wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

gary
i can't speak for dems because i'm not one of them but your statement "government has the right to make decisions concerning our own bodies." would be as silly as me saying my boss (who pays for me healthcare) has the right to make decisions concerning my bodies.) the "8% tax on revenues" is a compromise, the best answer is single payer. the only issue left is how to pay.

Jay [20], with the death of Sen. Kennedy & the illness of Sen. Byrd, the Democrats *don't* have enough votes to stop a filibuster. Yes, they're having problems convincing some of their own, but if they can't, they need a couple of Republican votes.

I had called in and asked an off-topic question. I only heard the Rep. Waxman would be on, so I immediately called with this question:

Would Mr. Waxman consider the health insurance corporations nothing more than intermediaries that, if they were entirely removed from the health care process, we would not only not miss, but we would also thrive and be better off without? The person screening calls made mention of the question referring to the single-payer system, which it is, but I just wanted to hear Mr. Waxman's opinion.

lori
sorry i thought i was talking about your concerns and i DID NOT call u GREEDY! i don't even know u! please reread my comment and talk to the points.

LONG TERM as u say i don't see how business (my boss) will keep paying for healthcare as the insurance profit rise and the outcome falls.
the corporate model just does not add up. long term or short term.

" If we cram this through without some level of buy in from Republicans and the general population, it will be overturned as soon as conservatives" what, like medicare ? yes GOP FOUGHT that one and are still fighting that. the middle class will always have to fight the profit machines, otherwise this place will look like central america. "doing a great job brownie!"

progressives aren't the problem the GOP did nothing for healthcare in the years they had all the power 2000-2006) how fast they forget.
i'm talking to ur points

I think that the debate about drug prices seems to be discussed in black and white whereas it is gray. What gets lost in the debate is the current system we have for funding drug development. The vast majority of innovative drugs are developed and become 1st available in the US, because here is the most profitable place to sell them. In addition, the FDA insists that for drugs that are sold in the US have the clinical research in the US. That research is very, very expensive and very, very risky, and it takes a very long time (5-10 years in most cases). It is more risky that all those bad mortgages.

The main problem is that we do not have a better mechanism for funding drug development. Federal funding only covers a very tiny portion of the costs. So, where will the new drugs for the chronic diseases, that are now the major problems in our Western Society, come from? I'm talking about Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes etc. Pharmaceutical companies are the only organizations that have the specialized expertise to bring a drug to market, and they need a way to recoup it and to make a profit. Can this be done by non-profits? Not so far.

What about the so called "me too" drugs? Anyone with a chronic condition knows that some of the drugs (even of the same type) do not work for them, while others will. These drugs do not act the same in everybody. So if one drug does not work for you, you're happy that there is another one.

Everyone talks about the great profits of the Pharmacuetical Industries, but the truth is that they are not so good. In fact, the industry is in decline and fewer innovations are coming out. It is much harder to make a profit when so much of the world will not pay the prices to keep it all going.

So, let's try to deal with the real issues here, and not just feel good by bashing the Pharmaceutical Industry.

Are Democrats politically consistent?
Only on paper-----almost:

Most Democrats' Position On Abortion:
The government has no right to make decisions concerning our own bodies.
Most Democrats' Position On Healthcare:
The government has the right to make decisions concerning our own bodies.

And they're consistently illogical:
The Common Democrat Lament:

"Businesses in the US are not competitive internationally, because of the cost of providing health insurance."
and
"If you lose your job, you lose your health insurance coverage."
The logical implication is that it was insane to have made businesses responsible for our health insurance.

The Democrat's Legislative solution for that:
Government will impose an 8% tax on revenues of businesses that do not provide health insurance for their employees.

comrade calls'em
PS
they might "revolt against socialism" BUT don't touch their medicare!
or the corn subsidies or... u get the point

the free market is dead. just give me 10 more years, you'll wish there WERE death panels

So, Brian, you don't like the idea of Medicare "negotiating" drug prices with drug companies. Medicare is so powerful that it could dictate prices. It seems you like it better with drug companies refusing to "negotiate" and thereby being so powerful that they dictate prices. I'd guess that you're trying to be/sound unbiased -- it's not working.

hjs:

Because you can't address my most basic concerns/questions, you try to shut me down by labeling me GREEDY and portraying me as an out of touch debutante and I am neither.

EVEN Dems like me can be critical thinkers, ask questions, and yes, not be keen about throwing money at every issue regardless of whether it will solve it. I have real concerns and questions about the LONG TERM viability of some of these concepts and you won't guilt me or shut me down by throwing around hateful labels. If we cram this through without some level of buy in from Republicans and the general population, it will be overturned as soon as conservatives get back into power. That's not a solution.

