Nurses General Nursing
Published Dec 9, 2006
h.r.6420 title: to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to impose an excise tax on certain medical care providers that fail to provide a minimum level of charity medical care, and for other purposes. sponsor: rep thomas, william m. [ca-22] (introduced 12/8/2006) cosponsors (none) latest major action: 12/8/2006 referred to house committee. status: referred to the house committee on ways and means.
title: to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to impose an excise tax on certain medical care providers that fail to provide a minimum level of charity medical care, and for other purposes.
sponsor: rep thomas, william m. [ca-22] (introduced 12/8/2006) cosponsors (none)
latest major action: 12/8/2006 referred to house committee. status: referred to the house committee on ways and means.
search results - thomas (library of congress)::
the text of the bill has not been published yet, but this looks like one more step towards universal health care. what do you think?
Multicollinearity, BSN, RN
3,119 Posts
My father had always been against universal health care. That is until I broke my ankle and racked up a 40,000+ medical bill. I was had just graduated nursing school so had no insurance/job yet. I was already kicked out of my parent's insurance. I did not qualify for IL medicaid bc I did not have children.After that, my father has been *somewhat* more open minded about universal health care. I think that those who have had insurance their whole lives, have not lost their jobs, or have been critically ill, or basically have never experienced the terrors of having no health care, can more easily say they are against universal health care.But once you are in that situation you may become more sympathetic to the millions out there who do not have adequate or any health care coverage.
After that, my father has been *somewhat* more open minded about universal health care.
I think that those who have had insurance their whole lives, have not lost their jobs, or have been critically ill, or basically have never experienced the terrors of having no health care, can more easily say they are against universal health care.
But once you are in that situation you may become more sympathetic to the millions out there who do not have adequate or any health care coverage.
So true. I have a friend who has always ranted against government...pull yourself up by your bootstraps, etc. Then he was laid off from his job. He was offered COBRA coverage for his family, but it was $1400 per month. That figure is not unusual BTW. He couldn't afford the COBRA coverage. He tried to get an individual policy on his own but couldn't qualify because his wife was on antidepressants, kids have asthma, etc. Two months after being laid off and without coverage, his wife developed a MRSA infection and went into the hospital. 40k later in medical bills, suddenly he doesn't rant about how bad government is and pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. He told me recently that he still listens to Rush Limbaugh but he can't listen to Rush when he starts ranting about "socialized medicine." I don't think anyone really understands the issue until it's affected you or a loved one in a personal way.
pickledpepperRN
4,491 Posts
I cannot, for the life of me, understand the objections to "universal" health care. What could possibly be wrong with having basic health care for EVERYONE?? The use of ERs for non-emergent conditions would virtually cease; people could see their doctors BEFORE they become so ill that expensive treatments and surgeries are necessary; and there would be no 'uninsured' patients whose care costs all of us so dearly.Best of all, getting the multi-billion-dollar insurance industry OUT of the picture would eliminate enormous amounts of overhead........do you have any idea what their CEOs earn in a year, that could instead go toward actual health care? And what healthcare professional wouldn't like to see the reams of paperwork and the utter confusion of our patchwork 'system' reduced or eliminated entirely?Finding the cash for universal healthcare is relatively easy: All the money that government, business, and private individuals now pay to health insurance companies could instead go into a larger pool of funds that would give every American citizen access to basic health services. Yes, it does amount to rationing, but what could be worse than the rationing we already have in this country by denying millions of people medical care because of health problems and/or lack of money? And I would not oppose allowing those with the resources to pay for additional services to do so on a fee-for-service basis; only the most necessary services, such as physical exams, immunizations, maternity care, medications and surgeries would be covered. (If you want Viagra or Botox, you're on your own.)I would also advocate for health services to be administered at the state, rather than federal level, by entities made up of healthcare professionals, financial planners, and educated laypersons. All 50 states would be required by the federal government to have a universal health system, but they would manage it according to the specific needs of their populations; for example, the health needs of rural Alaskans differ considerably from those of urban New Yorkers. Also, the emphasis should be on preventive care and education, which would save billions of dollars over the next several generations as serious illnesses related to obesity, smoking, STIs and other major health concerns would be reduced.That's my take on things, anyway.........There is absolutely no excuse for a supposedly 'moral' nation such as ours not to have basic health care for all its citizens. We are the world's only remaining superpower, yet some 40 million American men, women, and children lack access to medical care. And please don't give me that old argument about "socialized medicine".........this is nothing more than the fear of certain political factions that someone, somewhere, might receive a service for which they didn't have to pay through the nose.Universal health care is not socialized medicine---it's CIVILIZED medicine. And that's all I have to say about THAT.
Best of all, getting the multi-billion-dollar insurance industry OUT of the picture would eliminate enormous amounts of overhead........do you have any idea what their CEOs earn in a year, that could instead go toward actual health care? And what healthcare professional wouldn't like to see the reams of paperwork and the utter confusion of our patchwork 'system' reduced or eliminated entirely?
Finding the cash for universal healthcare is relatively easy: All the money that government, business, and private individuals now pay to health insurance companies could instead go into a larger pool of funds that would give every American citizen access to basic health services. Yes, it does amount to rationing, but what could be worse than the rationing we already have in this country by denying millions of people medical care because of health problems and/or lack of money? And I would not oppose allowing those with the resources to pay for additional services to do so on a fee-for-service basis; only the most necessary services, such as physical exams, immunizations, maternity care, medications and surgeries would be covered. (If you want Viagra or Botox, you're on your own.)
I would also advocate for health services to be administered at the state, rather than federal level, by entities made up of healthcare professionals, financial planners, and educated laypersons. All 50 states would be required by the federal government to have a universal health system, but they would manage it according to the specific needs of their populations; for example, the health needs of rural Alaskans differ considerably from those of urban New Yorkers. Also, the emphasis should be on preventive care and education, which would save billions of dollars over the next several generations as serious illnesses related to obesity, smoking, STIs and other major health concerns would be reduced.
That's my take on things, anyway.........There is absolutely no excuse for a supposedly 'moral' nation such as ours not to have basic health care for all its citizens. We are the world's only remaining superpower, yet some 40 million American men, women, and children lack access to medical care. And please don't give me that old argument about "socialized medicine".........this is nothing more than the fear of certain political factions that someone, somewhere, might receive a service for which they didn't have to pay through the nose.
Universal health care is not socialized medicine---it's CIVILIZED medicine.
And that's all I have to say about THAT.
Do we want to promote the general welfare?
To be a civil society?
I do.
PANurseRN1
1,288 Posts
Why don't they just call it what it is? Universal is just a nice way to say "socialist" healthcare. I didn't realize we were now living in Russia. If you want to see what a bad idea socialist healthcare is, go look at Canada's system. People waiting months and months for urgent surgeries. Poor quality doctors, etc. Tha bottom line is - why should people who earn a paycheck have to pay for healthcare for the people who don't?
Tha bottom line is - why should people who earn a paycheck have to pay for healthcare for the people who don't?
Not only is that ridiculous and untrue, it's a slap in the face to our many fine Canadian members here.
Moderator, please...
blueyesue
566 Posts
I think that those who have had insurance their whole lives, have not lost their jobs, or have been critically ill, or basically have never experienced the terrors of having no health care, can more easily say they are against universal health care.But once you are in that situation you may become more sympathetic to the millions out there who do not have adequate or any health care coverage.
I used to be homeless. As an adult I only have had insurance for a few years because my husband works at a factory. I know what it is like to be without, I know what it is like to rely on the government, and I know what it is like to have health insurance.
Let me ask you this. Why do people all over the world come to America to get health procedures done? It is because we pay our doctors the best. We have the best healthcare in the world. That is a fact!
If we go universal healthcare the doctors and nurses will get paid a flat rate. Where is the incentive to be the best?
I wonder why some Americans are fixated on the idea that we are the BEST. I'd say we are very good at many things. But clearly, some other countries have better healthcare systems than we do. Some can't see that because they are looking thru the smoke of "we are the best." I'm not quite sure why some Americans are so arrogant as to deny that other countries do some things better.
sunnyjohn
2,450 Posts
Let me ask you this. Why do people all over the world come to America to get health procedures done? It is because we pay our doctors the best. We have the best healthcare in the world. That is a fact!If we go universal healthcare the doctors and nurses will get paid a flat rate. Where is the incentive to be the best?
I am a professional. When I graduate I expect to be paid and treated as a professional. Still, I've became "the best" at many things in life that had no monetary value. The incentive was in the doing.
As a proud American with roots outside the US, I often wonder, "Are we truly the best or the BEST KNOWN?"
It is possible that with single payer the actual providers of care, physicians, nurses, and others will be paid more. Now it is the unproductive "middle man" who makes the most money.
And each state (or federal government) can negotiate medication prices lik4e the VA does.
We would still have to be vigilent to catch curruption.
There is always a crook where money is involved.
Universal healthcare eliminates the right of privacy between doctors and patients as governments demand power to oversee the healthcare of its citizens. Plus, governments such as Canada, have outlawed medical care if the service is paid for by private individual funds. Something just isn't right about that.
WHO report article:
BBC News | HEALTH | French health care 'best in world'
Simplepleasures
1,355 Posts
rach_nc_03
372 Posts
:yeahthat:
