Think about this: William W. McGuire, the CEO of United Health Group, a giant among giants in the health insurance industry, made $297 million over the last 5 years, an average of $59 million a year (source: Forbes; website http://www.forbes.com/lists). Primary care physicians average about $149,000 a year.
Let's break that down into manageable numbers. Daily income for the physician, whose job it is to heal the sick: about $408. Daily income for the CEO, whose job it is to ensure that his company makes a profit: about $16,273. (How does one SPEND sixteen thousand dollars a day, while holding down a job?)
Our system of for-profit healthcare insurers and pharmaceutical companies is fundamentally flawed. Despite all the goozly TV ads, these companies' mission is profit, not service. To continue to exist, they have to provide a profit to their shareholders; this "need" for profit is in direct conflict with the stated mission to provide the best health care to the insured. AND, to continue to reap such unreasonable profits, they need to prevent competition in the form of a public health insurance option. This they are attempting in several ways: by generous donations to legislators whose cooperation they hope to purchase, and through preposterous rumors they hope the American public is too dumb to question. We shall see.
I'm especially amused by the latest scare tactic: rumors of "death panels" (a completely false claim, not surprisingly). No death panel could be as efficient as the current army of Big Insurance employees whose job it is to find loopholes in coverage, i.e. to figure out how to not provide what their customers have paid for.
Consider the case of Robin Batin, a 59 year old nurse diagnosed in 2008 with an aggressive form of breast cancer, and scheduled for an immediate double mastectomy. Days before her surgery was due, Blue Cross/Blue Shield rescinded her coverage based on a review of her medical records that showed "dermatitis" (an inflammation of the skin, or acne, in her case). They contended that this was early cancer and, thus, a pre-existing condition that invalidated her insurance. They refused to pay, and she waited months for the surgery, by which time the tumor had doubled in size. This practice, known as "recission", is widespread; it guarantees hefty profits for the companies benefitting from the suffering of those they "serve".
United Health Group's profits more than doubled in the second quarter of 2009. Their website lists revenue for 2008 at $81 billion. What's wrong with this picture?
Don't be fooled by the arguments against a public option in health care reform. It is not "socialism". Medicare is one version of public insurance that is highly efficient, with (by conservative estimates) less than 1/3 the administrative costs of private insurance. Other "socialized" programs include: public schools, libraries, postal delivery, roads, water, building inspection, fire and police protection. It only makes sense for us to pool our resources to purchase necessary services. A public option, pooling resources while cutting waste, is the only approach that makes sense.
Nor is a public option a death knell for private insurance. Witness bottled water, Fed Ex, UPS, bookstores. Private insurance companies that provide a good product at a good price should do just fine. Those that provide $16,000 a day to their CEO's might need to worry. . .
Follow the money. It's obvious who stands to gain from obstructing real reform: the for-profit health care industry, and legislators the industry is bribing to act against the interests of the people they claim to represent. The most outspoken anti-reform legislators are also recipients of millions in campaign donations from Big Health. More than coincidence?
Let's break that down into manageable numbers. Daily income for the physician, whose job it is to heal the sick: about $408. Daily income for the CEO, whose job it is to ensure that his company makes a profit: about $16,273. (How does one SPEND sixteen thousand dollars a day, while holding down a job?)
Our system of for-profit healthcare insurers and pharmaceutical companies is fundamentally flawed. Despite all the goozly TV ads, these companies' mission is profit, not service. To continue to exist, they have to provide a profit to their shareholders; this "need" for profit is in direct conflict with the stated mission to provide the best health care to the insured. AND, to continue to reap such unreasonable profits, they need to prevent competition in the form of a public health insurance option. This they are attempting in several ways: by generous donations to legislators whose cooperation they hope to purchase, and through preposterous rumors they hope the American public is too dumb to question. We shall see.
I'm especially amused by the latest scare tactic: rumors of "death panels" (a completely false claim, not surprisingly). No death panel could be as efficient as the current army of Big Insurance employees whose job it is to find loopholes in coverage, i.e. to figure out how to not provide what their customers have paid for.
Consider the case of Robin Batin, a 59 year old nurse diagnosed in 2008 with an aggressive form of breast cancer, and scheduled for an immediate double mastectomy. Days before her surgery was due, Blue Cross/Blue Shield rescinded her coverage based on a review of her medical records that showed "dermatitis" (an inflammation of the skin, or acne, in her case). They contended that this was early cancer and, thus, a pre-existing condition that invalidated her insurance. They refused to pay, and she waited months for the surgery, by which time the tumor had doubled in size. This practice, known as "recission", is widespread; it guarantees hefty profits for the companies benefitting from the suffering of those they "serve".
United Health Group's profits more than doubled in the second quarter of 2009. Their website lists revenue for 2008 at $81 billion. What's wrong with this picture?
Don't be fooled by the arguments against a public option in health care reform. It is not "socialism". Medicare is one version of public insurance that is highly efficient, with (by conservative estimates) less than 1/3 the administrative costs of private insurance. Other "socialized" programs include: public schools, libraries, postal delivery, roads, water, building inspection, fire and police protection. It only makes sense for us to pool our resources to purchase necessary services. A public option, pooling resources while cutting waste, is the only approach that makes sense.
Nor is a public option a death knell for private insurance. Witness bottled water, Fed Ex, UPS, bookstores. Private insurance companies that provide a good product at a good price should do just fine. Those that provide $16,000 a day to their CEO's might need to worry. . .
Follow the money. It's obvious who stands to gain from obstructing real reform: the for-profit health care industry, and legislators the industry is bribing to act against the interests of the people they claim to represent. The most outspoken anti-reform legislators are also recipients of millions in campaign donations from Big Health. More than coincidence?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Ann Nichols
Frank Michels
Jimmy Zuma
Maureen J Andrade
dramaqueen09
Writer to the Stars
Salon.com
Comments
Why can't we have a public accounting of campaign funds?!
"democracy doesn't work" i've heard often. it saves having to stir yourself. but what you've got doesn't work, and it will go on not working until you put 'by the people' with 'of the people' and 'for the people.'
until then, you've got the government you deserve.
It sickens me. Ironically.
Rated!