Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
War of the Words: How Town Hall Crashers are Transforming Public Opinion
Public opinion on health care reform is shifting rapidly. Public
disapproval of Obama's "handling of health care" rose from 42 percent
in June to 52 percent in July according to a Quinnipiac University
poll. As the New York Times reports, "President Obama's ability to
shape the debate on health care appears to be eroding as opponents
aggressively portray his overhaul plan as a government takeover that
could limit Americans' ability to choose their doctors and course of
treatment."
This ten percent change in opinion in less than a month is dramatic
considering that public opinion scholars rarely find such large shifts
in such a short period. What is it that accounts for this dramatic
change? The primary factor is probably not the substance of health
care reform itself, since no bill has yet emerged from Congress. Five
proposals are still floating around in committees, and information on
which will win the day is scant. This suggests that some other factor
is at work in changing public attitudes. A more likely cause is the
effort on the part of Republicans in Congress and town hall crashers to
muddy the reform debate.
It is undeniable that those who are protesting Obama and the Democrats
are guaranteed the first amendment right to speak up against government
and that they are entitled to be as rude as they like in public forums.
Whether this kind of discourse is harmful to a vibrant democracy,
however, is another question.
There is little indication that the screaming and shouting in town hall
meetings constitutes an open dialogue on health care. Sarah Palin's
fabricated claims - disseminated faithfully by conservative media -
that an emerging health care bill will establish "death panels" that
allow the state to kill elderly people - do little to encourage
democratic debate. Town hall crashers often attack health care reform
by relying on emotion over substance. Demonization of the Obama
administration for promoting "big government," "socialism," health care
"rationing" and "death panels" does much to incite public outrage,
while distancing town hall crashers from a productive discussion of
reform.
While the liberal commentators at MSNBC stand behind the president and
the "public option," Fox News pundits lambaste not only Obama's plan,
but single-payer health care. Very little effort is made to explore
the differences between the public option and single-payer, as they are
lumped together as a singular "socialist" threat. My review of all Fox
News programming from July 29th to August 11th finds that 18 programs
referenced single-payer health care, most of them failing to
distinguish between Obama's proposed reforms and single-payer proposals
(single-payer proposals, to date, do not seriously enter into
Democrats' plans). Of course, demonization and incitement are not the
only ways to kill discussion on single-payer care. The most popular
way to do this is simply by refusing to mention it as an option - a
tactic preferred by mainstream media (see the FAIR study: "Media
Blackout on Single-Payer Healthcare").
A responsible reframing of the public debate on health care requires tackling a number of issues:
Socialism, Big Government, and Rationing
Obama's former physician David Scheiner is speaking out publicly in
favor of single payer health care (a.k.a. Medicare-for-all). On the
charge of socialism, Scheiner says that a single-payer health care
system still relies on "private doctors, private hospitals, private
clinics, private companies making the [medical machines], the only
thing that's national is the insurance." At best, then, to claim that
the system is socialized is an exaggeration, if not an outright
distortion.
On the issue of "rationing" health care, Scheiner explains that under
private health care, "every patient I see, the insurance people are in
the room watching me telling me what I can do and what I can't.
Medicare [as a single-payer system] has never interfered with
me...Medicare doesn't tell us which hospital to go to, doesn't tell us
which specialist we can use. It's extraordinarily rare that it ever
denies a procedure. Private insurance is doing this all the time."
Addressing anxiety over "big government," Scheiner fires back that "we
[already] spend $400 billion a year in handling administrative costs of
health care that would cover the 50 million who are uncovered" under
Medicare-for-all.
While the mass media and town hall crashers play an integral role in
demonizing Medicare-for-all, polling firms also play a role in limiting
debate. I've seen little evidence in the polls I read of any questions
probing the public on whether they support Medicare-for-all, in
contrast to the more limited public option supported by Democrats.
What very little survey data I can find on Medicare-for-all suggests
that people do support it, despite the media blackout. Polling from as
far back as 2007 shows that 64 percent of Americans support "a national
health insurance program for all Americans, even if this requires
higher taxes." A July 2009 poll from the Kaiser group finds that, as
of July 2009, 59 percent of Americans support "having a national health
plan in which all Americans would get their insurance through an
expanded, universal form of Medicare-for-all." What's truly fascinating
is that the Kaiser poll finds that, when the words "single-payer" are
added to the same question, support drops by nearly 10 percent. This
is a strong indication that political officials and media are able to
manipulate public opinion and demonize a program, not in substance, but
through buzz-word phrases.
Mass media, pollsters, Republicans in Congress, and town hall crashers
are creating a perfect storm in order to demolish health care reform.
Unfortunately, the use of name calling and slogans is replacing
reasoned, open debate on how to move forward. Of course, it's not too
late to promote a respectful dialogue. The sooner we realize the
toxicity of today's mudslinging, the quicker we can promote a real
discussion of the problems that burden the American people.
69 Comments so far
Show All"The sooner we realize the toxicity of today's mudslinging, the quicker we can promote a real discussion of the problems that burden the American people."
Tony, WE do "realize the toxicity" of the current obufuscation of the issues. The fact is that the people behind the effort to shut down discussion don't care and most of the electorate is too damned ignorant to understand what's going on.
It's probably impossible to educate an entire populace on the rudiments of rhetoric in a few months.
q
I can only disagree, the electorate is not that ignorant or they would be buying the crap put out by Congress.
There is no desire to have a discussion about this, that became quite evident when they tried to push it through without any discussion. These fools have scupperd any chance for Single Payer by trying to back door it instead of honestly proposing it and debating it.
Calling people Nazi's, Un-American, Evil Mongers is not exactly a good way to discourage mud slinging wouldn't you say?
Thank you Henry8. My conservative parents and their friends out in small town MO would actually thank you from the bottom of their hearts for understanding the heartbreaking plight of the working class. If Democrats wanted to actually reach out to the conservatives, they would have put single payer on the table and made it clear that the taxpayers would save greatly. If more conservative voters out in the rurals had their real feelings taken into consideration, think of how different the Republicans and Blue Dogs would be today. Oh well, time for the USA to remain the laughing stock nation when it comes to health care. :.(
It wouldn't have worked.
The corporations, through their private media, would have bombarded your parents and all the rest of rural and suburban conservative USA with massive red-baiting campaign that would have made the stuff so far look mild. And who would your conservative parents have believed? The all-American, free-enterprise corporations, or the government, who they distrust, which indeed is worthy of mistrust, but in their case, mostly for the wrong reasons?
Paul D.
"The corporations, through their private media, would have bombarded your parents and all the rest of rural and suburban conservative USA with massive red-baiting campaign that would have made the stuff so far look mild. And who would your conservative parents have believed? The all-American, free-enterprise corporations, or the government, who they distrust, which indeed is worthy of mistrust, but in their case, mostly for the wrong reasons?"
That has already happened back in the mid 1980s up to today. I forgot to mention that they've all been numbed just like our side has been. The liberals and progressives never made the powerful point that there really is no "free" in any of this. What the progressives and liberals also fail to realize is that although money can play a huge role in influencing ideological leanings, the trick is to stop trying to take short cuts and be prepared to accept the fact that long term happiness stems from putting quality before quantity first. Had they done that, we wouldn't be needing another Great Depression to wake up and enlightened the numbed ones.
Henry8 is dead wrong in his defense of the degenerate town hall meetings- staged for big media benefit just as were the 2000 Florida stop-the-vote-count astroturf-riots. Still works, apparently.
There IS NO 'crap' put out by Congress yet, as they are still debating and changing legislation, which is a big part of the problem. But Congress is definitely NOT left alone to work out the solutions- the capitalist corporations and their money and goons are IN THEIR FACE 24/7- which is EXACTLY why the bill is shaping up so terribly. And Congress is not 'backdooring' something that takes up vast amounts of media time, and is overtly discussed by Obama and others.
