1. Good news from the Vermont Health Care Reform Commission

Meanwhile, in Vermont the first draft for a single payer health care system will be submitted on January 19th to the legislatur­e, followed by a 15 day public comment period.

All proposals must meet the following criteria defined in the bill:

• Universal access and coverage for all essential health services for all Vermonters­
• A transparen­t, efficient and accountabl­e system
• Free choice of providers for all Vermonters­
• A system of containing costs
• A financing mechanism that is “sufficien­t, fair, sustainabl­e and shared equitably.

I'm more than happy that Vermont is on the right track. Once their system is up and running, people will realize how government-run health care provides superior services for less.

Source: What comes next for single payer in Vermont? 2. Employer-s­ponsored health coverage protects fewer workers

"The percentage of Americans younger than 65 who receive health insurance through their employer has fallen below 60% not only because of high unemployme­nt. It's also because many of those who remained on the job saw their coverage eliminated or reduced, or dropped it themselves because their plan became too expensive.
The conclusions come from separate reports issued by the Economic Policy Institute and the Commonwealth Fund. The organizations each released a report in November and December on the cost and prevalence of employee coverage.

[...]

On Dec. 15, the institute put out another report noting that those who did have insurance were paying more for it. It said family health insurance premiums rose by 131% between 1999 and 2009 -- a rate far outstripping the 38.1% rise in average hourly earnings for nonmanagement employees and the 28.8% overall inflation rate."
http://www­.ama-assn.­org/amedne­ws/2010/12­/27/bil112­27.htm

This is why I don't understand why labor unions are so vehemently defending employer-based health care. Just a few have access to cadillac health insurance plans (very generous health plans with no co-pay) and the numbers are decreasing.
It's for this reason why civilized countries simply tax all employees and employers. The money goes directly to a single fund that provides coverage for all citizens and residents.

It would take only a few amendments to turn the current health reform bill into such a much better system that even President Obama had in mind:
We need to discourage employer-b­ased coverage so that all people purchase health care through the Exchanges. The money that pays for the subsidies would come directly from employers through a separate tax. Since the cost is spread to all employers, the cost of health care would lower for large and small employers as well as employees.

Then, you only need to add some new powers to the government (negotiati­ng drug prices, pay-as-you­-go instead of fee-for-se­rvice, power to lower premiums etc.) and you would have a much better, more affordable universal health care system. The question is, when are our politicians going to wake up and take real action?
3. 9/11 Responder bill passed.

By Elise Foley
Huffington Post
"Just before leaving town for Christmas, senators reached a deal to ensure Republican support for the bill. It will now go for a vote by unanimous consent. The House remained in Washington to act on the bill.

The new deal reduces the cost of the bill by $6.2 billion from its previous Senate version and $7.5 billion from the version that passed the House, according to a statement from Coburn's office. It calls for closing the Victims Compensation Fund in 2016 instead of 2031, preventing claimants from pursuing civil lawsuits if rejected from the fund, and limiting infrastructure costs and attorney fees."
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/22/911-first-responders-heal_1_n_800326.html

I commented on Republican obstruction towards the 9/11 Responder bill on July 30, 2010. On one side, I'm more than happy that it finally passed. On the other hand, it's a very bitter pill. Our heroes fought for this for 9 years. Now they only get 5 years of benefits for the chronic illnesses caused by toxins?

The solution would have been more than simple. One only has to take a look at PPACA. In the bill, a provision allows residents of Libby, Montana, who have been exposed to asbestos for years to enroll into Medicare. A few hundred heroes would NOT have broken the bank, especially since they would still pay the Medicare premiums. It's a perfectly rational solution for providing affordable long-term coverage.
I can only wonder why Congress did not add 9/11 heroes to this provision.