A different idea in the healthcare debate

So I just read an article on HuffPost called: "Public Option Plan Will Cover Few Americans, New Statistic Reveals." A quote from one comment on how the public option should have been:

"Here's how it should have been: Open up clinics for citizens who don't have health care insurance. Require proof of citizenship for access. Done. It really is that simple. And no one should have a problem with that. I could have written the bill for this in ten days and it would have nothing to do with the insurance industry..."

I think the person who commented is on to something here to provide access to everyday health service needs, especially with the public option sounding as watered down as it is... Further suggestions for improvement would be to include legal immigrants (who have to file taxe returns like citizens do) in the ability to access services and include preventive care as services provided.

Study after study shows that preventive care reduces costs across the system, yet our current system is not based on any preventive care incentives. Instead, it's based on reactionary care... fixing things after they've gone wrong instead of focusing on wellness.
About Health Care
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

To Be or Not To Be: The Public Option and thoughts on politics

As one of the former employed who will be losing my health insurance in March, I strongly and sincerely call on Congress to pass health care reform containing a full and robust public option. That is one of the reasons I worked so hard to elect President Obama and the Democratic majority in both houses of Congress. This is the time when the proverbial rubber needs to meet the road.

We the People created a huge call for change during our last election, yet I haven't seen very much change in the way legislation is being crafted. Kowtowing to industry and corporate welfare seems to be the message of the day. We the People elected you, and if you can't get Our Business done instead of getting Corporations' Business done, then I will work even harder to elect people who will actually live up to their campaign promises.

Speaking of which, there was once a thing called truth in advertising, and this whole mess has me thinking about starting a grassroots effort to sue elected officials who break their advertised campaign promises.

And since we're on the topic of advertising... am I the only one who's noticed that healthcare costs started skyrocketing immediately after we removed or watered down the regulations regarding advertising for prescription drugs???

Perhaps the politics of the day is too entrenched in the culture and we need to work to make it easier for parties other than Dems and Repubs to be in power. Maybe other parties could do a better job and create the change we demanded (and so desperately need) in our last election. If a majority in the House and Senate can't make this happen, then we have a very serious problem on our hands.

Either way, not a dime of my now limited money will go to support any political campaign or organization that does not support real reform in our healthcare system.

Leaderless: Senate Pushes For Public Option Without Obama's Support

I am so frustrated with the idea of a trigger. "Trigger" is typical politicalese for "we are telling you we're going to do it, but we're not really going to do it" kind of reform. A trigger does nothing but allow the status quo, which is definitely not working, to continue. The only way a trigger of some kind could work is if there is a strong tracking and enforcement mechanism built into the trigger option... something I've not heard a thing about. If anyone can enlighten me, I'd appreciate it.



I don't often agree with Harry Reid, but I very much prefer his idea of the opt out public option. This would provide the states who want it the chance to have it. Those who don't, don't have to and the residents of both will be able to see the differences between the two healthcare ideas.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost