From the White House: Health Insurance Consumer Protections

Pin It

FINALLY, the White House turns it UP:

Health Insurance Consumer Protections

http://silentgoddess.etsy.com Laney

HOLY CRAP!

Would that not be wonderful?
Papa Bradstein

About time.
http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

Yes, and our farts will smell like roses and lollipops and gumdrops will fall from the sky!

Get for real Jon…the government is NOT your friend or partner…it never has been, never will be. This is what us right wing hacks call a LIE. One of those things told to gullible people who think everything is as easy as pie and as great as anyone says it will be.

Obama need to back the eff away from my diabetic child’s healthcare! This is one issue I won’t ever concede on. I’m one of the 80 percent in this country who likes their healthcare and is beyond happy with my medical care. My child is taken care of at Vanderbilt Hospital and has had excellent care since not only the day she was born (as has my youngest), but since THE second she was diagnosed as diabetic at age three.

Last year we got her an insulin pump. If you don’t know what one is, Google it. It is not considered a standard treatment for diabetics and most insurance won’t pay for it, especially for children. They cost $5,000. But my doctor made the case to my insurance company and not only did I only pay a few hundred dollars, but they cover 80 percent of the supplies. I have wonderful coverage and found out just recently how blessed I am indeed when we accidentally forgot to pack my daughter’s insulin when she stayed overnight with my sister, more than two hours away. We had to pay out of pocket for one bottle of insulin, which is well over $150. We must get a new bottle every month, even if we only use a tiny portion of the bottle…opened after 30 days can deteriorate. Actually she gets two bottles…one of long acting and short acting. Each of her test strips, which we use many daily costs $1 each, there are 50 in a bottle.

I pay a good sum with my 20 percent portion, but am very happy about not having to foot the total amount. And I would gladly pay a higher premium to keep such coverage for my child.

I’m sorry, but as many sob stories as you can give on bad healthcare, too expensive, blah, blah, blah…I can give the same, if not more, of people with great care, excellent coverage and a real fear of that being STOLEN by our government. You are not reading the actual legislation, you are reading the spin. If you read the bills, you will find mandates that will force private insurers into the public exchange. I DO NOT WANT, NOR DO I NEED GOVERNMENT ANYTHING!!!! It’s bad enough to be taxed for crap I wholeheartedly disagree with…but this crosses a line that just makes me wanna throwup. It’s MY freedom to work and pay for MY insurance and to pick MY doctor and to coordinate the care for my child with a life threatening illness. I’m sorry for other people’s illnesses and such, but THEY are not my concern…MY family is. And if the tables were turned, I wouldn’t expect anyone else to give a good gravy over my plight either. My body, my business. Oh, that sounds familiar…but apparently only applies to uteruses and unwanted fetuses to the libs.

If this passes, I will do whatever I can to NOT take part. I will buy my coverage from Lithuania before I become a ward of the state for my health care.

And for that freakin matter, I plan on buying a damn incandescent lightbulb from wherever on this planet I can when the feds make them illegal…versus having to callin the hazmat team in case I break one of the green thugs bulbs!

I can not believe you have been so brainwashed to think the people in Washington actually give a damn about you or your family, really. I’d say I can tell you I told you so after the fact, if it didn’t mean I’d be totally screwed in the process. So, I will just tell you now, you are completely and UTTERLY naive when it comes to this issue.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

And what’s going to happen when your insurance company decides at it’s own will to drop coverage for your child? Or when your child is an adult and tries to get coverage?

Get real yourself. You are living in a fantasy world with great benefits that can change at the whim of a corporation.

nobody

Actually, I have rights, in contract and in law, which protect me. And the insurer does have incentives perform on their obligations. Cost containment is one incentive, but companies have others, such as reputation, which bear on future marketing and revenues. And of course, if they’re properly pricing and reserving, they _can_ do the right thing, which is generally what people want to do in the first place.

But let’s say they’re all just greedy scumbags. Why are you so sure of the motives of the politicians and bureaucrats you’d have run things? Today, their motives seem to align with what you would like done. Will they tomorrow? How will they act when the alignment slips? Have you noticed that political promises sometimes outstrip practical possibilities? People do strange things when they’ve promised more than they can deliver, and someone will be shorted.… If you don’t like their actions, what will you do, what _could_ you, or anyone, do about it? Are you really sure you want your case, or anyone’s, adjudicated by majority vote?

http://blurbomat.com blurb

Yes, I am sure.

We’ve gone over this already. In all but a few markets, healthcare is already provided by monopolies who have no need to worry about marketshare, PR or perception. They can and do nullify contracts:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/17/business/fi-rescind17

I trust elected officials more than I trust under-regulated monopolies.

Imagine what it will do for our economy if people who work in jobs they hate are free to keep their insurance and go out and innovate. Or start their own business.

nobody

Answer the question, Jon. How would you discipline a politician, with a majority behind him, when he behaves badly?

You have no choice but trust them a great deal indeed. And you can consult history to see what must come of that trust.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

The most obvious answer is with my vote.

If a politician breaks the law (which is what we’re talking about here) they would be arrested.
nobody

If the politician already has his majority, he doesn’t need your vote.

Then what?

http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

The question is Jon why you think that the government couldn’t drop you from coverage or refuse coverage? Because they can and do in nationalized plans everywhere. This care is not free…and because it is not, they HAVE TO limit coverage or else it would bankrupt the system (see Medicare).

You demonize a corporation but glorify the bureacracy? That makes absolutely no sense. If you think you could trust this government to give you the care you so want and deserve, then tell me if they don’t what the hell you could do about it then? Now, in the private system I have a choice. If my insurer does something I don’t like, fuck em…I can find another one. But if the government screws me over I have absolutely NO recourse. NONE AT ALL.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

I don’t have a choice. I was born with a misshaped cornea, for which I received a transplant in 1998. I cannot get private insurance today. No one will take me.

My wife was born with depression. No private insurance company will insure her.

My oldest daughter was born with plagiocephaly, a condition which has rendered her uninsurable until she’s 13 (at last check with the two private insurance companies that offer or manage plans in my state).

I have two choices: have the state plan help us out with high deductible insurance or have no insurance whatsoever.

I’m glad you’ve got choice. I have no private insurance. My family has no private insurance. You are living in denial if you think that your employer subsidized healthcare is going to last much longer, with or without Obama in the White House.

Healthcare premiums have DOUBLED in 10 years. You and your employers are paying 25–30% of your compensation towards healthcare. How much longer is that sustainable?

You are living in denial if you think your insurance company is going to keep on insuring your child. And I hope that day never comes for you, because government stepped in.

nobody

These are not _insurance_ problems. Insurance is designed to manage the volatility of _unknown_ costs. You have conditions _known_ to have high costs. Why is it reasonable to expect a company to contract with you in a manner that will almost certainly lead to losses for them? Refusal doesn’t make them greedy, it makes them businessmen.

Let’s face it: people without these issues are much less likely to seek insurance, and are much more sensitive to its price. This “moral” obligation asserted of the insurers is not asserted of individuals — we don’t generally decry the greed of healthy people who choose to forego insurance. One-sided moral obligations are deeply suspect.

This doesn’t say we shouldn’t have some social arrangement to help people with such conditions, just that it doesn’t make sense to do so through “insurance”. If people have problems, through no fault of their, that they can’t afford to manage, by all means, let’s help. But doing so is no special obligation of the insurers. And we don’t need to completely re-engineer a sixth of the economy into a postal service model to provide the help.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

I don’t believe that insurance is designed to managed the volatility of unknown costs. As it stands, hospitals are free to bill whatever they want and the insurance companies pay it. There is some back and forth, but in terms of managing costs, the insurance companies have done a lousy job. For any industry to have rising costs that are above the rate of inflation and wage growth there are serious cost control issues.

I also would suggest that the moral obligation lies not with private corporations, but with we as a country. Everybody should have access to healthcare so that when we’re young and healthy, we pay more into the system than we get out. As we age, that trend reverses.

