Reconciliation, the public option, and Demcare revival
Looks like the Demcare peddlers have gotten a second wind. Pay attention to the regrouping of Senate lefties:
New York senators Chuck Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand join new public option push
Udall supports reconciliation for health care reform
Mikulski, Cardin support public option revival effort
Bayh Open To Reconciliation For Health Care Reform
Biden Could Force Reconciliation Through the Senate
Sebelius: White House may fight for public option in health bill
Tea Party counterforces, activate!
***
Handy background on reconciliation here and here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama Chief of Staff: No More Compromise on Contraceptive Mandate
February 12, 2012 04:26 PM by Doug Powers
114 Comments
Choosing Life and Beating the Odds
February 11, 2012 11:50 AM by Doug Powers
32 CommentsObama’s fraudulent abortion mandate “accommodation” Updated: Prez condemns “cynical” opposition
February 10, 2012 10:05 AM by Michelle Malkin
245 Comments‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’
February 10, 2012 09:06 AM by Michelle Malkin
199 CommentsCPAC vs. the Occupiers: Keep calm and carry silly string
February 9, 2012 10:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
109 Comments
Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage
February 7, 2012 03:40 PM by Doug Powers
75 Comments
How to Make a Liberal Politician Stand Up Against Intrusive Government
February 6, 2012 04:28 PM by Doug Powers
95 Comments
Your Friday IRS regulation dump: Obamacare’s job-killing medical device tax
February 3, 2012 04:21 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
The SIGA scandal: Calls for investigation mount
January 27, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
Categories: Health care,Tea Party
Weekly Standard
» White House Economic Adviser: 'We Need a Global Minimum Tax'Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"Sister Toldjah
» Obama’s new budget is a bad jokeJustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False Choices
The reason why they are so determined to push a very unpopular program through, is that it will become the “3rd rail” of future politics, just like social security. They can use it as an edge to counter conservatives by accusing them of “wanting people to die” whenever something is said. It can also be used as a means of more control in the future, with small additions, buried as amendments. They plan to open the door to health care, and, in return, hope it will get liberals elected in the future.
It won’t stop until enough supporters (and Pelosi/Ried brown-nosers) are voted out.
Obama is using the threat of passing his health care bill via reconciliation as a means of leverage in the upcoming televised meetings on health care.
But is it a threat he’d follow through on? Probably. He’s committed acts that are at least as arrogant in the last year.
The only good news that would come out of that is it would be the death knell for any democrats in office. They’d be voted out in droves in November.
So republicans need to stick to their guns. They need to push what makes sense, not what democrats would like. If Dems reject their proposals…. they need to call the Dems bluff.
Someone in the GOP needs to say… “Go Ahead Mr. President… Make My Day!”
Graysonret, well said sir.
Public option: where will they say they will get the money?
Unspent Stimulus (and TARP?)??
Charles Bronson redux.
Death Wish – Death Wish II – etc.
Using reconciliation can easily be proven unconstitutional and abuse of power, and will put a final nail in the democrat coffin. I’d say bring it!
Just don’t get invited to the White House if you are a Republican! You could end up sneaking out the back door past the garbage like the Dalai Lama.
Looks to me like it’s the very farthest left types who are pushing hardest. That should increase opposition from everybody else.
At least, it’s a good theory.
We are facing a kamikaze Congress, they really do have a death wish. They seem not to care that they are looking at losing worse than ’94 this year.
Maybe they think if they get govt. healthcare and amnesty they will only lose in 2010 and never again.
This is the Democrat’s last stand. They will reek as much havoc as they can before getting booted out of office. They are voting for it to support the liberal cause. Suicide votes! Anything for the Fuhrer and the mother party!
Obama and his goons can only govern through class warfare, lies, obfuscation and trickery . . . this approach keeps his parasitic constituents in line and compliant.
Once the door to government health care is open, it will be next to impossible to close. Once people are involved with the coverage, conservatives will have a hard time getting them off of it. The liberals know that. It will be like a chain attached to everyone in the country. Then, the true purpose will be seen, just like England. They will control diets, mandate exercise, home/work environments…etc. That’s what they really want; slowly at first, and quietly, new “rules” will become law. One day, people will wake up and find the government running every aspect of their lives. That’s the liberal ultimate goal.
Uh-oh. If Schumer is on board this means Kay Hagan (D hack-NC) is on board. He paid for her seat, and she will vote with him every time.
This is a ruse in advance of the summit with Republicans. They are trying to get the GOP to blink and accept a “bipartisan” Obama built healthcare bill. They expect the GOP to fold.
Dick Morris has it right. Obama has lost the Independents and will never have the Right. This is an attempt to retain his support on The Left.
I agree with NJ Avaiator’s recommended response”
Time for the Silent Majority to throw a hissy fit!
If this gosh horrible bill is rammed through without r’s voting for it, I pray this will make enough citizens so mad that Nov. not a single d gets voted back in. This bill is just the beginning, there will be so many admendments added in the dead of the night, no telling what will be put in. Please, ALL r’s NO NOT one single one of you vote for this.
L
2 questions:
1) Why is the filibuster a good thing? It wasn’t envisioned by the founders.
2) What do you think would work to make health insurance more affordable in this country?
Now’s the chance for so-called “moderate” Democrats to prove they are independent of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. In Virginia, I’ll be curious to see if our W’s (Warner and Webb) vote in lock step with the liberal gestapo or vote the wishes of a majority of their constituents.
The names and faces will change but not the message.
Red State Skeptic said:
To answer your question as simply as possible:
“In terms of fairness, the filibuster demarcates the difference between the Senate and the House. In the House, a dictatorial majority can prevent the opposition from playing any meaningful role — even from offering amendments. The existence of the filibuster in the Senate ensures that, at least in one chamber, the minority gets its chance to try to change the end product.”
Second: TORT Reform – so Doctors do not have to practice Defensive Medicine
Allow Insurance to be purchased and to be competitive across all State Lines
With the exception of Major illness, Doctors are paid direct rather than premiums to Insurance Companies
Last but not least – Immigration Control,if you are not here legally, out you go. The California Medical System is a prime example of going broke.
Tort reform, competition across state lines. Those two items alone would bring costs down through reduced malpractice premiums and increased competition.
Compare airfare today with airfare prior to deregulation. Many more choices and much much cheaper fares.
Bring it on Mr President.
Remeber the sound clip, that the D’s just about wore out, of Newt saying “…let it (Medicare) wither on the vine.”?
The Mr/Mrs Q Public never heard the rest of the speech that the clip was extracted from.
The D’s are Masters of The Media and will play the ObamaCare song until it gets passed.
The R’s suk at playing the media.
They are complaining about the 15B in profit that the top insurance companies make, but they don’t care about the 60B in waste and fraud that Medicare loses every year.
If they taxed 100% of their profit, it still wouldn’t cover the loss from waste and fraud in government Medicare.
They would rather the insurance companies go bankrupt. That way they could take them over like the autos and banks.
I’m far more interested in getting the price of health care more affordable. To do that, we need to look back at what used to work. We need to wean insurance away from employment, use HSA accounts coupled with high deductible policies, and stop run-away government spending. Third rail or not, big government now spends more than 50% of the nation’s healthcare dollars and is the primary reason that costs have spiraled so frantically upward. Unless we can detach Medicare from Social Security and allow the market to provide incentives to stay off the dole, no reform will work.
To all Republicans: Do not go to the White House for the healthcare meeting on February 25. Find something else to do or somewhere else to go.
The basic structure of the Senate is defined in the Constitution. Nuff said.
The 50,000 foot strategic view is
1)reduce adminstrative expenses by reducing beaucratic requirements.
2) tort reform.
3) create more competition between providers in the private sector. (basic econ 101)
I have question for you. Do you think government legislation that creates over 180 new government boards and commissions is going to reduce costs to consumers and taxpayers?
This “The Healthcare Bill will reduce costs is sheer lunacy.”
Yes, ThackerAgency – and that will also cover the auto insurance companies eventually. If we go down the road with healthcare if most likely will spill over to life and home insurance as well.
Just like Social Security, think of all the money they could siphon off (leaving a trail of IOU breadcrumbs) to pay for things we’ve never had the money for.
