Centrist Democrats or Independent

jader · February 2009

I am not sure what to call this thread but I am a person who voted for Obama wholeheartedly. So did all my family. We are all so hopeful that things will change and become better. Heck, we need it, don't you?

But some of us are kind of 2nd guessing now that our guy is in. I am in NO WAY saying I want McCain. Maybe I shoulda gone with Hillary? But I don't want to ruin that Hillary thread because I am kind of complaining about Obama here or maybe its questioning?

But to be honest, no one can do that on that other thread so I started a new one so me and daisy can ask our questions. I think it seems both of us just started looking at the situation we are in. My little one has me up with her cough so I've been reading!!!

No nasties here but I don't care if you are a democrat or republican, you can post here.

Anonymous · February 2009

way to go jader! i truly believe that you and your family voted for the person that can drive this country out of the ditch that has got so many scared and worried.

my guess is the next couple of weeks will be very exciting as we see President Obama and his team implement his three legged recovery plan.

jobs banks homes

we will all work together and come out of these times better than before. we have the leadership that we needed!

jader · February 2009

Well, I want to get to the bottom of what Congress is trying to sneak through in the package. I have read over and over about how the health legislation is going to effect seniors and those on public aid. Eventually, it is reasoned, that this will effect private insurance.

Quote:Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.

Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).

The bill's health rules will affect "every individual in the United States" (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system. Having electronic medical records at your fingertips, easily transferred to a hospital, is beneficial. It will help avoid duplicate tests and errors.

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and "guide" your doctor's decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, "Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis." According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and "learn to operate less like solo practitioners."

Keeping doctors informed of the newest medical findings is important, but enforcing uniformity goes too far.

----

Cost effective ? Who determines that? My grandmother is in her 70's .. well almost 80 .. I think she is past the life expectancy. I wonder if they would stop treating her!

LAphoenix · February 2009

jader, the commentary you're referring is inaccurate. There's nothing in the stimulus bill about the govt. getting involved in medical decisions or rationing care. This is from AARP's magazine:

AARP CEO Bill Novelli released the following statement in response to false reports regarding health care provisions in the economic recovery package:

"They're at it again. Opponents of health reform are now using scare tactics in a misguided attempt to stop progress in its tracks, blocking attempts to fix the broken health care system that is hurting American families and our economy.

"The latest attacks revolve around a smart policy in the economic recovery package that would fund ‘comparative effectiveness research'-a wonky term that just means giving doctors and patients the ability to compare different kinds of treatments to find out which one works best for which patient.

"Opponents-like some drug companies and medical device makers-don't want this research. They fear it will cut the profits they make on ineffective drugs and equipment.

"But they won't tell you that this research could save your life by giving your doctors better information so they can prescribe the best treatments available to you.

"This research is a common sense idea that is, unfortunately, not happening now. Some estimates say that only about half of all therapies that patients receive have been backed up by head-to-head comparisons with alternatives.

"While our country spends more than $2 trillion a year on health care, we spend less than 0.1 percent on evaluating how that care works compared to other options.

"AARP strongly opposes any attempts that would limit doctors and hospitals from providing the best possible care to their patients.

"And despite what opponents are saying, comparative effectiveness research funding was in the economic recovery package in both houses of Congress from the very beginning. That's because lawmakers understand the need to improve the quality and performance of our health system.

Anonymous · February 2009

If someone had Daschle's book I'd read it. But I'm not buying it.

I don't trust ANY of them. Like a Senator I heard this morning say..why are they spending billions on this health plan? Is that the way to save money? I hope there will be someone who we have employed in the government (Senators and Representatives) too look out for US.

Anonymous · February 2009

I don't trust AARP although I am a member. Who do you trust?

One of my friends who has had Rheumatoid Arthritis since she was around 32 yo said the Medicare will not pay for the expensive drug (injection she gives herself) Enbrel. That's government health care for ya.

Anonymous · February 2009

Madalyn, why did you bring Rush's name into this? I don't listen to Rush.

