FoxPolitics.net - Appleton, WI News - What's really going on in the Fox Cities

FoxPolitics.net Blogs

FoxPolitics News

Local/State Govt Links

Salaries

• Appleton School District, 2007-08
• City of Appleton
• Town of Grand Chute
• City of Menasha
• City of Neenah

Candidates

City of Appleton

• Elected Officials
• Salary Watch
• Directory
• Mtg. Agendas/Minutes

Advisory Board

Blogroll

Selected News Sources:
Business Jrnl of Milw
Christian Science Monitor
Daily Caller
Drudge Report
La Crosse Tribune
Milw Journal Sentinel
National Journal
New York Times
Public Policy Forum
Real Clear Politics
Stateline
The Hill
TPM
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times
WI State Journal
Selected Blogs - from the Right:
American Mind
Blaska's Blog
Boots & Sabers
Charlie Sykes
Dad29
Freedom Eden
Heritage Foundation
Jerry Bader Blog
Life Voice
Marketplace of Ideas
Marquette Warrior
Natl Review Online
No Runny Eggs
Patrick McIlheran
Real Debate Wisconson
RedState
Rhymes with Clown
Shark and Shepherd
The Lote Tree
Vox Populi
Wall Street Jrnl, Opinions
WI State Jrnl, Opinion
Wigderson Library & Pub
Wisconsin Family Voice
WPRI
Selected Blogs - from the Left:
Big Money Blog
Blogging Blue
Brenda Konkel
Caffeinated Politics
Capital Times
FightingBob
Folkbum's rambles
Griper Blade
Huffington Post
Lost Albatross
MAL Contends
Mid coast views
Moneyed Politicians
One Wisconsin Now
Open Left
Playground Politics
Political Environment
Rock Netroots
Talk to Tony
Uppity Wisconsin
Waxing America

Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie
My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more)

Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

3/3/2010
Did Obama get religion?

No. Tell me it isn’t so. Tuesday night was almost a Geraldine Ferraro moment for me. (I was sitting at the breakfast table on July 12, 1984 outside L.A. and was so shocked at the news – Mondale choosing a woman as his vice presidential candidate! - that instead of the scrambled eggs going in my mouth, they ended up on the ceiling.)

It was just as shocking to hear the newsman Tuesday evening – the Obama bill would expand the use of HSAs – WHAT? In the current legislation, my treasured HSA would absolutely not be allowed – that’s doing a 180!

Well, though Ms. Ferraro was a liberal to the left of the moon, she was most certainly a woman. That I could verify.

Verifying Obama proposals and doublespeak? – now that’s another story.

Obama’s letter to Congressional leaders magnanimously offers to include a baby-step toward consumer-driven plans, consumer-driven health care savings!

I know many Republicans believe that HSAs, when used in conjunction with high-deductible health plans, are a good vehicle to encourage more cost-consciousness in consumers’ use of health care services. I believe that high-deductible health plans could be offered in the exchange under my proposal.

In the federally regulated exchanges? How about in employers’ plans? Public employee plans? Tsk, tsk. Of all plans that need it (see Mitch Daniel’s “HSAs – An Indiana experiment that is reducing costs for the state and its employees”), they surely do. Any requirements (or even just plain old incentives?) from Pres. Obama in that regard?

So then I’m into this letter and have to keep reading. And Obama gets snarky. Dang it.

There are provisions that were added to the legislation that shouldn’t have been. That’s why my proposal does not include the Medicare Advantage provision, mentioned by Senator McCain at the meeting, which provided transitional extra benefits for Florida and other states.

That’s the “we’re-not-campaigning-any-more-John” Obama. If he weren’t the President of the United States, I’d say “what a jerk.”

I don’t trust the guy – or the Congress. I’d say Obama’s four proposals are carefully crafted to reel out the line just enough to give another jerk. And just enough for just enough voters to think Obama’s a hero. Geeez.

Even Senator Snowe’s not impressed. Now that’s saying something.

Senator Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine, said she was not impressed by the concessions Mr. Obama offered in his letter. “It’s always welcome, inserting Republican ideas,” Ms. Snowe said. “But it does not ameliorate other issues. The basic legislation is not going to change. That continues to be troubling.”

And while I’m at it, here’s Senator Grassley cutting to the chase on magnanimous proposal #3 – “exploring” increasing doctor reimbursement for Medicaid:

The bills passed by the House and the Senate would expand Medicaid to cover some 15 million people who are now uninsured. But in most states, payment rates are so low that many doctors do not accept Medicaid patients, a point that Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, raised at the forum on Thursday.

“There’s no question Medicaid won’t be able to provide adequate access,” Mr. Grassley said in response to Mr. Obama’s letter. “It’s good if the White House has figured that out.”

Higher Medicaid payment rates could substantially raise the cost of the bill, even as Democratic leaders try to hold down the price tag to secure the support of fiscal conservatives in their own party.

Higher costs for the bill. Imagine that. Plenty of big payoff spending is sure to come. Can’t wait.

Jo Egelhoff, FoxPolitics.net

COMMENTS

The cost of health care in the US is so much higher than in other countries mostly because of factors having nothing to do with individual choice. HSAs can for a while, encourage better consumer behavior (like the use of generic drugs). However the real cost factors such as fee for service, 30% administrative costs, hospital overcapacity, lack of preventive care etc. are much bigger and much more difficult to get at. Just try to find out what a procedure (my favorite is colonoscopy) costs after all the services and insurance company negotiated rate. It's at least a half a day process even if you know what you're trying to find out. Steve Kagen has continuously introduced legislation to force total cost clarity, but sadly it has not been adopted. HSAs will only make a relatively small permanent change in the overall cost expenditures. It's easy to get a generic drug but once you do that what's next? Negotiating your cost for a heart attack or liver transplant? People on HSAs often avoid getting care they should get because they can't afford the deductible. The Indiana plan makes steps in the right direction by funding the accounts. But overall stop blaming the consumer. The SYSTEM is the big problem.

dave allen (Wed Mar 03 06:42:05 2010)

"The SYSTEM is the big problem."

Yep - we finally agree. Now why you think ADDING a layer of government researchers, regulations, and reviewers to the process will make it more efficient or cost effective is the part that stumps me.

Please name ONE instance where our Federal Government has improved a private sector by way of efficiency or for that matter, when the government has ever been able to save "us" any money on anything.

That's where the discussion starts. The plain and simple fact (as it always has been), the more chefs you have in the kitchen, the more people you have to pay at the end of the week. And the soup doesn't necessarily get any better because you have three more culinary giants all trying to season it "their way".

Want to cut costs? Streamline the money flow!

Jeff Riedl (Wed Mar 03 08:56:45 2010)

Jeff,
I think you and I and most sane Americans know that the multiple layers in our health care system do nothing to help the system be efficient, quite the opposite. That is why I think it should be stripped down and made transparent and fair. It takes government to do that. Yes, the same government that sets standards for highways, auto safety and the like. Most business people (including me) want a clear set of rules to play by and are usually quite happy to compete as long as it is a level playing field. Health Care is quite the opposite, not because of government rules that are rational but because Government has had to make some rules to patch an irrational system so the rules themselves seem irrational. Strip it down to the basics and you will see real competition. Only government can force fundamental changes here.

dave allen (Wed Mar 03 10:11:56 2010)

Dave,

Too many layers, yes - but less layers can only be achieved by subtraction ... not by adding government.

Doctor bills patient, patient pays doctor. That's the bare-bones least number of layers. Anything more than that is more, not less.

As for fair - life's not and we can't make it so. If you want fair, go to Seymour at the end of July ... that's as close as it gets.

Jeff Riedl (Wed Mar 03 12:00:27 2010)

Jeff,
Rules by subtraction? That would mean so many of the protections we all have would disappear. No, I don't want to be thrown to the wolves with my health care. I have an HSA type product and pay every day that I don't get sick and somehow get terminated from coverage or priced out of coverage. Fewer rules, basic rules yes, no rules? Never.
Tell me what rules you would eliminate that would have a fundamental impact on cost per procedure or consumption and preserve the protections the rule is intended to provide. Just one or two will do.

dave allen (Wed Mar 03 17:19:05 2010)

Dave, what rules are you talking about? If we did as Jeff says, we wouldn't have the problems we have! Rules don't prevent malpractice or poor medical care. If drs were paid as other professionals--i.e. plumbers, electricians, instead of going through middlemen, costs WOULD come down.

emily matthews (Wed Mar 03 20:21:59 2010)

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend