Dr. Frank Luntz, a top Republican consultant on the language of politics, is warning the GOP that the American people want health-care reform and that lawmakers need to try to avoid directly opposing President Barack Obama.
[….]Here are some suggested arguments for Republicans that Luntz calls “clear winners”:
—“It could lead to the government setting standards of care, instead of doctors who really know what’s best.”
—“It could lead to the government rationing care, making people stand in line and denying treatment like they do in other countries with national healthcare.”
-“President Obama wants to put the Washington bureaucrats in charge of healthcare. I want to put the medical professionals in charge, and I want patients as an equal partner.”
Reader Interactions
90Comments
Comments are closed.
cleek
as opposed to what most of us have now: where we can walk into any doctor’s office, demand any procedure we can think of, and get it paid for, 100% (without having to fight a bureaucracy of any kind). likewise with prescription drugs: any drug we want, paid for 100%.
4tehlulz
Of course, under the current system, the doctor is totally free to order whatever test or treatment at any time, without delay and without worrying about being punished by the private insurance companies.
LOL
Do it Republicans. Refight the 1990s.
Xenos
“It could lead to” is really the most effective way present the argument? This is really a concession.
I am glad to see that Luntz has a handle on reality for once.
NickM
Are people really going to buy this crap yet again? Who really thinks their doctor is the only one calling the shots (no pun intended), and that their insurance company is the one with their best interests at heart, and that there’s no “rationing” right now?
MattF
Sure looks like Republican politicians and consultants don’t know much about how health care actually works in this country.
Question for Luntz: “When was the last time you saw the inside of an urban hospital’s emergency room?”
Aaron
The 2012 Republican presidential ticket is going to be “False Equivalence / Slippery Slope”
“Vote for us or our fascist government will sell your children for drug money”
Kirk Spencer
Some of the framing Luntz wants will resonate with a largish number of people. I think a lot of people who consider themselves Independents now still agree intuitively with Reagan’s line: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.'”
JayDenver
That’s a doctorate in politics not medicine, btw.
El Cid
Yeah, thanks for the analysis, “Dr. Luntz.” This is brilliant insight that I could not get from any AM radio station here in Atlanta yesterday, where every single one repeated the talking point words:
RATIONING…
GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRAT…
HIGHER TAX COSTS…
MAKE DECISIONS INSTEAD OF YOUR DOCTOR…
I wish putzes like Luntz were just more honest and said “FUCK YOU AMERICA.”
Comrade Darkness
—“It could lead to the government setting standards of care, instead of doctors who really know what’s best.”
That’s why we republican politicians thought it entirely our place to give a misleading, ridiculous name to a rare medical procedure and then proceed to make banning it a twenty year long crusade of false information, just because we “don’t want government settings standards of care”.
joe from Lowell
These people are so removed from reality.
People are denied care by bureaucrats RIGHT NOW. Their doctors have their treatment options limited RIGHT NOW.
To an ordinary American, the idea that the person reviewing doctors’ insurance claims could be a public servant tasked with promoting the public good, instead of a corporate functionary who’ll get fired if he approves too many treatments, sounds like a dream come true.
Republicans like Luntz who make this argument remind me of the Soviets showing “The Grapes of Wrath” in movie theaters in the 1930s. They wanted to show the Soviet citizens how terribly people were treated in the capitalist US, but the public’s response was, “Wow, even the poor people have cars? What a country!”
The Grand Panjandrum
I think this thread ties in very neatly with your previous post DougJ. Once again the blogosphere can at least challenge any of the bogus talking points put out by those who do not want this program changed. The ability to respond immediately to the inaccurate framing of a message is probably one of the more effective uses of blogs and social networking.
I spend a lot of time reading news and blogs. On an almost daily basis I hear a counter repeated by the establishment media that I read on a blog first. It’s difficult to know if they are reading the blogs for material but it sure is an interesting coincidence that so many counter arguments seem to pop up almost instantly in the establishment media.
I wonder if Luntz has evaluated the effect of the online community has on these attempts to frame messages? With each passing year it becomes more difficult attempt to frame a message as Luntz seems to think the GOP needs to do.
Aaron
@NickM:
That is the worst part about the whole thing – logic and thinking play no role in it whatsoever. Lakoff and Westen talk about about this and the sinister beauty of Luntz’ arguments is that they don’t stand up to scrutiny because they don’t have to.