The bills I’ve seen are trying to reform with smaller, less progressive steps than going straight to a single payer system. Your comparison to the post office is moot. It’s clear you don’t think that giving everybody equal access to healthcare is good for society. We’re going to have to disagree.
nobody

The reply threader doesn’t deeply enough for a direct reply to yours stamped 8:59am.

We do agree that society should do _something_ for those with uninsurable conditions. We probably agree on the extent.

We seem to agree that whatever moral obligations do exist, are obligations of society, rather than insurers. We seem to agree that requiring healthy people to take insurance is a a logical reciprocal of requiring insurers to cover all comers.

When I say insurance “manages” cost volatility, I mean _hedges_. Say an average person has an average annual health care bill of, say, $5000, with actual costs ranging from $0 to $2,000,000. Paying insurance premiums of $6000 narrows the range of those costs to, say, $6000 to $100,000. More expensive, but the total cost is capped. That’s risk management. I don’t mean that the role of insurers is to minimize health care cost inflation. They’ve an interest and a role in it, but this isn’t the primary purpose.

Teasing out the actual disagreements is the instructive exercise.

http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

Jon…

I just don’t see why you think that insurance companies dropping people is that common. I’ve had some form of private insurance since I was 18 years old…and when I didn’t, I paid COBRA. Why are high deductibles so bad? Some people actually choose to have high deductibles to lower their premiums. And if affording that is a problem, then why not compensate for the cost by having a HSA to cover them if they arise…or even to pay for routine care to offset your insurance benefits??

I’m sorry you guys have prexisting conditions that restrict you. But if there was a law allowing purchase of plans across state lines you’d have that problem solves immediately. We have that option with all other forms of insurance. I use a insurance company locally that does a national search for the best priced policies for every other coverage I have, ie life insurance, disability, car, home etc.

In Tennessee we tried the public option. It was a disaster! It nearly broke our state. It had to be reformed majorly or else we all would have added a huge state income tax to our already high sales tax. We fought it, got it reformed and actually they added a new component for small businesses which is working really well…it’s a private/public split for small businesses of less than 20 employees to provide coverage with the insured paying a 1/3, the employer paying a 1/3 and the state and insurer splitting the rest of the cost. Our preschool uses it actually and says it works really well. I would not be opposed to something like that, but I really feel that should be a on a state level…not federal. In fact, I would prefer states come up with options on coverage etc. anyway.

We have discussed alot about Sarah’s issues with coverage possibly when she’s an adult. Thankfully, we can and should be able to afford coverage for her even then. But also, I think it’s a good incentive for children to work…try to find a good career or job in order to get good benefits. I see no issue with that being the way it is set up at all. Benefits were always a top priority with me when I was working and I was lucky enough to always have good coverage, even when I was in my early 20s.

I think we all agree there could be some reform, sure. But government run healthcare, single payer is simply not good for anyone. I don’t care who says it is, they are either on of the sheeples that simply deals with what’s handed to them or just not educated about the systems already in place.

http://blurbomat.com blurb

Read this and get back to me:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/17/business/fi-rescind17

You make a great point about states not being able to fund universal healthcare. Massachusetts is going through the same thing right now. The system has to be changed on a federal level.

I dispute your words, “single payer is simply not good for anyone.” Ask 20 Canadians. Ask 20 people from France.
http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

Jon,

I read the article…but the one very obvious thing here is that you can’t rely on this article for complete story behind those policies being dropped. As a business, they do have the right to refuse coverage based on their limitations, of which every insured person signs and agrees to upon buying a policy.

Do people read their policies? Um, I’d say most do not. But if you go and read one you will see right of refusal and lists of things not covered right there in black and white. In a private sector situation you have the right of freedom choice when shopping to avoid these things.

I go back to the one real issue here…the limit of only a few companies in each state from which to get coverage. That is the number one thing that needs to be addressed…it not only limits choices, inhibits competition to lower costs but also breeds corruption. So, that would be where I could start. Open it up nationally, choices of providers…make uniform billing etc. to make that possible/easy for doctors when filling claims. Let states develop forms of their own universal coverage that is guided by some federal guidelines…but NOT run at the federal level. Incentivise employers to provide coverage, even small business owners in a progrma such as the one I just told you about.

We should also be looking at the free healthcare that is already in place in eveyr state in this country already and has been for decades…local health departments!!! Where are they in all of this?

There are tons of things that could be done that would do lots to improve on things that are a far cry from nationalizing the system.

pattyhans

Private healthcare is fine if you have the income and a plan that works well, but that just isn’t the case for most of us. My husband lost his job with the downturn in the economy (and our very good family healthcare plan) and was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes 2 months after that. We had to Cobra him — at a cost of $425.00 a month so that he could start treatment right away. That is a lot of money to add to our budget unexpectedly. I managed to get on the plan my employer offers (very high deductible, but free, at least for this year), but my granddaughter has no coverage, we make too much for any kind of state assistance. (Naturally, she broke her arm two months ago and we are now paying off a $2500.00 medical bill for that.) I’m sorry — I want my tax dollars to go for health insurance for everyone!

And why on earth does everyone look at government as the enemy? It’s supposed to be OUR government, doing what WE want. Granted, it doesn’t seem like it always works that way but that isn’t to say it can’t or shouldn’t.
steve-o

While i dont’ agree with the public option, I do believe that the protections that the whitehouse is pushing are great ideas. If they can be signed into law, then I think a lot of the issues with private health care would definitely be addressed.

I do take issue with pattyhans comment about “most of us” not being able to obtain coverage. While there are 46 million uninsured Americans, they only represent about 16 percent. That means that there are plenty of people who do have coverage and for the most part are having their health needs met.

Yes 46 million is a large number and I do believe that there are ways to address it. It think that the link you posted is one of the ways that could potentially take care of it.

I do have issue with switching to a government run health-care system still though. These doctors have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to obtain a very specialized skillset. If we are going to force them to become civil servants, then the fair thing to do would be to pay them back for all of the school costs plus interest. If you could figure out the cost for that, I think you’d find that the cost of health-care would triple.

I do think what you will find is that if doctor’s are forced to become civil servants, what you might find a different situation with health-care. My father in law who is a general practitioner is toying with the idea of becoming a doctor on retainer if the public option goes through. he could make a lot more money doing so and wouldn’t have to see as many patients. I’m curious how many others would move to something like that?

http://blurbomat.com blurb

It’s clear that the White House has a long way to go in education efforts about healthcare insurance reform.

None of the legislation I’ve seen and read makes doctors employees of the state.

It appears that Obama is pushing for something like Germany… Private insurance is available, but most folks choose the public plan. Doctors don’t work for the state, they retain private practice.

UtahMom

I, also have healthcare, through my employer. I appreciate it very much, even though 1/4 of my paycheck goes to my premiums. But faydean, I’m afraid the naivete is not on the part of blurb. The coverage that we are provided, does not allow for me to choose ANY doctor I would like. Have I been happy with the doctors I have seen? Some. Have I been disappointed when my regular physician no longer participated in my plan? Absolutely! Are we guaranteed coverage for any illness, no matter what it is and how long it takes to get well? I’m afraid not. There are maximums with every plan I have seen. The Private Insurance’s can and have canceled coverage on people because their illness was too costly.

I find it unfortunate that your tunnel vision only allows you to care for the people in your ‘family’. But it is those ‘others, that you don’t give a good gravy’ about are the ones who increase cost for healthcare for the rest of us. I expect that there would be an increase in coverage to get everyone on a system. But once everyone is covered, won’t the costs stabilize (or forbid, even decrease) if the rest of us don’t have to pay extra to cover for the hospital payments that don’t get paid because so many people can’t pay for medical treatment? Do you think that the people who file for bankruptcy (+60% of bankruptcy filings are due to medical), could better use their money to otherwise help the economy?

I’m glad that you can choose any doctor you want to see, especially for your daughter who needs extra care. I do hope that you do not reach her maximum coverage before they find a cure for JD. I hope your insurance doesn’t decide to cancel you, because she costs too much to cover. But, if we keep going like this, I’m afraid your daughter will be on her own…paying for her illness, with no coverage. Then who should care?

And blurb, sure is a good thing you don’t know anything about having a sick child who needed coverage and good doctors, eh?

makfan

We are all one layoff away from being in the same boat. Some businesses are dropping all coverage as the premiums continue to increase faster than inflation, which leads to more uncovered people.

In the end, we all pay for everyone’s healthcare, whether we want to be honest about it or not. The whole point of insurance is to pool the premiums and then distribute money to pay for ‘losses’ as they occur. If you live a relatively healthy life, you’ll never get back what you (or your employer) pay in to the system. However, if you get cancer at a youngish age, you’ll never pay enough to cover the cost of your treatment. That’s the way it works.

When someone loses coverage and can’t afford or can’t qualify for personal insurance, we pay in a number of ways. First, their health will decline as they postpone annual checkups and disease conditions aren’t caught early. Second, we pay when they do go to a doctor or ER and then don’t pay the bill. The doctor or hospital will eventually raise rates to cover the losses.

We do need to do something about our medical costs. A first step is getting everyone covered one way or another, so nobody is stiffing the hospital when they get the flu. We do need to reform malpractice, and we need to accept that medicine is about probability, and when a cure has a 90% success rate, you might be in the 10% that get no benefit from the treatment. You shouldn’t be able to sue for millions when that happens. I’d like to see the big settlements limited to gross negligence and not when you are on the wrong side of the odds. We also need to be honest that spending $50K on cancer treatment for a 90-year old may not be very realistic. I know I’d be inclined to just live out whatever time I had left and skip spending my last days in a drug-induced fog.

Lotorq123

I do believe parts of the bill are good but there are some parts that I have to question after listening to the following that someone sent me.

http://bit.ly/5Gkve

Long link, I know, but I’m not sure how else to post it. [USE A URL SHORTENING SERVICE LIKE: http://bit.ly . Thanks, –ed.]

We’re retired military and our so called “lifetime guaranteed healthcare” SUCKS. We spent 32+ years in the service believing the government about heathcare to find out they changed their minds and we were basically lied to. It’s a little harder to believe them this time around.
nobody

So if you want insurance just to manage catastrophic risk — ie, high deductible — you can’t, no high deductibles.

If someone gets the idea that cost sharing might make consumers more cost/quality conscious and so exert cost-saving pressures — they can’t, copay caps.

If you watch your weight and smoking and exercise and would like a premium that reflects your expected low risk — nope, everyone has to pay the same rate.

Everyone agrees health care costs are distorted by consumer insulation from costs and risks, and the President wants to insulate them further. Great idea, insurance by Procrustes.

Of course, all of this could be done without the Rube Goldberg proposals. You’d probably have to mandate coverage, and I’m sure this Administration would want to subsidize that coverge for its coalition partners, but the bill would probably be under fifty pages. So even if we buy that these are worthy solutions to real problems, why do we need legislation measured in reams rather than pages?

makfan

I’m a little disappointed that we don’t have a way to incent people to make better choices. When my parents were young, we didn’t know that smoking caused a slew of health problems. It burns me up to see 20 years old take up smoking today, however.

Still, how the hell do we distinguish what bad behaviors we’ll allow and what ones we’ll punish? Are we going to tell people in 2020 “sorry, you have lung cancer but you smoked for 20 years and we don’t want to cover you.” I have no good answer for this dilemma.

I’m most persuaded by the fact that the vast majority of people in countries like Canada, France, Sweden, etc. would NOT prefer the current US system. There is no system which is completely perfect and fair, but the idea of going bankrupt because of a cancer diagnosis is pretty freaking scary.

http://www.findingpointb.com Crys

Hi Jon — posting a reply for the first time.

I’ve lived in both Canada and the United States (I currently live in Arizona). I have insurance through my employer right now. It’s not something anyone I know here could understand, but the first time I had to select an insurance plan I went home and collapsed into a pile and cried all night. Growing up, and in the adult years I spend in Canada I never had to ask myself how much I thought my health was worth. I’m sure anyone could assume the direction my thoughts are on healthcare reform in the United States — they’d be right.

