Health care for all

I don’t understand why people seem to be scared of a public option insurance plan. The way I understand it, if you like your own insurance — great, keep it.

If you don’t have that option, which millions of people don’t, then you at least can purchase an affordable plan. For those afraid of having to wait for services, we do that right now.

We wait to see our primary doctor, who tries to solve the health issue and then has us call a specialist to get an appointment. That usually takes several months.

If you have your own insurance from your work, nothing will change. I know I would at least look into a public option if we had one because of the financial burden private insurance, and it keeps getting worse every year.

My employer pays the majority of my plan, and the expense for me is still out of this world. Let’s give the public option a try.

Teri Weiter

Raytown


In response to Dean Kelley (7/2, Letters) I would like to add a few things. Kelley points out that he was charged $405 for medical procedures, of which the contractual write off was $273.

 This has been going on for years. Hospitals, doctors and dentists supposedly have contracts with insurance companies to charge only a set amount. I believe insurance companies renegotiate these contracts every year, just as they do with the employer buying insurance for their employees.

There are so many insurance companies and so many policies it takes a group of employees to process, and they can’t tell you what your share is until it has been processed, unless you have a flat co-pay.

Two questions: When we hear figures of how much our health care costs, are these the amounts the doctor charges or the contractual amounts that the insurance company agrees to allow the doctor to charge? I would bet it is what the doctor charges.

Also, how much would be saved if we alleviated the contracts, therefore not having to pay the extra costs of dealing with the paperwork? I would bet that $405 charge could be reduced by 30 percent.

The bad thing is nobody seems to be taking this problem into account.

Jennie Sindak

Overland Park

Comments

[JoCo]

KeeWee KeeWee KeeWee,

Trying your triplicate system.
Ol' hit-and-run. Jumps in to attack, offers little new, then escapes to the next amBush.

[JoCo]

So, NMMNG, what, then, is your problem with Medicaid? EVERYBODY is the same when it comes to end-of-life palliative care. You, me, everyone has that need. You KNOW you have to be poverty-stricken to get that "freebie" legitimately and it's the players that are able to deceive and abuse it.

IMO, if ALL public care was like Medicaid and you had to almost completely divest yourself, there'd be no run for the freebies.

And I know you kid, but $12/hour docs puts you at $5/hr.

[JoCo]

KeeWee,

If it's OK with you, PLEASE call it "musing" out loud. I promise my lips are not moving and the keytaps make very little noise so as to disturb you any more.

[JoCo]

Marctnts,

If you are OK with me talking (to myself),

If your figures are right, and I have no reason to doubt them, the insurance industry is responsible for 14% of each rising dollar with 3% of that to profit. Doesn't that imply, then, that insurers have built their undeniable wealth on volume on the one hand and denial of payment on the other? I don't know the history, just asking.

And if 14% is to insurance, what IS the other 86% that needs to be examined?

These are such tough Q's. I don't have any definitive answers. The muddle that exists may prevent any, and might result in a "no change" outcome anyway.

[JoCo]

Yep, KeeWee the twitwit has assigned me a new 'un.

Sorry he approppriated a part of your handle.

I mean "sorrily". Sorry!

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

How's about limiting physicians to making $12 an hour, that would keep costs down.
Never mind that "fre" healthcare is going to have the affect free anything generally does, over suage and consumption.
Funny how peopole tend to conserve more or be more prudent when they have to pay for something versus it being a free for all.
How sick is everyone anyway? So everyone is ill and needs to use millions of dollars in health insurance. Everyone has diferent needs and everyone shold have to pay different rates based the risk and their usage.

[Marctnts]

"The way I understand it, if you like your own insurance — great, keep it."

"If you have your own insurance from your work, nothing will change."

Not quite, because everyone will have to pay for a new public option, whether or not they use it. Current proposals include taxing your employee-provided benefits, creating a new "surcharge tax" for those households making over $150K a year, and charging a penalty fee for those who choose not to participate in a private OR public plan. I guess there's an argument that those of us with insurance already pay for those without through increased costs to subsidize uninsured ER visits, etc., but from what I've read, the cost of a new public plan will more than offset any savings achieved through a higher rate of insured people.

I tend to think the argument is misplaced. Health care costs are exploding, only $0.14 per dollar of which is due to insurance costs (and of that, only $0.03 is due to insurance profit). It seems that arguing over who pays these costs (since WE end up paying them either way) should take a back seat to a REAL discussion about the causes of and solutions to the rising care costs that are the root of the issue.

[JUNGLEJACK]

... Jo Jack?

[Kee]

Jo Jack is talking to himself again.....

[JoCo]

Speculation that the "fee before writeoff" might be reduced 30% might presume a "cooperation" between providers and insurers to lower charges they have worked together to standardize. Without any judgment and a nod to physicians who have studied and worked long to be the best (I owe my life to a handful)that may not be the path followed or ,colloquially, "of least resistance".

[JoCo]

Public/private options, redundant or needless administration and costs, all of these things have been taken into account to death. Wait a minute, BAD phrasing.