I hope to see real healthcare and health insurance reform come to fruition within the next few weeks. Members of my family are losing their homes and futures because of the insupportable cost of their medical care... AFTER insurance has paid its "share." I'm not. I have very good, VERY expensive health insurance, which I am promised will continue after I retire... IF I can come up with $1,000.00 a month. Could you?
Why the disparity? Why should a family making less than I not have the same access to health care? Why is their share so much more expensive? Well now, THERE'S a question... and here's an answer. My beloved wife had a surgery that cost, according to the Explanation of Benefits (EOB) $65,000.00. That did not include hospital, anesthesiologist, medication, etc. That nice round number is EXACTLY what the surgeon charged. Now comes the fun part:
Amt: $65,000.00 Approved for pmt: $1,650.00 Ins pmt: $1,535.00 Patient pmt: $165.00.
If it had been my daughter, those last two numbers, especially the LAST one, would have been much higher... MUCH, MUCH higher.
This disparity is unconscionable. It happens because small companies can't afford the premiums for "small group" insurance. I've never understood why we aren't all one group. And it's high time we were!
Single-payer national health insurance isn’t socialized medicine (and if it was you can bet most doctors in the U.S. wouldn’t support it.) Single-payer is simply a streamlined system in which a single agency organizes health-care financing and payments: delivery of medical care remains essentially as it in in the U.S. today - largely private. All that’s lost is the red-tape and restrictions.
Who’s against it then? Insurance companies, because they profit enormously from the current system - even though they add no value. In fact, many people will tell you that insurance companies make it hard to get what they deserve and pay for with the premiums. That’s why it was such a major focus of Obama’s campaign in 2008: he proposed that modern health care should include giving everybody in the U.S. coverage.
To get there we need the freedom to choose between keeping private insurance—for those lucky enough to have any—and opting into a universally available public health insurance option (something like Medicare.) Ultimately, by reducing the number of agencies handling the payments we simplify the task for hospitals and clinics - less of the time and money goes to red tape, and more goes to actual medical services.
Ultimately that also means diminishing the power and profits of the private insurance companies currently siphoning their lavish earnings off your health care payemnts. They make money off the red tape, and by letting non-medical personnel decide what should and should not be prescribed to treat patients, and that’s a large part of what has caused costs to soar while coverage just shrinks.
It’s time for a reality check. Insurance companies profit from the current system, so naturally they’re opposed to changes that hurt their bottom line and their corporate bonuses. What value do they add to the process?
Digg this article…
Hi All,
Covered by the FISA fiasco we weren't watching behind the scenes.
As Barack Obama was taking the big hits for voting "Yes" on the FISA bill (which it was known was already going to pass by a huge majority without his vote), nobody seemed to notice the Medicare bill and the number of Republican Senators that jumped ship and voted, "Yes" on it.
Many of us were wiping the tears from our eyes as if maybe Barack Obama had stood us up for a date. When in fact, as Barack is not President yet but we are very aware of his persusive bipartisan influence; the Medicare bill was being passed with a majority vote that George Bush cannot veto.
A huge victory for the people of this country. What happened? We all know the give and take of Washington politics, the behind the doors goings on which Obama says will Change when he is President. But, Obama is not President yet and still apart of the give and take of Washington Politics.
I would venture to gain that the give and take was a trade off on a FISA bill which was going to pass anyway, for a Medicaid bill which wasn't going to pass. A bill which will now help to pave the way for a badly needed Universal Health Care bill.
Who knows but, I say 3 cheers to mybarackObama!
Loveya,
Duane Kuehn
FYI --- Access to the individual state groups for Health Care for All with Non-Profit Single-Payer National Health Insurance
This is what I"d say to Hillary: "You talk about all of your experience, but the most important thing that you sent out to accomplish was your aborted effort to bring about National Health Insurance. A look into the past reveals that this was a total failure! You alienated all of the parties who were going to have to cooperate. You set back the cause of NHI a generation. Because of this history, you are the last person in America who would be able to bring National Health Insurance."
note: I've noticed that when Hillary talks right after Obama, she starts by saying something positive about the strength of his he has just highlighted and then claims it for herself. Rather than disagree she "takes it over." I think that stopping this pattern will put her more on the defensive.
