We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Universal Healthcare Reform of January 4106
Details
Submitted by[?]: Konservative Union
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 4107
Description[?]:
| Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the DSU I am presenting the healthcare reofrm which is in our oppinion needed to improve the current healthcare system which now functions as it were in a big incubator. The closed circulation of money between pharmaceutical companies and the government, an attempt to create a free-drugs-and-pharmaceuticals utopia, and last but not least... marginalising and practicly anihilating the private sector of the healthcare system. We are proposing a series of proposals which would liberalize and imrove the condition of the HCS by allowing the provate clinics and hospital operate side-by-side with the gocernmental funded ones. We also are proposing a bold solution but needed to release the republic from the unneeded expense. DSU is proposing to change the current law of the overall funding of the prescription drugs for all to partly financing them with the exeptions of the low-income families which would preserve the law of the total-pay-release. It would end the total funds-circulation as the healthcare sector was in a giant incubator. I would like to invite every party to the debate over this proposals. Beatrix Scheller (Health and Social Services), DSU |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Health care policy.
Old value:: There is a free public health care system and a small number of private clinics, which are heavily regulated to ensure they treat their patients well and provide good care.
Current: There is a free public health care system and a small number of private clinics, which are heavily regulated to ensure they treat their patients well and provide good care.
Proposed: There is a public health care system, but private clinics are allowed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Pharmaceutical drugs policy.
Old value:: The government pays for all citizens' pharmaceutical drugs.
Current: The government pays partially for all citizens' pharmaceutical drugs, and pays entirely for those of low income citizens.
Proposed: The government pays partially for all citizens' pharmaceutical drugs, and pays entirely for those of low income citizens.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 13:16:40, October 17, 2016 CET | From | Vorwärts Republik! | To | Debating the Universal Healthcare Reform of January 4106 |
| Message | Herr Speaker, We welcome this fantastic proposal from the DSU, we are glad we have found at least one area in common with the DSU. Health needs to work for all citizens as it is an essential right for all of our citizens. Free prescription drugs for low incomes and partial payment for those who are more well off is a perfect counter balance. We thank the DSU for bringing this forward. Kerstin Schröder Health and Social Services Spokesperson |
| Date | 17:13:17, October 18, 2016 CET | From | Konservative Union | To | Debating the Universal Healthcare Reform of January 4106 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, I have a question to the FP members, what in this proposal isn't directed at progress and why in the outcome did they voted not in favour of this? Is keeping the private healthcare institutions on the short leash more productive and more beneficial for the state of the public health? The answer is simple: no (nein). Allowing the private clinics to operate side by side with public would improve the state of our economy, the health of our citizens and in the outcome the overall state of our country. It would prevent from situations like the lack of hospital beds in our institutions and it also would make our system more competitive and open to the innovations... so after all we pleading the Progress Party and the National Party to support this proposal and allowing our citizens to draw the bennefits which free market economy has to offer. Olaf Fasbender, DSU leader. |
| Date | 20:04:06, October 18, 2016 CET | From | Fortschrittsvereinigung | To | Debating the Universal Healthcare Reform of January 4106 |
| Message | Herr Fasbender, Your bill deregulates private healthcare clinics, thus meaning they are no longer regulated to ensure good care. We believe in a firm, regulatory hand to ensure private corporations don't backslide on care in favour of profit. With something so important as healthcare, we don't believe we can risk the dangerous de-regulation the DSU espouses. As for your ridiculous claims that your proposal will fix the lack of hospital beds, that it an utter fantasy. Your bill is not legalizing private clinics because they are already legal! You're simply de-regulating them, if anything it's more likely there will be a greater lack, because now their prices will be less regulated, and less will be able to afford them. Also, we see you have barely even talked about your second proposal on this bill, to force citizens to pay for prescriptions if they are not classed as low-income. Prescriptions, our party believes, is but a basic right. People need medicine, it is an essential. Our economy is in a sensible shape, why suddenly start forcing payment for prescriptions if we don't even need to? It seems the DSU is more concerned with making a small amount of cash as opposed to morality. Eckardt Obst, Party Leader (OOC: I would have responded to this bill sooner, but I was busy) |
| Date | 20:31:44, October 18, 2016 CET | From | Konservative Union | To | Debating the Universal Healthcare Reform of January 4106 |
| Message | Mr. Obst, only thing simmilar to fantasy here is your way of thinking that somebody would open healthcare institution to provide poor healthcare services. I would like to remind you that public clinics will operate normalny we are not trying to ban them so the competition is quite vast. There is no point in hard regulations of the private sector because along with the limitations in quality of providing the good service. Bringing the regualtions down means more advanced and innovative services and if you think othwerwise I am affraid that you don't understand the basic rules of ecnomy... "prescriptions, our party believes, is but a basic right"... another example of utopian thinking... no it is not... why an executive who can afford to buy their own medicaments would have his or her prescription paid for by the state? Utopian thinking and utopian thinking again... no we are not concerned with making small amounts of money... we are concerned with making our country more advanced and directed to open market... |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 336 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 164 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If your "Bills under debate" section is cluttered up with old bills created by inactive parties, report them for deletion on the Bill Clearouts Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363 |
| Random quote: "They can call us communists and fascists all they want but, their words are of a hollow ring with the blood of innocence at their feet." - Mathew Jameson, former Hutorian politician |