Health Care Bill

[Littledevil]

I am curious how some of you feel on the Health Care Bill that will be passed. I am not convinced it will be all bad or horrible, bad idea as many think or the commercials on TV say but I am undecided. What's your opinion? I would like to hear both sides.

[brilliant!MacLeod]

We don´t get many details about it here,so could somebody tell me what the bill is about?(I have a few informations but not the whole concept).
Our system is so different from yours.

[Coolwater]

I need to get back to work, but I'll come and post soon. There are a number of different proposals being considered. The irritating thing is that these "Town Hall" protests are the result of the drug and insurance industries financing a lot of half-truths and lies, and the people who are protesting don't realize that they are being suckered. When you have Medicare and Medicaid recipients (current government-funded health care programs) protesting about socialized medicine, you know something is being misrepresented!

[appeace]

Im not touching this one with a ten foot pole!:rolleyes:
Everyone has their own interpretation of the content of the various bills and that is as it should be. I only wish the govt would slow down on this and allow meaningful debate and get at the truth of the entire bill.
Dont rush and pass something awful, like the stimulus mess, but pass reform that every American can be proud of their govt for doing.

[Littledevil]

I agree it is going a little too fast, but want it delayed and delayed over and over as a tactic to squash it. It should be done right. There is a lot of lies being spread and people are definitly buying into it.

Im not touching this one with a ten foot pole!:rolleyes:
Everyone has their own interpretation of the content of the various bills and that is as it should be. I only wish the govt would slow down on this and allow meaningful debate and get at the truth of the entire bill.
Dont rush and pass something awful, like the stimulus mess, but pass reform that every American can be proud of their govt for doing.

[Scarpetta]

Appeace mentioned slowing down the process. Actually Health Reform has been attempted for about sixty years!

What we have in the US is Health Insurance run entirely by Private Companies whose 'overhead', administration, executive salaries etc take up about 30% of the Premiums people pay in. Of course Private Companies operate on the premise that 'profit' must be achieved for share holders. Thus your premiums keep going up because costs from providers continue to go up and profit margins must by Private Insurers be maintained.

In our State providers charge $86 a piece for immunizations for infants, IF you have insurance. $15 if you do not. Those with insurance are covering those without.

That is just one example. There are many. That gap continues to grow because 14,000 people are losing their insurance every day. Estimates on those uninsured vary only because of States inacting laws to help insure children. Not all States are equal on doing this.

If you lose your job in the US, you probably lose your Health Care coverage, because much is Employer sponsored.

Many documented cases even add another burden, that begs for Health Reform NOW. If you get sick. Many insurance companies deny claims, deny coverage for many, many reasons. Some as arcane as failing to disclose on your application, that you had Acne! Faced with horrendous medical bills, people are losing their coverage.

Then try to get insurance with a pre-existing condition? IF you find it, the premiums probably would preclude your living expenses, food and shelter.

It is this dire need, and the economic consequences for our Nation that make Health Reform something needed 'yesterday', not delayed yet again.

Many Americans when polled realize the importance of reform, but as Coolwater indicated the Lobbyists for the Insurance Companies have conducted a full court press on killing any reform. Millions of dollars have been spent to spread much falsehood. Profits have been good for Insurance Companies even during this recession, therefore they do not want reform, especially a Public Option that would force them to COMPETE.

Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, the Federal Employees Health Plans are all Public Plans, administered by the gov't for Seniors, low income, veterans and government employees.

The administration of these plans runs about 4%. Compare that to the 30% of Private plans.

We can do better for citizens. We must or our economy will be drug down even further.

[Coolwater]

I'm with you, Scarpetta, but what is your source?

One of the important points of having real competition is that certain health care providers and the pharmaceutical companies can continually raise their rates because they know they'll get paid their outrageous fees. We pay them through our insurance.

[appeace]

Most folks I have talked to do truly want reform and know we need it badly, however, most, including me, do not want govt run health insurance. I want a little govt intervention in my life as possible.
I do believe it is possible to propose a plan that would work if the govt, on both sides, are willing to take their time and try everything possible without total govt take over.

[Scarpetta]

Most folks I have talked to do truly want reform and know we need it badly, however, most, including me, do not want govt run health insurance. I want a little govt intervention in my life as possible.
I do believe it is possible to propose a plan that would work if the govt, on both sides, are willing to take their time and try everything possible without total govt take over.

This total government take over thing. Where does it come from? Now can a source for that statement be laid at anyones feet? Or would it be Republican members of Congress and the Healthcare community itself, that has hired lobbyists to promote it?

Public Option would provide just that an option to private insurance. Many are happy with their private plans and would stick with them. Reform that would enable insurers to increase clients by 30-40 million should provide additional revenue to private and for those opting public don't you think? With a larger pool cost effectivness should be a consideration and a plus? Private as I've already stated requires more to pay executives some earning millions and millions of dollars.

The government run boogey man is a bit disengenuous when millions of people rely on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the VA and Federal employees insurance plans. Do we hear them complaining about government run insurance? They all are. Overhead is as I stated 3-4% compared to 30% and up for Private insurers.

Cool requested sources. That was off the top of my head after familiarizing myself with this most important issue.

I read the CBO. Congressional Budget Office reports that review all policy, University studies, and this from California Nurses Association:

The state Nurses Association issued a press release saying that data it obtained from the Web site of the state's Department of Managed Health Care showed that in just the first half of 2009, California's six largest HMOs had rejected more than 31 million claims -- 21 percent of those they had received.

A national survey published by the Kaiser Family Foundation in June 2000 found that 51 percent of those surveyed had experienced some type of problem with their health insurance, but only two percent had made a formal complaint. Nearly 90 percent of those surveyed could not name the agency that regulates health insurance in their state.

[Scarpetta]

There is also a source that provides a US map which you can click on to see how Healthcare reform will help in your particular state.

The sources for all the data is provided.

http://www.healthreform.gov/

[Coolwater]

Bless you, Petta; I didn't mean to make you account for each nitty picky detail. I just wanted to know what I should start reading regularly. Congressional Office Budget Reports, you say?

See, my reaction was based on reading the Wall Street Journal descriptions of various proposals and on plain common sense. As you say, we already have some public medicine options: no one is obliged to accept Medicare, Medicaid, VA benefits of Social Security, and no one will be obliged to use the Publicly supported insurance instead of a policy they like better.

[Scarpetta]

Bless you, Petta; I didn't mean to make you account for each nitty picky detail. I just wanted to know what I should start reading regularly. Congressional Office Budget Reports, you say?

See, my reaction was based on reading the Wall Street Journal descriptions of various proposals and on plain common sense. As you say, we already have some public medicine options: no one is obliged to accept Medicare, Medicaid, VA benefits of Social Security, and no one will be obliged to use the Publicly supported insurance instead of a policy they like better.

I read what the CBO has to say, but also a lot of others to put the info in perspective. For instance: Its a blog, so that indicates opinion, some better than others. Enough information and , you get the picture.

Ezra Klein in today's Washington Post article "You Have No Idea What Health Costs" writes that "The average health-care coverage for the average family now costs $13,375, according to the the Kaiser Family Foundation's 2009 Employer Benefits Survey."

Actually that's not exactly accurate, since Kaiser actually reported that "In 2009, the average annual premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance are $4,824 for single coverage and $13,375 for family coverage. Premiums for family coverage are 5% higher than last year ($12,680), but there was no statistically significant growth in the single premiums."

According to America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the Average Annual Health Insurance Premiums in 2007 were $2,613 for "individual market single coverage," and $5,799 for individual family coverage," or about half of the employer-sponsored health insurance costs quoted by Kaiser. The huge difference in premiums is likely because the AHIP data includes insurance for those not covered by employer-sponsored health insurance, including those who are self-employed or retired.

This difference in health care insurance premiums between Kaiser and AHIP highlights some of the major problems associated with employer-sponsored health insurance: a) it's a tax deductible expense for the business, b) it's non-taxable compensation for the employee, and c) employees are insulated from the full cost of medical insurance because they pay only 26% of the full cost, all of which serve to result in overspending on more expensive health care coverage, ceteris paribus.

As Jeffrey Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School recently wrote:

There is our inefficient and inequitable system of tax-advantaged, employer-based health insurance. While the federal tax code promotes overspending by making the majority unaware of the true cost of their insurance and care, the code is grossly unfair to the self-employed, small businesses, workers who stick with a bad job because they need the coverage, and workers who lose their jobs after getting sick.
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/09/tax-deductible-employer-sponsored.html


Makes a point when MORE information is in the discussion!

[Coolwater]

You are a better person than I, Petta. I'm too lazy to read all that about something I'm not allowed to vote on yet. (Although I have contacted my senators about making sure the reform gets done.) OK, maybe too busy. Either way, there are a lot of folks like me who rely on the informed opinions of people we trust to have good sense, who actually do keep up with what's going on. We need short cuts. Is this CBO blogger a sound short cut?

appeace, is what you want from congress a reform that simply lowers the price of health care, so that less insurance is needed?

[appeace]

First, I would like to see all the fraud and over-spending addressed and inter-state insurance allowed to allow for more competition between insurance companies.

Second, I feel sympathy for those who sue doctors, if they truly have a case. However,I do wish to see tort reform because of the tendency of the patient, or the family thereof, to try to become rich and financially independent from malpractice suits not realizing that the only ones to do so are the lawyers.

Third, and I realize this is a sore spot for alot of folks, I want illegals of all nationalities out of this country--period. They, by in large, do not pay taxes because they are paid in cash. They do not carry health insurance but use our emergency rooms as drs offices and they take advantage of our welfare system when they have no rights in this country.
I am a Christian and do contribute to various organizations which assist the poor even tho I am not wealthy by any means, however forced charity is not charity at all but socialism. It is my humble opinion, that govt run anything is a disaster waiting to happen and the American people would be better off if our public servants would come together and work on a plan that uses every avenue, short of taking my hard earned money out of my families mouth and using it to pay for benefits for folks who are, some to lazy to get a job and provide their own insurance, and many who are not entitled to rights in this country.
If all else is tried and still the cost of insurance is beyond the means of most American citizens, then lets consider co-op insurance run by private citizen boards as are electric, and water coops in rural areas. We have both and their prices are usually very much lower than City water and TU Electric.

This problem did not evolve over nite and will not be fixed over nite, so why is Obama so dead set on pushing this thru NOW---makes me suspicious of his motives.
Makes me very sad and disappointed that grown adults cannot sit down together and do the right thing by our Constitution and our Nation.:(

[Scarpetta]

This is true as you said appeace:

Makes me very sad and disappointed that grown adults cannot sit down together and do the right thing by our Constitution and our Nation

Over sixty years of trying to solve a growing problem, yet the Insurance companies have not solved it, their profits continue to rise, and health care costs continue to go up, and those that are under insured or insured also continues to rise.


The points you made are effective as opposition, but not necessarily factual. They are however the talking points projected by the Insurance Companies and the Politicians who are maintaining the status quo and who think they do have something to lose. Why mess with profits when they have been so good?

It seems reasonable to equate purpose and ideology and the Private sector has always held that 'private' can do better. Before Yellowstone National Park was declared a National Park, the Private advocates were proclaiming the virtues of 'privatizing' it. Same with our other Parks where private concessions dropped explosives over cliffs to the delight of 'tourists' and suggestions to shine colored lights on natural vistas such as waterfalls, to make them 'better'!
Cutting holes through 'Sequoias' to drive through to entice visitors to drive through that 'private' road, not another.

There are some things that Private and Profits screw up. A system of Health care that excludes millions, drops you from coverage when you need it most, and profits from sickness is one of them.

That type of system needs competition and massive reform.

The National Coalition on Health Care has studied this massive problem and they write in part:

Significant increases in health care costs and in health insurance premiums are affecting Americans personally and profoundly -- and have become a major national economic problem.

Annual health care spending in the U.S.has been increasing two to fivetimes the rate of inflation since 2000. These increases translate into high and rapidly escalating health insurance costs for businesses and families. Over the past five years, employers, on average, have experienced double digit increases in their health insurance premiums. These substantial increases -- year after year -- are making it more difficult for businesses to continue health coverage for employees and retirees. Employers, on average, have seen their health insurance premiums increase nearly 120 percent since 1999.
The increases are making it much more difficult for individuals and families to pay their share of the cost of employer-sponsored coverage or to buy health insurance themselves. It is no coincidence that the number of Americans without health coverage has been climbing with nearly 8 million people losing their coverage between 2000 and 2007.


Bold emphasis is mine. It is bold measures that are required, not more of the same ineffective policy.

[appeace]

Please do not misunderstand. I did not say that we did not need Health Care Reform!
I simply want other means of reform investigated to the fullest. I do not want the govt running Health Care and infringing on my rights as an American.
Leave my hard earned wages alone and stop trying to FORCE me to pay for someone's medical care unless I CHOOSE to do so.
I simply believe that Health Care can be reformed without govt takeover of yet another segment of our lives,
AND--since it appears only your facts and beliefs are going to be allowed without question, for the sake of maintaining PEACE, I resign from this conversation..

[Coolwater]

Easy, appeace: mostly we agree, I think. Scarpetta is a bit passionate about making sure no one goes without medical care, and wants to be sure that what we are being told is legitimate. Why do you believe that a government run option would force you to have a particular kind of health care?

See, I'm asking you the same question I asked her: what are your sources?

[Scarpetta]

I am passionate. Thank you!:D

I am also passionate about misinformation. Reform has never been about Government take over. Had it been it would have been a 'Single Payer' system like Canada, and many European Countries have, and like very much.

But, the reform is for 'Option'. Public Option is just that, an option. If you are happy with what you have, you keep it. If not a Public Option would allow you to do so.

The 'Socialism' that has been floating is totally inaccurate when all providers in our system are private. The Dr's, the labs, the hospitals. All the services that do and will provide medical care do not and will not work for the government.

Forcing another to pay for their care, confuses me completely. If you are intimating that Illegal Immigrants will be covered there is no such legislation pending. If you want further data I will try and provide you that.

[Selling health insurance across state lines] would have the ultimate effect of standardizing state regulation to the least restrictive level, thus de facto de-regulating individual insurance markets. Politically, this allows the de-regulatory preferences of one state to negate the regulatory preferences of the 49 other states, without either a national or state-specific vote. Remember that the laws for Health Insurance Carriers are governed by the 50 States. Some have good laws, some not so good.

Another point with the State Line portability. Info from New America Foundation showed that:

The primary source of "savings" under [this kind of proposal] is not more competition or more efficient insurers. The savings comes from separating the healthy from the sick.... [It] would lower premiums for the healthiest Americans, but it would raise premiums and reduce coverage options for everyone else.

I don't mean to upset anyone. I want every American Citizen to be secure that if he/she has insurance, he won't lose it due to job loss or pre-existing condition and if he/she has none it will be available and affordable.

We live in a free country.

Eleanor Roosevelt said some time ago:
"When will our consciences grow so tender that we will act to prevent human misery rather than avenge it?"

[Coolwater]

Well, several of the Dems just bailed out on the Government option. :(