What is the minimum change you personally would accept as "reform" in the health care debate?

[leftofthedial]

I think they'll pass a bill and spend hundreds of millions trying to convince us that it's "reform," but I'm not so sure what's likely to pass will really change much of anything, except to further benefit insurance companies.

I think "reform" without single payer, or any change that leaves health insurance companies in business, is not real reform, but I'd accept a strong public option, like Medicare for anyone who wants it, and agree that it would constitute significant change for the better.

How about you? What is your non-negotiable requirement?

[Indenturedebtor]

1. A full public plan administered by the gov

Anything with any kind of private "management" or "administration" would be an ineffective sop to the Ins companies.

[ZombieHorde]

2. No more preexisting conditions clauses, affordable options for everyone,

and people get decent care.

[Honeycombe8]

3. I guess I'll have to accept whatever they pass. But I'll be angry if there's no public option, at a

minimum. SOME way to get health care, when you're unemployed or don't have a high income, without going through an insurance company, yet you don't qualify for Medicaid. (I think Medicaid and Medicare already take care of the rest.)

[and-justice-for-all]

4. A real Public Option, anything else is NOT reform..nt

[Sebastian Doyle]

17. +1

[polichick]

21. +2

[pampango]

5. Universal coverage, no pre-existing condition exclusions, can't lose coverage,

and some mechanism of controlling medical cost inflation.

British system would be best, Canadian system next, then a strong public option, but you asked for the minimum.

[TxRider]

47. German system might be easier to implement here.

But for me it's as simple as making sure everyone is covered, at an affordable price. Subsidies for those who cannot afford it.

[POAS]

6. Prefer single-payer, will accept

a good government option (medicare-for-all) in direct competition with private plans. Let the insurance companies get the ability to market across state lines because this would bring them under federal regulation through the interstate commerce laws.

Eventually the insurance companies will be forced into the "supplimental insurance" business and out of primary care to stay alive.

[uponit7771]

7. No discrimination for sick, no preconditions. That alone would make the current HCI's go bankrupt...

...and then people would clammer for a pub option

[Warren Stupidity]

8. No exclusions no rate shut outs etc reform/regulation,

a 'robust public option' for some value of robust and some value of public, no cherry picking (see no exclusions no rate shut outs) by 'private options' and some form of everyone in.

[Faryn Balyncd]

9. (1)Public Plan available to all, (2)paying Medicare rates to providers AND(3)Open Enrollment by both

....public & private plans.


If only all 3 conditions are met will the insurance companies be forced to compete.

If the insurance companies succeed in forcing a Public Plan to pay inflated rates to providers, rather than Medicare rates, then the premiums in the Public Plan will become unaffordable, since the Public Plan is required to be self-sustaining (If the self-sustaining requirement is dropped, then taxpayers will be forced to pick up the rest, in effect becoming the subsidizers of Big Insurance by enabling Big Insurance to continue their racket.

Likewise, if Big Insurance succeeds in exempting themselves from Open Enrollment, and allowing themto continue ti cherry pick and deny high risk enrollees based on pre-existing conditions, then they will have succeeeded in dumping all high risk patients into the Public Plan, which will consequently have high premiums, and Big Insurance will be able to continue their racket of overcharging their cherry-picked, low risk demographics.

In either of the above events, Big Insurance will have succeeded in crippling the Public Plan, & shield themselves from competition.

Consequently, we need MORE than a universally available Public Plan, for the Public Plan to be viable. We need the following:

- - - (1) Medicare based provider payment rates, and

- - - (2) Open Enrollment (no pre-existing condition exclusions) with community rating by BOTH PUBLIC & PRIVATE PLANS.






(K&R, by the way)

[bvar22]

10. My preference is to simply expand Medicare.

This is clearly the simplest and most economical road to true reform.
Incremental expansion starting with a drop from 65 to 55,
and expanding 10 years every 3 years is acceptable.


I will hold my nose, and as a last resort settle for a STRONG Public Option.

A STRONG Public Option:
Publicly Owned government administered option ("like Medicare"), with the unfettered ability to negotiate prices with Providers & Pharm, and is available to anyone who wants it.


ANYTHING less is a Trillion Dollar GIFT to the Health Insurance Industry.

With the exception of HR 676 (extending Medicare to ALL), none of the Bills currently in Congress come close to providing a any REAL Reform.

[Overseas]

11. Expand Medicare as soon as possible to all who want it.

That is the most effective option. Infrastructure in place. Low overhead.

Mixture of public and private-- medical services privately delivered-- between you & your doctors. Payments and cost controls publicly administered, accountable to the public.

Also, expanding an existing program can be done via Reconciliation. 51 votes would be fine. We can leave those disgustingly corrupt Blue Dogs alone and if they don't join their party in the moral imperative of Medicare for all, we can begin to support candidates to run against them.

My preference-- 2010 open Medicare to 50+ because private insurance companies practice great age discrimination by tripling of premiums for workers over 50. It is a real handicap in the job market.

[LiberalFighter]

12. Personally, I want all health insurance assholes castrated.

Could we get that slipped into the bill?

[leftofthedial]

23. we could,

but when it came time for the snippage, the procedure probably wouldn't be approved.

[CTyankee]

13. If there is no public option then don't do it, period. Don't waste the time and the money.

That is all.

[barbiegeek]

16. How many LIVES will DIE without some changes

If a small bill saves 1 million people it is worth it.

[CTyankee]

18. What I am saying is that if all we get is a giveaway to the insurance companies who STILL

won't cover people with preexisting conditions (or only cover them at an expesnisve cost they cannot afford) then how does that save their lives?

If all we get is expanded Medicaid I'd be in favor of that, however. Otherwise, I can't see how the insurance companies can make a profit w/o denying sick people coverage. They are in business to make money and they can't make money covering the people that you are talking about. So they won't cover them...

[ljm2002]

14. A public option...

...that is open to anyone who cares to join, if necessary phased in over a period of no more than 3 years.

We don't have to jump to single payer, but we do need a public option.

I'm worried about something even if we do succeed in getting a public option passed: namely, if its provisions are too weak, and if who can join is very restricted. It appears that right now, both of these are true in the bills under consideration. Obama and his team like to throw out the catch phrase "If you like your insurance, you can keep it!". But what they never bring up is the flip side: what if you don't like your insurance? or what if you would just prefer to join a public, not-for-profit insurance program that has less overhead? Nope, you're out of luck. You have to continue in the same program you are in now. In fact it is projected to cover only 10 million or so people and that in a few years, not right away. That IMO is not reform, but a sop to progressives, a fig leaf they can hide behind when voting for the bill if that is what they choose to do.

I would like to see the progressives in the House and the Senate hammer out a strong public option. I'm okay if we don't go straight to single payer, although that would have been my first choice. I'm not okay with a weak option that few of us can choose anyway. Right now is a time for political boldness on this issue!

[barbiegeek]

15. Ending Insurance Discrimination for AUTISM, ASPERGERS, & Spectrum Disorders

Insurance companies do not cover any care for Autism, Asperger or Spectrum related disorders. We are not treated equally with other mental disorders such as down's syndrome or mental retardation or stroke. We deserve the same rights as any American.

[CTyankee]

19. And the best way to do that is with a public option. nt

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

20. A full public plan I do believe will eventually lead to single payer, so we must make sure

the public option is strong and not watered down.

[DailyGrind51]

22. It must include a strong public option.

[leftofthedial]

24. Single-payer is stil the best "public option"

Maybe it will make a comeback...

[mkultra]

25. all take anything i can get. We can go back to the well for 7 more years

passing a bill doesn't mean we stop trying.

[Sebastian Doyle]

28. Yeah, just pass any old shitty bill. We can fix it later.....

...Just like NAFTA, right? :eyes:

[mkultra]

39. any reform is helpful

we should get as much as we can.

