Day: July 21, 2009

Old Answers For Health Care Reform

A Professor’s Classroom

It is my intention to give my readers as much info as possible on the issues and the solutions that are offered up.

The debate has revved up and it is slowly coming to a boil….health care is the latest issue to get the spin doctors working.  Drug industry is about to lose their collective minds trying to find a way to retain their hold on the medication market….the  insurance industry is near stroke potential…they also are losing their way…they see their profits going out the window…they see their influence drying up…they see……yada…yada…..

A report shows the the Health care industry, most noticeably the insurance companies are spending about $1.4 million a day trying to defeat any substantial reform.  Even when 80% of the people want a good health care plan from Washington…at least they are putting people to work…was this part of the jobs creation that Obama predicted?  Just asking.

I listen to the GOP and their pundits throw some ideas out there…..tort reform, that is frivolous lawsuits, they want to limit these. but these lawsuits account for about 1% of the cost of health care, so even if they were compl,etely eliminated the savings would be microscopic….but yet it is a pillar of the opposition and their plan to reform health care.

Next is an issue that McCain, among others , have thrown into the mix.  This was first brought out in the mid 80’s, I believe…it is the old reliable Medical Savings Accounts (MASs).  There was a lull on the insistence of these accounts, but the resurrection has begun.

Just what is a MSA?

MSA was a solution offered up as a cure for the health cost crisis.  It was a personal savings account, tax free, where an individual could deposit money to help cover the cost of any illness that could show up, supposedly to see the depositor through illnbess and retirement.  Hell of an idea, but to me it sounds like rationing.  Why?  The well off could deposit more than the working poor, which would mean that the wealthy would get better health care than the poor.

The newest argument against a public option for health care for all Americans is the cost.  I have read that the GOP is saying that it would cost over $4.9 trillion dollars over the next ten years.  Damn!  That ain’t chump change!  But my question is where did those figures come from?

I mean a public option is where the people would pay into a Medicare-esque health plan, if that is true and there is income, where does the $4.9 trillion come from?  Not everyone will be ill at the same time.  I would like to see the formula that was used to figure the cost listed.

Sorry I digress….the MSA is not the way to get everyone insured…it is that simple …the only major benefit would be to banks…it would help their bottom line.  These accounts would be raided by the depositor in times of economic crisis….kinda like now….and the problem of unisured people would return.  This IS NOT a fix that deserves any consideration at all.  It is a joke…a cop-out….and a looney tune.

Labor Gets Pumped –Again!

Probably on of the best pieces of proposed legislation to come out of Washington in years was the Employee Free Choice Act…this piece of work would have made it easier for workers to organize in their workplace….many industries and Repubs hated it, whic h is understandable because those two groups hate the worker, they tolerate them out of necessity.

But of all groups, Dems are at the heart of a weakening of the Act.  Democrats!  Yes, Dems…moderate Dems….or as I like to call them the Blue Turd Dems…..

Sam Stein writing for the Huffington Post:

On Thursday, The New York Times reported that a half-dozen senators “friendly to labor” decided to drop the majority sign-up provision from the Employee Free Choice Act. The measure would have made it easier to organize workers by allowing the formation of a union once more than 50 percent of workers signed cards in support of it.

Critics had dubbed the provision “card check” and had pledged to fight any legislative vehicle that contained it. Faced with the possibility of a heated political fight and a dead-certain filibuster, several major unions and congressional allies tried to muster the 60 Senate votes needed for cloture. The avenues weren’t there. And over the past two months,

The compromise legislation, as described to the Huffington Post, will contain several major labor priorities including requiring shorter time periods for a union election and containing some form of binding arbitration to prevent employers from dragging out a contract negotiation process. The measures, according to AFL-CIO spokesman Eddie Vale, will let workers choose to join a union without intimidation, ensure that those who join a union get a first contract, and institute meaningful penalties for violations of labor law.

Once again, politicans are tweaking instead of finding a solution.  The fun part about this is these gutless wonders are deemed “labor friendly”….what a joke!  This whole strategy was a piece of crap…it was handled poorly and is going to set labor back even though there was high hopes with a Dem Congress and a Dem prez.

Silly voter….fooled again!