The necessity for having a public entity as an insurance provider arises from the fact that private insurers profit from inflation of medical care costs. In a mature market, insurers cannot all grow their policy counts by 10% per year, but they can all increase their revenues, investment income, and profits at that rate, if they foster inflation of medical costs and wink at providers who pad medical bills. The last thing private insurers want is containment of medical care costs. Only a public entity will make any legitimate effort to control those costs.

Bob, you are so right. Every time Medicare wants to cut costs, they raise deductibles or limit coverage, and then group health plans or supplemental plans have to pick up the costs. Then guess who everyone points fingers at because premiums were raised.

Every time I hear someone point to Medicare as proof that a one payer system works, I want to scream. Their administrative costs are low because private insurance companies process their claims.

The truth is that we need to eliminate pre-existing conditions, mandate benefits for preventive care and people need to stop using emergency rooms for non-emergency care. Pharmaceutical companies need to stop spending millions of dollars advertising to patients who in turn plead with physicians for the latest (and most expensive) prescription. We need torte reform to lower the cost of malpractice insurance and we need incentives to add more family care doctors. Then how about if we not insure illegal aliens and control our borders. We also need to be able to cross state borders to choose insurance plans, and our legislators need to stop creating laws that are so costly to implement (HIPAA is one example). If we start with these changes and then see how things develop, we can gradually make the changes needed to insure more people without throwing all health care under the bus.

That's right, private companies will be put out of business. They have to show a profit in order to survive, the government does not, take a look at the post office. I don't think they ever showed a profit. The government will just pass on the debt to the tax payer. As far as insurance being expensive now, the biggest reason for that is illegals. Now before anyone starts playing the race card like Obama does, like me say that I am a hispanic male who doesn't have a problem with legal immigration just illegal. The reason why your insurance rates go up every year, is because medical institutions have to make up the loses incurred everytime someone uses medical resources but doesn't pay. The payers get stuck with the bill. The Medical sector isn't going to just incur more debt, they pass it on, after all it's a business not a charity. That's why Obama demonizes companies that make a profit as being evil.

Henry III, I would have agreed with you before I worked for a managed care company, especially now that I work with Medicare and Medicaid accounts. You would be amazed how much doctors/hospitals bill for some services. For example, a New York facility that charges $374 for a 20 minute therapy session. Many of the accounts don't work in such a way that we can afford to "wink at providers" because we are paid a flat rate regardless of how much we pay out. That is why we monitor treatment closely to avoid fraud and abuse like psychiatrists doing consults on people in a coma or therapists doing traditional counseling with people who are so psychotic they don't even know their own name...and yes I've actually seen both of those situations more than once. The problem with a public option is you don't have clinicians monitoring the docs and hospitals to ensure they are not just padding the bills. That is why we have so much Medicare/medicaid fraud now. I could go on and on, but I have to get back to work.

I agree with Bob. I would also say that our government has failed to prove they can run much of anything efficiently. And I wish someone could define "affordable health care". President Obama says this like it will cost us virtually nothing to have health care under his system. I think people hear "affordable health care" and think that it will be less than what they pay now. This will not be the case. Health care costs money and it will have to come from somewhere.

Cramming programs down citizen's throats without providing clear definition and actual cost impact toward taxpayer's relationships with health care providers, both existing and future, and clarity of compensation for services is what I see lacking in not only the pursuit of "health care", but far moreso toward a President, dependent upon a liberal Congress to lead him as they choose and enhance his ego for Congressional effort, not his. He's still campaigning and hasn't learned the skills of leading.

We don't have a President Obama, we have a President Pelosi!

I disagree with Bob's conclusion, but I think he makes the point well. Private insurance does partially subsidize the public safety net. Changing that de facto arrangement could have unintended consequences.

The problem with insurance companies (and drug companies) is that they are fundamentally profit-oriented. This is also a benefit, because competition weeds out inefficient providers. What we give up with our profit-based insurance is that different members of the "health-care team" have different vested interests. Insurance companies have a vested interest in denying coverage to anyone who will actually need care. Health-care providers have a vested interest in providing treatment whether it is needed or not. Drug companies have a vested interest in selling new patent-protected drugs whether or not they are better than established generic drugs. Patients have a vested interest in low costs and long productive lives.

The government has a vested interest in self-perpetuation---success in elections (political parties) and keeping their jobs (bureaucrats and elected officials). Voters have a vested interest in low costs and long productive lives. Out of all of these, the only two that have common vested interests are patients and voters.

I've left out investors. Investors want high returns and high growth. This means that their interests line up partially with patients and voters, because healthy employees are productive and businesses pick up a large portion of our national health-care costs. On the other hand, some businesses make their returns from the profits in the health industry.

Our health care dollar goes five places: providing useful care, providing useless care, research and development, administrative costs, and profits. A huge fraction of our health-care dollar goes to useless care (that insurance companies try to limit, but health care providers and drug companies do not), to administrative costs (that insurance companies and health-care providers try to limit), and to profits. (Insurance companies try to limit the profits of providers and drug companies, while consumers try to limit the profits of insurers.) Useful care is often underfunded, and research and development is not necessarily directed toward improving care.

There are checks and balances in the current system, but they are often a bit weak or slow. The biggest problem is the lack of feedback in favor of patient interests. Right now, the only strong feedback in this direction comes from businesses purchasing health insurance for their employees or from the Government purchasing health services for Medicare and other programs. Those individuals who fall through the cracks (unemployed, pre-existing conditions) can fall very fast and very far --- threatening their lives and their livelihoods.

My hope is that we eventually establish a level of universal care that is provided in a single-payer system with competition among providers (like Canada for example, rather than Great Britain). The universal care would be limited. Private insurers would offer supplemental plans. I'd rather see the system set up so that private insurers can also offer comprehensive plans that compete directly with the single-payer universal coverage, but unlike Bob, I don't feel strongly about it.

Our system has gaping holes with too many underinsured and uninsurable Americans, and too many who thought they had coverage only to find that their insurance company doesn't feel compelled to agree. Cost is a huge issue, but I think the issue is better addressed as value than as cost. Are we spending our health care dollar in ways that actually improve our health, our productivity and the quality of our lives? I'm not philosophically opposed to "health-care rationing". We have it now and any health-care system will have to (and should) impose judgments about what care is covered and what care is not covered.

We need to address health-care reform in a way that preserves (or replaces) checks and balances in the system. Progressives trust the checks and balances that trace back to voters through the electoral process, and Conservatives trust the checks and balances that trace back to the consumer through economic markets. Some of us are non-ideological and prefer to see a mixture of the two. All of us should be interested in the end result --- long, productive lives at a reasonable cost.

One of my main concerns is whether or not illegal immigrants will be covered and, once again, reap rewards for breaking the law.

my concern is that this plan does not cover the very people it set out to cover. This bill has morphed into just another added piece of legislation that does none of the following

1. Provide insurance to the uninsured
2. Reduce costs to patients
3. Protect patients
4. Fix Medicare / Medicaid / SCHIP / COBRA
5. Reduce RX costs to seniors
6. Close the gap that our elderly face

So far this bill has one definitive pro, it forces insurance companies to accept and treat prior conditions.

They have not closed the gap where Medicare patients are paying $1200 for a $500 C-Pap machine, or why seniors are paying RX markups over 10%. Medicare is the single payer system that the government has direct control over and it is fraught with mismanagement, poor budgeting, and soon to be bankrupt.

We need a real system that will cover everyone for the basics; poor, rich, young, old, and everything in between. The basics only though, and let the private insurers provide supplemental insurance in competition with an unfunded GRC.

This plan is poorly though out and does not solve our issues in a meaningful way. We need to fix campaign finance and impose term limits, or else we will never see true reform as special interests buy out our politicians.

I love my insurance (no referrals, great coverage) but I know I'll lose it as we are federal employees. My question is why are we starting from the beginning? Why can't we reform Medicaid and Medicare to help those that are slipping thru the cracks? I am all for a government program that pays for "Preventative" healthcare i.e. free vaccines, free annual check ups, making healthy foods more affordable (Not taxes on junk food), etc. Finally, how about health INSURANCE reform? Like starting with a universal form. Doctors are having to pay office workers to resubmit forms over and over again because of small errors &/or the insurance companies are trying to delay payments. This adds to the cost of our health care.

"If you thought insurance companies were bad, wait until government bureaucrats control your health care!"

Bob, you are just spreading more horse manure. The U.S. has the best mail delivery system in the world- a "socialized" government run system. The U.S. Veterans medical care is a "socialized" government-run program-again, excellent performance (when not interfered with). The U.S. highway system, a "socialized" government-run program is the best in the world. Medicare, another "socialized" government-run performs extremely well, as does Social Security, as do our air traffic control system, both "socialized" government-run programs. Your argument has no basis in fact.
Private health insurance companies are running rough-shod over Americans, reaping huge profits that benefit only a handful of greedy individuals who don't give a damn about the patients they deny health care to. THESE are the "death panels", the insurance companies who deny coverage to people who have little choice or recourse and can only go off and die. If private insurers go out of business, it will be the best thing that ever happened to health care, because profit motive has no place in healthcare. They are mutually exclusive.

For those that are against Socialized anything, a few things to consider. Your police, fire department, post office, medicare, and military health care, are all socialized and work just fine. The people that build your roads and run your street lights are all goverment run. Unless any of you have done the research or actually been a patient in say Canada, or France where they have socialized medicine, then you really don't have much to say about it. The constant drone of right wing lies is tiresome and antiamerican. Here are two statisticas that you need to consider. Their infant mortality rate and life expectancy are both better than ours. We as a nation are among the lowest.

I think all insurance companies should be put out of business. Other than being a scam to make the CEO rich, they serve no purpose. The CEO of United Health care makes about 102,000 dollars an hour. Yes, that is what I said, 102 thousand dollars an hour. That is a problem!Just be thankful you don't have to buy all your water from the bottling company or buy your electricity from a for profit company. Imagine what your utility bills would be if you had to pay Arrowhead 4 dollars a gallon to take a shower.

As for how to pay for it? I think the answer is above. Let the insurance companies pay for awhile. At least that way we as a people would get back some of the money we pay them in good faith.

Until Congress decides to include themselves and their families as part of this so called "overhaul", then I feel this entire Obamacare is nothing more than a mear sham and all the propaganda pushed by O and his ilk will not convince the masses that he, and this Congress, are being on the up and up with them. I say kill it where it lies, no amending will change this monster of a bill very much and 70 to 80% polled (who are covered) are satisfied. That amounts to fixing with isn't broken for these people. It's all so crazy and insane!

I always enjoy well-reasoned objections.

This is a complex issue, one that deserves more than blogging ... or signing bills before they are read .... can provide.

I do want to defend some element of the profit motive in health care. While I am no fan of the insurance industry, the profit motive has attracted some hugely talented people into health care and has resulted in incredible advances in drug therapies and medical technology. (Look at the advances in cancer therapy, AIDS drugs and hip replacement procedures as examples.) A big part of the problem with the wait time in the Canadian system is the result of the lower salaries doctors receive in Canada. Doctors spend years in college and medical school, racking up huge debts in the process. It is a demanding job and few people have the intelligence and endurance to become doctors. (I am not a medical doctor, by the way.) We should compensate them well for what they do. While drug companies have figured out elaborate ways to game the patent system and do seem more interested in finding new drugs for ED rather than a cure for malaria, their past record is pretty good.

Bottom line, the government has the power to regulate the drug and insurance companies -- why don't they use it!? The government has the power to control the duration of a medical patents, why don't they look at this issue more intelligently? The government has the legislative authority to effect tort reform and end the worst abuses of the legal profession (while perserving the right to sue in cases of actual wrong-doing), why don't they use it? Mathrec, your arguement rests on the assumption that the government provides a more effective vehicle than the private sector. While I acknowledge that your criticisms of the private sector's performance ring true, I do not see that the federal government has any credibility what-so-ever. IF we could get the government to regulate the private sector, we might actually get something that worked.

Nothing can be worse than private insurers!!! Their #1 operating principle is to make $$. That means take in more than they pay out. And if they do pay, increase premiums to offset the payouts so they can have their salares, corporate jets, etc. Healthcare should be non-profit.

And claiming govt will screw things up is bull***t! It's the insurance companies who are screwing you right now and freaking out because their sacred profits are threatened. Think! Who has the motive to circulate such scare tactics? The government? Obama? Ha! So keep listening to their lies, be their dupe, bend over and take it, because it seems you like it that way. Or go back to your insurance job, you patsy.

I truly do not understand the whole, "I don't want government making decisions about my healthcare" argument. What, you think insurance companies are somehow more trustworthy than government?

I'm not saying I trust government, but insurance companies?! Are you kidding?

If you have a favorable judge, you will get favorable treatment. If Hitler gets elected or appointed to oversee your healthcare you are dead. There are problems with insurance but you can at least seek another insurance company. If we go socialist you have one shot, that is it. If you are out of favor you will lose. Health should not be a judgement someone else makes for you. Catastrophic health care costs come when you contract something horrible. I can see something should be done there, but to pay for aliens teeth checkups and retire non-citizens on our weekly tab so they will vote for a liberal is wrong!? Where has logic gone? The health care they are ramming down our throats makes them in charge of our freedom! Read the insanity they have written into this bill and vote the liberals out of congress as soon as possible. Make them institute term limits or vote them out. Make them do what WE want or vote them out! Do Not be bribed into taking giving up your vote! This is what they do now. They bribe you with false promises and even some real promises they keep that are just wrong! Ask not what your country can do for you. Do what YOU can do for your country, to preserve freedom, justice, and HONOR in our representatives. Vote them out. Many are crooks and thieves and liars and are already owned by lobbying interests. When you see a congressman has been stealing or lying or selling you out, vote them out! Don't keep voting them in! It's irresponsible to vote bad people into office to serve your own interest. It's bad and it's done all the time and it's got to stop or America will not last!...now, "go do the right thing."

My question is this: will Americans continue to allow the Gilead Sciences [think Bechtel president George Shultz, Rummy Rumsfeld's replacement from when he was on both this board and the board of Tribune/LA Times/Orlando Sentinel (John W. Madigan), the guy from Intel, and a bunch of others from Stanfraud U.], Amilyn Pharmaceuticals (Rummy has replacements there from RAND, plus Morgan Stanley and Qualcomm are represented), and the G.D. Searle/Pharmacia/Upjohn/Pfizer/Monsantos (Rummy/Bob Shapiro/Aspartame/NutraSweet) to continue to to dominate the discussion - OR will they take democracy and control for their own lives into their own hands for the first time since Dallas in '63 and LA and Memphis in '68?

For eight years, Americans (allegedly) allowed Bush/Cheney/Rummy/Rice (Stanfraud)/ Wolfowitz, among others to run roughshod over their economic interests. Meanwhile, Mark B. McLellan (SIEPR with Shultz), brohter of White House spokesman Scott McLellan, was at FDA, approving drugs that have been shown to be unsafe, even lethal. And then there is the 'swine flu' scare...gee, Gilead makes TamiFlu...whaddya know?

Grab a clue, Folks! This isn't about President Obama. It's about the guys in the shadows who profit by putting pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers in your genetically-modified foods on the one hand, and own 'cancer treatment drug' companies on the other. Yes, Monsanto, that's you, Baby!

By the way, ever see a Chase ATM in Walgreens? The Rockefellers own both. Guess who was the MediCare drug prescription card czar? Mark B. McLellan, aforesaid.

ChrisPA, RaH, spoken like true socialist. And what does your fear of the private sector stem from? Are you that afraid of making your own decisions that you would prefer to defer that option to the nanny state federal gov't. Why, that says a lot about how far we've come from our original founding. You people are seriously pathetic for putting so much faith in a heartless entity as the gov't. You ask, who has the motive to circulate such scare tactics, you must be joking, right. Of course it's the gov't you nitwit. It's all about control and power when you are dealing with the gov't. Why else is Obama and this democrat lead Congress pushing for an overhaul of a health system that 70% to 80% of the people are satisfied with (check the poll data and not just your foolish brain). Maybe if you two losers would get off of your lazy a-$-$-e$ you just may develop a better appreciation of having your freedom and liberty (and making decisions for yourself and not by the gov't). But then again, I estimate that, on average, 5% to 10% of the population are just hopeless causes (like you two), and are destined to be dependant on the gov't for their subsistance crumbs. Count me out!

I do have one last question: where were all the Blue Dog Dems and all you "crammin' it down our throat" nay-sayers when Shrub was wiping his face/behind/whocantellthedifference with the Constitution, fighting illegal and immoral wars because he has Daddy issues, raiding the treasury to the tune of $3B borrowed from Elaine 'Mrs. Mitch McConnell' Chao's pals in Beijing, turning Dick Grasso's life upside down so the NYSE board could be overthrown and turned into EuroNext under the watchful eye of Bonesman William Donaldson at SEC, missing the failure of the world's largest economy until three days before the dreaded event, and allowing 20 'terrorists' on CIA and FBI watchlists to take flying lessons in Jeb's Florida, and fly Marvin Bush-guarded planes out of a Marvin Bush-guarded airport and into Marvin Bush-guarded (and Skull-and-Bones-owned) WTCs?

Bob, you are just spreading more horse manure. The U.S. has the best mail delivery system in the world- a "socialized" government run system.

The USPS is in debt, considering cutting delivery days and unreliable. The only "bargain" is the $.44 stamp that provides a service with ZERO guarantees or time constriants. Of course if you were hoping your letter to Bob gets to Bob and not his roommate, your SOL.

The U.S. Veterans medical care is a "socialized" government-run program-again, excellent performance (when not interfered with).

You'd be hard pressed to find people that agree with you. Our veterans get horrible care. Also, our current serivce members aren't getting fantastic care either. Tricare is a pain to deal with and dental is nearly non existant for family members. Referrals occur frequently and aren't always free in the Tricare world.

The U.S. highway system, a "socialized" government-run program is the best in the world.

You mean the rapidly deteriorating infrastructure that needs over 1 trillion dollars in improvements just to keep it operating properly? Have you not driven over our highways and bridges lately? Been in the NE, upper midwest, or CA lately? Do you live in Idaho?

Medicare, another "socialized" government-run performs extremely well,

You mean the running out of money fast system that still needs multiple reforms in order to function as intended? It's going bankrupt in a decade. There will be more people collecting than paying into it. BIG problem.

as does Social Security,

Please tell me you are joking.

as do our air traffic control system,

Ummmm....

Your argument has no basis in fact.

Speaking of facts, maybe you should get some.

Bob wrote: If you thought insurance companies were bad, wait until government bureaucrats control your health care!

______

Bob, you've got it backwards. As Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman and other economists have demonstrated, the overhead costs of PRIVATE health care run at roughly 18%; that under Medicare, Social Security etc.: 3%. THE GOVERNMENT IS MUCH MORE EFFICIENT than private plans, contrary to urban myths. THE LACK of control over overhead as well as any real incentive to do preventive care (and lack of competition) are at the HEART of our problem; that's why we pay TWICE per capita per person what ANY others in industrialized nations do--and they ALL enjoy a stable public option.

If there are any questions about how well the government handles business, take a quick look at just the past two years, both administrations. If you can find a well-managed program, much less a full multi-level bureaucratic process, then accept this at face value. If not, continue to question and request delays until the questions are answered. Valid questions deserve responses, and there are plenty out here.

NotPerfect,

Let's talk about facts, then. Americans have, arguably, the highest health care costs, highest infant mortality rate, and shortest expected lifespans of any citizens of any of the officially-labeled 'industrialized nations', all the others of whom have - now dig this - single-payer health care systems.

Did I just confuse ya?

PS - a thorough reading of many of the Proverbs and Jesus' teachings mysteriously talk about taking care of one's neighbor, the sick, the infirm, the widow, and innocent children. It's time to throw the money-changers out of the Temples of Power and allow social justice and compassion to rule! It's our time! We have the leader and we ahve just a small window of opportunity. For the pragmatists and athiests - how much worse could it get? Let's give it a try, Folks!

Linda-KC has the right idea. Those are excellent suggestions.

But the hurdles to any of those suggestions being implemented is that currently the insurance industry is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to fight overhaul. Doesn't that tell you something? They have plenty of profit and want to keep it - and more. This is not a health care debate, it's an economic debate over how rich this group gets to be. I see some similarity to Wall Street and this economic meltdown.

Another problem is that those with good insurance through work do not want change because they think it means higher costs. Same as with mortgage meltdown - no thought to the future, of losing their job or that costs are skyrocketing right now.

Every American deserves the same coverage that Congress has. Who pays for that? Right, you and me - the taxpayers.

Bob you can't have it both ways. Either the public government option would be so bad that it would make private companies a better choice or the government public option would be so good that it would put them out of business. In a capitalist culture if one offers bad service then one is out of business, plain and simple. One goal of reform is to create a public option that is like the post office - it operates on its own funds not tax payer dollars. So if the public option is bad it will fail and private companies will make money; if it is a successful not-for-profit and private companies continue to try to squeeze use for more money with higher premiums, etc. then they too will fail. That is capitalism. What you are suggesting is protectionism.

B in Illinois, Huh? Where do you people get your facts? This is total hogwash (and as far as that Paul Krugman goes, that guy is as far left as Vladamir Lenin every was...I wouldn't quote this guy, he has ZERO credibility). Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid combined account for a 53 trillion, unfunded, future obligation. Did you get that? That was t as in trillion, not billion. Please find a better source before making a fool of yourself. Thank you!

GuyWhoThinksMontyPythonIsaNewsShow -

Paul Krugman has no credibility, huh? Guess the Nobel selection committee doesn't either, then, huh?

Or Princeton, or the NY Times, or the London School of Economics...help me out here, Knight, who else in not credible? I await enlightenment.

First and foremost, I want health care reform to restore fairness to ordinary people. For example, while I am employed, my health insurance costs $5,500/year. If I retire, It immediately goes to $11,000/year (double). Being retired does not suddenly make me twice as likely to get sick.

If I go to my doctor, he charges $170 for an office visit. When insurance pays him $50, he takes it as full payment. If insurance refuses to pay, he bills me for $170, or if I did not have insurance, an office visit is $170, So why is the price more than 3 times as much if I don't have insurance?

If I got fair treatment by my doctor or the insurance industry, I could easily pay my own way; it's the feudal system that makes it OK to gouge anybody without a corporate protector that puts me one illness away from bakruptcy. As an employee, I'm fine as long as the job lasts; as an individual, I'm meat for a carnivorous medical industry.

KnightWhoIsaNaysayer,

Under GayOldPedophile leadership (ahem!), Congress voted itself a 30% increase in salary. Meanwhile, it marginally raised the cap on Social Security taxes to $108,000 this year. A CongressPerson makes, minimum, about $140,000. That means that they have $32,000 of income free from Social Security taxes. A guy making $107,999 has 100% of his income taxed; a guy who makes $216,000 only has 50% of his income taxed.

While we are at it, under your hero, The Grown Man Named Dubya, interest on a passbook savings account was taxed at the marginal rate (let's say, 30%). However, dividends on stocks, that are owned by a mere 10% of Americans, are now taxed at 15% because it's 'not really income'. In other words, Grandma pays twice the tax on her Certificates of Deposit than Bill Gates does on his Microsoft dividends - then he gets to set up tax-free trusts in which to stuff the dough, all the while engagin in anti-trust behavior...but that's a different topic...

Care to further enlighten me?

AuntBea (How's Opie doing?), sorry, but no effort of mine could possibly enlighten you. I have read your post and you are bouncing so much off the wall with your comments I swear you must be playing a game of racquet ball, LMAO!

...ah huh...as I thought...

Well, Dear, thank you so much, but I defer until a later time this golden opportunity to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed individual - and bid him 'Good evening'.

Enjoy watching Faux Noise, Dear, but please do take care that your IQ does not plummet precipitously in the process, won't you?

Speaking of wits, a battle with you would be a battle with a dimwit (my apologies to all you dimwits out there). And same to you as you enjoy watching MSLSD with Keith Overbite (Countdown to No Ratings) and his little nephew Mr. Rachel Maddow (obviously the sources of what you are posting).

If you want reform, change tort laws, make portability a mandated feature, have insurance companies pool a part of their money for catastrophic coverage, etc. What I don't like is that the government will issue a tax to all businesses WITHOUT coverage of 2-8% to be used to pay for part of this. How long until employers that are paying 10-15% of wages drop their private plans to save money? Eventually, everyone will be on this piece of crap and their won't be enough taxes to pay for it.... like every other government boondoggle.

I am just seeing smoke screens and spins against what so many President's and Administrations in the past have yet to achieve but is much needed. We are the greatest country in the world but we can't give our people Healthcare?! If one is so against what is being proposed then bring to the table something that is BETTER! If you can't --- then sit down!!

Auto insurance is required. Health insurance should be required and subsidized by the government and not controled by the government. Our tax dollars have subsidized the railroads and agriculture for decades and are currently subsidizing the banking and auto industries.

Why all this "giving" of gov't largesse? That was never the original intent of gov't as set-up by our Founders (ah, you remember these folks, don't ya!). Show me where, in the constitution, our federal gov't is authorized to institute gov't run healthcare. I'll tell you where you'll find it, it's NOT in the constitution. There, that is my solution, keep gov't OUT (as our Founders would have intended) at least that will be the start to putting an end to these massive gov't deficits!

Knight @1.32

Uh, actually I was spouting from three places, with some of which you may be wholly unfamiliar:

1) my heart, and its sense of social justice and moral fiber,

2) my intellect, and its ability to both connect the dots and draw logical conclusions, all on its own widdle self, and

3) (this one is gonna baffle ya, but...) the public record, Dear. Try it; you'll find that quoting it is much more palatable to intellectually-honest people than beginning attempted arguments with a phrase such as, "Bill O'Really and Rush Limberger told me..."

By the way, Dear, I believe that today is approximately the 2,295th day since the previous resident of the Oval Office declared 'Mission accomplished in Iraq.'

Good night, Good Knight.

WOW. thoughtful replies. a minimum of name calling and fear mongering. rational arguements. opposing views acknowledging each other's strengths and weakness.

I think this is finally starting to turn into an honest-to-god conversation. i'm impressed, people.

Hey, Knight - I gotta share this with you, then I'll stop posting.

This is regard to post1.17 where I discussed Mark B. McClellan, for the mis-spelling of whose name I apologize. I went to this web site just now: http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=2879&name=Mark-B-McClellan The stories about McClellan are not the funny part. In fact, they are sad.

The funny part is the advertisement that popped up to sign up for Ann Coulter's column. You can be among the first to read it! I cracked up. That ad has been up there for months - and you can STILL be among the first to read it! Best of all, it's FREE!

...still over-priced, but...

David Druen- The problem with your automobile insurance analogy is I can always choose to not own or drive a car. Plus the insurance you are required to have is not to protect yourself.

The best way to bring down the cost of health care is to 1) Get rid of employer provided ins. 2) Allow ins companies to sell catastrophic, major medical and emergency policies only. 3) Require all doctors and hospitals to disclose and publicly list what they charge for every service/treatment they provide. 4) Allow private hospitals to deny non-emergency care to anyone who can not demonstrate the ability to pay. 5) Set up an entirely separate system for the people on government programs. (similiar to the VA)

the main way that insurance companies jack up their profit margins is to deny coverage to those who have paid their premiums and are entitled to it. a friend of mine had a hysterectomy and not only did her insurance company not pay for it but they retroactively cancelled her policy. fortunately, she is persistent, sued them and won.

the main way that insurance companies jack up their profit margins is to deny coverage to those who have paid their premiums and are entitled to it. a friend of mine had a hysterectomy and not only did her insurance company not pay for it but they retroactively cancelled her policy. fortunately, she is persistent, sued them and won.

If it was a medically necessary hysterectomy - please tell me which insurance company it was because mine hasn't denied me anything I am entitled to under my plan. I want to avoid that company. If it was a hysterectomy that the person wanted but didn't have a medical need for, I could understand denying the customer. Hysterectomy should be a last resort because of the amount of care needed after the surgery.

