As it turns out, it was the elimination of funds for elective abortions from the healthcare bill that finally satisfied conservative Democrats in the house, and got the healthcare bill passed. The persons perhaps most responsible for eliminating the logjam and getting the bill passed were Catholic bishops, long proponents of universal health care and of course equally strong opponents of abortion being seen as a form of health care. It remains to be seen what happens in the Senate, but something may well happen this week.
Here is the story in the NY Times today. See what you think. As for me, I am with the bishops on both points. BW3
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/us/politics/09abortion.html?th&emc=th
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Were it the case that insurance companies were willing to reform themselves without government inducement or regulations, it would have already happened. But this is like asking the fox to guard the hen house. The insurance companies have had ample warnings and time to repent and do better when it comes to health care. Instead what we have seen is the ridiculous rise in the cost of health care and premiums due to a whole series of factors, not the least of which is pure greed. The less healthy America is, the more some people get rich off our misery. So, you will not find me having much sympathy for companies that cut off the elderly, cut off people with pre-existing conditions, refuse to insure some people and so on. All we are talking about, in any case at this point is a 'government option' at most. This is hardly the same thing as a government take over of all our health care, and it is dishonest to say that it is such a takeover. Go read the synopses on line of the two bills
BW3
I lived out of the country and experienced a government run system personally. It was fine if you did not get sick or at least not very sick. Otherwise there were long waits for procedures and long travel for some procedures. There were also severe restrictions on care due to limited funds. This included closing entire wings of the local hospital. In short, rationing was a continuing reality.
I'm not a fan of health insurance companies, but it is too narrow to make them the focus of health care problems. As long as the costs for care remain out of reach of most people we will have a problem. Shouldn’t we be just as concerned, perhaps more concerned, when providers cut off the elderly and others because they can’t pay their every increasing charges? Why are the insurance companies more to blame than the providers?
"it was the [temporary and utterly illusary] elimination of funds for elective abortions from the healthcare bill that finally satisfied [dishonest or easily duped] conservative Democrats in the house"
If you cut 100% of the profit out of the insurance companies, you'd reduce premiums by maybe 3%.
Taking an entire broken system and laying the blame at the feet of one bad actor is a recipe for disaster. We'll be looking for a new scapegoat in 5 years.
Micah
November 11, 2009 12:51 PM
If you cut 100% of the profit out of the insurance companies, you'd reduce premiums by maybe 3%.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I understand that -- and I forget where I heard it -- insurance companies are making very little profit.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.