Insurers Royally Played Obama

| | Comments (4) |


In the months after President Obama's inauguration, he and other administration officials held more than two dozen secret meetings with top insurers and the major pharmaceutical groups. He met with registered lobbyist Karen Ignagni, president and CEO of America's Health Insurance Plans, the major private insurer's industry group, on March 5, 6 and 11, May 11 and June 30.
The meeting with AHIP and the other industry bigwigs was followed by a much public and much ballyhooed pledge by the private insurers and the pharmaceuticals to plough tens of millions of dollars into an ad and PR blitz to back Obama's health care reform plan. They solemnly and very publicly assured that they'd work closely with Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus and his five other gang of five cohorts on the Committee to not be the hard headed obstructionists they'd been for the past six decades to getting health care reform passed. Obama bought their pledge, back patted them for their spirit of cooperation, and publicly hailed them for promising to break down the final barrier, namely themselves, to providing affordable health care to all Americans.

The insurers hustled, conned and lied to Obama. They cynically played upon his political naiveté about them. Worse, they didn't even try to mask their play of him. AHIP brazenly fired off to the press a study it commissioned that claims that Obama's health care reform plan will hike the cost of insurance for families by thousands. The insurers insist that private employers will get hit even harder with the increased fees, taxes, and add-on costs in the reform plan. They swear that will cause many employers to reduce or even eliminate coverage for their employees. The insurers doubled down on their play of Obama by threatening to spend a fortune on an ad campaign to kill his plan.


The worst part of the insurers con game is that they had already squeezed a guaranteed profit bonanza out of the White House and the Senate Finance Committee--no public option, government enforced mandates complete with penalties, taxpayer subsidies of the poor and middle class uninsured, forced employer mandated plans, and best of all absolutely no meaningful government hammer over them to make sure that they don't raise prices or figure out ways to dump those who private insurers label "high risk" or less charitably, "undesirables" at the first chance they get. Those are the millions who suffer chronic and major diseases--cancer, diabetes, asthma and heart disease. The overwhelming majority of them are blacks and Latinos and the poor.
Covering them was supposed to be the reason that Obama and congress battled for reform in the first place. The issue for private insurers even as they made nice with the White House and deceived Obama into thinking that he had a deal with them has never changed. It's still their endemic fear of any smattering of government control of medical care.

The hint that insurers would double cross the White House the first chance they got was Obama's mere mention that he'd impose higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for coverage of the uninsured. This stirred terror among insurers and medical industry groups of deficit soaring taxes and socialized medicine. The even bigger hint was the even more terrifying to them thought that congress might actually impose cost containment measures into whatever reform package that finally emerged from congress. This would directly threaten what insurers regard as their absolute right to make and keep the kings ransom in profits they've raked in seemingly forever. This drove them to the barricades the past six decades even faster than their phony, self-serving scare shout that health care reform is socialized medicine.
Obama learned an age old and bitter lesson from the insurer's double cross. When you try to buy your enemies affection you can never be rich enough. The insurers royally played Obama.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book, How Obama Governed: The Year of Crisis and Challenge (Middle Passage Press) will be released in January, 2010.

4 Comments

Diane Schrader Author Profile Page said:

I'm not even going to address the almost-hysterical paranoia of this article. I would just like to point out that Earl's writing often contains little gems like this one:

"the millions who suffer chronic and major diseases--cancer, diabetes, asthma and heart disease. The overwhelming majority of them are blacks and Latinos and the poor."

So let me get this straight. The OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of all cancer, diabetes, asthma and heart disease sufferers in this country are black, Latino and poor?

What a relief to all those white and rich people!

Jonathan Dobrer Author Profile Page said:

Come on Diane. It is one thing to disagree with Earl or me, but it is quite another to really change the context of a quote so blatantly for the sake of your argument.

The "vast majority" you take out of context, is not all who suffer, but--as the previous sentence makes clear--the "high risk and (insurance-wise)" undesirables".

"Almost hysterical paranoia" is not argument but name-calling.

You are smart, informed and can do better.
Jonathan

Diane Schrader Author Profile Page said:

I apologize for the "almost hysterical paranoia." I should have taken the time to illustrate exactly how hysterical and paranoid it was, but I chose to just call it that instead. It was a shortcut that I should not have taken.

However, Jonathan, I did not take his quote out of context. He did not make clear what he meant. I can't be responsible for his bad writing. I know what he PROBABLY meant to say (the interpretation you gave it) but that is in fact not what he said. That "sentence" to which you refer is a run-on nightmare of hyperbole which does bring to mind the term "hysteria" but is by no means clear.

So let's get is straight now. Is he saying there are "millions" of "undesirables" who suffer from cancer, diabetes, asthma and heart disease, and that the overwhelming majority of them are black or Latino? Whites are more likely to get a cancer diagnosis than blacks or Latinos according to the CDC. This fact alone makes me question, again, his hyperbole.

And let's get back to the crux of the health care issue. All those "undesirables" would have access to at least more affordable health care if the government would stop regulating it and let the free market serve all sectors. Let the insurance companies actually compete without restriction, and you would see everyone's costs drop. Why can't the Democrats just give this the old college try?

Minmus Author Profile Page said:

I've got to agree with Diane.
Reading this article "as written" does make one assume the author's intent. "Blacks and latinos and the poor WHITE people" is probably what was intended, I assume. Ha!

Leave a comment

Friendly Fire comments

Due to the huge amount of spam, commenters on Friendly Fire must now register with the site and sign in to leave a comment.

Creating a Movable Type commenting account is easy: After you click on the "comments" link in a blog post (or are already in an individual blog entry), click "sign in." When you are at the Movable Type "sign-in to comment" screen, after the words "Not a member?" click "Sign up!"

You will be asked for a minimal amount of information, including an e-mail address, which we need to verify the account.

If you sign up and for some reason don't get a return e-mail confirming your new account, please e-mail Steven Rosenberg at steven.rosenberg@
dailynews.com, and he will activate your account and notify you. He can also help you with any other issues regarding signing up for or leaving comments on the blog.

Tip: To ensure that you receive the confirmation e-mail when you do sign up to comment on the blog, BEFORE you sign up, put the e-mail address online@langnews.com in your mail program's address book. That way, the message from the server to confirm your account won't get lost in your spam file.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Earl Ofari Hutchinson published on October 13, 2009 8:24 AM.

Peace Nazis: "No soup for you, Nobel for you!" was the previous entry in this blog.

Madonna's Fling is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Recent Comments

Minmus on Insurers Royally Played Obama: I've got to agree with Diane. Reading this article "as written" does m ...

Diane Schrader on Insurers Royally Played Obama: I apologize for the "almost hysterical paranoia." I should have taken ...

Jonathan Dobrer on Insurers Royally Played Obama: Come on Diane. It is one thing to disagree with Earl or me, but it is ...

Diane Schrader on Insurers Royally Played Obama: I'm not even going to address the almost-hysterical paranoia of this a ...

Powered by Movable Type 4.25

Advertisement

Other blogs

Boys Hoops: Campbell Hall tournament schedule. Nov. 30-Dec.5 in Daily News High School Spotlight
Sunday Chivas USA-Galaxy Playoff Gameday in 100 Percent Soccer
Post-game extras in Inside UCLA with Jon Gold
LAPD Chief: The Contenders in The Sausage Factory
Morning Buzz in Inside USC with Scott Wolf