Chat today about health reform and 'public option'
On Friday at 10 I’ll be live-chatting about health-care reform, Maryland health-insurance prices and whether it’s a good idea to launch a government-run, ‘public-option’ medical plan to compete with existing insurers. Feel free to leave questions in the comments section of this post.







Comments
two areas that you have not covered
(1) if CareFirst is a nonprofit why do the politician make it run like a for-profit one - profits are not used to reduce premiums
(2) why do the politicians keep adding mandates that raise premiums inlieu of reducing them.
(3) Here in Maryland it is not a question of securing coverage but one of price - for the small businesses ( 2 - 50 employees - we have SEGO ) and for the individual we have MHIP - both programs offer comprehensive coverage including drug coverage.
Posted by: Chuck Lurie | August 21, 2009 8:02 AM
The advantage for a public healthcare insurance plan over not for profit insurance companies is in theory like Medicare/Medicaid it would be able to set reimbursement rates in a take it or leave it fashion.
The major problem is like Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare they are required to invest all premiums in US treasuries giving the illusion that there is more tax money coming into the Federal government’s tax coffers. This has made deficit spending too easy for the Federal government in the past, and due to the baby boomers pending retirement wave now impossible without substantial tax increases.
The other problem is doctors could refuse servicing customers enrolled in the “public healthcare insurance plan” due to low rates which already happens.
If goal is bring healthcare spending under control then focus on regulation the industry like an oligopoly that way prices are control better for all insurance providers.
Posted by: HLA | August 21, 2009 3:34 PM
The government has not proven itself economical in running anything so the premise of your argument about the public option is flawed at best.
There are a lot of other things that could be done to increase competition. One would be to come up with a national standard for health insurance coverage, so that health insurance could be sold across state lines.
It is ridiculous that there are separate mandates in each of the 50 states. Most insurace competition was squashed by the mandates put in place by the state of MD - insurance companies elected not to compete in MD beacuse of this.
You might also research as to why Maryland is the ONLY state that does not allow PEOs(professional employer organizations) to purchase health insurance as a large group employer which allows small businesses to reduce their healt insurance costs significantly.
The law was changed in the late 1990s since several MD representatives who sold heatlh insurance were losing customers, thus each business must now be individually rated. No conflict of interest here?
Posted by: jeffrey loveless | August 22, 2009 9:35 AM
Well I do not see u talking about the public option but this is the best place to comment I have found.
My name is Mark Magas. I have worked in Democratic politics since 1990. I was a team leader in South St. Louis for Obama. If Obama never even tries to fight for the public option I am finished. i will never make another cll, knock on another door. Democracy is a farce when your candidate never intended to keep his number one promise. I am helpless my vote and my voice do not count.
Posted by: Mark Magas | September 4, 2009 12:55 AM