Forget Single-Payer, or..."The Obama Health Care Plan According to Zeke Emmanuel"
I heard Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel interviewed on a local NPR station this morning; you can go here for it. He is Rahm's brother, and is a part of the Obama administration's health care team. This is a brief summary from what I heard:
Forget single payer; everyone will have reasonable insurance rates; insurers cannot exclude people for pre-existing conditions, or overcharge them for being sick. The insurance companies will get paid extra for the sicker people that they cover via a "value added tax." Insurance will no longer be linked to employment and will be completely portable. He says this will be "revenue neutral."
MEDICARE AND MEDICAID WILL BE PHASED OUT.
In other words, the one thing that is providing absolutely no service --> the "insurers" will keep their part of the pie. They will continue to make money for doing NOTHING (now THAT's revenue NEUTRAL alright!). He talked about it as though it is a done deal.
This is the first I have heard of this, and I am not happy. Any comments?


Sounds like change we can have serious doubts about.
January 10, 2009 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm all for giving Obama time to get things right, but if you listen to this it does seem to be the plan he has in mind. I guess we all got pretty excited about our own ideas of universal care with a Medicare-type model, and to hear him say that Medicare would be PHASED OUT was just shocking. Why save the insurance companies? I just don't get it!
January 10, 2009 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Healthcare was always my biggest reservation regarding BHO, and as foxie says below, it was never part of his health care plan. This is the one area HRC had a much more concise and long term plan IMO. That extra 5% of GDP we send the way of the insurers and pharmaceuticals is going to speak louder than our puny little voices until there is a groundswell of popular opinion to upset the apple cart. Although it isn't fully unexpected, this is disheartening to hear this being 'leaked' before Obama's been sworn in. I'm still hoping for a national debate on the issue of single payer.
January 10, 2009 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry about those trivialities. Just ready yourself for "go home and die" healthcare. It's coming.
January 10, 2009 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is some comfort in cynicism, no?
January 10, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
No comfort for me. Horror maybe.
January 10, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
What is it that makes you think we are moving to a "Go home and die" form of health care? The goal here is to make health care available to all; what is wrong with that? Is there a specific concern that you can articulate? I'm interested in hearing it, because I think a lot of people are fearful. I'd like to know what specific fears are out there.
Mine, as I stated above, is that health care dollars, rather than going to deliver health care, will be spent on "insurance," which provides no service and adds to extra costs in each medical office as well.
January 10, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Renaye has no specific complaints regarding health care or the new administration, just generalized, misinformed complaints.
January 10, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are funny today Miguel
January 10, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another fargin' agitator/attentionseeker. Some one alert Wonkette!
January 10, 2009 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Noooooooo! Please...
January 10, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
When was the last time you had dealings with a government agency? The least little i undotted or t uncrossed and you're sent on a wild goose chase. Horror stories are common with everything from the tag agency to the SSA. But it seems like some people, the connected ones, just don't seem to have the same problems?
Have you ever known someone who was left a strip of property that should have increased in value because maybe a street was enlarged or so? Who couldn't develop it or get it developed because government wouldn't change the zoning laws? Then they sell it to someone influential and Kazzam!! The zoning laws got changed in weeks!! When you politicize medicine, you're going to get politicized medicine. It's going to be heartless.
January 10, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
As opposed to the loving tenderness with which the insurers deny claims, delay claims, drop subscribers with pre-existing conditions, raise premiums for clients with pre-existing conditions, etc., etc.?
January 10, 2009 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
How can you drop someone already a subscriber with preexisting conditions? Isn't something a little contradictory there?
January 10, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, you can read all about that
here.
January 10, 2009 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then the solution to that is save your money against the possibility of a health problem. So you'll have money to go to the doctor, see? What's so alien about that? It's the American way, you know? Like, grow up to adult status, take care of yourself and quit wanting others to take care of you, and while you're at it, quit bitching.
January 10, 2009 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you even read the post? I thought you might just be ignorant, but I see you're in fact stupid. I won't waste my time trying to engage you in informed debate henceforth. Cheers!
January 10, 2009 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Possibly instant karma will get it.
January 10, 2009 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bwak, I do not think that Miguel likes that gentleman.
January 10, 2009 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Forget 'em. This winner's got about 24 hours left to its TPM-life.
In the meantime however, they provide an interesting case study of a new health problem. Apparently, there's a new phenomenon whereby the completely clueless steal a pair of Truck Nutz, and insert them in place of a brain.
It almost works.
January 10, 2009 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
January 10, 2009 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
doctorarron,
I want you to have free healthcare. As a matter of fact, I also want you to have free rent. Or a free house if you would rather own than rent. Everyone has to live somewhere, so a free house should be everyone's right. It's not a privilege, you may not be able to afford a house. You should be given one. It's your right.
Everyone has to eat doctorarron, and I know you have to also to stay alive. You shouldn't have to pay for food doctorarron, it's your right to have free food. Whether you want to go eat it where you wish, have it delivered to your door, or set it up on your bed. It's your right doctorarron. Where do your rights end, doctorarron. The silly way you responded gives me a hint.
January 10, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one says free.
Health care must be paid for.
Paid for by taxes with the money spent on health care, not marketing, executive "compensation", advertising, "product" development, or profits.
January 11, 2009 2:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree Dr. Ron.
Hey Renaye! Here's a thought. I suppose we should also privatize your local Fire and Police Dept. too.
According to your standards it should be perfectly reasonable for the police and fire departments to ask for payment or copays up front before they come save you - right?"
I mean if there is a DANGER to your life from fire or crime, we should not have just one agency to do that right? We should open it to the free market.
Hmmmm...let me see. Oh you can only afford the really crappy fire service...hmmm ok. You find your card and call the not toll free number on it:
"What's that? You're house is on fire?...Oh well it will be about thirty minutes. Do you have a bucket until then?"
Calling 911? No more. Thing of the past. You call your own security team to help you. That's if the criminal will stop attacking you while you wait on hold. Screams of terror while listening to Muzak? Not a good thing.
My point is (an I do have one) is that these life saving services are paid for by TAXES and benefits everyone. Whether you need it or your neighbor does. I don't hear anybody screaming about the socialized Fire or Police Departments.
January 11, 2009 2:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone else picture this person all red in the face and screeching like Rush Limbaugh?
January 11, 2009 2:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fact of the matter is, I do pay a yearly subscription for fire service. It's the old take it or leave it plan. I'm not coerced or forced by the almighty hand of government as you lot would have me be. You Marxists are something else.
A big problem causing exorbitant ER rates is, tens of thousands of dollars spent treating illegal alien drug dealers wounded in shootouts are added to any bills a responsible patient may incur. My take on it is before the gov. should pay, they should be allowed to die. Mean, ain't I?
January 11, 2009 6:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can "take it" or "leave it" on your property taxes? Wow that it a pretty sweet deal. Most people get their property taken away if they "leave it" and don't pay their property taxes. Do you live in Bumfukk, Montana or somewhere similar?
Most people pay property taxes for life saving services. Everyone in the community then can benefit from them if the need arises. Whether my house catches on fire or not, I still pay property taxes to fund the service.
Why you ask? Everybody should fend for themselves right?
Let's say I used your philosophy and only bought coverage for myself. Should I then listen to the screams of my neighbor when she burns up in a fire?
Should I casually watch the flames and mutter, "Heh heh, serves her right? She should have bought insurance instead of buying all those groceries."?
What kind of sick f*ck are you?
January 11, 2009 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're being silly. Of course I pay property taxes. It has nothing to do with fire protection. Property taxes here pay for schools. Been that way forever. In rural Okla., fire protection is a subscription service.
And yes, for the most part people around here do fend for themselves. Works out good. I decide what my priorities should be, then endeavor to fulfill them. I assume my neighbors do the same. But I don't advocate using the power of government to mandate their priorities mirror my own. They may think my priorities are misplaced. But they don't advocate the government confiscating what I've lawfully accumulated and returning to me what the government thinks I should be allowed. Like you seem to want to do.
January 11, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rural Okla, that explains a lot. Renaye, ask any of your farmer/rancher friends what the pay for antibiotics for their animals. You might be amazed to find that the same antibiotic, made by the same companies, for the same dosages, are 10-20 times more expensive when sold for humans as opposed to vets for animals.
Same exact drugs mind you.
Before you start blaming the poor or immigration for the high cost of healthcare, Try doing some research. Pharmaceutical companies are robbing us blind. Don't listen to what Fox news, Rush and Hannity are telling you. They purposefully want you to blame the least of us so the malfeasance of the rich can get away with the robbery.
January 11, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
mageduley
Everyone out here in the sticks knows better than to self medicate with veterinary antibiotics. The bar is way lower for their manufacture than human pharmaceuticals, hence the higher price. If you don't agree with the value of medicines versus the costs, by all means exercize your rights as a free American and don't buy them.
I'm not blaming the poor or "imigrants" for anything. I blame government policy, "spreading my wealth around" re: Joe the plumber
If you think the pharmaceutical companies are making too much money, by all means buy into them. Almost all are public companies on the exchange. Or start a pharmaceutical company yourself and drive the prices down. Grow up, be a worthy responsible American, and stop your whining.
January 11, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh oh...another one
January 11, 2009 2:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
We're not that rare.
January 11, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rare enough, thank goodness.
January 11, 2009 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bwak! Stop feeding the... , or we're gonna appoint you to change the kitty litter too.
January 11, 2009 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
(trucknutz)
January 11, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Health care already is available to all.
This program just insures that the middlemen stay in the game. The government privatizes their gains and socializes their losses.
January 10, 2009 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Considering that a significant number of people who go bankrupt do it because of medical bills, and many people don't get preventive care and therefore develop serious complications, how can you say that "health care is available to all?"
If you are a person who pays what you owe, and you know you can't afford a Dr visit, health care is NOT available to you.
January 10, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's expensive. It's available. That many cannot afford it, or that some desire far more then they can afford is not relevant at this point of the discussion.
Making it more affordable is not the same as making it available. Does Obama's plan really cut consumer costs a lot while also increasing the value delivered?
I think that as long as health care management is parasitic, it's less likely to be effectively symbiotic than cancerous, in the large view.
January 10, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Caviar and Champagne are also available to all -- or as Marie Antoinette put it so cutely: They can't afford bread? Well, let them eat cake!
Thanks for the enlightened comment. It goes a long way to advance this discussion!
January 10, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
CVille Dem
Marie Antionette was a queen. Prerevolutionary France was a kingdom. As such the rulers were responsible for their subjects in much the same way parents are responsible for their children. Such a reference as you made is superfluous because it's apples and oranges.
We have a different government. We are not ruled here as children, but governed as adults responsible for our own fate. It is plain the prevailing wish here is to become as children with a nanny government. I understand the mindset, but as an American, look upon it with revulsion.
January 11, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I thought you were not being stupidly sarcastic, I'd say thanks, CVD.
January 11, 2009 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If you are a person who pays what you owe, and you know you can't afford a Dr visit, health care is NOT available to you."
CVille Dem
Do you realize how many government health care programs already functioning on behalf of bums? The main reason healthcare is so expensive is that government mandates treatment for bums and dictates what the caregivers are compensated. Government mandates the difference in the cost of treating bums and what caregivers are compensated be passed on to productive patients. Hence skyrocketing healthcare costs.
January 11, 2009 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope you aren't talking about veterans, here. I might have to reach up through the screen and force-feed you some decency.
It is in the interests of SOCIETY to take care of the poor and less fortunate, as well as those who have given their health and well-being to protect that society.
If you object to doing so, your objection is noted, and arrangements can be made to ship you (all expenses paid) to Afghanistan where the 'go it alone' society is currently in full swing.
January 11, 2009 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's a whole lot of veterans who are bums. Poll your fellow panhandlers.
January 11, 2009 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are a jerk. I doubt you are American. There isn't ONE veteran in this country that is a "bum." Damaged, maybe, and it's thanks to selfish, ugly puke-for-brains, dimwitted louts like you that they don't get the care they are entitled to.
I do hope you get drafted into a hellhole in a third world backward nation soon. That's all callous idiots like you deserve. There is such a thing as American, and you don't qualify. You are the very antithesis of American. Stupid, selfish, greedy and proud of it, are you?
You are the boil on the rear of that fat-mouthed hatemonger Rush, and a coward, too.
I'm done with you, but you keep dissing veterans and I just might report you for abuse. There are many vets here, and they don't deserve to be subjected to the likes of you.
January 11, 2009 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go Girl!!! I was having fun with him yesterday. I thought republicans were supposed to feign some sort of sympathy for veterans. This one crawled out from under some rock. But I guess he will never be elected.
January 11, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're just proven your nuts!! Congratulations on your crowning achievement in life!!
January 11, 2009 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just FYI for you all, R's bio claims it's "just a free wheelin' good ole GAL."
I'm kinda hoping this is true, because I'm tired of so many of the trolls who show up here being male!! ;-)
January 11, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't trust that it is anything but a large, red, sucking mouth without the benefit of a brain attached. If it really is female, Afghanistan might be doubly good. Teach it the meaning of freedom and sacrifice.
Whatever it is, it is utterly clueless about the military, healthcare, and life in general.
And it's ugly.
January 11, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is really funny is this: Her comment to Dickday just above left off a fairly crucial apostrophe regarding his nuts!
January 12, 2009 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bwakfat:
You said: "I might have to reach up through the screen and force-feed you some decency."
Brava. Idiots such as these have either never been sick, or have never cared (and paid) for anyone with an ongoing condition.
You have. As you have paid the domino price of marital stress when a medical condition is a constant source of worry.
Forcefeeding decency, in this circumstance, is extremely polite as a response on your part.
January 11, 2009 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks ma'am. I'm tired of these sophomoric, bodice-ripper novelist-worshipping zeros taking, taking, taking. Meanwhile they resent anyone else getting anything, no matter how worthy. Their utter lack of empathy is astonishing, I do believe it must be tied to an amoeba level IQ.
For instance this jerk said TheraP should be supporting 'those who will protect this country', then turns around and talks about the very people who ACTUALLY do so in a insulting and clueless fashion. I thought it had maybe two brain cells rubbing together, but at this point it is obvious to me it is a single-brained bot only capable of parroting it's wants and needs to the detriment of the very society it owes it's existence to. I imagine it as a huge gasping mouth. Kinda ugly. An ingrate of epic proportions.
These louts are ignorant wastes of resources on our largely decent society. Pity we can't ship them out to Afghanistan so they can witness an "on yer own" society first hand. That experience just might penetrate the solid rock of their skulls and hearts. But I kinda of doubt it. They'd likely end up dead. People out there look out for each other or perish. Ask any vet who has been there.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to vent. I'm fed up with this mindset that has brought so much misery to so many decent people. At least it's not hip to be stupid anymore, thank goodness, and I do mean GOODness as opposed to whatever that commenter is.
January 11, 2009 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
CT:
I base my opinions about other posters on the combined quality of intelligence and heart I perceive in their writing. Bwakfat's comments impress the hell out of me most of the time on both counts.
January 14, 2009 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
ww: we don't know who did what where on an Internet board. We don't know if medical expenses were the reason behind workerbee's divorce or not (although she might claim so). Each position should stand on it's own, based on it's own logic.
This same person once accused me of being a child pornography and was, in fact, booted from the board for threats she made to another poster. That's what happened *here*, so it's a known quantity.
Conversely, just because you don't know the other person's story doesn't mean they don't have one. For all we know, their position may also have been formed by a serious life experience. Then what?
There is far too much messenger/message confusion here... and picking sides on the basis of messenger is not likely to provide intellectual discussion -- although it's possible to provide light entertainment.
January 11, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you don't stop these personal attacks, I will report you.
January 11, 2009 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought the raw Marxist side of you lot would come out eventually. Would be Pol Pots, right here in North America. Scary!!!
January 11, 2009 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll tell you what kind of health care plan I've got in mind. Free health care for everyone. Health care is a right, not a privilege. All the rights in the living constitution are free. Rights by their very nature are free. Everyone has a right to live in decent housing. Everyone should have free rent. Or better yet, everyone should be entitled to a free house. And everyone knows you've got to eat. Eating is not a privilege, it's a right! I demand free meals delivered in bed for everyone!!! Or wherever they want it delivered. Maybe to the door, or set out on the table!!!! Am I becoming an acceptable liberal???
January 10, 2009 11:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Got to agree with you that socializing losses is a terrible crime against the citizenry.
January 11, 2009 6:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why save the insurance companies? They have the money. They are the contributors he responds to. And because they are the change they were seeking!
January 10, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
We certainly cannot wait for him to get things right. We will only get the right thing done if we fight for it. Get to work!
January 10, 2009 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, get to work and fight for the assets of others!!
Why not go to work and fight for your own assets and not concern yourself with the disposition of the assets of those you so envy?
January 11, 2009 6:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Because greed and a lack of morality has allowed those with more assets to prey on those with none. We have lost a sense of shame and proportion, if we ever really possessed those virtues as a nation. Wealth is a collective activity. Most wealthy people living in America would not be wealthy had they been born in another country. The privilege associated with American citizenship requires a certain amount of collective goodwill.
