As House Democrats prepare to vote Saturday on a bill to overhaul the nation's health care system, they picked up an important endorsement Thursday from the 40-million-member AARP, the nation's largest senior citizens group and the nation's largest doctor group.
AARP, which has been pushing for a health overhaul for more than a year, had withheld a formal endorsement of any of the bills being developed by Democrats. That endorsement was followed by a noon Central time announcement from the Chicago-based American Medical Association in which the nation's largest doctors group voiced its support for the measure.
AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond said Thursday that the group saw the House Democratic bill as the most promising proposal.
More at chicagotribune.com
Poll of 522 people 45 years and older taken after President Obama's Sept. 9th speech to a joint session of Congress:
Before the speech 70% of respondents said they had at least some questions or concerns about what was being proposed by either party with regard to health care reform. This includes 77 percent of Independents.
After the speech:
- Of those who had questions and concerns prior to the address, nearly three-quarters said that their questions and concerns were talked about or addressed during the speech. This includes 72 percent of Independents.
- Nearly seven in ten of those who reported hearing their questions and concerns talked about or addressed said that they were supportive of the proposals being talked about related to health care. This includes 63 percent of Independents.
- For each political affiliation, a majority of respondents said that reform of the health care system should be a priority for political leaders to address in 2009. This includes 70 percent of Independents.
- 58% of Democrats and 85% of republicans had concerns before the speech. After the speech 88% of democrats and even 56% of Republicans said their concerns were addressed. Overall 73% said their concerns were addressed.
- 63% of independents are now supportive of the proposal put forth by the president, along with 43% of Republicans. Overall 68% support the proposal.
- 76% now say healthcare should be a priority this year, including 70% of Independents and 56% of republicans.
Read more here. [PDF]
From MyDD:
A new survey commissioned by the AARP asks respondents to what degree they support or oppose "[s]tarting a new federal health insurance plan that individuals could purchase if they can't afford private plans offered to them" -- a public option, in other words. The results are interesting, though not necessarily surprising to those who have been closely following the debate.
All: 79 percent favor/18 percent oppose
Democrats: 89 percent favor/8 percent oppose
Republicans: 61 percent favor/33 percent oppose
Independents: 80 percent favor/16 percent oppose
Not only does a public option enjoy strong support (AARP finds 37 percent strongly supporting such a choice), it enjoys broad support -- a finding based not only in this new survey but also in SurveyUSA polling released last week. Indeed, a supermajority of even Republicans supports a federal program to provide individuals with a choice for their health insurance coverage, with just a third of the party membership opposing such a plan.
So why, again, are supporters of a public option finding such difficulty in Congress?
What CBS didn’t report is that ASA is currently offering a promotion to get AARP members to switch their allegiance. As Dissenting Justice reports, if seniors send in their torn AARP membership cards, they receive a two-year ASA membership for the price of one year. ThinkProgress contacted an AARP spokesperson who said that while the organization is 'concerned' about the 60,000 members who have left the organization, the number needs to be put into perspective. The organization generally loses 300,000 members a month just due to membership lapses and death. But since July 1, AARP has had 1.5 million people renew their memberships and 400,000 new members sign up. Past campaigns like the ASA one have been largely unsuccessful. Earlier this month, the American Family Association (AFA) urged its supporters to call and cancel their AARP memberships. According to an AARP spokesperson, just 15 percent of the people who called were actually even members in the first place. Read it all at Think Progress. More on the subject from Media Matters: CBS News "has learned" that "up to" 60,000 people have cancelled AARP memberships? Well, that sounds awfully fishy, doesn't it?
"Up to 60,000 people" could accurately describe 60,000 people, 50,000 people, 30,000 people, or two dozen people. Generally, people use the phrase "up to ____ people" when they want to focus your attention on a large number they don't know is actually true. If CBS actually knew there were 60,000 cancellations, they'd just say "60,000 people," without the "up to" wiggle words.
So, since CBS apparently has no idea how many people have cancelled memberships, how have they "learned" about this? It seems rather obvious that CBS "learned" this not by gaining access to AARP's records, or from an AARP official, but from the American Seniors Association, a right-wing fundraising organization featured in the CBS report. ASA is urging seniors to mail them torn-up AARP membership cards, which ASA will reward with half-off membership.
There's no reason to take ASA's claims about AARP's membership seriously -- they are not in any position to know, and have a clear interest in inflating the number of cancellations. That's almost certainly how CBS News "has learned" about the AARP membership cancellations -- ASA told them. And, since ASA has no idea how many people have actually cancelled AARP memberships, and ASA has a clear motivation for inflating those numbers, CBS had to include the "up to" wiggle words. So, who is American Seniors Association? According to Attkisson's report, ASA is a plucky underdog conservative alternative to AARP, benefiting from spontaneous mass disgust with AARP and fighting valiantly for seniors.
