About 69% of American want the Republicans, including the Republican President, to to do some combination of working with Congressional Democrats or a combination of Democrats and Republicans to improve the plan. The preference for having the Democrats do this as opposed to a combination is about 2:1. People have apparently observed that the Republicans are not capable of coming up with a usable plan.

The Republicans, including the Republican President, seemed to threaten Obamacare a while back, saying that through executive order and cabinet level actions, they should damage the existing Obamacare plan to make it look bad so people want it less. A tad under 80% of Americans oppose this idea. A mere 13% support it.

One of the major changes in the newly proposed plan, which the Republican Congress and President intend to pass into law by Friday, is that states would have more power to ignore parts of the plan or change it. The new survey clearly indicates that Americans are very opposed to this idea, which is the main new feature of this plan. About 62% of Americans want things like preventative services, maternity and pediatric care, prescription drugs, etc to be covered in all states. About 70% want pre-existing conditions covered in all states.

This very negative view of Paul Ryan and Donald Trump’s version of a health insurance reform plan comes at the same time as parallel polling indicates that the Republican President is at this moment the least popular president known to polling science. There were a couple of real doozies in the past, but there is no polling data to show just how much the country disliked those individuals. For all the measured presidents, the current Republican president has the lowest ranking, and not by a small amount.

So, you know what to do. You will have to avoid eating in those establishments. Here is a graphic that lists the currently known offenders:

That is from here.

According to Fat Chick in LA, there are some companies that are “good” (for now). They are:

<ul>

<li>Starbucks</li>

<li>California Pizza Kitchen</li>

<li>PF Changs</li>

<li>T.G.I. Fridays</li></ul>

Click through to FCILA’s tumbler to read the details on the benefits offered by the “good” (for now) companies.

The key phrase here is “continuously insured.”

As pointed out by Jonathan Cohn via Think Progress:

the federal government already forbids insurers from denying coverage to the continuously covered through the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). But the measure has been seen as a failure because “there is no limit on what insurers can charge under HIPAA” and the law does “little to regulate the content of coverage, leaving the door open to insurers to offer bare-bones policies. In addition, HIPAA notice requirements are weak, making it hard for people to know about this protection.”

… the hazzards of sickness … should be provided for through insurance. This should be [charged to] the industries the employer, the employee, and perhaps the people at large … Wherever such standards are not met by given establishments, by given industries, are unprovided for by a legislature, or are balked by unenlightened courts, the workers are in jeopardy, the progressive employer is penalized, and the community pays a heavy cost in lessened efficiency and in misery. What [European country] has done in the way of old age pensions or insurance should be studied by us, and the system adapted to our uses, with whatever modifications are rendered necessary by our different ways of life and habits of thought.

That was Teddy Roosevelt in 1912.

What’s the difference between Teddy Roosevelt’s health care plan and Obama’s health care plan? There is only one important difference. Obama got it done.

Here is the executive summary from the article:

• The primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is dependent on the effective reduction of the major risk factors for CVD, particularly tobacco control and a healthier diet.
• The high-risk approach to prevent CVD typically involves population screening. Those exceeding a risk threshold are then given lifestyle advice and/or tablets to reduce blood cholesterol and blood pressure.
• Evidence suggests this high-risk approach typically widens socioeconomic inequalities. Such inequalities have been reported in screening, healthy diet advice, smoking cessation, statin and anti-hypertensive prescribing, and adherence.
• The alternative approach is population-wide CVD prevention. For example, legislating for smoke-free public spaces, banning dietary transfats, or halving daily dietary salt intake. Such strategies are generally effective and cost-saving; there is also increasing evidence that they can reduce health inequalities.
• We conclude that screening and treating high-risk individuals represents a relatively ineffective CVD prevention approach that typically widens social inequalities.

And, you can click here to read the whole think yourself.

Now, consider the following hypothetical sequence of events.

1) People presume that there are important genetic differences between races, say, pink/white people and brown/black people.

2) Health care disparities cause a significant gap in CVD preventative treatment so that people of higher SES get prevention, people of low SES get heart attacks. This correlates, because of pre-existing SES/Race correlations in wealth and opportunity, to a white/pink vs brown/black dichotomy in frequency of death due to heart attacks.

3) Epidemiological data, interpreted by people who really want to believe in point 1 above, and/or who are not aware of point 2 above, shows a difference in lifespan. Brown/black people tend to wear out and die of heart attacks sooner than pink/white people.

4) Shorter lifespan is associated with relative r-strategy life history parameters (compare, say, squids to whales) … more offspring, shorter gestation, shorter lifespan, having litters instead of singletons, being more aggressive and violent, less investment in costly traits such as intelligence, etc. etc. So, someone, probably someone who really wants to believe in Point 1 above, puts 1 and 1 together and ends up with 11. Brown/black people are more primitive than pink/white people, based on the life history differences combined with other equally bogus data.

Preposterous you say? Indeed.

Two months ago, I fell on the ice, was taken to the hospital in an ambulance, got emergency surgery, and two/three days later was released from the hospital. The paperwork I waas handed on my release indicated that the costs to that point were $20,000 US (all covered). I estimate that this injury will cost, medically speaking only, about another ten grand, so the total cost of this injury is going to be, let’s say, $30,000.

A few weeks later, a tooth crown that I had had repaired several years ago (“This may last six months, one year tops” said the dentist) finally came flying out of my mouth at a random moment. So now, I’m getting that fixed. Associated with the tooth crown falling off of its perch on my lower left mandible was a nasty little mandibular infection.

So the dentist put me on antibiotics and we started the process of figuring out what to do next.

This tooth needs to be fixed with either an implant or a bridge. The raw cost, before insurance, of both procedures totals to about $3,500. So, about one tenth of the knee surgery. But, there is a question about what insurance will cover (they don’t like to cover implants for some reason), so we sent off a request for information along with x-rays to Delta Dental, the insurance company.

Delta Dental screwed up the paper work, so about two weeks went by and we learned nothing, and could not start on the work. So we redid the paperwork, and now another three weeks has gone by, again Delta Dentals’ fault, and not only do we still not know anything, but the infection is back, somewhat worse than it was before.

So now I’m on antibiotics again. The pisser is this: If Delta Dental covers my implant, they still would only cover part of the procedure. If they don’t cover my implant, they will still cover the new crown, because they cover crowns (to 60 percent only). A bridge requires three crowns. So, when you do all the math, the answer we will eventually get from the Delta Dental insurance company … a “yes” or a “no” on the implant … will make a difference of about $800.

A mandibular infection can be a very serious matter. I’ve got an open hole in my jaw where bits and pieces of root canal stuff occasionally falls out into my food. And the dental insurance company can’t handle the paper work to the tune of going on a month and a half of time.

There are certain contrasts that come to mind.

In the paleolithic, I probably would have lived form the knee injury, but only after a long period of painful recovery, and I undoubtedly would have lost the use of my right leg. But my fellow hominids would have brought me bits of mastodon and cooked roots, the occasional kidney from a deer, maye a dead lizzard, and so on. I would live. In fact, I might even have been able to do something useful. But, in the paleolithic, this tooth infection would likely have killed me. These things, eventually, are often fatal in the absence of dentistry and antibiotics.

Yet the surgery costs ten times what the dental work costs. Also, people tend to complain mightily about the cost of dental work. But really, given what you get (you get to live!) it is really a bargain.

And, finally, Delta Dental leaves something to be desired. Listen; If I suck on my tooth I can taste the infection inside my jaw. Thanks Delta Dental. Great work. I’ll bet your fucking CEO never had to wait this long for what amounts to emergency dental work.

I’ll update you later on how it all works out. At the moment, if you have a choice, and one of your choices is Delta Dental, I’d consider the other choice. And let this be a lesson to us all!

Well, duh. People who actually claim that this bill should not become law because it is flawed come in two flavors:

1) Those who are simply against all health care reform and are just blowing this out of one orifice or another. Birthers, teabaggers, Republicans, heatlh care lobbyists, other undesirables.

2) People who have little knowledge of how these things work and just woke up to find that reality is not what they assumed, in their ignorance it to be. Have you ever heard of the EPA and environmental regulation? The “Great Society” and legal protections for disadvantaged groups? The New Deal and banking regulation?

All three of those major shifts if the interrelationship between society and government, all of which progressives look back on and can justifiably claim to be good things, started out as sucky law. This is how it is done. You propose some good law, the yahoos show up and delay, damage, mess with the process until you finally have something that can’t pass. Then you give up.

Then you come back and do it again. And again. And again. And finally, you get the law passed.

Then you have this law that is not what you wanted, but you DO have a bill. You are now, finally, at the table. The basic idea of having laws of some kind dealing with a basic issue … racial discrimination, environmental protection, banking regulation, or people- and health-oriented health care insurance regulation … is then a reality, and further negotiations must start from that point, in stead of the perspective that the notion of reform is alien.

If you look a those early versions for these other, earlier efforts they were much less developed and probably much less effective than the current health care bill is. And to demonstrate that, I give you the recently posted list of ten good things about this bill from Moveon.org:

1. Once reform is fully implemented, over 95% of Americans will have health insurance coverage, including 32 million who are currently uninsured.

1. Health insurance companies will no longer be allowed to deny people coverage because of preexisting conditions–or to drop coverage when people become sick.

2. Just like members of Congress, individuals and small businesses who can’t afford to purchase insurance on their own will be able to pool together and choose from a variety of competing plans with lower premiums.

3. Reform will cut the federal budget deficit by $138 billion over the next ten years, and a whopping $1.2 trillion in the following ten years.

4. Health care will be more affordable for families and small businesses thanks to new tax credits, subsidies, and other assistance–paid for largely by taxing insurance companies, drug companies, and the very wealthiest Americans.

5. Seniors on Medicare will pay less for their prescription drugs because the legislation closes the “donut hole” gap in existing coverage.

6. By reducing health care costs for employers, reform will create or save more than 2.5 million jobs over the next decade.

7. Medicaid will be expanded to offer health insurance coverage to an additional 16 million low-income people.

8. Instead of losing coverage after they leave home or graduate from college, young adults will be able to remain on their families’ insurance plans until age 26.

9. Community health centers would receive an additional $11 billion, doubling the number of patients who can be treated regardless of their insurance or ability to pay.

Harry Reid has a petition for you to sign to help develop this support.

Click Here to Sign

This is what happens when you (and by “you” I mean the insurance industry”) go one step to far in bullying Congress. Even the Republicans turn on you. A little.

Details from Rachel:

… and more …