Candidate's health insurance proposals revisited

Who really knows who has the answers to all the health care questions. But the thing I believe is that all citizens have the right to be treated for the most basic needs in life and that includes health care. My family and I recently moved from the Washington State to North Carolina. Our health care premiums went up 311% while our income only went up 5.3%. (Our premiums are 10% of our total month income.) The level of health care did not go up either, I had to go to the hospital shortly after moving, and it was the same wait in NC as in WA. I would like to see a candidate take on the whole system and make it better.

My nephew has Autism and my brother and sister in law pay for every single medical bill, because their insurance does not cover Autism on their medical plan. Autism is not covered under most insurance and is very expensive to treat. Most Americans are like myself and those 46 million Americans (http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf) without health insurance are not asking for the "Cadillac" coverage, but the most basic coverage at a reasonable and livable price. My family cannot really afford health insurance because right now, (only my husband works because I cannot find a job), but we have it because we cannot afford not to have it.

I don't think either candidate has it right, but one has a better plan than the other, and on this one I'm with Obama. I truly believe that covering people is better than not, but I also worry about the long term because as you said, "Just building on the current system might not be sustainable, especially in the shadow of massive budget deficits." Our economy effects so much more than Wall Street, the "trickle down effects" that conservatives like to use, works far better in the negative economy than in a healthy economy.

Health care is something people have to have in any economy and in an economy like this when you have to pay Dr. co-pays and deductibles it can break a family. Without health care 46 million Americans go to the ER for care or do not get care until they are so sick that it costs twice as much, how much does that cost taxpayers each year? Health care is very important, but is more important to people like me who are barely getting by and to those 46 million Americans who are not covered.

All Americans deserve to have some sort of coverage of health care, so voting for a candidate this year will be all that much more of an important decision. In the end I am voting for the best overall plan and I encourage everyone to do the same!

I am wondering how McCain's plan of going across state lines actually helps us. Don't health insurance companies and plans that currently operate in one or a few states have regional networks of doctors and hospitals? If I live in California, buying a plan from New York, even though they have guaranteed access, isn't going to help me. Even if it did, that would screw those states because all the people with preexisting conditions would go buy from those states with laws that guarantee access and all the people with good health would go out of state.

Working in the health field has brought alot of attention to the problems in the health field. I don't believe we have the answer to our health coverage yet. I think it cost us more in the long run not having anything for our uninsured and ones who are denied benefits due to preexisting. It is just not coverage we need, we need to look at the practice of medicine. If a patient is sick and needs a transplant and has medicaid as long as they are under 18 medicaid will pay and once they hit 18 they are on their own and then you have policies that max out. Why is it we bill for triple the cost we will only get paid by what insurance sees reasonable?Example test cost 1500.00 but insurance pays 400 and then the self pay has to pay the 1500 and is not offered a negotiation. Like I said we need more than what is being offered.

I don't understand why people fear the concept of "socialized medicine"; the fact that it is socialized is pure myth. The role of the physician and the concept of the medical in the form of free market is more socialistic, because the control is totally in the hand of the seller who is the decision maker. This is not an issue of socialism or capitalism! Medical care is a mandatory service to guarantee healthcare to a population who have an ethical right that it is provided to them for free or low cost.

The reality is that from state to state, medical demands vary. We learn from the mistake of Medicare and Medicaid is succesful in one state and totally sucks in the other. It is really not a problem if US Health care comes into control of Federal government. Only then will the quality and coverage of health care provided to an individual be independent from economic wellfare of the State this individual lives in, including his own social-economic status. If this is socialistic, well then the socialist is then a better health care provider then the capitalist.

But neither Obama nor McCain is proposing this. Beware of name calling!

Health care coverage, or lack of, is a social issue that becomes complex. Universal coverage tends to scare many people who work and pay for insurance because they see it as another hand out for those who can't get the coverage themselves, for whatever reason. It would seem like a basic American right to have some form of coverage, especially for children, but nothing is free. Our country can be a greedy, capitalistic nation that has no problem leaving the poor behind to fend for themselves. It comes down to morality maybe. Is it the right thing to do to extend our hand out to those who can not get the basics themselves? Sharing the wealth is not that popular amongst the wealthy. Middle class is left to pay the bill at an unfair proportion to what they make. So, no plan will be popular because somebody will have to pay for the poor. Will the ultra wealthy be willing to step up and contribute a larger share?

My mom has stage IV Colon Cancer and does not have health insurance. She was diagnosed this past August 2008. She earns more than $10,000 a year so she doesn't qualify for Mediaid. And since she's only 61 years of age, she doesn't qualify for Medicare. About 4 weeks ago she met with the office of Social Security to apply for Medicare and prove she's now disabled, but if they were to approve coverage they would penalize her for 6 months and then give her the health coverage she desperately needs. Right now the only thing keeping her alive is Charity Care, but they will only give her Chemo because she does not have Health Insurance. The two month CAT scan came in last week and showed that the tumors in her liver just got bigger after two months of Chemotherapy. She doesn't have 6 months to wait for Medicare coverage IF she is approved to receive it.

I believe that Obama's health care proposal is what this country needs. There are thousands of people in my mom situation that can't get the desperately needed medical attention. Obama's plan is not based on a $5,000 tax cut. What if you're too sick to work and aren't generating any income thats taxable? McCain doesn't even mention pre-exisiting conditions!!!

It seems you left out an important portion of McCain's plan. Under his plan, our health benefits will be taxed as income. So, if you have a family health plan through your employer worth $12,000 a year, you will now pay taxes on your income + $12,000, but your paycheck won't be going up at all. Right now, your contribution to your employer-sponsored plan is a pre-tax withholding, that is, it reduces your taxable income by the amount you contribute to your health insurance. I have a hard time seeing how his $5000 tax credit will make up for what this will do to our coverage, or the increase in our taxes.

I personally think that Obama has it far more right than McCain does. I have a pre-existing condition. I developed kidney disease when I was 16 years old and have always had to look at health insurance before salary before taking any job. It is for that reason that I work at a job that's more secure and has good health insurance benefits (although each year my out of pocket cost rise and the benefits go down) but pays about half of what I could be making with a Masters Degree in my field. I also took up a second job simply to help pay for my out of pocket costs which are approximately 3K per year. I had a kidney transplant when I was 20 after waiting on the list for 4 years while doing dialysis. That transplant lasted me until last year (14 years) when I was lucky enough to have a friend donate a kidney to me and for which I'll forever be grateful. I don't know where I would be had my family and then myself not had health insurance. I fear being laid off from my job and losing my health insurance and then dealing with my "pre-existing" condition if I had to find private health insurance. I also worry about people who have my same condition who haven't been as lucky when it comes to health insurance. I know that currently I have to fight with my health insurance company about every nickel and dime that is spent and am constantly battling to make sure they are paying things that are covered by my plan while also keeping the hospital and doctors' office's billing departments at bay so that my credit score is not affected.

Neither of the proposals will fix the rising costs associate with healthcare. The cost of healthcare increases significantly more than inflation due to 1) technological advancements and 2) the moral hazard created by insurance. The only way to stunt healthcare costs is to ration care (which is done in most other countries). However, rationing will decrease many of the incentives for technological advancements. Therefore we must choose between the rapid growth of medical technology or cutting healthcare costs. We simply cannot have both.

The Health Issue.
I cringed when I heard Obama say that the US couldn't afford Universal Health Care. All developed nations but the US enjoy universal health care. I understand that no one in these countries goes broke due to medical bills.
Is it true that thousands go broke annually in the US due to medical bills?

I am a Canadian and would appreciate someone to explain why universal health care is not embraced throughout the US. Is it a matter of demographics? Young and middle age don't want it because they don't need it YET vs. the elderly who is at risk of loosing everything they work for in their life time to health cost in their sunset years? You know, we all grow old.

I am saden to hear everyday how our neighbours in the US is dealing with health care issues. Many lives are broken becasue of that.

