Onward Through the Fog (Or: The Urgent Need to Reform Health Care)
There was a brief moment in the debate over expanding the S-CHIP program when the clouds parted and something of a consensus emerged that the crisis in American health care has brought to ground not just the poor but middle-class families like that of Halsey and Bonnie Frost. Then the swiftboating of their 12-year-old son began.
Well, the right-wing blowhards who pulled the rug out from under the people who opposed expanding S-CHIP for legitimate if arguable reasons finally are retreating back into their caves to prepare for the next attack on A Hapless Soul to Be Named Later, unaware of or not caring about the damage they inflicted on their cause by framing the debate in Roman Coliseum blood sport terms.
No matter, the need for health-care reform in America has become so urgent and so difficult to ignore that in 2008 — or perhaps the following year after the probable coronation of a Democratic president — the people who have blocked reform year in and year out will be confronted with having to get on board or get trampled.
Who might those people be?
In order of importance, Republicans, private health insurers, for-profit hospital corporations and pharmaceutical companies.
In order of influence, private health insurers, for-profit hospital corporations, pharmaceutical companies and Republicans.
The one certainty is that whatever steps are taken, they will be relatively modest and a far cry from what Hillary Rodham Clinton tried to ram through 14 years ago.
Please click here to read more at Kiko’s House.
13 Responses to “Onward Through the Fog (Or: The Urgent Need to Reform Health Care)”
Of course, you are not talking about health care reform. You are talking about health care finance reform in the form of nationalizing the financial aspects of health care ( and thus in directly nationalizing all of it).
I have seen nothing that actually talks about changing the delivery of health care other than making careers in health care less appealing and maybe off shoring the pharmaceutical industry. . All of the discussion has been on how to maximize the number of people who do not have to pay for health care will minizing the total number of people who will actually be net payers.
Of course, the real question is why does a family of six who makes $55,000 a year need $50K in subsidies to live in the bluest city in one of the bluest states.
I also find it odd that the moderateview has reached doubled digits in the number of posts about free money for the middle class while ignoring the news stories about immigration. How does the left propose to have a massive welfare state while maintaining open borders and unlimited immigration. Do they think that upper middle class whites will compliantly pay ever increasing taxes to fund a welfare state that seems to benefits illegal immigrants and flower children.
If people get the same standard of living being a flower child or working nights, weekends, and holidays in an emergency room, they why would anyone every want to work in an ER again?
The sad truth is that people such as Shaun Mullen keep forming this debate in the above terms.
US vs. THEM
The debate always falls along this line: Social Welfare for America is great and Anyone and everyone who works in the health care industry is evil naer do wells who want to bring about the downfall of America at the expense of little children.
This is hogwash. If the debate would stop being framed this way and instead be framed in a positive and constructive manner in which perhaps millions of people do not lose their jobs. Millions do not loose a good portion of their savings on failed investments in insurance and hospitals and hmos. Millions are not adversely affected but instead they are not affected at all. While:
Millions more are taken care of, given insurance or access to medical care that they can afford then this will be a win win situation for America.
Framed in a positive context it has a great chance to succeed. However as long as it is framed in this overwhelmingly negative and adversarial context…….Good vs. Evil there will never be a solution.
When Democrats and Republicans and their respective supporters learn this lesson then perhaps something will get done in this country. Until then…….no matter who the democrats put in the White House if anything is rammed down *throats* the other party will just stand up and stop it as they always have.
and in a rational, and in an honest manner …
we’re waiting for the lefties to start doing this.
Superdestroyer, Somebody, DLS:
I can think of nothing more worthy of serious debate that health-care reform, so I’ll take the bait.
Might I humbly suggest that it is you, in this instance, who want the debate to be framed in a way complimentary to your preceonceived notions while not even bothering to rouse yourself to debate?
As it is, my post goes after Republicans and Democrats alike with special scorn for a Democrat — Hillary Clinton.
I praise the bi-frickin’-partisan compromise hammered out by Romney and the opposition in Massachusetts.
I suggest, while acknowledging the shortcomings of my own arguments, that a near-universal plan is probably the best option under the circumstances.
So let’s hear your specifics to counter my specifics, rather than tiresome left vs. right blather.
If the present system works for you, please advocate why it should not be changed.
If there are aspects of the system that do not work for you, please advocate why they should be changed.
And if you do not believe that Americans are entitled to health care even if it means that taxpayers have to underwrite that care, please explain why.
Bring it on, gang.
Well, most aren’t entitled to it (that is a fact, which requires no explanation), and it obviously is not anything to which people have an inherent or human right. But everyone’s going to get government health care, eventually, in my opinion.
As I’ve said before, I believe that within 10-20 years (more likely sooner than later), everyone will have Medicare. That program already exists and merely need be expanded to cover everyone (including aliens, if the Dems have their way, not only citizens) and absorb VA, Medicaid, Indian Health, etc.. This is probably going to be done when most people see no other logical alternative. (What if more and more genes that predispose people to various diseases are discovered and eventually testing for these are required by insurance companies, with exclusions for conditions associated with whatever genes are found present in individuals?)
Then we will be exchanging the current set of problems we have (insurance company games and lawsuit abuse) for others (bureaucracy and likely, still, lawsuit abuse). We may or may not reduce overall costs initially; eventually costs will rise and health care will be rationed.
DLS:
I asked for what your solution is to the problem, not another ad hominem recitation of what those evil leftie Dems are gonna do.
If you want a universal system, the the government provided service should be very bare bones and those should be at the back of the line. Why should the families of a service member serving in Iraq or a policeman have to compete for limited health resources with illegal aliens or the homeless? Under the current single payer systems proposed by the netroots queues, friends, and political connections will determine the quality of medical services. I would guess that most of the netroots believe that they are clever enough to get to the front of the line and to get the rare sports at the Mayo Clinic, Sloan-Kettering, etc.
Superdestroyer:
Thank you, but I didn’t ask you to play back what it is that you think we lefty liberals want. I asked you what you want, or are you okay with the present situation?
If I had to involve government, I would change state laws in two ways. The first would be to eliminate requirements that insurers provide all kinds of services rather than function as insurance against catastrophic events only. (There is no reason why everyone should expect insurance to work as pre-paid comprehensive health care; instead, they can and should have high-deductible plans that insure against truly serious, expensive events such as automobile accidents or serious injury or disease.) If additional intervention were needed, I would have states impose community rating of the entire state’s population in place of experience rating, and ban exclusions and limitations for pre-existing medical conditions.
DLS:
Interesting. Thank you.
[...] Shaun Mullen wrote a fantastic post today on “The Urgent Need to Reform US Health Care: Onward Through the Fog”Here’s ONLY a quick extractThere was a brief moment in the debate over expanding the S-CHIP program when the clouds parted and something of a consensus emerged that the crisis in American health care has brought to ground not just the poor but middle-class … [...]
[...] Shaun Mullen wrote a fantastic post today on “The Urgent Need to Reform US Health Care: Onward Through the Fog”Here’s ONLY a quick extractThere was a brief moment in the debate over expanding the S-CHIP program when the clouds parted and something of a consensus emerged that the crisis in American health care has brought to ground not just the poor but middle-class … [...]
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]