But if you do a Nexis search for "American Seniors Association" -- or their previous name, "National Association of Senior Concerns," it seems they appeared virtually out of nowhere, just in time to get a profile on CBS News. Prior to the last week or so, they had sent out a press release about immigration, and announced plans to hold a Republican presidential primary debate (a debate that never happened.) Go to ASA's "History" page, and you'll find nothing more than a few paragraphs ostensibly written by former Hollywood Squares host Peter Marshall -- paragraphs that don't say much of anything beyond "We want to represent your values to government. We don't want to represent government's values to you."
Which values are those? What does this mean? Who knows! But send your check today!
What kind of organization is ASA -- a charity? A foundation? Is it a nonprofit, or a for-profit business? Who knows! ASA's web page doesn't say, and Attkisson doesn't tell us. But send your check today! This story has also been well covered by Darren Hutchinson: CBS News Continues Misleading Reporting of a Backlash Against AARP
Health care bills suffer conspiracy of silence -- Newsday.com: "On Jan. 28, a coalition of advocacy groups representing 15,000 doctors and more than 50,000 nurses, met at the Capitol to present a new study asserting that the Conyers' bill, called the National Health Insurance Act (HR 676), could create 2.6 million new jobs and would cost far less than the private insurance currently paid for by individuals and employers.
Only Congressional Quarterly covered it. The Kaiser Family Foundation's daily online report on health care developments at kff.org didn't mention it. Nor has Kaiser, the most comprehensive online source of health care information, made any mention of "single-payer" (the government as the payer), or the Conyers bill since it was introduced in 2003, despite widespread support for such a plan according to Kaiser's own polls. (After my insistent inquiries, Kaiser says it will publish charts next month comparing the Stark and Conyers bills.)
"AARP, another key source of health care information, briefly mentioned single-payer in the AARP Bulletin, sent to its 35 million members. But neither single-payer nor the Conyers bill have been discussed in any of its other publications or its advocacy materials at aarp.org.
"Why? Many health care writers and advocates believe it's because single-payer and the Conyers bill would bar any role for private insurance companies, which would have central roles in all the other proposals under discussion."
"Divided We Fail" presented itself as a broad coalition of diverse interests that could come together and agree on health care reform. But it isn't a broad coalition. It is a coalition that primarily represents business interests - big business through the Business Roundtable, and small business through the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB).
by California Nurses Shum The Big Insurance corporations have been on quite a spending spree lately, throwing money around like there's no tomorrow (and for them, there shouldn't be.) Their recent purchases include: AARP, banks, and leading Democratic political consultants—which should make you worry. This nation is engaged in a fundamental debate over the future of healthcare, and the one group that nobody is listening to is patients. Let's a take a look at what they're up to... Brought to you by the National Nurses Organizing Committee as we organize to make 2007 the Year of GUARANTEED Healthcare. Purchase 1: AARP; Cost: $1.5 Billion For the last 50 years, AARP has existed to sell insurance policies to seniors. They took a much more partisan turn when Bill Novelli, a Republican insider with ties to George Bush, took over the organization. Now AARP is on the move to strengthen their ties with insurance corporations—and to strengthen those corporations in return. First we learn that they have a new plan to make$1.5 billion in royalties by selling Medicare Advantage plans to seniors. Yes that's a "B" and yes those are care dollars they're skimming. Now, compromised by this treasure, word comes that AARP is supporting Arnold Schwarzenegger’s plan to force every Californian to buy private health insurance. Why wouldn't they? They get a cut. And patients pay the price. Sigh. Purchase 2: Banks and Credit cards; Cost: none.
Blue Cross is starting a bank for its customers and Cerner is about to offer a credit card. Is it just me--or is this idea completely terrifying? Half of all medical bankruptcies are due to medical debt, and now Blue Cross wants people to bank there? So they can just reach into your account and take what they need? People are already incredibly dependent on their insurers, and this will make them more so. (PS—Blue Cross just settled a suit with 900,000 doctors claiming it defrauded them; but I’m sure they’ll be a perfectly trustworthy bank.) Purchase 3: Democratic political operatives; cost: cheap
One of the reasons that politicians are so timid on healthcare is because most of the Washington insiders who work on campaigns take money from heathcare corporations on the side. Latest example? Dewey Square Group, who helped run John Kerry’s and other campaigns, now have the insurance industry trade group as a major client. They’re using their clout to strongarm Democratic politicians into supporting "Medicare Advantage," which gives insurers an 11% bonus for offering Medicare. While our healthcare debate is raging, all this means that the insurance corporations are steadily amassing more money, power, and influence. There’s only one thing they’re scared of: you. If you want to join the fight for guaranteed healthcare (with a "Medicare for All" or SinglePayer financing), sign up with GuaranteedHealthcare.org, a project of the National Nurses Organizing Committee. You can help the fight by sharing your story about surviving the healthcare industry here.
