Health Care Reform and the Brain Dead
If there is one thing the nation has shown so far in this current Health care debate is is that America is completely brain dead when it comes to listening skills.
I am blue in the face from:
1. Trying to get people (other than Canadians) to read the bill – which is online – so there is no excuse if you want to debate its merit...
2. To realize Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer and he does not speak for everyone right of center.
3. To realize that all Americans have a right to question their politicians when it comes to the legislative process and specifically how they plan to pay for their proposals.
I have repeatedly said – I have yet to see one person who does not feel health care needs an overhaul. I have also said many people are quite happy with their plans and have a right to worry that a government plan may endanger their freedom of choice.
The President has clearly said he wants a single payer system in the past...so there is validity to their questions and they deserve a forum to ask them. The fact that other Americans want a single payer system too, does not take away the right to question how the government plans to avoid this from occurring since public competing with private generally does not yield positive outcomes for private.
Why verbiage such as racism and radicals and tea baggers and other names need to come up when what we are seriously looking at is basic Constitutional rights is beyond comprehension. The nature of the United States is to be above the suppression of opinion and above the suppression of the American citizens right to question authority.
President Obama has control of Congress right now. The very fact he is facing resistance to the health care reform has been blamed on a grand conspiracy of right wingers who want to make Obama look bad, fail and to make sure nothing he proposes gets through. However, with control of Congress it would suggest just the opposite is true. If he cannot pass legislation with control of Congress, then there are issues that need to be addressed.
So let's look at the facts.
President Obama states 47 million Americans are uninsured. That's a misleading number.
Fact: Nearly 17 million qualify for insurance and have not signed up for it, 17.5 million make over 50k / year and 9.1 million make over 75k a year and over 9 million are illegals who although they do get emergency care it is highly unlikely they will get health coverage broader than that even with a national health care plan!
Subtract that number from 47 million and the figure is substantially different. Because it is so different – basing a program on a fictitious number should and does raise questions to the fiscally conservative.
How will the government force those who have not signed up for insurance when they already qualify and have not done so, to sign up under the new program and what happens when they don't? Will we fine them? Will we throw them in jail and if so – how much and how long?
Why are illegals who will see not change in coverage and will still only receive emergency treatment counted in the overall number and additionally, why are we counting people that willing opt out due to age and/or income levels?
The Cato Institute recently studied the House plan and determined it is not sustainable and the numbers are wrong.
If this is the case, why would the fiscally conservative not question why the Cato study is not being addressed?
Of course: "Cato's entitlement research demonstrates that consumers are better off when they, and not the government, are in charge of how their money is spent. This applies to health care, Social Security, and other areas where the government currently controls the dispersal of our tax dollars. In particular, Cato has been a longtime advocate of deregulating the health care industry, so that consumers can afford the health care insurance and treatment of their choice, and privatizing Social Security.”
However, with their extensive research, they found that the House is purposely reporting a deceivingly small cost for the reform. They are projecting a cost of 1 trillion over the next 10 years neglecting to state that add on just three years past that point and we are at 2 trillion. Additionally, this is all based on health care costs growing at the same rate as inflation when currently they are considerably higher. If that rate does not come down to the rate of inflation, costs will be considerably higher so how does the government plan address this important fact? What if the rate does not align with inflation?
President Obama pledges that the middle class and below will never see the taxes increase.
This is where the brain dead activity starts to really show ....
Taxing only those above the 200k mark simply will not work. Even if that promise were to be kept – it would raise taxes on the rich by 328% to cover the costs and that is a number that makes the rich unable to pay taxes... they would work to pay taxes alone and still not be able to afford dinner!
Fiscal conservative folks do not see that working out too well for the middle class. Should they not question their representatives on how they are calculating their figures? The Cato study clearly states:
"In fact, there is no mathematical configuration of taxes on the current rich alone — including additional levies on the "super-rich" making more than $1 million per year — that is compatible with putting the nation's entitlement programs and the new health-care plan on a sustainable course.”
That raises some pretty serious questions to me and none of them have to do with Obama being black, white, with Hitler or with angry mobs. I want to know the truth...HOW much more will the middle class and poor carry as a burden to this current House plan?
The numbers do not work.
These are the biggest questions currently being made about the House bill. To make it into any other form of argument is playing politics with fiction and nothing else.
This Health care bill should not pass. It is a failure for all of America based from conception on fictitious numbers that do not work, will not work and can not work.
Point being – there are many intelligent, informed Americans that deserve more respect than to be ridiculed by the left as to the reasons we question the current plan. It has absolutely nothing to do with race, or the President and everything to do with our future and the futures of our children.
SOURCES:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/08/0
1 of 1
Copy of health care legislation titled "America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009"Image Source: Reuters
Maryann Scarangello is based in Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America,
and is an Anchor for Allvoices.
Report Credibility
-
- Share:
-
-
-
-
-
-
Credibility
-
Reach
-
Advertisement
Post a Comment
Comments: 70
You made one excellent point. People shouldn't be either praising or critisizing the House bill until they've read it. It's online, available for all to see. It's long and not exactly easy-reading, but it's written in plain language. You don't have to be a lawyer to understand it.
I was actually impressed with it. For one thing, at least some of our elected representatives have been hard at work. It really is an ambitous effort. And as far as what winds up on the President's desk, it's still an unfinished product.
And the objections to it, what has been playing in TV commercials, and the concerns that have so many people worried- NONE of that is in the actual bill! No, America, euthanasia of old people is not even in there. No government bureaucrats deciding if you should live or die. Nothing socialistic about it at all. In a nutshell, it's some serious cracking down on fraud, waste, and abuse in the health care industry, and particularly the government-run programs- Medicare and Medicaid.
The public option isn't free. It's the same as insurance offered by private companies except there's no profit-motive so it will cost less. But there's no desire to drive the private sector out of business so it will be competitive. Anybody wanting to buy a better plan, lower deductibles and co-payments, can always do it. The days of free-reign by the insurance companies is over though. They'll just have to be satisfied with reasonable profit like everybody else.
I really doubt that most people are happy with their health care plans. Or at least I doubt that most people are happy with what they and their employers are paying for their premiums. And I doubt that most people are happy with the rising cost of their deductible and co-payments.
When I first heard about this provision in this bill to require all employers to provide health care to their employees I thought this was going to be a hardship to small business, adding another cost to businesses that were already struggling. Looked like a job-killer. After reading it, however, I realize there's provisions made to small business, and considering that the cost of insurance premiums will be lower, and also considering that most businesses provide health insurance to their employees anyway, I now see that this is going to lower costs for employers. Big businesses are really going to profit from this. The savings should be much more, but imagine if a large company like Ford suddenly got a 10% decrease in one of their largest expenses. This is a job maker!
As far as illegals go, it's stated very plainly, ILLEGALS RECEIVE NO FEDERAL FUNDS.
As far as 47 million uninsured go, I'd bet my last dollar the number was higher.
