Author Topic: CBS Confirms ObamaCare Would Oust People from Health Insurance and Doctor  (Read 1816 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
CBS Confirms ObamaCare Would Oust People from Health Insurance and Doctor
By Brent Baker (Bio | Archive)
June 23, 2009 - 23:56 ET 

CBS, of all news outlets, is setting a high standard for ABC to meet Wednesday in its broadcasts from the White House. On Tuesday night, just a week after a “Reality Check” on how President Obama's claim that his government-expansion health care plan won't hike the deficit doesn't match reality, the CBS Evening News aired a story on how his plan would likely force many to lose their current health insurance and/or doctor.

Katie Couric noted “72 percent of Americans say they favor a government plan that would compete with private insurers,” but “at the same time, nearly two-thirds are concerned that would reduce the quality of their own health care. And some experts believe they're right to be worried.”

Sharyl Attkisson featured the Cato Institute's Michael Cannon, who explained: “Employer premiums will go up and employers might respond by dropping coverage entirely. So if you're one of those unfortunate workers, then it will be a government policy that ousted you from your health plan.” Attkisson added: “And if you do choose a public plan, you may want to keep your favorite doctors, but they may not want to keep you. Under government health care, they could be paid 20 to 30 percent less.” Attkisson pointed out how “Obama also scoffed at claims that a public plan would put private insurers out of business,” but she countered: “The answer, say critics, is that the government has many tools to get an unfair advantage and undercut private companies.”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

(On ABC's World News, Jake Tapper highlighted how, in answering a press conference queston from Tapper, Obama had “backed off” the promise he made that people won't have to change plans, citing “the President conceding that companies may change their employees' health care plans because of circumstances the government creates.”)

My June 16 NewsBusters item, “CBS Airs 'Reality Check' on Obama's False Claim Health Plan 'Deficit Neutral,'” recounted:

Reality catches up with CBS News which on Tuesday night ran a “Reality Check” story on how a new CBO report shows President Obama's claim that his government-expansion health care plan won't hike the deficit doesn't match reality. So, will ABC News display similar skepticism when it broadcasts GMA and World News from the White House next Wednesday, culminating in a prime time hour, “Questions for the President: Prescription for America”? (ABC's Jake Tapper on Monday night briefly cited the CBO report, but ABC and NBC were silent on Tuesday evening.)

Fill-in CBS Evening News anchor Jeff Glor announced “there are growing concerns that President Obama lacks a realistic plan to pay for this sweeping reform.” Reporter Wyatt Andrews related “how the nation really pays for health reform just got a shocking wake-up call. The Congressional Budget Office, CBO, said Senator Ted Kennedy's health care proposal could cost one trillion dollars over ten years, and 36 million Americans would still be uninsured.” Andrews proceeded to note how Obama “claims he can achieve reform without raising the deficit,” but, he asserted, “the fact is, this means raising taxes.” Andrews also pointed out that Obama's “more than $600 billion worth of spending cuts” to Medicare and other programs don't comport with inevitable resistance from hospitals.

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the story on the Tuesday, June 23 CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: As Chip Reid reported earlier, the President put in a plug for health care reform during his news conference today. He wants it to include a public insurance plan, something Republicans are decrying in a new ad released today.

CLIP OF AD: Republicans also believe another government takeover would diminish health care choice and quality. President Obama-       

COURIC: Meanwhile, in a CBS News/New York Times poll, 72 percent of Americans say they favor a government plan that would compete with private insurers. But at the same time, nearly two-thirds [63%] are concerned that would reduce the quality of their own health care. And some experts believe they're right to be worried. Here's Sharyl Attkisson.

SHARYL ATTKISSON: Today the President again insisted that his health care reform won't force you to switch plans or doctors.

BARACK OBAMA: What I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.

ATTKISSON: That's technically correct, but what the President didn't say is that reform could lead your boss to change your health care plan. Here's how: 160 million people are insured through work. Their employer actually picks up most of the cost. Under the President's plan, Americans would be required to carry a certain level of coverage. That means many people would have to increase their insurance.

MICHAEL CANNON, CATO INSTITUTE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH POLICY STUDIES: Employer premiums will go up and employers might respond by dropping coverage entirely. So if you're one of those unfortunate workers, then it will be a government policy that ousted you from your health plan.

