US politics 2

[lupis42]

It seems like those things together would make a lot of sense. What is the existing reason for people not being able to buy across state lines? I imagine it would be difficult because regulations are different in each state, and cost of living is different, so would it even be possible for insurers to offer identical products for the same price in different states?

Tracker neil has the gist of it - there's more to it than that, though, various states have very different attitudes about what types of treatments should be covered, and how they should all operate. The reasoning behind preventing the sale of insurace across state lines is that it keeps insurance companies from moving to a state with favorable regulations and thereby potentially screwing customers, the reason for is to give consumers more choice in their health insurer, and thus increase the degree to which the market punishes bad insurers.

[IheartTesla]

I chuckled a bit when I read somewhere that Romney once wanted, or was harboring thoughts of marching in or attending a gay pride parade. Ahh politics, how it makes you 'evolve' your positions.

[Seli]

The link speaks to how out of touch Romney is to most working people, but this is known. What it doesn't speak to is how unworkable it is as a policy. If my insurance company denies my claim for my double bypass or whatever, then yes, it's great that it would now be easier for me to "fire" them and find someone else, but this still doesn't change the fact that I'm on the hook for the entirety of the $60,000 medical bill, which is going to put me in bankruptcy. I mean sure, if Romney's gardener fucks up his rhododendrons, he can fire the gardener and pay to have his new gardener fix the problem. But what insurance company is going to pick up my bill for services already rendered?

To put the bankruptcy risk in some proper perspective, according to a 2009 article in The American Journal of Medicine as of 2007 62% of personal bankruptcies in the USA were caused by medical problems. (loss of income and medical bills) (pdf)

some selected quotes:

As recently as 1981, only 8% of families filing for bankruptcy did so in the aftermath of a serious medical problem. By contrast, our 2001 study in 5 states found that illness or medical bills contributed to about half of bankruptcies.

Since then, the number of un- and underinsured Americans has grown; health costs have increased; and Congress tightened the bankruptcy laws.

Here we report the first-ever national random-sample survey of bankruptcy filers

....

BACKGROUND: Our 2001 study in 5 states found that medical problems contributed to at least 46.2% of

all bankruptcies. Since then, health costs and the numbers of un- and underinsured have increased, and

bankruptcy laws have tightened.

METHODS: We surveyed a random national sample of 2314 bankruptcy filers in 2007, abstracted their court

records, and interviewed 1032 of them. We designated bankruptcies as “medical” based on debtors’ stated

reasons for filing, income loss due to illness, and the magnitude of their medical debts.

RESULTS: Using a conservative definition, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these

medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for

medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical

bills. Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three

quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable

to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors,

the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001.

CONCLUSIONS: Illness and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of US bankruptcies.

....

● 62.1% of all bankruptcies have a medical cause.

● Most medical debtors were well educated and middle class; three quarters had health insurance.

● The share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 50% between 2001 and 2007.

[jurble]

I just saw a Rick Perry clip on CNN where he said, "I THINK AMERICANS ARE SICK AND TIRED OF THESE WALLSTREETERS THAT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF AMERICANS."

what

the

heeeellll

what has happened to you, Republican party?

Do you really, really hate Mormons so much, that you're really taking this road?

[Ser Greguh]

/shrug. Both Gingrich and Perry are throwing themselves on the proverbial hand grenade in an attempt to make him look bad; they'll likely say just about anything that they think will have that effect at this point.

Remember, this is the party that has spent the past three years actively attempting to do conscious harm to the country just to spite the black guy that they lost the presidency to (and have essentially bragged about it). They don't like losing, and they certainly value their spite to those they lose to over any principles that they might have hidden away somewhere.

[Shryke]

I can't speak for Romney, but it's just possible he's advocating for some of the same things Republicans were asking for when Obama was trying to get the ACA passed - an end to tax-breaks for employer provided healthcare, and an end to restrictions against buying health-plans across state lines.

Which aren't terrible ideas, but don't actually do anything to fix the issue.

That's mostly just a recipe for the Health Care version of the Delaware corporation.

[Shryke]

The RNC is fighting to allow corporations to donate directly to candidates:

One of the few remaining limits on corporations’ power to buy and sell American elections is that corporations are not allowed to give money directly to federal candidates. Citizens United frees them to spend billions of dollars running ads or otherwise trying to change the result of an election to suit their interests, but corporations cutting checks directly to candidates or to political committees such as the Republican National Committee is one of the few things the Supreme Court’s conservatives have not yet imposed upon the country.

If the RNC gets its way, however, that will soon change. In a brief filed yesterday in the Fourth Circuit, the RNC argues that the federal ban on corporate donations is unconstitutional in large part because it applies across the board to all corporations

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/11/402358/republican-national-committee-files-brief-seeking-to-allow-corporate-funding-of-campaigns/?mobile=nc

The current setup is a farce already, but still, seriously GOP?

[SpicyTurkey]

Tracker neil has the gist of it - there's more to it than that, though, various states have very different attitudes about what types of treatments should be covered, and how they should all operate. The reasoning behind preventing the sale of insurace across state lines is that it keeps insurance companies from moving to a state with favorable regulations and thereby potentially screwing customers, the reason for is to give consumers more choice in their health insurer, and thus increase the degree to which the market punishes bad insurers.

Tracker neil has the gist of it - there's more to it than that, though, various states have very different attitudes about what types of treatments should be covered, and how they should all operate. The reasoning behind preventing the sale of insurace across state lines is that it keeps insurance companies from moving to a state with favorable regulations and thereby potentially screwing customers, the reason for is to give consumers more choice in their health insurer, and thus increase the degree to which the market punishes bad insurers.

The reasoning behind the law makes no sense. All it does is screw us over. Preventing competition does not increase your pool of choices, and neither does it help decrease prices.

[SpicyTurkey]

Which aren't terrible ideas, but don't actually do anything to fix the issue.

That's mostly just a recipe for the Health Care version of the Delaware corporation.

Which aren't terrible ideas, but don't actually do anything to fix the issue.

That's mostly just a recipe for the Health Care version of the Delaware corporation.

And how do you propose to fix it? To let the government take over.

[Commodore]

How do you guys not see the inherent contradiction in saying corporations are not people (true) and then granting them the power of speech, which can only come from people.

[Shryke]

And how do you propose to fix it? To let the government take over.

Yes, it's called "learning from evidence".

[Shryke]

How do you guys not see the inherent contradiction in saying corporations are not people (true) and then granting them the power of speech, which can only come from people.

Because free speech doesn't come only from people?

Because corporations shouldn't have free speech rights?

Take your pick.

[SpicyTurkey]

Yes, it's called "learning from evidence".

I'm sorry, but most (if not all) mischief to date has been caused by government in one way or another. I suggest you reevaluate your evidence.

[Commodore]

Because free speech doesn't come only from people?

Sure it does.

[SpicyTurkey]

You got that, Shryke? If. Not. All.

What is the most terrible thing that happened in the last 70 years?

[TrueMetis]

Various Tsunami's, Earthquake's, Hurricane's, various genocide's. Hard to choose just one really.

[SpicyTurkey]

Various Tsunami's, Earthquake's, Hurricane's, various genocide's. Hard to choose just one really.

You know what I meant.

[TrueMetis]

I honestly don't.

[SpicyTurkey]

I honestly don't.

Then stay out of what you don't know.

[ThinkerX]

I'm sorry, but most (if not all) mischief to date has been caused by government in one way or another. I suggest you reevaluate your evidence

What is the most terrible thing that happened in the last 70 years?

I honestly don't

World War II - many tens of millions of people dead, entire nations bombed into rubble. Afterwards, we can add the cold war and the attendent possibility (very strong for a long while) of thermonuclear annihilation. During that time and after, we have had the US government stage coups and launch military interventions everywhere from Equador to Iran, sometimes overthrowing democratically elected governments to install brutal tyrants (though other nations, like the old USSR did the same thing).