eNewsletter

Wisconsin Clean Elections Coalition

Promoting fair elections for all parties and candidates

eNewsletter #36

March 5, 2007

This is a periodic newsletter on election and health care reform. If you wish not to receive it please unsubscribe at the bottom and accept my apologies for the intrusion.
.

In this issue:

1) Action Item: Health Care

2) Campaign Reform

3) Misdirected on HSAs

4) Making a Mockery of Reform

5) Tidbits

6) Give me a Break!

7) Book recommendations

8) Contact Information

9) Removal instructions
.

Health Care

ACTION ITEM: Green Bay, March 8th

Who?     Wisconsin Senate Committee on Health and Human Services
What?    Public Hearing
When?   Thursday March 8th starting at 4:00pm
Where? Aging and Disability Resource Center of Brown County
               300 South Adams Street, Green Bay, 54301

Call the Legislative Hotline weekdays before 4:30 at 1-800-362-9472
and leave a message for your state senator and state representative.

Talking Points to Consider for Legislative Hearings
on Wisconsin Health Care Reform

Compelling stories about your own experiences or about someone you
know have great value at a public hearing. Tell a story, if you have
one, and tell our legislators why they need to make meaningful reforms
that will reduce all the money that is wasted in our present system.

If you favor the Wisconsin Health Security Plan, tell the legislators
why that plan is different from the other two proposals:

- Wisconsin Health Security Plan (WHSP) will cover all Wisconsin
residents regardless of their age, employment or health status–even
people with pre-existing conditions.

- WHSP will provide all necessary care including the services of
doctors, dentists and other licensed health care professionals;
hospital and emergency care; clinic and office visits; prescription
drugs; long-term care; and comprehensive mental health services.

- WHSP will allow us to choose our own primary health care doctor.

- WHSP will not charge co-pays or deductibles. Such payments
discourage people from seeking timely help that would prevent them
from developing a serious illness.

- WHSP will save millions of dollars by reducing insurance company
administrative costs and provider paperwork, and by abandoning
means-testing for public programs like Medicaid and BadgerCare.

- Under WHSP, all employers will pay a health tax based on the number
of their employees, just like they do now for Social Security and
Medicare. Most employers will pay less than they do now but some who
don't provide any benefits now will pay more.

- Under WHSP, all residents who pay income taxes will pay a health tax
based on their income. Most residents will pay less than they do now
for co-pays and deductibles.

By Jan Gregoire Coombs, Madison, author of "The Rise and Fall of HMOs: An American Health Care Revolution" - (ISBN: 0299202402)

See this excellent Health Care WrapUp by Ezra Klein at http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/2005/04/health_care_wra.html that covers several countries' systems, including the much-feared Canadian system and the #1 rated French system, which is a public-private system (a Medicare-for-all system with some very useful twists, as spelled out in our eNewsletter #35).

NY Times coverage

Most Support U.S. Guarantee of Health Care

A majority of Americans say the federal government should guarantee health insurance to every American, especially children, and are willing to pay higher taxes to do it, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

While the war in Iraq remains the overarching issue in the early stages of the 2008 campaign, access to affordable health care is at the top of the public's domestic agenda, ranked far more important than immigration, cutting taxes or promoting traditional values.

Only 24 percent said they were satisfied with President Bush's handling of the health insurance issue, despite his recent initiatives, and 62 percent said the Democrats were more likely to improve the health care system.

U.S. HEALTH CARE SYSTEM NEEDS....

Minor changes
8%
Fundamental changes
54%
To be completely rebuilt
36%

SHOULD GOVERNMENT GUARANTEE HEALTH INSURANCE FOR ALL?

Yes
64%
No
27%

WHICH IS MORE SERIOUS?

Providing health insurance for all
65%
Keeping health care costs down
31%

PARTY THAT WOULD IMPROVE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

Democrats
62%
Republicans
19%

See complete article HERE and video at http://tinyurl.com/2x5asr and http://tinyurl.com/2kymxr

Complete results HERE

So it's up to the Democrats? I think they can do it, but will they? And if the R's stand in the way? Well, turnover time again in 2008!