The current crop of "wealthy" Americans(say anyone who makes over $500K per year) are a cancer on society because they claim much more than their fair share of common resources without delivering commensurate value for that drain. Just like they have done to the companies they wreck for a handsome fee. I bet Home Depot and General Motors are having buyer's remorse.
You polarize the discussion, in most respects, instead of illuminating your objection to collectively paying for and managing certain services. Simply fact of the matter is that whether privately or publicly paid for, Americans spend a defined amount of money per person for health care. It is something that nearly everyone uses at one time or another.
It clearly make more sense to pool the resources and buying power of 300 million Americans to get the best deal we can to drive down the costs on paying for those services. Insurance companies are horrible at managing health care costs else we wouldn't be in this position. They need to be regulated up the wazoo and given fair warning to find a new line of business or warned that their current business will be turned into a non-profit sector if left in private hands at all, because the regulatory environment necessary to make health insurance work will strip all the profit out of it.
I am not sure what the final solution will look like, but it will fix what is broken with our health care system in ways that will require both the left and the right to rethink assumptions.
January 11, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Look at your first sentence. It’s ridiculous. How can someone with no resources be “preyed upon”. The only way I can think is if someone with “more assets” bit one of the arms off someone with no assets and ate it. The rest of that paragraph is equally inane except for the last sentence which is easy to agree with.
People making over 500K are not delivering “commensurate value”? Evidently someone with 500K to spend happens to think so. How could such a private transaction possibly be any of your business?
Pool the resources of 300 million Americans? I don’t want mine pooled with you or anyone else who thinks like you. Why don’t you pool your resources with people that agree with you. I’ll bet you can find millions who would pool with you. Leave the rest of us alone. How about that? You pool, and those of who choose not to pool, well, we just don’t pool. And everyone’s happy.
By the way, when you pool, you’ll have to call it an insurance company. Law requires that. And you’ll have to name it. Allow me to suggest Marxist Lunatics Mutual. Yeah. Good luck managing your insurance company. It might be an attractive IPO when you go public. Specially cause your CEO will be working for minimum wage. Yeah
January 11, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
When you pool, you have to call it an insurance company? What, like medicare?
January 11, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Medicare is a welfare program financed by the dubiously constitutional confiscation of taxpayer assets.
No, if millions of you voluntarily 'pool', it would fall under the category of an insurance company, and unfortunately, be subject to a host of regulations from state to state. Go for it. This remains a free, but only marginally free, country.
January 11, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are preyed on by having to work three jobs to attain the very basics of existence. Their labor enables that lucky 10 percent at the top who enjoy two or three homes and all the toys of modern life.
As to the rest of your "opinions" I will leave them to stand on their own with all the logical holes and intellectual dishonesty in tact. Suffice to say that if generations of Americans before you felt the same way, this sorry excuse for an experiment in democracy would have been long over.
Salary alone doesn't equal someone's ultimate worth in society. If those at the "top" of the ladder think they could attain their lofty heights without ever rung below them then they need a refresher course in physics.
January 12, 2009 7:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hear, Hear, Jason!
January 11, 2009 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except if you look at the numbers, JEM, that $500K figure you quote is arbitrary and a good deal higher than what doctors earn. Indeed, as I quote below, Canadians were leaving Canada for the US to earn more.
As is typically here, the conversation is about a few mythical wealthy people and the vast hordes of trod upon.
Our society is much more complex than that -- indeed, it is the middle class that gives us our stability. Until there are solutions that deal with the entire middle class (not just the lowest end), there will not be popular support.
January 11, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
"As is typically here, the conversation is about a few mythical wealthy people and the vast hordes of trod upon."
Have you been out of that locker, any time in, ohhhh, these past 40 years? Can you read an income distribution chart?
I swear CT, on some issues you're utterly sane and fact-based, but what are you doing making statements like this???
January 11, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and the "middle class" has been wiped out, all that money going to the top ten percent. Obviously the $500K number if arbitrary, but historically relevant when looking at the upper end of our tax scale.
The simple fact of the matter is that people earning under six figures make up the vast majority of the American workforce and they support the extravagant lifestyles of those at the top.
Our tax system has been aggressively regressive for quite a few years.
January 12, 2009 7:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
CVilleDem
Come on now!! Who do you think pours jillions of dollars into these presidential campaigns? He's saddled with obligations just as real as your mortgage.
January 11, 2009 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
So... Krugman was right about that...
Thanks C'Ville
January 10, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Would someone please point me to the link that ever said we were going to have single payer under Obama. I sure don't remember he or any of his team ever saying they were going to go for single payer.
January 10, 2009 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are right; I was referring to our many blog-posts here where many of us joined in saying it was the only way to go. Obama NEVER promised that as far as I know, but he did promise to listen to us. I, and many people I know responded to that call at his website, and single-payer was a big part of the plan that many of us proposed.
I can hardly believe they are talking about phasing out Medicare, but nothing Obama has said has given me a reason for that surprise.
So, to answer you: Obama never talked about the single-payer system that I (and many others) think we need. But I am very disappointed that Emmanuel didn't bring it up and explain why it is not on the table, if indeed it isn't.
My concern is that money that could be productively spent on health care will go to paper-pushers who do not provide one single service, and if that is the case, I reserve the right to be disappointed.
January 10, 2009 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
No problems with your concern or disappointment. However, before we all get too disappointed or concerned there is a long way to go from now until an actual plan is presented. I would also pay more attention to what Tom Daschle says as opposed to some one who may have input, but not a final say.
I would also say keep pushing for what you want and think is right over at change.gov
January 10, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. I'll go there again and this time comment that I heard Zeke's ideas. I wonder if they actually manage to read all the comments they get.
January 10, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
On this your guess is as good as mine ;) However, I would venture to say, they do look at enough to get an idea of trends.
January 10, 2009 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's my understanding they read the comments. I know they've been reading the healthcare comments!
January 11, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your points are valid, but I might add that it may be more an issue of someone further down the food chain, (Zeke), straying from the talking points. We'll see.
January 10, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, Cville, Obama frequently said on the campaign trail that he would prefer single payer and that if that if we were starting from scratch that's what he would do. He said this, of course, to make people think he was actually interested in reforming the health care situation in this country. Surprise! That was just window dressing for shilling for the insurance interests as seems readily apparent in light of this policy assuming it is an accurate representation of the direction Obama is going to go. It never feels good to be betrayed.
January 10, 2009 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
What stands in the way of going to Single Payer from where we are now? Can we work around it or go over it?
January 10, 2009 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing stands in the way except the cowardice of the Democratic Party leadership which controls both houses of Congress and the White House.
January 10, 2009 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a pretty simplistic view of a very complex issue.
January 12, 2009 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sometimes simple is also true as in this case. They have the votes. The malarky about it not being pragmatic is only because the Democrats don't have the balls to stand up to their paymasters in the insurance industry. They don't want to leave the teet of easy campaign cash. That's cowardice when you consider how much damage the current system is doing to the country. There are lots of details, but that's the bottom line.
January 12, 2009 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt that is the calculus being used. Congress saw Obama's success going outside the normal political power brokers and appealing directly to the voter, so the trend away from inside trading on these things is starting to emerge as our expectations change.
What I think is more likely is that there are a number of competing priorities on the minds of various constituencies in this country. not just insurance companies, but also their customers (many of whom are satisfied with the services they receive) and health care providers (many who don't really like Medicare) and any number of players in this complex system we have allowed to mutate out of what was a pretty simple system prior to the 1970s.
It may take a couple of iterations to get the health care system "fixed" in a way that delivers value.
January 12, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
A couple of iterations? Have you been asleep for a long time man? Have ya paid no attention to what's been happening? Harry Truman tossed out the first "iteration" and the special interests have fought it off ever since mostly in cahoots with Democrats in Congress who have controlled that institution for most of the time since Harry first proposed it.
You seem to make the naive assumption that the DC Democrats actually see providing health care to all as a goal. That's quaint. Really it is. Wake up and smell the coffee! It's difficult for me to believe you actual fall for this act.
Their primary goal is not to rock the boat and to make sure there are copious campaign contributions for all of them. Whether or not there is any sort of health care legislation is of little consequence to most of them because their priority is not the nation's well being but their own. That's right. The good guys are that way and have been that way all your life. The only thing that makes them the good guys is that the bad guys are even worse. If it were a genuine priority of the Democrats in DC we would have had national health insurance (as we should have) decades ago!
Here's how the little game works (generally speaking) in case you haven't noticed:
1. First and foremost tell the people that single payer would be great but just isn't "practical" or "realistic" in today's political environment. Do not explain why this is so even though you have the votes and the President this time around which means you control the political environment, but make vague references to Republican opposition and the power of various industries.
Now, having dispensed with the obvious, clear and best solution (and incidentally the approach of every civilized western nation except the United States)we have guaranteed that option won't even be discussed so we are free to move on to talk about ways to keep the insurance company parasites bleeding the life out of the workers and businesses of the country forever and ever Amen! And this despite the obviously life threatening malignancy it represents for the American economy overall, for businesses being vastly overburdened by obscene health insurace costs, and for families who are desperately trying to hang on to coverage if they have it or who are foregoing insurance if possible because it simply is too expensive.
2. Call all the interested parties (except anyone interested in single payer) to the proverbial "table" to work on a common approach. Make sure most of the seats are taken up by the lobbyists who have thwarted every common sense reform for the past 40 years and allow them to set the parameters for discussion and control the agenda from start to finish. Otherwise, they might be unhappy and their mean, omnipotent friends in Congress (the Republicans and centrist/conservative Democrats) will get mad and make a scene. Make sure you don't discuss even looking at single payer except for the "not practical" disclaimer, otherwise we can't service the insurance companies who in turn will support our campaigns financially. If we even discuss the actual solution they will turn off the money spigot and that's a problem the nation simply cannot allow to occur.
3. Drag the process out as long as humanly possible and then some as though the alternatives and possibilities have never before been considered. During the process, create all sorts of complicated alternatives the public finds too confusing, ejxpensive and intricate so they lose interest and never settle on one option to use as we transition away from the old system. Make sure legislative deadlock is achieved so nothing passes and it remains cloudy as to who exactly killed the various pieces of legislation.
4. Tell the public "we did our best under the circumstances", but the insurance companies, the pharmaceutical manufacturers, and of course the omnipotent, mean old Republicans prevented passage once again. But fear not citizens! We hope to try again in the next session of Congress. (wink, wink to the lobbyists and whisper ("They fall for this one every time. It's really something. It's like they never learn a thing and by the next time they'll have forgotten everything so we can start all over.")
Remember, as a member of Congress complicit in this genuinely immoral sell out of the health of the American people there could be side effects. If you have trouble sleeping at night, salve your conscience by rationalizing to yourself that the only real solution isn't practical in this environment so that really was the best you could do. Single payer isn't a realistic option in our country remember! Everywhere else on earth, but not in the richest country the planet has ever seen. No, we are better off letting people get sick and live in poor health. It makes perfect sense! It's the American way! Don't think about the fact that your own party has the votes but not the political will or guts to institute single payer and a President who says it's best but falls back on the "it's not practical" dodge too. If you do start to think about it, the side effect might recur. So say to yourself... "see? There was really no point in even attempting to do the right thing since it wouldn't work anyway." Close your eyes and try and get some rest. You have fundraising calls to make in the morning.
5. Rinse and repeat every two years. Just make sure you are thorough and effective in step #1 so "you know what" doesn't get discussed and also that things remain as complicated and confusing as possible for the public. If you do that, they'll never wise up.
