WILLIAMSBURG
In the blizzard of statistics presented by Frank Luntz, perhaps this was the scariest one for the 10 governors in the room:
Asked whether they agreed with the statement "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore," 72 percent of Americans polled said yes.
That sentiment is much more than a pithy line from the 1976 movie "Network," Luntz told the governors. It's a perfect summing-up of the American zeitgeist in 2009, one that politicians ignore at their peril.
Luntz, a pollster best known for his work on the power of language in politics, has worked mostly for Republicans. But he spoke Sunday at the Southern Governors' Association's annual meeting at the invitation of a Democrat - Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, the group's chairman - and his advice was bipartisan.
Exhibit A of the prevailing public mood, Luntz told the governors at Kingsmill Resort, is the hostility that has greeted many members of Congress who have held town-hall meetings on health care this month. He decried the incivility of those confrontations, but Luntz also said politicians are mistaken if they think the anger is false or manufactured.
"The public is mad," he said. "It's not fake.... People spit on me when I do focus groups, and it's not because they don't like me. They're really angry."
Ironically, he said, a majority of those polled say they are satisfied with their own health care. He suggested that the public anger springs from a more generalized dissatisfaction with the way things are going in America - with the sputtering economy at the top of the list.
"Only 34 percent of Americans believe their kids will be better off than them," he said. "If you want to understand what this economy has done, this is what it has done to people."
People are looking to their leaders to restore their faith in the future, Luntz said.
"What the public is looking for is solutions and bold action," he said. "Not just action, but bold action. They're prepared for you to do things that have never been done before because they believe that we've never been in this situation before. There is a deep and fundamental rejection of the status quo."
On the other hand, he said, Americans harbor a distrust that their leaders will be able to solve the nation's problems.
"Nobody trusts government," he said. "More people believe in the existence of UFOs than believe that Social Security will still exist when they retire.... More people would rather be mugged than audited by the IRS. And 5 percent say there's no difference."
That means politicians must walk a fine line when it comes to health care reform, Luntz said.
"The public has come to the belief that everyone has the right to health care, no matter what their physical condition and no matter what their income," he said.
The desire for reform is as strong in the South as anywhere else in the nation, if not more so, Luntz said, noting that the Southern states have the highest percentage of people who can't afford the care they need.
"Make no mistake," he said. "And as I say this I look you straight in the eye. The American people want you to fix health care.
"They want you to fix it - and not break what isn't broken."
Bill Sizemore, (757) 446-2276, bill.sizemore@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
A thought on unions
Don't discount unions and their potential gain from a government run medical system. The President using union members as guard dogs to intimidate the public, for daring to express their anger and displeasure with the way Congress and this President is governing, is just dangerous and could easily incite violence. The unions being mobilized expressly to suppress dissent and intimidate the pubic, is unprecedented in national politics, and is a huge indicator of what the union movement hopes to receive from this deal.
An all new federal health care union would be one very large beast to feed indeed.
Great Britain’s system, covering 60 million is the world's 3rd largest employer.
How huge would a U.S. government run system have to be to cover 350 million people?
Unions = GM and other automakers – how’s that working out folks.
New Federal medical unions, full of the normal inefficiencies of anything run by government, and no way to trim the fat or even fire anyone.
Great hopey changey more of the samey taxey spendy. Thanks for nothing.
Know this about Mr. Luntz
Readers should know that Mr. Luntz is widely disrespected by other researchers because his work in support of conservative causes leads him to use research to mislead rather than to inform. In this particular story, he's stretching the notion that "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" to assume that people are against health care reform, when in fact people, even Republicans, are mad as hell that health care reform isn't happening.
This is the same man who took Americans who almost universally opposed the nation becoming involved in any war in the Mideast and justified George Bush's foray into Iraq by rebranding it as the "war on terror."
good Intell
You have to question a survey that uses a question from a move to make judgements. Mr. Luntz is obviously just doing an un-scientific pop culture thing. I might have answered 'Yes' to being angry but it would be because people are blocking Health Care Reform. I guess I am mad at the Republican Right Wing.
New flash
The republicans are no longer in power. Bush is gone. The democrats hold both houses of congress including a super majority in the senate and the presidency.
The republicans CANNOT stop health care reform.
The ball is 100% in the democrats court on this one.
Sorry!
In my industry medicaid pays
In my industry medicaid pays roughly 17% of our cost. Even with that they were unable to manage the program and turfed it off to a broker who receives a state mandated 15% profit margin. The providers make no profit at all. During the last 5 years they claim to have overpaid providers by millions of dollars and by their own admission had no mechanism to monitor payments nor could they even calculate them properly. To this day they still cant say if what they paid out was correct or not. Through 5 budget cycles these issues were never caught.
