Charles Krauthammer's Take on Healthcare Reform

[Guest]

This is Charles Krauthammer's column from today's Washington Post. I believe it is a very realistic projection of where healthcare reform will wind up.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/30/AR2009073002819.html

[Guest]

If the "individual mandate" that Krauthammer describes would do the trick, that would be wonderful. (Easy for me to say--I'm not one of the 18 million Americans who would have to pay premiums to support me!) Maybe if we add in some tort reform, some taxes on the wealthiest among us, and some sort of government-mandated record-keeping and insurance claim simplification, we could get there from here.

I was a little disappointed in Krauthammer's use of the phrase "transfer of wealth" again. He's right, of course. To substantially reduce the cost of healthcare in the U.S. in order to avoid the system from breaking our economy worse than it is now, of course there will have to be a transfer of wealth. It might be means testing for benefits, increased taxes on some, mandated insurance on those who don't want it or need it, forced reductions in payments for service--lots of things from among a list of things that would either increase out-of-pocket costs for some, or substantial elimination of benefits while keeping the premium payments at a high level. Either way, wealth will be transferred. But I see little to be gained by continually trying to inflame citizens by continually using the phrase.

[Guest]

If the "individual mandate" that Krauthammer describes would do the trick, that would be wonderful. (Easy for me to say--I'm not one of the 18 million Americans who would have to pay premiums to support me!) Maybe if we add in some tort reform, some taxes on the wealthiest among us, and some sort of government-mandated record-keeping and insurance claim simplification, we could get there from here.

I was a little disappointed in Krauthammer's use of the phrase "transfer of wealth" again. He's right, of course. To substantially reduce the cost of healthcare in the U.S. in order to avoid the system from breaking our economy worse than it is now, of course there will have to be a transfer of wealth. It might be means testing for benefits, increased taxes on some, mandated insurance on those who don't want it or need it, forced reductions in payments for service--lots of things from among a list of things that would either increase out-of-pocket costs for some, or substantial elimination of benefits while keeping the premium payments at a high level. Either way, wealth will be transferred. But I see little to be gained by continually trying to inflame citizens by continually using the phrase.

Tort reform isn't reform at all. If the goal is to reduce medical costs by eliminating the reason for "defensive medicine" practices, that will require blanket immunity from suit. Where limitations on medical malpractice claims are in force (CA is the best example), defensive medicine practices are still unchecked and overall medical costs still follow the same cost curves (if not higher) as elsewhere. So, are we willing to give blanket immunity to suit for the medical profession?

This "transfer of wealth" concept frightens me. Where is the line drawn? This is the "camel's nose under the tent flap" story with a dollar sign application. If done with health care, what's next - the type of car you can drive, or how much energy you can use at your house?

And when we increase taxes on the 'some," who are they? Of course, it's not us!

So we tax the "wealthiest among us," which always seems to be a bigger and bigger pool as more and more money is needed due to politically-inspired cost estimating that's always woefully short. Since the CBO says again that the cost curves are totally wrong as forecasted by the proponents of this health care scheme, we can expect "trickle down" taxation to bite us all.

We have the CBO so that we can have the most accurate and objective cost estimation before the gavel comes down. If we want to ignore the CBO forecasts as "inconvenient" to "Change, We can believe in," and continue merrily towards fiscal ruin, then we indeed have drunk the kool-aid and delegated full control of our lives to the party - and that is socialism at its worst.

When a health care plan can be shown by the CBO as meeting the fiscal goals of the plan's sponsors, and those goals are such that we actually have a better posture than present, then it will be endorsed by all of us. But this "to heck with the CBO forecasts, we need this passed by ____" is folly.

[Guest]

As much as we might like it to be otherwise, the reform of the U.S. healthcare system is going to result in a transfer of wealth. It doesn't have to be called that, but a transfer it will be. Call it what you want, increased premiums, means testing for benefits, higher copays, reduced coverages, reductions in payments to providers, higher taxes, negotiated prescription prices or hospital fees, limitations on medical research, lower payments to doctors, even a "government option"...they are all transfers of wealth from one group of citizens to another.

