Platform Item 1: Healthcare
The Federal Government must limit its involvement in the Healthcare issue to those functions authorized by our Constitution. This federal government is authorized only to create a climate that enables desired economic measures within the marketplace and that fosters competition.
1. Barriers to competition that exist between states must be abolished and insurance companies must be free to competitively determine for themselves what will be included in their policies.
2. Tort reform must be enacted to place a cap on awards for medical malpractice and that share the risk between both the patient and the doctor. Measures must be adopted that penalize frivolous lawsuits by awarding the winner the opportunity to recover attorney fees from the loser.
3. Onerous legislation that requires insurers to cover pre-existing conditions, high risk occupations and high risk lifestyles must be repealed with the intent that persons who fall within these categories will seek other solutions within their respective states or within privately supported charities.
4. Medicare must pay market rates. All price or cost fixing must end.
5. Create a tax deductible and portable medical savings account through which insurance can be purchased and medical bills paid.
6. Allow access to our healthcare system by persons in this country illegally but upon discharge these individuals must be immediately deported. They will be responsible for their entire bill and if they are unable to pay, any remainder of their bill shall be paid by the US Government and will be presented to their home nation for payment or via offset will reduce any payment pending to that country that is in the form of any government obligation.
Affirmative Argument
The primary reason that medical costs are so high is that federal and state governments have already meddled too much.
1. Eliminate state barriers to competition. Allow all insurance companies and all individuals and employers to participate in a national marketplace and purchase those elements of care that make most sense for them. There may be a need for some bundling to pass the risk of certain care to a larger pool but companies must be free to offer policies that do this or that finitely target their products toward smaller individual customer populations. This should be up to them. Consumers must be able to vote with their feet and move to companies that better target their individual needs.
2. Congress must enact tort reform. As long as exorbitant settlements are awarded to people who believe the risk of outcome for a procedure should all be with the surgeon, malpractice insurance rates will remain high and doctors will apply defensive medicine to ensure that no tonsillectomy is performed without first doing a MRI of both knees. People must assume some risk of outcome and caps need to be set on malpractice suits that will eliminate the propensity to practice defensive medicine. A cap must be placed on class action lawsuits and it must be established that the prevailing party be reimbursed attorney fees by the losing party. This would do much to eliminate frivolous lawsuits and in the case of class action suits it might actually reward the individual victims more than the attorney.
3. Governments have required that insurance companies include people in their risk pools they would otherwise exclude. People with pre-existing conditions, people in high risk occupations or persons who engage in high risk life-styles cannot be guaranteed coverage by a government that is not and should not be in the insurance business. The actuarial cost of this coverage increases the costs for all policy holders. Given this situation, let’s discuss, not in days or weeks but in months and within the fifty state legislatures, alternatives for people to obtain insurance that is otherwise priced out of the reach or set aside some of the budget to self-insure people who require assistance.
4. Programs like Medicare and Medicaid do not control costs. They fix reimbursements. Medical practitioners must recoup the costs that are not covered by these programs from other healthcare clients. Medicare and Medicaid must pay market rates. The greatest sin of the Nixon Administration was not the Watergate Cover-Up. It was wage and price controls. Wage and price controls have a devastating effect on the economy. Wage and price control in our healthcare system is a recipe for disaster. Let the market adjust freely to the needs of the marketplace. Government, stay out of it.
5. Empower people with actual ownership of a tax deductible medical savings account from which actual healthcare premiums, co-pays, deductibles, etc. can be paid. This would ensure portability and people will more logically ration their own care and visit the doctor only when actually necessary. We built the 401K, could we not build something similar to provide for our own health maintenance? The healthcare consumer currently bears no direct relationship to the cost of the service being provided. When all we are required to pay is a $15.00 co-pay, many take the attitude that they will visit the doctor for all sorts of ailments that used to be taken care of at home with a shot of whiskey, a teaspoon of lemon juice, a bowl of chicken soup or a little rest.
6. Illegal aliens must not be denied access to our hospital emergency rooms but they should be required to pay the cost for their care from their own pocket. If they lack the funds then the unpaid amount of medical care should be deducted from any foreign aid provided their home country. They also should be deported so they won’t be a drain on our system again.
In summary, the problem is too much government involvement. Let’s not make things worse and destroy our system by increasing government involvement.
Great article. Keep up the good work.
Reply to this
Articles like yours help me to liberalize and understand many things. Of course, if the topic is interesting one can open some http://www.pdfqueen.com/country/Sri Lanka/15-04-2010.html ebooks search engine download and read...
Reply to this
Great outline of points against the reform plan. Although is passed, I think our frustrations were heard and there is still a chance for us to make a stand against furthering the policy.
Reply to this
Thanks for your support and informative post.
Reply to this
You really make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this topic to be really something which I think I would never understand. It seems too complicated and very broad for me. I am looking forward for your next post, I will try to get the hang of it!
Reply to this
It is complicated, more so as a result of the fact that the world is not static. Government creates a regulation and people react. Just as they react by doing less of something once that something is taxed, they react in positive and negative ways when government subsidizes something. You can expect that when government provides free healthcare that people will take advantage of the system. Some will game it. Some will simply overuse it. Some won't make any changes to their lives at all. Tragically, when government regulates it does so as though the world is static and they are introducing an action into a fixed economy. But their artificial stimulus impairs. Then a second regulation is adopted and it impairs again. It is never ending. This is why overregulation is so harmful.
Reply to this
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.
Reply to this
This is a good site to spent time on .I just stumbled upon your informative blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. I will be your frequent visitor, that’s for sure.
Reply to this
It’s hard to find knowledgeable people on this topic, but you sound like you know what you’re talking about! Thanks
Reply to this
Hi, I appreciate your speculating as it attracts people’s attention and make this topic discussable.
Reply to this
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.
Reply to this
I found your website perfect for my needs. It contains wonderful and helpful posts. I have read most of them and learned a lot from them. You are doing some great work. Thank you for making such a nice website.
Reply to this
Thank you for another great article. Where else could anyone get that kind of information in such a perfect way of writing? I have a presentation next week, and I am on the look for such information.
Reply to this
Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I'll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon..
Reply to this
I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it Smile I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post..
Reply to this
Just Wanted to state that this post has got some excellent info....i dont entirely agree with every thing that is stated..and would like to hear some other points of view on the matter
Reply to this
I would never expect anyone to agree with me all the time. I don't agree with myself all the time. As I grow older I find that I will occasionally change my mind as a result of reflection or because of changes in the environment. When I began this blog I did so to encourage discussion and debate. It was my hope that I would receive comments from people that would improve upon the topics I put in play and the platform would evolve into something more representative of what multiple Tea Partiers believe.
I would encourage you to please tell us when you disagree with any part of what I have put forward and what part that is. One of us may have missed an argument and others who read this blog may benefit from that other point of view.
Reply to this
Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts. Any way I will be subscribing to your feed and I hope you post again soon.
Reply to this
I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post.
Reply to this
hey buddy,this is one of the best posts that I've ever seen; you may include some more ideas in the same theme. I'm still waiting for some interesting thoughts from your side in your next post.
Reply to this
I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post
Reply to this
Nice post. This is a great blog and I have to congratulate you on the content.
Reply to this
Awesome information. Thank you for posting and keep up the good work. I'll be following your blog closely from now on!
Reply to this
A good article on the health care and so nicely posted the comments and a good on the solutions so nice posted the comments.........
Reply to this
This is just the information I am finding everywhere. Thanks for your blog, I just subscribe your blog. This is a nice blog.
Reply to this
I can see that you are an expert in this field! I am launching a website soon, and this information is very useful for me. Thanks for all your help and wishing you all the success in your business.
Reply to this
I like your style, the fact that your site is a little bit different makes it so interesting, I get fed up of seeing same-old-same-old all of the time. I've just stumbled this page for you
Reply to this
That was an ideal commentary. I stumbled by your article and thought it very helpful.
Reply to this
This is my first time at your blog and I've really enjoyed looking around. I will come back again in the future to check out some of the other articles.
Reply to this
very nice article! Just want to say thank you for the information you have shared. Just continue writing this kind of post. Thanks.
Reply to this
What an interesting blog! Thanks for the write up.
Reply to this
Very good post. Hope to see even more great posts in the future.
Reply to this
It seems you have a very popular blog! congrats
Reply to this
Hey, I read a lot of blogs on a daily basis and for the most part people lack substance but I just wanted to make a quick comment to say GREAT blog
Reply to this
I usually don’t post in blogs but your blog forced me to, because of some mystery power 女子偵探, 徵信社 , 婚外情 , 女子偵探, Cheer!
Reply to this
This federal government is authorized only to create a climate that enables desired economic measures within the marketplace.
Did God tell you that? It sure as hell doesn't actually say that anywhere that I can see.
This is but another right wing platitude bandied about as if it God ordained it when in fact it is nonsense.
Reply to this
Excuse me but did I indicate that I was quoting from the Constitution or was I perhaps using my own words to describe limits that exist in the Constitution?
Article I of the Constitution enumerates the power of the Congress:
Sections 1 - 7 detail the makeup of the Congress, how it is organized, who qualifies for membership and how members are elected.
Section 8 identifies the power to the Congress to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, etc. to pay the debt and to provide for the General Welfare of the United States. As defined by Madison himself in Federalist 41, General Welfare speaks only toward those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Section 8 also provides the Congress the power to
Section 9 deals largely with the end of the importation of slaves and
· money drawn from the treasury must first be appropriated
· no title of nobility shall be granted
Section 10 prevents states from entering treaties, alliances or confederation, grant its own letters of marque and reprisal, coin money, emit bills of credit, make anything but gold or silver coin legal tender, pass any bill of attainder or law impairing the obligation of contracts or grant any title of nobility
This section also limits the states' powers to without the consent of Congress lay an import or duty on import or export except those necessary to cover the costs of inspection and grants exclusive rights to the Congress to write or rewrite laws involving exports and imports.
No state shall without the consent of the Congress maintain its own army or navy or engage in war unless actually invaded or in imminent danger as will not admit of delay.
There. Now note that I highlighted many of the examples of the Constitution providing Congress the ability to
"This federal government is authorized only to create a climate that enables desired economic measures within the marketplace."
One might also argue that among the reasons Congress has the power to maintain and equip an army and a navy is to protect commerce. No, I had no epiphany from God that told me this. I did something really novel. I read our nation's governing document.
Now, do please cite your evidence that the federal government has the enumerated power to require that we buy health insurance or to insert itself in the healthcare decisions and relationships between doctors and patients.
Your turn. Cite your evidence to the contrary.
Reply to this
Onerous legislation that requires insurers to cover pre-existing conditions, high risk occupations and high risk lifestyles must be repealed with the intent that persons who fall within these categories will seek other solutions within their respective states or within privately supported charities.
The right wing and the Republican Party says to those with pre-existing conditions, "Go to hell and be quick about it." You are my kind of people. As far as I am concerned you and the right wing can go to hell.
What utter thoughtless rot you publish. I have seen enough nonsense, good bye.
Reply to this
Where in what I wrote did you see a sense of abandonment of people who are in dire straits because of pre-existing conditions? Did I not say that the answer for these people is at the state and local level or through charities? This is simply not within the scope of the federal government.
Insurance companies are businesses that charge a fee for service and in their judgment they cannot include pre-existing conditions in a healthcare plan and maintain its affordability. Think about it logically instead of emotionally. If you are the insurer would you offer fire insurance to someone whose home just burned to the ground?
Somehow you and your ilk immediately jump to the conclusion that if the federal government is not the approved venue, it can't happen at all. This is insulting to your own intelligence and most insulting to conservatives. But you appear content to rant rather than read. Explore your nation's founding documents and listen with open ears instead of an open mouth. You might learn something.
Reply to this
Hello. I am an MD, seeing firsthand the incredible expenses to come from obesity. In discussions with patients and patients' parents, it is clear to me that the obese person's actions, including the parents', are taken very lightly by them. In other words, they really do not want to be told they are "fat", or "overweight" or "obese" in any way. They deny this continually. Unfortunately the expenditures that go even far beyond the healthcare realm, are enormous. I do not believe in more "taxation", except in certain circumstances where taxation can lead to reduction in dangerous and expensive behavior. From my experience, I can clearly see too that the lack of discipline that is shown in overweight/obese people translates into workers (not always, but by far "usually") that are slower, more "lazy" and unhealthy and less productive. There is no way such a "worker" can compete with foreign labor. I have some very simple solutions to this problem. It must be recognized and understood that these people are greatly increasing the cost of insurance and healthcare for the entire nation. First, ALL "confection" type foods/drinks must be taxed at 100% of their retail cost, essentially doubling the cost of all sweets and junk food. This allows choice, but a more expensive one. Second: Using standard BMI charts as a guideline, insurers would be mandated to charge a given additional charge for anyone lying two or more "levels" into the "overweight" area. In other words, there would be some leeway for body types to allow for SOME excess weight, but beyond a certain amount, the cost to the person for insurance greatly increases. Third. Using these same criteria, all employers would be required to reduce a person's salary (even a new employee) by 25 cents/hr each month the person is over the given weight. This would lower costs for businesses and be a huge incentive for people to lose weight. Similar types of procedures must be enacted for the unemployed and welfare recipients as well. There are many people who are so overweight that their chances of getting a job are significantly reduced. You may say this is "discrimination" but it is a fact of life and human behavior. Therefore, these people are chronically unemployed and on welfare. Welfare checks should be reduced similarly each month based on a person's weight. Food stamps must be returned to just that, not debit cards that we know people have been using for all sorts of expensive items and even trips. Certain foods must be eliminated from the food stamp programs, and stamps must be used only for staple items (such as milk, bread, grains, fruit, vegetables, cheaper cuts of meat/seafood etc.). Regarding the "health" of welfare recipients, it is also only logical that these people be drug tested. If ANY drugs, including nicotine, are found, then that person's check must be limited accordingly. A drug-free person is more easily hired and is more apt to look for work.
Reply to this
Doctor,
I have no doubt about the statements that you make regarding the risk of obesity or its prevalence in our communities and with regard to what you see in your profession. I am certain you are correct with regard to your statements as to its impact on the overall cost of healthcare. However, I would not want to live in a country where the government would define penalties for what it regards as high risk behavior. Where would this end? High penalties are already associated with smoking If obesity is to follow then what will the next behavior trait that is identified in an attempt to further control our lives?
Perhaps you engage in a high risk behavior that the next administration would deem inappropriate and decide should be taxed. Perhaps a tax should be imposed on persons who engage in mountain climbing, camping, sports, bicycling, sky diving, bungee jumping, hunting, fishing or highway driving. Although I would not object to insurance companies identifying high risk occupations or life-styles to impose higher premiums on high risk behavior I would strenuously object to the government doing it. I can voluntarily decide to purchase that insurance policy or should be able to and I have no such voluntary capability as far as taxation is concerned.
Reply to this
I completely agree with the principle though I think to make the argument more palatable to the party platform exchanging the term 'taxation' for "actual cost of goods & services" would be more effective.
I would much rather pay $6.00 for a gallon of gas than $3.50/ga at the pump and $2.50/ga in income taxes.
The same for junk food... the actual cost to society is what the consumer should pay. When calculating the fee all of these issues should be included, not passed on to people who chose to eat healthy.
We could eliminate income tax if all goods and services were charge at the actual societal costs. That includes the carbon emissions of the factory, the pollution or destruction of the environment and all these other actual costs that hippy socialists poorly attempt to extract outside of the cost of doing whatever business caused the degradation.
In the obesity example when calculating all the costs involved I suspect a Big Mac would cost closer to $30 a burger. This would not be 'taxation' it would be putting the full cost of the product on the consumer participating in the transaction.
I support it fully.
And as a policy platform, I can hardly imagine the Tea Party would support the continued subsidization of personal eating habits.
Reply to this
I'm interested to know how you came to the conclusion. It's a really interesting subject and something that should be covered more. I'll keep stopping by!
Reply to this
However, taxation is very intimately tied to healthcare expenditure since Medicare is a vast and huge operational expenxe and subsidized... medicare is no different than any other "insurance" company HMO, except that rather than it being funded by merely only policy premiums, it is largely funded by taxation... When we refuse to put personal responsibility into the healthcare equation, the results are exactly what we get - huge unnecessary expenditures (that are paid for by "someone else") That in itself is the key to less government, is lowering the costs paid by "someone else" for behavior or desires of the ones who benifit just because they "can". We need to reining in clearly scientifically proven MASS bad (and easily reversible) behavior (that costs any given system BILLIONS of dollars) (like the obesity epidemic), and the only way to do it is by making it cost.... those who "use" the services through clearly and easily avoidable behavior- not those who don't.
Reply to this
Excellent read, I just passed this onto a colleague who was also looking for it, And he actually bought me lunch because I found it for him. So I should thank you for the free lunch I got.
Reply to this
I am glad that I found this information. I am the type of person that loves to be inspired. Whether it be with regards to home life or business. This blog has some great posts and your posts inspire me to be productive and has given me ideas to move forward.
Reply to this