ASEVoIS: Health Care, Redux

One of the first articles we wrote back in the early days of WDR was an article on health care in this country. Back then, I was arguing that instead of wasting our time talking past each other on immigration (when a real solution would have merely involved a simple compromise), we should spend our time discussing a real problem like health care. It only took us two years to reach this point, but it looks like we've finally awakened to the problem.

Except what we have on our hands is not an argument, but the usual demagoguery and the like. This doesn't even speak to the issue that's been dominant in the media portrayal, the raucous nature of the town halls. To tell you the truth, besides the usual fear of having crazy-ass bastards bringing loaded guns to Presidential events, I don't have a problem with these events as a whole. I don't buy into the "Astroturf" arguments advanced by the left--these are no repeats of the Brooks Brothers riot for the most part, but instead the actions of a (mostly uninformed) citizenry. By attempting to deride the nature of these protests, the debate ends up being nothing but a series of ad hominem attacks that obscure the genuine issues on the table.

We understand the nature of the reforms being discussed at this point, with the main focus being on the public option. We've heard the potential benefits--lower costs, get uninsured on the rolls, free lollipops. So instead we should take the time to address some of the concerns.


Why the public option? We're a republic, we need a free-market solution! Free-markets!

Sure, free-markets are great. In theory, they're just about the best thing we have, and are a brilliant instrument. The problem is, even as it stands now, health care as a free market is broken. Free markets depend on the exchange of information and choice, and what we have now is neither.

Think about this: how much choice do you as a recipient of insurance have in choosing your provider? If you're like me and million of others, you have absolutely none. I just use the one that my school has signed with, and I don't even get dental. You're also probably with whatever provider your employer has made a deal, and they probably did that without any input from you. Or, to take another approach, if you live in some states, there's a 94% chance you're signed with BlueCross or some other conglomerate. In other words, there is no "choice" in this system.

Or think about the possibility of checking out your own insurance provider. You're not going to have any idea how effective they are with their coverage, because it often requires personal experience with the exact crisis--it may be great for that workplace back injury, but you just might get fucked over when that tumor on your pancreas develops. If you were going to make an actual choice, you need information--and it is in scarce supply.

But free-markets are efficient
Our free-market is so efficient that we spend more per-capita on health care than any other nation, yet our health care is only 37th best. Our health care is so efficient that we spend 16% of our GDP on it, while France at number 1 spends 9% (and insures all of their citizens). Clearly, the greatest benefit of the free market has not borne fruit when it comes to health care.

Consider the overhead costs of public versus private plans. Whereas overhead in private insurance (money that is sent to administrators and the like) can reach as high as 30%, the same costs in Medicare and other government health programs are in the low single digits. So much for "government waste".

I don't want someone choosing my doctor/plan/operation for me
Have you ever dealt with an insurance company? That is EXACTLY what already happens--you can only see their doctors, go to their hospitals, etc. And god forbid you ever had to negotiate with an insurance company over whether or not your operation could be covered or not.

The point is that for the most part, these decisions are ALREADY BEING MADE for you. The only thing that will change is that the person that may do this for you will be wearing a different suit, provided of course you end up with the same coverage (and considering the number of people that are currently underinsured, this is unlikely).

Get the government out of my Medicare!
Sir, put down the ether.



DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS DEATH PANELS
This has been discussed rationally and in-depth by everyone. But people, if you're getting your facts from Sarah Palin, noted language-expert, well...you need a new source.

We need to cut costs
YES. That is exactly what we need to do, thank you. That's why the public option is so integral to the process--by using the government's negotiating power of millions of citizens, better prices can be negotiated, and help force downward pressure on ever-escalating costs. And with an aging population, this is more of an issue than ever before.

So this is an issue that both Republicans and Democrats agree on. Yet the Republicans can only attack the Democrats, and just continue to spout CUT COSTS. Of course, if you asked them about their plans and what costs they would cut, they shut the fuck up and just offer a two-page outline of a "plan". They also create DEATH PANEL rumors. See guys, I'd love to hear your solution, but you have to offer something.

