the new health care?

[Beemnseven]

Okay, people have been asking "what exactly should we do?" regarding a new health care plan. Here are some ideas, again from Rep. Ron Paul, who is a doctor and knows first-hand of the trouble with the current system.

I'm not sure if these bills are still active, but the idea of allowing individuals and families to deduct the cost of health care off their income taxes has been an idea floating around for awhile. Sounds like a good idea to me.

HR 3075 provides truly comprehensive health care reform by allowing families to claim a tax credit for the rising cost of health insurance premiums. With many families now spending close to $1000 or even more for their monthly premiums, they need real tax relief-- including a dollar-for-dollar credit for every cent they spend on health care premiums-- to make medical care more affordable.

HR 3076 is specifically designed to address the medical malpractice crisis that threatens to drive thousands of American doctors- especially obstetricians- out of business. The bill provides a dollar-for-dollar tax credit that permits consumers to purchase "negative outcomes" insurance prior to undergoing surgery or other serious medical treatments. Negative outcomes insurance is a novel approach that guarantees those harmed receive fair compensation, while reducing the burden of costly malpractice litigation on the health care system. Patients receive this insurance payout without having to endure lengthy lawsuits, and without having to give away a large portion of their award to a trial lawyer. This also drastically reduces the costs imposed on physicians and hospitals by malpractice litigation. Under HR 3076, individuals can purchase negative outcomes insurance at essentially no cost.

HR 3077 makes it more affordable for parents to provide health care for their children. It creates a $500 per child tax credit for medical expenses and prescription drugs that are not reimbursed by insurance. It also creates a $3,000 tax credit for dependent children with terminal illnesses, cancer, or disabilities. Parents who are struggling to pay for their children's medical care, especially when those children have serious health problems or special needs, need every extra dollar.

HR 3078 is commonsense, compassionate legislation for those suffering from cancer or other terminal illnesses. The sad reality is that many patients battling serious illnesses will never collect Social Security benefits-- yet they continue to pay into the Social Security system. When facing a medical crisis, those patients need every extra dollar to pay for medical care, travel, and family matters. HR 3078 waives the employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes (or self-employment taxes) for individuals with documented serious illnesses or cancer. It also suspends Social Security taxes for primary caregivers with a sick spouse or child. There is no justification or excuse for collecting Social Security taxes from sick individuals who literally are fighting for their lives.

The bottom line is that health care costs seemed to get really out of control once the people stopped paying for the cost of a doctor visit up front, directly. Then the federal government started requiring employers to provide health care, and suddenly all the money was put into a huge pot with lots of people paying in and third parties began allocating those funds as they saw fit -- with doctors basically out of the decision making.

Today, the system is designed so that nobody could afford to pay for health care themselves. Get the insurance companies out, except for major, castostrophic illnesses or injuries, and let the free market dictate the price between the service provider (the doctor) and the customer (the patient).

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Today, the system is designed so that nobody could afford to pay for health care themselves. Get the insurance companies out, except for major, castostrophic illnesses or injuries, and let the free market dictate the price between the service provider (the doctor) and the customer (the patient).

i would be willing to give this a try. there is no way any insurance company should have the right to tell someone what they can, and cannot do

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by dmek25

i would be willing to give this a try. there is no way any insurance company should have the right to tell someone what they can, and cannot do

You really think that goverment run health care plan will just give doctors unlimited access to try and medical procedure they want to try? There is a reason that ins co. have restrictions on procedures and one of them is to reduce cost and if anything it might even be worse under a federal program.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by firstdown

You really think that goverment run health care plan will just give doctors unlimited access to try and medical procedure they want to try? There is a reason that ins co. have restrictions on procedures and one of them is to reduce cost and if anything it might even be worse under a federal program.

agreed. but what gives them the medical "expertise" to make those calls? pricing? the person making those decisions is about medically qualified as i am

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by dmek25

agreed. but what gives them the medical "expertise" to make those calls? pricing? the person making those decisions is about medically qualified as i am

Thats not true. Health Ins. Co. have on staff doctors that review whats been done and what the doctor is requesting. In most cases like my daughter if the her doctor can show why the plan B (the more expensive plan) is the best route to take then in most cases the ins. co. will allow them to skip plan A because in the long run it will save them money. If the doctor is lazy and just writes up a two sentence request then most of the time the Ins. co. will say no start with plan A.