Social Security and Medicare are the rails leading the US express train to failure. Adding a third rail will just hasten the fall.
The monster from hell that wouldn’t die! How can we kill this thing once and for all??? If we can just find a way to delay their agenda, the next election should fix the problem. Unfortunately, they know their days are numbered and they are ramping up their takeover plans. Torches and pitchforks may be needed here, folks!
AllahPundit on HotAir is onto something when he speculates that the donks know that they’re going to get creamed in November, figure that they’ve already lost everyone they could lose, and are now going for broke while they still can.
There are two underlying forces at work:
1. “Smile and wave at the camera.” I remember watching film taken during the Russian Civil War, in which White Russian prisoners were being executed by the Reds. There were so many to be shot that it had to be done in batches, and the film showed those waiting their turn to line up at the edge of the pit — smiling, laughing and waving to the camera. They knew that their collective goose was cooked, and they weren’t going to worry about it.
Likewise with a lot of donks. They know they won’t be coming back in January of 2011, or that if they do they won’t have the dictatorial power they have now, so they’ve stopped worrying about things and are focused now on partying while they still can.
2. “Save your Obama memorabilia, son; the donks shall rise again!” Those donks who know that they’re not likely to be re-elected are tempted to “take one for the team” with the idea that (a) the world won’t end when they’re out of office, they’ll just jump over to some lobbying firm, and (b) through their “sacrifice” the foundation will be laid for the ultimate goal of transforming American society into a European Socialist model — with a permanent donkey party majority.
Short-term pain, long-term gain.
The combination of people who know they’re going down and don’t care, along with arch-ideologues ready to immolate themselves for the glory of the party, is a potent one precisely because they’re capable of just about anything. They must not be dismissed or underestimated.
Correct.
Agreed Regulus, its the “take everyone down with me” approach to legislation. Healthy, isn’t it?
Tort reform… Georgia now caps noneconomic damages at $350,000, which to me is an insanely low amount to be compensated if, for example, a toddler dies because of a doctor’s negligence. And Georgia doesn’t have cheap health insurance as a result!
The only reason opening up competition across state lines has any affect is it would allow plans in states that allow for fewer protections for the sick and/or old to be offered anywhere. This may result in lower premiums and/or deductibles for the healthy and/or young, but it would also result in much higher premiums and/or deductibles for the sick old folks, if they can be covered at all. Is that the result you want?
Huh? There’s nothing in the Constitution envisioning a filibuster. Does that mean is should be eliminated?
Wrong question. Generous health insurance plans are what are driving demand and prices through the roof. More fee for services with catastrophic coverage only would drive down costs rapidly. Anybody that pays cash when they go to the doctor knows that prices go down fast (25% to 50%) when you tell them you will pay out of pocket. Also people that run to the doctor for every ache and sniffle will be forced to pay for their hypochondria themselves. people with unhealthy lifestyles would also be forced to modify their behavior or pay for their poor choices.
This is the way it was for most people as little as 30 years ago when very few people had the type of insurance coverage the Dems would have you believe is a human right. It is so obvious that it always amazes me that people cannot see this.
You’re right. But how are we going to fix the problem? End tax breaks to employers for health coverage so that individuals buy their own coverage?
and in a very very big way…like in the streets around the capital again…
Time for the minority party to present a serious alternative.
It seems the r’s have tried to present numerous serious alternatives’, but the d’s won’t even let the bills come up to be voted on. The d’s want it all their way or the highway! The r’s will be stupid to show up with this bho and the d’s on Feb. 25, the outcome has already been determined.
L
It is Standing Rule 22 of the US Senate. It is their rule. Been there for a longggggggg time.
Everyone wants to pay $1 to get $200 worth of health care. Very few are willing to budget healthcare costs to pay for their own healthcare – they want someone else to pay.
Ever see the “Scooter Store” ads about how nice the sco0ter is and how it cost them little or nothing to obtain? Well, someone paid for it.
What if groceries were like health care. If someone was paying for your groceries with very few limits, what would you buy? Hamburger Helper without the hamburger or some nice, juicy steaks if you like meat?
I agree with jsr, people have to share the burden of paying for their healthcare or they will continue to climb.
Our system of government makes it difficult to make dramatic changes. A filibuster gives a majority some amount of control over what happens.
Cut fraud
Cut frivolous lawsuits
Allow competition across state borders
That’s a start.
And one more to cut costs. Keep people who are not citizens from getting regular care in an ER. This is running rampant and it’s bankrupting hospitals.
I’ve thought about that and am not sure but have several ideas:
1. Not to diminish it when it happens but too many Americans have become paranoid about a major illness and do not look realistically at the probability one. When I hear 20-somethings worrying about their lack of health insurance and what will happen if…… I roll my eyes. People that age should be enjoying life not obsessing about illnesses that are about as likely as getting hit by lightning.
2. I tend to think employers should stop offering health insurance and just start increasing salaries by the amount of the premium. People can decide for themselves what is the proper coverage (if any) and once people are forced to make that decision and realistically weigh the risks I’m pretty sure most would choose a high deductible plan.
3. There will still be a problem of those with chronic illnesses/pre-existing conditions. That is the difficult part but possibly some type of government option to help these people. But this is not for routine care. These expenses need to be paid by the individual or demand and expenses quickly spiral out of control.
4. Poor people pay their own bills like everybody else. Sounds tough but I see plenty of “poor” people with money for expensive electronic gadgets, cable TV, cigarettes, alcohol and fast foods. Pay for the necessities first.
5. Those that choose to not buy any coverage but have a catastrophic event are billed for the services. Perhaps some legislation to require reasonable payment plans based on income but no passing it off to the taxpayers. People will quickly learn to buy a catastrophic plan. Those that don’t will have more money in their pocket but can suffer the consequences if something bad does happen. That is what freedom is about, personal choice and responsibility.
Increased competition…
Another thing we should not underestimate is the mind boggling arrogance of this [pseudo]“intellectual elite”. BarryO and his minions actually believe the reason the vast majority of Americans reject Obamacare is that we have all been deceived by the evil repubs and reactionary teabaggers, and don’t understand the wonderful thing they are trying to do for us. So when they defy the ignorant masses and give us the magnificent gift of universal government run healthcare, we will see our error and foolishness and bow down and thank them.
The utter narcissism of this man is as incredible as it is disturbing – but will ultimately bring him down.
And I agree with IamSaved.
People spend other people’s money a lot quicker and with less forethought than they do their own money. When people don’t get a free ride, they magically become less wasteful.
Unions like the Teamsters just had to cut a deal that says if they go to the ER and there was not justification for it, the insurance plan will not pay the bill. Why are they doing this? Because too many don’t bother to go to their primary care physican. They feel it’s quicker to go to the ER if they have a cold or some other non-emergency issue.
May I do a tiny edit?
It’s waaaay cheaper to take care of a sniffle at the doctor’s office, but for some reason people end up in emergency rooms. Oh yeah, emergency rooms by law have to treat 30 million illegals for free.
You are cherry picking. Note I said 50,000 foot view. My response is a “what.” You are attacking specific hows.
Will there be specific hows that are not desireable; undoubtedly.
1) In terms of tort reform, no matter what you do with the tort laws, someone will come up with a “bad” example” that supports your view.
Your Georgia example is IMO a poor one. What good does $350,000 do for you if your baby is killed by an idiot doctor. Does the money bring the baby back? You want my idea of “compensation” in that example. If I win I want my legal expnses paid by the doctor. Then I want the doctor’s license to practice revoked.
2) The high level principle that increased competion lowers cost is as predicatable as the Law of Gravity.
Show me a situation where increased competition in a free market has increased costs. Single payer flies in the face of that principle.
This is NOT rocket science.
RSS: Granted, there is nothing in the Constitution re. the filibuster. However, consider what Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) recently said: Reid, speaking “…the chamber’s procedures were designed to prevent the majority party from unilaterally changing the rules.”
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/02/reid-nixes-filibuster-reform-e.html
He fully recognizes that one day the democRATs will be in the minority (say 2011) and he knows the shoe will be on the other foot.
This is akin to Duh One’s proposal to eliminate nuke weapons from our arsenal as a way of getting the world to do likewise. The response is always, “You first!”
The R’s have proposed subsidized high risk pools for the otherwise uninsurable which, unless they want government to give them trillions in subsidies, would be so expensive that no one would buy anyway. Some states like Texas already offer these pools, and almost no one participates because they are so costly.
As I already wrote, the “competition across state lines” sounds so appealing to conservatives’ ears, but the only difference it will make is for healthy people to pay lower premiums and sick people to pay higher premiums.
So they really haven’t presented serious alternatives. If they’re afraid of the healthcare summit, it’s because they have good reason to worry about being exposed as the party without any real ideas about fixing healthcare. And obviously, they had a great opportunity during the years when they controlled Congress under Bush that they squandered.
As to the illegals who are sucking the system dry, as long as the bird feeder has seed in it, the birds will keep coming and leaving a mess behind.
We don’t have to be the Uncle Sugar to the world. The liberal, do-gooder laws have to be changed and the courts have to stop making laws based on their world view. The ACLU doesn’t help either.
Why would you even sue if that’s what you get? No, money doesn’t bring someone back. But it does help deter doctors from negligence, and it helps compensate families who otherwise would have benefited from the income brought into the household by the victim.
Regardless, I’m not convinced that tort reform is going to have any significant impact on premiums.
I’m not disputing this. But there is competition within state lines, and this doesn’t make premiums any more affordable.
Any Republican who wants to be re-elected should stay home on Feb. 25 and watch Disney’s “White Wilderness.”
Those who choose go along with Obama, Pelosi, and Reid may as well be one those little cute and fury lemmings next November.
Dems who support public option and ‘reconcilliation’ are no difereent than Dr. ‘Ann’ and the IRS suicide pilot.
Here’s hoping Obeyme’s appearance for Colorado’s Mike Bennet’s re-election effort has the same effect as it had for Coakley, the NJ and Virginia Governors, et al. Bennet said he would be willing to sacrifice re-election for what he believed in. Let’s make it happen!
Why do I think all these ‘leaks’ are a smoke screen? If the Democrats wanted to just push a flawed bill through a reconciliation process then they would have already done so.
I suspect that the Democrats still do not have a bill that they can agree on, and are simply hoping to somehow convince some republicans that they need to vote for this terribly flawed legislation.
I used to be a pizza driver for the only place in town that delivered to the “poor side.” (RAAAACIST)
I was shocked and disgusted to see how many of the alleged “poor” had freaking huge TVs.
WHat constitutes a quorum in the Senate? Can every Republican go spend a little time in a constituent’s basement for a few months to prevent any voting?
kind of like the time the donks in TX fled to OK.
I remember that! Wasn’t it over re-districting?
Agree, agree, and agree.
Up to a point; see below.
Agree, but:
Again, up to a point.
But, medicine is a bit different from other businesses, in that part of the reason we in medicine (I’m a doc) do what we do is – don’t laugh – to help folks, even if some of them cannot pay us our full fee, and maybe cannot pay anything at all.
We are not lawyers. We don’t refuse a case if it appears that we won’t make enough money on it.
We – at least, the decent ones – don’t (should not) refuse to treat people if they cannot pay up.
We don’t tell people “tough luck, go see so-and-so” if they come to us.
(The instances where that has happened seem to make the news, and to become targets of disapproval and anger, and even targets of investigation; because, as far as I know, it is unlawful to refuse a patient in need who presents to you.)
Would any of you want medicine to be practiced strictly as a business; to follow the 80-20 rule, to close unprofitable offices, to market/advertise directly to patients: “Wow, look at your nose. I can fix that! Here’s my card.” (An actual example related to me by an insulted, ticked-off hospital janitor/housekeeping/maintenance worker when I was in training ~30 years ago.)
Not trying to oversimplify.
Yeah, there are bastards and pr!ck$ in medicine – I’ve met my share.
I met reality about medicine and docs long ago in med school and training.
Some degree of competition in medicine is good – I do not deny that.
But, competition only works properly when both buyer and seller have a choice.
You wanna worry about a choice when you’re seriously ill, worried, and scared to death?
A strictly business, competition-driven model for medicine?
Is that what you’d want?
Is that what you’d want when you, or your spouse, or your kid, or your Mom or Dad are sick?