What about tort reform?
Getting at the lawyers is always a good idea. But you know, this is really not the answer to the problem. And this is not just because I'm working to becoming a lawyer myself--hell, I don't think I could stomach doing things like personal injury.

The thing is, medical malpractice suits represent such a minimal percent of total health care costs that reform would barely make any dent on the process. And if you look at this article, it also is explained how despite those extremely large settlements you hear about, it's NOT the driving factor behind rising costs. Of course, those cases represent but the smallest minority of potential malpractice claims, and usually involve a catastrophic injury of some sort--putting a cap on losing your legs at $250,000 sounds pretty ridiculous.

Tort reform advocates also ignore the fact that while there are cases of frivolous lawsuits, these are usually pretty rare. They also ignore how the cards are stacked against the plaintiff in these cases--the reliance on expert medical testimony, the influence of doctor panels, etc., are all heavily biased in favor of the defendant. So when these cases do succeed, there's usually clear and convincing evidence, and many unsuccessful cases may in fact be the result of gross negligence. So yeah, tort reform is not the answer.


Have you read the 1200 page bill
There is no bill. There are multiple bills--one House bill, and probably around four Senate bills. Nothing is final yet, so it's stupid to get in a tizzy over half-made sausage. And for the record, only about a quarter of that 1200 page bill is anything but boilerplate.

Obama is a Nazi Kenyan Marxist Alien!
Who let Lyndon LaRouche into this forum?

Besides, all you people who are apparently so concerned about the Constitution, they should be mad with Obama for other things. I'm not sure what the Constitution said about health care (Ed. Note: it says nothing), but it does say a lot about rights to a trial and use of executive power. Jesus people, read more Glenn Greenwald and get angrier about Obama's preventive detention policy and his Justice Department's attempts to expand the use of the state's secrets privilege. Oh wait, I forgot, this only concerns "fereners," so you don't give a shit.

We are not Canada! We are not France!
True enough. But it is amazing when you have people like Daryl Issa and Jack Kingston, both Republicans, talk about the efficiencies of the French Health Care system (see last week's Real Time with Bill Maher), yet deride the proposed reforms. These reforms are only halfway approximations of those models, yet this is taking the wrong approach. Amazing.

Hopefully this helps answer some of the questions you've had. If it doesn't, I don't know, look it up some place that Glenn Beck won't look into--that'd probably be a good start.

One man, in a race against time...

...will risk it all to learn the TRUTH.


Movies are fun. What can be even more fun is watching previews, especially if the actual movie blows it out the ass. Last night I went to see the box office sensation Superbad, and I had a lot of fun with the previews (and the movie itself was awesome).

One in particular was for National Treasure 2: Book Of Secrets. Yes, a second one. Now it was about what I expected until they mentioned the "Presidential Book of Secrets." I figured "Hey, this is some attempt to entertain and make money." I had no idea that they would bring up something with some historical value. WOW!

Those who are confused have obviously not studied their US history. If you had, you would know that there is a leather bound book of presidential secrets. It's in the White House and only the privileged get to know about it. I learned about it when I spoke to a congressional panel about the environmental and economic impacts of increasing Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (something, by the way, that they did not understand at all). As a special guest, I was given they VIP tour of the Capitol and the White House. To make a long story slightly shorter, I read some passages of this tome.

What I tell you now may, and probably should shock you. If I should go missing, you'll know who did it. Read at your own risk. Oh, and I found this when I searched "national treasure book of secrets" on Google. See that at your own risk too.


John F. Kennedy

This secret should put to rest all of the crazy assassination conspiracy bullshit. The fact is that Kennedy himself was behind the assassination. Confused? It turns out that Kennedy didn't have much time left on this Earth due to several ailments. Instead of leaving office and dying outside the public eye, Kennedy decided he would be best remembered if his death was a national tragedy with all sorts of confusing elements. "People will make all sorts of films about me and I'll live forever." Well put, Sir.