The talking points are crafted such that they appeal to emotions. Politics does not work on logic, look at all the stupidity of the Republicans over the past 8 years. They still got 46 million votes in the last election, if I recall correctly. Winning the debate comes down to controlling the way the issues are framed.
MikeJ
This is similar to the argument I use for marriage equality. “Do you want a government bureaucrat to decide who you can and can’t marry?”
I think Luntz is going to learn that too many people in the US have already been screwed by an insurance company. Sure, the government *may* screw things up, but you can then elect new politicians. The private sector is going to do everything they can to make sure you get screwed. That is their goal.
gbear
—“It could lead to the government setting standards of care, instead of
doctors who really know what’s bestbeancounters, who would rather see you die on the street rather than give you a dime ofyour insurance premiumstheir investment capital.”Cat Lady
Too many people are scared about losing their jobs and health insurance to have the scary words work like they would have, even just a year ago. Reality has shifted under the Republicans feet, and they just can’t see it. They’re stuck in the ’90s, and they’re not able to adapt. They don’t have anybody who can articulate a coherent proposal, even if they had one.
RSA
It’s a funny thing–these might or might not be clear winners, but I think they’re losers for people who can’t afford health care. Government setting standards? Standing in line? Washington in charge? For someone who can’t afford to go to the doctor, none of these sound like deal breakers; they sound like potential improvements on the status quo. Of course, these folks aren’t the incredible shrinking Republican base.
kay
I think the GOP approach fails because it doesn’t address the cost of health care. Obama and Hillary started there, at cost. That’s the practical place to start.
Republicans run into a brick wall about 5 minutes into this debate.
They can’t talk about cost.
Everyone already knows they can be and are priced out of health care. It’s already rationed.
They’re acting like the last 10 years didn’t happen. They’re just going to blow right by the expense? I don’t think they can do that.
jrg
Shorter Luntz: “If we pass health care reform, it will be Terri Schiavo all over again.”
os
so basically they arent arguing for a policy they are arguing against a policy. how do they craft legislation for any of those bullet points? so stupid this is another media argument. quotes that have no substance behind them.
Aaron
Some alternative framing (although I am by no means an expert)
– Big insurance companies should not be getting rich off your illness or influencing your doctor’s decisions . . .
– We pay more, for less, than any other country in the world
– Your health is too important to leave up to insurance underwriters. You and your doctor should be the only people involved in medical decisions
They aren’t great, to be sure, but it you accept the framing offered by Luntz the debate is already lost
DougJ
I hope you’re right.
Hunter Gathers
Anybody who believes this crap has definitely never had a legitimate claim denied by their health care provider. The insurance companies have only one person in mind when it comes to paying out claims. I mean, who’s thinking of the shareholders?
Krista
What I would like to know is why the doctors are so damn silent on this. Having worked for an insurance company, I know that most doctors loathe insurance companies. I would imagine that this is even worse in the U.S. It would go a big way towards shifting the debate if the AMA would come out with a statement basically saying that right now, medical decisions and treatment are being greatly hindered by the bottom-line tunnel vision of the private insurance companies, and that having publicly-funded, universal healthcare for basic care (i.e. non-elective stuff) would actually improve the health of all Americans.
Napoleon
@joe from Lowell:
Funny, I recall a time in the 70’s where apparently the Soviets were running some kind of interview with Angela Davis (the woman Michelle Obama was portrayed as on the infamous New Yorker cover, Angela was the VP candidate on the US Communist ticket multiple times) where she said something like she feared that the government and/or other US citizens would rob her of her freedom that she carried a gun. Some reporter had asked some Soviet citizen on the street about it and they said something like “she can’t be all that oppressed if they let a black woman carry a gun”.
Krista
Actually, that one works quite nicely, I’d say.
Or it could be worded as:
“Big insurance companies are interfering with your doctor’s recommendations for care for you and your family, solely in order to keep their shareholders happy.”
There’s an imagery to that — who amongst us can’t visualize a bunch of fat cats sitting around a board table, doing their best to make sure that their shareholders don’t lose one precious penny?
Michael D.
I am from one of those countries that “rations” healthcare and makes me “stand in line” for treatments. Guess what? It. Doesn’t. Happen. I have NEVER stood in line for treatment in Canada. I have NEVER been denied treatment for anything. I spent a month and a half in the hospital when I was 14 and, as far as I know, my doctor NEVER had to call the Prime Minister to see if he could give me an PET scan or bone scan.
