Harmony Healthcare is proud to be included among the seven companies listed by Becker's Hospital Review that provide revenue cycle management staffing solutions specific to the healthcare industry.

Tampa Bay, Florida (PRWEB) October 06, 2016

Harmony Healthcare is proud to be included among the seven companies listed by Becker's Hospital Review that provide revenue cycle management staffing solutions specific to the healthcare industry. Becker's is a highly respected business and legal information provider for healthcare industry leaders.

Founder and CEO Christopher H.G. Brown is proud of his company’s success and the recognition from Becker's. “It is an honor to have made this list by such a prestigious organization.” he said.

Harmony Healthcare provides interim, outsourcing, project management and reviews, as well as direct-to-hire services for clients. The company specializes in hiring revenue cycle and health information management professionals for client facilities. The company’s experts are highly trained, can spot problems and lead a client facility through the best processes, procedures and solutions.

With a career marked by a sharp entrepreneurial eye and the love of a good challenge, Brown founded Harmony Healthcare in 2010 after recognizing just how revolutionary the change from paper to digital medical records would be for healthcare facilities. His company helps clients solve problems associated with digital medical records and health information management that have coincided with the change in the way healthcare facilities collect patient information, code it, communicate with insurance companies and collect revenue in a timely manner.        

With a large breadth of expertise, the company is able to provide support in areas ranging from clinical documentation improvement and coding to auditing and GSA government compliance at Veterans Administration hospitals and U.S. military bases.

Harmony employs more than 500 people and has staff at client sites across the United States. The company maintains low turnover by providing 100 percent covered health insurance, paid time off, paid travel expenses and keeping the back-office operation inexpensive.

Harmony Healthcare also boasts a 418 ranking, with a three-year sales growth of 922 percent, on the 2016 Inc. 5000 list. This list of the fastest-growing companies in America represents a unique look at the most successful companies within the American economy’s most dynamic segment— its independent businesses. Companies such as Microsoft, Dell, Domino’s Pizza, Pandora, Timberland, LinkedIn, Yelp, Zillow, and many other well-known names gained their first national exposure as honorees of the Inc. 5000.

Brown founded and lead an accounting, finance, IT and human resources contract and placement services company known as Burlington Wells, Inc., until 2000 when it was sold to Monster.com/TMP Worldwide. He began and lead a Health Information Management contract and placement company called Insights Search, until its acquisition by On Assignment (ASGN) in 2006.

As a member of the Spartan Staffing board of directors from 1999-2004, Brown was recruited to help develop the internal structures and culture in preparation for the sale of the company. Further, Brown is an accomplished writer on the subject of recruiting and staffing. His 2001 book, “Insights, A guide to Successful Recruitment Strategies and Training” is a comprehensive guide to recruitment, staffing and human resources training.

Brown’s career record boasts an abundance of successes with founding and growing businesses, all while helping his employees excel in their own careers and dreams.

“This recognition is a testament to all the hard work of our dedicated, savvy employees,” he said. “I am thrilled that Harmony made the list again and am proud of the successes that we’ve had in the past year.”

Brown learned some of his best leadership lessons from the well-known, much-loved, and highly successful UCLA Basketball Coach John Wooden. Many of Wooden’s words of wisdom apply both on and off the basketball court.

“It’s not what you do, but how you do it,” is one of Brown’s favorite quotes from Wooden.

“This is our belief system and culture,” points out Brown. “Harmony Healthcare was founded on the principals of integrity, character, hard work and discipline.” Reported by PRWeb 9 hours ago.

Solidarity HealthShare provides an ethical and affordable way to pay for medical costs

PHOENIX (PRWEB) October 06, 2016

What if Catholics could participate in a medical cost solution that observed time-tested health care principles? What if Catholics could pay for their own medical costs while providing for the health care costs of others? What if Catholics were able to live practically the principles of Catholic Social Doctrine?

In an early soft launch last month, families all over America began to put into practice the sharing of material and spiritual goods through the health care sharing ministry of Solidarity HealthShare. Solidarity HealthShare is not insurance. It exists specifically for those individuals who either purchase health care for themselves and their family, or for those who can control their own health care. Solidarity HealthShare is exempt from the federal regulations, which require insurance providers to cover contraception, sterilization, abortion and other services that are contrary to Catholic moral teaching. Solidarity members also are exempt from the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act, which requires individuals to purchase health insurance coverage. Instead, this health care sharing ministry unites like-minded Christians to share medical costs together and to be “reconciled to one another” (Matthew 5:21) in solidarity.

While Solidarity’s health care sharing ministry is not comparable to insurance, it facilitates the voluntary sharing among its members to pay for eligible medical expenses. It is also designed to respect and promote the Church’s teachings and traditions with regard to love, responsibility and the sanctity of all human life. And because of its affiliation and membership in The National Coalition of Health Sharing Ministries, Solidarity is able to cooperate in the support, technology and national advocacy of health care sharing ministries, as well as benefit from collaborating resources that reflect the mission of its shared members. Solidarity HealthShare is the only health care sharing ministry controlled by a Catholic board of directors, run autonomously from any other health care sharing ministry partner, and guided by a Statement of Shared Beliefs that is wholly and authentically reflective of the social doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Bradley Hahn, the CEO of Solidarity HealthShare, is hopeful that this ministry will be the solution that many families have been looking for.

“We have spent several years searching for a way to help other like-minded individuals, families and organizations pay for medical costs without violating their consciences or breaking their bank accounts,” said Hahn. “I’m happy and grateful to God that we have found and can now offer this ministry to the many people who have been waiting for it.”

To learn more about Solidarity HealthShare, please visit http://www.solidarityhealthshare.org.

For more information, to request a Decision Guide from Solidarity HealthShare or to schedule an interview with its CEO, Bradley Hahn, please contact Kevin Wandra (404-788-1276 or KWandra(at)CarmelCommunications(dot)com) of Carmel Communications.    

### Reported by PRWeb 9 hours ago.

We live in a world turned upside down and too many Americans are buying into the candidate who apparently escaped from the asylum. In Trump world his supporters wait breathlessly to hear about leaked documents from a wanted criminal, Julian Assange, who is apparently being fed information by the Russians. Trump claims to be brilliant and his surrogates, like the clearly deranged Rudy Giuliani, call him a genius for losing a billion dollars in one year, 1995, and then sticking it to the American taxpayer to cover his losses by not paying taxes. This was at a time 1990-2000 when the economy was great, income went up and roughly 23,672,000 jobs were created.

The media is so sexist they don't even realize it anymore. Andrea Mitchell attacks Clinton for being sick and repeats Trump's unfounded charges about her health. Chuck Todd calls Hillary over-prepared for a debate and Brit Hume complains she smiled too much and called her unattractive. They don't comprehend talking about a woman's stamina, how much she smiled and attacking her for trying to power through a bout of pneumonia as if it's a world crisis is sexist. This has become so central to media reporting they no longer see themselves as biased.

We see Trump run a campaign playing to the worst aspects of American society; racism, sexism, homophobia and misogyny. Then a New Hampshire Senator, Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), tells parents in her state Trump is a good role model for their children.

The Trump campaign and its surrogates have degenerated so far into the gutter it is embarrassing. Attacking Hillary by attacking her husband for his infidelities twenty years ago and then suggesting she has cheated on him with not one iota of proof. Trump went even further by pantomiming Hillary stumbling when she felt feint in the same vein he joked about a disabled reporter.

Add to this Trump is running a fact free campaign. He denies climate change calling it a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese and submits a tax plan that continues to provide all the loopholes he uses to not pay taxes. Trump and his children get caught with their hands in the cookie jar of his personal foundation using it to pay personal legal debts and buying ugly portraits of him to hang in his for-profit golf club. Using money from the foundation to buy off the Florida AG. If all this isn't the world turned upside down I don't know what is.

On Tuesday night during the Vice-presidential candidates debate his running mate Mike Pence, the notorious anti-gay, anti-woman Governor, blatantly lies denying all the things Trump has said all of which are recorded on tape. Again the world turned upside down.

The only answer for decent Americans to all this craziness is to vote for and ensure Hillary Rodham Clinton is our next President. You may not love her and you may have bought into some of the twenty-five years of Republican smears against her trustworthiness; but this is not the year for a 'protest vote'. This is not the year to take a chance your vote will help elect the person who appears at different times to channel a clown, Hitler or Mussolini.

You don't have to be in love with Hillary to recognize she is the most experienced and intelligent person to run for President in our lifetime. Love her or not she has a nearly fifty-year record of public service from her days working to help children with disabilities get a good education with the Children's Defense Fund to her time as Secretary of State when she worked successfully to get a cease fire between Israel and Hamas; keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons; and spoke out for the rights of the LGBT community around the world among many other successes. You don't have to be in love with Hillary to recognize she fought for and won health insurance for eight million poor children; made adoption easier to help children get a loving home; and worked across the aisle when she was in the Senate to ensure our national guard had health insurance and first responders after 9/11 were guaranteed care.

So you may not love her or admire her as I have since first meeting her in 1990 when she worked successfully to improve the education of all children in Arkansas. But as a thinking person who wants America to continue to have the respect of the world; continue to see our economy grow; want a more equal playing field for all; and want to reject the politics of fear and division; you have only one vote to cast for President and that vote must be for *Hillary Rodham Clinton*.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

Car insurance is a hefty expense, luckily, there's a lot of ways to save. One that jumps out to most people is to simply opt for the most minimum amount they are legally required to have. Each state has a minimum threshold they need to meet that is far cheaper than opting for "full coverage." Before you choose to get the most basic protection, here are a few considerations you need to know about.