In fact, the town halls were supposed to get input on the issues from regular people. But the neo-confederate Republiklans and Right-Wingers and Corporate Spinmeisters, like the totally evil Frank 'mendacious obfusation' Luntz, have taken this as an opportunity to rile up and bring out their Gullibles to scream their idiot heads off about Socialism and Taxes. Meanwhile, the puppetmasters are chuckling all the way to the bank. The right-wing electorate IS THAT IGNORANT, SORRY! They just don't want to pay 'more taxes' or have 'death panels' or be 'socialist commies' - as if these propaganda-planted concerns had anything to do with the discussion at hand of the means of preservation of the life and health of the nation.
And the apparent monarchist Henry8 writes that calling people names is not exactly a good way to discourage mud-slinging... while in the very sentence preceding that one, he calls people THESE FOOLS!? Hey, the mud-slinging started from the RIGHT using all their enormous pile of Mud- that is, money and lies and deception- on this issue just as on EVERY ISSUE- for as long as I can remenber! Pushback is unavoidable, and necessary, and should be fierce. Unless you are ready to be another railroaded Mr. Nice Guy, like Mr. 'can't we all just get along' Obama.
The town hall meetings were not staged for big media, and they are not "degenerate"-- there have regularly been town hall meetings for many years where Congressmembers take questions and listen to their constituents-- but the Teabaggers showing up this time ARE staged for big media, and do NOT represent the majority.
I agree, special interests and lobbyists are the biggest problem to these debates, what I find most don't understand is that those people are being paid by the Insurance Industry to keep them from having to compete!
For those who say other wise, I have to wonder, do you work for the Insurance Industry!
quickstepper August 22nd, 2009 11:27 am
"WE do "realize the toxicity"...the people behind the effort to shut down discussion don't care and most of the electorate is too damned ignorant to understand what's going on."
Yes, what a weak ending, for reasons stated by you and RichM.
But this response is also symptomatic of how right wing the US is, not just due to the concentration of corporate interests and their middle class 'shock troops,' but due to the real weakness of progressive forces: the 'toxic' character of town hall disruption is due to the basic weakness of US progressive movements - no resistance to bullying, the bullying is worse.
As I noted elsewhere, ACORN - which, following its registration efforts, was in a position to mobilize for single payer - was deactivated as a movement force by keeping single payer off the table. Notice the Inglewood, CA free healthcare event this month? Imagine it combined with single payer education and rallying - right wing efforts to disrupt such an event would have run into resistance entirely different than town hall meetings.
Jeeezzzzeeee....when you begin to believe your own ppropaganda you are in real trouble. The Town Halls
aren't filled with "crashers," they are filled with pissed off citizens.
They believe they are being betrayed because Congress wasn't honest. If they had proposed Single Payer, if they had been honest about the real number of uninsured instead of the farcical 40 million figure, if they hadn't tried to push it through before anyone could find out...etc.....
Its not Republicans that are defeating this opportunity. Its not some small noisy minority and if its misinformation, its misinformation put out by Pelisse and crowd.
There is no Health care "crisis" as claimed by Pelosi and others. Reform is needed,,,,people need coverage, but lies, distortions and dishonesty usually lead to defeat.
Henry8: "Reform is needed,,,,people need coverage, but lies, distortions and dishonesty usually lead to defeat." Just so, and it is precisely the "lies, distortions and dishonesty" (and let me add "confusion") in the Obama health care "plan" that has led to the difficulty of proponents of really needed reform (single payer) to stand on their hind legs and resist the lies, distortions, dishonesty and confusions coming from the Republi-thug side of the "debate" and that will almost certainly lead to the "defeat" of what the people need: coverage and actually affordable medical care.
THANK YOU Jerry and Henry8 ! There are poor conservatives out here in the states who actually want Big Insurance to butt out and put the burden of responsibility on the pols. We pay our taxes and yet guess who walks away with it? If that's not bad enough, here's this. Now it seems that the Obamabots have sunk to new lows by not only attacking opponents of Obamacare as "Republicans" but even "racists" ! Bring up single payer and they resort to verbal and even physical abuse.
Jerry, the other day you posed the question about whether the Obamabots will wake up. The worse Obama is doing, the more abusive they are turning out to be. :(
The misinformation is not coming from the Democrats. It is coming from elderly people at the town hall meetings screaming that the government better not take over Medicare.
Perhaps "misinformation" is not apprproptiate. Stupidity might be more accurate.
The many tens of millions without health insurance and the many that die every day because they lacked it would vehemently argue that there is indeed a CRISIS in healthcare. You are a very unfeeling individual if you cannot see the truth of the matter, and certainly no progressive.
WHAT ?!? Henry8 has feelings and he knows that there are poor conservatives out there who actually have a heart for single payer ! He may be a military jingoist but when it comes to health care for all Americans, he supports single payer, not Obamacare. Let me guess, he's a "Republican" according to you? LOL !
No. He could easily be a Democrat. I've come across his non-progressive intimations before, and you just proved that he is no progressive: "He may be a military jingoist...."
Sigh, you got me there. Plus, on the Whole Foods article, he expressed his opposition to EFCA. But despite that, I try to look at the bright side. Yes, he voted for Obama but I forgive him. No, he does not support bombing Af/Pak although I feel skittish at his admiration of the military despite the monster it has turned out to be. Still, I like it that he not only has a heart for single payer but that he recogizes that millions of poor conservatives out there would be voting Democrat straight just like FDR's time if only the Democrats would quit playing kissyface to the corporate interests. I'd say he's quasi-progressive but he has admitted that he's an independent and more of a moderate liberal. Hope this helps.
"but lies, distortions and dishonesty usually lead to defeat"
Really? Then how did Bush get re-elected? Historically, I find that in American politics lies, distortions, and dishonesty usually lead to success and/or victory.
Again the vulnerability of Americans to misinformation spewed by FOX news, et al becomes apparent. Remember the SUCCESSFUL special intrest assults against Jimmy Carter because of his efforts to implement vital environmental reforms; the deceptive Swift Boat campaigns used by the Bush team against Kerry; the character assinations against Senator Max Cleland (a triple amputee Vietam Vet) because of his efforts to implement an investigation into 9/11; and the list goes on.
As long as such ignorance among so much of the populace prevails, the special interests will continue to prevent vital reform measures.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiKMmrG1ZKU&feature=sub
That is a link to a video on Edward Bernays and how he learned to manipulate "democratic" societies. The townhall crashers are not representative of the population as a whole, but we are made to believe by very powerful institutions that they represent public opinion, further isolating the supporters of health care reform, as they watch a small minority influence the masses. Why does the small minority get so much air time in comparison to say the anti-war movement? It obviously returns back to the role of the mainstream media, not to inform citizens, but to manipulate them into supporting policies that are not in their best interest. Selling a war is good; government sponsored health care for all is bad. A sad, sad, state of affairs...
Good points,
The Adam Curtis BBC documentary (not shown in the USA) "The Century of the Self" covers this brilliantly. You can find it online, I recommend it.
Calling them the "mainstream media" is a total distortion of the facts and must cease. They constitute the Propaganda System, and well deserve that moniker.
I concur. I shall label them appropriately from now on as the corporate, for-profit, propaganda media.
This ten percent change in opinion in less than a month is dramatic considering that public opinion scholars rarely find such large shifts in such a short period. What is it that accounts for this dramatic change?
Fear. Stupidity. Gullibility. Laziness. Breathing in the humid air of the USA's rapid and unstoppable decline.
Unless their opposition can find an effective way to neutralize the foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics, Obama's administration will find itself in the same boat Clinton did -- constantly beseiged by its ruthless, lying political opponents, unable to effect change because it's too busy defending its right to existence. This shouldn't happen with a majority in Congress. If Mr. Obama does not stand strong, he is going to get trampled in the mud -- and so are we.