As for the “Doctors in charge of healthcare” argument? I was recently prescribed a medication that my health insurance company won’t pay for because it’s an “abused medication.” It happens that it IS an over-prescribed med, but it is one I need and that I have to pay $255 a month for.
In other words, my HEALTH INSURANCE company is apparently, in charge of my health care and is making the decisions on what care I get – not my doctor.
If the United States had universal health care – NOTHING would change – except that everyone would be covered and it would be cheaper – the US spends far more on healthcare than other countries who have universal coverage.
Bootlegger
My uber-con uncle said the other day, in response to one of the inter-family emails that Obama-is-a-socialist, that he has been fighting with his insurance company to get the care he needs AND that we are in danger of government-rationed health care. Contradicting himself in the same breath was not a problem for him, for as I pointed out his contradiction he said “yeah, it will be WORSE if the government does it.”
So the Lutz talking points boil down to: “if you think its bad as a for-profit enterprise, just wait until the Obama socialists get their hands on it.”
cleek
GOP : leave your health care decisions in the hands of insurance companies, they know how to run a market efficiently!
Dems : do you know what the “I” in “AIG” stands for ?
sgwhiteinfla
To be honest with you universal healthcare is going to be a fight where Democrats can use Republican messaging against them. What did DeMint say the other day about “big tent of freedom”? Every time a Democrat talks about the public option they should equate it to freedom. Freedom to make your own choice. Freedom to decide what is best for your family. Freedom to have MORE choices. And they should throw it back at the Republicans and ask them why they don’t want to allow people to have the freedom to choose. It will KILL the conservatives and make their head explode and it will resonate with middle class America. If we aren’t going to have single payer but instead just an option of government run health care what is the GOP so afraid of? ConservaDem Ben Nelson has already said that he is afraid too many people will actually like government run health care and if we frame the message by invoking freedom to choose the GOP will eventually have to admit the same thing and take sides with the insurance industry. I think freedom=public option is a political winner.
Dungheap
Unless you’re a woman and we’re talking about your reproductive health, then I want to be in charge with medical professionals and patients not entering the equation.
ironranger
I don’t think the ‘gubmint telling you what doc you can see’ spin is going to work with the rapidly increasing numbers of americans who:
have no health ins coverage
can’t find ins because of pre-existing condition however minor
have to pay huge deductibles
are being kicked off state sponsored plans due to budget cuts
have insurance but the company won’t pay for treatments the doctor says you need
those who are losing everything they worked for to pay for the expenses from a devastating illness or accident not covered by ins
and it goes on & on.
It seems to me from watching the poll numbers and just listening to my neighbors that fewer & fewer americans are buying the R propaganda on health care, same gender marriage, education & other issues.
Emma Anne
@Krista:
I suspect the AMA doesn’t make this sort of statement because their members won’t stand for it. They do hate insurance companies, certainly, but there are a whole lot of wingnut doctors, and tend to be the older, more influential AMA members.
I knew a doctor who was a great guy, cared about people, empathetic, etc., but when the idea of single payer came up, he just frothed at the mouth. He told stories of medicare abuse and explained that everyone can go to the emergency room so we already have universal health care. Smart guy in a lot of ways, but a huge blind spot.
noncarborundum
Not a winning argument. It stands for “International”.
Krista
Same. The only time I ever had to wait for something was when I had a breast reduction at 17, and that was because it was elective surgery. That’s the only thing I’ve ever heard of people having to wait for — elective stuff.
Mind you, you do hear complaints about people who are in considerable discomfort while they’re waiting for things like hip replacements or knee replacements. And I have heard of people having to wait for MRIs in what they consider to be non-emergency cases.
Our system isn’t perfect, by a long stretch. But, I do know two things: any medical service that I’ve ever needed, I’ve received. And I haven’t had to pay a dime out-of-pocket for any of it. When I have this baby in August, I will be walking out of the hospital with absolutely NO bill.
Yes, my tax dollars have paid for my care, and the care of others (the latter, in more cases, as I’ve always been relatively healthy), but when you think of all of the useless shit that our tax dollars go towards, I think the healthcare of myself and my fellow citizens is really the BEST use of my tax dollars, and I don’t resent it one whit.
OldK
Sounds a lot like Democrats’ position on abortion.
Hunter Gathers
I can’t wait for Obama to go on the telly to make his case for health care reform. I imagine it will go something like this, minus the salty language:
“I watched my mother die because her health care ‘provider’ denied her claim, telling her it was a ‘pre-existing condition’. Essentially, some fat assed piece of shit decided it would be better for his company’s bottom line if my mother died of cancer. Fuck that, fuck him and fuck that insurance company. Under my plan, NO ONE will be denied treatment for life threatening illnesses. The insurance companies and my opponents in Congress, including those within my own party, will raise holy hell over my proposal. They can all go fuck themselves. We have been kicking around the idea of universal health care coverage for well over 30 years now. The can will be kicked no longer. To all of those who stand in the way of health care reform, all i have to say is this: Kiss My Black Ass, Bitches.”
I do not expect this to make it through moderation.
cleek
doh!
:)
that’ll teach me to trust my memory so early in the morning.
T. Scheisskopf
I wouls like to take this time to point out that under HIPAA, the patient, ANY patient, including psychiatric patients, is a full and equal partner in their course of care. The only ones that abrogate that law with any regularity are the health insurance giants and the HMO’s.
Frank Luntz must have a doctorate in uninformed jerkoffery.
His thesis defense must have been delightful.
geg6
As usual, Luntz and the GOP are eons behind the American public on an issue. All the polls show massive support for a public option and universal coverage and complete disdain for the health insurance industry and big pharma. The skeery “government run health care” meme of the 1990s has been drowned out by the number of bankruptcies due to health care costs, the lack of any sort of accountability to consumers displayed by the health insurance industry, the ridiculous cost of pharmaceuticals in the US compared to other industrialized nations, the massive increase in consumer deductibles and contributions, the decrease in the number of full-time workers who have employer-provided coverage, the number of procedures ordered by physicians that are denied or endlessly postponed for review by a cubicle dwelling insurance functionary, and…well, I could go on for hours. Hell, even with my so-called gold-plated, major public university-provided insurance does not cover or covers only a very small portion for many procedures that I require and costs me over a hundred dollars a month. My dental and vision insurance, which cost much, much less, deliver better coverage and service than my regular health insurance.
In the health care debate, as in all other recent partisan debates, the GOP seems stuck in the Reagan/Newt era. When your supposedly best ideas and messaging are refrains of the same ones you used to gain power almost 30 years ago, you have nowhere to go. Because people have moved on and reality has evolved. But then, they don’t believe in evolution and reality has a well-known liberal bias.
They are screwed.
Roger Moore
Fixt.
me
“Hey Luntz, you’re an idiot!”
...now I try to be amused
What it all comes down to is, the slogans of 1993 won’t work because there has been 16 years of reality since then, and reality has a well-known liberal bias. (Thank you, Stephen Colbert.)
It should be a winner with business owners as well. It’s the freedom to hire workers without having to worry about their health insurance.
Krista
And he was obviously conveniently ignoring the fact that a lot of people don’t go to the emergency room, even if they need to, because they’re scared of the bill they’re going to face. I guess I just don’t understand that mindset — a doctor being perfectly fine with people not receiving the treatment they need due to fiduciary reasons.
Krista
The cheers would be heard ’round the world…
Kirk Spencer
right.
Why should your ability to get medical care depend on whether it makes a profit for the insurance company?
Bootlegger
@geg6: I concur. Even with my similarly plated coverage I owe a couple grand for a thumb surgery I had to have to remove a splinter the size of toothpick embedded in my joint and for my son’s tonsilectomy (the hospital made us pay up front). I’ve also had prescriptions denied because there were more economical, or “frontline”, options available. PLUS, all the damned paperwork I have to keep filling out so that the insurance can be filed (also a bane in physicians’ offices).
Bring on socialized medicine!!
Dennis-SGMM
The GOP will run their old “Harry and Louise” ads and argue that UHC will hurt our global competitiveness. They will bolster their arguments with a chart full of circles and a graph provided by the Cato Institute.
Meanwhile, someone who just lost their job will have their first experience of taking a sick kid to the ER because that’s the only place they can go.
Violet
@Emma Anne:
This is exactly right. The doctors I know as friends (as opposed to doctors that I see as a patient) say pretty much this kind of thing. General practice doctors, of whom there are fewer and fewer, would probably welcome some form of universal coverage. But they are not the influential doctors in the AMA. People who treat poor people for general illnesses usually aren’t the ones calling the shots.
Echoing what everyone has been saying, Luntz is an idiot. Our healthcare, if we’re lucky enough to have it, is already rationed. And bean-counters are the ones making the decisions. EVERYONE who has used their health insurance in the last few years knows this. You’re told what you can and can’t do and what is and isn’t covered. If you’re a gazillionaire, then maybe you can pay for that non-covered procedure out of your own pocket. But Real People can’t do that.
I’ve listened to right-wing talk radio people try to use this same argument and just laugh and laugh at it. Fifteen years ago I thought they made more sense. And they probably did, as health insurance probably covered more. These days pretty much everyone knows the “government setting standards” argument is stupid. All you have to do to learn that is use your health insurance. Just once.
Bootlegger
@Violet: My VERY Republican sister is a pediatrician and I can tell she wants to support universal coverage in the worst way, but the cognitive dissonance it creates in her keeps her from doing anything more than saying, “well, I”ll see anyone.”
Original Lee
We were recently on a family vacation that included some time in Belgium. While in Belgium, my son sprained his ankle. We were able to get treatment with about the same amount of waiting as in the U.S., and we rented crutches from the local pharmacy for 1 euro (about $1.25 at the time, IIRC) for a week. We had to pay out of pocket for the treatment on our credit card, and it was actually quite reasonable – I think it was around $100 and included the X-ray. So this was not a bad experience at all.
OTOH, my husband sprained his ankle a year ago here at home. His treatment cost somewhere around $300, plus we had to buy the crutches for $50, and we had to pay the full amount because the annual deductible for emergency treatment with his insurance is $500. Incidentally, the copay for weekend visits is $80 but the copay for weekday visits is $15. So this was a typical and kinda sucky experience with our existing healthcare system.
Just based on these two experiences, I would take universal health care in a heartbeat.
Shygetz
My wife has had to deal with Medicare/Medicaid patients as a health care provider, and believe me, many health care providers dislike dealing with Medicare more than private insurance; in fact, many of the more successful groups in my wife’s field refuse to take Medicare patients, because they can make more money with less headache taking private insurance and cash patients. So I think, if anything, the AMA will come out AGAINST this, in the name of their members’ wallets.
Violet
@Bootlegger:
Yeah, I think many doctors struggle with this. And, honestly, I can understand why they do. Being a doctor is their job and that’s how they make their income. And if the government takes over they don’t know what they’ll be paid. I think any of us facing the same thing might be nervous.
Right now they know where the money is coming from – Medicare (if they take it), insurance compaies and small handful of self-pay patients. But if it changes to the government taking over health coverage, then the doctors don’t know what they’ll be paid. They also suspect they won’t be paid much because Medicare reimbursements aren’t very high.
It’s a huge unknown. And the only info they have is the low Medicare reimbursements. So they’re nervous they won’t make enough to have a good living. Or at least that their income will be cut significantly. It’s just a big unknown and the unknown is scary.
So I can understand where they’re coming from. But I think even doctors know that something has to give. We can’t keep going like we are. We’ll going to collapse under the weight of healthcare expenses. That’s where the cognitive dissonance comes in. That little part of them that went to medical school because they wanted to help people is still there.
Svensker
@Krista:
A friend of ours is a real winger who thinks Bush got a bad rap, but is also a very prominent doctor. He is for single payer government health care. In his practice, he has stopped dealing with insurance companies entirely and only takes patients who can pay cash because the insurance stuff is so onerous.
gwangung
@OldK:
You should check your hearing.
Svensker
@OldK:
?
Laura W
@Svensker: Speaking of health care reform, how is your friend doing? Was just wondering about her yesterday.
Bootlegger
@Violet: Sure, I get that, and the interest parties need to soothe those anxieties by telling the doctors how they fit into the UHC vision. Free medical school would be a nice start. I’d also gurantee pay and make it more equal across the specialities so that family docs make as much as dermatologists.
AkaDad
As long as there are profits to be made, 18,000 dead Americans a year is a small price to pay.
