Rep. Price: Free Healthcare For All?
Price co-sponsors SCHIP alternative
As Congressman Price describes his proposed health care plan in the Cherokee Ledger, it is a first step toward free healthcare for all. If the government starts paying for catastrophic healthcare (an idea that Price says his bill opens the door to), it is only a matter of time before it picks up the whole tab. Paying for preventive medicine is cheaper than paying for catastrophic results, thus governments will, in the future, start providing full coverage to save money.
I think Tom’s heart may be in the right place on this issue, but if we do not make people pay something how can we afford this? My solution of mandatory payment from for those who can afford it, and partial payment based on income for people who cannot, is tough medicine but is more realistic.
CL-The same day the U.S. House failed to override the president’s Oct. 3 veto on the bipartisan bill that would reauthorize the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), another piece of legislation was introduced Oct. 17 sponsored in part by a Cherokee legislator.
In addition, U.S. Rep. Tom Price (Right), R-Roswell, is calling for Democratic support on the alternative bill he co-sponsored.
“The House sustained the president’s veto on the flawed SCHIP bill that was introduced by the Democrat-controlled Congress,” Price said. “It gives us a great opportunity to now work together and come up with an appropriate renewed and reauthorized SCHIP program.”
One of the programs at stake is PeachCare, Georgia’s SCHIP program, which serves about 256,000 Georgia children. About 5,988 of those children live in Cherokee County.
The federal government extended the SCHIP program, which was originally set to expire in September. SCHIP’s new deadline is Nov. 16.
Price said he feels this is a good time for both political sides to get together to form a compromise.
The new bill reauthorizes SCHIP at 200 percent of the federal poverty level—$42,000 per year for a family of four. It also provides premium assistance in way of a tax credit for families who make $42,000 to $62,000 per year, Price said.
The new bill also gives states greater flexibility for creating programs to help their uninsured.
“If Georgia wanted to institute a program that provided for catastrophic insurance for all folks without health insurance, then they would be able to do that,” Price said.
Price co-sponsors SCHIP alternative
Cherokee Ledger News, by Erika Neldner (erikaneldner@ledgernews.com)The same day the U.S. House failed to override the president’s Oct. 3 veto on the bipartisan bill that would reauthorize the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), another piece of legislation was introduced Oct. 17 sponsored in part by a Cherokee legislator.
In addition, U.S. Rep. Tom Price (Right), R-Roswell, is calling for Democratic support on the alternative bill he co-sponsored.
“The House sustained the president’s veto on the flawed SCHIP bill that was introduced by the Democrat-controlled Congress,” Price said. “It gives us a great opportunity to now work together and come up with an appropriate renewed and reauthorized SCHIP program.”
One of the programs at stake is PeachCare, Georgia’s SCHIP program, which serves about 256,000 Georgia children. About 5,988 of those children live in Cherokee County.
The federal government extended the SCHIP program, which was originally set to expire in September. SCHIP’s new deadline is Nov. 16.
Price said he feels this is a good time for both political sides to get together to form a compromise.
The new bill reauthorizes SCHIP at 200 percent of the federal poverty level—$42,000 per year for a family of four. It also provides premium assistance in way of a tax credit for families who make $42,000 to $62,000 per year, Price said.
The new bill also gives states greater flexibility for creating programs to help their uninsured.
“If Georgia wanted to institute a program that provided for catastrophic insurance for all folks without health insurance, then they would be able to do that,” Price said.
Price said he and others will speak with the Democratic leadership and sit down to find a compromise soon.
“We will make an appeal to the Democratic leadership, to the speaker and the majority leader, that because of their inability to move forward with legislation without the majority of Republicans, it’s time to sit down and work positively,” he said. “I’m hopeful we’ll be able to do this in a very short period of time.”
At press time, Price said they had reached out to the Democratic leadership and followed the normal process, but they had not heard back.
“We’ve approached them. Being the minority, it’s not our purview to be able to set a meeting with the majority party,” Price said. “They have yet to show any interest in good faith in a bipartisan fashion.”
While politicians debate the reauthorization of SCHIP, Price said he feels a common ground will be found before the November deadline.
“If it doesn’t occur, then I and many others will work with the leadership to make certain that the current program is extended for a period of time to allow us to come up with that new proposal,” Price said.
The new bill authorizes $36.5 billion for the SCHIP program.
“It allots the amount of money that’s necessary to cover all of the children that were in the Democrats’ proposal up to 200 percent of the poverty level and then the tax credit portion between 200 and 300 percent. We do that without raising taxes and decreasing the waste and fraud that exists in the federal programs.”