Having said that, I’ve always felt that payment directly by the patient, with insurance only for big-league, major (not necessarily only catastrophic) illness would be the wise course.
Mr/Ms Regulus has it figured out and stated perfectly and concisely. I wish I could have stated it as well. With each passing day and victory, we think the danger of DemCare is receding. In fact, it is getting worse. This is the Dem’s Stalingrad, the battle they must win at any cost to ensure that Government of the Party, by the Party, and for the Party shall not perish in America.
I wouldn’t worry over young people paying cheaply for insurance, while the old and sick pay far more, or can’t get anything. If true, competition will bring down the costs. You can’t have a market out there in a free society without some company trying to satisfy it. Some solution will be found to satisfy the consumer and the seller, enabling both to be able to do business. Deregulation will enable companies to compete for the various markets and drive prices down. It could even force down prices for treatments or surgical procedures. Again, competition would drive the market. If comsumer A can’t pay insurance company B, because hospital C charges too much all lose, and an adjustment is made so both profit.
Correct.
Well said.
In your model of “justice” the doctor’s insurance companies policyholders (i.e. me and thee) pay for the doctor being an idiot. In my model the doctor never can practice medicine again and can work at McDonald’s for the rest of his life.
I find my “justice” more of a deterent to the good doctor.
Does this not imply there is still insufficient competition?
Also, lost in the debate is, does the value of care match the cost? If cost alone is the Holy Grail, I am not so sure I want the “affordable” product that gets delivered.
What is the Medicare “produict” going to deliver to my 90+ mother when they chop a cool $500 billion from the program.
I remember that. It was the last time I smiled at government.
From what other job/person do you demand perfection; do you accept not even one error within a, say, 40- to 50-year career??
I was attempting to be more concise by being obtuse. Your “yes but” and “yes to a point” regarding my remarks are totally appropriate.
I agree fully with your points.
Depends on the error. I can tell you I still want the license of the doctor who d@mned near killed my mother administering a drug against the recommendations of every nurse in her hospital ward, when she was a patient there.
He ASSUMED a non-existent, never diagnosed problem. The “problem” even if it had existed was NOT life threatening. There was no logical reason for him to have NOT waited for the test results to confirm his diagnosis. Instead, he administered a powerful drug in a cavalier, arrogant fashion that would have killed my mother, if not for the intervention of another doctor (God bless him).
He has no business being a doctor. He is the equivalent of an airline pilot who will not use a preflight checklist prior to take off. You want him being your pilot?
I do not want his money, nor does my mother. But we do want future patients protected from him.
Believe me, I strive for perfection!
And, you would not believe how difficult it is – yes, thanks to lawyers again – to restrict or get rid of docs of questionable competence.
Those of us who have concerns about another doc have to worry about that doc suing those of us who are supposed to check out credentials, privileges, quality, performance, etc.; and have to worry about whether that doc’s clown lawyer is going to be living in our house(s) and driving our car(s).
RSS: Get the government out of healthcare (shut down Medicare and Medicaid) and ban any third party insurance payor plans (employer insurance, union insurers, gov’t insurer programs) and make us pay for our healthcare as we do for our food, clothes, and transportation.
I heard a news story in Mo. today saying that all Mo. insurers MUST include plans covering Autism if they want to sell insurance. What, 10% maybe of Missourians have autism in their family, but all must pay for that 10%, so the unfortunate people with that disease don’t have to pay for it solely. Ever heard of mandatory pregnancy in these plans, what if you are an unmarried male? When you get the gubmint setting the rules, you get the broadest interpretations of every possible thing, so no one is left out.
In cases of blatant, arrogant, negligence, with willful disregard of consequences; and/or obvious, gross incompetence of a doc: toss that individual out of medicine.
My point has to do with the instances of liability without authority, and being a target because of “deep(er) pockets”.
I am liable for the actions/consequences of numerous non-MDs.
I obviously cannot spend all my time watching all of them like a hawk…my work would suffer, as would patients.
But, I am nonetheless “responsible” and liable for the actions/consequences of these non-MDs, whom I like and respect, and who almost without exception are super-conscientious, and do an excellent – and I really mean an excellent – job.
But, if there were to arise a problem, even if it were not my fault, I might very well be sued. Even were I to win, I would feel soiled by the process.
Also, I worry (somewhat less) about making an ultimately incorrect judgment call when deciding among two or more equally reasonable diagnostic possibilities.
I’m not saying that I should be allowed one or two of those a week; but, one in a career? (So far, knock on wood, and Thank God, that has not happened.)
Two thumbs up.
Good thoughts granite. Thank you.
and in other news….
Obama Buys Votes in Nevada and Elsewhere with $1.5 Billion Housing Bailout.
But there’s still no way for doctors to get sued at all, since no lawyer is going to take a case where he doesn’t get a decent cut. And tell me why my kids should not be compensated appropriately if I die because of a doctor’s negligence.
As for competition across state lines, your argument implies that in some states, health coverage is more affordable than in others. In reality, the only differences depend on what level of healthcare providers must give based on the state’s mandate of care given to the sick.
When I said “increased competition” I was thinking of the insurance industry. I want a Geico-like company on the web offering a zillion options that I can pick and choose to meet my needs and budget – and use at the doctor/hospital of my choice. Instantly there would be a Progressive-like competitor…and competition keeps prices down.
My guess is most people would insure against disaster and pay for their own sniffles, so doctors would get paid pretty quickly for most of the run-of-the-mill stuff without all the insurance paperwork, helping keep their costs down.
And yes, most doctors are in it for the right reasons.
A little friendly competition doesn’t hurt – Johns Hopkins and Sloan-Kettering keep track of each other.
My parents have been paying taxes for Medicare their entire working lives and just turned 65. You want to deny them coverage?
Holy big government, batman. You want big nanny Washington to come in and tell my employer that it can’t give me healthcare if it wants?
What business is it of theirs? In a Competitive environment, insurers will offer what people want and are willing to pay for.
I agree.
I disagree.
There’s no such thing as a “Law of Gravity”. May I suggest the “Law of Supply and Demand” instead?
I should be able to buy the insurance plan that suits me and not be forced to pay for the plan that my employer decides I can have. Further, the states should not be deciding what that plan has to contain. It is like going into a grocery store and being forced into paying for a bag of groceries that some one collected for me without asking me what I needed. Government regulation caused the problem and more government regulation will not solve it.
“Paul Revere said:Uh-oh. If Schumer is on board this means Kay Hagan (D hack-NC) is on board” Unfortunatly we are stuck with Mrs Schumer until 2016 – we don’t have recall ability. The interesting thing is to look at Hagan’s financial disclosure and see how much ($$’s) she has invested in Pharma/Medical/Health companies.
1) There are proposals today that would legislate that if you win your case the defendant pays your legal fees.
So if you are sure of your case, sue away and the other guy pays.
2) Assuming your children are still your dependents, then the doctor has a responsibility to the monetary support of them until they are legally of a self-sufficient age.
To me tort reform is primarily the elimination of “pain and suffering” compensation and lawyers getting “commissions” for bringing in big bucks. My children are adults now. If I die early because of a doctor they will get whatever death and estate benefits were there at the time. Getting cash for the Cancun trip is NOT how I want them to ease their suffering.
It is humorous for progressives (not implying you) to support highly structured socialized medicine that still provides a “whatever the market will bear” windfall profits opportunity for trial lawyers.
Gravity……. It isn’t just a good idea. It’s the law!
It boils down to this. Most of them are going to be voted out in November but have failed to deliver to their special masters. If they don’t deliver this year, those million-dollar post-politics sinecures with the hedge funds, private equity firms and lobbying firms will evaporate.
This does not even mention the time away from practice and the stress of depositions and litigation or a medical board inquiry.
Several years ago, I was sued by a woman who’s daughter was a another dentist. The daughter acted as my patient’s “expert”, and the mother and daughter figured they could scam some cash from an insurance settlement. I was in the right and chose to contest their assertions instead of letting my malpractice carrier settle out of court with them.
After a year and a half, I was vindicated both in court and by the findings of the dental board. In an unrelated case, the “expert” daughter lost her license to practice due to insurance fraud.
If we reform the so that the loser pays court costs, baseless lawsuits like the one I was involved in would not see the light of day.
