I t is just my opinion that the O'bama administration is feeling this intense need to act (I can see the banking area I have been unclear about thte rest. Mayb, just a hypothesis they have become identified with the Nw Deal and FDR rush to put programs ito place. Or following up on the busk's administration to "do somthing post 9-11. there is a concentration of power intheexecutive branch but all presidents attempt to do that.
I agree with you in part CapeC. I think the debate should not be rushed, and that every idea should be on the table. However I don't think we need a test. We already have many examples based on how it is done in other countries. Testing several differing ideas would take decades which could push us further and further behind other industrialize nations. The idea of affordable health care for every American is two fold. First, we need it to take the burden off those who pay into the system. Because each time an uninsured person acquires medical treatment, we who pay for health care get build for it due to the rise in our premiums.
Second, our manufacturing industry cannot compete with foreign companies because of the high cost of health care that companies over here pay in benefits. A cost affective health care program in the private sector would go along way in returning our economy to being competitive.
I understand the urgency based on the effect on the economy. But I also agree that to rush into this could be dangerous.
My concern is that the government, although well intetioned, has not shown the ability to run anything without huge deficits. Medicare and social security and the post office all rune at a loss and the losses keep growing. What makes us/them think that they can run a trillion dollar health care plan. I'd feel more comfortable if they fixed medicare/medicaid first.
I do not think we have to test, as Charles has said, but I do agree that we need to read everything before one signs anything...that should be common sense....
I think if you consider that the fact that the federal government has had to operate under extra burdens like fighting two wars over the past 6 years which added greatly to the federal budget would account for much of the federal short fall. Also we need to remember that the Bush Tax cuts shrank the revenue base of the fed while at the same time increasing the military budgets. Let us not forget that the administration before George W Bush had balanced the budget and left with a quarter trillion surplus. That means that everything under the fed was operating in a cost effective way at that time.
I am inclined to agree that a health care plan should not be rushed. There are too many considerations to compulsory insurance, for example, such as pre existing conditions which private insurers go out of their way to find to deny claims. Private insurance is expensive. And dispensation of needed care could be doled out according to age, if Daischle has his way. In other words, past a certain age, forget life saving procedures, medicines and surgery. I just don't want to see a health care bill passed in a hurry without a chance to see what is proposed and be assured that any measure enacted will protect us all.
Medicare/Medicaid has a lot of problems with it, not the least of which is failing to authorize preventative treatment, ordering more costly measures such as nursing homes when some people are able to care for themselves in their homes with just a bit of outside help -- far less costly than nursing homes.
With the pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies and medical profession giving the input to fashion the bills to their best advantage, a great deal of input from the public is needed if a health care bill is to serve us at the cheapest, most efficient cost.
That's my take on it.
"Second, our manufacturing industry cannot compete with foreign companies because of the high cost of health care that companies over here pay in benefits. A cost affective health care program in the private sector would go along way in returning our economy to being competitive."
no it is not the cost of health care
it is all the laws encouraging the outsourcing of jobs
it is all the laws puniching exporting manufactured goods
why to blame the health systme when it is not the problem
Medicare and madicaid aer totally different one is state hte medicad, and one is eligible for it at an income level , a means test, medicae is fedderal m not a means test every one will receive it at a certain age or if disabled. they do not cover the same thingsand have a different mechanism for paying.
U.S. senators on Thursday moved closer to agreement on a $1 trillion U.S. healthcare overhaul that would extend medical coverage to nearly everyone without adding to huge budget deficits.
The cost was a significant step toward getting a final package that could gain at least some Republican support.
view link
