What would you like to see in the new healthcare legislation?

Be specific. I would like to see: no dropping of policy-holders with preexisting conditions, no dropping of sick people, an information and policy exchange, subsidies for those who can't afford insurance or don't have employer coverage, and a reversal of tort so that companies and doctors can be sued for even more. What do you think?What would you like to see in the new healthcare legislation?
The destruction of the private industry and the implementation of a single-payer system.
It is a pretty word; the private industry, particularly the for-profit private industry, deprives people of health care when they need it most, yet it takes far more out of our economy and a bigger bite of our GNP than do superior, UNIVERSAL health-care systems in other countries.

Report Abuse

What would you like to see in the new healthcare legislation?
For liberals to get off their butts and work for it.
Not really, I don't really care for a bill that is 2000 pages and still vague. When you have lawyers and lobbyist writing bills, I have a feeling I am getting screwed.What would you like to see in the new healthcare legislation?
trial lawyers who sue doctors without collecting any fees

insurance companies who can do buisness an any state

discounts for people who pay cash for treatment

and the government to stay out of the private sector totally
"I would like to see: no dropping of policy-holders with preexisting conditions, no dropping of sick people, an information and policy exchange, subsidies for those who can't afford insurance or don't have employer coverage, and a reversal of tort so that companies and doctors can be sued for even more. What do you think?"



What do I think? If you want all that, then start your own insurance company. See how fast it takes for you to go out of business under those conditions. Insurance companies are private property, and neither you or the government has the right to dictate the terms of the conditions of their contracts with their customers.



I want tort reform, insurance companies allowed to sell across state lines.
Following is a quote; the source follows:



". . . government [already] pays most health costs - even in the United States. Indeed, public funding for health care in the United States exceeds total health spending in Canada on a per capita basis. It鈥檚 an odd market that relies largely on public funds.



Privatization results in a large net loss to society in terms of higher costs and lower quality, but some stand to gain. Privatization creates vast opportunities for powerful firms, and also redistributes income among health workers. Pay scales are relatively flat in government and not-for-profit health institutions; pay differences between the CEO and a housekeeper are perhaps 20:1. In US corporations, a ratio of 180:1 is average. In effect, privatization takes money from the pockets of low-wage, mostly female health workers and gives it to investors and highly paid managers.



Behind false claims of efficiency lies a much uglier truth. Investor-owned care embodies a new value system that severs the community roots and Samaritan traditions of hospitals, makes physicians and nurses into instruments of investors, and views patients as commodities. Investor ownership marks the triumph of greed."





Answering your question, the first priority has to be elimination of for-profit health care. The second has to be a system that makes payments and reimbursements based on outcomes, not procedures. In my opinion, a single-payer system best fits the bill, but there are options, like the highly-rated French system and the employment-based German system.
the public option - without it, we got nothing but another give-away to the billionaires.
Specifically at this point, I just want to see it pass. Everything you say is true.
A bit more freedom of choice . I do not think medical ins should be mandatory . but I do agree with a Public Option.