Sunday, May 31, 2009
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Daily Show about Healthcare
Best stat, courtesy of Elizabeth Edwards: "$1 in every $700 dollars went to pay CEO of UnitedHealthcare"
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Elizabeth Edwards | ||||
| thedailyshow.com | ||||
| ||||
The Republican Non-Alternative
Here's the Republican proposal. It's a non-alternative to the real efforts at healthcare reform. They call it the Patient Choice Act.
There's a lot of language in the PCA that makes it sounds progressive and forward-thinking. They throw around words like "accountability" and "prevention", "affordable" and "guaranteed". But the devil's in the details, and the details here are...well, there aren't any. Just vague posturing.
The details they do provide are complete non-starters. An example: they say that a "non-profit board would penalize insurance companies that cherry pick healthy patients." What criteria would this board use to decide if a company is cherry-picking? How would they penalize these companies? Would there be a fine? How much?
This board would be made up of political appointees, presumably. To me, this is exactly the wrong kind of government involvement in private insurance. I'd rather have an independent public health plan, and LESS regulation of private insurance. Let the two compete. Don't just have the government mess around in the private sector and call that a solution to our healthcare problems.
There's a lot of language in the PCA that makes it sounds progressive and forward-thinking. They throw around words like "accountability" and "prevention", "affordable" and "guaranteed". But the devil's in the details, and the details here are...well, there aren't any. Just vague posturing.
The details they do provide are complete non-starters. An example: they say that a "non-profit board would penalize insurance companies that cherry pick healthy patients." What criteria would this board use to decide if a company is cherry-picking? How would they penalize these companies? Would there be a fine? How much?
This board would be made up of political appointees, presumably. To me, this is exactly the wrong kind of government involvement in private insurance. I'd rather have an independent public health plan, and LESS regulation of private insurance. Let the two compete. Don't just have the government mess around in the private sector and call that a solution to our healthcare problems.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Great Factoid
Here's a good one to use when they tell you that a public plan will destroy the private insurance market:
And then throw in the many examples of private and public options existing side by side: FedEx and USPS, public schools and private schools, etc.
[Ms. Sebelius] said Mr. Obama did not support “dismantling the private market” and relying entirely on a public program. Indeed, she said, “the president and I want to stabilize the private insurance market.”
In more than two dozen states, she said, state employees have a choice between traditional private health insurance products and a public plan. Such competition does not destroy the marketplace but simply gives people an additional choice, she said.
And then throw in the many examples of private and public options existing side by side: FedEx and USPS, public schools and private schools, etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)