You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A note about socialized medicine...
- Thread starter Ender
- Start date
Hi everyone,
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
Hi everyone,
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
Hi everyone,
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
Hi everyone,
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
Current Program Changes:
-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
Mandates:
-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
exemption
-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
Regulations:
-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
Establish Health Care exchanges:
-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
Major Financing:
-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
Thanks for reading,
Erik
Hi everyone,
<br />
<br />My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
<br />
<br />As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
<br />
<br />First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
<br />
<br />Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
<br />
<br />Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
<br />
<br />With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
<br />
<br />Current Program Changes:
<br />-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
<br />-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
<br />-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
<br />-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
<br />-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
<br />-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
<br />-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
<br />
<br />Mandates:
<br />-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
<br />-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
<br />-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
<br />exemption
<br />-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
<br />-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
<br />
<br />Regulations:
<br />-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
<br />-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
<br />-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
<br />-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
<br />-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
<br />-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
<br />
<br />Establish Health Care exchanges:
<br />-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
<br />-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
<br />-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
<br />
<br />Major Financing:
<br />-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
<br />-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
<br />-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
<br />
<br />As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
<br />
<br />Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
<br />
<br />Thanks for reading,
<br />Erik
<br />
<br />My name is Erik, and I am a CF Spouse. I have not posted before, but always get the epatient newsletters that list some of the hot topics on this board, and I felt I had to comment on this topic.
<br />
<br />As with all of you, my wife Mary and I have followed the health care reform debate very closely. Obviously everyone can find things about one proposal or another that they don't like, and they can debate the merits of each, but because of a lot of misinformation and halftruths in the media and from certain interest groups, the facts often are distorted.
<br />
<br />First off - there is no "Obamacare". He barely got involved, much to many liberals dismay. Each house of congress crafted a bill, and as with many bills, each one contains some things that any number of people from all sides wants out.
<br />
<br />Second - reforming the health care system in the US is a large and complicated thing, leading to the '2000 page bills' you hear so much about. Yes this is large, but not unheard of for major legislation.
<br />
<br />Third - calling ANY of the bills that were reported out of committee, and those that were voted on "government take overs" is being disingenuous at best. Single payer (as many European countries and Canada have) was off the table from the start. And with some notable exceptions such as England, most don't have 'Socialized Medicine' anyway - meaning care is still provided by private, for profit, entities. Even with the public option (which is not in the Senate Bill) the idea was to give the option of purchasing an INSURANCE PLAN run by the government. Despite claims to the contrary, no serious proposals were made, or passed, that would eliminate private insurance, only regulate it. Thus the claim that anyone would somehow lose the ability to pay for better coverage outside of insurance because the 'government' said they couldn't have it, is ridiculous. Along the same lines, if the public option was instituted, and sucked, people would be free, via the free market, to choose another private insurance company.
<br />
<br />With that said, I've read more of the legislative proposals than I care to mention, but some the main points of the bill that was passed by the Senate (and in my opinion stands the best chance of passing at this point) are listed below broken into broad categories:
<br />
<br />Current Program Changes:
<br />-Expand Medicaid to cover more people above the federal poverty line
<br />-Shrink 'donut hole' to Medicare Part D
<br />-Drastically change Medicare Advantage program to no longer over pay private insures providing supplemental Medicare insurance
<br />-Encourage outcome based payments (ie: pay more to prevent re-hospitalizations etc...)
<br />-Reduce certain reimbursments to hospitals and other providers
<br />-Establish a board to make proposals to limit health care cost growth whose proposals must still be voted on
<br />-Various other proposals too numerous to list here to slow increase in medicare spending
<br />
<br />Mandates:
<br />-Mandate Coverage for all citizens (note - by all economic accounts, this is required to prevent denial of pre-existing conditions, or everyone would only buy coverage when they got sick)
<br />-Offer sliding scale subsidies for people up to 400% of the poverty level ($73240 family of 3) to help pay for the mandated coverage
<br />-Financially penalize individuals who do not have mandated coverage, and do not get an
<br />exemption
<br />-Financially penalize business that do not offer insurance (with numerous exemptions and differences in penalties based on the size of the business)
<br />-Offer business tax credits to encourage offering better insurance
<br />
<br />Regulations:
<br />-Global acceptance (ie: no pre-existing conditions or retroactive denial of claims)
<br />-Limit factors that can be used to affect premimum costs (limited to age, smoking, geography - not gender etc...)
<br />-Set % of insurance companies' collected premiums that must actually go to pay claims
<br />-Set basic levels of standard care that must be offered by plans
<br />-Establish maximum allowable out of pocket costs (can be lower, but this is maximum allowed) at ~12000 per family per year.
<br />-Eliminate cost sharing (copays, deducatbles) for preventative care
<br />
<br />Establish Health Care exchanges:
<br />-Establish a system of national non-profit, state based, and for profit insurance companies that individuals and small business can buy plans from at group policy rates.
<br />-Policies will be able to be sold 'across state lines' but must meet federally established standards to be offered on exchange
<br />-Subsidies for coverage would be provided to buy plans from the exchange
<br />
<br />Major Financing:
<br />-Impose excise tax on insurance plans with values of > 23,000 for a family of 40% the value over the threshold
<br />-Increase medicare tax .9% for those making over 200k
<br />-Raise threshold for medical expense deduction from 7.5% to 10%
<br />
<br />As you can see, just the basics lead to a long post. Its complex for sure. But to have a true debate about it, people should know the facts. I encourage you all to read actual reviews of the bill, if not the bill itself, from non-partisan organizations. You can view the various different proposals (in full or readable summary) here <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm">http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm</a> .
<br />
<br />Bottom line, its building on the current privatized insurance system we have, expanding already existing government programs to reach more uninsured, and better regulating the private insurance industry to benefit us all. I don't think the Senate bill is perfect, far from it, but I, and many other health care experts and economists, agree it is worlds better than what we have now.
<br />
<br />Thanks for reading,
<br />Erik
wow thanks for the info. The preconditioned clause in the insurance industry is freaking ridiculous...if you ask me.
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
wow thanks for the info. The preconditioned clause in the insurance industry is freaking ridiculous...if you ask me.
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
wow thanks for the info. The preconditioned clause in the insurance industry is freaking ridiculous...if you ask me.
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
wow thanks for the info. The preconditioned clause in the insurance industry is freaking ridiculous...if you ask me.
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
wow thanks for the info. The preconditioned clause in the insurance industry is freaking ridiculous...if you ask me.
<br />
<br />What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....
<br />
<br />What I think would be awesome is if the states did what we do and create a formulatory of drugs that are covered for certain chronic conditions, like cf, hiv, cancer....