Knotty issues for health care

[Bob]

Knotty issues ahead for insurance overhaul - Health care reform- msnbc.com Categories

NBC News
By Tom Curry
National affairs writer
msnbc.com
updated 2:25 p.m. ET, Thurs., Oct . 8, 2009


Tom Curry
National affairs writer
? Profile
? E-mail
Next week, the Senate Finance Committee will likely approve a bill designed to overhaul insurance, putting Congress another step closer to restructuring the nation's health care system.

But unresolved issues will confront senators when that panel's bill is melded with the health committee's legislation and when Senate negotiators square off with their House counterparts.

Here's a look at some of what remains to settled:

Will the final bill ditch the Senate Finance Committee?s tax on high-cost insurance plans in favor of a tax on high-income people?
The House Democrats' bill would get some of the money needed to pay for insuring the uninsured by raising taxes on people earning $350,000 or more.

This idea seems to have public support: in a Pew Research Center poll released Thursday, 58 percent of respondents favored hiking taxes on families with incomes of more than $350,000 as a way to pay for expanding health insurance.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday Democrats are weighing the idea of a windfall profits tax on insurance companies. She said Monday that Congress might also levy a value-added tax on goods and services, as is common in European countries.

The Finance Committee bill takes a very different approach.

It would get much of the revenue needed to pay for insuring the uninsured by imposing a new 40 percent tax on high-cost insurance plans. The target: so-called ?Cadillac? plans where the cost is greater than $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for family coverage.

 

[GoodWitch58]

interesting thoughts on Health Care...

8 DiggsRep. Alan Grayson: I Will Not Apologize- America Doesn't Care About Your Feelings
By CSPANJunkie Friday Oct 09, 2009 8:00am
DOWNLOADS: (737)

PLAYS: (6494)
October 08, 2009 C-SPAN. Rep. Alan Grayson has a few words for both Democrats and Republicans on health care reform.

Grayson: Maddam Speaker I have words for both Democrats and Republicans tonight. Let's start with the Democrats. We as a party have spent the last six months-- the greatest minds of our party dwelling on the question, the unbelievably consuming question of how to get Olympia Snowe to vote for health care reform. I want to remind us all... Olympia Snowe was not elected president last year. Olympia Snowe has no veto power in the Senate. Olympia Snowe represents a state with one half of one percent of America's population.

What America wants is health care reform. America doesn't care if it gets fifty one votes in the Senate or sixty votes in the Senate, or eighty three votes in the Senate-- in fact America doesn't even care about that. It doesn't care about that at all.

What America cares about is this. There are over one million Americans who go broke every single year trying to pay their health care bill. America cares a lot about that. America cares about the fact that there are forty four thousand seven hundred eighty Americans who die every single year on account of not having health care. That's a hundred and twenty two every day. America sure cares a lot about that.

America cares about the fact that if you have a pre-existing condition even if you have health insurance, it's not covered. America cares about that a lot. America cares about the fact that you can get all the health care you need as long as you don't need any. America cares about that a lot.

But America does not care about procedures, processes, personalities-- America doesn't care about that at all. So we have to remember that as Democrats. We have to remember that's what's at stake here is life and death, enormous amounts of money and people are counting upon us to move ahead. America understands what's good for America.

America cares about health care. America cares about jobs. America cares about education, about energy independence. America does not care about process or politicians, or personalities or anything like that.

And I have a few words for my Republican friends as well. I guess I do have some Republican friends. Let me say this. Last week I held up this report here and I pointed out that in America there's forty four thousand seven hundred eighty nine Americans who die every year according to this Harvard report-- published in a peer reviewed journal-- because they have no health insurance.

That's an extra forty four thousand seven hundred eighty nine Americans who die, whose lives could be saved-- and their response was to ask me for an apology... to ask me for an apology. That's right... to ask me for an apology. Well, I'm telling you this-- I will not apologize. I will not apologize.

I will not apologize for a simple reason. America doesn't care about your feelings. I violated no rules by calling this report to America's attention. I think a lot of people didn't know about it before hand.

But America does care about health care in America and if you're against it, then get out of the way. Just get out of the way. You can lead. You can follow-- or you can get out of the way. And I'm telling you now to get out of the way.

America understands that there's one party in this country that's in favor of health care reform and one party that's against it and they know why.

They understand if Barack Obama were somehow able to cure hunger in the world, the Republicans would blame him for over-population.

They understand that if Barack obama could somehow bring about world peace, they'd blame him for destroying the defense industry.

In fact they understand that if Barack Obama has a BLT sandwich tomorrow for lunch, they will try to ban bacon.

But that's what America wants. America wants solutions to its problems and that begins with health care. And that's what I'm speaking for tonight.

 

[Bob]

bright lad he is

 

[30ashopper]

Tort Reform Could Save $54 Billion, CBO Says

Congressional budget analysts said Friday that lawmakers could save as much as $54 billion over the next decade by imposing an array of new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits -- 10 times more than previously estimated.

New research shows that legal reforms would not only lower malpractice insurance premiums for medical providers, but also would spur providers to save money by ordering fewer tests and procedures aimed primarily at defending their decisions in court, Douglas W. Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote in a letter to Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah).

The CBO report lends credence to Republican arguments that substantive limits on malpractice lawsuits will reduce health-care costs. However, President Obama opposes one of the chief proposed changes the CBO studied, caps on jury awards, and analysts give the measures little chance of passage.

"These numbers show that this problem deserves more than lip service from policy-makers," Hatch said in a statement. "Unfortunately, up to now, that has been all the President and his Democratic allies in Congress have been willing to provide."
The letter comes in response to questions Hatch raised during the Senate Finance Committee's recent debate over health-care reform.

Elmendorf wrote that newly available research prompted CBO to update "its analysis of the effects of tort reform." The agency's conclusion: A package of reforms that included a $250,000 cap on damages for pain and suffering and a $500,000 cap on punitive damages "would reduce total national health care spending by about 0.5 percent."

The federal government would reap a substantial portion of those savings, the CBO said, primarily through reduced Medicare costs.

washingtonpost.com

One has to wonder why democrats are so against this?

 

[Bob]

those caps are too low to compensate for a ruined life.

 

[30ashopper]

those caps are too low to compensate for a ruined life.

and too high to compensate for a wrongful malpractice suit. What's your solution? Oh wait, you're a trial lawyer right?

 

[Bob]

and too high to compensate for a wrongful malpractice suit. What's your solution? Oh wait, you're a trial lawyer right?

my assertion is reasonable, and has precedent throughout the legal system in this country. judicial review can confirm the merits of any judgement as too it's fairness. you seem amped up to surrender your protection from malpractice.

 

[30ashopper]

my assertion is reasonable, and has precedent throughout the legal system in this country. judicial review can confirm the merits of any judgement as too it's fairness. you seem amped up to surrender your protection from malpractice.

..and you seem amped up to collect your 30%.

 

[30A Skunkape]

my assertion is reasonable, and has precedent throughout the legal system in this country. judicial review can confirm the merits of any judgement as too it's fairness. you seem amped up to surrender your protection from malpractice.

Do you think protecting the public from malpractice is the duty of plaintiff's attorneys?

..and you seem amped up to collect your 30%.

You want to see something funny? Start drumming up support for a 'windfall profit tax' on that 30% that would be dedicated to a malpractice injury fund (because the heroic lawyers just want to help malpractice victims, right?;-)). Heck, 5% of John Edwards loot would probably be enough to build a small hospital somewhere.

 

[Winnie]

Do you think protecting the public from malpractice is the duty of plaintiff's attorneys?



You want to see something funny? Start drumming up support for a 'windfall profit tax' on that 30% that would be dedicated to a malpractice injury fund (because the heroic lawyers just want to help malpractice victims, right?;-)). Heck, 5% of John Edwards loot would probably be enough to build a small hospital somewhere.

Grand proposal! I wouldn't have ever thought that. Maybe it could also apply to political contributions. Rep. Henry Waxman for instance - he's in a district that is practically a "sure thing" for him. He said so in his book. Almost all contributions to his campaign are a windfall since they aren't needed and he makes a pretty good living in salary. Maybe we're on to something....