Tuesday

Facing the Mortgage Crisis August 4th and Health Care Town Forum

On Tuesday August 4th at 7pm at HoustonPBS, we will do everything we can to help people facing foreclosure an opportunity to save their homes if they can or leave them with dignity if they can't. There are so many free services that can help people make better choices. We noticed in our research and through the production process that many people have a lot of fear and shame and that keeps them from getting help. There are also a lot of people who are apathetic or feel hopeless to do anything about the problem. Unfortunately, there are also a lot of SCAMS. It is unbelievable that to this day, there are many companies charging for services that homeowners can get for free from HUD (Housing and Urban Development) approved housing counselors. You can check our website for all sorts of resources to help you if you are facing this challenge. www.houstonpbs.org/mortgage
If you are interested in being part of our audience, we have limited seating but let me know. You would need to be here at 6:15pm.

Now moving on to Health Care. On October 13th we'll produce a town forum on health care reform. A lot could change from now until then, but the debate is essential for Americans. There are too many players that could be affected and there is no doubt our economy can't handle the continuation of the system we have. We have had a status quo for at least 20 years and we just can't afford it. Out of a lot of the material I have read. I really liked the simplicity of this article in the AARP website.

The Issue: Create a government-sponsored health insurance plan
Why do it: About 47 million Americans don’t have insurance, mostly because it’s unaffordable or unavailable. A “public plan” would compete with private insurance plans, and President Obama contends it would help reduce costs. After all, it could be offered more cheaply because of the government’s buying power and the fact that it wouldn’t need to turn a profit or spend millions on advertising.
Why not: A government plan with those advantages might draw so many customers away from private insurance that those companies fail. And if a public plan underpaid doctors—as health care providers claim Medicare and Medicaid do—health care providers might drop out of the program and then patients would have fewer physicians and fewer choices.
Who likes it: Consumer groups and many Democratic lawmakers, such as Charles Rangel of New York, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, who says it will be part of the legislation the House passes. The White House says Obama backs the idea but is keeping an open mind.
Who doesn’t: Many Republican lawmakers, private insurance companies and their trade group, America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), and businesses, which say a public plan would undermine the market. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which represents big drug companies, says the Medicare prescription drug benefit is proof that a new government plan isn’t needed to lower costs and improve health care access. It contends that the Medicare drug benefit has been successful using only private insurance companies.

The Issue: Require individuals to have health insurance and employers to provide help getting it
Why do it: Many uninsured people end up in the emergency room with expensive medical problems because they didn’t get treated earlier. This causes unnecessary costs and health problems. Most parties agree that a major overhaul of health care won’t work until everyone has insurance coverage. Moreover, expanding the pool of people buying health insurance adds younger people who do not need expensive care and will help keep insurance prices lower. An employer mandate with a “pay or play” option would force businesses to provide insurance for workers or pay into a system that would cover the uninsured.
Why not: Healthy younger workers without a lot of income, who often choose not to be covered, might not want to bear the cost. And businesses complain that their health care costs are already so high they can’t compete globally. Some states have considered an individual mandate, though most have balked at the expense of subsidizing those whom it requires to have coverage, but who can’t afford it.
Who likes it: Insurance companies and AHIP support the idea of everyone being required to have coverage and have offered to make care more accessible if that happens. They say they would stop refusing to insure people with preexisting medical conditions and also wouldn’t charge patients higher premiums based on gender or current health status. Most proposals still would allow insurance companies to charge more for older people but just how much more is in question.
The American Medical Association believes wealthier individuals should be required to have coverage and people who can’t afford insurance should get government subsidies.
Who doesn’t: Labor unions and consumer groups are likely to oppose a mandate on individuals if employers aren’t required to ante up as well. Small businesses oppose an employer mandate, contending that it would be so costly they would have to lay people off. (Because it's so expensive for them, many small businesses don’t offer their workers health coverage now.) The U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes a mandate on employers.

The Issue: Help workers ages 50 to 64 get health insurance
Why do it: Insurance premiums are expensive and often unavailable for this age group because they tend to have more medical problems. But the faltering economy has triggered widespread layoffs, forcing many Americans ages 50 to 64 to lose their jobs and thus their employee health insurance. In the most recent figures, 7.1 million adults in this age group had no coverage.
Why not: It’s expensive. Allowing those 50 to 64 years old to buy into the Medicare system could bankrupt that program if they were allowed the same subsidies as Medicare beneficiaries. Without any subsidies, most in this age group could not afford to buy into the program. And asking insurance companies not to charge them so much more, based on their age, could mean that younger workers have to pay more.
Who likes it: AARP. And Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., who has proposed letting people ages 55 to 64 buy into Medicare.
Who doesn’t: Some health care insurers say they must continue to charge older patients more for coverage or they will have to charge younger people too much.

The Issue: Spending more than $1 trillion for a major overhaul of health care that improves access to coverage and quality of care.
Why do it: Health care costs are climbing so fast they are consuming more than 17 percent of the total economy. These costs are hurting businesses that offer coverage to their employees. And more and more Americans are without basic medical treatment because they don’t have access to affordable health care.
Why not: Almost everyone involved agrees that health care reform is important—and expensive. Where will the money to fund it come from?
Who likes it: To come up with $634 billion of the $1 trillion-plus needed for major reform, President Obama proposed cutting Medicare payment rates to medical providers and raising taxes on the wealthy. Lawmakers will spend the next month or two hashing out other ways to pay for reform. Some Republicans like Sen. John McCain of Arizona have proposed capping or eliminating the tax deduction for health care coverage that employers get for providing insurance. Others want to require employees to pay taxes on the value of their employer-financed health coverage.
Who doesn’t: Republicans, including Ohio's John Boehner, the House minority leader, have criticized Obama’s proposal for raising taxes (on the wealthy) during a recession. Medical interests are concerned about cuts to their reimbursements.

At least this article has a list of all the players and what they are interested in. Here is what is missing in my own mind. What is missing is what we can do ourselves and what WE are responsible for. Let's face it. We Americans are too fat, too lazy, too stressed and many times unwilling to change our lifestyles to have healthier lives. A lot of the healthcare expenses have to do with obesity, heart disease, diabetes and many other chronic diseases caused by the terrible way we eat, play and deal with every day stress!
Do you want to spend less on health care? This is what my doctor tells me. Get moving, quit eating sugars and flours and start meditating!

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Great article. Americans have always eaten unhealthy for years depending upon their socioeconomic position. The main problem with health care is the insurance companies have been allowed to take control back in the early eighties. In an attempt to cut costs, everything in medicine was converted to a procedure code forcing more doctors to perform procedures rather than simply do an office visit. It is like taking your car in for service and the mechanic looks in a book for the cost of a part and the time allowed to replace that part so the final cost can be determined. Medicine has gone to the same idea except for one thing. People are not machines and even though many things are common we do have different variables.
A second problem has been the increase in litigation. It has gotten so bad over the past twenty years that coupled with the insurance companies forcing procedure codes on the doctors, it has become easier to refer patients to someone else who is specialized rather than treat the condition his or her self. If a physician treats a condition and isn't exactly correct the first time the chances of litigation may go up and it isn't worth the time or trouble. Most primary care physicians simply triage patients to specialists to avoid litigation and problems.
Health care is a bigger problem than just making it affordable for those who can't afford the system, it is also about tort reform. When litigation is controlled better the costs of health care may decrease and the primary care physician will become a real family doctor again.