john dickerson tells us that max baucus is in trouble because he sided with "insurance companies making campaign contributions" rather than "a man with a congenital heart defect"

really - those are the only 2 choice?

if thats REALLY true, then i have to go with the insurance companies, and here's why.

during the 2008 campaign Senator John Edwards (yeah - that guy - the one who made $153 million with flaky malpractice suits) had a sort of "campaign gameshow slash tent revival" where sick people were planted in the audience. They were called up on stage by Edwards, one by one, on cue, to have their maladies revealed, and the evil insurance companies that had denied them treatment castigated like the devil.

after the show, more than one writer pointed out that the denied treatments that had Edwards in such a religious fever wouldn't be covered by medicare or medicaid either, as they were (variously) experimental or without any scientific foundation.

Oops . .. you'd think a guy as (allegedly) smart as Edwards would be able to recognize medical malpractice when he saw it, wouldn't you? Or at least failure to follow established medical protocols.

But back to poor Dickerson. No matter what health plan you draft, I'm going to be able to call up on a stage some man or woman afflicted by tragic disease, and point out that he/she isn't covered for such and such course of treatment. NO MATTER WHAT BILL PASSES

so lets stop with the one-off anecdotal spin stories, eh john?

the endgame here is providing healthcare to people who NEED it, but can't get it.

there is no medical plan on earth - espeically not the ones in the UK or Canada - that provide the "over the top" gold plated medical benefits congress already authorizes for itself.

Not any on earth

baltimore aureole:

john dickerson tells us that max baucus is in trouble because he sided with "insurance companies making campaign contributions" rather than "a man with a congenital heart defect"

really - those are the only 2 choice?

if thats REALLY true, then i have to go with the insurance companies, and here's why.

during the 2008 campaign Senator John Edwards (yeah - that guy - the one who made $153 million with flaky malpractice suits) had a sort of "campaign gameshow slash tent revival" where sick people were planted in the audience. They were called up on stage by Edwards, one by one, on cue, to have their maladies revealed, and the evil insurance companies that had denied them treatment castigated like the devil.

after the show, more than one writer pointed out that the denied treatments that had Edwards in such a religious fever wouldn't be covered by medicare or medicaid either, as they were (variously) experimental or without any scientific foundation.

Oops . .. you'd think a guy as (allegedly) smart as Edwards would be able to recognize medical malpractice when he saw it, wouldn't you? Or at least failure to follow established medical protocols.

But back to poor Dickerson. No matter what health plan you draft, I'm going to be able to call up on a stage some man or woman afflicted by tragic disease, and point out that he/she isn't covered for such and such course of treatment. NO MATTER WHAT BILL PASSES

so lets stop with the one-off anecdotal spin stories, eh john?

the endgame here is providing healthcare to people who NEED it, but can't get it.

there is no medical plan on earth - espeically not the ones in the UK or Canada - that provide the "over the top" gold plated medical benefits congress already authorizes for itself.

Not any on earth

If that is the best he has got the Healthcare boondoggle is doomed to failure.

Wait just a dang minute now. Yer tellin' us Edwards PLANNED to get those folks to his campaign speeches? And asked them to speak up, knowin' full well they'd bitch about their health care?

What's this world coming to?

I'm so tired of the fallacy that congress has some kind of gold-plated plan. They have the same benefit package choices, at the same cost, that are available to all federal employees. Those plans cost the employee money and have cost sharing. Compared to the plans at large private sector companies, they are pretty average. Good protection, but not gold-plated. I work for a state government. My coverage is better and my costs are lower than those of the federal plans. However, I'm also covered by my husband's private sector plan. His plan pays most of my costs, because the cost sharing is much lower, as is the premium cost to the employee.

I think most of the country would be really pleased with good protection, but not gold-plated.

EbenCooke:

Wait just a dang minute now. Yer tellin' us Edwards PLANNED to get those folks to his campaign speeches? And asked them to speak up, knowin' full well they'd bitch about their health care?

What's this world coming to?

He had to plan it he needed to find the few exceptions to the success of our system and coach them on what to say.....You know Trial Lawyer Stuff!

congress has DEDICATED physicians on duty continually, and a pharmacy right in the capitol. they don't have to phone their HMO, get approval, then drive over and wait in the lobby, like ordinary federal workers.

read all about it here <link>