reprints| Yahoo! Buzz| ShareThisText size – + WASHINGTON - President Obama yesterday took the fight for a public healthcare option to a skeptical audience, telling the American Medical Association that a government plan that would compete with private insurers is "not your enemy; it is your friend."DiscussCOMMENTS (0)Addressing a key constituency whose rejection of Bill Clinton's healthcare plan helped crush it 15 years ago, Obama said he believes a public plan would "put affordable healthcare within reach for millions of Americans."He also told doctors that if health costs keep growing at current rates, the pressure could destabilize the healthcare system and threaten all reimbursements.Doctors, hospitals, and other providers worry they would lose money under a government insurance plan if it used the power of its size to dictate payment rates that are much lower than what private insurers pay. That is essentially what Medicare and Medicaid do now, and many providers make up their losses by charging private insurers more.The AMA has not ruled out embracing some form of a public option, but its members have been concerned about Obama's intentions.Obama tried to reassure doctors by saying the reform bill was not a "Trojan horse" for a Canadian-style single-payer system, as insurance companies and other opponents contend. But he stopped short of saying a public plan would pay doctors as much as private insurers do.Instead, he said the legislation would include broad changes to the way doctors are paid for their services, so that rather than getting paid by the visit, procedure, or test - a model that encourages unnecessary expense - they would be paid for their overall treatment of a patient.Doctors would ultimately benefit because they would be able to "focus on patient care," he said, and health costs would be brought under control.Obama got a mostly warm reception; Dr. Mario E. Motta, president of the Massachusetts Medical Society, who was in Chicago for the president's speech, said he believes the mainstream of the AMA is more flexible than it may seem."If a public plan was designed specifically the way he phrased it today - to give another option, to make sure all Americans are insured - and if its rates were adequate for physicians and it could pressure insurers to behave more responsibly," he said, doctors would sign on. But they will not support a plan that pays Medicare rates, which can be 20 percent lower than what private insurers pay physicians.The question of whether to have a government-sponsored health insurance program - and how it should be financed and governed, and who would be eligible - is one of the most difficult political questions facing Congress.Proponents say a public plan could cut administrative costs, bargain for lower prices, impose stricter quality guidelines, and pressure private insurers to do the same.Continued...Opponents say the insurance industry, unable to compete with a powerful government plan, would eventually collapse and leave patients with no choices.Dr. Donald Palmisano, a former AMA president and head of the Coalition to Protect Patients' Rights, a leading conservative group on healthcare legislation, criticized Obama for focusing on government solutions."More than 80 percent of Americans currently have health insurance, and the vast majority of them are overwhelmingly satisfied with their coverage, so let's fix the problem we have - not one that doesn't exist," he said in a statement.An analysis by the nonpartisan Lewin Group found that a limited public insurance plan paying Medicare rates could offer premiums 30 percent below market, but that a large public option plan could devastate the private insurance industry. If anyone could join, 131 million people would enroll, the study found, causing private insurers to lose 70 percent of their business."That would effectively end the employer-based healthcare system as we know it today," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for the insurance industry lobby.Key committees in the House and Senate are scheduled to begin finalizing bills this week.Both the left and right have staked out positions: Many liberal Democratic leaders have suggested they want a strong Medicare-style public plan; most Republicans firmly oppose that approach, fearing it could hurt private insurers.Moderate Democrats, and a few Republicans, are pushing various forms of a weaker public plan that would pose less of a threat to private insurers but would provide an affordable alternative for people who cannot get insurance through their employers.Senator Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York, has proposed setting ground rules for a public plan that would force it to compete on a level playing field with private insurers. But several moderate Democratic senators and many of the 100 or so moderate "Blue Dogs" and New Democrats in the House remain concerned.In an effort to broker a compromise, Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota, has proposed allowing federally chartered "co-ops" to operate like independent nonprofit insurers.But Jacob Hacker, co-director of the Center for Health, Economic, and Family Security at University of California, Berkeley, wrote in a piece on The New Republic website Sunday that Conrad's co-ops would be too small to exert the necessary pressure on the private industry to lower costs or improve quality, undermining two major purposes of the public option.Motta said the Massachusetts chapter of the AMA supports a limited public option and is fighting to defeat a resolution against one. At a discussion the other day, Motta said, he asked how many of the doctors loved their insurance companies."And not one hand rose," he said. "I think there is a sense that things need to change, despite the vocal minority."Lisa Wangsness can be reached at lwangsness@globe.com. © Copyright 2009 Globe Newspaper Company.Single Page 1 2 Next
WASHINGTON - President Obama yesterday took the fight for a public healthcare option to a skeptical audience, telling the American Medical Association that a government plan that would compete with private insurers is "not your enemy; it is your friend."
Addressing a key constituency whose rejection of Bill Clinton's healthcare plan helped crush it 15 years ago, Obama said he believes a public plan would "put affordable healthcare within reach for millions of Americans."
He also told doctors that if health costs keep growing at current rates, the pressure could destabilize the healthcare system and threaten all reimbursements.
Doctors, hospitals, and other providers worry they would lose money under a government insurance plan if it used the power of its size to dictate payment rates that are much lower than what private insurers pay. That is essentially what Medicare and Medicaid do now, and many providers make up their losses by charging private insurers more.
The AMA has not ruled out embracing some form of a public option, but its members have been concerned about Obama's intentions.
Obama tried to reassure doctors by saying the reform bill was not a "Trojan horse" for a Canadian-style single-payer system, as insurance companies and other opponents contend. But he stopped short of saying a public plan would pay doctors as much as private insurers do.
Instead, he said the legislation would include broad changes to the way doctors are paid for their services, so that rather than getting paid by the visit, procedure, or test - a model that encourages unnecessary expense - they would be paid for their overall treatment of a patient.
Doctors would ultimately benefit because they would be able to "focus on patient care," he said, and health costs would be brought under control.
Obama got a mostly warm reception; Dr. Mario E. Motta, president of the Massachusetts Medical Society, who was in Chicago for the president's speech, said he believes the mainstream of the AMA is more flexible than it may seem.
"If a public plan was designed specifically the way he phrased it today - to give another option, to make sure all Americans are insured - and if its rates were adequate for physicians and it could pressure insurers to behave more responsibly," he said, doctors would sign on. But they will not support a plan that pays Medicare rates, which can be 20 percent lower than what private insurers pay physicians.
The question of whether to have a government-sponsored health insurance program - and how it should be financed and governed, and who would be eligible - is one of the most difficult political questions facing Congress.
Proponents say a public plan could cut administrative costs, bargain for lower prices, impose stricter quality guidelines, and pressure private insurers to do the same.Continued...
Opponents say the insurance industry, unable to compete with a powerful government plan, would eventually collapse and leave patients with no choices.
Dr. Donald Palmisano, a former AMA president and head of the Coalition to Protect Patients' Rights, a leading conservative group on healthcare legislation, criticized Obama for focusing on government solutions.
"More than 80 percent of Americans currently have health insurance, and the vast majority of them are overwhelmingly satisfied with their coverage, so let's fix the problem we have - not one that doesn't exist," he said in a statement.
An analysis by the nonpartisan Lewin Group found that a limited public insurance plan paying Medicare rates could offer premiums 30 percent below market, but that a large public option plan could devastate the private insurance industry. If anyone could join, 131 million people would enroll, the study found, causing private insurers to lose 70 percent of their business.
"That would effectively end the employer-based healthcare system as we know it today," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for the insurance industry lobby.
Key committees in the House and Senate are scheduled to begin finalizing bills this week.
Both the left and right have staked out positions: Many liberal Democratic leaders have suggested they want a strong Medicare-style public plan; most Republicans firmly oppose that approach, fearing it could hurt private insurers.
Moderate Democrats, and a few Republicans, are pushing various forms of a weaker public plan that would pose less of a threat to private insurers but would provide an affordable alternative for people who cannot get insurance through their employers.
Senator Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York, has proposed setting ground rules for a public plan that would force it to compete on a level playing field with private insurers. But several moderate Democratic senators and many of the 100 or so moderate "Blue Dogs" and New Democrats in the House remain concerned.
In an effort to broker a compromise, Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota, has proposed allowing federally chartered "co-ops" to operate like independent nonprofit insurers.
But Jacob Hacker, co-director of the Center for Health, Economic, and Family Security at University of California, Berkeley, wrote in a piece on The New Republic website Sunday that Conrad's co-ops would be too small to exert the necessary pressure on the private industry to lower costs or improve quality, undermining two major purposes of the public option.
Motta said the Massachusetts chapter of the AMA supports a limited public option and is fighting to defeat a resolution against one. At a discussion the other day, Motta said, he asked how many of the doctors loved their insurance companies.
