From Liberty Belle: Counter a pro-socialized medicine rally, hosted by MoveOn.org in Bellevue. Bring those signs and voices and show them that theirs is not the only opinion, and that we represent the people!
Counter Protest: Fight MoveOn.org and Socialized Medicine
In front of Group Health Corporation
116th Ave. NE and 8th St.
Bellevue, WA 98008
Thursday, July 23rd
Time: 5:00 p.m.
"Please consider going! The Organizing for America folks will be doorbelling in that area (8th Congressional District) afterwards. If you are so inclined, you can organize your own Neighborhood Walk to counter them. Just go here for information on how to organize one."
-
We are still learning about this 1018-page bill that was unveiled last Tuesday. So is President 0. He is conveniently unfamiliar with section 102 that is reported to outlaw private insurance:
With the public"s trust in his handling of health care tanking (50%-44% of Americans disapprove), the White House has launched a new phase of its strategy designed to pass Obamacare: all Obama, all the time. As part of that effort, Obama hosted a conference call with leftist bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible.The text is the quote of a commenter (farther down) on a post at Huffington Post, but you can listen to the recording of the call at the same location.During the call, a blogger from Maine said he kept running into an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance. He asked: "Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?" President Obama replied: "You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about." (quote begins at 17:10)
Photos taken at the rallly 7/23/09 by Patrick Bell, returned from Austria.
Posted by Ron Hebron at July 23, 2009 07:39 AM | Email ThisI say let the Dems enact socilized medicine with the caveat that we have a national referendum in 10 years to see how well it worked out. If the referendum decides socailized medicine stinks, them we repeal it and go back to what we have now.
No matter what happens, policitians and government employees should be forced to participate in socialized medicine. When a senator gets to wait a year or two for bypass surgery, then we'll have a fair system: everyone suffers equally.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on July 23, 2009 08:35 AM
No one can ignore a movement that can bring out crowds like that!
Posted by: scottd on July 23, 2009 09:41 AMWhen I get off of work today at five pm, I will (have to) pick up my three children from two locations. By the time I have collected my little people at six pm, I am facing about a forty-five minute drive to Bellevue, accidents notwithstanding.
If I am a responsible parent, I'd probably feed my children as well, prior to hopping into traffic and that I would.
If I show up at 7pm, will everyone still be there? I think my, common, situation passes the smell test pretty well. Reality vs. your perception, may be different than you want to believe.
Back to work for me, my coffee is almost gone and I have some health insurance benefits for me and my children to work off.
Posted by: Boxxerace on July 23, 2009 09:57 AMSnarkiness isn't an argument.
Posted by: Richard on July 23, 2009 09:57 AMThank you for your explanation...you are excused. Sit back, relax, take a break (you deserve one) and get ready to welcome-in your new health care system...eh. :) Posted by: Duffman on July 23, 2009 10:03 AM
Like all socialized medicine systems, you will then come to find out that crippling our medical abilities was neither the hope nor change folks were looking for.
Actually, that empty suited moron is doing an outstanding job of setting up a 1994 redux in 2010. I wish him every success.
Posted by: hinton on July 23, 2009 10:11 AMAs they all approach 'senior' status they just don't worry about the toll that their health may take on their finance/pension, etc. Yes, some would (& do) choose 'elective' procedures of the U.S. because they can afford it and/or desire it because of cosmetic concerns. Posted by: Duffman on July 23, 2009 10:19 AM
-
House and Energy Committee canceled for third straight day. Harry Reid said *no* vote in Senate before recess, which means there is no way the House will walk that plank (see cap and trade) before the recess either.
They have a problem.
Meanwhile, let's continue to wrestle with the morality of good hard-working American families -- with and without health insurance -- going bankrupt every day, just because somebody in their family got sick.
They may lose their savings, their cars, their homes -- and their dignity. They may have to work until the day they drop dead. But at least they won't be forced to use Socialized Health Care™!
(Oh, wait, they wouldn't have been forced anyway to choose the public option.)
Whatever, it's still a BIG WIN! Take that, Mr. President!
Posted by: LaborGoon on July 23, 2009 10:54 AMDer. That's the freaking point. That's for making our argument.
Posted by: jimg on July 23, 2009 10:57 AMI'm sorry---but that's completely unacceptable, yet that's ultimately where Obama and the liberals would have us go. They want people who already have insurance and don't have to wait to get key medical appointments, to become people who have GOVERNMENT insurance and HAVE to wait months to get key appointments.
People, is this REALLY a good trade? Obviously not.
"It's better to have a product based on quality and thoughtfulness rather than try to jam something through."
-
I guess the Stimulus failure and the cap-and-trade joke taught the man something. I can hope.
that's a laughable basis on which to have an opinion.
They have elections in Ireland, also France, Canada, etc., it things didn't work so well, voters would change the system.
But the fact is, all over Europe, after they put in their socialized systems, conservative parties have been elected but HAVEN'T changed the health care systems.
That's obviously because voters don't want them to, and they'd rather wait a bit for elective stuff then risk their lives and fortunes the way we do here in the US where a reat part of all bankruptcies are from medical costs of people who HAD insurance. The system we have is one of tremendous and irrespnsible risk to you and your family, and ain't nobody in the world talking about copying our system, not even the conservative parties elsewhere, I guarantee you that.
Posted by: Torture Lawyer on July 23, 2009 12:10 PMDon't let little ole me stop ya.
Posted by: Gary on July 23, 2009 12:14 PM"I have to say I am surprised by the controversy surrounding my statement because I think it was a pretty straight forward commentary that you probably don't need to handcuff a guy, a middle-aged man who uses a cane, who's in his own home,"
-
Sure glad the President has time to get involved in this sort of thing. So, he knows what cops are supposed to do on a case by case basis, and he just knows that doctors are stealing people's tonsils. He knows all.
Life Expectancy at birth (per 2008)
USA = 78.14 (47th in the world)
CANADA = 81.16 (8th in the world)
Feel free to use it...may get unusual attention. :)
Posted by: Duffman on July 23, 2009 01:47 PMT.L., clearly you don't even realize that a root canal is definitely not an elective procedure. it's something you only do if you have to, and because your tooth is already in a world of hurt. See, you have drunk the socialist koolaid to the bottom of the pitcher that you don't realize the real dangerous and painful risks of putting something like a root canal on hold for 8 months. No dentist in town will agree with your view of it.
Posted by: Michele on July 23, 2009 01:58 PMPosted by: Gary on July 23, 2009 02:19 PM
So, Duffman, what will your relatives from Canada do when they can't come to the US to get their "elective" procedures done? It seems to be the height of hypocrisy to say your system is great, except for the parts that don't work, so you spend your own money to fix it. Does sound particularly egalitarian to me. But, then, most liberals are elitists.
Posted by: janet s on July 23, 2009 02:22 PMWhen I visit them (and they live the breath of Canada) - no one worries about health care per se; they worry more about the weather. :) Posted by: Duffman on July 23, 2009 02:29 PM
Not if we go Canada's route. We'll all just wait.
Posted by: Gary on July 23, 2009 02:34 PMNow WHY should we not get that but yet our hired/elected help DOES? Asi es la vida! :) Posted by: Duffman on July 23, 2009 02:35 PM
Posted by: Gary on July 23, 2009 02:41 PM
It really shouldn't matter that Americans will be forced to follow the dictates of government bureaucrats when they seek health care because after all, they can be just like Canadians.
JanetS,
Where do you come off saying that Canadians should be able to come to America to escape their lousy health care system?
Just like American sheep, they should be forced by a shiftless lying President and Congress to pay the price for being stupid cowardly bastards in their own country.
Once health care freedom is gone then we can take on other vital sectors of our economy and make them intolerable and unworkable as well.
We don't need freedom anyway, let Obama, Rizzo and BoyScoutBoy take care of us. That'll be a hoot.
BTW, don't worry . . . we're too smart . . . this can never happen here!!
Speak Farsi?
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on July 23, 2009 02:41 PMAnd muffman I'm sure many of us would like you to have a pony as well.
Mean time the adults are discussing basic American freedom and a proposal by our government to take away our freedom to buy our own health care coverage. Your fixation on the value of enforced equality is a silly substitute for the realization that you may well lose any freedom you ever had to make choices on your own.
Seniors are most vulnerable because their life choices through medicare and social security depend directly on the vibrancy of the private sector. Consider our current system without strong market forces, long term unemployment, and government gatekeepers whose jobs are to limit choices and ration health care.
This is what is being proposed and it is not real amusing.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on July 23, 2009 03:14 PMOne idea in the article that I haven't seen brought up before is where to store one's electronic medical record. The article proposes an interesting consideration. I agree that the electronic medical record should be the patient's and not the provider, or health insurance company's.
Posted by: tc on July 23, 2009 03:40 PMReally? How many do that?
god willing.
the problem is right now you have to wait. that is, if you are fortunate enough to have coverage. or that your coverage isn't denied.
because as it is, we are already facing rationing. and if you're too blinded by politics to see that, you must be getting a pretty fat check from some lobbyist.
steve beren doesn't stand a chance.
this is long overdue. not really pro-life afterall, are we?
Posted by: mike on July 23, 2009 03:54 PMI have to go cash my fat lobbyist check now.
Back in a bit.
Posted by: Gary on July 23, 2009 04:05 PMHow unbelievably petty. You'd have complained if Obama didn't answer the question.
Yeah Mike my lobbyist pays me Beaucoup (Frog lingo for big).
It is truly hard to imagine that anyone could actually be as idle and simple as you.
Your comments solve any mystery as to why Obama was elected President.
Whatever happens, you'll no doubt forever be pickin shit with the chickens, believing nonsense and barely wondering why.
I suppose God makes a place for everyone and you have yours.
Thanks for your contribution Mike
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on July 23, 2009 04:36 PMHe accused doctors of yanking out kids' tonsils for quick cash. How petty is that?
I agree with that, but also rest assured that will never happen. That is just one argument for term limits, which I understand needs to be approved by Congress, which will happen when pigs fly. The way that Obama-care will be paid for - on the backs of us (including small business) is what I find the most objectionable. In its present state, Obama-care is half-baked and David Brooks' op-ed says it well. Politically, it is damaging to the Democrats and it will become more evident with time, unless the overall strategy changes.
Posted by: KS on July 23, 2009 06:50 PMRight on. I'll sign on to Obama's single payer system as soon as I get assurance that I will have the same top notch healthcare and frequent tests that he has, along with all 300 Million other Americans, as well as the same technology we have access to now, and compensation for doctors that properly values their work. And all of that, without raising deficit spending.
For the rational amongst us, we know that's never going to happen, because real service, technology, procedures, drugs, hospital facilities, etc. all have a real cost. And that cost can't be borne out without vigorous competition and a tiered market where one gets what one pays for and pays in to an insurance system to spread risk.
Since we are going to have rationing like the UK and Canada, all government employees, and particularly those in high office ought to be subject to the same least common denominator as everyone else.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 23, 2009 08:01 PMDr. Orrin Devinsky, a neurologist and researcher at the New York University Langone Medical Center, said that elites often propose health care solutions that limit options for the general public, secure in the knowledge that if they or their loves ones get sick, they will be able to afford the best care available, even if it's not provided by insurance.Devinsky asked the president pointedly if he would be willing to promise that he wouldn't seek such extraordinary help for his wife or daughters if they became sick and the public plan he's proposing limited the tests or treatment they can get.
The president refused to make such a pledge, though he allowed that if "it's my family member, if it's my wife, if it's my children, if it's my grandmother, I always want them to get the very best care.
...Showing Obama is an elist ass that wants you and I to live under a sub standard healthcare system that he himself would not choose to expose his family to. Why is he confused that Americans are having second thoughts about his proposed plan? It's called common sense, Mr. President.
Posted by: Rick D. on July 23, 2009 08:32 PMas opposed to conservative elites who want you to have lots of (lacklustre) options, none of which solve the problem or provide the needed care for tens of millions of uninsured, tens of millions of underinsured, and millions going pay check to paycheck, hoping they don't get laid off.
between now and last year, something like 4 million people have lost health coverage. compassionate? laughable.
effing genius, if you ask me. the sheeple on the right are getting funnier and funnier.
how many wingnuts showed up, like 12?
Posted by: mike on July 23, 2009 08:56 PMIf you have private insurance now you will lose it in a few years because the insurers can not make changes in prices or coverages and remain approved providers. So eventually they will go out of business.
There is a whole section on the right of the Health Care commissioner to dictate end of life issues- death in other words. For those of you who have the time I would suggest reading Fredrick Hayek's book The Road to Serfdom particularly the section entitled why the worse always rise to the top. The only people who will be able to make the decisions in this plan will be amoral people.
This is not the Canadian or British system this is something out of Kalfka.
This no time to sit and wait we have to act, you have to write both Senators and all the Congresspeople and protest this thing. You will hate what they are going to do to you.
Hawaii was the first state in the country to attempt universal health care. It was called "Keiki Care" (Keiki means Child in Native Hawaiian) and it was stopped seven short months after it began due to budgetary concerns. Republican Gov. Linda Lingle had signed it into law, but they soon found a whopping majority of those who wanted free health care already had been insured!
Hmm, how well did the "public option work in Maine? Oh yea another unmitigated and easily proven failure!
To achieve these pathetic outcomes, Dirigo has cost state taxpayers $155 million over the past four years - a lot of money for a state with 1.3 million people. DirigoChoice's premiums have skyrocketed 74 percent in four years - four times faster than state employees' health premiums. DirigoChoice benefits have been slashed, with coinsurance increasing 20 to 30 percent). And the program has been closed to new enrollees for nearly two years. So much for reaching the uninsured.
But, but Rags, we have Tennessee.... oops, yet another shining example of failure.
TennCare was designed to replace Mediaid with managed care and use the promised savings to expand coverage. By 1998, TennCare swelled to cover 1.2 million people. Private business dropped coverage for employees and forced them onto state rolls. By 2002 enrollment had swelled to 1.4 million people and forced Tennessee's Governor to raise taxes and ultimately propose an entirely new state income tax to cover the unforeseen costs. Governor Bredesen was ultimately forced to dramatically restructure a program he has since called "a disaster". By 2006 Bredesen had disenrolled nearly 200,000 people and slashed benefits.
Maybe one of you libs can explain what exactly it is about your people that makes you convinced you will succeed with plans that have NEVER succeeeded before in history.
Remind us, what was it that famous guy said about insanity and doing the same thing over and over and over while expecting different results?
How to Talk a Liberal Out of Obamacare
OH! And let's not forget Massachusetts!
A study conducted by Harvard-Pilgrim, a private insurer, has exposed the Bay State's insurance plan -- similar to Democrats' proposal -- for the disaster that it is. The plan, requires residents (except those covered by the state) either to buy health insurance or to face penalties. In addition, for the past 15 years, under the "guaranteed issue" and "community rating" system, insurers must cover anyone who applies with no regard to his or her health or pre-existing condition. The result: people are waiting until they are sick or about to go into surgery to buy coverage. Many are buying coverage for a few months, running up astronomical bills, and then canceling it, leaving others to foot the bill.
Speaking of leaving others with the bill, The New York Times reports, "A hospital that serves thousands of indigent Massachusetts residents sued the state on Wednesday, charging that its costly universal health care law is forcing the hospital to cover too much of the expense of caring for the poor." The state is also dropping coverage for 30,000 legal immigrants to close a growing budget deficit. The question is, why is any of this shocking? How many socialist experiments have to fail before people realize that it just doesn't work?
Ordering a pizza in the abomination of our Obamanation
Hey! Thanks for that libs!
each page is about 150 words... it should only take an hour or two to read 100 pages, especially since the first 10 pages are even lighter. 150 words p.p. is about 1/6 - 1/4 the number of words that fit on a normal page.
this is the average text block for a single page:
(e) MEDICAID COVERAGE FOR MEDICAID ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--
(A) CHOICE FOR LIMITED EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.--As part of the enrollment process under subsection (b), the Commissioner shall provide the option, in the case of an Exchange-eligible individual described in section 202(d)(3), for the individual to elect to enroll under Medicaid instead of under an Exchange-participating health benefits plan. Such an individual may change such election during an enrollment period under subsection (b)(2).
(B) MEDICAID ENROLLMENT OBLIGATION.--An Exchange eligible individual may
apply, in the manner described in section 241(b)(1), for a determination of whether the individual is a Medicaid-eligible individual. If the individual is determined to be so eligible, the Commissioner, through the Medicaid memorandum of understanding, shall provide for the enrollment of the individual under the State
Medicaid plan in accordance with the Medicaid memorandum of understanding under paragraph (4). In the case of such an enrollment,
The only people who will be able to make the decisions in this plan will be amoral people.
i'd rather have amoral leaders than the immoral clowns that own the religious right and conservative party.
Posted by: mike on July 23, 2009 09:41 PMYou're in luck! YOU DO!
I'd rather have neither, but the choices are between fools like Obama and McCain.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 23, 2009 10:14 PMI kind of laugh (and feel queasy, as well), when Peter Weissbach jokes that the bureaucrats will tell a 75-year-old, "Okay, you now you need to go to the 'Transition Chamber'." Sure, we laugh--but some socialists do believe that some elderly people have "a duty to die". Posted by: Michele on July 23, 2009 11:07 PM
canadian insurance picked up the tab of her flight, hospitalization and care for the mom and babies.
you think if that happened in detroit, and there weren't enough NICUs, which, btw does happen - your insurance would cover you to go to the nearest NICU (windsor, canada)? not on their dime.
last quads born in calgary: 1982
yes, our hospitals are good, for those that can afford it.
but if you think on average our system is better than canada's, you've never been denied coverage for a pre-existing condition. or been denied by your insurer outright because the cost-benefit doesn't work out in their favor. or just been denied because you can't even afford insurance.
Posted by: mike on July 23, 2009 11:09 PMthe bureaucrats won't get between you and your doctor.
as is, your HMO/insurer already regulates who you can and can't see, and gets between you and your doctor.
now that's laughable. pathetic that you seem to think it's ok, and very, very laughable.
Posted by: mike on July 23, 2009 11:26 PMMove to Canada. I do not want to be enslaved under your substandard, rationing, govt, monopoly/monstrosity. Keep your laws off of my body. Pro-choice (to true free market insurance & health care).
The Democrat plan will prematurely kill millions, make our nation's health care worse, and would bankrupt our nation while preventing our economy from ever fully recovering.
Mike, why do you want to enslave us under a worse health care system than we have now? If you were truly for a superior, more affordable health care system, you would be battling the Democrats and their statist/fascist cabal of bureaucrats, big business, unions, & trial lawyers who are the biggest culprits in the current health care problems in this country. Obama's HHS Sec. is the former Pres. of her state's trial lawyer's association. Trial lawyers & big govt. are the two biggest reasons why health care in this country has become less affordable.
Posted by: AP on July 24, 2009 12:30 AM#52 Dagnar, thanks for the info on the aborted attempts to do similar herioc experiments in Maine, Hawaii, and Tennessee. In Tennessee more than one governor lost massive political points trying to correct that mess.
#51 started reading the bill, but "mike" says he is reading too slow.
