Paul offers healthcare prescription

Fortunately for us, we can go to his campaign website and read more about Dr. Paul's health care prescription. He would get more people covered by tying insurance to the individual instead of the job, giving tax breaks to the worker instead of the company, so people don't lose their insurance when they change or lose a job.

That would also make health care more affordable, by giving people an incentive to shop for the best insurance policy, and bringing market forces to bear. Less government intervention equals lower prices and greater choices.

The Health Savings Account idea, which is advocated by Dr. Paul and John Stossel, is the only solution that makes sense because it has the most choices. The last thing we should want is healthcare decided by politicians.

Ron Paul does address how to make health care more affordable.

The following is taken directly from ronpaul2008.com

" * Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
* Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
* Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
* Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
* Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower costs.
"

The following is Ron Paul's plan to make healthcare more affordable.

It is time to take back our health care. This is why I support:

* Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
* Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
* Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
* Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
* Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower costs.

By removing federal regulations, encouraging competition, and presenting real choices, we can make our health care system the envy of the world once again.

At least they are softening up on Paul a little. Maybe the Globe is realizing that Paul is who America needs. He changed this Democrats mind.

Nice article. I don't agree with everything Paul says, but at this point a vote that is not for Ron Paul is a vote for Hillary and socialism. Needless to say Ron Paul has my full support.

Good point. The writers for Pauls offical campaign commercials are not very smart and bad at writing commercials. It's a tragedy.

Yes because he can cover every issue regarding health care in 30 second commercial, I hope people are responsible enough to not just look at 30 second commercials by candidates and actually go to each candidates website and see where they stand on the issues.
more government is not the answer to our health care problems, remember its the government that got us in the mess with HMO's

It's clear neither party wants to disrupt their business as usual, influence peddling ways. This is the American public's most important opportunity to say enough is enough. Our current system allows our so-called "representatives" to sell their influence to the highest bidder. Let's take back our country and make it great again. Democrats and Republicans must unite and support the only candidate who can truly right the ship. Support Ron Paul!

Some people don't want the government providing health care to people; some of us want the option to be uninsured. Ron Paul will give us liberty and free market health care, which, while we pay for it ourselves, will be cheaper and vastly superior to government provided health care as is evidenced by the decline in quality and increase in prices that has occured since government got involved in medicine.

How much do you expect the guy to fit into a 30-60 second radio ad? "Here's my detailed plan on how to fix the healthcare crisis!" I don't think so. How about going to his website to see for yourself what he says instead of criticizing him.

This is a good, quick ad. Notice how the Globe thinks they know better than Ron Paul what the voters want.

The main problem with "affordable health care" is actually the environment that government has provided it: There are alternative health care programs being developed and tried - which are much cheaper - but it isn't the fact that they are bad ideas that is killing them - it is government regulations that favor the existing health insurance companies. My family used to belong to one such program, but the laws keep changing and it has been squeezed out. Why? Insurance companies don't like competition. Rewarding these monopolists by solidifying their stranglehold on the market isn't the solution, and I'm pretty sure that is what Ron Paul advocates.

Another major issue driving up our health care costs is the fact that we have to pay the costs of doctor's liability insurance so we can have the opportunity to sue doctors for insane amounts of money. Don't get me wrong, malpractice suits are a good thing, they protect the consumer, but this seemingly "unlimited liability," still protected by our government, is killing us! State sponsored health care doesn't even begin to address that issue.

The fewer parties involved in a transaction the better, more affordable a service will be. In the long-term, Doctors will also see no change in their bottom line because the market works when it is allowed to work. I also see the patients exercising more control over decisions to reduce or end treatment when existing health conditions offer no hope for recovery. While its uncomfortable to discuss, end-of-life treatment costs have a cost burden that insurers and hospitals have profited from on a large scale. Dr. Paul has the right prescription but these end-of-life care is a logical part of this debate as is the use of mid-wives to reduce the cost of bringing new life into the world

The fewer parties involved in a transaction the better, more affordable a service will be. In the long-term, Doctors will also see no change in their bottom line because the market works when it is allowed to work. I also see the patients exercising more control over decisions to reduce or end treatment when existing health conditions offer no hope for recovery. While its uncomfortable to discuss, end-of-life treatment costs have a cost burden that insurers and hospitals have profited from on a large scale. Dr. Paul has the right prescription but end-of-life care is a logical part of this debate as is the use of mid-wives to reduce the cost of bringing new life into the world

Many people have commented about the production quality/writing of the Ron Paul ads. I, for one, am sick and tired of the glossed over "sales pitch" of all other political candidates in my personal recollection.

Plastic food looks great when the photographs are taken - but I wouldn't want to eat it.

I want the real deal - one who never wavers - no pretensions, just sound principles.

I support Ron Paul.

Boston.com, it's rather silly to expect any Presidential candidate to go through bullet points on how to resolve the health care problem in 30 seconds. That's kind of a tall order for a complex issue.

This is GOOD commercial. Ron Paul gets his name out there, sends his message of anti-corporate/government lobbying, tells the public he has experience in the field (literally), it makes voters more curious about the candidate so they can research Ron Paul more.

(TRUST)
On the issue of U.S. Healthcare, HMOs, drug companies, I know that my vote for Dr. Ron Paul will be well represented.
This is a man who after beginning as a flight surgeon in the Air Force, moved on to private practice, and has delivered over 4,000 babies during his medical career. He has 5 children (18 grandchildren, 1 GC). Three of which (Rob, Joy and Rand) are Doctor’s themselves.

Which other candidate could possibly be more knowledgeable of our Healthcare System and Medical Insurance industry?

(FACTS)
His practice REFUSED Medicare and Medicaid payments; he worked pro bono, arranged discounted or custom-payment plans for needy patients,[20] or otherwise "just took care of them."[33]
Paul supported his children during their undergraduate and medical school years, preventing their participation in federal student loans because the program was taxpayer-subsidized. He has rejected a Congressional pension for the same reason.[19][20] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul#Military_service_and_medical_career

We can't elect this guy soon enough.

I bet that most of those 47 million people cited as not having health insurance are here illegally.

Universal government run healthcare would place an even larger burden on the American taxpayer to cover the 12 to 30 million illegal immigrants than we already do. It will fix the uninsured problem but will cost Americans much more than the already overpriced system. HMO / PPO administration eats up nearly 35% of every dollar spent on healthcare in the current US system which is crazy. The duplicated beurocracy that is health care administration needs to be abolished.

As a healthcare provider - I know that it is impossible avoid the fact that we will never turn away a sick or injured person - at least those that use the emergency department for all of their care as most uninsured do. Unless this policy changes, we are essentially covering all uninsured anyways - at least for any urgent or emergent medical needs.

Universal government run healthcare would place an even larger burden on the American taxpayer to cover the 12 to 30 million illegal immigrants than we already do. It will fix the uninsured problem but will cost Americans much more than the already overpriced system. HMO / PPO administration eats up nearly 35% of every dollar spent on healthcare in the current US system which is crazy. The duplicated beurocracy that is health care administration needs to be abolished.

As a healthcare provider - I know that it is impossible avoid the fact that we will never turn away a sick or injured person - at least those that use the emergency department for all of their care as most uninsured do. Unless this policy changes, we are essentially covering all uninsured anyways - at least for any urgent or emergent medical needs.

Ron Paul is EXACTLY what we need.

PLEASE vote for him in the primaries! Once he's the Republican candidate, major media can't ignore him anymore.

(Make sure you're registered Republican to vote in the primaries: as a Democrat myself, I had to switch first!)

The price of EVERYTHING depends on two things - supply and demand.

The ONLY way to lower costs is either to increase supply or to lower demand.

Lowering demand is not likely (although given the tremendous use of prescription drugs in this nation compared to other countries, that wouldn't really be a bad thing). Therefore, we MUST raise supply of drugs and health care providers.

Currently, to have a drug approved by the FDA costs over $100 million dollars, so only about six companies can do it (Pfizer, Merck, etc.). I am certain that President Paul will find a way to streamline this process, especially for drugs with little risk, providing us with more supply from more companies, lowering heathcare costs.

Only Ron Paul is honest and trustworthy enough to do what is right over the objections of the drug companies who stand to lose their stranglehold on the health sector of our economy. When the health monopoly crumbles, and small companies can compete, health costs will tumble and the American people will win.

Special interests have bought this country for long enough. This Sunday, we are buying our country back - www.teaparty07.com.