But we have to be careful of political games. For example, the Dems could attach poison pills that make the bill untenable by all, and force the R's to block it. We will be monitoring this closely. Not to say we don't trust either party, but ......

In a private conversation with a state senator, he said he didn't sign on to SB51 because he felt the lack of co-pays and deductibles would drive costs through the roof. This is a common misconception. I wrote him the following:

"I have serious concerns about the lack of co-pays and deductibles in Mark's bill too, but for different reasons than yours. The main one is that legislators are going to see it as a public giveaway rather than for what it really is. You could amend co-pays into the bill and I'd support it just to get it passed, but in time you'll find that they cost more money than they save. Studies have shown that they deter care until that care is far more expensive to treat or becomes untreatable, so they have a long-term negative cost value. Some mothers even go without their blood pressure meds to save money, resulting in a costly stroke or death."

A health care solution everybody can love

By Jack E. Lohman

Here we go again. Health care is at the forefront and three state plans to choose from. Let's compromise on a workable and fair solution, because people are really dying for us to get this done.

According to the World Health Organization France is ranked #1 in health care. Better outcomes and lower costs, all with a public-private system and public-private funding. So let’s steal some ideas.

Let's establish our own state-run Medicare-for-all system, which is 20% co-pay or optional Gap insurance. We'll provide 100% vouchers to those under the poverty level and a 50% voucher if under twice the poverty level. Throw in 100% relief when a family is hit with a catastrophic illness, and let's develop a reasonable end-of-life solution (ie, automatic no-code on people over 90 unless the family is able and agrees to absorb future costs). Just 5% of the population consumes 70% of our health care, and most of that is by us old geezers.

Let's mitigate the overbilling and fraud by retraining those displaced from the insurance industry to a Medicare oversight commission. Even let private insurers bid on that since they will no longer benefit from the current inefficiencies. Let's have medical courts to lower tort abuses and excessive costs of defensive medicine, and give any punitive damages to the health care fund rather than to the attorneys and patients who have already been compensated.

I'd keep an option like Medicare Advantage. Even though it costs 12.5% more than Medicare, it gives patient’s other choices and private insurers a role. The private insurers can even bid on the administrative contracts.

The fraud in nursing homes and home health agencies must be eliminated and prosecuted, and we should pass a law that requires employees to be educated on the whistle-blower statutes and rewards. Let the employees provide the oversight, though with such a law I expect the owners to clean up their act fast.

Reimbursements in Medicare (or our version of it) should be increased to ensure top pay for good doctors. State sponsored rebates of health care educational costs should go to all resident students who finish in the top 10% of their class, providing they agree to a two-year state internship.
We also need a patient database for transparency of physician utilization, best practices, practice variations, medication conflicts, and etc, with patient names kept secure unless released by the patient for travel purposes. That software is already available, free, from the VA.

I don't like co-pays and deductibles, but it’s the only way to achieve political acceptance. Eliminating them is not a liberal giveaway, and in time we'll find that they cost more money than they save. Studies already show that they deter care until that care is more expensive to treat or becomes untreatable, so they have a long-term negative cost value. Some mothers even go without their blood pressure meds to save money, resulting in a costly stroke or death. We can do better.

What we have is not working and those standing in the way of change should be sidelined. This is the most business friendly and public friendly solution available, and even the insurance industry wins something here. It would reduce the maze of physician and hospital paperwork, and substantially reduce our excessive administrative costs. For the same dollars we spend caring for 85% of the population today, we could care for 100%.

Though initially we’d need the employers’ help in transitioning – say, with a payroll tax – we should phase them out over five years and make it 100% taxpayer funded. As it is employers just add their costs to their product price and we reimburse them at the cash register. We don’t need these middlemen because they don’t really reduce our costs, and by making them more profitable, more jobs would move to Wisconsin and fewer will leave. At least until other states catch on to us.

-- Lohman is a retired business owner from Colgate, author of "Politicians - Owned and Operated by Corporate America" and founder of http://www.ThrowTheRascalsOut.org. He can be reached at jelohman@gmail.com.