That's the game. We've seen it played time and time again. And yes, it really is that simple. I'm sad that it's true, but it is true.
January 12, 2009 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice summation oleeb. If there are industry guys reading this blog, they're prolly all running back to their locked file cabinets to make sure it wasn't their copy of the 'Top Secret - Insurance Industry Plan for Killing Single Payer Health Care" that was stolen, and leaked on TPM today at 3:57 PM. Please put it in a blog. This discussion needs to stay up on the front pages of every news source in the country.
January 12, 2009 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
oleeb's comment should be turned into a blog of its own!
Paging oleeb!
January 12, 2009 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice simple world you live in with no moving parts and no competing interests but what would work in a perfect world. I am happy to see you think we have one, but nothing could be further form the truth, scolding tone or not. I'll be happy to engage you in a discussion on anything that doesn't involve rose-colored glasses as a prerequisite. You are so hung up on the definition that you would sacrifice the goal.
January 12, 2009 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS: In case you missed it, we no longer live in Harry Truman's time, so the solution he designed no longer applies. You appear to have missed many essential truths in debating this argument.
January 12, 2009 8:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's kind of sad how you just don't get it. Sorry. But, you obviously don't. What a shame.
January 13, 2009 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am sorry you feel the need to lecture on something rather than have a discussion about it. I am also sorry you feel the need to be condescending. That really limits conversation as well.
Until the American voter turns Congress out for not doing their jobs, single-payer health care is a fantasy. You ignore that very real data point in favor of a philosophical discussion. I "get" plenty.
More than you, apparently.
January 13, 2009 7:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice work, oleeb, in laying out the political realities.
Universal Health Care is to the Democratic Leadership what anti-abortion is to the GOP leaders. All they need to do is promise that they are for it. And then the calculation is that it would actually be counter-productive to follow through. After all, this committed constituency might move elsewhere if their number one issue was actually removed from the table altogether.
Cynical? Indeed. But why else would Bill and Hillary invite Insurance Company Execs into the first major discussion to address Health Care Reform during their Administration if the purpose wasn't to make certain they served their true masters. That these same execs blew it up altogether bore no real consequences for Billary, who simply shrugged their shoulders and said "Look, we tried!"
January 13, 2009 6:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
And please point me to the link that says Obama ever said we were putting an end to medicare and medicaid to benefit the frigiin insurance executives and their stockholders. Please.
January 10, 2009 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You’re talking about someone whose experience amounts to years of community agitation, a few terms in statehouse, and a few months as US senator, and whose education amounts to an affirmative action legal degree. Pleeeze!!!
January 10, 2009 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your comment is appallingly ridiculous! Every word is a negative take on Obama -- "affirmative action legal degree" my ass. I'd like to see you compete with him on any topic.
January 10, 2009 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have you ever watched the guy when he didn't have benefit of a teleprompter? It's nothing but "uhs, ers, you knows". If that dude's not scripted, he's an embarrassment. Had to get his terrorist buddy to ghost write his books. Jeeze!!!
January 10, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, that is just so incredibly uninformed I am almost speechless. How did you find this site by the way? Was the Fox news channel chat room filled?
January 11, 2009 2:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
"affirmative action legal degree"? Are you kidding me? You should be ashamed of yourself, not because it is racist which it is, but because, more importantly, it is false.
January 12, 2009 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pretty remarkable assessment, and undoubtedly from one of those "misunderestimated" Bush supporters. They know true genius when they see it, alright.
In the case of Obama? Well....
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." - Jonathan Swift
I think it's safe to include renaye among the dunces.
January 13, 2009 7:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Also the Medicare and Medicaid phase outs are so out of left field as to make me think Dr. Zeke has strayed way off the farm with this statement.
January 10, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
The corporations are going to be there to hassle people too. The corporations are going to do zip. Now there are going to be three medical bureacracies. The insurance companies, the corporations and the government are each going to have a medical bureacracy. This is not cutting waste out of the medical system. I think Obama's plan is going to be better but it is far far from ideal.
January 10, 2009 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
There was no promise of a single payer system.
But I am for a single payer system.
But what about thirty payer systems to start with?
Instead of twenty thousand or whatever it is.
Medicare, medicaid, civil service, Dept of Forestry?. Lets cut it down to two or three for the Feds.
HHS has a lot to look at right now. Blogs and petitions that go to Congressional Representatives and HHS, I think would help.
I just signed on to some petition with Moveon.org.
Collective communications have got to help.
January 10, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's it going to take (maybe a depression?) for us to figure out that we need either radical change in the Democratic Party or a third party?
I talk to Republicans at work every day and many of them have moved so far to the left of the blue dogs and corporately owned centrists that its hilarious!
I tell you there is nothing that convinces middled aged Republicans of the value of social security and medicare like a 35% drop in the value of their 401K.
Who of us who have elderly parents don't understand the value of Medicare? How'd you like to be that middle-aged Republican with an 90 year old mother who needs medical care.
This is craziness.
And after the debacle in the financial industry can you tell me who in their right mind would trust an insurance company with their welfare?
January 10, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hear! Hear!
Rigt on bluebell as usual!
Apparently there are a whole lot of people who are hoping Obama is what they want him to be who are willing to put their future in the hands of the insurance companies. Also, if this report is true, it seems pretty clear Obama is willing to sacrifice the health of the nation on the altar of insurance company profits.
January 10, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Attention bluebell,
Maybe you missed the news. Social Security is broke. Get it? Like zero percent of zero? To quote Obama and Caroline Kennedy, "Ya know". Now the simple question, which is greater?, 65% of 100%, or 0% of anything? Get on top of that one then we can talk.
January 11, 2009 6:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
When the time comes, I for one will NOT buy insurance from anyone! The medical care in this country is so f**ked up that it should be boycotted entirely (and many people are already doing that now.) No one should ever make a profit on my health!
January 10, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm, When the time comes? Are you under your parents insurance now?
Seriously -- I agree that our system needs a major tweaking with the emphasis in favor of prevention and public health rather than Cadillac surgeries and treatments for conditions (obesity, diabetes, renal disease from untreated hypertension) that could have been prevented in the first place. But to say that it is so f**ked up that it should be boycotted entirely betrays a major lack of information, or perhaps just a youthful mind.
One thing I promise you is that untreated appendicitis is a really horrible way to die. I could list several others, including strep throat, which can cause serious kidney damage and is treatable with $5 worth of Penicillin.
Why shouldn't people profit (earn a salary) if their job, which they work at 40+ hours a week, is to take care of sick people? Should firefighters profit for dousing your house-fire? Should teachers profit from the ignorance of their students by teaching them to read and do math?
People should NOT profit for providing ZERO service, and that is what insurance companies do. Insurance is a mechanism to pay in advance for protection if something unexpected and expensive might happen, like car accident insurance, or fire insurance for your house. Most people don't have car accidents, and most houses don't burn down. The insurance companies do just fine insuring everyone and manage to make a tidy sum in the mean time, as they protect their clients from UNEXPECTED disasters.
Virtually everyone is a consumer of health care; it is not a surprise when you get a check up. (I'll bet even you had a Dr in attendance at your birth!) What we need is Universal Health CARE - NOT health insurance.
Good luck with your boycot -- hope it works out for you.
January 10, 2009 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh you totally misunderstand me! First of all, I am not young (well maybe young at heart, but that is a different issue.) I am currently covered under an excellent insurance plan, but I am very close to coverage by medicare.
I KNOW that it is the insurance companies who are making a profit on my health care. It is because of the insurance companies that our health care system is so messed up. If someone is sick, they should not have to get pre-authorized for treatment, or go see this Dr first, before they can see that Dr., etc. etc. etc.
I said above that I will not buy insurance, and that is what I meant. I have always been totally for universal care for every single citizen. I have lived in countries that have universal care, and the whole attitude about medical care there is totally different. In other words, we are definitely on the same side here, and our health system can no longer be held hostage by big insurance and big pharma.
January 10, 2009 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, and no, there was NOT a Dr in attendance at my birth. Just FYI.
January 10, 2009 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
You tell em Hmmmm!!!No one should make a profit on my food either!! Or my shelter!!! I know my rights!!!! Power to the people!! Down with the capitalist pigs!!!
January 11, 2009 7:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Medicare for all is obviously what we need!
January 10, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right you are!
But then what would we do about all the starving health insurance parasites while the rest of the nation's health is being cared for?
January 10, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen to that!
January 10, 2009 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Easy. Train them to become civil servants or medical professionals instead of paper pushing parasites.
The "excess" overhead can go to pay for added health care and added jobs.
To the extent that investors in those "insurance" companies lose out, I say "tough".
January 10, 2009 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
For general knowledge . . .
Here is a quick video and transcript report with additional information relating to Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel's position, from last Thursday December 8, 2009:
Experts discuss health care reform
I am, and will remain a single-payer system proponent till the cows come home.
Although, what is being discussed in the above report is exactly what our family now has as a health program that we have had no problems with over the past 30 years.
~OGD~
January 10, 2009 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, OGD - in this link he talks about reducing paper-work and stopping companies from declining treatments; I'm not sure what the point is of having a company whose only job is to generate paper-work and function as a gate-keeper is, then.
The problem with "managed care" is that doctors are penalized for doing expensive procedures if they go over their monetary limit. I thought that was already known to be a bad way to run a medical system. He says managed care is = the Mayo Clinic. I hope he's right about that!
January 10, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shocking that this should be the result of the new team put together by the man who was, as a candidate, the biggest beneficiary of contributions from the health insurance copanies. Just shocking.
The way to read through the bullshit on this is the following: count on all the provisions being sold as beneficial to those who need healthcare as optional and all the provisions protecting the profits of the insurance companies and all the bad things about our current system as permanent, non-negotiable features. Another way to put this is: chalk up another victory for the special interests the people are going to get fucked again.
January 10, 2009 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read somewhere during the campaign (I am going to start keeping better track of what I read on the web) that Obama said the health insurance industry was so complex that bringing it to a single-payer resolution was nearly impossible. A single-payer system might be the ideal, but wrestling with the multi-payer as it is now was futile.
I think DD might have the wise path to follow. Instead of thousands of payers, how about a hundred. Then 50. Then 20. 10. One.
I'm in agreement with an eventual single-payer system. Phasing out Medicare scares the crap out of me. There had better damn sure be something reasonable to take its place.
January 10, 2009 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
"eventual" single payer translates to no single payer.
It would be nice if it could happen that way, but it cannot. The nature of our system is such that the insurance companies and their allies in Congress would drown that baby in the bathwater and quick. It needs to be done as Medicare was done: in one fell and irrevocable swoop. Otherwise it just won't happen.
Historically speaking, the moment for doing this is right now. Sadly though, it seems quite clear that our new President will not have the courage or vision to strike and lead us where we need to go as a nation while the window of opportunity is open. If he fails to lead as we need to be led on this issue, regardless of what he has said before (right is right after all) the nation will suffer for his lack of fortitude on this question and for a long, long time.
January 10, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that the switch to single payer needs to be done in one swell foop and that the time to do so is now. As you point out, we're up against the big guns, (read: lots and lots o' money). Those guys are hammering away at their talking points knowing that the majority of Americans currently have some form of affordable health insurance, and as such are susceptible to their sweet talk about quality of care, and choice. Unless there is a major grass roots movement to endorse a single payer system, we'll be stuck with some hybrid, bastardized form of our current system, and the national health care costs will continue to lead the world both in cost and rate of increase. People have to decide why they should pay an extra $679 Billion annually for health care. Why is per capita health care in Canada about $3500, while here it's about $6500? The insurance companies would have you believe that it's because our health care is more comprehensive, and that American's lifestyles make them more prone to disease. It's all bullshit tactics to preserve their own piece of that $2 Trillion+ healthcare pie we serve up every year.
