Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
McCain/Republican Health Plan
Author Message
gsloth Offline
perpetually tired
*

Posts: 6,654
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Rice&underdogs
Location: Central VA

Donators
Post: #1
McCain/Republican Health Plan
Looking to change the topics a bit more to something else (or at least give a parallel plan)...

This is one I need help with, because to me, there doesn't seem to be much of a plan. We're going to shuffle the money around (though it largely winds up in the same pockets), change the way we tax your benefits to be more consistent, maybe induce a few more people to buy a plan (if you are single - I cannot see a family getting a decent plan for $5k), but otherwise not change much (beyond standard bromides like eletronic records, etc.).

Am I missing something here? What's gamechanging about this plan? It seems to me like rearranging chairs on the Titanic.
10-07-2008 02:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,342
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1293
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #2
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
Okay...
The McCain proposal is to give a $5,000 credit to buy insurance. The "average" full coverage plan apparently costs 12,000/year. This has absolutely no impact on the tax treatment for employers, but it does for employees. At 25,000/year... you probably don't have insurance... so $5,000 is $5,000... but only for insurance. As you go up in income the actual benefit goes down... but even at 250k plus, it's not an INCREASE in cost. Of course, at 250k, you probably have more than a $12,000 "average" plan anyway...

Now, one cannot buy a "regular" plan for $5,000... but it can buy a basic plan which probably includes most preventative care, plus critical care up to a relatively small number... probably a few hundred thousand... Preventive care, plus using negotiated rates for the currently uninsured as opposed to emergency room rates will make a significant difference in cost and efficiency. Emergency care will improve as the system will be taxed less by the uninsured coming in for upper respiritory infections that are now being treated BEFORE they become serious.

If you don't currently have insurance, you can now buy a basic plan.

If you currently have insurance, you will pay less for it... IIRC (math not in front of me) this is worth 2-3,000 for a family at 100k or so after tax, and perhaps a few hundred at 250k.

Employers who couldn't afford to offer even a $5,000 plan may now be able to offer a $1,000 add-on plan to improve coverage.

Employers currently offering the benefit would have no reason to stop offering insurance. They offer insurance as an employment incentive... and that need to incent employees won't change.

What WILL change is that the uninsured will have basic coverage... I suspect that you will see competition amongst insurance companies for a variety of basic plans... some with high deductibles... some with zero... some with more narrow coverage... some with drug benefits... some without... ALL without regard to which plans your employer selects... this will be YOUR plan... not your employers plan... AND there will be a new market for add-ons, like the Medicaid suppliments covering prescription drugs, or mental health or whatever that employers that couldn't previously afford to offer... or employees couldn't "add" at their own expense.

I don't know that it is game-changing... but it is (IMO) a decent balance between cost and benefit... and doesn't take any significant new beauracracy to administer.
10-07-2008 03:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
texd Offline
Weirdly (but seductively) meaty
*

Posts: 14,447
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 114
I Root For: acorns & such
Location: Dall^H^H^H^H Austin

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlCrappiesDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #3
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
Currently I pay $250 a month out of pocket (for a mid-thirties male) for an individual plan that specifically omits my lower back problems. Any more problems and it's all my dime. (This despite the fact that I've been declared healthy for now and have never had any surgeries beyond 1 epidural steroid injection). This is what I could get from the only company willing to underwrite me.

It was that or pay $700 a month to be added on to my wife's employer-sponsored plan (note, this is more than the employer pays for her coverage, and she's of maternity age). I'm too tired to
10-07-2008 04:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gravy Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,394
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #4
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
Obama has been a Senator for almost 4 years. McCain has been a Senator for much longer than that. Most of us seem to forget that the Legislative Branch, not the Executive Branch, is where policy is defined.

Here's what I want to know every time one of the candidates says "I have a plan to...": if it is such a great idea, why haven't you sponsored it in Congress already?
10-07-2008 09:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,342
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1293
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #5
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
It is GENERALLY the job of the President to set priorities using the bully pulpit, and for Congress to impliment them. In fairness to both candidates, I doubt if national healthcare reform was the number one priority for a Senator from Ill, 'Zona or Conn. I agree that they could have been submitted once the debate had begun... but we haven't really had that debate yet.
10-08-2008 10:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gravy Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,394
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #6
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
Hambone10 Wrote:It is GENERALLY the job of the President to set priorities using the bully pulpit, and for Congress to impliment them. In fairness to both candidates, I doubt if national healthcare reform was the number one priority for a Senator from Ill, 'Zona or Conn. I agree that they could have been submitted once the debate had begun... but we haven't really had that debate yet.
Some bills start that way. Many don't. If Senators Wyden and Bennett can introduce a health reform bill (S. 334), why can't McCain or Obama? How often have presidential campaign policy promises historically come to fruition?
10-08-2008 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,342
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1293
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #7
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
I'll give you that... but that wasn't the question.

In MY experience, I've never seen a politician tax less or fewer people than he promised... and I've never seen a project cost less than it was budgeted to... and I've never seen a project deliver more than he promised, or to more people.

Therefore, I generally support the candidate who promises the least...
10-08-2008 03:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,845
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3211
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #8
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
I'd like to see us adopt what is basically the French plan. Having been a health care consumer in France, I can tell you a couple of things about it that you may not realize:

1. It is more free market than socialized medicine. It may actually be more free market than what we have now. It is almost certianly more free market than where we're heading under the Obama proposal, if not under the McCain proposal as well.

2. Although Michael Moore made a movie championing it, I don't think he'd really like it very much if he actually did enough research to know what it really entails.
10-08-2008 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl75 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,003
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #9
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
According to the NYT Bush proposed the "McCain" plan earlier this year. It has also been the center of a bill that has been kicking around for awhile with some bipartisan support. The liberals like it because the current system favors higher earners for whom the tax break is worth more. So it is viewed by liberals as a way to shift costs to the high earners, and then (some at least, not the Bush/McCain plan) would use the extra tax money to pay for coverage for low income folks. It has not had more democratic support due to many unions having gotten gold plated plans they don't want to give up. Since it would hurt high earners it hasn't gotten much traction on the republican side either.

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2...insurance/

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ef=opinion

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/us/pol...lan&st=cse

69 - What is the French plan?
10-10-2008 11:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl75 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,003
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #10
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
OK so I googled the French plan and it is too complex for a simple explanation here.

One very French feature I noticed: spa stays are covered! (ok there is a 30% co-pay)

Maybe someone in the health care system can explain something to me. I get a bill from a health care provider. It is for, say, $5,000. Then my insurance "disallows" $4,000 for various reasons, pays 80% of the remaining amount and I pay 20% or $200. This seems like a crazy dance. And what do people who do not have someone to run interference for them do? Pay the $5k?
10-11-2008 12:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


texd Offline
Weirdly (but seductively) meaty
*

Posts: 14,447
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 114
I Root For: acorns & such
Location: Dall^H^H^H^H Austin

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlCrappiesDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #11
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
Owl75 Wrote:Maybe someone in the health care system can explain something to me. I get a bill from a health care provider. It is for, say, $5,000. Then my insurance "disallows" $4,000 for various reasons, pays 80% of the remaining amount and I pay 20% or $200. This seems like a crazy dance. And what do people who do not have someone to run interference for them do? Pay the $5k?

Yes. Often that or nothing.

Some folks will also negotiate in advance to pay a lower amount (such as insurance rates).
10-11-2008 12:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,845
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3211
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #12
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
Owl75 Wrote:OK so I googled the French plan and it is too complex for a simple explanation here.
One very French feature I noticed: spa stays are covered! (ok there is a 30% co-pay).

As someone who has actually used the French health care system, perhaps I can cut through some of the complexities. A couple of general observations.
1. Before I had my experience with the French system, I though it was a good model to emulate. When I had the experience, I thought to myself, "You've been in favor of this system from afar, now let's see how much you like it up close and personal." After having the experience, I am 1000 times as convinced as I was before that it is the way to go.
2. The system is not exactly what people think it is, certianly not what Michael Moore thinks it is, and there are some reasons why it might not work here, but I'd still love to see us try it. It is not a socialized system. There is no national health service, unlike Canada or UK. It's basically an insurance-based, free-market system where consumers are free to choose. Conceptually, it is as if a socialized medicine system (like Canada) and a fee-for-care system (like the US) were allowed to operate side-by-side. Another comparison might be our education system where we have free public schools alongside private schools where you can pay to send your kids.

There is a system of "free" care. The health care it affords seems to be okay, but the creature comforts and delivery environment that accompany it are not what Americans are used to (this is why I think it might be hard to implement in the US). It has been subject to very strict cost controls, which means the care is pretty basic, with anything outside the basic health care envelope subject to quotas and queues. The government spends about $3400 per person per year, to give you an idea of the cost controls; this element has come under considerable criticism, and there was a movement to increase government spending significantly, but Sarkozy has made it clear that he is not going in that direction, and his election seems to confirm that the country agrees with him. Without demonstrating an inability to pay, nothing is actually "free." As in your example, everything comes with a co-pay, starting in about the $40-50 range for an office visit. Also as your example suggests, there is considerable emphasis on preventive care and homeopathic and other alternative treatments. A lot of the basic care is handled by paraprofessionals, particularly on the free side.

