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

[Sec. of State Superique]

I genuinely believe that part of the things that TNF is posting looks pretty nice but I would like to see limited-profit providers being included as part of bi-partisan agreement and introducing an scaled premium system as the main part of funding for this "new" healthcare system.

EDIT: Now I've seen that this is copy and pasting but we could use partially the structure of it and fine-tune it for Atlasian Standards.

[Sec. of State Superique]

I genuinely believe that part of the things that TNF is posting looks pretty nice but I would like to see limited-profit providers being included as part of bi-partisan agreement and introducing an scaled premium system as the main part of funding for this "new" healthcare system.

EDIT: Now I've seen that this is copy and pasting but we could use partially the structure of it and fine-tune it for Atlasian Standards.

Partially, maybe. But I fear that, even without the difference over signal payer versus a market competing-premium based and supported public option, that the size of the bill would render either version impassable based on the size alone.

so Hostile.

Fine then. Endorsed!

[Sec. of State Superique]

I genuinely believe that part of the things that TNF is posting looks pretty nice but I would like to see limited-profit providers being included as part of bi-partisan agreement and introducing an scaled premium system as the main part of funding for this "new" healthcare system.

EDIT: Now I've seen that this is copy and pasting but we could use partially the structure of it and fine-tune it for Atlasian Standards.

Partially, maybe. But I fear that, even without the difference over signal payer versus a market competing-premium based and supported public option, that the size of the bill would render either version impassable based on the size alone.

so Hostile.

Fine then. Endorsed!

Endorsed? what you mean endorsed man?

Sorry. I'm endorsing your hostility! Peace!

[Sec. of State Superique]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sorry for arriving so late on one of the debates that I really enjoy and I apologize for my inactivity during this month. I was pretty overloaded with homework, my exams and the Brazilian equivalent of the SAT.

Anyway, I was taking a look at what you've proposed Yankee and I might say that I pretty enjoyed the idea. Despite not being a fond of subsidies for healthcare private plans, I always believe that the best way to improve a system is allowing the citizenry to opt on a varied types of levels. From the insurance to the providers, being allowed to chose is important and crucial, although the later is much more important than the first. Summing things up, I would like to say that I'm favorable to the changes that you are proposing for our healthcare system.

However, while reading your bill, I might say that Section I - #3 gave me the impression that Regional Governments are permitted not to allow any private insurer whatsoever in their state, am I wrong?

If I'm not, I would like to say that this would be perfect and I think that we should keep it. One of the things that I've been thinking for a long time about Atlasian Healthcare is that maybe we should pass some of the responsibilities of handling Healthcare to the Regional Level. More than just allowing them to opt or not opt to have private insurers in their market, I think that we should allow our Regions to become laboratories of Healthcare Innovation with each Region trying to find its own way of providing Healthcare. I don't know what you Senators think of this, but I'm just throwing this idea in the debate.

[Sec. of State Superique]

Does anyone know anything about this "paying based on outcomes" as opposed to by the number or procedures. I recall hearing about in various discussions but I have forgotten the details. Isn't that what they do at the Mayo clinic?

From what I can remember it sounded like a good way to boost quality, cut costs and reduce those unnecessary procedures we discussed, whereas most measures do one at the expense of the other like tort reform requires balancing the need to guard against mal practice whilst trying to reduce unnecessary procedures and costs and a lot of cost cutting can also come at the expense of quality and so for.

So how does this process work, can it be done on a large scale or should it be done experimentally first?

I don't know if you aknowledge that but there are alternatives to fee-for-service style of payment; there are things like a Global Budget or Bundled Payments which looks much better than the current system.

[Sec. of State Superique]

http://www.minnesotamedicine.com/Past-Issues/Past-Issues-2011/February-2011/Five-Payment-Models-The-Pros-the-Cons

[Sec. of State Superique]

Interesting thing about Singapore written by Paul Krugman:

Most people hate him but anyway - http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/singapore-is-the-new-chile/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

[Sec. of State Superique]

Would you mind explaining me the CIEP? :/

[Sec. of State Superique]

Would you mind explaining me the CIEP? :/

Are you familiar with the concept of a "high risk pool"?  That's what this is.  It is a subsidized program to make sure that those with preexisting conditions have a good option for affordable insurance.

At least in Obamacare, High Risk Pools are inside the Exchange thing, aren't them?

[Sec. of State Superique]

Would you mind explaining me the CIEP? :/

Are you familiar with the concept of a "high risk pool"?  That's what this is.  It is a subsidized program to make sure that those with preexisting conditions have a good option for affordable insurance.

At least in Obamacare, High Risk Pools are inside the Exchange thing, aren't them?

Obamacare (ACA) doesn't have high risk pools. In the US, where they exist they are creations of the various states. The way ACA is set up it is actually likely to reduce usage of high risk pools.  What we are doing here is a focus on assurance of coverage through a nondiscriminatory public option rather than a focus on mandates as in the ACA, and so a high risk pool plays a role here to make sure the public option can function while providing affordable coverage.

I don't know but aren't HRP more expensive than having a mandate?

[Sec. of State Superique]

Great job on making sense of all of this and coming up with a reform, but I'm curious as to what the point of the CIEP is. Why is that necessary when the ANHC plan presumably already provides coverage to those with pre-existing conditions?

That was in some ways my doubt earlier =/