Author Topic: Talking Heads - Healthcare Reform (Read 102579 times)

BooksAdmin · « **on:** June 11, 2009, 11:36:55 AM »

Talking Heads #6

"It occurred to me that nothing is more interesting than opinion when opinion is interesting..."
Herbert Bayard Swope, creator of the Op-Ed page.

A two week forum for opinions on anything in print: magazines, newspaper articles, online: bring your ideas and let's discuss.

Our Sixth Selection is:
Health Care Reform~! Are We on the Fast Track?

7 Ways Health Reform Is Going to Affect You
Newsweek June 10, 2009

Quote

Change is coming to medical care in America, and it may be a done deal by summer's end. From Capitol Hill to the White House, enthusiasm is running high for President Obama's plan to morph with lightning speed the current patchwork, private-public blend of healthcare into something closer to a single-payer, government-run system. Steadfastly promising to bring high-quality, affordable care to everyone, the president assures people that they will keep their own doctor and insurance if they want, see a return of some $2,500 to their pocketbook, and become decidedly healthier. But restructuring will inevitably call for sacrifice on the part of most individuals.

Change is coming at last to Health Care in the US. What do you think the problem is? What needs to be done in your opinion? Are you willing to sacrifice what you have now?

Those of you in different countries, how does your health care work (or not?) Let's weigh the pros and cons. Everybody agrees something needs to be done, but what?

Is nationalized medicine the answer?

Let's discuss!

ginny · « **Reply #1 on:** June 11, 2009, 11:40:39 AM »

Welcome!! What's the #1 topic on everybody's mind today? Health Care Reform. But what will it mean to YOU? Will something change?

Check out the article above, 7 things we should know about proposed health care changes.

What do YOU think is the major problem in the US today? If you are not in the US, tell us how your health care works, the good and the bad.

Let's discuss the state of Health Care which is about to change drastically in the US, what are YOUR thoughts?

maryz · « **Reply #2 on:** June 11, 2009, 12:41:15 PM »

Checking in.

nlhome · « **Reply #3 on:** June 11, 2009, 12:43:33 PM »

I'm just marking my place for now. Health Care reform is an important subject to me. Our country should not have such an unfair system as the current mishmash of coverage/noncoverage.

Nan

CallieOK · « **Reply #4 on:** June 11, 2009, 02:19:15 PM »

Marking my place, also.

I don't understand why all the emphasis is on amounts for payment instead of amounts being charged.

Steph · « **Reply #5 on:** June 12, 2009, 07:58:32 AM »

Oh a good subject. My favorite bee in my bonnet is why drugs and hospitals and the private industries that own MRI's and CT scans, etc. why do they charge so much.. If they are all non profit, why do they pay their CEO's obscene amounts of money.. Why does my dermotologist charge me for at least a dozen different things to medicare, when he spends about 10 minutes with me and freezes one small spot on my face. Why does my husbands internist charge for surgery when all they do is do a finger stick for liver enzymes.. We could get a better grip on health care if they would stop being so creative in charges.

Babi · « **Reply #6 on:** June 12, 2009, 08:52:54 AM »

STEPH, I'd challenge that 'surgery' charge for a fingerstick. It was either
a mistake or someone is cheating the insurance people. Mistakes do happen. When I was auditing hospital medical records, I found an instance where a woman patient had been charged for a penile implant. Needless to say, it was corrected by the hospital immediately.

Quote

"enthusiasm is running high for President Obama's plan to morph with
lightning speed the current patchwork

"
If President Obama can do anything at 'lightning speed' in our government,
I will consider the man a miracle worker!

pedln · « **Reply #7 on:** June 12, 2009, 11:46:43 AM »

My TV is currently on and I pick up a few things every now and then. The screen just showed something regarding Obama's plan. AMA doesn't want to be reimbursed by Medicare's low rates. I for one am grateful for Medicare's low rates. And a similar govt. plan for all might be the only way we can control the high costs of medical care.

I've been using a Cpap for 3 months -- (sleep apnea). The DME (equipment supplier) gave me a chin strap and billed Medicare $76 for it -- after I had returned it to thembecause it didn't help. When I called them on it, they gave me a different one and said they wouldn't bill Medicare. (I later saw the first on the internet for 1/3 the cost.)

Do you all check your Medicare claims online at MyMedicare.gov? I think that site gives more info than what you get in the mail. And much much sooner.

And what about doctor office bills -- talk about being unable to read a bill!! Jargon.

maryz · « **Reply #8 on:** June 12, 2009, 01:27:19 PM »

I pay my rheumatologist directly at the time of each visit. The office immediately files the charges with Medicare and our supplementary insurance. I usually have my refund within two weeks. I don't mind doing it that way because they are SO quick.

In May, I got a Medicare & insurance statement from an anesthesiologist for services performed at my colonoscopy in April 2008. And then they had the gall to send me a bill saying I had 30 days to pay the balance. I really hate that!

CallieOK · « **Reply #9 on:** June 12, 2009, 05:32:07 PM »

About three weeks ago, I called to get an appointment for an Annual Checkup. I anticipated it being some time in August, but refused to take the appointment I was offered in November!!!
Yesterday, I called to chat with the appointment person. She "patiently" (as in 'I'm talking to an old lady') explained that Medicare will only pay for an annual physical every two years.
After my insistence that the basic thing I need is to have lab work to be sure meds are at an appropriate level, she was able to give me an appointment in mid-September.
When I asked how to get an appointment during the warm weather months, she said insurance insists on 366 days between "wellness" checkups.

I haven't decided what I think about all this, yet.

pedln · « **Reply #10 on:** June 12, 2009, 09:18:27 PM »

When I was teaching I had school board paid health insurance. When i retired, by law, I could keep the same insurance, but had to pay it myself. (And if I dropped it, I could never get it back.) When I became eligible for Medicare, the monthly school insurance premium dropped slightly, about as much as the medicare payment, and is my secondary insurance. Drugs, with copay, are covered by the school insurance. Other than my monthly medications, I really haven't had a medical bill since becoming eligible for Medicare. My question: Is this the norm, or not? All my medical providers accept assigment.

When you look at what's charged by the doctor and what's allowed by Medicare you really have to wonder how such things are figured: for example

Hospital sleep study -- charge 5,000 allowed 700
One synvisc shot to knee 700 300 --- takes about 5 minutes
Audiology exam 126 43 --- about an hour
Dermatologist visit 47 47 -- he's got that right

Babi · « **Reply #11 on:** June 13, 2009, 10:30:45 AM »

Thanks for that info. on MyMedicare.com, PEDLN. I didn't know about that
and it's a good idea. You know, I wrote a letter to my care provider once time
explaining why, in future, I would request a second opinion on any lab/test
results that recommended any type of surgery or a hospital stay. So far, the
testing facility had invariable sent findings that resulted in an unnecessary
hospital admission, an unnecessary minor surgery, and an unnecessarily extended major surgery. Funny, I did not hear a word back from my provider, but within a few months that testing facility had been taken over by another group. I couldn't help but wonder. BTW, Pedln, your dermatologist is a rare
sould. My (former) dermatologist wouldn't say 'Good morning' for less than
$80.

CALLEIN, I don't think a follow-up to assess the effectiveness of medication
qualifies as a 'wellness' checkup. The monitoring of some medications is vital
and new medicines should be checked until the doctor knows how they are performing.
You might want to take this up with your insurance company, or change companies.

CallieOK · « **Reply #12 on:** June 13, 2009, 12:10:30 PM »

Babi, I fully intend to take it up with my doctor in September! He has never suggested timing for monitoring medications - but he will when I tell him the situation.

I don't know how many doctors are one of several in a joint practice or "clinic" but I suspect those who are have little knowledge of the way the business office runs things.
I've been able to speak to his nurse and get a quicker appointment when I needed something for a sinus infection. However, this isn't urgent - so I'll "have my say" when I see him.

bellemere · « **Reply #13 on:** June 13, 2009, 05:10:58 PM »

Obama is right to insist on a government insurance program as an option. Opponents love to shriek "socialized medicine" to try to scare people who forget that we have had socialized education for hundreds of years.
The private insureres have had it made all these years, setting their own rates, turning away sick customers, and rejecting claims. One whistle blower said her instructions were to reject EVERY Claim, even if it was later appealed , to keep a healtheir cash balance in the coffers.
As the mom of the front desk /appointment person in a busy medical practice, I beg you not to take out your frustration on the staff. They deal all day with people who are not feeling well to begin with and then have to deal with the restrictions of their insurance.
I think before this battle is over, we wil all be nuts. But don't let them settle for a sham halfbaked reform. Let your rep and your senator know that you want to see how a government plan option will stack up against private plans. Nobody has to join it, but it should be an option.
Soapbox put away. For now.

"

CallieOK · « **Reply #14 on:** June 13, 2009, 10:37:25 PM »

bellemere, I am well aware of the limitations placed on the staff. The lady with whom I talked could not have been nicer or more patient with me...and I told her I appreciated her help.
I think this is an issue to be taken up with my doctor - and I will be equally nice to him because he has taken good care of my family and me for many years.

bellemere · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2009, 11:35:14 PM »

I meant no disrespect to anyone in my plea for patience with medical office staff people, it was directed to all of us who are trying to cope with this absurd system.
I really believe one answear to the appointment difficulties is the increased use of physician assistants and nurse practitioners, who can order tests and renew presecriptions. I am always so pleased when I deal with them. They are not as rushed, and really take the time to educate you. I hope ;any new health plan includes incentives for more medical practices to include them, especially for monitoring.

Babi · « **Reply #16 on:** June 14, 2009, 08:38:48 AM »

BELLEMERE

Quote

Nobody has to join it, but it should be an option.

That was precisely my objection to the first 'natioanl health care plan'.
Everybody had to join, whether they wanted to, or needed to, or not. I have
an engrained dislike of being told I have to do anything.

Also, I don't want a plan in which the government pays
all the bills, which is simply another way of saying the taxpayer pays the
bills, with bureaucratic inefficiency adding to them.

bellemere · « **Reply #17 on:** June 14, 2009, 11:46:13 AM »

Right on! Our Massachusetts system, while it is going through a struggle phase as it gets underway, does require everyone to buy some kind of health insurance. Just as some kind of car insurance is required. Plans are scaled according to income. the indigent get state help inpaying the premiums. Not perfect, but it is a new system and will have to work harder on controlling costs.
But back to cost control. Making use of physician assistants and nurse practitioners makes so much sense for those of us seniors who really need regular tests and medication monitoring. I go for blood pressure monitoring and potassium testing every four months. I get a feeling that mey highly trained (and very nice) doctor is almost wasted on this stuff. A P. A. could order the tests and check them for normal range; then alert the M.D. if something is out of range. And renew prescriptions that the patient has been taking for a while with no adverst side effects. And they usually have the time to discuss diet and exercise practices with the patient. Has anyone else had experience with them? What do you think?
the whole subject of over treatment and inapporpriate treatment was covered by Dr. Antal Gawadi in a New yorker article in May. Read it! If it doesn't make your blood boil, it should.

maryz · « **Reply #18 on:** June 14, 2009, 12:20:36 PM »

The group of family physicians that we see has a PA. I've seen him several times, and he is very nice and thorough. This practice is set up so that he is the one who sees the walk-in patients (but only those who are established patients). It's certainly an idea that works for us.

pedln · « **Reply #19 on:** June 14, 2009, 01:28:53 PM »

I had valve replacement about 11 years ago and the surgical group had a nurse? nurse practicioner? PA? I'm not sure which. But he was top dog. You rarely saw the surgeon, but Nurse Scott was really in demand and everyone deferred to him and followed his directions. I haven't had any major surgeries since, so don't know if this is common practice with surgical groups or not. But it certainly is beneficial for patients who have questions, etc. He was the surgeon's voice.

jane · « **Reply #20 on:** June 15, 2009, 08:42:28 AM »

I, too,prefer to see my Nurse Practitioner to the MD who's formally "my doc"...I've never met the man. He replaced the doc I did have who left to be an ER doc...paving the way for retirement, I guess.

At any rate, she's top notch. She refers me to and gets me appts with specialists when I need them...ie, an OB/GYN when she found nodules she felt she knew what they were but wanted the OB/GYN to examine me..he did; they were what she'd thought and he removed them there in the office, etc. THAT's the kind of medical care I like.

Callie: I don't ask for a physical each year. I ask for an appt to "followup on my medications/or high blood pressure or cholesterol and check appropriateness." It seems to be all in how the doc's office codes and bills medicare and the supplements.

I heard Pres. Obama speak of his plan. We have a neighbor/friend who's very conservative, and always railing about "socialized medicine"...while enjoying military complete coverage...which he admits is "socialized medicine"....but Mr. Obama explained that one payer doesn't mean it has to be socialized. It can be like Medicare...people pick own docs, etc.

The insurance companies now have too much control, I think, over what docs you use, what hospitals, etc. One large employer in this area...John Deere...threw all their retirees into chaos several years ago when they totally changed what docs they covered/what hospitals. So people who went to the local cardiologists , cardio vascular surgeons could no longer do so. They had to drive 60 miles for heart care. They were not happy campers.

There also, as others have said, needs to be more enforcement and checking for fraud...and nailing the docs/clinics/facilities that do the fraud. If some of these crooks were sent to jail, maybe the other docs/clinics would take note.

jane

maryz · « **Reply #21 on:** June 15, 2009, 11:03:26 AM »

jane, as usual, says it all for me - and better than I would.

Years ago, when I started out working in a doctor's office, I filed insurance. The insurance companies had a lot of control - even then. Remember when, in order to get lab work or x-rays paid for, you had to be a hospital in-patient? That's when all this mess started, IMHO. When you were having surgery, you had to go in the hospital the night before so you could get your preadmission lab work done.

I blame most of the problems and cost-inflation directly on the insurance companies.

bellemere · « **Reply #22 on:** June 15, 2009, 11:35:04 AM »

I worked briefly in regional health planning, before it was done away with by the Reagan administration. We made citizen recommendations to the public health council, among them, capital expenditures by our local hospitals. this was when the M.R.I. was just coming onto the scene. Every hosiptal had to have its own M.R/I. even if there was one in a hostpital nearby that could not utilize it fully. Hospitals have to borrow to build or buy expensive equipment. this is not hard; the state gives them loans. Then, to make the payments they have to raise their room rates. Then the insurance companies have to raise their premiums. And on and on it goes. Our recommendation for a mobile M.R.I. to serve two or three hospitals was very unpopular. Today, all the hospitals has its own.

jane · « **Reply #23 on:** June 15, 2009, 05:23:37 PM »

That may be true in large urban centers, but here in the rural areas, all hospitals don't have their own MRI. Ours comes here in a large semi truck and is available x number so days a month as it travels all over NE Iowa. AND, we're a very progressive hospital for a town of 5200....but serve many, many more from smaller towns in our several county area. We have a large number of specialists who come to the hospital to see patients...cardiologists, ophthalmologists, oncologists, orthopedic surgeons, rheumatologists, etc. It saves our elderly and working people many hours of travel time. A dialysis unit has just been added.

jane

bellemere · « **Reply #24 on:** June 15, 2009, 08:31:36 PM »

Sounds like your area has found creative ways to meet the needs of a dispersed rural population.

winsummm · « **Reply #25 on:** June 15, 2009, 09:05:45 PM »

today I watched Obama address a large groiup of doctors from the ana. They were enthusiastic, a supposedly difficult audience for him, but one that carried him along with cheers as well as claps.

obama knows he has to act FAST, this year, for instance, or NOTHING will happen at all. This is his prime objective now. health care is at base responsible for much of our financial mess. . . since so much of it is supported by business.

as for medicare advantage, which I have with my HMO, Insurance companies and pharmesuticals have been milking it for all they can get here in the US while selling drugs elsewhere for less. if ot outright fraud, I believe these companies are close to it.

I keep wondering why it should be. It is a form of insurance and I don't thinkit should be related to business any more than religion is to government. there is a mistake here in combining them, especially with unemployment at nine per cent.

claire

Steph · « **Reply #26 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:17:35 AM »

We have medicare and then AARP supplement, and with one exception we only use doctors who will accept the payments as full pay. MDH has now told his internist office that he will no longer allow his blood work to be done by Quest. Who bill you immediately and then complain when medicare etc dont pay in their stated time.. But yes, the internist office does in fact still charge for surgery for the finger sticks.. Since when we are home, it was happening every week, it was a minimal charge that adds up, plus of course it simply is not surgery.
I love the idea of the portable machinery. Makes so much sense, but then medicine does not really understand why this works so well.

Babi · « **Reply #27 on:** June 16, 2009, 08:50:08 AM »

JANE

Quote

It seems to be all in how the doc's office codes and bills medicare and the supplements are coded

.
You are absolutely correct about that, JANE. And wherever possible, the coders are taught to select the codes that will bring in the most money. It's a good idea to check into that aspect whenever you run into problems with billing and/or insurance co. denials.

Here is a link to an article about Obama's recent speech on his health plan. I
think it is the one Claire was referring to. However, it seems to point to a
more negative reaction from the AMA and a couple of senators. The views
expressed by the senators sound like scare tactics to me.
http://news.aol.com/health/article/obama-presses-doctors-to-back-health/527687?cid=14

marjifay · « **Reply #28 on:** June 16, 2009, 12:35:48 PM »

After seeing all the problems with bills some of you have been having, I'm glad I opted for an HMO and not the Medicare pay for services type plan. I have a great HMO, with a choice of several doctors, and I never have to pay a dime. The only problems I've had with the HMO is that some doctor's I've liked have left the plan. But I was not disappointed with the doctors I chose as replacements.

I haven't decided yet on exactly how I stand on what kind of national health plan would be best, but I feel so bad when I hear of people who have to give up their prescriptions in order to have enough money to buy food. At one time I was taking an expensive prescription, and found I saved a lot of money by buying it through a Canadian pharmacy. They were a reputable firm, and required an order from my physician. Yet our government would not allow the use of Canadian pharmacies.

I think it's really a shame that a country like ours which spends trillions of $$ on armaments and wars cannot have a decent health care plan for its citizens.

Marj

Eloise · « **Reply #29 on:** June 16, 2009, 01:01:44 PM »

Marj I think it's really a shame that a country like ours which spends trillions of $$ on armaments and wars cannot have a decent health care plan for its citizens.

I think so too, I like our Canadian system, of course has flaws but these flaws are not so bad when you consider that we don't pay out of pocket, our taxes do.

If I look at the total health care I have received during my life, I have to admit that I have never seen a better health care system in the dozen countries I have travelled in. I don't know how it is in the Scandinavian countries which I hear it is the best health care system in the world.

jane · « **Reply #30 on:** June 16, 2009, 05:07:57 PM »

Quote

After seeing all the problems with bills some of you have been having, I'm glad I opted for an HMO and not the Medicare pay for services type plan.

We chose not to go with the HMO since we want to be able to choose our own doctors and we've thus chosen the standard Medicare and a supplement. We've also never had a problem with payment, never been refused our insurance and seeing a doctor, whether here in Iowa...and from the local docs to the specialists at the Univ. of Iowa Hospitals or in Montana, or Texas or Alabama.

I suspect the billing problems are local doctor/hospital coding errors, as I said earlier.

The only things I can recall that we've paid for out of pocket were the refraction part of the routine eye exam ($18.00) and, years ago, a dietician visit because my husband was dx'd as diabetic.

jane

Babi · « **Reply #31 on:** June 17, 2009, 09:01:42 AM »

I like my 'Provider', too, Marj, but I do have co-pay. It is quite reasonable
and my few prescriptions are quite cheap, so I am satisfied.
The ones most in need of a viable health care plan are not those on Medicare, but those who cannot afford insurance. That includes my younger daughter, who is diabetic and in a low-paying job. She is fortunate in having some doctors who will 'go the extra mile' for her, but that's not the same as knowing
you can get whatever help you need when you need it.

bellemere · « **Reply #32 on:** June 17, 2009, 09:26:45 AM »

We have a Medicare Advantage HMO-type)plan for our health care and prescriptions and it has been great. My primary care doctor has never, ever , refused my request to see a specialist. In"c;hoosing my own doctor" I would be a little hesitant, not having anything but word of mouth from friends or somebody, this way I at least have the recommendation from him and his colleagues. I have a copay, as well as a monthly premium.
The New Yorker articel covered a town that has the lowest per capita income in the state, and the hightst medical costs. Why? Overtreatemtn and the entrpreneu;rial spirit of the local doctors who invest in surgical centers, ;hospitals, home health agencies, and refer patients to them to increase their income. If this practice cannot be curtailed. any health care reform will fail. (That was the conclusion of the author)
What do you think?

ginny · « **Reply #33 on:** June 17, 2009, 11:54:43 AM »

What do you think of the point the article makes that grandma might have to wait for care or not be admitted at all? Two workers here at my house in the last month, the chimney sweep and the window washer, have both said they are against nationalized health care. They don't want their care at the expense of somebody else, like me?

What do you think of that one? I was quite surprised at some of the points in the article: like a national computer database for each person, maybe even a chip in the person? What do you think of those ideas?

Babi · « **Reply #34 on:** June 18, 2009, 07:52:18 AM »

No chips in me, thank you!
It is true that the type of national health care plans practiced in Canada and
Britain result in long delays in optional treatment. Which may also mean long
delays in getting released back to work after an illness or injury. However, the plan Pres. Obama is advocating does not seem to be that kind of plan. It seems to be aimed more, at curbing some of the practices that result in excessive costs. We would all like to see that happen.

pedln · « **Reply #35 on:** June 18, 2009, 08:42:13 AM »

Leaving town in an hour, but to answer a few questions. I'm all for a national datebase -- digitized records, etc. Have you never watched a doctor plow through your chart trying to find a specific record? And sometimes he doesn't find it. I think overall it would benefit the health care providers and the patients.

I know privacy's a problem. What i what someone to know i'm a goofy old lady. it's not obvious? But the other day I read an articel about medical id theft -- and it usually originated in a clinic office, by a staff person. I think automation offers more than it take away.

When grandma is readmitted twice within a certain time period, medicare thinks the docs didn't do it right the first time and wan to to offer lower payment for the second admit. Docs not happy.

bellemere · « **Reply #36 on:** June 18, 2009, 09:19:26 AM »

A lot of objection to health care reform seems to center on "long waits for care" as in Canadian system. If I were to call today for an appointment with a specialist, e.g. a dermatologist, I would be given the "first available appointment," probably 6 or 8 weeks from now. That is just to be seen. And the same specialist doctors seem to load up their appointment calendars with"I want to see you again in three months" kind of appointments, so they are booked up to the gills. Is this a revenue strategy? Or high quality medical care? Nobody knows.
I think maybe President Obama is perhaps stressing universal coverage too much. Well insured affluent voters don't really care about the uninsured, especially since many of them are poor, or immigrants, or others that some people consider undesirable anyway. Instead, to gain political support, he must stress cost control over everything, since that affects the voters directly in increased premiums and deductibles. As long as doctors don't have to be accountable to anybody, even to their peers, for their treatment decisions, costs will continue to go up.
and we will continue to pay more and more for less and less.
"

jane · « **Reply #37 on:** June 18, 2009, 10:30:37 AM »

I wonder why, when universal health care is mentioned, everyone seems to say something bad about the Canadian and British versions.

Those aren't the only model out there. Why aren't people also talking about the Japanese system?

Japanese Pay Less for More Health Care : NPR

Japan's Universal and Affordable Health Care

or Germany's

Managed care - a solution for Germany's health care system?

I think it's because the insurance companies and pharmas don't want to give up their golden eggs with the system we have now. It's about their $$$...not our health, as far as I can see. Scare people with "socialized" medicine...even if the people have no clue what that really means...or what single payer can mean.

If people are left uninformed, they can be frightened.

jane

PEGGY · « **Reply #38 on:** June 18, 2009, 12:45:45 PM »

Hi everyone,
I have just viewed with interest this discussion group. Although I think some reform of the medical field exists, I am wondering what the big rush is to pass National Health Care. Will the government just print more money to finance it. What about the majority of Americans that oppose it.
Much discussion is needed pros and cons before rushing this through Congress. I think all of the Administrations policies have been rushed through in only 5 short mos. without much transparency to the American people.
The following article was of interest to me. This is a bipartisan poll, whatever party one belongs to. I think it is time to band together as Americans and ask more transparency from a man who promised this to the American people during his campaign

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/us/politics/18poll.html?_r=1&partner=MYWAY&ei=5065#articleBodyLink

LATEST NY TIMES/CBS NEWS POLL

Obama Poll sees doubt on budget and Health Care

"A substantial majority of Americans say President Obama has not developed a strategy to deal with the budget deficit, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, which also found that support for his plans to overhaul health care, rescue the auto industry and close the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, falls well below his job approval ratings.
A distinct gulf exists between Mr. Obama’s overall standing and how some of his key initiatives are viewed, with fewer than half of Americans saying they approve of how he has handled health care and the effort to save General Motors and Chrysler. A majority of people said his policies have had either no effect yet on improving the economy or had made it worse, underscoring how his political strength still rests on faith in his leadership rather than concrete results.
As Mr. Obama finishes his fifth month in office and assumes greater ownership of the problems he inherited, Americans are alarmed by the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been doled out to boost the economy. a MAJORITY SAID THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD FOCUS MORE ON REDUCING THE FEDERAL DEFICIT"

Steph · « **Reply #39 on:** June 18, 2009, 03:08:39 PM »

Before I retired I owned several retail stores. A large one was in a shopping area very close to Disney. There are a lot of marginal people in this area. They drift from place to place. Everything is ok, unless... one tiny health problem emerges. Then they sink deeper and deeper in debt. I saw them lose their apartments because of an abcess tooth.. a car because someone got a bad cold that would not go away.. a job because of an unexpected pregnancy that ended up in tragedy. We need some sort of universal health care to pick these people up and help them. They dont want welfare, they want to work, but their skills are minimal, so that they are hired only by small retail that cannot afford hospitalation for themselves, much less their workers.

News:

Author Topic: Talking Heads - Healthcare Reform (Read 102579 times)