5 freedoms you'd lose in health care reform

[ShockediSay]

Source: Fortune

If you read the fine print in the Congressional plans, you'll find that a lot of cherished aspects of the current system would disappear.

Read more: http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/health_care_reform_obama.fortune/index.htm?source=yahoo_quote

---

Special Interests My Fuzzy Fanny

The $ behind stories like this are

pimping lobbyists paid for by

bonus banging millionaire "health"

execs, against the interests of the

public.


?Why do we allow these multi-million dollar

lobby lawyer fees tax deductions?

[Dawgs]

1. This guy also thinks that McCain had the better health care plan.

And, writes articles defending the rich from Obama.

[WriteDown]

2. You've got it 100% backwards....

This bill is going to be the biggest payday for healthcare execs EVER. I've spoke before about it, but I have a childhood friend who is a CFO of a major healthcare corp and they are ready to pop the champagne if this ever passes.

[Autumn]

3. I kind of get the

feeling health care execs are writing the whole thing, behind the scenes. Like the bankruptcy laws.

[WriteDown]

4. I haven't talked to him about that...

but it's probably a valid suspicion.

[saigon68]

20. Yup the Senator from MBNA Joe Biden

He was responsible for that Cluster-Fuck

[No Elephants]

22. Which is a good reason why it should be single payer.

[WriteDown]

27. No argument from me...

Sweden or Switzerland. Both have excellent systems.

[peace13]

5. When we get the plan that Congress has it will be fine.

That is why we need one health care plan.

[rocktivity]

6. He left out the freedom to cash in

by lobbyists, health industry execs, and the national media.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[county worker]

7. This article talks to those who have a very good insurance plan in place.

I really don't think the bills in Congress will force people off their plans if the want to keep them. So I don't see how you risk losing freedoms. If anything you may gain rights if the insurance companies are forced to compete with better coverage in a public option.

The main thing to think about is that the majority of people don't have those freedoms now either because they have no insurance or they don't have very good plans.

Basically this argument plays to those who have good insurance and don't give a damn about anyone else but themselves.

[JDPriestly]

12. I have to say the author is to be commended for trying to pick chestnuts out of the coals

with his bare hands. Those medical savings accounts or whatever they are called may be a beancounter's dream, but they are an absolute annoyance to any normal person who does not want to have to track yet another small sum of money to make sure it is used up by the end of the year. Only a gambler could like those medical savings accounts. You have to guess at the beginning of the year how much you think you will need to spend on medical costs not covered by your insurance. There are all sorts of rules, and if, at the end of the year, you have not spend all the money on medical stuff, you forfeit the remaining amounts. These accounts are stupid. They make no sense for ordinary people.

And -- what's funny is the article laments the fact that all the insurance companies will have to offer the same basic coverage. That's what is so great about the plan. Families won't be faced with the shock of discovering after they get the hospital bill that very little of their medical care was actually covered under the new bargain plan their employer just enrolled them in. Shopping for medical insurance has not been fun because again you are supposed to know in advance whether you might need a wheelchair at some point or whether the package with the free crutches will cover your needs.

Face it, insurance industry, most Americans are NOT happy with the coverage and cost of the insurance now offered to them. That's one of the reasons they voted for Obama.

As for the insurance industry being pleased at the thought of mandatory coverage. So am I.

At the age of 50, I went back to school. I attended classes at night and worked all day. Unfortunately, I earned next to nothing and could not afford health insurance. Meanwhile, my blood pressure began to rise -- but I could not afford to go to the doctor. I now have insurance and control my blood pressure with a medication that costs pennies a day. How many Christmases with my kids will I miss thanks to those years when I should have been taking blood pressure medicine but could not afford the appointment to get the prescription?

Nearly every American has an experience like that. Very few are going to buy the propaganda in this Money magazine.

[pattmarty]

18. Whenever I hear "tax savings accounts" or "vouchers" I grab my wallet.

These are Republican answers for everything that ails the country. AND, they are designed for people with money. If you have the money you "invest" in these so called accounts or vouchers and it's another way for you to avoid taxes. It's just that, plain and simple more tax dodges for the wealthy.

[county worker]

24. Also when repukes talk about tax credits for health care it means you have to

spend the money first and collect when you file your income tax or lower your withholding by calculating what you are going to spend during the year which isn't easy. If you don't have the money to spend up front there is no tax credit. This also helps those who have the means to pay and they will get a new tax credit to boot!

[county worker]

23. I think you have medical savings accounts confused with cafeteria plans

Medical savings accounts do not go away at the end of the year. Basically you are putting money away to cover what you insurance doesn't cover. I have one and I have a payroll deduction for it and my employer pays into it. At the basic amount my employer will put in $900 a year and I can contribute that amount our more. I use it to cover my deductible which is $1,500. So I have $1,800 to cover it with and my employer paid $900 of it. That makes my deductible $600 out of my pocket. I can also buy medications and over the counter drugs with it. If at the end of the year I do not use all the $1,800 it rolls over to the next year and another $1,800 is added on.

[JDPriestly]

30. When I had the plan I had to put in all the money and any money not

used was lost. Maybe there are two plans. Maybe they changed the law since the early 2000s.

[TrogL]

8. Point #5 is ridiculous

In Canada, I cannot phone up a cardiologist and demand an appointment - I have to be referred by a physician. This is done so that my medical information is correctly communicated to the cardiologist and avoid wasting the cardiologist's time with bogus patients (eg. pulled intercostal muscles mimicking a heart attack).

My doctor's office arranges the appointments. The cardiologist's office makes sure the test results, diagnosis, or whatever else my doctor needs to know gets back to him.

[jpak]

11. While working in Canada, I had to see a cardiologist for a job-related physical stress test

My doctor set it up and it was done 2 days later - at 1/3 the cost of what it would have cost in the states.

IMHO, Health Canada is far far FAR superior to the American system...

[JDPriestly]

13. Note, you can only go to specialists in your PPO in most current plans.

The public option will probably give people more choice than they now have, and the private options will probably be required to refer cases that really need it to specialists more quickly. This is just a ridiculous point. If you are on a PPO, your choice of specialists is extremely limited.

I enrolled in Kaiser after having been on a PPO for a few years. I had conferred with my PPO doctor and then specialist for a genetic condition that caused the fascia in my hand to harden and pull my fingers in toward my palm. They couldn't help me. My Kaiser specialist told me to put Vitamin E oil and Aloe Vera oil on my hands and then come back for surgery -- and guess what, I put the oils on my hand as instructed and the condition improved to the point that I didn't need the surgery. That's the kind of care that we need. Surgery would have made my PPO doctor a little richer, but the natural remedy helped me. That is the kind of thing that Obama was talking about in his press conference.

Conditions cannot always be so easily remedied, but right now the incentives are fixed so that the doctor will reach for the solution that generates the most income for his or her practice. The doctor's only interest should be in helping the patient, not how to maximize profits.

[ieoeja]

29. Depends on how regulated it gets.

And you KNOW future Republicans will regulate this to death "to save costs." My one big concern about health care reform is that we might end up with a mess at some point because the Republics will WANT to make it a mess to discredit it.

That and the fact that the big economic benefit to this country is erased by not making it single payer. Without single payer domestic businesses still have a competitive disadvantage with their foreign counterparts that do not have to provide employer health benefits.





I had a PPO when I broke my hand. I went to the emergency room that evening, of course. He splinted me and gave me the name of an orthopedic surgeon. Two weeks later I had surgery.




Six months before I had my hand broken, my friend broke his hand. He went to the emergency room that evening, of course. They splinted him and, seeing that he had an HMO, told him he would have to see his primary for a referral to ortho. A week later his primary referred him to ortho whom he saw a few days after that. The ortho could not operate until the HMO approved. By the time the HMO approved, the bones had begun to fuse and had to be re-broken. However, this procedure also needed prior HMO approval. And would also require the addition of pins that wouldn't have been necessary had the hand been operated on immediately. All of this also meant it would take longer to heal.

As a security officer, my friend was not allowed to work, and draw a paycheck, for almost half a year. He'd have been back on the job after a month had he had a PPO.




Before I had a PPO, I had an HMO. Turned out I also had skin cancer. The primary referred me to a dermatologist who a week later did the biopsy. He then told me the location of the cancer required a certain type of specialist, but that the HMO rules required referral through a succession of other specialists before getting to the one I needed. That is exactly what happened. And once there the procedure was further delayed by HMO review of everything before he was allowed to operate.

Had I had a PPO, the entire process would have been done in a month. Instead it took five months (and another year of fighting over payment).

[surrealAmerican]

9. What a load of rubbish!

They seem to assume that people are choosing minimal plans because they want to pay more out of pocket, rather than "choosing" them because that's all they can afford.

[ashling]

19. You are almost right

I believe that it should properly be called a load of crap. :shrug:

[JDPriestly]

10. Actually, I like a lot of the provisions that Money magazine criticizes.

The whole point is that sick people (according to the article mostly old people with unhealthy lifestyles) have to be able to afford insurance. Of course, the healthy (and young) have to pay more to cover the sick. That's the point. Of course, those who do not abuse drugs or alcohol have to pay for treatment for those who do.

Guess what! The dirty little secret is that those who are healthy, those who do not abuse drugs or alcohol already have to pay for the care that those who are unhealthy and who abuse drugs or alcohol get. The unhealthy and those who abuse drugs or alcohol end up uninsured and suddenly appear in the emergency room at your hospital where the doctor who is supposed to be taking care of real emergencies gives those uninsured people the most expensive care in the system -- a hospital bed.

That's what this whole healthcare reform is supposed to end -- the extremely expensive yet inadequate care that people get when they can't afford to visit a general practitioner or by that asthma medicine or whatever medicine they need.

You can't cure everything with orange juice and a sprint in the park. Those things keep you healthy when you already are healthy, but they won't do much for that ovarian cyst or that broken arm.

The Money magazine article is trying to paint a dark picture with rosy facts. They will probably catch a reader's heart here or there, but most people are going to like what Money is trying to claim is horrible. I think this article will backfire.

[JDPriestly]

14. The truth is here (from the website of my Congressman Xavier Becerra)

LOWER COSTS FOR CONSUMERS

* No more co-pays or deductibles for preventive care
* An annual cap on out-of-pocket expenses—keeping Americans from financial ruin
* An end to rate increases for pre-existing conditions, gender or occupation
* Group rates of a national pool if you buy your own plan
* Guaranteed affordable oral health, hearing and vision care for kids

GREATER CHOICE

* If you like your doctor and current plan you can keep them
* More choice, with a public health insurance option competing with private insurers

STABILITY & PEACE OF MIND

* End to denials for pre-existing conditions like heart disease, cancer or diabetes
* Get needed care, no lifetime limits
* Job and life choices no longer based on health care coverage

HIGHER QUALITY

* Doctors, not insurance giants, in charge
* More family doctors and nurses entering the workforce, helping to guarantee access
* Benefits must include mental health

http://becerra.house.gov/HoR/CA31/News/Press+Releases/2009/071409+BECERRA+PRAISES+HEALTH+REFORM+BILL+ANNOUNCED+BY+HOUSE+COMMITTEES.htm

Congressman Becerra graduated from Stanford law school and is married to a doctor. He serves a very low-income community. He understands health care and economics. He is a man you can trust.

Can you trust Money magazine? In my opinion, no.

[Lifelong Protester]

15. I am glad someone posted that list of information as I saw it

also on Congressman Ron Kind's website (actually an information email he sent to all constituents who are signed up for his alerts).

I think the Fortune article (don't you just love the name of that magazine? :sarcasm: By its title alone, do you think many uninsured or underinsured folks are taking the time to read it, online or otherwise??? I caught it on the CNN page, I know, shouldn't have looked...) should be seen for what it's worth~more propaganda from the elite class and their literate toadies who don't want the status quo upset.

[damntexdem]

16. Five things we would lose:

1) freedom to be denied basic benefits -- the plan would set minimum requirements, so that we couldn't be denied the basics.
2) freedom to be priced out of healthcare because of our health conditions -- the plan would not require full community rating but would limit rates to twice the lowest rates charged.
3) freedom to be ripped-off by "tax-free" plans that confiscate one's donations if they are not used in a given period. Unfortunately, the plan will still allow deductibles that are too high, so would still allow the freedom to pay very-high prices for care, and some would still be free to be bankrupted by such costs.
4) freedom to be forced into plans that rip us off -- although unfortunately the plan will likely still provide us the freedom to lack a choice to opt for the public plan if we are covered by employer plans that don't allow for it.
5) freedom to be denied our choice of providers by private, for-profit bureaucracies -- well, actually, the health reform plan will unfortunately not take away much of this freedom at all.

Yeah, five freedoms that we can, and must, do without!

[pattmarty]

17. I am not optimistic about the final "reform" bill. But the way things.............

............are in this country today (and the way they have been for 30+ yrs) with big corporations and big money "bribing" ALL our politicians, if we get a bill that has no "caps", no more pre-existing conditions, no more "rescissions" and lowers co payments and premiums, It will be better than it was and no more than that. As far as Obama goes, I was with him up until about a month or so ago and now my feeling is that he is better than a Republican would be and that's about it. Bill Clinton without the blowjob.

[harmonicon]

21. I want all of these fuckers to die, but to suffer first

Fucking worthless pieces of shit. How fucking dare they deny healthcare to the poor just so they can stay just a tad bit more wealthy. Fucking scum of the earth.

The main lie here is that it would somehow become illegal or impossible to go to a private doctor's office or hospital. What bullshit. Even here in the UK where there are loads of NHS doctors' offices and hospitals, there are also private doctors and hospitals which the wealthy can pay for out of pocket or through supplemental private insurance. So, boo fucking who - you'd have to pay more taxes so that all citizens could be treated as human beings, and then maybe have to pay a little extra for the special treatment that you now get now under the unjust system.

[ArcticFox]

25. Point #3 is lies

1. Employer matching to health savings account contributions is voluntary. The article makes it seem mandatory.
2. You cannot pay premiums out of your health savings account. First you need to buy the insurance plan, then you can establish the HSA.

The article also fails to mention that high deductible health plans can cost almost as much as an HMO that covers pretty much everything.

Its also an extreme hassle trying to get a good deal, because its virtually impossible to figure out how much something should cost (i.e., what an insurance company would pay). Sometimes a doc will charge less if you pay in cash, but there's a severe lack of information out there. It's not like they post the prices of every procedure at the Doctor's office like at McDonalds.

Finally, HSAs have the unfortunate consequence of powerfully dissuading use of the emergency room. When our daughter was acting sick while we were out of town, we actually sat around for some time thinking whether it would just cost too much to take her. Fortunately, it turned out to be nothing, but if you have to be thinking about money when a life might be on the line, that's no good.

Any way you look at it, the system is broken. My employer pays for my HMO only. I have to pay an additional $6000 (HSA premium only -- add hundreds of dollars for each office visit) to $10,500 (PPO) every year just to cover my wife and daughter. (And you can just forget about dental and vision). That is just simply insane.

When I was a child, my father's employer covered our entire family with a good PPO, including vision and dental.

[alfredo]

26. Push the Lewin Group/United Health Care connection. They are the

ones pushing the misinformation on health care reform. The Repubs are citing their "research" as reason to defeat reform.

[alcibiades_mystery]

28. EDITORIAL...NOT A NEWS ARTICLE

This is the bullshit opinion of the bullshitting capitalist insurance company TOOL editor of FORTUNE Magazine.

This is NOT a FUCKING NEWS ARTICLE. Please post in correct forum.

[meow2u3]

31. The 5 REAL freedoms you will lose under Obama's health care plan

1. The freedom to choose between paying exorbitant premiums for substandard coverage or go without medical insurance altogether.

2. The freedom to be denied coverage the insurance company led you to believe you had when you first signed up for the health care plan.

3. The freedom to be discriminated against if you're sick or have a pre-existing condition.

4. The freedom to go bankrupt should you suffer a catastrophic illness or injury, despite being "insured."

5. The freedom to be deceived by fine print only a lawyer can understand.