Price said fraud is estimated at $5 billion per year.
The Department of Community Health is following the SCHIP news but state officials don’t comment on pending legislation.
Amanda Seals, spokesperson for DCH, has previously said that if elected officials in Washington simply renew the SCHIP program for a year, while they work out their differences on the subject, Georgia will run out of money by next spring.
State health officials are hoping that the formula, which determines how much money goes to each state, is reworked.
“We need Congress to reauthorize the program and fix the funding formula so we can have a successful SCHIP program in Georgia,” Seals previously said.
Everyone knows what my first question will be.
Are Illegal Alien’s covered under Price’s plan?
ASK BART
John – I have a couple of points to make on this;
1. Again, Hugh’s point is a good one. If illegals are covered, get rid of it right now. That leads to the second point;
2. GET RID OF IT ANYWAY. Why should people from other States pay to fund Peach Care or any other GEORGIA program? Why should WE GEORGIANS pay to fund other States socialized healthcare plans?
The democrats blew it again yesterday and couldn’t get the veto proof margin they were hoping to obtain. THAT plan woould have added $35B more to this ridiculous legislation.
Here’s the bottom line; the Federal Government has no business and NO Constitutional authority to run a healthcare program for the states. If the individual states want such a program, it’s up to them to find a way to pay for it.
At this point, Price is accepting the lesser of two evils by keeping the cost of this crap at the levels proposed by the President.
The socialized medicine crowd can’t wait for this crap to pass. It’s the first step in socializing all healthcare in our Country.
Any REAL Americans who believe in the vision of our Foounders will fight this tooth and nail.
Vote NO to Socialized Medicine AND ANY FORM of Federally Funded SCHIP! LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE!
ditto Mac.
Mac,
You are wrong about the cost. If Price’s plan becomes law the cost would go up faster than the first SCHIP bill.
The insurance companies charge and make money based on risk. If tax payers pay for catastrophic insurance only at first the price would keep going up because every study shows that without preventive medicine the cost goes up at an estimated 10 to 1 ratio.
The State would be forced to add preventive medicine because if not the premium for the cost of free catastrophic insurance would get out of control.
This is 101 in the risk based pricing and I would hope Congressman Price would understand this basic concept since it is his industry ie DOCTOR.
Do you understand?
Link to summary of legislation: http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR03176:@@@D&summ2=m&
According to the summary, “Provides for: (1) standardization of income determinations; (2) the application of citizenship documentation requirements; (3) an increased federal matching rate for citizenship documentation enforcement under Medicaid and SCHIP; and (4) temporary increase in federal matching rate for Medicaid and SCHIP administrative costs.
Not quite sure why some very conservative legislators would sign on to this bill unless this is part of the political games that must be played when dems immediately blast any vote against SCHIP as “killing the children”.
Other noteworthy co-sponsors include Lynn Westmoreland and Nathan Deal, both considered extremely conservative.
Bart,
Good job! Facts seem to escape the other side.
John,
As Bart RIGHTLY points out, any cost increase is TEMPORARY and a citizenship detemination is required.
I’d be lying if I said I agree with this coswallop, but as I said before, Price is signing on to the lesser of two evils. It’s anything BUT conservative, and is clearly the response to “killing the children” arguements.
Do YOU understand?
Vote AGAINST Socialized Medicine. The quality of care will decrease dramatically.
MAC,
TOM PRICE SAID!
“If Georgia wanted to institute a program that provided for catastrophic insurance for all folks without health insurance, then they would be able to do that,” Price said.
This is real basic!
If you give everyone catastrophic insurance and do not do preventive medicine do you understand it would cost us more for the insurance over time?
And if the insurance did not cover it tax payers would get stuck with the bill or the person would not get treatment.
Price’s plan would drive the cost up unless we did preventive medicine. How does Congressman Price account for that cost issue in his plan?
DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
Can somebody please give me an example of preventative medicine? The only prevention I know of is a healthy lifestyle and ALTERNATIVE medicine. Please show me where I’m wrong. And HELL NO to any more free stuff for illegals. What part of ILLEGAL don’t they understand?
The concept is check ups, using doctor office for stuff like cold and flue instead of emergency room,….
Where is Ron Paul’s legislation to abolish SCHIP? I thought he was a conservative…now is the time to put up or shut up!
Actually John, it is Joe Barton’s bill, not Tom Price’s, he just signed on a few days ago.
Bart
What would you call Tom Price’s plan LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE?
Bart
IE headline! Price co-sponsors SCHIP
John,
First I would call it Joe Barton’s plan giving proper credit where due.
