Would you support privatizing Medicare and Medi-Cal?
THIS WEEK’S QUESTION:
“Would you support privatizing Medicare and Medi-Cal?” ” Yes: 4 No: 6
? Karen Anderson: “Don’t get me started! We paid taxes for Medicare for many years and now are looking at having it taken away to benefit the obscenely wealthy. The tax code needs to be revamped to encourage American manufacturing and support a solid middle class.”
? Dave Appling: “No. For all its flaws, Medicare is probably the most efficient and effective health insurance system we have. Privatizing it will create almost no jobs, because the actual services (both medical and administrative) are already performed by the private sector. Privatizing Medicare has only two purposes: feeding irrational I Hate Government bias, and inflating Big Insurance’s bottom line. The same basically applies at the state level to Medi-Cal, except that it does need more repair work. Yes, fix and improve these systems. No, do not kill this patient to appease the Tea Party and its ilk.
? Bert Berson: “No. No, no, no, no, no, no, etc.”
? Chris Bryant: “Yes, A major restructure is necessary across all aspects of government spending, nothing should be left out.”
? Bob Chidester: “Yes. For those who truly cannot afford medical coverage, the government can give them a voucher to go out in the market place for medical coverage. In this way, the insurance companies and health care providers can compete for customers which practically always benefits the consumer. This also allows the consumer to shop for that insurance which best fits his or her needs. For example, I do not want or need medical insurance which includes sex change operations.”
? David Cohen: “No. Medicare and Medicaid programs are part of the social safety net. While cost savings refinements can and must be made, turning these programs into private insurance programs would result in a return to the stone age for the poor and elderly. We’re a better society than that.”
? Jeff Nunes: “Yes. The current system has to be revamped in order to tackle our massive debt and to save itself. I believe at least some minimal form of privatization, such as premium assistance in the open market, will encourage competition and ultimately result in better care and lower costs.”
? Lisa Pampuch: “No. This is essentially what Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has proposed. Fortune’s Allan Sloane rightly dubbed it ‘hocus pocus.’ What’s more, Ryan’s plan takes what little social safety net we have in this country and shreds it. We should be ashamed, as such a rich nation, to be considering treating our elderly and ill citizens so poorly.”
? Jeff Smith: “Yes I would. These programs, as well as medicaid and social security are all unsustainable and will be bankrupt in the near future. To bury our heads in the sand and pretend this will not happen is a recipe for disaster. To continue to spend and borrow and increase our overwhelming debt and pass this on to the next generation is immoral. We need to clean up these programs, modify them, and make them in-line with 21st century realities and fiscal responsibility. Privatization appears to be the best way to do this.”
? Steve Staloch: “No. Hard to believe but they are two of the most efficient and cost effective programs the government administers. Privatization will ultimately increase costs and dramatically reduce coverage. Striking the right balance should include reasonable reductions and restrictions in the government’s open-ended benefit plan, leveling a shrinking playing field that favors mega providers such as Kaiser while effectively punishing small community hospitals, and financially penalizing those adults who make unhealthy lifestyle choices.Vote in
