Are 46 Million Really Without Health Insurance In America? Yes & No.

It is an absolute disgrace that "one dime" of my taxes of my taxes has been or will be used to provide any medical expenses or health insurance for one single undocumented and/or illegal ALIEN or their dependents and relatives. They are not "immigrants". They are simply law breakers,plain and simple,and should not have the "constitutional right" to taxpayer funded medical care or health insurance. Nobody forced them to come here. Their situation is of their own making and taxpayers should have no obligation to ensure their health, happines, or welfare. To view this as a constitutional issue is absurd.

Before the election Mr Obama was blaming Pre. Bush, and he spent more than 600 millions to be elected, so he could fix the Bush era. Since he became the president of the universe, every day he has to blame the previous adm. Tell him to resign and go to car business rather than destroying this great country and her freedom. If he had inherited this from Bush, tell him to give the inheritance tax to the treasury, so that mr. secretary could donate that money to the IMF. Matt.

Before the election Mr Obama was blaming Pre. Bush, and he spent more than 600 millions to be elected, so he could fix the Bush era. Since he became the president of the universe, every day he has to blame the previous adm. Tell him to resign and go car business rather than destroying this great country and her freedom. Matt.

One area I've never seen talked about is the cost of medical equipment -- I don't know if the manufacturers price it like planes, where insurance costs against future suits are astronomical, & a huge part of the selling price, or if it's just milking the system. Either way that's a big chunk of costs that can be relatively quickly brought under control without rationing (which assumes costs can't be reduced otherwise). Maybe even repurpose one (or more) of the auto plants we now own? Not paying medical personnel as proposed through reductions in rates is counterproductive, since we already have too few personnel causing a high demand that increases pay. Tell someone you're reducing their pay & many will quit -- make the pay low & even fewer will enter health care fields. Adding layer upon layer of government bureaucracy is going to raise costs & lower efficiency. Lowering barriers to entering the field will reduce demand, lowering payroll costs. Most radically, & thus long term, reform the way the health care field shares information & data, reducing the need for specialists, lowering costs.

hey, here is a novel thought: americans, try getting off your couch and get some exercise and substitute all that garbage fast and processed food with some nice whole foods and fruits and vegetables! forget the doctor! eat better and stop drinking soda and sugary drinks and snacking on processed foods all day long. get 6-8 hours of sleep a night! i never saw such a bunch of wrong thinking group of people in my life! everytime i talk to my mom she tells me about another co-worker that died or who had a relative or spouse that died or was diagnosed with cancer. they are all fat, unhealthy babyboomers that think because they have health coverage they will be fine. having health coverage won't prevent you from getting sick! eating the things you should be eating will keep you from getting sick, geniuses! you are falling into the trap that the establishment wants you to fall into. the argument isn't "healthcare reform" it is you taking better care of yourself and it starts in the produce section of your local grocery store! peace out.

I think Obama is right that we need to cover the population as a whole and every one pay into the system to support it. Insurance works by spreading the risk around. To do that you have to have a big enough statistical universe. This will change the emphasis from exclusion of unhealthy risky people to one of encouraging preventive medicine and encouraging healthy behavior. I have heard the argument that government can not do as good and cheap job as private enterprise. If that is true why is the medical industry up in arms about a government run insurance enterprise being offered as one alternative. If it is the better way to go lets go to full socialize medicine. If not then private enterprise will crush it soon enough. Truth is that our medical industry is an Oligarchy which has been rooking the public for years. I think that private industry can in fact deliver better and cheaper health care than the government. But with out the goad of a government institution to set a upper limit on how much you can charge and get away with it will never happen. There is a lot of policy Obama is offering that I do not agree with. But this idea of a competing government health insurance entity is an excellent idea.

All employers should be made to force employees to obtain an accident or grievious illness policy so that in the case of something horrible happening, they can be treated. I also think that employers that have employees that opt out of health insurance should be made to make thier employees set $20 a pay check into an account that in case the employee becomes ill, they can use the money to go to the doctor. At the end of the year, they can any unspent money given back. I think that emergency care clinics rather than emergency rooms should be allowed to bill patients that come to them with sickness rather than forcing patients to pay upfront which causes the uninsured to go to the ER. This clogs up the ER with people who are coming without true emergencies but that is the only way the poor can be treated without payment being expected as services are performed. If the government would set up more clinics for the poor, that would also help. I have friends that have no insurance that run to the ER everytime they have fever because they have no access to a regular doctor. She has thousands of dollars in unpaid medical bills. Most of these visits are for sinus infections, strep throat, bladder infections etc. If she could have been billed at a doctor's office, she would have rather gone there. If she had a savings account through her employer that had the cash set aside for a doctor's appointment that would have been better.

I agree with Nacho and Stu, Healthcare is not a constitutional or natural right by any means. I also agree that health insurance is different than auto insurance...auto incidents are more likely to occur and agree you can injure others in auto accidents so insurance requirements may make sense (notice MAY make sense). The concern with lack of health insurance, even though obtaining it is a choice, is that if you don't have it and are injured or gravely ill, and treatment is provided, then all of the rest of those who are insured, are in fact paying the tab for those who choose to not have even catastrophic coverage, and now my freedom of choice is infringed upon. Whatever the magic # of uninsured actually is, we are in fact already paying for their care by default. Does the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness imply that it is you right to have those things, but all other men are obligated to provide them? I think not, but if we have PETA concerned about BHO swatting flies, what might happen if people who choose to not carry insurance are turned away? I'm for giving it a try and see what the backlash is..."Sorry like all other things in life, if you can't pay for it, you don't deserve it", not to say you don't want it, or even need it, but doesn't mean you deserve it.

The issue is that 38% could afford it and don't choose to. Yes it is expensive, but so is the SUV that we are driving, the Cable, the eating out, the X box. We have become so used to thinking we are entitled to "have" everything that we don't provide for ourselves the things we need. We expect the government to take care of us for the things we don't want to take out of our budget. The government can't even take care of itself. What a big lie to say that they can do this better! All we will do is end up with more taxes and that $50,000 you earn will actually be worth about $23,000 by the time they take everything out of it.

Tort reform is much needed. Why are people allowed to sue a doctor for millions, sometimes 10s of millions if they are injured or die? Is a human life worth that much money? I would think not when we live in a society that aborted over 49 MILLION unborn since 1973. For some reason those lives weren't worth a red cent!

Bonnie Ewald said: "There are many doctors out there that refuse to see, refuse to treat persons without insurance, and that is where the problem lies for those who find themselves in a situation that due to whatever circumstances, they are temporarily disabled, or permanently disabled. When they are refused treatment, they are not getting the help they need, which compromises their return to health, and results in an expense to the mental/physical condition of the patient and to society as a whole." With all due respect, many Physicians simply cannot afford to provide free care to all that seek it. I work at an Urgent Care Center. We never turn anyone away due to lack of insurance, but they are expected to pay at the time of service. Most doctors offices will allow patients to go on a payment plan. They are often extended a discount for paying cash. So, most people do have access to care, they just have to pay for it. There are programs to assist those who truly can not afford it (not those who simply do not wish to pay for it).

Stu...this is Obama's obsession with his interpretation of "fairness." I'm not sure he is that concerned with the constitution.

yes, it is true that most persons who enter an emergency room will be seen by a medical provider, who may or may not be at an MD or DO level. For those that have insurance, it is very likely they will receive the continuing tests they may need and an appropriate referral for ongoing treatment if needed. It is those who have zero insurance that find themselves under evaluated, under-treated in this circumstance, are not appropriately given the tests needed due ot lack of insurance. There are many doctors out there that refuse to see, refuse to treat persons without insurance, and that is where the problem lies for those who find themselves in a situation that due to whatever circumstances, they are temporarily disabled, or permanently disabled. When they are refused treatment, they are not getting the help they need, which compromises their return to health, and results in an expense to the mental/physical condition of the patient and to society as a whole. The excessive bankruptsies that result from health care expense are also an expense to society. The group between ages 21 and 64 are at highest risk of not having appropriate health care coverage.

Excellent educational article. Thought it might be interesting to frame the cost of socializing health care in a way that might be relevant as well. It's obvious why O is rushing these spending programs through. If people knew how much their taxes are going up they would revolt. I’m guessing Tax Freedom Day, if O gets his way, will occur like Canada 6/6 but after after these politicians are done it may be like 7/29 in Sweden. Tax Freedom Day is the U.S. economy's overall average tax burden – ( Wiki) Think about O’s plans in light of these TFD dates: USA 4/13/2009, Canada 6/6, UK 6/2, Germany 7/8, France7/6, Sweden 7/29. O saying his plans won't cost is false if we look at other countries with similar programs.

In my book published in 2008, I gave the exact same figures. At the time they came from the Insurance Industry who had gotten them from government studies. Strangely, the nations media never picked it up. (Not so strange I guess, when you consider they are all in bed with Obama). I've been throwing these figures out every chance I get. I wonder if Obama ever saw them. Seems unlikely. If so, it would change the way he looks at insurance. Insurance, by the way, only goes up because medical costs go up. You really cannot blame the Insurance companies. For the most part they are not out to get you.

BEYOND THE HUGH COST OF HEALTH CARE FOR ILLEGALS, IS THE ISSUE OF TORT REFORM, I DON'T ADVOCATE PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO SUE FOR MALPRACTICE, BUT TODAY IT IS OUT OF COUNTROL. FAR TOO MANY TESTS ARE RUN IN ORDER FOR DOCTORS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES. IF WE COULD ELIMINATE THE ILLEGALS, HAVE TORT REFORM AND INSURE THAT THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD INSURANCE BUT DON'T WANT IT MUST TAKE IT, THIS WILL GO ALONG WAY TOWARD REDUCING HEALTH CARE COSTS. THE GREATEST DANGER IN THE OBAMA PLAN IS RATIONED CARE AT A HIGHER COST TO THOSE OF US WHO DO WORK AND CARRY INSURANCE. NOT ONLY DOES HE WANT US TO SUPPORT THOSE WHO DON'T WORK, ARE NOT HERE LEGALLY, FILE NEEDLESS LAWSUITS OR JUST DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR INSURANCE, BUT TO ADD INSULT TO INJURY HE WANTS TO TAX OUR HEALTH BENEFITS. WE NEED TO RISE UP AND FIGHT THIS SOCIALIST HEALTH CARE SYSTEM THAT HAS FAILED IN EVERY EUROPEAN COUNTRY AS WELL AS COUNTRIES SUCH AS CUBA.

[...] Fox Business’ Brian Sullivan details that the 46 million uninsured statistic that’s bandied about in mainstream media (sometimes inflated to 50 million depending on the outlet) doesn’t necessarily mean all 46 million are chronically uninsured — meaning they are uninsured for more than two years. Some important points from his column: [...]

One thing interesting about this administration's approach to affordable health care is the failure to deal with law suits. This appears to be a sacred cow. Even FOX has failed to bring it up.

Three basic points: 1) Rising health care costs are directly correlated to rising malpractice insurance costs. You want to slow or reduce the cost of health care and health insurance, limit malpractice lawsuit settlements. Some of these things are just ridiculous, and understandably so. You can't put a price tag on health or a "normal" life, so people just pick big numbers out of a hat. Well its time to put some limits on just how big those numbers can be. 2) Rising health care costs are directly correlated to a rising level of health care in this country. We simply know how to treat and prevent disease today better than even a few years ago. Knowledge in the biomedical field is growing at an amazing rate, and you have to pay for that increase in care. It is possible to turn down the best available medical care, and go with acupuncture or something, but most people want the best care, and they have to pay for it. 3) Health insurance is not a natural right. One person without health insurance is not too many. Its just insurance. You're forced to have car insurance because you could hurt or damage someone else. With health care you aren't hurting or damaging someone else. So its a choice to pay for the risk aversion strategy that is health insurance. You could just take you chances and if something big comes along you pay for it after the treatment through a payment plan or just out of pocket, instead of paying before and after through insurance.

this is not a constitutional issue so why are we even discusing it????? no where does it say "...and the entitlement to subsidized healthcare"...