Lamar, "We have a better idea."

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama argued Thursday that a sweeping overhaul of the nation's broken health care system is imperative for the nation's future economic vitality, clashing in an extraordinary live-on-TV summit with Republicans who want far more modest changes. "We believe we have a better idea," declared GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander.

With the marathon policy debate available from start to finish to a divided public, Obama cast the health care crisis as "one of the biggest drags on our economy," painting his overhaul effort as critical to the economic revival that's even more pressing to many Americans.

We all know that this is urgent," he said.

Obama lamented the partisan bickering that has resulted in a stalemate over legislation to extend coverage to more than 30 million people who are now uninsured. "Politics I think ended up trumping practical common sense," he said.

And yet, even as he pleaded for cooperation — and "actually a discussion, and not just us trading talking points" — he insisted on a number of Democratic points and acknowledged agreement may not be possible. "I don't know that those gaps can be bridged," Obama said. "If not, at least we will have better clarified for the American people what the debate is all about."

His skepticism about reaching consensus was vindicated as soon as the first Republican spoke — in opposition to the mammoth bills that have passed the House and Senate. Alexander said Congress and the administration should start over and take small steps, including medical malpractice reform, funding for high-risk insurance pools, allowing Americans to shop out of state for lower-cost plans and expanding health savings accounts.

"Our views represent the views of a great many American people," he said.

Disagreements were not always expressed diplomatically.

Alexander challenged Obama's claim that insurance premiums would fall under the Democratic legislation. "You're wrong," he said. Responded Obama: "I'm pretty certain I'm not wrong."

As with much in the complicated health care debate, both sides had a point. The Congressional Budget Office says average premiums for people buying insurance individually would be 10 to 13 percent higher in 2016 under the Senate legislation, as Alexander said. But the policies would cover more medical services, and around half of people could get government subsidies to defray the extra costs.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100225/ap_on_...h_care_overhaul

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Ah, the President who doesn't have a damned clue as to what he's actually talking about is still trying to push his agenda.

What do you get when you have hundreds of lawyers running a country? - The current health care system.

Government is and always has been the problem when it comes to health care.

You can't keep overburdening a system with over-regulation, stiff requirements on a closed economy, allowing the FDA to block realistic procedures/drugs, and expect costs to stay down and insurance companies to play the way you want them to play. It's not going to happen.

and that's not even diving into the failure of medicaid and medicare that are draining US taxpayers.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Ah, the President who doesn't have a damned clue as to what he's actually talking about is still trying to push his agenda.

What do you get when you have hundreds of lawyers running a country? - The current health care system.

Government is and always has been the problem when it comes to health care.

You can't keep overburdening a system with over-regulation, stiff requirements on a closed economy, allowing the FDA to block realistic procedures/drugs, and expect costs to stay down and insurance companies to play the way you want them to play. It's not going to happen.

and that's not even diving into the failure of medicaid and medicare that are draining US taxpayers.

Youv'e got to be kidding. The problem with our health care system is the insurance companies. They are profit driven, not health driven.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Youv'e got to be kidding. The problem with our health care system is the insurance companies. They are profit driven, not health driven.

the entire medical industry is profit driven. the yet the insurance companies are taking the entire blame from the left.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

the entire medical industry is profit driven. the yet the insurance companies are taking the entire blame from the left.

Let the government run the whole thing. Problem solved.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Youv'e got to be kidding. The problem with our health care system is the insurance companies. They are profit driven, not health driven.

LOL.

Come on now, please don't even try and play that game.

Insurance companies make a profit yes, BUT they aren't the bad guys. Their profits aren't that high in comparison to most businesses out there and there are many regulations they have to follow as to how they obtain those profits. Your "dues" aren't the exact way they make their money either. Investment is a huge role or an insurance company.

Whether many people know it or not, insurance companies (especially ones like Blue Croos/Blue Shield) have a huge overhead to be able to be the companies that they are. Between government regulations, requiremnt of piddly services for all policies, having to have an actual corporate office in every state that they operate in, employees in every state, and on top of that having to negotiate rates with doctors who need a little more money to make up for the lack of funds they get from medicaid and medicare, I'd say they do a pretty good job.

Government over-regulates, keeps the market closed, and expects costs to go down?

Health Care costs have nothing to do with insurance companies being 'greedy' lol. If you truly think that, then you have no real understanding of the health care industry at all or ANY business for that matter. Insurance companies just like anyone else want to pay as little as possible for services.

Wal-Mart wouldn't be as big as it is if they didn't find ways to keep "costs" down.

The next time your insurance rate goes up or you see an update to your policy, you can 9/10 trace it back to a new piece of legislation, whether it be a mandate by the federal government or a mandate by your state/local government.

[SMOKE 1,426]

Let the government run the whole thing. Problem solved.

sure then we get taxed to death to pay for the idiots in washington to not improve anything.

[mawilson 2,133]

Youv'e got to be kidding. The problem with our health care system is the insurance companies. They are profit driven, not health driven.

According to Lamar, if you take away ALL their profits, it'll be enough to cover only about

2 percent of Americans (or something along those lines.)

Their profit margins are pretty thin.

[The_Dude 1,142]

LOL.

Come on now, please don't even try and play that game.

Insurance companies make a profit yes, BUT they aren't the bad guys. Their profits aren't that high in comparison to most businesses out there and there are many regulations they have to follow as to how they obtain those profits. Your "dues" aren't the exact way they make their money either. Investment is a huge role or an insurance company.

Whether many people know it or not, insurance companies (especially ones like Blue Croos/Blue Shield) have a huge overhead to be able to be the companies that they are. Between government regulations, requiremnt of piddly services for all policies, having to have an actual corporate office in every state that they operate in, employees in every state, and on top of that having to negotiate rates with doctors who need a little more money to make up for the lack of funds they get from medicaid and medicare, I'd say they do a pretty good job.

Government over-regulates, keeps the market closed, and expects costs to go down?

Health Care costs have nothing to do with insurance companies being 'greedy' lol. If you truly think that, then you have no real understanding of the health care industry at all or ANY business for that matter. Insurance companies just like anyone else want to pay as little as possible for services.

Wal-Mart wouldn't be as big as it is if they didn't find ways to keep "costs" down.

The next time your insurance rate goes up or you see an update to your policy, you can 9/10 trace it back to a new piece of legislation, whether it be a mandate by the federal government or a mandate by your state/local government.

Have you read anything about their profits? UnitedHealth, one of the bigger, but not the biggest averaged in excess of 850 million per quarter in 2009. Yes, that is down from 2008, but that is still massive profits. You mention all these government regulations and requirements for services that are a hindrance to them, please cite those references.

The health insurance industry is insulated by states at the behest of the insurance companies. Little to no competition means they have to do little to maintain their profit margins. The insurance industry spends many many millions on lobbying and marketing to maintain this.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Have you read anything about their profits? UnitedHealth, one of the bigger, but not the biggest averaged in excess of 850 million per quarter in 2009. Yes, that is down from 2008, but that is still massive profits. You mention all these government regulations and requirements for services that are a hindrance to them, please cite those references.

The health insurance industry is insulated by states at the behest of the insurance companies. Little to no competition means they have to do little to maintain their profit margins. The insurance industry spends many many millions on lobbying and marketing to maintain this.

Their margins are actually quite small.

You can dislike the 'amount,' but there's nothing wrong with a company making profits.

Mentioning 'lobbying' is always interesting because there again, you can't blame a company for looking out for their interests. You can only blame the politician who doesn't do right by the people.

Competition is what's needed in health care and the FDA needs to back off.

Adding tens of millions of people onto the system though and mandating that everyone pay for it, is utterly atrocious, not to mention unconstitutional.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

sure then we get taxed to death to pay for the idiots in washington to not improve anything.

Sooner or later, everybody runs out of money, and then costs will get under control.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Their margins are actually quite small.

You can dislike the 'amount,' but there's nothing wrong with a company making profits.

Mentioning 'lobbying' is always interesting because there again, you can't blame a company for looking out for their interests. You can only blame the politician who doesn't do right by the people.

Competition is what's needed in health care and the FDA needs to back off.

Adding tens of millions of people onto the system though and mandating that everyone pay for it, is utterly atrocious, not to mention unconstitutional.

Adding competition would improve this ####### of a system we have now. But even if you polish a #######, it's still a piece of sh!t. We have the 37th best healthcare system in the world, and pay the most for it. We need not just healthcare reform, but tort reform as well.

[Ban Hammer 13,645]

around half of people could get government subsidies to defray the extra costs.

which is why so many on the lower end of the economic spectrum are so for it.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Adding competition would improve this ####### of a system we have now. But even if you polish a #######, it's still a piece of sh!t. We have the 37th best healthcare system in the world, and pay the most for it. We need not just healthcare reform, but tort reform as well.

I would hardly call "WHO" rankings all that great.

The 'system' they may not like, but you can't beat the quality/efficiency in comparison.

I'd much rather get a procedure this week that I might need rather than waiting a couple of months for it because of lack of specialists/overcrowding.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I would hardly call "WHO" rankings all that great.

The 'system' they may not like, but you can't beat the quality/efficiency in comparison.

I'd much rather get a procedure this week that I might need rather than waiting a couple of months for it because of lack of specialists/overcrowding.

That statement is only valid if you qualify it with the caveat that it only pertains to those who can afford to pay for that type of treatment.