I am skeptical. The law has some worthwhile provisions (pre-existing conditions, focus on preventative measures). But the fact I am still restricted to buying in state health insurance is wrong. If you want the costs to go down, allowing competition is one answer. Tort reform is another. And how can we forget the rampant fraud and abuse of the system by some? Total repeal is not going to happen, and we need to move on from the debate. It's law, and we need to see how this all transpires.
Bottom line? Let's see where we are in 5 years. Less emphasis on the profit of the "business", and more emphasis on "humanity".
The Affordable Healthcare Act, AKA Obomacare will in reality be a step in the right direction and go a long way controlling costs and keeping our nation healthy. While it does not solve all of our problems with the current system it's a very good start and provides a foundation to build on.
Ed,
While you might like Obama-care, unless you are one getting it for free, it is hardly affordable. Premiums are going up and will continue to go up. There are something like 21 new taxes and many people who have medical deductions on their income tax will lose them. Some will now have to pay a tax on medical equipment they need
All it is as John says is giving more people free health care that the rest of us will be paying for...To expand medicade at this time and not have any plan to pay for this makes it a plan that need repealing ....No plan is better than this..All it does is make more people dependent on the government......Who came up with the name Affordable Healthcare,its far from that..
What Mr. Keller failed to point out in his article is this,
The Massachusetts Health Care law was largely successful because it was based on redistributing medicaid funding already being paid by the Fed to the state from direct payment to hospital;s and doctors to individuals to help defer the cost of personal health insurance.
Yes, there was a mandate that those who could afford and did not purchase their own would have to purchase a plan or bepenalized. but the key points there were
1. It was within the rights of the state to do so, Even though the supreme court upheld the AHCA as a tax, they also denied it was constitutional as a mandate by the federal government. So Mr. Keller on that point is outright wrong.
2. While a state can redistribute federal medicaid funding that already exist, the Federal Government has no one to turn to to fund but directly from the tax payer or by taxing businesses, in which case it in no way reduces cost.
The federal government can't fiscally mange itself and medicare is rife with fraud. The federal government has also destroyed the SS system by pilfering every last dollar from it. The federal government keeps digging us into a deeper and deeper debt hole every second of every day. I do not want them in charge of my health care, period. I want smaller federal government and I want the IRS out of business.
People have to be insane to even want another federal bureaucracy to come into existence. I know we all want health care for everyone but this way is the wrong way.
According to CBS News, federally-funded healthcare programs payout 3 - 20% in fraudulent claims. Fox News, per Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn, anoints the higher figure. Politico.com cites 10 percent, as does Forbes magazine. The fact that Medicare has lower administrative costs than private insurers is indicative of the greater investment in fraud investigation in the private sector. Although fraud is troubling, I find it difficult to blame the government for the criminal actions of some care providers and scammers. On the up-note, the government does prosecute those who commit fraud. Interestingly enough, MSNBC reports that fraud is localized to, "large urban areas, federal authorities said the very worst of it these days is in South Florida— particularly in Miami-Dade County."
The Coalition Against Insurance Fraud reports: Fraud amounts to 10 percent of U.S. healthcare expenditures. Government Accounting Office (1992), National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association (2001)
80 percent of healthcare fraud is by medical providers, 10 percent is by consumers and the balance is by other sources. Health Insurance Association of America (1998)
The U.S. government recovered more than $8 for every dollar spent fighting health care fraud and abuse by using the False Claims Act. New Directions for Policy (2001)
....But you agree that the federal government is fiscally unsound....you didn't comment on that. Instead, you nitpicked a single point of a larger issue. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that total Medicare spending was $528 billion in 2010. It can't even give an exact dollar amount of costs. $528 billion..give or take a few billion..who's counting? Even if fraud is as low as 3%, that's still $15.8 BILLION. A safer estimate of 10% places fraud costs at $52.8 billion.
Lets talk dollars, not percentages. I don't care where the fraud is. The fact remains that medicare a government run entity and it can't fiscally manage itself. If I'm expected to believe that medicare is run more efficiently than private health care, I'll reply with a loud retort of "BS!"
The answer would depend
The answer would depend ENTIRELY on what it would be replaced by. Repeal strictly for the sake of political aggrandizement, no!
And replaced with what? Bill
And replaced with what?
Bill Keller, in today's New York Times op-eds, has some straightforward myth-busting on this matter. Take a look.
I am skeptical. The law has
I am skeptical. The law has some worthwhile provisions (pre-existing conditions, focus on preventative measures). But the fact I am still restricted to buying in state health insurance is wrong. If you want the costs to go down, allowing competition is one answer. Tort reform is another. And how can we forget the rampant fraud and abuse of the system by some? Total repeal is not going to happen, and we need to move on from the debate. It's law, and we need to see how this all transpires.
Bottom line? Let's see where we are in 5 years. Less emphasis on the profit of the "business", and more emphasis on "humanity".
The Affordable Healthcare
The Affordable Healthcare Act, AKA Obomacare will in reality be a step in the right direction and go a long way controlling costs and keeping our nation healthy. While it does not solve all of our problems with the current system it's a very good start and provides a foundation to build on.
Can someone help me and point
Can someone help me and point out when Health Care became a right? I don't see it in the Constitution.
Ed, While you might like
Ed,
While you might like Obama-care, unless you are one getting it for free, it is hardly affordable. Premiums are going up and will continue to go up. There are something like 21 new taxes and many people who have medical deductions on their income tax will lose them. Some will now have to pay a tax on medical equipment they need
All it is as John says is
All it is as John says is giving more people free health care that the rest of us will be paying for...To expand medicade at this time and not have any plan to pay for this makes it a plan that need repealing ....No plan is better than this..All it does is make more people dependent on the government......Who came up with the name Affordable Healthcare,its far from that..
What Mr. Keller failed to
What Mr. Keller failed to point out in his article is this,
The Massachusetts Health Care law was largely successful because it was based on redistributing medicaid funding already being paid by the Fed to the state from direct payment to hospital;s and doctors to individuals to help defer the cost of personal health insurance.
Yes, there was a mandate that those who could afford and did not purchase their own would have to purchase a plan or bepenalized. but the key points there were
1. It was within the rights of the state to do so, Even though the supreme court upheld the AHCA as a tax, they also denied it was constitutional as a mandate by the federal government. So Mr. Keller on that point is outright wrong.
2. While a state can redistribute federal medicaid funding that already exist, the Federal Government has no one to turn to to fund but directly from the tax payer or by taxing businesses, in which case it in no way reduces cost.
Aside from conscience,
Aside from conscience, Hippocratic Oath and empathy, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act passed in 1986 sealed the deal.
All the more reason to take
All the more reason to take candidates to task I say Chris, those unintended consequences will get you everytime.
You made an excellent point.
The federal government can't
The federal government can't fiscally mange itself and medicare is rife with fraud. The federal government has also destroyed the SS system by pilfering every last dollar from it. The federal government keeps digging us into a deeper and deeper debt hole every second of every day. I do not want them in charge of my health care, period. I want smaller federal government and I want the IRS out of business.
People have to be insane to even want another federal bureaucracy to come into existence. I know we all want health care for everyone but this way is the wrong way.
Rife: unchecked, widespread.
Rife: unchecked, widespread.
According to CBS News, federally-funded healthcare programs payout 3 - 20% in fraudulent claims. Fox News, per Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn, anoints the higher figure. Politico.com cites 10 percent, as does Forbes magazine. The fact that Medicare has lower administrative costs than private insurers is indicative of the greater investment in fraud investigation in the private sector. Although fraud is troubling, I find it difficult to blame the government for the criminal actions of some care providers and scammers. On the up-note, the government does prosecute those who commit fraud. Interestingly enough, MSNBC reports that fraud is localized to, "large urban areas, federal authorities said the very worst of it these days is in South Florida— particularly in Miami-Dade County."
http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/september/fraud_090711/fraud_090711
The Coalition Against Insurance Fraud reports: Fraud amounts to 10 percent of U.S. healthcare expenditures. Government Accounting Office (1992), National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association (2001)
80 percent of healthcare fraud is by medical providers, 10 percent is by consumers and the balance is by other sources. Health Insurance Association of America (1998)
The U.S. government recovered more than $8 for every dollar spent fighting health care fraud and abuse by using the False Claims Act. New Directions for Policy (2001)
....But you agree that the
....But you agree that the federal government is fiscally unsound....you didn't comment on that. Instead, you nitpicked a single point of a larger issue. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that total Medicare spending was $528 billion in 2010. It can't even give an exact dollar amount of costs. $528 billion..give or take a few billion..who's counting? Even if fraud is as low as 3%, that's still $15.8 BILLION. A safer estimate of 10% places fraud costs at $52.8 billion.
Lets talk dollars, not percentages. I don't care where the fraud is. The fact remains that medicare a government run entity and it can't fiscally manage itself. If I'm expected to believe that medicare is run more efficiently than private health care, I'll reply with a loud retort of "BS!"