Do you think health care reform will pass?

[Baculus]

That's the thing. Enron went out of business, government failure is often met with more funding.

The state of Californian actually lost billions on Enron, since the state had to do some bailing out.

[Baculus]

No. A health information exchange can exist without EHRs and EHRs do exist without a health information exchange.

Yes, they can, but one often leads to another. Looking at PHIX, for example, which is the Pennsylvania Health Information Exchange. Data can be both physician-based and patient-EHR based.

This is a company which is involved in this particular area:

http://www.nextgen.com/products/productDetail.html?name=health-information-exchange

We are probably getting away from the point of the discussion with this.

Obama's basically proposing Massachucettes healthcare for all. The state sets the mandates (I think that's how this will be run, but that could still be at the fed level). Then, all insurance plans apply to the state/fed for the right to compete in that state. They submit coverage plans for approval. This is why it's "one size fits all." All insurance plans in that state have to meet the same standards.

This has nothing to do with EHRs.

There are some comparisons between Massachusetts and Democratic plans.

I think some changes have been made, though, if I understand it correctly, with the recent Democratic reconciliation. For example, instead of a penalty for failure to purchase insurance, you pay a 2% charge (state or federal? I am not sure) for an "ER" pool which, if you go into a hospital, will pay for your emergency care (which makes sense, if you ask me).

Also, the insurers that compete in the pool have minimum standards for coverage, but they don't have to have the same exact coverage. That is why it isn't quite "one size fits all," because they can still have differing plans (as long as they meet the minimum standards).

I am not sure you said "this has nothing to do with EHRs." Of course it doesn't: We are talking about insurance exchanges and not electronic health records.

[Ax]

Military is run by the government, so sit down and shut up.

No Alice, they're not. Any time they've tried to, say, in Korea, and then Vietnam, things didn't turn out so well, did they?

Oh, and I am sitting. No need for you to get so, huffy, either. Try Midol.

[Ax]

You should read beyond a couple of paragraphs, because it has more relevant spending data. And, as I said earlier, it accounts for ten years of spending.

I don't doubt that it "accounts" for a lot of things. But from their own mouths, they've talked about how we all start to pay, immediately. But we can't start to use it for another 2-4 years. Or, did I hear that wrong.

Since I haven't read it, let me ask you a question.

Preexisting conditions. My understanding is, this part gets phased in over a period of time too. Does it include everybody? The old and young alike?

I've heard rumors that it will cover up to a certain age. Not sure what the age will be. Everyone older than that age, is still SOL.

Again, I'm not saying this is the case. I'm asking.

[aREDSKIN]

Government run...

Social Security

Medicare

Medicaid

Fannie & Freddie

The Postal Service

Amtrak

and now...

Healthcare.

Inspiring, huh?

So inspiring that the ruling party has had to buy numerous votes from their own party members.

The accounting tricks being used in the CBO numbers are pure, 100%, USDA Bull****.

My favorite part of the new plan? 10 years of payments, for 6 years of incrementally increased "reform."

Here's a congressman telling it like it is.

"If You Don't Tie Our Hands, We Will Keep Stealing"

At least he's forthright & honest. Everyone who's paying attention knows this.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2

010/03/18/dem_congressman_if_you_dont_tie_our_hands_we_will_keep_stealing.html

[alexey]

No Alice, they're not. Any time they've tried to, say, in Korea, and then Vietnam, things didn't turn out so well, did they?

Oh, and I am sitting. No need for you to get so, huffy, either. Try Midol.

You used Fannie May and Freddie Mac as exampled of government-run institutions, but you are saying that military is not? Please explain.

I get a little frustrated when people forget the long and very impressive list of accomplishments of our government. Success of our nation = success of our government. Success of our government depends on putting competent people in charge and holding them accountable. If you automatically expect failure, then you are not competent enough to even vote.

[fansince62]

Why is the CBO suddenly unbelievable when it comes to this bill?

Also, be more specific when you say there are no real "cost containment provisions." And the revenue generating isn't entirely centered around raising taxes, either.

GD it do your friggin homework:

1) It ought to be a clue that it is already 90 billion higher than the numbers talked about last summer.

2) It is scored without knowledge of the specifics of the Bill

3) It assumes no coverage for illegal aliens (what legislation do you think will be next in the following year or so?)

4) It includes accounting tricks like taxes with no benefits the first 4 yrs to estimate a cost for only the first 10 years.

5) The CBO head affirmed that his organization had "not thoroughly examined the legislative language".

6) The bill raises taxes in all manner of areas there are going to have repercussions that can't possibly be understood in the week or so this estimate was hurriedly compiled. It has an implicit assumption that more income will be exposed to taxes - enjoy!

7) The current variant has provisions that will reduce social security taxes - a system headed for insolvancy.

8) It retains many of the corrupting buy-offs that are unrelated to health care and adds new ones.

This effort is a monstrosity and will cause huge divisions in this country for years to come. It has very little to do with true health care and everything to do with a power grab that is breathtaking. This bill will eventually render over 50% of the population....enemies of the state. just watch. it is corrput to the core and in that fact lies the seeds of its own demise. history has a way of always evening the score.

If you think the economy is bad now...wait till 2012 when all these taxes and incomplete, ineffective cost contaiers have had a chance to work their magic. I wouldn't want to be a young person graduating in that timeframe.

[Ax]

You used Fannie May and Freddie Mac as exampled of government-run institutions, but you are saying that military is not? Please explain.

I get a little frustrated when people forget the long and very impressive list of accomplishments of our government. Success of our nation = success of our government. Success of our government depends on putting competent people in charge and holding them accountable. If you automatically expect failure, then you are not competent enough to even vote.

The micro managing by the government, of all the entity's I mentioned, is what makes them, IMO, an array of walking, talking, cluster****s of ineptitude.

Our military operates best, when government management is minimal. In other words, we tell them, this is what we want, and we let them tell us the best way to get there. The more government restraint, the harder their job is.

Not saying government isn't necessary. And I agree that having competent people running things is our desire. However, after watching these clowns, from both party's, lie, cheat, and steal their way to reelection, their primary goal, for many, many years, you'll have to excuse me for being skeptical about anything, and everything they say.

And, if you automatically expect success, you are delusional, and therefore even less competent to vote than I am. Na-nanny-boo-boo!

[aREDSKIN]

GD it do your friggin homework:

1) It ought to be a clue that it is already 90 billion higher than the numbers talked about last summer.

2) It is scored without knowledge of the specifics of the Bill

3) It assumes no coverage for illegal aliens (what legislation do you think will be next in the following year or so?)

4) It includes accounting tricks like taxes with no benefits the first 4 yrs to estimate a cost for only the first 10 years.

5) The CBO head affirmed that his organization had "not thoroughly examined the legislative language".

6) The bill raises taxes in all manner of areas there are going to have repercussions that can't possibly be understood in the week or so this estimate was hurriedly compiled. It has an implicit assumption that more income will be exposed to taxes - enjoy!

7) The current variant has provisions that will reduce social security taxes - a system headed for insolvancy.

8) It retains many of the corrupting buy-offs that are unrelated to health care and adds new ones.

This effort is a monstrosity and will cause huge divisions in this country for years to come. It has very little to do with true health care and everything to do with a power grab that is breathtaking. This bill will eventually render over 50% of the population....enemies of the state. just watch. it is corrput to the core and in that fact lies the seeds of its own demise. history has a way of always evening the score.

If you think the economy is bad now...wait till 2012 when all these taxes and incomplete, ineffective cost contaiers have had a chance to work their magic. I wouldn't want to be a young person graduating in that timeframe.

Not only that but the HC "bill" includes a student loan provision which has a multiply billion offset (savings) in it which has absolutely nothing to do with health care. They are using that offset in the talking points of saving as it relates to health care. Dissemblers.

It's a sham juts like almost EVERYTHING the gov't touches. It cost are grotesquely exorbitant and out of line of any reasonable interpretation.

[Chicken Fried]

If they've got a reason to be monitoring you, then damn right they can track you on here. lol

BTW I'm reporting you to the FBI so they can check in on you and make sure you aren't some crazy extremist that could end up shooting up Capitol Hill. Your question just raised my eyebrows. If you've got nothing to hide, don't worry.

No problem. Check my post history. I have nothing to hide. I think you're kidding anyway, but I'm not really sure.

[NewCliche21]

The micro managing by the government, of all the entity's I mentioned, is what makes them, IMO, an array of walking, talking, cluster****s of ineptitude.

Our military operates best, when government management is minimal. In other words, we tell them, this is what we want, and we let them tell us the best way to get there. The more government restraint, the harder their job is.

Not saying government isn't necessary. And I agree that having competent people running things is our desire. However, after watching these clowns, from both party's, lie, cheat, and steal their way to reelection, their primary goal, for many, many years, you'll have to excuse me for being skeptical about anything, and everything they say.

