Health Care Reform: The Flow Chart

Comments (5)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

1. Delaware Republican says:

   August 19, 2009 at 9:08 am

   You left off the massive taxpayer subsidies, the lack of tort reform, the increased federal obligation of over $1 trillion, the reduced payments to Dr’s and Hospitals.

   Flow charts which leave off key components are not very helpful.

   Mike Protack

2. Unstable Isotope says:

   August 19, 2009 at 9:24 am

   Yeah, it leaves off conservative misinformation.

   Tort reform will do very little to help with costs of the healthcare system. According to the CBO, malpractice accounts for only 2% of the expense of medical care. States that have limited awards have not seen any benefits. That’s why even Republicans aren’t talking about tort reform much anymore.

   Evidence from the states indicates that premiums for malpractice insurance are lower when tort liability is restricted than they would be otherwise. But even large savings in premiums can have only a small direct impact on health care spending–private or governmental–because malpractice costs account for less than 2 percent of that spending.(3) Advocates or opponents cite other possible effects of limiting tort liability, such as reducing the extent to which physicians practice “defensive medicine” by conducting excessive procedures; preventing widespread problems of access to health care; or conversely, increasing medical injuries. However, evidence for those other effects is weak or inconclusive.

3. edisonkitty says:

   August 19, 2009 at 1:52 pm

   Agreed, UI. Tort reform is somewhat analogous to enacting seat-belt laws. Part of the logic is that not having them increases insurance rates for all because of more severe injuries. However, no insurance companies start handing out ‘mandatory seat-belt law discounts’. The carriers simply pocket any savings as profit. Tort reform may serve to reduce insurance payouts, but if it does, the carriers will likewise keep the savings.

4. anononthisone says:

   August 19, 2009 at 2:42 pm

   That actually clears it up quite nicely. I know I’d rather spend more money on making sure people who cannot afford insurance still have access to health care than on building bigger bombs and starting unnecessary wars like the previous administration did. Oh yeah, and the whole more tax cuts for the rich thing is kind of stupid too, especially while trying to pay for a war. The debt argument is null and void after the last 8 years. The following is my summary of the remaining key Republican arguments:

   “Dammit, this is socialism, and that’s evil. We’re not the Soviets…or the Brits…or the Canadians….or the Germans….or the French….or Sweden….or Norway…..or anywhere else that is hippy and froo froo and cares for it’s people. No, this is America and the lazy poor should get off their ass and work a fourth job so that they can afford health care. This will be Communism, I tell you…oh look, it’s the boogeyman. And Obama is from Kenya. and ….. shhhhhh….. he’s black, but we won’t talk about that openly. And MEXICANS might get insurance….and they almost look black. Why don’t those people speak English anyhow like my ancestors did when they came from Germany. Hey, wait, don’t look at the strings attached to me…they lead to the insurance companies and their investors on wall street.”

5. Delaware Republican says:

   August 19, 2009 at 5:52 pm

   Keep dreaming but the lack of tort reform is Obama’s sellout to trial lawyers who have never healed anyone. Obama likes lawyers more than patients.

   The same old argument of 2% forgets the destruction of the Dr/patient relationship and the extra tests and procedures cost much more than 2%.

   http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/30/AR2009073002816.html

   There are better ways and here is one:
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuNn3JF-NJE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fdelawarerepublican.wordpress.com%2Fdrtv%2F&feature=player_embedded#t=26

   Mike Protack