Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Why won't a company switch to government health care?

ASU2003 · 06-23-2009, 08:08 PM

If you watched Obama's news conference today, he didn't really answer this question. And I'm wondering why? Is it because they want most people to go to a government program?

Here is the transcript of the question:

Quote:

QUESTION: And, while I appreciate your Spock-like language about the logic of the health care plan and the public plan, it does seem logical to a lot of people that if the government is offering a cheaper health care plan, then lots of employers will want to have their employees covered by that cheaper plan, which will not have to be for-profit, unlike private plans, and may, possibly, benefit from some government subsidies, who knows.

And then their employees would be signed up for this public plan, which would violate what you're promising the American people, that they will not have to change health care plans if they like the plan they have.

So...

PRES. OBAMA: OK. You're pitching; I'm catching.

QUESTION: OK.

(LAUGHTER)

PRES. OBAMA: I got the question.

First of all, was the reference to Spock, is that a crack on my ears?

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: No.

PRES. OBAMA: All right. I just wanted to make sure. No?

QUESTION: Never make fun of you (inaudible).

PRES. OBAMA: In answer to David's question, which you co-opted, we are still early in this process. So, you know, we have not drawn lines in the sand, other than that reform has to control costs and that it has to provide relief to people who don't have health insurance or are under-insured. You know, those are the broad parameters that we've discussed.

There are a whole host of other issues where ultimately I may have a strong opinion, and I will express those to members of Congress as this is shaping up. It's too early to say that.

Right now, I will say that our position is that a public plan makes sense.

Now, let me go to the -- the broader question you made about the public plan. As I said before, I think that there is a legitimate concern, if the public plan was simply eating off the taxpayer trough, that it would be hard for private insurers to compete.

If, on the other hand, the public plan is structure in such a way where they've got to collect premiums and they've got to provide good services, then, if what the insurance companies are saying is true, that they're doing their best to serve their customers, that they're in the business of keeping people well and giving them security when they get sick, they should be able to compete.

Now, if it turns out that the public plan, for example, is able to reduce administrative costs significantly, then you know what, I'd like the insurance companies to take note and say, hey, if the public plan can do that, why can't we?

And that's good for everybody in the system. And I don't think there should be any objection to that.

Now, by the way, I should point out that part of the reform that we've suggested is that, if you want to be a private insurer as part of the exchange, as part of this marketplace, this menu of options that people can choose from, we're going to have some different rules for all insurance companies, one of them being that you can't preclude people from getting health insurance because of a pre-existing condition. You can't cherry-pick and just take the healthiest people.

So there are going to be some ground rules that are going to apply to all insurance companies. Because I think the American people understand that, too often, insurance companies have been spending more time thinking about how to take premiums and then avoid providing people coverage than they have been thinking about how can we make sure that insurance is there; health care is there when families need it.

But, you know, I'm confident that, if -- you know, I take those advocates of the free market to heart when they say that, you know, the free market is innovative and is going to compete on service and is going to compete on, you know, their ability to deliver good care to families.

And if that's the case, then this just becomes one more option. If it's not the case, then I think that that's something that the American people should know.

QUESTION: I'm sorry, but what about keeping your promise to the American people that they won't have to change plans even if employers...

(CROSSTALK)

PRES. OBAMA: Well, all right -- when I say if you have your plan and you like it, and your doctor has a plan -- or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don't have to change plans, what I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.

Now, are there going to be employers right now, assuming we don't do anything -- let's say that we take the advice of some folks who are out there and say, "Oh, this is not the time to do health care. We can't afford it. It's too complicated. Let's take our time," et cetera.

So let's assume that nothing happened. I can guarantee you that there's the possibility for a whole lot of Americans out there that they're not going to end up having the same health care they have. Because what's going to happen is, as costs keep on going up, employers are going to start making decisions. We've got to raise premiums on our employees. In some cases, we can't provide health insurance at all.

And so there are going to be a whole set of changes out there. That's exactly why health reform is so important.

While he kind of answered the question with the fact that employers could drop coverage to reduce costs and let people figure out what to do on their own (and pay the full cost), but I'm wondering how many companies would switch to a nationalized health care system if they have to pay nothing (or could pass the amount off in higher prices)? President Obama kind of skirted this important question. Why would my company pay $350/month (I pay $80/month) to cover myself (I'm healthy)? If the non-profit government plan came along, how much would that be? Even if they did treat everyone? Is that the plan? To take the same amount of money that is going to the private for-profit insurers and use it to treat everybody? Is this going to add needed competition to compete against the insurance cartel (they monitor each other to 'set' prices and won't undercut their competition)

Would the government be able to run a non-profit healthcare agency better than the for-profit insurance companies? Do you think Obama needs to work on his answer a little?

I'll be watching the healthcare infomercial tomorrow, but I'm worried that they aren't going to do it right. I wonder if it will eventually be like the FICA tax. I pay 6%, my employer pays 6%. It is capped at $92k or something. I could also see it being 2% if your are under 20, 4% 20-40, 6% 40-60, 8% 60+.

And yes, it is a 'new tax', but I am already being 'taxed' by my health insurance company, and my quality of care isn't all that good if I am sick. (If I really get hurt it is good)