John Thune on the GOP Option for Health Care reform

John Thune presented a well reasoned expression of one way to take care of the reforms needed in the health care industry. This is not new. So, my question is this. President Obama at the time of his speech shown just before Thune’s appearance said the opposition does not have a plan. It does not have a solution. Did President Obama lie? If he was aware of this, then the answer is yes.
There are market solutions better able to work through the mess we have. The Democrats who support the monstrosity they call a plan say the public option would offer competition to the insurance companies. I heard there are over 1000 insurance companies in this country. Just doing as Kudlow suggested allowing insurance companies to compete across the borders of the states would offer more competition than the public option would. It is nice to see a reasonable discussion. I think most normal people seeing this would say hell yeah.
President Obama has already admitted the number of uninsured is closer to 30 million than 46 million he has quoted in the past, meaning he was perhaps exaggerating the number? When we look at the 30 million a little closer, we find about 1/3 to 1/2 are already eligible but not signed up for a program. Then we have people who can afford health insurance but choose not to. This brings us to about 8-12 million people. Let us do something to solve the problem for the few instead of adding more problems for everyone. Perhaps some of the unspent stimulus money could be used?

Good job John. Can’t wait to hear TJ and Stephanie on tv…. oh, I can’t remember my life expectancy… I might not have enough time to wait…..

So Thune is advocating federalizing health care disregarding state’s rights.

As it stands now, each state has its own laws regulating health care insurance but he wants to ignore those and give that regulation over to the Federal Government. Interesting.

That’s similar to Thune’s concealed weapons amendment which would also disregard state’s rights to regulate gun control as they see fit.

Mr. Thune certainly seems to disdain state’s rights and embrace handing over more power to the feds.

Randall-
Your talking about a 1 payer system. The governmant option would walk over states rights as well. Take a step back and switch from kool-aide to H20. Do you just right away go after Thune because he is a conservative?

He’s mixing the kool-aide with Redbull.

Randall:I’m not so sure Thune is advocating federal regulation to replace state regulation. He may just be saying a company licensed in neocontopia (legislature, governor and regulatory agencies wholly owned subsidiaries of the insurance industry) can sell nationwide–buyer beware. Can you think of any states that might be susceptible to such manipulation (see usury laws)?

I can’t wait to buy my budget policy with the fine print explaining it will pay to remove a wart from my toe so long as my toe isn’t pre-existing. Of course I wouldn’t have the policy for long because it would be rescinded as soon as they discovered I neglected to mention having toes when I applied.

Foot:
Here is the problem with your reasoning, if it can be called that. If Insurance Company A has that kind of restrictions, it will not be long and word will get out. Insurance Company B comes in and offers the coverage you want in an ethical manner and soon takes in all of the business. That is what competition does. It forces the fly-by-night companies to provide a good service or leave the business. And by the way, if you are buying a policy to remove a wart from you toe, you are really missing the point of health insurance.

So duggersd, you really need to build a shrine to Ayn Rand as you’ve substituted her ideology for both reason and ability to grasp reality.

Competition certainly has its place, but it doesn’t seem to work very well in this instance. There is nothing stopping insurance companies from operating in more than one state and in fact they do. But states do have the right to regulate what can be sold within their borders. So company A is operating in a given state. All companies B, C, D and E need do to operate there too is abide by the state’s regulations, but that is seldom happening. In South Dakota, two companies share over 70% of the market. A similar situation exists in something like 94% of markets nationwide. It seems the insurance companies find dividing the country up between themselves is more profitable than competing. And the big companies are using those profits to buy up smaller ones thus getting rid of what little competition there is.

So if you decide to build that shrine, I’d advise doing it on a limited budget because you may well need some extra cash to pay next year’s inflated health insurance premium. Or are you lucky enough to be in some government sponsored program like Medicare that insulates you from that problem?

Didn’t I hear in the Obama Clip “you heard all the LIES”, and his statements that “they” don’t have a plan. Senator Thune then explained succinctly all the plans, offerings, and suggestions of the Republican Senate Leadership to reform health care, and they’ve all been left on the “cutting room floor”…by the Obamacrats in control. So who is lying to whom? There is NO “bipartisan” approach to anything in D.C. Thank you Sen. Thune for telling us exactly what the Obama game plan would be when he addressed the joint session. It came across just as you predicted.

Mr. Foot, I really do not see why you are bringing Ayn Rand into the discussion. Actually, I am a follower of Adam Smith. Maybe you heard of him and his book A Wealth of Nations. I would say Rand is more of a follower of him. My shrine would be to Adam Smith and his invisible hand. It is obvious you are more of a follower of Marx and Engels.
I do not know if you noticed, but you have already lost the states’ rights argument. If we institute the plan that is being foisted upon us by the Democrats and President Obama, there is either a public option or a coop that is really a public option. Are the states allowed to opt out? One thing the plan offers is an exchange. As I understand it, someone from SD could buy insurance from another state. In any case, the states’ right to regulate the insurance is flushed.
Some years ago, our state made some requirements that several insurance companies refused to accept. I believe it was auto insurance. What happened is several insurance companies left our state and left us with fewer choices. I wound up paying more.
I have noticed you cannot refute my statement of the real number of uninsured people. Do we really want to destroy a whole industry for 5% of the people? The only people who should be in favor of this are people who make so much they don’t care and the people who are wanting someone else to pay for their insurance. Which one are you?
Foot, tell me, is health insurance a right or a responsibility? How about food? How about a car? How about clothing? How about a house?

I’m with Sam Hurst on this one. Health is a fundamental human right. Period.
http://decorumforum.blogspot.com/2009/09/sam-hurst-delivers-definitive-health.html

I’ll see your Sam Hurst who I never heard of and raise you Leonard Peikoff, Ph.D. However you said health is a fundamental human right. I suppose that is true, but health care is not. Even having said that, we do offer anybody health care. If you are super ill and go to a hospital, they have to treat you. So the next question is whether health insurance is a human right. Again, it is not. Taking care of your health concerns is your responsibility. Period.

Excellent Druggersd.