Clinton and Democrats: On Healthcare, Just Pass Something

Reader Comments
Back to blog

ocean group mid height volunteer

cheresetho of IA 3:07PM December 19, 2009

There has been much talk about why health care reform is needed to reduce costs without explaining the makeup of those costs and especially the increase in costs.
1) Demographics and the aging population - Older people in general require more health care. The population of the US is aging and that will force up the aggregate costs of healthcare. In addition, since the number of people paying taxes will fall at the same time, the burden on each taxpayer will increase even faster.
2) Americans smoke too much, drink too much, eat too much and eat the wrong foods, and get too little activity - Bad lifestyle choices will continue to force up health care expenditures.
3) Malpractice - In the end, the costs of the obscene malpractice awards are passed on to the person buying health insurance. Since these costs are included in the costs of doing business of drug companies, medical equipment produces, hospitals, and physicians, the rates and prices that are charged to health insurers is higher. Also, these costs force up the cost of malpractice insurance which is also passed on to the health insurer. That just pushes up the cost of health insurance. These obscene malpractice awards also prompt doctors to order more tests and procedures in order to do CYA.
4) Cost of medical research - Most of the "easy" to discover drugs, procedures, and devices have been found. The education and experience required to be at the cutting edge of medical research requires a huge investment of time and money. Very few people are going to pursue those fields if they cannot expect to be well compensated. Also, the complexity of the equipment used in cutting edge medical research is increasing rapidly. That costs money just like the research itself.
It is clear the only major cost item that could yield large cost savings is malpractice and that is not even being addressed in the current plans. Also, the US is financing most of the medical research budget through higher drug prices but that opportunity to reduced costs has also been negotiated away by the current administration.
Short of passing laws withholding healthcare from people as they age (health panels) or passing laws to force people to make better lifestyle choices, the current administration has eliminated the opportunities where real savings could be realized.
The current plans being proposed will not reduce costs but they will provide a bunch of high paying government jobs that we as taxpayer will pay for.
What is actually needed is to remove the barriers that stifle competition between health insurance companies. Also we need to provide a framework where insurers can compete more effectively if they achieve better lifestyle choices among their insured.

AngryMobVoter of PA 12:13PM November 16, 2009

The one thing that "healthcare reform" certainly does NOT do is offer "choice"! Quite the contrary. This was made abundantly clear this past Friday in an Op-Ed that appeared Friday, December 13, 2009 in The Wall Street Journal by Andrew Heinze, a registered Democrat from New York. Following are a few words from that article:
"I'm a registered Democrat living in New York City, and I buy my own health insurance. But now, having seen the health-care reform bill that passed the House, I'm preparing for life without health insurance. And unless I'm the only person covered under the Empire Blue Cross/Blue Shield "Tradition Plus" plan, a lot of other people will end up just like me, uninsured.
I will gain one thing, though—an annual fine for losing my insurance. The exact amount of that fine isn't clear yet, but so far it looks like I'll be paying about the same amount—$2,000 a year—for having no insurance as I do now for having it."
Mr. Heinze goes on to describe the fact that, today, his minimum cost for a comprehensive major medical plan is $13,000 per year. His cost on a plan that just covers hospital stays is $2,000 per year. Therefore, he chose the less expensive option. He correctly points out that the $11,000 difference would pay for A LOT of doctor visits should that become necessary. Today Mr. Heinze has a CHOICE between these two alternatives. Under the provisions of the healthcare bill passed in The House of Representatives on Saturday, November 7, that CHOICE will NO LONGER EXIST!!!
The irony here is ultra liberal Democrats want to ensure "choice" for abortion in a bill that, in every other respect, takes away freedom of choice from individuals and transfers that choice to the federal government.
Healthcare reform is something that needs to be done correctly. Another irony is the fact that President Obama wants us to rush into this very important decision while, at the same time, the General that The President personally chose to run the war in Afganistan has asked for more troops MONTHS AGO, but when it comes to that decision it's quite a different story. No rush there according to Obama! The White House says they need to take the time to get it RIGHT! Go figure!!!
Given the fact that a recent poll indicates the vast majority of Americans believe that JOBS should be the number 1 priorty for the administration in Washington while only 17% believe that to be the case on the subject of healthcare reform, it appears to me that both Martha Coakley and President Obama have their priorities, shall we say, BASS ACKWARDS!!!
For the record, I am also a REGISTERED DEMOCRAT!

BorisB of NY 1:20PM November 15, 2009

There has been a tidalwave implementation of jobs going overseas due to busisnesses having to pay high health care premiums for their employees, the defeat of this bill will only continue that trend until there will be no businesses left to operate because premiums are sky high -- it is sort of like paying the mafia to operate!
If health care does not pass, it will reveal that the U.S. Congress does not have enough strength or right intentions to pass a healthcare bill that will benefit the people of the United States finally, control health care costs for both businesses and individuals -- that Insurance Companies and Pharmacies have more power over these legislators than the people who have sent them to Congress! It is always like pulling teeth for these legislators to do something beneficial for the people -- example: increasing unemployment benefits and raising the mimimum wage to a living wage and even that falls far short! I have faith that a bill will pass -- that it is the people's time now and not the corporations and insuarnce companies...
Why do the GOP fear the terrorists being tried in open court in New York? The terrorists are not military but terrorists and should be tried as such. The GOP remind me of bullies who pretend to be tough but are really afraid.

Angellight of PA 9:01AM November 14, 2009

"They all had their turn in the limelight"@@@@@@@@@ Gee, could someone please tell Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, and Dick Cheney the same thing?

JaJa of TX 6:39PM November 13, 2009

I agree. Get something passed. Let's just get our foot in the door and then we can get what we really need in increments. In 10 years we will have a national health cares system without corporations sucking huge profits out of sick people. Everyone will wonder why we waited so long and what we were so afraid of.

Jaja of TX 6:37PM November 13, 2009

What this nation needs are the likes of Tom Daschel, Bill Clinton, Carter, Gore to pass with irrelevance into the obscure annals of history.
Thankfully, they are all "has beens" that "never will be" ever again.
Someone needs to tell these types that nobody cares. They all had their turn in the limelight. Now they just need to go back into their dark little worlds and raise a new crop of Dems with the stuff they shovel.

Derrick of MD 5:59PM November 13, 2009