quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

quote:

With 50 percent of household bankruptcies now due to medical bills, the disease-based U.S. economy has reached a degree of financial absurdity that threatens to bankrupt the whole country.

this.

This is why this is so critical an issue. Even if you can get your head around the notion of letting millions of people suffer and die, the fact is that even for those of us who are covered, this is a threat.

My company for instance, is required by the marketplace to provide insurance- in order to attract skilled professionals, you have to offer one or your competitors will.
But last year we spent more on our health plan than we did for corporate income tax.

Meaning, that for all the Republican wailing about "Tax Cuts", what we really would benefit from is a Democratic plan to reform health care.

I will say it again- it is the Democrats who are more understanding of the long term interests of small businesses and the working professionals.

The Republicans are stuck in 1979.

quote:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

If it is does not specifically give the feds the authority, then it is reserved to the states.

quote:



Read the Commerce Clause and the decisions based thereon.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

It rolls over into the hospital costs, lab costs, radiology costs, Dr costs, ect. Medicare and Medicaid also pay a portion of the unpaid hospital portions. Posted that a while back, im not going to look it up again.

WASHINGTON — The average U.S. family and their employers paid an extra $1,017 in health care premiums last year to compensate for the uninsured, according to a study to be released Thursday by an advocacy group for health care consumers.
Families USA, which supports expanded health care coverage, found that about 37% of health care costs for people without insurance — or a total of $42.7 billion — went unpaid last year. That cost eventually was shifted to the insured through higher premiums, according to the group.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/insurance/2009-05-28-hiddentax_N.htm

During 2007, South Carolina hospitals provided $1.3 billion in care to persons who were either uninsured or underinsured. Much of that was spent treating preventable diseases or diseases that could have been treated much more effi ciently and successfully with early diagnosis. And all of those costs were passed on to insured patients as higher hospital bills, which ultimately lead to higher premiums. In the United States, the average insured family pays an additional $922 in premiums each year to help cover the health care bills of uninsured patients. So uninsured or not, each of us is a victim of the crisis.

http://www.scha.org/covering-carolina

And private coverage for the average individual costs an extra $370 a year because of the cost-shifting, which happens when someone without medical insurance gets care at an emergency room or elsewhere and then doesn't pay.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=7693941

quote:

"Ronald A. Williams, chairman and chief executive of Aetna Inc., gave the example of a local community hospital that provides care to someone without insurance who arrives at the emergency room. When it's not paid for, the hospital has to raise its rates to insurance companies, and they pass that on in higher premiums, Williams said."

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Do you have anything other than anecdotal evidence tazzy? Many of you far left radicals seem willing to say anything to push an agenda (see "Global Warming") and at times even seem to believe the lies and distortions that you push at the rest of us.

And that list you provided included wait times for cancers, too. I don't know why you choose to deliberately overlook that.

Of the 30 million the far left claims are uninsured, every one of them has access to medical care. Emergency rooms are always open to them and there are free clinics in most cities, and so on. Its nowhere near the nightmare that you seem to want people to believe it is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Keep it in perspective, sanity. Emergency cases do not wait. And here in the good ole usa, i had to wait 6 weeks for my knee surgery. And two weeks for the MRI. No matter what system your using... you WILL have wait times.

quote:

Of the 30 million the far left claims are uninsured, every one of them has access to medical care. Emergency rooms are always open to them and there are free clinics in most cities, and so on. Its nowhere near the nightmare that you seem to want people to believe it is.

I signed up for the Catholic Charities here... im on a year long waiting list to see their Drs and dentists. The ER is nice, as long as its a true emergency. They turn away non emergent cases. I need to see a specialist for my kidneys per the ER Dr when i went a few months back. I cant get an appointment because i dont have insurance and no one will work with me on payments.

So, what i have is the beginning of massive kidney problems and no way to have them taken care of. How many are in a similar boat? How many just lost their cobra coverage? How many just lost their jobs? How many havent had insurance in years and have not had preventative care in that long? Answer those questions and tell me about nightmares.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

From the bill

(1) LEVELS OF COVERAGE DEFINED.—The lev11
els of coverage described in this subsection are as
12 follows:
13 (A) BRONZE LEVEL.—A plan in the bronze
14 level shall provide a level of coverage that is de15
signed to provide benefits that are actuarially
16 equivalent to 60 percent of the full actuarial
17 value of the benefits provided under the plan.
18 (B) SILVER LEVEL.—A plan in the silver
19 level shall provide a level of coverage that is de20
signed to provide benefits that are actuarially
21 equivalent to 70 percent of the full actuarial
22 value of the benefits provided under the plan.
23 (C) GOLD LEVEL.—A plan in the gold level
24 shall provide a level of coverage that is designed
25 to provide benefits that are actuarially equiva

113
O:\BAI\BAI09M01.xml [file 1 of 9] S.L.C.
1 lent to 80 percent of the full actuarial value of
2 the benefits provided under the plan.
3 (D) PLATINUM LEVEL.—A plan in the
4 platinum level shall provide a level of coverage
5 that is designed to provide benefits that are ac6
tuarially equivalent to 90 percent of the full ac7
tuarial value of the benefits provided under the
8 plan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: shannie

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

It rolls over into the hospital costs, lab costs, radiology costs, Dr costs, ect. Medicare and Medicaid also pay a portion of the unpaid hospital portions. Posted that a while back, im not going to look it up again.

WASHINGTON — The average U.S. family and their employers paid an extra $1,017 in health care premiums last year to compensate for the uninsured, according to a study to be released Thursday by an advocacy group for health care consumers.
Families USA, which supports expanded health care coverage, found that about 37% of health care costs for people without insurance — or a total of $42.7 billion — went unpaid last year. That cost eventually was shifted to the insured through higher premiums, according to the group.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/insurance/2009-05-28-hiddentax_N.htm

During 2007, South Carolina hospitals provided $1.3 billion in care to persons who were either uninsured or underinsured. Much of that was spent treating preventable diseases or diseases that could have been treated much more effi ciently and successfully with early diagnosis. And all of those costs were passed on to insured patients as higher hospital bills, which ultimately lead to higher premiums. In the United States, the average insured family pays an additional $922 in premiums each year to help cover the health care bills of uninsured patients. So uninsured or not, each of us is a victim of the crisis.

http://www.scha.org/covering-carolina

And private coverage for the average individual costs an extra $370 a year because of the cost-shifting, which happens when someone without medical insurance gets care at an emergency room or elsewhere and then doesn't pay.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=7693941

All three of those links go back to the same study by "Families USA."  When that organization held a press conference to report their findings, the chairman of Aetna appeared with them (this is from one of your links):

quote:

"Ronald A. Williams, chairman and chief executive of Aetna Inc., gave the example of a local community hospital that provides care to someone without insurance who arrives at the emergency room. When it's not paid for, the hospital has to raise its rates to insurance companies, and they pass that on in higher premiums, Williams said."

It's nonsense.  Insurance companies charge for premiums exactly as much as the market will bear.  If their costs go down, their profits will go up.  And when they don't have to compete or innovate for customers, the cost of premiums will inevitably go up, not down. 

quote:

About the Collaborative
The Covering Carolina Collaborative was formed in 2007 by the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, the South Carolina Hospital Association, the South Carolina Medical Association, and the South Carolina Alliance of Health Plans for the single purpose of helping solve the uninsured crisis in our state.

The Covering Carolina Collaborative's long-term goal is to help make affordable, quality health care available to every South Carolinian by the year 2010.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

[With 50 percent of household bankruptcies now due to medical bills, the disease-based U.S. economy has reached a degree of financial absurdity that threatens to bankrupt the whole country.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yummee

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

From the bill

(1) LEVELS OF COVERAGE DEFINED.—The lev11
els of coverage described in this subsection are as
12 follows:
13 (A) BRONZE LEVEL.—A plan in the bronze
14 level shall provide a level of coverage that is de15
signed to provide benefits that are actuarially
16 equivalent to 60 percent of the full actuarial
17 value of the benefits provided under the plan.
18 (B) SILVER LEVEL.—A plan in the silver
19 level shall provide a level of coverage that is de20
signed to provide benefits that are actuarially
21 equivalent to 70 percent of the full actuarial
22 value of the benefits provided under the plan.
23 (C) GOLD LEVEL.—A plan in the gold level
24 shall provide a level of coverage that is designed
25 to provide benefits that are actuarially equiva

113
O:\BAI\BAI09M01.xml [file 1 of 9] S.L.C.
1 lent to 80 percent of the full actuarial value of
2 the benefits provided under the plan.
3 (D) PLATINUM LEVEL.—A plan in the
4 platinum level shall provide a level of coverage
5 that is designed to provide benefits that are ac6
tuarially equivalent to 90 percent of the full ac7
tuarial value of the benefits provided under the
8 plan.

I've already addressed this.  I have no hopes that the government will grant me platinum coverage when they are only required to provide bronze care.  I am not that special, and they aren't that generous.  I've also addressed how 60/40 or 80/20 makes little difference when catastrophic things happen. 

Is that your only focus on our discussion? Whether it's 60/40 or 80/20 or some mythical 90/10 if I am deemed really that special?  No comments on the substance of my position at all?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Your beliefs do not concern me. You will believe as you wish, regardless of what is actually contained within the bill. You posted all you saw, after reading over 1000 pages was a reference to the 60/40. I showed you were you were mistaken.. and.. if you had actually read it all, you would have known before posting.

I dont have a chrystal ball to look into the future as you seem to possess. I have pointed out the lies, misconceptions and fallacies of both bills. I have also pointed out, repeatedly, how we are all paying for the uninsured already. Even through charities, government money is being spent to take care of those who have no insurance.

Now, people are whining because they will have to buy insurance to keep those who HAVE insurance from paying for those who dont WANT to buy insurance. Talk about a fucked up system. I dont want to pay FICA taxes,, but i do. I dont want to pay for SS, state taxes, medicare... but i suck it up, because i have no choice. No one wants to pay income tax, no one wants to pay for sales tax, ect ect ect. Guess what? Its the cost of living within a society.

I do NOT buy into the idea that one of the richest nations cannot afford to pay for the well being and health of its citizens. And im glad the Democratic party has taken up this fight... one that many past presidents on both sides of the political party line have taken up.

If you dont want to buy the insurance, then pay the fine. Dont want to pay the fine, thats between you and the government.

quote:

My objection all along is that this particular bill does not address the problems we face. The idea that if we just pass something ... anything ... it will get better is looking into that crystal ball you claim not to have, but rely on in this instance. If we are going to get real healthcare reform, now is the time to do it ... and we aren't doing it. We are passing a total piece of crap and pretending we're reforming something. What we are accomplishing is mandated payments to private insurance companies, and subsidizing those payments with tax dollars. We've given those greedy gougers MORE money rather than introducing any sort of competition that could possibly make them lower premiums and improve service.

I don't want to be forced to take government handouts that line crooks' pockets. I don't think that is an irrational position to hold. As long as healthcare is a for profit industry, there will be no reform. We have the ability to do better and we should. We wont get another opportunity for a very long while.

quote:

I could afford catastrophic coverage, but not the $388 per month for a rounded policy. I cannot purchase catastrophic coverage because insurance companies are not allowed to provide ONLY that coverage. The minimum coverage is $388 per month, and its crappy coverage. I can afford to pay routine and preventative medical care and have always done so. If something catastrophic happens, others will be picking up the bill whether I have insurance or not. It is a matter of whether they pick up 40% or 100%. Either way, I will be bankrupt. With or without insurance, I am bankrupt in this state if something happens like that. If I were in Louisiana, I could be treated at one of the Charity hospitals there (teaching hospitals) or one of the charitable Catholic hospitals there. Not sure why that is not available nationwide.

quote:

Under the new plan, "those others" will be covering me, as I take home $1,000 per month. Under the new plan, I won't even have to bother paying my own preventative and routine medical care (which I have always done and prefer to do). I get a free ride off "those others." If I want to pay my own way (barring something catastrophic, when I will be unable to do so), I have to give my money to a private insurance company and then still have out of pocket expenses.

quote:

On paper, I am less than $100 per month above the poverty line. I could be getting all sorts of government assistance, but I don't. I could even get "those others" to pay my telephone bill. How ridiculous is that? Since when is a telephone so necessary, such a basic right, that we can get taxpayers to buy me one?

quote:

My own opinion is that I would rather the government address the cost of health care rather than mandating insurance coverage. If the coasts were addressed, more people could afford insurance coverage, and those who cannot (or choose not to) would not be crippled by the inflated costs if bad shit happens.

quote:

If I am ever in need of extended care, I would expect it would be treated much like my mother's case is treated. She still owes on her first back surgery and is soon going in for her third. I don't know where these people live who say that people are being denied care for lack of insurance (and are dropping dead as a result). I have not lived in every state, so I suppose it is possible. However, I have lived in a couple of states that are on very opposite ends of the spectrum, and my experience (and that of my loved ones) is that we receive the care we need, regardless of our ability to pay for it or our medical insurance status.

quote:

For myself, a Catholic charity paid a portion of my LEAP procedure. Other than that, I have paid all of my own health care costs. For my mother, she is insured and has been her whole adult life.

quote:

Let's work to bring down the inflated cost of health care and eliminate those isolated horror stories before we spend all this money and create a huge new bureaucracy that will make little to no difference to those who have crappy coverage or are unable to buy coverage.

quote:

The version I read, and it may have changed again by now, had a 60/40 policy listed. I was assuming that if the government was footing my bill, they would buy me the cheapest insurance they could and remain compliant. I am not holding out any hopes that the government is going to buy me an 80/20 policy when they can buy me a 60/40 policy. If I assume they buy me an 80/20 policy, however, and something catastrophic happens (which is the ONLY reason I would need assistance), I will still likely be unable to pay 20% of that medical bill. You work in the industry. What do you estimate the medical bills to be if I get into a car accident and require trauma care, emergency surgery, and a recovery stay? And then the physical therapy or other extended care that generally follows catastrophic events?

quote:

20% or 40% ... I am bankrupt either way, so the government foots the bill. Now, private insurance gets its money via premiums and the government not only foots the bill for that, but also foots the bill for the costs the insurance company doesn't cover. As it stands now, the government (all you taxpayers) aren't footing anything for me and won't unless I actually need it. Soon, you will be footing my insurance bill when I don't need it, and will still have to foot the bill if I need it. And, as an added bonus, I will be receiving government assistance when I have purposely gone my whole like without it and would like to continue like that if at all possible. The only winner is private insurance. I'm going to be on government assistance in order to benefit private insurance ... beautiful. It just makes me sick is all, so I am pissing and moaning. =(

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I cant stand idiots who play the fence, Brain. Dean is an idiot who is looking after his own ass.. and no one elses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

First, if this opportunity to address any of the ills of health care is allowed to slip away, it wont happen againt for a very, very long time. At least this round addresses their ability to drop people for pre-existing conditions without even a review, or to deny coverage at all for the same conditions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Second, there are two bills. Seems alot of people keep forgetting that part. Both have to be reconciled, then only a majority vote in the house and senate are required. Im hoping to see many of the previous concessions go bye bye. Time will tell.

I have often said i am withholding judgement until the final version.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Now, to get to the meat of some of your previous posts...

Even the Catholic Hospitals rely heavily upon government grants. And someone is still picking up the tab when you cannot.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
In essence, you are taking a hand out. Having everyone covered will reduce not only the payments people pay for insurance, but will also reduce the bills from health care since they wont have the excuse of the noninsured running up expences anymore.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
And minimum, crappy coverage here is 150... and thats with a 5000 deductible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Which new plan are you referring too? The senate version? The house version? Im not aware of any single "plan" that has this spelled out. Could you link me to what you are referring too? Up till now, i see two proposals, with some similarities, and many differences. Its those differences that will take the plan in one direction or the other.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
No one here pays for the poor to have a telephone. Must be a state law.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
The costs cannot be addressed as long as one of the problems running up the cost still exists.. meaning.. the uninsured and the underinsured. Lets not forget many just lost their cobra coverage due to the law changes. Employer based policies have changed as well, costing more, offering less, and changing deductibles... its almost as bad as having none at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Are you suggesting these people are lying? Denying the newborn recently for health care insurance because he was over the 95 percentile on a growth chart isnt disturbing to you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Can a hospital refuse to treat me if I don’t have insurance?
If you have an emergency medical condition, a hospital cannot refuse to treat you to stabilize you in the emergency room. Once your condition has stabilized, they do not have to continue your treatment if you are unable to pay

http://www.ohiolegalservices.org/public/legal_problem/health-care/hospitals/qandact_view

Im not so sure why you would believe they would continue to treat. I may even grant you a hospital might, a physician... no. They arent in the field for charity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
And those charities recieve government grants.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
You keep insisting these cases are isolated, or even made up, as your previous post about this suggests. I assure you, having worked in the field for years, they are not made up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
The verion you read lists the 60/40 on page 113 first, along with the other levels. Not sure how you read past the other three and saw only this one. And why would you assume you would only get the lowest one? Medicaid pays damn well for women and children... Medicare doesnt do badly either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
And again, you are assuming the only working version is the senate one. There is still alot of debate left to get the two together. you are a pessimistic person, i am more hopeful. Im hopong out of all this comes and exchange that is more government run as far as negotiating prices and policies. Getting pissed over the process doesnt help anyone. Moaning about how prices are high without looking, and correcting, the whys behind the high prices is a battle in futility.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
No one said this would be an easy process. But, in all honesty, no one has come up with a better solution. And i damn well am tired of waiting on an industry whose only concern is a profit line to correct itself.

quote:

Hey Harry: Where is Nevada's gift?

I'm very disappointed.

It's Christmas morning and I can't find one single gift to Nevada from Sen. Harry Reid under the health-care "reform" tree.

Louisiana got a nice package. Florida and Connecticut, too. And Nebraska scored a really big present.

Just three days ago Uncle Harry said that if a senator didn't get his state "something" in the health-care "reform" package, then that senator wasn't doing his or her job. And yesterday Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., upped the ante. He said that every state did "get something" in the measure.

OK. I'm excited. What's Nevada's gift? Uncle Harry, as everyone knows, is the Big Kahuna of the Senate. He "brings home the bacon," his TV commercials claim. So if Nebraska got dispensation from Medicaid increases forever, one can only imagine the magnitude of Nevada's present.


<snip>

http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/hey-harry-where-is-nevadas-gift-80104262.html

quote:

I am pointing out that there is a whole lot of spin on hot topics from both sides and a whole lot of fearmongering. I haven't seen anyone dropping dead due to lack of coverage and I've lived in two very opposite states. I hear on the news horror stories, both in our sytem and in universally covered systems. I've not heard of the newborn you are referencing. I take a lot of news reporting on both sides with a huge grain of salt since they are both pushing an obvious agenda. I've researched several specific horror stories. 95% of the time, there are circumstances the reporter completely failed to mention.

quote:

I don't expect to be given platinum coverage because I am not disabled, not a single mother (not even a mother), am only 41, and am technically above the poverty line. Like I said, I'm not that special and they aren't that generous. I agree that Medicaid and Medicare do well. I say we give this huge chunk of money towards expanding those to cover more people rather than give it to private insurance companies.

quote:

I talked about the senate one because that's what this thread is about. Also, because mandating and subsidizing private insurance is my biggest beef. Even just addressing the one the thread is about, my posts are as long as War and Peace. I'd be happy to discuss the other bill as well. I'm more than pessimistic about this bill. I'm angry about it. I think they sold out to big insurance.

quote:

I can come up with a better solution. You could come up with a better solution. Half the people on this board could come up with a better solution. If you're tired of waiting on insurance companies to correct themselves, how will you feel when we are subsidizing them and premiums are still outrageous? They will correct themselves when they are forced to do so. This is the chance to do that. Instead, we give them millions of new policies ... backed by the government!