The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

[5mn_Major]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Uninsured rate keeps coming down...

http://wonkwire.com/2015/06/23/unins...der-obamacare/

Wow. Minnesota with the trifecta for the win. The highest percent covered in the country, the lowest healthcare costs in the country, and the highest quality healthcare in the country.

[Rover]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

The ACA now viewed more favorable than unfavorable...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-oba...tag=YHF4eb9d17

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Every time one of those lists comes out, I find it shocking only when Minnesota isn't #1 overall. It's such a great state to live in.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Roberts upholding Obamacare again. Funny.

[Rover]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Its a pretty tall order asking the Court to overturn something like this. You'd pretty much need 5 Scalia's to do so.

[Kepler]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Its a pretty tall order asking the Court to overturn something like this. You'd pretty much need 5 Scalia's to do so.

Scalias or Alitos. Scalia votes based on conservative political ideology, Alito votes based on Republican party affiliation.

[Kepler]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Bernie's email to his supporters:

Today, because of the Supreme Court's decision to protect the modest gains made under the Affordable Care Act, it is a good day for millions of Americans who will be able to keep their access to health care.

It's also a good day for the small business owners who, before the passage of the Affordable Care Act, couldn't afford the escalating cost of providing insurance for their employees.

But while I am glad the Supreme Court upheld the law, in my view, the only long-term solution to America's health care crisis is a Medicare-for-all single-payer system.

I start my approach to health care from two very simple premises:

1. Health care must be recognized as a right, not a privilege -- every man, woman and child in our country should be able to access quality care regardless of their income.

2. We must create a national system to provide care for every single American in the most cost-effective way possible.

Tragically, the United States fails in both areas.

The health insurance lobbyists and big pharmaceutical companies make "national health care" sound scary. It's not.

In fact, a large single-payer system already exists in the United States. It's called Medicare and the people enrolled give it high marks. More importantly, it has succeeded in providing near-universal coverage to Americans over age 65 in a very cost-effective manner.

It's time to expand that program to all Americans.

If we are serious about providing high-quality, affordable care as a right for all Americans, the only solution to this crisis is a Medicare-for-all single-payer system. Add your name to our petition if you agree.

The American people understand that our current health care system is not working.

They understand that the profiteering of the pharmaceutical industry and private insurance companies causes the United States to spend more per capita on health care than any other nation, while our life expectancy, infant mortality and preventable deaths outcomes are worse than most other countries.

We should be spending our money on care and disease prevention, not paper-pushing and debt collection. But the simple truth is that our efforts to eliminate waste and profiteering are endangered by these powerful corporate interests.

A single-payer system will expand employment and lift a major financial weight off of businesses burdened by employee health expenses. And the millions of Americans stuck in jobs they don't like, they would be free to explore more productive opportunities as they desire.

I attempted to offer a single-payer amendment during the Affordable Care Act debate, but my efforts were blocked.

But our time will come.

Add your name to mine if you agree it's time for America to adopt a Medicare-for-all single-payer health care system.

I am convinced today more than ever before that universal quality health care as a right will eventually become the law of the land. It is the only way forward.
Thank you for adding your name to mine,
Bernie Sanders

[5mn_Major]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Bernie's email to his supporters:

Interesting. I celebrated when this case passed the SCOTUS. But there is a risk of going to far.

Right now, we may not have quite as comprehensive of coverage for everyone as some other countries. But there's no place in the world I'd rather have triple bypass surgery, CKD or any other serious malady. And while I get knocking the insurance industry as a middle layer in just about every sector they're in...my opinion is that the pharma industry gets way too much flack. Medicines they make save lives...pure and simple. But they need to be prescribed correctly. Do they sell them? Sure do. But just as with defense in a court case...you need someone to make sure that an outcome is properly considered. The doctors and patients need to make the final decisions. So I'm of the opinion that we can continue to refine the ACA...but just as with invading a country, you don't know what outcomes you'll get after you rip up the current system.

[SJHovey]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Bernie's email to his supporters:

Bernie is 100% correct in his statement that this is a huge benefit to small businesses.

I saw a statistic one time that showed there were about 6 million employers in this country. Of those 6 million businesses (I think they called them "firms"), somewhere between 5 and 5.5 million have fewer than 20-25 employees.

The ACA didn't make health insurance more affordable for small businesses. It gave them the opportunity to discontinue health insurance altogether without leaving their employees cold. Those businesses were able to give their employees a small, one time raise and send the employees out on the exchange, and finally, after all these years, separate themselves from the giant financial mill stone that was employee health insurance. I speak from personal experience. As a business owner that offered employee health insurance, and knowing what I know now, if you let me go back in time and asked me if I would be in favor of the ACA, I would say 100%.

Now, I personally believe it's going to come at a substantial, and very difficult cost. First, all these people out on the exchange are now going to have the burden of expanding health insurance costs heaped upon them, which will ultimately result in greater and greater subsidies until we get to a point where the government has just effectively expanded medicare to everyone. Until something is actually done about the cost of health care, this is going to gut the lower to middle class. All those employees of small businesses who used to have at least a portion of their health insurance picked up by their employer can now stand in line for subsidies.

[Rover]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Interesting. I celebrated when this case passed the SCOTUS. But there is a risk of going to far.

Right now, we may not have quite as comprehensive of coverage for everyone as some other countries. But there's no place in the world I'd rather have triple bypass surgery, CKD or any other serious malady. And while I get knocking the insurance industry as a middle layer in just about every sector they're in...my opinion is that the pharma industry gets way too much flack. Medicines they make save lives...pure and simple. But they need to be prescribed correctly. Do they sell them? Sure do. But just as with defense in a court case...you need someone to make sure that an outcome is properly considered. The doctors and patients need to make the final decisions. So I'm of the opinion that we can continue to refine the ACA...but just as with invading a country, you don't know what outcomes you'll get after you rip up the current system.

Bernie's campaign aides need to warn him about being the skunk at a picnic. I say again, I have no philosophical opposition to single payer. I'd just like to see a real world example IN THE US of it working, much like how the Massachusetts law foreshadowed the ACA.

[joecct]

Bernie's campaign aides need to warn him about being the skunk at a picnic. I say again, I have no philosophical opposition to single payer. I'd just like to see a real world example IN THE US of it working, much like how the Massachusetts law foreshadowed the ACA.

Under single payer, who pays the doctors and who do the doctors work for?

[Rover]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Under single payer, who pays the doctors and who do the doctors work for?

Not even sure if we still use insurers to help manage care or not. As I said, I personally need to see a lot more details.

Good article here regarding ACA:

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1.../p2p-83865959/

You know, some may say this ruling saves the GOP from doing something on healthcare, but does it? Every leading Republican candidate for President is committed to "repeal and replace". What exactly do they say when asked what "replace" means in front of 60M people in the Presidential debates? "I'll get back to you on that?"

Mittens got killed by even right leaning publications like The Economist when he couldn't be bothered to explain how cutting $5T in upper income taxes + $2T in additional defense spending would lead to a balanced budget. Likewise, if you can't be bothered to explain how you plan on throwing 20M people off of the insurance rolls and give back $$$ to the insurance industry yet still produce a deficit neutral law, voters are going to wonder why.

[Kepler]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Not even sure if we still use insurers to help manage care or not. As I said, I personally need to see a lot more details.

Good article here regarding ACA:

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1.../p2p-83865959/

You know, some may say this ruling saves the GOP from doing something on healthcare, but does it? Every leading Republican candidate for President is committed to "repeal and replace". What exactly do they say when asked what "replace" means in front of 60M people in the Presidential debates? "I'll get back to you on that?"

Mittens got killed by even right leaning publications like The Economist when he couldn't be bothered to explain how cutting $5T in upper income taxes + $2T in additional defense spending would lead to a balanced budget. Likewise, if you can't be bothered to explain how you plan on throwing 20M people off of the insurance rolls and give back $$$ to the insurance industry yet still produce a deficit neutral law, voters are going to wonder why.

And I think this is where the emotion-driven politics of the right of the last twenty years hurts them badly. The right didn't have to do the hard work in the 90s or 00s, they just had to throw out thought-terminating cliches like "big government" or "job killing taxes" or "red tape" and their voters didn't ask about the details. But since the Great Recession that rhetoric doesn't cut it anymore and they have to offer substance, and, mostly, they aren't prepared. The next gen conservatives will be, but these guys are at sea.

[5mn_Major]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

The GOP are saying that they'll get rid of the ACA because the polls are not fully in favor (which shows brainwashing at work). It really comes down to the fact that these guys have to stand for something. In the case of Obama, it was easy. He was going to salvage the economy. Since Bush left things in a mess which puts the GOP solution in doubt, GOP candidates have struggled with what they're going to actually do (rather than just stop the Dems). This is something they can do. Whether it actually improves the country is another story.

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Under single payer, who pays the doctors?

What??? the doctors want to get paid? those heartless, selfish bashturds. Who do they think they are?

think of the poor children who will die otherwise.

Let's face it, most of us won't be seeing doctors at all any more, nurse practitioners will be what most people get.