With the recent Senate approval of the sweeping health care overhaul reform bill, we're closing the previous thread on the topic and are interested in what you think about this latest itteration of U.S. government's attempt to reform the industry.

Not sure what this bill means, or confused about what it covers? Here is a brief overview of what the bill is designed to do:

• Require that most Americans have health insurance.


• Add 15 million people to Medicaid.


• Subsidize private coverage for low and middle income people (at a cost of $871 billion over 10 years).


• Cover 31 million Americans who are not currently covered, but leave 23 million uninsured in 2019.


• Prevent insurers denying coverage because of a person's medical condition.


• Prevent insurers discriminating on the basis of sex or health status.


• Prevent insurers rescinding care when someone becomes sick or disabled.


• Force insurers to include a summary of benefits that "does not exceed four pages in length and does not include print smaller than 12-point font."


• Limit insurance company profits by forcing them to spend between 80 and 85 cents of every dollar on healthcare.


• Set up healthcare exchanges — a marketplace for insurance shoppers which feature tax credits — that are the last remnants of a public option.

Read more here.

Sound off in this thread, but keep posts about the issues and what they mean, and not attacks on people.

"Among the large, for-profit health insurers, profit margins line up with the industry as a whole. UnitedHealthGroup, the biggest health insurer, had a 4.1 percent profit margin over the past 12 months. WellPoint, the next biggest, had a 4 percent profit margin. Aetna, Cigna, and Humana came in below that.

Health insurers turn out to be underperformers compared with the other parts of the healthcare sector. Pharmaceutical companies have a profit margin of 16.4 percent—seventh highest of the 215 industries that Morningstar tracks. Others segments of healthcare with margins well above the median include healthcare information (9.4 percent), home healthcare firms (8.5 percent), medical labs (8.2 percent), and generic drugmakers (6.5 percent).

The big money, in other words, isn't in the insurance industry. If it's anywhere, it's in the pharmaceutical industry. But the Obamanauts appear to have reached a kind of détente with Big Pharma in exchange for that industry's tepid support for some kind of reform. So Obama and his foot soldiers need to look elsewhere for black hats."  http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/25/why-health-insurers-make-lousy-villains.html

This is what I find most interesting;  Both bills protect the Pharmaceutical industry.  It grants them 12 years of market protection, yet they have a double digit profit margin. 

• Amgen (biotechnology): Profit margin, 30.6 percent


• Gilead Sciences (biotechnology): 37.6 percent


• Celgene Corp. (biotechnology): 11.9 percent


• Johnson & Johnson (drug manufacturer): 20.8 percent


• Pfizer (drug manufacturer): 16.3 percent


• GlaxoSmithKline (drug manufacturer): 17.4 percent


• Unitedhealth Group (healthcare plans): 4.1 percent


• WellPoint (healthcare plans): 4 percent


• Aetna (healthcare plans): 3.9 percent


• MedcoHealth Solutions (healthcare services): 2.1 percent


• Express Scripts (healthcare services): 3.7 percent


• Quest Diagnostics (healthcare services): 8.7 percent


• Medtronic (medical equipment): 14.9 percent


• Baxter International (medical equipment): 17.5 percent


• Covidien (medical equipment): 12.3 percent

I just want to know why the pharmaceuitcal industry didn't get spanked.  They had some of the biggest profit margins. 

The bill actually cuts the patent time for a new drug from 17 down to 12 years.  It must be noted that the time it used to take to approve a drug for human trials was cut dramatically due to public pressure in the 1980's when the AIDS epidemic started.

It is NOT a crime in this country for a company to make a profit on the goods/services that it offers.  When Pres. George W. Bush was in office, he made deals with foreign AND domestic pharmaceutical firms which increased exponentially the amount of antiviral drugs to Africa.  It is estimated that these actions saved over 4 million lives by making the AIDS drugs available to more people.

Also, Pres. Bush was the first president to push for and achieve Medicare coverage of prescription drugs since the program was started in 1964.

You also probably never heard through the mainstream media that he and Laura recently visited with the victims of the Fort Hood shootings.  This is because they don't make a big splash whenever they do a kindness.

this country is not ready for the kind of  care this health care bill will deliver.  the american wants everything done despite the actual state of their health.  it will be quite a shock for our 65 plus crowd to be told eventually...no yu are too old for that procedure or you are too old for that medicine.  giving control of your health to an advisory board is not going to be easy and i'm already laughing to think that all those of you who are in favor of this kind of legislation will be some of the first on the list that are told "sorry charley" get in line behind all those people who are younger than you are and are more deserving than you for the medicine ,treatment,surgery etc etc. make no mistake healthcare is a finite resource and with the addition of the milllions of clients it will go fast fast fast!

i was talking about the bill about 10 years down the road when everyone is on the plan.  my employer has no reason to keep us covered since the fine will be a mere 750 bucks per employee to drop them from coverage.  they will pay about 1/3 in fines of what the actual cost of insuring us all would be.  you can keep your doctor ah yes mr brown the question is ...will they keep you??? i think not!!!!

what keeps my employer from dropping us now is absoulutely a lot of power and prestige to have the best being offered by the best .  but obviously if offering the best is not necessary and offering mediocrity is the standard then as all good business men and women offering more would be silly since there will be no competition for offering the best and actually there will be more fines oops taxes for offering "cadillac care" i'm not scared either  and mr brown the only reason you are not scared is because you have a healthy view of death and that is more than i can say for yur 60 something baby boomer counterparts who literally throw a fit when they find out they cannot have a reg diet immediately following lap hand assist colon resection!!! whiners! i am not seeing that these people are even remotely ready for the change that will occur in healthcare over the next decade!

universal healthcare with all its bells and whistles will need only to shoot your little healthcare crisis to the healthcare advisory board and whala you will no longer be denied care in fact you will get everything that is coming to you....to bad its not what you think it is....more like what they think yu need based on your age your meds and full access the board will have to your medical records ah yes things are about to get SO much better i just can't wait!!!

we are the fattest nation on earth and all the healthcare in the world will never change it... just who is paying for it ...!!!!bottom line your doctors will keep you on as long as your medical condition doesn't cost em anything but get a hernia or a renal tumor and good luck getting some specialist md to see you!! they will all be busy,on vacation or my personal favorite...im not accepting new patients right now!!!oh and say im all for getting some guys in here from other countries i  just love their approach to modern medicine... i hope you don't mind an open chole or a hernia repair cuz maybe they didn't cover that in surgery 101 in their country.  oh and also they seem to have no trouble telling the pt that until they lose that 50 or more pounds they will NOT be getting that back surgery!!now there's an approach i can live with!!!i never said i was not in favor of healthcare reform i just don't believe the gov can do it . im paying now and i will be paying later and no amount of reading the bill is going to change that either. enjoy your health insurance and let me know how that little trip to the healthcare advisory board goes for ya!

here's a scenario for you........old old old person living with family in home owned by the old old person....told by ER md that he cannot admit grandpa for a sixth time due to dehydration family asks...why not.???..doctor says cuz its not an admitting diagnosis that will be covered ...doc calls in social worker who says ...why not take grandpa home and we can set you up with hospice????family says NO WAY we can't take him home and care for him until he dies!!!!.... disgusting americans... now that thinking is what needs an overhaul and bottom line our loser american mentality cannot be legislated  away by any of those idiots in congress.  i think we managed to get to this place all by our loser selves oh and a little help from fast food .

yes yes where would we be with out the infernal bill ???? i would  venture to say we would 871 billion bucks richer!!! but still stuck with our stupid loser american attitudes

I'm not defending any marriage penalty. However it has always been that way to some degree. When I was in junior high (early 60's) I remember my parents discussing why Mr. X and Ms. Y lived together instead of getting married. It was taxes. They both had become single by death of their spouses and figured out that if they got married they would pay more in taxes than if they stayed single and "shacked up" as ol' dad put it then.

