Can Public Option Work?

[Annie]

You do Rabbi. There is a lot that government does that works well in spite of congress and their meddling with things for personal gain.

Safe food? Thank government!

Do you ever use Roads, Bridges, Airports, etc? Thank government!

Think about it!

It isnt that they dont get things done. It is that they get things done in the most expensive least efficient way possible. And in doing so they destroy private enterprise, enslave the population, and reduce us to serfs. The health care mess will be more of the same, a lot more. And it is completely unnecessary.

Necessary -vs- not necessary is strictly a matter of opinion..... I believe you are in the minority of opinions saying change in the way we 'do' health care in this country is 'unnecessary'.

That being said I stand by my thinking that the real change needs to be in the way we bill ourselves for health care.

'Insurance' was never meant for maintenance like physicals and pap smears, insurance is for when your kid gets leukemia.

We need to be able to buy insurance from private insurance for the catastrophes that we, as individuals, fear and pay our local hospital system a maintenance fee or 'tax' for routine doctoring and emergencies.

Why do we force the hospitals to contract the billing and financial data management aspect of healthcare out to private insurance companies, adding another layer of bureaucracy making a handsome profit by creating paperwork.....?

Traveling Americans is the bitch frustration, that is why the federal government must be involved - that being said, if a company the size of Boeing can 'self insure' their employees for health, I see no reason for a state as small as Rhode Island not to be able to..... if all 50 states tried to 'self insure', in 20 years our children will have 50 working models to work with.

If that were what was being offered, wouldn't be as expensive as it will be. It's only been for the past 35-40 years that people are insuring their dental, dogs, physicals, flu shots, glasses, etc. If all they were 'buying protection' for was catastrophic, the costs would be much lower, their deductibles could be much lower, and in all likelihood the coverage would be better regarding services rendered. That is NOT what the Congress is looking for.

 

[The Rabbi]

ummmm tenncare is their MEDICAID program.... it is NOTHING like the hr3200 public option which is PAID FOR BY THE POLICY HOLDER....

what is it that you guys can not GRASP on this...why do you guys keep repeating things that don't relate to the public option in the house bill?

do you want me to link it again?

care

TennCare is a Medicaid waiver, or demonstration, program. Its purpose is to demonstrate that the use of managed-care principles can generate sufficient savings to enable the state to cover more than Medicaid eligible people.

Problem with Tenncare started when people begin dropping their insurances and signing up with state controlled insurance because of the cost saving. Now, isn't that exactly the intention of federal promoted "public option"?

Today, Tenncare has huge budget problems so TN government simply started dropping people. The same will happen sometimes in the future with federal health care... don't ya think?

the thing with the hr3200 public option americano, is that it is on the public insurance exchange with all other private insurers in your state and no tax dollars goes towards it to sustain it or it's adminitrative costs but the POLICY HOLDERS through premiums pay for it, the ones that choose the plan....so if there is no savings, just switch plans....you or your company are not obligated to stay with any particular insurance plan....they can go right back to a private plan if the premiums go up the following season....is how i understood the plan option, when i read the actual bill....

so, it hurts no one, if they mess up and prices go higher than the other insurers, they just lose customers to the better private plans...

OK, so you admit that your assertion that many states had one health insurance provider was simply not true.
Glad we got that cleared up.
To "public option": if what you say is so, then what is the possible advantage of a public option? Just because a company is "public" doesnt suddenly mean they suspend the laws of averages, which is what insurance is built on. Any company, public or private, still contends with pricing policies based on risk. And removing the profit incentive will introduce inefficiencies that will eat up any savings that might go to profit.
As to TennCare: the program became so expensive and awful that Gov Bredesen made a hard political choice and ended it. He has also come out against Obamacare, saying it will be too expensive for the states. And this is a Democrat who was rumored to be HHS head until Obama picked Sebelius.

 

[The Rabbi]

If that were what was being offered, wouldn't be as expensive as it will be. It's only been for the past 35-40 years that people are insuring their dental, dogs, physicals, flu shots, glasses, etc. If all they were 'buying protection' for was catastrophic, the costs would be much lower, their deductibles could be much lower, and in all likelihood the coverage would be better regarding services rendered. That is NOT what the Congress is looking for.

Just because people buy policies with all that crap shouldn't make health insurance in general more expensive. The people wanting "dog dental insurance" would just pay more for it.
What has made it expensive is that each state determines what MUST be offered in any policy sold. In NY you must have mental health coverage in your policy. It doesnt matter if you want it or not, need it or not. No policy can be sold there without it. And it is not cost-free, obviously.
THAT is the problem right there. Allowing companies to sell acrosss state lines would eliminate that.

 

[Annie]

If that were what was being offered, wouldn't be as expensive as it will be. It's only been for the past 35-40 years that people are insuring their dental, dogs, physicals, flu shots, glasses, etc. If all they were 'buying protection' for was catastrophic, the costs would be much lower, their deductibles could be much lower, and in all likelihood the coverage would be better regarding services rendered. That is NOT what the Congress is looking for.

Just because people buy policies with all that crap shouldn't make health insurance in general more expensive. The people wanting "dog dental insurance" would just pay more for it.
What has made it expensive is that each state determines what MUST be offered in any policy sold. In NY you must have mental health coverage in your policy. It doesnt matter if you want it or not, need it or not. No policy can be sold there without it. And it is not cost-free, obviously.
THAT is the problem right there. Allowing companies to sell acrosss state lines would eliminate that.

What you say is correct, but so was what I said. There was a time that the doctor's office had a nurse and a receptionist. Now they need a 'staff' to deal with insurance claims. If you go to doc or dentist without insurance, they will knock down the rate and make payment arrangements with you. Part of the reason is because you will actually cost less to service. Not to mention, that your likelihood of suing drops drastically, since they became 'personal' in dealing with you. Sort of like when people 'knew' their doctor and their doctor, them.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah, OK. That goes back to the whole 3rd party payer issue.
A proposal that would reduce costs would start by shoving more costs on the consumer of medical services and making him more responsible for paying. None of Obamacare's proposals remotely do that.

 

[keee keee]

The more the people know about Obama care the more they are against it that is why they are trying to shove this on us without even allowing the public to read this horrible plan. what happened to the tranparency that Obama promised us? This health care plan suck thats why the senator and congressmen exempted themselves and families from it. Ill think about it if they use it too!!!!

 

[Annie]

The more the people know about Obama care the more they are against it that is why they are trying to shove this on us without even allowing the public to read this horrible plan. what happened to the tranparency that Obama promised us? This health care plan suck thats why the senator and congressmen exempted themselves and families from it. Ill think about it if they use it too!!!!

Indeed.[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNQdp9m3TNs&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Behind Closed Doors[/ame]

 

[Harry Dresden]

Annie is delusional, Varth Dader. The first clue is her mistaking health insurance reform for universal health care. The second clue is the inference that Americans overwhelmingly support the far right agenda as some how being mainstream. She is just sick, as are so many on the loony fringe right.

if you think Annie is that "far right" Jake ...then i dont think you know Annie.....

 

[JimH52]

The public option will work of:

-there are strict guidelines on who is eligable along with income limitations
-the government sponsored program is closely monitored to avoid abuses as in the present welfare program
-direct competition between private insurance providers and the public program is limited.

Look, there are thousands of so called "public option" programs that give monetary assistance to citizens, but the guidelines for these programs are strict and exclude persons whose economic means and income status allows them to seek private sector assistance. One that comes to mind is downpayment assistance programs through HUD.

To avoid embarassment from wide spread abuses, a public health care option would have to be air tight and monitored well. JMHO

 

[Harry Dresden]

Since when is it sensible to tell people to ask their doctors about some new drug?

are you serious?....if you had a condition and nothing seems to be working,and you heard about a new drug that is getting good results,you would not ask your doctor about it?.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Rabbi, in post 137 above, links partial proof for the position that I have been supporting, that something short of a complete public option will pass if the GOP would get on board. Snow in the Senate is now on board, and others will follow. Pelosi recognizes now that she cannot get an ouright public option. Politico suggests that the compromise "would clear the way for backers to sneak a limited public option through the Senate by attracting moderate Democrats and then to win President Barack Obama's signature."

