Rube Goldberg, adj.,Of, relating to, or being a contrivance that brings about by complicated means what apparently could have been accomplished simply.—The Free Dictionary
There’s a maxim in Washington that says never do anything simply when you can complicate or convolute it and make it deviously complex and impractical.
The American people wanted, and still want, universal single-payer health insurance via an expansion of Medicare. Since Medicare for those over 65 already exists, all it would have taken is a few strokes of a pen to extend it to everyone.
Too simple.
Taxpayers would have kicked in a few more bucks, except for the poor who would still have Medicaid. The self-employed would have been spared the astronomical costs of private insurance. Pre-existing conditions would have been covered. Employers who provide all or some health insurance would have been spared the cost of ever-increasing private insurance. Health care providers would have been spared the costs of filling out different forms for a myriad of private insurers. Best of all, people wouldn’t be bankrupted paying medical bills.
Too simple.
Medicare has lower administrative costs than private insurers—Medicare from 3% to 11% versus private insurers from 14% to 25%, depending on who you talk to. Add in all the additional paperwork and bookkeeping costs of filing forms for various private insurers and another big chunk of money is saved.
Too simple.
The British National Health Services Act comprised one page, according to former Member of Parliament Tony Benn (Michael Moore’s SiCKO [NHS in Britain] starting at 1:44).
It’s complex, convoluted, deviously complex and impractical. It’s better than doing nothing, even though the Republican majority in the House have tried 42 times to repeal it and, from all indications, aren’t done yet.
Instead of a law that took effect all at once, it’s a piecemeal approach spread over some three years, opening the door for opponents to make wild false claims about the whole program—and, since the Republicans in the House have yet to repeal it or defund it, right-wingers are spending big bucks trying to persuade the uninsured or underinsured not to choose a program from an exchange and sign up, beginning tomorrow (Oct. 1), for when that part of the program kicks in on Jan. 1, 2014.
To make Obamacare workable, businesses with 50 or more employees need to sign on, as well as the uninsured. Those that don’t will be hit with a monetary penalty.
To further complicate things for Medicaid recipients, the US Supreme Court stuck its nose in and ruled that states have the option of not participating in the Medicaid expansion, even though the federal government will be paying the bulk of the costs.
Like the dreadful mess of prescription drug coverage under Medicare Part D, people must make choices of the coverage they want and can afford, plus make sure their doctors and hospitals accept the plan they choose. Choices have a nice ring to them but people are already overburdened with choices. And the choices in this are many: how much coverage, affordability, co-payments, deductibles, acceptance by health care providers and hospitals. It’s all Greek to many who’ve never had health insurance, so tens of thousands of “navigators” are being hired to help them through the maze of choices.
A single-payer system would have eliminated this mess and saved beaucoup bucks in the process.
Too simple.
You would think businesses would have been jumping for joy to rid themselves of the health insurance expenses and burden of paperwork. Then their buddies in the insurance industry would have lost out, except for lower cost supplemental health plans.
Despite the convoluted and complex mess the Affordable Care Act is, neither it nor a single-payer system is socialism or a takeover of health care by the government, as the Republicans trying to kill it contend.
Moreover, we are supposed to be a government of, by and for the people. “Supposed to be” are the operative words. If so, then we the people have the right to the safety nets that serve us all. If not, then the notion that the government is ours has gone out the window with many of our constitutional rights.
RSS
Health insurance for all, a simple idea turned into a Rube Goldberg
Posted on September 30, 2013 by Bev Conover
There’s a maxim in Washington that says never do anything simply when you can complicate or convolute it and make it deviously complex and impractical.
The American people wanted, and still want, universal single-payer health insurance via an expansion of Medicare. Since Medicare for those over 65 already exists, all it would have taken is a few strokes of a pen to extend it to everyone.
Too simple.
Taxpayers would have kicked in a few more bucks, except for the poor who would still have Medicaid. The self-employed would have been spared the astronomical costs of private insurance. Pre-existing conditions would have been covered. Employers who provide all or some health insurance would have been spared the cost of ever-increasing private insurance. Health care providers would have been spared the costs of filling out different forms for a myriad of private insurers. Best of all, people wouldn’t be bankrupted paying medical bills.
Too simple.
Medicare has lower administrative costs than private insurers—Medicare from 3% to 11% versus private insurers from 14% to 25%, depending on who you talk to. Add in all the additional paperwork and bookkeeping costs of filing forms for various private insurers and another big chunk of money is saved.
Too simple.
The British National Health Services Act comprised one page, according to former Member of Parliament Tony Benn (Michael Moore’s SiCKO [NHS in Britain] starting at 1:44).
Too simple.
With a lot of help from the private insurers, who were determined to preserve their bailiwick, Congress ended up with a 906-page Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, using sneaky “parliamentary gymnastics to pass an amended version of the bill in a way that avoided a Republican filibuster; this was done through the so-called “reconciliation” process, which limits debate on spending bills.”
Not simple.
It’s complex, convoluted, deviously complex and impractical. It’s better than doing nothing, even though the Republican majority in the House have tried 42 times to repeal it and, from all indications, aren’t done yet.
Instead of a law that took effect all at once, it’s a piecemeal approach spread over some three years, opening the door for opponents to make wild false claims about the whole program—and, since the Republicans in the House have yet to repeal it or defund it, right-wingers are spending big bucks trying to persuade the uninsured or underinsured not to choose a program from an exchange and sign up, beginning tomorrow (Oct. 1), for when that part of the program kicks in on Jan. 1, 2014.
To make Obamacare workable, businesses with 50 or more employees need to sign on, as well as the uninsured. Those that don’t will be hit with a monetary penalty.
To further complicate things for Medicaid recipients, the US Supreme Court stuck its nose in and ruled that states have the option of not participating in the Medicaid expansion, even though the federal government will be paying the bulk of the costs.
Like the dreadful mess of prescription drug coverage under Medicare Part D, people must make choices of the coverage they want and can afford, plus make sure their doctors and hospitals accept the plan they choose. Choices have a nice ring to them but people are already overburdened with choices. And the choices in this are many: how much coverage, affordability, co-payments, deductibles, acceptance by health care providers and hospitals. It’s all Greek to many who’ve never had health insurance, so tens of thousands of “navigators” are being hired to help them through the maze of choices.
A single-payer system would have eliminated this mess and saved beaucoup bucks in the process.
Too simple.
You would think businesses would have been jumping for joy to rid themselves of the health insurance expenses and burden of paperwork. Then their buddies in the insurance industry would have lost out, except for lower cost supplemental health plans.
Despite the convoluted and complex mess the Affordable Care Act is, neither it nor a single-payer system is socialism or a takeover of health care by the government, as the Republicans trying to kill it contend.
Moreover, we are supposed to be a government of, by and for the people. “Supposed to be” are the operative words. If so, then we the people have the right to the safety nets that serve us all. If not, then the notion that the government is ours has gone out the window with many of our constitutional rights.
Bev Conover is the editor and publisher of Intrepid Report. Email her at editor@intrepidreport.com.