we have united healthcare or my wife works, and she is a schoolteacher. she gets it through her job. i retired, and we are well satisfied. we pay about $800 a month for it, but it is well worth it. and i sure do not want no government to run -- look, medicare is going broke. who is going to pay for 50 million more people, health care who is going to pay for? it is going to be bankrupt, this country. obama, he is just destroying this country. i cannot understand -- he is going to put all these illegal mexicans on at, and their families are going to come into this country? what is going to happen? we have the best health care in the world. . people come here from canada. they have to wait in line -- excuse me, i am just -- host: sammy, let me read to you the piece by david gresser, a physician and a senior fellow at the manhattan institute. he writes about "canada's obama care president." tens of millions of americans will potentially be joining a new public insurance program and the federal government will increasingly be involved in treatment decisions. b

host: you said you and your wife both have health care from united healthcare in cigna. part of this proposal circulated by the president would call for companies to provide -- part of the law would ask the companies to provide health care or face a penalty. would you be in favor of that? caller: not really, because i don't believe the government belongs to the private sector business. that is well beyond the spectrum of what the government should be doing. host: here is the view of "the baltimore sun" 01 way to pay for health care. charging for the pop in soda. slapping a tax on sugary drinks could be good for health. but dcent a 3¢ excise tax on the strings may prove to be exactly what the doctor orders, not only if it means less consumption of the stuff of dreams, but if it can help finance barack obama as health reform. it hits low-income people the hardest. but, in fact, it is just the opposite. if poor people are less likely to buy sugary drinks they stand to benefit the most. omaha, neb. on our democrats' line. caller: and a person goes to see a doctor the doctor

caller: united healthcare. we really like it. host: what do you pay a month? caller: about $800 a month. host: she pays 800 or her employer? caller: if i get a prescription filled, i don't pay anything. if i go to the doctor, i don't pay anything. it is well worth it. it is real good. host: things for your input. this from a viewer. a payroll tax is fairer. it makes small companies pay with a part-time or temporary. i want to show you the comments of former michigan -- massachusetts gov. mitt romney on the talk shows yesterday, talking about health care reform. >> if there is a public auction, should republicans reject it? >> of course they should. republicans recognize that we have problems in health care and have had -- should have health care reform. we took that on in massachusetts. i understand the president considers this plan following the model of massachusetts. let's learn from our state. we have 98% of our people covered by insurance. we did not put in place a government plan. we have competition in health care. we don't need to have the government g

you get -- if you love blue cross or united healthcare or you love cigna you can stay with that. there is no reason why you would have to change. honestly, if i was in the middle of chemotherapy, the idea changing anything that seemed to be working for me might scare me. you don't need to be afraid of the public provider. anybody can choose it and anyone can say, i don't want it. our choices don't get smaller. our choices get larger at least by one. and once more, if the market works the way it should, your choices become less expensive, too. this is pretty important right now for middle class family has an average income of $80,000 and the average health insurance policy for that middle class family is about $12,000 making insurance cost a little bit less is pretty important at your kitchen table. if we want to solve families economic downturn we need to remember that 62% of bankruptcies are attributable to a significant degree on crippling healthcare costs and you think the subprime mortgage crisis is behind all those foreclosures, well, you're half-right. half of the foreclosu

my primary and by private insurer has to be my secondary and now medicare is gatekeeper for united healthcare and instead of getting the test that i need before preventative maintenance, i have to wait a year for a prostate exam, concerns about pet scans and cats can't ping allowable and my wife had lung cancer -- guest: i would strongly recommend. you have great people in new jersey. i strongly recommend you talk to your member of congress about being forced to wait a year for a prostate exam. let me go back to my comments, objective data by independent sources that evaluates the costs of health care and looks at the outcomes in terms of how long people live. the rates of various diseases, how procedures people -- people " look and compare community to community. the objective evidence is that the overall costs and oregon are no war and the outcomes are better. are people concerned in oregon? you bet they are. they are concerned about the costs of health care, concerned about having enough doctors, they are concerned about the trend line. that is one of the reasons i am working hard on this

by the house subcommittee on oversight and investigation shows that health insurers ballpoint united healthcare corporation and assurance canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people and allowing companies to avoid paying more than 300 million in medical claims. it also found that policyholders with breast cancer, a lymphoma, and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for cancellation. so, i mean, private health insurance? they make money by denying care. she is talking about recisions. look for any reason to dump that person. when you look at some of the insurance reform that are emerging now in some of these bills, i think they want to draw attention to that. i would say that democrats are saying at this point, that they don't want the government between you and your physician. they want you and your doctor to make decisions together on your care and keep your insurance if you like it. host: walter let's go to walter on the republican line in indiana. >> caller: thank you for taking my call, i constantly hear i want. america, guess what? and everyone is covered, health insurance i