*The Advantages of Going with Minimum Car Insurance *

As we pointed out above, the biggest upside to going with the minimum is that it is far cheaper than any other coverage. For a clean driver without prior accidents, it is usually at least half as expensive as "full coverage", and can be closer to 66% cheaper in certain states. We found the average cost of car insurance for a sample 30 year old male driver is around $1,521. If our sample driver were to go with minimum coverage he could potentially save around $700 a year!

*The Disadvantages of Going with Minimum Car Insurance*

The downside is obviously not being adequately insured. What does it mean to be adequately covered? In some states, you are only required to carry enough insurance to help pay for another driver's damages in the event of an accident. If you are at-fault for an accident, minimum car insurance won't provide any means of paying for your damages, be they medical or property. Admittedly, there are a handful of states that make it mandatory for your insurance to cover your own injuries. However, there are only 12 of them. If you are from the 38 that don't however, you are potentially taking a large financial risk by driving around with just minimum coverage.

*Who Can Opt for the Minimum*

There are two main groups of people who can get away with driving with the minimum:
1. *Those with excellent health insurance.* In the event you are injured in an accident, and do not have personal injury protection insurance, you may use your health insurance to cover your medical bills. However, There are certain things under Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage that you will not get with just a health insurance plan, so be mindful of that.
4. *Those with a low-value car*. When you opt for the minimum, you are forgoing collision and comprehensive coverage, which are meant to cover vehicle damage. If your car is worth less than a couple thousand dollars, the insurance probably isn't worth it.
If you are a part of the above groups and come from a state with mandated PIP, like Massachusetts, then you may be adequately covered by going with the minimum. You just need to make sure that together, your PIP and health insurance will be able to cover the medical costs of a car accident, which can tip over $60,000 in certain cases.

*When You Should Not Opt for the Minimum*

People who drive others, have a valuable car or have a high level of disposable income should all opt for higher limits and/or full coverage. If you drive other passengers frequently, and your limits are low, there may not be enough coverage to compensate everyone injured in a potential accident. This would leave you open to litigation.

If you are high net worth individual, you should definitely have high limits as well. If your insurance is inadequate, and people are seeking a higher amount for compensation, they can sue against your assets to get that money. If you have money stored in a bank account, 401k, savings account, or even your future earnings, a plaintiff can sue against those assets to pay for the injuries sustained in an accident you caused. There is a steadfast rule in insurance; have enough to cover your net worth. If after debts that number is $70,000, then you need $70,000 worth of protection, if that number is $500,000 then you need $500,000 worth of protection.

Finally, if you have a valuable car, you should get collision and comprehensive coverage. Valuable cars will cost a lot to repair, and will cost even more to replace if they are totaled or stolen. Without those two coverages, you will have to foot that bill out of pocket. Collision and comprehensive together usually double your monthly bill, but may be well worth it if you have a valuable car.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

If you want a case study in why Donald Trump isn’t serious about governing ― and how that attitude is typical of the Republican Party generally ― take a close look at the conversation about Obamacare that’s unfolding in the presidential campaign right now.

It started on Tuesday, while Bill Clinton was speaking to Democrats in Flint, Michigan. When the former president started talking about the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 health care law that President Barack Obama signed and that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton supports, he decried the plight of people facing higher premiums and less generous coverage because of the law. “It’s the craziest system in the world,” he said.

The comments lit up social media, and it didn’t take long for the Republican presidential nominee to pounce. “He absolutely trashed President Obama’s signature legislation,” Trump said during a rally on Tuesday.

Trump has made the argument several times since ― as have his allies and pretty much everybody in the GOP, for that matter.

But as HuffPost’s Jeffrey Young pointed out, Clinton didn’t actually trash the whole program. On the contrary, he had started his comments by praising the law’s many accomplishments ― chief among them, helping something like 20 million people get health insurance, thereby bringing the nation’s uninsured rate to a historic low. The comments he made were about one particular group of people: those who make just a little too much money to qualify for the program’s financial assistance.

Their problems are real. One of Obamacare’s main goals was to help people buying coverage on their own, rather than through employers. Previously, insurers could charge higher premiums or deny coverage altogether to people with pre-existing conditions. And the policies they sold frequently had big gaps, leaving people facing massive, potentially ruinous bills when they needed serious medical care.


Neither Trump nor the Republicans have a serious alternative that would provide anything resembling the same level of benefits.

Obamacare tries to stop all of that, by requiring insurers to sell to everybody, at uniform prices, and to include “essential benefits” like prescription drugs and mental health coverage in every policy.

This has been a godsend for people who couldn’t get insurance before, or pay their bills if sick. It has also raised premiums, since insurance must cover more services and be available to people likely to use them. By design, the law shields people from these increases with tax credits, worth as much as thousands of dollars a year. But more affluent households get less assistance, or none at all ― and particularly for the lucky ones who could find cheap plans before, the new costs are a shock.

Hillary Clinton didn’t need her husband to tell her about people in this situation. Like Obama, the former secretary of state has been talking about them for a while ― and proposing to help them through a combination of policies that, in theory, would make prescription drugs cheaper and reduce expenses for people now paying the most out of their own pockets.

These are the sorts of adjustments that the law’s architects always understood would be necessary. Tom Harkin, a former Democratic senator from Iowa, famously referred to Obamacare as a “starter home” that would require further work. That phrase was emblematic of the attitude the law’s supporters have carried through to the present day. In just the last few months, both Obama and Hillary Clinton have written lengthy articles ― one each in the Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine ― hailing the law’s progress but also pointing to its shortcomings and outlining their ideas for addressing them.

The contrast with Republican rhetoric could not be more stark.

One reason Obamacare has such a kludgy design is that Obama and his allies had adopted a coverage scheme, heavily reliant on private insurance, that some conservatives had championed and that a Republican governor ― Mitt Romney of Massachusetts ― had signed and implemented. The hope was that this method would help health care reform attract bipartisan support.

Republicans in Washington wanted no part of it. Instead, they opposed the law en masse, wildly distorting its features (by, for example, claiming it had “death panels” that would cut off care to the elderly) and predicting that it would wreck the economy and cause the budget deficit to explode.

None of these dire predictions came to pass. But Republicans ― whether you’re talking about individual congressional candidates or the man at the top of the ticket ― haven’t changed their tone. Their rhetoric remains as hyperbolic and apocalyptic as ever, not to mention one-sided.

Listen to Trump, and you’ll hear all about what a “disaster” Obamacare is. What you’ll never hear is even the slightest acknowledgement that, whatever its flaws, the law has also done some good ― that it has helped millions of people get coverage, and that it has ended insurance company practices that the vast majority of Americans had long opposed. Trump’s campaign website instead claims that the law has “raised the economic uncertainty of every single person residing in this country.”

Of course many Republicans have serious, principled objections to the health care law, as well as the new steps the Democratic nominee has endorsed in her presidential campaign ― steps that, they believe, would double down on a failed approach to health care. Trump may think the same way, although he has said enough contradictory things to make his true intentions impossible to divine.

But what neither Trump nor the Republicans have is a serious alternative that would provide anything resembling the same level of benefits.

The plans circulating among conservative intellectuals ― a version of which Trump appears to endorse with some vague talking points on his website ― would dramatically scale back the new regulations on insurance, reduce what the government spends to help people get coverage, and eliminate new taxes (mostly on the wealthy) that pay for the program. In effect, they would wind back the clock, partly or entirely, so that America’s health insurance system looks like it did before Obamacare came along.

In that system, young and healthy people could sometimes get very cheap insurance. But the coverage was frequently threadbare and a lot of people had no access to policies at all. It was a system that, overall, left many more people suffering ― financially and medically.

If Trump and the Republicans were merely willing to accept the basic structure of the Affordable Care Act ― a structure, remember, many of them once supported ― then they could find plenty of Democrats willing to compromise over further changes to the law. It would take only a little bit of negotiation to hammer out a bipartisan reform package that drew on proposals from both conservatives and liberals, while helping the people still struggling with health care costs ― the ones, in other words, Bill Clinton was talking about in Flint.

But neither the GOP nor its presidential nominee has ever shown that kind of attitude. It’s one of the ways in which Trump, for all of his bluster, turns out to be an utterly conventional Republican.

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly
incites
political violence and is a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-911_565b1950e4b08e945feb7326"> style="font-weight: 400;">serial liar, href="http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/entry/9-outrageous-things-donald-trump-has-said-about-latinos_55e483a1e4b0c818f618904b"> style="font-weight: 400;">rampant xenophobe,
racist, style="font-weight: 400;">misogynist and href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-stephen-colbert-birther_56022a33e4b00310edf92f7a">>birther who has
repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from
entering the U.S.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

While the union is pushing for higher wages and cheaper health insurance, the university contends the compensation and benefits it offers are already better than industry norms. Reported by Christian Science Monitor 4 hours ago.

“I want a dyke for president,” reads the rendering for a 20-by-30-foot public artwork in downtown Manhattan. “I want a person with AIDS for president and I want a fag for vice president and I want someone with no health insurance and I want someone who grew up in a place where the earth is so saturated with toxic waste that they didn’t have a choice about getting leukemia.”

Zoe Leonard’s iconic 1992 poem, titled “I want a president,” will soon be installed as a giant billboard on the High Line, New York City’s elevated park in the neighborhood Chelsea. The bold words, presented by Friends of the High Line beginning Oct. 11, will appear just weeks before the 2016 presidential election, drawing a stark parallel between Leonard’s lines from the ‘90s and the uneasiness many voters still feel today.

Leonard is a queer feminist activist known for her photography and sculpture, works that responded to the AIDS epidemic that devastated the artistic community in the 1980s and 1990s. She wrote “I want a president” when, as a press release for High Line Art points out, the poet Eileen Myles ran for president as an “openly female” independent candidate against George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ross Perot.

Leonard’s poem was set to be published by a queer magazine at the time, but, when the publication dissolved, the work began to circulate amongst the artist’s social group, its typewriter font passing from friend to friend to friend-of-a-friend. By 2006, the poem was turned into a postcard courtesy of the feminist genderqueer journal LTTR, and later read, translated and reappropriated by fans enduring their own tumultuous political experiences in the U.S. and beyond. Just this week, Dazed recruited musician Mykki Blanco to recite the text in a video online.

This month, Leonard’s words are larger than life, set to be plastered on a pillar tourists throttle by every day. “I am interested in the space this text opens up for us to imagine and voice what we want in our leaders, and even beyond that, what we can envision for the future of our society,” Leonard explained in a statement. “I still think that speaking up is itself a vital and powerful political act.”

Leonard’s poem continues in the “I want” construction, ending on a particularly searing indictment: “I want to know why we started learning somewhere down the line that a president is always a clown: always a john and never a hooker. Always a boss and never a worker, always a liar, always a thief and never caught.”

It’s difficult to read those words without conjuring the faces of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, comparing and contrasting the depths through which the candidates had to wade to get to where they are. “While Leonard’s text speaks with the mourning, rage, and profound disappointment surrounding the AIDS epidemic and the consequent political inaction that left an indelible mark on our culture,” Melanie Kress, assistant curator for High Line Art, said in a statement, “it also breathes heavy with the timeless experiences of health, wealth, loss, and love.”

In an interview earlier this year with The New York Times, Myles revisited her run for presidency, looking back on the time when Leonard’s poem debuted. As for the Trump v. Hillary showdown, she had the following to say:

Hillary is no Bernie Sanders. But she’s a politician, and she understands Congress. And I think with that kind of twisted beauty, she could lead our country. I want a ‘‘she’’ in the White House now.

Zoe Leonard’s “I want a president” will be on view from Oct. 11 to Nov. 17, 2016, on the High Line under the Standard hotel, overlooking West 13th and Little West 12th Streets.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.

Remember that time when South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson shouted* "You Lie!"* just after *President Obama assured American's before a joint session of Congress that illegal immigrants would not be eligible for Obamacare? *

If not, we highly recommend you take a look:

 

Apparently California Governor Jerry Brown was not convinced by Obama's denials as he signed a bill back in June that allowed the state to apply for a federal waiver to open Covered California to illegal immigrants.  And, lest you thought it was a bluff, Covered California’s Executive Director Peter Lee has just sent a letter (attached in its entirety below) to the Health and Human Services Secretary, Sylvia Burwell, requesting a *waiver to "expand access to undocumented individuals."*





While the waiver would only allow for "undocumented individuals" to purchase "unsubsidized health insurance plans" we suspect that this is just an initial request in what will turn into a long-term negotiation that will ultimately result in taxpayers providing free healthcare to illegal aliens in California. 

As Bill would say, "it's the craziest thing in the world!"

 

Full letter here: Reported by Zero Hedge 11 minutes ago.

The first presidential debate was devoid of health issues. One good thing: we did not hear about either candidate's most recent doctor visit, including headlines that dominated the news like Clinton's pneumonia and Trump's doctor's letter declaring him "in excellent physical health." But the time has come to ask the meaningful questions about the future of health care. From the woman with metastatic breast cancer whose working husband cannot afford health insurance, to policy makers charged with the overall wellbeing of the American people, we are looking for answers to health care questions that will affect our day-to-day lives. Here are the most pressing questions that ought to be addressed in the upcoming presidential debates.

1. Are you committed to health care coverage for all American citizens by the end of your first term in office? Before the ACA, 22.3% of the 200 million Americans aged 18-64 were uninsured. Mr. Trump, if the ACA is repealed, you will have the burden to find new ways for that same 45 million people to have health insurance. Secretary Clinton, if the ACA is not repealed, 11.9% - or 24 million people - continue to be uninsured. How would you change the ACA to cover them? Bill Clinton pointed out that change is needed - not a surprise.

2. Surely we could cover more people if health insurance was more affordable. Right now, insurers are leaving the marketplace exchanges because what they offered was too expensive - for them to provide and for individuals to afford. Past CMS Administrator Berwick published estimates that we waste 1/3 of our health care dollars, which totals a staggering $1 trillion a year. How would you recommend we decrease waste? How much would be saved permitting insurance to be sold across state lines? How would you deal with skyrocketing drug costs? If you are successful, the first to benefit would be payers such as Medicare and commercial insurers. How would any savings from these ideas be passed along to the consumer to reduce the price of health insurance?

3. How would you deal with the mandates to buy health insurance by individuals and employers. For example, would you increase, decrease or abolish the mandates? In your answer, please provide data as to how your solution would make it more likely that all Americans would have coverage.

4. At present, 19 states have not adopted expansion of their Medicaid programs. How would you propose to provide coverage for the people who are eligible for Medicaid in those states?

5. There is a serious problem with access to health care - in other words,
seeing the right provider at the right time at the right place. Waiting times to see a physician are increasing not only in the Veterans Administration, but also in the private sector. How would you deal with improving access? Turning out more doctors and nurses is expensive and takes a long time. What else can be done? What changes in federal policy should be made?

Hopefully, the next president will consider our health to be one of the top issues. We should work together with the goal of affordable health care for all Americans. There are a number of ways to get there - but getting mired in dogma is not one of them. We can start by getting some answers at the next debate.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 23 hours ago.

As high-tech gets developed and advances day by day to the point that people like me become lost and confused. These days decision making turned to a puzzle. Does not matter what you want to buy a health insurance, house with or without appliance. You think the list end here, but not this soon. Most of all is when it gets to point you want to buy a computer, telephone which it come with this phone that phone, smart phone, and iPhone. Of course the iPhone/Smartphone made picture taking to people like myself so much easier. But if you want good camera there are some that could be bragged about by brand name with price start at $129.00 up to five digit number. Reported by DailyTech 7 hours ago.

In a complimentary Oct. 19 webinar from Atlantic Information Services and McKesson, participants will learn how to implement episodes of care, the fastest-growing value-based payment model.

Washington, DC (PRWEB) October 07, 2016

Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) and McKesson are pleased to announce “Implementing Effective Episode-of-Care Programs: Strategies for Health Plans and Providers,” an upcoming Oct. 19 webinar. In this complimentary program, Lili Brillstein, Director of Episodes of Care at Horizon Healthcare, and Mark McAdoo, Vice President, Value Based Payments, at McKesson Health Solutions, will explain the details of strategies that can help plans and providers steer clear of pitfalls that make episode-of-care programs so challenging to operationalize.

This webinar will explain recent market findings and highlight how provider partnerships, continuous collaboration and the use of technology helped Horizon implement a successful retrospective episode-of-care program. Webinar participants will obtain valuable perspectives on key questions, including:· What is the projected growth rate of episode-of-care programs across payers and providers?
· Are payers and providers prepared to scale episode-of-care models?
· Why are collaboration and transparency across stakeholders critical to building a successful episode-of-care program?
· How can plans and providers use analytics to support program development, pinpoint opportunities and assess program performance?
· What quality results have plans and providers seen in episode-of-care practices versus non-episode-of-care practices?

Visit https://aishealth.com/mckesson-sw607-101916 for more details and registration information.

About McKesson    
McKesson Corporation, currently ranked 5th on the FORTUNE 500, is a healthcare services and information technology company dedicated to making the business of healthcare run better. McKesson partners with payers, hospitals, physician offices, pharmacies, pharmaceutical companies, and others across the spectrum of care to build healthier organizations that deliver better care to patients in every setting. McKesson helps its customers improve their financial, operational, and clinical performance with solutions that include pharmaceutical and medical-surgical supply management, healthcare information technology, and business and clinical services. For more information, visit http://www.mckesson.com.

About AIS
Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is a publishing and information company that has been serving the healthcare industry for nearly 30 years. It develops highly targeted news, data and strategic information for managers in hospitals and health systems, health insurance companies, medical group practices, purchasers of health insurance, pharmaceutical companies and other health care organizations. AIS products include print and electronic newsletters, databases, Websites, looseleafs, strategic reports, directories, webinars and virtual conferences. Learn more at http://www.AISHealth.com. Reported by PRWeb 11 hours ago.

A new report shows that the number of small businesses in Kentucky that offer employee health insurance dropped sharply from 2012 to 2015. Only 26.6 percent of small businesses in the state offered health insurance last year, down from 36.4 percent in 2012, according to the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky. "That drop of nearly 10 percentage points means that thousands fewer Kentucky small businesses offered health insurance to their workers in 2015," Ben Chandler, president and CEO of the Foundation… Reported by bizjournals 11 hours ago.

Gaudeamus igitur, iuvenes dum sumus! Let us rejoice while we are young!

With this Latin song traditionally sung by University Choir at the inauguration ceremony, a new record number of students began their studies in Gdansk. We are happy because from year to year the number of students, both Polish and foreign, grows. They can study in six public and nine private universities. Last year, in the Pomeranian region 93 391 students attended these institutions in more than 800 fields of study: medical, technical, humanities, economics, science, sports, art. Polish universities operate in the universal European "Bologna" system and apply the universal ECTS point system that facilitates the recognition of study periods outside the home university.
Gdansk University of Technology. Photo: Krzysztof Krzempek / Wikipedia / CC

This year's data will probably be announced in November, as some universities still continue their recruitment. We already know, however, that Gdansk University of Technology (Gdansk Polytechnic), Gdansk Medical University, Sports Academy and the University of Gdansk have recruited more students than last year. In addition to an increase in Polish students, there is a growing interest abroad to study in excellent Gdansk schools. The number of foreign students is also increasing. Last year, it was nearly 2.5 thousand people, mostly from Ukraine, Sweden, Belarus, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Lithuania and India. We hope for more this year. Of course, many of them come and go through the Erasmus exchange program. However, a large proportion are those who study with us are full time, full paying students in various fields of study.

