the healthcare debate
Sep. 23rd, 2009 09:04 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
serynWe keep hearing about how in order for health care to be universal and for there to be insurance reform, we must have a public option. That there would be a governmental program, similar to Medicare, available to all people.
I have one question. Why can we not regulate the snot out of the health insurance industry? Make the pricing structures transparent, make the back-room deals public, disclose what insurance providers pay for the same services compared to what the uninsured would pay. Auto insurance is heavily regulated after the states forced the insurers to disclose their common practices and decided those were unfair and discriminatory. Yet the auto insurance industry still makes money.
It seems like the problem is that the companies doing business in this field have been given a completely free hand and told to regulate themselves. That should not happen. Part of what we pay taxes for is for the government to use its heavy hand to put the brakes on discriminatory practices and to find out what the common practices are and tell us what is going on. That kind of regulation and oversight is not possible on an individual basis. It must come from the government.
Another issue with health insurance is how regionalized the options are. If you live in certain states, you can only get coverage from a limited number of options, sometimes just one option. If you have outside coverage, many procedures would not be covered because there is a certain density of subscribers before the insurance company is going to negotiate rates with the service providers. So people are forced to buy into the available plans. That kind of monopolistic practice is unfair and there should be redress available.
I see the touting of the public option as Congress abdicating its responsibility to legislatively provide oversight of an industry gone amok.
I don't necessarily think a public option is a bad idea, but the public option will be colored by "common" morality. I worry about the kind of medical care women will receive in a country that does not believe contraception is a right that should be available to all people.
Regardless of what is done, I think all members of Congress should put their health insurance under the same laws and restrictions and fees that they are legislating for the rest of the country. Also, any senator who votes against health care reform because of cost should voluntarily opt out of the Congressional plan and pay for their own insurance out-of-pocket, at least after their term is over. Otherwise everyone in the country should be sworn into the House or Senate temporarily and we should just raise taxes across the board to cover the massive influx. Seriously, the best health insurance in the entire country is what the Senate voted for themselves. It lasts forever, no COBRA, no co-pays, no regionalization, and they never pay for it. Of course members of Congress don't see the health care and insurance issues as a crisis. They're the only people in the country who don't have to care.
I have one question. Why can we not regulate the snot out of the health insurance industry? Make the pricing structures transparent, make the back-room deals public, disclose what insurance providers pay for the same services compared to what the uninsured would pay. Auto insurance is heavily regulated after the states forced the insurers to disclose their common practices and decided those were unfair and discriminatory. Yet the auto insurance industry still makes money.
It seems like the problem is that the companies doing business in this field have been given a completely free hand and told to regulate themselves. That should not happen. Part of what we pay taxes for is for the government to use its heavy hand to put the brakes on discriminatory practices and to find out what the common practices are and tell us what is going on. That kind of regulation and oversight is not possible on an individual basis. It must come from the government.
Another issue with health insurance is how regionalized the options are. If you live in certain states, you can only get coverage from a limited number of options, sometimes just one option. If you have outside coverage, many procedures would not be covered because there is a certain density of subscribers before the insurance company is going to negotiate rates with the service providers. So people are forced to buy into the available plans. That kind of monopolistic practice is unfair and there should be redress available.
I see the touting of the public option as Congress abdicating its responsibility to legislatively provide oversight of an industry gone amok.
I don't necessarily think a public option is a bad idea, but the public option will be colored by "common" morality. I worry about the kind of medical care women will receive in a country that does not believe contraception is a right that should be available to all people.
Regardless of what is done, I think all members of Congress should put their health insurance under the same laws and restrictions and fees that they are legislating for the rest of the country. Also, any senator who votes against health care reform because of cost should voluntarily opt out of the Congressional plan and pay for their own insurance out-of-pocket, at least after their term is over. Otherwise everyone in the country should be sworn into the House or Senate temporarily and we should just raise taxes across the board to cover the massive influx. Seriously, the best health insurance in the entire country is what the Senate voted for themselves. It lasts forever, no COBRA, no co-pays, no regionalization, and they never pay for it. Of course members of Congress don't see the health care and insurance issues as a crisis. They're the only people in the country who don't have to care.
