Health Coverage Reform NOT Health Care Reform

[kknudson]

Health Coverage Reform NOT Health Care Reform

Our politicians are pushing Health Care reform, but what they are really pushing is Health Coverage Reform.
Health Care Reform would directly deal with the costs and issues of Health Care, not providing coverage to all. If Health Care costs are brought down, more people could afford insurance as we know it.
Consider this, when you go to the Doctor, he bills you 100 dollars, the insurance company pays $20, and you pay $20. What happens to the remaining $60? Is this an attempt to gouge the uninsured, written off as a loss or just games played between the medical industry and the insurance companies?
By providing universal coverage, our politicians are addressing the symptom, not the problem; they are going for the issue that gets the most attention of the voters.
But you never solve a problem by addressing the symptom.

Just a statement from my point of view.

NOTE for this thread no one can blame the Republicans, or the Democrates.

IMHO Politicians are Politicians and the VAST majority are not interested in our welfare, only their own. And I am being VERY polite in that statement.

[DieselAddict]

Have you read the entire 1000+ page bill? I haven't. Supposedly there are some measures in it to address costs. Even having just the public insurance option for everyone would give the govt major bargaining power to bring down costs. But I fear this option will not be implemented or it will be weak and close to meaningless. Subsidizing poor people to purchase private insurance just plays into the hands of private insurance and does nothing to bring down costs, in fact it will increase costs.

[aklim]

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

Even having just the public insurance option for everyone would give the govt major bargaining power to bring down costs.

You forgot to add IN THEORY. Otherwise how do you explain the cost overruns in the military? Know anyone in the country buying bombers, tanks and other military equipment? $400 toilet seats or something like that?

[DieselAddict]

The power will be there, but the question is will they use it, so you do have a point.

[rscurtis]

KK hit this out of the park. Had this subject been referred to as health INSURANCE reform from the start, I think the discussion would be a lot further along. An option that comes to mind is the idea of opening the market up so insurance companies can cross state lines. Imagine what you'd be paying for homeowners' insurance, car insurance or your cell phone if you could only deal with one company in your geographic area. Of course, there are some insurance company practices that should be reined in, such as pre-existing conditions and failure to renew.

[aklim]

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

The power will be there, but the question is will they use it, so you do have a point.

The question is what has their past shown them to do?

[DieselAddict]

Why not just bypass the middle man (private insurance) completely and purchase non-profit insurance directly from the government? At least I'd like to have that option. But yes, I do think it's a good idea to allow private insurance to cross state lines, as long as they comply with each state's individual regulations, but that alone won't be enough to reform health care. A patchwork of insurance companies will never have the same price negotiating power as a single-payer system would, not to mention private insurance has to make money, meaning less of your dollars go toward actual health care with private insurance standing between you and your doctor.

[DieselAddict]

Originally Posted by aklim

The question is what has their past shown them to do?

A little of both. Medicare does pay out less to doctors than private insurance, which supports my argument that it helps to bring down costs. OTOH, the Bush drug prescription benefit plan prohibited Medicare from negotiating drug prices and essentially gave American pharma a monopoly. I believe this is to change with the current bill.

[aklim]

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

Why not just bypass the middle man (private insurance) completely and purchase non-profit insurance directly from the government? At least I'd like to have that option.

with private insurance standing between you and your doctor.

But would it be an option or will we be pressganged into it? Much like you "volunteer" when you are in the military. Like I said before, if they can keep it optional and if they can do it from their own pot of money which is insulated from the legislators, it might be worth looking into.

Which is easier to change and take to court? Private health insurance or your govt?

[aklim]

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

A little of both. Medicare does pay out less to doctors than private insurance, which supports my argument that it helps to bring down costs.

OTOH, the Bush drug prescription benefit plan prohibited Medicare from negotiating drug prices and essentially gave American pharma a monopoly. I believe this is to change with the current bill.

With all the tricks involved and the budget is still unbalanced? I think a little of savings and a lot of squandering.

Signed by Bush, authored by congress. Most of whom are still in place. That is, unless it was an executive order

[DieselAddict]

Originally Posted by aklim

But would it be an option or will we be pressganged into it? Much like you "volunteer" when you are in the military. Like I said before, if they can keep it optional and if they can do it from their own pot of money which is insulated from the legislators, it might be worth looking into.

Which is easier to change and take to court? Private health insurance or your govt?

I wouldn't mind if it was truly optional, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. What govt expenditure has ever been optional? Was there a way for me to opt out of paying for the Iraq war? I don't think there was.

You can take anyone to court, including the govt. It's debatable what's easier to change. Certainly private insurance is not easy to change, unless you're willing to spend tons of money. With govt insurance, if enough people are dissatisfied with it and voice their complaints, the govt will most likely make improvements. After all, politicians want to be re-elected. But private insurance has little incentive to improve. There's just very little competition and they couldn't care less if you complain if there's little competition. After all, you can't vote out the people who run private insurance.

[kknudson]

I want to add that my example of the problem to reform medical coverage is just one.

I can add several more.
Malpractice, some cases are valid, most IMHO are not. If nothing else Doctors, Nurses etc are human, not GODs. Mistakes happen, remember when an accident was an accident, not a lottery ticket.

Extraneous tests, many times related to the above.

A question I have had, hospitals and outpatient facilities have all this expensive fancy equipment (Xray, MRI ...) used 9 to 5 M/F. Maybe some Saturday, gee put in half as many use them 6 to midnight, wouldn't you rather go for a MRI or ... at 9PM rather than take a day off work.

Like gas stations, they build speciality medical things next to each other. Competing with each other, ie a Proton ??? is proposed here SW of Chicago, there are only a dozen or less nationwide, AND one is to be built but afew miles from an existing one.

Any other examples ???

[DieselAddict]

Originally Posted by aklim

With all the tricks involved and the budget is still unbalanced? I think a little of savings and a lot of squandering.

Signed by Bush, authored by congress. Most of whom are still in place. That is, unless it was an executive order

No, that was in Bush's first term when the entire govt was run by republicans. I think even Congress has changed quite a bit since then.

[kknudson]

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

No, that was in Bush's first term when the entire govt was run by republicans. I think even Congress has changed quite a bit since then.

No the government is run by politicians, not Republicans or Democrats.

It's my thread, no blaming either party, blame them ALL.

[kknudson]

As proof that Politicians give a flying F about us.

Most Polls say the public is against the government plan.

The town meetings have been a ruckus.


They intend to try and push it through anyhow.

And only a 1000 pages, you know they haven't read it anyhow.