Mike Huckabee makes an unintentional point:
“It sounds so good, and it’s such a warm message to say we’re not gonna deny anyone from a preexisting condition,” Huckabee explained at the Value Voters Summit today. “Look, I think that sounds terrific, but I want to ask you something from a common sense perspective. Suppose we applied that principle [to] our property insurance. And you can call your insurance agent and say, “I’d like to buy some insurance for my house.” He’d say, “Tell me about your house.” “Well sir, it burned down yesterday, but I’d like to insure it today.” And he’ll say “I’m sorry, but we can’t insure it after it’s already burned.” Well, no preexisting conditions.”
He’s on to something. It makes no sense to insure somebody who is already sick. That’s why the health insurance industry hasn’t traditionally offered plans to sick people. The government can’t very well come along and force a private business to make a business decision that is guaranteed to lose them money. So, what’s the solution?
The individual mandate is the solution. By compelling all people to buy coverage, the insurance industry gains enough new, healthy planholders that it makes up for the cost of insuring those with pre-existing conditions. What’s the problem with that? Well, now the government is requiring us to become the customer of a private for-profit health insurance provider. Some of us don’t believe in for-profit health insurance and we resent the hell out of having to become their customers. That’s why we demanded a public option that would serve as an alternative to the private insurers. We didn’t get that, and so we’re pretty dissatisfied with the health care reform bill.
But the individual mandate and the public option were already suboptimal solutions. As Huckabee points out, it doesn’t make sense to insure people against getting sick, since many of us are already sick. Hell, we’re almost all going to get sick before we die. It’s as if we knew with certainty that all our homes were going to burn down in the next fifty to sixty years. Recognizing our shared mortality, it makes sense to simply cover everyone’s health needs rather than to insure against them. Here’s what you do.
You pay into a health care fund while you are of working age. When you need medical attention, you go get it. To prevent overuse of the system, you have small co-payments. Rather than paying doctors for each procedure they perform, you pay them for how efficiently they provide for the health of their patients. If they convince you to eat better, exercise, and quit smoking, they make more money rather than less (as it stands now). This is basically a Medicare-for-All plan with some elements of the British health care system thrown in.
People are not houses. I don’t know how Mike Huckabee ever developed a world-view that sees people and houses as interchangeable. Some of us are blessed with good health, while others struggle with chronic pain and disease. We never know when we might jump from the first group to the second, so we ought to be humble and support a system that provides for all of us in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Health insurance has no necessary role in this, and it certainly doesn’t contribute to increased quality or better cost-efficiency. It just creates a wholly unnecessary middle-man. Imagine if you not only had to pay for Medicare, but you had to put an extra $100 in the mail to AETNA just to gain access to your Medicare. That’s what our current system effectively asks us to do. No one benefits except for the people the private insurers happen to employ and the shareholders in those companies.
So, yes, the Health Care Reforms were nice, and it’s great that people with preexisting conditions can now gain access to health care that won’t force them into bankruptcy, but we can do so much better than concocting some bizarre system that has to account for the fact that people are not houses.
Mike Huckabee developed that worldview by coming from a Christian movement that fuses Biblical literalism with pro-corporate policies while somehow whiting out Jesus’ teaching on compassion.
But who cares, he sure can play that bass guitar!
Oh, please. Insurance companies take extreme liberties with “pre-existing conditions”.
Most of us think cancer, heart disease, concussions, etc are pre-existing conditions, however you might want to add high cholesterol(high depends on the insurance company), blood pressure(same reasoning), pregnancy, new born’s with cardiovascular problems, domestic abuse, etc.
Huck knows this and is just trying to lie about the insurance companies.
amen.
BTW, did you hear that shit-heel baucus complaining that the reason more people than ever are uninsured is because of the “egregious” abuses of the health insurance companies?