[Sebastian Doyle]

41. False reform is WORSE than the status quo

Especially if it's the mandatory corporatist Romneycare type. They get to claim "everyone's covered" and it's STILL in the hands of the insurance criminals, with no possibility of any REAL reform, because they will claim the problem was solved. And again, they (the DLC corporatists) told us they would "fix" NAFTA. They never did, and as a result, millions of Americans are jobless. Most lost their healthcare as a result, BTW.

We can NOT accept a half-assed non-solution this time.

[mkultra]

43. its only worse if we lose ground

Only in some twisted fear based world will some change for the better equal change or the worse. I know, i know, save your breath. War is peace and all your bullshit.

[Sebastian Doyle]

45. How do we NOT "lose ground"

If EVERYONE is forced to buy useless insurance from corporate criminals? Or if useless "co-ops" are set up, deliberately designed to fail. Where is the gain in that for anybody? (aside from the criminals)

Single payer/medicare for all is the solution. A real public option is the acceptable compromise. Anything less than that is unacceptable. End of story.

[bunkerbuster1]

26. A modest "public plan," i.e., lowering Medicare age eligibility to 55...

that sort of thing.

Bottom line is, I want a significant expansion of publicly funded health insurance. I want this to be a net loss for the private insurers--the rollback needs to start now.

[Milo_Bloom]

27. Without a strong public option, it does more harm than good.

[LWolf]

29. Minimum?

A strong, vibrant public option open to ALL.

Which IS the compromise, when we should be getting universal, not-for-profit single-payer.

[old mark]

30. I want to see REAL public option, such as available Medicare. But

I doubt they will consult me. They haven't taken much notice of my opinion over the last months, something I expect to continue.

But I will still continue to email the White House when sufficiently enraged.

mark

[boppers]

31. Retroactive care.

Call it "pre-existing", "exclusions", whatever, affordable health care for people, regardless of their history, should be available.

It doesn't matter to me if it's called "Medicare", "Public Option", or "Super Evil But Affordable Corporate Medicine", as long as people can get it.

[PurityOfEssence]

32. Guaranteed affordable coverage for EVERYONE

Anything less is putting profit above human lives.

[Becky72]

33. public option, allow drug importation from Canada, and lower costs n/t

[IndianaGreen]

34. I didn't vote for insurance reform.

I voted for universal health care!

[eridani]

35. Open Medicare to those who want to buy into it

The proposed public option and insurance exchange do not take effect until 2013, which is WAY too late. Medicare is up and running already.

[Amos Moses]

36. Whatever happens, I want the money spent on

health care, not on a bunch of goddamn insurance companies. They're the ones that have our health care system in such a sorry state to begin with. To leave them in control, with no serious public option, would just be another kick in the teeth for the working class.

[Mass]

37. Too early to ask the question. The battle for a public option has not be fought.

When it is, however, and if it is clear it cannot pass, we must remember that no change is not an option (whatever some people think). There are people dying in this country whose life could be saved by changes that are already accepted by all. Implement them and continue the fight, but please, stop talking about compromising BEFORE the fight is fought.

[GreenPartyVoter]

38. First choice is immediate Medicare-for- all, but second choice is an

immediate Medicare-for-all-who-want-it public option.

[brentspeak]

40. Minimum for me is universal public option -- EVERYONE can opt in

and the public option would need to be a legit insurance plan

[Skidmore]

42. More regulation of the insurance industry AND get it out of the

investment/banking business while they are at it. Rein in big pharma.

[Tippy]

44. Change the Debate Single Payer is a Public Option........N/T

[zulchzulu]

46. Take away the socialized, government-run healthcare from anyone who voted against it

That includes Senators, Congress members, governors, any other politicians or anyone who protested against healthcare reform.

[blue_onyx]

48. Reforms I want...

I want:
-a single-payer system


I'll accept:
-Public option with NO individual mandate
-Stop insurance companies from not insuring those with preexisting conditions
-allow prescription drugs to be brought in from Canada