She has 12 months in an executive position, actually running a government...
Posted By: sam on 2008-08-29
In Reply to: Saying it don't make it so. Back up your claim - that her experience is "more" than Obama'
Obama does not. She is going to be 2nd chair, not 1st. If either of them is going to be training on the job, better it be 2nd chair. She also served as mayor, which is also executive work. She has more experience to be President now (and that is not the position she is running for) than he does. Just fact, based entirely on experience. And the only reason I posted that at all is that is the first criticism of her that surfaced here. Personally, with Obama's limited experience going into the first chair, not the second chair...I would think his campaign and his followers would want the conversation to avoid that...that make an issue of it. Just an observation.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Executive experience = running a government...
McCain hasn't, Obama hasn't, Biden hasn't. She HAS. Bill Clinton had only been a governor before he was elected President. Double standard alive and well on the left?? Of course it is.
Excuse me....the Presidency is an executive position...
Palin is the only one of the four who has executive appearance. She is as ready to lead right now as Obama is. Obama has zero international experience other than one trip to talk to the Germans in a political speech.
And I would think the fact that your #1 has less experience than McCain's #2 you would stay away from the experience thing...?
He picked her because she shares his ideals..wants change in washington. Obama wants that too. McCain picked a REAL Washington outsider. Obama didn't. Soooo..they are saying some of the same things Obama is saying, but when Obama says it is good, when they say it, it is bad?
Hello President McCain, and VP Palin!
Joe the Plumber wasn't running for a top government job. nm
*
Government now owning/running U.S. car companies?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/15/obama-car-czar-oversee-auto-industry/
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama plans to appoint senior administration officials -- rather than a single "car czar," as had been discussed -- to oversee a restructuring of the auto industry.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers will oversee the across-the-government panel, a senior administration official said Sunday on the condition of anonymity because no announcement had been made.
"The president understands the importance of this issue and also understands that the auto industry affects and is affected by a broad range of economic policies," the official said.
As the teams move forward, Obama "wants to make sure that we're getting the expertise and input of agencies across the government," the official said.
Obama and his aides face difficult choices on the fate of the U.S. auto industry, weighing the cost of pouring billions more into struggling companies against possible bankruptcies that could undermine plans to jump-start the economy.
General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC are racing against a Tuesday deadline to submit plans to the government. The plans are to be followed by weeks of intense negotiations ahead of a March 31 deadline for the final versions of the reports.
GM and Chrysler are living off a combined $13.4 billion in government loans. If they don't receive concessions by March 31, they face the prospect of having the loans pulled, followed by bankruptcy proceedings.
Any bankruptcy would be particularly painful, with some economists predicting the country could lose 2 million to 3 million jobs this year and the unemployment rate, now 7.6 percent, could swell past 9 percent by the spring of 2010.
In television interviews Sunday, White House senior adviser David Axelrod didn't respond directly when asked if the U.S. economy could withstand a GM bankruptcy. Nor did he directly address a question about whether the Obama administration would let GM go into bankruptcy.
"I'm not going to prejudge anything. I think that there is going to have to be a restructuring of those companies. I'm not going to get into the mode of how that happens. We'll wait and see what they have to say on Tuesday," he told "FOX News Sunday."
Executives at the two automakers have said bankruptcy is not an option because consumers would not buy cars from a company that might go out of business.
"How that restructuring comes is something that has to be determined," Axelrod said. "But it's going to be something that's going to require sacrifice not just from the auto workers but also from creditors, from shareholders and the executives who run the company. And everyone's going to have to get together here to build companies that can compete in the future."
Enter the President's Task Force on Autos. That group will use officials from the departments of Treasury, Labor, Transportation, Commerce and Energy. Members of the National Economic Council, the White House Office of Energy and Environment, the Council of Economic Advisers and the Environmental Protection Agency will also be involved, according to the administration official.
Obama also plans to name restructuring expert Ron Bloom a senior adviser to Geithner. He will not be the "car czar" pointman many labor and business leaders expected. Bloom, a former consultant to the United Steelworkers of America, will be doing much of the financial analysis for the administration.
Geithner is expected to be the only Cabinet secretary to be part of the panel, the senior administration official said. Deputy secretaries, however, would be involved.
Obama "felt it was important to have the treasury secretary as his official designee to oversee these loans," the senior administration official said.
GM spokesman Greg Martin said the company welcomed the task force.
"We expect to meet soon with this team to share GM's detailed restructuring plan to restore our company to viability and to meet the requirements of its loan agreements," he said.
The terms of the federal loans set "targets" for concessions, largely from debt-holders and the United Auto Workers union, but concession talks have made little progress with just a couple days left before the initial deadline.
Negotiations between GM and the UAW broke off Friday night but resumed Sunday, still focusing on exchanging the company's cash payments into a union-run retiree health care trust for GM stock, according to a person briefed on the talks who didn't want to be identified because the bargaining is private.
GM and UAW officials declined comment.
GM and Chrysler don't need to have everything nailed down for Tuesday's progress reports, but the companies are expected to detail concessions along with plant closures, the potential elimination of brands and thousands of job cuts.
Axelrod wouldn't say whether the administration would offer the auto industry more bailout money. GM already has borrowed $9.4 billion to stay in business, and it would receive an addition $4 billion if the Treasury Department approves its viability plan. Chrysler wants $3 billion more on top of the $4 billion it has already borrowed.
"We need to see what it is that they come up with this week," Axelrod said.
She has put herself in this position
Don't blame the vultures for her mistakes.
You don't even know his position do you?
@!@
You are in an even worse position than I am...
at least my mortgage is a fixed rate mortgage with a reasonable interest rate - not as low as what is being offered to those who are defaulting, but not too bad in the grand scheme of things. So--good luck to you!!!
Sorry - you can't diagnose my position
I live in a blue collar neighborhood - those who lose their jobs - start scrapping metal or cutting wood or whatever they can do to earn a living. They do not sponge off of society. Their kids go without medical care as a result, but the whole family does. They also hunt to put meat on the table. I go into the cheap grocery stores to shop - rarely do I see food stamps being used. My husband is a white collar worker who was just laid off. Wehave to decide between COBRA and the mortgage. I have cancer, so I guess COBRA wins. Please research welfare and find out, REALLY, what a small percentage of our population is on the dole. Welfare is just another propaganda tool. I know - I went into social work.
Not in a position to give more
The problem is not everyone is in a position to give MORE but the government doesn't take that into acct. We will all be paying more to the government eventually. Who else will be paying this money back?
He was sworn into his current position
using a Koran, not the Bible. He refuses to honor our flag because it is against his religion. He will ruin this country from the inside out if elected. The phrase "One nation under God" will be removed from our Pledge of Allegiance. Think about that!
Whoever gets the position will have a whale of a job to clean up. sm
Our troops are stretched so thinly worldwide that homeland security is compromised. Ya gotta hear some of the older vets talking strategy...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiJk6MeBx54
I stand by my position. Isn't that partly what
the VP is for. I am glad that McCain thinks he needs to be in DC, but let Palin take over for a few days.
Don't be ridiculous, of course the financial crisis is more important. But, why can't he do the debate 1 night. It is just 1 night. Let them debate the economy instead, I am sure Americans would love to hear what they have to say about it right now.
It's not an attack, it's a statement of position.
the concept I take exception to. I want my health insurance benefits to stay in the "pre-tax" column on my pay stub. In fact, I want all my benefits to stay in that column. Under McCain's plan, I would pay tax on my benefit out of every single paycheck and the US treasury gets the use of that money until filing time rolls around. I need my money to stay in my house, not theirs during the course of the year. I don't want a percentage of my health insurance benefits to be used to bail out predatory lenders (under McCain's new Resurence Plan) on subprime mortgages. I want it to be used to buy groceries, pay for gas and pay bills. The slippery slope comes into play the next time they need to go looking for another way to screw over taxpayers and they start to monkey with the 14% rate. Thanks but no thanks. No second grade math lession needed here.