Posted by: Ron Hebron on July 24, 2009 06:29 AM
Have you noticed their not on this plan. I wonder why.
http://www.aae.org/NR/rdonlyres/14F3726F-DA2D-4155-97E9-D0201E690B17/0/paraformaldehydefillingmaterials.pdf
Don't take the chance....injuries are random and can show up months or years after a seemingly properly done root canal. ASK, SAY NO. Don't walk in our shoes. http://www.worstrootcanalever.com Posted by: saynono on July 24, 2009 06:43 AM
HA! You better tell Senator Kennedy that. He said that they damn well *will* get between you and your doctor... for the purpose of keeping you *away* to save costs. Oh, and just you. Not him.
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 06:51 AMArguing about whether health care reform will give everyone the same coverage as Ted Kennedy is a strawman.
Posted by: scottd on July 24, 2009 07:35 AM++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rep. John Carter (R-Texas), the secretary of the House Republican Conference and a former District Court Judge, is having his messages to constituents censored by Democrats on the Franking Commission. Republicans are no longer allowed to use the words "government run health care" in the communications to their constituents.
Carter received an email from the Franking Commission informing him of the censorship.
Posted by scottd at July 24, 2009 07:35 AM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes I have great coverage Scott.
PS. If it's good enough for Teddy. I'll have the same please.
The strawman is you scott.
Why? if it's a Right, as the Left claims it is, shouldn't it it be equal?
So... I demand, it is my *Right*, to have the same level of health care coverage as Senator Kennedy.
C'mon now... if it is a Constitutional Right to have health insurance provided by the government, then it must be equal. After all, I have the exact same right to free speech as Kennedy. The exact same right to be secure in my home against improper intrusion as Senator Kennedy. The same exact right to practice my religion, etc.
Heck, I've been told by a liberal that I don't have a right to *not* have health care coverage. If that is the case, than I demand equal health care rights with Senator Kennedy.
learn to read.
i did say she was transferred because the NICUs in calgary were full.
and the canadian health insurance system picked up the bill. pretty good chances yours wouldn't do the same.
Posted by: mike on July 24, 2009 08:17 AMhttp://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=270338135202343
http://physicianonhealthcare.blogspot.com/2008/03/httpwwwthenewstribunecomopinioninsights.html
Even some Canadian Doctors do not like their system.
Hannity had a a good program last night that showed many of those problems.
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=7262613&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/
President Obama and Congress need to fix some things such automating health care records but proceeding down their current path is going to be a complete disaster for the United States!!
tens of millions of americans being underinsured is rationing.
millions being on the verge of losing their jobs and insurance is rationing.
hmo's/insurance coming between you and your doctor is rationing
insurance being denied due to pre-existing conditions is rationing
insurance co's denying to pay for tests/procudeures because it cuts too deep into their bottom line is rationiong
hannity is shrill for the insurance co's, tim. hardly ever a fair and balanced argument on faux noise.
Posted by: mike on July 24, 2009 08:38 AMThe Canadian health care is still a very bad idea because it kills people because of rationing.
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 08:43 AMPlenty of American doctors don't like our system of health care.
Of course, all of these comparisons to Canada's system aren't very useful. Congress isn't considering a Canadian style health care system. Just another of the many strawmen presented on this blog.
Posted by: scottd on July 24, 2009 08:46 AM-
You guys brought it up at #11, I think. Are we not permitted to respond?
Tim, we are arguing with people who *want* single-payer, and know damn well that this reform will lead it by attrition, but they cannot admit it for fear of driving even more people away from it.
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 09:07 AMNot true -- and not bad even if it were true.
If a company is currently paying more than 8% of payroll to provide health insurance, it's doing so because that's what it needs to do to retain the employees it wants. Nobody is forcing them to do this. If the company was only interested in reducing health insurance costs, it would just stop offering health insurance and drop those costs to 0% of payroll.
If health care reform makes it possible for employees to obtain equivalent benefits while allowing the hypothetical company to drop its costs to 8% of payroll, that's a good thing, right? Companies can reduce their costs (good for business) and employees no longer need to worry about changing or losing their jobs, at least as far as that affects their health insurance. What's wrong with that?
On the other hand, if government sponsored options don't provide the same level of benefits, then the incentives for companies to continue offering their current plans haven't changed. That company can already reduce its benefit level to reduce costs and hasn't done so -- adding a government-sponsored option that allows the same thing changes nothing.
Tim, we are arguing with people who *want* single-payer
Don't know what others are thinking, but I'm not one of those people.
The notion that availability of a government-sponsored health plan will kill private insurance offerings is ridiculous. Medicare is a government-sponsored plan that's been around for more than forty years, and yet we still have millions of seniors choosing private Medicare Advantage plans and Medicare supplement plans. Many European countries with government-sponsored plans also have private insurance co-existing as an alternative or as a supplement.
Posted by: scottd on July 24, 2009 09:52 AM"The average family doesn't understand how Wall Street's dictates determine whether they will be offered coverage, whether they can keep it, and how much they'll be charged for it. But, in fact, Wall Street plays a powerful role. The top priority of for-profit companies is to drive up the value of their stock. ...
Wall Street investors and analysts look for two key figures: earnings per share and the medical-loss ratio, or medical "benefit ratio," ...
To win the favor of powerful analysts, for-profit insurers must prove that they made more money during the previous quarter than a year earlier and that the portion of the premium going to medical costs is falling. Even very profitable companies can see sharp declines in stock prices moments after admitting they've failed to trim medical costs. ...
To help meet Wall Street's relentless profit expectations, insurers routinely dump policyholders who are less profitable or who get sick. Insurers have several ways to cull the sick from their rolls. One is policy rescission. They look carefully to see if a sick policyholder may have omitted a minor illness, a pre-existing condition, when applying for coverage, and then they use that as justification to cancel the policy, even if the enrollee has never missed a premium payment. ...
They also dump small businesses whose employees' medical claims exceed what insurance underwriters expected. All it takes is one illness or accident among employees at a small business to prompt an insurance company to hike the next year's premiums so high that the employer has to cut benefits, shop for another carrier, or stop offering coverage altogether leaving workers uninsured. The practice is known in the industry as "purging.""
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 10:24 AM
Much of the debate centers on providing health insurance to millions of people who don't have coverage now. That's a worthy goal, but to many Americans it sounds like welfare -- an extra cost that probably doesn't benefit them. I think reformers would do better if they got out the message that millions of working Americans face potential ruin because the insurance they have now costs a fortune and yet, may not cover as much as they think and may even be unavailable when they need it most.
More and more people are coming to realize this -- and that's one reason I think reform is picking up more steam this time around.
Posted by: scottd on July 24, 2009 10:31 AMI don't think HR 3200 is a final bill, so the question is (at least a bit) moot, but if we make the hypothetical question 'Do I favor HR 3200 over doing nothing?', my answer is yes.
My frustration is that Republicans have offered nothing, and certainly only appear to want to stop reform.
The current system is broken in that Insurance costs continue to rise faster than the rate of inflation and coverage rates continue to decline.
My business is at a long term competitive disadvantage under the current system, and the disadvantages are growing. Something has to give.
Thanks, MikeBoyScout. Very illuminating. Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 10:49 AM
What are you reading? Whatever it is, you're being ripped off.
First, this is about individual private insurance only.
Second, premiums explicitly can be changed, according to the bill: The issuer cannot vary the percentage increase in the premium for a risk group of enrollees in specific grandfathered health insurance coverage without changing the premium for all enrollees in the same risk group at the same rate, as specified by the Commissioner. So if you change everyone's premium in the same risk group at the same rate, you can change the rates.
Third, new plans (and changed old plans) can still have the option of being on the government's Health Insurance Exchange. We have NO IDEA what the requirements for participation in the Exchange will be, but the bill says that a private insurer can make new private plans for the Exchange.
Yet another anecdotal story that doesn't add anything to the debate. Is neonatal care a "cosmetic" issue? Well the supposedly wonderful Canadian system cannot provide that service.
Oh and this isn't anecdotal either Duffman, this is real:
http://www.komonews.com/news/10216201.html
Posted by: pbj on July 24, 2009 11:05 AMtens of millions of americans being underinsured is rationing.
millions being on the verge of losing their jobs and insurance is rationing. -Posted by mike at July 24, 2009 08:38 AM
Oops!
We've also recently had house guests (from Denmark) and they too appear to treat aging with their health care system as a non-event, thus relieved of any stress that may be so-related.
And, I'm not someone with no or bad insurance - I have excellent insurance coverage. Posted by: Duffman on July 24, 2009 11:16 AM
We have a system where tens of millions face possible financial ruin or worse if someone in there family should suffer commonly occuring illnesses or accidents.
But Canada has a system where, if you have quadruplets, the government might have to fly you to a different location to get state-of-the-art treatment.
Hard to decide which of those is better...
Posted by: scottd on July 24, 2009 11:20 AMBut if you are an GM Auto Dealer, Health Insurance firm, or a Doctor, especially one that is pro-GOP, you should be expected to give away your services for free, and submit willingly to more government controls?
Which industry is next? Democrat programmers that haunt this blog shouldn't be so smug. Soon Obama will be telling you that your software costs too much, that it contributes to the Digital Racial Divide, and that you should give it all away for free.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 24, 2009 11:35 AMAs a businessman with operations in Vancouver, while there are lots of issues and concerns with the Canadian system, health care and health insurance sure ain't one of them. The opposite is true. The BC government run health system saves countless HR hours and our statistics show lower rates of unplanned leave due to illness.
If the question were to be HR 3200 vs. the BC system... Give me the BC system!
A bill that wants single-payer would be a single-payer bill. This bill explicitly doesn't advocate for it. In fact, in HR3200, businesses with more than a few employees are cannot participate in the health care exchange where the public plan lives.
So there is literally no way, no possible way in the world, that the public plan would drive all insurance companies out of business and create a de facto single-payer system.
Comparisons to Canada are stupid and wrong. We have single-payer for the elderly, and it's called Medicare. Yet people like Gary can't find the rationing, they can't find the poor treatment, and they can't find the lives ruined by Medicare -- so they try to fear-monger with other countries.
It just shows that this isn't an argument on the merits for many conservatives. It's about scaring people, distorting the bill, and dealing a personal blow to the President so they can recapture congress in 2010.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 11:41 AMopen source - you've never heard of it?!? it's phenomenal.
Posted by: mike on July 24, 2009 12:18 PMPosted by: MikeBoyScout on July 24, 2009 12:21 PM
I guess the "Heil queen nancy" meme isn't going as scripted, eh?
"Comparisons to Canada are stupid and wrong."
Great, so your side can stop making them then.
Hear that, Duffman? John says not to make the comparisons.
"a personal blow to the President so they can recapture congress in 2010."
Wh.. what? You told me that the American people want this. How can the GOP retake Congress by stopping the President if the American people want this? And besides, we are not in power in any branch of government, are we? What's stopping you? It's not us, John.
Thanks.
Hey, join the club, Blue Dogs!
Ha!
And Obama (and others) blame the GOP!
Man, this is getting good!
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 12:38 PMThat is the truth (well, the part that I highlighted). The Slavery Party (and this health care takeover represents a serious shackle placed on everyone who cares about freedom) wants the GOP to participate so when it starts crumbling IMMEDIATELY they can point and blame the GOP.
But the sad truth is that a majority of Americans do NOT want a public health care plan. A majority of Americans are dissatisfied with the Obamassiah. The GOP leads the Slavery Party in the generic Congressional ballot.
So what do the Slavery Party leaders do? Push for health care "reform". Yes, do something that a majority of Americans do not want - a public takeover, a public plan. But Pres__ent Obama will push for it anyway.
Truly sickening...
Oh, and up a ways, Mike posted that we chose the "smarter" of the two between Obama and McCain. How do you know? Where's Obama's transcripts? Would be nice to see just how "smart" this guy really is, because so far he's shown he's got a big ego, can read from a teleprompter in a fairly engaging manner, but there's not much more...
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on July 24, 2009 12:46 PMYou lie about this being a "public takeover" since the vast majority of Americans will not be permitted to join the health care exchange because they work for large businesses who offer health care coverage.
These scare tactics are designed to derail the bill and defeat the President. They are not designed to have a realistic discussion about health care reform.
And that's what it's taken me this long to figure out. For people like Dan and Gary it's not about fixing health care, it's about defeating Obama. Gary and Dan's health care plan for the next ten years is the status quo: crushing health-related deficits, health cost explosions, and millions losing their coverage.
I want HR 3200 to have more cost controls, for example. But the fools who criticize the lack of cost controls in the bill are the same as those who ridicule and paint negatively the most basic forms of cost controls such as seeing if treatments are actually effective. If democrats capped the employer tax exemption on health benefits -- which Republicans have typically been in favor of reforming entirely -- conservatives would exploit this politically tough decision to sink the bill.
It is not about making good health care policy. It's about defeating Obama. As long as that is the case, Democrats may avoid the tough choices that need to be made to significantly reduce costs.
But there I go again, talking about complex issues with an air of adulthood. I keep on forgetting that you guys don't deserve complexity or intelligence, you just want to "HURR HURR" on with your screams of socialism no matter how stupid they are.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 01:01 PMNo, it isn't.
An again, how can *we* defeat Obama, John?
My God, you guys blame us even when you have it all!
Again, who is stopping you, John? Not us.
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 01:05 PMPrivate insurers are already spending millions of dollars trying to comply with unfunded mandates (EMR/HIPAA) and these new ones will be more sticks on the proverbial camel. Due to the way that medicare is reimbursed, these companies will receive fewer and fewer reimbursement dollars by design.
For all of you that talk about Canadian Drs. ,,, they do like their system for primary care (ie emergent, urgent, immediate care) situations. They do not like it for preventative, repair (knee, back, etc) or clinical. I also personally know many people in both Canada and the UK and they would not trade their system for ours, ever.
Posted by: Mr. Rcguy on July 24, 2009 01:05 PM:-)
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on July 24, 2009 01:06 PMThe GOP machine, screaming socialism this, rationing that -- these are made up claims. If anyone believes that a government-run system is being proposed, they are being deceived. Nevermind if a single-payer system would be better or not, or how much Canada succeeds or not -- people are simply lying about what this health care bill does to scare Americans. What are they trying to do by scaring Americans? Influence poll results, which could influence moderate Democrats.
This is not a debate about health care policy and nuance. It's some argument against the whole Obama administration: spending this, spending that, when all bills are budgeted to be deficit neutral, and when the GOP attacks any effort to make it deficit neutral by raising taxes; takeover this, government-run that, when less than 10 million people will be on the public plan by 2019 according to the CBO; reckless spending this, cost-controls that, when the GOP criticizes every form of cost-control as "rationing" -- including USING SCIENCE to determine the best treatments.
It's not a real debate. Any GOP health plan can be battered by focusing on all the tough choices, too. But those tough choices are exactly what health reform needs to succeed.
The path is clear: Democrats must write a bill that makes some tough choices (see the movement on MedPAC recently), open themselves up to political liabilities, and simply whip the caucus so we can pass the thing. The majority of the GOP would rather see Obama fail than see health care fixed.
Gary, the legislative process is holding us up. Some Blue Dog members are pushing for some cost changes. I hope they convince Democrats that cost controls are necessary, regardless of GOP backlash. And I could lose some subsidies to the middle-class if necessary, sure. Take the time to do the bill, I'm okay with that. August recess has never been my rallying cry.
But if the constant GOP battering of the bill results in removing some of the controversial measures that seriously reduce costs, then that is an exercise of incredibly bad policy even if the bill is more popular in opinion polls. Most folks do not know the nuance of the health care debate, and I do not think opinion polls determine good policy. We are a representative democracy for just this reason.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 01:18 PMHow Much Are You Willing to Pay for Health-Care Reform?
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTJmOGVmZTY1YjgxMzQ1N2NkODk1ZWIzZjc0ZmU3MTA=
Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854
Why We Must Ration Health Care
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/magazine/19healthcare-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine
The 'Public Option' Health Care Scam
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/16/the_public_option_health_care_scam_97473.html
$1.5 Trillion Gives Me Heartburn
http://townhall.com/columnists/RichGalen/2009/07/15/$15_trillion_gives_me_heartburn?page=full
Let's Put Some Real Faces on the Casualties of Obamacare
http://www.americanissuesproject.org/blogs/aip/archive/2009/07/17/let-s-put-some-real-faces-on-the-casualties-of-obamacare.aspx
One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years (and more often if they become sick or go into a nursing home) about alternatives for end-of-life care (House bill, p. 425-430). The sessions cover highly sensitive matters such as whether to receive antibiotics and "the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration." This mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse care. Do we really want government involved in such deeply personal issues? http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nypost.com%2Fseven%2F07172009%2Fpostopinion%2Fopedcolumnists%2Fos_broken_promises_179667.htm
Democrats want to ram through one of the greatest raids on private income and business in American history.
Then there's yesterday's testimony, from Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Doug Elmendorf, that ObamaCare's cost "savings" are an illusion.
But the most remarkable quality of this health-care exercise is its reckless disregard for economic and fiscal reality. With the economy still far from a healthy recovery, and the federal fisc already nearly $2 trillion in deficit, Democrats want to ram through one of the greatest raids on private income and business in American history. The world is looking on, agog, and wondering why the United States seems intent on jumping off this cliff. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124779717982855785.html
If government-run health care holds such wondrous possibilities for the nation, why don't we all "invest" in this magical cure? Why only the rich? http://townhall.com/columnists/DavidHarsanyi/2009/07/17/pay_up!_utopia_aint_free,_ya_know?page=full
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/holb090717_cmyk20090716094124.jpg
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/varv07172009a20090717024113.jpg
House health care bill 'outlaws private insurance' http://www.wnd.com/index.phpfa=PAGE.view&pageId=104161
Obama figures out how to control health care costs: let old people die http://crushliberalism.com/2009/07/17/obama-figures-out-how-to-control-health-care-costs-let-old-people-die/
More things you should know about ObamaCare http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/07/17/more-things-you-should-know-about-obamacare.php
Runaway Train To Less Freedom, Higher Taxes And Rationed Care
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332725027738512
House Health Overhaul Bill Will Create Government-Run Insurance, Expert Says
http://liberty.pacificresearch.org/press/house-health-overhaul-bill-will-create-government-run-insurance-expert-says
Obama Fatalities http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2009/07/obama-fatalities.html
Stopping Obamacare http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2009/07/stopping-obamacare.html
Obama Care in 60 seconds or less http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/obama_care_in_60_seconds_or_le.html
Government run health care more expensive than private sector care - Study
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/government_run_health_care_mor.html
The goal of nationalizing health care is to standardize services, not to specialize in them.
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/51133037.html
Healthcare 'fix' hurts small businesss OUR OPINION: House Democrats' reform places undue burden on entrepreneurs http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/editorials/story/1147098.html
The government health care plantation
Rather than moving dysfunctional America off the welfare state, as we did with welfare reform in 1996, we are now moving the free, functioning and once prosperous part of our nation onto the welfare state.
I'm praying for a miracle that will wake up a slumbering nation.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104275
A thorough, rational, reasoned debunking of national health care
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/a_thorough_rational_reasoned_d.html
This gorgon of a bill isn't dead - not by a long shot. But it has been stalled by the inability of Democrats to come together and pass it.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/is_obamacare_dead_in_the_water.html
Destroying private health insurance
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/20/destroying-private-health-insurance/
Reform Puts Hospitals at Risk
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/20/health_reform_bargain_puts_hospitals_at_risk_97537.html
The Cost of Taxing Health Benefits
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/19/AR2009071901761.html
A Nation of One Eyed Sycophants? "In 2006, older patients with macular degeneration, which causes blindness, were told that they had to go totally blind in one eye before they could get an expensive new drug to save the other eye." http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/20/a-nation-of-one-eye-sycophants
Rationing for Dummies http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32760
Health-Care Reform: Why Not Try Ownership? http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2ZjMjFkMTc5YjM0YzUwZDY4ZDgxMDE3N2NhNzkzZGQ=
"The more these things are made public, the more the American people run like hell from them," http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2009/07/20/mrcs-bozell-discusses-health-care-card-check-announces-mrc-bailout-request
WaPo-ABC News Poll shows skeptical public on Obama agenda http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/wapoabc_news_poll_shows_skepti.html
The Media Needs to Acknowledge There is No Health Care Crisis http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2009/07/20/bozell-media-needs-acknowledge-there-no-health-care-crisis
But now that 1,000-page bills are being passed without being read, those that give us cap and trade and an entirely new government-based health care system, people are getting a bit nervous.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104439
Obama Admits He's "Not Familiar" With House Bill ... ARE YOU KIDDDING ME??? http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/21/morning-bell-obama-admits-hes-not-familiar-with-house-bill/
http://takeastandagainstliberals.blogspot.com/2009/07/obama-not-familiar-with-hr-3200.html
What we see is an across-the-board erosion in not just the public's overall approval of Obama's performance, but in confidence in his ability to manage every significant domestic item on his agenda. http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/73712
Poll: Public losing trust in President Obama
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25189.html
More Disapprove Than Approve of Obama on Healthcare
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121814/More-Disapprove-Than-Approve-Obama-Healthcare.aspx
'Health care' is not 'medical care'
Is there a coherent argument for government-controlled medical care, or are slogans and hysteria considered sufficient? None of the people who are trying to rush government-run medical care through Congress before we have time to think about it are pointing to Medicare, Medicaid or veterans' hospitals as shining examples of how wonderful we can expect government medical care to be when it becomes "universal." http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/21/medical_care_confusion_97543.html
When they get sick in Canada they don't call a doctor, they call a travel agent. Obamacare's prescription for disaster includes:
a price tag that exceeds a trillion dollars;
much higher taxes to cover these costs;
medical professionals forced to perform abortions;
health care rationing;
life-saving treatment denied;
jail sentences for those who seek treatment outside the socialized health care system;
and after a decade, 15 to 20 million Americans would still remain uninsured. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104587
Perils of Obamacare: The Three Big Lies
"If you like your current health-care plan, you can keep it."
Even White House spokesmen have said that Obama's oft-repeated pledge that you can keep your current insurance isn't meant to be taken literally. The reality is that millions of Americans - perhaps most Americans - will be forced to change insurance plans.
"You will pay less."
The Congressional Budget Office has made it clear that the reform plans now being debated will increase overall health-care costs
"Quality will improve."
Anyone who thinks a government takeover of the health-care system will improve quality of care has only to look at the health-care programs the government already runs: The Veterans Administration is overwhelmed with problems, Medicaid is notorious for providing poor quality at a high cost - and Medicare has huge gaps in coverage.
Worse, however, on Friday, Obama endorsed the creation of a government board with the power to dictate how your doctor practices medicine and all but endorsed the rationing prevalent in nationalized health-care systems around the world.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/21/perils_of_obamacare_the_three_big_lies_97550.html
Obamacare side effect: Medical travel The trouble with socialized medicine is that it corrupts the doctors. They start living a double life. So do the patients. And irony of ironies, it doesn't hurt the rich one little bit. http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/welcome_to_mexico_gringos.html
HR 3200 Kills the Private Insurance Industry http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/07/20/barack-obama-inadvertently-tells-the-truth-about-his-health-care-plan.php
Sorry, Gramps http://www.wnd.com/images/toon090721.jpg
VIDEO: OBAMACARE SUMMED UP IN 120 SECONDS - "TAKE A PAINKILLER" INSTEAD OF PACEMAKER
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-dQfb8WQvo
An Ideologue in a Hurry
When the work product is indefensible, deliberation is dangerous. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTMyM2FmYmIzNGYwNzg3NmU0MjM0ZTI0YzFiNjI2Zjk=
Government 'counselors' on end of life treatment http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/government_counselors_on_end_o.html
Under the worst of circumstances, the report said, the government's maximum exposure could total nearly $24 trillion, or $80,000 for every American. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090720/ap_on_bi_ge/us_meltdown_oversight
Obama Won't Rule Out Health Surtax...
At the same time, Obama remained noncommital on a surtax to pay for the overhaul, which some experts have said could cost over $1 trillion in the next several years to reconstitute and incorporate some 46 million uninsured into the system.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/21/obama-wont-rule-surtax-health-care/
Obama Gives Special Interests Inside Health Care Deals
In cutting deals with hospitals and drugmakers, President Barack Obama is giving a private inside track to special interests that's at odds with his campaign promise to make policy in the open.
http://townhall.com/news/politics-elections/2009/07/21/promises,_promises_private_deals_on_health_care?page=full
Obama Health Plan to Cover 12 Million Illegals
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/obama_illegals_healthcare/2009/07/19/237484.html
Dems' Prescription For Spending Without Restraint - Chicago Tribune http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/chi-0721edit1jul21,0,4218728.story
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/lb0722cd20090721120603.jpg
Racial Preferences in the Democrats' Health Care Bill http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/racial_preferences_in_the_demo_1.html
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gm09072020090721120020.jpg
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz072109dAPR20090721023707.jpg
More Health Care Lies http://townhall.com/columnists/DavidLimbaugh/2009/07/21/more_health_care_lies?page=full
Mayo Clinic Rebukes Obamacare http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/21/mayo-clinic-calls-house-plan-bad-medicine/?feat=home_cube_position1
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/07/20/mayo-clinic-rebukes-obamacare-how-will-media-respond
Obama: Mayo is the model health plan; Mayo: Thanks but your plan still sucks "The real losers will be the citizens of the United States."
