My Opposition to Don Young's Position on Health Care Refrom

by: Jeanette

Sun Aug 02, 2009 at 20:16:36 PM AKDT

Our lone representative in the U.S. House has chosen once again to ignore the concerns of his constituency. He recently sent me a letter expressing his views on national health care reform stating in no uncertain terms that he does not support H.R. 3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. Mr. Young cited as his reason the following:

The President's proposed program will create a public option that functions very similarly to the current Medicare program, and for us Alaskans that spells disaster. As it stands today, most doctors are not taking new Medicare patients in Anchorage because even though we have a standardized reimbursement rate, the cost of practicing medicine is higher in this state than in the Lower 48. Doctors are finding that taking on too many Medicare patients will bankrupt their practices. Implementing a public option modeled on Medicare will actually decrease Alaskans' access to health care.

This statement by Mr. Young simply is not true. H.R. 3200 seeks to impose regulations on the private health insurance industry that would vastly improve coverage for Americans. Without it health insurance companies will continue to raise insurance premiums, and cut or limit what medical treatment.

For a summary of H.R. 3200, please see below:

SUMMARY AS OF:
7/14/2009--Introduced.
America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - Sets forth provisions governing health insurance plans and issuers, including: (1) exempting grandfathered health insurance coverage from requirements of this Act; (2) prohibiting preexisting condition exclusions; (3) providing for guaranteed coverage to all individuals and employers and automatic renewal of coverage; (4) prohibiting premium variances, except for reasons of age, area, or family enrollment; and (5) prohibiting rescission of health insurance coverage without clear and convincing evidence of fraud.

Requires qualified health benefits plans to provide essential benefits. Prohibits an essential benefits package from imposing any annual or lifetime coverage limits. Lists required covered services, including hospitalization, prescription drugs, mental health services, preventive services, maternity care, and children's dental, vision, and hearing services and equipment. Limits annual out-of-pocket expenses to $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family.

Establishes the Health Choices Administration as an independent agency to be headed by a Health Choices Commissioner. Establishes the Health Insurance Exchange within the Health Choices Administration in order to provide individuals and employers access to health insurance coverage choices, including a public health insurance option. Requires the Commissioner to: (1) contract with entities to offer health benefit plans through the Exchange to eligible individuals; and (2) establish a risk-pooling mechanism for Exchange-participating health plans.

Provides for an affordability premium credit and an affordability cost-sharing credit for low-income individuals and families participating in the Exchange.

Requires employers to offer health benefits coverage to employees and make specified contributions towards such coverage or make contributions to the Exchange for employees obtaining coverage through the Exchange. Exempts businesses with payrolls below $250,000 from such requirement.

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a tax on: (1) an individual without coverage under a health benefits plan; and (2) an employer that fails to satisfy health coverage participation requirements for an employee. Imposes a surtax on individual modified adjusted gross income exceeding $350,000.

Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to revise provisions relating to payment, coverage, and access, including to: (1) reduce payments to hospitals to account for excess readmissions; (2) limit cost-sharing for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries; (3) reduce the coverage gap under Medicare Part D (Voluntary Prescription Drug Benefit Program); (4) provide for increased payment for primary health care services; and (5) prohibit cost-sharing for covered preventive services.

Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to provide for the development of quality measures for the delivery of health care services in the United States.

Establishes a Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research within the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, financed by a tax on accident and health insurance policies, to conduct and support health care services effectiveness research.

Sets forth provisions to reduce health care fraud.

Amends title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act to: (1) expand Medicaid eligibility for low-income individuals and families; (2) require coverage of additional preventive services; and (3) increase payments for primary care services.

Sets forth provisions relating to the health workforce, including: (1) addressing health care workforce needs through loan repayment and training; (2) establishing the Public Health Workforce Corps; (3) addressing health care workforce diversity; and (4) establishing the Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment.

Sets forth provisions to: (1) provide for prevention and wellness activities; (2) establish the Center for Quality Improvement; (3) establish the position of the Assistant Secretary for Health Information; (4) revise the 340B drug discount program (a program limiting the cost of covered outpatient drugs to certain federal grantees); (5) establish a school-based health care program; and (6) establish a national medical device registry.

Mr. Young futher states in his letter:

H.R. 3200, the mainframe for the health care bill, creates 53 new government boards, bureaucracies, commissions, and programs and adds $1.2 trillion in new federal spending over the next ten years. Nearly five million jobs could be lost as a result of increased taxes with small businesses being particularly hit hard. Unemployment is already at 9.5%; how much higher will it go when small businesses are forced to choose between paying new government fines and keeping an employee on the payroll? This legislation misses the mark completely.

Figures posted by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) refute this statement. The link to the CBO report follows:

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=332

H.R. 3200 will cost taxpayers money, but the percentages and figures Mr. Young states in his letter are not factual, and he provides no references to back them up.  Yes, new government position will be created, but the wording of the legislation provides concise governance for their actions.  Those actions will serve to protect Americans from the unscrupulous dealings of "for profit" health insurance companies.  They will serve to protect our medical providers from the burden of unreasonable premiums for malpractice insurance.  

At the end of his letter, Mr. Young asked me to support two other pieces of legislation before the House that he consponsored, H.R. 2516 (Medical Rights Act of 2009) and H.R. 3218 (Improving Health Care in America Act of 2009).
I read both bills through and through. It wasn't hard, because neither bill is very lengthly.  Mr. Young accuses H.R. 3200 of being a poor attempt at placing a band aid on a deep wound.  If that is true, then the effect of his two bills could be likened to your mother kissing your boo boo.

H.R. 3218 does little more than provide a small tax credit to insurance policy holders. The maximum credit is $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 to couples filing jointly. That is it. No reform. It will not cost the tax payers much, but then neither will it provide much benefit. I pay $3200 in premiums each year. I might be grateful for the return, but then there is the $2500 deductible and the 50% of ten thousand that I have to pay before I am reimbursed 100% for medical expenses. I will probably appreciate it even less when I can't get reimbursed for a medical procedure, and the insurance company keeps me jumping through hoops until I am bankrupt or dead.

While H.R. 3218 can be considered a pathetic attempt to convince Americans that compassionate conservatives have our best interests at heart, H.R. 2516 is a blatant attempt to outright forestall any attempt by the Federal government to reform health care.  Here is a excerpt from the bill:  

(a) In General- Subject to subsection (b), no Federal funds shall be used to permit any Federal officer or employee to exercise any supervision or control over--
(1) the practice of medicine, the practice of other health care professions, or the manner in which health care services are provided;
(2) the provision, by a physician or a health care practitioner, of advice to a patient about the patient's health status or recommended treatment for a condition or disease;
(3) the selection, tenure, or compensation of any officer, employee, or contractor of any institution, business, non-Federal agency, or individual providing health care services; or
(4) the administration or operation of any such institution, business, non-Federal agency, or individual, with respect to the provision of health care services to a patient.

Because such a bill would absolutely hamstring the government in administering current government run programs, section (c) of the bill sets forth a provision exempting existing programs such as the VA, DOD, Indian Health, and Public Health. In summary, if H.R. 2516 were to pass, the government have no authority to regulate private health in any way, shape, form or fashion. The link to the full text of this bill is below:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/...

Representative Young's alternate to H.R. 3200 is unacceptable. H.R. 3218 does absolutely nothing to reform private, "for profit" health insurance, while H.R. 2516 is an outright to hamper if not outright block government from regulating the health insurance industry.

I wish to express my condolences to Mr. Young on the loss of his wife. His loss makes it very difficult for me to post this blog out of respect for his grief, but I cannot let Mr. Young's letter go uncontested. Please write, call and email Mr. Young and demand that he support true reform for health care in Alaska.    

Are we talking about 2010 already? Research 2000 poll...and the results are scary

by: Celtic Diva

Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 18:15:52 PM AKST

REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES:

Senate

Murkowski 31
Palin 55

I've had a number of Progressive folks tell me they believe that Gov. Palin wouldn't have a chance against Murkowski.  The results for the Senate primary reaffirm what I have feared.

Markos states what he believes to be the reasons:

Palin would crush Daddy's Little Girl in a primary. Remember, Lisa Murkowski was appointed to the seat by her father when he was elected to his ill-fated term as governor. Palin's successful primary challenge to father Murkowski was aided in great part by the backlash to that nepotism. The voters passed a ballot initiative stripping the governor of the power to make such appointments in the future. So given a credible Republican challenger, Murkowski melts.

He's got it half-right.

I've paid attention to the noises from the Republican side about this issue for years.  I remember that Lisa was a pro-choice centrist (in my opinion, many viewed her as Liberal) when she was on the Anchorage Assembly Alaska Legislature.  That was a HUGE part of the anger at Murkowski from Republicans when he appointed her to the position.  They felt betrayed that Lisa was thrust upon them and many have never looked upon her as "one of them."  While the nepotism issue resonated with Dems and Non-partisan folks, that just added fuel to the fire with the Republicans.

