I was very disappointed yesterday when at four o'clock p.m., I realized the window installers had a made a mistake that would need to be corrected immediately. I had to wait for them to come and fix the problem.
A good friend of mine, "B, attended the meeting, and has kindly agreed to share with me her notes. In addition to "B"s notes, I also read several news accounts of the Town Hall meeting including this from KTUU, Channel 2.
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/sto...
From what I learned, it doesn't appear that Senator Murkowski's views on health care reform have changed at all since her last town hall in Fairbanks, or from what is published on her website.
http://murkowski.senate.gov/pu...
Senator Murkowski still thinks the "bill" (note the singular form of the word) before Congress is "to costly and ineffective." My friend, who shall be called "B" told me that the Senator did not chose to discuss in any great detail how and why she believes the health care plan is too costly and ineffective. Costly and ineffective compared to what: the current situation with multi-payer, for profit, health insurers who have a 35% (AETNA) and 65% (Blue Cross) control of the health insurance market in Alaska? What is the comparison between the 1 billion spent in Alaska on Medicaid to the $200 billion wasted by the health insurers through "ineffective" administrative costs (AMA 2009 National Health Insurers Report Card). How many years does it take for $200 billion to add up to one trillion?
Apparently, at one point during the meeting, a young woman of high school age, stood up and commented that people didn't seem as inclined to protest the cost of the Iraq war, and no one seems to want to discuss how the debt from the war will impact future generations. And, yet, she noted, people all over the country keep talking about the trillion dollar cost of health care reform and the burden it will place on the youth of America. "B" said the audience gave the young lady a nice round of applause after she finished speaking.
The Senator did remark that "she agrees changes do need to be made" to the current system of health care, but had nothing much to say about the Republicans plan to make those changes. "B" reported that members of the audience made comments both in favor of and against Medicare and Medicaid. Murkowski reiterated her belief that both of these programs are inadequate to meet health care needs of Alaskans. The Senator did not discuss the chronic lack of funding for these programs, and its impact on the ability of the programs to retain the services of medical providers.
Contrast this with the Chamber of Commerce meeting on August 10th. Senator handed out several very well organized fliers at his meeting. They were ripe with facts and figures, as well as credible sources to back them up. Those very same facts, figures and links to helpful informational sites can be found on his website. Senator Murkowski's site contains roughly the same information she presented at the town hall meeting last night and earlier in Fairbanks.
KTUU reported that:
"The forum was pretty tame compared to last week's held by Sen. Mark Begich where a large crowd turned out to shout down the plan. On hand Thursday were people on both sides of the debate."
This does not surprise me in the least. Progressive Alaskans came to hear what the Republicans have to offer the people of America. To effectively listen one must remain quiet. In addition, "B" mentioned that the members of her group chose to spread out in the audience so that they could discuss their opinions with folks who were open to doing so. Contrast this approach with the tactics of "teabaggers" who push to the front of audiences to make their numbers appear larger. Take that you "big oaf."
I truly apologize for not having attended. Despite my criticism of our senior Senator, I refuse to develop a political callous on my liberal heart, and discount the possibility that our presence and voice might not yet convince her to rethink her position. My belief in the power of rational discussion is what compelled me to remain after the press conference earlier this month, and attempt to talk with protesters.
Here is my response to a news article on the Channel 2 website (link provided above), which sums up my feelings about what Senator Murkowski had to say at the Town Hall meeting:
Bottom line - the goal of health care reform is to make health care more available and affordable to the public. Health insurance is merely a means by which we pay our medical debt. For those of us who can afford it, we purchase a health insurance policy that will pay the most toward that debt. We expect insurers to honor their contractual obligations. Mounting evidence says that this is not always the case. Policies have become overly complicated, riddled with exclusions, and patients and medical providers alike are fed up. The primary culprit in the current mess surrounding health care is the multi-payer, for profit, health insurance system. According to the American Medical Association (AMA), "The inefficient and inconsistent claims process adds as much as $200 billion annually to the health-care system." The following link will take you to the AMA website where one can read the all the details of the 2009 National Health Insurers Report Card from which I took the above quote. http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pu... Private health insurers must either bow to stricter regulation and place the needs of the premium holder above those of the shareholder, or move over and let the government find a solution. If the definition of socialism is the unequal redistribution of wealth, than having the profits from my premiums divvied up at the end of the year for redistribution to shareholders of the company qualifies my private insurer as a socialist institution. I invite anyone who doubts that statement to take a look at the year end financial statements for their health insurance company.
I concur with Linda's comment in her earlier blog that republicans have nothing to add to meaningful health care reform. Indeed, they appear to be in the midst of developing new strategies to further delay reform. The basic Republican message is, "Let them eat 0g transfat, low carb, no preservative, organic, low sodium cake!"
To illustrate this final comment, I present this link from last night's Rachael Maddow show. This is just too good.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26...
|