ATTKISSON: And if you do choose a public plan, you may want to keep your favorite doctors, but they may not want to keep you. Under government health care, they could be paid 20 to 30 percent less. Today Mr. Obama also scoffed at claims that a public plan would put private insurers out of business.

OBAMA: If private insurers say that the marketplace provides the best quality health care, if they tell us that they're offering a good deal, then why is it that the government – which they say can't run anything – suddenly is going to drive them out of business?

ATTKISSON: The answer, say critics, is that the government has many tools to get an unfair advantage and undercut private companies.

CANNON: The government can subsidize its plan with tax revenue from other taxpayers. The government can enact regulations that favor its plan over other private insurers.


ATTKISSON: In the end, the President argues it's riskier to do nothing because rising health care costs have put employers on the brink of raising premiums or dropping health insurance entirely. Sharyl Attkisson, CBS News, Washington.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center

________________________ ________________________ __________

Obama is going to hire Dr. Kevorkian type doctors to pay for his plan. 



BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Once the government gets involved in health care,its the end of the country.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Oh I agree Billy.  This and Cap & Trade will be the end.   The cost of goods is going to skyrocket while incomes go down due to higher taxes.

We will have a permanent 10 -15% UE rate, just like Europe.

Obama truly is the most diabolical president I have ever seen in my lifetime.   

 

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Once the government gets involved in health care,its the end of the country.

news flash - the govt is already involved in health care

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
news flash - the govt is already involved in health care

Bingo.  Thats why it is overly expensive, inneffcient, wasteful, and in need of major repair. 

Just like every other damn thing the govt gets involved in.   

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
The questions by CBS was good and brings up a good issue.

If a govt plan was available it is feasible that a company would drop it's health plan.

It's also possible that a company would still choose to keep it's plan as a perk to attract good employees.

It's also possible that the private sector health plans would be forced to be more competitive in order to survive and the whole question might be moot.

There are a lot of possible outcomes

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Bingo.  Thats why it is overly expensive, inneffcient, wasteful, and in need of major repair. 

Just like every other damn thing the govt gets involved in.   

which govt plan are you suggesting is overly expensive, inneficient.   

are you referring to Medicare?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
which govt plan are you suggesting is overly expensive, inneficient.   

are you referring to Medicare?

Yes.

Here is the problem, businesses will have no choice but to dump employees on the public plan. 

The public plan has an unfair advantage against private plans since the govt has the power to ttax and add regulations that no private company could ever adhere to.   

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
The questions by CBS was good and brings up a good issue.

If a govt plan was available it is feasible that a company would drop it's health plan.

It's also possible that a company would still choose to keep it's plan as a perk to attract good employees.

It's also possible that the private sector health plans would be forced to be more competitive in order to survive and the whole question might be moot.

There are a lot of possible outcomes
Its not a possible outcome straw its a probable certainty that overtime the companies will go with the choices that save them money after all business is business and the goal in business is to make a profit.

problem is straw the government program will more then likely run in the red as most government programs do and as the government as a whole  does, how is a company that must make a profit supposed to compete against another company that can operate in the red?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Its not a possible outcome straw its a probable certainty that overtime the companies will go with the choices that save them money after all business is business and the goal in business is to make a profit.

problem is straw the government program will more then likely run in the red as most government programs do and as the government as a whole  does, how is a company that must make a profit supposed to compete against another company that can operate in the red?

what's the alternative?

anyone who can't get on a group plan is facing health care costs that are impossible to afford.

maybe the govt should just issue cyanide caps to anyone who has a chronic illness (or fatal disease) and can't afford insurance.

I still can't figure out how other countries are able to do this yet we can't seem to figure it out.

maybe it's got something to do with all the money we spend on our military adventures

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
what's the alternative?

anyone who can't get on a group plan is facing health care costs that are impossible to afford.

maybe the govt should just issue cyanide caps to anyone who has a chronic illness (or fatal disease) and can't afford insurance.

I still can't figure out how other countries are able to do this yet we can't seem to figure it out.

maybe it's got something to do with all the money we spend on our military adventures

Partially that.

The other is rationing and quality of care. 

Other nations ration care and you dont get as good quality docs.

That is why many docs come here to practice and many wealthy from other countries come here for surgery and major stuff.   

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Partially that.

The other is rationing and quality of care. 

Other nations ration care and you dont get as good quality docs.

That is why many docs come here to practice and many wealthy from other countries come here for surgery and major stuff.   

I've heard claims on both sides and I don't think that the quality of care would just drop in this country on a public plan.  Then again, if you can't afford insurance in the first place then quality of care is really not an issue

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
The questions by CBS was good and brings up a good issue.

If a govt plan was available it is feasible that a company would drop it's health plan.

It's also possible that a company would still choose to keep it's plan as a perk to attract good employees.

It's also possible that the private sector health plans would be forced to be more competitive in order to survive and the whole question might be moot.

There are a lot of possible outcomes

The providers of health care coverage will be forced out of buisiness.They wont be able to compete with the government as the government has taz payers money behind it and they can low ball everyone.

Then we wiull be FORCED to get government plans and then be subject to government controlls.This will be the end of the country.How long before the government starts taxing ANYTHING they deem as a possible rise to health care costs?Think a sport like bodybuilding wont be taxed?or football?or eating habits?Once the government is involved they controll EVERYTHING.

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
straw acting simply to act is not a solution thats the kind of thinking that brought about the stimulus bill and you can see how effective that is.

you have to understand like i pointed out and since you didnt address i assume you see my point...government health care will drive private health care out of business for the most part overtime. When thats the case they will be able to say treat this condition this way or treat this condition this way and as there wont be an alternative what other options would we have?

Also there are already waits for procedures, check ups, general doctor visits...you think with adding what 46 million ppl wont add tremendously to that?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
straw acting simply to act is not a solution thats the kind of thinking that brought about the stimulus bill and you can see how effective that is.

you have to understand like i pointed out and since you didnt address i assume you see my point...government health care will drive private health care out of business for the most part overtime. When thats the case they will be able to say treat this condition this way or treat this condition this way and as there wont be an alternative what other options would we have?

Also there are already waits for procedures, check ups, general doctor visits...you think with adding what 46 million ppl wont add tremendously to that?

1.  Neither you nor I know the full effect of the stimulus bill yet
2.  I don't assume a govt option will drive private health care out of business although it very likely will make them be more competitive
3.  I have no way to judge whether wait times will increase or decrease.

I'll give you a personal example.  I had a minor case of skin cancer last year and when I started calling doctors (before I knew what it was) the first thing they would ask if I was on an HMO or PPO.   If it was an HMO the wait was 2 months.  Luckily I have $$'s and am on a PPO plan and they saw me the same day I called.   The difference is $$$'s in their pocket and not urgency of care. 

I have friend who pay more for their health care premium than I do for my mortgage.  It's f'ng insane.

Here's one thing that will never change.  If you have the money you can buy whatever you want.  If you're loaded you can see any doctor you want to at any time.   That's the way it is now and that's the way it will be in the future. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
1.  Neither you nor I know the full effect of the stimulus bill yet
2.  I don't assume a govt option will drive private health care out of business although it very likely will make them be more competitive
3.  I have no way to judge whether wait times will increase or decrease.

I'll give you a personal example.  I had a minor case of skin cancer last year and when I started calling doctors (before I knew what it was) the first thing they would ask if I was on an HMO or PPO.   If it was an HMO the wait was 2 months.  Luckily I have $$'s and am on a PPO plan and they saw me the same day I called.   The difference is $$$'s in their pocket and not urgency of care. 

I have friend who pay more for their health care premium than I do for my mortgage.  It's f'ng insane.

Here's one thing that will never change.  If you have the money you can buy whatever you want.  If you're loaded you can see any doctor you want to at any time.   That's the way it is now and that's the way it will be in the future. 

Did you know that insurance companies cant write policies across state lines???

 

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Another question....will the government plan reduce visit/proceedure payments to doctors and clinics even lower than they are now?  We are having a hard enough time getting paid for what we do (thats another reason why we have to see so many patients other than increased operating costs) and medicare dictates the payment that almost all insurances provide.  Ex...say I bill a code for an established patient routine visit...approx $80.  We only get paid a portion of that...maybe $50 from medicare.  Thats how it is now, will it get worse?  Will we have to see even more patients (which means less time and attention per visit) to stay in business?

If reimbursements are slashed, not all docs and clinics will accept the public plan...so you may get poorer quality and/or poorer service.

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
1.  Neither you nor I know the full effect of the stimulus bill yet
2.  I don't assume a govt option will drive private health care out of business although it very likely will make them be more competitive
3.  I have no way to judge whether wait times will increase or decrease.

I'll give you a personal example.  I had a minor case of skin cancer last year and when I started calling doctors (before I knew what it was) the first thing they would ask if I was on an HMO or PPO.   If it was an HMO the wait was 2 months.  Luckily I have $$'s and am on a PPO plan and they saw me the same day I called.   The difference is $$$'s in their pocket and not urgency of care. 

I have friend who pay more for their health care premium than I do for my mortgage.  It's f'ng insane.

Here's one thing that will never change.  If you have the money you can buy whatever you want.  If you're loaded you can see any doctor you want to at any time.   That's the way it is now and that's the way it will be in the future. 
you havent addressed how a company that MUST make a profit can compete with a company that can operate in the red? the govt can and will operate in the red, how will the private companies compete with that? it wont cause them to be more competitive it will cause them to go out of business...

ok so there is a line and you add 46 million ppl to the line did the line b/c longer or shorter? its ignorant to believe that wait times wont increase, even more ignorant to say you cant decide whether they will or not...

problem again straw is that once we all have the same healthcare provider, i.e. the govt for the most part it wont matter...I agree that there will be situations where money will always help the situation but the situation will get much worse overall.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Another question....will the government plan reduce reimbursement to doctors and clinics even lower than they are now?  We are having a hard enough time getting paid for what we do (thats another reason why we have to see so many patients other than increased operating costs).
If reimbursements are slashed, not all docs and clinics will accept the public plan...so you may get poorer quality and/or poorer service.

Yes they are going to reduce reimbursements.  There is where the 300 billion cut in Medicaire is coming from. 

I feel bad for you Shoot.  If this goes through, your career is going to be extremely more stresful with less monetary reward. 

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
33386, I added to my post above..

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
you havent addressed how a company that MUST make a profit can compete with a company that can operate in the red? the govt can and will operate in the red, how will the private companies compete with that? it wont cause them to be more competitive it will cause them to go out of business...

ok so there is a line and you add 46 million ppl to the line did the line b/c longer or shorter? its ignorant to believe that wait times wont increase, even more ignorant to say you cant decide whether they will or not...

problem again straw is that once we all have the same healthcare provider, i.e. the govt for the most part it wont matter...I agree that there will be situations where money will always help the situation but the situation will get much worse overall.

I wish for once they would do an actual audit just as to who these people are that dont have insurance.  

Additionally, if someone does not want insurance, why should they be forced to buy anything???  

What about new businesses who cant afford it???

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
33386, I added to my post above..

You may be forced to.  They may make cash payments illegal.   

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
"you havent addressed how a company that MUST make a profit can compete with a company that can operate in the red? the govt can and will operate in the red, how will the private companies compete with that? it wont cause them to be more competitive it will cause them to go out of business..."

This is a very valid point.

Docs have been complaining about poor reimbursement (particularly for primary care) for many years...now they may reduce it more?  Devistating.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
you havent addressed how a company that MUST make a profit can compete with a company that can operate in the red? the govt can and will operate in the red, how will the private companies compete with that? it wont cause them to be more competitive it will cause them to go out of business...

ok so there is a line and you add 46 million ppl to the line did the line b/c longer or shorter? its ignorant to believe that wait times wont increase, even more ignorant to say you cant decide whether they will or not...

problem again straw is that once we all have the same healthcare provider, i.e. the govt for the most part it wont matter...I agree that there will be situations where money will always help the situation but the situation will get much worse overall.

You have no clue if the private companies can compete or not.  You also have no clue whether the govt program will operate in the red or not.

Who are the doctors that are involved in the govt. programs now?  Are they going broke?

Right now the private companies make money by finding way to deny YOU care.  

That will change

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Did you know that insurance companies cant write policies across state lines???

I did

seems stupid huh?

who do we have to thank for that?