US Health Care Reform

Debate: US Health Care Reform (Goes to Conference Comittiee)

Currently the a stool in the Domestic policy of the Obama Administration, my favorite topic: Health Care reform, is being publicly debated throughout the United States.

Original thread: https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=189588





[FONT=&quot]Summary: [/FONT]
The summary of the bill includes the following elements, among others:

• prohibiting health insurers from refusing coverage based on patients' medical histories
• prohibiting health insurers from charging different rates based on patients' medical histories or gender
• repeal of insurance companies' exemption from anti-trust laws
• establishing minimum standards for qualified health benefit plans
• requiring most employers to provide coverage for their workers or pay a surtax on the worker's wages up to 8%
• restrictions on abortion coverage in any insurance plans for which federal funds are used
• an expansion of Medicaid to include more low-income Americans by increasing Medicaid eligibility limits to 150% of the Federal Poverty Level and by covering adults without dependents so as long as either or any segment doesn't fall under the narrow exceptions outlined by various clauses throughout the proposal.
• a subsidy to low- and middle-income Americans to help buy insurance
• a central health insurance exchange where the public can compare policies and rates
• a government-run insurance plan (public option); according to some analyses, the plan would be prohibited from covering abortions
• requiring most Americans to carry or obtain qualifying health insurance coverage or possibly face a surtax for non-compliance.
• a 5.4% surtax on individuals whose adjusted gross income exceeds $500,000 ($1 million for married couples filing joint returns)
• a 2.5% excise tax on medical devices
• reductions in projected spending on Medicare of $400 billion over a ten-year period
• inclusion of language originally proposed in the Tax Equity for Domestic Partner and Health Plan Beneficiaries Act
• inclusion of language originally proposed in the Indian Health Care Improvement Act Amendments of 2009.

Status:

US House of Representatives: Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962, introduced October 29, 2009, passed on November 7, 2009)

The United States House of Representatives has passed it's version of the bill by a vote of 220 Yay - 215 Nay.

The bill was supported by 219 Democrats and one Republican - Joseph Cao from New Orleans. Opposed were 176 Republicans and 39 Democrats.

Now the bill must be reconciled with the Senate Version in a Joint US House-Senate Conference Committee.

US House of Representatives (1st Vote): Bill Passed (220 Yay - 215 Nay)

[FONT=&quot]Tri Committee: [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]House Energy and Commerce[/FONT][FONT=&quot]: Bill revised/Passed (31 Yes - 28 No)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]House Ways and Means[/FONT][FONT=&quot] : Bill revised/Passed (23 Yes – 18 No) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]House Education and Labor:[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Bill revised/Passed (26 Yes - 22 No) [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]US Senate: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) is a bill passed by the United States Senate at 7:05am on December 24, 2009.[/FONT]

On December 21, the Senate voted to end the Republican filibuster and vote on their version of health care reform, by 60 to 40.

On Christmas Eve of 2009, the Senate arrived at 7am Eastern Time, the first time the Senate had met on Christmas Eve since 1895, and passed the bill to be compromised by both houses of Congress by a vote of 60-39, with only Jim Bunning (R-KY) failing to vote.

The bill will need to go to Conference where differences with the House version may be resolved. If the Joint Conference Committee is able resolve any differences between each chamber's passed version of comprehensive health care reform, the resulting Committee Report becomes the lead proposal and goes back to each chamber to be voted on by the full-body. The Committee Report, if passed, can then be presented to President Barack Obama for his signature into law or be vetoed back to Congress.

US Senate (1st Vote): Bill Passed (60 Yay - 39 Nay)

[FONT=&quot]Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee: Bill revised/Passed (13 Yes – 10 No) [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Senate Finance Committee[/FONT][FONT=&quot]: Bill revised/Passed (14 Yes - 9 No)[/FONT]

No Country for Sick Men: To judge the content of a nation's character, look no further than its health-care system.

