Comments on: A healthcare plan to save Obama’s presidency Politics and policy from inside Washington Tue, 14 Oct 2014 12:57:43 +0000 hourly 1 By: tubalreversal Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:05:11 +0000 Tubal reversal is process through which women can go for the option of re-pregnancy. As we know that Every woman has right to dream of having a baby. Tubal reversal allows a woman the ability to conceive naturally without any harm. Although tubal ligation is considered a permanent method of birth control,

By: LS Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:16:37 +0000 you said it “jacksmith.” it is impossible for right-wing radicals (who, I stress, do not represent the average conservative) to argue the numbers; these figures represent something similar to truth carved in stone. The people of this country want and need health care reform—let us have it! This is a democracy, isn’t it? The majority of Americans want health care reform, don’t they? As a free country, then, our government is obligated to change our health service. Thank you, jacksmith, for a great post, and God bless the United States of America!

By: Concerned Taxpayer Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:59:18 +0000 Many mainstream publications have reported online
that the USA Private Insurance Companies Hospitals
etc.. waste something like 1.2 trillion dollars per year.

If covering everyone with quality insurance is estimated
to cost 150Billion per year, then if I do my math
right, then you would have a surplus of over 1 trillion
dollars per year if you cut out the waste, fraud
and bureacracy and enough to give everyone a tax
rebate check every year or lower taxes.

By: Mike Sun, 23 Aug 2009 23:29:45 +0000 First let me say, that I’m for Single payer health care for many of the reasons mentioned above. But in reading the last two comments I see a problem in their logic.

Philip, you made the comment “I DON’T WANT, OR WOULD I EVER CHOOSE, GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTH CARE”, what do you think the VA is?! Duh! I’m a Vietnam Vet and use the VA, it works but slowly, 3 years ago I was diagnosed with Melamona and was recieving treatment through my wife’s insurance (it’s in remission), she lost her job and we were turned down by 5 insurance companies, my wife finally got insurance for herself. Thank God for the VA (a government Run Health Care System).

And for our Anesthesiologist, I’ve been an OR Nurse for 15 years, and I agree that your job takes brains, but let’s get serious. Once you put someone under, your off reading a paper, magazine, emailing on your Iphone, calling your wife, talking with another Anesthesiologist about your planned 3 week trip to the Bahamas. I couldn’t count how many times I’ve been asked to get you another cup of coffee, or run to the nurses lounge and get you another donut. Your suppose to tract Vital Signs every 15 minutes throughout the surgery, but how many times have you just filled in the blanks at the end of the case? I have been associated with hundreds of Anesthesiologists, and I only know a few that track vital signs every 15 minutes. Your job isn’t that tough, just ask other doctors.

I’m not picking on either of the above people or their logic, it works for them. That’s the problem. They’re worried about themselves, if we could get a Single Payer System I would be happy to give up more of my paycheck.

By: Philip Clock Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:15:49 +0000 TWO MORE THINGS:
1) ALLOW INSURANCE COMPANIES TO COMPETE NATIONWIDE. Each state can allow only a select few insurance companies to offer policies, the rest cannot, based upon a federal law. REPEAL THE RESTRICTIVE FEDERAL LAW;
2) TORT REFORM. Put a ceiling on most lawsuits, and stop unnecessary “preventive care” treatments ordered only to defer expensive lawsuits.
3) CATASTROPHIC CARE INSURANCE WITH BIG DEDUCTIBLE. Subsidize the deductible in medical savings accounts as necessary (employers, poverty line), allow unspent account money to roll over, guess what, COSTS COME DOWN!

Open up the health care market, let me spend my own health care money, I GUARANTEE that I’ll shop around for the best deal! And given an open market I DON’T WANT, OR WOULD I EVER CHOOSE, GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTH CARE. I was in the Navy, no thanks! It’s NOT an open market, so I use VA for my catastrophic care.

IT’S COMMON SENSE, check out JOHN MACKEY, WHOLE FOODS CEO’S “ALTERNATIVE TO OBAMACARE” for an in depth view. 052970204251404574342170072865070.html

By: Greg Sat, 22 Aug 2009 00:20:22 +0000 Democrat voters have been brainwashed by Obama into thinking that this is a health insurance problem. It’s not. It’s a malpractice insurance problem. Doctors buy insurance to guard against disasters, namely being targeted by a sleazy malpractice lawyer. Obama is a lawyer and trial lawyers who control the Democratic party have stifled all mention of tort reform. Without tort reform, ANY health care system in America will eventually collapse because there is a limitless supply of lawyers and lawyers-in-training and no cap on malpractice damages. Unlike every other civilized country, the plaintiff in the U.S.A. doesn’t have to pay if he or she loses, so lawyers go on fishing expeditions to see how much money they can extort from doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies. If we had a single payer system, it may save 30% in efficiency, but then lawyers can increase the number and size of malpractice lawsuits by 100% because they know the single payer is the Democrat controlled Congress, which will barely put up a fight to stop their biggest benefactors from milking the health care system for all it’s worth. After all, the so-called “rich” can pay for health care, health insurance, and extortion by Democrat lawyers. Until we run out of “rich” Americans.

By: Sonja Sat, 22 Aug 2009 00:14:36 +0000 Expect a two-tier medical system and needless ER deaths if Congress and the White House have their way as Viewed by Anesthesia.

Anesthesiology is a critical care specialty in which patient safety depends on maintaining the quality of care givers. It is a mentally and physically grueling specialty that demands perfection each and every time. If you want your patients to be at ease, you also have to do it in a seemingly effortless manner. From outside the profession, it is easy to be fooled by allusions to the anesthesiologist/patient relationship as merely provider and customer. That is simply not what goes through the minds of a quality anesthesiologist in a healthy practice environment. A good anesthesiologist focuses their entire attention on the patient’s medical condition and how to most safely and most comfortably convey you through the dangers of medical procedures. Professional satisfaction comes from knowing you gave superlative care AND that you feel fairly compensated. Both needs must be met to have sustainable quality.

