Why do no Republican candidates have any plan to fix healthcare?

Question

I definitely don't like all of the Democratic Candidate's proposals for fixing the problem, but Healthcare definitely is an issue, with people dying because they switch companies after having a pre-existing/uninsurable condition, or after loosing jobs our corporations take to Mexico and India, why do no Republican candidates have any Healthcare Plan on the platforms? Do they think we're too dumb to notice? I might not expect much from someone like Mitt Romney who took his profits to other countries so he could avoid the taxes the rest of us pay, but Giuliani? Paul? I expect something.

Dizney, that's no plan, but a complaint on someone elses plan. I was hoping I had just missed a plan made public by one of the republicans I respect, but your answer makes me think there isn't one. Do nothing.

I'm sorry to hear that Maj. Most families have one or two people who are in this situation. It touches us all so I'd like to see all candidates, Republican and Democrat have some plan to fix it.

I doubt people who can't get their brain tumor removed until it gets to the point requiring an ER visit are splurging on cell phones. This isn't the Welfare issue we're talking, it's the first part of our right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."
This issue is worse every year. Our government wastes money to bring in "independent contractors" who make much more than government employees than it would have to pay to fix this problem.
btw. Medicare is much cheaper than Health Insurance. 4000 dollar is less than 10000 in my case. I'm not saying I'd choose Medicare, but give me the choice.

The "free market" can't fix anything, and never has. It's a unfounded religious belief that feudal lords (corporate leaders born into money) will take care of those who need help. The government (We the People) takes care of the commons. (Or do you not want Sewers, Highways, clean water/food anymore?) We've read "The Jungle," and "A Christmas Carol" to know how the "Free Market" fixes problems.

Ahcho, the veteran's health care plan is 100% socialized. If it works so well, why wouldn't this work for everyone else?

Wow that's awesome Jim. My insurance company changes my information (i.e. "sex" or "age") every year to get out of the costs. I have to put in a request for it to go back to the way it was every year for a different article of information.
I wish we had a choice in healthcare, but we have to take what our employers decide for us. In my case, this is expensive and a sociopathic corporation. I'd like to support corporations that do things by the laws, not support criminal corporations. (i.e. ones who talk their way out of paying those taxes on the big buildings downtown)

Good point, Reminder. So, maybe the proposals out there won't work. I'm just more comfortable with candidates who are putting some idea foreward.

Michael, that is my biggest fear. If it's true, we know why McCain failed in his anti-lobby movement, and our Republic is truely at risk, where dollars and not people vote.

Answer 1

I have the perfect health care plan. I was in the military and all of my medical needs are taken care of free of charge. Sucks to be a coward.

Answer 2

A better question may be, "is there a 'fix' for healthcare?"

There is a system in place where national and local payers insure most Americans, and within that model, there is not a tremendous amount of flexibility. I don't think the problem is with the insurance companies so much as it is with the health care delivery at the providers. Most of the health care dollar goes to medical costs and not to insurance costs, so it stands to reason that savings or progress made on the provider side would go further than on the insurance side.

Answer 3

Ron Paul and Healthcare?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As it stands now coverage based on profit. HMOs are essentially trying to keep as much money as the people will give them, while paying back out as little as possible, it's essentially a gamble on who will live the longest. They actually research this very thoroughly so they might give you a rate that will get acceptable profit ratios from any person before they become ill, at which point they try to avoid as many costs as possible. It's a company, and obviously companies must do this to survive, it's not that they're immoral, as a company it HMOs have no vices. Some people cannot afford the extra bill to get an insurance card, and many more are denied crucial care by carefully crafted bureaucracy designed with money in mind.

Ron Paul's system would eliminate the middle man of HMOs and instead use a certain tax to create a personal account with which anyone may choose to spend as they will. I presume if the person is particularly daring they might just empty that account one day and head south. Though, because the accounts are personal this would only effect one person and their family. The virtues of such a system: it gifts more power to those who live comfortably. It would free up the emergency room as people would be less keen to waste their personal health credit on any visit. However, the reason Canada has such long waiting room waits, is not because there is some failed system at work, it's because the people can make it to a doctor for every symptom that they honestly should have looked at (and anyone with money would do anyway). They are not petty saps on society for behaving this way.

So in this system, there are obviously the wealthy and the poor. The poor, who earn less and are taxed less have smaller personal coffers to spend on, quite the opposite for the wealthy. It's very easy to argue that there will be less burden on the system, more people are poor than wealthy, and these people can't afford to simply get care for every conceivable injury/illness they may run into (surprisingly more common for lower-income persons). What would this achieve? It seems to me nothing more than a lot of saved paperwork and maybe an extra office building converted to appartments. This is an improvement, yes, but in my eyes totally unacceptable.

Answer 4

I think it is because the healthcare crisis is no where as severe as the media would like you to believe.

I know, I know. There are millions out there without insurance. I know, there are those that cannot get the care they need because of one reason or another.

What I am saying is that of the 300 million people in the US, how many of them died because their insurance carrier refused their treatment? 1%? .001%? Do we 'fix' the system because less then 1% are in serious danger?

As to the folks without insurance, why? Can they not afford it? They can afford a cell phone bill every month. They can afford cable TV service. Why not healthcare insurance? (I know there are some that honestly cannot afford it. There are already government plans to assist those folks.)

The Republicans understand that healthcare is an issue. They understand that many parts of the system are far from perfect. They also see that influences outside the medical community are the root cause of a lot of the healthcare issues. Fix the root cause, and you will fix the problem. Just put a band-aid on healthcare will do nothing to improve the underlying system.

There are all too many people that think not getting a bill from the doctor represents free medical service. It is not. Someone is paying that doctor, and that someone is the US taxpayer. And, your tax bill will go up more then the cost of major medical insurance if national healthcare is instituted.

Answer 5

As someone who can no longer get an individual health care insurance policy (as of a few weeks ago, oh, joy), I have to say, I'm amazed they haven't addressed this. I know a large portion of their insurance company support comes from mid-sized insurance companies, though---the types that will get squeezed out of business if any real healthcare fix ever goes through. These companies are the cherry-pickers when it comes to who they will cover, and if nationalized systems are ever put in place, they'll never survive. If the GOP has to appease this group, it makes it very hard for them to put forth a plan of their own.

Just to add to the discussion, I'm a healthy 20-something girl, with a genetic syndrome that affects 5-10% of ALL women, and requires two ridiculously cheap meds and only a few doc visits a year......and I'm now too much of a risk to insure. That's obscene. Estimate ~200Mil people in the US, 100 Million are women, 5% of 100 Mil is 5 MILLION women insurance won't carry, even though they're pretty healthy. It's ridiculous.

Answer 6

I have worked for 4 decades

I never had health insurance that wasn't a headache from the word go.

That is, till I landed a job that had the Kaiser health plan.

While I had issues with Kaiser, nevertheless, it was easy as hell to navigate through, cheap, no headaches, no worries, no complicated insurance forms, no waiting for the doctor or hospital to get paid as they were threatening to screw up my credit because of slow pay.

We need to put it in perspective.

50% of all bankruptcies are the result of medical bills, 50% of those had medical insurance that ran out. Which means, in order to stay alive, or get needed treatment, they had to give up much of what they spent a lifetime securing.

I want a kaiser type plan for every American.

This is affordable, and uncomplicated. My biggest fear, is it will be too damned complicated. Regardless, it is needed and for the anti universal health care nuts to be talking about personal responsibility and that we can't afford it, I'll remind you of the bankruptcy reason I gave above, and the half trillion dollar wars that you are paying for as we kill others into our oblivion of ignoring our own self interests.

Peace

Jim

.

Answer 7

Why would I think that the Federal Government, under anybodies control, would be able to administer a social program w/o widespread corruption and loss.

Just look at social security. Sure at first it was great and it did help some people, however there is a very REAL possibility that I will not see one dime of the money I have been FORCED to contribute over the last 24 years.

What will be different this time ? Not a thing.

Government programs are like a pyramid schemes. They're great when you get in early, but the bottom line is someone is going to get screwed.

Answer 8

The Republicans do have plans that involve free-market solutions and tax subsidies to the poor and small business owners to solve the health care problem. If you honestly think the federal government can do anything to this except turn it into the world's largest "circle-jerk", you need to pay closer attention to the way things don't work in Washington.

Answer 9

What is ironic is when I clicked on the link in Yahoo News for Hillary on Health care, down at the bootm under Opinion: it said Republicans can win on Health Care.

I highly disagree because I haven't seen them put up anything yet?

Answer 10

the main one i think of of is they are no longer as sleazy as Hillary. Hillary's campaign team replaced into caught sending out mass e-mails claiming Obama is a Muslim out to break the U. S.. The evidence they stated replaced into that Obama refused to assert the pledge, placed his provide up his heart for the pledge, and placed his hand on the bible. All Lies. Now those idiots try to bypass the dollar and blame the republicans? bypass Hillary bypass, Blame everybody yet do no longer look interior the mirror.