Chutzpah: AHIP Calls for Single Payer Debate

I personally support single-payer... (4.00 / 2)

Americans are frustrated and confused about just what health-care reform will actually mean for them  We need the facts before anything is decided in Congress.  An open and honest debate about all the options is the only way to go with this.  

---

by: TeresaH @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 17:25:59 PM CDT

Well, I hope you know I'm with you, Teresa. (0.00 / 0)

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 17:31:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

For the record... (4.00 / 1)

I just deleted the abusive posts - that wasn't MassLib's doing.

We're here to discuss the here and now of health care reform - NOT to discuss what happened 15 years ago or to go back and forth over health care plans that were put together over 2 years ago.

When trolls turn up, we hear them out and try to engage them in discussion.  If it becomes clear they're only here to replay last year's primary wars (which just happened in this thread), we ban them.

I hae more patience now than I did this time last year, but life is too short to waste time on folks who turn up just to screw with this online community.

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 18:07:58 PM CDT

I do love you, Alegre. :) (4.00 / 1)

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 18:54:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Right back at ya :) (0.00 / 0)

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 19:35:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Can someone help me out on single payer? (0.00 / 0)

Can someone point me to some non-biased links regarding the pros and cons and economics of single payer healthcare? thanks.

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 20:24:09 PM CDT

Boy - non-biased... (0.00 / 0)

I'm not sure I'm the one to ask.  The more I look into this the more convinced I am that single payer is the way to go.  A lot of my views are based on personal experience regarding the insurance industry and my inlaws reports on their care in Ireland - which has a national health plan.

My dad lost his insurace over 2 cents and died at the age of 61 because he couldn't get health insurance.  No insurance = no care in this country.

Hubby and I are both out of work.  We have a COBRA policy but with a huge deductible ($2,400 a year for our family) we can't afford to USE the coverage - so we might as well not even have coverage.

We'll have to drop the coverage in Sept. because even at $430 a month, it'll be more than we can afford and the mortgage comes first.

We spend $2 trillion a year on health care in this country - all through insurance companies.  A third of that doesn't even go to delivering health care services.  It pays lawyers, advertising, CEO pay and bonuses and examiners who look for every trick in the book to deny care.

The government run health care program that's already in place here - Medicare - spends all but 3% of it's funding on health care services.  Medicare is TEN TIMES more efficient than private insurance.  Ten times!

Meanwhile, my inlaws in Ireland go to a doctor whenever they need to.  Sign in - show their national health care card - see their doc - go get prescriptions - all without forms, deductibles, co-pays or hassles with an insurance company that refuses to cover things after the fact.  

No brankruptcy over medical bills.  

No waiting for appointments or care.

No one but their doctor deciding what care they get.  If they need it - they get it.

No huge taxes to cover it all.

Getting back to non-biased info... I think one way to get a fair look at our options is if we could get the CBO to score the Medicare for all bill that's now before the House (HR 676).  They might not take into account the benefits of preventative medicine and quick action when an illness is discovered, but it'd be a good place to start.

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 20:50:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What kind of... (0.00 / 0)

Taxes are we talking about here though, for real. If they are talking about a robust public option and says it will cost over a trillion dollars, how does that not equal higher taxes? If it's so cost effective why does it cost, let's get real, 2 trillion dollars for just some of the people?

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 20:58:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

They're looking at several ways to pay for this (0.00 / 0)

but yeah - it's going to cost a bundle as the plan now stands.

If we're going to spend that kind of money to only increase the pool of the insured by 10 to 15 million people (out of the 47 million currently left out in the cold) then we should at LEAST have the CBO score the Medicare for All plan put forward by Congressman Conyers (D-MI).  That plan would cover ALL OF US, and I can't imagine it would cost too much more than this current plan will.

