Howard Dean smacks down Newt Gingrich by agreeing with him

medicalcosts_opt

As you know, I am a Deaniac, you can’t believe how giddy I got this morning when I heard Dean was debating Newt ‘Assmunch’ Gingrich this morning on ABC’s This Week. Dean was very precise, (paraphrasing) “A public insurance option would be a CHOICE not a REQUIREMENT.” Other great moments was when Howard basically called out Newt’s bullshit about end of life decisions (Republicans are spinning that Obama wants to let old people die instead of treating them). He asked Newt where it was in the current bill’s proposal, and Newt changed the subject, rambling about who knows what. I’m sure the googles will be hot about this tomorrow. I’ll have to give Howard credit, he is getting better at staying on topic, and makes his points short. He should be a political cartoonist.

I also found this letter to the editor about Thune. About time the SD MSM, at least printed something about his crap, too bad they don’t actually investigate and report it.

Have you wondered why Sen. John Thune is against health care reform? Could it be that he received $1,206,176 from the insurance companies, the pharmaceutical industry, and hospitals?

He doesn’t mind using the health care he gets from the government – which means we citizens are paying for his health care. However, he doesn’t want his constituents having the same coverage. Does that make sense? To him it does, financially. But is that why he was elected as our senator? The underinsured and uninsured people in South Dakota ought to be asking him that question, and demanding a truthful answer.

Lobbyists’ money talks in Washington. Apparently, we citizens don’t have the clout to have Mr. Thune’s representation after voting him into office. Now he has other interests. Is his bank account more important to him than the people of South Dakota?



13 comments ↓

#1 Green Lantern on 08.09.09 at 9:26 pm

“A public insurance option would be a CHOICE not a REQUIREMENT.”

Unless of course, you quit your job. Then, you get to pick from a list of options controlled by the upcoming National Insurance Exchange. The NIE will be the standard that tells the private insurers how much they can charge for which coverage. So, your choice is the public option, or the government-price-controlled “private” options.

Not much of a choice in my book…

#2 l3wis on 08.10.09 at 3:43 am

You can get private insurance now if you are unemployed. I have had it for years, it is more, but worth it. I have never thought employee based health insurance was a good idea. For one, it is none of your employer’s business what your health condition is and secondly it is bankrupting small businesses. That money could be better spent on higher wages and making their businesses more efficient. That is why it surprises me that more small businesses don’t support it.

#3 l3wis on 08.10.09 at 3:52 am

Here is the clip of Newt rambling:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/gingrich-defends-palin-claim-reform-will-cau

#4 l3wis on 08.10.09 at 4:12 am

I see Dr. Blake Curd put in his two cents today:

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20090810/VOICES05/908100316/1161/CUSTOMER06

#5 Ghost of Dude on 08.10.09 at 6:54 am

The NIE will be the standard that tells the private insurers how much they can charge for which coverage.
Incorrect.
The government does not say what insurers can charge for coverage, only what the policies will cover at certain levels. It is then up to the individual insurers what the policy costs, and they’ll have to compete based on expenses, mortality, and investment performance rather than what they can weasel out of paying in claims.
It will look a lot more like medicare supplement policies (also offered by private insurers) where you have different levels of coverage at different prices.

#6 Green Lantern on 08.10.09 at 7:48 am

@l3wis
That private insurance you are talking about? COBRA goes away under Obamacare… thought you should know.

@Ghost of Dude
Do you even read what you’re typing? You yourself say the government will determine “only what the policies will cover at certain levels.” Um. If the government is dictating the conditions of what’s covered under a policy it’s not going to be up to the insurers to determine cost of covering individual procedures. Especially since Obama has said that one of the aims of Obamacare is to limit what insurers can charge, as far as premiums. How is that not a price control?

#7 Ghost of Dude on 08.10.09 at 8:24 am

Do you even read what you’re typing? You yourself say the government will determine “only what the policies will cover at certain levels.” Um. If the government is dictating the conditions of what’s covered under a policy it’s not going to be up to the insurers to determine cost of covering individual procedures. Especially since Obama has said that one of the aims of Obamacare is to limit what insurers can charge, as far as premiums. How is that not a price control?

Do yourself a favor and read up on how insurance works – not just health insurance, but insurance in general.

Here’s a quick Insurance for Dummies guide:

The insurance company collects premium. How much premium paid by individuals is determined by how much risk they pose to have a claim paid out in a given year, and how much money the company needs overall to pay expenses (not just claims).
From the premium dollars flowing into the comapny, they pay expenses (general overhead, payroll, taxes, etc.), mortality (claims), and then invest the rest.
With a level playing field such as the proposed exchange, those three criteria will be the determining factors in how competitive a company is.
Think of it as Wal-mart vs. K-Mart. Both stores sell the same kinds of cheap chinese crap. However, due to Wal-mart’s inventory management sytem, they were able to cut costs (and prices) to the point that K-Mart nearly went out of business.
What you’ll have with an insurance exchange is the same concept – comapanies will sell the same basic insurance plans, but there will be absolutely brutal competition to see who can keep expenses down and investment returns high (seeing as mortality will be more consistant in hte industry given the government mandates on what must be covered). The result will be lower premiums – or at least a slower rate of increase.
As to your response to L3wis: COBRA going away is a good thing. This bill does something republicans have been talking about for years – un-couples health insurance from employers. It’s possible today to purchase individual health insurance policies.

#8 l3wis on 08.10.09 at 8:55 am

Green-

I have had private insurance for over 10 years, not COBRA

#9 Green Lantern on 08.10.09 at 2:27 pm

@l3wis

You are right. I assumed you were referring to COBRA, which was my mistake. However, private insurance isn’t going to be magically better under Obamacare. See my response to CAH at lanternofoa.wordpress.com for my views on that.

#10 l3wis on 08.10.09 at 3:52 pm

I know it is not, that’s why I am signing up for the government option as fast as I can. I suspect you will see a mass exodus to the government plan.

#11 Ghost of Dude on 08.10.09 at 8:57 pm

I kind of doubt it. There are a lot of people dead set against getting insurance through the government.
I guarantee you the private stuff will be cheaper for healthy people, who will jump their current ship for it ASAP.

#12 redhatterb on 08.11.09 at 7:20 pm

I odn’t know why people are worried about the government health care saying what can and can’t be treated. Some of the private insurance companies do that now, plus telling you what doctors to go to.

#13 l3wis on 08.11.09 at 7:26 pm

Exactly. That is the problem with the system. I compare it to restaurants. If they can get away with using cheaper product for the same taste, they will, yet charge the same price as the good stuff.

Leave a Comment