WASHINGTON — As public pitchman, President Barack Obama accuses special interests of fighting to block his health care overhaul. "They run their ads. And let's face it, they scare people," he told one weekend audience.
Yet Obama has spent months assembling a formidable lineup of special interests of his own, an essential element of a plan to remake the health care system and succeed where President Bill Clinton memorably failed.
"We have the American Nurses Association, we have the American Medical Association on board," Obama told the weekend crowd in Grand Junction, Colo. "We have an agreement from drug companies to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors. ... The AARP supports this policy."
In the parlance of Washington, the organizations on both sides are special interests — the insurance industry and business groups strongly opposed to the direction health care legislation is taking in Congress, as well as the groups of doctors, nurses, drug makers and labor unions working to pass an overhaul despite any misgivings they may have.
Part of the permanent landscape in the capital, they all lobby Congress and federal agencies on the issues they care most about. Many purchase political ads in campaign season or try to turn out their own memberships to vote for preferred candidates. They have enormous sums at stakes in the outcome of the struggle over Obama's proposed remaking of the health care system.
Take just two:
_ America's Health Insurance Plans has emerged as a leading opponent of the portion of Obama's plan that calls for the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies.
_ The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association is unhappy about the same provision but has pledged to spend a staggering $150 million on television commercials in support of the administration's quest for legislation.
What's the difference?
"They're stakeholders when they're with you, and they're interest groups when they're against you," Mary Matalin, a Republican, said recently, a tongue-in-cheek explanation that hints at the unappealing aroma associated with the label "special interests."
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs seemed to understand as much when he said the administration is benefiting from the help of "interest groups," avoiding the more unsavory term "special interests."
"It'd be sort of odd to go to a town hall meeting and rail against interest groups that are supporting reform ... who have acknowledged that it's time for health care reform," he said. The president's criticism is aimed at "interest groups that are aligned to keep the status quo either because it benefits them or they have a vested interest."
Far more than semantics is involved.
Eager to succeed where Clinton failed, Obama nailed down agreements with deep-pocketed drug makers and others. The effect was not only to secure allies who could pay for grass-roots and advertising campaigns but also to drive a wedge between Republicans and organizations that have supported them in the past.
Despite the obvious turbulence surrounding Obama's proposals, there is evidence the strategy is working. GOP discomfort was obvious when Rep. John Boehner, the House Republican leader, accused the drug industry of trying to protect its own profits by "cutting a deal with the bully" on health care.
It marked a turnabout from the days when congressional Republicans received two-thirds of the political contributions handed out by the pharmaceutical industry.
Ken Johnson, a senior vice president at PhRMA, sought the high ground in response. "We have been working diligently for more than a year to advance bipartisan health care reform. We're proud of those efforts, and they are completely consistent with our core principles."
The drug makers went first in making a deal with the White House, agreeing to pick up $80 billion in additional costs over the next decade to help defray the expenses of the legislation.
The American Hospital Association agreed to shoulder an additional $155 billion.
In exchange, both won assurances the White House would protect them against attempts in Congress to seek additional cuts in their projected Medicare and Medicaid payments.
The American Medical Association's key issue was different. Doctors hope the legislation will allow them to avoid a looming 21 percent cut in payments under Medicare. The cost to the government for that would be about $230 billion over a decade.
Obama also agreed to require individuals to purchase insurance, reversing a position he held during his campaign. "My thinking on the issue of mandates has evolved. And I think that that is typical of most people who study this problem deeper," he said.
It was a bow to the special interests — some now with Obama, others not — that suddenly opened up the possibility of millions of new customers with insurance to help pay for their health care.
by the associated press
AdBrite
AdBrite
Showing posts with label Health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
HEALTH Panel says slow down on Tylenol
ADELPHI, Md. — Government experts called for sweeping safety restrictions Tuesday on the most widely used painkiller, including reducing the maximum dose of Tylenol and eliminating prescription drugs such as Vicodin and Percocet.
The Food and Drug Administration assembled 37 experts to recommend ways to reduce deadly overdoses with acetaminophen, which is the leading cause of liver failure in the U.S. and sends 56,000 people to the emergency room annually. About 200 die each year.
"We’re here because there are inadvertent overdoses with this drug that are fatal and this is the one opportunity we have to do something that will have a big impact,” said Dr. Judith Kramer of Duke University Medical Center.
But over-the-counter cold medicines — such as Nyquil and Theraflu — that combine other drugs with acetaminophen can stay on the market, the panel said.
The FDA is not required to follow the advice of its panels, but it usually does.
The panel recommended 21-16 to lower the maximum dose of over-the-counter acetaminophen from 4 grams, or eight pills of a medication such as Extra Strength Tylenol. They did not specify how much it should be lowered.
The panel also endorsed limiting the maximum single dose of the drug to 650 milligrams. That would be down from the 1,000-milligram dose, or two tablets of Extra Strength Tylenol.
Industry responds
The industry group that represents Johnson & Johnson, Wyeth and other companies defended the current dosing that appears on over-the-counter products.
"I think it’s a very useful dose and one that is needed for treating chronic pain, such as people with chronic osteoarthritis,” said Linda Suydam, president of the Consumer Healthcare Products Association.
Some on the panel opposed a sweeping withdraw of products that are widely used to control severe, chronic pain.
"To make this shift without very clear understanding of the implications on the management of pain would be a huge mistake,” said Dr. Robert Kerns of Yale University.
If the drugs stay on the market, they should carry a black box warning, the most serious safety label available, the panel said.
by the associated press
The Food and Drug Administration assembled 37 experts to recommend ways to reduce deadly overdoses with acetaminophen, which is the leading cause of liver failure in the U.S. and sends 56,000 people to the emergency room annually. About 200 die each year.
"We’re here because there are inadvertent overdoses with this drug that are fatal and this is the one opportunity we have to do something that will have a big impact,” said Dr. Judith Kramer of Duke University Medical Center.
But over-the-counter cold medicines — such as Nyquil and Theraflu — that combine other drugs with acetaminophen can stay on the market, the panel said.
The FDA is not required to follow the advice of its panels, but it usually does.
The panel recommended 21-16 to lower the maximum dose of over-the-counter acetaminophen from 4 grams, or eight pills of a medication such as Extra Strength Tylenol. They did not specify how much it should be lowered.
The panel also endorsed limiting the maximum single dose of the drug to 650 milligrams. That would be down from the 1,000-milligram dose, or two tablets of Extra Strength Tylenol.
Industry responds
The industry group that represents Johnson & Johnson, Wyeth and other companies defended the current dosing that appears on over-the-counter products.
"I think it’s a very useful dose and one that is needed for treating chronic pain, such as people with chronic osteoarthritis,” said Linda Suydam, president of the Consumer Healthcare Products Association.
Some on the panel opposed a sweeping withdraw of products that are widely used to control severe, chronic pain.
"To make this shift without very clear understanding of the implications on the management of pain would be a huge mistake,” said Dr. Robert Kerns of Yale University.
If the drugs stay on the market, they should carry a black box warning, the most serious safety label available, the panel said.
by the associated press
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Vaccine for diabetes
PITTSBURGH — The doctor had barely pulled away the needle when a blister appeared on Tracey Berg-Fulton’s abdomen: An experimental shot was revving up the 24-year-old’s immune system — part of a bold quest to create a vaccine-like therapy for diabetes.
"If we’re right, that is what’s going to stop Type 1 diabetes,” said Dr. David Finegold as he watched the blisters appear.
It’s a big "if.” The research is in its infancy, a first-step experiment to be sure the vaccine approach is safe before researchers test their real target — kids newly diagnosed with this deadliest form of diabetes.
Scientists increasingly hope to control Type 1 diabetes by curbing the rogue immune cells that cause it, before patients become completely dependent on daily insulin injections to survive.
by the associated press
"If we’re right, that is what’s going to stop Type 1 diabetes,” said Dr. David Finegold as he watched the blisters appear.
It’s a big "if.” The research is in its infancy, a first-step experiment to be sure the vaccine approach is safe before researchers test their real target — kids newly diagnosed with this deadliest form of diabetes.
Scientists increasingly hope to control Type 1 diabetes by curbing the rogue immune cells that cause it, before patients become completely dependent on daily insulin injections to survive.
by the associated press
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Health-Care Activists
In the high-stakes battle over health care, a growing cadre of liberal activists is aiming its sharpest firepower against Democratic senators who they accuse of being insufficiently committed to the cause.
The attacks -- ranging from tart news releases to full-fledged advertising campaigns -- have elicited rebuttals from lawmakers and sparked a debate inside the party over the best strategy for achieving President Obama's top priority of a comprehensive health-system overhaul.
The rising tensions between Democratic legislators and constituencies that would typically be their natural allies underscore the high hurdles for Obama as he tries to hold together a diverse, fragile coalition. Activists say they are simply pressing for quick delivery of "true health reform," but the intraparty rift runs the risk of alienating centrist Democrats who will be needed to pass a bill.
In recent days -- and during this week's congressional recess -- left-leaning bloggers and grass-roots organizations such as MoveOn.org, Health Care for America Now and the Service Employees International Union have singled out Democratic Sens. Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), Arlen Specter (Pa.) and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) for the criticism more often reserved for opposition party members.
"Will Mary Landrieu sell out Louisiana for $1.6 million?" says one Internet ad that suggests a link between contributions she has received from the medical industry and her reluctance to back the creation of a government-sponsored insurance option.
In many instances, the ad buys are relatively small. But Obama demonstrated the political power of Internet-based grass-roots activity in the presidential campaign. Still, as health care moves from electoral rallying cry to the tedious work of legislating, Obama finds himself caught between his campaign foot soldiers and the elected politicians who will vote.
One of his most stalwart supporters, for instance, says time is running out on efforts by the president and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to forge a bipartisan compromise on legislation affecting more than one-fifth of the economy.
"We are getting to the point if people aren't going to respond to the patience and openness of Senator Baucus, we should begin to make a different plan," said Andrew Stern, president of the 2 million-member SEIU.
