Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why can't we just tell congress we want medicare open to all?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:23 PM
Original message
Why can't we just tell congress we want medicare open to all?
All those seniors screaming not to touch their medicare are the best sales job anyone could ever do for the program.

Why should they get the best plan and the rest of us be stuck with all this pre-existing condition crap from private insurers? Its NOT FAIR!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. +1 n/t
:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. I believe that idea's come up
...from time to time so I don't think telling Congress is exactly the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. You can tell Congress anything - the problem comes when they are deaf.
But they understand pictures. Particularly those pretty portraits that come on legal tender.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. I don't want to force everyone to go into medicare, just given the option.
The first bill requires that providers be non-profit/public. I don't think we can limit it like that.

The second bill specifies a percentage of income from the participant and the employer. I was thinking it would be along the lines of the same way we pay now and we wouldn't be subsidized by the taxpayer but make the inclusion of additional people revenue neutral.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orwell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
4. Because it makes too much sense...
...You could start by opening up Medicare for low cost buy-ins for the 40+ million uninsured. Those families at or near poverty level could be subsidized depending on their income.

It would be far more difficult to demagogue Medicare than it is to attack simplistic catch phrases like "public option" or "single payer" even though Medicare is a single payer system. We could call it something innocuous like "Medicare Plus".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. That would work if most Congresscritters saw us as their employer - instead of corporate America. nt
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 02:42 PM by polichick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
7. because we need to change the fee for service model too.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Whoa. That is a pretty huge change.
We haven't begun to discuss that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. It's coming, although coming soon...
Edited on Sun Aug-23-09 03:24 PM by Davis_X_Machina
...the experience of Massachusetts' insurance-mandate plan is driving them in the direction of capitation payments.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Interesting.
It talks about problems in the past with delay of treatment due to costs though. How do we address that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Now that you've read the piece...
...you now know all that I know. :-)

This is a hobby -- my day job is as a Latin teacher and debate coach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Just being contrary..but we really should discuss it
all the other stuff...public option, exchanges (or medicare for all if we were smart), needs to anticipate this fact. We can't change it right away, we'd break the economy. But definitely build structres that can adapt to a world without it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. Why can't the POTUS open it up with an executive order?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Sounds good to me.
Maybe if we march on Washington?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Because our last king was about 220 years ago? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. in fact, just the opposite is taking place. this joke of an INSURANCE reform

(i.e., a private insurance wet dream) is going to be funded primarily by gigantic, unprecedented and atrocious cuts to Medicare/Medicaid. see this, for example: http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20090823/OPINION03/9...

i don't understand why more people are not LIVID about this monstrosity; Medicare is being dismantled so insurance industry can have their gauranteed profits. it's simply obscene.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quantass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
16. But..but..but...your Congressmen wouldnt be getting his Kick-Backs from the Lobbyists any longer...
Cant let that happen...Daddy needs a new pair shoes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clear Blue Sky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-23-09 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
18. I've thought much the same.
It is a "government option" that is already in place and running. Most seniors seem to like it. Let people buy in at rates tied to income levels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Nov 27th 2014, 04:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC