Obama speaks so highly of competition and then pushes so hard for a government-run health care that will diminish competition by creating a company/government that does not play by simple economic principals. I will agree that we need reform, but it is not in the manner he suggests. We the people need to educate ourselves, stand up, and be heard.
As Corker stated, “No serious debate can take place without details and language and I am anxious to see the full text of the legislation the President described last night.”
And we, for the moment, are in no better position than Corker "or" Gordon to decide ahead of our representatives whether or not any government or non-profit run insurance is not going to be played by simple economic principles. In other words, let us stop jumping the gun before we know the facts and opinions of reps.
I don't know if the state of TN is sue-happy as far as malpractice suits, but if so, I would love to see a pilot program tested here.
Does anyone actually believe Bart Gordon?
If there were Tort reform, and a change in the regulations to let insurance companies sell across state lines, then BHO would have no reason to push for government run healtscare (no typo there). When BHO was a senetor he voted against letting insruance companies sell policies across state lines, yet in his speech he intimated that it was the Republicans who had created the impass. It was a conservative bill that he voted against. I'll bet that if one of his Liberal buddies had proposed that bill he would have been wildly in favor of it.
"healtscare (no typo there)." Yeah, there is. It's healthscare. :) Just playing, Dave.
Did we miss today's article? "Gordon’s medical malpractice reform endorsed" and is this not a big step towards tort reform in the malpractice arena?
I'm a little confused Dave, about selling insurance across state lines. Is that not basically what's being done anyway (BCBS)?
The insurance companies are the ones who choose not to sell across state lines because each state has different regluations regarding insurance. It's the "individual states" that make the insurance regulations.
So what is the point for if for example, say, a New Yorker decides to purchase a cheaper policy in TN and because the cheaper policy covers hangnails... when the NY state insurance regulations may not cover hangnails. Does this mean the NYer must travel to TN to get the full coverage they want? And what about medical providers themselves? How many times has someone had coverage with Humana for instance but walks into their doctor's office and see's a sign... Humana not accepted here?
It is a federal regulation that prevents insurance companies from selling health insurance across state lines, and you wouldn't have to travel to a different state to purchase the insurance. Like I said, Obama voted against the bill that would have changed that regulation, yet now he is trying to say that it was the republicans that have blocked it.