Insurance is the most visible aspect of health care, but by putting the major focus on the insurance industry, is Congress really going to make health care affordable? Wouldn't concentrating on bringing down the individual costs of medication, general hospital procedures and beds, and surgery ultimately lower the cost of insurance? As an example, I was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes and the insurance had to pay $800/night for my two day stay in the hospital - and that's just the cost of the bed. That's absurd, and it seems that I could have easily paid less for personal care in my own bed. Why is congress rushing this issue? Have they performed any real studies that says that simply offering insurance will bring down all these other costs?

Jeremy, Burlington

I am a left-leaning, fairly liberal individual, though I consider myself an independent. I support health care reform and voted for President Obama. Part of what moved me to vote for President Obama, was his commitment to creating a bi-partisan health reform bill and minimizing the political divisiveness in Washington. Somewhere along the line, that seems to have gone out the window. Perhaps, that concept is not possible. With that being said, can you tell me what specific parts of the current proposed bill come from the Republican party? I may lean towards the left, but I'm not foolish enough to believe the Democrats have all the answers on this complex problem our country faces. Thank you for your time.

Rob, Richmond

The more I hear about the healthcare bill, the worse it sounds. What they're talking about now in the House sounds ominously like Medicare Part D:
* having to buy private insurance or pay a penalty
* no public option
* taxpayer dollars being used to further subsidize the healthcare industry. (When and why did people's pain and suffering become a profit center? We who are people of faith are asking that question very seriously!)
If you go with this bad Part-D model, can you at least build in an annual option to change plans, as Part D offers?
Keep up the good work!

Background: People on Medicare were forced to buy Part D or pay a penalty. The only good part is that Medicare recipients can change plans annually if they want. I'm about to enroll in my third different plan in three years, because the drug companies/providers offer come-on rates for the first year, then hike the rate the second year and beyond. But you have to be agile to research the plans and make the shift every year! I'm lucky to take only two relatively low-cost prescription drugs; the premiums I pay to the insurer almost always exceed the amount I would have paid out of pocket. But on the other hand there are people I know who are in the doughnut hole -- one woman is paying over $500 a month for her husband's prescriptions but won't tell him because he would refuse to take them if he knew!

Linda

Can you ask Congressman Welch if he is aware that the Treasury Department is demanding UNLIMITED power to give money to large financial institutions under a phony TARP II proposal that would ignore Congressional oversight? Also, is Peter aware that the falsely named "derivatives reform bill" does nothing to regulate over $500 TRILLION (yes, trillion) of over-the-counter (OTC) unregulated derivatives?

Philip, Norwich

Just for the sake of discussion, let's assume the current estimates for savings to come from the current bill prove too optimistic, (and I'm a supporter of the public option, in fact of full-on single-payer), Can you say how much of the cost of this bill would be covered if we were no longer waging the wars in Afganistan and Iraq?

Andrew, Montpelier

I'd like to know if there is anything in the bill to help reduce premiums for self employed Vermonters. I've been watching mine skyrocket for years and it's becoming unaffordable.

Alec, Mt Holly

According to news reports, two provisions of the House bill have come under "furious assault" from industry lobbyists.
One imposes a tax on insurance companies for their high-premium "gold-plated" policies and the other creates a commission to explore options for Medicare cost-containment.
What do you think are the chances of retaining these two important provisions in the final legislation?

Jonathan, Shrewsbury