Cisco Health Management - “Measuring the benefits of online health management” - January 2007 - A survey

See: http://austin.illuminas-global.com/cisco_health_management.htm

ACTION ITEM: Here's a cigarette tax that even smokers can like. Doyle wants to increase cigarette taxes by $1.25 per pack to (1) help insure 185,000 of 250,000 uninsured residents, and (2) send some of it back to smokers in the form of smoking cessation assistance. This is not just a fund-raising tactic. It is to slow the rate of new children smokers and to increase the rate that current smokers quit, and the smoking cessation assistance will help current smokers. It is also a public health issue, and it will help reduce health care costs and deaths in the future.

Register your support (or objection) by contacting your state senator and assembly person today. See:

Wisconsin State Assembly pages: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/leginfo/contact/legislatorslist.aspx?house=assembly

Wisconsin State Senator pages: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/leginfo/contact/legislatorslist.aspx?house=senate

Medicare scammers use billing to snare unsuspecting victims

And here's even more on Medicare Fraud

Campaign Reform

Just Say Yes:
Take the Pledge

Democracy 21 Calls on Presidential Candidates to Join Senators Obama and McCain and Pledge to Accept General Election Public Financing if Nominated and if their Major Party Opponent Agrees To Do the Same

Yesterday Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and John McCain (R-AZ) pledged that they would accept public financing and agree to spending limits for the 2008 presidential general election if they won their party's nomination and if their major party opponent also agrees to use the general election public financing system..... ''It is now time for the other presidential candidates to 'Just Say Yes.'''

The following is a list of Democratic and Republican presidential candidates who should ''Just Say Yes'' and ''Take The Pledge'':

Democratic Presidential Candidates

Senator Joseph Biden
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
Senator Chris Dodd
Former Senator John Edwards
Former Senator Mike Gravel
Representative Dennis Kucinich
Governor Bill Richardson

Republican Presidential Candidates

Senator Sam Brownback
Former Governor James Gilmore
Former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani
Former Governor Mike Huckabee
Representative Duncan Hunter
Former Governor Mitt Romney
Representative Tom Tancredo
Former Governor Tommy Thompson

See Democracy 21 at www.democracy21.org.

From the Concord Coalition has just released a new issue brief looking at the Presidents budget proposal for 2008. The President aims to balance the budget by 2012, how does his budget plan to do it? How is this budget different from those of past years? Find out in: The President’s FY 2008 Budget: Same Priorities in a New Environment.

The Concord Coalition does a great job tracking government spending, but as a Libertarian think tank they don't seem to understand what causes that spending, and they steadfastly oppose getting the money out of politics. Here they show Medicare spending decreasing by 1% (even with more Boomers signing up), and defense spending increasing by 3%. There is but one effect and one solution: The effect is reduced services to the elderly and the poor so more tax cuts can be given to wealthy contributors. The solution is that the elderly and the poor simply must start giving more campaign contributions than do the defense contractors!

Latest Data From www.CTJ.org Shows Over Two Trillion Spent this Decade on Tax Cuts;

Majority Goes to Richest One Percent

Citizens for Tax Justice has released the latest data showing the cost and distribution of the Bush tax cuts enacted through 2006. The projected total cost of the tax cuts from 2001 through 2010 is either $2.4 billion or $2.6 billion, depending on whether or not Congress chooses to extend temporary higher exemptions from the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The top one percent of taxpayers would receive 53 percent of the benefits of the tax breaks in 2010 under the President's budget proposal (which does not include extending AMT exemptions). Extending AMT relief through the end of the decade would cost an additional $278 billion.

Misdirected on HSAs

Clyde Winter, one of our readers, shared this letter that he received from his assembly representative.

> Thank you for contacting Senator ............'s office to express
> your support for Senate Bill 51 which would allow for the provision of
> universal health care in our state. We appreciate you letting us know
> of your interest in such legislation.

> As I researched Senate Bill 51, I noted only 18 out of a possible 132
> legislators actually co-sponsored this particular bill. Likely, there
> is concern regarding the overall cost associated with this particular
> plan. While there are numerous health care proposals currently under
> review in the State Legislature, I see Senator ........... is a supporter
> of Assembly Bill 47 and Senate Bill 18 which provides for health
> savings accounts and empowers individuals to determine for themselves
> the type of health care services they prefer to receive. If you would
> like more information about these companion bills, please feel free to
> access the following links:

> http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2007/data/AB47hst.html - Assembly Bill 47
> http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2007/data/SB18hst.html - Senate Bill 18

Are your representatives co-sponsoring these bills?

