Truth is stranger than fiction - The Sarah Palin Chronicles

[Kirkland Laing]

That was the 2000 Texas GOP platform. When it started getting unwelcome media attention via the new-fangled internet they changed it to a much more palatable version, something that wouldn't make headlines, but you can guarantee that's what they really want and was publicly till 2000ish.

The problem is people want the government to manage certain things like health and education. They just want it done much more efficiently and here both parties and the current system fail miserably.

[OumaFan]

I'm really not scared of Palin, they can find somebody that appeals to the base that freaks people out a little less. Bobby Jindal appeals to the base and....yeah ok bad example.

A candidate that would be scary is somebody that the base believes is one of them but yet is still able to project an image that doesn't scare off independents, centrists, etc. An image of sanity, stability, maybe some intelligence. I guess you might say that they could try to turn Palin into that but I don't see it.

[VictorCharlie]

I definitely don't want the government (federal that is) in education or healthcare.

[Kirkland Laing]

I definitely don't want the government (federal that is) in education or healthcare.

It works out much better if they are. Every first world country has a national healthcare and education system, it's something we've learnt is necessary over decades of experience with various systems. America has no choice but to have a national healthcare system like other countries or the current system will bankrupt the country.

[VictorCharlie]

I definitely don't want the government (federal that is) in education or healthcare.

It works out much better if they are. Every first world country has a national healthcare and education system, it's something we've learnt is necessary over decades of experience with various systems. America has no choice but to have a national healthcare system like other countries or the current system will bankrupt the country.

We definitely need some dramatic changes in health care and I agree that to obtain affordable coverage for all Americans some measure of Federal control is necessary. I just don't trust the US Government to run an affordable, timely and high quality health care program for its 300 million citizens. What kills me with the President/Democrats is their effort to create this program w/o an overall raise in taxes. They are scrambling to pinch a penny here and find a dime there. I understand a National Health Care Plan will provide some big savings but how in hell can you look me in the face and say we can afford it w/o a large increase in revenue? I'd like to take some smaller steps first and see where we are at that point.

1. Find a mechanism to create competition between doctors/hospitals price wise. Most doctors can't tell you their actual prices b/c w/ insurance companies it is irrelevant and static regionally. I don't really know how one would go about doing this or even if its possible within our current system

2. All though I am typically against federal databases and I will hate to see GE make a ton a money on this, a creation of a national medical data base and singular nationalized means of insurance filing regardless of company would greatly reduce the bureaucracy/paper work/paperwork load

3. Cap or change in malpractice suits to reduce the large amount of money Doctors pay for malpractice insurance

4. Provide more state/federal money to help Doctors with the staggering amounts of student loans they incur while spending near or more than a decade in school

These four things would in theory lower overhead for medical practitioners, increase efficiency and reduce the price for the customer. If in fact these things happened and the overall price of insurance didn't drop remarkably then we would have to take another look.

p.s. Pretty sure Switzerland doesn't have a nationalized health care plan. Maybe they are a model to look at.

[Kirkland Laing]

What kills me with the President/Democrats is their effort to create this program w/o an overall raise in taxes. They are scrambling to pinch a penny here and find a dime there. I understand a National Health Care Plan will provide some big savings but how in hell can you look me in the face and say we can afford it w/o a large increase in revenue? I'd like to take some smaller steps first and see where we are at that point.

1. Find a mechanism to create competition between doctors/hospitals price wise. Most doctors can't tell you their actual prices b/c w/ insurance companies it is irrelevant and static regionally. I don't really know how one would go about doing this or even if its possible within our current system

2. All though I am typically against federal databases and I will hate to see GE make a ton a money on this, a creation of a national medical data base and singular nationalized means of insurance filing regardless of company would greatly reduce the bureaucracy/paper work/paperwork load

3. Cap or change in malpractice suits to reduce the large amount of money Doctors pay for malpractice insurance

4. Provide more state/federal money to help Doctors with the staggering amounts of student loans they incur while spending near or more than a decade in school

These four things would in theory lower overhead for medical practitioners, increase efficiency and reduce the price for the customer. If in fact these things happened and the overall price of insurance didn't drop remarkably then we would have to take another look.

p.s. Pretty sure Switzerland doesn't have a nationalized health care plan. Maybe they are a model to look at.

You're not going to get competition between anybody with the current system. Half a dozen huge health insurance companies have their own regional monopolies and spend hundreds of millions on lobbyists to restrict competition and preserve their monopolies. The way the Democrats (some of them) want to create competition is by creating a public insurance option which will allow the government to offer a competing insurance scheme with the big health insurance companies. But the insurance companies are terrified of the competition and are lobbying to block a public plan. All the GOP and some Democrats are now dead against it and it looks like nothing is going to change.

Malpractice suits total costs are less than half of one percent total spending.

The medical malpractice myth. - By Ezra Klein - Slate Magazine

Blaming the cost of healthcare on malpractice is just something the GOP do to press peoples' buttons, blame it on lawyers instead of on health insurance companies who've increased premiums 80+% in six years and increased their profits 400%.

A great way to cut healthcare costs is to stop healthcare companies authorising super expensive treatments that are ten or more times more expensive than similar treatments. It's hard to believe that a private business would take advantage of sick, scared people to sell them expensive stuff they don't need but maybe there's a first time for everything. Some studies say the insurance companies inflate bills by up to 30% by pushing various types of treatment. Obama recently got a billion dollars in funds to carry out comparative effectiveness programmes that would find out which types of treatments were expensive rubbish and which could be done at a fraction of the cost by other treatments. The GOP fought the billion dollars all the way and have now introduced a bill which if passed will ban anybody from using the findings of the studies to try and get the insurers to stop pushing expensive bill-inflating treatments.

[VictorCharlie]

Not competition between insurers Kirk, competition between doctors. Because most Americans only pay a co-pay neither them or their doctors can tell you what an ordinary office visit actually costs. There is no mechanism in place causing doctors or hospitals to compete with each other and provide the same service but for a cheaper price.

The cap on malpractice suits is not a major factor but it simply meets a complaint by doctors. When they cant bitch about it anymore then they have no excuse. It also is a bipartisan issue. Both parties are full of lawyers and the ABA lobbys both.

Nobody is forced to get a specific treatment here. If someone has a serious illness and doesnt take the time to research it and get multiple opinions then they are equally to blame for the service they get

I agree though, more comparative research is imperative. Ultimately I want to decide what kind of treatment I get though not the government. Those steps I mentioned were simply the first to be take in health care reform. The US is moving towards single payer system of some type whether Lyle and I like it or not, but a sudden dramatic shift is the wrong answer. It will take a long time and several changes for the US to get a system that is best for its citizens.

[Kirkland Laing]

Not competition between insurers Kirk, competition between doctors. Because most Americans only pay a co-pay neither them or their doctors can tell you what an ordinary office visit actually costs. There is no mechanism in place causing doctors or hospitals to compete with each other and provide the same service but for a cheaper price.

The cap on malpractice suits is not a major factor but it simply meets a complaint by doctors. When they cant bitch about it anymore then they have no excuse. It also is a bipartisan issue. Both parties are full of lawyers and the ABA lobbys both.

Nobody is forced to get a specific treatment here. If someone has a serious illness and doesnt take the time to research it and get multiple opinions then they are equally to blame for the service they get

I agree though, more comparative research is imperative. Ultimately I want to decide what kind of treatment I get though not the government. Those steps I mentioned were simply the first to be take in health care reform. The US is moving towards single payer system of some type whether Lyle and I like it or not, but a sudden dramatic shift is the wrong answer. It will take a long time and several changes for the US to get a system that is best for its citizens.

You're not going to get any competition in the system while it's dominated by half a dozen big companies who all have local monopolies.

The GOP use malpractice suits to blame lawyers for inflating medical bills when in actuality it's only a tiny amount of overall healthcare costs. The issue is a red herring.

Nobody is going to be forced to have a specific treatment, they're just going to have cheaper more effective treatments advocated over useless superexpensive treatments.

Sarah Palin already started her non-GOP base outreach. She's definitely thinking ahead :

Brushing aside the criticisms of pundits and politicos, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she plans to jump immediately back into the national political fray — stumping for conservative issues and even Democrats — after she prematurely vacates her elected post at month's end. The former Republican vice-presidential nominee and heroine to much of the GOP's base said in an interview she views the electorate as embattled and fatigued by nonstop partisanship, and she is eager to campaign for Republicans, independents and even Democrats who share her values on limited government, strong defense and "energy independence."
"I will go around the country on behalf of candidates who believe in the right things, regardless of their party label or affiliation," she said over lunch in her downtown office, 40 miles from her now-famous hometown of Wasilla — population 7,000 — where she began her political career.
"People are so tired of the partisan stuff — even my own son is not a Republican," said Mrs. Palin, who stunned the political world earlier this month with her decision to step down as governor July 26 with 18 months left in her term.


EXCLUSIVE: Palin to stump for conservative Democrats - Washington Times