Can you actually prove it will work? If not, is it worth the risk? Health care overhaul...?

Question

Can you who support Barack's health care bill prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his health care "plan" will in fact be as efficient and reliable as what we currently have? Do you have sources you can site?



PLEASE do not criticize the current health care system, yes there are problems. I want direct defense and proof of what is being proposed.

Thanks.

Answer 1

To understand what will work requires understanding what's driving the problem.



What drives the problem is not insurance companies. What drives the problem is that people in the U.S. are sick, fat and poor. They incur hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical expenditures before they die, whether they paid into the system (via taxes) significantly throughout their lives or not. So the problem is about the expectation that someone(s) ELSE should pay for one's own medical needs. Long-term, that is not sustainable, whether based on a private insurance system or a government system. No person has the incentive to control the costs of his or her own medical care. That is how costs balloon.



The only thing that will truly fix our health insurance dilemma is seemingly unconscionable and virtually no one will accept the reality. The way to fix the system is to make individuals pay for their medical care, the way we used to in the 1950s. Unfortunately, as medical technology has improved, EVERYONE has felt entitled to its benefits, regardless of cost. But nothing is free. Make people pay cash for their medical care. That is the essence of freedom and personal responsibility. It's a service, not a right.

Answer 2

There is no "plan" all there is is a thousand pages of ideas of different kinds. No cost has been assigned to it, it doesn't even stipulate how it's going to be paid for, Once we have given Obama a blank check, then they will make up a health plan of some sort. That is why people are so mad, Obama wants a bill passed that in actuality does not exist yet. The lawmakers on break getting an earfull from their constituates can't tell anything more than Obama has been saying on ad after ad, generalities, and how the people want and need reform, oh yeah the dems left a loophole big enough to drive a truck through so that up to 20 MILLION illegals can sign up, and officials are not allowed to ask their lmmigration status, then when they get it their whole family is covered. The GOP tried to get the loophole closed and outvoted by the Dems 29 to 28. See why the American people are pissed.

Answer 3

I think Obama put it well in his press conference on the topic: If I said I had a plan that's guaranteed to double health care costs every 5 years, and not provide care for millions, would you support it? That's what we've got now.



So, you know we have problems, but you don't want us to solve them? WHY NOT? You want to see every family, business, and the government go completely bankrupt within a few decades, WHY?



It's impossible to have a 100% guarantee of something we haven't done yet. (BTW, by your standard, humans would never have built a single bridge EVER -- or done anything else, EVER.)



If it doesn't work as well as expected, it can be tweaked.



People who have any brain can make reasonable predictions about the broader effects of this or that action. There can't be PROOF about the future -- but then, if we had to have proof, we could never do anything, could we?





Do nothing: 100% guaranteed disaster down the road.



Deal with the problem intelligently: a good chance of improvement.



Why do you prefer guaranteed disaster?



People are loosing their lives, other are loosing their homes, because of the current system.

Answer 4

This is a really big piece of why lawmakers are beginning to worry whether they'll make it home if they vote for this. We know that most Senators and Representatives don't read the bills on which they vote. But after rushing through $787 billion to their cronies, taxpayers are upset at being robbed and don't want to get robbed again based on the "good intentions" of those who say they're helping, but then get rewarded after their service with a hundred million a year job, working for the government or a company to which they sent our money.

Answer 5

Half the country actually receives 100% government sponsored health care already. I haven't heard any complaints about that though I'm sure there are many as there will always be.

It works rather well in other countries not nearly as wealthy as the US.

But, if you want actual, indisputable proof in a very simple, compact answer: Every single member of Congress and their minions receive 100% taxpayer supported health care and I haven't heard a single one complain about it.

Answer 6

You want direct proof? Then look at Canada's health care system, because that is basically what Obama is proposing. That is a tested system that has provided medical care, in whatever degree required, to every Canadian who needed it. Urgent or emergency surgery gets first priorty - which only makes sense. Elective surgery comes next. And everything is covered - from surgical fees to hospital fees, prescription drugs, special nursing care etc.

The only things that are not covered are things like cosmetic surgery, done for reasons of vanity. Cosmetic surgery required after accidents, burns, or to repair per-natal defects etc. are all covered.

Answer 7

It's not Barack's healthcare plan. It comes from congress.

There are no guarantees in life, but the plan is sound and it will accomplish it's goal of getting tens of millions of Americans covered. For the majority of Americans there will be no change at all, so you don't even have to worry about it.

I fear you're buying into the Right Wing hysteria, and most of that is utter garbage intended to confuse the issue. Note the liars who say he's proposing Canada's healthcare system, as proof of their dishonesty.

Answer 8

this is all for 45million people.......15% of the population we are talking about....of which 12 million are illegal (mostly hispanics ) so the govt is going to take over everyones health care for 15% who aren't covered...

as long as all the elected officials are covered by the plan...just think kennedy would already be dead....dodd could kiss his a$$ goodbye. Let the congress go on the plan for a trial basis.....we could clean house





edit: @Black Man...start packing your bags

Answer 9

The same questions were asked and the same conservative terrorists came out when Medicare and Medicaid were approved in the '60's. In all major bills like this, tweeks will have to be made, but we'll be better off than with no coverage, and sorry you have a preexisting condition, etc.

Answer 10

It will work and well worth the risk the fact that you think what we hv now is working is testiment to the fact of how ignorant peope really are.Try reading the bill. and talking to people who hv had health care issues.If you were really interested in the issue there would be no problems finding facts but you hv to be receptive to truths.

Answer 11

You didn't even ASK the REPUBLICANS if it would work WHEN they passed Medicare Part D and FROM 2003 AMERICANS HAVE BEEN PAYING FOR IT AND THE ONLY ONES GETTING RICH ARE THE HOSPITALS, PHARMA, INSURANCE & DOCTORS.



I STILL DON'T SEE ANYONE SAYING ANYTHING.



WE DID NOT HAVE THE MONEY AND WE HAVE BEEN BORROWING FROM CHINA & OTHER COUNTRIES FOR THIS PROGRAM.



SO NOW YOU ARE ASKING WHERE IS THE BEEF WHEN SOMETHING MAY............................ HELP AMERICAN CITIZENS, HELP THE JOB ECONOMY.... AS FAR AS BUSINESSES.



YES, EVEN THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS KNOW THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO HELP THE BUSINESSES BECAUSE:





AS WE ALL ................................... KNOW....... THAT DUBYA'S TAX DECREASE WENT INTO AFFECT 2001 ...................



AND:



IT DIDN'T DO A DAM THING...................... NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAID..............................



TO HELP!

Answer 12

I dont know, Go ask some evil Swedish people who live under such horrible system.

Answer 13

how well has these three democrats made worked for us? medicare,medicaid,social security! and they want us to trust them yet again,lmao!

Answer 14

"Yes, Barack Obama is God, and healthcare is the world. He will build it and it will work"



-Obamabot

Answer 15

You want facts......... Why I bother I have no idea you won't read them.........



Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill – YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!!



If you go to pg 29, lines 4-16, you’ll see that this section is discussing limits on cost sharing. Scroll up to pgs 8 and 9 for a definition: “The term ‘cost-sharing’ includes deductibles, coinsurance, copayments and similar charges but does not include premiums or any network payment differential for covered services or spending for non-covered services”.



So, if cost sharing is the amount that you have to pay for services, then a section on a limitation of cost sharing is setting a limit on the amount you have to fork out, NOT on the amount of coverage you receive. Therefore this is NOT about rationing your health care.



Pg 42 of HC Bill – The Health Choices Commissioner will choose UR HC Benefits 4 you. U have no choice!



This section is about the establishment of a Health Choices Administration, and the duties of its Commissioner. To understand this section, you must understand that this bill will set up a “Health Insurance Exchange”, in which private insurance companies will compete with each other and with the public option. In this exchange, there will be three or four standard plans that must be offered, so that everyone is on the same level, and to help reduce confusion over benefits being offered by competing plans. So, this section sets the Commissioner’s duties, one of which is to help determine what those standard plans offered in the exchange should look like.



This has nothing to do with a reduction in choice. You can still choose the level of coverage that is right for you, and most importantly, if you already have coverage that you like, you keep it and none of this applies to you.



Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access 2 ur banks accts 4 elect. funds transfer



Okay, this page falls under Section 1173A of the bill, which discusses the standardization of “electronic administrative transactions”, and is an amendment to a section of the Social Security Act. I see no mention in this section, much less that particular page, of the government have direct access to your bank accounts. Rather, the lines in question seem to be about enabling electronic funds transfers between the government and health care providers. This must be viewed in the context of the entire section, which is about standardizing the attempt to streamline the various processes involved electronically, in an effort to save money. This isn’t an attempt to steal your money.



PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan 4 retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).



Section 164 simply makes no mention of unions or community orgs, much less ACORN. This was made up.



Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange 2 bring priv HC plans under Govt control.



This is an assumption of intent. The bill sets up an exchange in which any private health insurance companies can compete with each other and with the public option for your business. In order to work properly, there must be certain standard plans available, so that consumers can easily compare plans to determine the best price for them. Now, if you have insurance under your current employer that you are happy with, nothing changes for you. This is clearly either a misunderstanding of, or an attempt to mislead the public about, this bill.



PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill – Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs 4 priv. HC plans in the Exchange



As explained above, the creation of a functioning marketplace necessitates the standardization of several plan options. It reduces confusion over the plan choices, and allows for consumers to make better value-based decisions.



PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill – Specs for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration ur Healthcare!



This point seems to be the result of a breakdown in logic. The creation of these standard plans does not mean that your health care will be rationed. Besides, if you stay with your current coverage, nothing changes for you.



PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill – Govt mandates linguistic approp svcs. Example – Translation 4 illegal aliens



Like it or not (and for the record, I don’t), there are LEGAL citizens in this country who dno’t speak english. The requirement that there not be cultural or linguistic barriers to obtaining coverage does not have anything to do with illegals.



I’m starting to notice a trend, btw. The author seems to be inserting his own talking points, making something of nothing.



Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps 2 sign up indiv. for Govt HC plan



Again, the author adds details (”ACORN”, etc.) not located in the bill, as a scare tactic. This is simply a statement that people should be informed of the new system.



-PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill – Medicaid Eligible Indiv. will b automat.enrolled in Medicaid. No choice



Here, the author has turned a positive into a negative. The goal is to ensure that everyone has coverage. In the referenced section of the bill, it states that a Medicaid-eligible individual who “has not elected to enroll in an exchange-participating health benefits plan” will be enrolled in Medicaid. This prevents a lack of coverage as a result of someone simply not knowing how to obtain it. If they are not enrolled in Medicaid, they would have no coverage. Who does that benefit? So they can choose to enroll in a plan, but if they don’t, they’ll be covered by Medicaid. Again, not a lack of choice.



pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No “judicial review” against Govt Monop



Another misinterpretation. Pg 124 falls under section 223, which discusses the establishment of payment rates for the public option. These rates that are paid to providers will be based on the rates for similar services under Medicare. The lines referenced simply state that these are not subject to review. This has nothing to do with the rates that consumers are charged, and especially nothing to do with a monopoly.



pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill – Doctors/ #AMA – The Govt will tell YOU what u can make.



This is section 225, which discusses the payment of providers under the public option. The lines in question simply establish to classes of participation for providers in this option. This is no different than providers who accept Medicare payments.



Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into pub opt plan. NO CHOICE



These lines in question are only describing which employers have to abide by the rules set forth in this section on employer contributions. One of the requirements is that they offer autoenrollment “in accordance with subsection (c)”. Scrolling down to subsection (c), paragraph (2), you will find that employees are clearly given the choice to opt-out of employer coverage. So much for “NO CHOICE”. Maybe the author should’ve given this more than a skim.



Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay 4 HC 4 part time employees AND their families.



Typo. Should be pg 146. However, this does not mention families. It discusses the minimum employer contributions for part-time employees, which is set to the rate of a full-time employee, but prorated by the average weekly hours worked.



Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Emplyr w payroll 400k & above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll



This doesn’t make sense AND lies. Employers would never provide the public option. That is provided by the government. What this section is saying is that if an employee opts out of employer-provided coverage, and the employer has payroll over $400,000, the employer must pay 8% of the AVERAGE wages in the company. This basically ensures that the company is still contributing some amount, even if the employee gets coverage in the exchange.



pg 150 Lines 9-13 Biz w payroll btw 251k & 400k who doesnt prov. pub. opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll



Same as above. This is a contribution equal to a certain percent of the AVERAGE wages, for ONE employee, if they choose to get insurance in the exchange. More lies.



Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesnt have acceptable HC accrdng 2 Govt will be taxed 2.5% of inc



This is the first one I’ve seen that is actually correct. However, the purpose of this section must be clearly understood. For an example, I’ll use auto insurance. Now, all drivers are required by law to carry at least a minimum amount of coverage, in order to prevent any unforeseen expenses on the part of other parties. The same sort of logic is applied here. The more people we have insured, the lower our collective rates will be. Studies have shown that insurance premiums are currently approx. $1,000 higher because of the cost of care provided to those that don’t have insurance. So, a tax is imposed on those who can afford it, but don’t get insurance. The tax is 2.5% of adjusted gross income, but not larger than the average insurance plan. So, it’s basically an incentive. If you know that you’re going to be charged a tax that is equal to a premium, you’d just be sure you had insurance. Problem solved.



Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from indiv. taxes. (Americans will pay)



Not quite. This section states that people who are visiting from other countries are not required to have insurance. This has nothing to do with American’s paying.