If costs are to be reduced, it simply can't be any other way, "nose under the tent flap" or not. The cost of healthcare as either a percentage of GDP or on a cost per capita basis must be reduced, and reduced substantially. Call it whatever you'd like, but the result will be a transfer of wealth.

[Guest]

Transfer of wealth is socialism. No if, ands or buts.The American dream is on a slippery slope. I think it is preposterous that people of our age who have enjoyed the benefits of capitalism their whole life, would want our grandchildren to be straddled with the limitations of socialism. The audacity of hopelessness.

[Guest]

Transfer of wealth is socialism. No if, ands or buts.The American dream is on a slippery slope. I think it is preposterous that people of our age who have enjoyed the benefits of capitalism their whole life, would want our grandchildren to be straddled with the limitations of socialism. The audacity of hopelessness.

Health Care is an extremely emotional issue for some. My husband and I have wonderful health care. But, my best friend in Chicago is 55 and works for a law firm. They do not provide health insurance any longer and she cannot afford it. She just found a lump in her breast and cannot afford to go to a doctor. People say hospitals and doctors will work with you. She tried that. They don't. Would any of you anti-public healthcare proponents care to tell her what to do???

Health Care in America should be just as much of a "Fundamental Right" as carrying your precious guns. In fact, more.

As long as there is one homeless person in this country, one starving child, one American without Health Care... "The American Dream" will remain a myth.

[Guest]

Health Care is an extremely emotional issue for some. My husband and I have wonderful health care. But, my best friend in Chicago is 55 and works for a law firm. They do not provide health insurance any longer and she cannot afford it. She just found a lump in her breast and cannot afford to go to a doctor. People say hospitals and doctors will work with you. She tried that. They don't. Would any of you anti-public healthcare proponents care to tell her what to do???

Health Care in America should be just as much of a "Fundamental Right" as carrying your precious guns. In fact, more.

As long as there is one homeless person in this country, one starving child, one American without Health Care... "The American Dream" will remain a myth.

"Health Care" wasn't in the constitution last time I looked. Second amendment to the constitution gives Americans the right to bear arms. The American Dream is alive and has been for over 200 years, where as the socialist utopia that you describe has been tried many times and failed. Please remember that the USA feeds many people throughout the world including some of your utopia failures.

[Guest]

We already have a transfer of wealth going on in america.

Those of us who pay taxes and health insurance premiums
are paying for the healthcare of those who pay little or no taxes and have no health insurance.

You have to remember that all residents of america get healthcare free if they have no insurance and no money.

[Guest]

Chesea24 tell your friend to go to emergency or to a regional medical center or to buy insurance if she can afford it.

[Guest]

As much as we might like it to be otherwise, the reform of the U.S. healthcare system is going to result in a transfer of wealth. It doesn't have to be called that, but a transfer it will be. Call it what you want, increased premiums, means testing for benefits, higher copays, reduced coverages, reductions in payments to providers, higher taxes, negotiated prescription prices or hospital fees, limitations on medical research, lower payments to doctors, even a "government option"...they are all transfers of wealth from one group of citizens to another.

If costs are to be reduced, it simply can't be any other way, "nose under the tent flap" or not. The cost of healthcare as either a percentage of GDP or on a cost per capita basis must be reduced, and reduced substantially. Call it whatever you'd like, but the result will be a transfer of wealth.

The issue is that health care costs (as an industry) have indeed risen, while the rest of the industries in America have been relatively stagnant or depressed. With a vibrant economy where all industries are on the upswing, health care costs become invisible.

Nationalizing industries don't work, as the industry eventually becomes "average" (remember the "C" grade that schools aren't supposed to give anymore?). No nationalized industry has ever excelled, and most barely stay afloat. Why should we think health care will be any different? If indeed costs are lowered, so will the standard and quality of care, as every industry has inherent costs for product development and delivery. While some economies of scale may be found and exploited, they will be quickly offset by declining research and development - nationalized industries shun R&D on the "we have enough problems of today, let tomorrow be taken care of by the next watch."

