Empathy & Sympathy -Things of the Past
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 09-25-2009 - 9:24am |
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
At the Richmond Times-Dispatch “public square†forum yesterday, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) took questions from his constituents on the health reform debate for the first time this summer. One such constituent, Patricia Churchill, spoke about a close family member, now unemployed and thus uninsured, who is dying of tumors. Cantor suggested that Churchill’s relative seek “existing government programs†or find charity.
This is all interesting, because Cantor is against a public option, yet he wants Churchill to find a government program (or charity). Yeah, we know how easy that is.
CHURCHILL: I have a very close relative, a woman in her early forties, who did have a wonderful, high-paying job, owns her own home and was a real contributing member of society. She lost her job. Just a couple of weeks ago, she found out that she has tumors in her belly and that she needs an operation. Her doctors told her that they are growing and that she needs to get this operation quickly. She has no insurance. I am just wondering gentlemen, we can talk about high-flown ideas and we can talk theory all we want to. But this person is a very close member of my family, she's ill, and she has no way to get this operation. So I'm asking you, what would you do if this were your close relative
CANTOR: First of all, I guess I would ask what the situation is in terms of income eligibility and the existing programs that are out there. Because if we look at the uninsured that are out there right now, there is probably 23, 24% of the uninsured that is already eligible for an existing government program Beyond that, I know that there are programs, there are charitable organizations, there are hospitals here who do provide charity care that if there’s an instance of indigency and the individual is not eligible for existing programs that there can be some cooperative effort. No one in this country, given who we are, should be sitting without an option to go be addressed.
What? Cantor is saying no one in this country should not have an option? That would be the public option, or universal health care, that all other industrialized nations have, in one form or another.
But, truly, why would Representative Cantor CARE about anyone else? He HAS gold standard healthcare for himself and his loved ones. Everyone else can just go DIE.


Pages
If people move outside of their old insurance company's geographical network, the old insurance policy will NOT convey at the same levels. They could continue paying the same premiums AND pay for out-of-network care but where's the logic in that? And you can bet money that a new insurance plan with a new carrier, will mean running the "pre-existing conditions" gauntlet again. Like I said, easier to port a cellphone number than insurance coverage.
Federal employees CAN move with impunity--the FEHB program doesn't allow insurance companies to refuse coverage based on pre-existing conditions. They can pick up a new regional carrier with no penalty, at least during open-enrollment season.
Show me an insurance company which has in-network coverage for every state in the Union. I'll be waiting.
Edited 9/28/2009 6:44 pm ET by jabberwocka
Jabberwocka
My DH would be rolling on the floor laughing out loud at being characterized as a liberal. He thinks that much of the reason health care costs have ballooned so much more than just about any other cost of living is the fact that people have become divorced from cost. There's no marketplace check and what has ensued is a free-for-all which has actually cost 1/6 of the nation's GDP. Hardly free.
Insurance simply is not necessary. Quality, affordable, accessible care is the need. Rather than looking solely at the demand side, he says, why not increase supply? Have incentives for people to join the medical/health care professions. Break the monopolies. The AMA would probably kick up a fuss, insurance companies would be out of the picture, and people would be able to shop for their health care needs and none of it would be grossly overpriced, even emergency care.
Jabberwocka
Eight years of ineptitude, incompetence, cronyism and sham free-market capitalism is NOT going to be fixed by anybody overnight. Or in six months. Probably not even in a decade. Rebuilding is ALWAYS more time-consuming and painstaking than destruction.
Show me your source for the claim that Doran Yount was working as a consultant before the recession. I'll be waiting. In any event, he's supporting Maggie but thanks to our archaic and dysfunctional system of health-beware, Maggie can't get insurance coverage.
BTW, this is a representative democracy. You can speak your piece and back the candidate or party of your choice. In a healthy democracy, people engage in civil debate based on facts and logic. Civil civic activism is wonderful! But once the results are tallied and elected officials are sworn in, you personally don't get to choose where tax levies go or whose lifestyles get supported.
Thank God!
Jabberwocka
Would prefer to take care of myself, make my decisions myself, and just generally stay independent. But, and it's a big but, am also aware that there may be a time when I simply am not able to manage that because of financial circumstance, physical health, whatever. Just because I am blessed at the moment, doesn't mean it will always be that way. Time may come when I need a hand up, not one leaning on my shoulder to keep me down. Am pretty sure those preferences are true of most of us.
I wold rather err on the side of generosity. Assume that there are people with legitimate needs, whether immediately discernible to me, or not. Sure, there will be people who game the system. People who commit fraud for the sake of getting something for nothing. And I wish such traits didn't exist since they tend to be spoilers and make us cynical of those with truly pressing needs. But it's not a perfect world.
There, but for the grace of God (and not my innate superiority******said sardonically******), go I. Words to live by and words to heed before making judgments about who's "deserving" and who's not!
Jabberwocka
"My DH would be rolling on the floor laughing out loud at being characterized as a liberal. He thinks that much of the reason health care costs have ballooned so much more than just about any other cost of living is the fact that people have become divorced from cost."
Wow, something I partially agree on. I wish more people did not obtain employer-provided insurance and had to go out on the free market just like auto insurance. My teacher friend ( I wrote about him on another thread had no idea what his cost was for insurance was, and why would he? His union has taken care of this for him for years. He was astounded to see my own bills, and shuddered at the thought of writing those checks each month. Well perhaps if more people had to do that you might see a greater public awareness of the cost of medical care/ insurance. I disagree that this is the total reason for the escalation of cost, however.
"BTW, this is a representative democracy. You can speak your piece and back the candidate or party of your choice. In a healthy democracy, people engage in civil debate based on facts and logic. Civil civic activism is wonderful! But once the results are tallied and elected officials are sworn in, you personally don't get to choose where tax levies go or whose lifestyles get supported."
Actually the public has a bit more say than you'd like to think. If not, we'd have had amnesty for illegals in 2007 and be on our way to government-run healthcare today.
You're avoiding my point.
They spend a lot on their squirlley lobbyists crawling all around like roaches. They spend billions on paying them to keep the status quo. While the CEO's sit on gold toilet seats.
Oh yeah!
Pages