PhoenixIX, Jenks (11/21/2009 5:30:51 AM)

David

GREAT letter!

tried, (11/21/2009 7:48:05 AM)

Well said.

Michael Phillips, Tulsa (11/21/2009 7:55:06 AM)

I choose to spend a great deal of my money on health insurance because I like what I get. I have liberty to make that choice. If I am forced to spend money to buy health insurance, private or otherwise, I have lost some liberty.

Fred Orth, Tulsa (11/21/2009 8:08:00 AM)

David, Thank you for your well constructed analysis. Positive contributions to the discussion seem so rare these days.

Msdash00, Rural (11/21/2009 9:06:21 AM)

You lost some liberty sharing the government provided roadways, too.
You are forced to provide proof of insurance when applying for a auto tag and drivers lisense. This protects you and others on the road in case of incurred debt from an accident.
Health care is already available and purchased by many low income families i.e. Sooner Care, to cover debt incurred from health related issues.

A program requiring each person obtain health insurance provides several other useful measures many people have complained about.

Identifying those who are here illegally
More accurately monitoring health trends
Getting services to more people, promoting better educated and hopefully a more healthful society
Covering more of the costs presently absorbed by state funding (freeing more of this money up)

Personally, I am looking forward to the possibility of NOT paying more annually for same or less services (aka HealthChoice). Secondly, as a 2X cancer survivor, having the opportunity to change my insurance provider.

A least favorable thought I live with is my vunerability. If I have further incidents of cancer or related health issues from past and present treatments and my unpersonable provider could become my death panel, refusing me insurance coverage at any time for future treatment, drug, etc.

MP, I understand your sentiment. I am not sure, but I just imagine you could go to a private hospital and doctor that recieves no state or government funding. Personally, I would not be able to afford this type of care.

Msdash00, Rural (11/21/2009 9:34:03 AM)

Thank you, Mr Carr, for the well constructed letter. I am eager to share it with my daughter who is just beginning a family.

She calls me often with what I consider bizarre fears and questions. Some of her interesting questions are from un-researched and possibly originally 'planted' ignorant e-mail forwards sent by friends (?).
Another source of this anxiety is the shared ideologies of (some) co-workers conveying outrageous fears they appear to believe whole heartedly. These, I assume are media imposed becasue they are often repeat performances I have read or heard. They could qualify as a share delusion.
Teaching her to investigate futher and rationalize intended objectives by going to the source has helped her to dispell much of the 'silly' hunting 'season' for 'hate' based on 'fear.'

When does this season end in Oklahoma?

Jeffrey Ehlers, Tahlequah (11/21/2009 9:45:38 AM)

Kudos for actually researching the issue. Far too many people tend to just go with mealy sound bites in order to emotionally manipulate the people they are trying to "convince". This is by no means limited to one party; both do it when they are trying to fight against an issue. My question is, if they are fighting on behalf of the "people", why not present the truth and let the people decide for themselves, rather than putting "win at any cost" first?

The answer, of course, is money and political favors. But that doesn't make it right. I consider both of those to be necessary evils, to be tolerated only so far as absolutely necessary and not one inch further. Sadly, many of our "representatives" consider them to be perks of the job anymore.

Woofenburger, Hominy (11/21/2009 11:53:49 AM)

The MBA's would like to think so.

fredsdad, Tulsa, OK (11/21/2009 4:14:57 PM)

Socialized medicine is not unconstitutional. The constitution specifically allows Congress to spend money to promote the general welfare. The constitutionality of the government creating a business that competes with existing private enterprise will indeed make a court case, though given precedents from 1936 and 1987 I suspect it will pass on a 5-4 vote.

The writer claims that the public option will be a private company intially funded by the government with money to be paid back in ten years. The last time we did this was with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Each became the fundraising arm of the Democratic Party, then through political interference and politically condoned gross mismanagement not only failed to repay the government, but cost us hundreds of billions in addition.

We did a similar transaction with AMTRAK. That company also has not repaid the government, and continues to cost us $7-8 billion annually.

We most recently tried it with the Post Office, who also has not repaid our money and who also continues to cost us $6-7 billion a year.

The constitutionality of requiring citizens to purchase health insurance is very much in question. This provision could rightly be construed to be a bill of attainder, targeting those who have chosen to self insure for medical expenses. This requirement would be very different from the requirement to carry liability insurance as a condition of securing the privilege to drive on public roads. In that the government does not own (yet) the means of delivering health care, no such quid pro quo exists.

Finally, the fact that something may be constitutional, does not infer that is is consistent with original intent, nor in any other way a wise thing to do.

Alexis de Tocqueville in writings extensively read by our founders warned that democracy (or a democratic republic, as we are) would last only until the citizens discovered they could vote funds for themselves from the public treasury.

What de Tocqueville and our founders failed to contemplate was the cynicism and self-centeredness of our politicians. In setting terms of office, and in the financial world of the time, career politicians were neither encouraged nor expected. It was not contemplated that politicians would use public funds to buy votes, and it certainly was not contemplated that those funds used to buy votes would be borrowed with no expectation or even contemplation of repayment.

I suspect our nation is irretrievably bankrupt already, as Social Security and Medicare are already underfunded to the tune of $38 TRILLION, or about 10 times our total annual budget for everything. By year 9 the proposed health care reform in the Senate will be underfunded by over one trillion. We are already spending nearly a third of our budget on interest payments - not repaying debt, just interest - and borrowing more to do that. We are signing up for every credit card offer that comes in the mail, maxing them out as soon as we get them, and making minimum payments on the old credit cards with cash advances taken on the new ones.

If you can't figure out how to make that work for your family, you can't figure out how to make it work for your government.

Michael Phillips, Tulsa (11/21/2009 8:44:29 PM)

Msdash00, I too am a cancer survivor and I don't want to have to depend on our government for my health care.

Fredsdad, I know you are right and I wonder why everyone isn't angry about it.

Woofenburger, Hominy (11/21/2009 9:21:41 PM)

I am a cancer survivor and I would rather depend on the government to pay for it than a bunch of shyster health insurance execs. I spent four months in and out of the hospital. Surgeries, radiation treatments, tests, you know the drill. Came time for the insurance company to pay and guess what. No check. I talked with them over the phone numerous times. The hospitals and doctors offices corresponded with them numerous times. Still, no payment. I decided to go to the insurance company's office to talk to them in person. When I got there I found a sign on the door saying they had ceased doing business in Oklahoma and left no forwarding address.

Went through the insurance commissioner. Big help. His office said well, we can write them a letter asking them to pay but we don't have any enforcement power.

They left me to pay a $50,000.00 bill in 1979 when a good car cost $12,000.00. I was still a college student at that time. Had a wife and a child.

No, the government is still around and can't really pull up stakes and change to a different government to keep my taxes and not pay. A private company is able to do so and has.

zzx375, BA (11/21/2009 10:19:08 PM)

Insurance covered my daughter's bone marrow transplant without a hitch.

FUTURE WORLD, Tulsa (11/21/2009 10:20:48 PM)

Yes I can. That is their underhanded method of recouping the loss they paid out.

Woofenburger, Hominy (11/21/2009 10:43:09 PM)

By the way, I need to mention about that last post that I worked for Jack Griffith Gas-Up at the time as a convenience store manager. It is now On Cue convenience stores.

Mr. Griffith paid me full salary from September 1979 through January 1980 without me showing up one day for work. He told me to go get healed and I would have a job when I got back.

I will be forever endebted to that man and his company for the generosity and compassion he showed me. We didn't have sick leave in those days and had 40 hours per year vacation time. Jack took care of me on the job front.

redbeard, Stillwater (11/21/2009 11:13:46 PM)

I agree with Justun,FutureWorld and Woofenburger.There are a lot of crooked insurance companies out there.Just read about claims denied by insurance companies after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast.It'll make you sick.

The government may be slow and inefficient sometimes,but they don't steal from taxpayers.

gadfly, Broken Arrow (11/21/2009 11:35:45 PM)

Medicare for all. We are only staving off the inevitable. Insurance companies are pricing themselves out of business and this country into socialized medicine. When insurance companies can spent $60 million for commercials scaring seniors about 'death panels' and have their lobbyists padding pockets in DC to the tune of $40 million in one month, I'd rather have the government handle my health care insurance. A true 'public option' (not one run by already corrupt private insurance companies) is the only hope to make these scavangers competitive and give us coverage we can afford. It looks like that's not happening. Medicare for all, socialized medicine - it's coming.

Carl, Henryetta (11/22/2009 9:00:20 AM)

A couple of points. Using Workers' Comp as an example is not really accurate - since Workers' Comp ONLY applies to people who actually work - it is not a "social service" - per se. it is INSURANCE provided by the employer to injured WORKERS.

I think it has been said again and again that "the plan" currently in front of the Senate will NOT chnage anything for those who wish to carry private health insurance. As such, it shouldn't matter to anyone who has or wishes to obtain private coverage.

Medicaid has not ever presented a threat to those who wish to maintain private coverage.

Carl, Henryetta (11/22/2009 9:03:28 AM)

And, although I personally think they're a veritable den of thieves - keep in mind that insurance companies - being BUSINESSES - are in it for ONE PURPOSE and one purpose only - to make $$$$......NOT to help anyone out. Making money - in part - presupposes NOT paying money out.....

As I have personally heard a few LAWYERS say - "don't take this personally, doc, it's just BUSINESS."

grizz, tulsa (11/22/2009 11:40:28 AM)

Conservatives are more interested in warfare than welfare. They see it as patriotic.

Msdash00, Rural (11/22/2009 9:00:24 PM)

Woofen and MP, I salute your courage and recovery.
Dusty, a heartfelt moment of sharing there, thanks.

I have thoroughly enjoyed the exchanges posted, here.

Visiting with a Tulsa House Rep, she stated when talking with constituients about what concerns they had, she reported the majority stated, 'Healthcare costs and the wish to be old enough to be on medicare.'

This was astounding; I can only imagine that many of these people were harnessed with high insurance (or annually increasing) premiums who were wanting to get old.

Though I have insurance through my place of employment, to keep it I will more than likely prolong working after I reach retirement age because my insurance annually increases will make it difficutl to afford on projected income and I will not be old enough for medicare. As someone else mentioned, even with medicare a supplimental insurance is often required.

zz-You have much to celebrate!

I hope I only alluded to problems with 'my' insurance. Not 'all' insurance companies operate in this manner.

Too many people have difficult experiences: Very slow claims processing, denied claims, conflicting and lack of communications along with delayed payment to creditors can impose a threat to a person's good credit not to mention the stress level of a patient working to recover.