Kucinich Denounces Health Care Sell-Out by Pelosi and the House Dems
by: Rabbi Michael Lerner on November 8th, 2009 | 16 Comments »
Under the misleading title of “Health Care Reform” the Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have given the insurance companies the biggest boost in history, and screwed ordinary Americans. Congressman Dennis Kucinich has the courage to explain why. Here, in full, are Kucinich’s explanation from his official website and below it an article from The Raw Story that explains his position further.

Dennis Kucinich. Credit: Flickr/Cheshire County Democrats

Dennis Kucinich. Credit: Flickr/Cheshire County Democrats
Kucinich: Why I Voted NO
Washington, Nov 7 -
**********************************************************************************
Kucinich: Health reform legislation ‘a bailout for insurance companies’
By Stephen C. Webster
Saturday, October 31st, 2009 – 4:01 pm
TheRawStory.com
According to Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), the Democrats’ health reform legislation is basically a sham.
Appearing on MSNBC’s The Ed Show on Friday night, the House’s most unabashed progressive condemned Democratic leadership for removing his amendment that would allow states to create their own single-payer systems. Then he called the entire legislative package “a bailout for insurance companies.”
Under a single-payer system, like those in Canada and the United Kingdom, the government pools taxpayer funds to pay for citizens’ health care and fees are not collected by health care providers. The Kucinich amendment would allow individual states an opt-in to such a system.
The amendment is missing from health reform legislation unveiled Thursday by Democratic leadership.
“Representative Kucinich was livid when he found out that his provision to allow states to create a single payer system was stripped,” News Junkie Post noted. “Kucinich’s amendment passed the House Labor and Education Committee in July. ‘No one gave me any rational reason,’ Kucinich said. ‘I can only assume the insurance company interests brought pressure to take it out. Otherwise I would have heard from someone.’”
“The [committee] vote was 25 to 19, with support coming from an odd mix of liberal Democrats who support single-payer on its merits and conservative Republicans who want to preserve the rights of states to regulate themselves,” The Washington Independent noted at the time.
“The removal of the Kucinich amendment constitutes yet another capitulation to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries who are already reaping billions of dollars from the bill,” reads a statement from the congressman’s office on Thursday.
Under the revised public option, “Pelosi and her team have proposed a plan that would not make payments for care based on Medicare rates…” CBS News’s John Nichols noted. “Rather, under the Pelosi plan, the rates be tied to those of the big insurance companies. That’s a big, big victory for the insurance industry, as it will undermine the ability of the public option to compete – and to create pressure for reduced costs.”
Speaking to liberal MSNBC anchor Ed Schultz on Friday, Kucinich continued his assault on the legislation.
“I think we need the support of the American people to say, look, you need that state single-payer amendment in the bill to make it credible,” the congressman said. “I mean, what are people giving up already? They’re being mandated to buy private insurance. If you read the bill, the people are going to end up paying – the insurance companies can raise rates 25 percent right off the bat, if you read the bill.”
Schultz encouraged Kucinich to repeat himself on that point.
“It’s on page 22 of the bill,” he replied. “Right here, it says that rates shall be set at a level that does not exceed 125 percent of the prevailing standard rate for comparable coverage in the individual market. Now… It’s very easy to understand what that means.”
“It’s not reform,” Schultz insisted.
“It means a 25 percent increase, they’ll have the ability to execute and since insurance companies have already raised rates for the last four years by double-digits, we can expect – based on the bill – another rate increase by the insurance companies.”
Schultz called the bill a “sellout” to insurers because the bill only allows 11 million people into a limited government-run health insurance option, and includes a mandate for Americans to buy private policies.
“Maybe instead of a sellout it’s a bailout,” Kucinich responded. “Maybe what we’re looking at here is another way that Wall Street’s speculative engine can be fueled, this time with the help of the premiums of tens of millions of Americans.”
On his Web site, Kucinich took his point further, calling the legislation “a bailout for insurance companies” that must be altered.
“The Kucinich [single payer] amendment has been added to H.R. 3200 in the Education and Labor Committee, the amendment would permit states to enact a single-payer health care system,” the congressman’s Web site claimed.



Kudos to Kucinich. This is a sad day for progressives and President Obama even more sadly seems to be a pale shadow of his candidate self. Even more clear that the immorality of this legislation is brought out by Tikkun and NSP and like-minded organizations in clear, simple and bold (unwatered-down) media-savvy visually-pleasing ways.
Murli
A great article to read!!!
Kudos to Murli for his words!!!
Kudos to Kucinch and the saying of “To thy own self be true!”
Each of us must stand for something. When we stand for something, we must be true to ourselves and not pay homage to false prophets. Once again Tikkun and NSP shine like bright stars in the sky!
Kudos to Rabbi Lerner for his work!!!
I am really glad Kucinich is talking about this. However, the sad fact remains that the majority of Americans never travel abroad, do not understand our health care non-system, and really don’t realize that much better care is available in other industrialized countries. A significant number of voters are employed by the blood-sucking industries we want to eliminate or at the very least, radically alter.
We won’t be able to accomplish our goals unless we change the ability of most Americans to imagine something different. I disagree strongly with Kucinich that this bill is not reform. It will end some of the most egregious practices of the insurance industry and create health care access for millions of Americans. There is still time to strip out the Stupack amendment. We can also work to push for a robust public option.
It is entirely conceivable that the last minute assault on women’s reproductive freedom was meant to distract us from improving the public option in the Senate or in conference. Let’s not be cowed.
Thanks, R. Lerner for spotlighting Dennis’ truthtelling. Dennis keeps sticking to the new bottom line and the rest of the owning class just keeps ignoring him and the rest of us who desperately need a new bottom line.
For those of us in the lower classes, this bill will be the death of many of us, now matter how many “egregious practices of the insurance industry” have allegedly been “end[ed].” With the public option pegged to irrelevant federal figures (Californians know the federal poverty level is on ave $20-$30K under our locally adjusted poverty levels), we’ll be wracked with medical debt and forced to choose insurance premiums over food for our foreseeable future. I can’t wait for the Senate’s death blow.
JustJack, if the minimum wage kept pace with the COL (cost of living) when it was first put into law, the minimum wage would be $19 per hour.
In fascist-Nazi America everyday is a BOHICA Day. Bend over here it comes again!!!
I don’t get why insurance companies aren’t for a bill that will get them 21 million more clients. If anyone out there gets it, please reply.
Jill, they don’t like the bill because it imposes strict regulations. They have to actually provide health care to sick people. The bill ends the huge giveaways that were a part of “Medicare Reform” under Bush. They going to work harder and they will make much less money per individual.
The fact that they hate this bill should tell us something.
So what are we supposed to do, then? Keep things as they are? That’s what Kucinich’s vote amounts to. I want single payer as much as anyone, I’ve supported it for 25 years, but it’s just not going to happen this time around, we have to keep working for it.
That’s why I’m very disappointed with Kucinich’s vote–it was a vote for the status quo, with 45,000,000 people uninsured. So, no kudos from me–rather, brickbats.
Dennis always has the perfect, pragmatic, purposeful and expedient response to the bills they pass and ammendments they shred…..and he does the footwork, walks the walk, instead of just talking the talk.
Pelosi and her henchmen bribe, threaten and cheat the middle class; aligning their weaknesses with the fascism of the robber barons; only the rich will survive this. Obama says this bill needs some fine tuning; Kuchinich says it should be shredded, like his ammendment, and he’s right on the money.It
provided the ability for the states to opt- out of the federal program but now they’ll be sued by the rich
health insurers, accustomed to preserve their lucrative profits as they’ve done for most of the decade,
reaping double digit profits yearly and making our system the most expensive in the world while we’re
in economic freefall, while if we went to single-payer now, we could cover everyone and still save 8 bil’n.
What are we waiting for? Frontline has a helthcare program “Sick Around the World” and the countries
all agree, we’d save about 8 billion by going to a single-payer system and would have something we
could finally live with.
“… rates shall be set at a level that does not exceed 125 percent of the prevailing standard rate for comparable coverage in the individual market.”
Standard rates in the individual market are higher than in the group market. Chances are they can raise most rates more than 25 percent, especially once they raise individual rates before the bill takes effect. Buy Aetna, Humana, and United Health Care.
BTW. Be wary of the Medicare fee structure. It too benefits drug companies and device makers and users. If Medicare rates were standard for everything, the doctors you don’t see, the cardiologists putting stents into coronary arteries and the surgeons, will do just fine. The doctors you need to see, the family practice doc, the pediatrician, the general internist, the psychiatrist, will be out of business.