And we wonder why progressives can't get anything done? Sigh...

comrade calls'em
"suspicious that there is no single plan"

NO the blue dogs dragged their feet.
the republicats lied to everyone's face.
the left has been lazy. i know why there is no plan $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

we are the government. why should i be "suspicion about government?" maybe u think because i might have been suspicion about rove or allie north or corporate welfare but they are not the government. we are.

did u see the glen beck/ GE building piece. i should hope they reshow it this weekend i'd like to get that one on tape!

hjs - why aren't you suspicious that there is no single plan yet? After all, this affects 1/6 of the economy. Originally, they wanted to jam this "plan" down the peoples' throats without discussion or even the reading of the “bill/bills” by the end of this past August. Are you kidding me? There has only been discussion because the general population of this country is in democratic revolt against socialism. Where is your old time liberal suspicion about government intrusion and wrong-doing? Let’s fix what’s broken to get more people better health care, not break what’s working for the vast majority of the American people.

ps
i hope u know there are people who work and don't have insurance.

lori
you never pay retail? we all pay retail for healthcare and the corporate health care profits don't add to the length of anyone's life.
People ARE not left in the gutter to die.
many of my poor country men die without health care. i WOULD pay more for them to live. i pay for them now and WOULD pay more.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFiles/Image/Blog/ftsbs-large.jpg

sometimes u have to give to this nation that has given u so much. or does it always have to be about GREED?

hjs:

I have no problem with paying taxes, I just want the money to be appropriately/wisely spent. I never pay retail if I can avoid it, so why would I be happy for our government to pay more than required because of the power of lobbyists?

Will YOU pay more in taxes for this plan? I doubt it. Would YOU be willing to pay more for this plan as described/proposed/theorized? That's the litmus test. It's easy to spend someone else's money.

We do have a safety net in this society for the poorest, uninsured Americans. People are not left in the gutter to die. Stop dramatizing! What we need is an affordable plan for lower middle class/working class, freelance workers, small business owners, etc. I just don't have a lot of confidence that this patchwork half ass approach will provide that solution for the long term.

lori
there is no 'plan' yet. congress is talking about several options.
healthcare just like the green energy creates jobs. try thinking about those who die without health insurance. more nurse, more doctors, more hospitals, more dollars in the local economies (not china's)
there's nothing 'wrong ' with medicare it just needs to be paid for with "evil" taxes.

hjs:

I doubt Medicare will be there by the time I need it.

I'm not opposed to a plan, I just think this "plan" (which no one really seems to have defined nor really understand) is being crammed through at great expense at a time when our country just narrowly escaped a depression.

I'll pay more for real reform, this isn't real reform and, frankly, it may cost Dems a lot of races next year and then EVERYTHING (energy reform, restoring clean water/air standards, protecting reproductive freedom, worker's rights, etc.) will be LOST.

I don't pretend to have the answer but I feel entitled to ask the questions.

Brian, was Waxman in the studio? I ask this because if you could see his lips moving then he lying. It's just as simple as that.

Chuck
the LEFT has been lazy

Lori

ok, we'll wait 20 more years until you're safely on medicare.
feel better now.

I'm sorry, but it's thoroughly disingenuous for Mr. Waxman to lay the problems with healthcare reform on the Republicans. Their opposition is a distraction at worst.

The truth is the Democrats control the White House and Congress -- they have virtually all the power they need to pass anything they'd like. They don't need the Republicans on this issue.

The problem is they've absolutely failed to put together a proposal that will pass muster even with members of their own party, and they can't get the financial case to close.

When they do, healthcare reform will proceed, as it should.

On Ken Johnson's statement that only 1 out of 5 drugs in the research pipeline get to the market, does 1 out of 5 drugs = 1 out of 5 dollars spent on them? If early studies on a drug aren't promising, the company will stop spending money on research for it, so the amount spent on the 4 out of 5 drugs isn't 4 times the amount spent on the 1 drug that does get approved.

Waxman get it together! All you Democrats in office make us look bad.

Get on point and get health reform through.

Most Americans are dumb and listen only to talking points.

Convince them!

I'm a liberal and for health reform, but the way you guys are going about it is so scattered you wouldn't convince me if I had the slightest doubt.

preventing the govt from negotiating on behalf of American consumers is nuts. These drug companies negotiate with other govts--that is why drugs are cheaper in Canada, France etc. why are Americans being penalized?

1. I'm a Dem.
2. I'll be one of those families who will pay more taxes for this plan.
3. I'm in favor of insuring all Americans.

I am offended that I am told by Obama and my Congressman that it is my patriotic duty to "pay a little more" to insure my fellow Americans when my representatives have negotiated away with lobbyists substantial cost savings. I've been hollering about PHARMA for weeks, glad someone is finally paying attention.

This is the wrong bill at the wrong time. This is not reform and this plan is not sustainable.

