Comments on: ‘Public option’ on the table?

By: rmforbes

rmforbes — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 00:32:44 +0000

Texas has had these reforms in place since 2003 and still has the same problem as the rest of country, healthcare cost growing 3 to 4 times faster than inflation, individual and company premium rates nearly doubling in just the last 5 years, and health insurance company profits increasing by 435% in the last 5 years. I’m a small business owner and it’s in my own self interest to offer health insurance to my employees because a healthy employee is productive and makes me money. However, my business competes in a market place with other companies that offer simular product as I. I could never earn a profit margin of 35% because my competition would not allow it. The health insurance industry is getting a 35% profit margin at my expense and the expense of every other American. Why can’t we address this? We’re talking major savings to all Americans. Not just the pennys saved with tort reform. We need to inject real competition into health insurance industry and remove publicly held corporations from the system. Publicly held corporations must by law continually strive to increase profits to maintain their stock price and pay dividends to their shareholders. This is not a good model for the healthcare industry. They can be for profit but must be privately held so that profits are not put before contractual obligations. They must not be allowed to deny claims when benefits are needed most in order to increase profits.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:15:56 +0000

which premiums are so high now that they cause many doctors to quit private practice and deter many students from becoming doctors.

The decrease in the supply of doctors increases the cost of their services.

The potential liability for malpractice increases the cost services.

The fear of a lawsuit, which, even if frivilous can ruin ones reputaion causes settlements that increse the cost of services.

The fear of malpractice causes many unnessesary tests that increases costs.

Get it?

By: rmforbes

rmforbes — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:37:21 +0000

Very little or nothing, as a small businessman I’m getting killed now by the current system. We need to get a real reform system that will reduce the costs on small business fast. Tort reform hasn’t been proven to be the answer, we need real answers.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:34:20 +0000

a former plaintiff’s trial lawyer of 15 years before going corporate in 2002. I know all the trial lawyers assn arguments but I do think the savings would be significant for two reasons:

Now, the potential liability is nearly infinite and two, the supply of doctors is quite suppressed due to the cost of med mal ins. The cost is so high for premiums that it is simply prohibitive for many and causes doctors to charge exorbitant rates to cover it and still make living they deem commensutate with all the hard work and student loans they had to incur to become a physician.

Lower premiums will increase the supply of doctors and that will have a somewhat hidden and uncalculated effect in addition to lowering costs directly.

How significant? No one knows, but it is intuitive and common sense that informs my opinon as well as the fact of seeing businesses surrender and settle so many cases in many areas of life (race and sex harrasment cases as well as ordinary torts incl med mal) that also inflates the cost of every thing.

Avoiding runaway juries absent judges with character and courage is exacting a great cost on America.

By: rmforbes

rmforbes — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:39:58 +0000

that tort reform does need to happen, I just don’t see any significant healthcare cost savings as a result. We need insurance reform that allows small groups to bands together to spread the risk and change the rules so individuals can take their coverage with them when they move or change jobs. The current system just doesn’t work for small business at all.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:06:21 +0000

for tort reform to have significant impact is at the federal level in conjunction with interstate commerce for ins cos.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:05:49 +0000

different medical costs/tort laws in states. Well, the sale of any product is subject to differing tort laws and costs of doing business but they manage to set prices. Ins cos could do the same if they chose. many may choose to sell some policies only in certain states, but most would offer varieties of products that increase the pool of insureds and lower premiums.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:02:46 +0000

until it crowded out all private ins cos for single payer, at least the private ins cos would have an incentive for better service afforded to those mandated so long as they could switch private insurers.

By: rmforbes

rmforbes — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:28:55 +0000

It had no effect in reducing healthcare costs or even doctor’s malpractice premiums. So how will that reduce my health insurance premiums as a small businessman. My rates have almost doubled in the last year and I don’t know if I’ll be able to stay in business unless something is done.

By: janis

janis — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:51:48 +0000

saying that Obama is going to try for making it legal or workable for only 50 senators to vote this kind of stuff in instead of 60. Nothing would surprise me at this point with the possible exception of wondering why he didn’t do that sooner.

By: Vegas_Rick

Vegas_Rick — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:41:38 +0000

The co-op idea will be even more confusing to the general public. It can easily be made to seem innocuous, but IMHO it will quickly crowd out the private competition and make a “public option” a backdoor reality.

By: AKSteveB

AKSteveB — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:30:46 +0000

Yep, we all want tort reform, but remember, the big thing above all else is stopping the public option. We can fix anything else when we’re in power, a public option will be impossible to reverse. Enjoy a victory, we likely just avoided health care Argageddon with only 40 senators. You’ve all done great work.

Btw greetings from Iceland, I’m over here for another week.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:55:10 +0000

I should have! But I am going to have to now.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:53:34 +0000

and after I review that old column and comments, I will respond fully in the comments here and maybe do a whole new essay.

By: janis

janis — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:38:28 +0000

on the “AMA and Tort Reform.” You did receive comments. That you didn’t receive more is not necessarily a critique of your writing, but more an indication that most of us don’t really know whether what you said was correct or not. That’s because most of us don’t know the arcane rules that govern such things. For many of us, it just comes down to “We detest lawyers like John Edwards and somebody should be able to stop guys like him from doing what they do.”

I’m on board with that sentiment, by the way. There should be something that can be done to stop people like Edwards from mucking up the system for the rest of us while getting obscenely rich at the same time.

By: Rod_Patrick

Rod_Patrick — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:30:04 +0000

I also want to be enlightened on what you’re saying about those “TORTish” obstacles.

By: jeffreywturner

jeffreywturner — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:06:34 +0000

There are thousands of others just like him. They are leeches. They don’t actually go into the operating room and do anything to improve the system. They just exploit the misfortune of others. They are parasitic organisms, not unlike ticks or fleas on a dog. They truely are the vermin of humanity and are among the most vile and disgusting people alive.

Worst people in the world:
1. (tie) child rapists
1. (tie) litigation attorneys
1. (tie) Keith Olberperson
4. ACLU

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:57:21 +0000

I respond so that I can try and cover the matters fairly comprehensively.

Suffice to say for now that a statute that only caps damages would not have the dire consequences you fear.

more later

By: casel21

casel21 — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:35:30 +0000

was written because I’ve posted a few diaries on this subject and have not received any comments. Probably I’m just a poor writer.

I look forward to your response.

By: janis

janis — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:43:30 +0000

lawsuits actually do—i.e. they enrich lawyers, make everyone’s health care costs skyrocket, and tie up courts & juries that could be otherwise more productively used. Back before I quite reading John Grisham’s books, due to his miserable politics, I remember reading whichever one it was that explained how class action suits really work and the pittance that a claimant actually received while the lawyers got the millions off the top.

Rule of thumb: If a lawyer is advertising on TV, steer as far away from him as you can. If for no other reason, your fees will be higher in order for him to pay for all that lovely advertising. Well, that, and they come across as exactly what they are–ambulance chasing money hogs.