In the battle between these two candidates, Sarah Palin OWNS the Republican "base" in Alaska.

GENERAL ELECTION:

Governor

Palin (R) 55
Knowles (D) 38

They used Knowles as a "stand-in" for a "strong Democrat" but I don't think using someone who lost to her once already is a good indicator.  I would love to see a poll with Walt Monegan's name in there to see what would happen.  Whoever runs against Palin will need to be able to pull Rural Alaska and I think he's got a good chance.  I would also throw another name in here as one of the few folks I think has a good shot against her...Diane Benson.

Re-elect Palin?
Reelect 51
Consider someone else 33
Replace 16

I look at these numbers and have some hope, since 49% would either consider someone else or replace her.  However, I don't believe for a minute that Palin is going to run for Governor again.  The only way she can pull off taking all of the trips required to run for President in 2012 will be to get out of the state.  I strongly believe she's going to try for the Senate.

For the rest of the poll on the Senate and House races, click on the above link and check out the diary.  Let me know YOUR opinions on the poll!

Alaska poll workers and voters speak about turnout (PLEASE share your story!)

by: Celtic Diva

Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:05:59 AM AKST

By: Melissa Fouse on November 6, 2008
at 2:04 pm

Shannyn - I was a poll watcher for this election, a volunteer (for the Ds) and spent 15 hours Tuesday watching for any election fraud or anomaly in House District 26 (Anchorage, west side). Turnout was low - of the 1200 registered voters in that precinct, about 550 voted. Another 66 voted questioned ballots. Every ballot was properly handled; the touch-screen machine was not even used. In the middle of the afternoon, when the results of the Presidential election were announced (I suspect, we were in a news blackout in the polling place) the trickle of voters slowed even more. Of the over 300 identified D supporters on the list I had in front of me, not even 100 voted. I know there were some 200 volunteers doing what I was doing and most likely more from the Rs.

It stinks that so few people voted, but in my small precinct, it was all on the up and up.

By: mike on November 6, 2008
at 7:02 pm

Our polling place was DEAD QUIET when we voted at 6:30 pm. There were MUCH bigger crowds in the evening for at least the last 2 elections.

I hate to say it but I think once it was clear Obama won, many Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents just didn't bother to show up. My guess is a lot of people only really cared about the Obama race, and didn't care so much about our local elections.

By: Carrie on November 6, 2008
at 11:25 pm

I did exit polls on Tuesday. There was a huge line at my precinct prior to the polls opening at 7am. After about 7:30am it was DEAD the rest of the day. This is the third presidental election I have done exit polls for, and it was very clear to me that turnout was WAY down. In fact, the officials at my site were very perplexed.

Get over your conspiracy theorys and get a life. Would someone be crying foul if the Senate and House races had gone the the other way? Doubtful. For goodness sake, even the pollsters were suprprised at the low turnout. Ask the officials who were there - the voters didn't show!!!

People called into Cary Carrigan's show this morning recounting pretty much the same experience.  While it sounds like polls in Homer were busy, poll watchers, poll workers and voters in Anchorage have recounted the same story; it was busy first thing in the morning and dead the rest of the day.

This completely jives with my husband's voting experience just after 6:00 PM in Anchorage District 24 -- there were two people voting when he walked in.  When he was done, it was so empty he said you could practically hear the wind whistling in the rafters.

PLEASE recount your Alaska voting experiences either here on the blog or by emailing me at celticdivaak@yahoo.com.

Election Night at the Egan Center!

by: Celtic Diva

Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 09:55:26 AM AKST

Morrigan and the neighbor kids get a picture with a rather "wooden" President-elect Obama.

The Obama team makes their entrance.

The kids sign the board where all the Obama voters/supporters have signed.

Trill from Fox 4 and (where we know her from) Alaska Theater of Youth -- Morrigan and I love her!

Alaska Communication's Director for the Obama Campaign, Nate Osburn.  I don't know how I got this picture as he was smiling all night!

(more below the fold)

Have Ted Stevens and Don Young won? **UPDATED**

by: Celtic Diva

Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 01:53:45 AM AKST

Last precincts in  - Mark won them, new numbers are: Begich 103,337 (47%) to  Stevens 106,594 (48%) 100% in. Estimate is 60 - 75 thousand yet to count. We are told 15% are from Juneau which I am trying to confirm. We won 64% of the vote in Juneau.

There are still 50,000 votes left uncounted:

...the Division (of Elections) is doing things differently this year when it comes to counting absentee ballots.

Normally, some fraction of absentee ballots would be included in the election night numbers...

... the roughly 40,000 absentee ballots cast so far won't be included in the official count until later.
That's to double check the ballots and make sure no one is double-dipping.

About 23,000 people have voted early, according to the Division. Of those ballots, about 14,000 will appear in tonight's numbers. (Generally, if you're an early voter who cast a ballot before Thursday, you're vote will likely be included tonight.)

Add thousands of questioned ballots to the uncertainty, and any close races will be very much in the air tonight.

As of right now, Ted is only ahead by 3,352 and Don Young is ahead by about 14,000.  

Considering how hard the Obama and Begich Campaigns were working to promote early voting, not even 14,000 is enough of a lead to declare victory before 50,000 votes are counted.

**UPDATED** Smear Against Ethan Berkowitz perpetrated by local printer...for Don Young's Campaign!

by: Celtic Diva

Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 00:26:50 AM AKST

Well, at the time, I thought it was interesting that they had chosen District 24 and I figured it happened because wing-nut candidate Uwe Kalenka used the printer involved, Nenana Creative Arts, for his signs.  I thought maybe he was doing Don Young a favor.

However, the tenacious Michelle Meyer took it a step further.  She did the research and discovered that "Nenana Creative Arts" is also DON YOUNG'S campaign printer!

Here's Michelle's Press Release.  The spreadsheets showing the Young connection can be emailed if anyone would like a copy.


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 3, 2008

ALASKANS FOR CLEAN ELECTIONS, A NON-PARTISAN CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM GROUP, IS BEING FRAUDULENTLY LISTED ON DISCLAIMER OF NEGATIVE CANVASSING EFFORT IN ANCHORAGE

(ANCHORAGE)  Over the past weekend, Anchorage residents contacted Alaskans for Clean Elections reporting a flyer hanging on their doors with the disclaimer, "Paid for by Alaskans for Clean Elections".  Alaskans for Clean Elections (ACFE) is a non-partisan campaign finance reform group which sponsored a ballot initiative on the August 2008 primary election. The flyer (see attached file) was not paid for by, nor distributed on behalf of AFCE.   AFCE had no part in, nor does the group participate in partisan campaign activities.

"Alaskans for Clean Elections had nothing to do with this negative, partisan campaigning," said Michelle Meyer, Campaign Manager for Alaskans for Clean Elections. She continued, "In fact, this style of campaigning is exactly why we must reform the current political campaign finance system. We have worked for 18 months to educate Alaskans about the need for reform in our electoral system and we certainly don't want Alaskans to be confused about our organization or its goals."

When asked, multiple canvassers said they were paid by Nenana Creative Arts.  Clean Elections has since learned that Nenana Creative Arts is Don Young's political sign vendor.  

Tim June, Chair of Alaskans for Clean Elections, said today "The blatant dirty politics that is on display is the reason we need Clean Elections for Alaska, and for that matter all elections, including federal."

Sponsors of Alaskans for Clean Elections are exploring all legal options, including the filing of an FEC complaint to investigation violations of federal election laws.  "We wish to stop anyone from using the Clean Elections name on negative literature for this, and future elections," continued June.  

For more information contact Alaskans for Clean Elections at 907-230-5617 or via email at michelle@alaskansforcleanelections.org

Smear Campaign against Ethan Berkowitz perpetrated by local printer Joe Law **UPDATED**

by: Celtic Diva

Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 15:02:52 PM AKST

**UPDATE 2**  Please let me know if there are other Districts besides 23 that got some kind of smear against Ethan.  Other folks and I are very curious.

Yesterday afternoon my daughter ran in the house with the flyer pictured above.  A couple of guys were going around the neighborhood (College Village--Berta Gardner territory) sticking these attempted smears of Alaska At-Large Congressional Candidate Ethan Berkowitz in the front door of each house.

The flyer claims that Ethan Berkowitz accepted donations from Bill Allen of VECO and had a copy of an APOC document to show it.  However the section on that document containing the date was conveniently cut off during the copying process...as if an amateur had done it.  When I searched the APOC site, I found one donation in May of 2000...during Ethan's primary for his house seat.  That's the ONLY donation I found listed in the APOC database from Bill Allen, who also donated to Con Bunde, Loren Leman, Kevin Meyer and many more during the primary and tons more folks during the General Election.

Remember, I said the year was 2000...before much of the corruption with Veco had been perpetrated and before it had come to light even within the Legislative community.