Universal Healthcare, Welfare, Social Security and any other liberal entitlement wasnt envisioned either!
Quite right.
Loser pays!
Absolutely that’s the way it should be!
The question I would love to have answered by these libs is…
If you work and represent the people…and the People overwhelmingly DON’T want this Bill… then who’s interest are you served by FORCING all all costs this unwanted bill through??
Of course these Marxist Elites would never give a straight answer..
“My parents allowed their elders to leech off of them – now you want to deny them the right to leech off us?” Talk about taking responsibility for your own inaction….but that would never get a candidate elected, so the answer would have to be a compromise to phase it out over the next two generations.
It took 50 years for the cancer to spread so far, but quitting cold turkey would kill the patient.
You would think that Mr. “Arrogant-ass” Obama would learn a lesson from the past few elections but it is obvious that he needs another serving or two of “humble pie”. Unfortunately, this controversial relationship does the country no good but if that is the way he wants to do business for the next 3 years then “let’s party”.
Off topic, but ………
Say a prayer for a patriot, Alexander Haig, who is in critical condition.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100219/ap_on_re_us/us_haig_hospitalized
I’ve been misquoted – the Gravity comments were by others.
I deal only with Gravitas.
This makes no sense. You can NEVER be sure you’re going to convince a jury that a doctor acted negligently. You never know because without conducting expensive discovery, you don’t know what the hell was going on, only you ended up badly damaged. And obviously no lawyer is going to take a case where all he gets are ordinary attorneys’ fees *if he wins* and nothing if he doesn’t.
No it’s not. It’s an unproven theory taught as fact in our school system.
Newton and Einsteins theories about “gravity” break the Laws of Physics. namely: The Law of Conservation of Energy. Gravity, as they describe it, is somehow able to expend a tremendous amount of energy (holding us, the moon etc.) but yet DRAINS no SOURCE of energy in order to continually hold you to the planet…or the moon in orbit. This means that somehow the earth is a “energy for free” mechanism…which violates the law I mentioned above. Not to mention the glaringly obvious fact that you can pick up a pencil off the floor despite gravity….and they want you to believe that the same force holding the pencil to the floor…that force you just defeated while lifting the pencil from the floor….is strong enough to hold a billion-billion ton rock like the moon in orbit…..from 250,000 miles away. And…”gravity” is supposed to weaken with distance? Anyway…back to the discussion….ummm…no public option and all that.
This Bill has got “NO” written all over it by the American people. Bayh is going to support reconciliation of the most partisan bill to come down the pike in the nations history? And he is complain about partisanship and Washington being broken? (or words to that effect). I am beginning to believe these guys are trying to put the US so far in debt we will collapse. This is traitorous!
Roger that.
Other than death, what is certain in life? I sue, therefore I win is the legal standard?
The lawyer gets ordinary legal fees from the loser of the case in either circumstance. Heaven forbid that he should earn a “John Edwards” lifestyle by preying on the misery of others.
Why do you think you see a Mesophilioma Legal Ad on TV every 5 minutes? There’s gold in them thar hills!
Well, there was, but The One decided to overturn it. Hang onto something.
Bingo!!!
Right there is one of the differences between docs and attorneys.
I can’t tell you how many times, when I was in private solo practice, that I provided diagnoses; but then either got paid say, only 20% of my bill, or nothing at all, because of insurance “intricacies”, or because the patient didn’t have the bucks.
And the diagnoses were of the same “quality” and extent as that of any other case/patient.
And when the treating doc would say that the patient was of limited means, I’d tell him to tell the patient to get done what he needed to get done; we’d worry about the bill after, structure a payment plan, “write off” some of the bill, whatever it took. (I’d typically send out bills 1-3 weeks after rendering the service; and get paid 2-6, sometimes more, months after rendering the service.)
Only people who threw the bills away, and whom my billing service never heard from after 3-4 notices, got sent to a collection agency.
Not complaining.
Still practicing.
Still doing the same thing.
Looking at all this and what other posters have said – The Demorat Progressives are going down in flames and they damn well know it – but rather than taking their defeated idiology and leaving they will burn the house down with them in it. This is what is going on today and god help this country because what damage thats going to be done before November may never be able to be repaired.