So what would a bipartisan health care reform bill include?

[SnakeBoy]

Hey, works for me. Are you serious that you think it would pass easily?

Absolutely. If Obama scratched the current plan and submitted this plan he would be in a position to do several things. First he would see a big jump in his approval ratings which would give him more leverage. Second he would put Republicans in the position of voting against the very things they have been claiming would fix the system. Third he would put any Democrats who opposed it in the position of voting against the very things they have been claiming would fix the system.

[SnakeBoy]

everyone will have to pay more and get less.

Or reduce healthcare costs. See my first post.

[spursncowboys]

that's a killer because it'd necessarily lead to mandates. Unless there's no kind of price control mechanism (so insurers can ask for a price nobody would be willing to pay) and in that case, what's exactly the point?

To me:

1. Tort reform
2. Free trade on drugs (re-importation)
3. Allow individuals and employers to purchase insurance across state lines
4. Allow individuals and small businesses to band together increasing their bargaining power with insurance providers
5. Cut the government waste in bureocracies like the u.s. Department of health and give that money saved to citizens who can use it to purchase health-care if they want to.

+1

[George Gervin's Afro]

John McCain is quoted this morning as saying that he thinks Obama should start over with Health Care, and actually make an attempt at bipartisan authorship of such a bill. Presumably, Republicans would want tort reform to be included in any health care reform. What say you, forum members? Who on this board would participate in health care reform efforts, and what would you want included and excluded?

I, for one, believe that there is a need for Health Care reform, but I also think that this bill is awful, and that the dems have given up WAY to much to their own members to pass something. I would want a new bill to include:

Some measure of tort reform (not doing away with all possilbities of suits, but some limitations), and

A requirement that Insurance companies not be allowed to turn people down for coverage if they have 'a pre-existing condition'.

What else would anybody say we HAD to have, and if you don't like one of these, would you agree to allow it in for the purpose of having some sort of reform? For example, what about universal coverage (and if you feel it has to be part of it, how would you pay for it?)?

Gentlemen, start your keyboards!

What McCain and republicans don't get is that they are in the minority. When you are in the minority you can't dictate terms of the debate. I'm all for taking all things under conisderation but the minority must accept that not all of their ideas will be included in the final legislation. The problem is that the GOP is acting as if they are in still the majority.

[coyotes_geek]

Or reduce healthcare costs. See my first post.

#2 & #3 definitely need to happen. And I could live with #1 as long as there were iron-clad assurances that the public co-op would have to be self sustaining.

I'd also like to see what could be done in the way of encouraging private charitable health insurance providers.

Even then, I don't think that's enough to bridge the entire funding gap we're looking at today.

[EVAY]

#2 & #3 definitely need to happen. And I could live with #1 as long as there were iron-clad assurances that the public co-op would have to be self sustaining.

I'd also like to see what could be done in the way of encouraging private charitable health insurance providers.

Even then, I don't think that's enough to bridge the entire funding gap we're looking at today.

Now see, this is cool! Between Snake Boy and Coyote we have beginning.

I also like the idea of taxing junk food. I like it a lot! And I bet if we took Teysha Blue's suggestion of expert contributors, they would also be willing to tax junk food. One of the reasons junk food is so popular is that it is relatively cheap and readily available. Taxing it heavily would alter both of those.

[ElNono]

1.) Public Option/Co-Op: A governement non profit that would be required to be self sustaining after the initial start up costs.
2.) Allow private insurers to sell policies across states lines.
3.) Meaningful TORT Reform

Passes easily. Bipartisanship isn't that difficult.

Your point 1 is impossible without strict price controls in place, something no republican will vote for.
2 and 3 won't reduce costs in any meaningful way, so it's kind pointless...

[Stump]

Not trying to shoot down the idea, but how exactly would the junk food tax be enforced? Would there be a single tax rate that either would or would not be enforced, or would the tax vary based on how bad exactly foods were? Who would determine the standards of what falls in what category?

[SnakeBoy]

Even then, I don't think that's enough to bridge the entire funding gap we're looking at today.

True, healthcare costs will never fix medicare but they could extend the lifespan of the program. I think saving medicare permanently would require increasing the cost and increasing the age for eligibilty but that would destroy any chance for healthcare reform to pass so they would need to deal with that seperately. That's the same reason I left off pre-existing conditions coverage since it requires a mandate to work. So I would just stick with what could be passed and have a positive affect and deal with those issues seperately. Then again I have no power.

[jack sommerset]

Now see, this is cool! Between Snake Boy and Coyote we have beginning.

I also like the idea of taxing junk food. I like it a lot! And I bet if we took Teysha Blue's suggestion of expert contributors, they would also be willing to tax junk food. One of the reasons junk food is so popular is that it is relatively cheap and readily available. Taxing it heavily would alter both of those.

Having a job, paying taxes is a start. It's a start for me and millions of other Americans. You Give me some scared tactic example, the sky is falling bull of some hard working American getting some bad lotto medical need and for this, you want to give everyone free healthcare. Sorry not free, you want Americans that work pay for everyone. We will take your movie of the week case or cases like that, case by case. Son, if you want Americans to pay for other Americans healthcare you should want them to help.

Taxing junk food. I don't want to pay for your healthcare and I don't want you telling me what I can eat by making me pay more!

[SnakeBoy]

I also like the idea of taxing junk food.

Don't need to tax it, just quit subsidizing it.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Having a job, paying taxes is a start. It's a start for me and millions of other Americans. You Give me some scared tactic example, the sky is falling bull of some hard working American getting some bad lotto medical need and for this, you want to give everyone free healthcare. Sorry not free, you want Americans that work pay for everyone. We will take your movie of the week case or cases like that, case by case. Son, if you want Americans to pay for other Americans healthcare you should want them to help.

Taxing junk food. I don't want to pay for your healthcare and I don't want you telling me what I can eat by making me pay more!

poor kids with irresponsible parents.. that was easy. How do you suggest we work the case by case edict jack?

just stop eating junk food jack..you're such an idiot..

[coyotes_geek]

Your point 1 is impossible without strict price controls in place, something no republican will vote for.
2 and 3 won't reduce costs in any meaningful way, so it's kind pointless...

If the public option is impossible without price controls then that's a pretty damning admission that the public option is incapable of providing health care as efficiently as private insurers. In other words, it defeats the entire point of having it in the first place.

As for 2 and 3 not reducing costs in a meaningful way, perhaps. But if the point is to make health care cheaper, and those are steps in the right direction they're still worth doing.

Not trying to shoot down the idea, but how exactly would the junk food tax be enforced? Would there be a single tax rate that either would or would not be enforced, or would the tax vary based on how bad exactly foods were? Who would determine the standards of what falls in what category?

If I'm not mistaken, don't all restaurants have to provide nutrional information for their menu items? It shouldn't be too hard for the FDA and/or some panel of nutrionalists to establish guidelines based on calories per serving size. Just come up with some system to rate the food and apply a tax on the food items that rate above it.

True, healthcare costs will never fix medicare but they could extend the lifespan of the program. I think saving medicare permanently would require increasing the cost and increasing the age for eligibilty but that would destroy any chance for healthcare reform to pass so they would need to deal with that seperately. That's the same reason I left off pre-existing conditions coverage since it requires a mandate to work. So I would just stick with what could be passed and have a positive affect and deal with those issues seperately. Then again I have no power.

What's probably going to happen with medicare is that congress will wait until we're right on the verge and then do the minimal package of tax increases / benefit cuts that will back us away from the cliff. Then they'll just ignore it until we're right back at the cliff again.

[doobs]

That's a killer because it'd necessarily lead to mandates. Unless there's no kind of price control mechanism (so insurers can ask for a price nobody would be willing to pay) and in that case, what's exactly the point?

To me:

1. Tort reform
2. Free trade on drugs (re-importation)
3. Allow individuals and employers to purchase insurance across state lines
4. Allow individuals and small businesses to band together increasing their bargaining power with insurance providers
5. Cut the government waste in bureocracies like the U.S. Department of Health and give that money saved to citizens who can use it to purchase health-care if they want to.

The problem with tort reform is that it accomplishes so little, and the cost of adding it to a bipartisan compromise would be huge. (What would Democrats get in return?)

I would add eliminating the healthcare benefits exemption in the tax code. You can call it a tax hike if you like, but it would certainly help make people more cost-conscious when making healthcare decisions.

I would also add means-tested healthcare vouchers for those who can't afford to purchase insurance on their own. Democrats would like that, I think.

[jack sommerset]

poor kids with irresponsible parents.. that was easy. How do you suggest we work the case by case edict jack?

just stop eating junk food jack..you're such an idiot..

[jack sommerset]

It's sooooo funny that some people EXPECT working Americans to pay for everyone else.

And then on top of that, tell us what we can eat!

[coyotes_geek]

Taxing junk food. I don't want to pay for your healthcare and I don't want you telling me what I can eat by making me pay more!

And those of us who actually take care of ourselves don't want the fatties we share insurance policies with driving up our premiums.

[George Gervin's Afro]

In a phone interview with CNN, Bauer, a Republican candidate for governor, said, "I wish I had used a different metaphor." Bauer told an audience Friday that people receiving government assistance are like "stray animals" because "they breed" and "don't know any better."

Were you quoted by CNN in the last couple of days?

[jack sommerset]

And those of us who actually take care of ourselves don't want the fatties we share insurance policies with driving up our premiums.

Ask the insurance companies to put you in a pool of people who don't eat twinkies. There is some reform.

[SnakeBoy]

And those of us who actually take care of ourselves don't want the fatties we share insurance policies with driving up our premiums.

I don't think he understands how health insurance works.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Ask the insurance companies to put you in a pool of people who don't eat twinkies. There is some reform.

I see..your ideas are based on asking insurance companies nicely.. brilliant!

[coyotes_geek]

It's sooooo funny that some people EXPECT working Americans to pay for everyone else.

And then on top of that, tell us what we can eat!

Step 1 - Jack eats whatever he wants and gets fat.
Step 2 - Jack's obesity creates health issues for Jack.
Step 3 - Jack EXPECTS all the working Americans he shares an insurance policy with to cover the costs of treating his illnesses. Illnesses which were completely preventable.

[SnakeBoy]

2 and 3 won't reduce costs in any meaningful way, so it's kind pointless...

Then there is no reason for you to be so opposed to them.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Step 1 - Jack eats whatever he wants and gets fat.
Step 2 - Jack's obesity creates health issues for Jack.
Step 3 - Jack EXPECTS all the working Americans he shares an insurance policy with to cover the costs of treating his illnesses. Illnesses which were completely preventable.

Again, jack doesn't think things through.. his world is in black and white.

[jack sommerset]

Step 1 - Jack eats whatever he wants and gets fat.
Step 2 - Jack's obesity creates health issues for Jack.
Step 3 - Jack EXPECTS all the working Americans he shares an insurance policy with to cover the costs of treating his illnesses. Illnesses which were completely preventable.

What on earth are you talking about? I'm not fat, I don't have a illness and I am not asking anyone to pay for me. Why would you make that up?