By the time all of the costs for HR 3200 for the next 20 years (under the best estimate!) are tallied, it will be proven cheaper to have the taxpayer pay for a private Blue Cross policy for every citizen and lawful permanent resident in the US who is uninsured today. As far as the rest of us, health care costs will indeed NOT stabilize, as there will be just a bigger market in "supplemental" policies to cover what government won't. And again, watch the boom in medical tourism, especially to Central/South America and the Caribbean.

[Guest]

we each understand what it is that is being called health care reform. Does the reform fix the abuse of the system?

[Guest]

Cashman, thank you for your thoughts. I am actually going to plead with her to go to emergency. I hope that works. She did go to the Social Services office of the hospital and they were unwilling to work with her. She simply cannot afford health care as she lives from paycheck to paycheck, as so many Americans do nowadays. (Makes me count my blessings for sure.)

As far as Regional Medical Centers... that's a no go. They want your credit card up front. I know this because I took her into one one day (for something else) when I was still living in Chicago and I gave them mine for her. They weren't going to see her.

You said to remember that all Americans get free health care if they have no money and no insurance. I'm curious as to how you think that works? I'm not being sarcastic, I am genuinely curious. I think that we, the more fortunate, sometimes believe we know how it works. But that the reality of it is quite different. As previously stated, she does have a job. But, paycheck to paycheck means choosing between -- do I start with the doctor's visit, mammogram, biopsy $$$ -- or risk not paying my rent???

Yes, I think the reality is very different than perceived by some.

I just keep thinking.... "There, but for the grace of God, go I... :sad:

[Guest]

The issue is that health care costs (as an industry) have indeed risen, while the rest of the industries in America have been relatively stagnant or depressed. With a vibrant economy where all industries are on the upswing, health care costs become invisible.

Nationalizing industries don't work, as the industry eventually becomes "average" (remember the "C" grade that schools aren't supposed to give anymore?). No nationalized industry has ever excelled, and most barely stay afloat. Why should we think health care will be any different? If indeed costs are lowered, so will the standard and quality of care, as every industry has inherent costs for product development and delivery. While some economies of scale may be found and exploited, they will be quickly offset by declining research and development - nationalized industries shun R&D on the "we have enough problems of today, let tomorrow be taken care of by the next watch."

By the time all of the costs for HR 3200 for the next 20 years (under the best estimate!) are tallied, it will be proven cheaper to have the taxpayer pay for a private Blue Cross policy for every citizen and lawful permanent resident in the US who is uninsured today. As far as the rest of us, health care costs will indeed NOT stabilize, as there will be just a bigger market in "supplemental" policies to cover what government won't. And again, watch the boom in medical tourism, especially to Central/South America and the Caribbean.

:agree::agree::agree: If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it is free.

[Guest]

What I have a problem with is the parts of today's "system" that work does not need to be reformed.

The average senior on Medicare, with reasonable health or stated other wise reasonable non health, has probably not had to spend much out of pocket for their care.
My wife went through breast cancer and all the pre op specialists and all the post op procedures and Medicare + OUR SUPPLEMENTAL covered EVERYTHING. She is a survivor hence the treatment expenses have subsided.
Her older sister was not so lucky, she was not a survivor, very costly treatments for 2 years of care....all covered by Medicare + supplements.

One would/could say health care is working well. There is of course abuse within these processes....what will be done about that in the new reform?

If in the proposed reform, idiotic aspects, like death counseling, would be stripped away in a heart beat. 37,000 administrators, not counting bricks and mortar or management or supervision...and the price....who knows....but here again another major chunk of $$$$$. Who is going to eliminate such stupidity from the reform?

The biggest issue seems to be how to add those who are not covered for what ever reason/race/belief/etc......and how to pay for it.

In the reform where are the words that say those currently over 65 are grand fathered. How does it help reform the system if we have to get less coverage? Pay more for what we have? How does that translate into helping the economy? It does NOTHING if we pay more from a fixed income for what we already have.

In the reform where is the language that states what changes will be made to the pharmacy/medicinal aspect of health care? How about the government taking over these industries (just kidding).

How about eliminating tort, not just reform it. But like the pharmaceutical aspect, there is too much special interest influence for that to happen.

I am for improved health care coverage or reform if it in fact solves the real issues at hand. As long as it remains a political, scratch my back and I'll do yours as usual....there will be no reform.....only more covered....more cost and less wealth.

The devil is in fact in the details and as usual the details will not have an effect on the outcome....just politics as usual.

Thus far I have yet to see any REAL improvements proposed....not as long as the current ills remain.

btk

[Guest]

What I have a problem with is the parts of today's "system" that work does not need to be reformed....My own health insurance is much the same as your own. I had major surgery in late April and my hotel bill for my wife staying in downtown Chicago while I was in the hospital was more than my deductible and co-pays for the procedure. It works well for me. I would be perfectly justified in saying, "don't change a thing in my behalf--I'm just fine, thank you very much".

But what about the people who don't qualify for Medicare (the "single payer government system" that many say will be the death knell for American healthcare)? I've read statistics that 14,000 people per day are losing their health insurance because their employers are discontinuing medical insurance as a fringe benefit. The premiums have escalated beyond the point where the employer can afford to pay them.

And the illegal immigrants, of course. The lobbyists have been quite effective in gutting any proposed immigration reforms because employers want and like the cheap labor provided by those crossing our borders illegally. We all know that even the illegals can get emergency care for nothing. It's not really "nothing". of course. The costs get shifted eventually to those that are paying insurance premiums, like the employers who can no longer afford to do so. By the way, would anyone disagree that this is really a "transfer of wealth"?

What a Catch 22. The critical problem is fast becoming grave. Fewer and fewer people have reasonable healthcare coverage. And the lobbyists are hard at work making sure that it stays that way--or gets worse.

[Guest]

My own health insurance is much the same as your own. I had major surgery in late April and my hotel bill for my wife staying in downtown Chicago while I was in the hospital was more than my deductible and co-pays for the procedure. It works well for me. I would be perfectly justified in saying, "don't change a thing in my behalf--I'm just fine, thank you very much".

But what about the people who don't qualify for Medicare (the "single payer government system" that many say will be the death knell for American healthcare)? I've read statistics that 14,000 people per day are losing their health insurance because their employers are discontinuing medial insurance as a fringe benefit. The premiums have escalated beyond the point where the employer can afford to pay them.

And the illegal immigrants, of course. The lobbyists have been quite effective in gutting any proposed immigration reforms because employers want and like the cheap labor provided by those crossing our borders illegally. We all know that even the illegals can get emergency care for nothing. It's not really "nothing". of course. The costs get shifted eventually to those that are paying insurance premiums, like the employers who can no longer afford to do so. By the way, would anyone disagree that this is really a "transfer of wealth"?

What a Catch 22. The critical problem is fast becoming grave. Fewer and fewer people have reasonable healthcare coverage. And the lobbyists are hard at work making sure that it stays that way--or gets worse.

And this is indeed a major problem, if not THE major problem affecting everything else. WHY are these employers reducing health benefits? The answer is the simple one we all kn ow - employers have to compete and employee compensation (wages, benefits, taxes and employer-required insurances for unemployment, etc) are a cost to be considered. Employers are reducing employee compensation costs wherever possible, and in the trade-off of wages versus benefits (the rest are 'stuck' costs), employees (when polled) would rather have a slice in benefits rather thas a smaller wage amount.

So, how do we make it possible for employers to compete, and who are they competing against? That's an economic - not a health care - question, and when answered and the fix put in place, health care for employees solves itself.

Even with a government-run single-payer system, the moneys for it come from what an employer has in his/her employee compensation costs. That amount is fixed, and the pieces that make it up are variable. Making employers pay a fixed number just reduces something else, and 'that net amount an employee takes home is the variable that will suffer. Anyone who believes the employee will gain in the end has never run a business.

[Guest]

And this is indeed a major problem, if not THE major problem affecting everything else. WHY are these employers reducing health benefits? The answer is the simple one we all kn ow - employers have to compete and employee compensation (wages, benefits, taxes and employer-required insurances for unemployment, etc) are a cost to be considered. Employers are reducing employee compensation costs wherever possible, and in the trade-off of wages versus benefits (the rest are 'stuck' costs), employees (when polled) would rather have a slice in benefits rather thas a smaller wage amount.

So, how do we make it possible for employers to compete, and who are they competing against? That's an economic - not a health care - question, and when answered and the fix put in place, health care for employees solves itself.

Even with a government-run single-payer system, the moneys for it come from what an employer has in his/her employee compensation costs. That amount is fixed, and the pieces that make it up are variable. Making employers pay a fixed number just reduces something else, and 'that net amount an employee takes home is the variable that will suffer. Anyone who believes the employee will gain in the end has never run a business.


There are many many reports that generally say that costs to employers would increase with a single payer system, and thus to Steve's point, either reduce the employee's bottom line or at least increase the cost of goods.

Also the CBO has said they project that health costs under the current House plan will increase at a rate of MORE than 8% per year between 2017 and 2018 and increase at a similiar rate as time goes on.

[Guest]

Chelsea24 you have to go to a rural regional medical center .
They are not for profit org's getting grants from the us gov't.

They are required to give free medical attention when the patient cannot pay.

[Guest]

There is probably enough government waste to provide those without coverage, with coverage ( or at least a small portion of it). I'd like to see zero based budgeting in the Federal Government. Get the feds out of ANYTHING that isn't specifically covered by the Constitution or involving interstate governance.

A uniform military comes to mind as something that is properly Federally covered and not the subsidization of tobacco growing, which we as a nation spend probably billions in health care for cancer related illnesses.

Interstate commerce and transportation is needed, lest we fall to a cacophony of individual state laws. Paying farmers NOT to grow crops is ridiculous, so stop the payments.

Subsidized loans to electric utility companies under the Rural Electrification Program needs to stop. This program provides low interest loans to electric companies, for the asking, even if the companies are profitable. Any company that received a loan in the past is eligible, no means testing required.

The list of unneeded government spending is so large, and so many people feed off of the government largess, that even the government doesn't know where they spend the money.

Less government, fiscal sanity, freedom to choose, individual state and personal rights are needed in this modern society.

Am I rambling, I guess so. But with the insanity of government spending it's easy to get caught up in the merry go round of thoughts.

[Guest]

...Am I rambling...No way. All good ideas as far as I'm concerned. I don't know if the savings would be sufficient to fund care for everyone who doesn't have it or can't afford it, but it would be a start.

[Guest]

Health Care is an extremely emotional issue for some. My husband and I have wonderful health care. But, my best friend in Chicago is 55 and works for a law firm. They do not provide health insurance any longer and she cannot afford it. She just found a lump in her breast and cannot afford to go to a doctor. People say hospitals and doctors will work with you. She tried that. They don't. Would any of you anti-public healthcare proponents care to tell her what to do???

Health Care in America should be just as much of a "Fundamental Right" as carrying your precious guns. In fact, more.

As long as there is one homeless person in this country, one starving child, one American without Health Care... "The American Dream" will remain a myth.

Chelsea....has she tried this site? It sounds like it has a lot of options. It also provides a lot of contact numbers including one directly to the Governor's Office. If it was me, I'd rattle the cage right at the top. Do you know any doctors or politicians in Illinois that can work that site for her?

http://www.hfs.illinois.gov/medical/apply.html

Maybe someone can hit the phones for her and find help within this system. Perhaps they can find a way to speed up the process.

I hope she gets the attention she needs and this info is useful.

[Guest]

It is not the governments business to provide health insurance. Every time the government legislates that something should be mandatory...well...wasn't it the government (Bush and Congress) that was telling everybody that every American should own a home? How did that work out?????? Yea, see what I mean?

[Guest]

Chelsea, Here in FL she could go to any of the University Medical Schools and receive treatment. If the schools in Illinois do not do this, get her on a plane, fly her down here and go to Gainesville.

[Guest]

Cashman, Cabo35 and BBQMAN, I would like to sincerely thank you for your thoughtful and helpful advice. I am going to look into each and every avenue you mentioned... right now she just seems frozen in fear.

As I said, this is a very emotional issue for me. The matter of health care reform is overwhelming. And my friend is in that murky area of having a full time job, earning a salary (which has been frozen for the last two years) so she doesn't qualify for some of the programs out there, being 55, not old enough for Medicare, but not young enough to be desirable in the job market to even look for a job with benefits.... a woman alone and I'll tell you, it's scary and dark out there.

Now, of course, health care is not just a woman's issue, it is a human issue. A year ago January my beloved brother-in-law passed away from a particularly vicious form of cancer. He had worked for United Airlines for over 30 years. In that time, his salary had been so down-graded and cut, he was making just a little more than when he had started. Pension and 401K, gone. Everything he had worked his whole life for. The one shining light is this tragedy was that his health care from United Airlines, covered all of his bills, which were tremendous. Three surgeries, chemo, radiation, experimental programs. Just beyond belief.

I remember the last time we saw him alive, he told my husband (his brother) the life insurance from United was such that if he died before Janurary, his wife would get $200,000. But if he lived until after Janurary 1st, she would only get $20,000. Such was the way the company had set things up. He died January 8th. Honestly, I don't know how she's going to make it, 3 children, the youngest only 12. Of course, we helped and will help.

I know I'm rambling, but my point is that all my brother-in-law had was his health care. The only thing that put a twinkle in his eye was when he would say "Well, at least my medical bills are covered."

I feel with every fiber of my being, that this should be provided to every American. I can't give you numbers and Lord knows I'm not smart enough to know how it will be paid for, but I know this country was built by people with backbone. People that did not just sit and call each other names. People of foresight and ingenuity. People that did not just say "let's kill this bill to make the President look bad." People that cared about the good of all. People that used their knowledge and creativity to get the job done. I know this can be done... and it is not a dream I will give up on. It is not an issue that can be tossed aside any longer.

Well, call it Socialized Medicine, call it Universal Health Care, call it whatever you like. But, let's get the job done. And if "transfer of wealth" means "transfer of health" again, let's get the job done. As I stated before, I think this is fundamental right of all Americans. No, it's not in the Bill of Rights. But, in my opinion, it should have been.

Again, as I count my blessings, I thank you for your kind advice and allowing me to vent. I'll leave you with one of my favorite sayings... "No man is as tall as when he stoops to help another." Sincerely, chels

[Guest]

"People that did not just say "let's kill this bill to make the President look bad."

It was a good speech until I got to that statement. Do you really think that is the reason most people don't want socialized medicine?

[Guest]

Cashman, Cabo35 and BBQMAN, I would like to sincerely thank you for your thoughtful and helpful advice. I am going to look into each and every avenue you mentioned... right now she just seems frozen in fear.

As I said, this is a very emotional issue for me. The matter of health care reform is overwhelming. And my friend is in that murky area of having a full time job, earning a salary (which has been frozen for the last two years) so she doesn't qualify for some of the programs out there, being 55, not old enough for Medicare, but not young enough to be desirable in the job market to even look for a job with benefits.... a woman alone and I'll tell you, it's scary and dark out there.

Now, of course, health care is not just a woman's issue, it is a human issue. A year ago January my beloved brother-in-law passed away from a particularly vicious form of cancer. He had worked for United Airlines for over 30 years. In that time, his salary had been so down-graded and cut, he was making just a little more than when he had started. Pension and 401K, gone. Everything he had worked his whole life for. The one shining light is this tragedy was that his health care from United Airlines, covered all of his bills, which were tremendous. Three surgeries, chemo, radiation, experimental programs. Just beyond belief.

I remember the last time we saw him alive, he told my husband (his brother) the life insurance from United was such that if he died before Janurary, his wife would get $200,000. But if he lived until after Janurary 1st, she would only get $20,000. Such was the way the company had set things up. He died January 8th. Honestly, I don't know how she's going to make it, 3 children, the youngest only 12. Of course, we helped and will help.

I know I'm rambling, but my point is that all my brother-in-law had was his health care. The only thing that put a twinkle in his eye was when he would say "Well, at least my medical bills are covered."

I feel with every fiber of my being, that this should be provided to every American. I can't give you numbers and Lord knows I'm not smart enough to know how it will be paid for, but I know this country was built by people with backbone. People that did not just sit and call each other names. People of foresight and ingenuity. People that did not just say "let's kill this bill to make the President look bad." People that cared about the good of all. People that used their knowledge and creativity to get the job done. I know this can be done... and it is not a dream I will give up on. It is not an issue that can be tossed aside any longer.

Well, call it Socialized Medicine, call it Universal Health Care, call it whatever you like. But, let's get the job done. And if "transfer of wealth" means "transfer of health" again, let's get the job done. As I stated before, I think this is fundamental right of all Americans. No, it's not in the Bill of Rights. But, in my opinion, it should have been.

Again, as I count my blessings, I thank you for your kind advice and allowing me to vent. I'll leave you with one of my favorite sayings... "No man is as tall as when he stoops to help another." Sincerely, chels

I can't fault your logic and feelings on this. If we can take care of the rest of the world, we should be able to take care of our own. Veterans have been saying that for a hundred years.

I do think there are limits, and they should be fenced with citizenship as the standing requirement. If non-citizens eceive taxpayer-funded health care, then their countries of citizenship should be liable for the costs (and then those nations can figure out how to get reimbursement from their citizens).

The government has several health care programs it runs now, with the US Public Health Service (http://www.usphs.gov/) being the most competent and least known and understood. Yet, no plan so far capitalizes on what's in existence and working. It just seems logical to say that all Americans should be eligible for care from the US Public Health Service, and the management/delivery of those services should be the cornerstone for those in need (e.g., means tested) or circumstance-tested). That system (http://www.usphs.gov/multimedia/dutystationmap/HSO/default.aspx) is already the foundation for "national health care," and any expansion of the customer base should simply be in consonance with expansion of the US Public Health Service itself.

My prayers are with your friend and family.

[Guest]

Somehow the american's have been desentized as to what taxes are and refer to them as transfer of wealth, taxing the rich, etc. It must be remembered that taxes are nothing more than the government taking the money from one person and giving it in some way to someone else. THe government has no money. They take it from you and me. They want to take more money from the rich and give it away. If that is not socialism I don't know what is !! We elect mainly Attorney's to congress, elect some guy from Chicago who never ran a business and they want to demand to take money from us and set up some sort of a medical business that will consume one seventh of the national gross product. Are we insane or what?
The Constitution as been run over by a steam roller and the citizens are just now waking up..At some point returning to the Democracy which served us so well for all these years will be very painful. THe pain will be determined by how long we wait to stop these people from ruining our lives. Senior citizens should be outraged. Did you know that in the UK if you are over 59 there are certain medical procedures that you can not have because you are old!
How sad it is to watch this generation pass on to the next a wreck of a society. God help us.

[Guest]

How sad it is to watch this generation pass on to the next a wreck of a society. God help us.



I agree, sometimes I think that the hippies of the 60's didn't die...they just went into hibernation for 40 years. The majority of the greatest generation have passed on, but their offspring continue to cause havoc.

When the war ended they cut their hair and traveled to Wall Street....now after 4 decades of ravishing the system and stockpiling their wealth, they have reverted back to their preaching ways again.
Do as we say...not what we did.

[Guest]

It was a theory that ancient Rome was brought down because the Roman's ate out of clay pots that hasd lead in them. Sometime I wonder if we are not eating out clay pots? My hope is that come the next election for Congress the population will take serious what is going on and elect only members who are Constitutionaly dedicated regardless Democrat or Republican. 40 or 50 people have been appointed as "Czars" over certain areas of society and they are not vetted nor do they have to be accountable to the Congress. If that doesn't scare you then nothing will and welcome to the Socialistic America where the government owns your salary and income and they are your employers. You no longer are challenged to excel as the government will tell you what you can earn and take your earnings and give them to someone who does not want to work. Like I say, "God Help Us"..

[Guest]

Readers may want to read this to get some background on the dangers of the health plan being presented. Understanding the issue is key to protecting our great country..

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2009/3621orszag_dies_first.html

[Guest]

Chelsea24 your thank you post was incredibly beautiful until the second last paragraph. Your aunt must feel the same as you.

When you live your life thinking that the government or people who have wealth will and should care for you when you become needy you will then surely become needy. Don't you think it would be better to live your life planning to take care of yourself.

[Guest]

to realize no one should advocate or rail against health care reform in general terms. And that is what I see and hear far too much.

The details of the current proposal WILL reveal to anybody who takes the time, there are some obvious benefits, especially if you currently do not have insurance or are an illegal alien. There are substantial DOWNSIDES for seniors.
Current Medicare services will be reduced. Rationing of care (call it what you will) is in the bill. Live life to the fullest is not a part of the proposal.

The burden to placed on grandchildren and beyond is a complete unknown.... to be confronted with a system that has no known way to be funded can only result in higher taxes and lessor health care coverage.

Before one supports bailing out all the have nots with across the board reform, stop and educate yourself first. You will be doing yourself and your loved ones a favor.

The politicians are always talking time table. How about we the people insisting they get it right...pass it when they know the answers.

You cannot read too much about this subject. We must all let our representatives know what we dis-like. He/she is not faced with term limits
and they like their jobs and want to keep it. More of them will be around when the legislation is finally implemented. Obama will not be!!

btk

[Guest]

to realize no one should advocate or rail against health care reform in general terms. And that is what I see and hear far too much.

The details of the current proposal WILL reveal to anybody who takes the time, there are some obvious benefits, especially if you currently do not have insurance or are an illegal alien. There are substantial DOWNSIDES for seniors.
Current Medicare services will be reduced. Rationing of care (call it what you will) is in the bill. Live life to the fullest is not a part of the proposal.

The burden to placed on grandchildren and beyond is a complete unknown.... to be confronted with a system that has no known way to be funded can only result in higher taxes and lessor health care coverage.

You cannot read too much about this subject. We must all let our representatives know what we dis-like. He/she is not faced with term limits
and they like their jobs and want to keep it. More of them will be around when the legislation is finally implemented. Obama will not be!!

btk

The misses and I have been on the phone almost every day calling our reps .
We are making it clear we are against this bill as it stands written. Slow down and work on something that makes more sense.:agree::agree:

[Guest]

Chelsea24 your thank you post was incredibly beautiful until the second last paragraph. Your aunt must feel the same as you.

When you live your life thinking that the government or people who have wealth will and should care for you when you become needy you will then surely become needy. Don't you think it would be better to live your life planning to take care of yourself.

Yes! Absolutely Cashman, I do believe people should plan for their own futures. But, sometimes, circumstances get in the way. My best friend had a couple of these, unforeseen circumstances. My husband, Thank God, is and always has been a planner. So we are quite secure. But, that is exactly why when I look at her, I say, "There but for the grace of God.... go I."

I will, respectfully disagree on one point. Although I know there is a portion of people that are an exception, I don't believe anyone wants to become dependent or needy. Sadly, sometimes things just happen...

I'll leave you with a joke that sums it up (you've probably heard it.)

Do you know how to make God laugh??? Tell Him your plans for the future!

Thanks again. :)

[Guest]

The misses and I have been on the phone almost every day calling our reps .
We are making it clear we are against this bill as it stands written. Slow down and work on something that makes more sense.:agree::agree:

Good for you. My wife and I have e-mailed almost daily and our next move will be the telephone. Our problem is that I live in a socialist state (Massachusetts) and our reps don't care because the sheeple here will vote for a monkey if it has a (d) in front of his name.