Stern said his organization issued a release chastising Feinstein last week, because she should "put her foot on the gas, not the brake" on health reform.
The gas pedal to go where?" Feinstein replied, explaining she has questions about how a broad expansion of health coverage will be paid for.
"I do not think this is helpful. It doesn't move me one whit," she said. "They are spending a lot of money on something that is not productive."
Much of the sparring centers around whether to create a government-managed health insurance program that would compete with private insurers. Obama supports the concept, dubbed the "public option," but he has been vague on details. Left-of-center activists want a powerful entity with the ability to set prices for doctors and hospitals.
But in the Senate, where the Democrats do not have the 60 votes needed to stop a filibuster, members are weighing alternatives such as a nonprofit cooperative or a "fallback" provision that would kick in only if market reforms fail.
"Democratic senators are taking millions of dollars from insurance and health-care interests and getting lobbied by those donors and coming out against a position that 76 percent of Americans agree on," said Adam Green, interim chief executive of Change Congress.
While recent polls show high initial support for a government option, the number declines if told the insurance industry could fold as a result. Change Congress and its sister group Progressive Change Campaign Committee are airing cable and Internet ads against lawmakers such as Landrieu and Nelson, who have not endorsed a robust public plan.
Green, in an interview, was hard-pressed to articulate a substantive argument for the public plan but said that it "has become a proxy for the question of Democrats who stand on principle and represent their constituents."
The Web-based MoveOn.org plans to run ads this week against Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) over the issue.
"The Democrats were voted into office to fix this problem," said MoveOn political advocacy director Ilyse Hogue. "It is absolutely our job to hold them accountable."
One Democratic strategist who is working full-time on health reform was apoplectic over what he called wasted time, energy and resources by the organizations.
The strategist, who asked for anonymity because he was criticizing colleagues, said: "These are friends of ours. I would much rather see a quiet call placed by [Obama chief of staff] Rahm Emanuel saying this isn't helpful. Instead, we try to decimate them?"
Richard Kirsch, campaign manager of the labor-backed Health Care for America Now coalition of 1,000 groups, believes grass-roots pressure and targeted advertising are already having an impact. After the group aired a spot in Pennsylvania attacking Specter for remarks critical of a public plan -- and supplemented that with flyers and phone calls -- the lawmaker shifted.
At an event Thursday, Specter said he is willing to consider a compromise. "That shows Senator Specter has come a long way," Kirsch said.
Listening to constituents, even those speaking over the airwaves, is part of "representative democracy," Specter said.
But Kirsch may still end up being disappointed by the newest Democratic senator. Specter, voicing the sort of flexibility the groups dislike, said, "This legislation is so complicated and so important that we all ought to be flexible and not approach it with fixed positions."
Like Specter, Wyden is sanguine about ads in his home state intended to pressure him to embrace a liberal bill.
"I get an election certificate from the people of Oregon," said Wyden, whose bipartisan health bill picked up its 14th co-sponsor last week. "As far as these ads are concerned, I pay them no attention."
from the washington post
The attacks -- ranging from tart news releases to full-fledged advertising campaigns -- have elicited rebuttals from lawmakers and sparked a debate inside the party over the best strategy for achieving President Obama's top priority of a comprehensive health-system overhaul.
The rising tensions between Democratic legislators and constituencies that would typically be their natural allies underscore the high hurdles for Obama as he tries to hold together a diverse, fragile coalition. Activists say they are simply pressing for quick delivery of "true health reform," but the intraparty rift runs the risk of alienating centrist Democrats who will be needed to pass a bill.
In recent days -- and during this week's congressional recess -- left-leaning bloggers and grass-roots organizations such as MoveOn.org, Health Care for America Now and the Service Employees International Union have singled out Democratic Sens. Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), Arlen Specter (Pa.) and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) for the criticism more often reserved for opposition party members.
"Will Mary Landrieu sell out Louisiana for $1.6 million?" says one Internet ad that suggests a link between contributions she has received from the medical industry and her reluctance to back the creation of a government-sponsored insurance option.
In many instances, the ad buys are relatively small. But Obama demonstrated the political power of Internet-based grass-roots activity in the presidential campaign. Still, as health care moves from electoral rallying cry to the tedious work of legislating, Obama finds himself caught between his campaign foot soldiers and the elected politicians who will vote.
One of his most stalwart supporters, for instance, says time is running out on efforts by the president and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to forge a bipartisan compromise on legislation affecting more than one-fifth of the economy.
"We are getting to the point if people aren't going to respond to the patience and openness of Senator Baucus, we should begin to make a different plan," said Andrew Stern, president of the 2 million-member SEIU.
Stern said his organization issued a release chastising Feinstein last week, because she should "put her foot on the gas, not the brake" on health reform.
The gas pedal to go where?" Feinstein replied, explaining she has questions about how a broad expansion of health coverage will be paid for.
"I do not think this is helpful. It doesn't move me one whit," she said. "They are spending a lot of money on something that is not productive."
Much of the sparring centers around whether to create a government-managed health insurance program that would compete with private insurers. Obama supports the concept, dubbed the "public option," but he has been vague on details. Left-of-center activists want a powerful entity with the ability to set prices for doctors and hospitals.
But in the Senate, where the Democrats do not have the 60 votes needed to stop a filibuster, members are weighing alternatives such as a nonprofit cooperative or a "fallback" provision that would kick in only if market reforms fail.
"Democratic senators are taking millions of dollars from insurance and health-care interests and getting lobbied by those donors and coming out against a position that 76 percent of Americans agree on," said Adam Green, interim chief executive of Change Congress.
While recent polls show high initial support for a government option, the number declines if told the insurance industry could fold as a result. Change Congress and its sister group Progressive Change Campaign Committee are airing cable and Internet ads against lawmakers such as Landrieu and Nelson, who have not endorsed a robust public plan.
Green, in an interview, was hard-pressed to articulate a substantive argument for the public plan but said that it "has become a proxy for the question of Democrats who stand on principle and represent their constituents."
The Web-based MoveOn.org plans to run ads this week against Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) over the issue.
"The Democrats were voted into office to fix this problem," said MoveOn political advocacy director Ilyse Hogue. "It is absolutely our job to hold them accountable."
One Democratic strategist who is working full-time on health reform was apoplectic over what he called wasted time, energy and resources by the organizations.
The strategist, who asked for anonymity because he was criticizing colleagues, said: "These are friends of ours. I would much rather see a quiet call placed by [Obama chief of staff] Rahm Emanuel saying this isn't helpful. Instead, we try to decimate them?"
Richard Kirsch, campaign manager of the labor-backed Health Care for America Now coalition of 1,000 groups, believes grass-roots pressure and targeted advertising are already having an impact. After the group aired a spot in Pennsylvania attacking Specter for remarks critical of a public plan -- and supplemented that with flyers and phone calls -- the lawmaker shifted.
At an event Thursday, Specter said he is willing to consider a compromise. "That shows Senator Specter has come a long way," Kirsch said.
Listening to constituents, even those speaking over the airwaves, is part of "representative democracy," Specter said.
But Kirsch may still end up being disappointed by the newest Democratic senator. Specter, voicing the sort of flexibility the groups dislike, said, "This legislation is so complicated and so important that we all ought to be flexible and not approach it with fixed positions."
Like Specter, Wyden is sanguine about ads in his home state intended to pressure him to embrace a liberal bill.
"I get an election certificate from the people of Oregon," said Wyden, whose bipartisan health bill picked up its 14th co-sponsor last week. "As far as these ads are concerned, I pay them no attention."
from the washington post
Friday, June 26, 2009
President Barack Obama tax on health benefits
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama left the door open to a new tax on health care benefits Wednesday, and officials said top lawmakers and the White House were seeking $150 billion in concessions from the nation's hospitals as they sought support for legislation struggling to emerge in Congress.
"I don't want to prejudge what they're doing," the president said, referring to proposals in the Senate to tax workers who get expensive insurance policies. Obama, who campaigned against the tax when he ran for president, drew a quick rebuff from organized labor.
Obama also fielded a pointed personal question during an ABC News town hall at the White House on Wednesday. The prime-time program was the latest in a string of events designed to build public support for his plan to slow the rise in health care costs and expand coverage to the nearly 50 million uninsured.
Dr. Orrin Devinsky, a neurologist at the New York University Langone Medical Center, challenged Obama: What if the president's wife and daughters got sick? Would Obama promise that they would get only the services allowed under a new government insurance plan he's proposing. Obama wouldn't bite.
If "it's my family member, if it's my wife, if it's my children, if it's my grandmother, I always want them to get the very best care," Obama said.
Earlier in the day, the administration and its allies pushed for a prominent display of progress in the Senate before Congress begins a weeklong vacation on Friday.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., labored in a series of meetings to produce at least an outline of legislation that could command bipartisan support. Of the five House and Senate committees working on health care, Finance is the only one that appears to have a chance at such an agreement.
For their part, key Republicans pressed the White House for assurances that any concessions made now would not merely lead to additional demands at a later date. "We want to know the president is working in good faith along the way as we are," said Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, after meeting with Nancy-Ann DeParle, the top White House official on the issue.
Baucus appeared especially eager to show progress before the exodus from the Capitol began.
To that end, several officials said he was negotiating with representatives of the nation's hospitals, hoping to conclude an agreement that would build on an $80 billion weekend deal with the pharmaceutical industry.
Hospitals were being asked to accept a reduction of roughly $155 billion over the next decade in fees they are promised under government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, according to numerous officials.
Officials at the American Hospital Association and the Federation of American Hospitals said they could not comment on any discussions.
Baucus is seeking similar concessions from nursing homes, insurance companies, medical device makers and possibly others, noting that any legislation would create a huge new pool of customers for industry providers.
At its heart, any legislation is expected to require insurance companies to offer coverage to any applicant, without exclusions or higher premiums for pre-existing medical conditions.
Overall, Baucus has said he hopes to hold the size of any legislation to $1 trillion or less, and in private negotiations, there were discussions about further scaling back eligibility for insurance subsidies from the government.
