Palin, have a tort, Obama

[johnrocks]

Shill with a ghost writer.


You can tell, no lame sports analogies.

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

Exactly! State courts are regulated by States, what little part of the 10th is left, I don't want ceded to the Feds.!

 

[Lumpy 1]

Shill with a ghost writer.


You can tell, no lame sports analogies.

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

Exactly! State courts are regulated by States, what little part of the 10th is left, I don't want ceded to the Feds.!

It is a good point but do you feel the same about Federal control of your health care and all that will inevitably come with it?

 

[johnrocks]

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

Exactly! State courts are regulated by States, what little part of the 10th is left, I don't want ceded to the Feds.!

It is a good point but do you feel the same about Federal control of your health care and all that will inevitably come with it?

Yes, the Federal govt, has no place dealing with health care,imho. I support a free market based system, about the only thing the Fed. should do is invoke the Commerce Clause to allow insurance to be sold nationally,imho. Repeal the HMO Act as well as ERISA and HIPPA, again,imho.

 

[Polk]

then how come if you pay cash, the price is always lower than it would be if you had insurance or medicare/medicaid?

No paperwork.

ROFLMAO
no shit
but the price is still LOWER

That's why the price is lower. They're giving you a discount because they don't have to fill out all the paperwork.

 

[Polk]

Exactly! State courts are regulated by States, what little part of the 10th is left, I don't want ceded to the Feds.!

It is a good point but do you feel the same about Federal control of your health care and all that will inevitably come with it?

Yes, the Federal govt, has no place dealing with health care,imho. I support a free market based system, about the only thing the Fed. should do is invoke the Commerce Clause to allow insurance to be sold nationally,imho. Repeal the HMO Act as well as ERISA and HIPPA, again,imho.

John, how would you address coverage differences between states in a national marketplace? Wouldn't that have the net effect of all insurance companies headquartering in the state which mandates the lowest level of required benefits?

 

[johnrocks]

It is a good point but do you feel the same about Federal control of your health care and all that will inevitably come with it?

Yes, the Federal govt, has no place dealing with health care,imho. I support a free market based system, about the only thing the Fed. should do is invoke the Commerce Clause to allow insurance to be sold nationally,imho. Repeal the HMO Act as well as ERISA and HIPPA, again,imho.

John, how would you address coverage differences between states in a national marketplace? Wouldn't that have the net effect of all insurance companies headquartering in the state which mandates the lowest level of required benefits?

States already have various mandates Polk,is that your concern? I would prefer there NOT be those mandated benefits, allow me to purchase a high deduct,catastrophic plan if I want and if you want a low deduct comprehensive plan,then that would be your right, just an example but that's what I'd like to see.

I've had a long day,nite bro.

 

[DiveCon]

Yes, the Federal govt, has no place dealing with health care,imho. I support a free market based system, about the only thing the Fed. should do is invoke the Commerce Clause to allow insurance to be sold nationally,imho. Repeal the HMO Act as well as ERISA and HIPPA, again,imho.

John, how would you address coverage differences between states in a national marketplace? Wouldn't that have the net effect of all insurance companies headquartering in the state which mandates the lowest level of required benefits?

States already have various mandates Polk,is that your concern? I would prefer there NOT be those mandated benefits, allow me to purchase a high deduct,catastrophic plan if I want and if you want a low deduct comprehensive plan,then that would be your right, just an example but that's what I'd like to see.

I've had a long day,nite bro.

aka a la carte coverage

 

[Polk]

Yes, the Federal govt, has no place dealing with health care,imho. I support a free market based system, about the only thing the Fed. should do is invoke the Commerce Clause to allow insurance to be sold nationally,imho. Repeal the HMO Act as well as ERISA and HIPPA, again,imho.

John, how would you address coverage differences between states in a national marketplace? Wouldn't that have the net effect of all insurance companies headquartering in the state which mandates the lowest level of required benefits?

States already have various mandates Polk,is that your concern? I would prefer there NOT be those mandated benefits, allow me to purchase a high deduct,catastrophic plan if I want and if you want a low deduct comprehensive plan,then that would be your right, just an example but that's what I'd like to see.

I've had a long day,nite bro.

I'm not talking about high deductible versus low deductible. I'm referring to the types of treatment which are covered. For example, some states require insurance to cover mammograms. That's not the case in other states. Spread that out over all different sorts of treatments, and some states require a lot more things to be covered than others. The creation of a national marketplace would effectively make the lowest common denominator the law of the land, since the insurance companies would just base themselves in the state with the lowest requirements.

 

[DiveCon]

John, how would you address coverage differences between states in a national marketplace? Wouldn't that have the net effect of all insurance companies headquartering in the state which mandates the lowest level of required benefits?

States already have various mandates Polk,is that your concern? I would prefer there NOT be those mandated benefits, allow me to purchase a high deduct,catastrophic plan if I want and if you want a low deduct comprehensive plan,then that would be your right, just an example but that's what I'd like to see.

I've had a long day,nite bro.

I'm not talking about high deductible versus low deductible. I'm referring to the types of treatment which are covered. For example, some states require insurance to cover mammograms. That's not the case in other states. Spread that out over all different sorts of treatments, and some states require a lot more things to be covered than others. The creation of a national marketplace would effectively make the lowest common denominator the law of the land, since the insurance companies would just base themselves in the state with the lowest requirements.

exactly
and you should be able to PICK what coverage you want to pay for
thats what John was talking about

you are unlikely to NEED mamogram coverage
but should you get married, you might want to add it
just as a single woman wouldnt need to have coverage for prostate issues

 

[Polk]

States already have various mandates Polk,is that your concern? I would prefer there NOT be those mandated benefits, allow me to purchase a high deduct,catastrophic plan if I want and if you want a low deduct comprehensive plan,then that would be your right, just an example but that's what I'd like to see.

I've had a long day,nite bro.

I'm not talking about high deductible versus low deductible. I'm referring to the types of treatment which are covered. For example, some states require insurance to cover mammograms. That's not the case in other states. Spread that out over all different sorts of treatments, and some states require a lot more things to be covered than others. The creation of a national marketplace would effectively make the lowest common denominator the law of the land, since the insurance companies would just base themselves in the state with the lowest requirements.

exactly
and you should be able to PICK what coverage you want to pay for
thats what John was talking about

you are unlikely to NEED mamogram coverage
but should you get married, you might want to add it
just as a single woman wouldnt need to have coverage for prostate issues

The differences between men and women are already taken in to account when policies are issued (which is why men and women are charged different rates). And it's not a matter of choice, because the companies simply won't offer the coverage. We already know this from the existing marketplace.

 

[Emma]

Shill with a ghost writer.


You can tell, no lame sports analogies.

They did get in her whiny 'everyone picks on me' shit, though.

Just a question to throw out here.

Attorneys are licensed to practice in their respective states. With few exceptions, Federal courts do not have jurisdiction in medical malpractice cases. So what gives the Federal government the power to step in and meddle in what is clearly a state issue? If individual states want to enact tort reform, go for it. I don't believe it should be part of a Federal law, though.

Exactly! State courts are regulated by States, what little part of the 10th is left, I don't want ceded to the Feds.!

John!!!!

*big hugs*

 

[johnrocks]

John, how would you address coverage differences between states in a national marketplace? Wouldn't that have the net effect of all insurance companies headquartering in the state which mandates the lowest level of required benefits?

States already have various mandates Polk,is that your concern? I would prefer there NOT be those mandated benefits, allow me to purchase a high deduct,catastrophic plan if I want and if you want a low deduct comprehensive plan,then that would be your right, just an example but that's what I'd like to see.

I've had a long day,nite bro.

I'm not talking about high deductible versus low deductible. I'm referring to the types of treatment which are covered. For example, some states require insurance to cover mammograms. That's not the case in other states. Spread that out over all different sorts of treatments, and some states require a lot more things to be covered than others. The creation of a national marketplace would effectively make the lowest common denominator the law of the land, since the insurance companies would just base themselves in the state with the lowest requirements.

Insurance is supposed to insure you against high risk and to spread those risks, protecting your assets, not to be a pre paid medical plan Polk. An uninsured person's average cash price for a mammogram is appox. $100, the insured cost is over $200 and that ;when in a policy, is simply added to the premium cost, a policy then is about $15-$20 higher because of just that one procedure. I bet the cost would be even lower if mammograms were not covered at all by any insurance. Personal responsibility has to be here somewhere, as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink is true in healthcare, women die needlessly each year; not because mammograms are unavailable or they aren't insured or whatever; but because they don't go get a mammogram. Same with men and prostate screenings or colon exams,imho anyway.

 

[Polk]

John, I was just using mammograms as an example. The fact of the matter is, the creation of a "national" market is really just forcing the rules into alignment with those of the state with the most lax regulation.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If you liked what Freddie and Fannie did for the US housing market, you're going to love what ObamaCAre will do to your healthcare.