Thanks- courageous Reps Kucinich and Massa, who see and speak clearly. The US majority is Female. The bullies in the House passed a bill to FORCE women to buy health insurance that explicitly DENIES essential reproductive health care, from the same greedy rats who colluded to deny “Pre-existing conditions” and other needs that we all paid them for. Ms. Pelosi was smiling. Is the House crazy or Fascist? The Constitution, which Congressmembers swore to protect, REQUIRES Separation of Church and State. That means the Catholic Bishops should have their say, but legislation must be ‘religion neutral’. The Senate and
Conference and President Obama must really reform health insurance so everyone can get health care they need, without strangers interference. Medicare recipients pay private Blues thousands for Supplemental cover. That could go to non-profit ‘single-payer’ public comprehensive coverage to cover all. Why should Public Health Insurance be ‘cost neutral’ when wars are costing us billions a week, creating a horrific deficit no one demands be cost neutral?
Dennis Kucinich speaks truth to power. Is Obama listening?
While some valid points are made, his entire argument rests solely on the idea of a for-profit competition system being fundamentally flawed and rails against a “monopolistic” (which is by definition incorrect, oligopolistic perhaps) health care system. How does trading one oligopolistic system for a governmental monopoly offer a better choice? We would be trading a ‘high cost oligopoly’ for ‘long wait monopoly.’ Does it serve the poor, or anyone else for that matter, to be able to afford coverage they have to wait on when they need it immediately? Wouldn’t a series of well regulated non-profits be the best option? You take control away from the ‘profiteers’, ‘big money’, ‘wall street’ whatever you want to call them and limit their ability to raise costs unchecked but you retain the fundamental benefits of a competitive system. I’m obviously on a website with a fundamentally one-sided political agenda; but why is the middle ground always ignored?
Answer: the political primary system; but that’s an entirely separate issue.
Here’s a more complete answer to Jill Schmidt’s question.
Various blurbs I viewed about what was going on during the health care “debate” gave me ample warning that “We the People” were about to get one of the more royal screwings in history by the insurance companies and the feds.
I work in health care (40+ years) and Representative Kucinich is absolutely right about the massive increase in “administrators” versus doctors and other health care people. We have more billing people than we have nurses, spending hundreds of thousands of hours per year trying to squeeze money out of insurance companies for the services we render. This all started when they began having for-profit insurance companies (or buzzards) the only goal of which is to hold on to enough money to pay their CEOs millions of dollars in salaries. (Check out the Daily Kos, for one, on compensation for Health Insurance Execs).
We have 12 doctors in my clinic and I can guarantee you their combined salaries do not equal that of the one CEO of the insurance company we use for the employees, whose annual pay last time I looked was about $12 million in base pay and about another $10-12 million in perks. OF COURSE health care costs have been going up!
I won’t even venture into a discussion about the “masters and commanders” of the female reproductive system: the religious right and the roman catholic church. The whole thing is a farce.
The Obama administration has received my very last dime and my very last vote.
Newsflash: the reason the public doesn’t respond with outrage is that the public does NOT find Kucinich or his claims convincing.
Reading the clueless support for him in this forum reveals why: ALL of you are far too quick to blame capitalism itself for our helthcare crisis, and loudly shout that interfering with capitalism is the only solution.
But in the social sciences, there are few facts as sound as this: interfering with the law of supply and demand inevitably either raises costs or forces rationing of supply.
We ALREADY have both in our health care market. The public believes Kucinich and his plans will only make it worse. THAT is why they are content to let the lobbyists get away with this rather than follow Kucinich’s call.
Finally, even that scary clause on p22, allowing a 25% increase, might not be as bad as he says: they are, after all, submitting to alot of regulation to get that 25% increase, that regulation is in turn designed to make sure we actually get more complete coverage for our premiums.
The problem is, of course, that this too is interference with the law of supply and demand, so it too runs the risk of only driving up costs.
Finally, don’t let the ‘progressives’ fool you: one of the reasons Europeans get away with paying less is that the pharmaceutical industry — both US and European — has been financing the expensive drug development process with profits from the US.
That’s right. We have been subsidizing drug development. So what happens when those funds dry up?