Additionally, Baucus was still searching for ways to cover the cost of his emerging legislation, and numerous officials said he appeared roughly $200 billion shy of achieving that goal. They added that a proposal to make it harder for taxpayers to itemize their medical expenses was drawing renewed interest among key senators as one way to raise revenue.
Current law allows those expenses to be itemized when they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The proposal under review would raise that to 10 percent, officials said.
At the White House, Obama sidestepped when asked if he was open to taxing health care benefits — a proposal he opposed vigorously in the campaign for the White House.
"I have identified the ways that I think we should finance this. I think Congress should adopt them. I'm going to wait and see what ideas ultimately they come up with," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"I don't want to prejudge what they're doing. We've put forward what we think is best."
Organized labor weighed in quickly.
Gerald W. McEntee, president of the 1.6 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said in an interview that union leaders believe Obama is "a person of his word." He was referring to Obama's opposition to taxing those benefits during last year's campaign.
"They're not going to tolerate that," McEntee said of workers' views of that proposal.
It was the latest in a series of signs of presidential flexibility. He has said he could accept a requirement for individuals to buy insurance, a position he opposed in the campaign.
Baucus and many Republicans support taxing health care benefits, and officials have said discussions center on imposing the tax in cases in which premium costs exceed $17,000 combined in payments by the employer and worker. Democrats want to exempt union members covered by contracts, but Republicans are resisting.
The officials who provided specifics on the negotiations in the Senate did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to disclose private talks.
ABC News was the lone network broadcasting Obama's town hall — drawing criticism from Republicans who wanted equal time.
by the associated press
"I don't want to prejudge what they're doing," the president said, referring to proposals in the Senate to tax workers who get expensive insurance policies. Obama, who campaigned against the tax when he ran for president, drew a quick rebuff from organized labor.
Obama also fielded a pointed personal question during an ABC News town hall at the White House on Wednesday. The prime-time program was the latest in a string of events designed to build public support for his plan to slow the rise in health care costs and expand coverage to the nearly 50 million uninsured.
Dr. Orrin Devinsky, a neurologist at the New York University Langone Medical Center, challenged Obama: What if the president's wife and daughters got sick? Would Obama promise that they would get only the services allowed under a new government insurance plan he's proposing. Obama wouldn't bite.
If "it's my family member, if it's my wife, if it's my children, if it's my grandmother, I always want them to get the very best care," Obama said.
Earlier in the day, the administration and its allies pushed for a prominent display of progress in the Senate before Congress begins a weeklong vacation on Friday.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., labored in a series of meetings to produce at least an outline of legislation that could command bipartisan support. Of the five House and Senate committees working on health care, Finance is the only one that appears to have a chance at such an agreement.
For their part, key Republicans pressed the White House for assurances that any concessions made now would not merely lead to additional demands at a later date. "We want to know the president is working in good faith along the way as we are," said Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, after meeting with Nancy-Ann DeParle, the top White House official on the issue.
Baucus appeared especially eager to show progress before the exodus from the Capitol began.
To that end, several officials said he was negotiating with representatives of the nation's hospitals, hoping to conclude an agreement that would build on an $80 billion weekend deal with the pharmaceutical industry.
Hospitals were being asked to accept a reduction of roughly $155 billion over the next decade in fees they are promised under government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, according to numerous officials.
Officials at the American Hospital Association and the Federation of American Hospitals said they could not comment on any discussions.
Baucus is seeking similar concessions from nursing homes, insurance companies, medical device makers and possibly others, noting that any legislation would create a huge new pool of customers for industry providers.
At its heart, any legislation is expected to require insurance companies to offer coverage to any applicant, without exclusions or higher premiums for pre-existing medical conditions.
Overall, Baucus has said he hopes to hold the size of any legislation to $1 trillion or less, and in private negotiations, there were discussions about further scaling back eligibility for insurance subsidies from the government.
Additionally, Baucus was still searching for ways to cover the cost of his emerging legislation, and numerous officials said he appeared roughly $200 billion shy of achieving that goal. They added that a proposal to make it harder for taxpayers to itemize their medical expenses was drawing renewed interest among key senators as one way to raise revenue.
Current law allows those expenses to be itemized when they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The proposal under review would raise that to 10 percent, officials said.
At the White House, Obama sidestepped when asked if he was open to taxing health care benefits — a proposal he opposed vigorously in the campaign for the White House.
"I have identified the ways that I think we should finance this. I think Congress should adopt them. I'm going to wait and see what ideas ultimately they come up with," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"I don't want to prejudge what they're doing. We've put forward what we think is best."
Organized labor weighed in quickly.
Gerald W. McEntee, president of the 1.6 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said in an interview that union leaders believe Obama is "a person of his word." He was referring to Obama's opposition to taxing those benefits during last year's campaign.
"They're not going to tolerate that," McEntee said of workers' views of that proposal.
It was the latest in a series of signs of presidential flexibility. He has said he could accept a requirement for individuals to buy insurance, a position he opposed in the campaign.
Baucus and many Republicans support taxing health care benefits, and officials have said discussions center on imposing the tax in cases in which premium costs exceed $17,000 combined in payments by the employer and worker. Democrats want to exempt union members covered by contracts, but Republicans are resisting.
The officials who provided specifics on the negotiations in the Senate did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to disclose private talks.
ABC News was the lone network broadcasting Obama's town hall — drawing criticism from Republicans who wanted equal time.
by the associated press
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Dodd, Graham fight over health care
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Lindsey Graham says the Senate will not let the U.S. "go down the government-run health care road."
The South Carolina Republican was on a Sunday morning talk show repeating the charges of those opposed to President Barack Obama's attempts to overhaul the health care system. Graham said Obama's plan would let a government bureaucrat stand between people needing treatment and their doctors.
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who is heading the reform effort in the Senate, reminded Graham that a new poll showed the 72 percent of Americans want a government role in health care and expressed a willingness to pay higher taxes for that.
The senators appeared on ABC's "This Week."
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Lindsey Graham says the Senate will not let the U.S. "go down the government-run health care road."
The South Carolina Republican was on a Sunday morning talk show repeating the charges of those opposed to President Barack Obama's attempts to overhaul the health care system. Graham said Obama's plan would let a government bureaucrat stand between people needing treatment and their doctors.
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who is heading the reform effort in the Senate, reminded Graham that a new poll showed the 72 percent of Americans want a government role in health care and expressed a willingness to pay higher taxes for that.
The senators appeared on ABC's "This Week."
(This version CORRECTS long headline that Graham says Obama plan unacceptable)
by the associated press
The South Carolina Republican was on a Sunday morning talk show repeating the charges of those opposed to President Barack Obama's attempts to overhaul the health care system. Graham said Obama's plan would let a government bureaucrat stand between people needing treatment and their doctors.
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who is heading the reform effort in the Senate, reminded Graham that a new poll showed the 72 percent of Americans want a government role in health care and expressed a willingness to pay higher taxes for that.
The senators appeared on ABC's "This Week."
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Lindsey Graham says the Senate will not let the U.S. "go down the government-run health care road."
The South Carolina Republican was on a Sunday morning talk show repeating the charges of those opposed to President Barack Obama's attempts to overhaul the health care system. Graham said Obama's plan would let a government bureaucrat stand between people needing treatment and their doctors.
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., who is heading the reform effort in the Senate, reminded Graham that a new poll showed the 72 percent of Americans want a government role in health care and expressed a willingness to pay higher taxes for that.
The senators appeared on ABC's "This Week."
(This version CORRECTS long headline that Graham says Obama plan unacceptable)
by the associated press
Affordable prescriptions
WASHINGTON — The pharmaceutical industry agreed Saturday to spend $80 billion over the next decade improving drug benefits for seniors on Medicare and defraying the cost of President Barack Obama’s health care legislation, capping secretive negotiations involving key lawmakers and the White House.
The deal "means affordable prices on prescription drugs when Medicare benefits don’t cover the cost of prescriptions,” said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
Obama praised the deal, calling it "a turning point.”
Baucus’ announcement said drug companies would pay half of the cost of brand-name drugs for seniors in the so-called doughnut hole — a gap in coverage that is a feature of many of the plans providing prescription coverage under Medicare.
Other officials said wealthier Medicare beneficiaries would not receive the same break, but there was no mention of that in the statement.
In addition, the entire cost of the drug would count toward a patient’s out-of-pocket costs, meaning that their insurance coverage would cover more of their expenses than otherwise.
Billy Tauzin, president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said, "America’s pharmaceutical research and biotechnology companies are signaling their strong support” for health care reform.
by the associated press
The deal "means affordable prices on prescription drugs when Medicare benefits don’t cover the cost of prescriptions,” said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
Obama praised the deal, calling it "a turning point.”
Baucus’ announcement said drug companies would pay half of the cost of brand-name drugs for seniors in the so-called doughnut hole — a gap in coverage that is a feature of many of the plans providing prescription coverage under Medicare.
Other officials said wealthier Medicare beneficiaries would not receive the same break, but there was no mention of that in the statement.
In addition, the entire cost of the drug would count toward a patient’s out-of-pocket costs, meaning that their insurance coverage would cover more of their expenses than otherwise.
Billy Tauzin, president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said, "America’s pharmaceutical research and biotechnology companies are signaling their strong support” for health care reform.
by the associated press
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Obama's Health plan could cost $1 trillion
WASHINGTON — A leading health care bill under consideration in Congress would cost the government an estimated $1 trillion over the next decade and reduce the ranks of the uninsured by about one-third, or 16 million individuals, congressional budget officials said Monday in a preliminary estimate report.
In a letter to Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas W. Elmendorf said the estimate was based on major provisions contained in an incomplete draft of the bill. He noted that "taking all of its provisions into account could change our assessment of the proposal’s effects on the budget and insurance coverage rates though probably not by substantial amounts relative to the net costs already identified.”
The CBO released its preliminary estimate as several congressional committees looked ahead to votes on legislation that President Barack Obama has placed atop his list of domestic priorities.
Ironically, hours later, key House Democrats unveiled a plan to pour nearly $300 billion into physician payments in Medicare over the next decade. Under current law, doctors face a 21 percent cut in Medicare fees in January.
Obama has proposed reducing overall costs within the health care system at the same time coverage is extended to an estimated 50 million who lack it. He has proposed nearly $1 trillion in savings through spending cuts and tax increases.
Many of the cuts would fall on major health care providers and will be difficult to support for many Democrats in Congress.
Eager to minimize the political risk, the White House and top aides on the Senate Finance Committee are both negotiating directly with the pharmaceutical industry, officials said during the day.
by the associated press
In a letter to Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas W. Elmendorf said the estimate was based on major provisions contained in an incomplete draft of the bill. He noted that "taking all of its provisions into account could change our assessment of the proposal’s effects on the budget and insurance coverage rates though probably not by substantial amounts relative to the net costs already identified.”
The CBO released its preliminary estimate as several congressional committees looked ahead to votes on legislation that President Barack Obama has placed atop his list of domestic priorities.
Ironically, hours later, key House Democrats unveiled a plan to pour nearly $300 billion into physician payments in Medicare over the next decade. Under current law, doctors face a 21 percent cut in Medicare fees in January.
Obama has proposed reducing overall costs within the health care system at the same time coverage is extended to an estimated 50 million who lack it. He has proposed nearly $1 trillion in savings through spending cuts and tax increases.
Many of the cuts would fall on major health care providers and will be difficult to support for many Democrats in Congress.
Eager to minimize the political risk, the White House and top aides on the Senate Finance Committee are both negotiating directly with the pharmaceutical industry, officials said during the day.
by the associated press
Monday, June 15, 2009
Compromise could ease health care overhaul
WASHINGTON — As Congress begins work on putting President Barack Obama’s goal of universal health coverage into law, administration officials and allies sought to sidestep an unpopular tax on existing benefits and Republicans’ objection to a government competitor to private plans.
Cabinet officials and Obama allies on Sunday sought to rein in lawmakers, who were expected this week to introduce specific plans that run counter to Obama’s political promises. Many urged lawmakers to consider a cooperative program that would expand coverage to the 50 million uninsured Americans with taxpayer support without direct governmental control.
The concessions could be the smoothest way to deliver the bipartisan health care legislation the administration seeks by its self-imposed August deadline, officials said.
"There is no one-size-fits-all idea,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on ABC’s "This Week.”
"The president has said, ‘These are the kinds of goals I’m after: lowering costs, covering all Americans, higher-quality care.’ And around those goals, there are lots of ways to get there,” Sebelius said.
While supporters from Obama’s left have advocated a government-run option, presidential aides and congressional leaders in both parties have sought a speedy compromise.
Leading that pack: the cooperative approach, similar to rural utilities that have government financial support but operate independently. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who chairs the Budget Committee, has offered the co-op idea as a way to avoid a bruising and protracted political wrangle on Capitol Hill.
Conrad’s plan drew interest from moderate Republicans, and Obama’s team also sees such a compromise as an option.
But the answer for Republicans: Unacceptable.
"I think that ... a government plan is a nonstarter,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "There are a whole lot of other things we can agree to do on a bipartisan basis.”
To reach that bipartisan solution, Democrats were likely to make concessions to find the $1 trillion the plan would cost over the next decade.
One way to get there would be to tax health benefits for families whose coverage costs $15,000 a year or more in premiums paid by employer and employee combined.
But Obama personally opposes the move, which is politically unpopular.
by the associated press
Cabinet officials and Obama allies on Sunday sought to rein in lawmakers, who were expected this week to introduce specific plans that run counter to Obama’s political promises. Many urged lawmakers to consider a cooperative program that would expand coverage to the 50 million uninsured Americans with taxpayer support without direct governmental control.
The concessions could be the smoothest way to deliver the bipartisan health care legislation the administration seeks by its self-imposed August deadline, officials said.
"There is no one-size-fits-all idea,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on ABC’s "This Week.”
"The president has said, ‘These are the kinds of goals I’m after: lowering costs, covering all Americans, higher-quality care.’ And around those goals, there are lots of ways to get there,” Sebelius said.
While supporters from Obama’s left have advocated a government-run option, presidential aides and congressional leaders in both parties have sought a speedy compromise.
Leading that pack: the cooperative approach, similar to rural utilities that have government financial support but operate independently. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who chairs the Budget Committee, has offered the co-op idea as a way to avoid a bruising and protracted political wrangle on Capitol Hill.
Conrad’s plan drew interest from moderate Republicans, and Obama’s team also sees such a compromise as an option.
But the answer for Republicans: Unacceptable.
"I think that ... a government plan is a nonstarter,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "There are a whole lot of other things we can agree to do on a bipartisan basis.”
To reach that bipartisan solution, Democrats were likely to make concessions to find the $1 trillion the plan would cost over the next decade.
One way to get there would be to tax health benefits for families whose coverage costs $15,000 a year or more in premiums paid by employer and employee combined.
But Obama personally opposes the move, which is politically unpopular.
by the associated press
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Swine flu pandemic update
GENEVA (AP) — Swine flu is now formally a pandemic, a declaration by U.N. health officials that will speed vaccine production and spur government spending to combat the first global flu epidemic in 41 years. Thursday's announcement by the World Health Organization doesn't mean the virus is any more lethal — only that its spread is considered unstoppable.
Since it was first detected in late April in Mexico and the United States, swine flu has reached 74 countries, infecting nearly 29,000 people. Most who catch the bug have only mild symptoms and don't need medical treatment.
WHO chief Dr. Margaret Chan made the long-awaited declaration after the U.N. agency held an emergency meeting with flu experts and said she was moving to phase 6 — the agency's highest alert level — which means a pandemic is under way.
"The world is moving into the early days of its first influenza pandemic in the 21st century," Chan said in Geneva.
Dr. Thomas Frieden, the new head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in Atlanta that he does not expect widespread public anxiety in the United States as a result of the declaration, noting it came nearly two months after the virus was identified.
For many weeks, U.S. health officials have been treating it as a pandemic, increasing the availability of anti-viral flu medicines and pouring money into a possible vaccination program. And scientists have grown to understand that the virus is generally not much more severe than the seasonal flu.
"That helps to tamp down any fears that may be excessive," Frieden said at a news conference — his first as CDC director.
But the virus can still be deadly and may change into a more frightening form in the near future, and so people should not be complacent, he added.
So far, swine flu has caused 144 deaths, compared with ordinary flu that kills up to 500,000 people a year.
The pandemic decision might have been made much earlier if WHO had more accurate information about swine flu's rising sweep through Europe. Chan said she called the emergency meeting with flu experts after concerns were raised that some countries, such as Britain, were not accurately reporting their cases.
Chan said the experts unanimously agreed there was a wider spread of swine flu than was being reported.
She would not say which country tipped the world into the pandemic, but WHO flu chief Keiji Fukuda said the situation from Australia seemed to indicate the virus was spreading rapidly there — more than 1,300 cases were reported by Thursday.
In Chile, authorities have identified almost 1,700 cases to WHO.
Many health experts said the world has been in a pandemic for weeks but WHO became too bogged down by politics to declare one. In May, several countries urged WHO not to declare a pandemic, fearing it would cause social and economic turmoil. At the time, WHO said it would rewrite its pandemic definition to avoid announcing one.
But with the recent surge in cases across Europe, Chile, Australia and Japan, the agency was under increasing pressure to acknowledge a pandemic.
"This is WHO finally catching up with the facts," said Michael Osterholm, a flu expert at the University of Minnesota.
David Ropeik, an expert in risk perception and communication at Harvard University, says the word pandemic is less frightening than when emerged during worries about bird flu a few years ago.
He said the "soft buildup" to declaring swine flu a pandemic has been helpful.
"That allows people to get used to what is otherwise a scary word, understand the particulars of the disease, and that should mean reaction will be a little more information-based and a little less emotional," Ropeik said in an e-mail.
WHO will now recommend that pharmaceutical companies make swine flu vaccine. The agency typically recommends which flu strains drug companies should use in the vaccines. In a global outbreak, WHO also advises whether companies should make pandemic vaccine.
The decision to make pandemic vaccine is a gamble. Most flu vaccine makers cannot make both regular seasonal flu vaccine and pandemic vaccine at the same time. That means they must decide which one the world will need more.
Drug giant GlaxoSmithKline PLC said it could start commercial production of pandemic vaccine in July but that it would take months before large quantities are available.
Glaxo spokesman Stephen Rea said the company's first doses of vaccine would be reserved for countries who had ordered it in advance, including Belgium, Britain and France. He said Glaxo would also donate 50 million doses to WHO for poor countries.
Pascal Barollier, a spokesman for Sanofi-Aventis, said they were also working on a pandemic vaccine but WHO had not yet asked them to start making mass quantities of it.
WHO described the pandemic as "moderate." Fukuda said people should not get overly anxious about the virus. "Understand it, put it in context, and then you get on with things," he said.
Still, about half of the people who have died from swine flu were previously young and healthy — people who are not usually susceptible to flu. Swine flu is also crowding out regular flu viruses. Both features are typical of pandemic flu viruses.
Swine flu is also continuing to spread during the start of summer in the northern hemisphere. Normally, flu viruses disappear with warm weather, but swine flu is proving to be resilient.
"What this declaration does do is remind the world that flu viruses like H1N1 need to be taken seriously," said U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, warning that more cases could crop up in the fall.
Now that a pandemic has been declared, some countries might be prompted to devote more money to containing the virus. Many developed countries have pandemic preparedness plans that link spending to a WHO declaration.
The U.N. is keen to avoid panic. "We must guard against rash and discriminatory action, such as travel bans or trade restrictions," said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
Fear has already gripped Argentina, where thousands have flooded hospitals this week, bringing emergency health services in Buenos Aires to the brink of collapse during winter weather. Last month, a bus arriving in Argentina from Chile was stoned by people who thought a passenger had swine flu.
China has quarantined travelers, including New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, on the slightest suspicion of contact with an infected person.
The U.S. government has already increased the availability of flu-fighting medicines and authorized $1 billion for developing a new swine flu vaccine. In addition, new cases seem to be declining in many parts of the country, U.S. health officials say, as North America moves out of its traditional winter flu season.
Still, New York City reported three more swine flu deaths Thursday, including a child under 2, a teenager and a person in their 30s.
"Countries where outbreaks appear to have peaked should prepare for a second wave of infection," Chan warned.
by the associated press
Since it was first detected in late April in Mexico and the United States, swine flu has reached 74 countries, infecting nearly 29,000 people. Most who catch the bug have only mild symptoms and don't need medical treatment.
WHO chief Dr. Margaret Chan made the long-awaited declaration after the U.N. agency held an emergency meeting with flu experts and said she was moving to phase 6 — the agency's highest alert level — which means a pandemic is under way.
"The world is moving into the early days of its first influenza pandemic in the 21st century," Chan said in Geneva.
Dr. Thomas Frieden, the new head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in Atlanta that he does not expect widespread public anxiety in the United States as a result of the declaration, noting it came nearly two months after the virus was identified.
For many weeks, U.S. health officials have been treating it as a pandemic, increasing the availability of anti-viral flu medicines and pouring money into a possible vaccination program. And scientists have grown to understand that the virus is generally not much more severe than the seasonal flu.
"That helps to tamp down any fears that may be excessive," Frieden said at a news conference — his first as CDC director.
But the virus can still be deadly and may change into a more frightening form in the near future, and so people should not be complacent, he added.
So far, swine flu has caused 144 deaths, compared with ordinary flu that kills up to 500,000 people a year.
The pandemic decision might have been made much earlier if WHO had more accurate information about swine flu's rising sweep through Europe. Chan said she called the emergency meeting with flu experts after concerns were raised that some countries, such as Britain, were not accurately reporting their cases.
Chan said the experts unanimously agreed there was a wider spread of swine flu than was being reported.
She would not say which country tipped the world into the pandemic, but WHO flu chief Keiji Fukuda said the situation from Australia seemed to indicate the virus was spreading rapidly there — more than 1,300 cases were reported by Thursday.
In Chile, authorities have identified almost 1,700 cases to WHO.
Many health experts said the world has been in a pandemic for weeks but WHO became too bogged down by politics to declare one. In May, several countries urged WHO not to declare a pandemic, fearing it would cause social and economic turmoil. At the time, WHO said it would rewrite its pandemic definition to avoid announcing one.
But with the recent surge in cases across Europe, Chile, Australia and Japan, the agency was under increasing pressure to acknowledge a pandemic.
"This is WHO finally catching up with the facts," said Michael Osterholm, a flu expert at the University of Minnesota.
David Ropeik, an expert in risk perception and communication at Harvard University, says the word pandemic is less frightening than when emerged during worries about bird flu a few years ago.
He said the "soft buildup" to declaring swine flu a pandemic has been helpful.
"That allows people to get used to what is otherwise a scary word, understand the particulars of the disease, and that should mean reaction will be a little more information-based and a little less emotional," Ropeik said in an e-mail.
WHO will now recommend that pharmaceutical companies make swine flu vaccine. The agency typically recommends which flu strains drug companies should use in the vaccines. In a global outbreak, WHO also advises whether companies should make pandemic vaccine.
The decision to make pandemic vaccine is a gamble. Most flu vaccine makers cannot make both regular seasonal flu vaccine and pandemic vaccine at the same time. That means they must decide which one the world will need more.
Drug giant GlaxoSmithKline PLC said it could start commercial production of pandemic vaccine in July but that it would take months before large quantities are available.
Glaxo spokesman Stephen Rea said the company's first doses of vaccine would be reserved for countries who had ordered it in advance, including Belgium, Britain and France. He said Glaxo would also donate 50 million doses to WHO for poor countries.
Pascal Barollier, a spokesman for Sanofi-Aventis, said they were also working on a pandemic vaccine but WHO had not yet asked them to start making mass quantities of it.
WHO described the pandemic as "moderate." Fukuda said people should not get overly anxious about the virus. "Understand it, put it in context, and then you get on with things," he said.
Still, about half of the people who have died from swine flu were previously young and healthy — people who are not usually susceptible to flu. Swine flu is also crowding out regular flu viruses. Both features are typical of pandemic flu viruses.
Swine flu is also continuing to spread during the start of summer in the northern hemisphere. Normally, flu viruses disappear with warm weather, but swine flu is proving to be resilient.
"What this declaration does do is remind the world that flu viruses like H1N1 need to be taken seriously," said U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, warning that more cases could crop up in the fall.
Now that a pandemic has been declared, some countries might be prompted to devote more money to containing the virus. Many developed countries have pandemic preparedness plans that link spending to a WHO declaration.
The U.N. is keen to avoid panic. "We must guard against rash and discriminatory action, such as travel bans or trade restrictions," said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
Fear has already gripped Argentina, where thousands have flooded hospitals this week, bringing emergency health services in Buenos Aires to the brink of collapse during winter weather. Last month, a bus arriving in Argentina from Chile was stoned by people who thought a passenger had swine flu.
China has quarantined travelers, including New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, on the slightest suspicion of contact with an infected person.
The U.S. government has already increased the availability of flu-fighting medicines and authorized $1 billion for developing a new swine flu vaccine. In addition, new cases seem to be declining in many parts of the country, U.S. health officials say, as North America moves out of its traditional winter flu season.
Still, New York City reported three more swine flu deaths Thursday, including a child under 2, a teenager and a person in their 30s.
"Countries where outbreaks appear to have peaked should prepare for a second wave of infection," Chan warned.
by the associated press
House negotiators reach a war-funding deal
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama would be allowed for the next four months to order Guantanamo Bay detainees into the United States to face trial under a compromise reached Thursday by House and Senate negotiators struggling with a war-funding bill.
Transferring detainees from the U.S. detention center in Cuba would be allowed only through Sept. 30, according to top House aides, leaving until later the question of whether Guantanamo detainees tried in military trials in the United States would serve prison time in other nations if convicted or would face imprisonment in the U.S.
The short-term solution to the debate over whether detainees should be brought to the U.S. buys the administration time as it struggles to come up with a permanent solution that would allow Obama to fulfill his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility by Jan. 22.
The Guantanamo tangle was but one of several side issues Democrats have struggled with over the past two weeks as they have tried to reconcile Senate and House bills funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
House liberals successfully forced the Senate to drop a provision to block the release of detainee abuse photos Obama wants to remain sealed. Lawmakers from automobile manufacturing states won $1 billion for a new "cash for clunkers" program that aims to boost new auto sales by allowing consumers to turn in gas-guzzling cars and trucks for vouchers toward the purchase of more fuel-efficient vehicles.
The bill started out two months ago as an $83 billion war funding request from Obama, then morphed into a $106 billion measure brimming with money to fight the flu, buy military cargo planes and help poor nations weather the global economic crisis.
Lawmakers announced the informal agreement on the war-funding measure at a House-Senate negotiating session. The real work was done behind the scenes.
Competing House and Senate versions passed by wide margins last month, but several issues slowed House-Senate negotiations on a compromise bill. The most significant obstacle was the loss of support from House Republicans opposed to an $5 billion Obama request to secure a $108 billion U.S. line of credit to the International Monetary Fund to help poor countries deal with the world recession.
The loss of GOP support gave House liberals leverage to force out a Senate provision by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that would block the release of photos showing detainee abuse. Obama doesn't want the photos made public because they could incite anti-American violence.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., weighed in on the matter Thursday by calling for Obama to simply issue an executive order turning the photos into classified material, thereby exempting them from the Freedom of Information Act.
"It's time for the president ... to stand up to the left wing of his party for the good of the national security of this nation," McCain said.
The numerous controversies obscured widespread support for the core of the bill: $79.9 billion for the Pentagon, most of which is for carrying out military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Included in that total was $2.2 billion for eight C-17 cargo planes, manufactured by the Boeing Co., despite Obama's call to terminate the program.
The measure provides $10.4 billion in foreign aid, including $700 million to help Pakistani security forces fight insurgents and $700 million in international food aid, more than double Obama's request.
There's also $7.7 billion to fight the flu — the World Health Organization declared a swine flu pandemic on Thursday — far higher than Obama's initial $1.5 billion request. Democrats rejected an administration plan to trim part of Obama's economic stimulus law to pay for part of an additional request submitted last week.
The measure provides $489 million requested by the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, to restore barrier islands along his state's coastline that Hurricane Katrina destroyed in 2005. That came despite a promise by Obama to keep the war-funding bill free of pet projects.
On the very week that Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., appeared at the White House to tout a "pay-as-you-go" law requiring new programs to be paid for instead of being lumped onto the deficit, the measure would use deficit dollars for the auto-buying subsidies programs and to give GI Bill education benefits to the children of military service members who die while on active duty.
by the associated press
Transferring detainees from the U.S. detention center in Cuba would be allowed only through Sept. 30, according to top House aides, leaving until later the question of whether Guantanamo detainees tried in military trials in the United States would serve prison time in other nations if convicted or would face imprisonment in the U.S.
The short-term solution to the debate over whether detainees should be brought to the U.S. buys the administration time as it struggles to come up with a permanent solution that would allow Obama to fulfill his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility by Jan. 22.
The Guantanamo tangle was but one of several side issues Democrats have struggled with over the past two weeks as they have tried to reconcile Senate and House bills funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
House liberals successfully forced the Senate to drop a provision to block the release of detainee abuse photos Obama wants to remain sealed. Lawmakers from automobile manufacturing states won $1 billion for a new "cash for clunkers" program that aims to boost new auto sales by allowing consumers to turn in gas-guzzling cars and trucks for vouchers toward the purchase of more fuel-efficient vehicles.
The bill started out two months ago as an $83 billion war funding request from Obama, then morphed into a $106 billion measure brimming with money to fight the flu, buy military cargo planes and help poor nations weather the global economic crisis.
