Affordable Care Act Goes to Washington

Supreme Court to Debate Affordable Care Act Next week - and plaintiff's case has imploded

Quote :

With the impending, and unprecedented, 3 days of arguments over the Affordable Care Act occurring early next week, it's interesting to see that the test case being used to challenge the law has now become a test case demonstrating the necessity of the law.

Mary Brown, the woman who asserts no one has the authority to make her buy health care is now bankrupt, at least in part due to medical bills. From the LA Times article:

Quote :

Mary Brown, a 56-year-old Florida woman who owned a small auto repair shop but had no health insurance, became the lead plaintiff challenging President Obama's healthcare law because she was passionate about the issue.

Brown "doesn't have insurance. She doesn't want to pay for it. And she doesn't want the government to tell her she has to have it," said Karen Harned, a lawyer for the National Federation of Independent Business. Brown is a plaintiff in the federation's case, which the Supreme Court plans to hear later this month.

But court records reveal that Brown and her husband filed for bankruptcy last fall with $4,500 in unpaid medical bills. Those bills could change Brown from a symbol of proud independence into an example of exactly the problem the healthcare law was intended to address.

I think at this point the solicitor general just has to point at the plaintiff and say "See! See!".

People without health insurance are still covered by the ethical obligations of EMTALA. They can still see doctors and get treatment and not pay their bills. Then who pays for it? All of the rest of us.

The "individual mandate" should be called a "personal responsibility" provision, because the fact is all these rugged individualists are parasites. Refusing to pay into the system then benefiting when they, inevitably, need to use it.

Makes sense to me.

Heretic wrote:

People without health insurance are still covered by the ethical obligations of EMTALA. They can still see doctors and get treatment and not pay their bills. Then who pays for it? All of the rest of us.

I've been preaching that ever since the health care debate started. Not only do the rest of us have to pay for it,but going without insurance also so means going without a lot of preventive care,which of course leads to further complications and even more unpaid bills.

Before there was a black Democrate president it also made sense to republican conservatives. Before they were against it, the republicans were all for the "individual mandate."

Quote :

History of the Individual Health Insurance Mandate, 1989-2010

Republican Origins of Democratic Health Care Provision

Heritage Foundation's 1989 report is considered to be the conceptual origin of the health insurance mandate.

The concept of the individual health insurance mandate is considered to have originated in 1989 at the conservative Heritage Foundation. In 1993, Republicans twice introduced health care bills that contained an individual health insurance mandate. Advocates for those bills included prominent Republicans who today oppose the mandate including Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Robert Bennett (R-UT), and Christopher Bond (R-MO). In 2007, Democrats and Republicans introduced a bi-partisan bill containing the mandate.
http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004182

Quote :

How the Heritage Foundation, a Conservative Think Tank, Promoted the Individual Mandate

http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/10/20/how-a-conservative-think-tank-invented-the-individual-mandate/

In reality, the Affordable Health Care Act is really pretty damned good. I saw an excellent presentation on it in January by Jonathan Gruber from MIT, who served as an advisor for both the Massachusetts and national health care reform bills.

He covered a lot of ground in an hour, and IMHO, it's definitely worth watching.

If you're interested, here's a link to the video.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Grub

I've always thought it is a good idea.

Quote :

What is the cause of excess costs in US healthcare? Take three - signs of reform

We've already extensively discussed why it costs twice as much for the US to provide healthcare for it's citizens all the while failing to cover health care for all. Most recently, we discussed the hidden tax of the uninsured and the perverse incentive structure of US healthcare which encourage costlier care, more utilization, and more procedures.

To summarize, the US spends more on healthcare compared to other industrialized nations because

• We deliver it inefficiently
  
• Without universality problems present when critical and in the ER
  
• Fee-for-service incentives in the form of excessive reimbursement for procedures and hospitals ramp up costs by encouraging doctors to overuse expensive tests and perform more procedures
  
• Direct-to-consumer advertising (we are one of two countries that allow advertisement of prescription drugs) and medicare part D encourage overuse of pharmaceuticals while tying providers hands when it comes to bargaining for lower drug prices
  
• Defensive medicine
  
• Poor management of end-of-life decisions and excessive and futile overuse of resources at the end of life
  
• Absence of a universal electronic medical record (or record format) to prevent redundancy and waste.

Now, what about the new Affordable Care Act? Are there going to be measures to address these sources of excess cost while creating universal coverage? The WaPo has an article outlining reforms addressing many of these specific problems.

Spoiler alert: It's not a prelude to a Nazi, socialist, zombie, Islamic, Anti-Christ hellscape. It's just going to work, which is why Republicans hate it so much.

Quote :

Get Mad: Health Care CEOs Now Make More Than Bankers

While the Time's Person of the Year has been distracted protesting the financial industry, the salaries of healthcare CEOs have been skyrocketing. The same American companies that are fighting health care reform are making Wall Street's famously inflated compensation packages -- that means paychecks as well as stock options -- look minuscule in comparison. The latest statistics show that not a single banker made it onto the list of top ten best-paid executives this year. The Guardian's Dominic Rushe offered up a few startling figures in his report on the newly released GMI Survey of CEO pay in 2010. Three of the top ten best-paid CEOs run health care companies:
John Hammergren, CEO of McKesson Corporation (a pharmaceutical company): $145,266,971
Joel F Gemunder, CEO of Omnicare (a pharmacy for the elderly): $98,283,242
Thomas M Ryan, CVS Caremark Corporation (a pharmacy for everybody): $68,079,823

If you're having a hard time stomaching the idea of paying health care executives nine-figure-sums as rising health care costs are making some Americans homeless, the story does have a bright side. Bankers' salaries are sinking fast.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/business/2011/12/get-mad-healthcare-ceos-now-make-more-than-bankers/46213/

Heretic wrote:

Spoiler alert: It's not a prelude to a Nazi, socialist, zombie, Islamic, Anti-Christ hellscape. It's just going to work, which is why Republicans hate it so much.

Exactly! Every good piece of legislation Democrats ever produced becomes a target of Repubs sooner or later. Whether it's Medicare,Civil rights,minimum wage,etc.

There's no such thing as affordable health care. The states that implemented the new Aetna Health Care is in disrepair. They have caused more people to run to the ER than ever before. There are no doctors willing to sign on to the AtnaHealthCare in 25 states.

As far as Medicare, there won't be any in the future the way the democrats spend and don't know what the hell they are doing - can't balance a butdget since 2009, but they want to tell you where to go, who to see, and what meds you are allowed.

Government should stay out of the business of medicine. If anything, require all the states to buy meds in bulk and allow people to travel and not having to worry if their stupid medical is covered in another state. How restricting. And...that's what ObamaCARE will do for you. You will be waiting months for doctors.

The Wall Street Journal last year reported that ObamaCare calls for sending heart patients to pediatricians, and "take a crash course in cardiology," and take a cut in pay. Ill. cannot find one freaking doctor west of cook county that will join Aetna. The few that have or own clinics that accept it, can't speak English.

UrRight wrote:

The Wall Street Journal last year reported that ObamaCare calls for sending heart patients to pediatricians, and "take a crash course in cardiology," and take a cut in pay. Ill. cannot find one freaking doctor west of cook county that will join Aetna. The few that have or own clinics that accept it, can't speak English.

Do you ever get tired of making things up and posting out and out lies? Don't blame Obama for the fact you're on Medicaid.

I'd also be willing to bet that Dr's don't like dealing with you either. I have a strong suspicion that you've been prescribed psychotropic drugs and refuse to take them as prescribed. What else would possibly explain your behavior?

Meet the Republicans for Mandated Coverage...They were all for it until Obama was for it