If government-run health care is an evil, socialist plot, why do 55 Republican Congress members participate?

As of October, 151 Congressmen had "government-controlled" health care insurance plans. That's close to 30% of our elected officials. 55 Republicans on that list have steadfastly opposed other Americans getting the public option, like the one they have chosen.

Here's the list.

If they think government controlled health-care is a problem, why do they continue to trust it for themselves and their families?

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, journalist, and political analyst who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

Tom Hayes: Has Senator Lieberman jumped the shark?

Shining the light on those who game the system and talk out of both sides of their mouth has given some in Congress fits. D.C. has never liked public attention to focus on influence peddling: the facts about campaign contributions, or how congressional spouses (such as Mrs. Joe Lieberman) earn money from sitting on boards of directors, or working for lobbying firms, etc., never sit well with constituents. But in times of economic crisis the appearance of financial improprieties becomes even more politically dangerous.

In a year when "lobbyist" may replace "liberal" as the dreaded L-word, the wise politician draws no attention to any connections with the corporate shills who infest Congress like a biblical plague. Any elected official whose spouse is paid to represent or advise an unpopular special interest should observe that simple caution even more carefully. Naive voters may not understand that this is simply how business is done in their corrupt capital these days -- so it is best to say nothing and hope that nobody asks too many questions.

~Joe Conason
In bed with Big Pharma
September 2006

What connects the Senator to GlaxoSmithKline, and lobbying firms APCO and Hill & Knowlton? What's the effect of drawing so much attention to the undue influence big insurance companies have via contributions to his campaign and PACs? Will his threatened defection on the public option cost him his precious committee chairmanship?

For-profit insurance is unique to the U.S. health care system. No other developed country has a profit motive warping the payment of health care. Activists have had more influence than predicted, and information flowing from "new media" sites that aren't being influenced by relying on profits from advertisers with an agenda is shining a lot of unwelcome light on influence peddling in D.C.

Will the changes move from health insurance reform to ethics reform?  Remember, both were on Obama's agenda when he was elected a year ago...

Read more...

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, journalist, and political analyst who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

Health care isn't the problem - health insurance costs are

Some people who say the government "can't do anything efficiently" also now say a public insurance system competes with private insurers unfairly – these fear it will out-compete big business? CEOs earning tens of millions of dollars per year fear free market competition?

The cost control problem is that the idea of controlling health care costs is contrary to earning insurance company profits - what incentive there is only applies to their own costs of operation. When the cost of health services go up the big insurance companies just make a cut of a larger price-tag.

That's why U.S. health care costs have tripled the rate of inflation for three decades. Insurers have no incentive to moderate health care costs, only how much they profit -- so naturally they insure the healthiest, and make it hard to get help with pre-existing and/or expensive conditions.

Sometimes they even countermand medical decisions. Bureaucrats worrying about their bottom line can over-rule a licensed doctor's prescriptions and treatment orders to protect the corporate profits.

There's no real choice when an individual enters the health insurance market. They bundle in with the group at work, which has a very narrow range of choices - and every insurance company makes about the same markup on the same basic services, so the costs (concealed in overly complex plans) aren't all that different.

The government's role in fixing the system for our mutual benefit is to model efficiency - at least until big insurers learn to deliver their services efficiently - to compete.

read more | digg story