Health Care Reform – As reported by the Australian Media
By mattsmallbone. Filed in Politics |Tags: Australian Media, health care reform
As an Australian who lives in the USA, it must be said that the USA is a great country. I really do feel like American’s are tremendously misunderstood at a global level. In Australia, American’s are considered loud and obnoxious. I rarely find this to be the case. In Nashville, TN… it is probably fair to say that the ‘loud and obnoxious’ label better fits most of the Australian’s who have come and joined the CCM circus.
Just ask any road crew or CCM bus driver.
Anyway…
One of the main criticisms that the typical USA citizen receives is that they are ignorant of how the world views their particular brand of politik.
Therefore, I thought that it would be a worthwhile endeavor to include the basic ‘USA health care reform’ coverage from my local newspaper “The Courier Mail” in Australia.
And here you go…
Historic change for US after Obama’s health care bill passed
US President Barack Obama’s health care bill, which passed today in the House of Representatives, aims to bring the United States closer to universal coverage than ever before.
The plan is intended to usher in the most sweeping overhaul of its kind in four decades and extend coverage to some 32 million Americans out of the 36 million who lack it now, according to the independent Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
The legislation carries an initial 10-year price tag of US$940 billion ($1.27 trillion), but would reduce the ballooning U.S. deficit by US$138 billion through 2019 and 1.2 trillion over the following decade, the CBO said.
Here are some other notable features of the compromise, which requires the House to pass the Senate’s health bill, followed by both chambers approving a package of changes to make the overhaul more palatable to the lower chamber.
- Tough new rules on private insurers
The bill would ban insurance company practices like denying coverage for preexisting illnesses, dropping people from coverage when they get sick, or capping lifetime coverage, and restrict new plans’ use of annual limits.
- No “public option”
After a year-long fight, Mr Obama’s Democratic allies opted not to include a government-backed program to compete with private insurers, which supporters and many analysts described as the best way to rein in costs.
- New insurance markets
Instead, the plan creates new state-based marketplaces called exchanges where Americans without employer-provided coverage could buy insurance.
- Requirements, subsidies
For the first time in US history, most Americans would be required to buy insurance or face fines, and larger firms could face penalties for not offering coverage.
But the bill would also offer subsidies to help individuals who earn too much to get coverage under an expansion of the government’s Medicaid program but under 400 percent of the US federal poverty level, which in 2009 stood at earnings of US$22,000 per year for a family of four.
- Elderly drug benefits
The bill offers a rebate to seniors who fall into a “donut hole” gap in prescription drug coverage under the government-run Medicare program for the elderly. The gap would be phased out by 2020.
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 12:19 pm |
From Facebook:
Well said. I remember huge opposition to the building of the Aussie system in the 70′s and 80′s. Now you won’t find a voice who says it should be shut down. I think in 20-30 years it will be accepted and supported in the US … All the paranoia will have pawed and the bugs worked out.
Ainslie Grosser
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 12:55 pm |
Awesome post, hey I came across this post while searching for music videos. Thanks for sharing I’ll tell my friends about this too.
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 1:29 pm |
From Facebook:
What about the babies our taxes are going to go towards killing? No thanks. I know that sounds obnoxious but Obama’s executive order carries no weight against the law they just passed and he knows it.
I would love if no one had to worry about their health care but this bill is only going to raise my taxes and drive the cost of my health insurance up and eventually force me to take a coming public option coming down that we have no money to fund. The lack of funding will force a rationing of care and then we are back where we started except now the government gets to decide who gets care.
I’m sure the Australian system works fairly well but I’m pretty sure they do not have the deficits we do.
Medicare and Medicaid were set up to do what this bill is supposed to do and they never got the bugs worked out of those programs so I have no hope for this new law. Those programs are a big reason we have the problems we have.
I hope I am wrong.
Charles Garrett
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 2:01 pm |
The Courier Mail is telling Australians only our president’s side of the story. It seems to have left out the fact that over 70 percent of Americans do not support this particular bill.
When I was in Australia I watched a children’s television show explaining how the Australian health care system worked. I remember realizing how blessed I was to be a citizen of the United States of America, where the health care is second to none and nobody determines the level of importance of my illness. Nobody here will disagree that our system is in need of reform, but this isn’t the way to bring it about.
There are certain basic fundamental rights and freedoms granted us by our Constitution. We fought for these, and died for these. This health care bill and the process by which this “reform” has come about undermines those rights and takes away some of those freedoms. And in so doing, spits in the face of all who gave so much for this country to exist, thrive, and contribute to society globally.
Sometimes it’s easy to sit on the other side of the ocean and say, “It’s not that bad. Look at the rest of the world.” America has contributed more to medicine than all other countries combined. Now a few ignorant, power-hungry politicians want to take this away from us – and the rest of the world. Why? We won’t look back in 20 or 30 years and be thankful for socialized medicine. We’ll look back and think, “I remember when we used to be great.”
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 4:58 pm |
From Facebook:
A reminder Charles… your country uses the highest per capita amount of tax in the developed world for healthcare ALREADY – it’s just wasted as it mostly goes into the hands of HMOs.
Shannon
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 5:07 pm |
Ouch Bill! I think you may be demonstrating the attitudes Matt was saying Australians see as arrogant and US-centric.
I think it is fair to say that both our countries have much better health care systems than many people experience in the rest of the world. As a Christian living in Australia and working in the public health care system I am happy that there is health care available to all who need it – and yes, we are taxed to achieve some of these ends but as I read my bible I fail to see the part where it says life is all about looking after your own back yard. I feel that we are blessed to be able to afford all that we need, and I think as citizens of the world we can be looking out for the ‘least of these’. Many Australians share your attitudes about people leaching off the system, it is understandable, but I think not particularly helpful.
That is great that the USA has contributed so much to the body of medical knowledge, but would have to disagree about USA contribution to medicine outweighing more than everyone else in the world’s combined. Do you have some figures for that? There are many many significant contributions to medical knowledge being created in Europe and in Australia and actually all around the world. I recently read a blog by Gov. Mike Huckabee using the same phrases about the ‘USA doing more… (for peace, in the case he was referring to) than the rest of the world combined’ – so I’m guessing that is a common attitude about many global issues?
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 5:40 pm |
No matter where we live I applaud any effort to ensure that our poorest and most vulnerable citizens can access health care where and when they need it. Our access to health care should not be determined by our employer’s health plan or our bank balance. Instead it is the role of modern progressive governments to ensure quality health care is available for all. Good stuff from your president I reckon.
Incidently, the biggest tragedy inflicted on the Australian health system was done by a US doctor, Jayant Patel. He’s currenlty in the Oz courts defending a bunch of manslaughter chargers.
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 5:51 pm |
From Facebook:
Shannon – Medicare and Medicaid payments to doctors do not even cover the costs of many of the procedures. Most of the waste of this money is in the government beaurocracy and fraud. Also, anyone who goes to an emergency room(even illegal aliens) will be treated (debunking the myth that there are millions of people deprived of health care in our country) whether they can pay or not. The paying consumer has to make up these differences.
Another reason our cost is so high per person is the quality of care is already so much higher than the rest of the world. For example, per capita, we have the most MRI machines.
Another reason for the high cost of care here is Lawsuits. Obama admitted this himself but declined to address the issue because to much money comes to the Democratic party from Trial Lawyers….
It is easy to demonize HMOs, Doctors and Insurance Companies because they make profits as if that is a bad thing. I hope they make profits so they can hire more people and get us out of this recession.
Charles Garrett
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 7:25 pm |
From Facebook:
Ainslie is right. In 20 years no one will care. The system is broke and will still be broken but no one will want the old broken system. I just wish they would try to really fix things not just create more dependents (voters who rely on the government). Amnesty will be next which will create even more dependents. It is all about power and not about fixing anything.
Charles Garrett
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 7:48 pm |
I know it’s not exactly the same, but has our government ever stopped a car insurance company from dropping a policy holder for putting in too many claims? Why can’t health insurance companies have the freedom to drop who they want – they are private corporations with their own rules. If you sign up for a health insurance policy, aren’t you made aware of “caps” at that time? Seems like everyone thinks the insurance companies are the bad guys and that the feds should be able to tell them what to do. Our health care “crisis” has been brought about by many factors, including ridiculous lawsuits, unhealthy lifestyles and outrageous costs in medical education.
We have just had a major blow to our freedom with the signing of this bill into law. We are now going to be forced to purchase a product simply because we exist. It’s a sad day.
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 8:06 pm |
“The Courier Mail is telling Australians only our president’s side of the story.”
We only listen to Obama, Oprah and Paris out here in the colonies Bill. Yee Ha!
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 8:15 pm |
I have had the privilege to live in the US, Europe, Australia and Africa. And I have great sentiment for the US and the capitalistic markets and the freedom to make money and become whoever you want to be – if you have initiative and drive. The America history and culture is interesting and something to aspire too. But how can any country, not look after their sick and elderly? Isn’t freedom giving human beings the right to access basic health services? I’ve lived in Africa and seen children witness their parents dying of AIDS, with no access to basic health services – is this the same picture you want for your elderly? For them to be dying whilst you argue about ‘freedom’? When many of our basic freedom rights disappeared after Sept 11th. If your country does not move forward on this bill, are you saying that the elderly and sick have no constitutional rights as they do not contribute to the capitalistic market? And it is their fault that they did not have the opportunity to play the capitalistic market and make a success of it? Surely this is the death of compassion and community, if we do not support those who are ill?
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 8:32 pm |
It’s interesting to see the comments here and on others’ facebook posts, and the talk at work where I’m in a hotbed of US Republicans, with a smattering of Canadians. Basically everyone who has lived in a universal healthcare system would never accept anything else. It’s those who have ideological objections with no basis in experience who oppose it. To me it seems like an unarguably positive result of human progress, and as a Christian I don’t see how we can’t applaud a society looking after its sick, underprivileged and vulnerable. I find it ridiculous in the extreme when I see people somehow couching this as “taking away our freedoms”. Maybe it will cost more in tax. So does starting wars overseas, and it seems that those who oppose healthcare are usually the ones who support those. The difference is that wars are designed to kill people, healthcare is designed to heal people. Which is more noble?
Tuesday, March 23rd 2010 at 9:50 pm |
I do apologize, Susan, if I offended you. I must admit that my view of Australians was that they were loud and obnoxious (not Matt of course). Upon visiting, however, I quickly found that this certainly was not the case. I love Australia and the people there, and would move there in a second, despite the differences in health care. Furthermore, in my opinion, your physiotherapy blows our physical therapy away so I don’t mean to take anything away from your country in particular.
The US offers incredible benefits for the poor – a very Biblical principle as you pointed out. Our benefits, in fact, are so good that those receiving them are often willing to never work again. These are not the “least of these”. They are the “most slothful of these”. The majority of the 36 million uninsured are illegal immigrants – another result of those incredible benefits. We turn no one away who is in need of medical care, insured or not, legal or not (something I know you can appreciate) and I don’t have a problem with that.
Don’t let the speech of President Obama fool you, this health care bill is not at all about caring for the poor, reaching the needy, or bringing medical attention to those who are dying from lack thereof. It is the systematic destruction of the basic foundations of what helped make America great from the beginning. The result will be fewer choices, more bureaucracy, and less freedom.
I don’t believe it should be considered arrogant or US-centric for me to be proud of my country. I do think, though, that you might check your thoughts on capitalist Americans. With all we give to our own people and others throughout the world, to say we are “looking after our own back yards” is a bit of a misrepresentation of who we are.
Wednesday, March 24th 2010 at 10:31 am |
Interesting discussion here.. Here’s the opinion of an american – so take it for whatever it is worth..
I think the most troubling thing about the health care bill is that we really don’t know what is in it – we are only now finding out bits & pieces. Although we have no clue as to Obama’s intentions, it is the way this monumental piece of legislature was pushed through. Is this the “progressive” way of doing things? This is the President who said the people would have a chance to review any bill for 5 days before he signed it. Did we even get 48 hours?
I am all for taking care of people, but I am not one for redistribution of wealth or the “progressive” nature of our current government that is progressively eating away at our fundamental rights. If someone needs help, that is where the people of the community (local government/community care) and the church should be to help. And in my reading of the US Constitution I am yet to find where healthcare is a fundamental right provided for by the government. The constitution is a living thing, but it cannot be morphed into whatever suits you best at that particular time. Confused suggested that the elderly people lose their constitutional rights? Thats not true, the Constitution protects the people from undue interference by the government. It was never written to take care of all the needs of the people – it actually puts a limit on what the government can do – healthcare is not one of those things the federal government is allowed to mess with!! Our society is becoming a consequence free society. I know I plan on taking care of my parents when they are elderly, why should I be forced to pay for Confused’s elderly relatives, when I plan on taking care of my own.. I certainly don’t want any President (Liberal or Conservative) deciding what is the best for me or my elderly parents. Its simply not what the founding fathers had in mind for the federal government’s role in our lives. They specifically saw the problem with a welfare mentality and government interference — and guarded against it. Do you think the writers of the US constitution did not have illness? Do you think they loved their family members less? Whats going to be next, the right to car insurance, life insurance?
Every person should have the ability to get health insurance, health care & should not be discriminated against, and there should have been more regulation of health insurers and health providers to ensure that they actually offer health insurance, don’t have the ability to skip liability, remove people from coverage when they gambled on offering coverage to the wrong person and increase premiums to ridiculous levels.. Individuals should also have the right to not get health insurance if they don’t want, and should be allowed to buy a packet of cigarettes instead of paying health insurance premium if that is their preference. Thats there choice, and there are obvious consequences to such choices. Their preference for cigarettes over healthcare coverage should not become my problem. It seems that now, they will be able to keep on smoking, not worry about health insurance and those bad choices will now become a problem of all US tax payers.. Interestingly the research showed a vast number of the uninsured Americans, generated enough income to have some level of healthcare coverage, they just didn’t want to pay it. Just as I choose the minimum level of car insurance allowed by California law. If I wreck into a ferrari, I am in trouble… But I choose to not drive like an idiot and the chances of that happening are less and its worked out well for the last 40 years. I fear the day is quickly approaching that I will have very few choices and the clowns in Washington will instruct my every move.
As someone else mentioned, hospitals are not turning people away. There was a time in my life I did not have health insurance and my wife was sick and we went to the hospital. It cost $1250.. I didn’t have $1250 so I negotiated a payment plan with the hospital. If I had nothing to lose, I would have filed bankruptcy. This is the capitalist society I live in and love!! Far from perfect is the US health system, but it is not as bad as the world thinks. I am also able to keep 70% of my paycheck and can pay my healthcare bills. Unlike other countries who are paying unbelievable levels of tax, and yet from what I have heard still need additional private healthcare insurance in order to actually get treated in a reasonable time.
The rest of the world, and it seems in this case Australians, needs to spend a little less time watching Michael Moore and reading far left websites. If you are truly interested in discovering why the majority of us are upset about the healthcare bill and the current “progessive” administration, you need to understand the constitution and WHY that document was written. Correct me if I am wrong, but Australia is still under the authority of the Queen is it not? This is the same monarchy that George Washington fought to be free from for the sake of the civil liberty’s provided in the Constitution. This is in no way meant as an attack on the other comments, but I don’t find it at all difficult to understand why non-american’s could not fully appreciate our passion for freedom from government interference. Freedom has many costs, the founding fathers decided that individual freedom was more important than a socialist form of healthcare & control..
Wednesday, March 24th 2010 at 12:40 pm |
This is an interesting link to a more simple way to fix healthcare..
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/printer_friendly.cgi?article=359
Is it possible that a free market could be the answer?
Wednesday, March 24th 2010 at 3:47 pm |
I just want to say that David W. said it all PERFECTLY, and I want to tell Shannon that I have NEVER heard anyone who lives under universal healthcare, say that they wouldn’t accept anything else.
Good debating, people!
Wednesday, March 24th 2010 at 4:38 pm |
I wouldn’t accept anything else. There’s one.
Wednesday, March 24th 2010 at 4:41 pm |
Anyone got a response to Michael’s link?
Thursday, March 25th 2010 at 7:05 am |
From Facebook:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/22/2853179.htm?site=thedrum
Another interesting (Australian) perspective on the US debate. The general attitude is “Of course they should fix healthcare.. it’s stuffed!” But this blog makes the point that that doesn’t mean it’s the right fix.
I hear there are death threats over it now… don’t go prompting too much debate Matt! Those Americans tote guns!
D
Wednesday, April 7th 2010 at 12:12 pm |
Aw, this was a really quality post. In theory I’d like to write like this too – taking time and real effort to make a good article… but what can I say… I procrastinate alot and never seem to get something done.