"You can't really do health care reform without it"...that's what Charles Dean told The CBS Early Show today. His comment comes after widespread reports that the Obama Administration is considering dropping the public option from its health care reform plan.
Let's see: the minority party ferments complaints about "death panels" (which is actually end-of-life counseling, and was in fact sponsored by a Republican Senator, but never mind) and the majority party wusses salute and drop it from the plan.
Now after constant attacks on the "public option" (It will be an unfair competition for the Insurance Companies! It's Socialism!), it too may be dropped.
Let me just guess what happens next. The GOP pulls the rug out from under Barack Obama at the last minute and says "Sorry, but even with those changes, it's too much too soon...we'll revisit it another time."
[UPDATE: From Paul Krugman in the Times, this quote: "The Public Option has become not so much a symbol as a signal, a test of whether Obama is the progressive activists thought they were backing."]
[UPDATE: 8/18/09 80 Liberals in Congress insist Public Option must be included.]
The health care our G.I.'s, veterans and their families get must really be some of the most rotten care ever! (TRICARE/CHAMPUS, VA, CHAMPVA, etc.)
ReplyDeleteI mean, what with the "socialist, government provided" nature of the care and all...
< / sarcasm >
And gee whiz! The elderly and poor (Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP - another minority segment of our population, albeit a growing one) also get good, if not excellent care... also courtesy of (more accurately, paid for by) Uncle Sam. (U.S. Census Bureau says "About 1 in 8 Americans were elderly in 1994, but about 1 in 5 would be elderly by the year 2030." And then, there's the Indian Health Service.)
A growing segment of healthcare providers (translate: physicians and others) are REJECTING insurance. (Some call it "concierge" service. Think "Royal Pains" teevee show. Some pay only $50/mo "retainer" for 24/7 on-call service, online access to health records, etc. Not a bad idea.)
Why?
It costs too damn much to pay paper shufflers and detracts from patient time! (Without time, there can be no quality, i.e., the "quality time" argument doesn't hold H2O.)
Well... duh!
Common gripes (from the privately insured) include commentaries like "My doctor does this for $500 a year. I've seen her for my high blood pressure and cholesterol, six times so far this year and have had to pay a $25 deductible each time (on top of the $800/month my health insurance costs.) I dare say somebody is getting a better deal than me?"
Not only are
• excessive insurance prices a common gripe, but
• non-payment and
• rejection of claims/treatments,
• rejecting physicians/health professionals' decisions in lieu of pencil-necked, paper-shuffling geeks' decisions (you don't really need that medicine/test/procedure, etc.),
• rejection for existing conditions and more.
From my perspective, that's practicing medicine without a license.
And why does Congress give itself something to which they do not allow you to have access to (some of the best health insurance in the world)? Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) http://www.opm.gov/INSURE/HEALTH/
We pay for 72-75% of Congress' health insurance premiums. The remainder comes from their paychecks... for which we are taxed. Well, dang! We pay for it all! Shouldn't we get some of that fat?
Does this scenario need "fixing"?
You're dang skippy it does!