Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 20, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

Drought Adds to Syria’s Misery




The Divide


Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Report

Full Text of the President’s Speech to Congress

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Sep 9, 2009

(Page 3)

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business.  They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors.  I just want to hold them accountable.  (Applause.)  And the insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that.  But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange.  (Applause.)  Now, let me be clear.  Let me be clear.  It would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance.  No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance.  In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5 percent of Americans would sign up.


Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea.  They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government.  And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option.  But they won’t be.  I’ve insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects.  But by avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits and excessive administrative costs and executive salaries, it could provide a good deal for consumers, and would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better, the same way public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students without in any way inhibiting a vibrant system of private colleges and universities.  (Applause.)


Now, it is—it’s worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight.  But its impact shouldn’t be exaggerated—by the left or the right or the media.  It is only one part of my plan, and shouldn’t be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles.  To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage available for those without it.  (Applause.)  The public option—the public option is only a means to that end—and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal.  And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.  (Applause.)


For example—for example, some have suggested that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies.  Others have proposed a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan.  These are all constructive ideas worth exploring.  But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice.  (Applause.)  And I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need.  (Applause.)

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

Finally, let me discuss an issue that is a great concern to me, to members of this chamber, and to the public—and that’s how we pay for this plan.


And here’s what you need to know.  First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits—either now or in the future.  (Applause.)  I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period.  And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize.  (Applause.)  Now, part of the reason I faced a trillion-dollar deficit when I walked in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last decade were not paid for—from the Iraq war to tax breaks for the wealthy.  (Applause.)  I will not make that same mistake with health care.


Second, we’ve estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system, a system that is currently full of waste and abuse.  Right now, too much of the hard-earned savings and tax dollars we spend on health care don’t make us any healthier.  That’s not my judgment—it’s the judgment of medical professionals across this country.  And this is also true when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid.


In fact, I want to speak directly to seniors for a moment, because Medicare is another issue that’s been subjected to demagoguery and distortion during the course of this debate.


More than four decades ago, this nation stood up for the principle that after a lifetime of hard work, our seniors should not be left to struggle with a pile of medical bills in their later years.  That’s how Medicare was born.  And it remains a sacred trust that must be passed down from one generation to the next.  (Applause.)  And that is why not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.  (Applause.)


The only thing this plan would eliminate is the hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud, as well as unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies—subsidies that do everything to pad their profits but don’t improve the care of seniors.  And we will also create an independent commission of doctors and medical experts charged with identifying more waste in the years ahead.  (Applause.)


Now, these steps will ensure that you—America’s seniors—get the benefits you’ve been promised.  They will ensure that Medicare is there for future generations.  And we can use some of the savings to fill the gap in coverage that forces too many seniors to pay thousands of dollars a year out of their own pockets for prescription drugs.  (Applause.)  That’s what this plan will do for you.  So don’t pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut, especially since some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past and just this year supported a budget that would essentially have turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program.  That will not happen on my watch.  I will protect Medicare.  (Applause.) 


Now, because Medicare is such a big part of the health care system, making the program more efficient can help usher in changes in the way we deliver health care that can reduce costs for everybody.  We have long known that some places—like the Intermountain Healthcare in Utah or the Geisinger Health System in rural Pennsylvania—offer high-quality care at costs below average.  So the commission can help encourage the adoption of these common-sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals throughout the system—everything from reducing hospital infection rates to encouraging better coordination between teams of doctors.


Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan.  (Applause.)  Now, much of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers.  And this reform will charge insurance companies a fee for their most expensive policies, which will encourage them to provide greater value for the money—an idea which has the support of Democratic and Republican experts.  And according to these same experts, this modest change could help hold down the cost of health care for all of us in the long run.


Now, finally, many in this chamber—particularly on the Republican side of the aisle—have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the cost of health care.  (Applause.)  Now—there you go.  There you go.  Now, I don’t believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I’ve talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs.  (Applause.)  So I’m proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine.  (Applause.)  I know that the Bush administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these ideas.  I think it’s a good idea, and I’m directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.  (Applause.)


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By pdx-tpe, September 12, 2009 at 11:38 pm Link to this comment

Obama is a great orator, but the content of the speech leaves me disappointed. 

When talking about the public option, he said “It would only be an option for
those who don’t have insurance.  No one would be forced to choose it, and it
would not impact those of you who already have insurance.”

Based on this and other comments he has made, and the legislation coming out
of the Senate HELP committee, you won’t be able to opt-out of employer based
insurance, if you can find a better deal with the public option.  Employees who
work for companies like Wal-Mart will be stuck with their company plan.  At
least now, they can opt-out and sign up for Medicaid.

And for a broader point, the president also made the historical references to
Social Security and Medicare.  If he is going to follow through and make history,
as was done with the creation of these two programs, he needs to make it
simple, like both of these programs, and simply expand Medicare to cover
everybode who is here legally.

Expand Medicare, and support it with a payroll tax on both employers and
employees, like Social Security is funded today.  I, and I believe my employer,
would trade in high premiums for a modest increase in payroll taxes in a
heartbeat.

Report this
Purple Girl's avatar

By Purple Girl, September 10, 2009 at 12:07 am Link to this comment

Pulled the Panties out from both our Right and Left Ass Cheeks- Superb Speech.

Report this

By abdo, September 9, 2009 at 11:23 pm Link to this comment

i am a supporter of single payer, which i experienced in Sweden for 15 years. It was simple you pay your taxes and you get your car no Questions asked. however, the president hopefully, will fight the wing nuts and help pass some reform as first step towered a larger health car reform.  ,

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.