[Nesster]

Of course this is just a political ploy but interesting anyhow, as an example of politics trumping transparency and accountability:
Republicans Block Congressional Health Care Disclosure

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. House of Representatives approved a rules package on Wednesday, the first day of business for the 112th Congress, that will dictate the way the legislature operates this year and reflects a shift to Republican control of the lower chamber. The bill passed on a party-line vote, with 240 Republicans in favor and 191 Democrats against.

One measure that didn't make it into the rules package was a proposal by Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.) that would have required all members to disclose whether they are taking advantage of their federal health insurance plan within 15 days of taking the oath of office. Crowley's measure also split on a party-line vote, with Democrats in favor and Republicans opposed.
On MSNBC's "Hardball" Wednesday, Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), the new chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Dems' House fundraising arm, accused Republicans of a double standard in blocking the disclosure:

ISRAEL: Every Republican voted to hide their own government health care, while many of them are pledging to repeal health care for everyone else. So, you go from hypocrisy to hypocrisy; from broken promise to broken promise. And this is just the first day of the new Congress.
MATTHEWS: You mean, they didn't want to admit that they're taking health care?

ISRAEL: This is a very straightforward amendment that we offered, that, if you're going to take government-sponsored health care and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, simply disclose. Let your constituents know that you are taking that government health care. Every single Republican voted to hide their health care while many of them are pledging to repeal it for their constituents.

[mikemike]

health care for everyone else

How does Chris Matthews let him get away with such a bald faced lie? Under the HCR bill 30-40 million people will still be uninsured. The Obama administration is issuing exemptions to compliance left and right for companies that offer the worst kind of coverage which provide just enough coverage to diagnose problems but deny coverage of any treatment. If Mr. Israel wants to talk about hypocrisy he should be talking about the willingness to exempt businesses, like McDonalds, with flawed business models that push the health problems of their employees and their customers onto the rest of us.

With responses like that Mr. Matthews should change the name of his program from "Hardball" to "Tee Ball."

[jeffkrol]

How does Chris Matthews let him get away with such a bald faced lie? Under the HCR bill 30-40 million people will still be uninsured. The Obama administration is issuing exemptions to compliance left and right for companies that offer the worst kind of coverage which provide just enough coverage to diagnose problems but deny coverage of any treatment. If Mr. Israel wants to talk about hypocrisy he should be talking about the willingness to exempt businesses, like McDonalds, with flawed business models that push the health problems of their employees and their customers onto the rest of us.

With responses like that Mr. Matthews should change the name of his program from "Hardball" to "Tee Ball."

Don't deflect.. this is an important statement.........

ISRAEL: This is a very straightforward amendment that we offered, that, if you're going to take government-sponsored health care and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, simply disclose. Let your constituents know that you are taking that government health care. Every single Republican voted to hide their health care while many of them are pledging to repeal it for their constituents.

[Parallax]

You give our government WAY too much credit. Because of lobbyists, a single payer system will end up costing more.

There is no doubt that America could curb health care costs, but to do so properly will step on everyone's toes in some form or another, so it's not acceptable to anyone.

I completely agree with that.
Mix 2 parts lobbyists and 1 part no profit motive (for the provider/payer).
Stir in as much cash as you want from the infinite (from the government's viewpoint) cash availability from the taxpayers' pockets.
Wrapped tightly in good old fashioned red tape, and you have a recipe for you-aint-seen-nothin-yet health care costs.

---

Last edited by Parallax; 01-06-2011 at 12:08 PM.

[Nesster]

...and that's incredibly discouraging, as it will bankrupt us. The idea that nothing can be done, or rather, as bad as things are now, and projected to get worse, that government led reform will only make things worse... is a bed-rock modern conservative idea. And a defeatist one to boot. And the worst legacy we give our children. Medical costs are one of the top identifiable threats to our national security and liberty. If it's true nothing can be done to improve things, we're in a sad state indeed - and kiss all your retirement plans goodbye, and realize, when we get downsized, we kiss whatever industry we were in good bye (or accept a crap job for a lot less money) and we're on our own.

Something will break.

[mikemike]

Don't deflect.. this is an important statement.........

In two paragraphs of the quoted transcript four of my pet peeves were tweaked...
1. An interviewer let a statement that isn't even half true (not even a quarter truth) slide.
2. A politician patted himself on the back for accomplishing passage of a bad bill as if it was a good thing.
3. They are encouraging one another to engage in political posturing (passing up on health insurance coverage because your employer is the government) that doesn't amount to anything.
4. Turning a program on a cable news channel into a biased political infomercial.

I would respectfully disagree with your assessment that this was an important statement or idea because it is a move that is a step away from a better government. No one in congress is poor and couldn't afford to go out and get there own coverage or they have access to a golden parachute they pulled long ago.

Pulling the trigger and passing on their employer coverage becomes a simple calculation for the politician... they will pass on it if the $10-15K/year they spend buying private coverage is worth it as a bullet point on their mailer or TV commercial come election time.

No one goes to congress to get rich or get the sweet benefits, thats why they leave congress and lobby.

This is a stupid idea and dangerous if stupid people re-elect stupid politicians on the basis that the politician in question is able to afford to eat their own health insurance costs. Its like calling a product "All Natural" or "Chemical Free."

[Wheatfield]

...and that's incredibly discouraging, as it will bankrupt us. The idea that nothing can be done, or rather, as bad as things are now, and projected to get worse, that government led reform will only make things worse... is a bed-rock modern conservative idea. And a defeatist one to boot. And the worst legacy we give our children. Medical costs are one of the top identifiable threats to our national security and liberty. If it's true nothing can be done to improve things, we're in a sad state indeed - and kiss all your retirement plans goodbye, and realize, when we get downsized, we kiss whatever industry we were in good bye (or accept a crap job for a lot less money) and we're on our own.

Something will break.

What is astounding is that pretty much every developed nation except for America has socialized health care and is able to make it work.
Heck, even Cuba has socialized health care and they seem able to make it work.
You are right, the culture of defeatism that comes up in these threads is incredibly discouraging.
I had no idea that Americans had been so ground down by the jackboot of their government that they didn't think change for the better was possible, much less striving for.

[jeffkrol]

I had no idea that Americans had been so ground down by the jackboot of their government that they didn't think change for the better was possible, much less striving for.

Only some..........

[jeffkrol]

In two paragraphs of the quoted transcript four of my pet peeves were tweaked...
1. An interviewer let a statement that isn't even half true (not even a quarter truth) slide.
2. A politician patted himself on the back for accomplishing passage of a bad bill as if it was a good thing.
3. They are encouraging one another to engage in political posturing (passing up on health insurance coverage because your employer is the government) that doesn't amount to anything.
4. Turning a program on a cable news channel into a biased political infomercial.

I would respectfully disagree with your assessment that this was an important statement or idea because it is a move that is a step away from a better government. No one in congress is poor and couldn't afford to go out and get there own coverage or they have access to a golden parachute they pulled long ago.

Pulling the trigger and passing on their employer coverage becomes a simple calculation for the politician... they will pass on it if the $10-15K/year they spend buying private coverage is worth it as a bullet point on their mailer or TV commercial come election time.

No one goes to congress to get rich or get the sweet benefits, thats why they leave congress and lobby.

This is a stupid idea and dangerous if stupid people re-elect stupid politicians on the basis that the politician in question is able to afford to eat their own health insurance costs. Its like calling a product "All Natural" or "Chemical Free."

It's called putting your money where you mouth is.......
and to the current politicians it's ALL bullet points... I hate hypocrisy....
There really are no "good bills" if you think about it.....

A handful of Republicans have already said they won't be taking the federal health plan, including Reps. Sandy Adams (Fla.), Bill Johnson (Ohio), Mike Kelly (Penn.), Bobby Schilling (Ill.), Joe Walsh (Ill.) and Daniel Webster (Fla.). Rep. Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) recently said he doesn't need to use the federal plan because he's already on Medicare -- another government-run program.

Israel can say what he wants, facts are facts......

Our progress is under attack.

Their majority is not even a day old, but House Republicans are already getting ready to pass a bill to repeal health reform.

Instead of focusing on the future, they want to put insurance companies back in charge of our health care. To go back to the days when these companies could deny coverage to children based on pre-existing conditions, cancel coverage when people would get sick, or limit the care you could receive -- even when you needed more. When seniors would be forced to choose between paying their mortgage and paying for their prescription drugs, simply because they landed in the "donut hole" in coverage.

They want to turn our progress into a partisan fight.

But you and I know that the Affordable Care Act and other reforms to protect consumers did not pass because of a partisan or ideological agenda.

They passed because millions of Americans stood up and said we were ready for commonsense solutions after years of fraud and abuse, for a new era of responsibility after unchecked power. They passed because, after 100 years of debate and negotiation, we said we would wait no longer for health reform.

[mikemike]

What is astounding is that pretty much every developed nation except for America has socialized health care and is able to make it work.
Heck, even Cuba has socialized health care and they seem able to make it work.
You are right, the culture of defeatism that comes up in these threads is incredibly discouraging.
I had no idea that Americans had been so ground down by the jackboot of their government that they didn't think change for the better was possible, much less striving for.

The HDI which is used to determine which countries are "developed countries" and which are "developing countries" takes into account access to health care.

More than 30% of the people who live in a developed country live in the united states. I am fairly certain that more than 50% of the people who were born in developing countries but now live in a developed country live in the US.

Maybe living under the jackboot of socialist canadian mounties has closed your mind to the possibility that there are other ways besides your socialist system.

[mikemike]

It's called putting your money where you mouth is.......
and to the current politicians it's ALL bullet points... I hate hypocrisy....
There really are no "good bills" if you think about it.....

How so?

Has any republican ever said that people should not carry health insurance or utilize their employer sponsored health coverage which is government subsidized through tax breaks?

They are rejecting the bill that was passed and the individual mandate as a mechanism to try and achieve universal coverage. The individual mandate may not hold up in the courts and if that piece is severed from the rest of the bill what we end up with is 1 step forward and 2 steps back. I think letting the courts sort out the constitutionality of the individual mandate should be allowed before they try to repeal the rest of the stuff and any attempt to make a symbolic repeal vote is just foolishness and doesn't deserve the attention it is receiving. Something more productive might be passing a bill that fuses stuff like mandating insurers to cover preexisting conditions and outlawing lifetime limits with the individual mandate so that if the court does reject the individual mandate congress doesn't have to scramble to repeal the other stuff that only works in an environment of 100% participation in the insurance market.

[jeffkrol]

How so?

Has any republican ever said that people should not carry health insurance or utilize their employer sponsored health coverage which is government subsidized through tax breaks?

They are rejecting the bill that was passed and the individual mandate as a mechanism to try and achieve universal coverage. The individual mandate may not hold up in the courts and if that piece is severed from the rest of the bill what we end up with is 1 step forward and 2 steps back. I think letting the courts sort out the constitutionality of the individual mandate should be allowed before they try to repeal the rest of the stuff and any attempt to make a symbolic repeal vote is just foolishness and doesn't deserve the attention it is receiving. Something more productive might be passing a bill that fuses stuff like mandating insurers to cover preexisting conditions and outlawing lifetime limits with the individual mandate so that if the court does reject the individual mandate congress doesn't have to scramble to repeal the other stuff that only works in an environment of 100% participation in the insurance market.

I'M there employer....... yet I don't get what my "employees" get.....AND I have to pay for it.
IF the mandate doesn't pass what happens to "mandated" auto ins. in the states???
Interesting to ponder.......
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/mandatory-health-insurance-is-not-like...insurance/7996

Like all legislative proposals, the devil will be in the details that still remain unclear to the American people. It may be imprudent (and just too costly) to try to overhaul every aspect of our health insurance system in a single legislative proposal, but if we can start to focus on solvable issues, slowly but surely we might be able to make real, bipartisan progress. Catastrophic-care insurance coverage may be a good place to begin, and solutions in this area may generate the kinds of cost savings that are needed to reform additional parts of the health-insurance system. And we might learn some valuable lessons through this focused effort that could enable us to develop even better solutions to the larger problem.

Incremental progress might mean that President Obama isn’t the last president to talk about health-care reform, as total system overhaul could take years to accomplish, but I think it was he who asserted that health-care reform is too important to be the victim of concerns about political wins and losses.

FUNNY........

Compulsory auto insurance coverage is required in most states, and has been for decades. Virginia and New Hampshire are two notable exceptions; in those states, if you are struck by an uninsured motorist, you and/or your insurer bear the risk and the costs.

Just Like The Ballpark
This insurance model is known as the ballpark model. The idea is that people who attend baseball games run the risk of being hit by balls or bats, and accept this risk when they come to the park. (The opposite of this is called the “Disneyland model;” in this case, the park or the institution would bear liability.)

Uninsured motorists in Virginia don’t get off totally scot-free, of course; when they purchase their vehicle tags, Virginians must declare whether or not they have liability coverage. If the answer is no, they must pay an uninsured motorist fee of $500. This money goes straight into state coffers; it does not provide any sort of coverage or protection.

http://www.theautoinsurance.com/states-without-compulsory-auto-insurance-coverage_2010-04-22/

Lawmakers decided early on that driving was a privilege, not a right – and carried certain responsibilities as it was understood how expensive and catastrophic auto-related damages could be.

Maybe if we consider health a "privilege" not a "right" we'd have better luck......

[Wheatfield]

It looks like health care Arizona style is if yer poor, yer gonna die.

2nd person denied Ariz. transplant coverage dies - Yahoo! News

Seems a little callous to me.

[mikemike]

IF the mandate doesn't pass what happens to "mandated" auto ins. in the states???

That is not equivalent... you can avoid it by not owning a car. The health insurance mandate is unavoidable.

It looks like health care Arizona style is if yer poor, yer gonna die.

2nd person denied Ariz. transplant coverage dies - Yahoo! News

Seems a little callous to me.

Maybe we should buy them one way bus tickets to Canada.

[jeffkrol]

That is not equivalent... you can avoid it by not owning a car. The health insurance mandate is unavoidable.

but like Virginia, you just pay a "fee" for not being covered.. you can avoid it.
pop of US 307,006,550 (includes all even under 15 or whatever)
vehicles.....246,000,000
optional, not real likely in the real world......