We already pay into the Medicare pool now.  Maybe it means they adjust the amount we eacy pay into it in exchange for coverage.  I can't imagine it would jump by the $500 a month I had taken out of my paycheck when I was working and there wouldn't be that $2400 deductible we had with the private insurance.  We wouldn't be paying co-pays.  There wouldn't be any "GOTCHA!" after the fact.  No separate policies for dental or eye care.

It all adds up when you think about it.  And we wouldn't get that with Medicare if we were all covered under it.

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:07:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

thanks... (0.00 / 0)

well, the good news is that the avg. doctor in canada makes 230,000 a year, which is a major concern for me if doctors do not make a lot of money under universal health.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

Seems pretty good.

But i'm an analytical person, i really need to know exactly what the costs are, exactly why our costs per person are higher. I know we have higher obesity rates, way more heart attacks, heart failure, aids, etc. Plus, of course, profits and administrative costs, but where will all the insurance employees go? What do most doctors want? It's really hard to trust the people in power right now, they are so full of shit. How do we know that there won't be longer wait times? In most countries with single payer there are indeed longer waiting times. Now, for me, the most important thing is that people with cancer, diabetes, etc get care, it's SICK that they don't, but what about everyone else? Is healthcare in MA really that bad? Gov't bureaucracy in the U.S. is PATHETIC and will always be that way, we really can be a lazy country, so what then? I much prefer a gradual change when it comes to healthcare. If the vast majority of people in the U.S. are not for single payer, it would be terrible to impose it on them against their will. Anyway, those are my rambling thoughts on healthcare.  

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:38:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The excess spending is the adminstrative costs (0.00 / 0)

and profits.  I really suggest you do some research.  You seem to have a lot of misinformation.

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:49:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That's why i'm asking... (0.00 / 0)

So help me out with this, if excess costs and profits are the high costs, than why will a public option, that i assume we'll be paying into a large pool, why will it cost trillions of dollars? this is not some rhetorical question, it is actually a real question.

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 23:45:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Because that is not what is being proposed. (0.00 / 0)

The original concept was a pub. opt. of 123 million enrollees at conception.  This would have included everyone now on Medicaid and SCHIP.  It was to be called "Medicare Plus".  That's been reduced to a pub. opt. with an estimated CBO enrollment of 0-10 million.  It doesn't have the market share to bring down costs.  The original pub. opt. was to be the only place where subsidies could be used.  Since this is a tax based system, you can look at subsidies as a sliding scale.  That's not what is being offered.  We are allowing subsidies(tax payer money) to be used to by for-profit insurance(subsidize profits), again this means costs go up. In a single payer system taxes rise, obviously, but private spending goes way down.  The net gain is 300-400 billion annually.  

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 07:16:39 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

which btw... (0.00 / 0)

is why i initially asked, does anyone have any good links, i was looking to find unbiased places to research.

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 23:48:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We already have a national health plan (0.00 / 0)

that's run by the government - several in fact.

As I already said - the goverment uses all but 3% of its funding for the delivery of health care services.

Doctors like dealing with them.

They don't get any run around and there's no wait time for care for Medicare patients.  No more so than under private insurance.

As for the majority of people and single payer - poll after poll shows that the majority of Americans WANT a national health program.

There's so much info out there - look into it and get the facts and I think you'll come around to thinking a national plan is the way to go here.

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:58:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

anne, single payer (0.00 / 0)

is a method for financing health care.  Private, for-profit insurance is also a financial instrument.  PNHP has the best research on different ways to finance health coverage.  Medicare for All would be very similar to the French system, which has basic coverage and supplemental:

Because the model of finance in the French health care system is based on a social insurance model, contributions to the scheme are based on income. Prior to reform of the system in 1998, contributions were 12.8% of gross earnings levied on the employer and 6.8% levied directly on the employee. The 1998 reforms extended the system so that the more wealthy with capital income (and not just those with income from employment) also had to contribute, since when the 6.8% figure has dropped to 0.75% of earned income. In its place a wider levy based on total income has been introduced, gambling taxes are now redirected towards health care and recipients of social benefits also must contribute.[7] Because the insurance is compulsory, the system can effectively be thought to be financed by taxation rather than traditional insurance (as typified by auto or home insurance, where risk levels determine premiums).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

We spend more than any industrialized nation on health care, the next closest is France:

Per capita health care spending (2003):

United States: $5711
France: $3048
Germany: $2983
Denmark: $2743
Italy: $2314
United Kingdom: $2317
Japan: $2249

http://www.correntewire.com/

The single payer bill in the House details how taxation would work.  

http://www.johnconyers.com/hr6...

