Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How much health care reform is the "right amount"?
Today | Me

Posted on 10/03/2009 11:39:43 AM PDT by agooga

I'm actually a little optimistic that our reps may stumble into a compromise that doesn't suck.

The stalemate our reps are in right now is not going to last forever. Sooner or later they're going to start talking not about what they "want" but about what is possible.

I would actually tolerate (and in some cases welcome) some fairly extensive health care reform, short of any kind of public option. Some things I could live with:

-- Tort Reform

-- Buying across state lines

-- Getting a tax deduction for health expenses

Insurance company reforms including:

-- No cancellations

-- No denials of basic treatments

-- A public arbiter to settle disputes (???)

-- Coverage for pre-existing conditions

Reform of Medicaid and Schip, making sure that the poor are adequately covered, while the middle class are excluded.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Health/Medicine; Miscellaneous; Society
KEYWORDS: chat; vanity
Would love to hear what others are thinking...
1 posted on 10/03/2009 11:39:44 AM PDT by agooga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: agooga
Privatization + Inter-State Sales + Individual Policies + Tort Reform = Healthcare Reform

I can't imagine another way out that will not draw us into the disastrous slippery slope that will be co-ops or "expanded medicaid" or other euphemisms...we need to privatize, make portable and drive down costs by opening a free market that means that the 1300 companies selling insurance have to compete with each other.

Performance based outcomes will propel the better providers to the top and the market will sort out the lesser programs. 25% of the "uninsured" are "the invincibles" (the 18-25 year olds) that feel no need to buy insurance...if they do not buy insurance they can contract with private fee for service firms that will compete and possibly make loans or give them credit for procedures.

The higher risk 50-65 uninsured (ineligible for medicare, but struggle with no coverage, low income, job loss or pre-existing conditions) get assigned to a "risk pool" that better performing insurers will ultimately compete for, because they are able compete for them at reduced rates, giving them good coverage and reasonable rates.

The elderly will be covered by medicare and the indigent will be treated pro-bono by participating hospitals. I would like to see THAT pool covered by University Hospitals, many of whom have billion dollar grants behind the universities and should make use of the interns and younger doctors to keep the indigent covered, much as many law firms do.

2 posted on 10/03/2009 11:45:32 AM PDT by jessduntno (Tell Obama to STFU - Stop The Federal Usurpation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agooga
What the senators are saying about the new Baucus ObamaCare bill!

…"arcane"… "confusing"…

"hard stuff to understand,"..."incomprehensible"

…like the "gibberish" used in credit card disclosure forms!

3 posted on 10/03/2009 11:46:18 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (I don't remember Americans being called "racists" when we fought against Hillarycare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agooga
The odds of getting your list of wishes from this Congress, then signed by this President, are probably less than the odds of you flapping your arms and flying to the moon.

We couldn't have gotten that list out of the Congress right after the 2004 elections, with a solidly Republican Congress, and President Bush in the White House.

4 posted on 10/03/2009 11:50:04 AM PDT by willgolfforfood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agooga

The only reform that is needed is to abolish Medicaid and Medicare.


5 posted on 10/03/2009 11:55:44 AM PDT by trumandogz (The Democrats are driving us to Socialism at 100 MPH -The GOP is driving us to Socialism at 97.5 MPH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: willgolfforfood

“We couldn’t have gotten that list out of the Congress right after the 2004 elections, with a solidly Republican Congress, and President Bush in the White House.”

It seems like most moonbats I talk to mainly go aggro over the
insurance companies— if you plant a hefty amount of regulations and reform on them, I find that a pretty 50/50 compromise. No?


6 posted on 10/03/2009 11:56:35 AM PDT by agooga (Struggling every day to be worthy of their sacrifice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: agooga
I don't think Nancy, Waxman, Dingell, Rangel, or ANY member of the 100 person "Progressive Congressional Caucus" are looking for a compromise - to use your word. Not now, not soon, and not ever.

Ditto most of the Dim Senator, not to mention Zero.

7 posted on 10/03/2009 12:21:53 PM PDT by willgolfforfood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson