http://m.feedblitz.com/donrobbins
Vote On Healthcare Bill - Article LA Times
It would probably be best to wait on the final vote to allow for renegotiations. A guarantee of a standard of care with coverage would be a necessary part of the bill. Changing the system to be able to provide equal care for all Americans is possible. But changes need to be made. Here's my idea on how to accomplish that, primarily.
The American Healthcare bill *Trumpcare, so to speak, is still not clearly defined. As it was with Obamacare the statements made in defense of the bill are not backed up with written guarantees or even promises from the leaders. Taking Trumps word for things might be easier than believing what Obama and the secret Democrat party said about the Affordable Care Act. But still yet it is not clear as to what exactly will happen in many circumstances. With young people who are going to be able to stay on their parents policies it's not so dramatic - but for others it could mean losing coverage.
Working poor being asked to work before they receive the Obama type Medicaid care coverage- let's stop there....
This matter is not clearly defined by the Republicans. Some are for and some are not for, so far. The vote is Thursday. It is not apparent that the bill will pass. There is opposition to the bill in the Republican House.
The statements about total care on Medicaid is like saying that you have a premium policy with Medicaid coverage, that it covers every treatment test, diagnostic procedure, out patient, rehab, specialty care, and so on.... Which isn't really true. The total coverage part is in reference to the people who are covered by the insurance policy within each state. Doctors are paid less under Obamacare that are primary care givers who make initial contact with patients and referre patients from their offices to specialty treatment and testing.
The shortage of qualified MD's has been known by the media and Washington for some time. nothing has been said, that I know of about this matter by the Republicans supporting Trumpcare.
Drug prices and what to do about the expense of drugs in the country is a matter that President Trump wants to deal with by instituting some regulation changes and opening up markets for competition. He thinks that opening up markets for insurance providers is the way to go to try and avoid increases. There is some merit to that idea.
A major point in cost analysis is '"Cost Transference" within the system. That's where the providers pay for services that are offered to the customer (patient) for far less money that actual cost. Money is taken from other areas to cover the bill. Like if you went to the doctors and they charged 200 dollars for a simple check up visit and the real cost was 1200 dollars. They would bill the insurance for 200 but charge more for other services to cover the costs. This practice is called cost transference. One of the major problems with this policy was that the system also served people who were not covered by the private insurance companies. The fixed payment part of the system did not work well with the cost transference system. A policy to pay the care provider the actual costs would be necessary. And actual expenses to initial doctor visits needed to be calculated and paid to the facilities and general practitioners. This needs to be a rule in any policy changes.
As it stands, Medicare seems to be safe. Some adjustments on supplemental care are apparently going to take place. Exactly what those are, I don't know. I'm on Medicare. I pay a separate charge each month for the coverage I have. That charge helps to cover medicine.
As it is I probably wouldn't vote for Trumpcare. But I would still vote to end Obamacare.
Fixing The Medical Care Facility Expense Problem Saving the System
A private healthcare system being employed by the government to care for the medical needs of the poor and under insured became very expensive. Mostly because of (minor) healthcare visits to medical facilities set up to provide care to the wealthiest population on earth. Expenses came into play when making decisions on how to provide for the poor and uninsured.
Because of costs and cost transference within the system, the cost of program expenditures rose exponentially. Over the years since the end of community based ( non profit) care facilities. funded through tax dollars locally, the overall costs associated with basic treatments and the real costs of visits continually rose.
It is necessary to understand that transferring people from community based non profit facilities into private care and specialized care was more expensive. But the greater costs associated with policies was transference of costs from basic care upon visits to other treatment and care giving within the facilities and hospitals. Even small locally ran community hospitals could do a lot of things just as well as larger and more expensive private (for profit) operations.
The promises of the government, that the private system could be used to provide universal diagnosis and treatment to uninsured and poor patients was a false promise to begin with. The private system was never meant to be used specifically, alone, for the welfare of the poor.
Insurance rates climaxed and the working poor also found insurance rates out of their budgets range. Many people depended on Medicaid to cover them when they did not have insurance. And that is the way providers got money for treating the uninsured. The rest of the bills were sent to the patients in hopes that they would pay the remaining balances on the bills.
When profit based systems are used to provide care for patients with money to purchase insurance policies, the matter of convenience and luxury, comfort, aesthetics, and such come into play to keep the customers satisfied. Many expenses are incurred that would normally cost far less for simple care and visits. If you look at the real cost per visit and the real costs for basic care in a not for profit setting verses a profit based setting the differences are staggering. With respect to real costs.
Just think of a person going to a higher cost facilitiy to be checked for a cold in the winter, a patient with the sniffles. The cost to see that patient may be as much asd three thousand dollars! Just to check the patient for a cold. The bill is three hundred dollars instead of three thousand dollars. The other money is spread around to cover the actual costs of the visit. But it's a matter of convenience and a matter of luxury that is paid for. The inconvenience of going to a non profit based facility for basic needs is bankrupting the system
Mandates of using non profit facilities by everyone with certain needs is the answer to the cost problem. The savings to the system and government would be enough to insure that everyone gets fair treatment in the system. Without modifying the private system to incorporate some non profit based care facilities the costs will continue to rise unchecked.
The cost of using the profit based system for all needs is what keeps the system from being used and operated as a universal healthcare system.
Comments