Open thread on U.S. Supreme Court’s consideration of health care law
Health care arguments start today before the U.S. Supreme Court, and the topic will dominate headlines throughout the week.
The case is arguably the biggest topic in national politics this week.
Post your thoughts about the health care law and the case in the Supreme Court here.
March 26, 2012 - 11:40 AM
We all have a right to drive a volvo. These are the safest cars on the road and making me drive something else because of my income is unconstitutional. The guvenment should subsidize my car purchase.
I firmly believe that no matter which way the SCOTUS rules,
cost of health care will increase for everyone.
About 95% of what goes on in Washington ends up costing
everyone.
#2 That’s a pretty good bet. Health care was skyrocketing even before the act.
I’m sure everybody realizes that the state forces you to buy car insurance or pay what is essentially a fine or a fee, right?
Rob you are right. The biggest reason for high healthcare is the “group benefits package” so highly touted. When insurance companies are forced to cover anyone and everyone duriing an open enrollement they lose the ability to be competitive in the marketplace. They MUST charge enough to make a good ROI for the investors and the only way to be cerian they will is to gouge each policy holder
Gdad @2:43.
But, I am sure you realize that someone who does not drive or own a car does NOT have to purchase car insurance, right?
Even someone who DOES own a car, once it is paid for, they are not required to purchase insurance to protect their OWN car..they are only required to protect the “other guy”, so there is really no comparison between having to buy an insurance policy for the priviledge of driving, and having to purchase an “approved” health insurance policy simply because you woke up this morning in America.
Name one American who will never use the health care system?
If you do not understand how the whole “insurance” model works and what it takes to be effective and profitable, that is not my problem.
If you do not want a single payer, government run system, then you have to have all people who will use the health care system paying into the insurance that runs it. Period. The analogy to car or renter’s insurance required for users, child support, back taxes, fines and garnishments and a whole host of other issues where someone is “forced” to comply, or to adhere to the rules is well within the discussion. Everyone will use the health care system and everyone should be compelled to be part of paying for it. You cannot have it both ways and expect to ever lower costs or have people be responsible for themselves. That has been a joke. On us.
It’s going to be overturned unfortunately. When the chips are down for something very important (i.e. Bush vs Gore), Kennedy always sides with the GOP.
Sharon, you do realize that you & I pay for people’s healthcare when they go to a “non profit” emergency room, do not pay, & the hospital writes their healthcare costs off, then increases their fees.
So why not have people pay (health insurance)for their own healthcare, if they can afford it?
I listened to a discussion on the health care law driving into work this morning, in which one of the panelists raised an interesting point: If the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate unconstitutional, should the 1986 law that mandates that hospitals provide emergency care to anyone regardless of ability to pay be stricken as well, either by the court or by Congress?
As always, I’m interested in our readers’ thoughts on this topic?
– Mason Adams
Mason, I believe the distinction with the 1986 law is an important one. For profit hospitals are engaged in “interstate commerce” as has been absurdly perverted and deifined by the Supreme Court. In the case of Obamacare, “Congress exercised unprecedented and unbounded power in passing Obamacare. Although Congress has the power to regulate commerce between states, it does not have the power to order commerce into existence so it can regulate it. By compelling Americans to purchase health insurance, this is precisely what the individual mandate does.”
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/obamacare-both-unnecessary-improper
I would argue that in both cases the Federal Government lacks the authority to legislate or regulate these matters and that the 10th Amendment very specifically reserves those powers not explicitly granted to our federal government remain with the States. Government by it’s very nature is an inefficient allocator of resources and the further away that government is from the citizens it supposedley serves the more inefficient it becomes. Anyone who believes federal programming can improve the quality and/or cost of healthcare is sadly mistaken.
Garfield, tell that to the people who live in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisana. I doubt they would agree that the Federal Gov’t does not need to be involved in healthcare. The infant mortality rate for the entire US in 2009 was 6.4 deaths per 1,000 live births; 513 deaths per 1,000 live births in Alabama in 2004-2006 followed by Mississippi.