So I'm guessing, Kitty, that you and the hubby make in excess of $237,000.00 in combined income. I'm not saying this lightly but if that is the case, consider getting divorced. Over the years many rich couples would fly to Bermuda for Christmas and get divorced. End of year, they are divorced and pay less. Go back home and get married again. Sounds ridiculous but it saved a lot of rich folks a lot of dough. So much so that in the 70's 60 Minutes did a piece on it.

I wish I could see some of my friends from the late 60's-early 70's. I declared back then we would not collect our Social Security. Didn't think about Medicare back then as I was bulletproof at the time. I was looked at like I was nuts. What 20-something even thought about that stuff? I did and they declared I was wrong and nuts for even "dreaming" that up. How about now, guys?

And as a point of fact here - the real reason these systems are in trouble is simple and inexcusable. These taxes we all pay on these items are supposed to go into trust funds. They are not to be counted as assets in the General Fund. However in 1999 (who was President then?) the projected surplus of the US was projected to be $3 TRILLION dollars! Now that figure was never real because the sum was in part counting the Social Security Trust Fund. So the real projected surplus was actually $1 trillion dollars.

In any regard the situation was a surplus created by the fiscal policies of the Clinton administration. Now Clinton assumed the Presidency and inherited a deficit from GHWB. So any surplus was a miracle.

What happened to this surplus? Well the GOP controlled Congress wanted to (and did) refund $800 billion of this surplus to the taxpayers and to Wall Street. They wanted to use the remaining $200 billion to help reduce the national debt which stood at $5.6 trillion dollars then. As one writers stated that use of money and its effect "Spit in the ocean. Or a creek if you don't live near an ocean. Let's see how much higher the water level goes".

The inevitable question: How could there be a national debt that high and still be able to say we had a surplus? Because the debt is owed to those who bought T-notes. Nowadays it is the Chinese mainly. But we are talking budget deficit here and not national debt. The 2 are seperate and are seperate.

So much for the fiscal responsibility of the GOP. George Herbert Walker Bush inheritied a surplus from carter and created what was then a record deficit. He broke Reagans record who did the same thing. Clinton oversaw a drastic cutting of federal programs to stop the hemorrhage and left the above mentioned surplus to GWB. With this huge "surplus" in mind Bush pushed for tax cuts, gave back money we did not yet have and then started 2 wars.

getting divorced to save money now there's an idea......i wonder what the pope is going to say about that.....not that i care but seriously is this how the Obama administration really intends to make the money to pay for their social justice programs????wow that is really history worthy.  maybe the will considering taxing you per child too since they produce the dreaded carbon dioxide ! i  have never ever thought i would recieve a social security check and can't say i want one ....by the time i'm old i think our dollar will be worth 3 cents!

In May 2009 the Senate Finance Committee proposed placing a "sin tax" on fattening and nutritionally deficient drinks and foods. This includes alcohol which, no matter the vehicle, is loaded with empty calories. Beer bellies?

The reasoning was two-sided:

• Increase the cost of junk food to help narrow the cost between it and healthier choices


• Raise money for the health care overhaul

Probably funded by all involved that would be forced to collect this tax, but most notably by soft drink manufacturers, the lobbyists went to town. Or at least to DC. The idea as it stands now? Who knows. Now that this reform looks more probable than just talk regular Americans will see fit to not fight it.

I say tax tobacco, alcohol, soft drinks and junk food. Those are four major contributors to a growing rate of diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity and reactive airway disease.

Carter? Nixon was President when that happened. I was alive and I owned a Fina gas station back then. I recently saw a blog where somebody had blamed that on Carter and then had to strike it and correct it to Nixon. See? Everybody is just sure that the Dems will "tax and spend" when historically it is the opposite.

However that crisis had nothing to do with us but was caused totally by OPEC.

The Republican Presidents have been the ones in my lifetime, to the man, that have created these huge deficits. Reagan started it in most recent times by overspending on defense by declaring the Russians were coming. Every GOP prez since him has inherited a budget surplus, including GWB from Clinton, and immediately started creating deficits.

I agree on term limits however.