Shalimar
So it just might, worst case, lead to the government replacing the insurance companies telling the doctors what they can and can’t do, resulting in no better or worse situation than we have now? I can live with that, at least it would stop private companies from making obscene profits letting people die.
Atlliberal
I once called up my HMO and told them that I was having chest pain and difficulty breathing. (I had hurt my chest moving heavy furniture, but at the time didn’t know what was wrong) They replied that I could see a doctor in 3 weeks. After catching my breath from shock, I informed them that I could be dead in three weeks, they let me see someone the next day.
When we make appointments for an annual physical, the wait is 6 months. We can only go to their doctors, and the HMO decides what is and isn’t covered.
Single payer seems like a big improvement to me.
At this point, everyone at least knows someone who has lost a job (and long with it their health insurance) or has had difficulty getting coverage for pre-existing conditions, or is at risk of losing their job. It’s not that far a stretch for most people to imagine themselves in the same situation, like it was in 1994. I think we will get this done this year, and if the Republicans try to block it, they will excelerate their trip to irrelevence.
ironranger
We owned a small business for almost 20 years with # of employees ranging from 16 to 20. About half of the employees were covered under their spouses’ insurance & we offered a plan for the others (and us). Over the years the cost of the insurance just kept increasing. We changed plans &/or companies several times. It was a huge headache trying to keep the costs down while still having half way decent health coverage. No way to avoid higher deductibles. By the time we sold the business the cost was nearing $80,000 a year that we would have loved to have had for more frequent pay employee pay raises & improvements in our business.
I noticed that Cantor didn’t address the pizza parlor owner’s concern about the huge increase in cost of health insurance for his employees. Cantor swiftly moved on to trashing the dreaded Canadian & UK systems. What a plan! I’d love to know how pizza guy felt about that non-answer answer.
One of the reasons we sold our business 2 years ago was the feeling that this country was headed for financial tough times & we wanted to get out while it was easier to sell. Everyone I was reading on the internet was anticipating a mess. I sure didn’t hear this from our almost useless cable/network tv news.
lilysmom
Two years ago my husband and I sold two businesses that we owned in the central western region of South Carolina. No, we didn’t live there and it was too hard to keep staffed, etc.
When we sold out, the area had an unemployment level of 7.8%. Now the area has a 22.4% level of unemployment. When they lost those jobs, most lost their insurance coverage. COBRA is not cheap and most of the folks in the region weren’t earning a lot to begin with. I feel so sorry for them. I get angry when I read the moronic bleatings of Governor Mark Sanford, but they voted him in. And Lindsay Graham. And Jim DeMint.
Who gives a damn about choosing your doctor when you can’t possibly hope to see, or have your child see, a doctor at all unless it is paid for by a ‘Democrat’ legislated, taxpayer funded program?
Mike in NC
So now he’s calling himself “Doctor” Luntz? Hey, doc, just how long can you keep your patient — the GOP — on life support? Might be time to pull the plug.
Steeplejack
Underlying the whole health care issue is the usually overlooked fact that it is one area in which “capitalism” is not a good approach. (At least go-go, hyper-growth, maximize-shareholder-value capitalism.)
When was the last time anyone had this conversation?
“Honey, the baby has been crying all night and has a fever over 102.”
“Well, let’s wait until the docs open in the morning, and I’ll call around and see who can give us a good deal on some treatment.”
No. You want to whisk the kid off to the best facility available and have her treated by Dr. George Clooney from E.R. or Dr. House on one of his less prickly days. Not some overworked, sleep-deprived resident at the emergency room.
This is not a good scenario for the “invisible hand of the market” to work its magic.
I am not an insurance mogul, but I think health insurance originally started as a way to address this problem. We have a big pool of premium money, we pay the expenses for those who get sick, we make a good but not spectacular profit. Yawn. But as go-go capitalism became a religion over the last 30 years the insurance companies drank the Kool-Aid–“We, too, can be masters of the universe!”–and became blind to everything except the “maximize shareholder value” part.
How does a corporation do that? Get more people to buy your product, charge more for your product and cut costs. Given that the “product” is treatment for people’s health, often in life- or lifestyle-threatening situations, the possibilities for “market” distortion and manipulation are endless. Which is pretty much where we are today.
Justin
Pretty much anyone that has had to deal with health insurance knows that medical professionals are NOT in charge of private health care. Bean counters with spreadsheets about the value of your life are.
Bootlegger
@Steeplejack: I agree with this. Capitalism is premised on scarcity and the right of the consumer to choose not to buy the product. With health care scarcity is bad and choosing not to buy is worse.
Krista
@ steeplejack:
You nailed it. The free-market wankers are always talking about how if an insurance company screws the customer, they’ll soon find themselves out of business, with the wise, omnipotent Invisible Hand making sure that competition between insurance companies results in free MRIs and lollipops for all.
They’re completely and willfully ignoring the actual facts on the ground. You can’t shop around for insurance when you can’t get any insurance company to cover you in the first place. You can’t shop around for insurance when insurance companies are dropping policyholders the second they start costing more in claims than they’re paying in premiums. The Invisible Hand has the average consumer held firmly by the balls, and anybody who doesn’t realize this is naive, an idiot, an asshole, or all three.
InflatableCommenter
The opponents of reform are just warming up.
Their whole schtick has always been that citizens will give up choice if they get government healthcare.
Americans’ addiction to costly, full-choice healthcare without government assistance is the very thing that the enemies of reform have always used and will continue to use as a wedge of fear and doubt to drive public support for the reforms down, and to provide cover for their flock of political manipulators in congress.
someguy
I have several doctors in my immediate and extended family. They hate insurance companies, which are a pain in the ass to deal with administratively, but they hate medicare a whole lot more because Medicare limits the fees they can collect to about 25-30% of their private fee structure, at most. The one who runs his own practice tells me that he’s required to accept Medicare patients so he does, despite his perception that he loses money on them. So he jacks up prices on everybody else to “cover the cost,” which apparently includes both treatment, a McMansion and a couple damn fine European-built cars.
This tells me two things about private sector health care and where we’re at right now:
1) If you put everybody on a government-operated single payer scheme the government will be able to control the cost of health care – the docs and pharmas don’t like it, they can find some other line of work where you have to work on Wednesday afternoons like the rest of us; and,
2) Doctors in the U.S., including my relatives, seem to be greedy motherfuckers just like hedge fund managers and bankers, who are in it to get rich. They need to get over themselves.
CalD
Good points, Dr. Luntz. I see you haven’t lost the touch. I just see two potential problems:
1. Someone will likely notice that if you substitute the phrase “the MBAs running American insurance companies” for “the government” in each of those bullet points, you get a pretty accurate summary of the biggest problems with our current system.
2. Someone will then almost inevitably ask, who do you trust more? (Or less, perhaps.)
As of this moment, I’m thinking “the government” wins that round.
jonas
This old line about “government bureaucrats” controlling your health care may have worked in the 80’s and 90’s to scare people away from single-payer, but it’s going to backfire today. 25 years ago, more people were insured, health care costs were not rising dramatically year over year and managed care seemed to work for a lot of people. Fast forward a generation and all that has changed. Most Americans now know someone in their family or circle of friends who has been denied care, is in bankruptcy after trying to pay for health care, or cannot qualify for insurance due to pre-existing conditions. As with so many things, liberal policy fixes wouldn’t be necessary if conservative policies didn’t fuck things up so badly.
YellowJournalism
Don’t forget that you’ll be able to receive that wonderful after-care that allows Canadians to have a lower infant mortality rate, too. : )
jonas
@Steeplejack: Word.
Cris
28% says Yes.
I’m sorry what?
Yukoner
I’m with Michael D and Krista on this one. No system is perfect and the Canadian health care system gets slammed for waiting times for what are deemed non-essential treatments. And most doctors don’t make as much as their American counterparts. But the care is there, for everyone.
And the cost of insurance in the US! I continue to be gobsmacked by it. I’m self-employed and make a decent living, enough to be the sole earner for a family of five. I’m told that in the US I’d have to find another $12k or so a year to buy health insurance for the family and even then it would be riddled with deductibles, exclusions (don’t even think about having another kid!), and co-pays. Hell, I don’t even pay $12k in income tax and get a lot more than health care for it.
Jamey
I had to wait two weeks for an orthopaedist visit because there were too few practitioners who participated in my PPO network.
And my experience is largely the rule, and not the exception.
So tell me again, Dr. Luntz, how health care would be rationed under a nationalized form of health insurance.
JoyousMN
Why is it, all these years of reading about Frank Lutz I’ve never once heard him referred to as “Dr.” But now that he is issuing talking points about health care his credentials (in what, I wonder) are important and used…
hmmm…makes ya think, doesn’t it?
jhaygood
How come single-payer can’t even get a seat at the table while Baucus et al discuss this? Why can’t we even CONSIDER it?
Call your congresshacks. Tell them they can golf with the insurance lobby, just not fellate them on teevee.
TenguPhule
Insolvent.
Dennis-SGMM
@someguy:
Good to hear from someone with first-hand knowledge. Does anyone agree that UHC might get more support from the medical community if part of the deal included partial subsidies for medical school tuition? It’s my understanding that many doctors graduate med school owing tens of thousands on student loans.
JR
BC/BS just denied my mother a PET scan necessary before we can begin treating her lung cancer and bone metastatis, and created a weeks-long delay thereby. She’s right now in agony because her spine is fractured and being eaten, but BC/BS thinks their process is better than what her doctors say. Still, at least it isn’t the Big Bad Government deciding whether or when she gets treatment.
If I didn’t know that our for-profit health insurers were really looking out for our best interests, I’d think they were trying to wait her out until her “treatment period” would be much shorter and consist mostly of morphine and sotto voices.
Fuck Frank Luntz.
sparky
i notice that most of the comments in this thread don’t talk about the doctors. most doctors want money. a lot of it. if you think the insurance companies don’t want to be out of a job, wait till you see how the AMA howls, because we aren’t just talking about the visit in the MD’s office. we’re talking about the lipo place they opened up, and the drive-by MRI place, and the long-term care facility….
there is a tremendous health-care industrial complex in the USA and if you think it is confined to the insurers you are in for a rude awakening.
asiangrrlMN
Sure, doctors want to make money. Everyone does. However, and this is probably my naivety, I think many doctors actually want to do what’s best for their patients as well. That’s just me.
I only have catastrophic insurance. I would gladly welcome governmental interference in the health care system.
OldK
@gwangung, Svensker, Cris:
…sounds like they lifted and repurposed the Democratic frame (paraphrasing) “the decision to have a child or not should be between a woman, her family, and her doctor; the government should have nothing to say about it.”
Seriously, did no one else make that connection? Or at least see the hypocrisy in them saying that the government should make our reproductive decisions, but should not “set standards of care” (which strikes me as far less intrusive, no matter how you spin it)?
Roq
Rebuttal to all of Luntz’s arguments: just substitute “insurance companies” anywhere “government” or “bureaucrats” appears.
Sheesh, this is all they got? Here comes the new arguments, same as the old arguments.
EnderWiggin
that was fast just heard Mark Levin dutifully repeating Frank
‘s talking points verbatim
Bob UK
I really dont understand how people can support the Rethugs opinion that Capitalist healthcare is the best way.
If your counting the money for profit then whats a few thousand deaths ?
In the UK our system isn’t great its true. Our Gov has spent too much time fiddling with ‘targets’ and ‘savings’, which have impacted the quality of service.
But the basic standard is good.
I’ve never needed help and been refused. I’ve had physiotherapy due to knee injuries from sports and it was free.
I’ve had medicines and never paid more than £7.50 for them ( they’re subsidised, and free to pregnant women/kids/ and old folks )
My wife and I recently had a child, and we received regular scans / bloodtests for free. Our birth was free, and my wife had a private room for the experience.
We have weekly health checkups for the baby, which are free, and when my wife was made redundant, we were worried about the bills, but healthcare wasn’t an issue, because ITS FREE.
And for the arguement that our ‘socialist’ healthcare is perhaps of a low standard ? well, if we have some money, we can have PRIVATE healthcare from companies such as BUPA
They cost about £30 per month, but if we cant afford it, there is still our standard FREE healthcare.
Any arguement against this freedom, this availability, this LIFE SAVER is pure gibberish.
Newly Laid Off
I got laid off in June (thanks, Wall St.), and I’m paying $870/month for COBRA for me and my daughter. That’s almost half my unemployment. The stimulus will pick up 65 per cent for 9 months – if I qualify – they won’t tell me whether I do or not yet. That’s on top of $20 co-pays for primary care docs, $40 for specialists, and up to $60 co-pay for some drugs. And I supposedly have a good plan. This is crazy.
Newly Laid Off - I meant Dec
Sorry, I meant I got laid off in December.