Democrats are already exploiting the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy to reinvigorate their push for government-run health care.
Well, if we're going to be led by sentiment, let's at least be guided by the feelings of the American people.
The fact is, an utterly amazing majority of Americans are quite pleased with their health care: A 2006 survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today found that 89 percent -- nearly nine out of 10 Americans -- are satisfied with their health care.
It's not just the well-to-do or the fat-and-happy saying that, either: The same survey found that 70 percent of the uninsured receive medical care that the majority are pleased with.
In truth, this debate should be about facts. So here is one very pertinent fact: There are not, as is often stated, 47 million people who can't afford health insurance. The group simply isn't that monolithic.
As Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss noted at a meeting here this week, the breakdown of the uninsured is roughly: 6 to 12 million illegal aliens; 14 million who are eligible for current government health care programs Medicaid and S-CHIP but are not enrolled; 15 million or so who simply choose not to carry insurance; and 12 to 15 million who truly are unwillingly uninsured.
So the real number to shoot for in health care reform is the 12 to 15 million.
We can do that without a radical overhaul, and without creating a catch-all government plan that could ruin the good thing that 89 percent of Americans say they have.
Here are some less radical, but more effective health care reform proposals we've seen:
- Prohibit insurance companies from denying insurance based on pre-existing conditions.
- Allow interstate purchase of insurance, and end antitrust protections the big insurance companies enjoy, in order to bring true competition to the marketplace.
- Give individuals the same tax credits for health insurance that companies enjoy.
- One of the biggest payoffs could come with tort reform. If health care professionals are protected from unreasonable and frivolous lawsuits, malpractice insurance premiums will come down and the number of unnecessary tests and procedures would also likely drop.
- Offer incentives for prevention and preventive care. Much of America's health-care tab is spent on lifestyle-related disease such as obesity, smoking and substance abuse. There are many companies out there doing it already; why not learn from them?
- Give Americans more of a financial stake in their health -- not less of one, as a government program would do. If those of us who are able are encouraged to use our own money on health care -- through such things as health savings accounts -- then we're likely to be more frugal. As others have pointed out, if you go shopping with someone else's money -- as we do with health care -- then you're more likely to break the bank.
There are lots of other great reform ideas out there that don't infringe on Americans' right to self-determination or risk hurting the good thing we've got. As many Americans have angrily expressed in congressional town hall meetings, there's no reason to blow up the current health care system.
We can think of 89 reasons not to, right off the bat: the 89 percent of Americans who like their current medical care.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2010 Morris Communications, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Tort Reform would solve a lot of problems but I don't see any liberal leaders with their law degress calling for change in this area.
The liberals would rather have access to our bank accounts than to see a system actually work. Thus, no tort reform.
If fewer legislators were lawyers, tort reform might have a chance.
If you limit recovery for negligence, what punishment is there for negligence?
You're suggesting virtual immunity for malpractice, which is not acceptable.
You are only catering to the medical profession, which is spending megabucks to influence your opinions. Typical, ACES, cater to those who, at times ruin lives, and actually, because of the insurance, don't care. Why should they, they're aren't paying the damages. The ONLY tort reform should be the addition of CRIMINAL charges to national medical license that is removed for the first conviction of malpractice.
GACopperhead: there are far fewer actual cases of malpractice than you think. Incompetent physicians should indeed be barred from practice. However, the profits of private insurance companies have risen 400% in the past 5 years. Why? No tort reform. Proponents of Obamacare simply want control of the insurance companies' profits. Seriously, you could not possibly believe that Congress is interested in the welfare of the people when they come up with a plan when they themseves are exempt from the plan?
