A Helpful , Glossry of Health Care Terms

Thanks to the LA Times for publishing this glossary of health care terms, including "single-payer system", "public option", coops, mandates, universal health care, the "gang of six" and more. It's short and you don't need a Ph.D. to understand it.

< Obama's Labor Day Speech to AFL-CIO | The Health Care Compromise: Worse Than No Bill At All? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    It is a great little glossary of terms (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by shoephone on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 01:21:40 AM EST
    I especially like that they hit the nail on the head by pointing out that a public option would not guarantee insurers would compete repsonsibly on premiums, but that they "might" feel compelled to compete. It shows what a risk we are taking by even insisting on a public option, instead of single-payer.

    Oh wonderful... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by weltec2 on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 04:51:26 AM EST
    There are so many people at Fox Noise that need this. I'm going to e-mail those poor people copies right away.

    Thanks! (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Cream City on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 07:10:13 AM EST
    My daughter has been prepping for a poli sci class today on the health care debate, so I just copied and forwarded the linked article to her to be able to be the one to answer questions on all these terms . . . since as we discussed the debate this weekend, I made a muddle of trying to define some of the terms even after all these months of reading here and elsewhere.  Information overload, perhaps?  But this quick reference list will help.

    Comments on the glossary (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by lambert on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 09:40:26 AM EST
    1. On comparison shopping: There's every reason to believe that comparison shopping for health care won't work. Health care is not a commodity that you can shop for like shoes.

    2. Universal healthcare: "A situation in which everyone has medical insurance." This perpetuates one of the major confusions of the debate; health insurance is not at all the same as health care!

    3. Expert panel: The composition of this panel is unspecified. That kind of haziness should sound an alarm bell. If this is IMAC, and if insurance representatives or lobbyists count as experts, then we've got a situation where health care (or health care denial) for profit is out in the open and normalized, and regulations could be written to that standard. It's not encouraging if the base closing commission is the model.

    4. Medicare and Medicare Part D. The definition might have pointed out that Medicare is single payer, and that Medicare Part D is privatized (and subisized) -- since that means that we now have a controlled experiment to compare single payer and market-based approaches.

    Control the terms, control the debate...

    A few nits to pick with that glossary (none / 0) (#4)
    by MO Blue on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 07:36:21 AM EST
    Overall the glossary is good. It would have been much better without the "some say" inaccurate proponents.

    The fact that opponents call single payer socialized medicine does not make that statement true. The statement is false.

    But some argue that the premiums on Cadillac insurance might be high because of preexisting conditions.  400 of Goldman Sachs top executives receive company insurance. The premiums are $40,000+ for each family plan.

    "Some say" (none / 0) (#5)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 08:40:07 AM EST
    I rather liked that one-- after explaining the simple beauty of single-payer, just the dry comment that this is what people mean by "socialized medicine."  Sounded pretty dismissive to me.

    OTOH, the comment about Cadillac premiums maybe being higher beause of preexisting conditions makes no sense.  I bet a sentence or two got cut in the editing to fit the space in the hard-copy paper.


    Right. Probably the opponents call single payer (none / 0) (#7)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 10:12:29 AM EST
    not only socialized medicine, but also,  a number of other things.  But that does not mean that balance requires giving credibility to inaccurate or patently false statements. Their own definition betrays the socialized medicine claim; if inferior care with Medicare for All was claimed by opponents would that be given equal footing without factual accuracy?  The V.A. system is socialized medicine, and could be noted in contrast to single payer. Moreover, that awareness and the effectiveness of the V.A. system could deflate the socialist bogeyman argument.

    Interesting (none / 0) (#8)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 11:20:01 AM EST
    that a House plan includes a 2.5% tax penalty on MAGR for those who "opt out" of mandates.

    If your modified adjusted gross income is $20,000, you have to come up with $500/year for uncle sam if you don't buy insurance.  That can make or break some people's ability to stay out of the red.

    So, does the bill also include increased funding for tax evaders who will go to prison?  Maybe the 2.5% tax pays for the increased prison population?  LOL.  For some, prison might be the best way to have a roof over their head and food in their mouths.

    Yeah, I was thinking... (none / 0) (#9)
    by shoephone on Tue Sep 08, 2009 at 11:56:02 AM EST
    that refusing to pay the mobsters their penalty fee and ending up in jail would mean... taxpayer-funded health care for me, "the prisoner".

    Looks like debtor's prisons will be coming back into fashion. Hey! I'm starting to sound like Kdog!!