Thanks, Rab. All can read further at Pelosi lacks votes for most sweeping public option - Yahoo! News

any thing that Pelosi is pushing should be a red flag to EVERYONE to get the hell off that bus....NOW........

 

[judyd]

Since when is it sensible to tell people to ask their doctors about some new drug?

are you serious?....if you had a condition and nothing seems to be working,and you heard about a new drug that is getting good results,you would not ask your doctor about it?.....

The drugs that are advertised on television are not new, they are just being heavily promoted by the pharmaceutical companies. Most doctors are quite familiar with those in their field of medicine. We have only had this sort of advertising for the last decade or so, and it has gradually increased to the point of almost all the commercials are for one drug or another. Doctors did fine before this type of amateur diagnostic phenomena entered the fray. "If you have these symptoms, ask your doctor if you can take this for it". Many of the things they are promoting could be done without, if a patient applied a proper diet and exercise routine. It's getting rather silly that the US has become such a drug-driven society.

 

[AVG-JOE]

I am curious for the people that can afford health care insurance now and do not buy it. If the Public option comes into play, will people really jump on it and pay the premiums for it? For those that cannot afford it now but want it, I can see why they would get it; but then again they would still have to pay premiums to be able to get it albeit at a reduced cost. Looking at insurance for vehicles and how many people do not have it, how can the government guarentee that people will pay their premiums for it to work.

I do think alot of people automaticly assume that the public option means free health care. most of the uninformed probably think that, I also heard that they would fine people that do not get health care, there is alot of assumption going on in the government, if they fine people for not getting insurance how are they going to pay for that as well as the premuims for health insurance.

in a perfect world it would work, but there are alot of people that will not buy it "deadbeats" or do not even know they have to buy it. are they going to offer classes to those people that do not understand it or will it all be controlled by some bureaucrats and who will enforce the fines?

I could be all wrong about this and everyone will jump on it but I still do not think they will get the people to pay for it. and on top of that have they actually coem up with how much the premuims will be anyway?

I mean there are alot of folks that do not pay their child support/auto insurance and parking tickets/speeding tickets and numerous other things. I am sick of the debate about it but looking at how people sometimes are it is hard for me to believe this is going to be all that they say it is going to be.

We all pay for it now. Most employer covered people pay something, and their employer pays more on their behalf.... hell, even folks over 65 pay 100 bucks a month for medicare - does anyone know exactly how much they spend on health insurance and health care?

I think for myself and my bride it is a total of $400 bucks a month and I'm 50. How many friends, lovers and neighbors would it take kicking in $200 a month each to create a fund big enough to help cushion the blow of tragic medical news for those in the co-op?

I suppose it depends on what you pay the data freaks required to do the paperwork....... 10 million bucks a year for one of 'em at AIG, I hear!

 

[AVG-JOE]

i don't think you can compare health and auto insurance. Those who don't have auto insurance are usually dropped because of DUI's or multiple accidents, and can't get affordable insurance with another company.

People who don't get health insurance usually just can't afford it. Also many younger healthy people figure they will forego insurance because they "never get sick". They see it as a low priority. Should it be a requirement, yes, I do believe most will get it.

Why can't you compare them? They are perfectly comparable. People without health insurance generally think they can get by without it because of the expense. Ditto with people without car insurance.
I really dont see a lot of difference. They are there for the same reason.

The two are similar, but very different too..... You buy auto insurance hoping you never have to use it and you buy health insurance knowing damn well you're going to use it, and soon.

We need two separate programs - something for maintenance and physicals that you pretty much cover yourself as needed and another program for if your kid gets cancer.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Annie is delusional, Varth Dader. The first clue is her mistaking health insurance reform for universal health care. The second clue is the inference that Americans overwhelmingly support the far right agenda as some how being mainstream. She is just sick, as are so many on the loony fringe right.

if you think Annie is that "far right" Jake ...then i dont think you know Annie.....

Then Annie is deliberately being malignant in actively engaging in deception. Why? (1) Health insurance reform is not universal health care. (2) Americans overwhelmingly oppose the far right windbag rhetoric. includings Republicans, even to the extent that the windbaggers are threatening mainstream Republican candidates.

Go back and read our respective posts.

 

[AVG-JOE]

President Obama's Healthcare Reform 'Public Option' Explained - LAist

I'm a little confused when it comes to the public option debate. I dont know if I should support it or not.

This website shows a nifty chart explaining how public option would work, which was very helpful. But I still can't ignore how public option reminds me of socialized medicine. What about the death panel debate, the limitations on doctors and individual patient options? Not to mention the HUGE cost for this small part to healthcare reform. My paycheck is as thin enough with the other governmental programs I still pay for. So is public option worth supporting, or are u like me; a little skeptical. thanks for the comments!!

Here's your answer.

Social Security- bankrupt
Medicare- Bankrupt
Medicaid - bankrupt
Freddie and Fannie - Bankrupt.
The postal service- bankrupt.

With a resume that looks like that, why would any sane person turn over another 6% of our economy? Answer- a sane person wouldn't, an insane person would.

The reason it reminds you of socialized medicine, is because, that's exactly what it is.

So what's your answer, Maple?

Get together with 20 other couples and buy 20 acres and a lot of guns?

There is a place for 'government' in modern society - hell we couldn't have it without 'government'!

You want to toss the baby with the bath-water, or shall we fix the infrastructure our ancestors gave so much blood to build for us?

 

[AVG-JOE]

" A government big enough to give you everything you need is big enough to take everything that you have." Thomas Jefferson

"308 million people trying to live together and maintain a shitload of shared property and infrastructure will require a government that is HUGE by the standards of Thomas Jefferson's time in history, if the life-style to which Americans have become accustomed to is to be maintained"

Average American Joe, 2009

 

[Ame®icano]

ummmm tenncare is their MEDICAID program.... it is NOTHING like the hr3200 public option which is PAID FOR BY THE POLICY HOLDER....

what is it that you guys can not GRASP on this...why do you guys keep repeating things that don't relate to the public option in the house bill?

do you want me to link it again?

care

TennCare is a Medicaid waiver, or demonstration, program. Its purpose is to demonstrate that the use of managed-care principles can generate sufficient savings to enable the state to cover more than Medicaid eligible people.

Problem with Tenncare started when people begin dropping their insurances and signing up with state controlled insurance because of the cost saving. Now, isn't that exactly the intention of federal promoted "public option"?

Today, Tenncare has huge budget problems so TN government simply started dropping people. The same will happen sometimes in the future with federal health care... don't ya think?

the thing with the hr3200 public option americano, is that it is on the public insurance exchange with all other private insurers in your state and no tax dollars goes towards it to sustain it or it's adminitrative costs but the POLICY HOLDERS through premiums pay for it, the ones that choose the plan....so if there is no savings, just switch plans....you or your company are not obligated to stay with any particular insurance plan....they can go right back to a private plan if the premiums go up the following season....is how i understood the plan option, when i read the actual bill....

so, it hurts no one, if they mess up and prices go higher than the other insurers, they just lose customers to the better private plans...

That would mean forcing states to accept public option regardless of how states regulated their health care and that is against tenth Amendment. Also, they opening back door to compete against insurances within the states while that door is staying closed to other insurances. Do you find that right?

You're saying it hurts no one. I say Tenncare is fine example who gets hurt.

 

[jeffrockit]

Why are we paying ridiculous rates for pharmaceutical products?

You should check with the White House about that question. Or read the link below which explains how Obama cut a deal with big pharma.

Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In White House Deal With Big Pharma

 

[driveby]

President Obama's Healthcare Reform 'Public Option' Explained - LAist

I'm a little confused when it comes to the public option debate. I dont know if I should support it or not.

This website shows a nifty chart explaining how public option would work, which was very helpful. But I still can't ignore how public option reminds me of socialized medicine. What about the death panel debate, the limitations on doctors and individual patient options? Not to mention the HUGE cost for this small part to healthcare reform. My paycheck is as thin enough with the other governmental programs I still pay for. So is public option worth supporting, or are u like me; a little skeptical. thanks for the comments!!

No.......