OPT-OUT Equals SELL-OUT »
Posted By TANC_Freeman 1 month ago in Political OpinionIn the days since Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) joined Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) to push forward a Byzantine, multiple-choice "Opt-Out/Opt-In/Trigger/50-State Pubic Option/No Public-Option bill in the Senate, it has made me wonder if this loophole-riddled, pork-laden $900 billion (10-year) proposal still ultimately plays into the hands of For-Profit/Big Health Insurance contributors?
Of course, I would love to know how you also feel about this latest bill proposal from the Closed-Door/Closed-Forum debates on Healthcare Reform taking place in Congress.
At the same time, our citizens' advocacy organization, Trans-American Alliance for a National Consensus (TANC), also proposes why our "elected" representatives have not simply given consideration to a federally-mandated Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MA-PD) that created and fostered a small sub-classification of nonprofit-based "Social Managed Care Plan" (aka "Social HMOs") to provide a viable model/blueprint for broadened out "Medicare-minimum" base-rate premiums for both under-65 and over-65 American citizens -- a price-lowering/correcting "Universal Healthcare" alternative to the antitrust-exempt "For-Profit/Big Health Insurance" carriers currently manipulating pricing and coercing/threatening consumers in local markets.
Read Full Story at motleymoose.com »
136 Views Share Story 6 Comments Report
Submitted By:
TANC_Freeman
Idealistic fool looking for Americans to believe in "Direct Democracy" & INDEPENDENT "Citizens Oversight" of the U.S. government -- please join our citizens' advocacy organization, Trans-American ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 6 (view all)
-
78%
Radiofreeeuropa1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think most of us understand that the larger the pool, the less expensive the cost is generally regarding health care. Though we have no real concrete bill to discuss, many of the proposals and claims are outlandish. If indeed we can't embrace any type of single payer system which has been proven time and again to be the most cost and service efficient, then a not for profit public option becomes the ONLY real instrument that contains costs of "for profit" companies. Now if this "option" is only open to a small amount of people, (many whom are already denied coverage for having pre-existing conditions etc.)and the availability determined by political whim of state level politicos; it will do very little in terms of providing market competition. In fact my bet is the insurance companies will simply flood it with the accounts they don't particularly want. Plus if regulatory practices on the insurance industry are removed at the state level, where they currently reside, a whole new can of worms is opened.
Reply
I submitted a page from this plan earlier, so some folks may have encountered this idea before. It seems most folks agreed, this idea was a good one. What we have here basically is an expansion of a segment of medicare that has a 25 year track record of good performance both financially and in terms of customer satisfaction. Allowing-promoting non-profits to provide insurance requires very little capital from taxpayers and accomplishes the same goal as a publicly funded option.
This should be discussed not only by us, but by the people actually designing the reform. Whether you agree with other issues TANC proposes or not, this proposal regarding health care reform seems like one people of all political views should be able to agree on. Why not send your representative, senator, even the White House a link to the proposal? Let's at least consider this inexpensive proven approach. -
75%
Radiofreeeuropa1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I suppose despite efforts to have social HMOs such as Scan Health Plan of Southern/Northern California, Elderplan and Kaiser Permanente brought to the table for discussion have so far been ignored is simple. Mainstream media would be self defeating to do anything against it's own advertisers. Politicians seem bent on agenda's either very pro-insurance industry (and we know why...follow the money) or focused on some aspect of reform for various other reasons. It really is up to us, the end users of health care to inject other ideas such as this into the public dialog.
Reply
Consider the million and a half dollars a day insurance lobbies are spending. (The CEO pulling 200 million a year in salary and stock options isn't paying for this...but if your paying the premiums, you are! As well as his salary!).
I don't understand the need for middle men adding 30% to health care costs, do you? Why? Because Wall Street likes the dividends? Because so many investments include these companies? Why else?
These companies have a right to make their profits, but not on the backs of the sick, dying, or poor! We are better than this. -
-
40%
protoham1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We all know this has nothing to with the health of American.
Reply
The Obamanation Plan:
Fact: The British Health Care Service is the largest health care system in the world with over 1.3 million employees. Most of them are administrators. This makes them the 5th largest employer in the world. So what is important about this you ask? To be on par with the British system we are looking at 8 to 9 million employees, making the US Health Service the largest employer in the world and have access to all your personal data, bank accounts and taxes. Now add that to the 17 Million that already work for the Federal Government and you are looking at 25 to 26 Million Government Employees trying to run your life.
That should say something to you.
President Obama will appoint “his man” to be in charge of this organization and I believe that they will focus on hiring ACORN and SEIU members to fill many of the positions. Both of these organizations are currently under investigation for illegal activities. This will create massive employment, credited to President Obama. However, in 2013, after the election, when private plans can no longer accept new members, (HR3200 Section 102), the private Health Insurance companies will have to start laying off employees and we will have massive unemployment and your health care will be provided by ACORN and SEIU. This scares the hell out of me and it should you too.