January 10, 2009 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not only BS talk about how wonderful everyone's policy is; there is a lot of fear-mongering out there (see the hysterical comments by renaye above. You don't even have to go to Canada. Fact: Medicare WORKS!
- and it has an overhead far below that of insurance companies
- and its population is old and sicker than the rest of us
- and Ronald Reagan tried to scare everyone away from it
My fear is that insurance companies will win the day; they have all that money to spend on PR and elections that should have been spent on health care!
January 10, 2009 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
They will win the day unless some press is generated that is pro-single payer, (and conversely anti-insurer). Relying on the fourth estate to convey this to us may be wishing on stars. Take a look at advertising expenditures for the pharmaceutical industry. In 2002, they spent 24.4% of every sales dollar on advertising/promotion. That computes to an annual advertising budget of $57 Billion. Compare that to their expenditures on R & D - 13.4%. I didn't have time to find a link to the annual advertising expenditures of the insurance companies, but I would predict it is significantly higher than that of the drug companies. That is a lot of money going to the media outlets we depend on to provide informed discussion of things like, well... Single payer, universal health insurance. There is a lot of opportunity for conflict of interest here.
January 10, 2009 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Revamp that "head-fake" blog you allllllmost posted today, eh? Or did I miss something?
Let's keep the posts on it coming here, daily.
January 10, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
But you see, the people will not lead on their own and their will be no grass roots voice unless and until somebody in Washington DC grows a pair namely one President Obama. If he doesn't take the risk and lead there's simply no hope. If he surrenders in advance which it appears he has already done, then the American people are just fucked. With just the slightest bit of leadership and a signal from the guy at the top that now is the time, the people would follow. Without that we have nothing.
January 10, 2009 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right! The plan I sent to change.gov was to phase out insurance companies by gradually lowering the age of eligibility for Medicare until everyone was covered. Tweaking it to make it work for younger people, and completely re-doing the prescription part to simplify it and make it work.
In the end, we would have a single-payer system with far less overhead than we have now with insurance companies, and a functioning Public Health system within it. Who knows? With a system that is simply designed to deliver health care without a profit margin, we might even do better than Nicaragua in infant mortality!
January 10, 2009 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama did say they could have a seat at the table. They just could not buy every seat.
That said though, I think insurance companies are nothing but weighted gambling on our lives and it can be argued that they should be outlawed. However this country has treated them all as legitimate businesses for decades.
That said, how can our government legally put a whole industry out of business? If they use the fact that the insurance companies are a serious threat to American's health (rather than helping) could it be legally done?
Now think about that for a sec. Do we really want to set the precedent that the government can deem a company "unfit" for the American people? We have just seen the most amazing amount of over-reach malfeasance in the history of this nation.
Just think about granting the power of destroying any company you want based only on the governments discretion. What could future administrations do with that power?
I think Obama has it right. Keep insurance companies where they are and regulate the shit out of them.
January 10, 2009 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
The entire S&L industry went out of business after the last financial mess. Government decisions drive companies out of business all the time and government decisions prop up other businesses. Why should your primary care physician be thinking of retiring early since he doesn't like the working conditions or the pay scale while the head of some health insurance company is taking home tens of millions for figuring out to deny you another 5 minutes with that physician?
If they want to stay employed, let them go into nursing.
January 10, 2009 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you bluebell. I want to see single payer and the insurance companies out of business tomorrow.
I think the question is how do we do it that is in keeping with American philosophy. I personally think we should have a government single payer as an option that, with medical costs being what they are, everyone will gladly choose. That is the key point, though, people must choose it.
The insurance companies can try to exist but with the entire populace, flocking to non profit govt health care, they wont be able to stay in business. The people will have chosen. The market at it's finest.
I think our government should corner them out of the market. The good old American Way.
January 10, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would just note that right now doctors do not like the small amount the medicare reimburses compared to some insurance companies.
But they do take medicare patients. Why? Because of the sheer numbers of people. If most doctors did not accept medicare patients, they would not be in business very long. Older people use a lot of healthcare.
Believe me, if govt offered an alternative people would go nuts for it. Who the hell wants to shell out $800 a month (or more to Blue Cross) when they can get the same care for a fraction of that?
January 10, 2009 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not only do you shell it out to BCBS but they do stuff like stick you with tens of thousands of dollars in bills if you aren't smart enough to figure out that your surgery was not an "emergency" and that your surgeon was out of network. You have to be an attorney to understand your insurance coverage and even if you were they'd have half a dozen more attorneys ready to deny your coverage.
January 10, 2009 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Regulating insurance companies wastes health-care dollars! I say, lower the age of Medicare eligibility and let people choose: Do you want to sign on to Medicare or keep your private or job-based insurance? Let the people choose.
Maybe the companies will either lower their profits or get into a different type of insurance; say flood insurance for coastal properties, or pet insurance, or insurance against specific things like cancer, which would pay out a lump sum if you contracted that illness.
The government wouldn't have to outlaw insurance companies; let them compete with a non-profit health care provider and see if they can do better for their patients. Health care dollars should be spent on delivering HEALTH CARE!
January 10, 2009 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah but the beauty of it CVille, is that we can make a regulation that the for-profit companies will need to pay the govt for their regulation and oversight.
For example, right now many medical facilities have to pay for their own inspections to be govt certified. If you are not certified, you can't do business.
Just another way we can force them out of business faster - and by their own hand no less!
January 10, 2009 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
"weighted gambling"
There's a lot of that going around.
And it's not a single company, it's a kind of parasitism, which is at issue.
January 10, 2009 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink