Dear AOTA Members,
This week will be a very critical week in terms of healthcare reform. The cost of doing nothing is too great. In Illinois, 10,000 will die in the next ten years and nation wide 295,000 will die without health care reform. If you would like to see what healthcare reform will do for your individual state, please visit Family's USA at http://www.familiesusa.org/. The heathcare reform improves access, affordiability, and does improve quality by creating competition in the heathcare market and eliminating the Medicare gap.
As a member of AOTA, I along with many other members have written members to Congress about including occupational therapy in the healthcare package, given speeches about the importance of OT and how the profession's philosophy is inextricably tied to the bill, and donated to AOTPAC. However, I think it is essential that members of AOTA not only fight for our inclusion in the bill but for the bill itself. The bill itself allows 31 million access to care which means prevention of unnecessary disability and improved quality of life for American families (as occupational therapists- this is what we strive to help our clients achieve..improved quality of life and successful participation in their daily occupations).
Please, call your members of Congress today and let them know that you support healthcare reform. AOTA provides an easy way to look up your Congressman or vist the Illinois General Assemby homepage at http://www.ilga.gov/ and look under legislative look up for your Congressman. If you already know who your congressman are, you can just call 1-888-801-4426 and ask for senator/representaive's line in Washington. I'm currently working with Campaign for Better Health Care, and we are currently targeting Daniel Lipinski as he has decided to change his vote to "no". If you could call him in Washington at 1-202-225-5701 and let him know you support health care reform it could really push him to change his vote to Yes (this is a federal bill-it will effect you even if you are not in his district).
Again, please continue to fight for healthcare reform to improve accessibility, affordibility, and quality to 31 million Americans. I'm sure that all occupational therapists went into the profession to help people. Calling your members of Congress today will be an easy way to make a large difference for the millions that we serve. The healthcare reform bill was marginally passed and your support is critical at this time.
"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in healthcare is the most shocking and inhumane,” Martin Luther King.
Sincerely,
Tracy Schnabel, OTR/L
Dear AOTA Members, PLEASE do NOT support healthcare reform. This so-called legislation is a pack of lies, written under the cloakness of night, twisted and wrangled in ways never before demonstrated by our elected officials. President Obama and his cadre of insolent and arrogant leaders are unable to pass this legislation without stooping to the lowest depths of non-democratic parliamentary procedures. These procedures are not even supported by the U.S. Constitution.
This is the WORST piece of legislation ever written and it will do almost NOTHING to increase access or effectiveness of American healthcare. The little bit of increased access which MAY occur will come at a substantial cost, both financial and otherwise.
If you believe socialism is better than capitalism then please support this bill. However, if you think that capitalism, which has built this GREAT country, offers better choice and access than Government healthcare, then please stop this stupid legislation in its tracks.
Changes are needed in healthcare, but not in the form being promoted and jammed down our throats.
Healthcare is not an inalienable right!
VOTE NO ON REFORM!
Ron Carson MHS, OT
From: tschna2 <bounce-tschna2@aota.org>Sent: 3/16/2010 1:11:47 PM
Here is a link to a document prepared by the Kaiser Family Foundation that gives a good summary of what is being proposed:
http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/housesenatebill_final.pdf
I support Congress passing the Senate bill as it our only option at this point. I believe failing to act will be more costly financially and tragic for those Americans without health care or who have pre-existing conditions.
The proposed changes do not reflect socialism and actually provide subsidies that will in effect benefit profit making health care organizations including insurers over the long-term.
The parliamentarian methods for moving this legislation forward (in the absence of any true bipartisan effort) are absolutely appropriate and not in conflict with our Constitution in any way. While it is unfortunate that a true "up or down" vote cannot be held without threat of a filibuster (another unfortunate parliamentary tactic) use of procedural approaches are reflective of accepted democratic procedures.
Brent Braveman, PhD., OTR/L, FAOTA
No body REALLY knows what is being proposed. Between reconciliation and the Slaughter rule, it is only a guessing game as to what the final bill will look like.
There are other options to IMPROVE American healthcare other than this cost-prohibitive, behemoth of a concoction.
Government takeover of the 1/6 of the US Economy is socialism. The people at the top of the "food chain", who aren't even subject to this plan, will decide who and when people access healthcare. Look to Canada and Cuba if you want to see how socialized medicine doesn't work.
There has NEVER been a true bipartisan measure. From the get-go, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have worked endlessly to ensure that this measure was crafted without input from Republicans. It was only AFTER they crafted the bill that the sought input. It's like saying here's our bill, what do you have to say about it? That's only half-hearted bipartisanship.
I take great exception that the "pass and deem" measure is constitutional. How can it be within the intention of our founding fathers for individual US Representatives to not be held accountable for passing legislation. The pass and deem measure is a cowardly tactic and everyone on the hill knows it. There is nothing stopping an up or down vote! It's not happening because they don't have the votes. If the dems had the votes, this would already be law! There are not enough votes to pass this legislation so they are trying every possible tactic to pass this bill, even though the majority of US citizens do not support it.
For the pledging a 'transparent' Government, Obama is going to great lengths to make sure we don't know who voted for this bill. Transparent, yea right!
And look at other Government programs and what GREAT job they are doing:
Medicare, broke
Medicaid, broke
USPS, broke
Everyone of these programs lives on borrowed money and time. And they are tiny compared to the healthcare legislation. Who is going to pay for all this GREAT healthcare? How much tax increase is necessary to offset the cost of illegal immigrants and chronically unemployed medical care? We are already in dept beyond recovery and adding this trillion dollar liability will possibly drive the US economy beyond the brink.
When does a US Citizen's right to be free from Government oppression trump the right of someone to have access to free healthcare?
Socialism requires transfer of ownership from private parties to the government. Where is that happening?
Does this legislation propose increased regulation of the health care system? Absolutely it does, but that action is not socialism.
Some argue that increased government regulation is "creeping" toward socialism, but that is debatable in it's own merits. I believe if we are going to call an action "socialistic" in a pejorative sense it should fit the basic economic definition of the term.
The "Slaughter Rule" is a mechanism that has been used by both Republicans and Democrats. Also referred to as the "Deeming Rule" it is essentially what the Representative Assembly does when a Task Group presents a substitute motion. In essence it means "If B assumes A, and we adopt motion B, we also adopt motion A." Granted, in this case it is being used so that Democrats who face challenges in the fall can try and avoid saying they voted for the Senate bill which holds items they are not fond of.........
The process of reconciliation has also been used by both parties when Congress is evenly split or nearly so. The Republicans used the process four times:
The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 1836, 3/26/01] – The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 2, 3/23/03] – Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 [HR 4297, 5/11/06] – The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [H. Con Res. 95, 12/21/05]
The obstacle to what I consider a fair up or down vote (51 votes being a majority) is the filibuster which Republicans have made clear they would use. If the filibuster were removed, Congress would be forced to vote up or down and we (Americans) would more clearly be forced to face that sometimes we are barely in the minority, but that means we don't get our way.
Personally I am in favor of doing away with all of these procedural tactics but of course for both parties. In a country such as ours where we are so evenly divided on so many critical issues what would it be like to have vigorous and honest debate of ideas and then have to accept that sometimes we won't get our way? We might have to spend more time attacking ideas and expend less effort attacking those that disagree with us.................
From: Brent Braveman, PhD, OTR/L, FAOTA <bounce-brentbraveman@aota.org>Sent: 3/17/2010 12:10:50 PM
Dear Ron, I agree with you. This piece of legislation is socialism all the way. We can take a look at government run agencies: UPS, Public School, Medicare, Medicaid. We hear the results of the bargaining, and buying of votes, at our cost. Did we agree to that?
What does our government not understand about: not getting the votes they want? The people are peacefully, not approving, their present plan.
Not only do I not want it, I don't feel our government should be elite, and not be given the same option we are. We did elect them. We do pay their salary.
Here's the expansion of Medicaid written into it. This bill has Medicaid expansion rules that will cost Texas up to $20 billion annually, and with a $15 billion shortfall to deal with in 2011, there is no money for this. This is only one state. ----- Debbie McGee
"If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as a sorry state as the souls who live under tyranny."— Thomas Jefferson
Diana Ramos, COTA
Is the Medicare system that so many older Amercians and so many occupational therapists charge for services socialism? How about Medicaid?
As is asked in the article linked below, the Veterans Affairs systems is owned by the government, run by the government but nobody complains about that being socialist?
By the way, I favor a single payer, socialist form of health care, so calling health care reform "socialist" is not an insult, it unfortunately is a misnomer. The word actually means something but let's not worry about that. Let's just say it angrily as if it were an insult and hope nobody notices. Or perhaps you would favor the new Republican definition of socialism?
Socialism, n. 1. Anything that the Obama administration does. See also Marxism.
Some concrete information about the "cost" of the health care reform and the extent to which coverage will be increased:
"Comprehensive health care reform will cost the federal government $940 billion over a ten-year period, but will increase revenue and cut other costs by a greater amount, leading to a reduction of $130 billion in the federal deficit over the same period, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. It will cut the deficit by $1.2 trillion over the next ten years.
The source said it also extends Medicare's solvency by at least 9 years and reduces the rate of its growth by 1.4 percent, while closing the doughnut hole for seniors, meaning there will no longer be a gap in coverage of medication. The CBO also estimated it would extend coverage to 32 million additional people.
In response to Ron & Diana,
Thank you for your thoughts on health care reform. It appears that your concerns are the following: legislation was done in secret, it's non-democratic, the bill is not bi-partisan, there are other options, the cost of healthcare reform to the public, the failure of medicaid/medicare, and fear of socialtic goverment.
Legislation was done in secret. Actually, the bill is available online- just google it.
It's non-democratic.
As Brent Bravemen stated earlier, the process is democratic. The vote passed through Congress but the use of a fillibuster was used to stop progress from being made. A majority vote is now being used, just as it was used by the last administration to provide tax cuts to the wealthy, to get healthcare done.
The bill is not a bipartisan effort.
The bill actually was done through a compromise approproach with input from Republicans. Two of the core concepts of reform, the state insurance exchanges and the individual mandate, were originally Republican proposals. Democrats also accepted more than half of the Republican amendments (161 of 287) that were offered during debate in the Senate HELP Committee, and more than half of the Republican amendments (121 out of 239) that were offered during the House tri-committee mark-up.
Also did you see the health care summit? President Obama listened to the ideas of Republicans during the seven-hour televised health care summit with Republican and Democratic leaders. Key ideas raised during that summit have been integrated into the bill that is moving forward in Congress (including malpractice reform, health savings accounts, and measures to prevent fraud in Medicaid and Medicare).
Please Check out an article in the Chicago Tribune by Ray Lahood (Republican Congressman from Peoria), "Why Republican should vote for Health Care Reform."
There are other options.
Attempting to cut health care costs through piecemeal reform steps would be like squeezing a balloon—costs would just pop up elsewhere. Trying to cut federal costs without comprehensive reform would simply shift those costs to businesses and individuals.
Cost of healthcare reform
Healthcare Reform is Socialist
Health care reform promotes and enhances consumer choice and control, which is very democratic. The reform bill creates a system of 50 state exchanges that would allow a very broad range of private insurance plans to be offered, giving people the ability to shop for the plan that best meets their needs. Most importantly, people will have meaningful choice in the exchanges because they will have help with the cost of purchasing coverage and therefore will not be forced to simply look for the least expensive plan. In today’s market, a plan that covers few benefits but has high cost-sharing often isn’t anyone’s first choice.
Lastly, it deeply saddens me that you do not feel healthcare is an inalienable right. I believe everyone has a right to care who needs it. Furthermore, I think this bill is well aligned with our core values including: altruism, equality, freedom, justice, and dignity. I can make several arguments for healthcare reform including logistical/economical/medical, but I think the strongest is ethical. Please, take the time to go the Campaign for Better Healthcare's website and read the stories of the people who need reform. http://www.cbhconline.org/index.html
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the legislation passed by the Senate–the basis for reform–will cut the federal deficit by $132 billion over 10 years and by much more after that.
Bankruptcy of Medicare/Medicaid
This is true Medicare/Medicaid are going bankrupt. This is why there needs to be change now, before it goes completely bankrupt in the next ten years. The American Medical Association support this bill as physicians believe that it will improve quality of care to patients by fixing the broken Medicare physician payment system that harms seniors access to care and improves physician reimbursement which will be cut by 40% in the next ten years if change is not made.
Ms. Smith,
With respect intended, while I agree that we should frame our posts to avoid "bickering" and that posts should be carefully reviewed to written in a polite and respectful manner (hoping mine in this thread have been written as such) I do think that a discussion of health care reform is appropriate in a "general" discussion forum.
There are many posts on topics on a site such as this that I have no interest in reading, so I either don't open them or quickly "vote with my feet" by closing the thread and not returning.
The health care reform legislation currently before Congress may be the single most important event that will impact the profession of occupational therapy this decade. I believe that to achieve our Centennial Vision and become a "powerful" profession the general occupational therapy practitioner needs to become a sophisticated consumer of political discourse. To that end I encourage more debate on health policy and legislation, both in terms of its direct impact on the profession and the society in which we live.
Thanks for considering my viewpoint.
Brent Braveman
From: barbara smith <bounce-barbyotr@aota.org> Sent: 3/17/2010 3:29:56 PM
From: Brent Braveman, PhD, OTR/L, FAOTA <bounce-brentbraveman@aota.org> Sent: 3/17/2010 12:10:50 PM
Tracy,
Last Friday March 12, my position as a COTA was eliminated. During this process the V.P. stated the reason for my job loss was the 22.8% reduction in Medicare reimbursements the company must deal with soon.
Steve