At the same time the patients freedom of choice was removed. Services went to low bid selected by the broker and when a patient was injured the broker successfully argued in court that they and the provider as a sub contractor were covered under sovereign immunity.
So in review....Medicaid cant account for its own money for a period of over 5 years. Turfs off the program to a broker who turns a profit. The providers meanwhile cant even cover costs. The services go to low bid with zero consideration of quality of care and the patient has lost freedom of choice. And as a bonus if the low bid, low quality provider injures you providing the
From the article...
"They want you to fix it - and not break what isn't broken."
Amen. No one argues that there aren't some significant steps needed to improve health care in this country. What's undeniable is that the 'fix' isn't an incompetent, unqualified entity like the govt taking it over in its entirety. Moving health care from employer provided to consumer based, implementing real tort reform, providing for a catastrophic insurance option (perhaps the BEST option the govt can provide?), and addressing the 'pre-existing' condition situation will be the common sense starting points for making the absolute best health care system the world has ever known even better. There are states that reputedly have good, effective health programs, they should be looked at and see if any lesssons learned can be applied. Means testing should be performed in some states as well, so the mistakes of the Medicare drug programs can be avoided. Common sense, and slow but steady implementation of good ideas and 'fixes' will provide what needs to be provided.
As I have said right along...
Any of these issues can be best addressed at the Statehouse - NOT DC!
Right off the bat those governors at that meeting could have immediately resolved to propose to their legislatures opening their borders to all health insurance companies in or out of their states. Just this one move would make somemore healthcare accessible to those who cannot get it today.
There ar ehtings to be done without moving 1/6th of the economy into the Federal's hands.
I agree ...
... that "takeover" of health care/insurance by the feds is wrong, and unnecessary.
There are a lot of screamers out there who want you to believe there are but two possible outcomes here: 1) The system we have; and, 2) Socialism.
That's bull. "2cents" has a lot more than 2 cents going for him ... he's studying issues. The advanced/industrialized nations who do a better job with it use a mix of strategies, mainly relying on *regulation* and *oversight* by the gov't rather than *ownership* by the gov't. Several of them do it very well. As a result, they're not wasting $$Billions of our premium payments on lobbying politicians or advertising.
In Japan, there is virtually *no* wait for health care services. You can go to any doctor or facility you choose. You do have to participate in the health care plan that has been assigned to your business/industry/profession, but gov't oversight has made them all work pretty much the same.
Even the much argued "long wait" for service in Canada is misunderstood. That's for *elective* services. Emergency services are excellent. A good Canadian friend who survived breast cancer will attest to that.
In the US, it's acknowledg
oops...
... acknowledged that about 20 percent of every health care dollar goes to overhead/administrative costs. In Japan that figure is 3-4 percent; in Germany and Sweden it's 5 percent or less.
When we squawk about "waste, fraud and abuse," we should keep those numbers in mind; 20 percent of every dollar we pay for health insurance goes into the pocket of a politician, lobbyist or PR agency.
That is inaccurate
86% of health premiums go to providers (of which 10% is due to malpractice defense and insurance.) See http://tinyurl.com/hcdollar
Of the 14% that does not, 3% is insurance company profit, and the other 11% goes to claims processing, compliance with regulations, communication with patients and providers, and into a government fund that backs up insurance reserves much like the FDIC insures banks.
Could they do better on the overhead? Probably, if they were not required by law to use the mail instead of the internet to inform patients and providers of claims handling. But even if they were to achieve the ideal balance of efficiency and fraud prevention, you would not see more than a few percent less.
(Regular posters beer summit, Thurs 8/27 6PM New Belmont, Norfolk.)
Nice try, Doc Tabor ...
But you're wrong ... even the chart that you refer to on tinyurl.com allocates 5 percent for "CONSUMER SERVICES*, PROVIDER SUPPORT AND MARKETING" -- quoted in caps from the chart. You sorta overlooked that.
If you read the chart again, and you can do the math in your head, you'll see that just 76 cents of the health-care dollar goes to direct medical care -- even *worse* than the ratio I quoted. The rest goes to profit, marketing, overhead, "liability" (undefined) and "cost of defensive medicine," whatever the heck that is. Sounds like some sorta cheesy euphemism to me.
Also, if you note the small print at the very lower right-hand-corner of the chart, you'll see that it is provided, "© 2006 America’s Health Insurance Plans" -- i.e., it's spoon-fed by the insurers' own lobbying organization.
Man, if the health industry's own "facts" bend so badly against your argument, imagine what a non-biased analysis might yield.