William J. Clinton

Former President Clinton killed people before he was president. You may be saying "so wait - those idiots of the right wing were right?" No, they aren't. They say that Clinton had acquaintances of his killed. Clinton was too smart to actually do that. Instead, Clinton was responsible for the Zodiac murders in the Bay Area in the 1970s. The spelling errors in the letters were used as a red herring. Seems to have worked, hasn't it?


Warren G. Harding

Harding had a child with his mistress. Oh wait, that's not actually a secret.


Chester A. Arthur

President Arthur had a pants fetish. Most saw it as being some sort of obsessive compulsive thing, but it wasn't. The man had a sinister lust for pants.


Calvin Coolidge

Gay.


Ronald Reagan

He actually hated that damn monkey.


Benjamin Franklin

Not President. Still, he wrote that he boned Martha Washington. No wonder George wasn't smiling...


James Madison and James Monroe

Actually the same person.


George H.W. Bush

Loves gangsta rap.


Abraham Lincoln

Actually built the house he was born in. Also built the first time machine. Turns out that going back in time actually does change the future.


Thomas Jefferson

Had a Mexican kid, too. Wild nights in Cabo.




There's more, but I don't think it would be wise to keep going. I've said too much already...

Revolution Fulfilled? The Reuinification of Rage (I)

I am finally getting around to writing about the defining event of my summer. It would have made sense to have written this out as soon as I witnessed the concert (and "witness" seems to be the appropriate term), but I am not one for following "sense". So what we have here is a haphazard attempt to collect some thoughts and impressions of probably one of the landmarks of my music career.

Part 1 of 2: Why I Give A Crap

Rage Against the Machine is a difficult band to fully capture and efficiently summarize. They are defined by their contradictions--from their political stances that they take while being supported by a major label that's a small division of an enormous corporation, to their music that turns the conventions of genres on their head but can also be reduced to a simplistic formula (pentatonic riff + rapped lyrics + toss in some weird guitar noise = Rage hit). But only the most jaded hipster (or perhaps cynical critic) would call them boring.


They were also a dominant influence on my adolescence, putting me firmly in the "rock" camp while my friends would move into the "rap" camp. Rage was the first band I would become a superfan of, and would mark my foray into harder music. I was enthralled by Tom's guitar chicanery and intrigued by Zack's rantings, and would listen obsessively for hours. Over the years I would find subtleties within the Rage dynamic, from Tim's jazz influence to Brad's rhythmic counterpoint that ran the gamut from hip-hop beats to hardcore. I appreciated the nuances found in the different eras of Rage--each album had its own distinctive style, meaning that it was easy to identify from what album a particular sound came. Evil Empire was always the favorite, not only because of its place as my first Rage album, but because of the maturity of Zack's flow and the creativity in the different musical styles by the rest of the band.


So of course when I learned of the breakup of Rage that one morning in 2000, I was practically heartbroken. I would never be able to hear new music from my favorite band, nor see my favorite band in person. The second part was especially hard on me. Rage was well-known for their incendiary live show, and I would never get the chance to see for myself.

But I moved on. My musical tastes further developed. I would later move on to other devotions, first with Radiohead, then later (and to a much greater extent) with Pearl Jam. Actually, anyone who would meet me these days would notice my fandom of Pearl Jam more than anything else. These days, Rage barely even registers, relegated to a backburner in my mind, brought out every so often as almost a nostalgia trip. The fervor fades.

Spring of 2007 changed things however. There were rumors of a Rage reunion, which were quickly confirmed. I think my heart literally stopped for a full two seconds once I read the news. In fact, it may have saved my life. It then became my mission to figure out a way to fulfill my childhood goal of seeing my musical heroes in person. And in an epic struggle that lasted around two weeks, we found out that they would play a handful of dates on the West Coast; and after sitting at my computer for a couple of minutes, I was able to procure tickets for myself and the rest of the WDR crew (who coincidentally happen to be my best friends--sounds pretty conspiratorial to me). And thus began our journey into the shithole that is the SoCal desert.



Enough with the foreplay. Tomorrow is the actual fucking review.