Universal Health Coverage

[Shapley]

I suspect he had to wait for some test results, just like the rest of us. He most likely didn't give a report because he didn't have one. Hospitals around here send people home with a 'tentative all-clear', but they still have to wait for some results.

[Haggis@wk]

An M.I.T. professor — whose "expert analyses" in favor of the Democrat health-care bill are frequently cited in the media — is on the administration payroll to the tune of $300,000

[OperaTenor]

An M.I.T. professor — whose "expert analyses" in favor of the Democrat health-care bill are frequently cited in the media — is on the administration payroll to the tune of $300,000

No doubt. Whatever we can do to implement medical corporate welfare.

[analog]

JONATHON GRUBER, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has extensive first-hand research experience in a broad range of topics in health care economics, taxation and redistribution programs. He has taught Contemporary Public Finance at MIT for twelve years and has served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy at the Treasury Department, where he worked on tobacco regulation, child care, higher education, public health insurance, global warming, Social Security reform, and welfare and income distribution policy

from Amazon's page on his book...

And they complain about Fox News?

a.

[Haggis@wk]

NEWSCHIEF --

While Washington is deep in the throes of trying to overhaul the nation's health-care system, another development is fast gathering momentum that shows the lawmakers in many ways are pursuing a moving target.

A growing number of Americans are bypassing doctors and going directly to online and storefront labs for diagnostic testing. Most often they pay for these tests out of their own pocket. The results may persuade the consumer to pursue the matter further with a personal physician but, in any case, the consumer is in charge of who sees the results.

The name of one fast-growing chain of walk-in labs encapsulates the field's business model, Any Lab Test Now. The company says it can generally have testing results within 24 hours and at a cost that is as much as 80% less than going through a doctor. The lab franchises offer up to 1,500 tests, from a simple cholesterol check to more sophisticated packages of tests that address complex medical issues.

The medical profession views this development with some skepticism, fearing that consumers will order the wrong kinds of tests or misdiagnose the results. Major physicians organizations like the American Medical Association have cautioned against any kind of clinical or genetic testing done without a doctor's consultation. There is no federal oversight over medical testing, other than requiring that the labs that do the actual testing for the storefronts be properly certified. State regulations vary widely. As so often happens, the consumers seem to be far out in front of the lawmakers and regulators.

From the Any Lab Test Now website:
· No Insurance Needed.
· Doctor's Order Provided.
· No Appointment Necessary.
· Confidential and Anonymous.
· Most Results in 24-48 Hours.

go to the website to see the full, transparent price list for all of the procedures offered, and there's a list of the 22 tests available for $49 (cholesterol, drug test, hepatitis, herpes, pregnancy, etc.).

Another affordable, convenient market-based solution to rising health care costs and an alternative to a government overhaul of the health care system. I think it's going to catch on.

[piqaboo]

That rocks.
Be interesting to listen to their discussions of what to offer and risks involved.
Ex - genetic testing vs PSA screening vs fasting glucose.

[Giant Communist Robot]

Another affordable, convenient market-based solution to rising health care costs and an alternative to a government overhaul of the health care system. I think it's going to catch on.

Free Market Capitalism at work

[Shapley]

Deal Reached On Taxing "Cadillac" Health Plans

The White House has reached a deal with health care negotiators, including labor unions, on taxing the high-level "Cadillac" plans that workers with high-risk jobs often purchase.

The excise tax on high-cost insurance plans has been one of the biggest sticking points in the negotiations, as President Obama has favored the Senate plan which calls for the tax, while House Democrats preferred raising taxes on high-income earners.

A senior Democratic official speaking on background told Fox News that the threshold for exemption would be raised from $23,000 to $24,000 per family but would remain the same at $8,500 for singles with high-value plans. Dental and vision plans would be removed from that calculation, however.

State and local workers and union members are exempted until 2017. A Democratic source with close union contacts said labor leaders are not particularly happy with the tentative deal, but are much less angry than they were at the previous plan.

The new plan was not accompanied by an explanation to how much revenue would be generated by the new figures.

The whole concept of 'uniformity' is lost. In fact, the whole concept of 'Constitutionality' is lost. Is this the change people were hoping for?

[jamiebk]

Is this the change people were hoping for?

Probably not the one you were hoping for, but it probably is the change many people want. Frankly, I think this whole health care issue/plan has tuned into a fiasco. It is now all about "getting a victory" and less about getting real change (even if you disagreed with the change that was desired (i.e. public option etc.)) This is a sell out to the insurance companies at this point.

[Shapley]

This is a sell out to the insurance companies at this point.

The sell-out to the insurance companies happened before the consolidation negotiations began. This is a sell-out to the labour unions and government workers. I'm not sure how many more sell-outs we'll have before the final bill is written.

I'm not talking about the bill itself. I'm talking about the process, is that the 'change' people were looking for? We are a government of cry-babies, by cry-babies, and for cry-babies. Cry loud enough and long enough, and the government will let you have what you want. Pathetic. These exemptions are disgraceful. The Democrats aren't 'draining the swamp, they're overstocking it.

"Conservatives believe in passing laws at the lowest possible level, and enforcing them effectively.
Liberals believe in passing laws at the highest possible level, and enforcing them selectively."

Nowhere is that more evident than in this bill.

[piqaboo]

I am so going to hate these bills when I have to live with them.
My 'real income' is gonna tank. OT's standard of living is going to tank.
And gas.... remember all the reasons gas went up?
And we paid it, because we pretty well had to or stop working.
And now its > $3 / gallon again. No loss of capacity. No loss of inventory.

They learned we can pay so now we will, forever.
Haggis, you better do something fun w the money earned from that investment, or I'll send our bbb.com hitman to Tx to getcha.
I'll divert him from OT.

[Shapley]

I'm curious as to what became of those who wanted Mr. Obama in office. Why are they not here to cheer him on in his pursuit of equality, fairness, and change?

[piqaboo]

I'm curious as to what became of those who wanted Mr. Obama in office. Why are they not here to cheer him on in his pursuit of equality, fairness, and change?

Who were they?
I know OT only thought him the slightly lesser of two evils by election day.

[Shapley]

I'll have to rummage through the "The Next President" thread to refersh my memory of who they are. I know some of our international friends were cheering for him, but I need to refresh my memory.

[Haggis@wk]

Rep. Chris Van Hollen tells Bloomberg that, in the reporter's words, "Congress may still pass a health-care overhaul by using a process called reconciliation, a top House Democrat said. That procedure requires 51 votes rather than the 60 needed to prevent Republicans from blocking votes on President Barack Obama's top legislative priorities." The most obvious problem with this is that it requires 60 votes in the Senate, and a mere representative is in no position to make threats on behalf of the upper chamber.

As an aside, Van Hollen also has this charming comment in explaining why he thinks Democrat Martha Coakley will win today's special election: "Why would you hand the keys to the car back to the same guys whose policies drove the economy into the ditch and then walked away from the scene of the accident?"

Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.

[Giant Communist Robot]

I'm curious as to what became of those who wanted Mr. Obama in office. Why are they not here to cheer him on in his pursuit of equality, fairness, and change?

OK, I was one. Go, Barry, go.

This Cadillac plan tax sounds bad to me. I don't think it'll be limited to the wealthy who have great plans but will also tax the working class--many unions have some good plans. The result may be less coverage for many.

[jamiebk]

Rep. Chris Van Hollen tells Bloomberg that, in the reporter's words, "Congress may still pass a health-care overhaul by using a process called reconciliation, a top House Democrat said. That procedure requires 51 votes rather than the 60 needed to prevent Republicans from blocking votes on President Barack Obama's top legislative priorities." The most obvious problem with this is that it requires 60 votes in the Senate, and a mere representative is in no position to make threats on behalf of the upper chamber.

As an aside, Van Hollen also has this charming comment in explaining why he thinks Democrat Martha Coakley will win today's special election: "Why would you hand the keys to the car back to the same guys whose policies drove the economy into the ditch and then walked away from the scene of the accident?"

Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.

The reconciliation process will not work for this healthcare bill. Reconciliation is limited to budgetary matters only and the Parlimentarian will not allow the process to apply to this bill.

[OperaTenor]

I'm curious as to what became of those who wanted Mr. Obama in office. Why are they not here to cheer him on in his pursuit of equality, fairness, and change?

Who were they?
I know OT only thought him the slightly lesser of two evils by election day.

True dat, and I still think that's the case. Only by a nose...

[Shapley]

I think he is the more evil of two lessers...

[Haggis@wk]

Canadian Premier comes to U.S. for surgery.
From the comments: “Seems to me that when our Premier goes to the US for heart surgery, the analogy that comes to mind would be if the President of General Motors said ‘Our GM cars are fantastic, but myself — I own a Ford.’”

It prompts the question: If the US adopts Obamacare, how will the Canadian health care system survive?