Oh, the criticisms of the proposed healthcare reform. I'd guess there's someone or some group against every single section. The problem is that no one has a better idea. If we're lucky, the traction being built against the proposed plan will result in it's defeat. But we'd be left with the same problem of too expensive and underfunded healthcare. No one seems to have a comprehensive better idea.

A couple things are for sure. Reform is necessary in order to bring down the cost of healthcare in this country and getting everyone insured. Whatever reforms are put in place should not add to the deficit or national debt. Those are simple objectives, really. Difficult and tough to achieve, for sure. To cut costs while insuring 20% more people means that someone's ox will be gored. There's simply no other way. The objective should be to eliminate the least necessary costs.

Here are a few ideas...again. I wish I had a Government Budget Office (GBO) to price them out.

• Set a standard, minimum coverages, for any healthcare insurance policy offered in the U.S. This could be done quickly by a consortium of the largest private insurance companies and then approved by the government. Or the standards could be set by the government itself.
• Stop reducing the funding of Medicare. This "cost cutting" idea is lunacy at a time when the number of Medicare-qualified people is increasing. All it does is drive more providers away from the system, resulting in more uninsured citizens.
• Use the terrifc technology we already have to assist doctors in diagnosis and the development of a medical plan or a protocol of prescription drugs. Once that data base of medical diagnostic data is in place, it should be used to determine whether certain treatments, procedures or drugs are paid for by insurance. Some will argue that we shouldn't adopt a "one size fits all" approach, but such use of technology would definitely result in reduced costs.
• Means test for government-provided healthcare insurance, Medicare or any new program. If people can afford to pay more in premiums, co-pays or deductions, they should.
• Include preventive medical measures either in the proposed legislation or in the tax code. The degree to which actions by individuals to prevent the onset of bad health will reduce future costs. What could this include? Maybe items like increased taxes on tobacco products, increased premiums for people not showing progress towards reducing obesity (that's me!), tax deductions for health club memberships...those sorts of things.
• Firm limits on how much any kind of insurance, government or private, will pay for experimental procedures and/or medical research. These are costs that should be funded privately.
• Enact medical tort reform. Some will argue that it won't work. But strict tort reforms do work in countries with national healthcare insurance. Remember one of the prime objectives of any reform--reduce spending on healthcare. Even if legal reforms saved a few percentage points, it's a step in the right direction. The reforms could be as simple as "loser pays" as a start.
• Permit the government, or some consortium of private companies or agencies, to determine the maximum price that will be paid for a formulary of prescription drugs. Drug companies can charge more for their drugs in the free market if they choose. If they can sell them at prices greater than the approved/negotiated price, they would be free to do so. It just wouldn't be paid for by health insurance.
• Certain procedures or drugs not necessary for the maintenance of good health should be eliminated as those paid for by any form of health insurance. I'm sure there's a long list that could be developed, but things like in vitro, any kind of cosmetic surgery, abortions not needed to protect the mother, etc. should be identified. The objective of "reform" should be to provide for improvements in the general health of the population at reduced costs--not addressing all health issues. If desired, pay for them privately.
• If there's still a "cost gap" after enacting everything anyone can think of, we may be left with increasing taxes to fill the gap. That should be a lst resort, but certainly one that would trump adding to the deficit or national debt.

These are probably just the beginning of a list of reforms that would work to accomplish the objectives. You all can probably add more. I wish we had a GBO to price them out.

One thing is for sure. Just saying "NO" doesn't accomplish the objectives that need to be addressed.