"And not one hand rose," he said. "I think there is a sense that things need to change, despite the vocal minority."
Lisa Wangsness can be reached at lwangsness@globe.com.
On nicotine, it specified that the level can be set by the FDA but not to zero. Officials of Philip Morris, USA, the largest cigarette manufacturer, were party to the negotiations. -- ST PHOTO: MALCOLM MCLEODWASHINGTON - CONGRESS' strongest anti-smoking law in decades gives regulators new power to limit nicotine in cigarettes, drastically curtail advertising and ban candied tobacco products aimed at young people. At the same time, it orders the Food and Drug Administration, the country's main regulator of foodstuffs and medicines, not to ban either cigarettes or nicotine, the substance that makes smoking tobacco addictive. NEW MEASURES TO DETER SMOKERSRegulators could prohibit tobacco companies from using candy or other flavors in cigarettes that tend to attract young smokers, and restrict advertising in publications often read by teenagers. Rules on sales to minors would be toughened, as would warning labels.Tobacco companies would have to get FDA approval for new products, and would be barred from using terms such as 'light' or 'mild' that imply a smaller health risk.... moreAdvocates of the legislation say the changes are necessary to marshal government powers to save some of the 400,000 people who die in the United States from smoking every year and to reduce the US$100 billion (S$145 billion) in annual health care costs linked to tobacco. The legislation, one of the most dramatic anti-smoking initiatives since the US surgeon general's warning 45 years ago that tobacco causes lung cancer, would give the FDA authority to regulate the content, marketing and advertising of cigarettes and other tobacco products. On nicotine, it specified that the level can be set by the FDA but not to zero. Officials of Philip Morris, USA, the largest cigarette manufacturer, were party to the negotiations. Thursday's 79-17 Senate vote sends the measure back to the House of Representatives, which in April passed a similar but not identical version. House acceptance of the Senate bill would send it directly to President Barack Obama, who supports the action. Supporters of FDA regulation of tobacco have struggled for more than a decade to overcome powerful resistance from the industry and elsewhere. In 2000, the US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the agency did not have the authority under current law to regulate tobacco products, and the former George W. Bush administration opposed several previous efforts by Congress to write a new law. Thursday's legislation gives the FDA power to evaluate contents of tobacco products and to order changes or bans on those that constitute a danger to public health, except for nicotine yields. Opponents, led by Republican Sen. Richard Burr of the tobacco-growing state of North Carolina, argued that the FDA, in charge of ensuring the safety of food and drug products, was the wrong
At the same time, it orders the Food and Drug Administration, the country's main regulator of foodstuffs and medicines, not to ban either cigarettes or nicotine, the substance that makes smoking tobacco addictive.
NEW MEASURES TO DETER SMOKERSRegulators could prohibit tobacco companies from using candy or other flavors in cigarettes that tend to attract young smokers, and restrict advertising in publications often read by teenagers. Rules on sales to minors would be toughened, as would warning labels.Tobacco companies would have to get FDA approval for new products, and would be barred from using terms such as 'light' or 'mild' that imply a smaller health risk.... moreAdvocates of the legislation say the changes are necessary to marshal government powers to save some of the 400,000 people who die in the United States from smoking every year and to reduce the US$100 billion (S$145 billion) in annual health care costs linked to tobacco.
The legislation, one of the most dramatic anti-smoking initiatives since the US surgeon general's warning 45 years ago that tobacco causes lung cancer, would give the FDA authority to regulate the content, marketing and advertising of cigarettes and other tobacco products.
On nicotine, it specified that the level can be set by the FDA but not to zero.
Officials of Philip Morris, USA, the largest cigarette manufacturer, were party to the negotiations.
Thursday's 79-17 Senate vote sends the measure back to the House of Representatives, which in April passed a similar but not identical version. House acceptance of the Senate bill would send it directly to President Barack Obama, who supports the action.
Supporters of FDA regulation of tobacco have struggled for more than a decade to overcome powerful resistance from the industry and elsewhere. In 2000, the US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the agency did not have the authority under current law to regulate tobacco products, and the former George W. Bush administration opposed several previous efforts by Congress to write a new law.
Thursday's legislation gives the FDA power to evaluate contents of tobacco products and to order changes or bans on those that constitute a danger to public health, except for nicotine yields.
Opponents, led by Republican Sen. Richard Burr of the tobacco-growing state of North Carolina, argued that the FDA, in charge of ensuring the safety of food and drug products, was the wrong
