Democrats Agree on a Health Plan; Now Comes the Hard Part

[steven johnson]

Source: New York Times

By ROBERT PEAR
Published: April 01, 2009
WASHINGTON - Efforts to overhaul the health care system have moved ahead rapidly, with the insurance industry making several major concessions and the chairmen of five Congressional committees reaching a consensus on the main ingredients of legislation.
The chairmen, all Democrats, agree that everyone must carry insurance and that employers should be required to help pay for it. They also agree that the government should offer a public health insurance plan as an alternative to private insurance.

They have yet to tackle the question of how to pay for coverage of the uninsured.

And they have not figured out the role of state insurance regulators, who enforce hundreds of state laws mandating coverage of a myriad of items, including infertility treatments, prostate cancer screening and acupuncture.




Read more: http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=351390&single=1&f=21

[aquamarina]

1. Sounds like a train wreck waiting to happen.

As long as the focus is on health insurance we will never get true health care reform.

[Gman]

13. I don't for a second think the focus is on health insurance alone

this is a multifacted problem. One news story about the progress of health care reform is not the final one.

[JerseygirlCT]

2. You know what's sort of disturbing?

The very idea that it's necessary for the insurance industry to be involved in the legislation like this. It reads as if their approval is needed in order to make law. Scary thought.

[Auggie]

6. It's a telling reminder: corporate America owns our government

We'll never get true reform without a major overhaul

[mike_c]

3. cluster fuck of special interests....

:puke:

This will likely fail.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

36. Better than nothing, I guess.

Of course, what this country really needs is single-payer, universal healthcare.

[Autumn]

4. Fuck these people, they need to live in real life

this is why I will never again vote for some asshole just because they have the magic D after their name.

[denem]

31. The plan outlined has the same plank's as Hillary's plan.

I'm presume you supported it in the primaries?

[Autumn]

35. Hillary's, Obama's , same thing,

insurance companies are not going to allow reform, they have a much better seat at the table. And I seriously doubt the politicians will either. If it isn't single payer it isn't any type of reform. Get past my avatar, it's not political.

[Winterblues]

5. Why should I as an employer be forced to provide health insurance?

This would put me out of business. I think this stinks...Put the burdon on business, that is why our business in America is not competetive throughout the Global economy. No other business in the entire world has this burdon upon it...

[quaker bill]

12. Why

would it put you out of business, given your competitors also have to pay the same costs? It seems to me that all prices would have to rise more or less evenly to cover costs.

All other businesses have the same burden. Some pay it in insurance premiums, others in taxes, and others yet in either higher wages or reduced economic activity.

Now if you put the expense on individuals, disposable income drops and the ability of individuals to purchase your products declines.

Covering everyone will be expensive. The only thing that is more expensive is not covering everyone. Under the current scenario, premiums are increased because hospitals and doctors pass the expense of indigent care on to those who have insurance. All the essential bills eventually get paid and no money is created, so it has to come from someone.

The point of single payer is not who the money comes from, but a reduction in aggregate costs for the health services. The way costs are reduced in single payer is that the people end up paying far less for the lake houses, corporate jets, and yachts of insurance executives, and instead spend that cash on doctors, nurses and actual healthcare expendables. In most places with single payer, Doctors are reduced to only living very, very well, rather than becoming vastly wealthy. By putting insurance execs out to pasture and putting Doctors merely in the upper 10 percent of all earners, vast savings are realized.

[Winterblues]

14. Bull, How does that make American business competetive?

Take the burdon off business. Put it on the Government where it belongs. The entire purpose of Government is to Maintain the Health and Welfare of the nation and putting such a huge burdon upon business does not do that..

[quaker bill]

28. What burden will the government bear?

The government can bear burdens to the extent we pay taxes to fund it. I am entirely good with the notion that instead of forcing businesses to buy health coverage, we simply tax businesses and have government provide the coverage. Bottom line, the money either comes from the worker or the business that hires him/her. Government only produces money to the extent it collects it (taxes), (or borrows it) from someone.

There simply is no way to keep the costs from affecting business. Either the business is taxed or the customer has less money due to higher expenses or taxes. You can rearrange the variables of this equation any way you care to, but you still get the same answer, math is just like that. (it is called the distributive property)

Over the long haul, the freight must be paid in full. The only solution is to reduce the costs. The major solution to reducing costs is to get as many people who do not produce actual health care results out of the business as possible.

[knixphan]

33. Hear, hear!

'Promote the general welfare' and all that jazz.

[RantinRavin]

17. One slight flaw in your logic

"Now if you put the expense on individuals, disposable income drops and the ability of individuals to purchase your products declines."

By putting the burden on business, business will have to recoup those costs by raising prices, and the ability of individuals to purchase the products still declines.

[wartrace]

26. AKA- We will all pay for it one way or the other. n/t

[quaker bill]

27. That is correct

it basically all comes out in the wash.

There are two ways at looking at this conundrum and only one way out of it.

It does not matter where you put the costs unless you conclude, as most pro-business commentators do, that the reason american business is uncompetitive is because the workers get paid too much. On this basis one concludes that the proper place to put the costs is on the individual, to "protect business". The problem is that this does not protect business, because the domestic market falls in proportion to the transfer of cost.

The problem is not that the american worker gets paid to much, it is that the american worker gets paid too little, and far too much goes to the corporate boardroom and stock arbitrage deals.

If instead of getting 100 million deals, the corporate execs suffered the mere pittance of say 10 million a year and pumped the other 90 million into wages, we all would live better and the economy would boom.

Without this sort of arrangement, and something like single payer, we are simply rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.

If you take healthcare costs from the current near 15 percent of GDP and reduce them to a level consistent with most industrialized countries, of say 5 to 7 percent of GDP, business will be competitive, regardless of where you put the costs in the economic cycle. It is always far easier to collect such an assessment from employers than individuals, because there are simply fewer of them.

[Bandit]

42. Here is the flaw in your reasoning

If you remove the very heavy burdon from business then they have more capital. They can pay higher wages and hire more employees. Yes people's taxes will rise but not nearly as much as what they are currently losing from uncompetetive business and lousy health care. If the Government had complete control over Health Care Costs then prices would plummet, so overall cost would be far less than they currently are and as far as taxes go, the wealthy would suddenly be a part of the process. Their taxes would go for health care as well as yours and business would flourish from the loss of such a heavy burdon and being able to compete on an even playing field with the rest of the world. Single Payer Government run National Health Care would be a huge boon to America and our economy. Why should Insurance Companies get a cut in Health Care costs? They are the number one reason costs are as high and getting higher daily..

[dysfunctional press]

38. "given your competitors also have to pay the same costs?"

only if the competitors all are american companies. which doesn't generally happen in the new 'global' marketplace.

my father-in-law died last year, and the small factory/business he had that employed 8 people died with him. something like this would have closed his doors a lot sooner.

[bemildred]

18. Why should you as an employer not be forced to do whatever the government says?

Like the rest of us citizens? Or else you could stop being an employer. Go out of business, who gives a shit?

[dkofos]

7. Fucking imbeciles.

[McCamy Taylor]

8. Medicare is a federal go'vt run insurance that has not driven privates out of business

so this is bullshit.

"But Republicans say a government plan would have unfair advantages and could drive private insurers from the market."

Privates want the U.S. government to take care of all the sick and they will get all the well. So they love the feds to cover the elderly (except the healthy elderly whom they sign up on Medicare Advantage using fraud).

Never trust private health insurers. They make money by denying health care.

[droidamus2]

19. Oh really

I thought the Republicans were always pushing how the free market could do things cheaper than the government. I think it is called privatization. So now all of a sudden when it comes to another big corporate entity, insurance, want to continue to suck money out of peoples wallet the big bad government will have 'unfair advantages'. We do not need 'health insurance reform' we need 'health care reform'. Single payer is the only way to go period!!!!

[DamnYank]

9. Single payer

Now. Fuck the insurance companies. Expand Medicare for all.

[Massacure]

24. You must have missed the part that said

They also agree that the government should offer a public health insurance plan as an alternative to private insurance.

If private insurance companies keep pulling crap, the government is going to put them under real quick.

[dysfunctional press]

39. i'll reserve judgement(and hope) until i see what the 'public health plan' looks like...

but- if it is set-up as it should be, insurance companies would have NO WAY to compete- so we KNOW that it won't be what it should be.

[quidam56]

10. We need a cure for health care in America

http://www.wisecountyissues.com/?p=62 In East Tennessee, profit care comes ahead of patient care...

[and-justice-for-all]

11. Insurance companies are pure fucking evil....Terrorist to say the least.

OUR reps. need to stop listening to those fuckers and do the right thing and do their fucking job, which it to help us...THE PEOPLE.

All they have to do is expand Medicare, its not that fucking hard. It is just hard for them to ignore repukes and corporations.

[Vidar]

41. Hear, Hear! Couldn't agree more!

[Bluenorthwest]

15. So, in the midst of a major recession

they are going to force people to buy insurance from their pals. What the fuck are people going to use to pay for this insurance? If they had money, they would have insurance.
These people are idiots. They are out of touch with reality.

[bemildred]

16. Look, it is simple ...

Everybody needs health care, sooner or later,
so everybody pays for it by taxation (you do already),
and everybody is covered (well they ought to be),
for the health care they want (within limits specified by cost and feasibility).

And all this would STILL be way the heck cheaper than the Pentagon plus the spooks meddling in strange undeveloped foreign countries that just want to be left alone.

[Hawkeye-X]

20. My son was recently rejected for state health insurance.

Now we're going to give him his own insurance starting tomorrow. Hopefully it'll give the docs from the hospital and the regular ped a chance to catch up on Joey's billings.

The reason for the rejection is because we "make too much money" - with my wife on maternity leave, and considering not returning to her job, it's a ridiculous notion. I'm on disability, and work part-time, and my wife barely clears about $1400 a month, and that SUCKS.

Oh well, we'll wind up paying $90/month (ish) with Blue Cross/Blue Shield, full coverage with $1,500 deductible.

[bob4460]

21. When you don't have a job or money

What are you going to buy it with?? How are they going to enforce this ? Lock up the non buying unemployed people that are not in compliance?

[Fumesucker]

23. "I can envision a day when you will have to show proof of insurance at the job interview".

-Hillary Clinton.

That is how they will enforce it, no insurance, no job.

I wonder if politicians will have to show proof of insurance before they run for office?

Yeah, right.. :eyes:

[diamidue]

22. Just rearranging the deck chairs..

Just more bureaucratic red tape for people to wade through. More paperwork. More confusion.

Why do we have to run everything past the lobbyists for the health care, insurance and pharmaceutical industries all the time anyway?

Why not put it to a vote? And then, TELL these industries to adapt.

And why wasn't Zeke Emanuel mentioned in the article? Is he still advising?

[pmorlan1]

25. YES!

They also agree that the government should offer a public health insurance plan as an alternative to private insurance.

I just hope they don't cave in on this one. If there is a public option available so that I don't have to buy from greedy insurance companies that's major progress.

[defendandprotect]

29. The best and CHEAPEST way to go is Single Payer . . .

what do insurance companies have to do with health care?

[defendandprotect]

30. Simply remove age restrictions from Medicare and we're there . . .

we don't have to reinvent the wheel --

Just get rid of the greed-drive Bush drug plan which put insurance companies in --

and redo that part of it!!!

[dpbrown]

32. Universal, Single-Payer Healthcare for all

Cheaper, more effective. Shit or get off the pot, Congress.

[knixphan]

34. Thumbs-UP

:thumbsup:

[dmosh42]

44. We all agree on that, but.....

we don't run Congress. The big corporations do, and the health insurance industry needs to keep their big profits!

[SwiperFox]

37. ...

Small businesses that employ no more than 2-4 people are already struggling under this economy while the huge corps get bailed out. I own a small business and that action would KO me too. So, what would I need to stay afloat? Let employees go, work triple and bursting in pieces like an overloaded mule.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[annabanana]

43. This thread is all over the place

It's almost as if many of the posters just got here.

[yurbud]

45. a mandate to buy private insurance is just about the worst option unless it has price controls

then it would be second to worst.