Anonymous · February 2009

daisy - the development of medical record databases started five years ago:

In 2004, the President issued an Executive Order establishing the
position of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology
within the Office of the Secretary of HHS. The primary purpose of this
position is to aid the Secretary of HHS in achieving the President's
Goal for most Americans to have access to an interoperable electronic
medical record by 2014.

>>>>>>

I for one welcome it. If I am out of my area and need medical attention, I would want my treating physician to have all my info at his fingertips. JMHO

gpawelski · February 2009

Conservatives have been misinforming the public about the health IT provisions of the stimulus package by falsely claiming that it would lead to the government telling the doctors what they can and cannot treat, and on whom they can and cannot treat. The Hudson Institute fellow, Betsy McCaughey, claimed that the legislation will have the government monitor treatments in order to guide your doctor's decisions.

The new language in the bill tasks the (already existing) National Coordinator of Health Information Technology (NCHIT) with providing appropriate information so that doctors can make better informed decisions. The NCHIT provides counsel to the Secretary of HHS and Departmental leadership for the development and nationwide implementation of health information technology.

Contrary to Ms. McCaughey's statements, the language in the House bill does not establish authority to monitor treatments or restrict what your doctor is doing with regard to patient care. It addresses establishing an electronic records system so that doctors can have complete, accurate information about their patients.

The funding for health information technology in the recovery package is projected to create over 200,000 jobs and a down-payment on broader health care reform. Converting an antiquated paper system to a computer system by making the health care system more efficient.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that one-third of $2 trillion spent annually on health care in America may be unnecessary due to inefficiencies in the old system such as exessive paperwork. Investing in infrastructure like health IT would help improve the quality of America's health care.

Currently, fewer than 25% of hospitals and fewer than 20% of doctor's offices employ health information technology systems. Researchers have found that implementing health IT would result in a mean annual savings of $40 billion over a 15-year period by improving health outcomes through care management, increasing efficiency and reducing medical errors.

Investing in health would also help primary care physicians who often bear the brunt of tech implementation without seeing immediate benefits, affording the infrastructure for expanison.

LAphoenix · February 2009

Shirley, I think AARP is a lot more trustworthy and impartial than Betsy McCaughey Ross, that's for sure! I also use factcheck.org and propublica.org. If I can check the original source, like the actual text of the stimulus bill, I do. Since you don't listen to Rush, what nonpartisan information sources do you trust? (Fox News doesn't count, as their conservative bias is well known.)

Sherri, where is the "worrisome language" you refer to on the HHS site? Is this new policy? It doesn't look like there's anything new (i.e. post-Bush) on the site. Please post it so we can discuss it. And please post any worrisome language from the stimulus bill you find.

Madalyn, my private insurance has denied me certain effective medicines and treatments on many occasions. I'm involved right now in a riduculous red-tape snafu regarding some medical equipment I rent. The number of offices I had to call and the amount of time I spent to get one mistake corrected was outrageous. Anything to make the healthcare system more efficient and therefore less expensive will be welcomed.

Anonymous · February 2009

Here in California, the IT part is already law ... that part is a good thing. Keeping records is a good thing. I talked to my dr and all dr's will not have access to all your medical records. It will still be a need to know basis. For instance, a dermatologist will not have access to your oncology records. The highest level of access is not what you'd think --- psychiatrists. They have access to all your records and that really makes sense since they can see the "whole picture" and see all the rx's you have had and might be taking.

Hopefully, our insurance does not go the way of Dashle's desires as he stated in his book. I

LAphoenix · February 2009

Sherri, while I agree that deciphering govt. lingo is hard, I've read quite a bit of the healthcare part of the stimulus bill and find nothing troubling in it or on the HHS site. Nothing jumped out at me as sinister. I don't see the govt. trying to put old people down. Quite the contrary. There's a lot in the two stimulus bills about improving care for seniors. But we're coming at it from different perspectives obviously.

