Hello:  Paul Double's challenge to WOD members, asking us to evaluate who could best get needed health care reform done (the federal government, AFL-CIO, Banks or Walmart) is a provocative question.  Unfortunately, in the real world lawmakers are dealing with three players:  the federal government, state government (we have Minnesota Care here), and private insurers.  The currently proposed Medicare reform bill is an example of this. 
 
The plan is complicated and deserves more description than I can give it here, but it includes a prescription drug benefit for seniors.  It would not ease restrictions on importing drugs from Canada.  Drug company stocks have gone up in response to the proposed bill, which Goldman Sachs analysts say has an 85% chance of being passed (referenced on CBS Market Watch).  The bill is opposed on the left by Senator Kennedy, and on the right by the conservative Heritage Foundation and Cato Institutes, who both argue that it will be an expensive give-away.  AARP supports the bill, but has a conflict of interest that is seldom mentioned as it stands to gain royalties from insurance policies sold to members, if the bill is passed.  The bill also includes funding for six pilot projects allowing seniors to choose between Medicare and managed care providers, which some say is paving the way for privitization of Medicare.  Apparently Senator Dayton is poised to vote against the bill.
 
I've appreciated the online discussion about health care.  It's a good idea for all of us to become better informed about this issue, since reforms will also be hotly debated in the Minnesota Legislature.  A recent Star Tribune article, with link below, discussed some of the ideas that are being considered on a state level, and the Boston Globe article, also linked, identifies some of the debate over the Medicare bill.
 
Martha Greenwald
 
 
 

Reply via email to