United States - Private system

Private sector funded, with more than half from private sources. Private health insurance available through employer, government or private schemes.​

15.3% of population (45.7 million people) do not have health insurance.​

Federal government is largest healthcare insurer - involved in two main schemes, Medicaid and Medicare, each covering about 13% of population.​

Medicaid - joint funded federal-state programme for certain low income and needy groups - eg children, disabled.​

Medicare - for people 65 years old and above and some younger disabled people and those with permanent kidney failure undergoing dialysis or transplant.​

Most doctors are in private practice and paid through combination of charges, discounted fees paid by private health plans, public programmes, and direct patient fees.​

In-patient care is provided in public and private hospitals. Hospitals are paid through a combination of charges, per admission, and capitation.​

UK - Universal, tax-funded system​

Public sector funded by taxation and some national insurance contributions.​

About 11% have private health insurance. Private GP services very small.
Healthcare free at point of delivery but charges for prescription drugs (except in Wales), ophthalmic services and dental services unless exempt.
Exemptions include children, elderly, and unemployed. About 85% of prescriptions are exempt.
Most walk-in care provided by GP practices but also some walk-in clinics and 24-hour NHS telephone helpline. Free ambulance service and access to accident and emergency. In patient care through GP referral and follow contractual arrangements between health authorities, Primary Care Trusts and the hospital.
Hospitals are semi-autonomous self-governing public trusts.​

France - Social insurance system
All legal residents covered by public health insurance funded by compulsory social health insurance contributions from employers and employees with no option to opt out.
Most people have extra private insurance to cover areas that are not eligible for reimbursement by the public health insurance system and many make out of pocket payments to see a doctor.​

Patients pay doctor's bills and are reimbursed by sickness insurance funds.
Government regulates contribution rates paid to sickness funds, sets global budgets and salaries for public hospitals.
In-patient care is provided in public and private hospitals (not-for-profit and for-profit). Doctors in public hospitals are salaried whilst those in private hospitals are paid on a fee-for-service basis. Some public hospital doctors are allowed to treat private patients in the hospital. A percentage of the private fee is payable to the hospital.
Most out-patient care is delivered by doctors, dentists and medical auxiliaries working in their own practices.​

Singapore - Dual system
Dual system funded by private and public sectors. Public sector provides 80% of hospital care 20% primary care.​

Financed by combination of taxes, employee medical benefits, compulsory savings in the form of Medisave, insurance and out-of-pocket payments.
Patients expected to pay part of their medical expenses and to pay more for higher level of service. Government subsidises basic healthcare.​

Public sector health services cater for lower income groups who cannot afford private sector charges. In private hospitals and outpatient clinics, patients pay the amount charged by the hospitals and doctors on a fee-for-service basis.

Click to expand...

Ok now, combine the bills and re-debate it. Senate passes one w/o public option. House Passes one with it.

Goes to conference, Obama swoops in to influence the final legislation.

Final Bill goes to both Houses, Rahm Emanuel pressures the Lib Dems to support it w/o public option, Senate votes through reconciliation (50+1 Majority) and the President signs it into law.

Netto Azure said:

Senate panel passes health bill

Healthcare and reform: Strong opinions in US

​

YAHOO~


Ok now, combine the bills and re-debate it. Senate passes one w/o public option. House Passes one with it.
Goes to conference, Obama swoops in to influence the final legislation.
Final Bill goes to both Houses, Rahm Emanuel pressures the Lib Dems to support it w/o public option, Senate votes through reconciliation (50+1 Majority) and the President signs it into law. :P

No longer 50-50, the momentum is there even if it is the bare-bones Massachusetts plan. :P

Shoot, it's past the 1 month mark. TT^TT

Do I have to make another thread for this? Or just re-title it as revived?

Click to expand...

Yay, a bill without public option! Just what I always wanted! Now I'll be able to continue being ripped off by insurance companies! It's like my birthday, only in hell!

if its going to breakrupt our econmy no its not in direr need of fixing just tweeking govement oversight not gorverment take over

If they have ANYTHING in there saying that people who don't get health insurance will be penalized, I'm moving to England.

They have that in place in Massachusetts. And I HATE IT! That's why I despise Mitt Romney so much.

narutoactor said:

if its going to breakrupt our econmy no its not in direr need of fixing just tweeking govement oversight not gorverment take over

Click to expand...

