If the program can’t be sustained during a recession then it should not be proposed. The economy goes into a recession about every ten years. This should only be proposed if they can find 1.5 Trillion of programs to cut. Lots of luck on that one.

As a proud LA-7 constituent, we need your informed, conservative voice now more than ever.

Every time I visit the post office or the DMV, it sends chills down my spine to imagine government health care.

A big part of the problem is that we have forsaken the free market in health care. Health care will be consumed like water when there is no cost, and that goes for the well-insured patient who has no incentive to opt for generic drugs, as well as the Medicaid patient that shows up at the emergency room for an Extra-Strength Tylenol.

Medical savings accounts would seem to be a simple, sane, market based tool in the fight against spiraling costs.

FYI– America has NOT emerged from the “recession”. Check the correct factual information, please.

Once again, America has a “system” that has allowed government, big business, and special interest groups to meddle and manipulate the economics of health care from a free market enterprise.

The health care industry is doomed to failure because this is the desired outcome. Until insurance companies stop dictating the medical practices (or the lack, thereof) to permit free market health care to prosper, the health care industry will continue the downward spiral.

Isn’t it about time that the American Medical Association is exposed for it’s real mission?
Why is there a quota on medical students? Medical graduates?
Why is practicing medicine such a monopoly?
Why does the United States have a quota-based physician limitation?
Why is there no cap on lawsuit awards?
Why did health care costs rise, leading to health insurance, when the government intially became involved during the 1930s?
Why is there a restriction on purchased health insurance by State?

Why should the gov be involved in making sure every American can get healthcare coverage? Why should the gov be involved in disease prevention or management of chronic diseases? Gov involvement in healthcare should shrink not expand, especially with mediciad and programs that fall under public health.

The Congressman may be well intentioned but history shows that Democrats can’t be trusted in this scenario. They’ll make a show of bipartisanship, try to push government control, then blame Republicans when we push back and the media will be their echo chamber.

“It is possible – and necessary – to achieve the above objectives through common sense reforms, without raising taxes and eliminating employer-sponsored health benefits for working families.”

Pardon my ignorance, but why must maintenance of employer sponsored health care be necessary? I have never had any input as to how much coverage I get nor how much I pay for that coverage. Those decisions have always been made by someone at my employer’s HR dept that has a higher priority than my families health or finances.

I suspect if you simply detach health insurance from employment, people will make far better choices for their situation than their employer will. Granted life or auto insurance isn’t an ideal market, but it is much better off than the health insurance market.

-Bri

I do not believe in the premises stated or implied, and, therefore, I disagree.

First and foremost, thinking that you will be able to work with dems to accomplish a better version of health care is a premise I don’t buy. It is compromising with an enemy, who will never compromise with you. I believe it weakens your position greatly. Why find common ground, how about standing on principles and not budging for a change. The politics of compromise are a large reason Republicans find themselves in the minority now.

Health care in and of itself is not a right. The ability to choose one’s health care is a right and that is what should be protected.

Get a spine and do what is right.

The good doctor is drinking Kool-Aid laced with pixie dust.

No! Rep. Charles Boustany, you still don’t have it right.

Until we get the government AND employer out of the equation, Americans will continue to health-care freedoms stripped away. Further, it doesn’t address the root cause of the problem: the complete disconnect between the true costs of health care incurred by the end-user and the costs to provide both insurance and health care. So long as consumers don’t pay for their own health care or insurance, this problem will never be resolved.

Your words don’t make sense to me. They indicate that even so-called republicans are one more step down the road toward nationalized health care…just not as far as the democrats just yet.

Let me suggest something to you.

No responsible business worth its beans would ever nationally roll-out an untested (at least successfully) unproven and costly new product.

If we are in a so-called crisis and if we continue as you or the democrats propose, the crisis will only get worse and more costly and, most important, irreversible.

What if we develop and TEST two, three, four different plans. Private/private with no employer or government involvement and public/private in small test markets throughout the country.

For once, let’s stop and do this right and get this right. Maybe by first determining what the real problems are the real solutions can be found. Maybe, just maybe, we’d actually lick this problem and put it behind us once and for all.

It’s possible we’d find that what we really need it better access to catastrophic health insurance or something else completely unexpected.

We must start thinking and looking OUTSIDE the government box for answers.

for posting. It’s wonderful to know that there are accomplished M.D.’s in a position to influence or make policy relating to health care. Your bullet points state a reasonable goal and show your understanding of the problems that face many of us.

So please, please, please use your position to help push forward a detailed solution to the current system problems.

My family, through a recent major illness, has been immersed into the current health care machine. I used to not pay that much attention to it. Healthy people usually don’t.

Like many, we have employer coverage and it has been really good. But, I still see the bills. They are sometimes more than $10,000/month, mostly in drug costs. There are not many Americans capable of paying that for very long.

Right now, I find myself in that group that has to stay at a job to keep coverage, as no one would ever cover us with the pre-existing conditions we have.

I don’t care if health care reform is a Democratic plan or a Republican plan. I just want a system that won’t “X” my family out of any kind of coverage because of preexisting conditions.

When faced with dire medical situations, it is literally a matter of life and death within your family. Ideology falls by the wayside. I implore you to use your knowledge and expertise to help craft a plan that helps us. My family has played by the rules and paid in for more than 30 years now and as I stated, our coverage is good, right now. My concern is that at some point, no one will cover us and eventually a beautiful human being may pass solely on our lack of ability to afford treatment.

Again, please help.

We need to ask why healthcare is so high. Lets just not throw the govt at it.

Is the number about 47 million to 300 million Americans who dont have insurance? So, 253 million Americans do have insurance? The way the democrats talk its the other way around – I dont trust them.

I, personally, think that if Republicans are to show an alternative to the Dems healthcare plan, they should reject their premises (i.e., healthcare is a right). I would rather have Repubs focus on the idea that healthcare is broken because of an over-reliance on government, and show how employee-centered healthcare, rather than the current employer-centered healthcare, can reduce costs, increase quality, and reduce government involvement. This obviates the Dem talking points from the debate, while making us look more knowledgeable about the debate by providing an explanation of why our healthcare options are currently a mess.

We need to move away from an employer-funded system. This inherently sets the patient interests against the employer’s interests, leading to conflict, Worse it shifts the employee’s focus to maximizing benefits, while saddling employers with additional employment costs that inhibit job creation. Plus it chains people to their employment, especially if they have pre-existing medical conditions, as they risk losing coverage and savings if they lose their job.

The equations governming two-body problems are solvable, but once you turn it into a multibody problems, the equations turn chaotic. Our current system is a four body problem: patient, medical professional, reimbursement party, and employers. It’s not surprising then that our system is chaotic – its inherent in the system.

Adding a fifth-body – government – will be even worse and almost certainly result in collisions. We clearly agree on that.

Rather, we at least need to remove employers from the picture combined with the ability to include everyone in groups and better incentives towards appropriate utilization (e.g. co-pays). We’ll still have instability as a three-body system, but there’s better hope preventing collisions that with four or five bodies.

The real elephant in the room though is affordability.

I’ll agree that adding government is never a positive solution.

But if you think employer-funding is bad, please call Aetna, Blue Cross, or a few others that offer private Individual Health Insurance … or ask your HR department for the current COBRA premium (what you’ll pay for 18 months if you lose your job).

Please note that the employers’ cost for “benefits” is far north of 30% of your salary … probably more like 100% … and lower-paid employees benefit far more (as a percentage) than executives.

You are right that “more bodies” means “more costs.” Every body takes its cut except the patient pays for it all one way or another. Doctors make a profit, hospitals make a profit, insurance companies make a profit … each adding to the actual cost.

And note especially … even the Government continues to make a profit on Medicare, although they will no longer in a few years.

The DEMS want universal healthcare and they want a value-added tax (VAT) to pay for it.

Call their bluff. They can have what they want if the vehicle is a universal health savings account. HSA would be consumer/family administered and could be left to heirs.

The VAT would be a HAT, (Healthcare Added Tax) would be a dedicated pass through to people’s HSA’s.

Offer this pragmatic compromise and the American will love it. End Medicaid and Medicare with universal HSA!

THIS IS KEY:

No U.S. or state government owns our private health records or us.

Private citizens who agree must resist government health care by refusing to allow government’s unauthorized confiscation of our records.

We must find or create a legal document or letter template private citizens can use to prevent physicians, insurance companies, etc. from releasing our health records to any government entity without each individual’s express, informed and written consent.

If medical/insurance providers throughout the country receive millions of these documents, they will take note. Sending a copy to federal/state legislators, the president and governors will reinforce this message.

It will take nationwide participation, but it can be done. It might be the only way to stop the release of our private records to the government and put a stop to government health care.

If this makes sense to you, pass it on! Better yet, how do we work together to make it happen?