Obama never intended to "stand strong" on this issue as his negotiated capitulation to Pharma and Insurers proves. Obama is Bush when any sort of "change" is concerned.
Americans are so stupid. I just got finished talking to a completely apolitical American friend, someone who didn't even know the health care fracas was going on. Yes, many Americans are that clueless and absorbed in pop culture and their own day-to-day lives, which they don't think have anything to do with politics.
I brought up health care to this friend thinking she'd know what I was talking about. When it became clear that she didn't, I told her what our current insurance-driven non-system is like, what single-payer is, what a public option is, and what Obama seems to be proposing. She then remembered that she had seen "Sicko" a few years ago, said it had made her cry, that she had no idea it was that bad here compared to other countries, but apparently she completely forgot about "Sicko" once the next movie-of-the-month hit the screens.
After I outlined the health-care options presently before us, I asked if she'd heard about the right-wingers showing up at town halls armed with assault weapons. She hadn't and didn't know what a town hall was. I explained it to her and told her about the lies right-wingers have been telling about Obama's health care plans - the "death panels" and "it'll kill my Down's Syndrome baby" and all that. She gasped, so I thought she understood how outrageous it is. But after I'd finished and again reviewed the actual options before us on health care, I asked her for her thoughts. "Will it really require old people to be put to death?!" was all that stuck in her head, even though I'd just explained the reality of it.
I think a lot of Americans are that stupid and that reliant on soundbites and catchphrases.
As Nader said: "If you don't get into politics, politics will get into you."
I do have contempt for her at times, but it's one of those situations where I've known her for so long that we put up with each other's shortcomings, while still thinking the other is stupid in certain areas. She'd say the same thing about me in regard to certain topics.
Depending of course on what questions were actually asked in the polls, it would be easy to arrive at a conclusion that reports Obama's diminishing support. Much of his failing support, if actual, is probably coming from his 'left'who are disappointed by his apparent lack, like Bill Clinton, of a spine with which to stand up in support of his own rhetoric and platform.
He has consistently failed to effectively use the 'bully pulpit' to make a clear, concise, repetitive, emotional or fear-based case for his policies (since a reason-based case inevitably fails to work on Americans) as his opponants have so successfully employed. Whatever he may think of US politics, he must make his choices in the real world where policy, details, and facts are less well-received by Americans than the self-aggrandizing fantasies spun by their leaders.
Obama is an admirable individual but a weak leader - like Jimmy Carter - and we can only hope he will, like Carter, be a better ex-president than he is/was president.
Like them or hate them, the right have been far better at playing Bernay's game of manipulation than the fools in the democratic party who never seem to learn from history. They will soon lose both houses of congress, even given the abominable republican alternatives, and then the presidency and we'll be further along the path to dissolution and inevitable collapse. I can hardly wait. The sooner we collapse as a society, the sooner we can get about the business of rebuilding a hopefully better one. Until we crash, we don't have any chance for real change.
"Obama is an admirable individual but a weak leader..."
He is a killer, a mass-murderer, and you see that as "admirable"?
So who has he killed?
Been following what has been going on in Afghanistan and Pakistan?
Yes. So? With all the power I have I can't change what is happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan and neither can you. If wringing your hands and whining about what you can't change makes you feel better, more power to you. Personally, I don't find it particularly satisfying. I recognize the limitations of my reach and care about that which I can actually do something about. I'll repeat what I posted above - how many has your self-rightous outrage saved? If not more than zero, then how is your way any better? Unless of course if you don't mind being a hypocrite.
Thousands. But you obviously don't give a damn.
What I give a damn about is what I can do something about. How many has your self-righteous outrage saved? I'm sure the victims of America's global violence are relieved that you care about their plight. It probably makes all the difference in their lives.
So obviously I don't give a damn if you're one of them.
