The Race
October 5th, 2009 | Editorial Cartoons | 21 Comments
Tweet
It’s beginning to look like we’ll get something in the way of health care reform. Whether it ends up being something that actually works to cover everyone and reduce costs is another question entirely. If it contains a universal mandate and eliminates the ability of insurance companies to exclude people, it will at least be a start to repairing our broken system, even if it doesn’t control costs. Unfortunately, the Republican Party seems wholly uninterested in fixing anything. All I can assume is that conservatives are so fixated on handing Obama a defeat, they’ve entirely stopped thinking about the common good. It would be nice to believe that one of the two major political parties wants to be part of the solution, but I’ve heard nothing substantive from them–only absolute opposition to any change.
I ask critics of reform a simple question: whatever your reason for opposing the proposed reforms, how will you solve my problem: when my newspaper closed, I lost my health insurance. When COBRA runs out, I face buying insurance for my family knowing both my wife and I have pre-exisiting conditions which will almost certainly preclude our buying private insurance at an afffordable rate, if we can find it at all. If you can come up with a reasonable real-world answer short of reforming the system, I’ll listen. But don’t just recite slogans to me, or give me another taste of a broad anti-government philosophy, or invent a hypothetical solution that ignores current reality. I don’t want to know why we can’t do something; I want to know what we can do. Give me a solution. If you can’t, stop arguing.
Topics: GOP, health care reform, Obama
E-mail
Facebook
RSS
Twitter
Amen to that, Ed. Simply stated, if we don’t get some sort of reform, hopefully universal or “single pay,” I will be paying thousands from my hard earned savings after my cobra ends and the Obama stimulus subsidy also ends. Being a post-polio victim, also caught up in the unemployed, what insurance company would ever cover me, even though my personal costs of health care is about on the average of a healthy covered person? Also, who would hire me at age 63, even though I would be a good, if not better employee. You know, Ed, all the critics can never answer your questions. What it boils down to, is that they don’t believe that health care should be a RIGHT. . .let alone cold hearts most critics never want to admit. IT’S THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR, SAD TO SAY.
Those that have healthcare don’t care if anyone else can get any healthcare and/or they believe the Lies that have been spread by the insurance companies about how our country will fall apart if anything changes. I would really like to know the opinions of the people in opposition to healthcare reform to My proposal and their specific objections to any particular point. http://foosmaster.wordpress.com/
Any suggestions to improve my proposal is always welcome.
“how will you solve my problem”: Why, with rhetoric of course! E.g.; on The New Hour Oct. 5th, 37th in outcomes and most expensive on the planet translated into “the best health care system in the world”! But even more important, the speaker rejected the validity of any form of statistical measurement. That way, of course, anything he says must be correct!
You know that last poll I saw on CNN of all places, said that only 47% of Americans support a Public Option. That means that the majority don’t want Government Controlled Health Care. Maybe that’s why the Dems are having such a hard time.
When this all started, I was positive that there was going to be some sort of Health Care package give or take the public option or whatever other bits and pieces that got thrown in or taken out. But now I doubt that anything will ever happen and to be quite frank with everyone, I would welcome a change no matter what it is at this point.
Pelosi claims that she can get something passed in the House, that leaves the Senate which the Dems supposedly have a filibuster proof majority and even if they did not they claim they could use the so called “Nuclear Option” that lets them get something passed with less votes.
So why do we not have a Health Care bill passed yet?
I am sorry, but if you are honest with yourself at ALL, you can’t put the failure to pass anything so far solely at the feel of the Republicans.
I don’t blame the Republicans entirely, only mostly. I’ve already chastised the Blue Dogs for their stupidity. And I blame a gullible public for succumbing to the absolute lie that the public option is somehow “government controlled health care.” That’s like calling the Post Office government controlled package delivery, as if FedEx, UPS and DHL don’t even exist. How about government controlled snow removal. Ominous; I won’t be allowed to choose my own snow shovel. Give it up.
Our society was formed such that the individual, or a collection of individuals, should be allowed to operate freely, without interference from the government. The justice system is there to deter and punish any injustices brought about by greed, corruption, etc. This structure produced the most rapid advancement of any society in recorded history. From hand plows to the moon in 200 years. In a free market, competition is essential, but competition coming from the government can be lethal. Non-essential, large government programs (those that go beyond protecting the general welfare of the public) are in a bad state, with ever increasing taxes, while now falling more and more into the red. The playing field is different for a government program, as they don’t seem to be subject to the option of failure, as in the private industry. This can’t lead to a happy ending. When looking to the cause of health insurance problems, look at the restrictions placed on private health insurance companies, not the absence of a government program. Post rates for services online. Let companies operate beyond state lines. Stirve to create competition and incentives. Stay out.
Much of the support for the current proposals for heath care reform lie in individuals refusing to look beyond their microcosm, looking for what they perceive to be easy solutions to their particular issues. This notion that it is a moral right, a natural right for one to have health care is flawed. Natural rights are inalienable, what we are born with as humans. Our health care and our health insurance benefits are a luxury afforded to us by the great nation we became.
How can you say that giving Healthcare to the needy is “going beyond protecting the general welfare of the public”? Your words! Giving people access to Life Saving services Should be a RIGHT for ALL American citizens! You obviously have Never had any problem getting healthcare because it is a “Luxury” that you obviously can afford and there is obviously nobody you care about that needs healthcare that they can’t get. You sir are in a Very Small Minority and I envy you but you do not live in the same world as Most Americans! I’m also sure that you will fight if necessary to receive the Social Security that you feel you are Entitled to when you reach 65.
“Social” policies for the good of ALL the people that protect the people from those who would restrict availability to services for “Profit” reasons are what make a country civilized! If unchecked progress is the measure of county then we have lost our civility.
Access to Life Saving services is not the same as access to health insurance. Hospitals are required to provide stabilizing care for emergency conditions, regardless of ability to pay, as they should. And the patient should be required to try to find a way to give compensation for the services provided.
Wrong about my past. My family and I went for a stretch without health insurance only a few years ago. I steered clear of government assistance, and went about reacquiring it on my own. I am currently eligible for other government assistance programs, due to low income, but do not take them. It would not be fair to those paying excess in taxes to facilitate those programs. As for Social Security, I would take it only in virtue of what I have already been forced to contribute. Given the choice, I would opt out and invest that money myself or pay down debt with it.
Lastly, I was not advocating “unchecked progress.” That is why the justice system exists. And I will come off as callous once again by stating facts, but health insurance companies need to weigh risks when evaluating potential customers. Much like a car insurance company does when looking at a driver with a history of tickets. No “evil profits” = no existence.
I absolutely agree with BG regarding “No “evil profits” = no existence”.
However, with all this bs about having a government bureaucrat making life and death decisions about grandma, do we really want the decision made by someone who’s bonus or the company’s existance is dependant on the decision (because that is how it works today)?
Another Entitlement Statement: “I would take it only in virtue of what I have already been forced to contribute.”
Social Security was not created as a Entitlement program. It was a program created for the “Social Good of the People” to help those that have had a hard life and can no longer take care of themselves, it was not created as a savings account for everyone! The access to Social Security by people that don’t need it (Wealthy) is what causes the problems in the system, people feel they are “Entitled” to get their tax money back. But Social Security is another issue.
Lastly, about healthcare, I truly am glad that everything has worked out for you. Too many Americans have had past healthcare issues or just can’t find a good enough job that gives healthcare insurance. They can’t get any medical help until it is so bad that they can get treatment at an Emergency Room, by then a disease is so far advanced that very little can be done. Once you have an illness it is either Way Too Expensive to get any healthcare insurance for that or is simply Not Available. The system runs on Profit and it will NEVER be “Profitable” to insure those types of people. Companies that offer health insurance will Fire you as soon as you get too sick to work and then you would not be able to get any healthcare coverage that is anywhere close to being affordable. A government option is the Only way to give healthcare to ALL Americans. Insurance companies will Never insure a risky person at a reasonable rate, if at all. I truly hope that you never have to learn this first hand because of a healthcare issue.
“Our society was formed such that the individual, or a collection of individuals, should be allowed to operate freely, without interference from the government.”
I see the above statement often these days. It’s one of many “truths” propogated by some folks that has no basis in fact. It’s simply been made up. While there was not much more unanimity then as there is now, the majority of the framers of our Constitution did not have a problem with government. Their problem was a system of monarchs and a “ruling class”.
I have to laugh, when folks quote “inalienable rights” in an anti-government argument. The full quote from the DOI is: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, GOVERNMENTS ARE INSTITUTED (my caps) among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”.
There is also great debate about the “general welfare” but you have a real difficult time convincing me that making sure the public as a whole has adequate health care is NOT promoting the general welfare.
Our society has evolved over the 200+ years. Since the founders formed our government, we outlawed slavery, passed workmen’s compensation laws, got federal deposit insurance, social security, unfair labor laws, child labor laws, civil rights laws, Medicare and occupational safety and environmental protection. We even allowed women to vote! Health Care for all doesn’t fit in?
About a 100 years ago, we had about as “free enterprise” a country as you would want. The Rockefellers, Morgans, Gettys, Vanderbilts, Carnegies, etc had a great time. I’m not sure many others did.
Very well put. Don’t give me platitudes. Just give me solutions. What are you supposed to do? I can’t believe that someone accused you of feeling entitled when all you asked for is a solution.
The ONLY solution is the government opton healthcare! Nothing short of that will work. Insurance companies will ALWAYS put profit before people! It’s time to join the rest of the civilized world and take care of our sick citizens! The time of insurance companies deciding who lives and who dies based only on profits needs to come to an end!
Foos, I don’t understand why it is called “entitlement” when one wants control of the money that they have earned through their labors. When I see the amounts on my W2 that come out every year to social security, that could be money that I could invest or spend as I choose, money that I rightfully earned. Instead it goes away by default until I have reached retirement age, assuming I live that long. If we were to follow your string of logic, then we should take a portion of our paychecks, determined by the government, and put it in a fund that would pay for housing for all Americans. I’m not talking about Division 8, but for all. How about food? That is a need primary to even health care. Since it is a social benefit to all to have food, let’s all have money deducted for our paychecks and redistributed to everyone for their groceries. Hey, it’s for the social good of the people, right? Especially those who are less fortunate. It will help to destroy the culture of corruption that permeates the society you perceive that we live in.
You want solutions, not platitudes? Fine, let’s take a step back, and look at what is right in our system, our medical system. What works financially? What provides the best service? Medicare has largely provided good service, but is in dire straits financially. We became the country we are by NOT relying on government programs. Your hollering about our needing to join the rest of the civilized world is about as grounded in reality as those who believe in the death panels.
I know that Foos can respond for himslef, however, I just can’t let two items go by.
1. You imply that you shouldn’t be any taxes at all since you sound like you shouldn’t be paying Social Security. I believe what Foos was saying earlier is that Social Security was not created as a forced retirement plan. It is a tax. It is a tax you pay now to proivde a basic level of income to the current elderly. It was intended to be like insurance. The not paying taxes reminds me of my farmer friends who don’t feel they should pay taxes so that “welfare moms” get a basic level of support but when the conversation later gets around to commodity price supports, they are entitled to them. You make a joke about food but we actually do that. Your taxes go to pay for food stamps.
2. “We became the country we are by NOT relying on government programs”. Where did that come from? In reality, we became the country we are BY relying on government programs. Programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, FDIC Insurance, Unemployment Insurance, Commodity Price Supports, Corporate Subsidies, Food Stamps, SCHIP, TARP, just to name a few. Like them or not, we are a country of government programs.
BG’s point about Social Security is that it IS a tax, but it was sold to the public as a retirement plan. To prove to the American people that it was a retirement plan and not welfare for older workers EVERYONE qualifies at a certain age. Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, George Soros. These men and MILLIONS (I’d even venture a guess – the MAJORITY) of Americans don’t need SS to survive. And shouldn’t collect a penny. SS should be means tested. SS taxes should not be capped. It is the most regressive tax we have. All that being said, can you imagine even the most liberal congress trying to pass those changes? I can’t. They couldn’t at the time. It took the LIE that it was a retirement fund for everyone to pass it.
BG is correct that what is being shoved down our necks now is another LIE. We can cover the 10% of Americans (it’s less than 10% if you require proof of citizenship) that currently don’t have any insurance without messing with the current system. Expand Medicaid, add a percent or two to the FICA taxes that everyone pays.
The Democrats are fixated on taking over the system. The system could be fixed easily with a couple minor adjustments, but the Democrats need to be honest and quit LYING about what they are doing.
1) Government sets a minimum standard for a ‘basic’ policy. Insurance companies must offer this policy, but can offer additional policies that have additional coverage.
2) Insurance companies have to charge the same rate for everyone at every level of policy.
3) Insurance companies have to accept everyone to every policy with no “pre-existing” conditions.
4) Everyone has to purchase insurance.
5) Insurance provided by employers is taxed as income to the individual.
6) Tax credit for a certain amount each year.
7) Extra tax credit for low-income individuals (same as other welfare programs).
9) Insurance can be bought from any company anywhere in the United States. It doesn’t matter where you live. If you find a cheaper rate anywhere else, you can buy it.
10) Tort reform that ends the frivolous lawsuits that are treated as a lottery winning. Actual damages aren’t capped, but punitive damages go to the government and not some trial attorney.
I believe 90% of Americans would be on-board with these changes – which would cover every American, reduce costs, provide better care through competition, and not have a “public option (read government program)”. It is the left-wing of the Democratic party that is stopping these changes. When the Republicans held power as the Democrats do now, every one of these was proposed and stopped in the Senate by the minority.
Truly bizarre. In your first paragraph, you actually agree with Foos. But as he says, Social Security is another issue.
“The system could be fixed easily with a couple minor adjustments”. It seems “couple is now defined as “10″, give or take.
In looking at the 10, it’s not clear to me how they slow down the skyrocketing costs of health care and in turn, health care insurance rates.
Once we have #1, a cost will be arrived at by the insurance companies. If it exceeds some threshold, the government will some how subsidize the payment. I’m not clear how this process insures that people shop for lower rates unless the gov. forces people to the lowest cost provider.
Everyone has to purchase but I’m not sure how we enforce but later I see that we will buy it for them and it’s not clear how that is done or paid for.
Several of your proposals sound good to me including tort reform and nationwide purchasing of insurance. What confuses me though is how they are a “couple minor adjustments”. How are they any less simpler than just expanding Medicare for that paltry 10%? How do your changes insure that taxpayers aren’t paying for the continuation of multi-million dollar pay packages for insurance company execs or insurance company bureuacrats deciding what care an individual should receive?
All that said, I’d take your changes over what we have currently. That’s because I can afford insurance, I just can’t get it – pre-existing condition. But I truly do not believe that they would magically be agreed to by the GOP. This argument is like gun control, abortion, gay rights, etc. – don’t give an inch!
I realy would like to know the opinions about MY healthcare proposal by those who opject to my opinions about healthcare. You can read it at http://foosmaster.wordpress.com/ This is MY proposal. I want to hear specific opinions about specific parts of my proposal. Any suggestions are Always welcome, even if they are in opposition to my views! I will consider anything that makes since. Really! Make me believe that what you have to offer is better. I really am open minded but I do have extensive personal experience with the current system so you will have to convince me. Please let me know your proposals and ANY specific objections to MY proposal. Yes I know that MY proposal is not being put forth, but if it was being proposed, what would be your suggestions to improve it. Warning, I truly believe that the current system is completely unacceptable but good logic is always acceptable.
Thank you Jerry, you have an eloquent view that I support.
OK Foos, here we go:
1. Doctor Assignment – the problem here is that some doctors won’t accept what the government (or an insurance company) is willing to pay. So, in either case, you can only keep seeing your current doctor if you can and are willing to pay the difference.
2. Specialists – I thought the problem with specialist care in Canada was that there simply weren’t enough of them. I understood that was because they don’t make the huge sums our specialists do. That’s why we have plenty of them. What we have is a shortage of primary care doctors. I read that primaries make around $100k and specialists $500k.
3. Cost to Companies – I’ve never understood why companies were involved in the first place Why not get them out of the loop? Have them give the $$ they spend on health care to their employees or up the corporate tax rate.
4. Government waste and corruption – Gov employees are no more wasteful or corrupt than non-gov. The corruption is actually from private enterprise. It doesn’t matter what program you have, people will be out there conning the system. Fraud should be treated like tax evasion and enforced aggressively.
5.I don’t agree on your position on abortion but that is another topic.
I generally agree with your other points. The biggest problem is that I don’t see in your or congress’ plans any meaningful way of curbing health care costs. Without that we are on a course for a train wreck whether we have “health care insurance reform” or not. There are a lot of people in the health care industry making a lot of money. Yea, tort reform would help a little bit but not make a major impact. So that is the nut that needs to be cracked and it won’t be easy…..
One thing we could do is stop allowing drug companies to market prescription drugs directly to the public. We take way too many drugs.
Point 1) True. I am open for suggestions on how to fix that if possible.
Point 2) Also True. But I don’t think the specialists will have anywhere else to go if the last Insurance Conglomerate Economy in the world changes to government healthcare so they will continue to practice here but with a smaller salary.
Point 3) Good Point and I agree. I think that single payer is the Best way to achieve this.
Point 4) I thought that was the point that I was trying to convey. Maybe I just worded it wrong.
Point 5) Let’s not get into that one right now.
Please go to my blog and suggest some updates and rewording.