From Myway.com:  http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090906/D9AHL2PO1.html

President Barack Obama’s adviser Van Jones has resigned amid controversy over past inflammatory statements, the White House said early Sunday.

Jones, an administration official specializing in environmentally friendly “green jobs” with the White House Council on Environmental Quality was linked to efforts suggesting a government role in the 2001 terror attacks and to derogatory comments about Republicans.

The resignation comes as Obama is working to regain his footing in the contentious health care debate.

Jones issued an apology on Thursday for his past statements. When asked the next day whether Obama still had confidence in him, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said only that Jones “continues to work in the administration.”

The matter surfaced after news reports of a derogatory comment Jones made in the past about Republicans, and separately, of Jones’ name appearing on a petition connected to the events surrounding the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. That 2004 petition had asked for congressional hearings and other investigations into whether high-level government officials had allowed the attacks to occur.

“On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me,” Jones said in his resignation statement. “They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide.”

Jones said he has been “inundated with calls from across the political spectrum urging me to stay and fight.”

But he said he cannot in good conscience ask his colleagues to spend time and energy defending or explaining his past.

Jones flatly said in an earlier statement that he did not agree with the petition’s stand on the 9/11 attacks and that “it certainly does not reflect my views, now or ever.”

As for his other comments he made before joining Obama’s team, Jones said, “If I have offended anyone with statements I made in the past, I apologize.”

Despite his apologies, Republicans demanded Jones quit.

Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana said in a statement, “His extremist views and coarse rhetoric have no place in this administration or the public debate.” Missouri Sen. Christopher Bonds said Congress should investigate Jones’s fitness the job.

Fox News Channel host Glenn Beck repeatedly denounced Jones after a group the adviser co-founded, ColorofChange.org, led an advertising boycott against Beck’s show to protest his claim that Obama is a racist.

James Rucker, the organization’s executive director, has said Jones had nothing to do with ColorofChange.org now and didn’t even know about the campaign before it started.

Jones, well-known in the environmental movement, was a civil-rights activist in California before shifting his attention to environmental and energy issues. He is known for laying out a broad vision of a green economy.

Nancy Sutley chair of the council, said in a statement released early Sunday that she accepts Jones resignation and thanked him for his service.

“Over the last six months, he had been a strong voice for creating jobs that improve energy efficiency and utilize renewable resources,” she said. “We appreciate his hard work and wish him the best moving forward.”

Publicly, President Barack Obama is still calling for a bipartisan bill to overhaul the nation’s health care system. Privately, Democrats are preparing a one-party push, which they feel is all but inevitable.

Obama urged religious leaders Wednesday to back his proposals, and he prepared for a pep talk to a much larger audience of liberal activists, whose enthusiasm is in question. Polls continued to show slippage in support for the president’s approach, although Americans expressed even less confidence in Republicans’ handling of health care.

The administration said it still hopes for a bipartisan breakthrough on its goals of expanding health coverage, controlling costs and increasing competition among insurers. In private, however, top Democrats said a bipartisan accord seems less likely than ever when Congress reconvenes next month.

Obama was to promote his plans Thursday in a conference call and online address to supporters that could draw huge numbers of listeners. He also was to speak with Philadelphia-based radio talk show host Michael Smerconish, who will broadcast from the White House. Smerconish is generally seen as a conservative, although he endorsed Obama last year and supports abortion rights.

Vice President Joe Biden was meeting with health care professionals in Chicago on Thursday to push the administration’s plans. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was to join him.

Some Democrats said Democratic researchers have concluded lately that a strong-arm tactic on Senate health care legislation that would negate the need for any GOP votes might be more effective than previously thought.

The strategy, called “reconciliation,” allows senators to get around a bill-killing filibuster without mustering the 60 votes usually needed. Democrats control 60 of the Senate’s 100 seats, but two of their members — Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts — are seriously ill and often absent. And some moderate Senate Democrats have expressed reservations about the Democratic-backed health care overhaul plan.

While always contentious, reconciliation lets the Senate pass some measures with a simple majority vote. Non-budget-related items can be challenged, however, and some lawmakers say reconciliation would knock so many provisions from Obama’s health care plan that the result would be “Swiss cheese.”

Democratic aides say they increasingly believe those warnings are overblown.

On Wednesday, Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., warned Republicans that reconciliation is a real option. The White House and Senate Democratic leaders still prefer a bipartisan bill, he said, but “patience is not unlimited and we are determined to get something done this year by any legislative means necessary.”

In a conference call with liberal religious leaders Wednesday, Obama called health coverage for Americans a “core ethical and moral obligation.” He disputed claims that Democratic bills would create government “death panels” for the elderly, offer health care for illegal immigrants or fund abortions.

“I know that there’s been a lot of misinformation in this debate and there are a some folks out there who are, frankly, bearing false witness,” Obama said. “I need you to spread the facts and speak the truth.”

Administration officials and congressional Democrats were deeply discouraged this week when key Republican lawmakers seemed more critical than ever about various Democratic-drafted health care bills pending in the House and Senate. They said they still hope Senate Finance Committee efforts to craft a bipartisan compromise can succeed, although private remarks were more pessimistic.

“The president believes strongly in working with Republicans and Democrats, independents, any that seek to reform health care,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. “The president strongly believes that we’re making progress.”

Many Republicans believe that millions of Americans, and especially the GOP’s conservative base, ardently oppose Obama’s health care plans, which they consider too costly and intrusive.

Obama’s approval ratings “continue to inch downward,” a Pew Research Center poll concluded Wednesday. Favorable ratings for the Democratic Party also have fallen sharply, although they still exceed those of the Republican Party.

Nearly all sides agree that conservatives showed more energy than liberals this month at often-raucous town halls and other forums on health care. Valerie Jarrett, a top Obama adviser, warned liberal bloggers recently that the health care push is “an uphill battle, and it won’t happen unless we energize our base.”

Many conservatives think they see the first big chink in Obama’s political armor, and Web sites and radio talk shows have encouraged the attacks against his proposals.

Democratic officials, meanwhile, say the often complex and slow-moving health care debate has not captivated millions of liberal activists who campaigned tirelessly for Obama last year.

Organizing for America, the president’s political organization based at the Democratic National Committee, is trying to rally its members. Last week about 60,000 volunteers sent messages to lawmakers, urging them to support Obama’s health care agenda.

Republicans are keeping up their criticisms, and a prominent GOP Senate negotiator warned Democrats not to shut them out.

“If the Democrats choose to go it alone, their health care plan will fail because the American people will have no confidence in it,” Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming said Wednesday.

Enzi is one of three GOP senators who have met regularly with Finance Committee members to seek a bipartisan bill.

The U.S. government is prepared to provide up to $10 billion in loans to finance the development of massive hydrocarbon reserves off Brazil’s coast.

President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Gen. James Jones, discussed the matter with officials this week during a visit to the South American country, Brazilian Planning Minister Paulo Bernardo da Silva told reporters.

He said the U.S. Export-Import Bank already has signed a letter of intent in that regard with Brazilian state oil company Petrobras.

The loan is equal in value to a similar credit line agreed to with the China Development Bank, also for exploiting Brazil’s “pre-salt” area, so-named because the estimated 80 billion barrels of high-quality crude in that new oil frontier lie far beneath the ocean floor under layers of rock and an unstable salt formation.

Under the agreement with the Chinese state bank, finalized during Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s visit to Beijing in May, Brazil can repay the loan facility with oil as opposed to cash.

According to the government’s projections, the pre-salt reserves – located at a depth of up to seven kilometers (4.3 miles) below the ocean surface in an 800-kilometer by 200-kilometer area – could eventually lead to a nearly six-fold increase in Brazil’s current proven reserves of 14 billion barrels and transform that nation into one of the world’s 10 largest oil producers and a major crude exporter.

Petrobras plans to invest close to $29 billion through 2013 to develop the pre-salt deposits in which the company already holds concession rights.

Petrobras is projecting that some 1.3 million barrels per day can be extracted by 2013 from the pre-salt fields and 1.8 million bpd by 2020.

The Tupi field, which is believed to contain between 5 billion and 8 billion barrels of oil and was the first to be exploited in the pre-salt region, is considered to be the largest hydrocarbon discovery in the Americas in the past 30 years.

Other large oil and natural gas fields were later found nearby, also under a thick bed of salt.

But Brazil has been forced to seek external financing because the fields pose an enormous technical and financial challenge due to the depth and thickness of the salt and the drastic changes in temperature as the oil is brought to the surface.

Acknowledging that Petrobras alone is not capable of developing the massive pre-salt reserves, Brazil announced in May that it will invite international oil companies to bid for concessions in that region beginning next year.

The country had previously halted the sale of concessions after the massive finds were made.

Petrobras, an integrated energy company and the global leader in deepwater oil exploration and production, operates in 27 countries in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe.

Shares of Petrobras, Brazil’s largest corporation, trade on the Sao Paulo, New York, Madrid and Buenos Aires stock exchanges, but the Brazilian government retains control through a golden share.

When Laure Cuccarolo went into early labor on a recent Sunday night in a village in southern France, her only choice was to ask the local fire brigade to whisk her to a hospital 30 miles away. A closer one had been shuttered by cost cuts in France’s universal health system.

Ms. Cuccarolo’s little girl was born in a firetruck.

France claims it long ago achieved much of what today’s U.S. health-care overhaul is seeking: It covers everyone, and provides what supporters say is high-quality care. But soaring costs are pushing the system into crisis. The result: As Congress fights over whether America should be more like France, the French government is trying to borrow U.S. tactics.

In recent months, France imposed American-style “co-pays” on patients to try to throttle back prescription-drug costs and forced state hospitals to crack down on expenses. “A hospital doesn’t need to be money-losing to provide good-quality treatment,” President Nicolas Sarkozy thundered in a recent speech to doctors.

And service cuts — such as the closure of a maternity ward near Ms. Cuccarolo’s home — are prompting complaints from patients, doctors and nurses that care is being rationed. That concern echos worries among some Americans that the U.S. changes could lead to rationing.

The French system’s fragile solvency shows how tough it is to provide universal coverage while controlling costs, the professed twin goals of President Barack Obama’s proposed overhaul.

French taxpayers fund a state health insurer, Assurance Maladie, proportionally to their income, and patients get treatment even if they can’t pay for it. France spends 11% of national output on health services, compared with 17% in the U.S., and routinely outranks the U.S. in infant mortality and some other health measures.

The problem is that Assurance Maladie has been in the red since 1989. This year the annual shortfall is expected to reach €9.4 billion ($13.5 billion), and €15 billion in 2010, or roughly 10% of its budget.

France’s woes provide grist to critics of Mr. Obama and the Democrats’ vision of a new public health plan to compete with private health insurers. Republicans argue that tens of millions of Americans would leave their employer-provided coverage for the cheaper, public option, bankrupting the federal government.

Despite the structural differences between the U.S. and French systems, both face similar root problems: rising drug costs, aging populations and growing unemployment, albeit for slightly different reasons. In the U.S., being unemployed means you might lose your coverage; in France, it means less tax money flowing into Assurance Maladie’s coffers.

France faces a major obstacle to its reforms: French people consider access to health care a societal right, and any effort to cut coverage can lead to a big fight.

For instance, in France, people with long-term diseases get 100% coverage (similar to, say, Medicare for patients with end-stage kidney diseases). The government proposed trimming coverage not directly related to a patient’s primary illness — a sore throat for someone with diabetes, for example. The proposal created such public outcry that French Health Minister Roselyne Bachelot later said the 100% coverage rule was “set in stone.”

“French people are so attached to their health-insurance system that they almost never support changes,” says Frédéric Van Roekeghem, Assurance Maladie’s director.

Both patients and doctors say they feel the effects of Mr. Sarkozy’s cuts. They certainly had an impact on Ms. Cuccarolo of the firetruck birth.

She lives near the medieval town of Figeac, in southern France. The maternity ward of the public hospital there was closed in June as part of a nationwide effort to close smaller, less efficient units. In 2008, fewer than 270 babies were born at the Figeac maternity ward, below the annual minimum required of 300, says Fabien Chanabas, deputy director of the local public hospital.

“We were providing good-quality obstetric services,” he says. “But at a very high cost.” Since the maternity closed, he says, the hospital narrowed its deficit and began reallocating resources toward geriatric services, which are in high demand.

In the Figeac region, however, people feel short-changed. “Until the 1960s, many women delivered their babies at home,” says Michel Delpech, mayor of the village where Ms. Cuccarolo lives. “The opening of the Figeac maternity was big progress. Its closure is perceived as a regression.”

For Ms. Cuccarolo, it meant she would have to drive to Cahors, about 30 miles away. “That’s fine when you can plan in advance,” she says. “But my little girl came a month earlier than expected.”

France launched its first national health-care system in 1945. World War II had left the country in ruins, and private insurers were weak. The idea: Create a single health insurer and make it compulsory for all companies and workers to pay premiums to it based on a percentage of salaries. Patients can choose their own doctors, and — unlike the U.S., where private health insurers can have a say — doctors can prescribe any therapy or drug without approval of the national health insurance.

Private insurers, both for-profit and not-for-profit, continued to exist, providing optional benefits such as prescription sunglasses, orthodontics care or individual hospital rooms.

At a time when the U.S. is considering ways of providing coverage for its entire population, France’s blending of public and private medical structures offers important lessons, says Victor Rodwin, professor of health policy and management at New York University’s Wagner School. The French managed to design a universal system incorporating physician choice and a mix of public and private service providers, without it being “a monolithic system of Soviet variety,” he says.

It took decades before the pieces fell into place. Only in 1999 did legislation mandate that anyone with a regular residence permit is entitled to health benefits with no strings attached. Also that year, France clarified rules for illegal residents: Those who can justify more than three months of presence on French territory, and don’t have financial resources, can receive full coverage.

That made the system universal.

In the U.S., health-overhaul bills don’t attempt to cover illegal immigrants. Doing so would increase costs and is considered politically difficult.

Today, Assurance Maladie covers about 88% of France’s population of 65 million. The remaining 12%, mainly farmers and shop owners, get coverage through other mandatory insurance plans, some of which are heavily government-subsidized. About 90% of the population subscribes to supplemental private health-care plans.

Proponents of the private-based U.S. health system argue that competition between insurers helps provide patients with the best possible service. In France, however, Assurance Maladie says its dominant position is its best asset to manage risks and keep doctors in check.

“Here, we spread health risks on a very large base,” says Mr. Van Roekeghem of Assurance Maladie.

The quasi-monopoly of Assurance Maladie makes it the country’s largest buyer of medical services. That gives it clout to keep the fees charged by doctors low. About 90% of general practitioners in France have an agreement with Assurance Maladie specifying that they can’t charge more than €22 (about $32) for a consultation. For house calls they can add €3.50 to the bill.

By comparison, under Medicare, doctors are paid $91.97 for a first visit and $124.97 for a moderately complex consultation, according to the American College of Physicians.

In France, “If you are in medical care for the money, you’d better change jobs,” says Marc Lanfranchi, a general practitioner from Nancy, an eastern town. On the other hand, medical school is paid for by the government, and malpractice insurance is much cheaper.

In 2000, the World Health Organization ranked France first in a one-time study of the health-care services of 191 countries. The U.S. placed 37th.

Financial pain has long dogged the French plan. As in the U.S., demand for care is growing faster than the economy as people take better care of themselves and new treatments become available.

Since the 1970s, almost all successive French health ministers have tried to reduce expenses, but mostly managed to push through only minor cost cuts. For instance, in 1987, patients were required to put a stamp on letters they mailed to the national health insurer. Previously, postage was government-subsidized.

In 2004, France introduced a system under which patients must select a “preferred” general practitioner who then sends them onward to specialists when necessary. Under that policy — similar to one used by many private U.S. health-care plans — France’s national health insurance reimburses only 30% of the bill, instead of the standard 70%, if patients consult a doctor other than the one they chose.

At the start, patients balked, saying it infringed on their right to consult the doctors of their choice. But the system is now credited for helping improve the coordination between primary and specialty care, which remains one of the main weakness in the U.S. health-care system.

In recent years, Assurance Maladie has focused on reducing high medicine bills. Just like U.S. insurers and pharmacy-benefit managers, France’s national health insurer is promoting the use of cheaper generic drugs, penalizing patients when they don’t use them by basing reimbursements on generic-drug prices.

The most important aspect of Mr. Sarkozy’s latest health-care legislation, passed this summer, focuses on reducing costs at state hospitals. About two-thirds of France’s hospitals are state-run, and they are seen as ripe for efficiency savings. Among other things, Mr. Sarkozy has asked them to hire more business managers and behave more like private companies, for instance, by balancing their budgets.

The proposals didn’t go down well.

In April, some of France’s most famous doctors signed a petition saying they feared Mr. Sarkozy would turn health care into a “lucrative business” rather than a public service.

In the U.S., hospitals are paid for each individual procedure. This system, called fee-for-service, is suspected of contributing to runaway costs because it doesn’t give hospitals an incentive to limit the number of tests or procedures.

Ironically, France is actually in the midst of shifting to a fee-for-service system for its state-run hospitals. The hope is that it will be easier for the government to track if the money is being spent efficiently, compared with the old system of simply giving hospitals an annual lump-sum payment.

France’s private hospitals are more cost-efficient. But state hospitals say it is unfair to compare the two, because state hospitals often handle complex cases that private hospitals can’t.

“When a private hospital has trouble with a newborn baby, we are here to help, night and day,” says Pascal Le Roux, a pediatrician at the state hospital in Le Havre, an industrial city in northern France. “Having people standing by costs money.”

In theory, Assurance Maladie should be able to contain hospital costs the same way it does with doctors: by harnessing its position as the dominant payer in the health-care system. In practice, it doesn’t work that way.

The state hospital of Le Havre, called Groupement Hospitalier du Havre, or GHH, has nearly 2,000 beds and is one of the most financially strapped in France. A 2002 report by France’s health-inspection authority found that the hospital had a track record of falsifying accounts in order to obtain more state funds.

Philippe Paris was hired about two years ago to help fix the hospital’s spiraling costs. He is cutting 173 jobs out of the staff of 3,543.

And he is trying to enforce working hours. “People don’t work enough,” he said. “If consultations are scheduled to begin at 8 a.m., that means 8 a.m. and not 11 a.m.”

Yet even the smallest budget moves are proving controversial. Local residents are up in arms over a cost-cutting measure that makes patients pay €1.10 an hour to park at the hospital. “It’s a scandal,” says retired local Communist politician Gérard Eude. “It goes against the very idea of universal health care.”

Protestors rally against Obama health care plan
8/9/2009 5:05 PM
By: News 8 Austin Staff

Hundreds of protestors rallied on the steps of the Capitol Sunday, most demonstrating against President Barack Obama’s national health care initiative.Protestors chanted, “Kill the bill. Kill the bill.”

Only a handful of people were there to support the president’s plan.

“I’m a veteran. I would like to see everybody have a good health care program. That’d be fine, but find the money to pay for it and find the same one for the Congress and the Senate as they got for me and then I’d be happy,” San Antonio resident Amos Joel Jones said.

The crowd was estimated to be about 250 people

Click here for the original story.

Hundreds protest against
Obama plan

Protestors say health plan is too
intrusive

Updated: Sunday, 09 Aug 2009, 6:32 PM CDT
Published : Sunday, 09 Aug 2009, 6:32 PM CDT

• Paul Matadeen