SENATE BILL: Reforming Atlasian Public Health Act of 2014 (Debating)

[Napoleon]

As much as I like the guy, there is no such thing as "Fritzcare". But honestly that's the least of this bill's problems, which I am trying to figure out the purpose of. Is this designed to completely undermine national healthcare or is that inevitable result going to be considered an "unintended consequence"? I'm genuinely curious what problem this is supposed to solve.

[Napoleon]

Making his healthcare more efficient=making healthcare more expensive for all but the wealthiest of Atlasians? Ok.

This bill seeks to return to the days of old, where preventative care was disregarded. That benefits those who want to profit off of the livelihood of atlasians "we can fix you once you get sick". Well excuse me for supporting a system that encourages early cancer detections via regular screenings and actually getting well instead of sitting around the house watching tv while sick as US flu deaths set records in many states.

All these HSAs do is add more bureaucracy and reduce benefits- the worst of both worlds.

[Napoleon]

While I don't have the time to offer a wholesale explanation of the system, I can answer specific questions related to the system.

[Napoleon]

The only part of this bill I can agree with is the section that removes the ceiling on out-of-pocket costs for wealthy individuals - which is certainly a good idea, but I doubt it will reduce costs that much at all.

Do the sponsors of this bill have any raw numbers on its effects?  How much will this save, exactly?  Where is the evidence that people will be better off?

Even that is a terrible idea. The cap is there for a reason- no one should have to spend their entire income on simply staying alive. A family making $250, 000 a year could conceivably afford to spend $50, 000 on healthcare but if you havea child with leukemia or a horrible car accident or even a kidney failure...these are expensive treatments. The cap prevents out of pocket costs from skyrocketing and allows families to preserve some stability through tough times, and families with those incomes already pay extremely high taxes and a lot of money on the health care payroll tax. This program is designed to ease the burden on all Atlasians even if the less fortunate receive the greatest benefits.

[Napoleon]

So lets examine what Federalists are trying to do here, because the premise of this bill is truly infuriating to me. Slashes benefits to lower income Atlasians while leaving the benefits for wealthier Atlasians intact. Removes the pay cap for the wealthy that could result in a family going bankrupt because of a major catastrophe. Denies worker's rights to hospital employees, becahse cheaper is always better of course. Moves the system away from preventative care and toward an archaic HSA approach, which will make health care more expensive for all, less effective for all, without any proper reason or objective for doing so.

Its really a shame. As the primary author/architect/whatever of the current system, the goal of the New Atlasian Healthcare Act was a bipartisan reform to fix a broken, bloated healthcare system. Left and right were able to work together to reduce prescription drug costs, consolidate various existing programs, move away from government healthcare to subsidized private plans that could compete against each other to lower costs while making sure we had universal access and affordability. I left the Senate before the bill was passed and most of the legislative dirty work was taken up by two great and dedicated FEDERALISTS- namely Scott and Sbane. We made healthcares budget impact rather neutral and strengthened our institutions. To undo that, for "cost saving purposes" (presumably to offer tax cuts to the rich down the road or something) we undo a stable and successful program tbat Atlasians enjoy for no good reason.

We don't have a healthcare problem. We certainly don't need this "solution".

[Napoleon]

Also you can't just roll over 25% of unused funds to the general fund, the regions are responsible for the administration of costs and services and therefore it would carryover each year. You can't really just snatch the money back.

[Napoleon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, then we have a loophole in the law? Aren't we saving any money at all?

I'm not sure whether I'm missing something, but it seems as if we are paying health care providers less and telling them that they can't bill patients for the difference. At this point I wonder whether we have any hospitals that haven't declared bankruptcy.

It would go through the insurance.

[Napoleon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, then we have a loophole in the law? Aren't we saving any money at all?

I'm not sure whether I'm missing something, but it seems as if we are paying health care providers less and telling them that they can't bill patients for the difference. At this point I wonder whether we have any hospitals that haven't declared bankruptcy.

It would go through the insurance.

I don't understand why most people (and employers) would bother carrying insurance after the 2009 law was enacted, which guaranteed a "universal, best" standard of care covering "all medically necessary" services to "all individuals residing in Atlasia," available at any health care provider (public or private), free of charge.

Because we eliminated that.

[Napoleon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So, then we have a loophole in the law? Aren't we saving any money at all?

I'm not sure whether I'm missing something, but it seems as if we are paying health care providers less and telling them that they can't bill patients for the difference. At this point I wonder whether we have any hospitals that haven't declared bankruptcy.

It would go through the insurance.

I don't understand why most people (and employers) would bother carrying insurance after the 2009 law was enacted, which guaranteed a "universal, best" standard of care covering "all medically necessary" services to "all individuals residing in Atlasia," available at any health care provider (public or private), free of charge.

Because we eliminated that.

Averroes has a point over here. We should end this loophole as soon as possible!

There is no loophole and what Nix mentioned is no longer part of the law.

[Napoleon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not all clinics are accepting ANHC, presumably.

[Napoleon]

Ill get back to you on that, you may be on to something.

[Napoleon]

At this point it would be a miracle if any of our hospitals haven't gone bankrupt.

Never heard about mass hospital bankrupticies during your time as GM or anyone else for that matter. I'd have to guess that isn't the case. The letter of the law can often contradict the enforcement of the law, as we all know.