Consensus emerging on universal healthcare - but single payer is off the table

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

After decades of failed efforts to reshape the nation's healthcare system, a consensus appears to be emerging in Washington about how to achieve the elusive goal of providing medical insurance to all Americans.

The answer, say leading groups of businesses, hospitals, doctors, labor unions and insurance companies -- as well as senior lawmakers on Capitol Hill and members of the new Obama administration -- is unprecedented government intervention to create a system of universal protection.

At the same time, those groups, which span the ideological and political spectrum, largely have agreed to preserve the employer-based system through which most Americans get their health insurance.

The idea of a federal, single-payer system patterned on those in Europe and Canada, long a dream of the political left, is now virtually off the table.

Rejected as well is the traditionally conservative concept, championed by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) during the presidential campaign, of reforming healthcare mainly by giving incentives for more Americans to buy insurance on their own.

...

Among the issues to be decided as more concrete proposals emerge in the months ahead is whether the roughly 46 million uninsured people in the U.S. will be pushed to buy private coverage or will be enrolled in a government insurance program, as some consumer groups want.

...

Also unresolved is what mechanisms might be created to force individuals or businesses to get insurance, both potentially contentious subjects.

And few have tackled how the government will control costs and set standards of care, proposals that raise the unpopular prospect of federal regulators dictating which doctors Americans can see and what drugs they can take.

...

"Once you get into the details, the consensus is going to vanish pretty quickly, I suspect," [stuart Butler, vice president for domestic policy at the conservative Heritage Foundation] said.

http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-...3383,full.story

[William33 110]

I don't want to pay more than the current (outrageous) amount for healthcare. Under this "dead" plan, the working stiffs would subsidize the rest. I don't think that plan will ever work and it didn't this time.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I don't think that plan will ever work and it didn't this time.

What plan?

[rocks 494]

Insurers worry they could lose customers to the government.

are we supposed to sympathize with them?

[William33 110]

I don't think that plan will ever work and it didn't this time.

What plan?

This:

"Rejected as well is the traditionally conservative concept, championed by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) during the presidential campaign, of reforming healthcare mainly by giving incentives for more Americans to buy insurance on their own.

...

Among the issues to be decided as more concrete proposals emerge in the months ahead is whether the roughly 46 million uninsured people in the U.S. will be pushed to buy private coverage or will be enrolled in a government insurance program, as some consumer groups want."

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I don't think that plan will ever work and it didn't this time.

What plan?

This:

"Rejected as well is the traditionally conservative concept, championed by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) during the presidential campaign, of reforming healthcare mainly by giving incentives for more Americans to buy insurance on their own.

...

Among the issues to be decided as more concrete proposals emerge in the months ahead is whether the roughly 46 million uninsured people in the U.S. will be pushed to buy private coverage or will be enrolled in a government insurance program, as some consumer groups want."

McCain didn't win, his plan (giving Americans tax credits to buy insurance) was never actually enacted. How do you figure it didn't work?

[William33 110]

I don't think that plan will ever work and it didn't this time.

What plan?

This:

"Rejected as well is the traditionally conservative concept, championed by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) during the presidential campaign, of reforming healthcare mainly by giving incentives for more Americans to buy insurance on their own.

...

Among the issues to be decided as more concrete proposals emerge in the months ahead is whether the roughly 46 million uninsured people in the U.S. will be pushed to buy private coverage or will be enrolled in a government insurance program, as some consumer groups want."

McCain didn't win, his plan (giving Americans tax credits to buy insurance) was never actually enacted. How do you figure it didn't work?

A Republican wasn't elected?

[Danno 1,228]

I am stunned at the number of folks who are "all for" universal healthcare... because they think they will be getting some bargain-store price from what they are paying now.

NOTHING GOES THROUGH WASHINGTON AND COMES OUT CHEAPER.

If it seems that way, it's only because someone else is paying for it.

Change we can all believe in.

[rocks 494]

I am stunned at the number of folks who are "all for" universal healthcare... because they think they will be getting some bargain-store price from what they are paying now.

NOTHING GOES THROUGH WASHINGTON AND COMES OUT CHEAPER.

If it seems that way, it's only because someone else is paying for it.

Change we can all believe in.

so you'd rather that people who couldn't afford healthcare died?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So McCain's plan was horrible and was rightly rejected - but rather than doing what is really necessary (a wholesale reform of the healthcare system that tears it apart to its foundations) we'll take the same leaky old house, paper over the cracks and flog it back to an unsuspecting mug (i.e. Us).

Job done. Apparently

Edited December 2, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

So McCain's plan was horrible and was rightly rejected - but rather than doing what is really necessary (a wholesale reform of the healthcare system that tears it apart to its foundations) we'll take the same leaky old house, paper over the cracks and flog it back to an unsuspecting mug (i.e. Us).

Job done. Apparently

Exactly. The Baucus 'plan' is a joke.

[William33 110]

So McCain's plan was horrible and was rightly rejected - but rather than doing what is really necessary (a wholesale reform of the healthcare system that tears it apart to its foundations) we'll take the same leaky old house, paper over the cracks and flog it back to an unsuspecting mug (i.e. Us).

Job done. Apparently

Exactly. The Baucus 'plan' is a joke.

What do the liberals suggest, that will not cost the taxpayer further tax?

[rocks 494]

So McCain's plan was horrible and was rightly rejected - but rather than doing what is really necessary (a wholesale reform of the healthcare system that tears it apart to its foundations) we'll take the same leaky old house, paper over the cracks and flog it back to an unsuspecting mug (i.e. Us).

Job done. Apparently

Exactly. The Baucus 'plan' is a joke.

What do the liberals suggest, that will not cost the taxpayer further tax?

war costs lots of money, do you agree with that?

[William33 110]

So McCain's plan was horrible and was rightly rejected - but rather than doing what is really necessary (a wholesale reform of the healthcare system that tears it apart to its foundations) we'll take the same leaky old house, paper over the cracks and flog it back to an unsuspecting mug (i.e. Us).

Job done. Apparently

Exactly. The Baucus 'plan' is a joke.

What do the liberals suggest, that will not cost the taxpayer further tax?

war costs lots of money, do you agree with that?

Indeed and without question. However, you can not cover all Americans with health insurance, without significant impact to the taxpayers. I am not willing to support that agenda.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

So McCain's plan was horrible and was rightly rejected - but rather than doing what is really necessary (a wholesale reform of the healthcare system that tears it apart to its foundations) we'll take the same leaky old house, paper over the cracks and flog it back to an unsuspecting mug (i.e. Us).

Job done. Apparently

Exactly. The Baucus 'plan' is a joke.

What do the liberals suggest, that will not cost the taxpayer further tax?

war costs lots of money, do you agree with that?

Indeed and without question. However, you can not cover all Americans with health insurance, without significant impact to the taxpayers. I am not willing to support that agenda.

Plenty of Americans feel that way, which is why the Baucus plan is what it is. It's essentially a way to pick the 'low hanging fruit' without the incredible expense of picking all the fruit. The hope is that if the number of uninsured can be reduced substantially, public pressure will dissipate.