Interestingly for two years now the best foreign student in Poland, selected in the Interstudent competition, studied in Gdansk. Two years ago the winner was an American student studying at Medical University, and a year ago a Spaniard - a student of architecture from the University of Gdansk. Is there something magic in Gdansk that brings out the best in them? Absolutely! Our genius loci, or good spirit of the place.

Gdansk's colleges offer 15 degree programs in English, but students from abroad, especially from the east, very often decide to study in Polish.

Universities in a close cooperation with the City in a "Study in Gdansk" program actively assist foreign students in all matters related to studies and acclimatization in new conditions. Employees of specially appointed offices facilitate the settlement of administrative matters, finding housing, health insurance, etc. Students from the Poland are attracted to Gdansk mainly by its a great location with endless beaches and a lake district nearby, by a rich cultural offer, good availability of basic housing, but, above all, employment prospects after graduation. Universities of Gdansk are constantly working on opening new fields of study.

At the University of Gdansk in 2016/17 academic year, among many new disciplines, a new major will be taught: chemical business - a direction inspired by employers of the chemical industry. There is also natural language processing at the Gdansk University School of English, or psycho-sexology at School of Psychology. These directions are not random; they are created in collaboration with practitioners and experts in various fields. The university uses knowledge, statistics and wisdom and experience of the future, prospective employers. As indeed do other universities. This is not surprising. Market laws operate also in the area of science.

*What is the most popular study majors among Gdansk students in this academic year?
*
At the University of Gdansk these are: Scandinavian studies, criminology, psychology, English philology and management of cultural institutions. At Gdansk University of Technology: Spatial management, energy studies, geodesy and cartography, automation and robotics. At the Gdansk Medical University, traditionally Department of Dentistry (up to 31 people for one place) was the busiest, with medical studies, dietician studies and physiotherapy following. The new academic year brings new rectors to our schools of higher education.

I wish them good luck for the entire upcoming four-year term and to our students I wish passing all exams in the first session. May the time they spent studying in Gdansk be unforgettable.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 8 hours ago.

*Business Wire India*Key features:

· Comprehensive cover for Heart and Cancer related conditions
· First fixed benefit plan to cover heart related conditions
· Double Claim Benefit: Claim in addition to any existing health insurance
· Premium Funding Benefit for 5 years under moderate conditions
· Tax Benefits on premiums under Section 80D of Income Tax Act, 1961Exide Life Insurance, an established and profitable Life Insurance Company, today announced the launch of Exide Life Sanjeevani. Exide Life Sanjeevani is first fixed benefit health insurance solution by a life insurance company offering comprehensive coverage against all prevalent Heart and Cancer related conditions.

Heart and Cancer related conditions are very common. While advancement of health care has increased the chances of survival from these critical illnesses, the extremely high cost of treatment can be a huge cost. That’s where Exide Life Sanjeevani steps in to help you be prepared financially.

The plan is distinct from standard critical illness policies as it provides a fixed lump sum benefit on diagnosis of early and major stages of heart and cancer related conditions, waives future premiums and also allows you to claim in addition to any existing health insurance.

*Exide Life Sanjeevani offers 2 plan options*

*Option A:  Cover for Heart Related Conditions *where a lump sum amount is paid to you on diagnosis of a covered heart related condition.

*Option B:  Cover for Heart and Cancer Related Conditions *where you can cover yourself against Cancer related conditions in addition to Heart by paying a nominal additional premium. A lump sum amount is paid to you on diagnosis of covered Heart or Cancer related condition.

Commenting on the launch, *Kshitij Jain, MD and CEO, Exide Life Insurance said,* “As per reports, out of the estimated population of more than 127 crores, about 4.5 crores people suffer from coronary artery disease in India. Current estimates suggest India will soon have the highest number of cases of cardiovascular disease in the world. Heart diseases, once considered as the disease of late middle age and old age, has affected the young Indian population 10 years ahead of their Western counterparts. On the other hand 2.5 million people in India are living with Cancer and over 7 lakh cancer patients are added every year. 71% of all cancer related deaths happen in the age group of 30-69 years. While advancement in medical infrastructure has helped improving survival rate from heart and cancer, the major hurdle faced is the inadequacy of funds to manage the expenses. Out of pocket expenses arising out of these conditions have eroded many families’ lifetime savings. Over the last 15 years, Exide Life Insurance has been helping Indians prepare financially for a long and happy life. Exide Life Sanjeevani, our new health insurance offering for Heart and Cancer related conditions will help our customers be better prepared financially for any such eventuality. The plan also offers double claim benefit, premium funding benefit and tax benefit along with being a fixed benefit and comprehensive plan.”

*How does the plan work?*

We have classified all covered Heart and Cancer related conditions under 3 categories – *Mild, Moderate and Severe.* These categories are based on severity of the diagnosed illness and define the extent of payout made to you as a percentage of your chosen sum assured.

· Mild: 25% of the chosen sum assured is paid to you on diagnosis of a mild condition.
· Moderate : 50% of sum assured is paid to you on diagnosis of a moderate condition. As conditions under moderate category because of the severity and longer recovery time can have an impact on your savings as well as future savings, Exide Life Insurance will pay premium for next 5 years on your behalf.
· Severe: 100% of sum assured is paid to you on diagnosis of a severe condition.  The benefit amount is paid on diagnosis of a covered condition even if you have filed a claim under any existing health insurance policy that you may have.

*For more details on coverage, terms and conditions of this plan please refer to the attached product leaflet. *

*You can also refer to the product brochure on **http://www.exidelife.in/products/health-insurance-plan*

*About Exide Life Insurance*

Exide Life Insurance Company Limited, an established and profitable life insurance company, commenced operations in 2001-02 and is head quartered in Bengaluru. The company is 100% owned by Exide Industries Limited. The company serves over 15 lakh customers and manages assets of over INR 10000 Crores*. During the financial year 2015-16, the company achieved total Premium Income of over INR 2000 crores. (* As on 30^th June, 2016)
 
Exide Life Insurance distributes its products through multi-channels viz. Agency, Banc assurance, Corporate Agency & Broking as well as Direct Channels. The Agency channel comprises of 50,000 advisors who are attached to over 200 company offices across the country. The company also offers group life insurance solutions.

The company is focused on providing long term protection and savings solution plans and has a strong traditional product portfolio with a consistent bonus track record. The company has ISO 9001:2008 quality certification for all Customer Service processes.

For more information, please visit our website, *exidelife**.in*
  Reported by Business Wire India 9 hours ago.

This ice cream company is tired of racial injustice, so they’re no longer remaining silent.




*Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield have never been the kind of guys who shy away from demanding social justice.*

When they aren’t making delightfully tasty ice cream flavors, the creators of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream are out to to ensure that the world is a better place for everyone.

*This week, they made it clear that “a better place for everyone” also includes people of color:*



Black Lives Matter. Choosing to be silent in the face of such injustice is not an option. https://t.co/6Vy0KHJeKU #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/pK96teLRhd

— Ben & Jerry's (@benandjerrys) October 6, 2016

*In a statement that encapsulates some of the best of humanity, the Ben & Jerry’s team broke down why black lives matter.*

They explained the systemic inequality plaguing communities of color and the simple, yet somehow still misunderstood, concept that asking for equal rights in the eyes of the law doesn’t mean that other lives do not matter.

Photo by Ade Johnson/AFP/Getty Images.

*“Black lives matter," the statement reads. "They matter because they are children, brothers, sisters, mothers, and fathers. They matter because the injustices they face steal from all of us — white people and people of color alike. They steal our very humanity.”   *

The statement also explained the importance of standing together in “overcoming systemic racial injustice” by admitting there is, in fact, a problem:

“Whether Black, brown, white, or blue — our nation and our very way of life is dependent on the principle of all people being served equal justice under the law. And it’s clear, the effects of the criminal justice system are not color blind.”  

**Ben and Jerry’s outspoken support of Black Lives Matter is especially crucial right now.**

When San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick kneeled during the national anthem to protest systemic injustice — an act he has the constitutional right to do — he received death threats, was berated by “fans,” and was questioned about his dedication to his country.

According to the Guardian, the number of people killed by police in the U.S. this year had already surpassed 800, more than half of which have been people of color. Black women are continuously being harassed on social media by racists for merely existing as a black woman. And black actors and actresses continue to be paid less than their white counterparts.

As Ben and Jerry aptly point out: We have a very big problem.

*But their commitment to social justice and political responsibility isn’t new.*

The ice cream tycoons have long worked toward addressing systemic injustice with social consciousness.

In April 2016, the co-founders were arrested outside the U.S. capitol while taking part in a “Democracy Awakening” protest, a movement to "protect voting rights, get big money out of politics, and demand a fair hearing and an up or down vote on President Obama's Supreme Court nominee.”

Black Lives Matter protesters. Photo by Sean Rayford/Getty Images.

They’ve also made strides in ensuring that the farmers who help produce the ingredients in delightful flavors, like Cherry Garcia and Chunky Monkey, are treated fairly. And in January 2015, they committed to using fair-trade certified ingredients, such as sugar, coffee, and bananas.