I'm with you about hopping off this thread. I don't fit jader's category either!

jader · February 2009

No worries, Sherri, I've read several news articles and I am afraid of the bill the way it is. Maybe it was not the intent but we know what happens when you have a law in place, the government will find a way to benefit themselves and leave us taxpayers in the dust!

Daisy6 .. I am a mom, I do the budget in our home. I can't see it any other way but I didn't major in economics. To me, when you are broke, you don't spend, you don't borrow, you reduce your spending, sadly nutrition suffers, our health sometimes does, too. We had to eat Campbell's soup and crackers, Maruchan noodles, and refried beans for a week. We didn't qualify for the free lunch program so the kids had pb&j every day, we refilled our bottles of water (and still do). Blankets and heavy sweaters instead of using the heat. Thankfully, we don't live in snow country but it sure gets rainy here and cold.

So, do I think that spending all this money is the right thing? No, it doesn't make sense. I do think forcing Wall STreet, the banks and auto industry to reform is good but I think they should have made them go bankrupt and re-organize and then approved a business plan before loaning money to those 3 giants. I also think they should FORCE the banks to modify home loans and bring down the interest rates to people so they afford their house. People have to live somewhere, losing the homes costs everyone money. Costs the homeowner lots more since their credit will be ruined. Try finding an apartment for a family of 5 with a dog -- which is why abandoning pets has become all too common.

So, I will sit and watch and hope but sitting very scared. Trying to have an attitude of gratitude that we have jobs and health!

Anonymous · February 2009

daisy, yes i can and i am still waiting for yours, patiently...:)

edited to add source: http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/onc/background/

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040427-4.html

Anonymous · February 2009

daisy - this is what President Obama said:

Acknowledging 'honest mistakes,' Obama tolerates critic

By Associated Press | February 10, 2009

ELKHART, Ind. - President Obama wanted to talk yesterday about his economic stimulus plan, but one woman in the audience instead wanted to talk about the tax troubles that have snagged some of Obama's Cabinet picks.

"You've come to our county and asked us to trust you, but those that you have appointed to your Cabinet are not trustworthy and can't handle their own budget and taxes," the woman said to boos before Obama cut off the rowdy crowd of 1,700 in a high school gym.

He told the crowd he wanted to hear the question.

"I'm one of those that thinks you need to have a beer with Sean Hannity," said the woman, referring to the conservative Fox News Channel personality.

Obama acknowledged what he called "honest mistakes."

"Now, with respect to Sean Hannity, I didn't know that he had invited me for a beer," Obama said. "You know, but - I will take that under advisement. Generally, his opinion of me does not seem to be very high, but I'm always good for a beer."

During his marathon campaign, Obama conducted scores of such town hall-style meetings. He returned to the format yesterday, his first public trip from the White House to stump for his legislation.

"Here's the deal on questions: First of all, we didn't screen anybody, so there's some people who like me in the audience, some people that don't, some people agree with me, some people who don't. It doesn't matter. We want to take questions from everybody," Obama said.

...................................................

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/02/10/acknowledging_honest_mistakes_obama_tolerates_critic/?rss_id=Boston

........................

Anonymous · February 2009

Daisy - one more piece of proof here for you...:)

.......White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs added that neither members of the audience nor the questions that will be posed at the town hall-style events in Indiana on Monday and in Florida on Tuesday will be pre-screened by White House officials.

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/TOP%20STORY/2164349/

.....

hope this clears up the misinformation for you, it has for me...:)

jerseymaria · February 2009

i envy the knowledge i'm seeing here. i'm much to sick to be reading and following this as i should be. i do know that many many ladies are getting a combo of herceptin with tykerb for stage IV her2+++. i cannot. my primary is medicare and that combo is not approved by them. and if medicare won't pay, then my other insurances won't either. so where does that leave me if that turns out to be my best option, or only option. i guess dead?

Anonymous · February 2009

Thats sad ... but I was told by my gf who is stage 4, that she is on Herceptin for life until that stops working for her, then they will use Tykerb. I think Tykerb might still be considered "trial" but I could be wrong. I have heard that some oncs are doing the double whammy with the Herc and Tyk .. targeting the inside and the outside of the cell. Things could change right after the next ASCO conference. Hang in there!!

Anonymous · February 2009

Maria, that's horrible. I don't know what to say. I'm hoping you can get this approved...sucks! There ya go...government insurance. MAKES ME MAD!

jerseymaria · February 2009

my onc feels herceptin did stop working since my progression was started while will on it. tried xeloda with tykerb and some of you might remember my disasters there. i was told that medicare will pay for any treatment that is approved by the fda. this combo is not yet approved by the fda, although individually they have been. haven't reached the point of checking further or fighting so i can't speak to that. that's my story but at least started rads again. and trying real hard to stay out of hospital but no promises here.

jader · February 2009

My day is so long today! ..... I need sleep!!

My hubby is pissed off (Oh can I say that on the board?)!!! The tax break we will get is $13 per week per paycheck! Woopdedoo! Thats $26 a week for the both of us. My only hope is that we fall under the provision for the AMT--supposedly we can go lower than the AMT used to be. The AMT now is supposed to be for higher wage earners but I have not seen the figure yet.

Maria, I hope things go your way and fast!

ijl · February 2009

I am one of these people who did not vote for Obama but was rather hopeful when he won. I guess I got caught in the moment.

But now I am outright scared. Obama "let" Polosi and Reid write the stimulus bill which ended up being full with favorite pork from Democrats. Even Congressional Budget Office which is independent said that even though the stimulus might create a few jobs in the short run it would hurt our economy in the long run. This should be considered as an objective opinion.

It's not clear that we do need this bill. Just a few days ago Intel announced that they would spend 7 Billion dollars building new factories in USA and that they did not care about stimulus bill. They had a lot of cash and things are cheaper now so they want to take advantage of it.

The retail numbers came out today and they are up.

We do still lose jobs, but the numbers are misleading. They compare an absolute number of jobs lost to previous decades, but the workforce doubled since then. In addition it has been shown that job loss accelerates toward the end of the recession. In 1972 the most jobs was lost just prior to the point that marked the beginning of the recovery.

Let's just entertain the possibility that with a little pain the economy would recover and then get hit with this stimulus bill that our children would pay for.

My husband lost his job so I am not one of those who feels secure. But we need to realize that sometimes we can't avoid pain on the road to recovery.

Reagan was my favorite president. And I know it has been quoted before but he was right when he said "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem". I would love to have this quote chiseled onto the White House.

Anonymous · February 2009

My SIL was layed off from the small company he worked for...developers. He was extremely busy. He's now contracting with them (and he WILL pay his taxes unlike some of the jokers that the prez has picked and stood behind). He is making less AND WORKING HARDER THAN EVER (more work than he WAS responsible for)! So, why did they lay him off? Because they banks tightened up on credit, thus the employers couldn't pay. So, with all the building bridges and highways and weatherizing buildings and 4 million dollars for STDs that was but back in the package and Pelosi's 30 mil $$$ for her wetlands, and new cars for Washington, and new green golf carts and Reid just slipped in 8 billion without anyone know it for rails from Los Angelos to Los Vegas and on, and on, and on...where will my SIL fit in all of this? My dd works SO if his employers do not have the "funds" to pay him she can BARELY carry the load. This BULL is HORRIBLE!

Shirley

Anonymous · February 2009

jader · February 2009

Excuse me laura, this thread is for Centrist/Independent --as I said, people who were hopeful but are now scared of what we voted for!! Maybe your joke belongs on the other Obama Supporter thread.

Anonymous · February 2009

jader - i am a centrist democrat, i am just not afraid of what i voted for. this is the centrist democrat thread isn't it?

jader · February 2009

Yes but not for Obama supporters .. that's why I decided not to post over on your and OisP's thread because it's totally for Obama and I understand that you have your views. This is not a bash the other side thread. Frankly, I am truly afraid of our family decision to have voted for him. I actually think that before the housing fallout, our ecomony was pretty good. So, I am not a republican hater. I lean to both sides and see good in both parties and bad in both parties. So, I am asking nice, to please edit out your cartoon and post it to your friends.

Maybe I should have named it the skeptical democratic thread.

jader · February 2009

Daisy6, I am going to watch ABC tonight, it's about Appalachia. I feel so sorry for the people there right in plain sight of us. I don't understand the poverty we have in America when we are spending trillions on other countries. I wish Obama would speed up the plan to get out of Iraq and spend that money re-developing some our communities.

In fact, I refuse to watch Extreme Makeover because they overspend on one family when they could spend that money to help 10 and I think Americans would still watch the show since it would really turn around a whole street.

Imagine taking back a neighborhood rather than one house!

Anonymous · February 2009

the bc.org political corner header states:

All views on politics and other subject matter are welcome. Expected in this forum are political differences but personal respect.

No doubt there will be a difference of views on the Centrist Democrats or Independent thread, but all views are welcome.

according to recent Gallup polls, the vast majority of Democrats support the stimulus package.

ff0srphnpums706nuceldw

Jader - if you feel the need to start a thread for Democrats who do not support President Obama, i completely support right to do so.

Anonymous · February 2009

I'm a republican but my opinion is based on an issue by issue basis. Therefore, while I have a foundation from which I make my life decisions, I always try to hear both sides before deciding. I don't think all Democratic ideas are bad. Some of the ideas make good sense. There are some philosophies, however, that violate the very core of my faith and I will never support. And I will never willingly give up any freedoms outlined in the Constitution like freedome of speech, press, religion, the right to assemble, and some non-Constitutional ones like the right to make my health care decisions with my doctor.

Anonymous · February 2009

As a Centrist Democrat , I am constantly looking for the consensus view and adapting to it without compromising my core philosophy . I have no problem crossing party lines and voting for a Republican. I voted for the governator here in California, I felt his Democratic opponent was a total crook. Although, I differ with him on some things, all in all, I support him and feel he has represented me well.

I think health reform is sorely needed in our country but also have no desire to give up the right to make health decisions with my doctor. I hope that health reform allows this and that we see some reform in the next four years.

I found this harris interactive poll gave me an insight into what americans are looking for:

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/pubs/harris_healthday_poll_2009_02_11.pdf

this is the overview of the poll findings:

February 11, 2009 - Most U.S. adults are aware that President

Obama proposes to reform the health care system - many (79%) say they know at least

a little about the possible health care reforms likely to be proposed by President Obama,

but only 17% say they know a lot. People often have strong feelings on issues even

when they are not well informed, and this poll shows that Americans have positive

expectations for President Obama's reforms.

These are some of the results of a Harris Interactive/HealthDay Poll conducted online

within the United States between January 27 and 29, 2009 among a national cross

section of 2,491 adults age 18 and over.

When asked about President Obama's proposals for health care reform in general half

(50%) of all adults supports his plan and 20% opposes it. Replies to this question are

highly polarized by political party (75% Democrat, 26% Republican and 48%

Independent).

When presented with specific concepts that might be included in the President's reform

plan, majorities find them all "good ideas" and only one-fifth or less say they are "bad

ideas." The most popular proposal is to allow Medicare and other government health

plan administrators the right to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices (78% say

it's a good idea), and this is favored regardless of political affiliation. Requiring all

children be covered by insurance is considered a good idea by 69% of adults, including

majorities of all parties (87% Democrat, 53% Republican and 62% Independent).

Even three-fifths (60%) think a national health insurance exchange is a good idea.

A national health insurance exchange would offer a range of private insurance options

as well as a new public plan that will allow individuals and small businesses to buy

affordable health care coverage. This is considered a step toward universal coverage,

which has not been appealing in the past, especially with Republicans. Now, half of

Republicans (49%) and Independents (56%) and three-fourths (73%) of Democrats react

favorably to this reform.

Centrist Democrats or Independent

Comments

Categories