|
User loginThings you should KnowNavigationWho's onlineThere are currently 2 users and 12 guests online.
|
Honesty in Short SupplySubmitted by WhitesCreek on March 20, 2010 - 8:30am.
There's been so much false information put out on Health Insurance Reform that I understand why folks have trouble realizing it's a good thing on the balance. Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam sent an open letter to the TN Congressional delegation slamming the HCR Bill and giving horrendous numbers of the cost of the bill to the State of Tennessee...Problem is that Haslam's numbers are completely false. If only we could have a political campaign in Tennessee that would focus on factual discussions of the issues instead of this game of "Liar's Poker" we have now.
|
New DiariesBrother WebsitesOther "Views":
• Blountviews • KnoxViews • TennViews • Whites Creek Journal Local Interest: • Princess Theater • Roane Heritage Com • Roane State • RoaneTNHistory.org • Swan Pond Community • Tamke Allen Obsv • TCASN Folks that Help: • EPA Kingston Site • Roane CAG • SOCM • SRSS • TCWN • West Roane Progressiveness: • All Hat No Cattle • American Progress • Campaign for America's Future • Daily KOS • digby • Liberadio • NoChaser • Paul Krugman • Talking Points Memo • TooFunny • Whitehouse.gov Local News Media: • Roane County News • Today's Local Weather Local Government: • City of Harriman • City of Harriman Code • City of Kingston • City of Kingston Code • City of Oliver Springs • City of Oliver Springs Code • City of Rockwood • City of Rockwood Code • Cong. Lincoln Davis • Rep. Dennis Ferguson • Roane County • Roane Schools • St. Sen. Ken Yager Candidates: • Democracy for Tennessee • Lincoln Davis for Cong. • Roane County Democratic Party • Roane TNDP • Roy Herron • TN Dem Party News • TN Democratic Party Upcoming events
|
I agree that there is a real and serious need for health care reform. But, the bill on the table at this time is not what we need. It needs to go to conference committee and have differences hammered out then both chambers need to vote on it. The rule changes etc need to stop. And yes Concerned Citizen, that applies to previous (plural) administrations.
Instead of saying this bill isn't what we need, tell us why? Why don't you think it's a good idea to cover 95% of all Americans and save 45,000 lives this year alone? Why don't you think it's a good idea to cut the deficit by a hundred billion dollars a year? Why don't you think it's a good idea to provide basic care to people with pre-existing conditions and preventing insurance companies from kicking sick people off their roles instead of providing the medical care they've been taking premiums for?
But the actual topic of this post is that we should be tired of being fed crap by our candidates and we should let them know that fact above all others.
In theory it is a good idea. Some of the things that I don't think are good? IRS is the gatekeeper. Nothing provides for purchase across state lines...all states with two exceptions border at least on other state. Tax on high level benefit plans..that person is already paying a higher premium, why do they need to pay tax on top of that. Yes there are still special deals in this even for Tennessee. It needs to be a level playing field. The medicaid cost to the states and ultimately to the tax paying citizens. The forced purchase of health insurance. I understand that everybody needs to purchase it to make the plan work, but assessing a fine when you don't purchase it?
Do pre-existing issues need to be addressed? Yes
Does the cancellation of coverage (when paid on time etc) need to be addressed? Yes
Does fraud and abuse need to be addressed, in the private sector as well as the Mecicare program? Yes
Can all of this be done without this monstrous bill? Yes
There are special rules, Slaughter. These types of tactics have been used in the past, and it didn't sit well then either.
What would it be like if the voters of this country acted like the House and Senate at election time....? Big mess.
Time constrains me from continuing, so, I'm done, stick a fork in me.
That sentence ends with a question mark. Tell us your opinion of the proper way to ensure that people will purchase health insurance. You say you understand the need for people to purchase insurance to make the plan work. It appears that contingencies have been made in the plan for those who can't afford to pay whether they are a small business or individual so why would they not want to take the insurance other trying to circumvent the system.
If you don't have some penalty for not taking the insurance some people are going to decline the insurance, and when they get sick they will go to the emergency room (the most expensive place you can go) for treatment and you and I will end up paying the bill, as we do now. That happening will result in us slipping back into the same old broken system we now have. If those people are compelled to have insurance they will have the ability to go to a doctor for treatment, instead of the more expensive emergency room, which will save us all money.
That may be true but if so the question has to be asked, why hasn't it been done before now? It was first proposed decades ago that healthcare should be available for all of the citizens of this country but so far it has not happened. It is my opinion that it has not happened because of opposition by those who rake in the ridiculous profits that is afforded by the current broken healthcare system. We currently have the fox guarding the hen house and that needs to stop and the proposed plan is a good first step toward doing that.
I agree that the current plan on the table is not perfect. But it certainly is better than what we have now.
How about this senario: A man's hip joint is hurting him. He decides to wait and go to the doctor the next day instead of the emergency room in order to defray health care cost. The doctor wants to send him across the street for X-rays.
Guess what: The man's insurance would not cover it until the deuctible is met.! Had he went to the emergency room, tied up the emergency room and staff, he would have only had to pay a co-pay of $100, but because he thought he would try to save his insurance some costs for use of room, staff, etc, he could have ended up with having to pay the first $1,000 and 20% of the remaining cost!
Something is wrong with this type of coverage!
I don't know about that scenario. I don't see how it pertains to the point I was trying to make.
My post was about the people who declined health insurance offered to them under the healthcare currently up for consideration and then got sick.
Your post seems to be about someone who has insurance and is trying to save the insurance company money by not going to the emergency room first. I was talking about all of us who have insurance having to pay for those who don't, through higher premiums, when they go to the more costly emergency room instead of a family doctor.
When you say, "Something is wrong with this type of coverage!" I'm not sure if you are talking about the current system of the proposed system but either way I would agree that something is wrong with that type of coverage.
I apologize if I don't fully understand what you are trying to say.
My post was to show how we need some health care reform because current insurance policies have problems. Those types of problerms need to addressed
should the bill be passed and implemented.