Latest liberal health care proposal: 'Medicare Extra for All'

[Northeast Agent]

Latest liberal health care proposal: 'Medicare Extra for All'

Medicare Extra’s main features include automatic eligibility for coverage for all U.S. citizens and lawful residents, as well as free preventive care, treatment for chronic disease and generic prescription drugs. Dental, vision and hearing services would be included.

Low-income people would have no premiums or copays, while income would decide premiums and copays for all others. Employers could participate or not, while employees could choose Medicare Extra or stick with their employer’s plans; tax-free status of employer-provided health care would remain, subject to a limit.

Seniors with private Medicare Advantage insurance plans through Medicare could keep similar coverage through a redesign of the program called “Medicare Choice.” They would also gain coverage for vision, dental and hearing services, as well as long-term care services. Medicare currently does not provide any of those.

 

[aikenhealth]

Sounds like Obamacare part 2

 

[adjusterjack]

"Taxes would be higher, of course, and the government would play a more prominent role in health care, but some of the options identified in the report as possible ways to pay for it include a rollback of some of the recently enacted GOP tax cuts for corporations and upper-income people, raising Medicare taxes on upper-income earners and tax increases on tobacco and sugary soft drinks."

And the one thing it won't do:

Reduce the cost of insurance and medical care.

 

[Monti_Ray]

Both sides of the political spectrum can agree on one thing, it is good to know the price of something before you commit to use it. Will anyone get a haircut without knowing the price before extending their head? Why is it so different even in a non-emergency healthcare situation?

 

[gregj]

1% of our population accounts for 12% of health treatment spending; just 5% accounts for over 50%. On the other end of the spectrum, 50% accounts for around 3%.

Most of the burdensome spending in our (not a) system arises in situations where no "consumer" makes the choices: complex labor & resource-intensive rescue care. Changes that remove a significant number of people from the rescue care category require policy commitments beyond even the overstuffed category of "health care" and whose effects emerge over long timeframes, usually longer than a 2-year Congressional term.

Should people be more engaged in health treatment decisions that affect them and their families? Sure. Is "consumerism" a panacea for reining in health treatment prices? It's another of "the" solutions that gets more attention than it probably deserves.