Lawmakers announced the informal agreement on the war-funding measure at a House-Senate negotiating session. The real work was done behind the scenes.
Competing House and Senate versions passed by wide margins last month, but several issues slowed House-Senate negotiations on a compromise bill. The most significant obstacle was the loss of support from House Republicans opposed to an $5 billion Obama request to secure a $108 billion U.S. line of credit to the International Monetary Fund to help poor countries deal with the world recession.
The loss of GOP support gave House liberals leverage to force out a Senate provision by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that would block the release of photos showing detainee abuse. Obama doesn't want the photos made public because they could incite anti-American violence.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., weighed in on the matter Thursday by calling for Obama to simply issue an executive order turning the photos into classified material, thereby exempting them from the Freedom of Information Act.
"It's time for the president ... to stand up to the left wing of his party for the good of the national security of this nation," McCain said.
The numerous controversies obscured widespread support for the core of the bill: $79.9 billion for the Pentagon, most of which is for carrying out military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Included in that total was $2.2 billion for eight C-17 cargo planes, manufactured by the Boeing Co., despite Obama's call to terminate the program.
The measure provides $10.4 billion in foreign aid, including $700 million to help Pakistani security forces fight insurgents and $700 million in international food aid, more than double Obama's request.
There's also $7.7 billion to fight the flu — the World Health Organization declared a swine flu pandemic on Thursday — far higher than Obama's initial $1.5 billion request. Democrats rejected an administration plan to trim part of Obama's economic stimulus law to pay for part of an additional request submitted last week.
The measure provides $489 million requested by the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, to restore barrier islands along his state's coastline that Hurricane Katrina destroyed in 2005. That came despite a promise by Obama to keep the war-funding bill free of pet projects.
On the very week that Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., appeared at the White House to tout a "pay-as-you-go" law requiring new programs to be paid for instead of being lumped onto the deficit, the measure would use deficit dollars for the auto-buying subsidies programs and to give GI Bill education benefits to the children of military service members who die while on active duty.
by the associated press
President Obama and GOP on health care plan
GREEN BAY, Wis. (AP) — Undertaking a new and aggressive push to enact health reform this year, President Barack Obama bluntly challenged Republican critics on Thursday to put forward their own plan to expand coverage to the uninsured and help struggling families afford care. "To those who criticize our efforts, I ask them, `What's the alternative?'" Obama said at a town hall-style meeting, surrounded by supportive citizens in the heartland.
"What else do we say to all those families who spend more on health care than on housing or on food? What do we tell those businesses that are choosing between closing their doors and letting their workers go?"
A dispute over Obama's desire to create a new government-sponsored health plan to compete with private insurers is forming a major obstacle to bipartisan consensus on a sweeping overhaul of the nation's health care system. So the president is stepping up his personal efforts, a key part of which is selling his ideas directly to Americans, in hopes they will pressure lawmakers directly and create momentum through a groundswell of public support.
He described his critics as naysayers.
"I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years," Obama said. "Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer."
The president's warnings come as reservations have been expressed by health care providers, Congress — led by Obama's fellow Democrats — and the public. The brief ride from the airport to the high school where he spoke featured a rare sight for the new president: a large gathering of protesters.
Signs held among the several hundred demonstrators lining his route said "NObama" and "No to Socialism."
Back in Washington, Republicans assailed any inclusion of a public insurance option in a new system of expanded health care.
"We see that as a slippery slope to having the government run everything," Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wy., said at a news conference.
But Obama, answering a question, said no one — "certainly not me" — is interested in a nationalized health care system, like that in Great Britain. The president said the government is not going to force any change upon people who are pleased with the plan they already have with their employer.
"When you hear people saying socialized medicine, understand, I don't know anybody in Washington who is proposing that," he said.
For his goal of reshaping the nation's health care system to bring down costs and extend coverage to 50 million uninsured Americans — an overhaul that has vexed Washington for decades — Obama has set an August deadline.
"This next 6-8 weeks is going to be critical," he said, asking the audience to lobby Congress to get it done. If the country puts off health care reform, he said, "it's never going to happen."
Senators of both parties agree on many big issues, including getting all Americans covered and prohibiting insurance industry practices that deny coverage to people with health problems. But there remain major disagreements over how to pay for the $1.5 trillion it will cost over the next decade to cover uninsured Americans, whether to require employers to offer coverage and whether government-sponsored insurance should be one option.
Obama has detailed few specifics that he is for and against, and did not break any new ground at the event. He said he won't run roughshod over Congress with a "my way or the highway" approach and is "happy to steal other people's ideas."
The president also acknowledged that extending coverage will cost "a good deal of money at a time where we don't have extra to spend." He promised anew that he will not allow reform to add to the deficit, and said he will propose new savings "in the days to come" beyond those already outlined to help explain how reform will be financed.
But, he said, that won't be enough.
"I'll be honest, even with these savings, reform will require additional sources of revenue," Obama said.
The president proposes raising taxes on the highest-earning Americans by limiting the value of deductions they can claim, including charitable donations. This idea has little backing on Capitol Hill.
Green Bay resident Laura Klitzka, a 35-year-old, married mother of two who has breast cancer that has now spread to her bones, introduced Obama. She carries about $12,000 in unpaid medical bills that continue to pile up as treatment continues that she said her family cannot afford.
The White House considers such emotional pleas critical to selling reform. Obama's political arm, the grass-roots machine known as Organizing for America, has collected hundreds of thousands of similar stories that could shame lawmakers who don't sign on.
"What we're doing right now is we're really priming the pump. I mean, we will ramp this activity up, we'll make more explicit calls for people to call members of Congress — every member of Congress that we can get a call into — as we approach key votes," said Dan Grandone, a political aide who runs Obama's re-election campaign-in-waiting in Wisconsin.
by the associated press
"What else do we say to all those families who spend more on health care than on housing or on food? What do we tell those businesses that are choosing between closing their doors and letting their workers go?"
A dispute over Obama's desire to create a new government-sponsored health plan to compete with private insurers is forming a major obstacle to bipartisan consensus on a sweeping overhaul of the nation's health care system. So the president is stepping up his personal efforts, a key part of which is selling his ideas directly to Americans, in hopes they will pressure lawmakers directly and create momentum through a groundswell of public support.
He described his critics as naysayers.
"I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years," Obama said. "Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer."
The president's warnings come as reservations have been expressed by health care providers, Congress — led by Obama's fellow Democrats — and the public. The brief ride from the airport to the high school where he spoke featured a rare sight for the new president: a large gathering of protesters.
Signs held among the several hundred demonstrators lining his route said "NObama" and "No to Socialism."
Back in Washington, Republicans assailed any inclusion of a public insurance option in a new system of expanded health care.
"We see that as a slippery slope to having the government run everything," Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wy., said at a news conference.
But Obama, answering a question, said no one — "certainly not me" — is interested in a nationalized health care system, like that in Great Britain. The president said the government is not going to force any change upon people who are pleased with the plan they already have with their employer.
"When you hear people saying socialized medicine, understand, I don't know anybody in Washington who is proposing that," he said.
For his goal of reshaping the nation's health care system to bring down costs and extend coverage to 50 million uninsured Americans — an overhaul that has vexed Washington for decades — Obama has set an August deadline.
"This next 6-8 weeks is going to be critical," he said, asking the audience to lobby Congress to get it done. If the country puts off health care reform, he said, "it's never going to happen."
Senators of both parties agree on many big issues, including getting all Americans covered and prohibiting insurance industry practices that deny coverage to people with health problems. But there remain major disagreements over how to pay for the $1.5 trillion it will cost over the next decade to cover uninsured Americans, whether to require employers to offer coverage and whether government-sponsored insurance should be one option.
Obama has detailed few specifics that he is for and against, and did not break any new ground at the event. He said he won't run roughshod over Congress with a "my way or the highway" approach and is "happy to steal other people's ideas."
The president also acknowledged that extending coverage will cost "a good deal of money at a time where we don't have extra to spend." He promised anew that he will not allow reform to add to the deficit, and said he will propose new savings "in the days to come" beyond those already outlined to help explain how reform will be financed.
But, he said, that won't be enough.
"I'll be honest, even with these savings, reform will require additional sources of revenue," Obama said.
The president proposes raising taxes on the highest-earning Americans by limiting the value of deductions they can claim, including charitable donations. This idea has little backing on Capitol Hill.
Green Bay resident Laura Klitzka, a 35-year-old, married mother of two who has breast cancer that has now spread to her bones, introduced Obama. She carries about $12,000 in unpaid medical bills that continue to pile up as treatment continues that she said her family cannot afford.
The White House considers such emotional pleas critical to selling reform. Obama's political arm, the grass-roots machine known as Organizing for America, has collected hundreds of thousands of similar stories that could shame lawmakers who don't sign on.
"What we're doing right now is we're really priming the pump. I mean, we will ramp this activity up, we'll make more explicit calls for people to call members of Congress — every member of Congress that we can get a call into — as we approach key votes," said Dan Grandone, a political aide who runs Obama's re-election campaign-in-waiting in Wisconsin.
by the associated press
President Obama the time to fix health care is right now
GREEN BAY, Wis. (AP) — President Barack Obama went to the nation's heartland Thursday to challenge critics of his proposed health care overhaul, asking: "What's the alternative?"
Obama has run into opposition from fellow Democrats in Congress and the nation's largest doctors' association.
Dismissing criticism, Obama attempted to sell his proposals directly to Americans. He did not directly respond to the American Medical Association's president, who remains unconvinced of the wisdom of the White House's call for a public health plan. Instead, Obama broadly described his critics as naysayers.
"I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years," Obama said. "Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer."
The president's warnings come as reservations have been expressed by health care providers, Congress — led by Obama's fellow Democrats — and the public. During the brief ride from the airport to a town hall-style meeting, Obama passed several hundred protesters. Many held signs such as "NObama" and "No to Socialism."
White House aides brushed off the protests and instead focused on the president's message of the day: Inaction on health care overhaul is too dangerous to put off and would cost money the country simply doesn't have.
"I will not welcome endless delay or a denial that reform needs to happen," the president said in a speech that contained no new policy proposals but instead repeated oft-repeated generalities.
Obama has set an August deadline for an overhaul that has vexed Washington for decades.
by the associated press
Obama has run into opposition from fellow Democrats in Congress and the nation's largest doctors' association.
Dismissing criticism, Obama attempted to sell his proposals directly to Americans. He did not directly respond to the American Medical Association's president, who remains unconvinced of the wisdom of the White House's call for a public health plan. Instead, Obama broadly described his critics as naysayers.
"I know there are some who believe that reform is too expensive, but I can assure you that doing nothing will cost us far more in the coming years," Obama said. "Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will go up. Our wages will be lower, our jobs will be fewer, and our businesses will suffer."
The president's warnings come as reservations have been expressed by health care providers, Congress — led by Obama's fellow Democrats — and the public. During the brief ride from the airport to a town hall-style meeting, Obama passed several hundred protesters. Many held signs such as "NObama" and "No to Socialism."
White House aides brushed off the protests and instead focused on the president's message of the day: Inaction on health care overhaul is too dangerous to put off and would cost money the country simply doesn't have.
"I will not welcome endless delay or a denial that reform needs to happen," the president said in a speech that contained no new policy proposals but instead repeated oft-repeated generalities.
Obama has set an August deadline for an overhaul that has vexed Washington for decades.
by the associated press
President Barack Obama pushes senators on health
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama urged lawmakers Wednesday to work through partisan differences that are threatening health care legislation.
The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee starts working on the bill next week. Democratic and Republican senators said Obama was willing to listen to all sides but insisted that Congress must pass a bill this year.
Senators agree on issues like getting all Americans covered and prohibiting insurance industry practices that deny coverage to people with health problems. But there are disagreements over financing, requiring employers to offer coverage and whether the government should sponsor a plan.
by the associated press
The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee starts working on the bill next week. Democratic and Republican senators said Obama was willing to listen to all sides but insisted that Congress must pass a bill this year.
Senators agree on issues like getting all Americans covered and prohibiting insurance industry practices that deny coverage to people with health problems. But there are disagreements over financing, requiring employers to offer coverage and whether the government should sponsor a plan.
by the associated press
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
South African HIV rate drops
CAPE TOWN, South Africa — The number of new HIV infections among South African teens has dropped significantly, prompting hope that efforts to tackle the epidemic have finally turned a corner after years of denial and delay.
A report by the Human Sciences Research Council released Tuesday said that although young people continue to have multiple sexual partners — which drives South Africa’s epidemic — they are increasingly heeding advice to use a condom.
"There is clearly light at the end of the tunnel,” Health Minister Dr. Aaron Motsoaledi said.
Motsoaledi became health minister last month. He must overcome the legacy of former President Thabo Mbeki, who denied the link between HIV and AIDS.
by the associated press
A report by the Human Sciences Research Council released Tuesday said that although young people continue to have multiple sexual partners — which drives South Africa’s epidemic — they are increasingly heeding advice to use a condom.
"There is clearly light at the end of the tunnel,” Health Minister Dr. Aaron Motsoaledi said.
Motsoaledi became health minister last month. He must overcome the legacy of former President Thabo Mbeki, who denied the link between HIV and AIDS.
by the associated press
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
It's OK to borrow to pay for health care , Obama said
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Tuesday proposed budget rules that would allow Congress to borrow tens of billions of dollars and put the nation deeper in debt to jump-start the administration's emerging health care overhaul. The "pay-as-you-go" budget formula plan is significantly weaker than a proposal Obama issued with little fanfare last month.
It would carve out about $2.5 trillion worth of exemptions for Obama's priorities over the next decade. His health care reform plan also would get a green light to run big deficits in its early years. But over a decade, Congress would have to come up with money to cover those early year deficits.
Obama's latest proposal for addressing deficits urges Congress to pass a law requiring lawmakers to pay for new spending programs and tax cuts without further adding to exploding deficits projected to total about $10 trillion over the next decade.
If new spending or tax reductions are not offset, there would be automatic cuts in so-called mandatory programs — although Social Security payments and the Medicaid health care program for poor and disabled would be exempt and cuts to Medicare would be sharply limited.
"The 'pay-as-you-go' rule is very simple," Obama said. "Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere."
Last month Obama suggested a tougher plan that would prohibit Congress from swelling the deficit in one year by putting off until later years the tax increases or spending cuts to pay for it.
The requirement for legislation to be financed over the coming decade generally mirrors existing congressional rules and reflects the likelihood that Obama's health care plan will add many billions of dollars to the deficit in the early years. Savings and revenues in later years would have to make up for the initial deficits.
Congress lived under a so-called "pay-go" regime in the 1990s and the early years of this decade. But it didn't stop lawmakers from passing President George W. Bush's landmark 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and big increases in farm subsidies without making the required spending cuts elsewhere. A $127 billion surplus in 2001 subsequently turned into deficits over the next four years of $159 billion, $377 billion, $413 billion and $319 billion.
The rules still exist and lawmakers routinely find ways around them. For example, a bill to effectively double GI Bill education benefits was enacted last year. Congress also regularly waives the rules to pass an annual "patch" to the alternative minimum tax, sparing some 20 million families from a $2,000 tax increase on average.
Still, Democrats profess a faith in pay-as-you-go rules.
"It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s — and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt," Obama said.
In fact, the surpluses of the late 1990s were largely due to a huge influx of tax revenues from a booming economy.
Rep. Dennis Moore, D-Kan., said the House is likely to pass Obama's latest proposal next month. The plan faces far tougher sledding in the Senate, where Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., has expressed serious reservations.
Conrad said Obama's proposal does nothing about the fiscal perils the country already faces, including deficits that the Congressional Budget Office predicts will average nearly $1 trillion a year over the next decade.
"I remain concerned about the potential effect of this proposal on American farmers, seniors and veterans," said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
Republicans said new budget rules ring hollow in the wake of the Obama-championed $787 billion stimulus package and other deficit spending. They said legal limits on appropriations should be put into place as they were in the 1990s, though such "caps" were easily evaded when surpluses appeared.
Congress is just ramping up the annual appropriations process, which in the House would award increases averaging 12 percent to non-defense programs. Obama's proposal does not include the comparable "caps" from the 1990s.
"Time after time this year, Democrats have ignored calls for fiscal responsibility," said House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio. "We don't need more rhetoric and gimmicks. We need action to tackle the tremendous fiscal challenges facing this nation."
Obama's proposal would require future tax cuts to be financed by tax increases elsewhere. But again, he carves out several exceptions, including for an extension of Bush's tax cuts due to expire in 2011 and relief from the alternative minimum tax.
The federal deficit is on pace to explode past $1.8 trillion this year, more than four times last year's all-time high. The record borrowing is credited with pushing up interest rates, which could imperil chances for a recovery later in the year.
by the associated press
It would carve out about $2.5 trillion worth of exemptions for Obama's priorities over the next decade. His health care reform plan also would get a green light to run big deficits in its early years. But over a decade, Congress would have to come up with money to cover those early year deficits.
Obama's latest proposal for addressing deficits urges Congress to pass a law requiring lawmakers to pay for new spending programs and tax cuts without further adding to exploding deficits projected to total about $10 trillion over the next decade.
If new spending or tax reductions are not offset, there would be automatic cuts in so-called mandatory programs — although Social Security payments and the Medicaid health care program for poor and disabled would be exempt and cuts to Medicare would be sharply limited.
"The 'pay-as-you-go' rule is very simple," Obama said. "Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere."
Last month Obama suggested a tougher plan that would prohibit Congress from swelling the deficit in one year by putting off until later years the tax increases or spending cuts to pay for it.
The requirement for legislation to be financed over the coming decade generally mirrors existing congressional rules and reflects the likelihood that Obama's health care plan will add many billions of dollars to the deficit in the early years. Savings and revenues in later years would have to make up for the initial deficits.
Congress lived under a so-called "pay-go" regime in the 1990s and the early years of this decade. But it didn't stop lawmakers from passing President George W. Bush's landmark 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and big increases in farm subsidies without making the required spending cuts elsewhere. A $127 billion surplus in 2001 subsequently turned into deficits over the next four years of $159 billion, $377 billion, $413 billion and $319 billion.
The rules still exist and lawmakers routinely find ways around them. For example, a bill to effectively double GI Bill education benefits was enacted last year. Congress also regularly waives the rules to pass an annual "patch" to the alternative minimum tax, sparing some 20 million families from a $2,000 tax increase on average.
Still, Democrats profess a faith in pay-as-you-go rules.
"It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s — and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt," Obama said.
In fact, the surpluses of the late 1990s were largely due to a huge influx of tax revenues from a booming economy.
Rep. Dennis Moore, D-Kan., said the House is likely to pass Obama's latest proposal next month. The plan faces far tougher sledding in the Senate, where Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., has expressed serious reservations.
Conrad said Obama's proposal does nothing about the fiscal perils the country already faces, including deficits that the Congressional Budget Office predicts will average nearly $1 trillion a year over the next decade.
"I remain concerned about the potential effect of this proposal on American farmers, seniors and veterans," said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
Republicans said new budget rules ring hollow in the wake of the Obama-championed $787 billion stimulus package and other deficit spending. They said legal limits on appropriations should be put into place as they were in the 1990s, though such "caps" were easily evaded when surpluses appeared.
Congress is just ramping up the annual appropriations process, which in the House would award increases averaging 12 percent to non-defense programs. Obama's proposal does not include the comparable "caps" from the 1990s.
"Time after time this year, Democrats have ignored calls for fiscal responsibility," said House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio. "We don't need more rhetoric and gimmicks. We need action to tackle the tremendous fiscal challenges facing this nation."
Obama's proposal would require future tax cuts to be financed by tax increases elsewhere. But again, he carves out several exceptions, including for an extension of Bush's tax cuts due to expire in 2011 and relief from the alternative minimum tax.