GACopperhead on Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:48 AM GAC have you ever been sued? I talk about this all the time. It is simply a shake down racket that makes lawyers rich! Do you think those lawyers advertising on TV (one call that's all) actually care about you? Do you think they spend all that money to promote justice? I have used the drug trasylol. It worked very well to reduce post op bleeding in certain cases. Would you rather have fuctioning platlets or a few lawyers get rich? I had surgery and was told of some of the problems that can occur. Did I want cancer or possible side effects. I got one of the side effects. Did I sue my surgeon, no because he is a good competent caring person. These doctors do get sued for known side effects or untoward outcomes, thier malapractice insurance goes higher, thier waryness is increased and they want assurance so more tests. All this raising health care costs. Insurance is shared risk so even the very excellent doctors who never get sued share the cost . Defending a legal action with no settlement is expensive. Life has no guarantees but the nanny liberal crowd thinks it should!
The tort reform issue is another republican myth. Over 2/3's of our states have passed tort reform. They have not seen anything saving. In 2003 the republicans in Texas passed some of the nations toughest tort reform. What do they have to show for it? The 3rd fastest rate increases since they passed the law. Answer this ACES or any right winger show me one instance where tort reform has lower medical costs. Insurance companies control malpractice rates for one and doctor aren't going to start dropping their fees because they save a grand or two a month on malpractice insurance. You federalists should appreciate the states addressing the issue but it hasn't worked. Back away from Hannity who only say Tort Reform/Tax Credits all day everyday. Tax Credits don't mean anything if you can't afford to write the check for the premiums. Plain and simple. Lastly insurance costs have went up 80% since 2000. If people are happy now they won't be able to afford it in 10 years without reform. This is a new concept gov addressing something before it is too late. I don't see wages going up at the rate so the curve needs to be addressed not. And last insurance profits are up 400%
since 2000. All of this need to be addressed now before it is too late. On our current path more people will become uninsured every year with these rate projections. Again wow the govt actually trying to fix something before it is too broken. I don't know that it is has ever been done. So the ACES is against it boy you guy define reactionary status quo to a tee.
Maybe if the ACES and Billy boy were to get their conservative heads out of their posteriors, the Chronicle wouldn't be headed for bankruptcy. I say Republican idiocy is it's own reward, and if the AC continues, it will go the same eventual path as the present Republican party, the path to non-existence.
LAstly, how many of those 89% have insurance that is subsidized by their employers, ie the consumer? It must be wonderful to have insurance at the expense of others.....WAIT! THat's what Republicans are fighting! BRILLIANT!
Does the name "Van Jones" mean anything to you all who support Obamacare?
Right now the lawyers have their way and health insurance is rising every year. The solution of GaC and concernednative is to give the lawyers more power and the taxpayers less. How Dem of them. While some medical law suits are needed to deal with malpractice, the idea listed in the editorial is "protection from unreasonable and frivolous" legal action, which makes up the majority of the suits and not only runs up liability insurance, but forces the doctors to order obviously unnecessary testing for their own protection. Intelligent tort reform will produce a huge savings-------even for the misinformed.
GaC, wealth envy controls your sanity, or lack there of. To make more money, change your life. Don't just wait for the government to take somebody's money and give it to you.
Still waiting for GAC to EXPLAIN how he/she thinks he/she paid ONE CENT of my insurance as claimed yesterday.
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
......Abraham Lincoln
According to the AC's own poll question (granted, not scientific), 49% of the respondents said they knew someone who could not get health insurance. There are around 14.5 million Americans who are unemployed, and it's estimated the number could be double that due to people no longer making claims. Roughly 59% of Americans' health insurance is tied to their employer. Add in those that are employed, yet still can't afford insurance, and the AC and Saxby claim that really only 12 to 15 million are really having a problem. Yeah, right.
Even if you accept that doctors order unnecessary tests (ie. a CT scan)as a safety measure against malpractice, all that explains is why your TOTAL medical bill would be higher, not why the CT scan, etc. costs so much in the first place.
Techlover....you can reform that problem without forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for even MORE freeloaders than we already do. I agree that Doctors shouldn't have different charges for cash v/s insurance, but socializing the system, the stated objective of Obama is NOT the solution.
