Prognosis improves for public insurance »
Posted By Beau7890 1 month ago in Political News
Democratic leaders in the Senate and House have concluded that a government-run insurance plan is the cheapest way to expand health coverage, and they sought Friday to rally support for the idea, prospects for which have gone in a few short weeks from bleak to bright.
The shift in momentum is so dramatic that many lawmakers now predict that President Obama will sign a final bill that includes some form of government-sponsored insurance for people who do not receive coverage through the workplace. Even Democrats with strong reservations about expanding government's role in the health-care system say they are reconsidering the approach in hopes of making low-cost plans broadly available.
Read Full Story at washingtonpost.com »
310 Views Share Story 34 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Beau7890
Truth rests on the mathematical reeds of the infinite and everything moves forward by order of the eagle riding pillion, while the genius of vegetable ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 34 (view all)
-
94%
Progressive1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
Because a government-run plan would be dedicated to holding down costs and would lack a profit motive, congressional budget analysts predict that it could reduce the cost of expanding coverage to people who don't have it by as much as $100 billion over the next decade.-
94%
deathray1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
thank goodness the public option is not on life support anymore. it's actually off the ventilator and breathing on it's own, but it's in no way out of danger just yet.
Reply
it looks like, at least in this instance, congress is paying attention to the wishes of the majority of americans -
11%
Endoscopy1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Holding down costs how??? This bill will force all providers to hire more paper pushers to deal with the enormous amount of paperwork the 54 different brand new bureaucracies will create. Medicare at present does not cover many procedures and pays the providers less than the cost of providing the service. Medicaid is worse. In some states it only pays 15%. In Mass. there is a hospital that is suing the state because they are going bankrupt with the payments they are forced to accept.
Reply
This is the government in action. Pay less than the services cost thus forcing the other patients to pay extra. When those patients disappear what happens then. Bankruptcy for all providers? What a plan to cut costs. Drive the health care people out of business. That cuts costs dramatically. The only problem is where do you go to get help from a doctor????
-
-
100%
frctm51 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is the only way that reform will be meaningful. I find it amusing that the Republicans say, how can private insurance compete with the government? To this I answer, aren't you the guys that are always saying the government can't do anything right? That the government can't compete with the private sector because the private sector is so efficient and service oriented? Well nows the time to punch a hole in that gas bag.
Reply
I would characterize the current system as profits first, service second.-
100%
Beau78901 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I find it amusing that the Republicans say, how can private insurance compete with the government? To this I answer, aren't you the guys that are always saying the government can't do anything right?"
Reply
I've been asking the same thing for a couple of months now. To date, no opponent of a public option has given a rational answer.
-
-
100%
pokydoke1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The only reason that a public option should fail is because of the bribes given to our elected officials by the health insurance industry. It is in the best interest of our citizens to be able to purchase affordable and reliable health insurance. 40K people die needlessly because of lack of health care because they can't afford it. I would say that denial of health care coverage by our insurance carriers in this country is tantamount to murder.
Reply -
-
100%
Beau78901 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It would help our economy immensely if investors would stick to lending their money only to businesses whose profits come from providing goods and services that actually benefit consumers rather than ones that create profit by cutting corners, cheating customers and inventing new and non-productive revenue streams that leech off the productivity of others. But that's not "the American way."
Reply
-
-
-
100%
Beau78901 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I do too. The best news I've heard lately (though it'll still be woefully inadequate for many) is that the Senate Finance Committee bill contains provision to require that all states provide Medicaid eligibility to all adults making less than 133% of the federal poverty level. Currently, no matter how little you make, some states (many of them red) can still deny you eligibility for Medicaid.
Reply
-
-
100%
jordan111 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Any public plan is likely to have a relatively narrow scope, as it would be offered only to people who don't have access to coverage through an employer. >>>>>>>
Reply
Small business employs about 57 million Americans. Small business can't afford sky high insurance rates that keep climbing. Can't imagine where this "narrow scope" of a public plan is coming from.-
100%
Beau78901 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I could be wrong about this, but I imagine what's meant by "relatively narrow scope" is that it wouldn't be offered to everyone. 57 million is a lot less than 300 million.
Reply
But speaking of narrow scopes, I'm a bit concerned that because of short-term consideration of the cost of such a plan, any public option offered would cover only medical catastrophes, and so would provide no incentive toward prevention, which would do more to lower the cost of healthcare overall in the long run.
-
-
0%
ettucatk1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is hype, trying to get you to believe the majority is now agreeing with government intervention, in order to get those who always want to be on the "popular" side of an issue, off the fence and on their side. DO NOT BELIEVE IT. Do not believe Medicare is great......it is not, and it certainly is not free. It is a cumbersome process you need to go through, it often shifts you from one doctor/medical facility to another, and the premiums/deductibles continue to go up while the benefits are diminished. And, with the fact the government just continues to take more out of your SS checks in order to support Medicare, it is still going bankrupt. JUST SAY NO TO ANY FURTHER GOVERNMENT INTRUSION INTO THE BEST HEALTHCARE SYSTEM IN THE WORLD. What the DEMS are proposing would be better served if it were called DEATHCARE.
Reply-
-
100%
Beau78901 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ettucatk:
Reply
We have excellent healthcare for those who can afford it. That number is dwindling quickly, as private insurers continue to exclude applicants, rescind coverage for existing customers, and deny payment of claims for those they can't find an excuse not to cover.
Reasonable debate about life-saving healthcare should be about how to cover the most people possible, not about what it costs. I'd be happy to pay a little more in taxes to help give poor people who aren't covered by Medicaid access to health services.
Can you proudly look in a mirror and say a teenager who needs a liver transplant that because their insurer believed they failed to report a case of acne, they defrauded the company on their application and therefore should die from lack of necessary medical services?
Can you sleep peacefully at night believing a woman who was drugged and raped and is taking anti-HIV meds because she doesn't know who raped her or what they did that she is not allowed to buy insurance at any cost because the insurer thinks taking those meds is an indication that she's a risk?
Do you really mean to defend insurance company executives' ability to buy larger summer homes over ordinary peoples' ability to receive life-saving medical treatment?
If your answer to any of those is "yes," then I hope you're not religious. 'Cause we all know how comfortable you'll be in the afterlife. -
100%
moxxxxxxxxxx1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Medicare became a problem when the previous administration allowed private insurnace corps to manage Medicare Insurance and control Medicare part D prescription plans. Medicare started out as a government program and was successful. When for profit entities invade government social programs the result is failure. There is a limited amount of monies to start with stealing from the pot for profit reduces the amount and quality of services intended for recipients.
Reply
-
-
-
More News
Fox News Politics
Racial Crossover Voters Key to Atlanta Mayoral Runoff
Senator Proposes Delaying Health Care Reform to Pay for Afghanistan War
Sanders Says No to a Second Term for Federal Reserve Chief
Bayh: White House Party Crashers Could Impact Security Like Shoe Bomber Did
9K Marines Reportedly to be First to Go After Obama Announces Troop Increase for Afghanistan
The Huffington Post
Mehmet Oz, M.D.: Flicking The Switch: The Phenomenal Circuit Board Of The Epigenetic Frontier
Arianna Huffington: Sunday Roundup
Rachel Strugatz: Christmas Gifts 2009: 23 Super Stylish Ideas (PHOTOS, POLL)
Fred Goldring: The Main Point: Musicians, Arts Education And The E Street Shuffle
Michael Kieschnick: Second Thoughts on the Obama Peace Prize
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.