I am all in favor of Republicans issuing our own version of healthcare reform. It is essential to winning, IMO. That said, there are a few elements in this plan which make me uncomfortable. First, the centralized electronic medical record base. The government doesn't need to know your private business. Second, this program is dictated from the top down. It's not simply about providing insurance for everyone but about controlling fees and outcomes. Third, you can't place all the blame for poor outcome on the healthcare providers. The patient is ultimately responsible for his diet, exercise or lack thereof and healthy lifestyle.
The above, while claiming to be free market, has a socialized feel to it.
BobbyJ gets points for trying but ultimately the fix has to come from those who treat patients, not the government. If you haven't worked in the field you don't know the issues involved.
CoD,
I agree with you 100%
ampu
From Wikipedia: "Following high school, Jindal attended Brown University, graduating with honors in biology and public policy.[7] Although he had thought of a career in medicine or law and was accepted by Harvard Medical School and Yale Law School, he chose to pursue a political career."
So he has professional education in fields related to medicine. Add to that the fact that he actually RAN the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, taking it from a $400 million deficit to $220 million surpluses.
Jindal knows more about fixing health care than ANY physician. And likely far more than any other politician.
Medicare and Medicaid already account for close to 60% of healthcare dollars already. It is a gravy train for the Blues. Jindal’s plan is the best I have seen so far at providing a means to corral costs. Perfect? No. Socialist? Absolutely not. The state is already picking up the tab for this segment. Something has to be done to slow rising costs. Otherwise we will indeed wind up with single-payer—administered by, guess who? Da Blues.
I run into this before. Insurance, which is “pooled” by definition does tend look like a collective to some, although ideally is mostly about spreading risk, not control.
This is a proposal to add some accountability and rational cost containment to LA’s Medicaid program, which is a publicly funding social program for the poor already. Without moving to sometype of voucher program, it’s hard to imagine how they could bring less socialism,in a politically viable way, to a totally government run program.
Having said that, I WOULD love to see a modified Health Savings Account approach somewhere in the country on Medicaid. I find that many Medicaid recieptients are very savvy and know how to stretch dollars in far more intelligent ways than many leaders imagine.