"The sooner we collapse as a society, the sooner we can get about the business of rebuilding a hopefully better one. Until we crash, we don't have any chance for real change."
Sigh, you're right. Society will never learn until she is forced to sit down in tears. :(
Perhaps "society" will learn a bit about the ways of the political world (especially the republicanazi side) when Tom "The Bug Man" DeLay hits "Dances with the Stars" this next season and tries to bribe the judges in his favor. Once he starts, then keeps on winning the various dances, in spite of being an obviously inferior dancer, perhaps we will hear this giant collective "CLICK!!!" and people willl start asking "Wasn't he in politics at one time??? I seem to remember hearing about him on the news!"
Hi aussidawg, perhaps true. It's just a shame that all along Delay got help from both parties even before he got into Congress. The conservative and some moderate Democrats were too nice to him if I understand TX politics. I could be wrong though. In any case, as Henry8 and quickstopper pointed out to me, Max Baucus is looking to outdo Tom Delay. It's hard to tell if, let alone when, society will learn as there always appears to be someone next in line ready to out-corrupt the most corrupt every time. :(
P.S.: Nice to hear from you again. Looks like Alternet has turned out to be even worse what with that foreverhope creeep and her cronies Beck, pelican beak, GuitarBill, etc ... blindly defending her. Thankfully, there are more rising independent voices out there.
We could mock the protesters at the town halls or accept that they were there as instigated by the right media on behalf of elites. The poll is as bullshit as polls get. Do people really trust these stupid polls? I think we could name call them if we want anonymously over the internet but more than that we should go to these healthcare forums as socialists, in brigades, well organized, capable of defense against right wing protesters and police and be disruptive on the demand for single-payer and the complete wiping out of health insurance companies with the imprisonment of their executives.
This article is flawed because it focuses on the symptom and nothing about the underlying cause. The real cause starts out with Obama, Baucus, Pelosi, etc ... keeping single payer off the table and arresting advocates of that idea. Obama even bans people from his own presidential website for raising the concern about his taking it off the table. The rightwingers only cashed in after the consequences of a weak Democrat foundation from the start started showing up.
JenniferBedingfield August 22nd, 2009 2:39 pm
"This article is flawed...it focuses on the symptom [not] the...cause. The...cause [is]...keeping single payer off the table...[R]ightwingers only cashed in after the consequences of a weak Democrat foundation from the start started showing up."
Yup - accurate, well phrased, Jennifer.
Note that ACORN - which mobilized so effectively to register low income voters - does not list healthcare as an issue on its website. That is, the organization and constituency that rallied behind Obama, and that is most affected by poor healthcare, is silent and inactive on healthcare where the "public option" is concerned. Why? Because - with good reason - they cannot in good faith get behind it. Right wing disruption of town meetings a problem? Imagine town meetings full of ACORN followers reacting to right wing single payer hecklers. There'd be right wing media, but I don't even know if there'd be right wing town meeting disruption - they'd be afraid to come.
By keeping single payer off the table, right wing Democrats have alienated more liberal and progressive Obama-supporters with bad healthcare plans they cannot support, and - thereby - inactivated those groups that could have spearheaded populist opposition to the predictable right wing reaction.
The people are naturally far left. Some were pushed to extreme right by evil elites, some were pushed center by lesser evil elites. The question is why aren't the people preserving their natural state? Answer: material opiates.
I agree. Everyone knew this would be a horrible fight yet the president chose to come out from a position of weakness. Let's hope someone screws his head on straight soon because his base is starting to get real pissed and the results are going to be disastrous for both the Democratic party and this country.
kw
"Single man saves universe" only happens in Hollywood movies and there might be a misconception as to the real powers of a US President.
America definitely has a president who is sincere, on the side of the people and probably he has taken the red pill, but he has to walk a fine line in the sand. The entire world is radicalizing right now and situations are getting more and more unstable, everywhere. Imagine the situation gets out of hand in the US, with this type of widespread aggression, the countless guns, the unscrupulous and ethically blind corporations, the ideologically blind Republicans and radical Christians and whoever corporations can buy.
We in Europe would love to have a top politician like Obama. We got some honest and sincere ones, but countless jerks and blablas and when you look at Berlusconi, he comes across like a combination of Fox and the Mafia, just the Italian way, with songs, parties and girls to keep everybody entertained.
Obama cannot do it alone, he needs people to take a stand and he is right when he says, that this is only a beginning. The beginning is always the toughest part. Industry and the Republicans will not give up anything without a fight.
America can't be real. It is a monty python sketch on a grand scale.
USans are not denied healthcare. By law the emergency rooms treat USans and the bill is passed on to the taxpayers, policyholders, and billpayers in a convoluted way. However, USans ARE DENIED dignity, i.e. USans are highly oppressed, in that those who must resort to the emergency room forfeit their social standing. They are ostracized from the society. This cultural phenomenon has always been elite-driven (as is the overall healthcare cost inflation per capita of twice the cost in other countries with better care), when it SHOULD be the elites we are ostracizing from the society. The class war is the granddaddy of all wars. Elites are the "special case" in which force is required. It's the only language elites understand, while the people are far more rational and ethical.
Ostracize the elites, and the vast majority of people will embrace universal equity, justice, solidarity. Do YOU know how to do YOUR part to help ostracize the elites from this society? You may think it's impossible for you to do anything. But it doesn't require big actions. It's mainly a held value that you communicate with your opinions, that influence those around you. And there are plenty of ways to align your decisions and actions to help reduce elites' power/influence in the society, e.g. shifting your exchange/association away from elites and toward your local community, voting third party in the elections, and letting your reps know you're busy ostracizing elites from the society.
People keep referring to Medicare as an example of a well run system....unless you are on Medicare you don't realize that you pay into it and still pay into it when you begin to use it at age 65...a substantial amount is deducted from your Social Security check before you even see it. Then it is necessary to have 'supplemental Medicare insurance to cover what Medicare does not cover and then....within the last few months the co-pays have doubled in many cases. An average office call is $127.00 which is billed to Medicare. Somebody somewhere is making a bundle. Obviously not the Government which is supposed to be running the system as they continually hollar 'broke.' The docs? The facilities? The insurance providers? Wow! At $127.00 for a ten minute office call adds up to about $762.00 an hour.
Peace
Annabelle
The charge that is submitted to Medicare or for that matter to any insurance or private payor, is just that. The fees are usually set at or above what the best insurances will pay for a visit or procedure, but most insurances including Medicare pay out at a discounted rate, sometimes one half of the charge, and the federal deficits determine any or no rate increases on a yearly basis. In fact Medicare has consistently been lowering reimbursements over the years with a few perks thrown in.
The person that gets hit hardest for services is the self pay component. In the past it was the private insurers higher reimbursements that compensated for the poor pay by Medicare, then the private insurers started to follow Medicare fee schedules. And that is how the 10 minute office visit came into being, it was only by seeing more patients in a single day that most offices are able to survive the overhead. And now you see a request for payment in order to sit to counsel people on options for end of life, hence the fanatical 'death panel' debacle. The distortion is mind blowing.
Both my older sister and I are now in our 70s and on Medicare. I believe that Medicare is basically a good system although it pays less than what I thought. The problem is that supplementary insurance doesn't. Several years ago, my sister had a stroke and spent six weeks in rehab. Medicare covered the basic costs but not the therapies. The facility told us that supplementary insurance would cover most of the rest. It didn't.
I have the same supplementary insurance as my sister. It costs me about $2400 a year. After my sister's problems, I called to try to find out exactly what was covered if, for example, I had a stroke like my sister. I got a big spiel and nothing more. They only talked about things like drug coverage. I don't take any drugs so I tryed to ask about other things. Nothing! I have no faith in private insurance. I continue to pay it in case I'm in an accident or something. But I expect very little from it.