Slog

News & Arts

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Health The Case for a Public Health Plan

Posted by Jonathan Golob on Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:44 PM

... isn't about the uninsured. Paul Begala put it concisely on Real Time with Bill Maher last week:

(Most relevant part starts at 3:35.)

My transcript:

What we've really spent our money on, in this system, is trying to figure out to not cover people who have paid for their premiums.

There was a hearing last week, with no network covered, including mine (CNN). And they had witnesses, people who had paid their health insurance premium for months or years and then committed the sin of getting sick. And then insurance companies kicked them off.

And then they had insurance company executives and they were asked, under oath, 'Will you stop doing this? Will you stop kicking people off unless they've committed fraud?' Ok. Short of fraud, will you cover the people who pay their premiums?

And they all, under oath, said 'no.'

That's why we need a public plan. Because they'll keep kicking you off.

Comments (12) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

This is spot on. The insurance companies have nothing to loose by being corrupt because where will people go? They all work the same way, so there's no incentive for any of them to be better.
A public plan changes that, and I can't wait to join it when it's offered.
Maybe we should inundate Cantwell's office with this video/transcript.

Posted by Enigma

on June 25, 2009 at 12:52 PM

To me the most accurate and clear point was made by Ms Kay starting at 4:15

Posted by Loveschild

on June 25, 2009 at 1:12 PM

I just turned down an opportunity to take a job that would enable me to further my new career because it would have required me to purchase my own insurance. Instead I am staying at my old hated job that guarantees me my insurance despite "pre-existing conditions."

This might not speak to people who are currently out of work, but if you are thinking of changing jobs/careers it is something you have to think about.

Posted by renbot on June 25, 2009 at 1:22 PM

Let's face it, a reasonable single option national health plan would always be cheaper and more efficient than anything the America-hating GOP want.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on June 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM

Seriously, the dems in congress need to realize the repubs will never concede. NEVER. They must be dragged, as always, kicking and screaming into a better world.

Posted by Urgutha Forka on June 25, 2009 at 1:41 PM

Many good points in the discussion, but the primary cause of the problem is not discussed: GREED.

Health-care actors' (i.e. hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, doctors, insurance companies) primary objective is to make a large profit. Healing is a secondary or tertiary concern.

Perhaps we could solve the problem if profit was no longer the primary goal. Our capitalist society, however, rejects the idea of limiting profit.

Refusing to provide medical assistance unless you earn a profit is nothing short of extortion. A child would know this is wrong. Yet, our values are so distorted that it is not seen as extortion. To assert this is to invite ridicule.

These health care actors are earning obscene profits. The primary goal should be to HEAL. The side benefit should be a fair profit. Our system turns the medical ethics on its head.

The problem is GREED, yet few want to discuss that elephant in the room.

Posted by Medina on June 25, 2009 at 1:51 PM

OMG, I agree with Urgutha Forka @5.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on June 25, 2009 at 2:04 PM

Every time, this just brings that red miasma creeping across my field of vision until everything is blocked out. I'm a fiftyish male, 6', 175 lbs., don't smoke, with hereditary autoimmune arthritis and a mild non-life-threatening irregular heartbeat (both readily controlled by cheap meds), and no other diagnosed conditions.

I can't get individual insurance. Period. If I applied to my state's high-risk pool, after a 6-month wait, I MIGHT get approved for a $900 monthly premium and a $75k absolute annual cap.

Since I have no dependents, I just decided several years ago, FUCK this twisted society, I'll go barefoot and naked into the minefield. If something bad happens, they take my savings, I go on Medicaid and cost the taxpayers whatever it will cost. But not one fucking dime of premium money until this is fixed. I would gladly pay $200-500/month if I knew I could not be dropped.

FUCK all Republicans, and all cowardly Democrats, right in the ass. Fuck 'em raw.

Posted by rob!

on June 25, 2009 at 4:00 PM

By the way, 50 million currently uninsured paying $200 apiece monthly for full coverage equals $120 billion per year or 1.2 trillion in 10 years, not to mention massive savings in actual costs of care by not fighting claims, organizing health records, and negotiating fees from a position of strength.

Anybody who tells me we have to make huge additions to the deficit to pay for it is a lying sack of shit.

Posted by rob!

on June 25, 2009 at 4:32 PM

And if, after a half-century of paying premiums, I were to die in my sleep at age 95 without ever having spent another day in the hospital, I would die happy knowing that my years of premiums had kept some other individuals or families from disaster rather than adding another fucking wing to some insurance CEO's McMansion. That's what shared risk means.

Posted by rob!

on June 25, 2009 at 4:52 PM