Difference being if elected, SP will be in a position to
nm
For key cabinet position, just where would you suggest
One key element of bringing change to Washington in my estimation would be to take US leadership one step beyond the "old guard" of the Boomer generation. I can say this with impunity since I am referring to my own generation. In any case, this is a bit of a tricky proposition since that means Obama would need to focus on younger individuals born in the early to mid 1960s and beyond, with ages approximately 46-48 or younger. These individuals would have reached their adult years and started building their professional careers AFTER the Carter administration. How many democratic presidents have we had since the Carter administration?
With the selection of KEY positions, it is imperative that Obama appoint people with senior-level experience. Stop to ponder for a moment, the appointments that have been made thus far.
1. Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, by all measures a "Clinton person."
2. Atty General Eric Holder served in the US Justice Dept during Ford, Carter and Reagan, who appointed him DC Superior court Judge in 1988, a post he held until 1993 before Clinton appointed him US atty in DC, later becoming Clinton's Deputy Atty General. In other words, 17 years of his experience was gained in service to the 3 former presidents prior to the Clinton appointments.
3. Director of the Office of Management and Budget - Peter Orszag, Director of Congressional Budget Office under W and served on Council of Economic Advisors under Clinton.
4. Senior Advisor Pete Rouse - Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. Clinton and W.
Holder served under 3 different presidents prior to Clinton, Orszag's onlyh appointed position was under W and Rouse servced under 5 other presidents before Clinton. My question then is why is it that all of these people are suddenly "Clinton people?" Even if they all were, where would you expect Obama to look for his cabinet appointees...retired officials from the Carter administation perhaps? Would Reganites deliver Change? How about those Bush people (I am so sure).
I have no doubt that there will be appointees with roots in the republican camp, but please note that we are talking about only 4 choices at this point in time, 3 of which DO have ties to administrations other than Clinton's. Besides that, the most key factor is that all of these appointees will be serving under a DIFFERENT leader with a strong mandate for change, equipped with favorable legislative bodies. Perhaps it would be wise to reserve judgment on ALL of this until AFTER they take office and actually start doing their jobs, ya think?
He disqualified himself from the position by his own testimony.... sm
Didn't he? Or was that someone else talking?
Who can believe anything this guy says?
Any republican in his position would be run out of Washington.
Extremely poor judgment from President Obama on this one.
Had dog catcher been an elected position
I'm sure she would have run for it. Well, she's ''moved on up to the big house'' now. She is a co-sponsor of Card Check and a real party hack. This is my representative. Abandon all hope!
Take a 2nd look. She has more executive
nm
WHy is disagreeing with a position viewed as bullying?
Your response is much more bullying....self-righteous and pompous I think were your words...
It is not MY party. I am not a Republican. This country would be much better off if everyone, both sides, put country first and not the party.
That being said...it were an important issue to debate, it should not have had to have a pregnant 17-year-old girl "spark it." All I am saying is, regardless of that, it is a choice whether to continue to bring into the spotlight a candidate's child for political fodder.
The point is...it was not an issue before 17-year-old pregnant Bristol. But now it is, a way to keep that constantly in the forefront. That is the choice some on the left have made.
All I am saying is...while I am sure you think it is justified, there are many who will not. And that is ALL I am saying.
Wow, is this the type of person we want in a position of power? (nm)
xx
And where is that written, if you are conducting the job or position for which you ran with integrit
where is it written that you give away your right to privacy? Are you kidding? I am so sick of the media mentality that just because someone has chosen a profession, such as politics, acting, the arts, etc., that EVERYTHING is fair game, you can never have a private moment in your entire life (or term), you may be hunted, haunted, treated like an animal in a zoo.....yes, you are a public figure, but still a human being with rights, and that means a right to privacy. To think otherwise is mercenary, cold, and totally out of touch with humanity. Actors play parts to entertain us, give us pleasure, help us escape, but they can never ever escape the papparazzi at any time, when off camera??? What a cruel and voyeuristic society we have become!!!!
She's the only one of the four with executive experience
Obama has little experience even as a legislator, but you believe this smart woman with executive leadership experience is less qualified to be president should it come to that? No, I don't think so.
She already has more executive experience than your guy...
and he is 1st chair. All those negatives you posted are positives for a lot of people. THe state ethics committee investigation is not over yet, and frankly, a state trooper who tasers an 11-year-old (oh he asked me to) SHOULD be fired in my humble opinion. And a state trooper who threatens the life of his estranged wife and her parents should not be wearing the uniform of a state trooper. But that is just me, I guess.
I am sure the people of Alaska are thrilled to hear that the Democrat supporters of Obama are marginalizing them into nothing because they have smaller population than Austin, Texas.
All this kind of post does is show how petty, vindictive and mean people can get when their backs are up against the wall and they think they might lose.
The DNC should have thought about all this before they took on the Clintons. Howard Dean messed up big time.
Executive experience is a big zero
You showed up late today so rather than repeating everything that has already been said on this imponent executive experience media mantra thing, please catch up on your reading. Also, the issue of her not running has been exercised in light of the very real possibility that she would be positioned to take over sooner rather than later. Besides, the Bimbos Unite! cult sure seems to think she is running for president. You will notice just how absent McCain has been from the spotlight since yesterday morning. The notion that our party is somehow fractured or not strongly unified is more of your delusional thinking. McCain took care of that when he decided to insult most of thinking women in this country by selecting a token female he met once to save his sinking ship. Strategy is lame, transparent and has actually created an angry backlash from Hillary supporters and women in general that will make Hurricane Gustav look like a a flushing toilet. You got no idea what you are talking about when you try to analyze the democratic party but please do us all a favor and continue to feed your delusions. theonly thing that's going to come back and bite bigtime is what's-her-name calling Hillary a whiner and McCain calling US economic refugees whiners. We do agree on one thing here. Sweeeeet!
You must have EXECUTIVE experience
nm
Executive travel
Executives who travel for business on private jets may actually be doing something line buy or sell a product, bring in revenue, broker a deal that will create jobs.
Politicians traveling that way are mostly being seen. Example: Was it truly necessary for O to fly to the Southwest just to sign a bill and stand in front of some solar panels? He doesn't have pens in the oval office? Does Pelosi really rate a government plane to get her back and forth to California? Not sure if she actually got the privilege, but know she requested it because she is sooooo important to the nation, being assistant president and all, that she has to travel efficiently.
Before you jump all over me with 'Bush did....' yes, I know, they ALL get face time this way. That was then, this is now. If we're supposed to be going 'green' how about cutting out politicians' needless self-promoting travel on our dime?
Her position was not eliminated - it says she is on unpaid leave of absence. nm
x
Obama's take on his own executive experience...
Obama: Running campaign counts as executive experience
Tuesday September 2, 2008
Talk about resume padding! He compares his experience running a campaign (which, btw should come as a surprise to his campaign manager) with her experience as mayor and totally ignores her experience as governor and Cooper lets him get away with it.
COOPER: And, Senator Obama, my final question -- your -- some of your Republican critics have said you don't have the experience to handle a situation like this. They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska.
What's your response?
OBAMA: Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year.
You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.
So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years. And, certainly, in terms of the legislation that I passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina of how we handle emergency management, the fact that many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place as we speak, I think, indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.
Maybe he should practice this response a little more before he plants it with another reporter.
BTW, Hot Air has the unedited transcript if you are interested in how he really sounded when he answered the question. He is quite liberal in his use of "uh." For someone with a reputation of being articulate, he sure uses a lot of them.
Update: Here's the McCain campaign's response:
"For Barack Obama to argue that he's experienced enough to be president because he's running for president is desperate circular logic and it's laughable. It is a testament to Barack Obama's inexperience and failing qualifications that he would stoop to passing off his candidacy as comparable to Governor Sarah Palin's executive experience managing a budget of over 10 billion dollar dollars, and more than 24,000 employees." --Tucker Bounds, spokesman John McCain 2008
McCain has no EXECUTIVE experience
"I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility," said Clark,
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/29/clark.mccain/index.html
She does have more executive experience than McCain has...
McCain has no executive experience. None of them but Palin do. McCain does have more experience in the Senate and with foreign affairs, the military, et al, than Obama has. Much more. Those are the two running against each other. Joe Biden also has more experience than Obama has. Obama has the least experience of the 4. Obama has been a state senator and has spent most of his US senate career running for President. He is the least experienced of the 4, and he will be in the chair day 1. I don't feel real good about that possibility, especially in the war on terror. I really don't think he gets it. Talking to O'reilly about radical islam he kept saying something about factions, and you have to figure out what faction you are dealing with...that is talking like a senator. Have a committee and discuss it for 6 months. We can't afford that, in my opinion. I agree with Biden, and I don't mean to make fun, I'm serious...he is not ready for the job, IMO. That is one reason I am not voting for Obama.
Very funny. NOT! Executive experience!
nm
She has more executive experience than the #1 candidate on the other ticket...
she is, in fact, the only one of the 4 who has executive experience. SHE is not running for President. Obama IS. You decide where you would rather have limited experience, the #1 seat or the #2 seat. But of course i know the answer. ITs ok if he doesn't have any executive experience...after all, he has biden to fall back on, right?
As far as John McCain...he has more years of experience as a senator than Obama, he has years more experience in foreign policy than Obama, he does not bow to the Republican Party, Obama does bow to the Democratic party, McCain has bucked the Republican Party, Obama has never and I would guess will never buck the Democratic party, it is clear his first allegiance is there. Both McCain and Palin have demonstrated that their first allegiance is to the American people. She has an 80% favorability rating in Alaska...I am relatively sure 90% of Alaska is not Republican. Obama has never had an 80% rating...well except from NARAL, who gave him 100%. For me, McCain is more experienced and I want someone who is interested in what is best for me, not what is best for his political career and his all-important party.
But the fact remains...she has more executive experience than your #1 guy.
That is indisputable. In fact, more than her running mate and your #2. To say she is inexperienced only shines the same light on Barack Obama. That is not a slam, it is a fact.
Yeah, Obama's executive experience
nm
JOHN MCCAIN HAS HAD NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE
"I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility," said Clark, a former NATO commander who campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004.
(Ret) General Wesley Clark
"I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility," said Clark, a former NATO commander who campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004.
"I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war. And he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility," said Clark,
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/29/clark.mccain/index.html
Bush creates executive pay loophole.
Right up until the end, Bush is working hard for his "base." I can't wait to see this man leave -- if he leaves. 
Bush Administration created executive pay loophole
John Byrne
Published: Monday December 15, 2008 |
The Bush Administration inserted an eleventh-hour provision into the $750 billion bailout bill to protect executive bonuses, a single sentence that will torpedo efforts to reduce bonuses even as companies slash tens of thousands of jobs and use taxpayer money to gobble up other companies at fire-sale prices.
Pressured by constituents who worried that companies would take government aid and continue to pay their executives eye-popping bonuses, Congress inserted a provision that would penalize companies who took taxpayer money and shelled out outsized bonuses.
But at the last minute, Bush officials insisted on a one-sentence provision that stopped the measure in its tracks, according to congressional aides who spoke to the Washington Post.
The change stipulated that the sanction would only apply to firms that sold mortgage backed securities to the government at auction, which the Bush Treasury Department said would be the method they'd use to infuse troubled companies with bailout cash.
"Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts" who spoke to Post reporter Amit Paley. "In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future. Lawmakers and legal experts say the change has effectively repealed the only enforcement mechanism in the law dealing with lavish pay for top executives."
"The flimsy executive-compensation restrictions in the original bill are now all but gone," Sen. Charles Grassley, a Republican from Iowa and ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, told Paley.