I'm sure Sneed can give more details on this works. One thing to remember alot of people throw in to the mix expermental treatments which is tough to get the ins. co. to approve.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Thats not true. Health Ins. Co. have on staff doctors that review whats been done and what the doctor is requesting. In most cases like my daughter if the her doctor can show why the plan B (the more expensive plan) is the best route to take then in most cases the ins. co. will allow them to skip plan A because in the long run it will save them money. If the doctor is lazy and just writes up a two sentence request then most of the time the Ins. co. will say no start with plan A.

I'm sure Sneed can give more details on this works. One thing to remember alot of people throw in to the mix expermental treatments which is tough to get the ins. co. to approve.

Well, I just have to throw in a personal anecdote at this point:

My son was born May 8th, 1997. We had a very good BCBS employer sponsored Health Care, a caring employer, solid doctors etc. My son came 4 weeks early - unexpectedly, and had a perfect apgar for the first test, but quickly went into respiratory distress. We nearly lost him that night and several times over the next 3 weeks while he was in the NICU, the neo-natal specialist was called in made several visits and over time the medicines and treatments, and basically nature all kicked in. My son is in very good health at the age of 12, and has not even a clue of this, except what we tell him. Great story. Love US medical care.

A year later we were still disputing with Blue Cross about the neonatal fees, as they said that he was to be paid according to the fees for west of the Rockies (we lived in Colorado Springs, which is east of the Rockies, and close to Denver like Baltimore is close to Washington). The Doctor, who was the only specialist available for the period when my son needed his services charged the fees based out of his Denver practice. In the end the insurance commission sided with BCBS (my wife fought them tooth and nail) and we were stuck with major (to us at the time massive) bills. Thankfully, my company(not the govt) helped us, and we paid the fees, and in the end the system worked. The whole total was near 100,000 dollars I think, and we-with my companies help paid maybe 4-6 thousand, I don't remember the exact numbers.

That's my anecdote. I probably pull almost all of my healthcare beliefs from the interactions from those days.
No government UHC was going to help that situation, the good will and charity of my employer, the doctor's abilities, and even the insurance companies overall management all made my son's life possible. And I believe with all my heart that in Canada, Germany (this one I know, as I was told by native Germans), and other UHC countries, my son would have died that night, or up to 3 weeks later when he wasn't given the medicines he needed for the extended time. Every one draws their beliefs from something or some events, this happens to be mine.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Well, I just have to throw in a personal anecdote at this point:

My son was born May 8th, 1997. We had a very good BCBS employer sponsored Health Care, a caring employer, solid doctors etc. My son came 4 weeks early - unexpectedly, and had a perfect apgar for the first test, but quickly went into respiratory distress. We nearly lost him that night and several times over the next 3 weeks while he was in the NICU, the neo-natal specialist was called in made several visits and over time the medicines and treatments, and basically nature all kicked in. My son is in very good health at the age of 12, and has not even a clue of this, except what we tell him. Great story. Love US medical care.

A year later we were still disputing with Blue Cross about the neonatal fees, as they said that he was to be paid according to the fees for west of the Rockies (we lived in Colorado Springs, which is east of the Rockies, and close to Denver like Baltimore is close to Washington). The Doctor, who was the only specialist available for the period when my son needed his services charged the fees based out of his Denver practice. In the end the insurance commission sided with BCBS (my wife fought them tooth and nail) and we were stuck with major (to us at the time massive) bills. Thankfully, my company(not the govt) helped us, and we paid the fees, and in the end the system worked. The whole total was near 100,000 dollars I think, and we-with my companies help paid maybe 4-6 thousand, I don't remember the exact numbers.

That's my anecdote. I probably pull almost all of my healthcare beliefs from the interactions from those days.
No government UHC was going to help that situation, the good will and charity of my employer, the doctor's abilities, and even the insurance companies overall management all made my son's life possible. And I believe with all my heart that in Canada, Germany (this one I know, as I was told by native Germans), and other UHC countries, my son would have died that night, or up to 3 weeks later when he wasn't given the medicines he needed for the extended time. Every one draws their beliefs from something or some events, this happens to be mine.

god bless your son, but he might have had major issues if this were to happen today. would your employer today go above and beyond? i know for a fact mine wouldn't