Will Arnold's health plan work?
Categories: Diet & Weight Loss
In his state of the state speech on Tuesday night, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed sweeping healthcare reform -- essentially, championing a plan that would require every Californian to buy health insurance. While the plan has public support, some have expressed concerns about the how the new initiative will be executed.
This plan is similar to the one Massachusetts implemented last year.
California intends to expand it's Medicaid program and penalize employers that don't offer coverage, while redirecting charity funds and raising taxes on hospitals to defray the $12 billion cost of the proposal.
However, Anmol Mahal, president of the California Medical Association, believes that "Doctors and hospitals will be forced to pass the cost on to their patients, which could actually decrease many Californians` access to healthcare. It is not a tax on physicians or doctors, but rather sick Californians."
What do you think? Do you believe universal healthcare is important? Do you think it's feasible?
Recent Posts
- Thanksgiving: The Year's Worst Diet-Buster? (11/26/2009)
- Denise Austin 3-Week Boot Camp: DVD Review (11/26/2009)
- Turkey Tetrazzini (11/26/2009)
- More Healthy Holiday Meals: This Week on AOL Health (11/26/2009)
- Don't Diet Over the Holidays! (11/26/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jan Stowe 1-11-2007 @ 3:00PM
As an RN in a large community hospital I see many abuses of both the AMedicare and Medicaid system. We have one young, massively obese patient who has spent 220 of 365 days in the hospital. She just packs her bag, call EMs and then "dictates" what floor she wants to be admitted to, what nurse and what hospitalists she wants taking care of her- all on Medicaid dollars. She takes 41 oral medications in the morning. She is just one of what we call "frequent fliers" who abuse our system. If healthcare is made universal, I think there should be a cap on the number of hospital days allowed and also a cap on the expenses per year that will be allowed for each patient. I also think there should be tighter ethical control over how much "care" is provided. For instance, what is the sense of placing a feeding tube in an unresponsive 90 year old Alzheimer's patient who hasn't spoken or moved in years, just because the family is not ready to let go. There are many ethical issues that need to be addressed as we, the nurses, are already stretched to the maximum, new nurses are not entering the field, and there is going to be a huge need ( predicted as many as 800,000 nurses, in the next 10-15 years. Where are they going to come from. Robots perhaps??????????
Reply
Bridget 1-11-2007 @ 3:57PM
This is one of the most insane ideas possible. The physicians and hospital eat the costs in the state of CA already, providing services and never get paid. HMO's negotiate payback to the health care providers that pay $8-13 a month per patient. The idea to now TAX those same providers and pretend that then they will get paid is a shell game for morons.
I have a new idea, lets tax the lawyers. They are the ones who profit from ambulance chasing, they rape the victims again by taking 30-50% of the collection. If the awards were capped then the insurance rates wouldn't be so crazy.
Reply
Marjorie Pruett 1-11-2007 @ 4:11PM
People are always putting forward these schemes with little thought as to how it is going to be paid for. I am from England which has socialized medicine. Most of my friends there pay taxes at a very high rate. I have a struggle paying for my health insurance but consider it to be good value. I have to do without a lot of things to be able to afford it as I am very old. Old age is no fun, believe me
Reply