Stupak called 'baby-killer' on House floor

[one...two...tree 2,762]

[spookyturtle 9,466]

To whom? Your premiums will go down when everyone is covered vs. the old system where your premiums reflected the cost of millions of uninsured.

This money could have been used to start another war somewhere, now it's being wasted.

[mawilson 2,133]

There are cost controls in the bill

Name one.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Name one.

Prudent purchasing - insurers can't enter, or stay, in the exchanges unless regulators are satisfied that they're doing a good job. That works both to ensure a good product, but also to hold costs down. If an insurer wants to hike premiums, for instance, they have to submit a justification to the exchanges and post that justification publicly on their Web site. If the exchange isn't convinced, that insurer can be dropped from the exchange, losing all customers and profits they were making.

[mawilson 2,133]

What if they choose to get dropped from the exchange?

Who's going to be left in the exchange if all insurers drop out?

[spookyturtle 9,466]

What if they choose to get dropped from the exchange?

Who's going to be left in the exchange if all insurers drop out?

If all the insurers drop out, who are they going to sell insurance to?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

What if they choose to get dropped from the exchange?

Who's going to be left in the exchange if all insurers drop out?

Employers change insurance providers all the time, as they are always looking for the best deal.

[mawilson 2,133]

If all the insurers drop out, who are they going to sell insurance to?

Selling to no-one is better than selling to someone at a loss.

Insurance companies don't drive up costs of healthcare - hospitals, doctors and patients do.

Their premiums simply reflect the costs.

Edited March 22, 2010 by mawilson

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Selling to no-one is better than selling to someone at a loss.

Insurance companies don't drive up costs of healthcare - hospitals, doctors and patients do.

Do you really think they will have to sell at a loss and be forced to drop out?

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Name one.

De Minimis Non Curat Lex

Edited March 22, 2010 by IR5FORMUMSIE

[slim 1,533]

Your premiums will go down when everyone is covered vs. the old system where your premiums reflected the cost of millions of uninsured.

I have some oceanfront property in Arizona for you. Real cheap, too!

How about people like me with NO health insurance? How is this going to help my costs go down?

Next they'll be up advocating gun violence.

I sure hope not.

This money could have been used to start another war somewhere, now it's being wasted.

A big on that one! The single best way to stimulate the economy and create jobs, and they're going to waste it on something like this. Idiots.

And don't forget in addition to the airlines and car companies, the govt. now controls 1/6 more of our economy.

[SMR 368]

Nonsense. Insurance premiums are effected by the uninsured just as your car insurance premiums are effected by uninsured drivers.

^link

Exactly. Healthcare costs are affected by the uninsured because healthcare providers have to treat the uninsured, at least in emergencies. They need to recoup their costs and thus charge higher rates to those who can pay or have insurance.

However, the real question is how is giving insurance to the uninsured going to reduce this cost? Treating people costs money on a fundamental level. The bill does nothing to reduce this cost. People who don't have insurance don't have it for a reason--(for the most part) because they can't afford it. (Some of these people are very expensive to insure because of high risk, but that doesn't change the final result. And the bill doesn't change the risk. People with cancer are expensive to insure because cancer is expensive to treat. An act of Congress doesn't change that).

A certain number of Americans currently have health care and a certain amount of money is currently spent on health care. If you increase the number of people being treated, you have to increase the amount of money being spent to treat them. Considering those who currently don't get treatment don't have money to pay for it (insert dry well analogy), those who do have money to pay for health care will have to pay more if those people are treated. That may come through increased premiums, increased taxes, taxes on health care providers that increase premiums, or taxes on employers that reduce wages and motivation to hire new employees. But that money has to come from somewhere.

So, yes, we currently pay for the uninsured. But the current bill doesn't change that. It just moves those costs around and renames them.

There are, of course, ways that congress could reduce costs. But these measures are for the most part absent from the bill. And in the end, quality medical treatment is expensive no matter how you tackle it.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Selling to no-one is better than selling to someone at a loss.

Insurance companies don't drive up costs of healthcare - hospitals, doctors and patients do.

Their premiums simply reflect the costs.

What is being mandated is not health insurance reform, it's health care welfare.

Within minutes of Stupak's vote, an award he was to receive from a Susan B. Anthony group was recinded with scathing language pretty much calling him a phoney and a baby killer. He will pay dearly for his betrayal.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Sofiyya

[mawilson 2,133]

So, yes, we currently pay for the uninsured. But the current bill doesn't change that. It just moves those costs around and renames them.

Currently we only pay for emergencies. With this great piece of legislation, we will pay

for every little sniffle and sneeze.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Currently we only pay for emergencies. With this great piece of legislation, we will pay for every little sniffle and sneeze.

Well, first of all, that's not true. There are publicly funded health facilities around the country that we pay for today, too. Those would have to be expanded if nothing was done on the insurance coverage. Way too many people for way too few facilities. Care delivered in the ER is the most expensive care available and all it does is stabilize the patient. No follow-up, no follow-through, the patient will be back at a later point or kick the bucket. We're also addressing the invincible - those that don't pay at all today and are to get a "free ride" if they ever had an emergency. They will now pay towards their own care. They complain because they don't believe in personal responsibility as much as they claim. As for your sniffles, you can treat a hundred sniffles and still save money if that avoids just one visit to the ER. Most importantly, however, one of the main generators of unpaid hospital bills - PHI - will no longer be able to do that - insurers will not be able anymore to leave people hanging once they get sick. They will no longer be allowed to socialize their risk while privatizing their profits.

Edited March 22, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog