- Reaction score
ModlrMike said:To get the discussion back on track:
I think the most pressing question is: does the government have the authority to tell the populace how and where to spend their money?
I say no. Others contend that the greater good trumps individual rights. Personally I think the most fundamental change to health care in the US should be tort reform. But that would require the lawyers who occupy the house and senate to agree... and how likely is that?
Tort reform has been shown to have only a minimal effect on overall health care costs. the CBO estimated that it would reduce the overall costs by about 0.5%
A more realistic fundamental change should be moving to a federally regulated single payer system. It addresses many of the complaints on both sides. It provides for cost controls by limiting the pay outs. It reduces or eliminates the inherent administrative costs that exist in the current insurance based system. It eliminates the issues of coverage, portability and affordability. It would also allow the Federal Government to negotiate directly with the drug companies for pricing under Medicare and Medicaid.
Like I said previously, Obamacare (which, by the way the Dems are now using as a rallying cry rather than a derogatory reference) tries to do too much too soon, but missed the opportunity to resolve the biggest issues by going single payer.
And that is the fault of the Dems. They dismissed GOP efforts to amend the bill, opting to go it alone rather than work to get a lesser bill passed with bipartisan support. And here we are today speculating the outcome of the Supreme Court deliberations.