Not sure if you're saying it will bankrupt the government or that it's bad only if it does bankrupt the government (and if it doesn't... it's okay?)

I for one am willing to pay more taxes to help fund this. It's not like I'd be paying more to the government than I would to insurers. Glad to see that stopping pre-existing conditions exclusions is almost the very top of the list. That's the kind of law that should be enshrined in the Constitution. Something like:

twocows said:

Yay, a bill without public option! Just what I always wanted! Now I'll be able to continue being ripped off by insurance companies! It's like my birthday, only in hell!

Click to expand...

Haha, my thoughts exactly...

narutoactor said:

if its going to breakrupt our econmy no its not in direr need of fixing just tweeking govement oversight not gorverment take over

Click to expand...

It won't bankrupt our economy any more than "socializing" law enforcement did when the country was made. Would you rather have police be owned by private corporations? Can you say "protection money?"

KR said:

Haha, my thoughts exactly...

Click to expand...

Cool, I got siggied. :3

Mario The World Champion said:

If they have ANYTHING in there saying that people who don't get health insurance will be penalized, I'm moving to England.

They have that in place in Massachusetts. And I HATE IT! That's why I despise Mitt Romney so much.

Click to expand...

Well that's why the insurance companies want to increase the penalties, to force people to buy from them, hence the need for the public option (As Massachusetts has shown us) to create true competition.

And the House bills don't have penalties I think. They just out and out tax those who make $2+ M. :S

narutoactor said:

if its going to breakrupt our econmy no its not in direr need of fixing just tweeking govement oversight not gorverment take over

Click to expand...

To be frank it won't bankrupt us as much as letting things go on like this. AND THIS IS GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS, hence no more Pre-existing stuff, and arbitary caps on coverage/dropping your policy. It's not "a government takeover" as have been trumpeted multiple times. IT'S NOT SINGLE-PAYER. @.@

I also have a problem with insuring illiagal imigrants if they illigal they shouldent be here and they shouldent have any perks
why should be reware the bad
and punsih the good(high taxes)
also I dont want to be find If I dont have heath covage

I don't like the fact that our government is trying socialized medicine. It's not even that I prefer the way it is now, it's one of the signs of turning to a socialist government entirely. The USSR showed that socialism on such a scale does not work in the real world. One angry president later, the US may not exist anymore...

On a more focused point, whether or not it passes, there had better be a public option or I'll want to gtfo the country. Forcing something like this down the throats of everybody in the USA? Nooo thanks. Birthday in hell indeed.

mOOG said:

I don't like the fact that our government is trying socialized medicine. It's not even that I prefer the way it is now, it's one of the signs of turning to a socialist government entirely. The USSR showed that socialism on such a scale does not work in the real world. One angry president later, the US may not exist anymore...

Click to expand...

The USSR was communist (and we'll never be sure how long they would have lasted if the US hadn't bankrupted them with an arms race). Most of the developed world is already more socialized than the US will be if it gets this into law. The US is not getting anywhere near what the USSR was. That's just fearmongering.

Amazing, I don't even remember the last time I went to the doctor for some care.

Why are Americans willing to spend so much.

I don't like that summary, they need to leave private enterprises alone.

i voted maybe so because i don't really care. i mean, one way or another, we're going to die, if its from the health care re-form or not. so why should i bother caring about something that might kill us or not, when i could be worrying about some more important to me? and before anyone says anything, this is my OPINION!

pokejungle said:

That's like telling the government to turn a blind eye to rape. Privatized insurance companies have taken the business of keeping us healthy and turning it into a business of making themselves rich, without regard for people's actual welfare. It isn't even so much an economical debate anymore so much as a moral one, how can we let so many people suffer because they cannot afford insurance in order to take themselves to the doctor? Dentist? Their kids to the ER?

It's just such a ridiculous situation. Luckily my family has no financial trouble, but I have plenty of friends who do not have health insurance and they have run into some real trouble. Business cannot come before the basic needs of humans. That is pure greed.

Click to expand...

I thought that summary was directed towards all employers?

I don't mind if the government is just bothering the Medical Insurance companies with this bill.