On the surface it appears that President Obama has the best intentions for us, but underneath we get the largest socialist program run by his buddies in the world.
Bill H.R.3200 or any plan that contains a public option or a trigger for a public option MUST BE DEFEATED AT ANY COST!!
ANY COST!!
So the Obamanation plan is simply this: Nationalize Health Care and steal the business for his friends. This is exactly what Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Castro in Cuba did to their countrymen.
Free Health Care sounds great until you find out how much it costs.-
100%
TANC_Freeman1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hi Protoham:
Reply
If Universal Healthcare is so awfully costly and sucks the life out of the For-Profit/Big Health Insurance conglomerates out there, why don't we then have hordes of Britons or MILLIONS of people from the other 50 or so countries with Universal Healthcare flooding onto U.S. shores to take advantage of America's wonderful private-sector "Have or Have-Not" healthcare system?
It just seems you are engaging in the same kind of Republican "Fear-Mongering/Demonizing Playbook" that is so tirelessly regurgitated to scare the hell out of Americans to never really open their minds to other sorts of NONPROFIT organizational and other "business models" that will offer far more humane and equitable forms of health insurance coverage.
Our organization, Trans-American Alliance for a National Consensus (TANC), has just released a 23-page position paper about a little-known, 25-year-old sub-classification of the Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MA-PD) for a handful of these nonprofit-based "Social Managed Care Plan" organizations (aka "Social HMOs") have proved to be STELLAR MODELS for greatly expanded coverage offerings, cheap "Medicare-minimum" base-rate premiums ($96.40 per month in 2009, not billed to Seniors and just seamlessly shifted from their standard Medicare coverage) and zero- to minimal-cost deductibles and co-pays.
If you take a comparative look in Medicare Advantage's online database, these "Social HMOs" beat the For-Profit/Big Insurance companies in most of those aforementioned categories and in many others I can't go into detail here. If For-Profit/Big Insurance can claim to offer "Cadillac Premiums," then these "Social HMOs" can claim to have "Rolls-Royce Premium" offerings by comparison.
I'm not saying you or any other Americans should not have your "choice" to pay and keep your Big Insurance's "antitrust-exempt," artifificially-price inflated "Cadillac Premiums," I'm just fine with that. But please don't condemn MILLIONS of other Americans without adequate or no insurance, who can otherwise obtain FAIRLY-PRICED, ENHANCED and NON-DENIALS insurance from NONPROFIT "Social HMO" insurance carriers.
(continued in next reply)...
-
-
100%
TANC_Freeman1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
(continued from previous string)...
Reply
Since the current "Have or Have-Not," for-profit insurance system is built upon the strategic business model of "MAXIMIZING PROFITS AND MINIMIZING RISKS" (the latter being accomplished through denials of claims and revocations of policies for people with "preexisting conditions," not to mention systematically shifting cost burdens of CO-PAYS and DEDUCTIBLES back onto consumers), this really comes down to addressing the CRIMINAL, federally-sanctioned, anti-competitive/antitrust-exempt business practices of For-Profit/Big Health Insurance.
So, if the government can simply encourage and foster the broadened-out application of nonprofit "Social HMO"-like health insurance organizations for the under-65 American populace, we will have an "ETHICS-BASED," price-lowering/price-correcting new competition to place into markets in U.S. monopolized currently by Big Health Insurance Corporations.
This is all about ending the government-sanctioned ethical and moral CRIMINALITY of For-Profit/Big Health Insurance, because American lives should not be balanced and out-weighed by PROFITS and EARNINGS on balance sheets. There is a "better way" working out there already (in the Seniors marketplace) and it will cost FRACTIONS of what our government is still proposing of a For-Profit/Big Insurance-controlled "Insurance Exchange" -- the fact is these "Social HMOs" can bill consumers directly and be self-financing/self-sustaining nonprofit healthcare organizations.
And I would rather see the creation of THOUSANDS of new nonprofit health insurance industry jobs than seeing For-Profit/Big Insurance justify these massive executive compensation/stock option packages to CEOs and the bloated administrative overhead they pass along to consumers in their over-inflated premium charges.
The antitrust-exempt For-Profit/Big Health Insurance conglomerates are already engaging in anti-competitive threats director toward consumers and letting so many thousands of American lives hang in the balance, so it's time for this government to step up to end the atrocities of this "Have or Have-Not" healthcare system to be replaced by an ethics-based, humane NONPROFIT "Universal Healthcare" system. It's time to END obsessive profit motivations and mitigate or eliminate the rampant, unchecked criminal business practices long factoring into the American healthcare equation.
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.