Let's talk about facts, then. Americans have, arguably, the highest health care costs,

And the largest rate of obesity - Diabetes and heart disease are in the top 5 most expensive to treat.

highest infant mortality rate,

No we do not. I can name off several African countries who have far worse infant mortality rates. We also have 304 million people in our country, drug and gang issues, and a serious issue with homicides. You need to post a link to show that we have the highest infant mortality rate - then you need to prove it's due to our medical care...

and shortest expected lifespans of any citizens of any of the officially-labeled 'industrialized nations',

Recent proof of this? Not that I don't believe our lifespans aren't short. Look at our obesity and violence. Has nothing to do with standard of care.

all the others of whom have - now dig this - single-payer health care systems.

AND smaller populations, fitter populations, less violent populations etc.

Jesus said for ME to help my neighbor. I donate to charities and cancer societies and funds that help people get treatment. St Judes, food pantrys, clothing drives etc. Giving to the government is not helping your neighbor. Please cite the Biblical text that asks me to support my government to "help the poor". I do help the poor, in fact, 100% of my donated dollars goes to helping people... What percentage of our tax dollars does. Cuz it sure ain't 100. Don't throw my religion in my face. I have read the Bible multiple times and made an effort to be a caring person DIRECTLY to people who need.

PS: If you're gonna cite that WHO report - it was published in 2000. Not at all recent.

Henry III- When my company see it's private insurance rates begin to rise 10% plus this is when the 4,500 of us move to another insurer. This has happened 7 times in my time with the company and has allowed us to maintain a farily resionable out of pocket cost.

This is called free market economics, and it can never be replaced by government cost control, and even government subsidy. When this happens all incentives are lost with guaranteed revenue, at a flat rate quality. Eventually competition ls lost and you will end up with a single payer system (in this case).

Insurance industry needs revamped for sure, not taken over by our government.

"Insurance industry needs revamped for sure, not taken over by our government."

Revamped how? How do you force them to change? By writing a polite letter to them? I'll tell you how - put the fear of God into them. Have a public option. If the public option sucks, the private companies have nothing to fear. If the public option does well, the insurance companies hear loud and clear from their shareholders. Hopefully they change, or they go out of business. Good riddance!

Isn't it funny - all this competition, and yet my health insurance premiums and copays keep going up and up (Cigna, Kaiser).

All those of you who are happy and secure in their employer-provided health care - there's a pink slip somewhere dying to meet you. Good luck !!

George2 - part of the reason your health insurance premiums keep going up is doctors and hospitals keep raising their rates, not to mention the rampant fraud and unecessary procedures out there. With the public option, all you are going to see is more fraud and abuse when you don't have insurance companies to monitor doctors to make sure they aren't milking the system. Then taxpayers are just going to have more national debt to pay off. Here is a personal example. I recently went to my doctor because I thought I had a kidney stone. He sent me to get a CT and gave me some pain meds. On my way home, they called me back and told me my colon had ruptured and I needed to come back to be admitted to the hospital so I did. When i got there, it was "after hours" so they would not admit me until I waited in the ER so they could charge me over $400 to "evaluate" me even though I told them I had already been evaluated and diagnosed from the CT scan at their hospital.

protectthekids : I'm sure that's part of it. I've had long waits in the ER as well ... at Kaiser. Ridiculous billing. Doctors engaging in business on the side etc.

Medical stuff is tough because it is not always easy to tell (by a layman, govt or insurance bureaucrat) as to what's necessary and what's not. Plus the consequences on making the wrong call can be devastating.

How about we eliminate fee for services and institute fee-for-outcome? I'm sure it's easier said than done, but something to think about. After all, the bottom line is the outcome for the patient, and not how many MRI and CT scans can be billed to the insurance company, or govt. However we then need a way to figure out how to detect misrepresentations of the original malady.

The biggest issue here is not health care reform, but TRUST of the Washingtoncrats, down to the executive branch.

I think everyone wants reform for cost control of health care, but do not trust the government (read ALL branches of it) to come through with effective measures and legislation.

The political process is suspect due to all the earmarking in the past, and the scandals that continually run rampant through Washington.

Obama's ratings are falling because after all the talk of change, he has handed legislation over to Congress which has a sterling record of screwing things up and double speaking about costs and funding. Obama supporters feel betrayed, others are scared because of the lack of leadership, rampant spending and the coming "hyper inflation" due our way because of it.

The Cap and Trade is a prime example of a minority in this country dictating to the rest to pay for their agenda.

That's why there is such rage. Grannys and gramps are protesting for the first time ever in our history.

The American public is fed up with the Barney Franks and Chris Dodds failure to regulate banking and finance, Pelosi's outright lying, the Republican obstructionists, lobbyists buying legislation, Murtha's earmarking of airplanes for themselves while they criticize others for the same thing, etc. This list could go on forever, but looking at Congress's approval rating validates the point. The waste is evident and contributes to the rage.

I see a lot of incumbents being voted out this next time, just because they are incumbents, if nothing is done to vent the rage. The apathy has been replaced by rage, and THAT is representative of America's mood.

The government already controls part of our healthcare. We call it medicare.

Just ask any U.S. Veteran about how wonderful government health care is. Then take a look at how many Canadians are crossing into the U.S. for health care versus how many Americans are headed to Canada for the "wonderful" government health care there! Besides, we already have medicare and Medicaid... why doesn't Obama work on straightening out the mess they already have before he worries about screwing up the rest of the health care system?

Sadly enough you are right! I think our "leaders" think we are all too stupid to understand the real issues.

That's because most people are...

Speak for your self!

Yes. What we have currently is so transparent. If you believe that is true, wait until you have a large claim or go on Cobra.

I agree...most Americans are stupid.

How does a President earn our trust? Not by lying to us every chance he gets. I don't know if here is that stupid or just that dishonest. His plan is a boondoggle, and will cost us trillions. Before he forces a vote, he will cut back a lIttle and tell us he is saving a million or two. That's not a drop in the bucket for a plan that is estimated to run 2 trillion by an independent group. Fixing the current system makes more sense. TORT reform is a good start. Stop unfounded law suit, maybe make losers pay legal costs for the doctors. Most doctors are paying as much for malpractice insurance as they make for all their work and schooling. If they have a malpractice suit, the insurers want to settle because it's cheaper that litagation for them. This short sighted plan has led to slip and fall millionairs that sue every chance they get. After a poorly thought out settlement, the doctors malpactice insurance could double. I think this whole plan is why medical care is so expensive, but that is not an excuse for a budding socialist beaurocracy. Let's identify each problem, and then find a solution. Let's not find a solution, then look for a problem that fits. No bill should ever be voted on until everyone has had a chance to read it.

Peter is right. If any of you have been listening to facts and information, you would know what has been proposed and you would understand Obama's proposal.

People who claim they don't understand yet need to listen to CSPAN, listen to Obama's and various analysts' comments LIVE (not paraphrased by talk radio), and get informed. Read real British and Canadian press (it's in English!), and find out not who has complaints, but who would trade systems with us. There are very few in those countries who would give up their healthcare for ours.

There is more transparency here since Obama came in than ever before. Maybe some folks can't handle the truth....that our healthcare system is ranked below 35 other countries in the world. They want to be told what to think instead of doing this for themselves.

The Right and the insurance companies are banking on the fact that most Americans will not read and learn about the issues, and that too many Americans prefer to be TOLD, screamed at, treated like dumb children. They are hoping that they can get ill-informed people upset and anxious about NOTHING. Yes - NOTHING. Obama has all along proposed a health care system for all Americans just like the one for federal employees (Congress included). Several million have it now. NOT just Congress, but janitors in the federal buildings, secretaries, daycare providers, bureaucrats, etc.

Stop believeing everything the Right and the insurance companies tell you. Check out their stories as much as the president's. If you don't, ask yourself why......Do you believe that the folks who are giving you overpriced coverage now will improve? Do they want to improve? Will it be better for you? Since they have made it worse during the past 30 years, why would they suddenly want to help you now? Why are they trying to scare you? What have they offered to fix the current problems? Who is really telling lies?

The internet is full of lies. You should always research many sources. How do you know what you disagree with if you don't know what the other side is proposing?

DeeToo The problem with government run health care is the government is the main problem now, tort reform, no acrross state line shoping for coverage, no competition from doctors or hospitals, government paying 25% of cost, hospitals forced to care for anyone coming in from the street, all this is paid on the backs of you and me that have coverage. No one can show how a complete government run program saves money because it can"t . If you would read history on any government run program, US, British, Canadain, they are all the same.

Thanks, DeeToo, best comment so far!

Bravo, Dee. You are 100% correct.

It is, of course, easier for people to repeat one-liners about "socialized medicine" and to believe lies (forced euthanasia! Puh-LEASE!!) spouted by those afraid of change than it is to do their homework. If they do their homework and still oppose reform, fine. At least they will know what they're against.

I think people have to ask themselves a question: if someone just shouts "NO!" to something, what is it they are afraid of? Could it be an honest debate? And if they are afraid of an honest debate, why????

DeeToo, not everyone who opposes the plan is ignorant, anti-Obama, or a pawn of right-wing radio commentators. There is plenty not to like. Let's talk some facts ...

First off, there really isn't an Obama plan. The President has outlined a broad agenda and left it to Congress to develop a plan. Some fault him on not providing enough specifics; however, the downfall of the Clinton plan was that they decided everything and delivered it to Congress ... where it went down in flames. Truth is, the President should not be making laws, this is the role of Congress.

House Bill 3200 is the only real version of this legislation available at the moment and you can read it. I have tried, but the Bill is not light reading. The Senate is all over the map on this.

So, there really isn't one final plan to review, and when one is developed, it will be Congress' plan and not the President's.

OK? So since a plan is not yet available, please don't accuse people of being ignorant of the plan or saying how much transparency there has been on this issue! If you really want to know the facts of the plan you are still listening and reading. Until we know what the plan is, we cannot really decide whether it is the best approach to resolve the complex issues involved in providing health care coverage for Americans.

DeeToo,

Drink much Kool-Aid?

Barbara,

It is our question-dodging, name-calling, finger-pointing president and congress who are afraid of honest debate. Yes; why?

DeeToo, I wouldn't exactly believe the propaganda put out by the WHO (World Health Organization) in there ranking of the USA 37th in the world. This is an extremely, anti-American, biased organization funded by the radical leftist running that sham organization known as the United Nations. These people have no credibility and have as their major goal to undermine the USA at every turn. All in all, the US overall has the best health care system in the entire world (2nd to none). Just look at how many desperate individuals trapped in socialized health care systems all over the world and are willing to pay thousands to get into our health system for treatment. The truth is in the reality of our current system, not in some biased, anti-American poll. And another thing, what makes those who have a stake in this health care issue (such as Obama and his administration and network analysts in the tank for this administration) a more credible source than those who are reporting and have no stated interest (blogs, talk radio, etc.). I would think the opposite is more to the truth and they are a less reliable source. Your statement is a non-sequitor at best.

Barbara, you have a really good point! If people are afraid to debate, we know they don't know much! What are they afraid of? Being proven wrong? Or that they don't know anything worth presenting? I think there are some really valid issues to be discussed with those who are building this plan, and are somewhat right of the center. It's almost as if the Conservatives feel they have no voice! But they do! And I for one wish some of them would stand up and talk about it. I have heard that many of them reject the idea of their tax money being used to pay for abortions. Although, I don't feel that I have the right to make decisions for other people, I do not feel that I should have to pay for their decision if it is contrary to my beliefs or morals. This is the same as "conscientious objector", the way I look at it. Another valid issue, to my way of seeing it, is that we should not have to use our tax money to pay for bad medicine. Numerous pharmaceuticals and even over-the-counter "remedies" have been shown to have dangerous and sometimes fatal results, yet they continue to be "pushed" by doctors and companies that have a vested interest in doing it. Actually, it's a HUGE problem. Fatalities range in the 100,000's. Likewise, doctors who repeatedly "make mistakes" or are careless need to be eliminated from the system before tax dollars are used to pay medical personnel.

The other issue is liability for those that contribute to their own ill-health by smoking or excessive alcohol use, or drug use. Why should we be forced to pay for those who make themselves sick? And especially, why, when we ourselves are staying well with healthy practices? Even the Pentagon has owned up to this problem, and has issued "quit smoking" orders to the military. They have realized that 90% of the veterans with lung problems are smokers, and that it is a major expense for the V.A. hospitals!

DeeToo, I wouldn't exactly believe the propaganda put out by the WHO (World Health Organization) in there ranking of the USA 37th in the world.

Not to mention that data was published in 2000.

The right wing will never cooperate. When there is a general outline, they whine about a lack of details. When there are details, they deliberately misinterpret them and scream about how similar they all are to Hitler.

Look what they've done with the details that are already available: A provision to ensure that anybody who has insurance they like can keep it was deliberatly misinterpreted as outlawing private insurance. Another provision, to help people prepare a living will so their care is according to their wishes when they cannot answer for themselves, was deliberately misinterpreted as mandatory euthanasia; the equivalent to Nazi death camps.

You can only be bipartisan with an honest and sane Republican party; and the Republican party demonstrates again and again they are not honest or sane. No amount of compromise will get more than a handful of Republican votes; no amount of careful explanation will stop Republican demigogs from scaring the $hit out of old people for political gain.

Knight Who Says Nee,

1. The United States is a member of the United Nations. So do you believe that as a member, the United states is also anti-American?

2. With regards to the poll taken by the World Health Organization, I find it much more reliable than any conservative OR liberal talk radio host. Apparently that's where you get your information. Really believe they have no stated interest? That's a nice little fairy tale you've been telling yourself, but they actually get PAID to spout off their nonsense.

3. As far as blogs are concerned, all I can say is opinions are like a**holes... Who are these desperate individuals trying to get into our health care system and how many are there? Where do you get your statistics? Should we just take YOUR word for it?

As a side note, I actually have a lot of questions about the health care bill that's being drafted. So when there is a town hall meeting in my town I would hope that if given the opportunity to get some answers I would not be shouted down by an angry mob.

since there is no bill yet, no bill which has survived conference committee, there is really not that much to be transparent about

DeeToo- I listen to Obama carefully, and I do my research on the fact's

it's just that I don't trust Obama.

I listened to him through out the election, and researched the facts. Now, looking at his results against his promises, I do not trust him. He has always had a hidden agenda, even as a Senator when Obama speaks with his right hand, people should be watching his left hand.

Sad but true, look at his history in the Senate and now the Presidency, look at the prov-en track record... that is all we can go on, not what they want us sheeple to believe in.

If folks want a government run health industry of any kind, first visit Canada and the UK before you cast your vote. You will say- "private insurance care will still exist". News Flash- not with the competition subsidised by tax revenue.

This has to be done in a way to guareenty a level playing field, government and private.

Moind, think man, the USA is just ONE out of 150+ member nations in the United Nations, yes, there is serious anti-American sentiment in that governing body of nations (obviously you have never heard of the country "Israel", right...if any country has received overwhelming negative sentiment in the U.N. it is Israel...same goes with the USA...stop believing the crap you get from the MSM...that garbage is guaranteed to turn your brain to mush). This is an organization that places countries like Cuba, Syria, Libya on the U.N. "Human Rights" committee. Goodness man, can't you see the bias in this organization, but I digress!

Knight Who Says Nee,

Here we go again...

1. Since when does being anti-Israeli translate to being anti-American? Did I fail to receive the memo when Israel (also a member of the U.N.) became the 51st state? Maybe they want to replace Texas after it secedes?

2. Our allies are also members of the United Nations. Some countries like us, some don't. That's not the point. It's not meant to be an international love fest in honor of the United States or any other country. Want to know what its purpose is? Visit the U.N. website.

3. Cuba, Syria, and Libya are not on the human rights committee. (Something you should also take the time to research).

4. If the WHO was out to get us, wouldn't it make more sense to give us a #1 ranking in order to make us think we have better health care than we actually do? (Ya know... maybe that's why Cuba, Libya, and Syria all rank below the U.S.).

5. This blog, which you happen to be a member of, is part of "crap" that I get from MSN (not MSM). But if the "crap" I get is worth posting I generally try to verify its accuracy beforehand. Once again, where do you get YOUR information?

Since the poll that was taken by the WHO is from 2000, it would be interesting to know where we stand now. Not that it should be a contest anyway. Even convicted murderers in this country get basic health care.

I so agree......and I'm from Texas so I hear you.!

What do our polticians have to worry about? They have top-of -the line insurance & retirement! If they had the same coverage millions of Americans have there would have been changes a long time ago.

Grow up. Putting your trust in Obama is the most naive thing you can do right now. HR 3200 is a waste of money and the worst health care plan to ever come out of anyone.

Why are we going to create a public plan you can buy when it's cheaper to work with insurance companies to create value plans to offer?

Why is it okay to impose a 2.5% AGI tax on people who want to opt out of health care coverage that meets the "government requirements"? If the government would kick out the illegals, that would cut down on ER abuse.

Cite a precedent where public insurance has made private insurance cheaper.

"Grow up?" Is civility really so difficult for conservatives these days?

We're going to create a public plan because for the last fifty years insurance companies have been raping the American public with their private plans, and with impunity. Until now.

The only thing that would come from private companies creating a "value" plan, is lack of coverage when it is needed. Let's get costs under control. You can see what "competition" has done for auto insurance. When we're all required to buy it, they get in bed together and hike the prices. Without an impartial, not-for-profit public plan to compete against, health care will continue to soar out of control. The greed that exists in the boardrooms of the health care industry is no different that we've seen in the Wall Street boardrooms. It's unfortunate, but government regulation and a public plan are the only deterrence to the alarming greed that has invaded our culture.

My auto insurance is $66 per month - full coverage. Private auto insurance is competitive. Perhaps if people would stop driving like morons, it'd be cheaper where you are.

Just like health care, if people would stop stuffing their faces and watching television, all our rates might drop.

Yes, grow up. I am not being uncivil. I am being realistic. We can't "all work with Obama" as the poster above implied since it's been made clear the democrats only with work with the democrats. Please explain how that is working together.

We're going to create a public plan because for the last fifty years insurance companies have been raping the American public with their private plans, and with impunity. Until now.

In the past 50 years, Americans have gotten fatter. The population has increased. More fraud has been introduced. Emergency rooms have been administering 'free' care to illegals and the uninsured. Medical lawsuits are out of control. Consider all the factors.

I invest in Cigna, a large insurance company and my dividend has been a measly 2.3% for the last 7 years. Worse than my other stocks. Since Cigna's CEO and other execs own stock, wouldn't it be fair to assume they aren't making a whole lot of profit?

United has posted a gain of 4% this year. Where is this profit you speak of?

"We can't "all work with Obama" as the poster above implied since it's been made clear the democrats only with work with the democrats. Please explain how that is working together."

This from the party of "NO!" Obama has been bending over backward to reach some kind of bipartisan consensus on everything he has proposed, much to the frustration of the progressive Democrats. The result-complete and total obstinance and resistance to everything he has proposed. No cooperation. No support from Republicans at all. Democrats have tried to work both sides of the aisle, even in the darkest days of the Bush years, and they have been continually abused and brushed aside by the Republicans.

Since most Rx are sold outside a hospital setting and most people have a Rx copay somewhere between $10 and $50 per Rx, please explain how people are overpaying for Rx's?

Most people have no clue what the true cost of their Rx's are because that cost is masked behind insurance.

This from the party of "NO!" Obama has been bending over backward to reach some kind of bipartisan consensus on everything he has proposed, much to the frustration of the progressive Democrats. The result-complete and total obstinance and resistance to everything he has proposed. No cooperation. No support from Republicans at all. Democrats have tried to work both sides of the aisle, even in the darkest days of the Bush years, and they have been continually abused and brushed aside by the Republicans

What concessions has Obama made? If he's bending over backwards - there must be several concessions he made to get the GOP on board. Start naming them.

The GOP is saying NO because this is an entirely DEM plan with zero republican input. Don't claim bipartisanship UNLESS you actually let the other side have a say.

It's a shame what the media has done to the masses.

I'm on board for "overhauling the system", but what is being presented in HR3200 doesn't provide the focused overhaul -- just puts the government in charge. That's not a solution, that's a problem.

The GOP has put more than 160 amendments in the health care plan. Why don't you listen. It is the GOP who will not work with anyone. Obama is waiting to see what bills the congress and senate come up with, and see if they are anything near what needs to be to provide good health care for us, the American people. Obama has more than bent over backwards, especially with all the drivel that the right wing nuts have come up with. Before there even was a plan on the table (there are now 4, with GOP input), the GOP was saying no....

The GOP has put more than 160 amendments in the health care plan.

Out of how many the Dems are putting in? There isn't even an actual plan yet. We'll see what makes it in there. Doubtful any significant GOP ideas will be used. Changing "health commissioner" to HHS or something like that doesn't count. What about the provision to allow us to purchase across state lines? Tax rebates for private policies? Where are the limitations on how much the government can throw at this "public option"?

Jack, since liberals like to always tell Conservatives only stating our OWN beliefs to grow up and do something, how about you visit the UK an check out your future.?

"Nobody will have read and understood it fully" Currently there is no "it." Just a series of proposals going through various congressional committees. The various proposals must eventually be reconciled into a "bill" which then must be voted on. I wish the actual contents of these proposals could be discussed, not the misrepresentation of the various details, so much in play nowadays. I fear the "Big Lie" attacks may be effective and derail what I feel could be a good change for our country.

We were going to discuss the details, but Republicans chose to disrupt the town hall meetings and put out political advirtising that is based on blatent lies. Republicans only "negotiate" to weaken the legislation and make it less effective in case they don't manage to kill it completely.

When you want to go into an illegal war, Republicans don't ask the cost. When you want to bail out banks, they don't ask the cost. When you want to help individual homeowners, keep people employed, or make sure everyone has health care, then suddenly, the costs are paramount. The pattern is simple; if it helps war profiteers and rich people, Republicans are all for it. If it helps ordinary people, Republicans are against it. Health care is a double whammy for Republicans because it says we should limit the obscene profits and executive pay of insurance companies (the rich people Republicans care about), and give everyone (the people Republicans don't care about) a fair shake on medical care.

I like my private health care that I WORK VERY HARD FOR, so my company can obtain private group policy that they can afford, and provides all 4,300 of us affordable out of pocket cost, for premiere care.

Maybe if Liberals would try working for something rather thann constant government handouts, they might understand how this works.

BTW- the wealthiest sector in America is Democrats... check your facts

the rich people Republicans care about), and give everyone (the people Republicans don't care about) a fair shake on medical care.

"And enough of covering those who choose NOT to be U.S. citizens."

I am so sick of this ME ME ME MINE MINE MINE attitude coming from people who enjoy the most privileged, protected, pampered lifestyles in the entire world. Whatever happened to gratitude and love thy neighbor?

"We the people of the United States, in order to FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION, ESTABLISH JUSTICE, INSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY, provide for the common defense, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE, and SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

That means ALL of us, not just the privileged, rich, white people.

There's a great deal of privileged, rich non-white people in this country. Leave race out of it please.

Ed,

"...Promote the general welfare..." does not mean everyone gets a free ride, as so many people seem to want.

And the "priviledged, rich, white people" worked hard to become that way, you racist!

Gee, I wonder when I will stop being subject to ridicule because I am white and don't want to pay for tens of millions of illegals.

Be more racist.

I'm sick of selfish Republicans, rich or stupid and their ME ME ME attitude, too. When did charity, community, sharing, and compassion become swearwords?

Ed......I don't know where you got off with the rich white people comment, nor the me, me, mine.....for one, I'm certainly not rich, what nurse do you know that is??? I've seen a LOT of healthcare, and talked to LOTS of nurses working here from Canada.... And in 30-something years of nursing, the ones who have an attitude of 'entitlement' are the very ones who threaten lawsuits, who, by the way, are living off our current welfare system.

There are too many gray areas not delineated in the health care reform agenda.....needed? Absolutely. MANY years in nursing, all aspects of it, have shown me over and over again, that the poorest get the most bang from the taxpayer buck. If one qualifies for Medicaid, one can get free medications, free home modifications, free home provider assistance with cooking and cleaning the home ~ the list goes on and on (not to mention, foodstamps, utility assistance, reduced rate housing, etc...add those $$'s up); my mom, on Medicare, who has paid into the system as a nurse for many years too, cannot get the same. BUT, the illegals, and the immigrants who CHOOSE NOT TO BE A US CITIZEN, get FREE HEALTHCARE, in addition to the above programs. Obama, Washington, listen up.....identify WHO will benefit from healthcare reform! Because we know who is going to pay for it. (I'm already looking at increased property taxes to pay for increasing indigent health care, and that is just the tip of the iceberg)

I have two requests....make the healthcare reform available to U.S. citizens only, AND, make it applicable to all employers, this includes the 'special' insurance provided to our elected officials, and government workers. If Congress were to vote on the plan that would be providing for THEIR healthcare, they would be more cautious as to what they would approve.

The current proposal would lower your costs! Wealthy individuals would subsidizes you and your employees.

The small business owners are the wealthy. Although I take home under $100,000 per year, my company makes over 4M. Therefore I am taxed as an upper 1% income earner. So, basically you are saying that as a small business owner, I am financially responsible for supporting the health plan, without any control over the costs. Thank you for making my point.

So, basically you are saying that as a small business owner, I am supporting the health plan, without any control over the costs.

How is this different than now, where you admitted the health insurance costs are going up 5%-15% a year regardless of coverage?

If the costs that we have drive us to loose money, we can elect to not offer voluntary coverage or go to a less expensive plan. The governments plan would force us to pay for it and possibly drive us out of business. The uncontrolled health costs are a huge burden for all business. A 10% annual increase in costs mean that our costs will have risen 259% from 2000 to 2010, without better health coverage. Show me a plan that guarantees the costs remain flat or are tied to inflation and I'm all over it. This is a government program and I believe that the revenue for it must come from cost savings, or the overall tax payer base. Not small business.

OK so take from the wealthy, isn't that redistribution of wealth?

cdahl: Although I take home under $100,000 per year, my company makes over 4M. Therefore I am taxed as an upper 1% income earner.

For a small business owner you are certainly a fool. Sorry, you are not being taxed as an upper 1% income earner. If you ever actually look at the tax return someone else prepares for you, you'll find that you don't pay taxes on your gross revenue. Tax is paid on the net revenue after expenses. You make $100,000 a year. That is what you are taxed on. As confused as you are, I wonder how you've managed to stay in business.

What makes you think only the wealthy will pay for this? A few democrats are already saying there will have to be a tax increase on the middle class to help pay for this plan.

Miguel,

One problem with your comment: What happens when we tax the heck out of the wealthy and they have no more money? Who will pay for your free ride then?

Reflections: As a small business owner, you'd greatly benefit from the public option (a health exchange with many choices, and most of them private insurance companies). If you had watched TV and hear President Obama explain it all very carefully, in detail, this morning at the town hall , it would have answered your concerns. My brother has a small business, and would welcome the public option so he could continue to offer health insurance to his employees, but at a lower cost. The public option won't be paid for by taxpayers' money. It will, however, have a large pool of insured, which will give it the clout to offer lower prices to businesses and any others who need it. It's basically the same thing members of Congress have now, and it's a very good deal for them.

And asking those who are very wealthy to go back to paying the same % of taxes as the rest of us is a good idea. It's not "redistributing the wealth"! It's just asking the wealthiest to pay the same percent as everyone else does. This was explained in the town hall today also. Some people seem to think the wealthy should pay less in taxes than the rest of us (thanks to outrageous loopholes). I don't think they should.