As far as 17 million people eligible for health insurance and choose not to get it: health insurance is expensive. It's a pretty safe bet to assume that they choose not to get it because they can't afford to buy it at the ridiculous prices available. Everybody would like to have it but not everyone can afford it. It's a gamble to a lot of people that are struggling to make ends meet. Depending on how much their employer is contributing, should they pay $50 a week just in case somebody gets seriously sick or is seriously injured, or should they use that money to buy food and clothing?
If nobody gets seriously sick or seriously injured then those insurance payments really are money down the drain.
I was actually impressed with it. For one thing, at least some of our elected representatives have been hard at work. It really is an ambitous effort. And as far as what winds up on the President's desk, it's still an unfinished product.
And the objections to it, what has been playing in TV commercials, and the concerns that have so many people worried- NONE of that is in the actual bill! No, America, euthanasia of old people is not even in there. No government bureaucrats deciding if you should live or die. Nothing socialistic about it at all. In a nutshell, it's some serious cracking down on fraud, waste, and abuse in the health care industry, and particularly the government-run programs- Medicare and Medicaid.
The public option isn't free. It's the same as insurance offered by private companies except there's no profit-motive so it will cost less. But there's no desire to drive the private sector out of business so it will be competitive. Anybody wanting to buy a better plan, lower deductibles and co-payments, can always do it. The days of free-reign by the insurance companies is over though. They'll just have to be satisfied with reasonable profit like everybody else.
I really doubt that most people are happy with their health care plans. Or at least I doubt that most people are happy with what they and their employers are paying for their premiums. And I doubt that most people are happy with the rising cost of their deductible and co-payments.
When I first heard about this provision in this bill to require all employers to provide health care to their employees I thought this was going to be a hardship to small business, adding another cost to businesses that were already struggling. Looked like a job-killer. After reading it, however, I realize there's provisions made to small business, and considering that the cost of insurance premiums will be lower, and also considering that most businesses provide health insurance to their employees anyway, I now see that this is going to lower costs for employers. Big businesses are really going to profit from this. The savings should be much more, but imagine if a large company like Ford suddenly got a 10% decrease in one of their largest expenses. This is a job maker!
As far as illegals go, it's stated very plainly, ILLEGALS RECEIVE NO FEDERAL FUNDS.
As far as 47 million uninsured go, I'd bet my last dollar the number was higher.
As far as 17 million people eligible for health insurance and choose not to get it: health insurance is expensive. It's a pretty safe bet to assume that they choose not to get it because they can't afford to buy it at the ridiculous prices available. Everybody would like to have it but not everyone can afford it. It's a gamble to a lot of people that are struggling to make ends meet. Depending on how much their employer is contributing, should they pay $50 a week just in case somebody gets seriously sick or is seriously injured, or should they use that money to buy food and clothing?
If nobody gets seriously sick or seriously injured then those insurance payments really are money down the drain.
winds : Thank you for your intelligent rebuttal. [:-)
JerrySatire
www.Lampoon.net
JerrySatire
www.Lampoon.net
Winds7seas,
Excellent rebuttal and great points. I also question the validity of only 47 million without insurance. I am self-employed and I haven't had a paid plan for almost three years and there are tons of other Americans in the same boat. I am relying on my general good health to remain with me. I also agree that many people don't sign up for their employers plan because the cost is still ridiculously high and they have to prioritize where their money goes.
Even the implication that people might get thrown in jail if they are not able to sign up for coverage--is misleading. The president was asked about the ability to pay in a town hall meeting a few weeks ago. He said the objective was to make it "affordable" for low income people and if they still can't afford it, they would be looking at other options and incentives to help make it happen.
Imprisoning people or fining them for not being able to sign up has not even been hinted at--to the contrary, the discussion has been how to make it happen and what it would take. This is America. We don't throw people in jail, because they can't pay.
You are also correct that nothing has made it to the president's desk yet. There will be changes in this legislation and hopefully both sides of the table will get enough concessions to make it acceptable.
While there are people who are locked onto the idea of reading the suggested bill and pouring over every tiny detail to see if it adds up, I have to wonder how many of them even listen to what the president has to say about his goals to reform healthcare. He has been out in public and giving speeches every few days. If the ability to listen is in question, I would challenge people to try and hear what he is saying.
President Obama's mother died from cancer and had to battle with the insurance companys. He has an altruistic desire to reform health care and clean up the fruad in the medical system, the insurance industry, and the current Medicare/Medicaid. He said that every American citizen has the "right" to health care coverage. It is expensive and unfair to the patient, when physicians can send them to 3-4 different specialists to order tests and not even communicate results with each other. But often they feel compelled to do so, in order to cover all their butts against malpractice lawsuits. Most of the country's medical records system is obsolete. Some doctor's offices are not even fully computerized yet.
Medical fraud is a major problem that has gotten drowned out by all the "death squad" noise. Doctors have been arrested for over charging insurance companies for procedures that were never done to the patient. I just heard a report on this kind of fraud and it is practically an epidemic.
Frankly, with the overwhelming importance of health care reform on so many levels, I have been shocked at the willingness of the "go with the flow" crowd, as you mentioned, to believe the illogical and divisive rhetoric that is being hyped to them. Talk about brain dead.
Excellent rebuttal and great points. I also question the validity of only 47 million without insurance. I am self-employed and I haven't had a paid plan for almost three years and there are tons of other Americans in the same boat. I am relying on my general good health to remain with me. I also agree that many people don't sign up for their employers plan because the cost is still ridiculously high and they have to prioritize where their money goes.
Even the implication that people might get thrown in jail if they are not able to sign up for coverage--is misleading. The president was asked about the ability to pay in a town hall meeting a few weeks ago. He said the objective was to make it "affordable" for low income people and if they still can't afford it, they would be looking at other options and incentives to help make it happen.
Imprisoning people or fining them for not being able to sign up has not even been hinted at--to the contrary, the discussion has been how to make it happen and what it would take. This is America. We don't throw people in jail, because they can't pay.
You are also correct that nothing has made it to the president's desk yet. There will be changes in this legislation and hopefully both sides of the table will get enough concessions to make it acceptable.
While there are people who are locked onto the idea of reading the suggested bill and pouring over every tiny detail to see if it adds up, I have to wonder how many of them even listen to what the president has to say about his goals to reform healthcare. He has been out in public and giving speeches every few days. If the ability to listen is in question, I would challenge people to try and hear what he is saying.
President Obama's mother died from cancer and had to battle with the insurance companys. He has an altruistic desire to reform health care and clean up the fruad in the medical system, the insurance industry, and the current Medicare/Medicaid. He said that every American citizen has the "right" to health care coverage. It is expensive and unfair to the patient, when physicians can send them to 3-4 different specialists to order tests and not even communicate results with each other. But often they feel compelled to do so, in order to cover all their butts against malpractice lawsuits. Most of the country's medical records system is obsolete. Some doctor's offices are not even fully computerized yet.
Medical fraud is a major problem that has gotten drowned out by all the "death squad" noise. Doctors have been arrested for over charging insurance companies for procedures that were never done to the patient. I just heard a report on this kind of fraud and it is practically an epidemic.
Frankly, with the overwhelming importance of health care reform on so many levels, I have been shocked at the willingness of the "go with the flow" crowd, as you mentioned, to believe the illogical and divisive rhetoric that is being hyped to them. Talk about brain dead.
Delilah : Thank you for your intelligent comments. [:-)
JerrySatire
www.Lampoon.net
JerrySatire
www.Lampoon.net
In Massachusetts you are fined if you do not have health
insurance.
If you would be so kind Delilah, please address the questions I have asked of Winds below and while you're at it, since you will not seem to listen to anyone who is not extremely liberal in their thinking... you could also address Bryansix too - he has great points.
I am self insured, and I pay through the nose for FAMILY coverage. I have also not taken a vacation in over eight years because insurance is more important to me than Disney World.
I resent your implication completely because you are closed minded enough to believe that ambiguity is not often abused and this bill is riddled with it. You are distorting facts for your agenda and that of liberals.
It's a shame - I am happy to come to the table with people who have a sense of reasoning...but I afraid you have clearly stated you do not care to reason at all.
insurance.
If you would be so kind Delilah, please address the questions I have asked of Winds below and while you're at it, since you will not seem to listen to anyone who is not extremely liberal in their thinking... you could also address Bryansix too - he has great points.
I am self insured, and I pay through the nose for FAMILY coverage. I have also not taken a vacation in over eight years because insurance is more important to me than Disney World.
I resent your implication completely because you are closed minded enough to believe that ambiguity is not often abused and this bill is riddled with it. You are distorting facts for your agenda and that of liberals.
It's a shame - I am happy to come to the table with people who have a sense of reasoning...but I afraid you have clearly stated you do not care to reason at all.
I can't reply to your post below - so I'll make it brief and to the point.
None of the current versions out there WORK mathmatically. Not one.
It's nice that you place a propaganda link to the White House but that's all it is - a propaganda link.
None of the current versions out there WORK mathmatically. Not one.
It's nice that you place a propaganda link to the White House but that's all it is - a propaganda link.
Write4Life, I just have to wonder if, perhaps, the reason they want to enforce that we ALL have to pay for health care insurance might be the same reason ALL drivers are required to have car insurance? That is a real financial burden to people, too, but there is a good reason for it.
Or do you feel car insurance shouldn't be required?
Or do you feel car insurance shouldn't be required?
There are currently three versions of the health care reform in the house and two in the senate. After congress reconvenes in the fall, all that legislation has to be merged into one final bill for the president's consideration. They are by no means even close to a final bill. A large part of the cost will be covered by eliminating or merging waste and inefficient programs.
As for taxing people who make over $250,000 to help pay for health care reform--that may have to happen, but only as a last resort. The president has asked for a bill that is not carried "on the backs of the people." If taxes have to be imposed in order to offer health care coverage for all Americans, it should be the rich and not the middle class. Donald Trump is a smart, hard working guy, but how many millions of dollars does one person need?
All the "doing the math" and pronostications about not listening to the REAL people, are just not true. The problem in far too many cases where people turn out in public to get answers, the organized mob has been booing and shouting and not allowing legitimate answers to be asked and answered.
People are really interested in facts over rhetoric, they can get a lot of answers from the white house web site:
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
As for taxing people who make over $250,000 to help pay for health care reform--that may have to happen, but only as a last resort. The president has asked for a bill that is not carried "on the backs of the people." If taxes have to be imposed in order to offer health care coverage for all Americans, it should be the rich and not the middle class. Donald Trump is a smart, hard working guy, but how many millions of dollars does one person need?
All the "doing the math" and pronostications about not listening to the REAL people, are just not true. The problem in far too many cases where people turn out in public to get answers, the organized mob has been booing and shouting and not allowing legitimate answers to be asked and answered.
People are really interested in facts over rhetoric, they can get a lot of answers from the white house web site:
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
Delilah;
On several occasions I've seen news videos of Obama saying that those who do not get health insurance will be fined $1,500.00. (it might have been $1900.00 but I'll give him credit for the lesser amount)
You said it yourself; this is a man who had to battle w/ the insurance companies! Could it be he has a personal vengence toward them?
This is also a man who doesn't know that a pediatrician doesn't do surgery so he/she can pick the most expensive treatment for the child with a sore throat but only passes the child on to be checked out by a surgeon/specialist!
This is a man who could have begun cleaning up health care fraud months ago!
As far as some doctors offices not being computerized yet....well; good for them. That's one way to insure privacy & to keep costs down! GEEEZZZ---they might even be one of the rare breeds that pick up the phone to call ya at home to see how you're doing or make a house call!!
Obama's response to a woman complaining that her grandmother was refused hip replacement by her insurance company was "well; she is 100 years old". Or if you don't take care of your health like others think you should you can be refused treatment or have treatment at a higher price. Let's say you're a bit overweight; get diagnosed with diabetes or have back problems. You will be told you're not taking care of your health since you're problems are probably related to being overweight.
The things that are broken with the existing health care need to be rectified. Replacing the existing health care is not the way to go!
I see no 'reform' in this bill. Only a new health care system for Big Brother to take charge of. A type of population control that keeps the government in an area where they don't belong. Why haven't I heard anything about the Insurance Commissions being involved with this? At both the state & federal levels? They have laws to follow & guidelines to go by.
There is no 'hype' or 'go with the flow' mentality of people who are dissatisfied with our government right now!
I'm sick of politicians telling me they know what's best for me....especially when the things that are going on have no effect on their lives. I'm far from being a child & don't need to be talked down to nor chastised.
These people need to realize they were voted in office to represent the American people not some disillusioned political party.
On several occasions I've seen news videos of Obama saying that those who do not get health insurance will be fined $1,500.00. (it might have been $1900.00 but I'll give him credit for the lesser amount)
You said it yourself; this is a man who had to battle w/ the insurance companies! Could it be he has a personal vengence toward them?
This is also a man who doesn't know that a pediatrician doesn't do surgery so he/she can pick the most expensive treatment for the child with a sore throat but only passes the child on to be checked out by a surgeon/specialist!
This is a man who could have begun cleaning up health care fraud months ago!
As far as some doctors offices not being computerized yet....well; good for them. That's one way to insure privacy & to keep costs down! GEEEZZZ---they might even be one of the rare breeds that pick up the phone to call ya at home to see how you're doing or make a house call!!
Obama's response to a woman complaining that her grandmother was refused hip replacement by her insurance company was "well; she is 100 years old". Or if you don't take care of your health like others think you should you can be refused treatment or have treatment at a higher price. Let's say you're a bit overweight; get diagnosed with diabetes or have back problems. You will be told you're not taking care of your health since you're problems are probably related to being overweight.
The things that are broken with the existing health care need to be rectified. Replacing the existing health care is not the way to go!
I see no 'reform' in this bill. Only a new health care system for Big Brother to take charge of. A type of population control that keeps the government in an area where they don't belong. Why haven't I heard anything about the Insurance Commissions being involved with this? At both the state & federal levels? They have laws to follow & guidelines to go by.
There is no 'hype' or 'go with the flow' mentality of people who are dissatisfied with our government right now!
I'm sick of politicians telling me they know what's best for me....especially when the things that are going on have no effect on their lives. I'm far from being a child & don't need to be talked down to nor chastised.
These people need to realize they were voted in office to represent the American people not some disillusioned political party.
Excellent comments. I especially like the fact that you pointed out that there are 17 million Americans who qualify for health insurance but don't have it. Notice nobody mentions the fact that a lot of these people are paying for healthcare out of pocket which to a lot of people is an economically sensible decision. Instead of spending a few hundred bucks a month they invest it or put it in the bank. Also illegal aliens do receive federal funds they just don't receive them directly.
Winds - I am going to lay this on your shoulders - or anyone else who cares to take it on since you say you've read the bill.
Convince me that someone who lives at or slightly above the poverty line will receive any more healthcare under the current plan than they have now. People at the poverty line who have a heart attack for example. Will they be able to afford the 5k outlined in the bill - or the monthly premium outlined in the bill? It's not free....
Convince me that a person who is claiming they cannot afford insurance can afford the payment that the government has outlined in this plan...since, you correctly pointed out: 1. it is not free and 2. it's got some pretty high caps etc...
Then convince me that it isn't absurdly lowballed in terms of cost to the taxpayer and how the middle class can believe they will not see a substantial tax increase to pay for it.
As for the 17 million that do not buy health insurance because of the cost - this plan isn't much lower than one can find on their own so why are they going to opt in because it is government run?
Next - many people are protesting because of the above points. That said, tell me with all sincerity that if people were not protesting right now you have 100% confidence that the authors of this bill would make the appropriate changes that reflect the issues people are addressing...and not the scare tactics...just the financial aspects alone.
Tell me why, if these points are all out there and have been known for some time - why did they push so hard to pass it as written and why haven't they gone on air to main stream media and told the American people who ARE uninsured what they will pay out of pocket for the BASIC gov't plan. It is right in the bill and people are not reading it - so tell me why the writers are not telling the America people the cost verses statements like Pelosi's that claim Republicans don't care about health coverage for all??????
I'm tired of trying to explain the fiscal side to people who won't listen or who worse, make it about something completely different. So you perhaps can explain to me how fiscally we will be better off with this plan a decade from now and how you, as a taxpayer, feel about the financial side TWENTY years out when the children of today are carrying the majority of the burden.
Put it in dollars and cents for me - because I am a numbers person and although I want everyone to have access to healthcare - these numbers don't add up for me.
Lastly, the "work in progress" crap is just that... crap.... this bill would absolutely passed as is if people hadn't said stop and it was never meant to be a work in progress - it was meant to be the government plan as it is currently written.
Maryann
Convince me that someone who lives at or slightly above the poverty line will receive any more healthcare under the current plan than they have now. People at the poverty line who have a heart attack for example. Will they be able to afford the 5k outlined in the bill - or the monthly premium outlined in the bill? It's not free....
Convince me that a person who is claiming they cannot afford insurance can afford the payment that the government has outlined in this plan...since, you correctly pointed out: 1. it is not free and 2. it's got some pretty high caps etc...
Then convince me that it isn't absurdly lowballed in terms of cost to the taxpayer and how the middle class can believe they will not see a substantial tax increase to pay for it.
As for the 17 million that do not buy health insurance because of the cost - this plan isn't much lower than one can find on their own so why are they going to opt in because it is government run?
Next - many people are protesting because of the above points. That said, tell me with all sincerity that if people were not protesting right now you have 100% confidence that the authors of this bill would make the appropriate changes that reflect the issues people are addressing...and not the scare tactics...just the financial aspects alone.
Tell me why, if these points are all out there and have been known for some time - why did they push so hard to pass it as written and why haven't they gone on air to main stream media and told the American people who ARE uninsured what they will pay out of pocket for the BASIC gov't plan. It is right in the bill and people are not reading it - so tell me why the writers are not telling the America people the cost verses statements like Pelosi's that claim Republicans don't care about health coverage for all??????
I'm tired of trying to explain the fiscal side to people who won't listen or who worse, make it about something completely different. So you perhaps can explain to me how fiscally we will be better off with this plan a decade from now and how you, as a taxpayer, feel about the financial side TWENTY years out when the children of today are carrying the majority of the burden.
Put it in dollars and cents for me - because I am a numbers person and although I want everyone to have access to healthcare - these numbers don't add up for me.
Lastly, the "work in progress" crap is just that... crap.... this bill would absolutely passed as is if people hadn't said stop and it was never meant to be a work in progress - it was meant to be the government plan as it is currently written.
Maryann
I didn't even intend for my comment to be considered as a rebuttal to your article. I was agreeing with you that people shouldn't be stating as fact rumors they've heard about the House bill without reading it themselves. And most of these rumors spread by people that ALSO haven't read it. And on and on.
I have to admit that I never saw in the proposed bill exactly how much a premium would cost for basic coverage under the government option. I must have missed that, somehow. I found how the premium is intended to cover health care and administrative costs, and some buffer, but I didn't see that they actually have a set price in mind. If you know exactly where that is please let me know. I don't see how they could possibly have a price set so soon without first lowering costs and this would be extremely important.
I don't know what you mean by "more" health care. You either can get care or you can't, and then there's a vastly differing degree as far as deductibles, network options and co-payments go.
The people that currently can't afford to buy insurance will get credits to help them get it. Same with small business. They get credits to help them provide insurance for their employees. And 1,000 employees isn't considered small. And companies that only have 20 employees, but are paying them $80,000 a year aren't considered small, either.
If the government option for health insurance isn't better and less-expensive than what private companies are now offering, then what are the private insurance companies even worried about? People will simply choose to buy insurance from the private sector and that makes any arguement about government takeover of health insurance completely moot. Right?
I can see that simply working to cut out fraud, abuse and waste in all aspects of the current health care system is going to lower costs for everyone. Most of this bill concentrates on exactly that, and right here is the majority of the savings. This will lower costs in the private sector too.
Now let's get down to money. This enormous effort to crack down on fraud, abuse and waste will pay off in a big way, but it's going to take a huge amount of administrative costs. Administrative costs in the government plan, at least starting off, will be higher than in the private sector. But then there's not the necessity for profit, so that will swing it back to having a competitive edge. At any rate, considering the administrative costs, the public plan will be competitive, but not so much as to force the private sector out of business. Just enough to keep them honest.
Start-up costs will be high. No denying that. Then,as fraud, waste and abuse in the current system is eliminated and as premium payments for the government option start rolling in, it should pay for itself.
One thing that I think hasn't been given enough merit is what a decrease in the price of insurance premiums would do to help business. Most businesses still pay the majority of their employees' insurance premiums, though the number of businesses and the percent they pay has steadily been decreasing especially over the last ten years, and if that amount can be decreased it would be a huge boon to business. Imagine if one of the largest expenses for most companies could be decreased by just 25% what that would mean to the economy! Many could afford to hire new people.
If more money is needed to get this thing off the ground, tax the wealthiest of Americans a little more. Cut out some of their tax breaks. Not SMALL business. The rich don't own SMALL business. Just the people that have so much money they couldn't spend it in 1,000 years no matter how hard they tried.
I recently saw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet on TV speaking to a public forum of college students. They were asked about the fairness of the income tax laws, and they both said that because of the more than 14% payroll tax that nobody seems to take into account, the poor and middle-class are charged a far greater percentage of taxes than the wealthy are.
If any bleeding-heart extreme right-wingers are feeling sorry for the fate of the ultra-rich in this country, that they might have to pay a little more in taxes, just picture Madonna and Britney Spears. They'll be among the ones paying a little more in taxes and I'm sure that's not going to break anybody's heart.
I have to admit that I never saw in the proposed bill exactly how much a premium would cost for basic coverage under the government option. I must have missed that, somehow. I found how the premium is intended to cover health care and administrative costs, and some buffer, but I didn't see that they actually have a set price in mind. If you know exactly where that is please let me know. I don't see how they could possibly have a price set so soon without first lowering costs and this would be extremely important.
I don't know what you mean by "more" health care. You either can get care or you can't, and then there's a vastly differing degree as far as deductibles, network options and co-payments go.
The people that currently can't afford to buy insurance will get credits to help them get it. Same with small business. They get credits to help them provide insurance for their employees. And 1,000 employees isn't considered small. And companies that only have 20 employees, but are paying them $80,000 a year aren't considered small, either.
If the government option for health insurance isn't better and less-expensive than what private companies are now offering, then what are the private insurance companies even worried about? People will simply choose to buy insurance from the private sector and that makes any arguement about government takeover of health insurance completely moot. Right?
I can see that simply working to cut out fraud, abuse and waste in all aspects of the current health care system is going to lower costs for everyone. Most of this bill concentrates on exactly that, and right here is the majority of the savings. This will lower costs in the private sector too.
Now let's get down to money. This enormous effort to crack down on fraud, abuse and waste will pay off in a big way, but it's going to take a huge amount of administrative costs. Administrative costs in the government plan, at least starting off, will be higher than in the private sector. But then there's not the necessity for profit, so that will swing it back to having a competitive edge. At any rate, considering the administrative costs, the public plan will be competitive, but not so much as to force the private sector out of business. Just enough to keep them honest.
Start-up costs will be high. No denying that. Then,as fraud, waste and abuse in the current system is eliminated and as premium payments for the government option start rolling in, it should pay for itself.
One thing that I think hasn't been given enough merit is what a decrease in the price of insurance premiums would do to help business. Most businesses still pay the majority of their employees' insurance premiums, though the number of businesses and the percent they pay has steadily been decreasing especially over the last ten years, and if that amount can be decreased it would be a huge boon to business. Imagine if one of the largest expenses for most companies could be decreased by just 25% what that would mean to the economy! Many could afford to hire new people.
If more money is needed to get this thing off the ground, tax the wealthiest of Americans a little more. Cut out some of their tax breaks. Not SMALL business. The rich don't own SMALL business. Just the people that have so much money they couldn't spend it in 1,000 years no matter how hard they tried.
I recently saw Bill Gates and Warren Buffet on TV speaking to a public forum of college students. They were asked about the fairness of the income tax laws, and they both said that because of the more than 14% payroll tax that nobody seems to take into account, the poor and middle-class are charged a far greater percentage of taxes than the wealthy are.
If any bleeding-heart extreme right-wingers are feeling sorry for the fate of the ultra-rich in this country, that they might have to pay a little more in taxes, just picture Madonna and Britney Spears. They'll be among the ones paying a little more in taxes and I'm sure that's not going to break anybody's heart.
Thanks for the clarification!
Premiums in the current bill are outlined on pages 134 -139 of the current house bill located here:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bil...
As for taxes on Britney - all for it - that's not the real issue addressed in the article... the issue is that OBama is telling the American public that helth care will be financed with an additional tax on the wealthiest Americans which in any scenario including making them pay for actually going to work - mathmatically will not work.
The tiering program is similar to what is in Massachusetts and it has been a massive failure (which I will add was set up by REPUBLICAN Mitt Romney...so, it's not an issue with the Dems doing it - it's an issue with following a failing plan as your base.)
The government plan allows (as in Mass) a fine imposed on those that do not have insurance and it will be monitored as it is in Massachusetts via income tax returns. As in MA, you will need the supporting number of the company providing the insurance to be listed on the return.
The government program is cheaper than current versions - premium wise. It gives the uninsured access to basic medical care - WHICH, I support - just not through adding it to the government's authority.
However, it has caps and those who cannot afford coverage now and live below the or close to, or even above the poverty line will never be able to cover in case of emergencies.
But for purposes of the article above - I was addressing simple mathmatical studies verses Obama's constant claim that he will not raise taxes on the middle class or anyone below the 200k mark.
It's not possible. He is also completely understating the costs of setting his massive expansion up and no liberal spin can change that.
The bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget says the house plans are back-loading the heaviest costs at the end of the 10-year period to make the costs appear less then they will be.
As for Obama's claim it will not add to the deficit - "two health care reform bills that have been analyzed by the Congressional Budget Office are predicted by the CBO to increase the national debt by $239 billion and $1.042 trillion respectively."
SOURCE: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=52306
Here is a link to a discussion on the health care reform ... it is a discussion between the small business advocate Jim Blasingame and public policy research organization The Galen Institute's President Grace Marie Turner. It is a very good discussion.
http://www.smallbusinessadvocate.com/small-business-interviews/grace-marie-turner-6674
Premiums in the current bill are outlined on pages 134 -139 of the current house bill located here:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bil...
As for taxes on Britney - all for it - that's not the real issue addressed in the article... the issue is that OBama is telling the American public that helth care will be financed with an additional tax on the wealthiest Americans which in any scenario including making them pay for actually going to work - mathmatically will not work.
The tiering program is similar to what is in Massachusetts and it has been a massive failure (which I will add was set up by REPUBLICAN Mitt Romney...so, it's not an issue with the Dems doing it - it's an issue with following a failing plan as your base.)
The government plan allows (as in Mass) a fine imposed on those that do not have insurance and it will be monitored as it is in Massachusetts via income tax returns. As in MA, you will need the supporting number of the company providing the insurance to be listed on the return.
The government program is cheaper than current versions - premium wise. It gives the uninsured access to basic medical care - WHICH, I support - just not through adding it to the government's authority.
However, it has caps and those who cannot afford coverage now and live below the or close to, or even above the poverty line will never be able to cover in case of emergencies.
But for purposes of the article above - I was addressing simple mathmatical studies verses Obama's constant claim that he will not raise taxes on the middle class or anyone below the 200k mark.
It's not possible. He is also completely understating the costs of setting his massive expansion up and no liberal spin can change that.
The bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget says the house plans are back-loading the heaviest costs at the end of the 10-year period to make the costs appear less then they will be.
As for Obama's claim it will not add to the deficit - "two health care reform bills that have been analyzed by the Congressional Budget Office are predicted by the CBO to increase the national debt by $239 billion and $1.042 trillion respectively."
SOURCE: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=52306
Here is a link to a discussion on the health care reform ... it is a discussion between the small business advocate Jim Blasingame and public policy research organization The Galen Institute's President Grace Marie Turner. It is a very good discussion.
http://www.smallbusinessadvocate.com/small-business-interviews/grace-marie-turner-6674
AGREED.
The only question I am mulling over this morning is one I heard on a TV discussion last night, which is that a lot of employers may opt to no longer offer insurance to their employees, preferring instead to save the money and let their staff use the gov plan.
Thoughts?
The only question I am mulling over this morning is one I heard on a TV discussion last night, which is that a lot of employers may opt to no longer offer insurance to their employees, preferring instead to save the money and let their staff use the gov plan.
Thoughts?
It will absolutely happen. The fine imposed will cost employers less than the cost of coverage for their employees.
Write4Life.........I have to agree with most of your comments & what you're trying to get the general public to comprehend!! However; it seems to me that we're seeing Big Brother at his best. Too many places where the government has taken over where they don't belong & not enough places where they should be! The Health Care bill at this point should be about cleaning up the fraud in the Medicaid & Medicare systems. Fraud committed by individuals & companies. Fraud by hospitals that overcharging for meds, care & excessive testing. Like being charged anywhere from $2.00-5.00 for an aspirin is pretty bad!! There are tons of fraudulent monies out there that could be recouped which would help cut costs across the board. We don't need a new Government run system; which Obama has quoted as his goal; we need regulations to stop the abuse of the existing system B4 taking any further steps. Oh! Me??? I haven't been able to afford health insurance for years now & NO I have never been to the ER nor used/abused it for general care. I have been blessed thus far not to need it for an emergency purpose either. I just do without.....I fall into that category that doesn't qualify for assistance of any sort but don't have enough income to pay taxes. I get by each month but NO EXTRAS are considered!
I'd also like to reiterate the fact that many of the 17 million who have Insurance offered via their employment don't buy it due to the high premiums it comes with. I guess the roof over their head & food on the table means more to them!
As for Rush Limbaugh; although he is an entertainer; I feel he'd be the 1st to say he doesn't speak for everyone. He's versing his strong opinion just as any American has the right to do. Even with his drama! Anyone who would be shallow enough to accept one persons opinion isn't much of a thinker & would fall into the "go with the flow" category!
The bottom line right now is that their has been way too much recent government abuse & it needs to be turned around PDQ!
I'd also like to reiterate the fact that many of the 17 million who have Insurance offered via their employment don't buy it due to the high premiums it comes with. I guess the roof over their head & food on the table means more to them!
As for Rush Limbaugh; although he is an entertainer; I feel he'd be the 1st to say he doesn't speak for everyone. He's versing his strong opinion just as any American has the right to do. Even with his drama! Anyone who would be shallow enough to accept one persons opinion isn't much of a thinker & would fall into the "go with the flow" category!
The bottom line right now is that their has been way too much recent government abuse & it needs to be turned around PDQ!
Chewthefat - great name and excellent points and I completely agree. If people spent oneyear working inside the claim units of an insurance company they would have a very different opinion of the system. The fraud in the insurance industries has gone through the roof - to the point insurance companies now employ thousands of adjustors just to look into the claims suspected to be bogus.
I agree - the best way to help health insurance and make it accessible to all is not to have government take it over - which will happen - but to fix what is already broken and privatize it.
Lastly - I forget the study I read on the 17 million who opt out... but will find it. The study suggested as many people opt out for financial reasons as personal reasons such as they want the money for "extras." The study (and it probably was Cato's) said that if these people were to cut out dinners out, night's on the town - incidentals - then healthcare would be reachable.
I for one opted out in my 20's and I promise you many people can vouch for this - I NEVER missed a Friday happy hour!
Thanks for the comments!
I agree - the best way to help health insurance and make it accessible to all is not to have government take it over - which will happen - but to fix what is already broken and privatize it.
Lastly - I forget the study I read on the 17 million who opt out... but will find it. The study suggested as many people opt out for financial reasons as personal reasons such as they want the money for "extras." The study (and it probably was Cato's) said that if these people were to cut out dinners out, night's on the town - incidentals - then healthcare would be reachable.
I for one opted out in my 20's and I promise you many people can vouch for this - I NEVER missed a Friday happy hour!
Thanks for the comments!
Yep... spot on. Another thing to think about for anybody who's read the bill and also done the math; such a large portion is weighted towards the Middle Class and higher(yes the Middle Class who can end up paying over 800/mo for premiums and be left with a whopping 30% liability.), who also own most of the small, medium and large businesses in the the US, it means that their increased financial burden will be passed on to the entire population in the form of increased costs for goods and services.
These are costs that CAN NOT BE OFFSET for the poor;
My wife and I would be considered middle class. A few years ago, we went through a two year period where my wife spent 8 days in the ICU, followed by 6 weeks in the hospital; I had a total hip replacement, and an aneurysm repaired in my heart as well as the installation of a titanium heart valve. Under my current health care, I paid $0 for all of it; under Obama's plan, I would be paying about $800/mo in premiums (only a little lower than my house payment), and would have been responsible for at least an additional $20,000 in medical costs ($10,000 max for two years running).
There is also a lot of generalized language which gives the Commissioner way too much power; essentially, Obama appoints him/her and turns the whole thing over to him/her to administer as they see fit.
I'd also have to say that the bill is NOT an easy read, nor easy to understand because it jumps around a lot. There is a lot of confusing language.
I urge everyone to not only read the bill, but DO THE MATH!
These are costs that CAN NOT BE OFFSET for the poor;
My wife and I would be considered middle class. A few years ago, we went through a two year period where my wife spent 8 days in the ICU, followed by 6 weeks in the hospital; I had a total hip replacement, and an aneurysm repaired in my heart as well as the installation of a titanium heart valve. Under my current health care, I paid $0 for all of it; under Obama's plan, I would be paying about $800/mo in premiums (only a little lower than my house payment), and would have been responsible for at least an additional $20,000 in medical costs ($10,000 max for two years running).
There is also a lot of generalized language which gives the Commissioner way too much power; essentially, Obama appoints him/her and turns the whole thing over to him/her to administer as they see fit.
I'd also have to say that the bill is NOT an easy read, nor easy to understand because it jumps around a lot. There is a lot of confusing language.
I urge everyone to not only read the bill, but DO THE MATH!
Changez,
I can assure you I do have a soul....and can dance too!
I can assure you I do have a soul....and can dance too!
For anyone who would care to enlighten themselves and get answers to confusing issues, you might want to check this out:
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
Delilah, Thanks for the White House web address! Hopefully I'll also be able to read/enlighten myself about transparency; line by line veto for any 'pork'; 'Cap & Trade'; an investigation pertaining Nancy Pelosi being 'lied' to by the CIA; an investigation & charges being brought against the 3 members of the New Black Panther Party policing the voting poll; Barney Frank & his mess; GE & Bank of America fines with no one being charged of a crime but the fines are paid for by tax/stimulus money & the list goes on & on! OH! Then there's the 30+ Czars hired by Obama that don't have to answer to anyone & I reckon are being paid with our tax monies! The 'NO LOBBYISTS' in Obama's administration is also interesting. The guy just can't walk the walk but he sure can talk the talk. It all boils down to "say what you mean & mean what you say"! I haven't heard/seen any of that!
Do not rely on a government link to get your facts people -
Go to Non-Partisan think tanks that have evaluated all forms of the bill.
This link is sugar for a diabetic.
Go to Non-Partisan think tanks that have evaluated all forms of the bill.
This link is sugar for a diabetic.
I read the summary of the bill here. http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BILLSUMMARY-071409.pdf
I have to admit that even though I am against this bill I actually like MOST of what is in it. The problem I had was when I got to the part where the American public will be FORCED into buying coverage. This is just wrong, unconstitutional, and it takes away our liberties and freedom.
I however do like the idea of a public option or rather any not-for-profit option. It doesn't have to be Government run. I don't however see why it needs to be implemented this way. Why is it thrust upon us all at once. Couldn't the plan be phased in over time in such a way as to be self financing?
The last thing I have a serious problem with is how it is financed. Why are the taxpayers being asked to subsidize this plan? Not only that but the BEST taxpayers. The ones who actually go out and make all kinds of money because they are smart, hard working, and take enormous risk. Do Democrats not get the fact that taxing the "rich" is just another way to drive up unemployment? Think about it. If small business provides most of the jobs in the USA and most small businesses are founded and funded privately by the "rich" then what do you think happens when the Government comes in and just takes away a big chunk of their money? That's right, they start smaller and hire less people.
So this bill is not evil but those pushing it are using nefarious tactics and are not willing to listen to the REAL concerns of the people.
I have to admit that even though I am against this bill I actually like MOST of what is in it. The problem I had was when I got to the part where the American public will be FORCED into buying coverage. This is just wrong, unconstitutional, and it takes away our liberties and freedom.
I however do like the idea of a public option or rather any not-for-profit option. It doesn't have to be Government run. I don't however see why it needs to be implemented this way. Why is it thrust upon us all at once. Couldn't the plan be phased in over time in such a way as to be self financing?
The last thing I have a serious problem with is how it is financed. Why are the taxpayers being asked to subsidize this plan? Not only that but the BEST taxpayers. The ones who actually go out and make all kinds of money because they are smart, hard working, and take enormous risk. Do Democrats not get the fact that taxing the "rich" is just another way to drive up unemployment? Think about it. If small business provides most of the jobs in the USA and most small businesses are founded and funded privately by the "rich" then what do you think happens when the Government comes in and just takes away a big chunk of their money? That's right, they start smaller and hire less people.
So this bill is not evil but those pushing it are using nefarious tactics and are not willing to listen to the REAL concerns of the people.
Birdpond - You're missing my point. I believe everyone SHOULD have access to affordable and quality healthcare. I just don't like that the President is full of S*** that the taxes are going to be covered by the wealthy and that he doesn't plan on crunching out private insurance or that without tort reform in the bill it will ever change.
All states do not require car insurance but they do require financial responsibility to operate a vehicle on the roadway. HENCE, if you can place a bond for the State's minimum which in my opinion are always too low - you don't need a policy. NH and Wisconsin do not have compulsory auto insurance liability laws.
The auto insurance industry is similar to the health industry.... Until there is tort reform and fraud is clamped down on,... it will never be cheap.
All states do not require car insurance but they do require financial responsibility to operate a vehicle on the roadway. HENCE, if you can place a bond for the State's minimum which in my opinion are always too low - you don't need a policy. NH and Wisconsin do not have compulsory auto insurance liability laws.
The auto insurance industry is similar to the health industry.... Until there is tort reform and fraud is clamped down on,... it will never be cheap.
Absolutely! Taxes are NEVER covered by the wealthy because they pass them on in the form of increased cost on goods and services. It's a smoke and mirrors approach used by liberals in an attempt to create class warfare.
Birdpond, Thanks for your comment, but you won't make any impression on people who think that this could be a personal insurance vendetta by the president, because his mother had to battle with the insurance companies before she died of cancer. He is doing this as a personal vendetta? Yeah, that must be it.
You will not be able to reason with people who have such narrow minds that they call the White House web site "nothing but propaganda. The web site was set up to answer people's legitimate questions, who are confused by all the mob scenes that are rolling on TV right now.
It answers questions on Veteran's issues, the euthanasia misinformation, how small business might be impacted in a positive way; that people's Medicare/Medicaid will not be reduced to help pay for reform, and many, many more relevant questions that people want the answers to.
Propaganda, yeah, that must be it.
But for anyone else who might be interested in factual information and legitimate answers, give it a try:
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
You will not be able to reason with people who have such narrow minds that they call the White House web site "nothing but propaganda. The web site was set up to answer people's legitimate questions, who are confused by all the mob scenes that are rolling on TV right now.
It answers questions on Veteran's issues, the euthanasia misinformation, how small business might be impacted in a positive way; that people's Medicare/Medicaid will not be reduced to help pay for reform, and many, many more relevant questions that people want the answers to.
Propaganda, yeah, that must be it.
But for anyone else who might be interested in factual information and legitimate answers, give it a try:
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
Birdpond, Thanks for your comment, but you won't make any impression on people who think that this could be a personal insurance vendetta by the president, because his mother had to battle with the insurance companies before she died of cancer. He is doing this as a personal vendetta? Yeah, that must be it.
You will not be able to reason with people who have such narrow minds that they call the White House web site "nothing but propaganda."
The web site was set up to answer people's legitimate questions, who are confused by all the mob scenes that are rolling on TV right now.
It answers questions on Veteran's issues, the euthanasia misinformation, how small business might be impacted in a positive way; that people's Medicare/Medicaid will not be reduced to help pay for reform, and many, many more relevant questions that people want the answers to.
Propaganda, yeah, that must be it.
But for anyone else who might be interested in factual information and legitimate answers, give it a try:
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
You will not be able to reason with people who have such narrow minds that they call the White House web site "nothing but propaganda."
The web site was set up to answer people's legitimate questions, who are confused by all the mob scenes that are rolling on TV right now.
It answers questions on Veteran's issues, the euthanasia misinformation, how small business might be impacted in a positive way; that people's Medicare/Medicaid will not be reduced to help pay for reform, and many, many more relevant questions that people want the answers to.
Propaganda, yeah, that must be it.
But for anyone else who might be interested in factual information and legitimate answers, give it a try:
www.WhiteHouse.gov/RealityCheck
You also won't be able to reason with people who have read the bill (or most of it) and have done the math, because we know the score. We don't have to rely pundits for our information. Propaganda is useless because we have first hand knowledge. Do you?
Advertisement
Related Allvoices Contributions
-
The U.S. government is convinced that the proposed by President Barack ...
By: karasiwo
After three days of hearings before the Supreme Court of the United States to reform the health of U.S. President Barack Obama in the White House has shown further convinced of the legality of the law. The government was "confident" that their health reform consistent with the constitution, spokesman Josh Earnest said Wednesday in ...
about 1 month ago
News Stories
-
Specter faces fury: 'You work for us!'
PoliticoIt will cost over a Trillion for the Bill, and with amendments, more. Obama is projecting, not based on fact, that he can save a Trillion with medicare/caid...Obama is projecting the number given to him, it's air, just a projection. Therefore people... -
The facts about the proposed health-care bill
The Indianapolis StarThere's a lot of suspect information out there. "There's been a lot of noise, and it's certainly made people wonder about what is being proposed because so much false information has been put out," said Brooks Jackson, director of FactCheck.org, a... -
Sorting out claims about healthcare legislation
Los Angeles TimesThis has become one of the most misleading, inflammatory claims made in the healthcare debate, advanced repeatedly by conservative commentators such as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Republican lawmakers working to stoke fears among seniors. Rep. -
Health care needs radical restructuring
The Hutchinson NewsOur president is racing us toward an expanded system of socialized, or public, health care. This has scared the main players in the private health care arena into devising a plan that will satisfy the president and hopefully deter him from continuing... -
2,000 turn out for town hall meeting at PSU; 400 attend
Centre Daily TimesSpecter addressed the local Democrats at an invitation-only meeting at the Penn Stater Conference Centre Hotel before he began to speak at 8:30 a.m. to those gathered for a larger public town-hall meeting in another part of the conference center. -
Fighting Healthcare Reform is Fighting a Better Future for Americans
Salem NewsRepublicans are strapping on their gloves in their fight to benefit the future of pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, and crappy healthcare for poor Americans...They want to throw poor Americans under the train but then what else is new...
Advertisement
Blogs
>
-
The Real Cost of a Government Takeover of Health Care | Cato @ Liberty
www.cato-at-liberty.orgThe biggest player in the health-care debate right now isn't Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, or even President Obama. It's the Congressional Budget Office, which is responsible for estimating the costs of proposed legislation. ... -
Obamacare: The House Bill and Obama's Lies (Part 4) « America, You ...
americayouaskedforit.wordpress.com(What was that Obama said about government wouldn't be controlling health care?) It's important to note that nowhere in this bill is there language to allow insurance companies to collect additional premiums in policy years where ... President Obama -
health care costs | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen
www.ordinary-gentlemen.comShifting costs from patients and businesses – the consumers of health care – over to government and tax-payers isn't actually reducing costs at all. It's simply changing who pays for them and who gets paid. ... It contains costs while providing -
Matthew Yglesias » Medicare is Still a Government Program
yglesias.thinkprogress.orgWhether or not you like the idea of a Canadian-style single-payer health care system, there's no question that we already have such a system here in the United States. The Canadians call their system “Medicare” and it's open to all citizens . ... -
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Quote of the day
hotair.comWhen healthcare goes single payer and it will. The gov't will cut cost is to cut service, they do this with medicare now, so when this becomes unaffordable and it will, a panel (Death Panel) of gov't employees will decide what will be ..... Michael -
Unfettered Letters
blogs.kansascity.comTheir healthcare is private and little different from ours. The Canadians only have single-payer, "socialist" health insurance. "... Americans who don't die [of] homicides or car wrecks outlive people in every other Western Country. ..." ... Canadian
Images
>
-
Copy of health care ...
Copy of health care ...Image Source: allvoicesCopy of health care legislation titled "America's Affordable Health Choices ...
Most Viewed Reports
-
American Idol: The Final Performances
By: Sherrill_Fulghum | about 14 hours ago
-
Pacers vs Heat Live Score Updates and Highlights Game 5 NBA Playoff
By: richwebnews | about 14 hours ago
-
American Idol 2012: The Grand Finale Performance Night
By: januarycouple | about 10 hours ago
-
Asus Ivy Bridge Ultrabook Zenbook Prime vs. 2012 Macbook Air
By: itobin53 | about 10 hours ago
-
Sheriff declares missing teen Sierra Lamar dead, but family is ...
By: mahlina | about 20 hours ago
-
Udonis Haslem suspension imminent in Flagrant Foul on Hansbrough (...
By: richwebnews | about 11 hours ago
-
Natalia Juarez goes topless and naked for her election campaign ads in ...
By: januarycouple | about 9 hours ago
-
Charles and Camilla visit Toronto for Diamond Jubilee
By: SofiaAmbrosia | about 11 hours ago
-
PA State Senator resigns after being convicted of multiple felonies, ...
By: StephenPope | about 19 hours ago
-
Thousands of people in Zambales are in fear of their lives due to ...
By: ben696molino | about 10 hours ago
Cartoons of The Day
Related People
Got a similar story?Add it to the network!
Or add related content to this report
News Stories | Blogs | Images | Videos | Comments
Most Commented Reports
-
Healthy Benefits of Garlic and Onions
By: Adebanjos | about 19 hours ago
-
Eight persons wounded in Oklahoma City after a basketball game ended
By: Deepizzaguy | about 19 hours ago
-
£20,000 robo-fish to monitor pollution in the sea
By: NinaRai | about 14 hours ago
-
Mark Zuckerberg-Priscilla Chan nuptial: Wedding gown was $4,700!
By: JeniferLamug | about 23 hours ago
-
Mali: Interim president beaten by protesters taken to hospital
By: northsunm32 | about 23 hours ago
-
PA State Senator resigns after being convicted of multiple felonies, ...
By: StephenPope | about 19 hours ago
-
Q & A of the day: What's your secret to whipping your summer bod back ...
By: VeronicaRoberts | about 20 hours ago
-
Everyday Science M.C.Qs Series # 01
By: atifji75 | about 22 hours ago
-
New List Of Babies(Girls) Ready By The America.
By: rizwan123 | about 21 hours ago
-
American Idol: The Final Performances
By: Sherrill_Fulghum | about 13 hours ago
Sitemap
Site Links
Site Topics
Contributions
- Report Your News
- User Leader Board
- Add your voice and contribute via your cellphone - check out how to Report News via Your Cellphone
- Blog Widget
- Widget for Blog Owner
- American Pundit