Thoughts on the passage of the health care bill?

[UCGal]

I just hope the house reconciliation stuff passes in the senate. The Senate version does not eliminate the anti-trust exemptions. The House reconciliation bill puts that in.

On some of the points mentioned previously… California already has medical malpractice tort reform. If a doctor amputates the wrong leg you are limited to $200k or so. The limit has not gone up since it passed in the 1975.

Here in CA we have very inexpensive health insurance compared to back east. My health insurance (same employer) was cut in half when I moved from Philly to San Diego. I assume this is because of the tort reform.

The largest health insurer in San Diego is Kaiser Permanente, a non-profit. I’ve got them. I am VERY pleased with my family’s doctors. My parents oncologists were REALLY good. Yes, I had to pay out of pocket when I wanted the genetic cancer test – I’m fine with that. (Was one dead relative short of meeting their criteria.) That’s the ONLY thing that Kaiser has denied me coverage for. But it’s no frills. No private rooms if you’re hospitalized. They don’t cover removal of skin-tags – expect you to pay for that yourself. But if you’re sick, or doing preventative care – they’re good.

This bill has some important fixes.

It eliminates the lifetime cap. As a person who has seen 2 family members fight and beat cancer… only to have a separate, unrelated cancer occur 20-30 years later – I am VERY afraid of lifetime caps. (and a 3rd member fight a long battle with her first and only cancer) It doesn’t take much before costs start accruing.

It addresses rescission. Where insurance companies take your money for years, then dump you if you get sick.

The rhetoric on the floor of the house last night, during the debate, was pretty over the top. One of the GOP congressmen conflated “Totalitarian Communist China” with the health care bill. I can see calling it socialist – but not communist. The shout of “Baby Killer” to Stupak… former darling of the GOP until he decided to vote for the bill. The exchange between Rep. Slaughter and Rep. Drier was completely rude (both parties involved.)

All in all, it’s far from a perfect bill – but it does address some of the problems. I hope, over time, more can be done to correct and fix the problems that still exist.

[poorgradstudent]

The bill falls somewhere between baby-step in the right direction and band-aid over a flesh wound. It will help cover a lot more Americans who need it. The costs will mostly fall upon the young, healthy, and currently uninsured. For your typical middle-class worker with health insurance through their employer it will be pretty negligible, aside from knowledge that more of our fellow human beings are covered.

It *probably* will be helpful to those who have to buy their own health insurance, such as small business owners.

Would single payer or actually switching to the Canadian style “socialism” Republicans tried to frame this bill as have been better? Yes. Single Payer would have done a lot more to control costs. And universal health care is the morally right thing to do, something every industrialized nation except the US has, and most of those countries enjoy a higher quality of care and life than we do. But change comes incrementally, and this is a step in the right direction.

[poorgradstudent]

The bill falls somewhere between baby-step in the right direction and band-aid over a flesh wound. It will help cover a lot more Americans who need it. The costs will mostly fall upon the young, healthy, and currently uninsured. For your typical middle-class worker with health insurance through their employer it will be pretty negligible, aside from knowledge that more of our fellow human beings are covered.

It *probably* will be helpful to those who have to buy their own health insurance, such as small business owners.

Would single payer or actually switching to the Canadian style “socialism” Republicans tried to frame this bill as have been better? Yes. Single Payer would have done a lot more to control costs. And universal health care is the morally right thing to do, something every industrialized nation except the US has, and most of those countries enjoy a higher quality of care and life than we do. But change comes incrementally, and this is a step in the right direction.

[poorgradstudent]

The bill falls somewhere between baby-step in the right direction and band-aid over a flesh wound. It will help cover a lot more Americans who need it. The costs will mostly fall upon the young, healthy, and currently uninsured. For your typical middle-class worker with health insurance through their employer it will be pretty negligible, aside from knowledge that more of our fellow human beings are covered.

It *probably* will be helpful to those who have to buy their own health insurance, such as small business owners.

Would single payer or actually switching to the Canadian style “socialism” Republicans tried to frame this bill as have been better? Yes. Single Payer would have done a lot more to control costs. And universal health care is the morally right thing to do, something every industrialized nation except the US has, and most of those countries enjoy a higher quality of care and life than we do. But change comes incrementally, and this is a step in the right direction.

[poorgradstudent]

The bill falls somewhere between baby-step in the right direction and band-aid over a flesh wound. It will help cover a lot more Americans who need it. The costs will mostly fall upon the young, healthy, and currently uninsured. For your typical middle-class worker with health insurance through their employer it will be pretty negligible, aside from knowledge that more of our fellow human beings are covered.

It *probably* will be helpful to those who have to buy their own health insurance, such as small business owners.

Would single payer or actually switching to the Canadian style “socialism” Republicans tried to frame this bill as have been better? Yes. Single Payer would have done a lot more to control costs. And universal health care is the morally right thing to do, something every industrialized nation except the US has, and most of those countries enjoy a higher quality of care and life than we do. But change comes incrementally, and this is a step in the right direction.

[poorgradstudent]

The bill falls somewhere between baby-step in the right direction and band-aid over a flesh wound. It will help cover a lot more Americans who need it. The costs will mostly fall upon the young, healthy, and currently uninsured. For your typical middle-class worker with health insurance through their employer it will be pretty negligible, aside from knowledge that more of our fellow human beings are covered.

It *probably* will be helpful to those who have to buy their own health insurance, such as small business owners.

Would single payer or actually switching to the Canadian style “socialism” Republicans tried to frame this bill as have been better? Yes. Single Payer would have done a lot more to control costs. And universal health care is the morally right thing to do, something every industrialized nation except the US has, and most of those countries enjoy a higher quality of care and life than we do. But change comes incrementally, and this is a step in the right direction.

[ucodegen]

Actually, Ucodegen didn’t quite “nail it”. This is a huge powergrab by the American Left and their toadies and stooges for 1/6 of the US economy.

I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.

I believe we will eventually see a repeal of this bill.

And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”. Remember what happened to the line item veto that was put in place for the president. It was brought before the Supreme Court and it was determined that it upset the balance between Congress and President as was originally determined by the founders of this country.

If you have cancer or a very expensive disease, then what do you think will happen to your savings if you have no insurance?

I have over 20 years of saving and investing what would have normally been paid into insurance. Have you ever taken all your payments into the insurance system and applied an internal rate of return of about 5% on it? The amount I have saved is more than the amount that insurance would generally cover. You have also failed to ask why cancer is so expensive to treat? Are the drugs really that expensive to manufacture? Why is the hospital bill for the room so high? What this bill does is stop you from really paying attention to the costs.. because it is covered and all you see are the monthly drip-drip-drip. Much in the same way that people concentrate on the monthly mortgage cost as a gauge whether a house is priced right, and ignore the total cost.. and then find themselves upside down.

I didn’t see auto rates increase in CA. In fact, my auto insurance rates have come down substantially when I switched to Wawanesa (A Canadian company that is very well managed).

It wasn’t the law that did it.. it was going to Wawanesa, which makes some questionable statements if you ever have to actually ‘collect’ on that insurance. My truck got hit by a person covered by Wawanesa and they tried to make the statement that they are not responsible because the person (a relative of the covered) was not on the insurance policy. It was clearly the fault of the person being covered. The truth is that they charge for the car and the car, not the person, is what is covered. If you have two cars and are the only driver, you get charged more.. though you can only drive one at a time.

[ucodegen]

Actually, Ucodegen didn’t quite “nail it”. This is a huge powergrab by the American Left and their toadies and stooges for 1/6 of the US economy.

I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.

I believe we will eventually see a repeal of this bill.

And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”. Remember what happened to the line item veto that was put in place for the president. It was brought before the Supreme Court and it was determined that it upset the balance between Congress and President as was originally determined by the founders of this country.

If you have cancer or a very expensive disease, then what do you think will happen to your savings if you have no insurance?

I have over 20 years of saving and investing what would have normally been paid into insurance. Have you ever taken all your payments into the insurance system and applied an internal rate of return of about 5% on it? The amount I have saved is more than the amount that insurance would generally cover. You have also failed to ask why cancer is so expensive to treat? Are the drugs really that expensive to manufacture? Why is the hospital bill for the room so high? What this bill does is stop you from really paying attention to the costs.. because it is covered and all you see are the monthly drip-drip-drip. Much in the same way that people concentrate on the monthly mortgage cost as a gauge whether a house is priced right, and ignore the total cost.. and then find themselves upside down.

I didn’t see auto rates increase in CA. In fact, my auto insurance rates have come down substantially when I switched to Wawanesa (A Canadian company that is very well managed).

It wasn’t the law that did it.. it was going to Wawanesa, which makes some questionable statements if you ever have to actually ‘collect’ on that insurance. My truck got hit by a person covered by Wawanesa and they tried to make the statement that they are not responsible because the person (a relative of the covered) was not on the insurance policy. It was clearly the fault of the person being covered. The truth is that they charge for the car and the car, not the person, is what is covered. If you have two cars and are the only driver, you get charged more.. though you can only drive one at a time.

[ucodegen]

Actually, Ucodegen didn’t quite “nail it”. This is a huge powergrab by the American Left and their toadies and stooges for 1/6 of the US economy.

I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.

I believe we will eventually see a repeal of this bill.

And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”. Remember what happened to the line item veto that was put in place for the president. It was brought before the Supreme Court and it was determined that it upset the balance between Congress and President as was originally determined by the founders of this country.

If you have cancer or a very expensive disease, then what do you think will happen to your savings if you have no insurance?

I have over 20 years of saving and investing what would have normally been paid into insurance. Have you ever taken all your payments into the insurance system and applied an internal rate of return of about 5% on it? The amount I have saved is more than the amount that insurance would generally cover. You have also failed to ask why cancer is so expensive to treat? Are the drugs really that expensive to manufacture? Why is the hospital bill for the room so high? What this bill does is stop you from really paying attention to the costs.. because it is covered and all you see are the monthly drip-drip-drip. Much in the same way that people concentrate on the monthly mortgage cost as a gauge whether a house is priced right, and ignore the total cost.. and then find themselves upside down.

I didn’t see auto rates increase in CA. In fact, my auto insurance rates have come down substantially when I switched to Wawanesa (A Canadian company that is very well managed).

It wasn’t the law that did it.. it was going to Wawanesa, which makes some questionable statements if you ever have to actually ‘collect’ on that insurance. My truck got hit by a person covered by Wawanesa and they tried to make the statement that they are not responsible because the person (a relative of the covered) was not on the insurance policy. It was clearly the fault of the person being covered. The truth is that they charge for the car and the car, not the person, is what is covered. If you have two cars and are the only driver, you get charged more.. though you can only drive one at a time.

[ucodegen]

Actually, Ucodegen didn’t quite “nail it”. This is a huge powergrab by the American Left and their toadies and stooges for 1/6 of the US economy.

I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.

I believe we will eventually see a repeal of this bill.

And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”. Remember what happened to the line item veto that was put in place for the president. It was brought before the Supreme Court and it was determined that it upset the balance between Congress and President as was originally determined by the founders of this country.

If you have cancer or a very expensive disease, then what do you think will happen to your savings if you have no insurance?

I have over 20 years of saving and investing what would have normally been paid into insurance. Have you ever taken all your payments into the insurance system and applied an internal rate of return of about 5% on it? The amount I have saved is more than the amount that insurance would generally cover. You have also failed to ask why cancer is so expensive to treat? Are the drugs really that expensive to manufacture? Why is the hospital bill for the room so high? What this bill does is stop you from really paying attention to the costs.. because it is covered and all you see are the monthly drip-drip-drip. Much in the same way that people concentrate on the monthly mortgage cost as a gauge whether a house is priced right, and ignore the total cost.. and then find themselves upside down.

I didn’t see auto rates increase in CA. In fact, my auto insurance rates have come down substantially when I switched to Wawanesa (A Canadian company that is very well managed).

It wasn’t the law that did it.. it was going to Wawanesa, which makes some questionable statements if you ever have to actually ‘collect’ on that insurance. My truck got hit by a person covered by Wawanesa and they tried to make the statement that they are not responsible because the person (a relative of the covered) was not on the insurance policy. It was clearly the fault of the person being covered. The truth is that they charge for the car and the car, not the person, is what is covered. If you have two cars and are the only driver, you get charged more.. though you can only drive one at a time.

[ucodegen]

Actually, Ucodegen didn’t quite “nail it”. This is a huge powergrab by the American Left and their toadies and stooges for 1/6 of the US economy.

I was trying to avoid being inflammatory. There are actually 2 possibilities. One is your example of “Everything will be provided for, but nothing will be available.” and the other of being taxed to death to maintain status-quo in the current care level.

I believe we will eventually see a repeal of this bill.

And/or a constitutional challenge. The end run that was done to pass it, contradicts constitutional provisions to prevent “abuse of majority”. The ability to filibuster provides a mechanism to prevent “abuse of majority”. Remember what happened to the line item veto that was put in place for the president. It was brought before the Supreme Court and it was determined that it upset the balance between Congress and President as was originally determined by the founders of this country.

If you have cancer or a very expensive disease, then what do you think will happen to your savings if you have no insurance?

I have over 20 years of saving and investing what would have normally been paid into insurance. Have you ever taken all your payments into the insurance system and applied an internal rate of return of about 5% on it? The amount I have saved is more than the amount that insurance would generally cover. You have also failed to ask why cancer is so expensive to treat? Are the drugs really that expensive to manufacture? Why is the hospital bill for the room so high? What this bill does is stop you from really paying attention to the costs.. because it is covered and all you see are the monthly drip-drip-drip. Much in the same way that people concentrate on the monthly mortgage cost as a gauge whether a house is priced right, and ignore the total cost.. and then find themselves upside down.

I didn’t see auto rates increase in CA. In fact, my auto insurance rates have come down substantially when I switched to Wawanesa (A Canadian company that is very well managed).

It wasn’t the law that did it.. it was going to Wawanesa, which makes some questionable statements if you ever have to actually ‘collect’ on that insurance. My truck got hit by a person covered by Wawanesa and they tried to make the statement that they are not responsible because the person (a relative of the covered) was not on the insurance policy. It was clearly the fault of the person being covered. The truth is that they charge for the car and the car, not the person, is what is covered. If you have two cars and are the only driver, you get charged more.. though you can only drive one at a time.

[citydweller]

I’m cautiously optimistic about the passage of this bill. My hope is that, if insurance companies can no longer drop people who get sick, they will realize it is in their best interest to focus their attention on how to keep people healthy.

They could become a pretty loud voice in the lobbying efforts to keep junk food out of schools, encouraging mothers to breast feed, creating walking and biking paths in neighborhoods, etc. They could also get behind the efforts to clean up our air, thus reducing the incidence of asthma.

[citydweller]

I’m cautiously optimistic about the passage of this bill. My hope is that, if insurance companies can no longer drop people who get sick, they will realize it is in their best interest to focus their attention on how to keep people healthy.

They could become a pretty loud voice in the lobbying efforts to keep junk food out of schools, encouraging mothers to breast feed, creating walking and biking paths in neighborhoods, etc. They could also get behind the efforts to clean up our air, thus reducing the incidence of asthma.

[citydweller]

I’m cautiously optimistic about the passage of this bill. My hope is that, if insurance companies can no longer drop people who get sick, they will realize it is in their best interest to focus their attention on how to keep people healthy.

They could become a pretty loud voice in the lobbying efforts to keep junk food out of schools, encouraging mothers to breast feed, creating walking and biking paths in neighborhoods, etc. They could also get behind the efforts to clean up our air, thus reducing the incidence of asthma.

[citydweller]

I’m cautiously optimistic about the passage of this bill. My hope is that, if insurance companies can no longer drop people who get sick, they will realize it is in their best interest to focus their attention on how to keep people healthy.

They could become a pretty loud voice in the lobbying efforts to keep junk food out of schools, encouraging mothers to breast feed, creating walking and biking paths in neighborhoods, etc. They could also get behind the efforts to clean up our air, thus reducing the incidence of asthma.

[Author]

Posts