In my practice, we isolate the individual payment issues from the point of care. If you come into the OR or go into labor, we take care of you. We don’t have to think about payment. The billing office takes care of that separately. We take care of you, the person. It does not matter if you are privately insured, on medicare, medicaid, or indigent. You are treated the same way. Concerns about getting paid would be a dangerous distraction. We learn your medical issues, formulate safe anesthetic strategies, tell you about your choices, agree upon a path, compassionately reassure you, and nimbly conduct you through a minefield of dangers during a highly compressed time span. You really should not be worrying about other things. When we do our job right, you never realize how much effort and skill is being brought to your benefit.

I can focus on taking care of you because I do not PRESENTLY have to worry about whether or not you can pay. I know that on average I can afford to take care of each person. It does not matter if you are rich, famous, well insured, on medicare, on medicaid, or indigent. I treat you the same way. We do quite a bit of care at reduced rate or no pay. That is part of being a physician. I am able to do so because I know I’ll be okay at the end of the month.

The present health care reform plan would gravely injure the anesthesia specialty because it threatens to move reimbursements far down to the less than market value medicare rates. The private insurance carriers would be naturally tempted to push their reimbursements down the the unsustainable government levels. I can afford to take care of medicare and indigent patients because other patient with normal reimbursement rates help make up the difference. Push everything down too far and the specialty becomes untenable. In Washington state we already have difficulty attracting anesthesiologists because our state has even lower than usual medicare reimbursement rates. Further, anesthesiology had its medicare rates erroneously set too low years ago. This error was scheduled to be corrected, but the present reform efforts would lock in that computation error permanently.

We cannot keep good people in anesthesiology if health care reform threatens to cut reimbursement down to medicare rates. The truly gifted won’t stay in the field nor will they enter it. We already had this demonstrated about ten years ago after a downturn in the anesthesia job market. Medical students diverted into other specialities and the candidate pool shrank. Those who would not normally have been trained as anesthesiologists were accepted into training. When it became time for those to graduate, we were quietly warned that class of residents was not recommendable for hiring. Anesthesiology requires top quality people to maintain patient safety. You might recover and get a second chance if a mistake is made by someone in another profession, but in anesthesiology you really want it done right EVERY time.

My anesthesia group has been fortunate enough to select and retain only the best. Only when in actual practice do you really see that anesthesiologists are not all the same. They vary in skill, knowledge, effectiveness during emergencies, and degree of ethical conduct. As a patient, you want the best. Yes, a lesser, perhaps willing to work for cheaper, practitioner may be survivable 95% of the time, but during intraoperative emergencies, is that who you want safeguarding your loved ones? It is not always a clear disaster that shows the differences between a superior provider and a mediocre one. Things may simply have been less than optimal because of poor skill or planning. You were unconscious and never knew how close you came to calamity.

And please…. if you are a concerned reader who wants sustainable, quality anesthesia care, let your representatives know.

Anesthesiologist of WA State

By: jason Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:49:04 +0000 Do be a fool. Reps and Dems have been at the heart of the downfall of this country. Neither party represents the Republic we are guaranteed by our Constitution nor the responsibility it takes to be free.

By: Kyle Martin Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:36:47 +0000 In this reader’s opinion, the problem with the present debate is that its dialogue is largely political and moral in its vocabulary, whereas effective health care reform must be almost entirely economic in terms if it is to be successful. Most people do not wish to be concerned with the economics of reform, but rather wish to know that “the bad things and the bad people” will be done away with for good. The “bad things and people” in this economy would be everyone’s responsibility, because it has been our combined nation’s attitude to spending and finances that has created the problem. An attitude of centralized accountability in an increasingly interdependent world is futile at best. Therefore, stifling a free market of ideas in political rhetoric of personal and ideological attacks is not only ineffectual, it is downright ignorant. Of the three proposed bills in Congress, one of them, the Healthy Americans Act, is the most economically sound, and therefore should be the one we approve at present and for one simple reason: it is the only choice we can afford to make at the moment. A 1.6 trillion dollar plan will temporarily alleviate one economic problem at the cost of even greater one. What good if a government option that not even the government can afford? And who will they tax to pay for it when so many citizens are out of work? And, a single plan that provides limited options to the public is, in this reader’s opinion, wholly unsatisfactory, assuming that freedom of options is the same as freedom of choice. The question is not an ideological one, which is to say that it is a largely emotional one. The question is what can we afford to do now that will maximize our options in the future? A broad, sweeping campaign of legislation that achieves almost nothing in the long term is far worse than a relatively simple, economically sound solution that will improve the present. We should be doing the best with what he have right now, rather than reaching for the moon and hurting each others’ credibility out of frustration with the limits of our current reach. As an American citizen, I simply refuse to believe that everyone on the other side of isle is out to get me. Such an attitude of paranoia is at the heart of the debate right now, rather than the knowledge of how the system works. I applaud Mr. Pethokokuis for expressing a perspective that is based on fact, observation, logic, reason, and research, and have nothing but contempt for those who would ignore sound thinking because they do not feel that their supposed oppressors have been adequately punished. The only thing oppressing anyone here is the lack of a healthy bank account, therefore the solution that should be made is the one that makes the most dollars and cents, not the one that satisfies a perception of victimization.

By: shashaman Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:46:56 +0000 all this is B.S, republicans oppose almost everything, dem, why do people nowadays love Eviel people and things, repuplicans can actually brain wash almost every american. why?, all they wanna do is messup the country and start complining.