Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, June 6, 2009

Bill calls for employers to provide health care

June 6, 2009

Advertisement

— Employers would be required to offer health care to employees or pay a penalty — and all Americans would be guaranteed health insurance — under a draft bill circulated Friday by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy’s health committee.

The bill would provide subsidies to help poor people pay for care, guarantee patients the right to select any doctor they want and require everyone to purchase insurance, with exceptions for those who can’t afford to.

Insurers would be supposed to offer a basic level of care and would be required to cover all comers, without turning people away because of pre-existing conditions or other reasons. Insurance companies’ profits would be limited, and private companies would have to compete with a new public “affordable access” plan that would for the first time offer government-sponsored health care to Americans not eligible for Medicare, Medicaid or other programs.

Comments

igby 5 years, 6 months ago

1994! Remember why the Dems got kicked out of power!

Same bill different time.

pace 5 years, 6 months ago

Kennedy has a good bill. The commercials touting the dire consequences of any health bill are a laugh, if you laugh at fraud and lies.

alm77 5 years, 6 months ago

"with exceptions for those who can’t afford to." and how is that defined?? I thought the whole point was to make everyone find something they could afford/make insurance a priority.

I do like the part about everyone guaranteed acceptance, although people will probably still be charged an outrageous amount due to preexisting conditions??

Richard Heckler 5 years, 6 months ago

Bills calling for employers to furnish health insurance is a dumb idea that's been around wayyyyy too long. Time to put this concept to bed. Stop badgering the employers to support this political action committee aka the medical insurance industry.

Look $1.2 trillion in taxes is spent to cover 60% of those insured today. These are primarily a wide variety government employees. It is estimated that same amount can cover all americans. That is the key. Pulling wealthy corporations off the corporate welfare subsidy line would provide even more money to insure americans and allow this country to become employed again.

Let's talk business principles. 50 million uninsured plus those tens of millions underinsured would now be fully insured = way way more dollars for the health care industry.

It will be better for all business because their employees will be in better health thus more productive.

And people will have more money to spend elsewhere other than on over priced health insurance = economic growth

And more jobs will become available because health insurance will be provided thus opening doors for new business = economic growth

HR 676 = one insurance company = efficiency = reduced cost = economic growth

HR 676 = patients choice across the board = removing the insurance companies from healthcare decisions = improved health care across the board thus a healthier and more productive society.

HR 676 = removing the health insurance industry from the special interests = removing health insurance dollars from campaigns,obscene salaries and golden parachutes = more money for employee hiring = better use of dollars = economic growth

HR 676 = no more bankruptcies due to insufficient health insurance coverage = no one losing homes = cut back on the costs of social services = happier taxpayers

Support HR 676 and Senate Bill 703.

Heatlth Care For All Monthly Meetings at the Lawrence, Kansas Library. Feel free to drop in anytime.

7 PM

June 16 July 21 Aug 18 Sept 15 Oct 20 Nov 17 Gallery Dec 15

Taxpayers want the opportunity to spend their tax dollars on their medical insurance. After all it is their money. This is not free insurance, not by any stretch of the imagination and not when tax dollars earned by hard working americans are involved.

Taxpayers want the choice of signing on to National Health Insurance HR 676 or S 703.

Let the choice be that of the taxpayers who want to spend their tax dollars on excellent 24/7 insurance coverage.

Contrary to popular belief Social Security and Medicare are two of the best managed programs on planet earth.

Again let the voting taxpayers make the decision. Put the decision to the voting taxpayers. Put it on the next ballot if necessary. It's time to bring the voters into the process. IF others want to stay with the commercial insurance vendors so be it.

Richard Heckler 5 years, 6 months ago

Why should taxpayers be forced to pay insurance for elected officials? They say paying for mine is not affordable. Then how is theirs affordable? Think about it. How many times are we paying considering the number of politicians in our lives?

All taxpayers need coverage, taxpayers need relief and big time reduction in cost.

HR 676 is the only equitable approach that includes all of us.

THIS IS what YOUR TAX DOLLARS could buy:

HR 676 would cover every person for all necessary medical care including prescription drugs, hospital, surgical, outpatient services, primary and preventive care, emergency services, dental, mental health, home health, physical therapy, rehabilitation (including for substance abuse), vision care, hearing services including hearing aids, chiropractic, durable medical equipment, palliative care, and long term care.