Let me say our system in Canada is not perfect but no one that I know goes bankrupt because of health cost they personally has to bear. We probably pay a heafty price through income tax but we have economy of scale that the government can bargain with the drug companies etc to make sure cost are kept in check. If Canada were to go with the McCain system and was told to buy my own health care insurance, I won't know enough to know what to do. But no matter what, I will always wonder if the insurance company will actually pay up when I'm in a hospital bed. Do I want to think about that when I am facing a medical issue or dying in bed?

To me, health care is a safety net. It is one of those things best done by the government and take the "profit" out of it. If it is free enterprise system, it is alway profit first and then service.

Any how what is the cost of health care in the US v. Canada? I would be intersted to hear if yours is actually cheaper after all parties pay. For me and my wife we pay $32 a month and have the comfort to know that is one thing we do not have to worry about saving for our retirement.

Thanks

H

I think insurance is a huge scam that no politician is willing to address. I switched from an HMO to a PPO since my physician no longer takes HMO's. I had no idea how much out of pocket money I'd have to spend just for a simple physical since I always get a pap and my blood drawn. Not only did I pay a $15 co-pay but my out of pocket totals $281. I cannot imagine if I truly had a medical condition how much I'd have to pay. When I was on an HMO I paid $10 co-pay and that was it. My premiums were less and it was less on my employer. I truly feel that insurance companies now dictate to doctors how much money they receive for their services instead of what it was like over 20 years ago when I was growing up all you needed was cash and one receptionist and money was paid directly to the doctor. How did doctors allow insurance companies to take over?

in 1950 the average American spent 1 out of every 26 dollars on healthcare. Now that number is 1 out of 4.

That is the problem. going to the doctor is too expensive because doctors need insurance to protect themselves from law suits.

The only way Universal Healthcare will work is if you only cover hospital stays, because people won't abuse it. People will abuse it if you cover office visits.

Insurance is the biggest change we need .I am a single parent that has a daughter with cancer and since she can not be a full time college student because I can't afford to send her because of her medical bills anymore I lost insurance on her and now NO company will insure her because of a pre-existing condition even the state, her meds are appx.$3000.00 (Yes THREEE THOUSAND ) a month on top of her medical bills.
Why can't we have Universal Health Care ,I believe we would have less bankrupcy,forclosures,bad credit , if you look ,most people that have situations with health have to decide on their house or CHILD it's a no brainer in my eyes. Let's see what they would choose ,than health care would be important to them if they lost everything.

If I could, I'd ask McCain how the hell I'm to purchase a policy on his $2,500 tax break. I have a pre-existing condition that includes 2 brain surgeries and $2,000/mo in medication. I’m only able to work part time. I do not qualify for government programs as they are now because I am able to work part time. I envy my friends Germany, the UK and Canada. Obama's got the best plan, no contest.

I hope your mom's doing better Yolanda. I lost an uncle and a cousin to colon cancer. My heart hurts for you.

I find both proposals have merit. From what I have read and heard, I would have to go with Senator Obama's plan.
I am single and (so far) surviving lung cancer. I don't see how Senator McCain's plan would serve me as well as Senator Obama's. I don't have the money to buy my own plan and $2500 credit frankly isn't enough.
My biggest fear right now is that I will lose my insurance through my employer and won't be able to purchase health insurance at any price.

Sue, NE CA

I am 62 year old widow and my health insurance is $10,000 a year probably going to $12000 in January. I have a couple of years to go before medicare. I am very lucky to be able to afford this right now. however, I know most Americans can't. A $5,000 credit from McCain will still make it unafordable for Americans. He is so out of touch.

The unspoken secret to politics is to "complicate the simple" so the people rely upon the politician to decipher the laws they create and health insurance certainly fits that mold. Simply speaking, America already has a National Health Care plan called Medicare with a built-in infrastructure of checks and balances preventing doctors to charge for male pregnancies and female prostate exams, ie. so why reinvent the wheel??? Simply determine the per patient cost and how to pay, hopefully by monthly payments by the patient. The notion of any universal health care plan completely funded by tax dollars is faulty logic since the average American will pay one way or another, the only question if how and when!!!