And, if you automatically expect success, you are delusional, and therefore even less competent to vote than I am. Na-nanny-boo-boo!

That military point goes the same for every agency from their own perspective. My fiancee is a teacher. She just spent two weeks giving students the Delaware state exams and the rest of her career trying to meet NCLB standards. Are the kids learning anything? Of course not. Are they passing the tests? Sure. The numbers are not indicative of success and with less government intervention, your five-year-old might actually do some fingerpainting like five-year-olds are supposed to do it rather than pass an exam.

This coming from someone with strong socialist views.

Agencies that are critical to our country, like the military, education system, large utilities (highways, water sanitation, etc.), banks, health care, and the like need to be under the federal umbrella, but too much intervention will ruin them faster than they would on their own.

[NewCliche21]

Not only that but the HC "bill" includes a student loan provision which has a multiply billion offset (savings) in it which has absolutely nothing to do with health care. They are using that offset in the talking points of saving as it relates to health care. Dissemblers.

It's a sham juts like almost EVERYTHING the gov't touches. It cost are grotesquely exorbitant and out of line of any reasonable interpretation.

Dude, really? Go pick ten random pieces of legislation. Doesn't have to be federal, doesn't have to be major. Just any ten. Tell me if there are any dumbass amendments or things like what you are railing against in this thread.

It's not a fault of this bill; it's reality.

[alexey]

The micro managing by the government, of all the entity's I mentioned, is what makes them, IMO, an array of walking, talking, cluster****s of ineptitude.

Micro managing has that effect in general. Put competent people in charge, let them do their jobs.

Not saying government isn't necessary. And I agree that having competent people running things is our desire. However, after watching these clowns, from both party's, lie, cheat, and steal their way to reelection, their primary goal, for many, many years, you'll have to excuse me for being skeptical about anything, and everything they say.

It is one thing to be skeptical. It is another thing to say that the whole thing is fundamentally corrupt and incompetent.

It is one thing to say that you want to make the government work better. It is another thing to say that you want to make the government "smaller." Both could be bloody lies, but at least the first one sort of means something, and does not necessarily entail raping of public interests.

And, if you automatically expect success, you are delusional, and therefore even less competent to vote than I am. Na-nanny-boo-boo!

I do not expect success. I expect a hard, continuous struggle to make slow and painful progress towards holding our politicians more accountable and making our government increasingly competent. Unfortunately it is difficult to overcome people like you who have a fundamentally poisoned view of our government.

(and this poison is spread deliberately by self-interested people to gain political power)

[fansince62]

Here's a congressman telling it like it is.

"If You Don't Tie Our Hands, We Will Keep Stealing"

At least he's forthright & honest. Everyone who's paying attention knows this.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2

010/03/18/dem_congressman_if_you_dont_tie_our_hands_we_will_keep_stealing.html

since they are willing to use the terrorist powers of the government...it's more like robbing.

[twa]

It is one thing to say that you want to make the government work better. It is another thing to say that you want to make the government "smaller." Both could be bloody lies, but at least the first one sort of means something, and does not necessarily entail raping of public interests.

I do not expect success. I expect a hard, continuous struggle to make slow and painful progress towards holding our politicians more accountable and making our government increasingly competent. Unfortunately it is difficult to overcome people like you who have a fundamentally poisoned view of our government.

(and this poison is spread deliberately by self-interested people to gain political power)

Poisoned eh?....and just where did we get afflicted?

At the Public interest feed trough:evilg:

Ignore the warnings of the past at your own peril.

“I think this is going to be all about deficit reduction — that’s the theme,” said David Wasserman of The Cook Political Report. “Vulnerable Democrats will seek to sell this as a deficit-reduction bill, not a healthcare bill.”

[fansince62]

I do not expect success. I expect a hard, continuous struggle to make slow and painful progress towards holding our politicians more accountable and making our government increasingly competent. Unfortunately it is difficult to overcome people like you who have a fundamentally poisoned view of our government.

