Why does President Obama always refer to the current debate as

[Subdivisions]

"health insurance reform"? I noticed that he always says "insurance" and not "care"?

If he has said "healthcare reform", please link to video.

[Bluebear]

1. Insurance = business. Care = people.

[Oregone]

2. Because thats what it is primarily

Are you reading about a different bill?

[Motown_Johnny]

3. because it is insurance reform, We are not trying to change the care

just the way it is paid for

[dflprincess]

6. Using a for profit middle man as the payor is nothing new

It's what caused the mess we're in now.

[dflprincess]

4. At least he's being honest about that

this bill has nothing to do with Amereicans having access to care and and everything to do with protecting the insurance companies and the status quo.

[pundaint]

5. Because if the called it "Sellout to Health Insurers," he would be spilling the beans

[Captain Hilts]

7. Because it's about insurance, not about the care you get. It's more accurate. nt

[Mike 03]

8. It is rhetorical, but it is also completely valid. The insurance companies are the #1 problem

with the health care system.

Why shouldn't he call them out???

[Hekate]

9. It's honest, because that's what it will be. You do know, of course, that if he kept calling it...

... health care reform, while pursuing insurance corporation regulation, that the boards would be alive with people shrieking that Obama is a liar.

Just like now. Sometimes you just can't win.

The corporatocracy is deeply rooted in this country, and there is no way to actually get rid of it. I think any president who seriously tried would be targeted for assassination, and I am not joking.

However, there is no reason that giant corporations cannot be re-regulated back into being good citizens.

It will take the co-operation of the Legislative Branch of government -- you know, Congress, the body that makes the laws -- because the President, being the Executive, cannot actually make laws. It will take recognition by the President that not a single Republican in Congress will help him, and it will take effort by us citizens to put pressure on Congress to co-operate with the man we elected to get certain things done.

To come back to your question: insurance of some sort is necessary, and the structure we are stuck with needs to be reformed so that everyone has access to the care they need when they need it. Those who already have access get good care, and that's what we all need: access to that same care. Many Americans have been deceived into believing that this is a zero-sum game, and that if other people (Group B) get something it means that they (Group A) will get less.

It's the same deception that goes on regarding Affirmative Action: if those Other People get a job and I don't, it means I was robbed; if those Other People are admitted to the university and I'm not, it means I was robbed. Don't look at the fact that there aren't enough jobs/classrooms for all the applicants in the first place, just find someone to blame.

So we have to be honest about the prospects and we have to spend money to expand the program...

Hekate

[WeekendWarrior]

10. Because that's what it is. nt

[AlinPA]

11. It's fine with me to call it insurance reform. The problem is that many people don't have insurance.

This reform was started by the fact that 40 million or some number around that do not have health insurance.

[frazzled]

12. If we were doing Medicare for all, that would be health insurance reform, too

Because Medicare is just another form of insurance--government administered insurance, but insurance just the same. It's not a change in health care delivery per se.

[moondust]

13. The first half of HCR

is making it possible for (almost) everybody to go to the doctor routinely and thus avoid expensive treatments in the ER and elsewhere for more serious conditions due to the lack of routine and preventive care. That more or less involves some kind of insurance coverage since routine care can be expensive.

The other half that has not gotten as much attention so far involves controlling the costs of the care itself, i.e. hospital equipment and supplies, administrator salaries, cost of tests, etc. This is the part that HMOs, PPO networks, etc. and insurance companies were supposed to control but I think their effectiveness is arguable.