There were many almost-laughable problems with the flyer. However, the bottom of the flyer claimed that it was paid for by "Alaskans for Clean Elections."  That was their biggest mistake as Michelle Meyers was going to be FURIOUS that someone was claiming that she paid for anything like this!  (I would never want her mad at me...she's tenacious!)

So I called her and what a surprise! She was already in my neighborhood looking for the culprit and threatening legal action!


(more below the fold)

Republican Consultant Writes Off Don Young

by: polarbear

Thu Oct 23, 2008 at 16:02:45 PM AKDT

Josh Kraushaar and Reid Wilson, writing for Politico today, found that a current Republican "Goner" List includes the seat of Representative Don Young (R-AK).  

The internal House Republican document warns of a congressional "bloodbath" at the polls. The list shows 58 Republican-held House seats as being 'at risk', and 11 already considered as good as gone. As many as 34 GOP-held seats are in serious jeopardy of swinging to Democrats, the assessment shows.

The author of the report, a consultant to the House Republicans, prioritized the vulnerable seats on a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 being a 'goner.'  Eleven members received a 5, including Representative Don Young.  The ranking means the seat is gone unless "a significant turn of events" changes things in the final two weeks.

Kraushaar and Wilson went on to say:

"With as many as 34 seats considered tossups or expected to flip, the National Republican Congressional Committee is being forced to make painful decisions about resource allocation."

The Republican National Campaign Committee has already cut off advertising funding to several Republican House campaigns it considers hopeless, including the campaigns of Reps. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.), and Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.)  
 

I'm FURIOUS at USA Today!! Does this bode ill for the piece on Good Morning America tomorrow?

by: Celtic Diva

Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 12:36:31 PM AKDT

Co-anchor Kate Snow of "Good Morning America"

I talked about my experiences last week when I had ABC News Good Morning America in my living room for their Alaska segment of "50 States in 50 Days" which they are doing in concert with USA Today.  

While I was a little concerned since they were rather vague regarding why they chose me, I figured this was a "culture" piece (not a lot of detail-just an "overview" of Alaska politics) so I didn't see a reason that it would be a hatchet job.  I had my friend Ron with me and he watched the whole thing.  He thought it went very well so I was somewhat less nervous about how it would turn out.

USA Today published their "50/50" piece on Alaska this morning (the "Good Morning America" piece airs tomorrow morning) and when I read it, I was horrified!

First off, they based their article on comments from alleged "independent" attorney Laura Bowen.  Yet, when I did a simple search on her name, I found that she signed a "Draft Palin for VP" online petition months before she was chosen.  I have strong suspicions that this woman works/volunteers for the McCain Palin Campaign, which would tarnish that "independent" title, wouldn't it?

And that would even be alright, if they spoke to an anti-Palin person to offset that...they didn't.

Anyway, below is the comment I left on the story:

Wow, this was just a bit inaccurate.

First off "independent Laura Bowen" signed a petition to "draft Sarah Palin for VP" LONG before she was picked by McCain. http://www.ipetitions.com/peti...

Maybe not QUITE so independent, huh?

I find it facinating that the Rovian Republican technique of accusing the other guy of what they were doing all along worked with the USA Today reporters.  

You do realize that the McCain Campaign SENT IN PEOPLE FROM OUTSIDE ALASKA to interfere with our state government, correct?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/pal...

You do realize that Alaska State Workers were "instructed" to send any phone calls even breathing Palin's name, not to the state Communications person, but directly to the McCain Campain in Virginia, right?

You understand that the McCain Campaign's "Truth Squad" were the ones smearing people like Walt Monegan, Sen. Hollis French, Investigator Steven Branchflower and a myriad of other folks who "dared" to investigate the Governor and then find that she "abused her power," right?  
http://www.ktuu.com/global/sto...
http://www.divasblueoasis.com/...

You do understand that the only people who were able to stand up to this were folks like Republican Senate President Lyda Green, who is retiring, Representative Les Gara and Senator Bill Wielekowski, who have each received numerous abusive and threatening emails and phone calls, correct?

You do understand that the primary reason the Troopergate Report was released was due to a grassroots effort of Alaskans to try and offset the huge amount of pressure put on the Alaskan Legislative Council by the McCain Campaign to keep the report under wraps, right?  http://alaskansfortruth.blogsp...
http://mudflats.wordpress.com/...

I guess that "independent" Palin-bot Laura Bowen sure fooled you!

I encourage folks to read it and go leave their own comments.

I can only hope that my piece on "Good Morning America" tomorrow doesn't make me want to scream.