The latest Palin Derangement Syndrome is the fact that Sarah Palin admitted she would cross the border into Canada to partake in some of their health care. Sounds like a sure fire “gotcha” moment right?
Yahoo has it up highlighted: (click to enlarge)
Kos, Think Progress, TPM, Alan Colmes…..all went off the deep end.
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin — who has gone to great lengths to hype the supposed dangers of a big government takeover of American health care — admitted over the weekend that she used to get her treatment in Canada’s single-payer system.
“We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada,” Palin said in her first Canadian appearance since stepping down as governor of Alaska. “And I think now, isn’t that ironic?”
The irony, one guesses, is that Palin now views Canada’s health care system as revolting: with its government-run administration and ‘death-panel’-like rationing. Clearly, however, she and her family once found it more alluring than, at the very least, the coverage available in rural Alaska. Up to the age of six, Palin lived in a remote town near the closest Canadian city, Whitehorse.
Of course they all look foolish thanks to some honest reporting from Politico:
CORRECTION: Whitehorse is in Yukon, not Saskatchewan, and Palin, as a young child, lived closer to it than earlier reported.
UPDATE: Here’s some more context: “My first five years of life we spent in Skagway, Alaska, right there by Whitehorse. Believe it or not – this was in the ’60s – we used to hustle on over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse. I remember my brother, he burned his ankle in some little kid accident thing and my parents had to put him on a train and rush him over to Whitehorse and I think, isn’t that kind of ironic now. Zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada.”
ALSO: Socialized medicine apparently only kicked in in Yukon in 1972, post-Palin.
The irony here is that they PAID for their health care.
Wow….go figure.
And all the other moonbats have ignored this info choosing to keep their PDS on display without correction.
Dan Riehl brings brings up the double standard here:
A sentence in an Associated Press item I blogged last night really brought home to me the double standard the AP and others have employed in covering Sarah Palin, versus their long running coverage of Obama going back to even before he was elected.
Palin’s health care history, even when she was a child, is of interest because of her criticism of Obama and other Democrats working on U.S. health care.
Palin is a former governor, now a private citizen with, admittedly, significant political cache. But Obama ran for and now occupies the office of the so-called leader of the Free World. Shouldn’t his college thesis that, for all we know, doesn’t even exist, have been of at least some interest before November 2008? What about the Law Review articles it seems he’s never written, unlike most every review editor in the past?
That and basically all of his college history remains locked away, evidently of no concern at all to the AP. And I have seen a recent item suggesting his record as a lawyer back in Chicago is far from complete in official records these days, though I can’t find a current link.
As I recall, Obama traveled to Pakistan as a young man in 1981. Back during the campaign, there never was any serious interest in why, or what he did during the trip. But that Sarah Palin! My God, she crossed the border for a check up a time, or two – we’d better dig into her child health care records, it’s now fair game, after all, because, well, who knows what we might turn up??
And Dan has more on the particulars of Sarah’s Canadian health care experience….stuff you just won’t read at Kos and friends.
They embarrassed themselves time and again with their BDS….now, they just look even more foolish.
UPDATE
From The Jawa Report:
Update: Jawa reader and Canadian citizen Garduneh Mehr points out..
Healthcare is not free in Canada; we pay for it with our taxes. And Sarah Palin’s family, not being citizens, would have had to pay full fee.
Of course this whole issue stems from Newfoundland premier opting for his heart surgery in the US.
Updated for clarity:
1972
Yukon creates medical insurance plans with federal cost sharing, April 1.
Also, Canada didn’t have nationalized health care in the time period being discussed.
Again, the media screws up.
actually the Canadian Federal government BEGAN subsidizing its health care system in 1946. By 1962 under HIPS all Provinces had hospitals that were 50% funded by their Federal Government.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_healthcare#The_beginning_of_coverage
But here is something that is even more amusing: what if Sarah had told a completely different version at another time ??
In May of 2007 way back when she was still Gov Palin She returned to her hometown of Skagway and was interviewed by the local paper. Amongst other items discussed was her recent signing of a bill for some increased funding for the Alaska Marine Highway System (state subsidized/socialism) and in THAT interview she clearly says (stressing the importance of their socialized ferry system) that her mother used that to take her brother who had burned his foot to Juneau to the hospital.
Palin drew from her Skagway past to illustrate her point. Her brother burned his foot badly jumping through a fire, and her mother had to take him down to Juneau on the ferry to the hospital. “All these years later, that’s still what people have to rely on here in some instances,” she said.
http://www.skagwaynews.com/051107GovPalinvisit.html
That quote is from the sentence directly above the single pic of her.
Don’t know if this will appear at Kos I seldom go there, but feel free to post it there and let them know.
Somewhat on topic, Pelosi says, We have to pass health care bill so we can see what’s in it…omg, we got us some transparency, ya want some? Read almost to bottom to see this grand idea.
http://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/pressreleases?id=1576
Mr. Ryan
Sarah Palin’s father has stated that the taking of the brother to Whitehorse is what actually happened. Remember, she was FIVE years old when that happened, and now, almost 40 years later she recalls the instance with her brother, first as having used a ferry to another Alaskan town, and a few years later with the taking of the brother to Canada for treatment. Are you implying that she lied? Just wondering as I am not sure just what the purpose is of your relation of that 2007 speech really is.
Whether she paid for it or not isn’t the issue. The issue is that NOW their system isn’t good enough for American families, when it was fine for hers growing up. Surely she had to expect this statement to at least raise some eyebrows.
Ah Cary, a troll of the finest order. Every minuscule issue tangentially associated with Sarah Palin is valid, proper, and every citizens duty to dig into until you smell authentic Chinese food. Any issue around Obama that citizens want further examination/explanation of equals RAAAAAAACCCCCIIIIISSSSSMMMMMMMMM and is only to distract from Republican shortcomings! And they wonder why their numbers are circling the drain…
Cary.
Back then, Canada did not have a socialist form of healthcare-payments. It was all still private, just as our was. In fact, some doctors actually had offices in BOTH countries. (It was drastically cheaper back then as well.)
She did NOT “expect this statement to at least raise some eyebrows”, because MOST people actually do some checking before spewing forth regurgitated talking points from their masters….Oh wait…most people other than progressive idiots. THOSE people mean nothing to her because they are firmly attached to Obama’s ass, and have no compunction to take care of themselves.
@Zipity:
Why do you label me a troll? I’m not exactly new here, and hardly deserve your personal projections.
Cary
You misunderstand the entire point of her comment. She was implying that back then they used the health care available to them in canada when they had to, meaning they crossed the border into canada FOR their health care. And now, Canadians are flocking across the border to use our health care. What has changed? Canadian now has a single payer system that rations health care and many treatments are either not available to everyday citizens there, or just not available at all, hence a highly elected canadian official travelling to Miami to receive treatment. It’s not a very hard concept to understand at all, although it doesn’t surprise me one bit that people like you and BRob here want a system like that. You would do anything to lessen the burden on your shoulders for your own life, wouldn’t you?
@johngalt: Actually, my own life is just fine, in fact my doctor says I’m in great shape for my age and thought I was an athlete when I had my checkup. But thanks for getting personal after an otherwise great, intelligent comment. Actually, I’m more concerned with the 1000 or so Americans who die per week as a result of not having health insurance, and less concerned with the profits that are made by industries. It ain’t about me, Mr. Galt – I’m not the Ayn Rand fan here (at all.) The idea that our system or the system Canada has are our only two choices is a total fallacy. But it is a fact that we are the only industrialized country (including Costa Rica) without one. So where’s Rush gonna go? I haven’t seen that one touched here yet.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/09/health-care-protesters-fa_n_492011.html
I would like to hear more about Obama when he wsa a child. Who his parents were, where was he born, to see his school records, ect. . If they can attack Sarah I only thinks it fair we go after more information on Obama after all he is the president and she is just a citizen.
From the White House blog:
Bullhockey Alert!
Actually, I’m more concerned with the 1000 or so Americans who die per week as a result of not having health insurance
I want you to produce the autopsy and or medical record that states cause of death due to lack of insurance for 1000 or so you mention. Of course, I’ll look the other way as you violate HIPAA to obtain proof your borrowed statement.
That money could probably be better spent keeping rates down for customers.
Probably? No guarantee, only the free market can keep rates at a reasonable level, you won’t get that with obamacare.
Costa Rica is doing quite well – we would be wise to adopt their Pura Vida!
@Skye: As you well know, I’m not going violate people’s privacy and give you exactly what you ask for here, even if I could. But I will give you the study from which my claim comes from, as I doubt you think I’m pulling it out of nowhere. Here ya go:
http://harvardscience.harvard.edu/medicine-health/articles/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-lack-health-coverage
I get all the arguments about cost, hardships, etc… but none of that trumps the fact that people are dying.
And they always will but not from lack of insurance. Are these nebulous people the ones who refuse to buy health insurance on the theory they are healthy and will not need it? Or the ones who say they can’t afford it but have two TVs and cable, ipods and go out to eat on a regular basis. These are their choices but I fail to see why I should pay for that. I paid my own health insurance from the time I started working at 19. It was not always easy but I felt the law of averages would catch up with me at some point.
No hospital can legally turn a sick person down and then there is always Medicaid in a pinch. Besides, the wonderful healthcare bill will still leave 23 million people without coverage but will cover illegals on our dime. In Birmingham, Alabama, where I came from, there is a charity hospital called Cooper Green Hospital for people who cannot pay. My son had to go there once when he was sick and out of work with no insurance. There are a lot of these in this country. You may not get first class accomodations but you will get treated.
If you think you will be able to keep your own doctor, think again. In a bureaucracy you do what you are told. I, for one, do not want an affirmative action doctor. I have heard too many stories about these butchers to want to be under their care. I now have a doctor who knows all my problems and I want to keep him.
@BarbaraS:
I’m quite sure there are a fair number who fall under this description. But do we punish those in real need because of them? How many have to be really suffering before we step up?
Sure, care can be obtained in the ways you mentioned, if it is available. And people don’t generally go to the ER unless something is really wrong, it doesn’t account for preventative treatment. If you read the study, it take all of the health and other factors into account. Think of how much we’ll save if we care for people BEFORE the heart attack or blood sugar crash! And guess what? We pay for those too!
Pingback: Marilyn Satin Halter Dress Plus Size Holiday Gown | Plus Size Clothes Compared
Lack of insurance cannot kill anyone. It is lack of care. And that is quite rare in this country. Sure, we need tort caps, competition across state lines. and that is about it. That will lower current prices by at least 50%. So insurance costs will also go down.
People die everyday. Most of them die in their homes. We should not allow people to go home. That would save tons of money. We should also not allow people to drive cars becuse we lose over 50 thousand people a year to deaths on the road. It is much worse than the number of people dying by refusing to buy insurance.
Ok …. I am seeing some really basic ASSUMPTIONS being made here out of either neight considering the FULL picture or out and out IGNORANCE. You (the reader) decide which you fall under.
“These are their choices but I fail to see why I should pay for that.”
I take issue with that remark. Why?
If you saw me, @5’9″ and 180 lbs, you would see that I am not overweight. I am not a twig, but I am not “FAT” nor “lovingly plump” etc. Nicely built muscular legs and arms with broad shoulders.
With that said, I am diabetic (type 2), have high blood pressure and had high cholesterol. I can control most of this with diet, BUT since I have been officially diagnosed with those in the past, I will not be able to get health insurance unless it is through an employer.
I’ve tried. And I’ve posted here previously that I was told that *IF* I could get an insurance company to even insure me that the premiums would dictate that I make in the “mid 6 figures” just so that I could pay them. How many people here make that??? Raise your hands or say “YES, I make $500+” …please.
I didn’t CHOOSE to have any of these things. I didn’t eat poorly, I won’t say I ate the best. I ate fairly average. Fruit salads in the morning, a good share of vegetables with my lunch and dinner and usually some meat with those. I didn’t drink tons of soda nor sugary drinks.
And yet here, I was being diagnosed with those.
I get so tired of hearing about people choosing things – yes I get it. There ARE THOSE WHO DO.
I AM NOT ONE OF THEM.
And yet, I am lumped into that group with that very broad sweeping generalization.
Skye – “I want you to produce the autopsy and or medical record that states cause of death due to lack of insurance for 1000 or so you mention”
And if I am ever placed into a position where I am not working, the cause of my death will not be listed as “lack of insurance” – NO ONE’S WILL. GET REAL.
Mine would be something tied to the conditions listed above. BUT!!!!!!
Lack of insurance would be a major cause. How else would I afford those things without it???
You saying that is like me saying this AFTER you were put on an deserted island with no food or water:
“I want you to produce the autopsy and or medical record that states cause of death due to being placed on an island alone…”
It will say STARVATION/DEHYDRATION. The island with no food/water is a contributing factor.
Now, can I plan ahead and TRY to save enough to be able to pay for all of this? SURE! TRY!
We all know how life throws things at you.
So, yes, while I realize there are some lard-a$$es who sit on their buts watching Jerry Springer on their large screen TVs eating bon bons and drinking alcohol and smoking weed who will not buy their insurance ….
But! There are many who do NOT fit that description, who have made good choices AND YET, insurance companies WILL NOT INSURE US and *THAT* IS NOT OUR CHOICE!!”
As much as any of you may want to ignore that, there are more people just like me out there.
Do we want YOU to PAY???
NO. We want to be able to get affordable insurance. What is wrong with that????
There is another breaking story on Palin getting free health care, “PALIN AS A THIRD GRADER ONCE RECIEVED FREE BAND-AIDE FROM SCHOOL NURSE”
I wonder when anyone (*cough* statists *cough*) will realize how many people DON’T die in this country because of our superior healthcare.
In the meantime, folks die while in English hospitals from…..dehydration. (After calling the cops from his own bed to get help.) And the Canadian political class come here for a simple surgery.
Cary, thanks for confirming you did pull that statement from discredited and misleading study.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2009/09/18/cbs-disguises-single-payer-groups-45-000-deaths-claim-harvard-study
Again, please provide the the evidence I requested
And if I am ever placed into a position where I am not working, the cause of my death will not be listed as “lack of insurance” – NO ONE’S WILL. GET REAL.
Again, there is simply no clear way to state lack of insurance contributed to your death. Anyone that claims that is lying.
The island with no food/water is a contributing factor.
Another misleading statement. You cannot simply compare healthcare to a deserted island.
No autopsy report ever stated lack of insurance as contributing factor. Any pathologist that did would rightly lose his position.
There is no lack of healthcare in this nation. Healthcare coverage will not protect you from your bad choices in life. You will die, but not because of a lack of healthcare.
Patavann,
Thanks for the reminder about the NHS patient. So, will the coronor conclude that the NHS was a contributing factor to this man’s death?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7383752/Police-probe-death-of-hospital-patient-who-begged-for-water.html
“Another misleading statement. You cannot simply compare healthcare to a deserted island. ”
Sure you can.
In one instance, you can’t get food and water which you require to live.
In the other you can’t get the required medicines which will keep your medical condition in check to allow you to live. High blood pressure will kill you left unchecked.
Diabetes will lead to an early death left on checked.
How is that misleading?
Please explain how I am misleading.
“You will die,”
Well DUH! I could go out tomorrow and get hit by a car.
“Healthcare coverage will not protect you from your bad choices in life.”
Did I say that? No. If you think I did please show me. YOU said it. Not me.
Healthcare coverage WILL allow those who may not be able to afford the required medicine to sustain their lives.
I hate to be mean but .. if you don’t get that, I hope you have my LUCK to live with my health issues. THEN we’ll talk after you get denied private insurance.
Have you been denied? I HAVE!
I’m sure Sarah Palin (at 5 years of age) made the decision to take a brother to Canada for a minor injury instead of traveling a hundred miles+ to an American doctor. I wondered why she was so smart, she started making major decisions young. Leave it to the left wing to try and shoot someone down and end up proving your point and shooting themselves in the foot.
No one in the United States has been refused medical care, and the best of what is the best. Hauled hundreds of people to the ER, never seen one refused treatment for lack of insurance. Playing on the poor don’t work. I’d trade my medical insurance for medicaid in a flash, as long as medicaid is administered by the states. Under O’Dumbo care they will amputate a broken finger to save the price of a splint and a followup visit. Make O’Dumbo care voluntary, I’ll keep mine and you go on O’Dumbo care. Even he won’t use the medical system he insist you use. Only crazy people would support that. I only hope a Dr does a Murtha on O’Dumbo and calls it an accident.
I am no fan of government run programs. In previous jobs, I have personally seen food stamps, WIC and other such services abused.
My wife is from Canada and is not fond of their health care system. She prefers what we have here for the most part. I’ve heard about Britain’s from friends I have there and none of it good.
My only issue was when I was unemployed and was facing the possibility of having to get private insurance. That is when we found out WE COULD NOT EVEN GET CATASTROPHIC due to “Pre existing conditions” – Luckily we kept cobra through that time.
I just don’t think that people should be allowed to be out and out refused and be faced with premiums so high that the cost is prohibitive.
Now, if you’re not taking care of yourself and following up with the doc … well …
In one instance, you can’t get food and water which you require to live.
With this logic, you are stating that a physical barrier – the island- is preventing a person from access to life sustaining goods, such as food and water. That is not applicable to this healthcare debate, it is simply a poor strawman argument.
In the other you can’t get the required medicines which will keep your medical condition in check to allow you to live. High blood pressure will kill you left unchecked.
Diabetes will lead to an early death left on checked.
Healthcare is NOT an island, it is an interconnected web of manpower and physical locations which offer services 24/7 to every inhabitant in this country (and abroad) irregardless of the ability to pay for the service. Access to medication and treatment is available to every person in this country. However, compliance to a prescribed medication regime or lifestyle goal cannot be legislated. To claim 1000 lives will be saved solely by granting them healthcare insurance shows an absolute misunderstanding of this complex situation. Non compliance with your high blood pressure or diabetes meds will kill you just as quickly.
“a physical barrier – the island- is preventing a person from access to life sustaining goods, such as food and water. That is not applicable to this healthcare debate, it is simply a poor strawman argument.”
Ummm no. What part of DENIED do you not get? I asked for ANY KIND of insurance. THEY SAID NO! Hence you are physically DENIED food in ONE. In the other you are simply DENIED.
I am serious. If you can not grasp that little bit, we are at an em passe. I will chalk it up to your age, lack of experience and not having been in a situation similar.
“it is an interconnected web of manpower and physical locations which offer services 24/7 to every inhabitant in this country (and abroad) irregardless of the ability to pay for the service.”
Good luck with that! If this is true, then go down to your local hospital and say you don’t have health insurance. Please. Follow by example.
“To claim 1000 lives will be saved solely by granting them healthcare insurance shows an absolute misunderstanding of this complex situation. Non compliance with your high blood pressure or diabetes meds will kill you just as quickly.”
WOW! You’re just as bad as the libs I encounter. I can’t believe after what I just said, that you ran those two sentences together.
BY granting healthcare insurance to some, you are therefore granting them access to meds they otherwise can not afford.
IN YOUR OWN WORDS:”Non compliance with your high blood pressure or diabetes meds will kill you just as quickly.”
And yet – you still will not get it or just simply blindly refuse to. Either way, I am unable to converse with you due to your lack of either empathy or lack of life experience or something.
My son was born with a bleeding disorder which I am sure you will somehow chaulk up to choice. He will more than likely never be able to get insurance. He will be denied. Something you can not grasp and you refuse to grasp because it goes against your agenda.
And it is in that way that you are just as bad as the liberals.
I’m sorry but I am done. I refuse to go further until you are older, have more real life experience and more mature.
Maybe one day, you will get it.
But seriously, next time you are sick and need to go to the hospital, play that “no insurance” card and let me know how far you get.
Last person I knew that did had liens against cars and home.
Take care skye. I am sorry to disappoint you though – I am not a liberal. Just someone who was faced with being denied ANY insurance at one point in my life.
So, I do hope you get that CHANCE one day to be denied health care. Maybe your child will be denied. THEN you will get it. If not, I feel for you and will feel more for the child.
I just don’t think that people should be allowed to be out and out refused
Stop perpetuating the myth of refused care. Granted there are cases of negligence in the medical field, but walk into any ER across the nation and you will be treated without prejudice.
Just did a quick and dirty search for individual healthcare plans in Philadelphia. I found an Independence Blue Cross plan that is comparable to my own healthcare plan at a reasonable price of $144/month.
A more realistic approach to healthcare would be to have insurance companies compete across state lines and have the market drive away any pre-existing clauses that inhabit some health insurance plans.
Tort reform would benefit everyone – especially residents of Pennsylvania who struggle to find qualified OB/GYN’s in the state – thanks to an open CAT fund.
These approaches make sense and would improve the quality of care across the board in healthcare.
Wow – the democraps are sure a pathetic lot to be mentioning something that happenend almost 40 years ago.
The care Palin got would eclipse what’s available to the average Canadian these days. Canadian health care is a complete failure. FACT.
@Skye: I believe I addressed your request in the first part of my reply. And I believe Hawk’s story illustrates more specifically what I’m talking about – he was very specific about his dilemma. Are you under the impression that his is a unique story? It’s not. So even if the numbers in the study I sited is wrong, exactly how many people have to be affected before we step up and do something instead of sitting by and watch the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies play with peoples LIVES for profit? Give me a number.
He will more than likely never be able to get insurance
Bullhockey! I’m more concerned about your parenting than his future insurance needs.
Ummm no. What part of DENIED do you not get? I asked for ANY KIND of insurance. THEY SAID NO! Hence you are physically DENIED food in ONE. In the other you are simply DENIED.
Bull, walk into any ER and you will get the treatment you need. It is sad that insurance companies cannot compete across state lines, then I would not have to listen to your sorry excuse for lacking insurance.
Good luck with that! If this is true, then go down to your local hospital and say you don’t have health insurance. Please. Follow by example.
It happens every day, in every hospital across this nation. No one is refused care – what part of that statement don’t you comprehend?
BY granting healthcare insurance to some, you are therefore granting them access to meds they otherwise can not afford.
Not true, they have access right now irregardless of the ability to pay. Every pharmaceutical company has programs for low income individuals to afford their medications. More importantly, it is not costing you or I a dime.
I addressed this in comment 16. I prefer not to get repetitive. Hawk has the right idea. Good night.
My son was born with a bleeding disorder which I am sure you will somehow chaulk up to choice. He will more than likely never be able to get insurance. He will be denied. Something you can not grasp and you refuse to grasp because it goes against your agenda.
So, Obamacare is the only solution for your son’s healthcare needs. Freeing insurance companies to compete across state lines will insure you son can access healthcare coverage when he is ready to purchase his own. Your doom and gloom for his future notwithstanding.
Question? How did you pay for his birth and where do you seek treatments currently for your son?
But seriously, next time you are sick and need to go to the hospital, play that “no insurance” card and let me know how far you get.
I’ve my own healthcare insurance, thank you. However, every day in hospitals across the nation patients without insurance are presenting at ER’s and given the best care available in the U.S.
You simply refuse to see reality of the situation. I work with it every day.
Just someone who was faced with being denied ANY insurance at one point in my life.
Obama care is not the fix to this situation, allowing health insurance companies to compete across state lines would eliminate ‘pre-existing’ clauses.
Simple fix that does not require a restructuring of 1/6 of our economy.
@Skye:
Okay Skye, even though this is part of the current bill, a Republican idea which was incorporated, if it doesn’t pass, I will fully expect the Republicans bring this up. And I will be looking for your posts which publicly support it. After all of this, I hope it’s not dropped altogether. Thanks for the discussion.
Wow! Cary, you just take a statement and run with it don’t you? And apparently, it’s usually perpendicular to the discussion at hand. Personal? Like implying since I like Rand’s work, my opinion is diminished? Whatever. Here are my positions on healthcare in this country:
1. We have the best healthcare in the world.
2. What we don’t have is everyone who wants to be covered, having health insurance. Somehow, this is deemed society’s problem and in particular those mean people who run health insurance companies.
3. I don’t want the government mandating that I must have health insurance, if I choose not to have it.
4. I don’t want the government taxing my healthcare because I happen to have a job and do in fact have healthcare.
5. I don’t believe that the government should mandate that insurance companies provide insurance for preexisting conditions. I would rather the government provide incentives for covering those people such as tax breaks for carrying pre-existing condition customers.
6. I don’t want the government making any payments for people’s health insurance. I would rather the government provide incentives to the insurance companies to lower the costs.
7. I don’t want the government mandating to the insurance companies what coverage to give, how to give it and how much can be profit. Contrary to the left’s assertion, health insurance companies do not make mega profits, as much of the money paid to them is used for paying for care provided and due to overhead. That overhead is a large sum to them because of already restrictive regulations and the numerous workers required to ensure that the company follows them.
Your status healthwise does not concern me, just as mine should not concern you.
If you love the long lines at the DMV & the compassion of the IRS then you will love Obamacare!
@johngalt: To be clear, I do not think that your appreciation for Rand’s work diminishes your opinion, simply that it clearly indicates we are coming from two entirely different mindsets. Rand herself suggested, as a part of defining her philosophy of Objectivism, “…[a man's] own happiness as the moral purpose of his life…” So, if you subscribe to that, we are not even starting on the same page, and that’s what I meant.
I discussed this on another thread, but the reason for the mandate is that everyone is part of the system, BEFORE they get sick, instead of only opting in when something has happened and everyone else has already paid in. It’s not to step on our freedoms any more than social security or requiring your kids to receive a basic education are.
As far as regulating the insurance agencies, do we really want to give these corporations a free reign with no leash to do whatever they want? I don’t.
I just cannot support a position that says it’s every man for himself against an industry that’s about profit rather than care, and has no mercy for those who can’t feed it.
Then we agree that personal digs like the one you aimed at me at the end of comment 9 are inappropriate in the discussion. Thanks. And be well.
Skye:”Stop perpetuating the myth of refused care.”
Were you in my house? NO
Were you on the phone with me and the insurance company? NO
It isn’t a myth. It happened to me.
You can sit with your fingers in your princess little ears saying “la la la” all you want.
It happened and no amount of you denying it will make it not so.
I am sorry that you have led such a pampered life that being denied health insurance has not happened to a loved one.
It happened to me. I really resent you calling me a liar. I can’t believe the ignorance and arrogance you display.
Again I ask, were you on the phone with me and the insurance agents?
I can answer – NO. YOU WERE NOT.
They did deny me and my family insurance. So live in your fantasy land princess. It happens and it happened to us.
“I’ve my own healthcare insurance, thank you.”
As did I, until that time. THANK YOU.(And again will soon) Just wait until your health starts fading… We should exchange contact info. I’d love to see how things are going for you in about 30 years young-un. Maybe we could actually talk then.
“I’ve my own healthcare insurance, thank you. However, every day in hospitals across the nation patients without insurance are presenting at ER’s and given the best care available in the U.S.”
YEP. And did those patients have liens placed against property owned?
I know those who did!
Are you saying the work for free????
Please answer these questions. I somehow doubt you will.
“Obama care is not the fix to this situation, allowing health insurance companies to compete across state lines would eliminate ‘pre-existing’ clauses.”
Did I say that it was????
WOW! Young lady you sure have a knack for reading into things. You seem to have a knack for putting words into MY mouth. Words I never said. Show me where I said ANYTHING about Obama care.
SHOW ME or drop it. You simply refusing to see what I really said and only interesting in what you are trying to say and make your point.
ALL I SAID …now follow closely with me SKYE
NO ONE SHOULD BE DENIED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE.
* This does not mean I support Obama care
* This does not mean I want the government to run it
* There is a difference in getting treated and getting insurance
* getting meds generally require seeing a doctor pretty regularly since they need to see how they are working.
Have you got that? Now, quit putting words in my mouth and answer my questions above.
If you want to keep trying to get your talking points in, I truly am done.
It utterly amazed me that you called me a liar about being denied health care insurance.
Quit trying to spread YOUR myth that it did not happen. It didn’t happen to YOU.
You really have some nerve kid.
Cary
I appreciate Rand’s work, specifically Atlas Shrugged, because the story places intrusive government and busybodies against those who want the freedom to make their own way in life. Kind of like nowadays with a growing movement on either side with one wanting more government intrusion and the other demanding less. The parallels between the story in Atlas Shrugged and what is happening in the US today is eye-opening.
As for my last question in #9 being a “personal dig”, you are wrong. Your comments here in this section are what led me to make the conclusion that you don’t want to take personal responsibility for your own self, but would demand that the government does it for you, by way of taking more from all who work for a living and then redistributing to everyone else. That is not personal. That is a condensed view of your arguments come to conclusion. If I am wrong on that, then refute it, but don’t claim hurt because you perceive it to be a “personal dig”.
I am not without compassion, and indeed, I give money to health related charities all the time, however, it is because I CHOOSE to do it. I don’t want to be forced into giving away my earnings, and you shouldn’t either.
Someone’s deliberately conflating denial of insurance with denial of care. Then making a bunch of emotive outcries and accusations as if they think it will keep people from noticing.
Rather dishonest.
@johngalt: Thank you for clarifying what you meant. I hope we can find something else to agree on in the near future.
@Patrick Chester: A condition such as diabetes requires long term care. The ER may not deny care, but they will certainly send a bill. Probably a very large one. Thus, long term care via this method may prove cost prohibitive, thus leading the uninsured to go bankrupt, lose their homes, and yes, their lives. So it’s really not a stretch to conflate denial of insurance with denial of care, which I believe Hawk has been trying to convey. He can correct me if I’m wrong.
I don’t think I’m going to persuade anyone here to my side, but at least you have an idea of where I’m coming from, and why the fight is such a priority, hopefully. Good night (this time I mean it! haha)
Were you in my house? NO
Were you on the phone with me and the insurance company? NO
It isn’t a myth. It happened to me.
This discussion is not about you and your experience with one insurance company. That does not give cause for your blanket statements about healthcare and access to care. That is where you seriously get unhinged. I’m trying to keep you focused on the bigger picture of health care.
NO ONE SHOULD BE DENIED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE.
Yet even without healthcare insurance, which some simply some do not want to carry, access to healthcare is not denied in hospitals, clinics or physician offices. As I’ve said numerous times before, competition is good for health care insurance and for those seeking to purchase it.
YEP. And did those patients have liens placed against property owned?
LOL, can’t put a lien against the homeless. You are the only one who is talking about friends with liens against their property due specifically to healthcare bills.
There is a difference in getting treated and getting insurance
This is an improvement over your previous statement:
Good luck with that! If this is true, then go down to your local hospital and say you don’t have health insurance. Please. Follow by example.
Quite frankly, Hawk, your are the owner of your own opinion, but not the facts. I’m not letting you blue opinion with fact.
Handy comparison table to compare healthcare coverage by state.
http://covertheuninsured.org/content/state-comparison-table
@Skye: LOL ..
Like NewsBuster is a trustworthy source.
Its a simple right-wing attempt to counteract Fact -checking site by turnin their own spin on news..
Its so evident, only morons dont see the sign!
Get a life
Wow Skye,
Your lack of empathy is astounding and shameful.
From the White House blog:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/by-the-numbers/8
The reason for pre-existing conditions exclusions or denials is pretty simple.
Think of not having home insurance until your house is on fire and then trying to get coverage, after having not paid for years and years. You want coverage now and you want it to pay for the house currently on fire. Why would anybody carry home insurance until the fire breaks out?
Why would an insurance company offering that kind of coverage not go broke in a week.
The pre-ex thing is designed to keep somebody who hasn’t had insurance for thirty years from stopping in at the agent’s office to get a comprehensive health plan–$600 monthly premium, say–on his way to the Cleveland Clinic for a heart transplant–$250,000, say–and then, when healthy again, dropping the policy. Four months’ premium is $2400, and the company pays out $250,000 (hypothetical cost).
Good deal for the patient, bankruptcy for the company.
Federal law requires each state to have an insurer of last resort who takes everybody without regard to pre-ex.
Gonna be costly because everybody there is going to be submitting hefty bills from the get-go. Insurance companies are not the federal government and are not allowed to create money by putting thousand dollar bills on the color copier.
@Richard Aubrey: Sorry, but your house is an entirely different thing than your life or you body. But you did make an excellent case for the mandate. Everyone has to be in the system, or the system doesn’t work. Exactly.
@Cary:
Please show me in the Congressional Enumerated Powers, on in any Article of the Constitution, or in the Bill of Rights the constitutionality of a mandate to purchase health insurance or any other consumer product.
Without a basis in the US Constitution, the entire discussion of a “mandate” is moot.
Exit question: Let’s just say Congress has the right to mandate that you purchase a certain product of their choice, they don’t, but for the purpose of our discussion let’s just say they do…
Why did they not use that “mandate power” to force people to purchase more efficient automobiles rather than offering the Cash for Clunkers INCENTIVE program?
If they could have forced people to conform to their wishes then participation would not have been voluntary.
@Aye Chihuahua:
While you may indeed have a well informed opinion on this point, you don’t actually know the definitive answer to your question, any more than I do:
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/health-care-overhaul-constitutional/
Note to Cary: Sourcing information from an organization or government with a vested interest in selling a healthcare product is disengenous. Please cite an independent report corraborating these numbers.
* 8 — The number of people every minute who are denied coverage, charged a higher rate, or otherwise discriminated against because of a pre-existing condition. [Source: HealthReform.gov...]
* 8 — The number of lobbyists hired by special interests to influence health reform for every member of Congress in 2009. [Source: Center for Public Integrity]
@Richard Aubrey: Sorry, but your house is an entirely different thing than your life or you body. But you did make an excellent case for the mandate. Everyone has to be in the system, or the system doesn’t work. Exactly.
Precisely the problem with Obamacare – 100% compliance at all times..however there lies a fatal problem – Obama care does NOT include everyone in the system. There will only be a slight reduction of the number of uninsured. See CBO report: http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=293
@Cary:
Actually, I do.
The US Constitution, and constitutional powers, are really, really simple to read and understand.
The Founders explicitly restricted the boundaries of the Fed Gov’t to the Enumerated Powers ONLY.
The Federalist Papers, the writings of the Founders, and the Constitution itself couldn’t be more clear.
Further, the 10th Amendment expressly states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
So, again, show me where Congress is affirmatively GRANTED the power to force a US citizen to purchase any consumer product.
Is it there?
If the power is not granted to Congress, and it’s not, is it prohibited to the States? No, it’s not.
Therefore, the decision to purchase, or not purchase, insurance or any other product is reserved for the States or the People.
If you cannot show where the power is explicitly granted to US Congress, the power does not exist.
So, back to our earlier hypothetical….If the power to mandate the purchase of consumer goods existed, then why did Congress not use it to force the citizenry to purchase more fuel efficient automobiles?
Why arent’ they using that mythical power to force people to weatherize their homes?
Why aren’t they using that mythical power to force people to purchase and consume only the “right” foods?
Why?
Because it doesn’t exist.
@Aye Chihuahua: Did you click the link I provided? Your points, and the counterpoints, are covered there. There are good arguments, including yours, for either position. I apologize that I don’t have the time to type more, but it’s in the link. When I say that you don’t definitively know the answer, it is because the question has not yet been brought before a court challenge … only then will we know for sure. Until then, we should each fervently stand by our positions, and I’m sure we will.
@Skye: I clearly stated that I sharing what was posted on the White House blog. To say it’s “disingenuous” to do so is to attack what you perceive my motives to be. Please don’t do that. Thanks.
@Cary:
Sorry, but your house is an entirely different thing than your life or you body.
The principles of insurance are nonetheless the same.
Everyone has to be in the system, or the system doesn’t work. Exactly.
That is reason enough to be against the proposed system, and instead seek alternatives, like the following:
I’m sure most of us here could live with a mandate for low-cost, high-deductible catastrophic insurance ONLY. Regular, low- and predictable-cost doctor’s visits would be paid for out of pocket, just like any other line item in a person’s or family’s budget. Higher-cost, one-off expenses (minor surgeries, short hospital visits, specialists, etc.) would be paid for out of accumulated savings or bank loans, just like any other unforeseen high expense. Insurance would be left to cover only VERY expensive things like major surgeries, extended hospitalization, transplants, cancer treatment etc.
Policies would be either purchased as individuals, i.e. completely disconnected from employers, or 100% portable between jobs. This all but eliminates the pre-existing condition problem except perhaps when the condition is present at birth, though that may be dealt with in other ways (family plans that ignore conditions in children, or something).
Full, cross-border competition between insurance companies will drive rates down, and getting insurance out of the regular-checkup business will drive those costs down too – no more deep pockets to charge exorbitant fees to.
The cost savings from buying a catastrophic-only policy instead of an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink policy, and from the downward pressure on prices, would more than cover the regular, everyday routine medical expenses in most cases.
Of course, if one wanted to, one could CHOOSE (key word!) to buy a more comprehensive insurance plan that would cover things like that middle category, if savings accounts and bank loans are too daunting. I personally think regular checkups should never be covered by insurance as they are a certainty as an expense, and you pay for them anyway in the cost of your premiums.
Hawk, would that work for you?
@Yackums: If it came down to what you propose, I’d be much happier than I am with the current conditions.
@Yackums:
No, speaking for me only, I WILL NOT accept a mandate of any type which forces me to purchase an insurance policy or any other consumer good.
Such mandates are not constitutional.
@Cary:
Yes, I read the link.
The Constitution is a remarkably simple, easy to understand document which either specifically grants a power to the Fed Gov’t or does not.
If you don’t find the mythical “mandate power” within the Enumerated Powers, then it doesn’t exist.
No Court challenge necessary.
Don’t feel bad Cary.
I asked my Dim CongressCritter the same questions two Saturdays ago. The best he could come up with was some vague reference to the Commerce Clause but when I informed him that clause only grants Congress the right to regulate, not mandate, commerce, he didn’t have anything else to say about it.
If the power to mandate were in the Constitution, or even implied in the Constitution, then it would have been tried before now.
FDR tried these kinds of overreaches, up to and including, attempts to pack the Court to get the results he wanted…he was promptly smacked down as a result.
The Dims are teetering on a precipice here.
Their only hope is to allow this bill to die, go lick their wounds, and hope for the best in November.
Exit questions: If, as you say, 4,000 people per week are dying as a result of lack of insurance, why does ObamaCare not cover everyone and why does it not kick in for several years instead of the day it’s signed?
Does Dear Reader not care about the thousands that will die before the effective date?
@Aye Chihuahua:
And that’s why it requires 9 Supreme Court Justices to interpret it, who often disagree…
As to your exit question: I totally agree these are major flaws. But I’m not ready to throw out the baby with the bathwater. You seem to be suggesting that if we can’t do it all, we shouldn’t do anything. I reject that idea.
@Aye Chihuahua:
One last link, then I have to head out the door:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/10/ten-wrong-reasons-to-oppose-health-reform/
Cary. “House”…”life”. Look up “analogy”. That way, presuming you understand it, you’ll be able to make your points more clearly.
@Richard Aubrey: I regret that my writing would lead you to to the assumption that my vocabulary is somehow deficient, or that I’m not privy to your form of rhetoric. In spite of such condescension, I will hold my already lucid stance. Enjoy the rest of your day.
Well, Cary.
If you know what an analogy is, then you just plain screwed up.
As Yackums said, the principles of insurance are the same, and you tried to obfuscate the point with snark.
Fail.
Should have pretended you didn’t know what an analogy was. You wouldn’t look so bad.
@Richard Aubrey: Okay, well if you value both equally, I suppose the analogy is valid for you. Replacing beams is like replacing your kidneys, you can put a price on either! You win the rhetoric war. Good job.
Cary.
You can stop digging any time.
Everybody reading this knows what an analogy is–even if you are pretending to miss it–and how it addresses the principle of insurance.
You’ll note the end of the analogy is the effect on the insurance company, not the house. Which would be the same if we were talking about health insurance.
Shoulda stopped when you only looked somewhat dim.
Oops. I may have offended you.
I have a friend afflicted with Asperger’s Syndrome. We have to be extremely careful to avoid analogy and metaphor with him. Can’t imagine what he’d do with a Scriptural parable.
Poor guy.
@Richard Aubrey: If you can’t debate without ad hominems, then any effort to communicate with you is futile. So continue being clever, and pat yourself on the back. I’m confident that my position on health care has been made. This little repartee of ours is irrelevant, silly, and not becoming of adults. I’m done with it.
The lamestreet media are a joke for printing this story. If they want a real story they should check on Obama’s childhood which no one wants to report.
Today’s dueling videos, who to believe?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/03/10/durbin_admits_premiums_will_go_up_if_health_care_bill_is_passed.html
Who is he calling a liar?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/03/10/obama_says_health_premiums_will_go_down.html
Think long and hard, nothing is free. This bill, on top of everything else they have been spending and will be spending not to mention obligations we can’t yet total will be a tremendous burden on the next generations. Should this country be allowed to spend the money of children that are not yet born?
Another 100 billion stimulus being bandied about, tuition, this:
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/438124/U.S.-Taxpayers-on-the-Hook-for-%245T-of-Fannie%2C-Freddie-Debt-No-Matter-What-Barney-Frank-Says
Just a few of the bills coming due, who pays for it all? How many think it’s ok to walk out of your child’s room with their savings in your pocket? Do you steal your grandchild’s piggy bank?
Nothing like that from the majority:
Why Obama Can’t Move the Health-Care Numbers
For every voter who strongly favors the plan, two are strongly opposed.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704784904575111993559174212.html
Another majority, as long as we are talking Constitution, remember, States have Constitutions too, and there are now 36 states trying to protect themselves from……ObamaScare. Another majority, 36 out of 50.
http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=18906
Both, stronger majorities than the democrats are claiming for reconciliation.
It’s noble to want to take care of those who can’t take care of themselves even accepting that you will also be caring for able bodied sloths because that’s how it goes, you feeeellll good about it. But, to agree with this fiasco without first attempting a more common sense approach or opening your minds to a reasonable alternative is unacceptable and deserves scorn.
@Missy:
I appreciate what you say, Missy, right up until the “deserves scorn” part. Thing is, this is not a new discussion, nor is it the first thing we’ve tried. I frankly don’t trust the Republicans to touch this issue at all, and have no delusions that time isn’t running out for my side of the isle, for various reasons.
Trust me, I don’t believe that those who oppose my view don’t care about the problems I, Hawk, and others have raised. Speaking of majorities, this article was just posted, which says that, while most don’t like the way this is playing out, only 4% of Americans don’t want any reform at all:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/10/new-health-care-poll-show_n_493159.html
So again I ask, how much longer do we have to hold out for a perfect solution, while honest people are suffering? When do people take precedent over process?
Cary
The perfect solution will never happen, and I’m not sure who knows even what that is. I know that I don’t, however, I am also quite sure that going further down the road into socialism is NOT the answer, as evidenced by the examples of Canadian healthcare and GB’s healthcare. There isn’t even any arguing to the contrary when comparing our healthcare to theirs, EXCEPT in the singular context of how many are covered. Is that the goal? To cover everyone regardless of the damage to the quality of the care and acquisition of new medical treatment advancements? Not a very good trade-off in my opinion. I am not one of those four percent you have referred to who don’t want any sort of “reform” to healthcare in the US, but I do think that doing nothing right now is a much better alternative than giving over much of the control of the one-sixth of the economy to a government that has shown no ability, whatsoever, in being able to control anything except the further spread of misery across the nation.
Healthcare in Alaska in the 1960s. Geography. And, a 5 year old child. Okay… I know it is asking a lot of people — but the geography of Alaska is quite different then the lower 48. Many towns and villages are not connected to the mainland. Many towns and villages do not have transportation to and from without a ferry or bush plane.
The Palins lived in Skagway. Though it now has a road, it did not then. The only way in or out had to be a consideration. Not having a physician in a town is not uncommon — especially in the smaller, remote communities. A PA or Nurse Practitioner. A physician may come in at regular intervals but it depends on weather.
It was the 1960s. Sarah Palin did not decide where her family would go in an emergency. Her parents did. Burns, fevers, broken limbs — all the things kids have occur — depending on how quickly they needed to see a physician would dictate where they went. Whitehorse is a small town with a hospital but it is also part of the Yukon. The Palin’s as Americans would have paid for the services they received. And, Canadian Medicare took place in 1984.
Get a grip. If you really want to criticize Sarah Palin — first learn about the geography of Alaska. Also — try realizing that times were a bit different 40 years ago. Canada today is not the same as it was in the 1960s with their healthcare system. Try learning about Alaska, the proximity to Canada and to Russia. Alaska boarders Canada. With Russia… at their closest Alaska and Russia are 2.5 miles apart – the distance between Little Diomede Island, Alaska, and Big Diomede Island, in the Bering Sea. In SE Alaska, the community of Sitka has a Russian heritage.
There is nothing out of the ordinary about this story related by Sarah Palin — only the people who hate her have nothing better to do then hang on every word she utters. Realize the MSM or LSM are filled with a desire to destroy this woman and realize you’ll have to research everything before believing a word of it!
As for the Canadian healthcare system… it works fine if you are healthy… but how long will you have to wait before you can have that procedure? And on what list. Take a look at Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams and his heart surgery. He chose to leave Canada and that speaks volumes about their healthcare, its quality and availability.
@johngalt: I understand what you’re saying. But as I said before, you are presenting only two options when there are many more. I also provided a link in comment #67 which refutes the Socialism argument, among others. While we disagree, I don’t think we do as much as it seems.
Is healthcare a right or a privilege that depends only on income ? Do poor children have a right to healthcare ? Do poor adolescents have a right to healthcare ? Do poor adults have a right to healthcare, up to and including that 250 grand heart transplant? Do vets have a right to healthcare ? Do old people have a right to medicare ? Who does not have a right to healthcare ? Prisoners ? An illegal alien who was in an automobile accident ? Who should be denied healthcare in the USA ? And remember please the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the USA is from medical bills. And personal bankruptcy affects all of us by leaving society to pick up the poeces.
I think it would do well for some to read my favorite columnist today. Maybe he can cut through a lot of the distorted thinking.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=127409
in the USa it is estimated that 25000 die each year from lack of healthcare,
FIFY.
The arguments from that lib columnist could be refuted by my 16 year old, especially the one about Socialism.
Please be cautious when reading my posts so as to not construct presumptuous assumptions regarding our exchanges back and forth on this thread. Doing so will prevent an unpleasant backlash which you will, undoubtedly, interpret as insulting.
I have never once suggested that “we shouldn’t do anything.” In fact, quite the contrary.
Doing what is currently on the table for consideration, however, is much, much, much worse in a thousand ways than the status quo.
I am about to head outside for an afternoon of springtime “Diggin’ in the Dirt” therapy, but I’ll drop back by later to give you a bullet point listing of the things that I propose, none of which include unconstitutional mandates.
I want to start a “Right” to free representation in courts… The constitution says I have that right, but we don’t really get it. The constitution says nothing about free doctors.
There is a terrible two-tiered system in the courts today. Can I get a free lawyer in the capacity of the guy who defended OJ?
No. I get stuck with an idiot intern or some PD who’s biding their time till their election for DA comes around.
FREE LAWYERS FOR ALL!!! (And I want them to all work for no more than $20.00 an hour, and be paid by the Gov.)
@Cary:
Even with this boondoggle you will wait until 2013, by then we could scrap it and put together a bipartisan reform bill that won’t threaten the freedom of the next generation by concentrating onreducing health care costs incrementally borrowing from what works in states that have been implementing hcr. Instead, we have a monstrocity put together that will not only harm the economy, it will burden the states economies, they will in turn raise our taxes and Obama gets to say the feds aren’t raising taxes on anyone making less than $250 grand.
If you don’t/can’t invest in healthcare you will pay a $750 fine as your income increases the fine can be as much as $3,800, then there’s those little confiscation from your bank account issues that have been tossed around and jail time. Prescription drugs as well as OTC drugs and medical devices will be taxed, so will health insurance, unless of course, you are in a union, now, that’s fair.
You may not want to trust Republicans, but you have a party that doesn’t even trust their own party. Isn’t that telling? Nancy Pelosi wants to pass the bill to find out what’s in it. Dick Durbin, on the very same day, tells the country our premiums will rise which is contrary to what Obama is saying out in St. Louis.
If they were serious about hcr they would be listening to the 96% that want reform instead of larding this thing up with pork that has nothing to do with healthcare and paying people off to vote for it. They could be honest instead of manipulating the long term costs, they could give CBO everything, instead they withhold real costs to make it appear cheaper than it is, the public sees right through it. If it was worthy they wouldn’t be having so much trouble passing it but they have proven themselves to be untrustworthy to the public and they are soundly rejecting this bill. Threaten or bribe, whatever they do to pass it, they will pay.
@John ryan:
@John ryan:
The lack of insurance death myth:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/03/myth-diagnosis/7905/
Bankruptcies caused by lack of medical insurance myth:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=18175
All you mention already have healthcare and for children, adolescents in families that make to much for medicaid and not enough to afford insurance, there’s SCHIP, available for those living in homes whose incomes are up to 250% above poverty level.
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/LowCostHealthInsFamChild/
Very interesting thread. Keep up the good work people.
@Aye Chihuahua:
Thank you for clarifying, I’m glad you’re not part of the 4%.
Anyway, I look forward to reading your ideas.
Cary
What you presented was an opinion piece that glossed over much of the detail of what little of the bill has come out. As for only presenting two options, that is all that is before us at the moment. We conservatives here are not against doing something positive about healthcare, but we are totally against the powergrab that the Senate bill will be, and against the intrusion into our lives, the mandates that will be forced on us, and the thievery of more of our hard-earned dollars.
On the subject of A.C.’s posts, he is correct. There are many of the founders who have presented writings on the Constitution, and the meanings of certain clauses contained therein. Knowing something about those writings, and of the constitution itself, I would state that the government has overstepped it’s bounds on numerous occasions already, and the push towards socialist tendencies that started around the time of FDR, brought about many changes in the government that many of the founders would find abhorrent, and completely against the original intentions written down in the Constitution. IOW, you can disagree all you want, but you would be incorrect in that regard when considered against what the founders have also stated. No offense, but I will take the words of the founders over yours any day.
giving poor babies free healthcare is socialism
The 2nd amendment grants “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms”. Since this is a Constitutional RIGHT then shouldn’t the government be buying us all guns? Just a thought.
right the founders would have definitely been against spending any money on trying to send a man to the moon. they would have thought that was crazy !! and of course we know what they thought about Black humans, but that doesn’t mean that we must blindly follow what they thought 200 years ago
social conservatives have always fought against change whether slavery, or giving women the right to vote. Progressives have made the USA better for the changes in American life. And American life will CONTINUE to change
My point is that the RIGHT to keep and bear arms is constitutional. The mandate to purchase any good or service is not one of the 18 enumerated powers of Congress and is therefore unconstitutional. Period. There is an amendment process, that is how the constitution is amended **legally**.
@johngalt: I’m not offended by that at all. However, as I brought up before, the founders also set up a Supreme Court that consisted of 5 judges at the time, which was later amended to other numbers between 6 and 10, now 9 (see? they made plenty of room for things to expand and change! That’s a large part of their genius!) to interpret the Constitutionality of laws. If things were as cut and dry and clear as you and Aye suggest, then every decision would be unanimous. Since this matter has not come before them, we only have our opinions, and I’m not going to try to take yours away from you any more than I’ll sell mine as fact. When it does come before them, and they issue a ruling, only their word should be taken as definitive, because that’s what the Constitution dictates.
@PatriotGirl: Well, given that the Right to Bear Arms is there for the purpose of creating a militia to overthrow government, if it should become tyrannical, handing out free guns would be counter to its own interest, wouldn’t it?!
What color is the sky in your world Cary?
@PatriotGirl: Oh, I don’t think you’d wanna talk about what the sky looks like here, trust me! That’s a whole other topic!
johngalt –
It is simply beyond the word “incomprehensible” to think that what slaveowners who died 230 years ago thought about this clause or that clause should control how we apply laws governing, for instance, whether a known gang member should be permitted to have a bazooka. Times have changed, technology has changed, so you cannot apply a mans musings in 1797 as a “solution” to a 2010 problem.
It is wonderful that you have your own quirky interpretation of what the Constitution “really means” and what it “should’ mean. But unless and until you and other protesters marshall some Supreme Court precedents, or at least a coherent argument, to explain why government, in exchange for covering your a$$ when you get deathly sick, can’t require you to spend part of your welfare check or your income tax refund on health insurance to defray the cost, I will remain unimpressed by your protests.
giving poor babies free healthcare
Yes, we do: http://www.bcnepa.com/ohpCHIP.aspx
Pennsylvania Governor Edward G. Rendell has made the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) available to all uninsured children and teens (up to age 19) through his Cover All Kids initiative. This initiative expands CHIP, regardless of family income. Click here for income guidelines.
Every uninsured child and teen (up to age 19), who is not eligible for Medical Assistance and who meets the eligibility requirements, can now have comprehensive health insurance*. Click here for eligibility requirements.
Many families will not have to pay for CHIP. Under the expanded CHIP program, families with higher incomes will have low monthly premiums and copayments for some services. Click here for copayments and benefits. Click here for monthly cost
Of course, I’m can only speak for PA, but I’m sure all state have a similar ‘chip’ program.
social conservatives have always fought against change whether slavery, or giving women the right to vote.
They went by the name Democrat back in the day…
in the USa it is estimated that 25000 die each year from lack of healthcare,
Please provide the summary of death indicating lack of insurance was the cause of death. I really want to see the surveillance data that backs ups this questionable statement.
Actually, about 36,000 people die every year from seasonal flu:
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/
Note the link to the statistics supporting my statement.
103 comments later….
Wow! I have to say I’m impressed with the passion of this debate. Although, cooler heads have produced evidence based ideas that are interesting and thought provoking. This spirited discussion has captured various tones of this debate.
We have been treated to the emotional argument with an associated tragic story of healthcare insurance with the hopes of gaining unquestionable moral authority over this debate. How many times have the FA readers encountered a similar story at a healthcare town hall debate?
Several individuals have put forth some great options the nation could pursue, others have simply cut and pasted whitehouse.gov talking points. The constitutional aspect of healthcare is fascinating and I’m glad we have that point of view being discussed. A free market approach to lowering costs associated with healthcare should, IMHO, be the principle talking point for healthcare reform, but that is not what obamacare is built on.
If only our elected officials would listen to the people, we might just get this thing right.
I said in an earlier post that I would try to get back at some point this evening to post a bullet point list of what I see as workable ideas to improve not only the health care industry but also the health care insurance market.
This list is not necessarily inclusive, it’s just the things that I can think of at this moment.
There have been dozens, if not hundreds, of ideas expressed here at FA over the course of the last 15(?) months…seems like 50 years…that we’ve been discussing this issue.
Anyway, here’s my bullet point (some will be large) list:
1) Loosen the restrictions, and lower or remove the hurdles that are in place for the creation and expansion of more medical schools and the enrollment of more medical students.
On a per capita basis, we barely have more doctors than we had in 1900. With a growing population, as well as an aging population, that is a problem which must be addressed.
By increasing the number of people who are allowed to become doctors, or medical practitioners of other types, we can, in effect, flood the market with a supply of medical talent. That increased supply will bolster competition between doctors thus driving down prices.
2) Remove all cross border competition restrictions currently imposed on insurance companies. By allowing a company in GA to sell in NY or SD or KS or any other state in the union, we allow that company to increase its’ customer base, thus spreading the risk factor over a larger pool. By allowing greater levels of competition, prices for coverage will go down.
3) Transfer all employer owned health plans to employee ownership. This will force individuals to comparison shop for their plan.
4) Expand tax free FSA and HSA availability to everyone. This change will be dramatic because the patient, the consumer, is always more careful when they are paying for things directly rather than through a third party. Perhaps an incentive to spend wisely could be offered as well.
Such an incentive could be that a certain percentage of the account balance at the end of the calendar year could be given tax free to the account holder. The remainder of the account could be held over for the next year.
5) Enable private collectives to purchase group insurance plans ie, a group of individual similar businesses (think family owned jewelry stores or bakeries or real estate or construction companies) could band together to form a larger purchasing pool thus qualifying for discounted rates.
6) Eliminate coverage mandates at the state level. It doesn’t make sense to force a 60 year old couple to carry maternity coverage. It also doesn’t make sense to force addiction therapy coverage on a non-drinker or a person who doesn’t take drugs.
7) Allow hospitals to turn away people from the ER if the person does not have a life-threatening condition. People using the ER for a case of the sniffles is a prime example. (Controversial I know, but big problems sometimes require tough decisions.)
#8 Encourage, and incentivize, the creation and expansion of non-emergency health care clinics that would be open seven days a week, perhaps 24 hours a day depending on market demand, offering care to the non-emergency patients at non ER rates.
(A non-emergency example would be the person [me] who has a daughter that developed an ear infection late on a Friday night/early Saturday morning when the regular doc’s office was closed up tight. That person [me] had no choice but take her to the ER because there were no other alternatives available to us. The doc’s office would not reopen until Monday…the nearest non-emergency clinic was nearly two hours away.)
9) Grant more practicing privileges to nurse assistants, LPN, and other medical professionals. Those personnel can diagnose flu, set a broken bone, do a physical, prescribe antibiotics, etc. for an illness just as well as a full fledged doctor…and for less money.
10) Require schooling which is reflective of the complexity of the field of specialty. A brain surgeon, for example, necessarily requires more education than a general practitioner. A person who sets broken bones doesn’t need the same amount of education that a cardiologist would need.
11) Grant full tax deductibility of all medical expenses, including preventive care.
12) Change the legal structure to establish “loser pays”. This one change alone would result in fewer suits being filed. Lower malpractice rates and thus lower medical charges would be a direct result.
13) Allow/encourage physicians to offer a “cash price” for patients who pay at the time of their visit thus removing the middle man (the insurance company). By doing something similar to SimpleCare, doctors are able to greatly reduce their overhead costs and are then able to pass along a much less expensive product without sacrificing quality.
14) Instruct the FDA to move more drugs to an OTC status.
15) Establish plan portability so that when a person leaves their job at Company A and moves to Company L instead they carry their coverage with them. (If health plans are owned by the employee instead of the employer as I proposed in #3 above then portability would be a non-issue.)
“Please provide the summary of death indicating lack of insurance was the cause of death. I really want to see the surveillance data that backs ups this questionable statement.”
Skye. You will never see that as a cause of death – you are being asinine.
Using your logic:
Smoking is not the cause of death. Its the cancer that is the cause of death.
The car accident accident is not the cause the death. Its the head/body trauma and internal bleeding that is the cause of death.
The years of drinking alcohol is not the cause of death. The cause of death may be liver failure.
If you do not get these, you are really choosing to be obtuse. And if you are not choosing to be, then you simply ARE.
I say that because you apparently can not/will not understand the consequences of things or causative actions/things. If you can not grasp those concepts – then the conversation is at an end.
Not taking your meds can kill you. BUT not getting those meds because you can’t afford it because you were denied is a contributing factor. But you won’t get that I am sure.
And … if you are just yanking my chain – well, that just labels you as something much worse.
*SIGH*
I am going to go pound my head into a brick wall. I think the wall will get it first before she does.
Reasoning and logic is not your forte is it? No frigging wonder IT is male dominated.
“because you were denied is a contributing factor.”
And to be 100% crystal clear
being denied INSURANCE …
which can prevent people from going to the doctor …
because they can’t afford to without insurance.
my 7 year old gets this!
BRob
I’ve met some really obtuse people in my life, but you are tops. The founders had more wisdom than all of us that post here have put together. They have provided means of changing the constitution, if it warrants it, and not by an overreaching federal government either. You talk of precedents, but there are numerous examples of precendent that if followed, would make our conversation here probably non-existent, or in a completely different context, and not for the better mind you. Your last statement proves that you either know nothing about the constitution or you choose to disregard it. As I told Cary, I’ll take the words of the founders regarding clauses in the constitution over yours or your kind anyday. The difference is, Cary and I have a decent, somewhat friendly discussion even while disagreeing, while you choose to belligerent arguing as your means of communication.
It is simply NOT possible for a US citizen to receive free medical care from the Canadian Universal Health Care system. I have been in Canada and have had to see a doctor. guess what? they ask for for ID , a Canadian Health card and make you fill out a basic form, just like doctors in the US . There are No signs saying “Free Healthcare for all americans . NO questions asked” . Bottom line is an American can get health care in Canada, but you have to pay. It is only free to Canadian citizen who have resided in the country for at least three months. A good article on the point is from the National Post ” Sarah Palin knows her Canadian health care history. Do we?
“
@Skye:
In spite of some issues I have within your portrayal of this discussion (I won’t point them out by rehashing what is all here), I agree that this has been a great discussion. Both sides have produced cogent arguments, and this is possibly among the best discussions I’ve had here at Flopping Aces. So, thank you and everyone else.
@Aye Chihuahua: You do have some great ideas here, and some are in the current bill. I trust you have shared these with your Congressperson and the White House. And you won’t get an argument from me on #7, although I would say that whether the ear infection is an emergency or not should depend on the age of your child. I had them as a small child, and they were quite painful. No child who hasn’t yet developed a vocabulary to describe what they’re feeling should be turned away at any time, as a seemingly minor problem could be indicative of something larger.
Four or five years ago, I went to the ER and discovered a couple other things that can be reduced within the system. I was at work when I felt some numbness in my left arm and hand. My boss excused me from work to go to the ER, so as not to take any chances. All I wanted was for someone to check my heart and see if something was up. I didn’t need or expect a bed, a meal, three EKGs, a CAT scan, and 12 hours of waiting. Just tell me I’m not gonna die, and I’ll take the time to figure out what’s up with a non Emergency doctor. (turned out to be a pinched nerve) I also noticed some homeless folk seeking a place to spend the night. It’s a separate problem, but connected. Most of the shelters here have curfews, forcing those down and out to choose between a place to lie their heads and employment with regular evening hours. It’s difficult, if not impossible to get on your feet without both, so some just run to the hospital and complain about something, and get a bed for the night.
In the end, those of us who don’t have to worry about these things in our own lives should be very thankful. I hope we’ll all agree on that.
Cary,
If you are not suffering from a neurological deficit, how did you miss a simple analogy?
The alternative is that you knew what the point was but had to pretend it was something else, i.e. the relative value to me of my house to my health.
That was snark designed to distract from the point you could not afford to address; that doing away with pre-existing conditions exclusions or denials is unsustainable.
Since you deliberately attempted to avoid the point, your good faith can be questioned in other areas as well.
@Richard Aubrey:
Not only do I quite fully understand the mechanics of writing and rhetoric, as I’ve assured you, I also fully comprehend the business paradigm you refer to, and absolutely get the point you’re trying to make. However, I’m rejecting your argument for the reasons I’ve explained (the value of and ability to replace each in your analogy), as well as what’s been discussed here. I’m moving on now. I hope we’ll find something else to agree on in a future discussion.
You will never see that as a cause of death – you are being asinine.
I’m being reasonable and using professional judgement to help you understand the fallacy of your statements.
Using your logic: Smoking is not the cause of death. Its the cancer that is the cause of death.
Cancer has many causes, simply making a direct connection between smoking to a cancer diagnosis is reckless. A patient may smoked during their lifetime but died due to complications of osteosarcoma. I cannot say the patient has a history of smoking, therefore the cause of his/her cancer – no reputable medical professional will say that.
The car accident accident is not the cause the death. Its the head/body trauma and internal bleeding that is the cause of death.
A car accident is a measurable cause and effect – something you cannot apply to your perception of healthcare coverage (note this discussion is about your perception of healthcare coverage and its link to overall health)
The years of drinking alcohol is not the cause of death. The cause of death may be liver failure.
A patient may have been a lifelong history of alcoholism, but developed hepatocellular carcinoma which caused liver failure and eventually death. You cannot support any blanket statment that directly connects the lack of healthcare to the deaths of thousands of Americans. Making oversimplified examples to support your position is weak, at best.
I say that because you apparently can not/will not understand the consequences of things or causative actions/things. If you can not grasp those concepts – then the conversation is at an end.
The end of the conversations….How many times have I heard that before? How many times are you going to fail to grasp the meaning of your own statements?
Not taking your meds can kill you. BUT not getting those meds because you can’t afford it because you were denied is a contributing factor.
Affordability and access is available to every citizen. Losing all emotional reasoning and giving up after one insurance rejection, is typical of who I help.
Your allowing your perception of healthcare to color this entire debate. I’m trying to help you get over yourself regarding this issue. You cannot make a direct correlation between not getting meds because of an insurance denial and cause of death or a contributing factor.
There are thousands of programs available to help patients get the care and medications they need. Most are unaware of the options (state and national, and Pharmecutical ) available to them – and that is a problem that needs to be addressed to improve healthcare delivery and prevent hysterical outbursts from those less educated on the subject.
But you won’t get that I am sure. And … if you are just yanking my chain – well, that just labels you as something much worse.
Can you stow the over the top dramatic diva? You are sounding more and more like a two year old in the midst of a tantrum.
*SIGH* I am going to go pound my head into a brick wall. I think the wall will get it first before she does. Reasoning and logic is not your forte is it? No frigging wonder IT is male dominated.
I take that back, you are a two year old emotionally. Not surprising you work in IT. Please resume pounding your head, it is your forte.
which can prevent people from going to the doctor because they can’t afford to without insurance. my 7 year old gets this!
Stop using your 7 year old as a prop for your flawed argument. I don’t believe he would like being portrayed as victim in your healthcare delusion.
@Cary:
I’m not sure which of the items on the list you are referring to but can you point me in the direction of some sources which support your conclusion?
Pretty much all of the items on my list are free market ideas…things which have NOT been embraced by those who have written the pieces of legislation currently on the table so I find it really difficult to believe that any of the things I listed are included in the bills.
I have, indeed, shared my ideas with my Congressman…unfortunately, he’s a Dim and is not terribly open to any free market solutions. He’s doing hard labor under the delusion that the gov’t can “fix” it even though each and every time gov’t has engaged in anything, their performance has been a dismal failure.
From the Postal Service, to the IRS, to Fannie and Freddie, to MediCare and Social Security, the gov’t has never run anything successfully. Hell, these are the same people who couldn’t even run the Senate Snack Bar successfully.
Now we’re supposed to trust them with 1/6 of the American economy?
You’re right on the ear infection stuff. As the parent of three, the oldest is 18, we’ve been through our share of ear aches, and now with boyfriends and girlfriends, heart aches.
I didn’t mean to imply that we didn’t take her ear issue seriously I was simply using that as an example of a time when we had no choice but use an ER because that was all that was readily available knowing all along that what she had did not fit the traditional definition of emergency.
@Aye Chihuahua:
I’m sure that #2, #15, and I’m not entirely sure, but perhaps #5 have at least been on the table. I regret that I’m short on time to look these up today, but I do concede that at least most of these have not been brought up. I wonder if you have to be a constituent of a particular lawmaker in order to share your ideas. Perhaps there’s a politician you trust who may take up your ideas in another state?
I will also say that in #9 – it should be an RN, not an LPN – RNs require 4 years of education, while one can become an LPN in just one. With that adjustment, I’ll agree wholeheartedly, from personal experience. My brother’s wife is an RN, and when my dad was dying, she was an invaluable resource. She told us more than any of the doctors did, and helped prepare and communicate in ways we wouldn’t have if she weren’t around. I see no reason not to give someone like her more authority.
skye:”You cannot support any blanket statement[sic] that directly connects the lack of healthcare to the deaths of thousands of Americans. Making oversimplified examples to support your position is weak, at best.”
I will just have to agree to disagree. You and I will never see it the same way.
“Losing all emotional reasoning and giving up after one insurance rejection, is typical of who I help.”
Nice to ASS – U – ME. But you are wrong. I made MANY calls to MANY insurance companies.
Same answer. Nice assumption on your part though.
“There are thousands of programs available to help patients get the care and medications ”
List them! Give Links! You are making the claim – back it up. I know I can get my diabetic medicine – already checked into that. I have also checked into the others and hit brick walls from so called experts like yourself who work in the field.
Matter of fact, I have a fantastic idea skye. E-mail me your work number and we will work this out professionally. This is your golden opportunity to shine and put your money where your mouth is. I am not kidding and I am dead serious.
I really want to see all of these programs that will do what you claim. See, if we do it professionally, then we can discuss all of the ailments in my family with HIPAA rules and such since that is your claim.
Heck, I’ll even let YOU make the calls to reputable insurance companies and get the answers.
And once they provide it in writing, we’ll go from there.
If you do this, and are correct, I will gladly come back and retract everything I have said about you negatively.
However, if I am correct, I want you to come back and do the same.
I leave the ball in your court.
I know I can get my diabetic medicine – already checked into that.
Even without insurance? How can that have happened? You want information – go google it – I’m not spoon feeding you the information.
You apparently need help that I cannot give you. Your insults and hysterical rantings are symptomatic a larger problem than healthcare coverage. If anything, I hope you see that.
Please seek professional help. I am serious.
I am new to this blog, and am very impressed with it’s content and with the caliber of the people who post & comment. However I have to say that I am disturbed by the shift to personal attacks that I am seeing here. It seems that if someone needs to resort to bashing someone’s character rather than simply disagree on issues then the argument is lost.
I agree, PG, personal attacks have no place on this thread.
Thanks Skye, of course I wasn’t talking about you!
Thank you, PG. Welcome to Flopping Aces – the blog where the writers and commentators are truly exemplary!
Skye:”Even without insurance?”
Why YES. That was what you claimed up there and you are now acting all surprised and shocked!??
You should be EXCITED that I found something that backs YOUR CLAIMS. Even that ONE example!
“How can that have happened?”
Why I talked to a REAL nurse who pointed me to the right people! WOW!
I didn’t talk to someone on the internet WHO CLAIMS to work in the industry and CLAIMS to know a lot of things but can’t/won’t prove any of what they claim to know.
If you posted what you claimed that you know, you wouldn’t just be helping ME. You would/could be helping the many you claim don’t have that information and the very ones you treat like idiots just because you supposedly have knowledge they do not.
“You want information – go google it – I’m not spoon feeding you the information.”
That is exactly the response I expected. You are a HYPOCRITE. You sit and expect all those arguing with you to PROVE THEIR SIDE. And if they do what you did, you dismiss them, call them liars, drama queens and what not. Funny how that works.
If people are THAT poor then how are they getting on the internet??
This is one of the reasons I keep calling you “princess” – you have lived a pretty decent life without wanting, without being poor and it shows in your attitude. While you can intellectually grasp the concept (I think), you just don’t get the reality. Kind of like Obama who can’t really relate to the average black person.
Well missy, the internet is a wonderful place where people, like yourself, who can claim anything and then when called on the carpet will respond as you did.
“You apparently need help that I cannot give you.”
I could say the same of you
I am not even sure at this point if life experience can/will help in your issue. I think you will only get worse as you age – Retracting into your own world with a dozen cats around you and thinking everyone is out to get you. I could be wrong. Time will tell.
“Your insults and hysterical rantings are symptomatic a larger problem than healthcare coverage.”
And you calling me a liar and being the pain in the butt you have by doing nothing more than parroting phrases shows a whole lot more about you and your personality disorders.
But I guess it was A.O.K to call me a liar without one shred of proof on your side. I think they call that defamation.
You too insult and act as if you do not.
“If anything, I hope you see that.”
I do. Do you see your own flaws? I somehow doubt it.
“Please seek professional help. I am serious.”
Another dig because why? You can’t back up your claim. You are all pissy because you are called on it and I offered you a legitimate way to make your case and you did exactly what I expected a nice neat little phrase parroting person to do …
You declined. Not only did you decline, you struck out like an injured animal.
When faced with the reality of their situation, delusional people usually strike out at those who force them to face reality.
Seek psychological counseling Skye. I am serious too. Just as serious as you are.
The offer still stands. You have every chance to prove yourself and live up to the standards you place on those with which you debate. Until you take that, you are A HYPOCRITE.
NOT ONLY are you a hypocrite, but until you prove some shred sof what you claim, you are spreading lies and myths.
BACK UP YOUR CLAIM.
@Skye: I said it previously but I am not coming back to this thread. Not even to see your response.
You can get my e-mail address should you seriously want to take up my offer. But otherwise don’t bother mailing me to say how wrong you think I am. ONLY if you want to take up my offer.
I wish you well.
We just will not agree on this issue. And that is why I am not revisiting this thread.
It is just going to continue to ad hominem attacks.
I said it previously but I am not coming back to this thread. Not even to see your response.
Bullhockey. You can’t stop and you will prove me right.
Your conflating your personal tragedy into this discussion. There is nothing I can do to help you with that. I will not contact you privately, and respectfully ask you to do the same.
Please seek help: http://angermanagementcls.com/index.html