# How do Republicans respond to stories like Stacey Lihn's? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 5, 2012, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700 "2012-09-05T01:12:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/21 "2012-09-05T10:39:38Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Your premise seems to be that since we can’t save everyone we shouldn’t bother trying to save more. > > Given the hideous amount of inefficiency in the American healthcare system, one could well argue that you could save more and spend _less_ per capita, as indeed many universal healthcare systems do. Actually, that’s not my premise. My premise is that the fact that a life was saved does not justify writing a blank check. If you believe ACA is bad policy and will be bad for health care overall, then single examples of people who are better off for it does not justify the policy. Many seniors will be worse off, with less access due to provider cuts. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/22 "2012-09-05T10:41:30Z")
> [@Onomatopoeia](#): > > No, but it provides wider access to healthcare options, and usually at lower cost than the current American system. Why are Republicans, in a general sense, always against this? I don’t know. Universal health care makes sense, but the funding commitment from the people has to be limited. The example in the OP is interesting. Can anyone here prove that other countries UHC systems would have made this much of a commitment to a newborn in that situation? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/23 "2012-09-05T10:58:29Z")
Having been in an NHS NICU unit a few years ago, I can tell you the NHS works damn hard to save babies. But here’s their website describing the [NHS treatment of congenital heart defects](http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Congenital-heart-disease/Pages/Treatment.aspx). Note that this is not an unlimited resource - there is no such thing - but you certainly won’t go broke getting it. And there remain options for jumping the queue - the UK does have private healthcare providers (note that these are often the same NHS doctors that would be treating you anyway, sometimes in the same hospital). Also, there are some ailments that are so rare and so difficult to treat that only a few hospitals in the world can provide it. [Here’s one notable case](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1224771/Generous-Simon-Cowell-X-Factor-judge-donates-100-000-cancer-stricken-youngster.html). But do note the “so rare” caveat. Now compare that to the number of preventable deaths in the US due to relatively common ailments. I’ll take the NHS, thanks. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/24 "2012-09-05T11:04:07Z")
Funny thing is, the NHS is better than the US at preventing deaths, but not THAT much better. Given that 20% of Americans don’t have health insurance, our preventable deaths should be 20% more. But it’s actually only 14% worse than the UK: > **[Health system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_system)** > > A health system, health care system or healthcare system is an organization of people, institutions, and resources that delivers health care services to meet the health needs of target populations. > There is a wide variety of health systems around the world, with as many histories and organizational structures as there are nations. Implicitly, nations must design and develop health systems in accordance with their needs and resources, although common elements in virtually all health systems are... That’s why I disagree with the premise. There’s no guarantee at all that this newborn would have done better in the NHS. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/25 "2012-09-05T11:23:30Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > [Here](http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/state/arizona-woman-stacey-lihn-to-speak-at-democratic-national-convention) is her story. In summary, her baby daughter has a heart defect that required multiple surgeries, and at 6 months old was already halfway to her lifetime insurance cap. The ACA got rid of these lifetime caps. > > So the ACA saved her family- without it, they would undoubtedly have gone hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more, into debt to keep their daughter alive. > > How do Republicans respond to this situation, and to families with similar stories? If the ACA saved their families, then how do Republicans respond to the charge that repealing the ACA would destroy those families? FTR, I (a bleeding heart liberal who thoroughly supports ACA) don’t think policy should be decided based on their effects on particular individuals or families. The unfortunate but necessary fact is every federal policy seriously effects millions of people. The desiderata have to be variables at the national level, not the effects on particular people. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/26 "2012-09-05T11:30:19Z")
The response is probably “shop around for a surgeon, or shop around for insurance, or tort reform is all we need, or you need to be able to buy insurance across state lines.” What it really boils down to is “we got ours, fuck you”. They have no answer because they simply don’t care. If the uninsured die, it’s no loss to them. In their Darwinian world, if you don’t survive, the species is better off. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/27 "2012-09-05T11:48:38Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Funny thing is, the NHS is better than the US at preventing deaths, but not THAT much better. Given that 20% of Americans don’t have health insurance, our preventable deaths should be 20% more. But it’s actually only 14% worse than the UK: > > [Health system - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_system) > > That’s why I disagree with the premise. There’s no guarantee at all that this newborn would have done better in the NHS. The difference is less in the survival rate than in the economic impact to the families of those affected. When you have an NHS the family doesn’t take on debt they have no chance of repaying. Think of this a different way: when it’s your child, what would you do to ensure his or her survival. ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/28 "2012-09-05T11:53:15Z")
Somehow, early on in this whole process, the debate/discussion veered dramatically from “affordable health care” to “universal health insurance coverage.” Some health care is rare and expensive, and figuring out how/if/when to pay for it, and who pays for it, is a tough question. I’m a democrat, and I have to agree with post #21: > [@adaher](#): > > Actually, that’s not my premise. My premise is that the fact that a life was saved does not justify writing a blank check. If you believe ACA is bad policy and will be bad for health care overall, then single examples of people who are better off for it does not justify the policy. Universal coverage doesn’t magically create unlimited care for everyone. ---
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/29 "2012-09-05T12:05:36Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Funny thing is, the NHS is better than the US at preventing deaths, but not THAT much better. Given that 20% of Americans don’t have health insurance, our preventable deaths should be 20% more. But it’s actually only 14% worse than the UK: > **[On Their Own: More Workers Losing Health Benefits Along with Jobs](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/number-of-uninsured-in-us_n_1276189)** > > On Their Own: More Workers Losing Health Benefits Along with Jobs Uninsured Americans 2010 = 16.8% Uninsured Americans 2011 = 17.1% > [@](#): > > There’s no guarantee at all that this newborn would have done better in the NHS. > **[Natural Family Planning](https://americanpregnancy.org/unplanned-pregnancy/contraception/natural-family-planning/)** > > Natural family planning is using your body’s natural functioning to determine the days of the month you are most likely to get pregnant. Uninsured Pregnant Women are provided care and nutrition under Medicare/WIC. Only 13% of WOMEN WHO GET PREGNANT are uninsured So, you may be proving that universal health insurance is actually a critical factor? Of course, we do pay a heck of a lot more on a per-capita basis for our average outcomes. ---
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/30 "2012-09-05T12:19:50Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > They have no answer because they simply don’t care. If the uninsured die, it’s no loss to them. In their Darwinian world, if you don’t survive, the species is better off. If you think about it, it is a cost effect way of culling out those who are unlikely to produce a cost effective work force. After child labor and minimum wage laws are abolished, you really do want workers who can start young and last at least until their 40s on minimum inputs, so we can compete with China! ---
**Author:** ![tim-n-va](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim-n-va/32/3001_2.png) [@tim-n-va](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim-n-va)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/31 "2012-09-05T12:38:03Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Not an official spokesman so I can’t answer you. > > But I do have a question for you: > > How much should a private insurance company (or, even tax payers for that fact) spend to keep one person alive? > > One million? > Ten million? > One billion? > One trillion? > Ten trillion? > I want you to tell me how much would be too much to keep one person alive. > And who get’s to determine what that amount is? You? Why you and not the people actually writing the checks? > > And after the amount you cite is surpassed, what are you going to say when the funds are cut off? $10 million. After that you start killing someone else thru indirect effects of lost opportunity. For example, taxes raised might cause a family to put off getting new tires for a car or to not replace the battery in a smoke detector. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/32 "2012-09-05T12:44:06Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Funny thing is, the NHS is better than the US at preventing deaths, but not THAT much better. Given that 20% of Americans don’t have health insurance, our preventable deaths should be 20% more. But it’s actually only 14% worse than the UK: That’s because a lot of the people in the US who don’t have health insurance still get health care to one degree or another. They just get it via a ramshackle, capricious, and ridiculously inefficient system of sliding-scale clinics, hospital subsidies, and charitable programs. Most of the cost is still ultimately borne by the taxpayer, and it would probably be cheaper just to pull those people under the umbrella of Medicare or Medicaid. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/33 "2012-09-05T13:01:22Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Actually, that’s not my premise. My premise is that the fact that a life was saved does not justify writing a blank check. If you believe ACA is bad policy and will be bad for health care overall, then single examples of people who are better off for it does not justify the policy. Many seniors will be worse off, with less access due to provider cuts. This is a reasonable response. I’m just wondering what you (or Republicans in general) would say to that family if they told you “we support the ACA because it literally saved our family”. I’m not really saying that this story means the ACA is a great bill, full-stop (though I do support the bill). I’m actually talking about the politics of it- that this is an extremely powerful story, politically, and I’m genuinely curious how opponents would speak to families in situations like this. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/34 "2012-09-05T13:19:46Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > FTR, I (a bleeding heart liberal who thoroughly supports ACA) don’t think policy should be decided based on their effects on particular individuals or families. The unfortunate but necessary fact is every federal policy seriously effects millions of people. The desiderata have to be variables at the national level, not the effects on particular people. I agree with that, and you can quote me here for future reference: If ACA DOES improve health care for more people than it doesn’t, and if ACA DOES reduce the deficit, I’ll change my view on it. My issue with it is that I think it makes Medicare worse and puts a lot of employees’ insurance at risk. And I think it will increase the deficit, not reduce it. If I’m wrong, then ACA is a great health care plan. ANd you all know I hate single payer, so if it keeps us from that, I’m all for it. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/35 "2012-09-05T13:37:00Z")
The problem is two-fold. One, insurance companies that don’t really cover anything. Mrs. Cad was given a sleep study to check for apnea. It cost $3000 and she has to pay out of pocket $1200. Two, the outrageous cost of health care in this country. Did you read #1? $3000 to pay for a guy making $15/hr to make notes on a chart. WTF? Look at tightscience’s examples. You cannot tell me that those cost reflect in any way the actual costs of care. Look I can come up with a lot of stories illustrating my points as can all of you. It remains that insurance is a for-profit business and so their goal is to make money. I can’t really argue that. The reality is that medical costs need to be lowered in this county. I have long thought that the government should have student loan forgiveness programs for doctors that offer low cost health care and free primary care services to low-income or uninsured families. I also think it is reasonable to cap medical expenses in a way that reflects the actual costs. For example, a hospital buys a machine that costs $100,000. It gets used 5 times a day and has a useful life of 5 years. The cost per use is under $54.80. There is no way that a patient or insurance company should be charged hundreds of dollars for that. A charge of $68.50 will give the hospital a 20% profit on that machine. What about the cost of procedures? I believe other countries that have socialized medicine cap those as well. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/36 "2012-09-05T13:44:09Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This is a reasonable response. I’m just wondering what you (or Republicans in general) would say to that family if they told you “we support the ACA because it literally saved our family”. We agree there is a need for change, but ACA is not the change we need. Americans need the freedom to choose the health care solution that suits them best. We need to stop illegal immigrants from driving up health card costs. We need to give small businesses flexibility to choose the health care plan that is best for their workers. We need to encourage people to come together in faith and community to care for each other. we need to create options like healthcare savings accounts. Blah blah blah blah. ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/37 "2012-09-05T13:50:53Z")
> [@](#): > > For example, a hospital buys a machine that costs $100,000. It gets used 5 times a day and has a useful life of 5 years. The cost per use is under $54.80. There is no way that a patient or insurance company should be charged hundreds of dollars for that. The problem with a zero-budget operating model for health care is that you have no idea what your inflows are going to be, so you can’t really plan any sort of useful budget. But in general I agree that charging $1000 for a $50 procedure is a travesty. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/38 "2012-09-05T14:20:55Z")
Saint Cad, insurance companies aren’t the primary problem if profit-taking is defined as the problem. Providers are the problem in that case. Insurance company profit margins are low. Drug company and medical device company profits are sky high and doctor salaries are highest in the world. Insurance companies just pay the bills, the high cost of the bills is the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/39 "2012-09-05T14:29:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Funny thing is, the NHS is better than the US at preventing deaths, but not THAT much better. Given that 20% of Americans don’t have health insurance, our preventable deaths should be 20% more. But it’s actually only 14% worse than the UK: > > [Health system - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_system) > > That’s why I disagree with the premise. There’s no guarantee at all that this newborn would have done better in the NHS. Yes but: United States total healthcare expenditure per capita: $7960 United Kingdom total healthcare expenditure per capita: $3487 So. 14% worse results at **more than twice the cost**. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2012, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700/40 "2012-09-05T14:32:21Z")
Yup, one thing that reformers rarely seem to touch on directly is that a decent amount of the problem is that physician salaries in the US are a decent amount higher than elsewhere: [How Much Do Doctors in Other Countries Make? - The New York Times](http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/how-much-do-doctors-in-other-countries-make/) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-do-republicans-respond-to-stories-like-stacey-lihns/633700.md?page=3)