Why mandates for health insurance are a nightmare

[cooolandrew]

One reason forcing people to buy heath insurance is anightmare, is a potential return to republican rule. Hillary's plan is said to be better as more covered the better and she will put some to the cost, but, if we return to republicna rule that won't happen. Then you will be stuck with unaffordable healthcare by law. At least with Barack's plan you can pick and choose. So HRC supporters, do you want to take that gamble. Stats say her cling to power would be weak if she even managed to get power. The best plan was Dennis's plan removing al profit, the true burden on healthcare making it expensive, but this is the breaks we got now, so optional is best.

[LostinVA]

1. Universal healthcare means everybody has it, or else it's not universal

In countries that already have it, people pay for it via higher taxes or the VAT. It's not going to be free. That's impossible.

It's no different than having to pay for Social Security or Medicare, which most people don't mind.

[sandnsea]

3. It is completely different

and the OP is exactly right. SS and Medicare are entitlements, mandated ON the government. She is talking about mandating individuals which means Republicans can remove assistance, and still say health care is solved because we've got Hillary's universal health care. It's a horrible mistake.

[Creideiki]

13. Unlike cutting benefits for SS and Medicare

Uh...you had a point?

Barack's going to have to come up with some kind of universal health care plan, or at least pledge not to veto the one sent to him by Congress.

[cooolandrew]

4. Dennis wasn't proposing free healthcare he was proposing removing profit to make it affordable and

and a rise in tax on the ultra rich.

[cooolandrew]

5. You will be universally made to buy insurance with republicans back no subsideis.

Republicans will one day return and you'd then have insurance unaffordable and obliged to pay for by law. Barack will drive down costs as he did in illinois but not make it law to buy.

[FormerDittoHead]

11. OK, then Obama won't MANDATE my buying insurance (for my kids)?

Let me get this straight.

Obama's plan...

OK, I'm a parent. There are a lot of us out here. We're in all 50 states and in most cities!

OK, so that we're on the same page here.

You're saying that parents (again, there's a lot of them out there) WON'T be MANDATED to UNIVERSALLY buy insurance for their kids??

Is that what you're saying?

Because that's not what I read.... HERE:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4738055

[dkf]

16. kids are cheap to insure.

[cooolandrew]

7. Barack even highlighted last night MA folks ended up with fines and insurance to pay.

The plan as Hillary has it is governor Mitt Romenys plan. With Barack's plan you won't end up with fines just cheaper halth plan.

[stevietheman]

9. Mandates are the *wrong* way to get to universal health insurance

The *only* plausible, palatable approach is Medicare for all. I think Obama's plan is a good first step in this direction, as it won't piss off a lot of the electorate and thus help Republicans win back Congress in the 2010 mid-terms.

[democrattotheend]

15. Social Security and Medicare are financed through taxes

Not premiums paid to private companies.

The OP is advocating a single-payer system like the one Kucinich proposed, which would involve higher taxes but cut the profits out, thus saving money for everyone.

[Sensitivity]

2. Hillary's MANDATE make a pro-insurance industry bill PUNITIVE

against some random person who just can't deal with it at a given time.

[Vinca]

6. To enact a law requiring everyone to purchase insurance means

there must be a punitive aspect. Will we have insurance police? Everyone needs health care, not health insurance. I'm afraid both candidates policies will morph into a tax deduction when it gets to Congress. Neither has a truly progressive plan. Both are pandering to insurance companies. No one has explained how or why the insurance companies would suddenly become philanthropic organizations that cared about people over money. It will never, ever happen. The insurance companies are the problem, not the solution.

[cooolandrew]

8. Yes, both lousy plans but Barack's lousy plan is not enforced. Somebody bring back Dennis.

[Vinca]

12. I think that's a good thing, but I agree. Dennis has the plan.

As for enforcement vs. nonenforcement, the notion of garnishing wages of people who might truly not be able to afford whatever the offered plan is, is ludicrous. I have insurance available to me now - I just don't have the $1200 a month to pay for it. People will say there are subsidies, but how are they awarded? One person might make $25,000 but after paying rent, buying food, etc., have nothing left. Another person might have $100 left at the end of the month. How well off you are depends on what part of the country you live in, what your previous commitments are, etc., etc., etc.

[suston96]

10. Social Security and Medicare were nightmares too. Republicans hated hated them.

But the nightmares went away. And the projected nightmare that they will go broke in 20 years is also bullshit. If they go broke it will mean that more than half of the working population at that time is unemployed.

It isn't about "forcing people to buy insurance". It's about everyone being covered. Poor people paying into Social Security and Medicare get their premiums back by way of Earned Income Credits.

[democrattotheend]

14. That's a really good point

Hadn't thought about that. A Republican Congress could cut the subsidies without lifting the mandate, thus creating a situation like in Massachusetts, where people are being fined because they can't afford it.

[cooolandrew]

17. I know I impress myself sometimes. But yeah, HRCs potential weak hold on power could make that real.

[backscatter712]

18. The biggest problems is with the subsidies and aid programs.

In theory, subsidies and aid programs like Medicare, Medicaid, S-CHIP, etc. will be used to make health care affordable to everyone.

In the sausage making process that Congress uses to make laws, the size and amount of money spent on the subsidies will be fiercely contested. And chances are good that the amounts won't be as big as we would like, after the GOP and the DINOs demand their pound of flesh in exchange for letting a health care package go through at all. There will be some help, but for many, it won't be enough.

Then what happens a few years down the road if the GOP retakes the presidency or Congress. Guess what. They're going to pull a Grover Norquist and they'll slash these programs. Before long, the poor and working class will be struggling even more to make ends meet, and we'll be back to where we started.

That's why we need to focus from the beginning not on mandates, but on making health care affordable. Yes, we need to use subsides and programs like Medicare, Medicaid and S-CHIP. But we need to attack some of the structural problems that are driving the cost spiral. We need to re-regulate the insurance industry. We need to ban them from jacking up premiums or denying coverage for people with preexisting conditions and medical issues. We need the government insurance program that Congresscritters get made available to everyone to work in competition with private insurers to drive costs down. We need to mandate minimum levels of coverage, and make them iron-clad, and make it known to providers as well as insurers, so they don't need to beg for permission from HMOs before providing treatments. We need to have Medicare empowered to negotiate drug prices with the pharmcos.