Update: Former Congressman Coehlo’s responses below.
Former Congressman Tony Coehlo (D-Calif) will be answering your questions on the current national debate over Health Care Reform right here on Virginia Virtucon.
Now through 11:59 p.m. on Wednesday evening, we are asking our readers to ask their questions via the comment section of this post for Congressman Coehlo. Approximately 10-12 of these will be selected by the Contributors here at VV and those questions will be answered this Friday by the former Congressman, House Majority Whip, DCCC Chairman, and primary author and sponsor of the Americans for Disabilities Act.
We’re hoping that some of your questions will include topics like the ‘public option’ plan, universal health care, the ‘insurance exchange’, the effects on private market insurance carriers, effects on insurance brokers, effect on small businesses, the price tag, and maybe when Coehlo thinks our own Virginia Delegation in Congress may get to vote on a reform package, along with a wide-range of other subjects that you find important. Please keep your questions thoughtful and on-point.
Coehlo remains involved in health care issues and policy, currently serving as Chairman of the Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC).
From their website:
PIPC is a diverse group of healthcare organizations – representing patients, physicians and other health care providers, researchers and innovators, and other groups – that have come together to promote comparative effectiveness research that supports patient access and informed health care decision-making and fosters continued medical progress. PIPC is dedicated to supporting comparative effectiveness research that strengthens physician and patient decision making, improves health care quality, and supports continued medical progress.
Recently, PIPC was a major supporter of H.R. 2502, a bill introduced by Democratic Congressman Kent Schrader (OR-5) and co-sponsored by NOVA’s own, Gerry Connolly (VA-11), a bill that provides ‘patient protections’ for ongoing research should government propose to ever expand its role in health care decisions.
Given the current path of this administration, that sure seems likely. Please leave a question or two for Congressman Coehlo. Look for his answers this Friday.
Lee Talley, on July 7th, 2009 at 11:54 pm Said:
What in the the new healthcare bill will have insurers cover medically proven therapies for children with Autism. The rates of diagnosis is now 1 in 85 boys and 1 and 150 children. Has there been any thought to including the Autism Treatment Acceleration Act S.819 and HR 2413 in the Kennedy – Dodd bill?
Thank you
Lee Talley
Legislative Director – Virginia Autism Project
State Chapter Advocacy Chairman (Virginia) for Autism Speaks
Thanks Lee for your question. It’s an interesting one. In fact, I just read about these families working together to form support for each other in the paper this week.
There are many people in the patient community, like myself, who are concerned that valuable and proven treatments may be excluded or ignored if health reform and comparative effectiveness research isn’t patient-centered.
One of the things that we’re hearing from a number of folks is that there are “too many” choices out there. In fact, I was on a panel at the National Press Club recently that was sponsored by the Alliance for Health Reform – and participants on that panel actually argued that Americans are given too many choices in their healthcare.
I would argue just the opposite. Americans should have choices. We should be able to choose the doctor and the treatment and the coverage that best suits our needs.
As far as including the Autism Treatment Acceleration Act in the HELP Bill – I know that there is continued negotiation on all fronts and this Act is still being considered by the HELP Committee.
Riley, on July 8th, 2009 at 11:00 am Said:
Congressman, thank you for agreeing to answer some questions. What is your take on the so-called “public option” and how can anyone expect that this or any future Congress or administration will not take advantage of being the ones in charge of setting the rules so as to give the “public option” a leg up on the private sector health insurance companies?
Thanks Riley for this important question, as the debate over the future of insurance coverage is certainly a hot topic on Capitol Hill right now.
However, PIPC is not involved with – and will be taking no position in – the public option debate. The Partnership’s sole focus is ensuring that new CER proposals stemming from the recent stimulus package are patient-centered and protective of the patient-provider relationship. And while we wish the Administration well in solving the problem of America’s uninsured, we hope that any effort at reforming our health insurance system continues to ensure that patients have the best access to care.
Tim Maloney, on July 8th, 2009 at 11:29 am Said:
In less than a year, Government has gone into the business of regulating banks and buying up bad loans, buying automobile manufacturers that no one else in the world would purchase thus now producing cars and trucks, threatening to take over the Internet through various forms of net-neutrality, and now not only taking over the health care industry, but getting into the business of providing health insurance too. Based on a premise that ‘money is no object’ (believed by this Congress), exactly where and when do you see this pattern slowing or, if ever, coming to a complete stop?
As a follow up; how much is this piece of legislation supported by your organization and Congressman Gerry Connolly going to cost me and every other taxpayer?
Thank you Congressman for taking these questions.
Thanks Tim. Hopefully, comparative effectiveness research won’t cost you – but it will help save your life or at least make you healthier.
What PIPC supports is building out medical studies to include a diversity of patients and treatment options then making that research and its findings available to the public. This will allow doctors and patients to have the best, most accurate information possible to help determine the best course of medical treatment.
CER has been going on for years. And while the Stimulus Bill did have $1.1 billion in it for CER, we want to ensure that it’s used in a way that helps patients, not in a way that would actually reduce treatment options.
Tim, I think every body is different and, so we each may react differently to different therapies. One that works for me, may not work for you. But I want to make sure that we (and our doctors) all have the best information possible so that we both can live healthier, longer lives.
Read more »