You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Kennedy to push for universal health coverage
2007-01-11
Hey, if it keeps him out of the way, let him go for it! :-)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The federal government should join the state of Massachusetts in enacting universal health coverage, said Sen. Edward Kennedy, the new chairman of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over numerous health issues. Kennedy's home state is the first to require everyone to have health insurance, just as drivers must have automobile coverage.
And it's driven up the cost of insurance due to all the included mandates.
Kennedy has his own version of what universal health coverage would look like. He wants to extend Medicare to all. In his first hearing Wednesday as chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, the Massachusetts Democrat called on 10 witnesses from all over the country to talk about how to make health care more affordable.

"Insurance coverage is down. Costs are up. And America is heading to the bottom of the league of major nations in important measures of the quality of care," Kennedy said.
Costs are up everywhere. Ask the Brits and Canadians ...
Posted by:gorb

#13  Costs efficiencies/accounting will inevitably lead to Diagnostic, Treatment, Physician, and Medicinal/Presriptions, etc. standardizations, where Nurses will do what certified Physicians =Surgeons used to do. THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT OUR POL ELITES WILL ALWAYS HAVE $$$ PRIVATE CARE IN SWITZERLAND, VIENNA, ETC. WHILE THE REST OF US WON'T.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-01-11 23:21  

#12  Medicine is already socialized, i.e. you are not paying for out of your pocket. Whether Blue Cross, Medicare, Tricare or any other entity but the end user pays for it, there is no incentive for the user to hold down cost, instead an incentive to demand the impossible as long as everyone else is paying for what you receive.

I think a better funding scheme is for each person to have the option control their own medical money, like an IRA account. Then they can buy the insurance appropriate to their needs or none at all. Until their consumer is directly responsible for the costs there will be no incentive to control costs.
Posted by: ed   2007-01-11 19:53  

#11  Beat me to it, #1 AH.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2007-01-11 19:29  

#10  Two sectors of the economy are dominated by the government, education and health care. Two sectors of the economy are totally screwed up. Guess which two.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2007-01-11 18:07  

#9  Socialized medicine is one of the two brass rings (the other being total disarmament of private citizens) that the left knows it must grasp to convert the U.S. to Euro-style socialism.

Therefore, it must be resisted at all costs.
Posted by: no mo uro   2007-01-11 17:56  

#8  You know, we've been lucky that no one has seen fit to shoot this fat, stupid, venal old bastard as were his brothers. If all of the male Kennedy spawn had been offed we would never, ever hear the end of LLL nutballs howling that the Kennedys would have saved America.

As it is, every time one of those idiot NewCamelot sycophants sits down to a keyboard, they've got the mental image of the real-life cowardly murderer to contend with as a counterbalance to their idealized conception of the Kennedy greatness. "Waitress sandwich," anyone?
Posted by: mac   2007-01-11 17:46  

#7  Better to have a citizens dividend (like the oil trust except for property) and let people buy their own insurance.

I'd agree with ya, ZPiB, except that any "trust fund" the Donks would create for this would be like Social Security & Medicare. Everyone pays in, and we have "excesses." Problem is there's no "lock" on those excess funds and the Congresscritters spend it like mad NOW and stuff the Treasury full of IOUs. I'd rather keep my own money and let the private sector handle my insurance.
Posted by: BA   2007-01-11 17:43  

#6  If you've been keeping up with the wild yowling of Teddy (the toad) Kennedy, you'd know this is nothing new. He's been pushing universal health care at least since 1992. He was a major instigator of Bill & Hill's "health care task force". The man needs a brain-case flush - it's getting awful rusty up there.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2007-01-11 15:34  

#5  ..Well, frankly he can ask for NHC all he wants, He uses the Congressional health care system and will for the rest of his life - he'd impress me a LOT more if he said that as soon as it was approved, he would be switching over to it exclusively.

Not, of course, like that would happen.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2007-01-11 11:52  

#4  Better to have a citizens dividend (like the oil trust except for property) and let people buy their own insurance.
Posted by: Zarquon Pebbles in Blairistan   2007-01-11 11:19  

#3  I ain't payin' for no goddamn Martians!
Posted by: mojo   2007-01-11 10:53  

#2  Very bad idea. Socialism doesn't work, there already is a safety net in place and it will become the ultimate black hole for American tax payers because in the interests of "fairness" I'm certain they'll want to cover the illegals as well. If it comes to pass I want to be on the plan the leeches in congress are on, because regardless of what they say, it will be better than anyone else's.
Posted by: JerseyMike   2007-01-11 10:31  

#1  Government-financed health care = rationing. When Sen. Kennedy renounces the use of his congressional health plan and agrees to use only the services Medicare allows for him to consume (he's eligible), I might be persuaded he's doing more than posing.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2007-01-11 10:15  

00:00