Again with the argument that the government shouldn't be allowed to bargain for drugs because Pharma needs to charge high prices to finance its R&D.

Yes, perhaps they do. But why should US consumers bear the costs of Pharma's R&D? Pharma makes deals with other governments for lower prices. Those other countries are our economic peers. No one is forcing Pharma into deals with them that doesn't cover their fair share of R&D costs.

There is simply no rationale for allowing Canada and France to get lower prices while prohibiting the US from doing so. Perhaps the would wind up paying more while we pay less. But the disparity we have today makes little economic sense.

Waxman get it together! All you Democrats make us look bad.

Get on point and get health reform through through.

Most Americans are dumb and listen only to talking points.

Convince them!

I'm a liberal and for health reform, but the way you guys are going about it is so scattered you wouldn't convince me if I had the slightest doubt.

Chuck
and the boomers are next. they take, we give

What a relief to hear Congressman Waxman. My mother is 74. Her income is about $22,000 per year. Her prescription drug cost for 2009 will be $4,350. That is 20% of her income. When she is in the donut hole, her drugs cost $825 per month. One drug is $200 and four are over $100. Her medical insurance is $200 per month: $100 for Part B and $100 for a Medicare supplement policy. That is a total of 30% of income for health insurance.
Thank you.

Brian,

In fact many medical advancements come from Europe -- there was something on this either in the Times or on DailyKos: France, England in particular have made major medical advances in recent years.

There's another health care related issue that there are bills out about. Extension of the COBRA benefit to those who are unemployed. There are 2 issues from my point of view. One is extension of the 2/3 reduction in cost into the future. The other, is extension to those who have been unemployed since last September, who the original bill covers, but who were laid off prior to September. I fall into this category and so despite my paying for COBRA since last October, I have received NOTHING from this COBRA benefit while others have received thousands of dollars in benefit (My COBRA costs over $550/mo.). This is patently unfair. I hope that this can be discussed here today and that it can be one of the 30 issues.

I am a great admirer of Congressman Waxman.

I have a question for him on Health Care Reforms.

Why are the Democrats not united? Why do we have these so-called "Blue-Dog Democrats" Yellow Dog or Pink Dog Democrats?

Why Can't the Democratic Party discipline itself?

President Obama and the Democrats are about to suffer a major policy defeat... which would amount to a fatal "body-blow" and yet, some Democrats are nattering about being Blue-Yellow-Pink Dogs?

It must be clear by now, that the Democrats are allowing themselves to be lured into sleep stupor of this romantic idea of bipartisanship!

Republicans are political orphans... only interested in the midterm elections and other elections after that... to regain majority in the House of Representatives, the Senate and eventually, regain the White House.

Republican have shown their lack of interests in bipartisanship during the Stimulus Package vote... during the vote on Justice Sonia Sotomayor etc.

If the Democrats allow the Health Care Reforms to fail.... all Americans.... especially, those who supported the Democrats during the last election... will make the Democrats to account... make them liable and take responsibility for such failure...the Democrats will be pummeled at the polls hence.

Most sincerely,

Paul I. Adujie
New York, United States

I'm tired of hearing about the seniors! What about all the people that are in their 30's and 40's that won't get to became seniors?

No one should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one should go broke if they get sick.

Nobody discusses WHY pharmaceuticals are so insanely expensive.

WHY does a pill or capsule with 40 cents worth of chemicals in it cost $20 each? Why does everyone take this as a given? WHY is the pricing of pharmaceuticals not examined >

The drug companies are ripping off the public on a scale never before seen in history. A complete federal examination of HOW they price pharmaceuticals and what costs they are criminally inflating to line their pockets should be done immediately.

In the case of prescription drug prices, the US government ALREADY grants Big Pharma effective kickbacks by granting longer patent protections than any other industrialized nation.

Fortunately, other countries are not going for it. India just rejected patent claims by a US pharmaceutical company with respect to some HIV drugs.

The American government may be too stupid or subservient to big business, but the rest of the world isn't having it.

(Same on GM foods, toxic plastics, etc.)

"Not by being gay" is very awkward phrasing. It implies that someone who got AIDS by accident is something different to someone who got AIDS by being gay. Know Brian probably does not mean it like this...but the phrasing is telling. Why not just say not through sexual relations...or something...

"why Congress has such a low opinion rating. "

congress might have a low rating but every likes "their" congress person.

We are the only major industrial country that permits prescription drugs to be advertised to the general public. We can't buy cheaper drugs from Canada or elsewhere. And the government is not supposed to negotiate drug prices. How can we not think that our Congress is in the pocket of the drug companies and their lobbyists? This is a major reason why Congress has such a low opinion rating.

what percent of new pharmaceuticals result from federally funded research?

why shouldn't the pharmaceutical industry pay royalties on these innovations?