Honestly, I wasn't interested about this issue and this is most likely due to the fact that I already have coverage from my workplace -- no cost to me (premium-wise). My son is covered under his father's plan, so all is good or so I thought. "Health care bill clears a hurdle" was the headline in today's Maui News, and I assumed that it meant that the bill was already law. Reading the article, I now understand that health care gets to be debated among congress. I thought that was already occurring and that it was a matter of voting to make it legal. I found myself agreeing with Majority Leader Harry Reid's comment accusing "Republicans of trying to stifle a historic debate the nation needed." The situation would most likely be reverse if the Republicans came up with this draft. All this political maneuvering makes me dizzy! I'm also glad that the two Democratic senators, Landrieu and Lincoln, voted affirmatively to allow this bill to move to the next stage.I agree with Landrieu when she said "doing nothing is not an option." Why is change always something to be fearful of, particularly when things aren't working harmoniously? With billions of people now residing in the United States, non-citizens and citizens alike, non-planning paves the way for how our government is "reacting" to several issues. What worked before, doesn't work now and health care is one of those issues that needed to be addressed years ago to balance the population demographics.Today's paper didn't go into length about the provision for the government to sell insurance, but did indicate that the state's have an option for this. What is the uproar about this? The key word here is option, and doesn't mean that the government is forcing this upon the states. I like the idea that insurance companies will not be able to deny PEC (pre-existing conditions). However, in my mind, costs can be astronomical...remember Erin Brokovich (sp?) and the claims against the electric companies? What about workers' compensation and fraudulent work-related injuries? Hmmm. How will this play into the PEC claim? This is where the medical field and the insurance field needs to come to an agreement of what's really "usual and customary." I'm sure there are other models to research and to come to a creative plan which benefits all of us.For me, it's all about greed! How much money can one make? Salaries for government workers, professional athletes, major corporate executives, doctors, etc. and the fringe benefits are obscene! How much money does one really need? Apparently, a lot when people are lobbying for this or that.
Mahalo e Pomai a me Kaohi no kou mana'o. According to Sen. Hirono, Hawaii has its own unique health care?! Well, wouldn't it be a trip if we all went back to laau lapaau? Problem is, finding the laau is difficult because of urban development, and finding kahuna laau lapaau to practice based on need not money is slim.
ALOHA Kaua, e Leimomi, I've always been for a National Health Care. The State Government Workers receivies the BEST of Health Care, even if you work for the DOE. Some say that a National Heath Care is a Social Program. Well I say, who pays for the government workers and for their Health Care? All government workers from the White House down to those who work for the DOE of Hawaii receive Socilize Health Care, at our cost. To top this off, after Hawaii State Workers retires, we the people of Hawaii pay for their Familites Health Care benefits. Even if their families did not work for the Hawaii State, they receive the Health Cre benefits. In fact if I remember right, there is about 5 Billion Dollars in the Hawaii State Retirement Fund. Have you ever heard of a Retired Government Worker in Hawaii being Homeless? E Maka Ala Kakou, o Pomai
The economy is pretty crazy right now and health care is difficult to access. Thanks for the post. I too not paying attention the the 'talk' but I should. Kaohi
Comments