Why Not Ohio? Other States Moving Forward on Health Care

[Rick Rowlands]

As I was talking about the other day, it is up to each state to decide for itself how it wants to handle the health care issue.  For some socialized health care may work out, for others it may be a failure.  With all the other problems facing Ohio I don't think tackling health care is a wise thing to do.  Would all that effort have been wasted if the Feds would have pushed through National health care?   Its not all black and white Dennis.  That 10K spent by Medical Mutual may have given them the ability to have one on on meettings with Strickland, but that doesn't automatically mean that he would do their bidding.  Remember he most likely received equal amounts of money from pro socialized health care advocates. 

[sfc_oliver]

Gee Dennis it seems there is some movement towards the individual states Blocking Federal mandated Healthcare.

"Although President Barack Obama's push for a health-care overhaul has stalled, conservative lawmakers in more than two-thirds of the states are forging ahead with constitutional amendments to ban government health-insurance mandates."
http://www.vindy.com/news/2010/feb/02/states-seeking-to-ban-mandatory-health-i/

[irishbobcat]

Why Not Ohio? Other States Moving Forward on Health Care
The Progressive States Network last week reported other state leaders are moving forward, laying the groundwork for how national changes should be implemented, and creating the momentum for other meaningful health care reforms in their states.
Public Options and Universal Coverage:  In Iowa, SB 2092 would establish the Iowa Choice Exchange -- a form of the public option -- to serve as an information clearinghouse where businesses and consumers could compare health insurance policies.  This would be combined with IowaCare Plus, which would subsidize health care for working families fully up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) with help up to 400 percent of FPL for buying more restricted health insurance.  Sen. Jack Hatch (Des Moines) emphasized the reality that "We cannot do this without a fair and appropriate partnership with the federal government."

Connecticut, building on the enactment of their comprehensive health care reform plan SustiNet in July 2009, will be moving forward to phase it in by 2016.  By 2014, it is estimated that 98 percent of Connecticut residents will be insured with a comprehensive benefits package.  Sustinet will give every patient a medical home, ratings will not be based on age, gender or health status, and coverage will be guaranteed for chronic or pre-existing conditions.  Other new coverage and insurance reforms include:

Vermont's HB 510 would establish "Green Mountain Care," creating a public health coverage option with sliding scale premiums and cost sharing.
Missouri's Universal Health Assurance Program (HB 1641), which would provide for a publicly financed, statewide insurance program, was introduced on January 13th.  If passed, the program would provide timely access to health services for all residents, adequate funding for health care, and lower health care spending through streamlined administration and uniform payments.
California's Universal Health Care Act (S.810) -- approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee this week - would enact a single-payer health care system for the state and create a commission to decide how to pay for the plan and then submit the funding plan to voters through a ballot initiative.
Maine's LD 1620 would eliminate annual and lifetime benefit caps from private insurance policies.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why not Ohio? Why does Ted Strickland not push the Health Care for all Ohioans Act? Is it because he took a $10,000 campaign Contribution from Medical Mutual? I think so.