I shit you not. Max “liz fowler from wellpoint wrote my bill” “no public option” “arrest those doctors” “my biggest corporate contributer is the insurance industry” Baucus is upset with the insurance companies.
maybe I should cut baucus slack, seeing as he’s got a pre-existing condition too: headupassism. It’s a very common condition in DC, which causes you to talk a lot of shit.
Healthcare like education is not best served by a market because markets ration goods and services on the basis of psychology plus cash — desirability and willingness to pay. That is the fundamental problem with Huckabee’s reasoning by analogy. Health insurance is not like homeowners insurance. Some homeowners burn down their own houses to collect homeowners insurance. I don’t know of a lot of cases in which people deliberately became sick in order to collect health insurance (or even disability insurance).
Providing services directly through a national healthcare system like the UK has (call it VA for all) spreads the risk over everybody but limits payments to actual services (given proper safeguards for internal fraud). There is no evidence of overuse of either the British National Health Care system or the VA hospitals. A single payer healthcare system (call it Medicare for all) does not suffer from the potential for overuse. Medicare has not suffered from overuse. It is at risk from fraud by providers or those posing as providers. The myth about patient overuse is as pernicious as the myth about Social Security’s financial problems. (If Social Security has financial problems because it can’t collect its loans to the general fund, T-bills also are risky and a 3% interest rate for T-bills seems to indicate otherwise.)
Even if a single-payer healthcare plan paid for gym fees, it still would not risk overuse as much as false billings. Seeking healthcare and working out in a gym are onerous tasks that limit demand (in economic terms) very quickly.
The elephant in the room in all these discussions is really long-term care through home health services or nursing homes. There have been a lot of middle class families divesting themselves of their assets before they needed long-term care so that they could qualify for Medicaid. The Boomers haven’t quite gotten this far yet, but it’s coming. Expect this to be an issue in the 2016 elections.
Want to end practitioner abuse? Employ them by the government.
Now that’s true socialism lulz (and coincidentally, probably the most efficient way…)
No, no, no. Everything private is better than anything public, and so long as one of us, somewhere, is covered by a collective bargaining agreement, none of us are truly free.
Did ya sleep through the eighties or something?
😉
Sort of, I wasn’t conceived until 1987 hahaha.
The mandate does suck, it is one of the first things that helped left leaning PUMAs to hold against Obama. The use of the bully pulbit was great wasn’t it?
But all that aside, the biggest issue with this is the shear number of people employed in this giant paperwork scam. If we actually cut out the middleman on this it might drive us into an actual depression from the additional millions of unemployed insurance / paperwork functionary s. Realistically people are getting laid off because of the high rates that business is forced to take on. Its a tough question, how to actually accomplish repairing the system without killing the patient.
A lot of the nurses could go back to nursing.
The claims people will have a lot of opportunities.
The ones who will be really hurt hard are the $4 million a year CEOs.
BTW, I think the 2014 start date was in the bill for a reason. And it will probably take until 2014 to get to a situation in which these jobs are threatened. If the economy isn’t booming then after 6 years, the Democrats if there are any around are in big trouble.
When your house is burning down, the socialist fire dept will come put it out. The insuranceco does nothing to prevent the disaster. When you body is burning with illness, there’s no socialist fire dept to put it out. The only role of the insuranceco is to find ways to keep private-enterprise medicine from stopping your body from burning down. Unlike the house insuranceco, the health insuranceco will not pay a dime once your body has burned down.
Big difference. Huckabee should really quit mentioning “common sense”, seein’ how his mean little god neglected to give him any.
But the life insurance company will, but it won’t matter to you by then.
Actually, if you have a pre-existing condition you may not be able to buy life insurance (sorry about those bad genes you inherited)….
First off, the 20 court cases from states are already not going well (judges have decided that there is cause for the suits to proceed when given the opportunity), so this discussion may become moot quickly.
What I don’t get is the logic of stamping this half-measure as a “great increment” towards true reform. Somehow the next step MUST be towards even greater reform. And housing prices always go up, right?
I believe it will have the opposite effect. People hate it because they are being compelled to do something. If people were forced to eat free ice cream, they would hate it. That’s America for you. It’s really not such a bad character ‘flaw’ when you think about it.
And I agree with those folks re: HCR.
While a mandate makes some good ‘ends justify the means’-type sense, it will forever be wrong to be tempted by this fascist approach, which combines profit motive and government coercion and leads no where good over time.
The idea of paying taxes to for-profit corporations was only found in distopian SciFi books for a reason. We’ve sold our souls to the company store with this one. If you aren’t a debt-slave already because of your mortgage/credit card debt, you will be soon simply because you wish to live a long and moderately health life.
For me, the main difference between HRC and Obama was his stand on the mandate. He went back on his word and lost many Independents and natural allies. And me.
Obama is definitely in the ‘lesser of two evils’ category that he had once been able to stand apart from.
——–
“Don’t worry we’ll fix it later, but at least we’ve got this far.”
If you are going to make a shitty bill and fix it later anyway:
Instead of trading mandate for pre-existing condition requirements, a deal that has profoundly wounded both party and President, why not just make the reforms that people want and FIX IT LATER. Just like the plan MUST be now.
AMERICA TO DEMS: You mean you went through all that to compel my insurance carrier to cover me, and me to pay for this coverage, when I can’t afford it any way? Gee thanks for that. My bills will only go up in single-digit percentages each year? Gee thanks for that reliable gov’t opinion. It doesn’t kicking for a few years anyhow? You guys are the best.
Unless there is some ability to trade the mandate out for a public option in the near future, I don’t get how the Democratic approach benefited anyone from any perspective.
Not that I haven’t been saying this all along.. sigh.
It’s been hard to watch this slo-mo car wreck, but it has played out as predictably as it can.
Let’s review: so that a group of people who can’t afford to pay for their health costs might be able to, we’ve compelled EVERYONE who already can’t afford to pay for their health insurance to pony up. How can this work? In exchange for this and a few more ornaments on the tree, the Dems gave up the House, potentially the Senate and (more and more likely) the Presidency.
So do you really think the American public will hire the Dems again to fix this
garbage pileimperfect law they made?I have no question that this was NOT worth it. Do you?
I was glad that the Dems ‘won’ on some level, but King Pyrrhus would certainly relate. Unfortunately, the measure of success isn’t always how hard you fought for something, rather where you stand when the dust settles.
Oh, for anyone interested, I have pre-existing conditions AND have only been able to afford insurance for maybe 5 years of my life, total. If I had been compelled to buy insurance my whole working life, I would not own a house and would have probably tens of thousands in additional debt. As fucked as our system was, at least I could choose not to participate, and as a result I can say confidently that my family will have a better chance for success.
Why would I not accept this bone thrown to me? Because it is covered in bullshit and that would be a purely selfish act, given how I feel about compulsory for-profit transactions.
People will bring up driving insurance, which is not the same because you can choose not to drive. You can’t choose when you get cancer.
Either promote pre-tax HSAs and stay out of it (so workers can choose to eliminate the insurer from the picture) or go for full public health, this incrementalist, neo-fascist BS reform just wasted everyone’s time, especially when the whole thing is thrown out in court because it was written as to have very limited separability (the ability to have part struck down with the rest left standing).
Yes, things could be worse given Repug rule, but to your average Joe it just isn’t better enough under Dems, and there is no way that people will believe otherwise now, given their fresh disillusionment with the whole hopey-changy thing.
The other day, I went to a family gathering where the topic of leaving the US came up. Everyone there admitted they had all separately been considering it seriously for a long time and were pretty much set on the idea. To me this is the measure by which Obama has failed most: the restoration of pride in America (and I don’t mean that scary obedience=patriotism shit the Right wing often exhorts).
We’ve been here since 1642.
Kill the fascist mandate (non-profit=non-fascist), finish the reform. Please?
Perhaps he’d support a shingle payer system.
Shorter Booman: Government!
And how! If only you’d been so open about it at the time.
Being open about it wouldn’t change the vote count in the Senate…
You’re right, Booman.
They (we) are not houses.
To the corporatist mind, they are commodities.
Commodities to be traded; commodities to be used for the good of the corporate state and commodities to be discarded when they become less than useful or productive.
This is the real message of the right.
Everything is potentially “collateral damage” in the war for progress.
Everything and everybody.
Some are more valuable than others.
Those who work for you are more valuable than those who work for your competitors. Those who do good or skilled work for you are more valuable than those who do not. You protect your assets according to their value.
In a time when these particular kinds of assets…human beings…are becoming more and more common, the law of supply and demand states that as they become more numerous they will become less valuable. As the ongoing technological/industrial revolution continues to eliminate the need for real thought of even the most basic kind at the workforce level, people have become less and less a valuable commodity. The direction of development is perfectly straight from the mindless assembly lines of Henry Ford right on through to contemporary computerized checkout stations where even the simple ability to add and subtract in order to make change has been eliminated.
In fact, population growth unfettered by the age-old checks and balances of disease and starvation threatens to make a large percentage of human beings less and less of a commodity and more and more of a liability to the corporations.
This is the real secret to the seemingly cavalier attitudes of the more reactionary parts of the PermaGov regarding war deaths and increasing healthcare costs. They wage wars only where less valuable commodities live, so it’s “Kill ’em all and let God sort ’em out/Kill ’em all and let the freed-up resources go to our workers” on one hand and “If healthcare costs go up, only those who are valuable to us will be able to afford them” on the other.
Military/industrial/corporate/governmental Malthusianism on a grand scale is what we are seeing, Booman.
Bet on it.
What to do about this?
Keep telling people about it.
Clearly and in no uncertain terms.
If it is not too late…if the general level of human minds and spirits has not been so lowered by the corporate hypnomedia that the majority of those who live in the so-called “developed world” traipse peacefully to the slaughterhouse like the sheeple that they are rapidly becoming…then have we still have a fighting chance.
If not?
Ol’ Charie knew.
Waaaay back in ’36.
You know…during that other so-called “Depression?”
Yup.
Bet on it.
Crazy as can be. Down the chute and back, then let’s go after the blonde for want of anything better to do.
Like dat!!!
Charlie knew.
That’s why the original Tea Party guys went after him.
The House Unamerican Activities Comittee
It’ll be a cold day in hell before they go away.
Bet on it.
AG
I’ll take the HSA part first instead of most everything else, TYVM. After that the best reform would probably be to allow you to spend said HSA funds on air flight to somewhere else where medical services are affordable. Somehow, chicken-bartering is looking more enjoyable everyday.
Is this re-doing reform meme emerging because there is fear that the first bill is, in fact, unconstitutional?
My Voucher Proposal solves the problem, while promoting competition.
Someone doesn’t use their voucher to buy insurance…apply it to the most cost effective private insurance program available.
Progressives, trust me…market solutions solve this problem, not a massive government bureaucracy.
Your voucher proposition leaves people without healthcare is what it does. So if you’re cool with that, well…ok?
How about this for a novel idea…we take care of our fellow men, women and children because it’s the right thing to do. Because people suffering is a bad thing. The way a lot of people talk about health insurance is like it is the fucking lottery or something. I had a friend from Germany tell me once that the difference between the US and European countries who cover all their citizens is that the culture in Europe is one where people care about each other being healthy. In American, it’s “every man for himself”, I’ve got mine, you get yours. The Reagan years made it chic to be selfish.
Huckabee confirmed Alan Grayson’s point that Republican health care plan is: Don’t get sick, and if you do get sick, die quickly.
People ARE houses in the health insurance model. And companies make profits by denying payment.