Senator Takes Initiative on Health Care

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I am surprised that more hasn't been made of the legality of essentially forcing people, by way of financial penalty, to buy a very expensive product from a private, and in most cases for-profit, company, as in the Massachusetts law.

The precedent has already been set by other insurance mandates such as auto insurance and even disability.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

An interesting diary on Daily Kos.

Why Mandated Insurance Sucks - a Primer

An excerpt:

... mandated insurance is a tax on people for being poor or lower-middle class. It will do NOTHING to solve the real problem or the real need, which is guaranteed access to affordable care. The subsidies will prove inadequate as has been shown in Massachusetts. The mandate will be widely evaded, as shown in Massachusetts. The public option will become the dumping ground for the for-profit insurers who want to get rid of the sick. And that will in turn drive up the costs of the public option and cause a political crisis that will give ammunition to enemies of government action on health care.

...

... health insurers as a matter of basic business practice must deny care and claims to maintain profitability - they have to take in more money than they pay out ... this means health insurers routinely deny care.

...

What all of this demonstrates is that health insurance is NOT health care. Health insurance is no guarantee of health care. Health insurance is nothing more than you paying some company. That's it. Whether you actually get health care is another matter entirely.

Sad but true. I am surprised that more hasn't been made of the legality of essentially forcing people, by way of financial penalty, to buy a very expensive product from a private, and in most cases for-profit, company, as in the Massachusetts law.

It's quite a mess we're in.

Well McCain sort of asked that question in the debates - but it didn't really go anywhere. From what I understand children would be required to have mandatory coverage - otherwise their parents would incur a fine.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

I am surprised that more hasn't been made of the legality of essentially forcing people, by way of financial penalty, to buy a very expensive product from a private, and in most cases for-profit, company, as in the Massachusetts law.

The precedent has already been set by other insurance mandates such as auto insurance and even disability.

I wouldn't say it's comparable to requiring auto insurance. Only people who have a car and drive need to worry about that; everyone with a pulse has to worry about health insurance.

I'm not sure about disability insurance; I didn't realize that was a law anywhere.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I am surprised that more hasn't been made of the legality of essentially forcing people, by way of financial penalty, to buy a very expensive product from a private, and in most cases for-profit, company, as in the Massachusetts law.

The precedent has already been set by other insurance mandates such as auto insurance and even disability.

I wouldn't say it's comparable to requiring auto insurance. Only people who have a car and drive need to worry about that; everyone with a pulse has to worry about health insurance.

I'm not sure about disability insurance; I didn't realize that was a law anywhere.

Comparable in the sense that there's a mandate requiring that people pay a private for-profit company.

And yeah, in NJ there's a disability mandate - employers have to pay for it.

[Amby 490]

How is it going to be paid?

Chuck Norris is gonna fund it.

chuck does a lot for charity so maybe he is going to pay for it