AARP seems to be interested more in selling junk insurance than acting on behalf of the seniors it purports to lobby for.
UnitedHealth Group and AARP will announce today that they have agreed to extend and broaden contracts that enable the health insurer to sell Medicare products under the powerful AARP brand.
The announcement of a 7-year extension to their marketing agreement puts to rest speculation that UnitedHealth's stock-option scandal would endanger the deal and that AARP would find a new partner. The current 10-year contract expires at the end of the year.
AARP, a lobbying and interest group representing millions of U.S. citizens over 50, is one of UnitedHealth's most significant customers and provides an enormous sales vehicle into the aging population.
The new agreements, which take effect Jan. 1, provide UnitedHealth with a pipeline to AARP's nearly 38 million members.
"The fact that it is being continued is a positive unto itself," said Thomas Carroll, an analyst with Stifel Nicolaus in Baltimore.
In 1998, UnitedHealth signed a 10-year deal with AARP to offer certain products to AARP members; in 2005, the relationship was expanded to include an exclusive partnership to market drug plans under Medicare's prescription drug program, called Part D.
Last year, analysts began speculating about whether a renewed contract with AARP would be threatened after errors in UnitedHealth's stock-option granting practices came to light. At an investor's conference in New York in December, analysts questioned company officials. Worries were that AARP would view the link with
UnitedHealth as troublesome. AARP Contracts With Aetna, UnitedHealthcare To Expand Available Health Insurance Policies To People Ages 50 To 64, Quality-of-Care To Be MeasuredAARP officials on Monday announced plans to expand the number of health insurance products offered by the group that will target U.S. residents ages 50 to 64 who lack coverage, the Wall Street Journal reports (Fuhrmans, Wall Street Journal, 4/17). As part of the expansion, AARP in 2008 will begin to market with Aetna a PPO for U.S. residents ages 50 to 64, as well as a high-deductible health plan possibly linked with a health savings account. AARP said that underwriting practices for the health plans for such residents -- who "often find that health insurance is unavailable or unaffordable" in the individual coverage market -- will "be less stringent than those of many commercial insurers," although the plans will deny coverage to some sick residents, according to the New York Times (Pear, New York Times, 4/17).
AARP initially will market the health plans in about half of the states. In addition, AARP in January 2008 will begin to market with UnitedHealth Group a Medicare Advantage plan. Medicare beneficiaries who enroll in the plan will have no monthly premiums but will have to make copayments for physician visits and prescription drugs. AARP initially will market the plan in about half of the states (Appleby/Wolf, USA Today, 4/17). The plan is "guaranteed to be in the Medicare marketplace for two years," although premiums and copays could change after the first year, Dawn Sweeney, CEO of AARP Services, said. AARP also will continue to offer Medigap plans (New York Times, 4/17). The new plans likely will double the number of residents who receive health insurance through AARP and UnitedHealth by 2014, according to Sweeney (Phelps, Minneapolis Star Tribune, 4/17). AARP CEO William Novelli said, "In launching these initiatives, we are driven by our mission to create a healthier America" (New York Times, 4/17).
Back in 2003 when AARP got on the Medicare Part D bandwagon, Physicians for a National Health Program pretty much laid out the AARP plan: The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) derives significant income from the sale of health and life insurance policies, and stands to make hundreds of millions more under the Medicare Prescription Drug bill now being debated before Congress. Yet the AARPís financial interests in the bill have received scant attention.
:: ::
We believe the AARPs huge insurance business helps explain why it has endorsed a bill that threatens the future of Medicare and the health of Americaís seniors. Under the proposed Medicare legislation the AARP would almost surely reap hundreds of millions of dollars in additional insurance revenues over the next decade. The Medicare bill would pump $400 billion in Federal Government money into new Medigap drug policies over the next decade. At present, the AARPís profit from its huge insurance sales amounts to 3.9% of the insurance premiums it collects. If AARPís partners were to capture even 10% of the new Medicare prescription drug coverage market, their premiums would amount $40 billion, and the AARPs profits would be $1.56 billion. The Medicare prescription drug bill offers huge payoffs to the drug industry, private insurers, and some large employers. It would provide paltry benefits to Medicare recipients and take a giant step toward privatizing Medicare. In effect, the AARP leadership has shamefully agreed to sell out its members in exchange for the organizationís financial gain.
|
