Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli kent
SesliChat
SesliSohbet

I think that the compromise would be to have the Public Option:

1) Negotiate rates that all other plans could depend on, as a maximum, that way the private plans would be able get the same rates as the public plan, except if they wanted to spend the time to get even less expensive rates on their own. — This would allow the public plan to have bargaining power and the private plans to benefit from any rates that were negotiated.

2) Bill and keep records for the private plans in addition to their own plan. — This would allow the centralization of records, thus a way to analyse result, one form for most, as well as a subsidy for the private plans.

3) Not get any subsidy, thus the public plan rates would be set based on the cost of medical care plus the administration costs.

The public plan would have some benefits, e.g. its administration costs would be low, but the private plans would benefit from these low costs also and be assured that they would be charged no more for medical care than the public plan.

Note: To get this administration and rate subsidies, the private plans must

a) Be open to all, at the same rate.

b) Cover all treatment, at least that is covered by the public plan

c) Share any savings with the clients for effective treatment or preventative care even if that treatment is purchased outside of the local area.

No, that makes Health Care being only Republican.

capitalism breeds individualism

individualism breeds yoyo= your on your own

americans spend one trillion on a unwinable war and say little

but billions for health care they resist

until americans realize they are an imperialist country little will change in america

I mean demos also not just repubs are imperialists

look at a demo congress supporting this illegal war in iraq

time to drain the swamp in wash

beck has that one right

“Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty which are embodied in one maxim: the fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate” Bertrand Russell.

http://www.newsy.com/videos/leaving_the_fold

If its gonna be bipartisan, then the dems have to drop their ideas and do it my way ?

There is an lternative to the public option: a series of laws that would make ‘pre-existing conditions illegal, make denial of doctor-approved procedures illegal, make insurance truly portable, and supplement unemployment insurance to support health insurance.
In short, regulate the hell out of the industry and force them to act fairly.
The advantage of that is that there would be a tremendous inducement never to let the Republicans back into power.

But I don’t think that’s what’s going to happen. That 58% of the Republicans want the public option speaks volumes. It doesn;’t matter what your politics are: The current system is broken, and people are scared. to. death. and it’s not just individuals: It’s also Most other american corporations. are being hurt by this as well.

The Washington Post revealed almost thirty key lawmakers helping draft landmark healthcare legislation have financial holdings in the industry, totaling nearly $11 million worth of personal investments.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has at least $50,000 invested in a healthcare index.

Republican Senator Judd Gregg, a senior member of the Health Committee, has up to $560,000 worth of stock holdings in major healthcare companies, including Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck.

The family of Democratic Congresswoman Jane Harman held at least $3.2 million in more than twenty healthcare companies at the end of last year.

Senator Kerry, John Kerry, and his wife Teresa Heinz Kerry hold at least $5.2 million in companies such as Merck and Eli Lilly.

Get the picture???? WHAT A RACQUET WHAT A FU**EN RACQUET!!!!

Taking it to the streets might be the only way to open up the eyes of your elected officials…..I wounder if the AMA AND THE REST OF THE HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY WILL GIVE THE ORDERS TO SHOOT????? Concidering they run the government????

Boiled down: if health care reform doesn’t include either single payer or a “public option” then it’s not health care reform. Without that, they might as well not even waste their time passing anything.

I agree ElBruce. Without that it’ll just end up being cost-cutting measures that will give the insurance companies excuses to deny certain tests, treatments or procedures and they’ll just end up putting more profit in their pockets.

I can’t see the insurance companies lowering premiums for any reason other than to stay in business.