Who Stands in the Way of Health Care Reform?

[Villager]

Obviously all Republicans oppose any reform that will not enhance the profits of our 1,300 plus health insurance companies, which in turn enhance the campaign coffers of all Republicans in Congress. But there are some "moderate" Democrats who may be a problem.

Here are eight senators who may stand in the way of the public option -- along with the total amount of money they’ve received from health and insurance interests.

Sen. Max Baucus $3,973,485
Sen. Evan Bayh $1,565,088
Sen. Kent Conrad $2,154,200
Sen. Dianne Feinstein $1,749,887
Sen. John Kerry $8,994,077
Sen. Mary Landrieu $1,653,943
Sen. Joe Lieberman $3,308,621
Sen. Ben Nelson $2,214,715

The question is, which party stands for the health of the American people, and which party, along with the above list, stands for the financial health of the 1,300 health insurance companies, with their CEO's and other top executives earning multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses, on top of huge company profits? If we want to know why our health insurance cost are double those of other industralized countries, we need to look no further.

[asimi7]

I personally am a conservative Republican. I don't support "health care reform," not because of campaign contributions, but because I don't want the government in charge of my health. Why are our health care costs double that of other industrialized countries, personally (and I spent several years working in health care) I feel HMOs are to blame...and I personally don't want one gigantic HMO, aka the US government, standing between me and my doctor. Us Americans can complain all we want (and aren't we lucky we have the right to do so), but we are spoiled by the services we are provided here.

My friends mother lives in France, she broke her leg, needed surgery, and after waiting 15 months, came to the US to have surgery... Imagine if you or I had to wait 15 months or longer for surgery, lets just say up in arms wouldn't describe it. I am proud to be an American, and am willing to take the good with the bad.

[Villager]

[quote=asimi7;87365]...and I personally don't want one gigantic HMO, aka the US government, standing between me and my doctor. Us Americans can complain all we want (and aren't we lucky we have the right to do so), but we are spoiled by the services we are provided here.

What we have now are insurance company employees standing between us and our doctors. That is, those of us who are fortunate enough to have health insurance.

On the other hand, many Americans already have government run health care: Members of the armed forces, and their families; veterans; prisoners; and people over 65. These people are not denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions. Is this what you mean by "...government standing between.,,"

[Twolf]

Washington DC has been flooded with lobbyists from the AMA, health insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry. Who lobbies for us? Both parties take big money from these people and we all know, re-election is all about raising money. Supposedly the Republicans have alternative plans but I haven't heard anything about them. Maybe because they aren't credible plans? The last GOP plan I heard about was 3 pages long with no numbers. Republican Senator DeMint from SC said in a conference call with Tea Party people "If we are able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him." The GOP is an anti-Obama, obstructionist party of NO. There is no pretense of bipartisanship; they simply want Obama to fail and to protect corporate interests.
First of all we need to dispel some of these myths that the GOP keeps mouthing:
"We have the best health care in the world. People come from all over the world for care." Actually the World Health Organization study ranks the USA as #37 based on life expectancy, infant mortality rate and satisfaction. (By the way Asimi7; France is ranked #1)
"We don't want some bureaucrat standing between you & the doctor." Well, unless you pay the doctor out of your own pocket, you already have a bureaucrat involved. Who would have your best interest in mind more; a for- profit insurance co. or a national non-profit health board as proposed by Obama? Furthermore, in a survey done by the Commonwealth Foundation, patients were happier with Medicare than with employer provided health plans. It is true that overall patients were unhappy with most plans. But Medicare patients had a 37% high approval rating compared to the 20% approval rating of employer plans. Also negative ratings were lower for Medicare at 8% compared to 18% for employer plans.
"But I like my plan and don't want to be forced into a gov. plan." If you are happy with your plan then you can keep it, unless your employer drops it.
"But we can't afford this change now; we are in a recession." Skyrocketing health care costs are one of the reasons we are in this recession now. Look at GM! Republicans just want to maintain the status quo. They are the ones that passed a law prohibiting Medicare from negotiating lower drug prices for prescription drugs like the VA does.

It is time for change. The status quo is not acceptable. I was forced into retirement last year. The HMO that I had paid into for 20 years denied me individual coverage even though I have no serious problems and only go to the Dr. 3 or4 times a year. Now I pay $660 a month thru COBRA! I have a friend who, after she had an operation, her HMO canceled her coverage retroactively. So I say to Republicans: You had 8 years for reform and did nothing and now you only want to criticize. If you can't be constructive, then just get out of the way!

Twolf

[asimi7]

Originally Posted by Villager

What we have now are insurance company employees standing between us and our doctors. That is, those of us who are fortunate enough to have health insurance.
Insurance company employees...yes, HMOs (Health Maintenance Organizations). They decide who you can see, what you can have done, and when. They cause the cost of providing health care to sky rocket. Doctors have to hire billers, insurance experts, and jump hoops, wade through red tape to get pennies on the dollar. It forces them to charge excessive amounts for services. Often the cash price is far less than co-payments or your share of costs through your insurance.

On the other hand, many Americans already have government run health care: Members of the armed forces, and their families; veterans; prisoners; and people over 65. These people are not denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions. Is this what you mean by "...government standing between.,,"
Now, I can't speak for Prison health care, as I have no experience there. I can however tell you that most VA hospitals are gross to say the least. I have a friend who had two c-sections on a military base, and has told me how she was herded in and out like cattle, and although she didn't see it, her hubby said that there was a towel shoved under the door of the taped plastic door of the operating room...how is that for sanitary? Having had a very sickly child, I have spent my fair share of time in pharmacies, and can't tell you the number of times that I have stood behind Medicare recipients that couldn't pay for the thousand dollar plus in prescription costs, not covered by Medicare, if their doctors prescribed it, obviously it was considered medically necessary...and if Medicare is running so efficiently, why is it that recipients would need supplemental insurance? Also can't figure out why it is that certain meds aren't covered, but it seemingly ok for TriCare to pay for surrogate pregnancies so Military wives to make $. http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2...ogate-mothers/

I totally understand the frustration of health care costs, but the grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence. I have a 4 year old who is considered to have a "pre existing condition," so I could go on for hours about my frustration with health care and insurance. My doctor and I decide what treatments are done, without anyone pre approving anything. I also enjoy the freedom of calling my doctor and getting in within hours instead of days and weeks. I like that when my child and myself needed surgery, we had it within one week instead of years down the road. Considering how well the government manages everything else, this is one area I would rather them not be involved in. Just my honest opinion, but I respect yours too. I just don't think it is fair to state that all Republicans are against it because they want campaign contributions. I think this is another less vs. more government issue...one of the fundamental differences between the Reps and Dems.

[asimi7]

Twolf, if you look back, I never said that we have the best health care system in the world...I only stated that my friends mother came here to have surgery after getting frustrated after waiting 15 months.

I also know that if satisfaction is taken into account... it is hard to satisfy us Americans. Maybe if we all drank more wine and did less whinning, we would all be happier.

[Ted]

Originally Posted by Villager

But there are some "moderate" Democrats who may be a problem.

Thank God for those "moderate Democrats"!
You can't reinvent our entire health care system, read it all and sign it in 30 days.
At least with any sort of understanding of the consequenses.
You are operating with a chain saw instead of a scalple.
For goodness sake, take the top problems with our current system and fix them one at a time wisely!

Why does this have to be completely done and signed in the next 30 days?

[Villager]

If you were a French politician trying to sell voters on an American style health care system, you could list the advantages:

1. It costs only twice as much
2. It covers upward of 85% of the people
3. Just a few thousand families lose their homes because of a serious illness
4. Treatment is rationed, at least for 47,000 000 uninsured and millions more who are underinsured.
5. People with previous conditions are on their own
6. Hundreds of private companies will make billions of dollars on people's misfortune
7. Insured people will almost always get the treatment they need, if the insurance bureaucrats who get between them and their doctors allow it
8. No system is perfect

What do you think? Would they buy it?

[Ted]

[quote=Villager;87369]

Originally Posted by asimi7

...many Americans already have government run health care: Members of the armed forces, and their families; veterans; prisoners; and people over 65. These people are not denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions. Is this what you mean by "...government standing between.,,"

Exactly! These are the only examples of how the government runs health care.
Have you not heard about the PATHETIC HISTORY of our veterans care? The runarounds? The delayed or denied benefits? The pathetic condition of the VA hospitals and treatment?
I have family that utilizes the veterans medical system and IT SUCKS!

Or medicare and medicade that doctors are being squeezed in a Wal Mart fashioned lower price and restrictions by the government?
What makes you think they will treat you better?

For goodness sake, this plan won't take effect till 2013. And the taxes start two years earlier.
Yet we MUST pass this in 30 days?
This is NOT how good sound decisions are made!

[Villager]

It is the few Democrats in congress who get the huge contributions, who team up with Republicans, who get even larger contributions from the health insurance industry that are fighting for continued contributions and not for health care. Does anyone expect them to do otherwise? Get serious!