I think healthcare is something that should be regulated, offered, and provided by the gov’t — I’m not saying there can’t be private competition (the province I’m from in Canada was very interested in this), but that a standard level of coverage should be available to everyone and paid for by everyone. I think a system like this is a long, long way away here. I loved reading the info you linked but.… I’m just not sure when it will happen.

I’m very interested in this debate, it is something I am so passionate about. I wouldn’t trust my health or livelihood to a business — businesses are about 1 thing: making money. I’d rather be at the mercy of a public system than at the mercy of a CEO’s wallet. What is a country if it doesn’t have citizens? I’m the type of person who wouldn’t mind paying for something I never use, just to know it’s there and to know that my family, neighbor, boss, coworkers got what he needed…

Just as a pre-defense on my part, I know and understand there are plenty of problems with state run systems. A story about someone not getting care in time is just as sad as someone getting dropped off of their insurance — one is purposeful, one is someone knowing that person’s name and deciding they are too expensive and Joe Blow needs his bonus this year and one isn’t like that. It’s a moral issue to me.

I’d like to recommend a podcast — This American Life (thisamericanlife.org — I think). The one they had this week was called ‘Fine Print’ and one of the stories in there was about people getting dropped from their healthcare coverage. It got me in the mind for this, this week…
http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

I must link to this video because I’m seeing this kind of thing over and over again…for those who are saying that most Americans don’t have good coverage are uninsured or support this government takeover…I’m sorry, but I just ain’t seein’ it. Only people I know that want it are already on the dole or have no coverage for various reason that aren’t the ones typically given (translate to most of them are just too cheap to pay for it or have put themselves into situations where they can get good coverage).

http://blurbomat.com blurb

You are heartless.

http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

Actually, I’m quite the opposite Jon.

You have prexisting conditions, fine. But didn’t you have coverage when you were working for someone else? Now all we have to do is try and reform the system to eliminate those restrictions if you have to buy it out of pocket as a business owner…so yes, you fall into one of those two categories,ie in a situation where you can’t get coverage because of your circumstances.

May not be fair, true. But that doesn’t mean the government should take over everyone’s healthcare does it?

If we cut out the stupid restrictions for pre-existing (I can’t see any of the three you guys have as being just cause for no coverage honestly…but could with some things, just for cost…it is private business after all. Though you may think that’s heartless.) or give you a broader base of choices via cutting the restrictions of interstate commerce, then you’d be good to go. I mean, the limitations to state companies limits your choices by 50 fold! That’s ridiculus, plus limiting competition that would naturally lower costs.

I don’t know if you don’t know people who take advantage of the government systems or what Jon, but I surely do. Many, many of them. And I’m thinking you’re a reasonable, smart guy…if you heard these stories you’d be pissed off too and think they don’t deserve the help, no matter what their sob story.

Ok, here’s a story from my husband to give you a perfect example of what a socialized system is like.

There was a cardiologist David works with who had a patient from Canada on vacation in Florida. The guy started having chest pain and went to the ER. They ran a test on him and found he needed a cathertization. They contacted his insurer, the government of Canada, who in turn refused to pay for it in lieu of running two other tests on the man, both of which he failed and definitively showed he needed the cath. Did they allow him to get the cath in Florida and pay for it? No, they did not…they paid for a private jet to fly him back to Canada and put him on a waiting list for the cath…more than six months. The cardiologist here said that was not safe…he could have a heart attack in that amount of time. The man did fly back, his symptoms got worse and he decided to simply come back to the U.S. to get his procedure and pay out of pocket!

Now how in the hell did a government run system help that man or provide cost effective treatment in any way? If you need more stories, I can give them up…ones from Britain, tons of Medicare stories and the reality of what being a health care provider is like in this country now.