The pay track works very much like the US system, only with a LOT less paperwork. One characteristic of the French system is much lower administrative costs than in the US. Another is a different approach to malpractice. Both these factors lead to significant cost reductions. You can purchase insurance to cover your expenses on the pay side. Employers typically provide health insurance (in a country with universal health coverage, no less) because if you get sick or injured they want you back at work, not stuck waiting in a queue. The insuarnce is cheaper because of the lower costs as noted above, because even if you have insurance you tend to go to the free system for things like tetanus shots and amoxycillin prescriptions and save the pay side for elective treatments, and because the government provides a catastrophic illness umbrella coverage for everyone (thereby eliminating a lot of the concerns that inusurers have here regarding preexisting conditions). The free side kind of works as a gatekeeper for the pay side, but you can buy insurance which lets you go directly to the pay side for everything (it is a bit more expensive than the normal process where the pay side is secondary). That's my perspective, now I'll try to explain how the system worked for me.

My mother and I made what was supposed to be a quick trip to Paris, that got extended when my mom fell and broke her hip on the Sunday evening before we were scheduled to fly back on Monday. She was picked up by an ambulance operated by the fire department, and taken to the emergency room in a "free" hospital. I would describe the hospital in terms I once heard used to describe Ben Taub, if you're in a life-or-death situation it's where you want to go, but as soon as you know you're going to live you want to get out as quickly as possible. She received outstanding emergency room care, and I was required to complete far less paperwork than would have been required of me in a simliar situation in the US, something I found particularly surprising since we were foreigners. She was scheduled for surgery the next morning. The ugly side of the free system reared its head on Monday, when she was prepped for surgery and taken down three times, only to be brought back up each time when some patient with higher priority came in. I began to realize very quickly what was going to happen, and I started working to get her out to the pay system. We were able to move her to a pay hospital on Tuesday, and she had the surgery Wednesday morning. The two weeks in the pay hospital were the best medical experience, by far, that either she or I can ever recall having. The surgery was a complete success, and six years later she has no problems. The recovery/rehab procedures were very aggressive. Upon her return to the states, my brother had enrolled her in a six week post-op program. After she was there two days, the facility called and told him to come get her, as she was already further along in recovery than they would have her in six weeks. Basically, they juice you up and tell you to walk, and if it hurts they juice you some more and tell you to walk. The anasthesiologist controls the morphine levels, and for that reason both the anasthesiologist and the surgeon make daily rounds throughout the recovery.

French docs aren't starving, at least not those who work on the pay side. The surgeon drove a 450SEL and lived in an condo where the cheapest unit was 800,000 Euros. The anasthesiologist was a 50-something woman, and in two weeks of visiting my mom, I saw easily $20,000 worth of clothes on that woman. You can test this for yourself. Docs are coming to the US from all over the world because they can make more money here than at home; look at the directory in any medical office building. While you're at it, see how many of them appear to be from France; I'm guessing you won't find many.

I got my mom in and out of two hospitals, with major surgery and two weeks of rehab, for less paperwork than it would take here if I went to a local emergency room to get an amoxycillin prescription for a sinus infection. At both of the French hospitals, comparable in size to what you'd find in major cities in the US, the back office staff consisted of a social worker (to evaluate ability to pay) and three or four clerks/bookkeepers. The savings on paperwork is immense. The nursing care was comparable to what you'd find in the US in the free hospital, but on the pay side it was several orders of magnitue more responsive than anything I've ever seen here. Both hospitals were in older buildings, but very clean. Neither hospital seemed to have quite as much glitzy, high-tech stuff as you see here. In a US hospital, the cat scan machine has touch-screen controls, whereas in France it has toggle switches; both work just fine. My mom's fovorite part was that every afternoon about 3:30, they came around with a wine and cheese cart for everyone. The food was amazing. There was a much greater emphasis on making the hospital stay a pleasant and enjoyable experience (you'd expect this of the French), and I'm guessing that translates into higher succes rates.

One of my business partners had the same surgery in the same time frame; his cost $40,000 in the US, while my mom's cost $13,000 in France. The hospital and the docs took Blue Cross.

I've likened the decision of whether to use the free side or the pay side to the decision faced by many in Houston, "Do I send my kid to Lamar or to Kinkaid." There are a lot of simliarities. If you're a patient, or visiting a friend or family member who is a patient, you would know very quickly whether you were in the free system or the pay system (by 3:30 at the latest, LOL). My mom is fond of saying, "I'm 85 years old, and if I ever need surgery again, I want to go back to that hospital in Paris."
(This post was last modified: 10-11-2008 11:46 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
10-11-2008 11:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lauramac Offline
.

Posts: 7,953
Joined: Nov 2003
I Root For: ,
Location:

The Parliament AwardsCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesBlazerTalk AwardNew Orleans BowlCrappiesDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #13
RE: McCain/Republican Health Plan
Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:...there are some reasons why [the French system] might not work here, but I'd still love to see us try it.

You've just about convinced me. That system sounds great -- and with the analogy to the dual school system, sounds like something that could work here, if only it could be enacted.

Too bad that's probably unlikely at best. On one hand, you'd have people resisting it as "ZOMG socialized medicine"; on the other, as "ZOMG doctors still make $$$ off of stratified healthcare for rich people". In no case will legislators be able to explain it to this all-important segment of the electorate!
10-11-2008 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.