Republicans unanimously oppose the government-run insurance option, saying it would drive private insurers from the market and eventually bring a government takeover of the health care system.Who's right? Is the public option simply a battle between the Republicans and the Democrats? I don't think it's that simple when we're talking about healthcare reform. Should they define a trigger? If they define such a "trigger," they will have proof that expanded coverage and lower costs are not possible unless major changes are made to our existing system.
Democratic leaders reject that claim, saying the public option would provide needed competition for private insurers while making health coverage accessible to millions of people currently lacking health insurance.
At the end of the day, I think we will eventually see some type of public option emerge in the United States. In my opinion, it's inevitable. Our healthcare system is so broken that we need to go through a major overhaul. It's difficult to overhaul a system in small stages. On the flip side, a complete overhaul isn't practical. So, we're stuck between a rock and a hard place. This is a true dilemma.
It is so sad that people do not understand that healthcare should be a RIGHT. I think it is only because we are so used to things the way that they are, most don't know anything different. People are so scared of the unknown that they are wiling to LITERALLY risk their lives.ReplyDelete
We have the right to an education in this country but not a right to be healthy, but if we aren't healthy can we really be educated?
I know that our healthcare system is broken, I am a healthcare profession that sees the break everyday and it saddens me. I also see how my government run insurance (military insurance) is wonderful and how I wish I could offer it to everyone!
In my opinion, if the idiot laws, mandates, and other handcuffs are removed from the wrists of the insurance industry, then we'd see real competition and an open and free market. Government has no place "competing" in the marketplace, especially since they are the ones who put the laws into place that got us into this mess!ReplyDelete
Not only that, but with the government effectively out of the picture, insurance companies could decide which states they would compete in, which types of coverage they would provide - including abortions, illegals, alternative, pre-existing, etc. - and it wouldn't be multi-trillion dollar taxpayer burden.
Health care should be a high priority. But that doesn't mean that the government has to butt in yet another area of our lives. And with the current level of nervous-making corruption in both major parties, I certainly don't want those spoiled idiots making such decisions for me. Remember, the solution to this "crisis" isn't due to go into effect until 2013. So much for crisis.
To Heather J. We all have a right to an education. However, we all do not have a right to pursue a PhD. The education analogy doesn't work with health care.ReplyDelete
To Renie....the competition we have right now is not working....and it is not government that is getting in the way.
The public option is an idea....and only if it is put to a test, will we know if it is viable. Right know, no one knows if it works. It must be field tested. There have been (and there currently exist) non for profit healthcare entities.
The two houses of congress are thing to force a public option into being by enacting law. It needs to created by making a proposals, assessing the proposals, re-evaluating the plan, then making another proposal, then a conclusion to the best delivery method for a public option.(if in fact it is the best method)
We have yet to have proposals form the health care providers. (In my opinion, the nurses would come up with the best plan. They are closest to care giving than any other group and they have experience with the pro’s and con’s of both the private system and medicare/medicade)
We need and option. It is best if the entity that provides the option is not the government. The government should underwrite the option, and we all need to learn the short comings and advantages of such a system, by a fully transparent documented reporting of costs, quality of care, and anticipated sustainability. The people whose lives are at risk with this experiment should be granted indemnity to harm if the system fails. However, if this experiment is successful, everyone will benefit.