This is an odd reversal of roles. The right wing wants a segment of our population to have their healthcare paid for by another large segment of our population. The right wing is supporting a bunch of free loaders. Then on the left they don’t want people getting something for free. Now we have right wingers funding abortions, drug abuse treatment, gang bangers, illegal immigrants and all sorts of things they would scream bloody murder over if they were mandated to pay for them.
Seems simple. If you can’t pay for healthcare you don’t get healthcare except from charitable organizations.
I read a good car analogy today. The current system is like me going to the car lot and the dealer must give me a car if I need one. I don’t pay for it. The dealer raises the car prices so everyone else pays for the free ones.
Need and proper authority are two very different animals. Despite those tragic numbers, Americans have the highest standard of living in the world because we value individualism over collectivism and understand that an incentivzed private sector delivers more good to society than any pandering government agency ever could.
this bill is toast
Sandi @ 9:42. How about if I ask you to name me ONE American who you know for a fact is going to use “Health Care” beyond their ability to pay for it? Not everyone who is born is going to need the emergency room, or an extended stay in a Hospital. As a matter of fact…MOST won’t.
By your post, I am not sure that YOU understand the “insurance model” and how to make it effective, profitable AND affordable. I feel that IS my problem because the way things are NOW, the Insurance AND Health Care are priced out of many people’s reach and we have many more uninsured because they just can’t afford it. Rather than trying to get back to an insurance model that is affordable..we have the Government telling us that we are going to pay for Health Insurance whether we can afford it or not, or pay a fine, without doing ANYTHING to stem the rising costs.
The Insurance model: Refer to my paragraph above. Health Insurance companies were there to provide a “safety net” ( one of your favorite words Sandi). They were able to do this because they knew that out of their group of members…MOST people who paid in would never need the service that they provided, but they would pay in anyway, just to have that safety net.
Somewhere along the line….we demanded that they start paying for things that most everyone of their members WOULD need and use….Doctor’s visits, medicine, bloodwork, and we demanded that they provide FREE mammograms, pap smears etc….we COULD have let them just stay a safety net for catastrophic accidents, or illness, but no, we were now demanding that they pay for everything medical in our lives. So, what happens, they have to raise their prices…because now they are no longer just a “safety net”….they no longer could collect a little from everyone to cover the FEW who WOULD need their service, they had to start basing their prices on what ALL of their members would be asking them to pay for.
Then we have the Dr’s. and Hosptals…they had increased costs due to increased paperwork, increased staff to cover the insurance claims etc..so they raised their prices too..and in some cases raised them a LOT for things that the Insurance Company was going to pay for,…and we didn’t notice because we didn’t see the bill..The Dr.s and Hospitals had no reason to try and control costs, to be competitive, because they were just sending the bill to our insurance company…WE weren’t paying it out of our pockets..or so we thought, not taking into consideration the high costs of Health Insurance.
Then we have the Malpractice claims and the insurance that the Doctor’s have to pay because of them…and ALL the tests they have to run to try to be sure they don’t “miss”. anything. When I was seeing the Doc regularly for my HBP and he was giving me meds for it…if I had to pay out of pocket, I am SURE I would have said…”Hey Doc..I can’t afford $135 dollars every couple of months to have you do bloodwork and have it come back EXACTLY the same..how about if you just tell me what symptoms to watch for that might mean that my kidney’s or liver are being effected by the meds and I will let you know if I have any of those symptoms and we will do more bloodwork THEN!! Okay?”
Then we have the poor people who are caught in a catastrophy with no insurance..maybe they are between jobs etc..they are charged what the INSURANCE companies have been paying. I saw an itemized bill from a Hospital when I was working in collections at a lawyers office and had to call this young lady and tell her that if she didn’t start making payments on that hospital bill, we were going to have to garnish her wages. And she explained that she couldn’t afford to have her wages garnished, she had a child to feed etc…and that it was not LIKE she just decided to visit the Hospital for a check up that she couldn’t pay for, she was very ill and was taken there. When I was looking at her itmeized bill….I got PO’ed…it was ridiculous what they charged her for simple things that she could have provided for herself at a LOT less cost. For example….when she asked for a Tylenol for pain….a SINGLE tylenol..they charged her $10 to administer it. She was having her “monthlies” at the time and they charged her $4 for every tampon that she used..they charged her for the box of gloves they had in her room.. (what, is NOTHING provided with what they charge for the “room”?) And this was a LONG time ago…before Obama OR Bush..so, I am not being political here..it is just plain out ridiculous and I can only imagine what those types of charges are NOW!!
But, WE let it get that way..by depending on insurance to pay for things that we COULD and SHOULD be paying for ourselves…to keep insurance costs down..which would ALSO help to keep CARE costs down too…because when WE have to pay for it…we will shop around to get the best deal.
If you don’t believe me…check into the big decrease in costs for Lasix eye surgery..which is NOT covered by most insurance companies.
Sure Sharon, I can name you many Americans who I “know for a fact is going to use “Health Care” beyond their ability to pay for it”. My preacher who has Lymphoma. My brother who had cancer, my husband who had cancer, a co-worker who died of heart disease, a neighbor who got cancer and lost their home and all they owned and now lives with their sister. Are you really that clueless on what surgery, cancer treatment and serious illness can cost a family that actually has possessions, a home, some savings and whatever else they can “take”? Sure, if you are poor, renting, and have little, nothing they do can actually hurt you. Those of us who have worked all our lives and have or are about to pay off our home, have a lot to lose and cannot afford NOT to be without insurance.
Do you have any idea of the cost of hip replacement, knee replacement, heart disease care, diabetes care, cancer care? The vast and overwhelming majority of Americans will need health care, accident care, emergency care and aging/degenerating care.
The ONLY WAY you make insurance affordable is by having more participants so that the risk is shared and expense lessened for all. It appears YOU do not grasp the “insurance model” if you think otherwise. The reason people cannot afford it is because “Insurance AND Health Care are priced out of many people’s reach” BECAUSE too few people are paying for insurance and their own care. People with insurance take up the slack. DO you really not know that?
If we all pay for Health Insurance (subsidized if needed) we will all be able to afford it. You cannot do “ANYTHING to stem the rising costs” until you manage and lessen the “free care” for those without health insurance that is never paid for except in higher fees to the rest of us. Insurance for all, will do that.
Are you kidding me when you say: “Health Insurance companies were there to provide a “safety net”? Insurance is a for profit, pure capitalism structure that works like any shared task/problem. The more people involved and paying, the less each has to pay and the better the service. It is as close to a no-brainer as you can get.
Unless young and healthy people are in the insurance pool, they lose or pay out too much money and since their profits come first, premiums have to rise. Unless young and healthy people are in the insurance pool “MOST people who paid in” WILL need the service. Are you seriously that uninformed?
Ask any group administrator how big the cushion is between premiums collected and money paid in services. One transplant patient in an entire business skews the whole pool ratio; As can one heart disease, one diabetes, one cancer even. You are fooling only yourself.
Coverage is negotiated and it is up to business owners what is covered. When you get a personal policy it is the same way. Insurance companies know what cost is a bargain and what cost is a killer and they push one and discourage the other. Preventive care, check-ups, and screenings save them money in the long run so they are covered. A flu shot is cheaper than a hospital stay if you get a bad flu. Again do you seriously not know who decides and prices what?
Every company and absolutely every individual policy can easily choose only “catastrophic coverage”. Again, do you not know this?
You are wrong about what was “demanded” and how the system came to be the way it is and as usual your bitter dislike of anyone who disagrees with your pronouncements and your aversion to any fact that does not fit your chosen mindset is making you look foolish and making you spread distorted information.
You are simply wrong and misleading people. Nothing new there.