Basically, by taking the profit and sales/admin cost out of health coverage we could cover everyone and save $400 billion a year.

Also, we currently rank 37th in health outcomes of every industrialized nation.  We are also the only industrialized nation that ties basic health coverage to employment.  It's really a no brainer.  but, this is an issue everyone has an opinion on.  States like CA and NY and MA and ME have all commissioned studies on state single payer.  In every case the savings were huge.

Oh, but the pub opt as written so far in Congress would only have 10 million enrollees at most, and a number of other issues that would make it hard to realize the financial gains of Medicare for All.

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:27:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

thanks... (0.00 / 0)

in terms of taxes, 5% on top earners is not going to cover the difference btwn incoming and outgoing, neither is a tax on stocks and bonds, we were going to repeal the bush tax cuts anyway, that bill is just way to idealistic. And the stats for other countries healthcare costs exclude our high rate of obesity and violence, drug addiction, Dunno. Do you have any links to the NY study on single payer?  Thanks.

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:58:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The insurance industry syphons off $600 Billion (0.00 / 0)

a year (that's billion - with a B) from the $2 trillion we spend on health care in this country.

Six hundred billion dollars.  That'll get us a long way toward paying for whatever national health care plan they put in place.

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 22:04:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Several studies have been done that health factors (0.00 / 0)

in the US do not effect the costs of the financial instrument, ie single payer, relative to other countries.  There's no evidence to back u your claims.

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 07:19:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

other questions... (0.00 / 0)

with Single payer, who decides what doctors get paid? Do countries in Ireland get paid what ours do here?  Also, in ireland they still have private insurance, so if people buy into private insurance, are they exempt from the costs of the single payer system?

This is why i'm hoping for a link or 2, i really want to look into this.  

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:04:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

oops, i mean... (0.00 / 0)

do doctors in Ireland get paid what ours do here, not countries. :D

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:05:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not sure of the payscale in Ireland (0.00 / 0)

But I do know that a lot of doctors here in the States like dealing with the Medicare folks.  Prompt payment. Decent rates.  No runaround.

I do know that private insurance is available in Ireland but that's for extra things - more posh care (private rooms in hospitals maybe?).  It's not deductible from what one pays in taxes.  I can't speak to that directly because my mother-in-law is happy with the care she gets from the regular program and as far as I know, hasn't seen any need for private insurance.

As for single payer and who decides which doctors get paid, I would imagine that the government pays out claims no matter who the doctor is as long as they're board certified etc.  Everyone in - nobody out goes for care providers just as it does for patients.

Still don't know of any unbiased links.  I do know that there are several groups of doctors and nurses who are behind the single payer movement 1000%.  The California Nurses association - now a union that includes nurses from a great many states around the country got on board a while back.

I'll see if I can find links for those groups.  Now mind, they're already in favor of single payer but I would think their opinion would carry a lot of weight with folks given that they're in the trenches when it comes to providing care and getting their patients treatment covered by both the private insurance industry and those running Medicare.  So they can compare and contrast better than anyone!

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:13:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Link to California Nurses info (0.00 / 0)

Here's a link to the union's page in a national health plan...

http://www.guaranteedhealthcar...

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:18:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Physicians for a National Health Plan (0.00 / 0)

This is a link to a national group of doctors who are working toward a national health care program...

http://www.pnhp.org/

Like I said - these are the folks who are in the trenches.  They watch a sick patient fight to get the care they need, and often those patients lose the waiting game.  I can't begin to imagine how frustrating that must be for a doctor.

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:21:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

thanks... (0.00 / 0)

thanks for all your help, i'll look into them.

---

by: annenyc @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:59:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Great! (0.00 / 0)

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 22:05:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's hard to say because we have so many specialist here (0.00 / 0)

who are in a different income bracket than GP's.  We need more GP's.  I do know studies show doctors support Medicare for All by 60-70%.  Also, they would have less time eating bureaucracy, and less malpractice insurance, so hard to say.    

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Wed Aug 05, 2009 at 21:30:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

By the pricking of my thumbs... (4.00 / 1)

Something troll like this way comes...

I get a distinct eau de troll around annenyc.

Every point she makes seems to come straight out of the RNC fax blast, couched in "ohhh I don't know anything about this lil' ole single payer stuff what on earth could it be??"

Call me cynical but once I see this:

Gov't bureaucracy in the U.S. is PATHETIC

my republican ray-dar starts zinging.

I dunno, maybe you all are just more patient than I am but I saw too many flags in her disingenuos posts.

---

by: DancingOpossum @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 09:37:53 AM CDT

We can handle her ;) (0.00 / 0)

Besides, her questions give us an opportunity to get more information out onto this thread and keeps us on our toes.

She's mild compared to the bots we used to have to put up with last year.  But we'll keep an eye on things just the same.

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 10:42:31 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't think she's a bot. (0.00 / 0)

She's got a hillary supporting blog site.

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 10:49:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

More anti-stuff than pro anyone (0.00 / 0)

Look at the tags used and you'll see what I mean.  And that first post re Conyers... yikes!

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 11:51:11 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes, it's not my sort of politics. (0.00 / 0)

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 11:58:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Same here (0.00 / 0)

I care about issues and results - not in replaying last year's fights.  Sure we hold the party accountable for the fraud, but NOT at the expense of moving forward on things like health care reform.

Life's too damn short to keep spinning our wheels over what's already happened.  Look forward and work on the here and now - that's what Hillary's doing and I've always found her to be a great example.  

Invest in Women - Change the World
http://twitter.com/alegrescorner

---

by: Alegre @ Thu Aug 06, 2009 at 12:26:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

what's the problem with the conyers post? (0.00 / 0)

He's a fucking ass who had John Lewis like a freakin POW reading a letter of support for Obama, it was disgusting. And you can see exactly what he did in the CBC, it was disgusting as well. I was AT the RBC meeting, so i've probably even met you if you went. Hold off your judgement. Yeah, conyers is a dick. He was wrong to pressure hillary supporters to drop her, i'm surprised you don't like someone calling him out on that.

---

by: annenyc @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 22:22:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

masslib... (0.00 / 0)

if this is the same masslib exiled from DU with the rest of us, then you know me very well. We went to DC together for the puma conference and we have met on several occasions.

---

by: annenyc @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 22:23:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No... there's a masslib there? (0.00 / 0)

Strange.

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 21:45:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What is your problem? (0.00 / 0)

I used to get this at Democratic underground. Just because I don't know all the details and ask questions? They are not rhetorical statements, they are questions. And as for beauracracy, not only republicans and trolls think this exists. I am a long time Hillary supporter who campaigned for her for months, you can see the link on my blog, i'm hardly a troll for not instantly being for single payer. jesus. Not every democrat is a liberal democrat, just so you know, and many democrats do not trust government.  

---

by: annenyc @ Fri Aug 07, 2009 at 22:18:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ok... (0.00 / 0)

"many democrats do not trust government." That's surprising because Dem's are the Party of Truman, FDR, LBJ, and WJC, all of whom delivered popular federal social programs.

Medicare for All is Civil Rights

---

by: masslib @ Sat Aug 08, 2009 at 21:46:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]