According to Paley, "The final legislation contained unprecedented restrictions on executive compensation for firms accepting money from the bailout fund. The rules limited incentives that encourage top executives to take excessive risks, provided for the recovery of bonuses based on earnings that never materialize and prohibited 'golden parachute' severance pay. But several analysts said that perhaps the most effective provision was the ban on companies deducting more than $500,000 a year from their taxable income for compensation paid to their top five executives."
This amendment to the Internal Revenue Code was the only part of the bailout measure that had an explicit enforcement mechanism.
Bush officials initially opposed executive compensation rules. Banks, in particular, had been taking heat for "golden parachute" cases, where top executives received lavish pay upon their departure even if they'd done a poor job leading their company.
It remains unclear whether the Administration ever intended to limit executive pay -- if perhaps they knew in advance that Treasury didn't intend to buy mortgage assets at auction all along -- as they'd told Congress.
Words in the form of an executive order
If you are content to subscribe in all this voodoo spell casting and foreboding pronouncements to nowhere, be my guest. I prefer to stay grounded in the reality of the moment and give time for the plan to unfold.
Executive power survey by presidential candidates.
In case you haven't seen this article, I am posting the link:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/12/22/candidates_on_executive_power_a_full_spectrum/?page=2
This is very enlightening for those who want to know their candidates thoughts about executive power.
Executive experience media mantra no answer.
nm
Obama had no trouble signing 5 executive orders
if he is so opposed to bombing Pakistan, why did he give the order to do so? US drones bombing Pakistan. He is now in charge.....Bush can't call those shots.
Like I said, as long as Dems are in control, they suddenly have no problem with bombing ANYONE......just goes to show you what they will be doing to this country........just bend over and take it like a good little girl
Fact remains, she has made executive decisions for a year and a half...
as governor, and before that as a mayor. He has made none. Zero, zilch, nada. The only time she will "legislate" is if she has to vote to break a tie Not hardly the same thing as running a state...or a country.
And this was only a few months ago
:?
About 2 to 3 months ago, someone tried
to break into my house with me home working. They purposely tried to scare me. They went around my house banging on the walls and windows. As we live in the country, I do have a gun in my office. As I was calling 911, they were trying to get in the front door. I yelled at them that if they went any further, I was going to shoot and the police were on their way. Thankfully, this did stop them. But if they would have come through the door, I really believe I would have shot them. I still have problems sleeping!
We have only had a dem congress for 18 months. nm
.
No, this just happened in the last 2 months.
It was WALL STREET, FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC that did it, not Bush. He had nothing to do with this.
3 months in barracks for everyone 18-25!!!!!! nm
x
Six months to a year
I'd like see what happens in six months to a year when our economy is still in the toilet, more and more people are still without jobs and losing them if the sheeple will still be saying Obama is the answer to their prayers. Their eyes will be open then but it will be too late.
Last year, it took 5 months before
we could call our money ours. Not 3 months. Soon, we will just be getting a weekly allowance if all the crap keeps going.
Look what he has done to the deficit in 2 months....
something it took Bush 8 years, and attack on this country and a war to do. No one has attacked us, and he has managed to double the debt in 2 months. Just think what he can do in 4...6...MONTHS, not years. And he won't be able to fix it just taxing the "rich." So, along with the promise to get all the troops out of Iraq (reneged already), along with the promise to do a line-by-line and stop earmarks (there were only 900+ on the bill he just signed - reneged already), will be the "I'm sorry, but the economy is lookin better and we have to raise taxes"...that will be the next one he reneges on. Unless of course you are in that bracket who gets refunds when you don't even pay taxes...is that where you are? No wonder you love him. All hail the great and powerful 0. lol.
The Doctor Will See You—In Three Months
The health-care reform debate is in full roar with the arrival of Michael Moore's documentary Sicko, which compares the U.S. system unfavorably with single-payer systems around the world. Critics of the film are quick to trot out a common defense of the American way: For all its problems, they say, U.S. patients at least don't have to endure the endless waits for medical care endemic to government-run systems. The lobbying group America's Health Insurance Plans spells it out in a rebuttal to Sicko: "The American people do not support a government takeover of the entire health-care system because they know that means long waits for rationed care."
In reality, both data and anecdotes show that the American people are already waiting as long or longer than patients living with universal health-care systems. Take Susan M., a 54-year-old human resources executive in New York City. She faithfully makes an appointment for a mammogram every April, knowing the wait will be at least six weeks. She went in for her routine screening at the end of May, then had another because the first wasn't clear. That second X-ray showed an abnormality, and the doctor wanted to perform a needle biopsy, an outpatient procedure. His first available date: mid-August. "I completely freaked out," Susan says. "I couldn't imagine spending the summer with this hanging over my head." After many calls to five different facilities, she found a clinic that agreed to read her existing mammograms on June 25 and promised to schedule a follow-up MRI and biopsy if needed within 10 days. A full month had passed since the first suspicious X-rays. Ultimately, she was told the abnormality was nothing to worry about, but she should have another mammogram in six months. Taking no chances, she made an appointment on the spot. "The system is clearly broken," she laments.
It's not just broken for breast exams. If you find a suspicious-looking mole and want to see a dermatologist, you can expect an average wait of 38 days in the U.S., and up to 73 days if you live in Boston, according to researchers at the University of California at San Francisco who studied the matter. Got a knee injury? A 2004 survey by medical recruitment firm Merritt, Hawkins & Associates found the average time needed to see an orthopedic surgeon ranges from 8 days in Atlanta to 43 days in Los Angeles. Nationwide, the average is 17 days. "Waiting is definitely a problem in the U.S., especially for basic care," says Karen Davis, president of the nonprofit Commonwealth Fund, which studies health-care policy.
All this time spent "queuing," as other nations call it, stems from too much demand and too little supply. Only one-third of U.S. doctors are general practitioners, compared with half in most European countries. On top of that, only 40% of U.S. doctors have arrangements for after-hours care, vs. 75% in the rest of the industrialized world. Consequently, some 26% of U.S. adults in one survey went to an emergency room in the past two years because they couldn't get in to see their regular doctor, a significantly higher rate than in other countries.
There is no systemized collection of data on wait times in the U.S. That makes it difficult to draw comparisons with countries that have national health systems, where wait times are not only tracked but made public. However, a 2005 survey by the Commonwealth Fund of sick adults in six nations found that only 47% of U.S. patients could get a same- or next-day appointment for a medical problem, worse than every other country except Canada.
The Commonwealth survey did find that U.S. patients had the second-shortest wait times if they wished to see a specialist or have nonemergency surgery, such as a hip replacement or cataract operation (Germany, which has national health care, came in first on both measures). But Gerard F. Anderson, a health policy expert at Johns Hopkins University, says doctors in countries where there are lengthy queues for elective surgeries put at-risk patients on the list long before their need is critical. "Their wait might be uncomfortable, but it makes very little clinical difference," he says.
The Commonwealth study did find one area where the U.S. was first by a wide margin: 51% of sick Americans surveyed did not visit a doctor, get a needed test, or fill a prescription within the past two years because of cost. No other country came close.
Few solutions have been proposed for lengthy waits in the U.S., in part, say policy experts, because the problem is rarely acknowledged. But the market is beginning to address the issue with the rise of walk-in medical clinics. Hundreds have sprung up in CVS, Wal-Mart (WMT ), Pathmark, (PTMK ) and other stores—so many that the American Medical Assn. just adopted a resolution urging state and federal agencies to investigate such clinics as a conflict of interest if housed in stores with pharmacies. These retail clinics promise rapid care for minor medical problems, usually getting patients in and out in 30 minutes. The slogan for CVS's Minute Clinics says it all: "You're sick. We're quick."
Are 4 months enough to judge O, especially in these
so difficult times?
It is said that the economy is already in a slight upswing and the unemployment rate went down bit.
I guess we have to give O at least 1 year to be able to judge his decisions and actions.
|
