healthcare malpractice reform and buying plans across state lines??? Need input

[francolettieri]

Every in this forum knows about republican's plans to defeat current healthcare reform in favor of their plan of simply malpractice reform and enabling people buying plans across state lines. My question is, how well would their plan work?? I simply don't know enough to know. Also, if their ideas are good (despite the fact that republicans are simple thinking and don't give a shit they can sometimes come up with good ideas) why can't it be included among the democrats reform bill? Maybe merging the two bills together would have beneficial results???? Overall, I am SOOOOOO SICK of democrats failure to point out the obvious...HOW CAN REPUBLICANS CLAIM TO HAVE THE ANSWER TO HEALTHCARE REFORM.....IF...THEY FAILED TO INITIATE IT WHEN THEY HAD THE CHANCE (1994-2006!!!!!) Something so Obvious that is rarely mentioned. God Forbid if the senate or house buildings caught on fire, I wonder if Democrats would notice that also!!!

[Warpy]

1. First, all health insurance corporations would move their

corporate mail drops to the least regulated state. That means your state could no longer regulate any insurance plan, removing an important potential safeguard. That means no health plan could be forced by any state to treat its subscribers fairly. It gives them carte blanche to be totally out of control and nakedly rob us all.

Tort reform is just a way to save insurance companies more money and in the absence of real health insurance reform with universal coverage, it's a cruel travesty. The few large awards that survive the appeals process generally go to a lifetime of medical care needed as a result of the malpractice. The savings to the health care system have been estimated at less than 1%.

Republicans will always protect the corporation to the disadvantage of living, breathing human beings.

If they like something, you pretty much know it's bad for you

[elehhhhna]

2. Very well put. K&R

You covered it really well! Thanks!

[tosh]

4. Providers, too, would be screwed by INSCOs if state regulators

are taken out of the equation without being replaced by serious regs at the federal level.

[Warpy]

6. They would.

At some point, I can see a wholesale revolution, with providers accepting fee for service, Medicare, Medicaid, and that's it.

They're already being squeezed to death by those bloodsuckers. They can't manage much more.

[surrealAmerican]

8. That covers it.

They have two planks in their platform: one of which would be ineffectual, the other harmful.

[BlueIdaho]

3. Part of me says lets pass the republican plan now.

Its such a monumentally catastrophic idea that their party would be totally and utterly destroyed in just a few years.

Except for all the pain and suffering of the country its a totally cool idea.

edit=typo

[sharesunited]

5. True federalization of insurance regulation would be the right way to do that.

As well as federal licensing of physicians and other health care providers.

The Bush economic crash has brought health care finance reform to a head because so many people have lost their employer sponsored coverage. Republicans were never forced to deal with the problem with the same urgency from voters who have had the rug pulled out from under them.

I am not clear on why the Republicans keep repeating the mantra that health care finance reform is "job killing." The Bush crash has already laid waste to employment. It is now a multi-generational opportunity to build a fresh framework out the smoldering ruins.

Tort reform should be embraced as a part of the new order, by anyone serious about sensible progress in the area of standardizing risks and costs.

[dorktv]

7. Tort deform would save $54 billion over ten years.

So not much compared to the fact that 90,000 people die a year because of preventable medical errors.