I wish the Democrats had not decided to "reform" health care.

[mmonk]

I wish it for the following reasons:

I think "reform" will prolong seriously addressing the costs to the people of our system.
It could kill any momentum from the ground up for single payer approach.
It will continue to produce false arguments to a confused and uninformed public while shutting down honest arguments.

To those that disagree and in my opinion, are fooling yourselves into thinking this could lead to something as cost effective and beneficial to the American population, feel free to state your arguments, but do so with facts and figures, and quotes from those in power that can dispute my assumptions. In other words, talk me down.

[cali]

1. you may turn out to be right.

I believe that if, by some stange miracle or twist of fate, we get a viable public option, it will have been well worth it. By viable public option, I mean a government run insurance program that provides good coverage on a sliding scale basis.

Oh, and your demand for facts and figures when YOU present none, is just a tad hypocritical.

[mmonk]

3. Let it be said I'm not a hypocrite.

http://www.pnhp.org/physiciansproposal/proposal/Physicians%20ProposalJAMA.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/single_payer_resources/administrative_waste_consumes_31_percent_of_health_spending.php

http://www.pnhp.org/PDF_files/MedicalBankruptcy.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/publications/payingnotgetting.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/canadastudy/CanadaUSStudy.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/PDF_files/ReappraisalofPrivateEmployers.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/publications/nejmadmin.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/publications/competition_in_a_publicly_funded_healthcare_system.php

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2005/september/projected_savings_fr.php

http://www.pnhp.org/dm.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/single_payer_resources/administrative_waste_consumes_31_percent_of_health_spending.php

http://www.pnhp.org/single_payer_resources/a_better_quality_alternative_singlepayer_national_health_insurance.php

http://www.pnhp.org/reader/Section%205%20-%20Quality%20and%20Malpractice%20Issues/IOM%20Chasm%20Paper.pdf

http://www.pnhp.org/states_flatline/State%20Health%20Reform%20Flatlines%20IJHS%20-%202008.pdf

[Kid Dynamite]

21. That is not an analysis

Do you believe it is worth it or not? "Yes, a miracle might happen" is a not-so-artful dodge, especially when you seem to be volunatarily setting yourself in opposition to the OP who has unequivocally stated where he stands on the matter. Can you logically explain your position?

[hobbit709]

2. Reform, hell. I wish they'd implement health care.

[mmonk]

4. Yes, implementation is a more honest terminology.

[KharmaTrain]

5. The Problem WIth Either Or...

I've never warmed to a single payer system as I could easily see it replacing one set of beaurucrats with another...going from the insurance companies playing god to government actuaries. I've always have seen a system that promotes competition and inclusion as being the way to keep all parties honest. If anything to force insurance companies to undercut or overserve what a government plan offers that, in turn either will contain or cut costs.

Call it what you will...but the current system needs change. There needs to be coverage for those who aren't ensured...but it's not a free lunch, it will be an expensive system and it has to be paid for. The question is who and how much. I don't favor employers having a say in health care...never have. There should be a system that allows a person to self-insure from either a basic government plan or to opt for a private plan. Or to allow those who can afford to either take their own private policy or purchase an umbrella plan that goes beyond what a basic government program offers.

Healthcare is not one size fits all...and competition is what can create robust and cost-effective system. If individual states want to go beyond thte government to create a single-payer system...more power to them. Again...diversity. But the thing people need to understand is whatever system happens it will be an expense to set up and need revision or "reform". There also will need to be other areas that I'm not hearing addressed such as tort reform...reforming the system where truly legitimate malpractice suits can move forward but frivilous ones are quickly adjudicated driving down the high malpractice insurance costs that are and will continue to be a major burden on the health care system.

[mmonk]

6. Will it allow for us to quit paying the most in the world

while there are still people going bankrupt over medical bills? Will it improve our numbers worldwide in level and effectiveness of care? I need to see some some projections based on real numbers to compare the research already done on single payer.

[KharmaTrain]

9. You Won't Get Them

And those throwing numbers out are guessing or trying to scare you. Truth is we don't know. There are so many moving parts in this system that you hope to make them more efficient...that's where the real cost savings begin.

If there's no addresing the malpractice issue and malpractic insurance premiums stay high, no there's not going to be a lot of savings...it could get worse if lawyers start going after the public system. Again...tort reform hasn't been addressed here.

The single-payer models I've seen assume to create a system out of whole cloth without considering the massive amounts it would take to create a new system and total liquidate the old one. This isn't the 60's or 70's where these systems were initially developed and the single payer advocates assume hospitals and doctors will just fall into a new government system over night.

The thing that will improve our own health is restoring medicine to doctors and to promote preventative rather than catastrophic care. Encouraging people to get check-ups or to offer accessible treatment in the early stages will save billions, but it's not one you can put down on paper.

Sorry I can't put numbers and give a definitive answer, but I also would suggest that those who say they have answer aren't being fully honest either. I'm watching how this debate rolls...and the more options the better...not the less.

Cheers...

[mmonk]

12. Costs to whom? And how much revamping could be involved

with replacing multiple insurers with one?

[KharmaTrain]

16. How Would You Collapse The Current System?

Would you force the insurance companies to go out of business? Then who would pay for the costs in doing this? Would you create a one-size fits all system...first-come first served? The devil is always in the details. And that doesn't count the thousands of people currently employed in the insurance industry...do you absorb them into a new system or build it from scratch?

Again...I don't see how replacing one set of overlords with a different set...especially one being fed with tax dollars could be a better way.

In the end, this is a futile exercize as single payer won't happen on a federal level.

[mmonk]

20. Canada has a federal system.

Like I said, what would be so involved in reducing the number of insurance payers? As far as insurance goes, there are a lot of things that can be and are insured. This is just not letting them insure health care. What happened to all the privately owned roads when we decided to have public roads? A public school system? Fire department?

[KharmaTrain]

23. That's Not Your Question

I'm strongly in favor of a public system...one that allows those who don't have coverage to get into an affordable program and to use several tax streams...including increasing taxes on those making over 150k a year, but also have it funded by our general taxes as well...thus funding and allowing a government funded system to evolve. But there are many who currently have policies and would like to keep them, willing to pay into a system for a government system, but still wanting to privately insure. There needs to be an option for people like me...similar to how we have public and private schools...while I pay for the public schools through my taxes, I do have the options (or did in my case) to send my children to a private school.

Again, I'm not comfortable with going from one health overlord to another and having the government play gatekeeper.

[mmonk]

25. You said it won't happen at a federal level and that was what I was

addressing. It's hard for me to see how administrative costs can be reduced without a singular approach. Also, we will still be paying for medicare which only has the elderly or high risk persons on it and still will be strapped looking for a way to pay for indigent care and subsidizing hospitals on the county level. Unless I'm wrong, I don't see where it is going to adequately close those costs and we still will have to deal with the lobbyists seeking stockholder profits.

[KharmaTrain]

31. It's A Double-Edge Sword

I keep going back to a lot of systemic problems that currently "on the table" that are keeping costs high...such as malpractice, but also the high costs of drugs that are protected by patents...these have contributed to soaring costs and it wouldn't matter if we have a private or public system the costs are going to be passed along one way or the other. Until we start seeing competition and/or reform in those areas, costs will continue to rise and will be passed along to the public in one form or another...either in higher taxes or "tiering" with a basic care that resembles today's catastrophic system. Money will be saved and made if people are healthier and this includes encouraging regular check-ups and a preventative approach to medicine and health care.


I'm no fan of the insurance companies or the current system...but until there is comprehensive reform the cost efficiency your addressing can't or won't happen.

Cheers...

[NNN0LHI]

36. I have never actually seen an example of a frivolous malpractice suit

To get a lawyer to even take on a malpractice suit someone would need need one doctor to go up against another doctor which isn't a very common thing to happen.

Cheers ... :hi:

Don

[peace13]

7. These threads are useless unless each poster divulges their current health insurance source.

As a small business person who pays $2400.00 a month for three employees, a group of three that will become ineligible if any of us get sick, thinks that we need a national source for health insurance. I see too many folks on Medicare, VA, Federal retirees and politicians that refuse to believe how bad the problem is out here. Folks, state your source of insurance before responding.

[hobbit709]

11. I'm on VA

My wife is paying $360/mo on COBRA, which runs out next month. Her current job is only 30hrs/wk so no benefits. We are both diabetics so between COBRA and copays we are shelling out $1000/mo-that is about 45% of our monthly income.

[peace13]

17. I hear that!

I don't understand how people can't see the extent of the problem. I feel like it is the end of the road without some type of national policy.

[mmonk]

13. I've thought of the VA as a poor analogy. If we go single payer,

there won't be any "single payer" hospitals. We're talking insurance.

[customerserviceguy]

8. I'm in agreement

We might have the numbers on paper, but in reality, the seats that we won from the Rethugs the last several years have been populated with politicians who know their districts could go GOP at any time. I doubt that we would even be in the majority in either the House or the Senate if it had not been for Iraq.