Ben & Jerry’s has also been — and continues to be — a vocal proponent of LGBTQ rights. (In 1989, the ice cream company was the first major company in Vermont to offer health insurance to same-sex couples and employees’ domestic partners.)

*In short, Ben and Jerry been awesome for a long time, and they show no signs of slowing down.    *

Their support of the Black Lives Matter movement is an example for companies like Air Academy Federal Credit Union, who dropped Denver Broncos linebacker Brandon Marshall for peacefully protesting police brutality and injustice.

*Instead of cowering to those who are uncomfortable with reality, Ben & Jerry’s is using its platform to amplify the voices of the unheard and ask that the status quo be changed.   *

Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

This matters because when major companies, celebrities, politicians, and other recognizable faces go against the grain and stand up against inequality, they become upstanders that can ultimately affect real, positive change in the communities that need it most.  

**Why? Because “All lives do matter. But all lives will not matter until Black lives matter.”    **


Reported by Upworthy 4 hours ago.

Customers for individual insurance policies who don't qualify for federal subsidies are facing double-digit premium increases in many places this year. The cost is forcing hard choices about coverage. Reported by NPR 4 hours ago.

Plenty of headline-grabbing words about health care and other topics have been exchanged between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton this campaign season making for an extraordinary 2016 race to the White House. Whoever wins in November, it's expected that our next president will change health care in this nation.

The substance of what Trump and Clinton are saying about actual policy sometimes gets lost in the soundbites, so here at insuranceQuotes we thought it would help if we breakdown what the candidates want to do about Obamacare, Medicare and the private insurance providers involved.

Sure, we've heard plenty of talk about the health of each candidate, but what about your health?

The outcome at the ballot box could affect everything from your insurance premiums and prescription drug costs to whether you receive coverage at all.

*Future of Obamacare*

The future of Obamacare is at stake in November.

Republican nominee Trump has vowed to repeal Obamacare, while Clinton is a firm supporter. The Democratic presidential candidate and former secretary of state has called to expand the health care law by offering government-run insurance plans. Keep in mind there is only so much the next president can do on his or her own without the permission of Congress.

President Obama's signature health care law came at a time when nearly 50 million Americans were uninsured. It was billed as a solution to make insurance more affordable and accessible, particularly for low-income Americans who struggle to pay for coverage.

Studies show Obamacare has expanded coverage to more than 20 million Americans who previously did not have insurance. Since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed in March 2010, the uninsured rate has plummeted to an all-time low of 8.6 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For this reason, Democrats hail Obamacare a success. But critics argue the cost of health insurance is rising, because of what they say are unsustainable health care reforms.

Previously, insurance companies could reject sick people because they cost too much to cover. Obamacare requires insurers not only to cover sick people with "pre-existing conditions," but also to offer them the same price as healthy people.

This forces insurers to bear the burden of sicker people because they cannot balance the risk with higher premiums.

Lawmakers anticipated this problem and built in a remedy to solve it, but their plan hasn't been as successful as first thought.

The individual mandate requires adults to purchase health insurance, or face hefty fines. Democrats reasoned the number of sick people seeking coverage would be balanced with an influx of young, healthy people, who are less likely to rack up expensive medical bills.

*RELATED: The ABCs (and D) of Medicare
*
Essentially, young people were intended to pick up the slack for older, sicker Americans.

The problem? The fines seem to be too small to entice young people to sign up for more expensive health care plans.

In 2016, the penalty is $695, or 2.5 percent of income. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates the average person will pay $969. That's a far cry from the cheapest Obamacare plan. Kaiser notes that the bronze plan cost an average of $2,484 in 2015. Many young people are taking the $695 hit and not purchasing insurance.

Also, growth has been slower than expected. The Congressional Budget Office originally predicted there would be 21 million people using the government-run health care exchanges by 2016, but as of March, there were only 11 million enrolled, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid.

That spells trouble for Obamacare.

The imbalance is forcing insurers to scale back as losses pile up.

*VIDEO SERIES: Medicare 101*

The nation's largest insurer -- UnitedHealth -- is pulling out of the exchanges next year in all but three states. The company claims it has lost $1.3 billion on the health care exchanges.

Aetna is also exiting the Obamacare exchanges in 11 states next year, amid $430 million in losses. While Humana plans to scale back by nearly 90 percent on the exchanges.

To make matters worse, an Obamacare risk corridor program that eases insurers' pain by partially compensating them for losses will expire in 2017.

The fallout could send prices skyrocketing. The Department of Health and Human Services reported insurance premiums have jumped 8 percent since last year. What's more concerning: Insurers are considering a 23 percent rate hike on average in 2017, according to ACASignups.net.

What this means is Obamacare could have a reverse effect: As insurers pull out, there will be less competition in each market, fewer options for consumers, and prices will rise, critics say.

The next president is tasked with solving this problem. Clinton plans to tinker with Obamacare, while Trump wants to scrap it and start over.

Let's take a closer look at the competing health care plans of Trump and Clinton.

*Where Trump stands on health care*

Trump plans to repeal Obamacare and replace it with "something much better."

"On Day 1 of the Trump administration, we will ask Congress to immediately deliver a full repeal of Obamacare," the Republican presidential candidate says in his seven-point health care plan.

But Trump cannot eliminate Obamacare on his own. He would need to rally support in Congress.

In 2016, that wouldn't be a problem. In fact, the Republican-led Congress earlier this year passed a bill to repeal the health care law, but it was blocked by President Obama.

Could lawmakers repeal it again next year? That depends. The Senate is up for grabs in November, and if the Democrats take back control of the upper chamber, most would be ideologically opposed to shutting down Obamacare.

*QUIZ: How Well Do You Know Your Health Savings Account?*

For the sake of argument, let's say Trump wins in November and Republicans maintain control of the Senate. What happens then?

Trump's plan to dismantle Obamacare would nearly double the number of uninsured Americans. According to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 22 million people would lose their insurance plans because of the repeal, while only 1 million of those people would regain coverage under the replacement policies.

This would cost the economy about $550 billion over the next decade, the study finds.

But the Center for Health and Economy paints a more optimistic picture. The group released a study in July that argues Trump's plan would decrease the federal deficit by $583 billion.

Trump's plan to replace Obamacare involves a patchwork of proposals aimed at relinquishing the federal government's grip on health care and creating a free-market system.

It's starts with an overhaul of Medicaid, the government-funded health care program for low-income families. Any overhaul would require approval from Congress.

Trump would shift the responsibility for Medicaid to the states through what's known as a block-grant system. Republicans say this will give the states more control over the program, and encourage them to "eliminate fraud, waste and abuse," but critics say it could lead to massive funding cuts from cash-strapped states that would increase the number of low-income Americans without insurance.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated Trump's Medicaid plan could "generate significant savings." If the federal government were to freeze the block grants at the current levels, it would save $845 billion over the next decade.

But warnings sign can be gleaned from House Budget Chairman Tom Price's 2015 proposal to turn Medicaid into a block-grant program, which according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, would have led to $1.8 trillion in funding cut over the next decade and left "tens of millions of Americans" without health insurance.

*CHECK OUT: 6 Common Health Insurance Myths*

Trump also would also seek to reduce the barriers for insurance companies to sell coverage across state lines.

Currently, federal law prohibits Americans from buying health insurance from out-of-state companies.

Trump would ask Congress to overturn this policy and open up a national health insurance market that increases competition and choice for consumers. This, he reasons, would put downward pressure on prices.

The Center for Health and Economy estimates that allowing insurers to selling across state lines would decrease premiums by as much as 37 percent by 2026.

In keeping with the spirit of a free market, Trump would also like to allow foreign pharmaceutical companies to import drugs that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Supporters say this would lower prescription drug prices, but others have expressed safety concerns.

Trump would replace the "individual mandate" with tax credits. Americans would be allowed to deduct insurance premiums from their taxable income, which is the current practice for employees who receive insurance through their companies.

But participation could take a hit if Trump removes the individual mandate, critics say, causing insurance premiums to climb.

According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the tax credits would cost the government $100 billion in lost revenue, and critics say it would only benefit wealthy people who make enough money to claim deductions.

Trump would also exempt health savings accounts from taxes, and allow the benefits to be passed onto family members.

Such a tax overhaul would require congressional approval.

Doctors and hospitals would be required to offer more transparent prices, so patients can shop for the most affordable healthcare services, under Trump's plan.

The Affordable Care Act prohibits illegal immigrants from buying coverage through the government-run exchanges, but Trump claims he can save another $11 billion each year in health care costs by more rigorous enforcing existing immigration laws. This would fall within Trump's executive authority, meaning he would not need the permission of Congress.

"If we were to simply enforce the current immigration laws and restrict the unbridled granting of visas to this country, we could relieve healthcare cost pressures on state and local governments," he wrote.

*
Where Clinton stands on health care*

As first lady, Clinton wanted to reform health care in the 1990s but never got the major overhaul that is Obamacare. She still has health care as a top priority.

The Democratic presidential nominee has sworn to defend Obamacare from Republican attacks. She admitted there are "glitches" that must be addressed, but ultimately, she would fight to expand the healthcare law.

"As president, I will make sure Republicans never succeed in their attempts to strip away health care and that the remaining uninsured should be able to get the affordable coverage they need to stay healthy," Clinton says.

That starts with establishing a government-run "public option" that competes with private insurance companies in an effort to provide Americans with more healthcare choices and lower prices. In 2013, the Congressional Budget Office estimated this plan would save the government nearly $160 billion over a 10-year period.

Clinton would be required to obtain congressional approval, but Senate Democrats are already rallying behind her push for a public option.

Clinton would also ask lawmakers for permission to expand Medicare, the government-funded health care program for older Americans. She wants to lower the age of eligibility from 65-years-old to 55-years-old.

This would make an addition 7 million Americans who currently do not have health insurance eligible for Medicare, according to a study from the consulting firm Avalere Health.

But critics say a Medicare expansion could have severe consequences: As more older Americans compete for the same number of doctors, treatment would be harder to come by.

The Affordable Care Act also provided incentives for states to expand Medicaid coverage to more poor families. So far, 31 states have increased eligibility to families that make up to 138 percent of the federal poverty line. This has helped as many as 10 million Americans who previous did not have health insurance find coverage.

But Clinton intends to launch a campaign against the 19 states that have so far rejected the Medicaid expansion. She could do this unilaterally, because it was previously approved by lawmakers.

"Access to care should not depend on where you live," her campaign says.

*CALCULATOR: Do You Qualify for a Health Care Subsidy?*

"It is a disgrace that 19 states have left [4] million Americans without health insurance, because their states have refused to expand Medicaid. It is wrong that Republican governors and legislatures are leaving too many Americans without health insurance, even though the quality for coverage."

However, a recent study from the federal government won't help Clinton's push. The Department of Health and Human Services found that the cost of expanding Medicare came out to $6,366 per person. This was nearly 50 percent higher than expected.

Clinton would also wage a war against insurers and pharmaceutical companies over the rising cost of healthcare. "She will not stand for unjustified health premium increases," her campaign says.

Under Clinton, HHS would have the authority to block "unreasonable" increases in premium rates. She would also support legislation to cap out-of-pocket prescription drug costs at $250.

Clinton is staunchly opposed to Trump's immigration proposal. She would call for Congress to make illegal immigrants eligible for coverage on the health care exchanges.

She would also push Congress to double the funding community health centers that provide free medical services for tens of millions of low-income families each year. This would include a request for an additional $40 billion over the next decade.

These community health centers save uninsured Americans $1,200 each year in medical expenses, according to her campaign.

Clinton would also get behind telehealth efforts to expand coverage in rural areas.

However, you may be able to find a Medicare Advantage plan from a private insurer that covers part of the cost hearing loss testing and treatment.

This article was originally published on insuranceQuotes.com.

Laura Adams is a personal finance expert, award-winning author, host of the top-rated Money Girl Podcast, and insuranceQuotes' senior analyst. For more on auto, home, health, life, and business insurance, click here.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.

National health insurance firm Anthem today said it won’t pay for the first drug in the U.S. to treat the deadly disease that affects young boys, Duchenne muscular dystrophy. But at least one other insurer already said it will, and others appear likely to do so. In a statement dated Thursday, Anthem (NYSE: ANTM) called the drug, Exondys51, launched by Sarepta Therapeutics (Nasdaq: SRPT) last month “not medically necessary” due to the incomplete clinical data supporting its approval. The drug… Reported by bizjournals 3 hours ago.

It will likely not come as a big surprise that at a time when US personal savings are once again declining, perhaps as a result of soaring health insurance costs, that US consumers are forced to borrow increasingly more to make ends meet. And, as expected, the latest consumer credit report confirmed this, when moments ago the Federal Reserve announced that in August, total US credit surged by $25.9 billion on a seasonally adjusted basis, smashing expectations of a $16.5 billion increase, and the third biggest monthly jump since 2001.

 

The spike was driven by a major jump in non-revolving credit, while revolving, or credit card, debt also spiked substantially in the last full month of summer.

 

Broken out, revolving credit rose by $2.9 billion...

 

... while non-revolving credit increased by a whopping $20 billion,the third highest monthly increase this decade.

But what was perhaps most interesting is that *on a non-seasonally adjusted basis, when removing the artificial Arima-X-13 seasonal factors, August consumer credit soared by a near record $46.8 billion, an absolute outlier month, and surpassed just once in history.
*

So for all those who, still, erroneous claim that US consumers are deleveraging, show them this chart, because the scramble if not so much into revolving debt then certainly into government-funded auto and student loans, is unlike anything ever seen.  And speaking of just those two kinds of debt, here they are broken out: they have both never been higher. Reported by Zero Hedge 2 hours ago.

While the media is transfixed with the just released Washington Post leak of a private Donald Trump conversation from 2005 in which he was speaking "lewdly" about women, and for which he has apologized, roughly at the same time, Wikileaks released part one of what it dubbed the "Podesta emails", which it describes as "a series on deals involving Hillary Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta. Mr Podesta is a long-term associate of the Clintons and was President Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff from 1998 until 2001. Mr Podesta also owns the Podesta Group with his brother Tony, a major lobbying firm and is the Chair of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a Washington DC-based think tank."

While the underlying story in this specific case involves the alleged kickbacks received by the Clinton Foundation from the Russian government-controlled "Uranium One", a story which has been profiled previously by the NYT, and about which Wikileaks adds that "as Russian interests gradually took control of Uranium One millions of dollars were donated to the Clinton Foundation between 2009 and 2013 from individuals directly connected to the deal including the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer. Although Mrs Clinton had an agreement with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors to the Clinton Foundation, the contributions from the Chairman of Uranium One were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons", *what caught our attention is an email from Tony Carr, a Research Director at Hillary for America, in which he lay outs hundreds of excerpts from the heretofore missing transcripts of Hillary Clinton's infamous Wall Street speeches, with an emphasis on those which should be flagged as they may be damaging to Hillary.*

Here is the full email by Carrk as of January 25, 2016 laying out all the potentially delicate issues that the Clinton campaign would wish to avoid from emerging. One thing to note: as Michael Tracey points out, the Hillary campaign had all the transcripts at her disposal all along, despite repeated deflection.  Perhaps as a result of this leak she will now release the full transcripts for the "proper context."

* * *

*From:*tcarrk@hillaryclinton.com
*To: *jpalmieri@hillaryclinton.com, john.podesta@gmail.com, slatham@hillaryclinton.com, kschake@hillaryclinton.com, creynolds@hillaryclinton.com, bfallon@hillaryclinton.com 
*Date: *2016-01-25 00:28 Subject:

*HRC Paid Speeches*

Team,

Attached are the flags from HRC’s paid speeches we have from HWA. I put some highlights below. There is a lot of policy positions that we should give an extra scrub with Policy.

In terms of what was opened to the press and what was not, the Washington Examiner got a hold of one of the private speech contracts (her speeches to universities were typically open press), so this is worth a read http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clintons-speeches-are-cozy-for-wall-streeters-but-closed-to-journalists/article/2553294/section/author/dan-friedman

*CLINTON ADMITS SHE IS OUT OF TOUCH*

*Hillary Clinton: “I'm Kind Of Far Removed” From The Struggles Of The Middle Class “Because The Life I've Lived And The Economic, You Know, Fortunes That My Husband And I Now Enjoy.” *“And I am not taking a position on any policy, but I do think there is a growing sense of anxiety and even anger in the country over the feeling that the game is rigged.  And I never had that feeling when I was growing up.  Never. I mean, were there really rich people, of course there were.  My father loved to complain about big business and big government, but we had a solid middle class upbringing.  We had good public schools.  We had accessible health care.  We had our little, you know, one-family house that, you know, he saved up his money, didn't believe in mortgages.  So I lived that.  And now, obviously, I'm kind of far removed because the life I've lived and the economic, you know, fortunes that my husband and I now enjoy, but I haven't forgotten it.”  [Hillary Clinton Remarks at Goldman-Black Rock, 2/4/14]

*CLINTON SAYS YOU NEED TO HAVE A PRIVATE AND PUBLIC POSITION ON POLICY*

*Clinton: “But If Everybody's Watching, You Know, All Of The Back Room Discussions And The Deals, You Know, Then People Get A Little Nervous, To Say The Least. So, You Need Both A Public And A Private Position.”* CLINTON: You just have to sort of figure out how to -- getting back to that word, "balance" -- how to balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically, and that's not just a comment about today. That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history, and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite predecessors, Secretary Seward, who had been the governor and senator from New York, ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need your help to get this done. And Seward called some of his lobbyist friends who knew how to make a deal, and they just kept going at it. I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position. And finally, I think -- I believe in evidence-based decision making. I want to know what the facts are. I mean, it's like when you guys go into some kind of a deal, you know, are you going to do that development or not, are you going to do that renovation or not, you know, you look at the numbers. You try to figure out what's going to work and what's not going to work. [Clinton Speech For National Multi-Housing Council, 4/24/13]

*CLINTON TALKS ABOUT HOLDING WALL STREET ACCOUNTABLE ONLY FOR POLITICAL REASONS*

*Clinton Said That The Blame Placed On The United States Banking System For The Crisis “Could Have Been Avoided In Terms Of Both Misunderstanding And Really Politicizing What Happened.”* “That was one of the reasons that I started traveling in February of '09, so people could, you know, literally yell at me for the United States and our banking system causing this everywhere.  Now, that's an oversimplification we know, but it was the conventional wisdom. And I think that there's a lot that could have been avoided in terms of both misunderstanding and really politicizing what happened with greater transparency, with greater openness on all sides, you know, what happened, how did it happen, how do we prevent it from happening?  You guys help us figure it out and let's make sure that we do it right this time. And I think that everybody was desperately trying to fend off the worst effects institutionally, governmentally, and there just wasn't that opportunity to try to sort this out, and that came later.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]

