Skip to main content

View Diary: Pssst...PPACA Saves Money -- Pass it on! (44 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Time to cut the twisted sisters loose... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, edwardssl, amk for obama

    Those two and a few others got so involved in their desire for a public option that they forgot what health care reform was about.

    We had 40 million Americans who could not afford health insurance/health care.

    We had people who could not purchase health insurance due to preexisting conditions.

    We had people getting kicked off their policies when they got sick.

    We had vast areas of the country under-served by health providers.

    We had hospitals in serious financial problems because the uninsured were using their emergency rooms as health clinics.  Hospitals were going broke, closing their emergency rooms, and leaving poorer parts of cities.

    The PPACA addresses all those, and may more, problems.  We won big.

    The PO was about how insurance premium prices would be made affordable for those 40 million who could not afford premiums.  The idea was that by creating a government insurance company, private insurance companies would be forced to keep their premiums lower.

    The PO was not politically viable.  

    The premium cost problem was solved in other ways.  

    A limit has been placed on how much insurance companies can collect over what they spend on customer care.  

    Insurance companies will be competing in open markets in which it will be easy for buyers to price compare.  

    And, most important, those who need help paying for their health insurance will receive very generous help.  Subsidies will be given even to many who make well over the US median income.

    The problems which we had have been largely solved.  No, not totally, that's always the case with legislation.  There's always more work that has to be done.  Part of the PPACA made more improvements to Medicare, a fifty year old bill.

    The two people you mention, they are hung up on the solution chosen was not the one they wanted.  Their solution might (or might not) have been better, but that's irrelevant.  We got a solution and now it's time to see how it works.  If it doesn't work then we'll know what our next job will be.

    "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

    by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 08:29:54 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I guess the WH forgot, too (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rick

      Those two and a few others got so involved in their desire for a public option that they forgot what health care reform was about.

      Didn't you get the memo? There is no healthcare reform.

      The Administration calls it health insurance reform.

      The problems which we had have been largely solved.

      More substantively, this is the key difference of opinion. Some of us would argue the opposite. PPACA solves only a tiny but of our problems. The problems in American healthcare largely remain unsolved.

      Ask your Member of Congress what they're doing to put Americans back to work.

      by washunate on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 08:47:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, I didn't get the memo... (4+ / 0-)

        I'm not on any right wing mailing lists.

        "There is no healthcare reform."  Making that statement, gosh, next thing the wingers will be telling us that cutting taxes on the rich will put millions of Americans back to work.

        --

        Are you unaware of the healthcare portions of the PPACA?  

        You don't know about things like free annual physical exams, mammograms, colorectal screenings, anti-smoking funding, vaccinations for children and adults?

        Or increased funding for doctor/physician training?

        Or supporting health care facilities in places which are currently under-served?

        There's more.  You should read up on what we passed.

        Link

        "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

        by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 09:00:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm pointing out that it's the Administration (0+ / 0-)

          driving this. They're the ones who shifted the lingo to HIR. It's comical to go off on eve and slink and others. In fact, they specifically supported the public option as a compromise! You should be thanking them; they went for what was 'possible' instead of the much more reasonable approach of demanding universal health insurance.

          Are you unaware of the healthcare portions of the PPACA?

          Are you unaware of what PPACA doesn't do? You're confused here. You think you're arguing with someone who thinks that PPACA is the most awful thing since bed bugs and Nazis. Hence the language about right wing mailing lists and so forth.

          I'm making a different claim. I'm suggesting that PPACA just doesn't do that much, In the Big Picture. I'm not saying it's horrible; I'm saying it's largely irrelevant, tinkering at the margins. That's in refutation to your claim that

          The problems which we had have been largely solved.

          I'm not saying the problems are worse. I'm saying most of them remain largely unsolved.

          Heck, just listen to Pete Peterson and the President's own catfood commission.

          Ask your Member of Congress what they're doing to put Americans back to work.

          by washunate on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 11:32:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Enlighten me... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Cedwyn, joedemocrat, amk for obama

            The PPACA extends health care to essentially all Americans.

            It insures free annual checkups - and all that other stuff I listed.

            It improves access to health care in areas where health care is hard to access.

            It cleans up health care paperwork, thus reducing mistakes.

            It improves preventative care.

            It rewards hospitals for improving care.

            That's some of what it does.

            How about listing what it doesn't do?

            What do we need to work on next?  What needs to be in our 2011 push for even better health care?

            ----
            I'm not saying, never had said, that the PPACA was the end goal, but it is a significant step in getting to that elusive goal.

            As for Pete Peterson and the Catfood Commission.  Too bad you've bought into that FDL misinformation campaign.

            "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

            by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 11:42:56 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  lol, yeah, we have a difference of opinion (0+ / 0-)

              The PPACA extends health care to essentially all Americans.

              Coverage in America really isn't the problem. What coverage means is the problem. Most medical-related bankruptcies, for example, involve people who had health insurance. Companies that offer health insurance spend far more per worker per year than the entire cost of healthcare in other advanced economies. We haven't decided what healthcare is or who should pay for it. That's a lot of decision-making left to happen.

              It insures free annual checkups - and all that other stuff I listed.

              No, it shifts the cost of annual checkups from co-pays and deductibles to premiums. They're not free. Med schools aren't reducing tuition. Specialists aren't giving some of their income to primary care physicians. There is no cost savings; it's a cost transfer. etc.

              As for Pete Peterson and the Catfood Commission.  Too bad you've bought into that FDL misinformation campaign.

              This is one of the things that's really sad about the meta wars. How one could possibly equate opposition to Pete Peterson as a misinformation campaign is simply beyond me. How one could support a Democratic President creating a body staffed with people designed to cut entitlements while protecting financial bailouts and defense spending is just beyond my comprehension. Not only is the deficit obviously not a major concern - look at the trillions spent on corporate welfare - but people like Alan Simpson and David Cote have no business being anywhere near a body investigating what to do about the federal budget.

              If you're interested in defending the assault on social insurance, then our differences are way too far to bridge. But it could lead to some interesting conversations. See you around.

              Ask your Member of Congress what they're doing to put Americans back to work.

              by washunate on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 11:52:19 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  What a pile of shit... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                joedemocrat

                You list zero health care problems left to be addressed.

                You state that health insurance coverage in America is not a problem when 40 million Americans can't afford health insurance and some 40,000 die unnecessary deaths each year because they can't afford health care.

                You argue that "free"/no out-of-pocket cost to individuals will do nothing to save health costs.  Clearly finding problems early means 'cheaper to treat'.

                You state that President Obama created a commission "staffed with people designed to cut entitlements while protecting financial bailouts and defense spending" which is simply a lie.

                And then you end this post of misinformation with "See you later" rather than listing the health care issues which we need to next address.

                Pathetic....

                "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

                by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 12:01:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  okay, I'll bite (0+ / 0-)

                  You state that President Obama created a commission "staffed with people designed to cut entitlements while protecting financial bailouts and defense spending" which is simply a lie.

                  What's the purpose of the fiscal commission? Why are the people involved qualified to pursue this purpose?

                  You list zero health care problems left to be addressed.

                  I understand why you would ignore my statement, because it's a pretty strong indictment:

                  We haven't decided what healthcare is or who should pay for it. That's a lot of decision-making left to happen.

                  If you really think that going from a $25 or $50 co-pay to no co-pay for an annual physical is a major change to the American healthcare system, that's cool, that's your belief. But I don't know why you refuse to accept that there's another legitimate perspective, which is the argument that these tweaks just don't amount to much in comparison to the aggregate size of the problem. And the evidence which would support such a claim is the fact that healthcare continues to be too expensive. We continue to ration care based upon ability to pay, and this shortcoming makes all of us worse off. Growth in healthcare costs continues to outstrip growth in the rest of economy. Drug dealers, hospital franchises, and others continue taking excess profits at the expense of consumers. For goodness sakes, PPACA didn't even allow Medicare to negotiate volume discounts in its procurement process. It didn't even give consumers the choice of buying into a government-run health insurance plan.

                  That's why I said I'll see you around. I enjoy the conversation, but we're pretty much beating a dead horse here. I think both our positions are pretty clear.

                  Ask your Member of Congress what they're doing to put Americans back to work.

                  by washunate on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 02:25:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •   National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Cedwyn

                    Reform

                    From the Commission's Charter...

                    Description of Duties.

                    The functions of the Commission are advisory only. The Commission shall propose recommendations to balance the budget, excluding interest payment on the debt, by 2015. This result is projected to stabilize the debt-to-GDP ratio at an acceptable level once the economy recovers. In addition, the Commission shall propose recommendations to the President that meaningfully improve the long-run fiscal outlook, including changes to address the growth of entitlement spending and the gap between the projected revenues and expenditures of the Federal Government.

                    The Commission shall provide its advice and recommendations, analysis, and information directly to the President. In providing the President this advice, the Commission should reflect the judgment and views of the members of the Commission. To meet these objectives, the Commission will conduct such activities as necessary. The President may direct the Commission to provide its analysis, information, and advice and recommendations to any agency with responsibilities relevant to the mission identified in the Charter, to Congress, or any other relevant congressional committee.

                    http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/...

                    How are the members qualified?

                    Who is on the commission?

                    The commission is composed of 10 Democrats and eight Republicans.

                    Six members were chosen by the president. He appointed co-chairs Erskine Bowles, a Democrat who was White House chief of staff for President Clinton, and Alan Simpson, a former Republican senator from Wyoming (watch their interview on the NewsHour). He also named three Democrats: Alice Rivlin, a former vice chair of the Federal Reserve who also served as director of the Congressional Budget Office and the White House budget office; Andrew Stern, retiring president of the 2.2 million-member Service Employees International Union; and Ann Fudge, former head of Young & Rubicam Brands, a global marketing and communications company. He also named one Republican: David Cote, the CEO and chairman of Honeywell, a technology and manufacturing company.

                    Senate majority leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi each picked three congressional Democrats: Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., who chairs the Senate Finance Committee; and Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who chairs the Senate Budget Committee; Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate; Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., a member of the Budget and Ways and Means committees; and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee; and

                    Rep. John M. Spratt Jr., D-S.C., chairman of the House Budget Committee.

                    Congressional Republican leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner also appointed three members each. They are Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who has sponsored legislation aimed at spending cuts; Sen. Michael Crapo, R-Idaho, a member of the Senate Budget Committee; Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee; Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., senior Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee; Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, an outspoken proponent of deficit reduction; and Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the top Republican on the House Budget Committee.

                    Bruce Reed, the CEO of the Democratic Leadership Council and a former Clinton White House official, serves as executive director for the commission

                    Link

                    "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

                    by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 04:41:37 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  I ignore what statement? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Cedwyn

                    This one?

                    Coverage in America really isn't the problem. What coverage means is the problem. Most medical-related bankruptcies, for example, involve people who had health insurance. Companies that offer health insurance spend far more per worker per year than the entire cost of healthcare in other advanced economies. We haven't decided what healthcare is or who should pay for it. That's a lot of decision-making left to happen.

                    1. I pointed out to you that coverage certainly is a problem for 40 million Americans.
                    1. The PPACA guarantees that people will not be dropped from their coverage if they get really sick - an end to cost caps.  And annual out of pocket expenses are limited.
                    1. One of the reasons that companies spend large amounts for employee health care is that each family policy is charged almost $1,000 each year to defray the costs of treating the uninsured.  With people being able to seek medical treatment earlier and in less expensive settings (rather than hospital emergency rooms) those costs will disappear from existing policies.
                    1. We know who will pay for health care.  For those with limited incomes, there will be either free government paid for health care.  For others there will be generous federal subsidies which will fade out as people's incomes exceed the federal median level.

                    You really should know this stuff.  It's very basic information....

                    "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

                    by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 04:50:46 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, health care costs are rising faster... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Cedwyn

                    than some other parts of our economy.

                    I'd like to see some data on excess profits.  

                    I'd be extremely surprised to see that hospitals are making excessive profits, most seem to be struggling to keep going.

                    Drug companies, I recall hearing make about a 10% return on capital, standard profits.  But I haven't found anything to prove/disprove that.  I did find a statement that drug company profits "amount to only about 2 percent of total health care spending".

                    For people to blame drug and insurance company profits for their predicament is just ignorant. People simply do not know what drives costs," said Uwe E. Reinhardt, the James Madison Professor of Political Economy at Princeton University. "What drives prices is the amount of services people are getting, plus the prices doctors and hospitals charge for those services."

                    Humphrey Taylor, chairman of The Harris Poll, a service of Harris Interactive, added: "These findings show how little most people understand the economics of health care. Increased profits of insurers and drug companies (if they have increased at all) cannot possibly account for the increases in premiums. Many health-care economists attribute the increased cost of care to increased demand and utilization, increased prices and the increased use of expensive tests and treatments. Most people, as shown here, do not think of these as the main drivers of increased health-care spending."

                    Link

                    "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

                    by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 05:01:14 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Uh..nobody ever said it was to be free (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Cedwyn

                In regard to this

                In regard to this

                No, it shifts the cost of annual checkups from co-pays and deductibles to premiums. They're not free

                Did anyone ever say that expanding access to health care would ever be free?  The goal of spreading the cost of prevenative care through premuims is so all people can get prevenative care. This is a fairer way. Why should the middle class and the wealthy be able to get prevenative care but not the poor?

                Again, we need to focus on what the bill accomplish not its shortcomings. To do otherwise just feeds into the right wing attack machine..

                "Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable" - Dorothy Day

                by joedemocrat on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 12:26:21 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  so you are saying then (0+ / 0-)

            It's comical to go off on eve and slink and others. In fact, they specifically supported the public option as a compromise! You should be thanking them; they went for what was 'possible' instead of the much more reasonable approach of demanding universal health insurance.

            that incrementalism doesn't suck?

            Die with your boots on. Gonna try? Well stick around. Gonna cry? Just move along. The truth of all predictions is always in your hands. - Iron Maiden

            by Cedwyn on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 03:31:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  It is time for the Democrats to go on the offense (5+ / 0-)

      about health care reform. Don't run from the bill but keep repeating what it will accomplish. That's what the Republicans would do if they passed a bill whos popularity was declining in the polls..We need to push back against attacks from the right and the left and say "hey this is what it will do" and yes it was worth passing.

      "Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable" - Dorothy Day

      by joedemocrat on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 10:18:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Absolutely. (4+ / 0-)

        This is one of the Democrats major victories.  It ranks up there with Social Security, Medicare, and all the other safety net programs that Democrats have produced.

        We have extended health care to all Americans.  Not just to those who are able to afford it.

        It's not enough for the Administration to put out the message.  Remember, most of the message will be ignored by the corporate media.

        It's up to us to help spread the word.  

        Get a set of talking points about the benefits of the PPACA so that you are ready to educate others with whom you come into contact.

        --

        And yes, boo-birds, the job is not yet finished.  We've got more work to do.

        But if we don't help people realize what good has been done it will be much harder to make the next steps.

        "They were overwhelmed by the learned ignorance, the accepted say-so of the times." Teale

        by BobTrips on Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 10:33:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site