In other words, the Democratic Congress is there with a mandate to stop losing the lives of our servicepeople, and they haven't even been able to do that. If they can figure out how to keep us out of wars that we don't belong in, then maybe they can be trusted to figure out how to dig us out of the rest of our problems.

[ixion]

10. I agree

as with so many 'reform' movements, it's looking like it will simply make things worse, not better.

[kenfrequed]

14. Well..

I am on the fence here. When and where would the impetus for single payer come from? No matter when we try to fix the problem we will still have to fight the lackies of the insurance companies. Pick for me the perfect time to approach this problem and tell me how we get around those that benefit from 'for profit medical systems' and I will agree with you.

I ask 'when' because you seem to agree with me in the need for healthcare change so it can't be a question of 'if.'

I agree that the bill the finance committee has floated out is a piece of corporate wealthfare garbage. It might be better to evaluate the bills that came out of the two other committees, one of which has a strong public option that was put in by Kucinich, the other has an actual universal single payer system built into it.

The mistake we make is in talking about the Baccuus bill like it is the only one worthy of mention.

[HamdenRice]

15. So you confidently predict the future failure of reform, but want "facts and figures" to refute

your prediction?

Well, I'll just predict that as long as there's a public option, no previously existing condition, no coverage dropping, states' ability to adopt single payer, then it will work.

[mmonk]

22. I don't see the cost reduction. I usually go with established figures.

Establishing mandated insurance with multiple payers seems to me not to address many of the core cost issues. Could it be an improvement? Possibly. Would it be as cheap cost wise to those who have it? I don't know the answer. I do know the answer as to single payer. I'll have to pin my hopes for single payer on the states as long as if they went to it, they wouldn't also have to pay for medicaid.

[LWolf]

18. I agree. nt

[Echo In Light]

19. Like everything about the U.S. it boils down to Perception Management.

[salguine]

24. Thus far "reform" seems to be code for "maintaining the status quo at all costs".

[bvar22]

26. The ONLY glimmer of "Hope" has come from Kucinich....

...who was able to slip an amendment in the abomination currently in the House (HR 3200).
Kucinich's Amendment would allow individual States to implement their own Single Payer Systems.

[mmonk]

32. Yes, if not for that, I would be more frustrated.

It's not that I'm inflexible as I look for any help. It's just the arguments sometimes aren't genuine at all.

[mvd]

35. That was great!

Go Dennis. :thumbsup:

[datasuspect]

27. congressional reform = cash giveaway to well-heeled donor constituencies

banks, health industry, etc.

[truedelphi]

29. That's the sweet and short version of what I'd say. Thanks. n/t

[HughMoran]

28. I would agree if I thought a ground-up approach was likely to happen in my lifetime

Alas, I think that a single-payer system is just a pipe-dream so long as we see polls where an utter anti-humanity moron in the form of Palin getting 42% in a 2012 Presidential poll. We live in a country filled with selfish ass-holes. If you want single-payer healthcare, move to Canada or Europe. In the mean time, perhaps a public option will succeed and be our foot-in-the-door to an eventually single-payer system. It's how we do things in this divided country these days due to the hate-filled opportunists who would rather see the country fail versus losing political power. And their single-corpuscle followers can't see farther than the red nose in front of their ignorant faces.

[bvar22]

33. This "Public Option" (HR 3200) is NOT a "foot in the door" !

It "Firewalls" and Protects the For Profit Health Insurance Industry.

According to the CBO, ONLY 9 - 10 Million will be enrolled in the "Public Option" after 10 years.

THAT is NOT a "Public Option".
That is a crumb tossed to the American People while the MAJORITY will be MANDATED into the For Profit system.
The 72% of the American People calling for a Public Option are going to be very angry when they find out that they are being FORCED to buy For Profit Insurance, and only 3% will be enrolled in the Public Option after 10 years, AND it will only save them about 10%.

READ the fine Print!
Health Care Reform is being brought to you by the same people who brought you the Wall Street "Bailout".

[Rosa Luxemburg]

30. In government the wheels grind slowly so it is better to do something

The way the government works any reorganization will be a major upheaval. It is better to get people in the frame of mind for change. before we know it 2012 comes around and we could have Republican president again who might easily get rid of medicaid, medicare or any form of government provided service. The GOP would have some war to pretend that they couldn't afford. So I would say go and get what you can while you can.

[bvar22]

34. Doing "something" BAD....

..is WORSE than doing nothing.

Please READ about HR 3200 before joining the parade.