Ron Paul = Integrity. He is not bought with special interest money. He is not on a power kick. He wants the best for our country and future generations.
Health care like everything else is what it is because someone else pays the bills.
As long as a third party pays the bills the quality of care to the patient will DROP
Not to mention the fact we are now moving into a state of FORCED health care.

Doctors form an OPINION and OPINIONs are sometimes wrong.....but we are headed for Forced health care because of someones opinion. We need Freedom in Health care, freedom to go to the doctor we will, freedom to take the drugs or NOT take the drugs they prescribe. Freedom to take vitamins ( and yes they are under attack) Freedom works.

Lasik Eye surgery. One example of free markets in action, because it's outside government regulation. When first introduced almost 8 years ago, the procedure cost up to $5k an eye, now it can be had for as low as $200 and eye. While every other government/HMO managed procedure is skyrocketing faster than inflation.

Ron Paul.... an American hero.

Comments about Dr Ron Pual's intelligence and his defense of our Constitution are fantastic...we do not need Government in our Health Care and most likely the 42 million uninsured are illegals...a moral issue for me...my money can only go so far and my family would come first...and I do not appreciate a stranger stealing it thru all of our beauracracies....we could all have a different life with less government programs...I for one have not used any of them and would like my money back. Congressman Ron Paul for the President of The United States 2008

Dr. Paul's health ideas are somewhat like the idea of "business deregulation." Immediately, that gives rise to skeptics and panic-mongers who see the return of the robber barons and physicians with rusty scalpels. While there may be some cause for concern--one that can be mitigated greatly by the threat of lawsuits, court cases, and bad publicity--the panic-mongers want to heap on MORE regulation and MORE fiscally unsound measures to combat the problem.

The first thing to consider is that there is already a public health system in the U.S.--the military health care system. Ever try to sue a military doctor? Ever try to navigate through the morass of rules, red tape, and one-size-fits-all solutions? My own experiences have been a mixed bag--I have received some very bad advice at times and had to buck the system to get it corrected. Currently, there are many well-publicized reports of malpractice, which occur everywhere, but there is very little recourse for the military. I have much less hope that a universal system would work well, despite the "Sicko" depictions to the contrary. That documentary highlighted the inequities in the current health system (which are made worse by the HMO scenario, for sure) but really did not discuss the problems when patients get bad advice and care in a protected, bureaucratic system.

The second thing to consider is that government-controlled business relationships become corrupted and inefficient. Things may start out well, but the lobbies quickly work to minimize costs and make ridiculous rules that favor the businesses. Sure, if politicians would not take money from the lobbies, there could be hope--but I don't see that scenario as realistic. Over time, the "system" drags down. So, adding the word "national" to the health care system makes it work? Keep dreaming on that one.

The third thing to consider is a way for more people to obtain health care at an affordable price. I don't know how Clinton and others think Americans can take more tax. More importantly, we can see how monopolies operate--look at TV cable costs and operational policies; you'll need go no further. The lobbies have got that one strangled, but good. Try complaining--no good; and try taking your concerns elsewhere. Not much different with national health care.

So, I think we need to dismiss an overly bureaucratic public system and the equally disastrous HMO-type of scenario (business-government nexus), and try for some free-market, free-choice systems that can operate efficiently--with full legal ramifications and customer opt-out solutions if they don't deliver. Give the pharmas competition--make them lower prices, or get your meds elsewhere.

For those who believe in the evils of "deregulation," there are many lessons of disaster about overregulation. The government-business protection scheme, when influenced by lobbies, has created a comfortable environment for scofflaws to operate immorally, then seek government protection when caught. The collapse of Enron was not really about "deregulation," but the fact that many business insiders could influence and operate around the "rules" in their favor, with a heap of help from government scofflaws and intervention/protectionism. Yes, there was action, AFTER Enron failed--a lot of good that did for many.

First and foremost, though, we need to make health care affordable--and take away its government-lobbying powers. Then, we can worry about malfeasance and sue the hell out of the scofflaws.

GIVE US THE TRUTH!!

http://wonkette.com/politics/the-war-on-paultards/wonkette-appoints-angry-commenter-general-in-paultard-war-325637.php

also part of his healthcare plan is to make whole medicare with the illegal overseas expenditures, giving those that have become dependent upon them something to carry them over. then, only then...with a sound monetary system and vibrant economy, give youth the opt out plan. couple that with the above discussed approach to those in their working years...makes good sense to me.

I agree the ad is terrible, luckily Ron Paul's position on healthcare is not. It is way to complicated to say in 30 seconds,but they could have done a much better job, if nothing else, point you to a place where you can find the information.

Go to www.ronpaullibrary.org and look it up. He is a very smart man with a very terrible campaign supporting him.

With the free market. As it happens with food for example. You don't need government to put food on your plate. And you don't need socialism in America. Scale down the welfare state, scale down the welfare vice inducing government.

What most people are failing to see in this whole "healthcare" debacle and possibly THE REASON that costs are so high, is the HUGE role that middlemen play!

The issue should be that we don't need insurance companies, drug companies and the goverment regulating what treatment we need, we need NO ONE coming between us and our doctors. Has anyone ever tried to find out just how many of the uninsured out there CHOOSE to be uninsured so that they can make their own decisions?

Look at the billions spent on all the extra salaries of executives all the way down to the clerks at the insurance companies not to mention all the staff the doctors need to handle all the insurance.....it BOGGLES THE MIND!!! These are dollars not going to where it should - our doctors and broke hospitals.

Go to Ron Paul's main site and under healthcare read about two doctors who do not accept insurance, medicare, etc. and let their patients pay them directly and get GOOD care to boot! One usually charges about $35 and there's no long wait, etc. This is what we used to have in this country before all the middlemen got into the picture. There was a major medical or hospital insurance for emergencies, but that was about all.

This is what we must return to.....nothing else! We cannot keep framing the argument around having or not having insurance or nationalized healthcare to pay our medical bills as this costs us even more money and we get poorer quality care not to mention the even longer waiting times.

Without the suffocating control over the healthcare system that the government, the insurance companies and drug companies hold, we would then see the costs go down dramatically; hospitals would then be able to have the proper staff, doctors could then practice real medicine and acutally help us to get well and try alternative treatments that work and not owe their soul to these leeches.... I think too that we would see more people entering the field of medicine instead of leaving it in droves or not even entering it as they do now!

What most people are failing to see in this whole "healthcare" debacle and possibly THE REASON that costs are so high, is the HUGE role that middlemen play!

The issue should be that we don't need insurance companies, drug companies and the goverment regulating what treatment we need, we need NO ONE coming between us and our doctors. Has anyone ever tried to find out just how many of the uninsured out there CHOOSE to be uninsured so that they can make their own decisions?

Look at the billions spent on all the extra salaries of executives all the way down to the clerks at the insurance companies not to mention all the staff the doctors need to handle all the insurance.....it BOGGLES THE MIND!!! These are dollars not going to where it should - our doctors and broke hospitals.

Go to Ron Paul's main site and under healthcare read about two doctors who do not accept insurance, medicare, etc. and let their patients pay them directly and get GOOD care to boot! One usually charges about $35 and there's no long wait, etc. This is what we used to have in this country before all the middlemen got into the picture. There was a major medical or hospital insurance for emergencies, but that was about all.

This is what we must return to.....nothing else! We cannot keep framing the argument around having or not having insurance or nationalized healthcare to pay our medical bills as this costs us even more money and we get poorer quality care not to mention the even longer waiting times.

Without the suffocating control over the healthcare system that the government, the insurance companies and drug companies hold, we would then see the costs go down dramatically; hospitals would then be able to have the proper staff, doctors could then practice real medicine and acutally help us to get well and try alternative treatments that work and not owe their soul to these leeches.... I think too that we would see more people entering the field of medicine instead of leaving it in droves or not even entering it as they do now!

The GOP needs to nominate Ron Paul. Of all the Republican presidential candidates, he offers the best hope in preventing eight years (or any amount of time for that matter) of Hell-ary.

Awww, come on Boston. Geez, how is one gonna get the details in on a 30 second ad? It's a good ad and will draw people. The first thing "tug of war" makes people nod, yep. Money in the pill bottle, yep, there goes my money. It is a total "yes" ad. Why don't you interview him yourself for the details and PRINT IT. Then everyone will know the finer details.