Event Calendar
July 2014
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * 01 02 03 04 05
06 07 08 09 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 * *
<< (add event) >>


User Blox 4
- Put stuff here

Barack Obama
"Lincoln Sells Out Slaves"
by: Rob Kailey - Sep 13
1 Comments
If You Haven't Seen This
by: Rob Kailey - Apr 28
5 Comments
Impeach the President?
by: Rob Kailey - Mar 16
15 Comments
It's the system, stupid!
by: Jay Stevens - Oct 24
7 Comments

Search




Advanced Search


Rob Kailey is a working schmuck with no ties or affiliations to any governmental or political organizations, save those of sympathy.

Health care bill constitutional

by: Jay Stevens

Fri Oct 08, 2010 at 07:28:43 AM MST


The health care reform legislation is legal:

A federal judge in Michigan on Thursday dismissed one of more than 15 legal challenges to the new health care law, becoming the first to rule that the law is constitutional.

Two other cases with higher profiles, one in Florida and one in Virginia, are headed toward hearings on the issues that were decided in Michigan. The central question, which may ultimately fall to the Supreme Court, is whether the Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to require citizens to obtain a commercial product, namely health insurance....

Judge George C. Steeh of Federal District Court in Detroit ruled that choosing not to obtain insurance qualified as an example of "activities that substantially affect interstate commerce." That is the standard set by the Supreme Court for Congress's compliance with the Commerce Clause.

That is, not buying insurance puts a financial burden on taxpayers and other insurance purchasers across the country. The uninsured will still need medical care; taxpayers and the insured will pick up the tab.

Illya Somin takes a stab at shooting down the decision:

The problem with this reasoning is that those who choose not to buy health insurance aren't necessarily therefore going to buy the same services in other ways later. Some will, but some won't. It depends on whether or not they get sick, how severe (and how treatable their illnesses are), whether if they do get sick, they can get assistance from charity, and many other factors. In addition, some people might be able to maintain their health simply by buying services that aren't usually covered by insurance anyway, such as numerous low-cost medicines available in drug stores and the like. In such cases, they aren't really participating in the same market as insurance purchasers.

W-e-e-e-l-l, not quite. For starters, unless non-insurance-buyers are some kind of genetic Supermenschen, they, as a group, will experience sudden and catastrophic injury or illness at the same rate that insurance buyers do - at best. Of course, that's only considering the statistical case. In reality, the uninsured are much more likely to rack up higher long-term medical costs because they are much less likely to seek out preventative or early medical care.

But, more simply, everyone gets sick and dies eventually. No one "maintains their health." Healthcare is inevitable for all.

And ridding health care of the individual mandate and keeping the regulation on insurers will create a total clusterf*ck. Why would anyone buy insurance until they're sick? But maybe that's the way to go: insurance costs will spiral out of control and the industry will die. And then we can go to a single-payer system. In the meantime, it'd suck to be us. Wheee!

So, under the commerce clause of the Constitution and Congress' power "to tax and spend providing for the general welfare," the bill is legal. For now. The radically conservative SCOTUS, as always, looms.

Jay Stevens :: Health care bill constitutional
Tags: , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Group Health Insurance: A Shared Risk Pool (0.00 / 0)
Back in the early 50s, the Anaconda Company offered a "group health insurance" plan wherein smeltermen and their families could go to the St. Ann's Hospital in Anaconda and see a company doctor for a $1 fee.  This was widely used and accepted.

Later, more formal group health insurance plans were set up, and the whole theory behind group health coverage was SHARED RISK.  For example, perhaps some women will not have babies, either because of age, choice, or physical problems; while others, on the other hand, will get pregnant and have children.  All would pay for pregnancy care and childbirth "risks."  By the same token, perhaps somebody would develop diabetes, while the majority would not: but nobody knew which person would be unlucky enough to become diabetic.  

The risk pool worked great, and costs were not as high (granted, taking into account inflation) as they are now because insurance companies "cherry pick" the best (healthiest), and let the sickest pay higher fees for coverage.  This is patently unfair!  If the person whose fees are lower suddenly has an accident or heart attack, he/she is given good medical care--even though they have never paid the higher premiums!  If the higher risk person doesn't need treatment as often as anticipated, or does not seek it, he/she still has to pay higher premiums.

We need to get back to the "shared risk pool" model, and the new health care reform bill will do this for us.  It will take years for this to be set in place, and get all the players involved, but it can be done.  I am so distressed by the Obama haters who wish to take down this HCR bill.  We all need the help now.

Why should most of us pay the freight for those who choose to pay zero in premiums, and have the cost of their treatment added on to our premiums?  I worked in a health care clinic and I saw high middle-income people refused to pay their bills, and I know that this frequently happens.  I rather like the idea that everyone MUST pay for coverage.


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Bookmark and Share

Poll
Purely Hypothetical, of course, but - The best candidate for the Republicans for US Senate is:
Corey Stapleton
Dennis Rehberg
Marc Racicot
Champ Edmunds
Steve Daines
Harris Himes
Kreyton Kerns

Results

Blog Roll
  • A Secular Franciscan Life
  • Big Sky Blog
  • David Crisp's Billings Blog
  • Discovering Urbanism
  • Ecorover
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Intelligent Discontent
  • Intermountain Energy
  • Lesley's Podcast
  • Livingston, I Presume
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Montana Cowgirl
  • Montana Main St.
  • Montana Maven
  • Montana With kids
  • Patia Stephens
  • Prairie Mary
  • Speedkill
  • Sporky
  • The Alberton Papers
  • The Fighting Liberal
  • The Montana Capitol Blog
  • The Montana Misanthrope
  • Thoughts From the Middle of Nowhere
  • Treasure State Judaism
  • Writing and the West
  • Wrong Dog's Life Chest
  • Wulfgar!

  • Powered by: SoapBlox