Healthcare reform

[Rex Kickass]

For all the talk of tort reform, I just need to keep pointing to study after study by places like the CBO that shows it is, at most, only a couple of percentage points of total spending. That includes payments, insurance and defensive medicine.

 

Or just look at McAllen, Texas where they have tort reform in place and the highest health costs in the country.

 

[kapkomet]

Or just look at McAllen, Texas where they have tort reform in place and the highest health costs in the country.

And read the reasons why that is.

 

[StrangeSox]

There's absolutely no way to know that. Think about it.

 

Go ahead and criticize the methodology of the studies, then.

[kapkomet]

Go ahead and criticize the methodology of the studies, then.

Simply put, when doctors are trained to run every test up the yingyang to CYA, how can you know that is 2% of total cost? Of course, the flip side of this argument is that they need to run every test up the yingyang to figure out what's wrong. Honestly, though, "defensive medicine" is a pretty loose term - which is my point. It's pretty hard to "cap" that number or percentage. IMO, it would have to be quite a bit more.

 

[StrangeSox]

Simply put, when doctors are trained to run every test up the yingyang to CYA, how can you know that is 2% of total cost? Of course, the flip side of this argument is that they need to run every test up the yingyang to figure out what's wrong. Honestly, though, "defensive medicine" is a pretty loose term - which is my point. It's pretty hard to "cap" that number or percentage. IMO, it would have to be quite a bit more.

 

Yes, its difficult. That's why people spend a lot of time and effort doing studies on these things and try to eliminate and identify the variables. It's not a hard quantification of defensive medicine costs down to the penny, but it is something that can be measured and observed. Again, look at the methods sections of the reports to find out exactly how they arrived at these numbers. If you find some glaring error or oversight in it, fine, but you're just casting blanket doubt over the numbers because you don't like them.

 

The basis for my opinion is rigorous studies. What's the basis for claiming that it is "quite a bit more"?

 

And, like another said, I don't have a problem with tort reform. Its just not the magic solution its thrown out there as.

[lostfan]

LOL. I just said which one.

I know. I was talking about what you said right after it. Mainly I'm just f***ing with you.

[EvilMonkey]

The basis for my opinion is rigorous studies.

WHich we don't have a link for? If you were citing rigorous studies that showed the opposite, Balta or others would have been screaming for links by now.

[lostfan]

WHich we don't have a link for? If you were citing rigorous studies that showed the opposite, Balta or others would have been screaming for links by now.

They've been posted before FWIW.

[Rex Kickass]

The immediate concern is to get this clusterf*** of a bill killed. Then, let's talk about real reform. What's going on today isn't reform, it's revamping (removing), and there's a total difference.

 

But there's no impetus on the side of the Republicans to bring about any reform whatsoever. You hear about tort reform. You hear about co-ops from the same Senators who say they'd vote against a bill with co-ops in it anyway.

 

If the Republicans cared about real reform, where's their competing proposal? Oh wait, they don't have one.

 

BTW: Where in the bill you've referenced does it state that people can't option back into private coverage? Could you provide a section number?

 

[StrangeSox]

WHich we don't have a link for? If you were citing rigorous studies that showed the opposite, Balta or others would have been screaming for links by now.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=tort%2...l=en&tab=ws

[EvilMonkey]

This is pretty much the only solution I've been seen getting presented by town hall protesters when they are asked. I really don't have any idea what they want.

Tort reform, ability to compete across state lines, (i don't know how to do this, but) untying insurance from employment, remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts and reform Medicare. The last one should be easy since the Dems already claim to have these magic savings ideas which will provide the needed cash for any public plan they propose. Don't wait then, propose THOSE changes now, let's see if they work first.

[StrangeSox]

Here's the CBO report I've linked a few times.

 

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=4968&type=0

[EvilMonkey]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=tort%2...l=en&tab=ws

Thank you.

[StrangeSox]

Tort reform, ability to compete across state lines, (i don't know how to do this, but) untying insurance from employment, remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts and reform Medicare. The last one should be easy since the Dems already claim to have these magic savings ideas which will provide the needed cash for any public plan they propose. Don't wait then, propose THOSE changes now, let's see if they work first.

 

This will help the uninsured how?

[EvilMonkey]

This will help the uninsured how?

Will allow options for those that say they 'can't afford it'. You can still look for implementing some sort of plan to cover those that truly can't afford it, like Medicade welfare, but there needs to be a ceiling on income, etc. Not all the uninsured are there just because they are poor, remember. And you still have the large amount already eligible for government programs that for some reason haven't taken advantage of them.

[StrangeSox]

Making an insurance plan that they can "afford" the premiums on but would be f***ed if they actually had to pay that $1000 or whatever deductible doesn't really help much imo.

[EvilMonkey]

Making an insurance plan that they can "afford" the premiums on but would be f***ed if they actually had to pay that $1000 or whatever deductible doesn't really help much imo.

OMG! $1000! You know, you can make payments on medical bills. They might get all the bad press about being eeeeevil, but if you call them upfront and let them know what you can pay, they work with you. What would these same people do if their car broke down and had to have $1000 to fix it! We need a government option for car repairs for those that cant afford it!

[StrangeSox]

That is a good point, because cars are directly analogous to personal health.

[Rex Kickass]

I'm going to guess you are referring to Sec 102 of the bill. The one that allows existing coverage to remain unmodified. It's a grandfather clause. So rules about preexisting conditions and recission, etc simply do not apply. Here's the text.

 

(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ‘grandfathered health insurance coverage’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:

 

(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-

 

 

(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

 

Nowhere in this section does it prohibit insurance companies from creating new health insurance plans that would conform to this particular bill.

 

In fact, from what I understand the bill to contain, if you are to choose new insurance - you have options of private and public plans through a federal or state level health insurance exchange. You even have the option of taking no coverage whatsoever (although you will pay a tax of 2% of gross income if you elect not to choose health insurance.)

[Rex Kickass]

And read the reasons why that is.

 

Are you talking about a high undocumented worker population? El Paso has about the same number of those people and the average bill in El Paso is roughly half.

 

Or are you talking about all the "high tech medical stuff" there that El Paso also has and the average bill in El Paso is roughly half (and rates the same or higher as McAllen in quality of health care services across the board.

[Cknolls]

http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/2009082...ATES01/90826020

 

http://www.helenair.com/news/state-and-reg...1cc4c03286.html

 

 

 

 

One no and one possibly no. At this rate, Schumer will not even get reconciliation through.

[Rex Kickass]

http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/2009082...ATES01/90826020

 

http://www.helenair.com/news/state-and-reg...1cc4c03286.html

 

 

 

 

One no and one possibly no. At this rate, Schumer will not even get reconciliation through.

 

Tester said he'd support a public option in your article. He also said he'd support a bill without a public option. That's not a "possibly no," that's an argument for incrementalism.

[kapkomet]

But there's no impetus on the side of the Republicans to bring about any reform whatsoever. You hear about tort reform. You hear about co-ops from the same Senators who say they'd vote against a bill with co-ops in it anyway.

 

If the Republicans cared about real reform, where's their competing proposal? Oh wait, they don't have one.

 

BTW: Where in the bill you've referenced does it state that people can't option back into private coverage? Could you provide a section number?

Yes, they do, it's just you're never, ever going to hear about it.

 

[StrangeSox]

Is it as hilariously inept as their budget proposal?

 

Where's that section mandating government health care insurance?

[Cknolls]

Is it as hilariously inept as their budget proposal?

 

Where's that section mandating government health care insurance?

 

 

I'm sure they would be within 2 trillion dollars of estimates.