One thing both parties want to control is the out of control increases in healthcare spending in America. yet as usual, they have completely different ways they want to accomplish it. We have the best hospitals, doctors and most of the best technology for treatment on the planet. yet, the costs to access those hospitals, doctors and treatments are out of reach of the vast majority of Americans. And because of the American tendency to want to sue someone for looking at them funny, Americans are the most over tested, over-medicated country to protect doctors from malpractice lawsuits. Throw in the for profit nature nearly the entirety of the US healthcare system, and its a disaster waiting to happen
The Democrats want to reform the system by attempting to provide insurance to every american, and by people being able to stay healthy, lower costs for everyone. The GOP would prefer to keep the pre-ACA status quo. Or to create a cross state competition system to give customers 'more choice'. Here's the problem with that. Each state has its own rules regarding what is considered proper coverage. Which is why each major health insurance company has the better part of 50+ side businesses (one for each state they do business in). telling consumers they can cross state lines to buy coverage doesn't mean they will get the proper coverages. If that happens, you'll basically see each state but MA trying to undercut each other to attract people from out of state. But I suspect what will end up happening is that any savings consumers may see in premiums gets wiped out and then some by the increases in overall out of pocket expenses.
The solution to that is adding a national standard for what is considered proper coverage in the ACA (and yes, I would consider women's issues like birth control and such part of basic coverage, but will address that in a bit). By doing that, at least from what I can see (and if you have read the first 2 posts, you can see I very much take a common sense approach to just about everything), you would have a blue cross/blue shield of america (instead of one for each state bc/bs does business in). that alone could save billions upon billions in administrative overhead.
A compete overhaul of the malpractice system needs to be done as well. Doctors are only human, they do occasionally make mistakes. and only gross incompetence (removing the wrong organ in surgery, etc) should really be punished with a malpractice suit. Second opinions should be part of whats considered basic coverage by the way. so if you go to your normal doctor and they say 'cancer' after a series of tests, you have the right to see any doctor of your choice (if they are willing to see you) to verify that diagnosis. the patient would have to foot any travel expenses to get said second opinion of course.
OK, women's health issues. Birth control, access to it, etc. in my eyes should at least have to be offered as part of whats considered basic coverage. My views on abortion and birth control have been discussed already in my opening post. But because they are female specific health issues, they have to be addressed in any standard of coverage discussion. if you choose not to take them, so be it. but they HAVE to be offered, and the price has to be reasonable. you cant make adding reproductive issues to a coverage plan so expensive that no one will take them. And you cant give employers the 'moral exception' excuse to not provide them
In closing on this issue.. Between a single standard for whats considered basic coverage and true malpractice reform, I suspect you could very easily get healthcare costs for everyone under control. Unfortunately, my brain is very much mush right now, and I know I've totally overlooked the 3rd head of the healthcare 3 headed monster, medications. so maybe I add on with a reply to this post when I'm thinking straight. but there's a common sense approach to every problem. And more often than not, the common sense approach is what I start with.