The federal deficit is on pace to explode past $1.8 trillion this year, more than four times last year's all-time high. The record borrowing is credited with pushing up interest rates, which could imperil chances for a recovery later in the year.
by the associated press
Monday, June 8, 2009
Alternative remedies
BALTIMORE — At one of the nation’s top trauma hospitals, a nurse circles a patient’s bed, humming and waving her arms as if shooing evil spirits. Another woman rubs a quartz bowl with a wand, making tunes that mix with the beeping monitors and hissing respirator.
They are doing Reiki therapy, which claims to heal through invisible energy fields. The anesthesia chief, Dr. Richard Dutton, calls it "mystical mumbo jumbo.” Still, he’s a fan.
"It’s self-hypnosis” that can help patients relax, he said. "If you tell yourself you have less pain, you actually do have less pain.”
Alternative medicine has become mainstream. It is finding wider acceptance by doctors, insurers and hospitals like the shock trauma center at the University of Maryland Medical Center.
But government actions and powerful interest groups have left consumers vulnerable to flawed products and misleading marketing.
Dietary supplements do not have to be proved safe or effective before they can be sold. Some contain natural things you might not want, such as lead and arsenic. Some interfere with other things you may be taking.
"Herbals are medicines,” with good and bad effects, said Bruce Silverglade of the consumer group Center for Science in the Public Interest.
Different standards
An Associated Press review of dozens of studies and interviews with more than 100 sources found an underground system operating in plain sight, with a different standard than the rest of medical care, and millions of people using it on blind faith.
Fifteen years ago, Congress decided to allow dietary and herbal supplements to be sold without federal Food and Drug Administration approval. The number of products soared from about 4,000 to well over 40,000 now.
"In testing, one out of four supplements has a problem,” said Dr. Tod Cooperman, president of ConsumerLab.com, an independent company that rates such products.
Mainstream medicine and prescription drugs have problems, too. But regulatory systems, guideline-setting groups and watchdog agencies help keep the industry in line.
The Federal Trade Commission is filing more complaints about deceptive marketing. One of the largest settlements occurred last August — $30 million from the makers of Airborne, a product marketed with an "invented by a teacher” slogan that claimed to ward off germs spread through the air.
People need to be skeptical of the term "natural,” said Kathy Allen, a dietitian at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla. Supplements lack proof of safety or benefit. Asked to take a drug under those terms, "most of us would say ‘no,’” she said. "When it says ‘natural,’ the perception is there is no harm. And that is just not true.”
by the associated press
They are doing Reiki therapy, which claims to heal through invisible energy fields. The anesthesia chief, Dr. Richard Dutton, calls it "mystical mumbo jumbo.” Still, he’s a fan.
"It’s self-hypnosis” that can help patients relax, he said. "If you tell yourself you have less pain, you actually do have less pain.”
Alternative medicine has become mainstream. It is finding wider acceptance by doctors, insurers and hospitals like the shock trauma center at the University of Maryland Medical Center.
But government actions and powerful interest groups have left consumers vulnerable to flawed products and misleading marketing.
Dietary supplements do not have to be proved safe or effective before they can be sold. Some contain natural things you might not want, such as lead and arsenic. Some interfere with other things you may be taking.
"Herbals are medicines,” with good and bad effects, said Bruce Silverglade of the consumer group Center for Science in the Public Interest.
Different standards
An Associated Press review of dozens of studies and interviews with more than 100 sources found an underground system operating in plain sight, with a different standard than the rest of medical care, and millions of people using it on blind faith.
Fifteen years ago, Congress decided to allow dietary and herbal supplements to be sold without federal Food and Drug Administration approval. The number of products soared from about 4,000 to well over 40,000 now.
"In testing, one out of four supplements has a problem,” said Dr. Tod Cooperman, president of ConsumerLab.com, an independent company that rates such products.
Mainstream medicine and prescription drugs have problems, too. But regulatory systems, guideline-setting groups and watchdog agencies help keep the industry in line.
The Federal Trade Commission is filing more complaints about deceptive marketing. One of the largest settlements occurred last August — $30 million from the makers of Airborne, a product marketed with an "invented by a teacher” slogan that claimed to ward off germs spread through the air.
People need to be skeptical of the term "natural,” said Kathy Allen, a dietitian at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla. Supplements lack proof of safety or benefit. Asked to take a drug under those terms, "most of us would say ‘no,’” she said. "When it says ‘natural,’ the perception is there is no harm. And that is just not true.”
by the associated press
Sunday, June 7, 2009
President Obama urges health action
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio and Internet address that "it’s time to deliver” on his health care agenda.
"If we do nothing, everyone’s health care will be put in jeopardy,” he said.
The first bill containing language to put in place his health care goals has begun circulating on Capitol Hill. Draft legislation from the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee would require employers to cover their employees or pay a penalty, and would guarantee coverage for all.
Congress still hasn’t figured out how to pay for a plan that could cost $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion or even more over a decade.
by the assiocated press
"If we do nothing, everyone’s health care will be put in jeopardy,” he said.
The first bill containing language to put in place his health care goals has begun circulating on Capitol Hill. Draft legislation from the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee would require employers to cover their employees or pay a penalty, and would guarantee coverage for all.
Congress still hasn’t figured out how to pay for a plan that could cost $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion or even more over a decade.
by the assiocated press
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Young Girl begins battle against ‘adult’ disease
LA MIRADA, Calif. — Ten-year-old Hannah Powell-Auslam is trying to remain brave as she battles what was initially diagnosed as breast cancer.
"I feel like a kid inside but sometimes I feel like an adult, when I’m always at the hospital,” Hannah told ABC’s "Good Morning America” in an interview that aired Wednesday. "I’m a kid fighting an adult disease.”
The fifth-grader in this Los Angeles bedroom community complained of itching in her side in April.
Her mother discovered a lump, and that led to a diagnosis of breast cancer.
Although she was initially diagnosed with the most common form of breast cancer, the family said that has been changed to invasive secretory carcinoma, a type discovered in children in the 1960s.
"Hannah’s prognosis is very good and the type of cancer is very slow growing,” her father, Jeremy, said Wednesday.
According to medical personnel, children still represent only a fraction of a percent of all breast cancer cases.
Hannah had surgery and has begun chemotherapy.
"You feel like you’re sick all the time. You just want to go lay in bed,” she said.
The show filmed Hannah at home getting her head shaved rather than waiting for chemotherapy to take its toll. Other family members got buzz cuts, too, in solidarity.
"I might be just a little bit afraid. I love my hair. I worked so hard to grow it,” Hannah said.
I’m a kid fighting an adult disease.”
Hannah Powell-Auslam
10-year-old girl fighting cancer
by the associated press
"I feel like a kid inside but sometimes I feel like an adult, when I’m always at the hospital,” Hannah told ABC’s "Good Morning America” in an interview that aired Wednesday. "I’m a kid fighting an adult disease.”
The fifth-grader in this Los Angeles bedroom community complained of itching in her side in April.
Her mother discovered a lump, and that led to a diagnosis of breast cancer.
Although she was initially diagnosed with the most common form of breast cancer, the family said that has been changed to invasive secretory carcinoma, a type discovered in children in the 1960s.
"Hannah’s prognosis is very good and the type of cancer is very slow growing,” her father, Jeremy, said Wednesday.
According to medical personnel, children still represent only a fraction of a percent of all breast cancer cases.
Hannah had surgery and has begun chemotherapy.
"You feel like you’re sick all the time. You just want to go lay in bed,” she said.
The show filmed Hannah at home getting her head shaved rather than waiting for chemotherapy to take its toll. Other family members got buzz cuts, too, in solidarity.
"I might be just a little bit afraid. I love my hair. I worked so hard to grow it,” Hannah said.
I’m a kid fighting an adult disease.”
Hannah Powell-Auslam
10-year-old girl fighting cancer
by the associated press
Health plan waivers
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama said Wednesday that if Congress ends up requiring individuals to buy health insurance, people who can’t afford it and small businesses should be exempt.
He also wants to slash an additional $200 billion to $300 billion from Medicare and Medicaid over 10 years — on top of $300 billion in cuts already proposed in his budget — to help pay for a sweeping health overhaul.
In a letter to senators Wednesday, he strongly reiterated his support for a new public health insurance plan to compete against private insurers.
The letter to Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairmen of the two committees writing health care bills, served as markers for what the president wants to see in final legislation.
The idea of what Obama called a "hardship waiver” for individual Americans splits the difference between where he was during the presidential campaign and where Congress may be heading.
Campaign stance
In the campaign, Obama did not support requiring everyone to buy insurance, putting him at odds with then Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Congress is looking at doing so.
The idea of a hardship waiver for people who can’t afford insurance is under consideration by Baucus’ Finance Committee, while Kennedy and House Democrats want to give subsidies to the poor to help them buy coverage.
The letter doesn’t address the issue of taxing health care benefits.
Obama opposed that in his campaign but Congress is now considering it.
by the associated press
He also wants to slash an additional $200 billion to $300 billion from Medicare and Medicaid over 10 years — on top of $300 billion in cuts already proposed in his budget — to help pay for a sweeping health overhaul.
In a letter to senators Wednesday, he strongly reiterated his support for a new public health insurance plan to compete against private insurers.
The letter to Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairmen of the two committees writing health care bills, served as markers for what the president wants to see in final legislation.
The idea of what Obama called a "hardship waiver” for individual Americans splits the difference between where he was during the presidential campaign and where Congress may be heading.
Campaign stance
In the campaign, Obama did not support requiring everyone to buy insurance, putting him at odds with then Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Congress is looking at doing so.
The idea of a hardship waiver for people who can’t afford insurance is under consideration by Baucus’ Finance Committee, while Kennedy and House Democrats want to give subsidies to the poor to help them buy coverage.
The letter doesn’t address the issue of taxing health care benefits.
Obama opposed that in his campaign but Congress is now considering it.
by the associated press
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)