You have researched, yes, Jon. You just think you know the entire story. When you get some more of this point of view, it sure does change the perception though. I get your reasoning…see your issues. But I truly think you are not even trying to understand the other side of this, which has very legitimate concerns and problems with government mandated coverage.

http://silentgoddess.etsy.com Laney

We have coverage that we pay over $500 a month for. We have a family of three and my husband’s coverage is paid for by his company. $500 a month, for a $3000 deductible plan. I don’t consider this cheap. We are lining the insurance company’s pocket to make sure we have coverage in case something catastrophic happens. We don’t go to the doctor unless absolutely necessary because until we pay our $3000 a year deductible, we pay out of our pockets. This is AFTER we pay $500 a month just to have this coverage. We are not “already on the dole”. We live paycheck to paycheck. He loses his job, we are screwed. Don’t lump everyone who wants to have universal health care into people who are too cheap to get good coverage or those who don’t have coverage. We have coverage and we want healthcare reform. We want this change.

Alexa

I like the idea of a public health system where you can choose private insurance if you want.

As someone raised in a military family, the government provided my health care for free until I graduated college. While Tricare has its flaws, so do all insurance plans. We did have to pay a co-pay when we were referred to specialists, but the co-pay was usually a reasonable amount. An hour of therapy, for example, set us back $15.

Now that I’m not covered by insurance, I wouldn’t mind seeing a similar system put in place for civilians. People can complain about not wanting to depend on the government for health care, but I’d argue that the government can provide a good standard of health care–in fact, it was the one time I went to a civilian hospital that I was misdiagnosed with an infection (and therefore, the antibiotics prescribed were unnecessary), and the doctor botched what should be a simple procedure (ingrown toenail), which I had to have a military doctor fix later. As I averaged several visits to a doctor a year (and with relatives who are doctors/military doctors), I can say that in general, my experiences with government-run health care are positive.
Alexa

Happy birthday, by the way!
http://silentgoddess.etsy.com Laney

And yes, Jon, Happy Birthday
Lotorq123

Alexa said:

“As I averaged several visits to a doctor a year (and with relatives who are doctors/military doctors), I can say that in general, my experiences with government-run health care are positive.”

I do agree that when we were in the military the military doctors were outstanding; however, now there are very few military doctors and only services provided at the military hospitals are clinic appointments (which handle routine problems and will provide a referral when necessary). The problem I have is that there are few really “good” doctors that take Tricare and those that do, are booked out MONTHS in advance.

I know the White House has good intentions but would feel better about it if the politicians were going to use the same healthcare they’re promoting or if WE got the same healthcare THEY get.
Doug

Crys hit the nail on the head. In any public/private debate, the underlying issue is profit. If profit is at stake, high risk unprofitable cases will be dropped as often as possible or never assumed. If there is a legal battle over such cases, corporate attorney’s fees and court costs are likely to be cheaper than medical care, and there’s always the opportunity to drag the case out in the courts until the patient dies or goes bankrupt.

Unfortunately, in order to get Congress to consider any such issue fairly and competently requires the elimination or massive change of the current lobbying environment..but that’s a different can of ugly worms. As long as politicians can get money from private or corporate sources, they are essentially employed by their benefactors and act in those interests first and foremost. The real danger in the health care debate is that even if we get a single payer public program in place, the corporate interests through lobbying are likely to be able to hamper it so badly that the situation may be worse than it is now. Faydean and the other dittoheads will then point to that and gleefully proclaim that programs for people — how was that put?- “One the dole?” are terrible, socialist, inefficient, and just inherently bad.

It’s unfortunate that the country is now so polarized that the problem itself gets shoved aside and ignored because of the cacophony of the debate over the solution. One solution isn’t going to solve the problem. Every person is a case, and what’s going to help everyone is an environment where the choice of public or private is going to depend on the individual.

We need single payer public health care. We need private insurance. I’m lucky to have insurance through my employer, and while I pay premiums on that, I have no problem with using my tax dollars to help people who aren’t as fortunate as me have a reasonable life. If you think it can’t happen to you tomorrow, think again. My America is generous, thoughtful, compassionate, and tolerant. Is yours?
ebarone

Up here in Canada where we have “socialized” medicine you cannot be denied medical coverage if you are born here. Even if you do not work and do not pay taxes you are covered. In addition, if you are not employed and do not have drug prescription benefits the government will help you with your drug cost. Did you know that a bottle of Insulin in Canada costs under $40.00? I have been covered since the day I was born. When I was diagnosed with a bone marrow tumour in the tip of my right femur I was hospitalized for 4 months. I had two surgeries and a bone marrow infection all at the age of 14. We did not receive a bill or a notice of cancellation after I was released. I am still insured today at the ripe old age of 47. Another interesting point is how people who are against universal healthcare for all citizens’ use the excuse that government cannot run it or it will turn the country into a socialist state etc. Balderdash. The people that seem to have been brain washed are the ones against universal healthcare. They have been brainwashed by the Insurance company lobbyists because the Insurance companies will loose a cash cow and by doctors who are afraid they will be paid less under a universal government healthcare program. Well doctors in Canada, in the U.K. and in Europe are doing just fine in the salary department. The USA is the richest economy in the world, the most developed, yet you do not have universal healthcare coverage for each citizen. However, you do have government run schools, government run police, government run fire department, government run Army, government run Navy, government run Air Force, government run public transit, government run Coast Guard etc. Etc.. You are actually more socialist than you want to admit. Let us do away with all these government run socialist institutions. Home school your kids, a gun to every citizen and the latest edition of medicine for dummies! So many things you let the government do for you and you do not want to lose them. Nevertheless, so many people are fighting to keep a “for profit” medical system that is not working for people that have coverage. We up here, and no disrespect intended, just shake our heads as we listen to this spectacle about universal healthcare in the US. Your healthcare cost is so high compared to other industrialized countries. People say to me, why are so riled up about people down south. Because I care about others, when I see them denied healthcare even though they are paying for coverage it bothers me. It is simply wrong. Healthcare run as a profit driven system only works by denying services to the insured and that is morally and ethically wrong. Charging $150 for a bottle of Insulin when in Canada it costs under $40.00 is morally and ethically wrong. Universal healthcare has been working for decades in Canada and Europe. Maybe it isn’t as bad as you think… Okay, I had better start doing some work here. I mean, they are paying me…

http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

I don’t pay the $150 for the insulin…I pay about $50…with my PRIVATE healthcare.

You are one Canadian who is fine with the coverage. I could find a dozen more that hate it and have horror stories about trying to receive care.

In this country we do have those government run things, but many of us have issues with how they are run and funded. Many don’t use public schools etc. Under our Constitution, it is the governments role to provide our military. There are NO provisions for any of the other public entities…those grew out of the legislative push for them over time. Some still argue we shouldn’t have them at all in fact.

I say you stay where you are and be happy and I’ll stay here and try and be happy…if the government will just leave me alone.

jeffeboy

I think you missed the point on the cost of the insulin…

ebarone

She did. The actual payment comes to about $8.00 a bottle depending on your type of drug coverage. However, Fay is right, let her have her choice. It is her patriotic and constitutional right. Let all Americans have Universal Healthcare provided by big bad socialist government. In addition, let people like Fay opt out so they can get expensive healthcare from private Insurers at a much higher cost. The funds for health care in Ontario are based on what you make in a year and it cannot exceed $800.00. And if you have 12 kids, or just one they are all covered under you until they are 21. There are horror stories in all hospitals whether private or government run all over the world. Eight years of Bush is a good example. Remember, humans are not perfect they make mistakes. You voted in Bush twice. That’s a perfect example of making a mistake. Thankfully, due to term limits he is gone. And thankfully, you voted in Obama. And we prey for his safety and hope he is in for 2 terms. Obama rocks!

http://faydean.typepad.com faydean

Ebarone:

I did not miss the point, I think you are missing mine. I am willing to pay my portion of what my daughter’s insulin costs, versus your eight dollars. Why? Because your healthcare in Canada is NOT free…you all pay huge taxes across the board (or at least those who pay taxes) for this system. Nothing is free, not matter what pricetag they put on it. Government coverage has just as many restrictions as private insurances and costs JUST as much, if not more overall.

I did not personally vote in either Bush nor Obama. And secondly, why do you care about Obama at all? You live in Canada!

ebarone

This is what you support Fay.

BLURBOMAT

Jon Armstrong shares photos, music, politics, hair & pants.

From the White House: Health Insurance Consumer Protections