http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105525
This bill smells badly.
Printable View
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105525
This bill smells badly.
I think the author of the article forgot to take his medication.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Gutermuth
Claim: Section 1308 allows the government to dictate mariiage counseling and mental health services.
Reality: Section 1308 provides that marriage counseling.therapy services and mental health serivces provided by licensed providers will be eligible for coverage.
Claim: Section 163 gies the government direct, real time access to personal finances including access to bank accounts.
Fact: Section 163 requies that all electronic transactions conform to standard for electronic transaction simplification (defined in the existing HITECH Act) to permit timely processing of claims.
Claim: Under section 1401 a Federal bureaucracy will be created to research the efficacy of medical treatment and will be permitted to collect data for this purpose.
Fact: Absolutely true, with provisions for protecting the confidentiality of private and proprietary information.
Claim: Sections 440 and 194 establish home visitation programs and parenting programs where the government will tell you how to raise your children.
Fact: There is no section 194 as far as I can tel. Section 440 provides grants to assist states that want to establish quality program to provide visitation and parenting programs for persons in need.
Claim: Medicare recipients will be advised at least every five years on how to end their lives sooner.
Fact: Can't find this. No section number was given. However, it sounds like they are referring to counseling with respect to "advanced planning options" under section 1233, including preparation of living wills and durable powers of attorney. Good service. Happily my father was well prepared in this regard and we were able to follow his wishes precisely when he could no longer direct his own care.
Wow. I thought scare tactics reached their zenith under Condy and Rummy, but this is still "pushing the envelope". There are some things I like about Newt Gingrich, but I believe it was he who ushered in the era of utter and total disregard for the truth or facts, when it comes to all things politics. Say whatever you want, so long as it helps achieve your goals. The end justifies the means, without bounds. Thank you for setting the propaganda straight Yardley.Quote:
Originally Posted by YardleyLabs
Does anyone REALLY think this Health Care Bill will make it through the Senate?
kg
I wonder what solient(sp) green taste like ?
Well I could be wrong here but since the government will be the insurance company for all of us they will in fact be able to dictate all those things.Quote:
Originally Posted by YardleyLabs
I'm not sure i understand your point. However, under the bill, the government is not the insurance company for all of us. It is and remains the "insurance company" for Medicare. It is and retains a shared responsibility with state governments as the "insurance company" for Medicaid, and is and remains the "insurance company" and health care provider for the VA system.Quote:
Originally Posted by eildydar
Under HR 3200, there would be one health insurance plan that was operated by the government. However, there would be no limit on qualified, privately operated health plans. Being "qualified" means that individuals or companies purchasing those plans would not be subject to penalties associated with not having health insurance. In addition, individuals eligible for subsidized coverage would be able to purchase any qualified plan and apply the subsidy towards the premium. Finally, there would be no restrictions on individuals purchasing supplemental insurance on their own or on companies providing supplemental insurance coverages for their employees. The government is not the provider of care (as it is in the English system) and exercises no control over what services are offered or not offered subject to whatever state laws may exist regulating medical care.
All in all, the proposed approach follows the structure of what we have now -- both good and bad. Under my current insurance, if my doctor orders an MRI of my knees, it must be approved in advance by my insurance company and I must receive it from a specific provider. If I obtain the service without their approval or from a different provider, I must pay for it myself.
"Gotcha" provisions are the norm in our current health system. As an example, based on medical history, I have colonoscopies every 2-3 years. In the past, these have always been done in the hospital and my total cost has been under $200. For the last one, my physician suggested that it be done in his office because that is cheaper than the hospital. I agreed. However, the anesthesiologist that he used was not a participating physician and the lab used to analyze the samples was not a participating lab. Net result, the insurance company saved a lot of money and I paid almost $2000 out of my own pocket. Problems like this are built in to the approach we now use for coverage. Insurance companies point out thst they are not denying care, they are simply denying coverage. In the short term, because it builds on our current system, HR 3200 will do nothing to imrove that system or make it worse.
Before a plan is adopted, assuming that one is, I suspect that the "public option" will be dropped. I believe that will be a major mistake. The reason is that a government plan is less likely to rely on "gotchas" to save money. Competition from such a plan would make it harder for insurance companies to continue to play the fine print game in marketing their plans and I believe we would all benefit.
For years, the republicans have accused the dems of torpedoing their legislation, and accusing the dems of never offering alternative plans. The tables seem to have turned. I see tidal waves of opposition to the healthcare plans, but no alternatives, despite their admission that the current system is "broke".Quote:
Originally Posted by YardleyLabs
The irony I see, is that republicans repeatedly claim that gov't cannot run ANYTHING with any semblence of efficiency, and how wonderful big corporations are....then why worry that a gov't plan will put private plans out of business. Surely, no one on this list or anywhere else would give up their expensive private insurance for affordable gov't coverage? I wonder how the VA or tricare survive?
Originally from Yardley "The reason is that a government plan is less likely to rely on "gotchas" to save money. Competition from such a plan would make it harder for insurance companies to continue to play the fine print game in marketing their plans and I believe we would all benefit."
Under our current system who sets the standard for reimbursement rates for insurance companies? Who currently regulates the insurance companies? Why do you think they will do a better job in the future?
Regulation and administrative requirements are a major factor in health care costs. Nothing I have seen in the proposed bills decreases that. If anything it will be increased with the new government agency for oversight of the program.
The govt cannot even run the post office, how in the H#LL are they going to run something as important as health care?