THat's easy, tigger....if your employer subsidizes your insurance, he passes the cost directly to the consumers of his product or service,thus the subsidy is actually paid by the consumer, costing the employer nothing. It's really simple to see......unless you're a Republican. Techlover, don't you know why? It's as plain as the nose on Jimmy Durante's face! GREED! Noone begrudes anyone a reasonable fee for services rendered. In the real FREE market, if one doesn't like the price charged, he can go elsewhere. That is NOT the case in medicine. The only alternative is to not get the treatment.
Republicans only care about how much money they make, and the only criteria for human worth to a Republican is their level of wealth, or the amount of money that can be made OFF of you.
Tigger, why do you continue to call hard working, decent people freeloaders? Why do you continue to say that the reform bill is forcing you to pay for others? They are falsehoods that are spoonfed to you by those who are terrified that their gravy train will be eradicated.
Republicans, your tort reform and other "ideas" for reform are nothing more than asking the fox how to keep him out of the henhouse.
The doctors, hospitals and insurance companies agree between them selves on exorbitant fees. The doctors get rich, the hospitals get rich, the insurance companies get rich. Those paying the fees only get poorer and sicker. This is the Republican idea of nirvana.
Let's summarize the republican stance. They were for hc reform before they were against it. That is my only guess since they have never acted on reform when in or out of power. Tort reform hasn't brougth down costs in 38 states and counting. They have created myths about death panels and elimination of the private market that even members of their own party have admitted aren't true. Yeah, this thing is going to have to pass without republican support. Someone show me one shread of evidence of a republican working in good faith to prevent rates going up 80% in the next 8 years and insurance profits going up another 400%.
GACop - Who do you think is going to pay for a Government run health care plan? It will be the hard working people. I should only have to pay for the insurance I use. However, I pay for Medicare and Medicaid with my taxes. Another government run insurance plan will only be added onto my taxes, thus I will be paying for your insurance. Obama said he is only going to raise the taxes on those making over $200,000.00 a year. However, others in his administration say that will not cover this. So, eventually, every worker will pay higher taxes. The government is broke and selling out to the Chinese. Do you really trust a government that has sold us to the Chinese?
Here's your cheese to go with that whine, GACOP. Your wealth envy is showing. And ROESCHEN, don't you get it? Libs like GACOP know it is the taxpayers that will pay for this program. They don't care if you pay more in taxes. In fact, they hope you do!
GAC...if someone is living at the expense of someone else, they are freeloaders...that is why I insist on it. Besides....if you don't like subsidizing someone's insurance, don't spend your money their....YOU have a choice..what you want is for me to have NO choice. The proposed bill will have ME and other's pay for the insurance of FREELOADERS. THOSE who receive insurance at no cost to themselves! Who the heck do you think is supposed to pay for it....I guess we can just print some more money. I love the left's twisting of words. concerned native fell for the twisting, hook line and sinker. They take a bill that socializes medicine and call it reform...that way if you are against it, you are against reform. Intelligent people have no problem seeing the difference.
The fact is, ACES, "an utterly amazing majority of Americans are quite pleased with their health care"...until they lose it... or get a new job and find out that their new policy doesn't cover preexisting conditions...or have a truly devastating illness and discover their insurance won't pay for life-saving treatment...or until they reach their lifetime maximum. You people claim you are pro-capitalist, pro-business, pro-achievement...yet you don't recognize that the current situation hinders people from moving up in their careers (by taking a better position with another company) and starting their own businesses. The current situation is a DRAIN on our country's productivity and entrepreneurial spirit. Can someone address THAT?
HotFoot....I know NO ONE who doesn't want the health insurance industry to reform. What we oppose is socialized health care! THAT is what is in the proposed bill.
Besides...if you support Obama, you clearly don't care about small business. He, himself, has stated that he intends to drastically raise the taxes on small business owners.
Tigger, simply not true. Only 8.9% of small businesss make more than 250k a year. You guys have got to stop just throwing stuff again the wall.