A Health Care Bill or An Insurance Bill? What is the President Pushing? This Poll Will Be Educating.

Which is the President pushing Congress to pass so that he can sign?

I get the sense that, in spite of all the fevered posting by a very tiny, but vocal minority here, that the great majority of DU'ers feel that this current bill is an insurance bill more than a true health care bill.

I also feel that the great majority of progressives here believe that health care is a right of citizenship at birth and no one should ever need to purchase insurance "in case" they get sick.

I believe it is a right of citizenship just as it is in every developed nation on earth, except in the U.S.

I will look forward to seeing how the poll turns out and to see the pulse here at the DU.

Please kick this up from time to time so that everyone will have a chance to vote. I'm still very ill and don't get to my computer as much as I'd like.

I'm not surprised.

Insurance pays for access to health care. Single payer isn't health care either. The system is not the care. Insurers have been denying access to health care and will be banned from doing so when reform is passed. Their profits will be limited and the government will have greater control over rate increases. As for health care, that is provided by doctors.

You can only use insurance to access care if you can afford your share. Low actuarial valued plans that poor people can afford don't always allow this.


"Single payer isn't health care either"

My single payer plan has NO copay and NO deductible. Dont be disingenuous. Many single payer plans do not encourage economic rationing among the lower classes, as low actuarial value plans do

something to stare at.

"My single payer plan has NO copay and NO deductible." What state are you in?

I'm a self-employed business man with a family. Much better deal here on insurance than when I lived in the states 2 years ago, uninsured in a rural community in Oregon

And yes, people have to stare at it if they have no ability to afford the deductible or copays. I'm sorry you cannot follow this simple argument, but people exist (many) who cannot use health insurance that has a 70% actuarial value. In fact, some can't use it at 90%. Especially if you have a family.

Hell, from food poisonings to pneumonia in my two children, I went to the doctor 6 times last month (at NO expense). Even with good plans, many people can't afford that. And no, I don't overuse as my family wasn't in an office for many months before then. Sometimes you get hit out of the blue unexpectedly. The poor shouldn't be punished for being victims of circumstance.

Im sure you have a point you can copy and paste from somewhere.

Seems fine to me.

It's wearing thin.

Knee jerk partisan hackery, and personal attackery. As Socrates said to one of his more stubborn (and overmatched) opponents, "this fellow positively refuses to be improved."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0">Bolded Blind Link

Authorities on everything must follow the standard protocol to prove the seriousness of their authority.

You shut that down. :thumbsup:

Under PPO plans, hospitals and other providers discount fees charges to members of insurance plans that are not available to patients who pay out of pocket. In the case of BC/BS of Illinois, those discounts can amount to one third of the bill.

The lower the actuarial value on a health plan, the more it resembles a dental plan in reality (other than the annual caps). And with those plans, you don't have to merely have them, but you have to have a decent amount of money to even us them.

Under the Senate bill, these new plans being created will actually be plans that will require the covered individual to put up a reasonable chunk of the costs at point of service. This will cause widespread economic rationing among the poor (studies have confirmed it takes but minor fees to do so). Having this type of plan will not enable many to have any more access to care than before. All it enables is the insurance companies to provide a policy that will never be used (which the government is paying for). Its a great racket.

And do not forget, it's a big gimme to Wall Street too. Insurers take our payments and play the casino on The Street with the money. This is a way to get around our refusal to 'privatize' (send to Wall Street firms) Social Security with holdings to prop up that ponzi scheme. By MANDATING purchase of a product that really does not enable us to get care, they are basically doing an end run of direct with holdings from wages going to brokerages on The Street. Insurance execs get a cut for laundering the money.

More corporate welfare, nothing to really improve health care.

I'll remember you said this: "Insurance pays for access to health care." That would seem like a punch line to a joke to the rest of the civilized world.

I am conflicted on this bill but a single payer system would indeed provide health care to all. It may have its own problems, say waiting lists, but rich and poor alike would be able to use it. There is a real problem if you have an insurance which requires alot of out of pocket before it kicks in.

As for health care, profits will continue to be provided.

Only occasionally.

is being soldered into place until the end of time. Buy insurance stocks with the pennies in the jar on your kitchen counter.

Brought to us by a Democratic President.

and have it function well without any major changes. Just a stupid and lazy concept. We need a new engine, he wants to change the oil and get better upholstery for the seats.

And there seems to be a real disregard as to how this bill could cost the Democrats to lose the House in November, lose control of the committees and the right to subpoena. Obama doesn't face the voters for another 3 years, but every member in the House is up in eight months.

There has to be insurance reform before there can be healthcare reform.

It's just a government run insurance program. A Health Care bill would be like National Health. Where the government controls say, who becomes a doctor, where they can practice, what technology gets invested in etc... Very few Americans are in favor of that. Many want a universal coverage plan however.

what the insurance industry offers. I don't think you can call "Medicare for all" insurance reform.
See Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_insurance

by putting the insurance companies to heel; instead, they're being given the leash.

Revealing, huh? And it's exactly what I thought.

Medicare for all. Rep. Grayson introduced a bill to allow any American to buy into Medicare. I like that. A lot.

"Health Care Plan." That says something about how happy Big Pharma and Insurance are.

They are happy indeed.

After all, they practically wrote it!

Hopefully you'll get a bigger sample of DU opinion.

I'm not surprised by the results. I read thru the threads and see how the majority here feels. It doesn't seem that way because a few post with great fervor, but there it is.

and in the end...I think he wants to be a ONE TERMER. His future is secure....he can go off like Clinton and Carter and "Do Good Works" making money from BIG DONORS who just "LOVE BIG WORKS" in Foreign Countrys...NOT OUR OWN. Or, he has a job with Rahm or Summers or the Rest who will be SECURE working for the BIG BANKS he BAILED OUT.

I don't WORRY for OBAMA.... I worry for WHAT HE LEFT BEHIND!

It makes me sadder every day...and gives nightmares to those who thought he might just be the antidote to DECADES OF "TRICKLE DOWN."

He is for HIMSELF...and if it doesn't work out he and his family are still GOLDEN...but those he promised much too...are all over the age groups and won't have his advantages.

But, hey...We rolled the Dice...and we Lost.

That's change!

but, I worry that many here are in favor of an "Insurance Bill"...not getting the "nuance" in your post.

So...it might come out skewed...in some way. :shrug:

Trades a few crumbs from Master's Table (which we probably won't even get when the lobbyist-lawyers are done with it) in exchange for a MAJOR step closer to true Neofeudalism.

And market it to the left as "health care reform" when it is the institutionalization of, at minimum, a generation locked into corporate/for-profit control with some 30 million new "customers" forced to buy their product by the law of the land.

I've studied the threads and the post on this subject and I found that an extremely tiny minority appears -- by preponderance of posting -- to be larger, when under analysis, the opposite is true. The great majority of posters here (who don't post like paint ball spray in every thread three and four times) feel exactly as this poll shows.

As you said, "pretty decisive". The DU is a smart community.

That's what makes me truly despair.

The final nail in the coffin was the corporatization and neutralization of the M$M. Operation Mockingbird v2.0, much of it right in plain sight, things are so far along now.

We are kidding ourselves if we don't think DU is subject to the Busho-Corporate PR manipulations here, as well.

It is simply impossible to pull away from the RW-Corporate Dominant Media Narrative, even for those who know of it and actively try to resist it.

"It just sort of seeps in," as an American diplomat returning from a year in Nazi Germany in the mid-30s said upon his return home. It seeps in and there is not much we can do except shout ourselves hoarse into a Busho-Corporate maelstrom over which we can never be heard.

No one is immune, not even we who actively fight against it, for it penetrates into our subconscious', which is where all the best advertising and marketing does it's work.

In fact my view is much of the opposition comes from people who think that this is "THE" health care bill, the one and final one people have been pushing for for 70 years that will move us from desperation to the promised land. It isn't, it is a health insurance reform bill. It is designed to reform how health insurance companies act and treat their customers. And we need that reform.

'Health care reform' would entail single payer, comparative effectiveness, outsourcing of some procedures, massive restructuring, etc. This isn't health care reform, it is health insurance reform. And no matter a person's positions on health care reform, it should be clear that we need insurance reform.

feel better :)

A handful of prolific posters and just that: a handful.

Feel better. You are in good company.

I hope you feel better soon David. :hug:

they are guaranteed to be fat, happy and first in line for federal gravy. Once it passes, the bill will be fixed - fixed to provide thicker and thicker gravy to insurance racketeers in the form of taxpayer funded subsidies. Healthcare in America will go through a series of regular episodic "crises", in which the need to ladle ever more sauce to the insurance companies will seize headlines and hostages because ZOMG!! They are our healthcare system, and if they collapse millions of American's lives and health will be in peril !11!!! WE MUST PASS THE NEXT BAILOUT NOW!11!11
Eventually this will lead to a taxpayer revolt headed by Republican demagogues, and the stinking corrupt govt-insurance-mafia syndicate will be beheaded - but replaced with nothing. The idea of "govt-run" healthcare will have been deeply discredited, and real Democrats will have a harder task than ever to revive it.

.

This is just the first step that allows the insurance companies to line up for subsidies and bailouts. Every so often, the insurance companies will line up at the trough, claiming that they will "go under" because of the added costs of having to insure people with pre-existing conditions, etc. Since they will be insuring so many people, they will be in the "too big to fail" category and they will have to be bailed out "for the good of the American people."

As for health care, I couldn't be happier with my current coverage. I pay ~$60/mo, my copays are $11 for a doctor visit, $8 for a prescription,
and everything is covered 100%. My doc is absolutely fantastic. I couldn't ask for better. There is a big emphasis on preventative care and annual physicals as well as associated tests (e.g., mammograms, etc.) are mandatory and have no copay. They reimburse me $20 for my health club membership for each month I work out 8 times or more. I joined a health club last year and go 5-6 times/week. I visited the doc only once last year for a weird viral infection. The health club membership paid off in spades for both my health care company and me. I'm healthier and happier and their costs are down. Everybody wins. It only makes sense.

So, how is it I have this fantastic plan? It's through a non-profit HMO, the key phrase there being "non-profit." Everyone in this country deserves to have the same exact coverage I have. Take the profit out of "health insurance" and turn it into "health care" and it would be economically feasible.

Now, I'm not rich* by any stretch of the imagination (not even remotely) but I'd be willing to pay more for my health care if it meant that everyone in this country would have the same exact coverage I currently have. It's the right thing to do. Take the profit out of the system, implement a single-payer plan and it's possible and everyone benefits. With the current system, only the people at the top benefit.

* I don't make much but I feel positively rich every time I need to utilize my health care and know I won't have to fork out money left and right and have to fight them up and down to get them to pay the bills. I pay a co-pay at the time of the visit and never see a bill. My health care is as hassle-free as it can be. I truly couldn't ask for better. So I guess in that sense, I'm actually rich.

Keep on voting. I'd love to see DUers' vote on this one.