Reflections37, Thank you for your input. Your view of the small business owner is precisely what is wrong with this country. As an S corp, the business income is my personal income, but not what I take home. That additional benefit goes into inventory, employee benefits, etc. Most businesses out there between 15 and 400 employees have the same problem. I don't blame you for being incorrect in your misconception, it happens often. Another point you are wrong on. 4M are the earnings, the gross rev. is over 40M. I agree that I should have substituted makes 4M with earnings of 4M and then it would have been more clear.

Karl K, Just curious. What % do you feel that the wealthy should be taxed in order to pay their fair share? And lets all agree to do away with loopholes and make an even playing field. Lastly, just because Obama says so does not make it true. Congress still has to write the bill. I would like to see the details when they are finished. I agree we need a program, I do not agree that small business or the wealthy need to pay for it.

"we can elect to not offer voluntary coverage or go to a less expensive plan."

What are you going to do when their are no more "less expensive plans" offered by private insurance?

"One problem with your comment: What happens when we tax the heck out of the wealthy and they have no more money?"

That's never going to happen.

"Who will pay for your free ride then?" Who pays for the free ride these greedy insurance companies now? You and I do through outrageous medical costs and poor health due to insufficent and unavailable coverage.

"OK so take from the wealthy, isn't that redistribution of wealth?"

The Bush tax cuts were redistribution of wealth-upward, leaving the rest of us impoverished and desperate.

Ed,

Trust me, there IS a finite amount of money out there. Take enough money from the rich and then we can all be poor! That, my friend, is not the "level playing field" that I want to be on!

Ed, please keep in mind that offering health coverage is a Benefit, not a right. If it is a right, then the government should find the revenue for it. Obviously we are running deficits now and the only way to pay for this is via a tax increase. If you are agreeing to put the burden on business, where does it stop? Making better roads, education, Medicare, etc..... According to your argument business should just pay for everything. A socialized program is just that. And I'm not even against that. I am against people saying give me the program for free, but I don't want any financial skin in the game.

With the number of idiots on this blog who claim to be "small business owners", I can certainly see why our economy is in the dumper. I don't know how you can waste time on the internet all day and still claim to be a hard-working small business owner -- unless your small business is lobbying and astroturf for big healthcare corporations.

Eric,

We wont ever see that happen, they know it and we know it.He will keep trying to smokescreen this thru by telling lies about what is NOT in the plan instead of telling you what IS in it.This is all about getting votes to sustain control of the Congress and continue this slide to socialism.The elitists control everything while they reap all the benefits and pick and choose what they want from their programs. Why not put this on a public referendum and lets vote on it. Nover......that would be too much like a democracy , exactly the opposite of what they want now. After all , we are too stupid to control our own destiny.

Eric, you said that if it's such a great plan, why is Congress exempt from it? That subject was brought up at the President's town hall this morning and the answer was that the public option (health exchange) is the same plan that members of Congress have now. They're not exempt from it. They have it.

In order for the people to vote on it they would actually have to see it and read it and understand it - Don't see that happening anytime soon and from what I've read on the blogs it really wouldn't matter - people will complain one way or the other - hey it's the american way, but alteast we have freedom of speach, so write a letter to your congressman and voice your opinion.

Eric - medication time??????

1. Congress is not exempt - it would be just like their coverage. The president has asked for this all along.
2. Politicians have nothing to do with decisions about treatments. Sometimes I think you all have cotton in your ears.

Jim - ooooooh - a "slide to socialism".....sounds very spoooooky!!!!

So when you are 65 and want Medicare, you will be a socialist? When you are a veteran who wants VA care you are a socialist? When you are a policeman who is government paid you are a socialist? When you drive over a government built bridge you are a socialist?.....give me a break.

What IS in the plan is just like what many of us have now - healthcare. Our own doctors. Our own hospitals. Our own wishes met. Our pulse being taken when we enter the hospital BEFORE they get our insurance card. Coverage that cannot be taken from you or denied due to pre-existing conditions. Affordable - not going up 15% every year. Not an uncommon burden to employers as it is now, making our products uncompetitive and driving businesses under.

I am 55 years old, and welcome the changes. I want Medicare to last through my own life, and reforms can make that happen. Leave it all as-is, and none of us will have it. I make good money, and cheerfully contribute to my health security - and maybe a bit of that for others. Peace of mind is a golden thing when you are fighting an illness.

You are so busy dicussing what "he" is saying and doing. Do you mean the president? Elitists control everything? You must be kidding...the lobbies, insurance companies, corporate interests and the Right wing that is funded by them are hoping, no dreaming that you will allow them to control what is happening here. Obama is the ONLY one who is trying to give the middle class the same benefits as federal employees.

I was hoping you had more sense...

DeeToo . . . I can't believe you really buy into this.

...What IS in the plan is just like what many of us have now - healthcare. Our own doctors. Our own hospitals. Our own wishes met. Our pulse being taken when we enter the hospital BEFORE they get our insurance card (DON'T KID YOURSELF CHECK YOUR CARD AND YOUR SS #). Coverage that cannot be taken from you or denied due to pre-existing conditions. Affordable - not going up 15% every year (BUT YOUR TAXES WILL). Not an uncommon burden to employers as it is now, making our products uncompetitive and driving businesses under. ...

Let me tell you. If they run it anything like tri-care - we're all screwed. long lines, pick a number. wait for authorizations and referrals. AND your FORCED to take generics or pay extra for the brandnames pharms. God help us.

When all these Republicans can't read a bill and report accurately what it contains, when they try to tie health care reform to all kinds of unpopular issues. When they repeatedly show they have no respect for our government or understanding of the constitution, ask yourself why, ask what they have to gain by keeping a system that is on track to become too expensive for most of us within a decade. Ask yourself why they are always trying to undercut our elected leaders. Personally, I only come up with 2 possible answers; greed and a lust to reurn to power.

Eric,

The problem w/ letting doctors make all the decisions for their patients is that there is too much fraud and abuse. Just look at the statistics for how much money is wasted due to outright fraud along with abusive overutilization of tests just to pad the bill. That is the reason there is more overhead in private insurance than in medicare. In government plans like medicare, there is no one guarding the cookie jar. Insurance companies have doctors and nurses that review the requests for services to determine medical necessity. They aren't just accountants and bean-counters.

Also, insurance companies don't decide which procedures are allowed under a particular plan. They just determine the medical necessity of the procedure if it is one of the benefits YOUR EMPLOYER PURCHASED for your plan. It is similar to other insurance you buy like auto insurance. If you go out and only buy liability coverage, don't expect the insurance company to foot the bill if you get hit buy someone w/o coverage. You get what you pay for.

Similarly, if you want to force insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, you have to make health insurance mandatory for everyone. Otherwise, everyone is going to wait until they get sick before they get health insurance. If no one pays into the pool when they aren't sick, there is no money to pay out for claims when they get sick. That is not insurance, that is waiting for a handout.

Just look at the statistics for how much money is wasted due to outright fraud along with abusive overutilization of tests just to pad the bill.

Um no, those tests are done in excess because every other day some sue happy individual is looking for a way to get cash. If they don't order a second MRI or refer you to get a second opinion, you'll sue if the outcome isn't 100% exact to that doctor's diagnosis.

When all these Republicans can't read a bill and report accurately what it contains, when they try to tie health care reform to all kinds of unpopular issues. When they repeatedly show they have no respect for our government or understanding of the constitution, ask yourself why, ask what they have to gain by keeping a system that is on track to become too expensive for most of us within a decade. Ask yourself why they are always trying to undercut our elected leaders. Personally, I only come up with 2 possible answers; greed and a lust to reurn to power.

Read page 16 of HR3200 and tell me what YOU think it means. You talk about inaccurate representations. Read it for yourself. That's just one misrepresentation in black and white:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf

No one knows what's in the final bill because the GOP has been dragging it out. The bill should have been finalized by now, but the GOP is trying to kill it. How can anyone read the whole thing when it's not ready yet?

That being said, one of my WI Congressmen mentioned that the various forms of the bill coming out of the committees have pretty much been read by the President and members of Congress. It's just a matter of putting the forms together into a final bill to be voted on. He also said that anyone in Congress who hasn't read the various parts of the bill being discussed are either lazy or lying, because there has been plenty of time and opportunity to read them over the last several months.

Karl, please play with facts. Obama and the Dems do not need the GOP. Obama even stated such. Unfortunately they cannot get consensus within their own party.

Stop blaming all the delays on the Rep. Your boys and girls have the controls, drive it or get out of the car.

There was a time when Democrats pushed for good social policy and Republicans added fiscal discipline; but Republicans demonstrated over the last 8 to 12 years that they no longer have fiscal discipline; just a mainia for deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy. On the other hand, it is Democrats who are pushing for fiscal discipline such as "pay as you go". I don't see anything that Republicans bring to the process anymore except sand in the gears.

Say what? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot are you talkin' bout???

Tommy, that's a great idea in its simplest form. But yes, someone will have to pay for that gov't company - and that will be the taxpayers. If they could come up with a deal that would have private insurance companies subsidize from their profits or taxes and in return would have some of their costs paid, that might work to drive down medical practitioner costs. Also, they need to cap malpractice insurance so it isn't such a burden on doctors and such a concern for those viable candidates who want to attend medical school. Otherwise, prices will continue to rise and quality of care will suffer.

Deborah,

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, or WTF, is short for something that can't be printed on here. Think about it a minute, it will come to you.

Text much?

Huh? W...T...Foxtrot??? Hmmm.

The conservative mantra is there is always some way to label those who need care as undeserving and thereby ignore enormous human suffering.

Basically, conservatives believe that if you need help, that is proof in itself that you don't deserve help. So if you can't be ignorred for a drug problem or illegal status, they'll be happy to not help because you enjoyed some small luxury once, or ate a cheeseburger.

Conservatives also have an insane lack of proportionality. If you can't afford a hundred thousand dollars in medical care you need, it's all because you spent a couple hundred on a TV once; or your lack of exercise is the entire cause of all your health problems, and therefore you deserve to die.

So "Death panels" make a lot of sense to conservatives like Palin, because if they had the power, that is exactly how they would solve the problem; simply declare everyone who needs care unworthy to receive it, and let them all suffer and die.

Condew,

And just what does Obama's health care czar, Ezekiel Emanuel stand for...?

Look it up. Scary stuff.

You posted what I wanted to post -- I feel the same way:  Why aren't our representatives going to be part of the healthcare plan -- because they have one of the best health care plans in the country.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander!

This should include all government workers including county and state -----scool teachers, police firemen, commissioners and all

They should not be allowed to retire until age 67 like all the rest of us either or loose benefits like we do

The Unions who just recently donated huge sums of money to this health care overhaul ARE NOT part of the plan either and they also have the best health care available, they too should have to be part of the "govt plan."

Alice,
The government is not is your business if this type of plan goes through. And it IS what the Congress has. Hear any federal employees complaining?

It must be tough being ill-informed and paranoid.

OK, you think everybody should have the same health care as congress. How do you propose to pay for it?

You are poorly informed. Federal employees do NOT have what the politicians do. They get various choices like Blue Cross, etc etc, and they pay for it just like real people.

DeeToo - And how much out of pocket expense do those government employees pay? From what I gather from all the hype, it will be dictated to us the amount we will be required to pay and that amount will be considerably much more than government employees pay. Not only that, I refuse to pay a nickle for health care of any kind to illegal immigrants regardless of why they are in this country. If they are working, the employer they are working for should be required to pay for their insurance, not us taxpayers. We do not need a complete overhaul of Medicaid/Medicare, we need to deter abuse of it and expand its benefits. I do not trust the health care overhaul this Administration is adament about shoving down our throats whether we want it or not. Questions asked about the plan are not being specifically answered by any recipient of such questions, including OBam. Many don't know enough of plan contents to provide an intelligent answer, and that in itself is causing an uproar. The public servants we chose to represent us need to back out of their dictatorial stance on this plan including other plans in the making that most likely will infringe on our consitutional rights. Beware!

You won't get the same insurance as congress; they will see to that. And whay would you want the same insurance as the VA and medicare? They both are horrible! Haven't you read any recent headlines? Educate yourself before you post and keep up!

Why is that anyone who is against this health reform can not hold back at taking a poke at someone? 'Educate yourself...and keep up' no where in my post did I mention quality, merely stated we have gov't health care. As far as quality, something is always better than nothing.

beansmommy - I don't think so - I've been going to the VA since I returned from Viet Nam back in the 60's it was bad- but right now I would rate them favorably in most areas of medicine - like any large institution you can come up with horror stories but for the most part their equipment is more modern than most hospitals I see.

For everybody to have a gold-plated plan like congress is a laudible goal, but just trying to make sure everybody gets access to an adequate plan already has a price tag on the order of a trillion dollars over 10 years. How do you plan to raise another trillion or so in tax revenues to pay for this generous policy?

Remember, the reforms do protect your ability to keep the plan you have, or buy private insurance; so you can buy a premium private insurance plan for yourself.

But of course this sudden generosity is all just another conservative trap. Now you complain excellent care for everybody is not outstanding care for everybody. If the proposal was for outstanding care for everybody, you'd then say the plan was unaffordable.

Honest arguments and conservatism just don't ever coexist, do they? The conservative plan is to lie, bargain dishonestly, destroy the economy, or even start a civil war if that's what it takes to regain power. Hopefully the last 8 years have taught most of us something.

it's not one or the other you still have a choice

There are none so blind as those who will not see. If you were looking for reasonable solutions to problems, you would probably see them. But you are not looking for reasonable, you are looking for a reason to condemn.

THe military. Best in the world. But that's what the government should be doing; protecting the country from hostile actions of other organizations.

My elderly aunt and uncle live in Canada and love the healthcare they get there. And yes, they lived and worked in the US all of their working lives so they know the difference. My aunt is Canadian and so they retired there. My cousin is living there and also thinks it is worth the higher taxes. So before you say that National HC works no where take a look at the rest of the world, ask the British, French, Germans or Japanese if they want our system. Not that they don't have problems but they don't have healthcare that takes 23% of GDP. No one in those countries goes bankrupt from an illness.

And for those who want their doctor to make decisions for their care not the government. The doctors can only give you the care your insurance company will pay for.

Barbara,

We do need some kind of reform, just not the government-controlled, tax payer -payed, deficit-increasing reform that is being shoved down our throats now.

Yes, I'd like to see all those Republican politicians tell those without any insurance that they won't allow them to have any insurance until they can get exactly what congress gets now. Delay, Delay, Delay; I'm sure Republicans will come up with a great plan someday, just not in your lifetime.

loser pay - not a bad idea. Not sure it's constitutional though - someone can now be prevented from seeking redress.

socialized medicine - it's socialized insurance we're talking about, not socialized medicine.

interstate insurance - race to the bottom ?? every insurance company registers in one magical state?

illegals - fine to exclude them, but how do you plan to enforce it.

No one will be forced to perform abortions...it is an unfounded fear. I would never have an abortion but I can't denied the access to anyone else. Especially, if their life was in danger. We can't have it all in a health plan....I think we Americans are too used to getting everything "served to order" but healthcare can't be doen that way. There are things I don't like either but millions of people have differences of opinions...we just have to support the best plan possible even if there are aspects we don't like.

Why is it always the men who complain about abortion....I'd like to see just one of you get pregnant from rape, incest, etc., and see how quickly you run to an abortion doctor. Leave the decision up to the woman....it's OUR bodies. No, I don't support the government paying for willy-nilly abortions for stupid teenagers who get pregnant, but I DO support some government intervention for those who get pregnant from rape, incest, and other reasons such as those. You men....if ONE man got pregnant; we'd never see another child born in this world. You guys couldn't handle 9 months of pregnancy and giving birth, believe me!! Quit complaining about abortions until you have to have one, okay?

Matthew Greene - ever had a family member pregnant from rape or incest - my guess is NO, so therefore you wouldn't understand or have a clue. Lets not take anymore choices away as we've lost enough already.

Mathew there is a law that prevents the spending any federal dollars on abortion. End of another myth.

Didi,

rape, incest and the life of the mother only account for 1% of abortions. The other 99% are PREVENTABLE and due to personal choices. It is due to the choice factor is getting pregnant in the first place that most complain about abortion being a form of birth control. Tax payers should not have to flip the bill for personal choices.

attaturk; thanks for the clarification.

Regardless of your personal views folks, abortion is legal.

Funny how all those people who are against abortions are also against all those things that prevent the need for abortions. Things like comprehensive sex education and easy access to condoms and other birth control methods. The people who are against abortions want "abstinence only", which worked so well for Bristol Palin. Yeh, right, keep them fertile and ignorant so they fall for all the old stories; can't get pregnant if you do it standing up, can't get pregnant the first time, can't get pregnant if the guy drinks a sixpack of mountain dew first. Yup, all these stories sound stupid to an adult, but teens have fallen for them for many [short] generations.

Ingorance and innocence are not the same thing.

Funny how all those people who are against abortions are also against all those things that prevent the need for abortions

Proof? I'm conservative and I'd rather see birth control than maternity care covered, if I had to choose. It's more cost efficient.

I personally feel abortions are an optional procedure that should be out of pocket or purchased separately. We have widely available birth control yet abortion is still "needed" - well, actually it's wanted, so pay for it yourself.

Couldn't agree with you more

Illegal aliens are already receiving free healthcare at taxpayer assistance.......look at your property tax statement (unless you don't have a Hospital District tax, in that case, I want to know where you live so I can move there)

AMEN, Jeff

While the congressmen may have their posh plan that is superbly unfair to most of society, I got news for you bub: the 300 million federal employees outside of that select group have the same basic plan that most private companies offer (like BlueCross BlueShield, Keiser, and other HMOs) and it's average at best. So before you go spouting off about federal employees getting special treats, why don't you do a little homework.

The plan that is being proposed is basically the plan that all federal employees including the Congress currently have - a little less Glen Beck and a little more reading would really help everyone. If you think the feds have a great plan then you should be for this - if not then I don't think anything can satisfy some of you.

Oh, I forgot about the millions of people in this country illegally! Guess all you supporters will like paying for that.

News flash- we already are.

The plan that is being proposed is basically the plan that all federal employees including the Congress currently have

No it's not. Congress and fed employees have two different plans.

The plan proposed so far is neither. It's a "basic plan" and the details of what "basic" means have yet to be explained. Congress has pretty much anything and everything covered. Federal employees pretty much have total coverage, they might pay a little something for it though. Nothing like average citizens pay though.

These comments are on the mark. One major issue that has not been addressed is the HIGH cost of malpractice. Until there are limits on settlements and ceilings on how much the lawyers can make on a claim medical costs will continue to climb. The US has the most lawsuits per capita in the world, and everyone pays for many outlandish claims and settlements. In conjunction with the lawsuits is the need for the medical community to identify and remove from practicing medicine those people who should not be allowed to continue to treat patients when it has been shown that they should not be doing so.