SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 12:55 PM
Original message |
Will the current HC bill, as it is now... |
|
...allow for States to adopt a single-payer system if they choose?
I'd think with this "mandate" clause it would not.
---
|
valerief
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 01:00 PM
Response to Original message |
1. That would help to hold down costs! How would UHC benefit from that?? nt |
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
2. yes for the Senate version, not sure about the House. |
SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. they need to preserve that |
Neecy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 01:01 PM
Response to Original message |
3. I think that provision was proposed.... |
|
And was knocked down by the Blue Dogs in the House.
|
Laelth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 01:13 PM
Response to Original message |
5. The Kucinich Amendment to the house bill would have allowed it. |
|
It was stripped out in the House conference by Nancy Pelosi (who acted, almost certainly, on direct orders from the President).
cali, above, says the Senate bill allows it. I don't know for sure, but I very much doubt it.
One of the primary purposes of this bill is to prevent any state from ever enacting a single-payer system. At least three states have already applied for Federal ERISA law waivers so that they can reform health care on their own. California, for its part, has passed a law enacting a single-payer system twice. Both times the Governator vetoed it. If California gets a Democratic governor in 2010, it's very likely to pass a single-payer system, and that's why it's so important to the health insurance industry to pass this bill now.
The real purpose of the bill is to prevent single-payer systems from catching on and spreading from state to state (as happened in Canada).
Kill the bill. Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.
:dem:
-Laelth
|
ThomWV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |
6. If it does industrial-medicine will knock them off one by one - like ducks in a barrel. |
|
Edited on Thu Dec-24-09 01:15 PM by ThomWV
They defeated a national plan, the states will be easy.
|
Cleita
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Dec-24-09 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Why can't the states go into the insurance business and offer |
|
a non-profit comprehensive health package that people can buy into with a sliding scale of affordability? Apparently the bill says you have to have insurance. It's not telling you that you have to buy from Blue Cross or Aetna.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 07:58 PM
Response to Original message |