world

Democrats roll out bill to extend health care to millions

39 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

39 Comments
Login to comment

"a government-run option to compete with private insurers"

How can private insurers compete with an entity that doesn't have to make a profit?

"It will kill jobs with tax hikes and new mandates"

No doubt.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let us see the effect of health care bill in the coming years,hopes it improves health care USA.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They would be required to spend 85% of their income from premiums on coverage, effectively limiting their ability to advertise or pay bonuses. Additionally, the industry would be stripped of immunity from antitrust regulations covering price fixing, bid rigging and market allocation. And in a late addition to the bill, 30-year-old restrictions on the Federal Trade Commission’s ability to look into the insurance industry would be erased.

I love it. OMG I love it.

Oh Sarge the only health care bill offered by the republicans before the democrats forced this issue is exactly what we have now. Nothing. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream - How can private insurers compete with an entity that doesn't have to make a profit?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How can private insurers compete with an entity that doesn't have to make a profit?

The same way the Japanese insurers do, I'd guess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge, by offering higher quality treatment (duh!). Public hospitals offer free basic treatment but if you want to jump the queue or see a doctor with lots of letters after his name, pay extra and go private.

Tens of millions of people will have the right to free health care. If Bush did this, you would be applauding from the rooftops.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Tens of millions of people will have the right to free health care.

Pretty darn hefty price tag for "free health care" if you ask me.

The Congressional Budget Office said the cost of additional coverage alone was slightly more $1 trillion over a decade.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream: THat's classic, isn't it? They're scared they might not have the same golden parachutes and be able to screw the customers. Tsk tsk. Only a mindless sheep would buy into THAT being a bad thing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge I can't believe you republicans. Health care insurance goes up faster than the rate of inflation every single year. And you aren't looking for a way to save money in health care insurance. You want to continue to pay a system that takes, throws up walls to keep from insuring people, who increase co-payments, reduce services at will and has no competition and with existing laws you can't even investigate their scams.

You don't want to pay more taxes, cause it's your money. But you'd rather pay more in insurance rates because why?

The republicans are bought and sold by the insurance companies and you allow it. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How can private insurers compete with an entity that doesn't have to make a profit? The same way the Japanese insurers do, I'd guess." You are kidding right?

You don't want to pay more taxes, cause it's your money. But you'd rather pay more in insurance rates because why?" Bedcause its being spent on me and I take damn good care of myself. Now, what will have to do is help pay for some disgustinly over weight smoker/drinker whose riddle with STD's and is too much of a cheapskate to pay for his own insurance. As for being turned down, notice that much of that takes place in states with what we are going to get.... The state mandates the health insurance laws which is why in many cases you can't cross statelines with it. That's a governmental screw up. I have yet to meet someone whose been turned down by all insurance companies available. A pre-existing condition can get you a refusal but the state can force the insurer to take you on in most states as ultimately, its up to the state on how insurance is bought and sold. Additionally, most of the costs that go up are due to sales taxes on a hospital's equipment, their protective measures agaimst malpracitce. I might as just stay in Japan, at least they aren't newbies at it. Boy I can't wait to start hearing the complaining after all this starts taking place.

On the bright side, in the begining, the gov is going to spend a whole lot of money trying to build this. time to get back into medical products. Since I'm probably going to have to pay out more than I do now!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong

time to get back into medical products.

I keep hearing that the medical products aren't going to be creating any new products. They keep saying that the medical products companies and the pharmaseudical (sp) companies aren't going to come up with any more new drugs or new products. And it's all Obama's fault. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream: You are dreaming again. No one says its going to be Obama's fault. There are still going to be private hospitals, universities, and private care providers who will now be able to refuse you service! If you really read my post, I said the beginning is going to be profitable but I do not have confidence in it in the long term and I am sure neither will the medtech and drug companies. We will ultimately end up with a monopoly. then we will say its Pelosi and Reid's fault. You see this really is more about politics than anything else. hey, you're old right? You won't mind paying more than you do now?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The insurance companies and money changers will always find a way to cut themselves in with profits and bonuses. Wait and see, it will be the doctors and nurses, who are already overworked and underpaid, who suffer most of all from this system. Even now dog and cat hospitals are more financially secure than most US medical facilities.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong: "...and private care providers who will now be able to refuse you service!"

You act like that's not at all the case now. You need to qualify your statement with, "who will now be able to refuse THE INSURED service". If you are referring to the uninsured, they get refused all the time now, which is the problem. Hell, even a lot of people WITH insurance have their claims rejected and in turn are refused further (or any) treatment. The point is now that places WON'T be able to refuse them (your average Joe, that is).

Anyway, I DO agree that places will still find ways to make money. It's also true that a certain amount of this is about politics, but I also believe that there are those who genuinely wish that everyone have access to health care.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

On a lighter note.....Only in America could you roll out 1,990 pages of legalese and bureaucratic jargon and call it "Reform".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Health care is NOT a right! People who say it is, do not understand the concept of "rights". The U.S.is well down the road to totalitarianism. THIS IS WRONG! We have the BEST system in the world. The gubmit will not get one cent from me. Certain groups will be privleged, the economy will tank, and the gubmint will grow...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith: forgive my typing abilities on these tiny keys.. What I meant was, like in Japan for the few private health care insurance providers that 90% don't know about, is that they are allowed to refuse you for various reasons. In the states, if you are refused, you can look for another company and in most cases, you can take action. You normally never hear when the government sides with the insurance companies, you only hear when they lose. Most think if you sue an insurance company, you are suing only that company, but you are not, you are basically taking the state to court was well. They have the final say in all of these matters, but that seems to never be discussed. What will most likely happen is the states will have to reason the health care providers from their grips and allow them to go completely private.

If you want an anology, think of the US education system. You have to pay into the system even though you send your kids to say Catholic school. The Catholic school is require to fulfil certain requirements, but in only a handful of states these days. In those states, the school can refuse you entry, and including discriminating against you, and its all within the law. The same is likely to happen with this.

As for "I DO agree that places will still find ways to make money. It's also true that a certain amount of this is about politics, but I also believe that there are those who genuinely wish that everyone have access to health care." Those that are leading this are going to make a lot out of it, believing that they won't and its not a reason for it to be pushed outside of politics means you've been looking at too many Norman Rockwell paintings. "but I also believe that there are those who genuinely wish that everyone have access to health care." for those that can't afford, there is and has always been medicaid. While working in my younger years, I've lots of young people driving up with nice fancy cars, nice clothes, coming in and telling us they don't have insurance. There still is no real unbiased data on who are the people that really need to get public support.

I'm against paying any more than I have to especially since I am living in Japan. Plus, I have no gripes what I get and I pay less than I pay in Japan with its national care and the sector my wife has us on. Basically, after getting sick one time here and seeing the quality of un-named hospital, I feel I'm getting ripped off. In fact, next time I'm sick, I'm going to some international clinic where I have to pay cash. I think its in Kamiyacho. But I am for it as already there is a lot of traffic about how we can cash in on it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skip: "Those that are leading this are going to make a lot out of it, believing that they won't and its not a reason for it to be pushed outside of politics means you've been looking at too many Norman Rockwell paintings"

Perhaps they will make a lot of money out of it, but again I'm willing to bet there are those who are hoping everyone is covered. But let's say you're against it SOLELY because there are people that will make money. Well, there are those who will make FAR more if this system is not put in place, namely the medical establishment and the companies as they are. Even if you choose based on that alone, the former seems the lesser of the two evils.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith: maybe you won't believe me, but as far as I am concerned we, Americans, are and will be in a catch-22 for a while. Best thing to do is to see how we can capitalize on it just like "most" of the politicians who will. There is no point in arguing about now, its a done deal. So you won't hear any complaints from me until I start paying increase coverage for myself, and the employees I have back in the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My hard earned tax Dollars are going to pay for the lazy and immoral`s healthcare, also millions of illegal aliens. Another great job lame duck Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"free health care"

Gosh, I didn't know that doctors, nurses, hospital staff, drug company workers, etc., work for free!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am not American but pay a bit of tax there and I do hope they spend it on free health care for all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

At least there is a public option as I've said before without one nothing would be accomplished. My fear is whether or not this will lead to increased rather than decreased premiums as insurers try to make up money for having to cover pre-existing conditions. There are still not enough price controls but at least someone is looking at the problem.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

DickMorris: That's a knee slapper, your hard earned dollars already pay for the "lazy" (read poor or unfortunate) people through S-Chip and Medicaid. Apparently that bothers you more than the millions of people who can't get coverage because of pre-existing conditions or get dropped when they get sick. I am not a fan of government but private insurance has been merely a scheme to make a few CEOs wealthy at the expense of the whole of American society.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I just left a briefing with the director from TRICARE North. He stated something that absolutely blew me away. In 2000, health care was the number 17 reason people gave for joining the military. In 2009, government health care is the 2nd most popular reason given for joining the Uniformed Forces.

It's time for health care reform, no matter what the mouth breathers say.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, taking into account a 2005 study that showed about half of bankruptcies in the US are caused by debt resulting from medical bills and most of those were from your "average Joe" demographic (google Himmelstein's study). More recent data shows that 1 in every 92 homeowners have been forced to foreclose on their homes, and of those, a quarter will be due to medical bill debt (http://works.bepress.com/christopher_robertson/2/). That means about 1 in every 350 homes will be sold from under a family's feet so as to settle medical bills. This has a huge flow-on cost to the US economy. This isn't illegal workers or lazy layabouts we're talking about here, but average Americans.

The whole "I'm not paying for some lazy, disease-ridden illegal alien's healthcare" argument really is just a huge strawman argument. But hey, who am I to argue if you want keep rolling the dice and hoping you don't get rolled by the system. In my country we have a national healthcare system and the total number of people here who've lost their houses due to medical bills.... zero. I personally take out private healthcare because the private companies offer me extras that the government system doesn't. It's called competition. Companies offer services that people want and they do well. That's the way things work.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I personally take out private healthcare because the private companies offer me extras that the government system doesn't. It's called competition.

Thank you for dropping a logic bomb on this argument.

The canard that insurance companies won't be able to compete is an argument a 3rd grader could beat.

Other businesses have been able to compete with the govt. and thrive. FedEx does just fine competing against the government's USPS.

A little honest thought and research would go so far in the health care debate but as long as ODS is in full swing, stupid soundbytes is all we will ever hear.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong

adaydream: You are dreaming again. No one says its going to be Obama's fault.

I enjoy listening to Shawn Hannity, Laura Ingram and Mike Savage. I hear how the conservatives blame everything on Obama. Some times they sound so desperate that they shreak and whine telling me how Obama, Reed and Pelosi are ruining the country. Calling Obama and his ilk Marxist, Socialist and Communist. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"In 2009, government health care is the 2nd most popular reason given for joining the Uniformed Services"

Let's hear it for government health care! lol

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So tanglewood, where would you draw the line on compensation? How would you establish tort reform? I'm not for tort reform, but I'm just trying to see your side. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka

The canard that insurance companies won't be able to compete is an argument a 3rd grader could beat.

Other businesses have been able to compete with the govt. and thrive. FedEx does just fine competing against the government's USPS.

How are they suppose to compete with this restriction put on them if this passes?

They would be required to spend 85% of their income from premiums on coverage, effectively limiting their ability to advertise or pay bonuses.

Sounds real fair if they can't even advertise their services anymore doesn't it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream,

So tanglewood, where would you draw the line on compensation? How would you establish tort reform? I'm not for tort reform, but I'm just trying to see your side. < :-)

You might find this very interesting......Tort reform works, boy does it work.

When Sam Houston was still hanging his hat in Tennessee in the 1830s, it wasn't uncommon for fellow Tennesseans who were packing up and moving south and west to hang a sign on their cabins that read "GTT" – Gone to Texas.

Today obstetricians, surgeons and other doctors might consider reviving the practice. Over the past three years, some 7,000 M.D.s have flooded into Texas, many from Tennessee. [Why Doctors Are Heading for Texas] Corbis

Sam Houston.

Why? Two words: Tort reform.

In 2003 and in 2005, Texas enacted a series of reforms to the state's civil justice system. They are stunning in their success. Texas Medical Liability Trust, one of the largest malpractice insurance companies in the state, has slashed its premiums by 35%, saving doctors some $217 million over four years. There is also a competitive malpractice insurance industry in Texas, with over 30 companies competing for business. This is driving rates down.

The result is an influx of doctors so great that recently the State Board of Medical Examiners couldn't process all the new medical-license applications quickly enough. The board faced a backlog of 3,000 applications. To handle the extra workload, the legislature rushed through an emergency appropriation last year.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121097874071799863.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hey Taka, do you feel comfortable knowing a guy like me was one of those providing you with such health care services?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Before the asbestos and silica MDLs were created, nonmalignancy plaintiffs settled with defendants for anywhere between $30,000 to $150,000 per case. No one knows how many bogus cases were settled in the state with large cash payments. Lawyers who specialized in defending those cases say there were tens of thousands.

i read with interest the article on tort reform supplied by sailwind. Interesting article. The above example sited is an example of stopping ambulance chasers and frivilious cases, which I agree with totally.

The tort reform that certain doctors are screaming about is limiting all law suits at $250K and no-fault findings.

Sure you'll get good doctors to come to Texas. You'll get more bad doctors who can't practice in other states anymore or don't want to chance their sloppy doctoring getting caught in another state.

But to give carte blanche and amnesty to fault like so many are looking for is unreasonable. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skip,

None at all. Should I?

Sail,

LIMIT ADVERTISING....and their bonuses.

Wrong emphasis. Where did you go?

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313, did I miss something? How is skipthesong providing your health care service? < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yeah, I'm not sure there either Alan. But, Skip has my respect. We had our differences but put them behind us I believe. Plus, he's a musician so you know he can't be all bad. ;-)

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

With this healthcare reform bill, Obama will sell out America's future to create a new entitlement that will be fraud-ridden and abused. Liberals love to spend money, especially when it's someone elses.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Orrin Hatch recently did something rather uncharacteristic for a republican. He told the truth when he said that republicans aren't worried about health care reform failing, they are worried about it being a success because they know a grateful nation will turn to the Democratic party and the republicans will lose even more relevence.

Honestly, I'm far from surprised that the republicans would stick it to Americans in order to stay relevant.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites