Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. The VA is not satisfying people who use this because I'm a physician who sees patients in the VA so I have direct experience with this and the VA rations cares and veterans are not happy with that. The VA is limited to certain medications and there are unnecessary bureacratic protocols that must be followed to get procedures done. Patients have to satisfy certain requirements to get studies that private insurance doesn't impose. Medicaid and the Indian Health Clinic are also a govt run system that provides rationed care. Medicare is a system that people are generally content with but even with Medicare, people buy supplemental insurance. Medicare is also limited to a certain percent of the population. I'm not sure how it would function if it covered everyone.
2. I agree completely that Insurance companies have a monopoly. I also agree that insurance companies have abused the system. But I also think that a public option will cause most insurance companies to go out of business because the govt. can dictate price and policy with no recourse from anyone. As physicians we see this. Medicare continue to lower reimbursement for physicians over the long term. Sure, some years it may increase it but overall, it's been a steady decline in reimbursement. Our costs continue to increase yet our reimbursement continues to fall. There is no recourse by physicians.
3. If we could create a Public Option that could be kept in check so that it doesn't abuse its resources and undercuts private insurance to the degree that they can't compete, I'm all for it. I don't mind a cheaper option being available. I just don't trust it and think it will ultimatley lead to a single payer system.
Medicare reimbursement needs to be revamped in order to meet the rising costs of physicians in our country. I know of several physicians in PA who are not practicing anymore due to malpractice insurance rates which is just another problem that should be addressed with this bill. I think if a public option is limited to those with a certain income level, the insurance companies won't have a thing to worry about. It was never meant to take over all health care, anyway. It is just that, an option. Let's just hope that they don't put ridiculous restrictions on it that would allow people to fall through the cracks as they do with Medicaid.
AZRiverFan, you make it sound so simple and I mean that in a complimentary way, yet as usual, the Democrats vs. the Republicans are fighting like children. It doesn't matter which party is in office, it always happens. As long as the insurance lobbyists are as well-funded and strong as they are, they will have too many people in their pocket who will prevent reform.
As far as the VA goes, my father received excellent care when he was there in Wilmington, DE. No runaround, no wait, great doctors who were very thorough yet I've heard the complaints about the VA from other doctors and patients. Does it vary by state? Thanks for taking care of our vets.
(1) Medicare reimbursement needs to be revamped in order to meet the rising costs of physicians in our country. I know of several physicians in PA who are not practicing anymore due to malpractice insurance rates which is just another problem that should be addressed with this bill. I think if a public option is limited to those with a certain income level, the insurance companies won't have a thing to worry about. It was never meant to take over all health care, anyway. It is just that, an option. Let's just hope that they don't put ridiculous restrictions on it that would allow people to fall through the cracks as they do with Medicaid.
(2) AZRiverFan, you make it sound so simple and I mean that in a complimentary way, yet as usual, the Democrats vs. the Republicans are fighting like children. It doesn't matter which party is in office, it always happens. As long as the insurance lobbyists are as well-funded and strong as they are, they will have too many people in their pocket who will prevent reform.
(3) As far as the VA goes, my father received excellent care when he was there in Wilmington, DE. No runaround, no wait, great doctors who were very thorough yet I've heard the complaints about the VA from other doctors and patients. Does it vary by state? Thanks for taking care of our vets.
(1) I would be in favor of a Public Option being limited to people of a certain income level say 50K or less. I want to increase access to healthcare. This would not drive out insurance companies either. I think this is a good solution and I think many physicians would be okay with this as well.
(2) I would agree I'm simplifying it to a degree. I don't know how many of those reforms they will actually adhere to. I know the Insurance lobby is powerful. However, I don't think you and many like you have realized that the insurance industry is fighting for their lives and realize the Public Option threatens their very existance. With that in mind, the Insurance industry is willing to make reforms if it means they can still exist. So I don't think these proposed reforms by the Insurance industry are taken lightly. I know the Insurance industry wouldn't want to see this happen again in 6 years.
The one thing people don't discuss is the fact that attorneys particularly trial lawyers are very powerful as well. They don't want to see any type of nationalized tort reform or caps on punitive damages. They even distort the truth about punitive damages. Most don't realize that punitive damages are those damages that are separate from the awards given for current medical costs, future medical costs, lost earnings and future lost earnings. The public thinks that limiting punitive damages will hurt the patients who were harmed and it wouldn't. It would hurt the lawyers who jack up punitive damages so they can make money on it. Lawyers want the freedom to sue for 1 million + in punitive damages so that they make more money from it. We talk about the Insurance Industry but we always seem to turn a blind to the Lawyers. Defensive medicine is proposed to be 1/3 of the wasteful spending in healthcare. That is a result of trial lawyers who will sue doctors for anything. We have to practice defensive medicine. What occurs in these lawsuits is that a patient will approach an attorney or vice versa if a damage has occurred. The attorney will then go through the chart and all documents looking for any mis-step, any diagnostic test that wasn't ordered, any procedure that wasn't done. People complain about getting too many CT scans but a lawyer will ask why a CT wasn't ordered if a patient comes to harm. Just watch television and you will see attorney ads fishing for lawsuits. Every medication has some type of side effect and now even common antibiotics like Levofloxaxin are being targeted by attorneys. I have no problem addressing the Insurance industry but let's be fair about this. The Democrats have their own sugar daddy and it's funny how the lawyers seem to stay out of these discussions.
(3) Yes, VA hospitals vary by state. Some are new and have nicer facilities. I live in Phoenix and our VA is rather old but it's not the worst. I will hear veterans mention that a VA hospital in another place was a lot nicer, less busy and their experience overall was better there. However, the protocols are the same with regards to what medications can be used and getting procedures approved at all VA hospitals. Most of the VA patients I see can't afford private health insurance. But I know a lot middle class veterans including many physicians who will elect to be seen in a private hospital over the VA. I know many of them who will go to the VA ER because the wait times are less but if they undergo an elective procedure, they will usually try to go to a private hospital.
Last edited by azriverfan.; 10-01-2009 at 04:30 PM..
I think that a lot of responsible people won't be able to afford premiums. I could never pay thousands a year for coverage. I would have to live in a slide in camper down by the river, and keep just enough in the bank for expenses, and paying my doc if need be until Medicare kicks in. It's sad when responsible people have to resort to "Voluntary poverty" to get by. I would rather pay my doc than an insurance company that gouges me. Staying healthy is higher on my list than big screen TV sets. (in a slide in camper down by the river) My other option is to get married. Forget that !
The GOP- despite its 'crocodile tears' for 'protecting Seniors and Medicare', it is proof they speak out of both sides their mouths. As posters above have said- Republicans have been trying to destroy the program for years.
Ronald Reagan came on TV in 1964 and called medicare for older Americans, 'socialism'- LBJ got a mere handful of GOP votes in 1965 for it. Reagan would have loved to destroy Medicare during his time as President. GW Bush wanted to privatize it- and yes Dick Armey and other right wingers would love to see it destroyed entirely with their various conservative organizations - that are corporate backed.
Also, the republican party since the 1920's has obstructed every type of federal legislation to help people- and voted for every type of tax loophole or gain for the wealthy and corporations.
The only reason the current economic downturn has not been worse, is because of the changes and reforms FDR made in the mid 1930s (social security, the FDIC, SEC) and by medicare/medicaid 1965, under LBJ, initially proposed by JFK.
When I hear Senator Grassley, saying that Social Security and Medicare have become ' a fabric of American Society' it is proof of the hypocrisy and short sightedness of the republican party and its lack empathy or understanding regarding the basic inequities of life in their vaunted free market capitalist system, which has only been saved by 'socialist measures'.
In a sharp switch from their historic reproach of government-backed health care, Republicans on Capitol Hill this year are embracing Medicare in their bid to kill the Democrats’ health reform plans.
Last year, when the Bush administration rolled out its annual budget proposing more than $500 billion in Medicare cuts, many Republican leaders cheered the legislation as a necessary move in the direction of fiscal responsibility.
Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), then-minority whip, called the cuts “the needed first-step” to lend Medicare “a solid economic footing.” House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said the proposal marked “an important starting point” for reining in Medicare spending. And Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.), senior Republican on the House Budget Committee, cheered the plan for taking “a significant, critical step toward addressing the greatest threat to our nation’s future strength and prosperity — the unsustainable growth of our largest entitlement programs.”
What a difference a year can make.
