RECENT POSTS
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
- White House State Dinner: The Menu, Entertainment, and Decor
- Dan Pfeiffer, White House Blogger
- Guests Begin to Arrive for White House State Dinner Festivities
- President Obama on Afghanistan Strategy: “It Is My Intention to Finish the Job”
- The Obamas Kick off their First State Visit, Welcome India's Prime Minister to the White House
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
President Obama Continues Questionable “You Can Keep Your Health Care” Promise
July 16, 2009 5:48 PM
ABC News' Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller report:
At a rally in Holmdel, New Jersey, today, President Obama continued making a promise about health care reform that he has acknowledged isn’t literally true.
“Let me be exactly clear about what health care reform means to you,” the president told residents of the Garden State. “First of all, if you’ve got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan. Nobody is talking about taking that away from you.”
But last month, as the president acknowledged during a press conference, he doesn’t literally mean that you are guaranteed to be able to keep your health care plan, and your doctor, if and when health care reform passes.
“When I say ‘If you have your plan and you like it,… or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don't have to change plans,’” the president said after we asked him about this, “what I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.”
Importantly, the government might create circumstances – say, a public health care option that is less expensive since profit is not a concern and overhead is lower – where you might find your business forcing you into that public plan.
Pressed by Diane Sawyer in an interview that same day, the president acknowledged this, saying, “I can't pass a law that says, 'I'm sorry, employers, you can never make changes to the health care plans that you provide your employees.' What I can say is that the government is not going to force you to, your employer or you to join a government plan, for example. If you're happy with it, and your employer's happy with it, keep it."
At the ABC News’ health care forum with the president the next night, the president made a slightly different claim that “if you are happy with your plan, and if you are happy with your doctor, we don’t want you to have to change.”
In the audience was John Sheils, senior vice president of The Lewin Group, a health care policy research and management consulting firm, who estimated that up to 70 percent of those with private insurance would end up on the public plan.
"There are a whole series of ways that we could design this," the president responded, arguing that employers would be given a "disincentive" to shift their employees to the public plan.
-Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller
July 16, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (156)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
very interesting article..good going.....
Posted by: Valflowers- | Aug 28, 2009 12:07:14 AM
There it is folks, the loop hole onthe insurance scam. The government will not force you to change plans but the government will force out the private option & they will drop us. But if you get time to read the bill, it's on page 16 of HR3200. Just like the death panels weren't in there! How do you remove something that was never there??? LIEs,Lies Lies. Oh & now what he has been claiming isn't true about making a secret deal with the Pharmaceutical lobbyists will now cost us 80 bil more. It has just been leaked by the person that wrote it up. My head is starting to hurt from all this corruption, lies & thuggery!!
Posted by: barb | Aug 15, 2009 12:35:41 PM
We run a small chain of franchised restaurants. We currently have five stores and employ +/-50 people. We operate on a very tight margin and controlling cost is a major part of our company staying in business and being able to employ people. We have been in business for 22 years and over the course of that time have employed +/- 2500 people. Our industry is very transient with high turnover. The majority of our employees are high school or college aged kids working their way through college. We currently offer a health care policy for full-time salaried employees and pay 100% of their coverage. Out of our eligible employees only 5 want the policy. The majority of our employees opt out of any coverage. If the pay or play portion of healthcare reform goes into effect as written and after running the numbers and fines listed in the current plan,(and yes we read the plan) these are the decisions that we will have to make to be able to stay in business.
1. We will not offer any policy for any employee as it will be cheaper to just pay the fine. Therefore none of our current employees will be able to keep their current policy.
2. We will decrease the amount of people we hire and/or lay off people to compensate for the increase in our payroll costs.
3. We will no longer hire any full time employees.
4. We will have to evaluate all our pricing structures to see if there is anyway to offset these costs without driving customers away.
5. We will have to eliminate or curtail all charitable donations that benefit local schools, churches, athletic teams and other non-profits.
When discussing this with other fellow small business owners who are "on the bubble" in terms of tight profit margins, minimum wage employers etc., they anticipate doing the same thing.
Small business can not afford this nor do my employees want this.
Posted by: alphakiwi | Aug 11, 2009 10:57:36 PM
I would like to know why, drug companies are allowed to advertise drugs on the nightly news and in magazines.This must be very expensive and would cost drug companies tons of money.Stopping this in turn should allow the cost of drugs to come down. Making things more cost effective for americans.This makes the drug companies at the same level as "street drug dealers". When this is changed, the drug companies would only give Drs. flyers, that state only facts and side effects about the drugs. Drs. would be monitored to make sure they are not receiving money from drug companies to support any one drug.The mighty drug companies have become to big since they have peddled drugs. I look at the world some what different.Drs.and drug companies should be more interested in helping people with health problems,by treating cause of the problem not the symtoms.
Posted by: Sue D | Aug 10, 2009 8:50:37 PM
The $ cost of ObamaCare is what is going to be crippling. I bet it's gonna be AT LEAST 4-5 times more than what they're estimating. And the way they are wanting to fund it is NOT gonna work; there are not enough "wealthy" people in this country to pay for health care for all; nor should they. Can anyone say "National Sales Tax"? All of those countries with the "great" health care plans for their citizens have a value added tax (VAT) or goods and services tax (GST) (around 15-20%). And that's in ADDITION to their income tax. Are you folks ready to pay an additional 20% on EVERYTHING YOU PURCHASE for ObamaCare? I hope so. 'Cause it's coming!
Posted by: BostonTroy | Aug 8, 2009 7:44:15 AM
Someone wrote:
"One of the most outrageous mandates in the Democratic health care bill is found on page 416. On this page, you will see mandatory “end of life” counseling for seniors every five years. With this counseling, they will be spoken to about the different end of life choices that can be undertaken."
Actually, that's not in the bill at all. Counseling is provided to aid in *any* decision-making, if the patient needs it. I suppose that could be for end-of-life care, but that's not explicitly mentioned in the bill.
Posted by: Lucas | Aug 6, 2009 6:04:20 PM
Someone wrote:
"it has been interesting to read these comments. I would like to know why the hc bill on page 16 outlaws health insurance companies from seeking or accepting new customers. "
You are mistaken, sir. Section 102 (page 16) grandfathers in plans that don't meet the new standards. It prevents insurance companies from altering those plans, or seeking new customers for those plans.
Insurance companies can still seek new customers for plans that meet the federal standards, and they can also offer new plans so long as they meet the federal standards.
I've heard the "page 16" reference several times on talk radio now, and it's fallacious. I would also like to say, even though the bill is long, it's a pretty easy read; most of it is boiler-plate.
If you support a government option, please take the time to read the bill, and take the time to answer those with false beliefs! Thanks!
Posted by: Lucas | Aug 6, 2009 5:41:01 PM
And how about this: We talk about DEMOCRACY like American's invented the idea all by ourselves. Socialism is a VERY BAD thing because you know... ALL of you have immigrated from a REAL Socialist regime like... CAMBODIA or... NORTH KOREA. Listen, until you are at gun point being told to tow the party line? Be quiet, please. I know that feeling. Not fun.
This is not to say Socialism isn't inherently dangerous and not to watch out for it, but how come our BEST chums and allies whom THE USA calls DEMOCRACIES such as: France, The United Kingdom, Germany, Finland, Norway, Canada, etc.- All democracies, people can vote, have freedoms... THEY ALL HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTH AND NONE OF THEM TURNED INTO THE U.S.S. flipping R!!
What are they REALLY trying to hide form us? This goes BEYOND Left and Right, Republican and Democrats, Rich vs. Poor (I'm not too sure about that one) and I'm curious WHY all this OUTCRY about choices and fear of Socialism when we are presented with EVERYDAY proof that some of these claims are full of bull-manure? Are the vast majority of Americans THIS ignorant that some arguments that are made they can't just... Look at a map and say "Wait.. How about THESE guys on this part of the map? They did "X" and they didn't end up with "Y" like YOU claim would happen to us!"
Posted by: TC | Jul 31, 2009 8:36:08 PM
So, when you talk about CHOICE, I'm not sure I have that now. I did not choose to change our health care plans. I did not choose to raise my rates and co-pays. I did not choose to change aspects of my already available insurance nearly every year that I've worked year, each year shuffling stuff around that increased my costs to save the company some $$$. I didn't choose ANY of this stuff and I still have to get a referral to see a specialist 2 months from now, and wouldn't you know it? They change a date here or there and the next thing you know I'm waiting 3 months. Waiting lists? At least you can find your number on the flipping list! Here it's all arbitrary!
Another thing! Why is it when we compare health care we always say "UK vs USA vs Canada?" How come no one EVER compares it to saaaaay... FINLANDS: over 80% satisfied insured, PLUS one of the highest rated health cares/healthy people according to the WHO and other sources?
Posted by: TC | Jul 31, 2009 8:26:44 PM
HEY, YOU GUYS TALKING ABOUT "FREEDOM OF CHOICE."
I don't know about YOU guys, but last time I checked? My employer of whom I've worked for the past SEVEN YEARS changed our Health Insurance plans FIVE TIMES, and I WISH it was for the better.
Let's just say this year they gave what I can only describe as an "alllowance" of $600 a year, and my co-pay for a stay in the hospital (which was only 5% when I started in 2003) is now at 20%.
And when we had 3 HMO's and 2 PPO's, now we only have TWO HMO's to choose from! Where I USED to only pay $5 for co-pay visits? I know pay $15. I didn't CHOOOSE to pay more.
So, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that MAYBE Obama's plan lacks choices. Let's assume/believe that.
Are we so INCREDIBLY STUPID to believe that our CURRENT system offers us choice as well?! Are you BLEEPING KIDDING ME?!?
Posted by: Thought Criminal | Jul 31, 2009 8:12:04 PM
navyvet64 i like your plan. I think everyone should pay something based on their income. I agree totally with the tossing out illegal immigrants and their anchor babies. This alone will reduce cost. I would like to add to your posting to fine or tax people who do not take care of themselves, ie smoke. I not saying you cna't smoke but you will pay a fee for doing so. Absolutely no invitros like Octomom.
Posted by: dot | Jul 19, 2009 6:39:03 PM
it is obvious that the president means you have that choice and his plan isn't trying to take away your freedom to choose. the thing is the person may not even know they have one of the horrible plans that will drop them when they get sick or cancer, and then when they are kicked off, they will learn why they should not have continued choosing and paying for such a terrible plan. the insurance companies have many tricks to keep paying customers and they won't tell you personally until it is no longer profitable that some acne your doctor noticed will get you kicked off because you didn't disclose something ridiculous that they can kick you off for. and yes government isn't the best or high-end, but at least they can level the playing field against the tons of scammers and pretenders. and the healthcare in america is too expensive, let's do the right thing like other countries have already done and give access to healthcare to more than just the ER rooms.
Posted by: guest | Jul 19, 2009 5:16:31 PM
it has been interesting to read these comments. I would like to know why the hc bill on page 16 outlaws health insurance companies from seeking or accepting new customers. They will just wither and die when their customers leave or die. This doesn't seem to me to be a fair playing condition and forces public as the only option as you will not be able to join a private insurace company policy. I have never seen the government do anything yet without screwing it up and I'd rather not have them decide my parents are too old to deserve hc services. I'm tired of the deception and lies from this administration
Posted by: Lizard Lass | Jul 18, 2009 11:19:54 PM
Slow Down, at least let the bill be read and understood, then debated.
Take care of the major problems.
Tort Reform – Not saying that we should give up the right to sue for medical malpractice just set reasonable limits.
Insurance regulation – You should not be dropped just because you use your plan. If an insurance company wants to drop your coverage they MUST show that you are abusing the system. Also, make it an individual’s responsibility to have a least a minimal policy (just like having car insurance) that covers emergency treatment. If you want better coverage you pay a higher premium. Remember, you only get the coverage you pay for. Insurance companies should make a profit; but let face it, multi-million dollar bonuses are not warranted. Also set up an arbitration system where if warranted a procedure is reviewed for cost and then decided on in a timely manner.
Un-tie insurance from your JOB. If employers want to go through the process of identifying a plan and offering it to their employees, great, if not, give a portion of the expense they would incur back to the employee. That is what my company did for me when I opted to not use their insurance because as a retired service member I am covered via the TIRCARE system. Understand if you buy a minimal policy that is the service you will be getting. One of the biggest problems we face is the fact that our health insurance is tied to our employer, this has really screwed up things as we leave our jobs and are left without any insurance. Unless you’re retired union, government or military when you retire you normally left without insurance.
Mandatory insurance – The government should work with the insurance companies to create a tier system of service, low cost, medium cost, and platinum service plans. For low cost, say $50.00 per person per month just think of the total sum generated every month. Yes we would have to assist the folks who can not work with this payment but everyone else would be required to pay for the service on their own. Plans would be created to cover dental, optical and prescriptions coverage also.
A National ID card – a “Shovel Ready” program. Set up offices and have folks come in to get them. Mandate a one year deadline to have a Nation ID. Set up GMC Vans (might as well use GMC we own the company) and have teams go out to the poor and housebound. We have the technology to create a database to track the ID’s generated. Then as children are born and Legal Immigrants arrive they are given an ID card at that time.
Illegal Immigrants – Send them home, and yes if we wanted to do it; it could be done, a simple 8 week training course for new ICE agents. Start to round them up and ship them out. Just think, ICE could charter buses, trains and planes helping those industries out. Believe me if you pay your employees enough and treat them well you will fill the jobs that the Illegal’s current are doing. If caught back in the country illegally your are locked up in a federal work prison, see Sherriff Joe Arpaio to see how that program should be ran. How do we pay for this? Fine the employers that are hiring illegal Immigrants. As the flood of illegal immigrants decline the ICE agents would be reassigned to other task, i.e. TSA or border security.
Anchor babies – give the child a US Passport and a letter that says when they turn 18 they are welcome to come back but until them they MUST go home with their parents.
Use the military medical service as a guide and create medical centers around the country. These centers would be a one stop place consisting of a hospital, medical service buildings, government service building for administration staffs. We could even build barrack style housing for homeless folks and provide them training and jobs. Just think of all the Jobs that would be created, Start with one center in every state, then after that center is completed, build another in the state till we have enough created to fill the needs along with the current hospitals that we all ready have. Identify regional centers that would have the medical treatments that are advance and are not cost effective to have at every hospital. Give each state 30 days to identify a piece of land for the first center and then start to build it. We can build shopping malls in a year we can build a medical center in the same amount of time.
These medical centers would take the cases that other hospitals and Doctors will not take. Doctors and hospitals do not want certain patients because they will not be reimbursed for their services as they feel are justified.
So how do we staff them, assist Doctors and Nurses along with all the other staff with tuition assistance in colleges or technical schools. Have them pay back their assistance with a mandatory service time in the National Health Centers. Tie the pay scale to the same we use for military personnel. The patients will have some insurance so the majority of cost will be recovered.
Tax everyone working a $10.00 payroll deduction per month to pay for it all. For example 25,000,000 people at $10.00 a month would generate a return of 250,000,000 a month or 3,000,000,000.00 a year. If the government cut matching funds from other programs, i.e. foreign aid, reduction in military services, ect.. we would have enough to pay for this. Current US Population, 304,059,724 (per Google) if only 1/3 of the number is employed 101,353,241 x 10.00 = 1,013,532,410 a month or 12,162,388,920 a year. Make this pool of money untouchable for any other reason than National Health cost. Just think how much would be generated each year.
So if you go to an ER they are going to want to see your insurance card and National ID. No ID, well you get treated, provided a bill and then turned over to ICE agents at the hospital for deportation. No insurance, you get treated, sent the bill and a hefty fine. If you can not pay the bill you are given a required work period every week till the bill is paid.
We need lots of folks to pick up trash and sweep streets.
Posted by: NavyVet64 | Jul 18, 2009 4:27:36 PM
Just when you think this bill couldn't get any worse, It does:
"One of the most outrageous mandates in the Democratic health care bill is found on page 416. On this page, you will see mandatory “end of life” counseling for seniors every five years. With this counseling, they will be spoken to about the different end of life choices that can be undertaken."
So not only is the government going to ration health care, they also want to make your end of life decisions. What I want to know is this: How will they carry out the decisions they make? Denying surgeries? Shipping you off involuntarily to hospice? Assisted suicide through the office of the Science Czar?
This whole health care plan is nothing more than government getting more and more control over every aspect of your lives.
Now you know why 0bama is in such a rush to ram this thing through. They don't want you to become informed on how truly sinister this bill is.
Posted by: Jack | Jul 17, 2009 7:46:14 PM
"My only comment here was to fuss at other commenters for making rude remarks about Jake Tapper."
And so it begins...the Liberals perceive a threat and resort to Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" (same teaching Our Dear Leader received and executed as a community organizer and as he - and his party - still do today):
RULE 12:
Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy.
Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
Hang in there, Jake
Posted by: tjp612 | Jul 17, 2009 5:20:39 PM
Posted by: Sandy | Jul 17, 2009 3:15:40 PM
Posted by: Sandy | Jul 17, 2009 3:28:53 PM
Sadly, you are mistaken/misinformed or are not thinking things through.
Posted by: tjp612 | Jul 17, 2009 5:07:52 PM
Don't you need to go suck up and cover for Sanford some more? Don't pretend you are a "real" journalist now with the typical lies.
Jake, you lost all credibility trying to cover for the hypocrite adulterer.
Posted by: Renee | Jul 17, 2009 4:39:27 PM
DO YOU BELIEVE THIS GUY?? HE WAS WRONG ON ALMOST EVERYTHING HE HAS SAID AND DONE....WE ARE A BUNCH OF LOOZERS IF WE FALL FOR THIS REFORM HE IS TRYING TO SHOVE DOWN OUR THROATS BY AUG?? AND IN THE MIDDLE OF A RES SESSION...HE'S NUTS!!
Posted by: karen | Jul 17, 2009 3:41:39 PM
Oops,want to make sure I'm clear. The comment from sandy refers to my screenname and the time of my comment about not accusing Jake of being a shill. However, that is NOT my only comment on the thread-- I also had an early comment suggesting people contact their representatives and ask them to slow this bill down and look at it carefully. However, I don't see anything in that comment either that has anything to do with Sandy's comment. What am I missing?
Posted by: moderate | Jul 17, 2009 3:40:46 PM
Post a comment