As I looked at the co-sponsors I found that my Republican representatives were co-sponsors!!!

So I wrote this letter to Senator Darling and another to Sue Jeskewitz....

Dear Senator Darling;

I see that you are a co-sponsor of Senate Bill 18, the bill to give tax credits to Health Savings Accounts.

The banks, credit card companies and bankruptcy attorneys will have a field day if this passes. If the bill also mandated HSAs for all state legislators, perhaps I could be okay with it. If it’s good enough for the people it should be good enough for state legislators as well.

But it will be bad in any case, and I do hope you reconsider this disastrous approach. Corporations will use this as an opportunity to transfer their health risk to employees, causing another downward spiral for the state.

AB94/SB51 is the right plan, and I do hope you give serious thought to what’s in the best interest of your constituents.

Sincerely
Jack Lohman

Darling and Jeskewitz are Republicans, of course, so I expect them to support the private interests that help fund their party. Actually, I expect some Democrats to do the same. But this is just another public rip-off that we don't need and that will delay real reform.

And of course the Miller/Benedict bill has not developed a lot of steam yet, not because of its cost, but because it will reduce the insurance company role in health care!

Imagine that.

Making a Mockery of Reform

Wednesday, February 28, 2007
by Jim Hightower

Gosh, that was a refreshing respite that congress took from corruption, wasn't it?

The first thing the new Democratic-controlled congress did in January was to pass long-overdue curbs in lobbyist-paid junkets, jet-travel, tickets to sports events, and such. Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared: This will be "the most ethical congress in history."

That pledge didn't even last the month of January, however, as lobbyists and lawmakers quickly found the loophole in the law. While it's true that influence peddlers can no longer fly a congress critter on a corporate jet to a private party at the Super Bowl – lobbyists can pay $5,000 each into the lawmakers' political committees to jet them down to the Super Bowl blowout.

So, with the glow of reformitis still on their cheeks, members of congress have been staging all sorts of creative events for lobbyists to pay for and attend, thus continuing the pay-to-schmooze corruption that we were told the new law banned. Let's see, for $5,000, a lobbyist could hang out at Disney World with Sen. Mel Martinez, or go snowmobiling in Montana with Sen. Max Baucus. Also, Rep. Mary Bono let lobbyists join her at a Who concert for $2,500, or, for the same sum, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones spent quality time with lobbyists for a "Manicures and Muffins" Morning event at a Washington nail salon.

My favorite is Rep. Eric Cantor. Put $2,500 in his pocket, and you're entitled to join him for coffee four times this spring at a Capitol Hill Starbucks. Golly Eric, what do you charge for a real breakfast?

Still, the special interests are happy to pay the price – as one puts it, "I have to have some personal contact to be a lobbyist."

This is Jim Hightower saying... This is why tinkering around the edges of lobbying reform won't work. To stop the corruption for good, we must have publically-financed elections so congress critters don't need lobbyists' cash.

Sources: "Congress Finds Ways of Avoiding Lobbyist Limits," The New York Times, February 10, 2007.

Listen to Jim at http://www.jimhightower.com/node/6059

Looks again like it's the Dem's turn to play games.

Tidbits

On Microsoft Office 2007: If an earlier version is working for you, wait! In Word 2007, I have yet to find the File/Save As function. It's probably somewhere, but the File command is gone and its functions are buried elsewhere. Why? "Change" was probably expected if they were going to charge additional dollars for 2007. Obviously, if you are starting anew, this is the way to go. Otherwise, Don't do it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Gonna buy a Mac? If you are new to computers, it's a good buy. But plan to convert to their Leopard Operating System when it releases probably in the next 60 days or so. If you are an old-time PC user, like me, you might find the change frustrating. I plan to "play" with my new MacBook Pro laptop until Leopard comes out, then install Microsoft's Vista as a dual boot option, and then run my tried-and-true PC applications on it. Perhaps if I had started with the Mac I'd do it differently.