You're not very good at reading charts
The 10% that goes to to malpractice and defensive medicine is a portion of the cost of providing health care. It has nothing to do with the insurance companies. It you have a problem with that, take it up with the trial lawyers. Unless part of your socialist health care takeover is a ban on liability suits, it has nothing to do with health care reform.
You will also notice that the graph is based on audited data from PriceWaterhouseCooper, a rather respected accounting firm. The AHIP only put it in graphic format.
But if you're so sure you can do a better job at administering health care payments than the insurance companies, you should start your own insurance company and get rich. If you could trim that 14% to 12%, you'd be a billionaire overnight.
Debate all options
The health insurance industry needs to be opened up across state lines, there aught to be different levels of policies available to fit individual needs, no one should have to be dependent on the government and no one should have to be dependent on an employer. The Swiss have a free market health system with strong government mandates and oversight, this system is not bankrupting their country and they citizens have a universal guarantee of insurance. The government provides subsidies for low wage earners, but their choice of provider and coverage level remain the choice individuals.
The 'only a government run plan can work’ idea has proven wrong in all countries it has been tried. These government based systems are in worse shape than Medicare and it is out of money in less than 10 years. Medicaid is a state run government plan and many people who qualify already won’t enroll the same with the children’s insurance plan through the state. Look to the Swiss, the Germans, even France; we can borrow many ideas that free the individual without empowering government or employers to intrude and make decisions down to the individual level. If that is not top-down managemen
blaming
Blaming the insurance companies for all the problems is bogus. The health insurance industry is bottled up from state to state in laws and regulations that do nothing to help maximize access and affordability. Each state decides which insurers can operate and what practices each insurer can engage and which are forbidden. Each insurer has to comply with the laws of the state in order to operate.
Politicians, both Dems and Repubs write these laws to pander to the interests of their respective parties and ideology. Some of this regulation is good and some of it is bad. Mandating low co-pays, low deductibles, one-size-fits-all coverage, has made insurance outrageously expensive; and, politicians have allowed, as a way for insurance companies to spread the costs of these high maintenance plans, the off-set of denying or dropping coverage to maintain profitability and keep campaign dollars flowing to said politicians.
Remember these moments!
A phenomenon in American politics (local, state, or federal) is the uncanny ability of encumbents to erase the long-term memory of the electorate and replace it with the most recent 40-60 days of wall-to-wall campaign rhetoric. How many will recall these outrages of city, state, and federal politicians when Election Day rolls around? The result: essentially the same City Council, same General Assembly, and the same Congress. The "Vote 'em Out!" fervor dissipates as Election Day nears.
Caveat. Of course, in order to "vote 'em out," there need to be able opponents. If you or I are not going to run, we need to seek, encourage, and support those who will.
Well said!
The real poll should be... how many of these politicians take this information to heart and act on it back in their own states? I'd be willing to bet that, to the politicians, the speaker sounded like the teacher from Peanuts... womp womp womp womp womp.
Right On The Nose
This man hit it right on the nose. American citizens want the following:
1. Fix what's wrong with health care - don't fix what's not broken.
2. Stop all the "pork" spending. If it's not essential - don't spend it.
3. Fix the IRS. Go to a flat tax or a fair tax - but FIX the IRS.
Ditto!
Well said!
Beautiful ...
Well, said...
For an angry public to use that anger effectively, here's some advice:
1. Stop buying the lie that Americans have the best health care system in the world. We don't. The lobbyists for BigPharm and Big-Insurance just want you to believe that, and they spend a *huge* chunk of your insurance payments to reinforce that lie. As the man said -- fix what's broke, not what isn't.
2. After 8 years, stop nation-building in Iraq. Move the troops where they're needed, in Afghanistan. Let them fight battles, not collect the garbage and build better sewers. Stop buying the lie that Saddam Hussein had anything at all to do with 9-11.
3. Stop buying the lie that one political party is pure good and the other is pure evil -- no matter which way you swing. Stop buying the lie that overstuffed, undereducated DJs raving on the radio and TV will lead us to political salvation. All they ever lead to is ratings points.
4. Stop buying the lie that you can scream your way to better representation. You don't get there by screaming -- you get there by reading, understanding, interacting, and voting.
Check list...
LOL...this looks like the liberal "we are smarter than you" pacifism check list for the faint of heart. I especially liked the reference to Rush. Sad part is, liberals will drive right over you and your rights if you don't scream as in the current climate. Not saying anything or not "being heard" results in tacit approval of whatever the current administration wants to drive down our throats and they will then claim that is what "we" wanted or someone would have "said" something. If I have to scream to be heard, there is something wrong with the leadership.