Yale political scientist Jacob Hacker echoed that message, pointing out that conservatives have proposed cuts to Medicare long before last year’s Bush administration budget, including a fierce push in the mid-1990s originated by then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), who promoted the idea of allowing Medicare to “wither on the vine.” The current opposition from Republicans the the Democrats’ proposals, Hacker said, is “nakedly hypocritical.”
Yep, it's those evil Republicans who are in the minority in both houses killing the reforms that 59% of Americans oppose. Thanks for doing your homework on this one.
The GOP- despite its 'crocodile tears' for 'protecting Seniors and Medicare', it is proof they speak out of both sides their mouths. As posters above have said- Republicans have been trying to destroy the program for years.
Ronald Reagan came on TV in 1964 and called medicare for older Americans, 'socialism'- LBJ got a mere handful of GOP votes in 1965 for it. Reagan would have loved to destroy Medicare during his time as President. GW Bush wanted to privatize it- and yes Dick Armey and other right wingers would love to see it destroyed entirely with their various conservative organizations - that are corporate backed.
Also, the republican party since the 1920's has obstructed every type of federal legislation to help people- and voted for every type of tax loophole or gain for the wealthy and corporations.
The only reason the current economic downturn has not been worse, is because of the changes and reforms FDR made in the mid 1930s (social security, the FDIC, SEC) and by medicare/medicaid 1965, under LBJ, initially proposed by JFK.
When I hear Senator Grassley, saying that Social Security and Medicare have become ' a fabric of American Society' it is proof of the hypocrisy and short sightedness of the republican party and its lack empathy or understanding regarding the basic inequities of life in their vaunted free market capitalist system, which has only been saved by 'socialist measures'.
You're working form the assumption that federal legislation helps people.
I like the option I heard the other day, eliminate employer healthcare, open it up to all the states to bring the cost down and have an IRS credit to help pay for it. This way you buy your own insurance and have control and not the government. With some tort reform, I think it would be great.
Also, just because repubs point out that seniors are going to be hurt by a reduction to medicare doesn't mean that repubs change their beleifs in social programs. We're just pointing out the hypocracy of the left.
I like the option I heard the other day, eliminate employer healthcare, open it up to all the states to bring the cost down and have an IRS credit to help pay for it. This way you buy your own insurance and have control and not the government. With some tort reform, I think it would be great.
Also, just because repubs point out that seniors are going to be hurt by a reduction to medicare doesn't mean that repubs change their beleifs in social programs. We're just pointing out the hypocracy of the left.
And last night, Dwyer's amendment was voted down because Baucus and other members of the House and Senate have their hands in the pocket of insurance companies and labor unions.
I have to laugh when I hear about politicians complaining about "entitlement" programs. Yet they think they are entitled to lifelong benefits and money for their pensions for only a few years service in many cases.
Although I am a registered Independent and usually vote Democratic in the majority of elections, I'm disgusted with both parties right now and their lack of awareness of the problem in this country regarding healthcare. Our representatives never have to worry about THEIR healthcare ever again, so they have lost sight of the goal, to make healthcare affordable for ALL Americans. They are so busy worried about making sure their lobbyists are happy and in the case of the GOP, making sure Obama fails at anything he proposes, we're the ones being hurt. I was reading an editorial earlier written by someone who was on Medicare who basically was saying that healthcare wasn't a right that we were entitled to, guess they forgot about their own healthcare that was now in part being funded by the taxpayers. When people pull their heads out of the sand and stop being selfish, maybe then things will change. Yet when we hear from RW pundits who have wonderful coverage and make enormous salaries that nobody is dying from lack of insurance, and there are idiots who truly believe them, it's a sad reflection of many in society.
You're working form the assumption that federal legislation helps people.
It doesn't. It creates poverty and death.
Consider yourself extremely fortunate if you never find yourself in need of assistance. What a close minded view and very selfish, too. How many people wouldn't be able to feed their families when they've lost their jobs, burned through their savings and had to turn to unemployment, food stamps, Medicaid, and other federally funded programs? Those very programs are life saving in many situations and if you think it could NEVER happen to you, you're dead wrong. Just ask some of the families who were financially secure a few years ago but due to the economy are now struggling on a day to day basis. Would you prefer that people starve or die?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