If you have a Mac, the new Airport Extreme Wireless Router is nice, but it doesn't play well with PC networks. The built-in USB port allows easy networking of your printer or external backup drive, on a Mac, but on my PC network I had to have the Mac access the printer on the PC network.

On Vista, I'm fairly pleased with that update, but remember, it is likely going to require a new computer. But I think the added security is going to be worth it. A new graphics card (to run Windows Movie Maker) is likely going to drive you into a new mother board. You might just as well buy a new computer. Like the Mac decision, if you don't have to do it soon, wait 6-12 months before upgrading.

Give me a Break!

Three friends from the local congregation were asked, "When you're in your casket, and friends and congregation members are mourning over you, what would you like them to say?"

Artie said, "I would like them to say I was a wonderful husband, a fine spiritual leader, and a great family man."

Merle commented, "I would like them to say I was a wonderful teacher and servant of God who made a huge difference in peoples lives."

Don said, "I'd like them to say, 'Look! He's moving!'"

Forgive me, but I really do try to keep my wife out of the driver's seat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbY0Jh9_RJ8&feature=Favorites&page=2&t=t&f=b

And for you Soccer fans http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBP1tw518PI&feature=Favorites&page=4&t=t&f=b

UNDERSTANDING WOMEN
(A MAN'S PERSPECTIVE)

I know I'm not going to understand women.
I'll never understand how you can take boiling hot wax,
pour it onto your upper thigh, rip the hair out by the root,
and still be afraid of a spider.

The cop got out of his car and the kid who was stopped for speeding rolled down his window. "I've been waiting for you all day," the cop said. The kid replied, "Yeah, well I got here as fast as I could." When the cop finally stopped laughing, he sent the kid on his way without a ticket.

Book Recommendations

See other reviews on Amazon.com

Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy; (Paperback)
by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson (ISBN: 0300119755)

Amazon Reviewer: Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson have written a distinctly unusual book. Political scientists don't often write books that take sides in political arguments, and when they do, they usually don't do any better at it than common or garden pundits. It's hard to combine the attention to detail and to careful argument that academics are supposed to have with a passionate concern for the results of the fight. Off Center pulls off both. On the one hand, it is very clearly the work of people who have thought carefully and hard about how politics works. There's a depth of analysis here that's completely absent from the common or garden partisan bestseller-wannabe. But on the other, it doesn't pull its punches. Hacker and Pierson have no compunctions in arguing that the current Republican hegemony is dangerous, and needs to be rolled back.

(snip)

Lohman: I found the intro and first chapter boring, but from chapter two on it was rather insightful.

8
Contact information

Lohman is a retired business owner that volunteers’ time on the issues of Election reform and Universal health care -

Contact: Jack E. Lohman
jelohman@gmail.com or jelohman@charter.net
Phone 414-477-8686 (cell)
www.ThrowTheRascalsOut.org
www.WiCleanElections.org

www.MoneyedPoliticians.com (my book: Politicians - Owned and Operated by Corporate America)

www.SmokeFreeDining.net (A searchable restaurant database)

Wisconsin State Assembly pages: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/leginfo/contact/legislatorslist.aspx?house=assembly

Wisconsin State Senator pages: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/leginfo/contact/legislatorslist.aspx?house=senate

9
Removal Instructions

To leave the list, send a blank email to jelohman@gmail.com with “Remove eNewsletter” in the subject line

To subscribe, send a blank email to jelohman@gmail.com with “Subscribe eNewsletter” in the subject line

The system is automatic and you must send from the email address you want added or removed.

If either fails please notify me directly at jelohman@gmail.com. Thanks.

Disclosure: I am a center-right Republican that voted for Bush twice (though at this point I wish I could have a do-over). But the Republicans look worse here because they (are/were) in power and the party blocking reform. Next year it may be the Democrats taking center stage. Were I to have a political choice it would be for a strong third-party reform candidate in all seats. I do not like our very costly and ineffective duopoly. Jack Lohman

See Lohman's complete disclosure HERE.