Anonymous said...

as an interesting side-note to this article, few people realize that the "rising cost of health care" is usually provided courtesy of the insurance companies themselves, or a "non profit" group that is supported by the insurance industry. So the numbers they use are tainted, at best. Secondly, ask any doctor's office how many people and man hours per year are dedicated to filling out the huge variety of different claims forms and trying to assure the "coding" is correct. It's a huge industry in itself - which is a part of "health care costs." Those expenses for medical providers have grown exponentially throughout the years. Finally, the insurance industry was a pioneer in a 'backwards' form of premium setting, to which they still adhere: they project the profits they want to make for the year and then work backwards with increasing premiums for various plans. It's virtually NEVER done based on actual costs. Doubt me? Contact the General Accountability Office and ask them for their reports on the insurance industry. Those will also show you that virtually all the largest insurance companies in America maintain reserves of over 25% - when they could more than adequately cover all demands on them at one time with approximately 17% - an amount recommended by the GAO. The whole concept of "rising medical costs" has been cried out by the insurance industry for years - while they themselves have NEVER been required to impose strictures that would help reduce those costs. They don't want to. The only reason they lament the 'rising costs' is to justify they're eternal increases that are usually based on nothing concrete. It's time our government- either federal or state-force them to justify rate increases with substantive numbers and transparency. If that ever happened, I think we'd be likely to see a dramatic drop in the costs.

by ALONE (196 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 557 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:29:57 PM

Kevin Anthony Stoda said...

So, theoretically, if there is a single payer (only one national insurer or national insurer set of rules) the paperwork might actually be reduced on doctors because the procedures and forms would become identical. That should--again theoretically--reduce overall costs to doctors and clients to some significant percentage.

Instead of letting things remain theoretical. Legislation on health care should require penalties for insurance companies adding costs through unnecessary paperwork. (Enforcement will be a problem until standards are set across the country.)

 

by ALONE (196 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 557 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:31:44 PM

Unfortunately HCAN is a decoy to once again kill healthcare reform in this country.  Obama's plan is essentially Clinton's plan.  She found that the insurance lobby was so powerful that the best approach was to just give them what they want.  So the Obama/Clinton/HCAN plan is to leave the private health insurance industry in control, allowing them to keep insuring the healthiest and wealthiest people and reaping the profits of that, while the poor and sick would become the burden of the U.S. Treasury.  So just like in the Medicaire reform that the Republicans passed, we will have to incentivize coverage for the unprofitable- that is give taxpayer dollars over to the insurance industry at whatever level they decide is adequate.  The problem is the Treasury is about to go bankrupt with the multiple corporate scams that siphon tax dollars into private hands.  So it will be easy for conservatives to say there's not enough money to help poor people and the whole thing will crash once again.

The only plan that will actually reduce what we spend on health care, which is really our only option, is single payer.  That is medicaire for all, private delivery but publicly financed.  We need many more people to say no to HCAN and yes to the Healthcare Now initiative (you can see how they even co-opted the name to confuse people).  A strong counter-mandate to Obama's pro-corporate agenda by voting for a single-payer third party candidate is imperative.

by Doug Rogers (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 152 comments) on Thursday, Oct 23, 2008 at 12:25:48 PM

so, are you saying HCAN is not a single payer? I understood it was open to a single payer system. Can someone clarify? more on the single payer formats that are being promoted and by whom?

by ALONE (196 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 557 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:55:17 AM

No, it is not a single payer plan.  The original bill that was introduced by John Conyers is called Healthcare Now.  It is a single-payer plan.  It is backed by Dennis Kucinich and presidential candidates Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney. 

This other initiative, which is called Healthcare for America Now or HCAN(confusing right?) is backed by the mainstream Democrats, MoveOn.org (I cancelled my membership because of it), Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.  It is well-funded and is getting a huge push right now and threatens to swamp the single-payer initiative.

I don't know who the unseen players are in its promotion.  But the thing you have to ask yourself is why would anyone go into a negotiation asking for less than what they wanted?  If you had an agent negotiating the sale of your house and you were hoping to get $200,000 for it, but the agent offered it for $180,000 and then told you he ended up settling for $150,000, what conclusions would you draw?  Either that he is totally incompetent or that he was getting something on the side from the other party in the negotiation.

That is the situation we have with the Democrats right now.  Obama is receiving massive contributions from the health insurance industry, so its not hard to get the picture. 

Please check this out and let as many people as you can know what's really going on.  This is our last and best opportunity to reform healthcare and if the insurance companies can kill it it will be a generation before we get another opportunity.

by Doug Rogers (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 152 comments) on Friday, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:27:23 AM

Doug, this is important.  Can you get an article up on this?

I pass on your comments to others via the dialogue here and through personal e-mails but this point and your prior comments need to get into the mainstream.

ASAP 

by ALONE (196 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 557 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:13:45 AM

Kevin,

I will write an article.  I've already submitted something for this week so I will do something on these healthcare plans for next week. 

I'm not an expert on healthcare, but I do pay attention.  Sometimes that's the most important thing.

by Doug Rogers (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 152 comments) on Saturday, Oct 25, 2008 at 6:42:16 PM