>> is message was he had no interest in socializing the united states healthcare industry. he has no interest in preventing people like their doctors and like their insurance companies and their insurance coverage from continuing to receive the same coverage and going to the same doctors for treatment, that all the bonds to do is find a way to ensure the 46 million or so people who currently do not have health insurance and to ensure people with preexisting conditions that live in geographically out of the way parts of the country have access to the same quality of care as other people do, and that was the message he was trying to send to them. he is trying to preempt the ama to start looking at healthcare concepts coming out of the u.s. senate, in particular he is trying to prevent them from launching a full-scale offensive against the kind of healthcare reform that he wants. >> the helped committee is scheduled to work on its healthcare proposal later this week. what will you be watching for as lawmakers began in markup that could take weeks? >> well, the help committee i

healthcare is at the epicenter of the economic insecurity in the united states.ion of our nation's uniquely fragmented and costly framework of health insurance. now, this framework is distinctively american and any effort to improve it must be distinctively american as well building on the best elements of the present system, large group health plans in the public and private sectors. but an american solution must also fix what is not working. by allowing americans without access to secure workplace coverage to choose among group insurance plans to provide strong guarantees of quality, affordable coverage over time. to succeed, these reforms must be based on three strong pillars. shared risk, shared responsibility and personal responsibility. shared risk means we need a new national insurance exchange that allows workers without secure coverage to access good group health plans with premium assistance to assure responsibility. promote accountability this exchange must include also a choice a public health insurance plan competing with private insurers. now, this

assurant hell supports the principle that everyone in the united states deserts affordable healthcare and we see reform of the nation's healthcare system as a shared responsibility between doctors, consumers, health insurance and policymakers. the collectively can deliver effective solutions to provide coverage for all americans. that is why assurant health we will continue to participate in efforts to reform and improve healthcare in america. thank you. >> thank you mr. hamm. mr. collins, your opening statement please sir. >> good morning members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today. my name is richard collins, i and the ceo of golden rule insurance company. we are business that sells health insurance policies to individuals and their families. colgan roose the offering this at coverage for over 60 years. we seek to offer innovative and affordable products to meet the diverts healthcare and financial needs of our customers. in our current healthcare delivery system, the individual insurance market operates primarily for families who do not have access to gr

healthcare. last, the united states ranked last. some analysts estimate that as much as 30% of our spending is for ineffective redundant or inappropriate care. that's care that does nothing to improve the health of americans. our system leaves nearly 50 million americans without health insurance, 25 million more with inadequate coverage and most bankruptciess in america are related to medical costs. our system needs reform. if we fail to act, healthcare spending will account for 20% of our economy in 10 years. put it another way, 45% of a family's budget will be spent for healthcare premiums. raising -- rising healthcare costs will swap federal and state budgets, businesses and american families alike. if we continue to spend at this rate it's only fair that we ask ourselves, what are we getting for our money and what are we not getting for it? it's time for americans and their doctors to use the world's most advanced science so that the most personal healthcare decisions can be made with access to the best available information. ok

that we have the best healthcare system in the world. 90% of the world's innovation in healthcare comes from the unitedtates. as we proceed down this path we have to be very careful that we don't do anything that will impede the kind of quality and innovation that we have in our current system and we believe that our plan is a big improvement on the current system that will cost far less than what the administration is proposing. if you look at their plan, it really is a big government-run plan that will take control of the delivery of healthcare in america. i don't think that is what most americans want. families and small businesses are looking for access. lets washing on that problem and -- let's work on that and improve the current process. this is a serious proposal. we are hoping president obama and our democratic cleanings will take our ideas seriously and use them as they begin to develop their program. but everything that we have seen thus far, whether it was the stimulus bill, whether it of the omnibus appropriation bill, they have ignored our better solutions. but we are going to continue to

minority-serving networks would improve minority healthcare more than the complete elimination of racial disparities within every provider in the united states. indeed, given the greater reliance on ambulatory care we would want to change title 6 to go beyond the reach of care that is delivered by office visits and managed care plans. finally in closing let me make one simple point. the determinance of racial disparities in health is not the same of determinance in racial disparities in healthcare. the principle determinance of health, are genes, behaviors, schooling, neighborhoods, economic circumstance. health is secondarily affected by healthcare but more likely to be influenced by prevention including the quality of ambulatory care. of tertiary importance at the very end of the causal chain is the role of disparities in medical care. the quality of medical care matters much more than the disparity in the quality within it. so the 6 1/2-year racial gap in life expectancy in men and 4 1/2 racial gap for women which is larger when it accounts for the condition of life are unlikely to be affected by the focus on treatment disparities

had the privilege of john mccain to be debating the ideas over what healthcare show like they should look like going forward in the united states and a onetime did have a great privilege of running the cbo whose numbers have become a focal point* of this debate and properly so. the cbo estimates of what the obama budget will do to this country is very striking. is as clear on a path to a debt spiral that will lead to a crises in the currency and the national bankruptcy and that healthcare bill is a tipping point* in the wrong direction for that pass. so one of the things i wanted to do for those who are not connoisseurs' is talk about what the congressional budget office does. the answer is these estimates of 1.6 trillion dollars, for the senate finance bill, $1 trillion, for the first title health bill without touching the rest of it, these are business as usual for the cbo. good job, the price of federal budget and tax legislation by the congress in during that there is things that the cbo due does. number one is gore's actual legislation and not ideas it goes with a fantasy what could happen to what will happen if we

healthcare. some say there is not a health care crisis in the united states.f you are a mom with a child and you don't have health insurance and that child gets a disease of some seriousness it is a health-care crisis to you. of you have a small business and do have been providing health insurance and health-care cost is so high it drives you out of business or look at our of companies and do see the health care costs, it is a crisis what every you call it it is a serious problem and we need to fix it. we don't need what some of the democrats and the president what to do it is what they call the public option to disguise the term. it is nationalized health-care basically. just one quick statistic, they like the european for the canadian model preview were woven in the united states you get breast cancer your chances of survival in five years is 98%. great britain, if you're a woman your chances of survival only 70%, the problem in those health care system is a bureaucrat gets into the decision-making process between you and your doctor. there should not be in

healthcare. that is untenable. is unacceptable. i will not allowed as president of the united states. [applause] health care reform is not something i just cooked up when i took office. sometimes i hear people say he is taking on too much. i am not doing this because i don't have enough to do. [laughter] we need health care reform because it is central to our economic future. it is central to our long-term prosperity as a nation. in past years and decades, there may have been some disagreement on this point, but not anymore. today we have already built an unprecedented coalition of people who are ready to reform our health-care system. physicians and health insurers, businesses and workers, democrats and republicans. a few weeks ago some of these groups commended -- committed to doing something that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. the promise to work together to cut national health care spending by two trillion dollars over the next decade. that will bring down costs and premiums. that is the kind of cooperation we need. the question now is, how we finish the job? had we

healthcare system and raise questions and discuss with the federal government might be doing about it was when the secretary of state hillary clinton was then associated with the president of the united states william clinton and he formed a commission that she headed, and they spent considerable time and energy reviewing where we should go with their healthcare system. once the product was developed itself, i think many a message was sent to the congress that we would be well served by reflecting upon-- that package, out there for long enough that essentially the people got a chance to understand what was in it and they didn't want it very much. they send messages back to us that were very clear and rather direct. they said first, that the chairman suggested that i believe your statement suggested people want first to be able to keep what they have and above and beyond that, that they want to ensure that they maintain choices as the go forward with such a package. i do not know what a government single-payer system might lead us to come up but a lot could be learned by also not just looking at the hillary clinton commission, but some of that which john maynard keynes might have taug

united states today. if you are a mom and you have a child and you do not have health insurance, and the child is a serious disease, there is a healthcare crisis. if you have a small business any have been providing health insurance and health care costs are so high is driving you out of business, or if you look at our auto companies, there is a crisis going on in the united states. whatever you want to call it, it is a serious problem, and the need to fix it. we do not need what some of the democrats and the president want to do, and they call it a public auction. they tried to disguise the term. it basically is nationalized health care. just one quick statistic for you. they like the european or canadian model. if you or a woman in the united states and get breast cancer, your chances in survival in five years or 98%. in great britain, the chances of survival within five years are only 78%. the problem is, in those nationalized health-care system, a bureaucrat it's in the decisionmaking process between you and your doctor. there should not be anybody in that process between you and your doctor. that should be between the two of you. w

united states of america and not a citizen of the world. [applause] >> compare that passion for individual liberty and individual opportunity with the question as, group politics, and bureaucratic healthcare rationing advocating by our opponents. this republican commitment to the individual did not cease after lincoln. reagan in one of his radio talks in the 1970's, part of which we have in our movie, said the following: "some of our social planners refer to them as the masses, which only proves they don't know them. i've been privileged to meet people all over this land, in a special kind of way you meet them when you are campaigning. they are not the masses or as the elitists would have it, the common man, they are very uncommon. individuals, each with his or her own hopes and dreams, plans and problems, and the kind of quiet courage that makes this whole country run better than just about any other place on earth. and that's why rationing is wrong, and that's why question as are wrong. because in fact they eliminate the very power of the individual -- question as are wrong. this -- quotas are wrong. >> this lead us to some profound commitments. having judges that understand that americ

healthcare bill you don't like? >> i'm suggesting if there isn't a bipartisan plan moving through the congress, it's not likely to happen this year. because i just don't think in the united states senate you can get a bill through there on a partisan basis that americans will support. run over us here in the house. they have all year. we've reached out, offered our better solutions. but there's been no attempt at bipartisanship. and it's unfortunate. the american people want this done in a bipartisan way, in a practical way. that reduces costs and gets them better care. >> if there was a bill that came to the floor now that looked like what the democrats are talking about would any republicans vote for that? >> i'll live the vote counting to the whip. but i'd have to stretch my imagination to think of one who would vote for the most bizarre plan that i've seen. i can't wait for the cost figures to come out on this one. >> mr. boehner when the energy bill does come out on the floor, whether it's tomorrow, will your side do what 2 can to slow it down and keep it on the floor for as long as possible? >> well, i don't know what action we're going to take. there's a lot of ti

healthcare. it's interested in the course of the u.s. deficit and what health reform might do to the borrowing needs of our nation and the value of the dollar. in recent years, the unitedstates has been heavily dependent on large capital inflows from abroad. a significant portion of the treasury's n

healthcare was not available to most americans. today that is still true to one degree or another. but it is now an economic necessity, something which must be done to enable the united states to continue to compete in the world market place. our industries are being killed by the lack of this kind of support in a fiercely competitive world economy. 47 million americans are currently without health care. this is an upward of 86 million will be allowed out healthcare at some point in during this year. more and more americans are being forced to make decisions they never should be forced to make. do they pay their monthly health insurance premium if they can get health insurance policy board do they pay the utility bill, mortgage, or do they buy food for the family? american business owners are facing a tough decision as to whether to meet monthly payroll or to pay health insurance contributions toward their employees. if you look at the american automobile, it has $750 million worth of steel in it. foreign competitors do not have this problem. the federal budgets and no longer sustain our current health care spending. the health care costs grow and the cost to the cou

united states the experience of the national security interest authenticity and trusts. that is what the fight was about and you tried to define it. >> we said change first is more of the same and healthcare. above all we said change we could not continue past policies but the most concrete thing was the economy. so our polls i conducted polls to define the most powerful choice, but the main thing was focused on what is the most powerful toys i cut off her? that would shift voters to us, and bring in coalitions and voters in to the electorate that would support us what are our qualifications to make those relevant and make your qualifications, how to make his qualifications not relevant? make our issues relevant. deciding what the fight is about is everything. if you look at each of these leaders of the action with tony blair, or nelson mandela, what the fight was about as what i work on. that is my polling. >> host: has anything that you, anything that has surprised to analogous into ehud barak moving people to jerusalem, wants a name that was discovered to a poll we had nuclear in there and no nuclear power this is pre-9/11 and everyone anticipated or expected it would have the negative

healthcare. it's interested in the course of the u.s. deficit and what health reform might do to the borrowing needs of our nation and the value of the dollar. in recent years, the united states has been heavily dependent on large capital inflows from abroad. a significant portion of the treasury's new debt, in fact, 74% since december 2000 has come from foreign interests. this happens -- has happened because many nations have had large trade surpluses with the u.s. or were awash with petro dollars or had no need to stimulate their own domestic economies. the inflow allowed the united states to borrow at very low rates but all of that has changed now. the trade surpluses have disappeared. the petro dollar balances have shrunk and many countries are trying to stimulate their own economies. not to mention the fact that other democracies in the world are also in the market, borrowing huge amounts of money. so we have to be very, very cognizant that the ability of the united states to move forward and buy the time for health reform to begin moderating the growth of cost is limited. and what this means is that, i think, the cbo cost estimates and the debate around the spend