(and this poison is spread deliberately by self-interested people to gain political power)

no doubt based on your years of profound experience inside government and its mechanics/politics.

you seem to be another person who doesn't get it: the people in power now have a whole set of objectives that have nothing to do with efficiency or performance (they recently killed that one didn't they!!!). they aren't fiddle f'ing around when they talk about transformational politics. they hate the current social, economic and defense structure/relationships/"morality" and are H bent on completely transforming "the model". to do this they have to seize control of all the important levers of power....health, education, banking...it's happening in front of our eyes and people are either too self absorbed, too disingenuous, too invested in the benfits of the change, too stupid to see what is really going on.

the only break on any of this is going to be the utter chaos this inevitably wreaks on the economy. note how NONE..not one...of their prognostications have come to fruition in the economic realm. as a sidebar...ever notice how these people always seem to take care of themselves first? Obama didn't let rhetoric get in the way of his shady real estate millions with Resco....Pelosi has married her millionaire and runs a nice little tuna business overseas.....Rangle isn't exactly broke...Geitner apparenetly is interested in maximizing his wealth by whatever means......Dodd has his Freddie/Fanny perks...Billary have been outlaws from day 1.....they all want to shut down charter schools/voucher programs and send their kids to elite schools while leaving you and I to the disaster that is public secondary education.....the noble Penn is violent when confronted with opposing ideas.....the Clooneys if the world live overseas.......the elites drive prius's but fly around in private jets.....

IT'S ALL A GRAND SCAM.....and we are the suckers weeping like fools at florid teleprompter aided speaches that dissemble the real objectives while trading on selfish interests and atavistic fears. it's not that the Repubs are any better...it's that these people really are fascists who completely disregard you and I as individuals. you are a concept to them. a member of a racial group or an income bracket. they are very scary. just wait until all this regulatory rhetoric really takes hold......the law of unintended consequences will flourish (if you're paying attention...it has already started). you don't just regulate: you have to monitor, detect and enforce. what..exactly...do you think the implications of that are as the admin works to implement it's grand vision for transforming society into a more "equitable...just" organism that is top down driven?

[fansince62]

Poisoned eh?....and just where did we get afflicted?

At the Public interest feed trough:evilg:

Ignore the warnings of the past at your own peril.

Exactly.

[alexey]

Poisoned eh?....and just where did we get afflicted?

1980

[alexey]

do you think the implications of that are as the admin works to implement it's grand vision for transforming society into a more "equitable...just" organism that is top down driven?

We already know implications of top driven trickle-down stuff.

[JMS]

1980

It's true that when we reformed healthcare in the 80's going from a largely non profit model to a for profit one; the motivation was to get control of ever increasing costs. The result was our cost increases accelerated.

The reformers of the 80's believed big buisness and the free market was the most efficient mechanism to deliver goods. They failed to grasp without competition there is no free market, and big buisness's primary goal is not efficiency; it's profits.

Creating a for profit market with no competition just allowed the corporations carte blanch to ratchet up costs.

[JMS]

We already know implications of top driven trickle-down stuff.

We also know America hasn't used a free market healthcare delivery since before we were considered a global power. Not in anybodies life time posting here. Not since the 30's at best....

Why? because that model doesn't support the highly specialized nature of medicine in a modern medical system.

[alexey]

We also know America hasn't used a free market healthcare delivery since before we were considered a global power. Not in anybodies life time posting here. Not since the 30's at best....

Why? because that model doesn't support the highly specialized nature of medicine in a modern medical system.

It also does not address the fundamental conflict between profits and public good in health care.

Because of this inherent conflict, the health care system is a kind of thing where free market forces will not produce desirable outcomes unless they are well regulated.

[Ax]

It is one thing to be skeptical. It is another thing to say that the whole thing is fundamentally corrupt and incompetent.

I do not expect success. I expect a hard, continuous struggle to make slow and painful progress towards holding our politicians more accountable and making our government increasingly competent. Unfortunately it is difficult to overcome people like you who have a fundamentally poisoned view of our government.

Well, my friend, let's hope we're both alive, and still here on ES in 20 years. I'll be curious to see if you still think so, after a bit more, seasoning.

[alexey]

Well, my friend, let's hope we're both alive, and still here on ES in 20 years. I'll be curious to see if you still think so, after a bit more, seasoning.

Roger that, buddy.

There is this joke about a kid who got a piece of poo for his birthday, and got very excited: "I got a PONY!!! A REAL ONE!!! But it ran away!!!" You only live once, so I do not mind being that kid... It's not like he didn't know it was poo, he just decided to think differently about it.

(sorry about the earlier outburst, it was inappropriate)

[IHOPSkins]

Well Pelosi spoke and Obama is speaking about this now

They seem very optimistic about closure in the affirmative next week

For me the opposite is true, I fear this bill