Would I support it, hell no. But I’m not in DC thus am not privy to discussions taking place behind closed doors.
Do I trust Georgia Congressmen Lynn Westmoreland, Nathan Deal and Tom Price to know what they are doing in this political game instigated by dems with children shamelessly used as nothing more than political pawns, hell yes.
Unfortunately, there will be a renewal of SCHIP…there is no argument there. As the minority in Congress, the GOP can only work to get the best deal possible and they are doing this with support from GWB.
Now answer my question, Where is Ron Paul’s legislation to abolish SCHIP? I thought he was a conservative…now is the time to put up or shut up!
“Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich Hate Children”
http://tinyurl.com/2ztady
Bart
How is the Barton/Price plan the best deal if we now give out “catastrophic insurance” which would drive up cost faster?
Bart
BTW Boehner is clear Price is key driver behind the Plan.
Boehner Applauds GOP Measure to Renew SCHIP, Provide American Families More Health Care Choices
House GOP Leader: Bill Provides New Impetus to Begin Bipartisan SCHIP Negotiations
Washington, Oct 18 –
As the House voted to sustain the President’s veto and House Republicans renewed calls for the majority to negotiate a responsible bipartisan renewal of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today issued the following statement praising Reps. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO), Tom Feeney (R-FL), Tom Price (R-GA), and Tim Walberg (R-MI) for offering an alternative SCHIP plan rooted in principles of freedom and smaller government:
“I commend my GOP colleagues for offering legislation that embodies Republican principles of smaller government and faith in the free market. This measure would fully reauthorize the SCHIP program, which was established under a Republican majority in 1997, and does so in a way that would not set our nation on a path toward government-run health care managed by bureaucrats and politicians in Washington.
“For the last several weeks, the congressional majority has made it clear that partisan politics was a higher priority than crafting a responsible SCHIP reauthorization that puts poor children first. With today’s vote behind us, Congress has a fresh opportunity to begin bipartisan negotiations to renew SCHIP and insure low-income children first. As I told my Democratic colleagues during today’s debate, Republicans stand ready to join them in doing just that. This bill provides a new impetus to begin these negotiations, and I’m hopeful we’ll begin our bipartisan work very soon.”
NOTE: Reps. Musgrave, Price, Feeney, and Walberg today introduced the More Children, More Choices Act (H.R. 3888). Boehner has signed-on as a co-sponsor of the measure.
John,
Do you think a conservative…say…oh I don’t know…Ron Paul should introduce legislation to abolish the program?
Bart
How is Price’s plan “rooted in principles of freedom and smaller government”
WOW Boehner is a bigger spin artest than you!
John,
What part of I’m against it don’t you grasp?
Now the question yet again – Do you think a conservative…say…oh I don’t know…Ron Paul should introduce legislation to abolish the program?
-I certainly agree with the concept of mandatory payment from everyone living in America.
-The concept of a doctor not treating a human being who presents himself/herself in the office or ER because that person is an undocumented alien is WRONG.
-The usual negative commentary about the awfulness of “socialized” medicine is present in today’s posts. Medicine is the doctor—patient relationship, which is a joining of mutual trust between two people. Proper functioning of this relationship requires specific work input from the two participants, which has NOTHING to do with who the payer is. If you let the payer interfere with this relationship, you wind up with a mess. HMOs are more than adequate proof of that.
The work input does not conform to the meaning of “socialized” in the context of socialized medicine. It must remain beyond that. A single payer system is “socialized” insurance. If the quality of health care declines in a system of “socialized” insurance, then the reasons for that must lie with the two participants in the doctor—patient relationship as long as that relationship remains free of influence from the payer. I believe the Canadian and British systems suffer from this major flaw.
-regarding spending on health care in a “socialized” universal publicly financed program, I direct interested commentators to the work of Professor Thorpe, a highly respected health care economist, of EMORY University. (http://www.nchc.org/materials/studies/Thorpe%20booklet.pdf)
Great reductions in spending on both a national level and an individual family level are predicted for the universal publicly financed system. I see that Professor Thorpe’s work on the economic influence of chronic diseases has been much praised and used by politicians of both parties to help define their health care plans. ( A Route To Better Health Care by David S. Broder Sunday, June 3, 2007; washingtonpost.com)
But I do not see mention of his work on the economic impact of a universal publicly financed program mentioned.
-certainly, proper management of chronic diseases and efforts toward preventive medicine are very important. And they are important not because they cost less or more but simply because they are good medicine, i.e., the doctor—patient relationship functioning properly.
I believe that the major presidential candidates’ health care plans are not a route to better health care but rather a stroll along the garden path towards the great construction of the status quo.
R. Garth Kirkwood M.D.
http://www.equalhealthcareforall.com
doctork@equalhealthcareforall.com
John –
Why do you persist with this KONOPIAN logic? Read my first post. It clearly says GET RID OF IT ALTOGETHER.
What about that DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND?
It’s real basic John.
VOTE FOR ANYONE WHO OPPOSES SCHIP AND SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!
Mac
Please do not let the Facts get in the way you feel!
I know it is hard when we get past talking points for you.
Bart,
You know what plan I support! I think the problem goes beyound SCHIP.
“VOTE FOR ANYONE WHO OPPOSES SCHIP AND SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!”
Here, here. Good job old fellow.
Less health care for children and fewer abortions so that we can have more kids without health care.
It’s almost too perfect… [ENTER EVIL LAUGHTER]
SgtMac, you would make a great bureaucratic policy maker. Is that your current occupation? You have a natural tendency for promoting the most idiotic ideas. Were you running FEMA in 2005 by any chance?
Mac
You are a 100% PRO-Birth you could care less once the kid is born!
Birth is 4% of the time before 18, that makes you 4% PRO-LIFE!
bb
Ron Paul never introduces legislation unless he knows it’s going to pass. (just kidding)
What part of conservatism to these “plans” come from? One way or another it’s all about instituting a COMMAND ECONOMY. And centralization always leads to problems. When this happens the only folks that hold things together are the “McGyvers” who say “screw the regs” and go outside the “law” to fix the problem. And I don’t expect this to “compute” with some people.
Hey Doc
Your “free healthcare” for everyone (including illegal aliens) is going to “require” full participation. And there’s going to be, you know, some “enforcement costs” (like goon squads in flak jackets) So much for your care and compassion.
Does anybody remember the Davy Crockett speech about the Admiral’s widow’s stipend proposed by Congress? Where this Titanic bill will leave the USA is in the same spot as the ship. For those of you who chose the lesser of two Evils, you got that a slower ride to the cliff! Now those of us who support the principles that Ron Paul stand for will either have to go down with you poor ignorant, misguided souls or must jump to the iceberg for surivial.
Now if you want to deal with healthcare costs go after license laws and allow nurses and et.al to offer services, and remove the anti-trust protection insurers enjoin currently, hay but that would require dealing with their respective lobbyists and people would have to do home on who to choose as their health care providers, what a libertian thought.
John,
Good points about anti-trust and license issue!
Mr. Galt,
What specific services do you think nurses should be allowed to offer?
Do you envision any supervision of the nurses?
Do you envision the nurses taking night and weekend call?
Do you envision malpractice insurance policies for the nurses?
RGK
Dr. K
Why not let them do basic stuff like cold, flue….
Mr. Konop,
I believe nurse practitioners will play an important role if my system or something resembling it comes to fruition. The increased demand could be startling. But there has to be a standard. In my view, a sound, ongoing doctor—patient relationship is the gold standard. Therefore, I believe nurse practitioners should function under the supervision of a physician. The degree of responsibility that a NP can assume will have to be worked out with the physician supervisor. My opinion is that the ultimate responsibility for care will lie with both the NP and the supervising doctor. (Implied in this is that the patient has fulfilled their responsibilities in the doctor—patient relationship)
I honestly do not believe in the concept of basic stuff or simple cases. Each symptom and sign that a patient presents with carries a differential diagnosis (more than one diagnosis can cause it) and a huge part of a doctor’s training is to know and understand these, to correlate them in order of importance, (which is most likely) and then to proceed with diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic plans accordingly. It is impossible to know in advance which patients will ultimately turn out to have had simple problems, and then assign NPs to see just these patients.
Bottom line, I have no difficulty with NPs as long as they have ongoing supervision from the same physician and as long as both have developed clear working protocols.
RGK
WOW IT LOOKS LIKE PRICE SUPPORTS HILLARY/ROMNEYCARE!
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney announced members of his health care policy advisory group Wednesday who will help him formulate his policy goals as he seeks the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.
Romney’s health care team is composed of Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, an orthopaedic surgeon from the Atlanta area who practiced medicine for more than 20 years before being elected to Congress; Tim Murphy, the president of Beacon Health Strategies and former Massachusetts Health and Human Services Secretary under former Gov. Romney; Rep. Phil Gingrey, an obstetrician and gynecologist who practiced medicine for more than 25 years before being elected to Congress; John Cogan, a professor of public policy at Stanford University; Glenn Hubbard, the dean of the Columbia Business School; and Cindy Gillespie, who served as a counselor to Romney during his tenure as Massachusetts governor.