* * *

*Clinton: “Even If It May Not Be 100 Percent True, If The Perception Is That Somehow The Game Is Rigged, That Should Be A Problem For All Of Us.” *“Now, it's important to recognize the vital role that the financial markets play in our economy and that so many of you are contributing to.  To function effectively those markets and the men and women who shape them have to command trust and confidence, because we all rely on the market's transparency and integrity. So even if it may not be 100 percent true, if the perception is that somehow the game is rigged, that should be a problem for all of us, and we have to be willing to make that absolutely clear.  And if there are issues, if there's wrongdoing, people have to be held accountable and we have to try to deter future bad behavior, because the public trust is at the core of both a free market economy and a democracy.” [Clinton Remarks to Deutsche Bank, 10/7/14]

*CLINTON SUGGESTS WALL STREET INSIDERS ARE WHAT IS NEEDED TO FIX WALL STREET*

*Clinton Said Financial Reform “Really Has To Come From The Industry Itself.” *“Remember what Teddy Roosevelt did.  Yes, he took on what he saw as the excesses in the economy, but he also stood against the excesses in politics.  He didn't want to unleash a lot of nationalist, populistic reaction.  He wanted to try to figure out how to get back into that balance that has served America so well over our entire nationhood. Today, there's more that can and should be done that really has to come from the industry itself, and how we can strengthen our economy, create more jobs at a time where that's increasingly challenging, to get back to Teddy Roosevelt's square deal.  And I really believe that our country and all of you are up to that job.” [Clinton Remarks to Deutsche Bank, 10/7/14]

* * *

*Speaking About The Importance Of Proper Regulation, Clinton Said “The People That Know The Industry Better Than Anybody Are The People Who Work In The Industry.”* “I mean, it's still happening, as you know.  People are looking back and trying to, you know, get compensation for bad mortgages and all the rest of it in some of the agreements that are being reached. There's nothing magic about regulations, too much is bad, too little is bad.  How do you get to the golden key, how do we figure out what works?  And the people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry. And I think there has to be a recognition that, you know, there's so much at stake now, I mean, the business has changed so much and decisions are made so quickly, in nano seconds basically.  We spend trillions of dollars to travel around the world, but it's in everybody's interest that we have a better framework, and not just for the United States but for the entire world, in which to operate and trade.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]

*CLINTON ADMITS NEEDING WALL STREET FUNDING*

*Clinton Said That Because Candidates Needed Money From Wall Street To Run For Office, People In New York Needed To Ask Tough Questions About The Economy Before Handing Over Campaign Contributions. *“Secondly, running for office in our country takes a lot of money, and candidates have to go out and raise it.  New York is probably the leading site for contributions for fundraising for candidates on both sides of the aisle, and it's also our economic center. And there are a lot of people here who should ask some tough questions before handing over campaign contributions to people who were really playing chicken with our whole economy.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]

* * *

*Clinton: “It Would Be Very Difficult To Run For President Without Raising A Huge Amount Of Money And Without Having Other People Supporting You Because Your Opponent Will Have Their Supporters.”* “So our system is, in many ways, more difficult, certainly far more expensive and much longer than a parliamentary system, and I really admire the people who subject themselves to it.  Even when I, you know, think they should not be elected president, I still think, well, you know, good for you I guess, you're out there promoting democracy and those crazy ideas of yours. So I think that it's something -- I would like -- you know, obviously as somebody who has been through it, I would like it not to last as long because I think it's very distracting from what we should be doing every day in our public business.  I would like it not to be so expensive.  I have no idea how you do that. I mean, in my campaign -- I lose track, but I think I raised $250 million or some such enormous amount, and in the last campaign President Obama raised 1.1 billion, and that was before the Super PACs and all of this other money just rushing in, and it's so ridiculous that we have this kind of free for all with all of this financial interest at stake, but, you know, the Supreme Court said that's basically what we're in for.  So we're kind of in the wild west, and, you know, it would be very difficult to run for president without raising a huge amount of money and without having other people supporting you because your opponent will have their supporters.  So I think as hard as it was when I ran, I think it's even harder now.” [Clinton Speech For General Electric’s Global Leadership Meeting – Boca Raton, FL, 1/6/14]

 

*CLINTON TOUTS HER RELATIONSHIP TO WALL STREET AS A SENATOR*

*Clinton: As Senator, “I Represented And Worked With” So Many On Wall Street And “Did All I Could To Make Sure They Continued To Prosper” But Still Called For Closing Carried Interest Loophole. *In remarks at Robbins, Gellar, Rudman & Dowd in San Diego, Hillary Clinton said, “When I was a Senator from New York, I represented and worked with so many talented principled people who made their living in finance.  But even thought I represented them and did all I could to make sure they continued to prosper, I called for closing the carried interest loophole and addressing skyrocketing CEO pay. I also was calling in '06, '07 for doing something about the mortgage crisis, because I saw every day from Wall Street literally to main streets across New York how a well-functioning financial system is essential. So when I raised early warnings about early warnings about subprime mortgages and called for regulating derivatives and over complex financial products, I didn't get some big arguments, because people sort of said, no, that makes sense.  But boy, have we had fights about it ever since.” [Hillary Clinton’s Remarks at Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd in San Diego, 9/04/14]

* * *

*Clinton On Wall Street: “I Had Great Relations And Worked So Close Together After 9/11 To Rebuild Downtown, And A Lot Of Respect For The Work You Do And The People Who Do It.” *“Now, without going over how we got to where we are right now, what would be your advice to the Wall Street community and the big banks as to the way forward with those two important decisions? SECRETARY CLINTON:  Well, I represented all of you for eight years.  I had great relations and worked so close together after 9/11 to rebuild downtown, and a lot of respect for the work you do and the people who do it, but I do -- I think that when we talk about the regulators and the politicians, the economic consequences of bad decisions back in '08, you know, were devastating, and they had repercussions throughout the world.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]

 

*CLINTON TALKS ABOUT THE CHALLENGES RUNNING FOR OFFICE*

*Hillary Clinton Said There Was “A Bias Against People Who Have Led Successful And/Or Complicated Lives,” Citing The Need To Divese Of Assets, Positions, And Stocks.*   “SECRETARY CLINTON:  Yeah.  Well, you know what Bob Rubin said about that.  He said, you know, when he came to Washington, he had a fortune.  And when he left Washington, he had a small --              MR. BLANKFEIN:  That’s how you have a small fortune, is you go to Washington. SECRETARY CLINTON:  You go to Washington.  Right.              But, you know, part of the problem with the political situation, too, is that there is such a bias against people who have led successful and/or complicated lives.  You know, the divestment of assets, the stripping of all kinds of positions, the sale of stocks.  It just becomes very onerous and unnecessary.” [Goldman Sachs Builders And Innovators Summit, 10/29/13]

*CLINTON SUGGESTS SHE IS A MODERATE*

*Clinton Said That Both The Democratic And Republican Parties Should Be “Moderate.” *“URSULA BURNS:  Interesting.  Democrats? SECRETARY CLINTON:  Oh, long, definitely. URSULA BURNS:  Republicans? SECRETARY CLINTON:  Unfortunately, at the time, short. URSULA BURNS:  Okay.  We'll go back to questions. SECRETARY CLINTON:  We need two parties. URSULA BURNS:  Yeah, we do need two parties. SECRETARY CLINTON:  Two sensible, moderate, pragmatic parties.” [Hillary Clinton Remarks, Remarks at Xerox, 3/18/14]

* * *

*Clinton: “Simpson-Bowles… Put Forth The Right Framework. Namely, We Have To Restrain Spending, We Have To Have Adequate Revenues, And We Have To Incentivize Growth. It's A Three-Part Formula… And They Reached An Agreement. But What Is Very Hard To Do Is To Then Take That Agreement If You Don't Believe That You're Going To Be Able To Move The Other Side.”* SECRETARY CLINTON:  Well, this may be borne more out of hope than experience in the last few years. But Simpson-Bowles -- and I know you heard from Erskine earlier today -- put forth the right framework. Namely, we have to restrain spending, we have to have adequate revenues, and we have to incentivize growth. It's a three-part formula.  The specifics can be negotiated depending upon whether we're acting in good faith or not. And what Senator Simpson and Erskine did was to bring Republicans and Democrats alike to the table, and you had the full range of ideological views from I think Tom Coburn to Dick Durbin.  And they reached an agreement. But what is very hard to do is to then take that agreement if you don't believe that you're going to be able to move the other side.  And where we are now is in this gridlocked dysfunction. So you've got Democrats saying that, you know, you have to have more revenues; that's the sine qua non of any kind of agreement.  You have Republicans saying no, no, no on revenues; you have to cut much more deeply into spending. Well, looks what's happened.  We are slowly returning to growth.  It's not as much or as fast as many of us would like to see, but, you know, we're certainly better off than our European friends, and we're beginning to, I believe, kind of come out of the long aftermath of the '08 crisis. [Clinton Speech For Morgan Stanley, 4/18/13]

* * *

*Clinton: “The Simpson-Bowles Framework And The Big Elements Of It Were Right… You Have To Restrain Spending, You Have To Have Adequate Revenues, And You Have To Have Growth.”* CLINTON: So, you know, the Simpson-Bowles framework and the big elements of it were right.  The specifics can be negotiated and argued over.  But you got to do all three.  You have to restrain spending, you have to have adequate revenues, and you have to have growth.  And I think we are smart enough to figure out how to do that. [Clinton Speech For Morgan Stanley, 4/18/13]

*CLINTON IS AWARE OF SECURITY CONCERNS AROUND BLACKBERRIES*

*Clinton: “At The State Department We Were Attacked Every Hour, More Than Once An Hour By Incoming Efforts To Penetrate Everything We Had.  And That Was True Across The U.S. Government.”* CLINTON: But, at the State Department we were attacked every hour, more than once an hour by incoming efforts to penetrate everything we had.  And that was true across the U.S. government.  And we knew it was going on when I would go to China, or I would go to Russia, we would leave all of our electronic equipment on the plane, with the batteries out, because this is a new frontier.  And they're trying to find out not just about what we do in our government.  They're trying to find out about what a lot of companies do and they were going after the personal emails of people who worked in the State Department. So it's not like the only government in the world that is doing anything is the United States.  But, the United States compared to a number of our competitors is the only government in the world with any kind of safeguards, any kind of checks and balances.  They may in many respects need to be strengthened and people need to be reassured, and they need to have their protections embodied in law.  But, I think turning over a lot of that material intentionally or unintentionally, because of the way it can be drained, gave all kinds of information not only to big countries, but to networks and terrorist groups, and the like. So I have a hard time thinking that somebody who is a champion of privacy and liberty has taken refuge in Russia under Putin's authority.  And then he calls into a Putin talk show and says, President Putin, do you spy on people?  And President Putin says, well, from one intelligence professional to another, of course not.  Oh, thank you so much.  I mean, really, I don't know.  I have a hard time following it. [Clinton Speech At UConn, 4/23/14]

* * *

*Hillary Clinton: “When I Got To The State Department, It Was Still Against The Rules To Let Most -- Or Let All Foreign Service Officers Have Access To A Blackberry.” *“I mean, let's face it, our government is woefully, woefully behind in all of its policies that affect the use of technology.  When I got to the State Department, it was still against the rules to let most -- or let all Foreign Service Officers have access to a Blackberry.  You couldn't have desktop computers when Colin Powell was there.  Everything that you are taking advantage of, inventing and using, is still a generation or two behind when it comes to our government.” [Hillary Clinton Remarks at Nexenta, 8/28/14]

* * *

*Hillary Clinton: “We Couldn't Take Our Computers, We Couldn't Take Our Personal Devices” Off The Plane In China And Russia. *“I mean, probably the most frustrating part of this whole debate are countries acting like we're the only people in the world trying to figure out what's going on.  I mean, every time I went to countries like China or Russia, I mean, we couldn't take our computers, we couldn't take our personal devices, we couldn't take anything off the plane because they're so good, they would penetrate them in a minute, less, a nanosecond.  So we would take the batteries out, we'd leave them on the plane.” [Hillary Clinton Remarks at Nexenta, 8/28/14]

* * *

*Clinton Said When She Got To State, Employees “Were Not Mostly Permitted To Have Handheld Devices.”* “You know, when Colin Powell showed up as Secretary of State in 2001, most State Department employees still didn't even have computers on their desks.  When I got there they were not mostly permitted to have handheld devices.  I mean, so you're thinking how do we operate in this new environment dominated by technology, globalizing forces?  We have to change, and I can't expect people to change if I don't try to model it and lead it.” [Clinton Speech For General Electric’s Global Leadership Meeting – Boca Raton, FL, 1/6/14]

* * *

*Hillary Clinton Said You Know You Can’t Bring Your Phone And Computer When Traveling To China And Russia And She Had To Take Her Batteries Out And Put them In A Special Box. *“And anybody who has ever traveled in other countries, some of which shall remain nameless, except for Russia and China, you know that you can’t bring your phones and your computers.  And if you do, good luck.  I mean, we would not only take the batteries out, we would leave the batteries and the devices on the plane in special boxes.  Now, we didn’t do that because we thought it would be fun to tell somebody about.  We did it because we knew that we were all targets and that we would be totally vulnerable. So it’s not only what others do to us and what we do to them and how many people are involved in it.  It’s what’s the purpose of it, what is being collected, and how can it be used.  And there are clearly people in this room who know a lot about this, and some of you could be very useful contributors to that conversation because you’re sophisticated enough to know that it’s not just, do it, don’t do it.  We have to have a way of doing it, and then we have to have a way of analyzing it, and then we have to have a way of sharing it.” [Goldman Sachs Builders And Innovators Summit, 10/29/13]

* * *

*Hillary Clinton Lamented How Far Behind The State Department Was In Technology, Saying “People Were Not Even Allowed To Use Mobile Devices Because Of Security Issues.”  *“Personally, having, you know, lived and worked in the White House, having been a senator, having been Secretary of State, there has traditionally been a great pool of very talented, hard-working people.  And just as I was saying about the credit market, our personnel policies haven’t kept up with the changes necessary in government.  We have a lot of difficulties in getting—when I got to the State Department, we were so far behind in technology, it was embarrassing.  And, you know, people were not even allowed to use mobile devices because of security issues and cost issues, and we really had to try to push into the last part of the 20^th Century in order to get people functioning in 2009 and ‘10.” [Goldman Sachs Builders And Innovators Summit, 10/29/13]

 

*CLINTON REMARKS ARE PRO KEYSTONE AND PRO TRADE*

*Clinton: “So I Think That Keystone Is A Contentious Issue, And Of Course It Is Important On Both Sides Of The Border For Different And Sometimes Opposing Reasons…” *“So I think that Keystone is a contentious issue, and of course it is important on both sides of the border for different and sometimes opposing reasons, but that is not our relationship.  And I think our relationship will get deeper and stronger and put us in a position to really be global leaders in energy and climate change if we worked more closely together.  And that's what I would like to see us do.” [Remarks at tinePublic, 6/18/14]

* * *

*Hillary Clinton Said Her Dream Is A Hemispheric Common Market, With Open Trade And Open Markets. *“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.”  [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 28]

* * *

*Hillary Clinton Said We Have To Have A Concerted Plan To Increase Trade; We Have To Resist Protectionism And Other Kinds Of Barriers To Trade. *“Secondly, I think we have to have a concerted plan to increase trade already under the current circumstances, you know, that Inter-American Development Bank figure is pretty surprising. There is so much more we can do, there is a lot of low hanging fruit but businesses on both sides have to make it a priority and it's not  for governments to do but governments can either make it easy or make it hard and we have to resist, protectionism, other kinds of barriers to market access and to trade and I would like to see this get much more attention and be not just a policy for a year under president X or president Y but a consistent one.” [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 32]

 

*CLINTON IS MORE FAVORABLE TO CANADIAN HEALTH CARE AND SINGLE PAYER*

*Clinton Said Single-Payer Health Care Systems “Can Get Costs Down,” And “Is As Good Or Better On Primary Care,” But “They Do Impose Things Like Waiting Times.” *“If you look at countries that are comparable, like Switzerland or Germany, for example, they have mixed systems.  They don't have just a single-payer system, but they have very clear controls over budgeting and  accountability. If you look at the single-payer systems, like Scandinavia, Canada, and elsewhere, they can get costs down because, you know, although their care, according to statistics, overall is as good or better on primary care, in particular, they do impose things like waiting times, you know.  It takes longer to get like a hip replacement than it might take here.” [Hillary Clinton remarks to ECGR Grand Rapids, 6/17/13]

* * *

*Clinton Cited President Johnson’s Success In Establishing Medicare And Medicaid And Said She Wanted To See The U.S. Have Universal Health Care Like In Canada.* “You know, on healthcare we are the prisoner of our past.  The way we got to develop any kind of medical insurance program was during World War II when companies facing shortages of workers began to offer healthcare benefits as an inducement for employment.  So from the early 1940s healthcare was seen as a privilege connected to employment.  And after the war when soldiers came back and went back into the market there was a lot of competition, because the economy was so heated up. So that model continued.  And then of course our large labor unions bargained for healthcare with the employers that their members worked for.  So from the early 1940s until the early 1960s we did not have any Medicare, or our program for the poor called Medicaid until President Johnson was able to get both passed in 1965. So the employer model continued as the primary means by which working people got health insurance.  People over 65 were eligible for Medicare.  Medicaid, which was a partnership, a funding partnership between the federal government and state governments, provided some, but by no means all poor people with access to healthcare. So what we've been struggling with certainly Harry Truman, then Johnson was successful on Medicare and Medicaid, but didn't touch the employer based system, then actually Richard Nixon made a proposal that didn't go anywhere, but was quite far reaching.  Then with my husband's administration we worked very hard to come up with a system, but we were very much constricted by the political realities that if you had your insurance from your employer you were reluctant to try anything else.  And so we were trying to build a universal system around the employer-based system. And indeed now with President Obama's legislative success in getting the Affordable Care Act passed that is what we've done.  We still have primarily an employer-based system, but we now have people able to get subsidized insurance.  So we have health insurance companies playing a major role in the provision of healthcare, both to the employed whose employers provide health insurance, and to those who are working but on their own are not able to afford it and their employers either don't provide it, or don't provide it at an affordable price. We are still struggling.  We've made a lot of progress.  Ten million Americans now have insurance who didn't have it before the Affordable Care Act, and that is a great step forward.  (Applause.) And what we're going to have to continue to do is monitor what the costs are and watch closely to see whether employers drop more people from insurance so that they go into what we call the health exchange system.  So we're really just at the beginning.  But we do have Medicare for people over 65.  And you couldn't, I don't think, take it away if you tried, because people are very satisfied with it, but we also have a lot of political and financial resistance to expanding that system to more people. So we're in a learning period as we move forward with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.  And I'm hoping that whatever the shortfalls or the glitches have been, which in a big piece of legislation you're going to have, those will be remedied and we can really take a hard look at what's succeeding, fix what isn't, and keep moving forward to get to affordable universal healthcare coverage like you have here in Canada.  [Clinton Speech For tinePublic – Saskatoon, CA, 1/21/15]

 

* * *

Below is the full 80 page documents of "speech flags" in Hillary speeches:

  Reported by Zero Hedge 1 day ago.