A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 for all health care costs.

HR 676 ends deductibles and co-payments. HR 676 would save hundreds of billions annually by eliminating the high overhead and profits of the private health insurance industry and HMOs.

Health care costs and facts:

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2008/0508harrison.html

Ryan Neuhofel 5 years, 6 months ago

One of the largest promoters of health care inflation is the employer based system . . . promoted by government policies. Most individuals feel 'stuck' with whatever benefit their employer offers (usually very limited choices), unless they are willing to change jobs or pay an after-tax penalty (15-40% of income) for a private health plan. Individuals really have no concept of cost or value because they don't know the true cost of their premiums. Private health plans (now managed care) have very little incentive to provide good service because of the aforementioned. Imagine if employers provides 'food benefits' by contracting with a grocery store to provide produce . . . how fresh do you think the apples would be?

"guarantee patients the right to select any doctor they want" . . . What if a doctor chooses not to see that patient or chooses not to accept payment from their health plan? Apparently doctors are robots without freedom of choice in this bill.

Individuals and doctors must reject total third-party control of health care - whether from private or government managers.

Newell_Post 5 years, 6 months ago

Health insurance is a big problem for everyone as it currently exists. Like many things American, our system is in some ways the best in the world and in other ways the worst in the industrialized world. (The best if you are in a big union managed plan, the worst if you are one of the working poor.)

Unfortunately, this particular bill just seems like another mass of convoluted, piecemeal, patchwork political compromises.

IMO, someone should propose the following:

  1. Expand Medicare to provide basic, no-frills coverage for everyone. (Yes, I know. They would need to raise taxes to pay for it. They're going to need to raise taxes to pay for regular Medicare anyway.)

  2. Let the insurance companies sell "upgrade" policies to cover direct access to specialists, nicer hospitals, name-brand drugs, etc. etc.

jeremyhay 5 years, 6 months ago

I believe you folks in the US are being bombarded with ads from your commercial health insurers trying to point out how bad the British National Health Service is. Not true! I'm a Brit who lives in Germany. I've lived under the British and the German (state and private) health systems. The British NHS and the German systems work just fine. My brother in law has a cancer (an unusual lymphoma) and despite being affluent is quite happy with the NHS (all drugs - even expensive ones - fully funded). No one on this side of the pond worries about being bankrupted by long term medical care costs - why should you?

Alia Ahmed 5 years, 6 months ago

Someone who is funding the advertising trying to scare the American public about health care reform is Richard Scott, who was previously the CEO of Columbia/HCA. They defrauded the government of millions of dollars. He clearly has an interest in the "free enterprise" system of healthcare. He has made hundreds of millions of dollars off the current system and cheated taxpayers out of millions of dollars. We sure don't want this crook to give us advice as to how to make healthcare affordable and accessible to Americans. http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2009/03/who-is-richard-scott-and-why-is-he-saying-these-things-about-healthcare-reform.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn_Scott

Leslie Swearingen 5 years, 6 months ago

"The bill would provide subsidies to help poor people pay for care, guarantee patients the right to select any doctor they want and require everyone to purchase insurance, with exceptions for those who can’t afford to." But, the government still can't force a Doctor or medical provider to accept a patient. When I had cataracts I found out there is not one opthamologist in Lawrence who will accept a medicaid card. Believe me I am grateful for what that card does provide. As for the "exceptions" isn't that what people are doing now? Are there a lot of people who can afford health insurance, but don't, because?

Richard Heckler 5 years, 6 months ago

The medical insurance industry has one concern on their minds. Losing $1.2 trillion tax dollars aka gravy train aka corporate welfare.

National Health Insurance will reduce the cost of living.

Forcing employers to pay will increase the cost of living.

Isn't time for politicians to give taxpayers what they want instead of the parties giving what they think is best for us and their special interests? Taxpayers are paying out more than $6 million annually to insure those irresponsible legislators in Washington D.C.

The Kennedy Bill stinks.

Make National Health Insurance available to the people and let the people decide which they want to purchase.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.