http://crushliberalism.com/2009/07/21/obama-mayo-is-the-model-health-plan-mayo-thanks-but-your-plan-still-sucks/
Moon Walk Anniversary and Obama's Restriction of Possibility http://brightlightsearch.blogspot.com/2009/07/moon-walk-anniversary-and-obamas.html
Democrats Want to Teach You to Die With Dignity
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/07/20/democrats-want-to-teach-you-to-die-with-dignity/
Dem's giggling over idea Congress should actually read bills Just think about that! The majority leader of the United States House of Representatives was contending that it is not necessary for all - or any - members of the House to actually READ the 1,000 pages of a bill spending 1.5 trillion taxpayer dollars.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104520
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_w0uEadYgqRw/SmWzz_ZfDbI/AAAAAAAABvs/I6gmX1ke2H0/s400/Flat+Tax.png
Unemployment still 20% higher in Dem strongholds http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104517
Democrats Block GOP Health Care Mailing
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_12/news/37125-1.html?type=printer_friendly
THE CHART THOSE DUPLICITOUS SMARMY SCARED SNOTS DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE!
http://rightsoup.com/vast-expansion-of-abortion-included-in-house-healthcare-bill/
http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/07/23/the-health-care-rationing-chart-that-democrats-dont-want-you-to-see/
Take the red pill, Mr. President
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Take-the-red-pill-Mr-President-51473502.html
The "Public Plan" Exists and It Doesn't Work
Rather than learning from the failures of Maine's public option plan, Democrats in Congress (and possibly Maine's own Senator Snowe) aim to duplicate it.
http://townhall.com/columnists/TarrenBragdon/2009/07/23/the_public_plan_exists_and_it_doesnt_work?page=full
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/tmdsu09072220090722115708.jpg
"Hawaii's Universal Health Plan"
Hawaii was the first state in the country to attempt universal health care. It was called "Keiki Care" (Keiki means Child in Native Hawaiian) and it was stopped seven short months after it began due to budgetary concerns. Republican Gov. Linda Lingle had signed it into law, but they soon found a whopping majority of those who wanted free health care already had been insured!
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/07/23/fox-hannity-tonight-hawaiis-universal-health-plan-1.php
Obama's "Government Option"--Alligator or Anaconda?
http://townhall.com/columnists/KenBlackwell/2009/07/23/obama%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9Cgovernment_option%E2%80%9D%E2%80%94alligator_or_anaconda?page=full
Before some of these new proposals are even enacted, public spending will eat up 45 percent of our gross domestic product -- the largest percentage in our history except for the war years 1943-45. And in two years -- or even less -- our national debt will soar to 100 percent of GDP. Yet the pie shrinks even as we promise to serve more slices.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/23/big_government_medicine_97588.html
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/sbr072209dAPR20090723035259.jpg
GALLUP: Americans Concerned About Gov't. Spending, Expansion
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121829/Americans-Concerned-Govt-Spending-Expansion.aspx
ObamaCare in Trouble With The Public
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574304161389163586.html
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/sbr072309dAPR20090723035340.jpg
Gloomy Days for Obama's Health Plan
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/23/a_month_of_gloomy_thursdays_for_health_care_plan_97579.html
Health Commissioner Would Answer Only to Obama, Otherwise Unchecked
More from the final report:
Aside from the will of the President, the Commissioner's power would be unchecked. This is extremely troubling given the large scope of responsibility given to the Commissioner. In fact, the Commissioner is so powerful that the title is referenced almost 200 times in H.R. 3200. This government official would have:
• The power to decide which treatments patients could receive and at what cost;
• The power to decide which private plans would be allowed to participate in the Exchange;
• The power to regulate all insurance plans, both in and out of the Exchange;
• The power to determine which employers would be allowed to participate in the Exchange;
• The power to determine how many Americans will be allowed to choose health coverage through the Exchange;
• The power to form and control which physicians and hospitals participate in the government-run plan and in private plan provider networks;
• The power to determine which states are allowed to operate their own Exchange and terminate a previously-approved State Exchange at any time;
• The power to override state laws regarding covered health benefits;
• The power to determine how trillions of taxpayer and employer dollars would be spent within the Exchange;
• The power to determine who qualifies for premium assistance; and
• The power to automatically enroll Americans into the Exchange if they don't have coverage, including potentially forcing these individuals into the government-run plan.
Also troubling is the fact the Secretary of Health and Human Services would decide which prescription drugs are made available in the government plan. Evidence has shown that government officials in other countries have used this power to deny access to needed treatments on the basis of cost."
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32833
The doctor will kill you now
Buried in the arcane Death Care Act's 1,000 pages of detail is this little description of how the government will dictate to you, educate you and control your very survival with an "order regarding life sustaining treatment."
On page 430 of the 2009 Death Care Act we find:
(B) The level of treatment ...may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions ... (iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104710
Obama Utopia Built On Empty Promises
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/07/23/obama-utopia-built-on-empty-promises/
The American Medical Association's endorsement of Obamacare has sparked a doctor revolt
"Please remove me from the membership rolls of the AMA as of today. And good luck to the next generation of Medical Service and Product Providers and their unfortunate patients."
"unfortunate patients": THAT'S YOU AND ME AND OUR KIDS AND GRANDPARENTS AND OUR GRANDCHILDREN - PAY ATTENTION!
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTZkZDkzODNhYTlhN2Y2NzY4ZTdlZDRhODRiODZiYzM=
Snake Oil
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTZkZDkzODNhYTlhN2Y2NzY4ZTdlZDRhODRiODZiYzM=
Obama's insidious war on the middle class
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104711
The 47 Million* Uninsured
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz072409dAPR20090724025245.jpg
How Much Is a Year of Your Life Worth?
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/24/how-much-is-a-year-of-your-lif
Why is President Barack Obama in such a hurry to get his socialized medicine bill passed?
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/24/weve-figured-him-out
Questions I Never Asked Obama
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/24/questions-i-never-asked-obama
The Big Obamacare Lie
http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2009/07/big-obamacare-lie.html
Stop Democrats' Health Care Monstrosity
http://www.ourcountrydeservesbetter.com/campaigns/opposeobamacare.html
It turns out the president misjudged the nation's mood.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574306533556532364.html
Once you commit your fantasies to words and numbers, the Congressional Budget Office comes along and declares that the emperor has no clothes.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/24/why_obamacare_is_sinking_97598.html
Health Reform's Hidden Victims
The only way the House and Senate health plans can pass is if the costs they impose on vulnerable parts of the population continue to be hidden.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203517304574306303720472842.html
Health Care Quotas
http://townhall.com/columnists/LindaChavez/2009/07/24/health_care_quotas?page=full
DEM CONGRESSMAN Rep. Tonko Aide -- ". . . Solve the Prolonging of Life Issue"
It's always great to hear liberals speak when they think no one is listening.
http://www.redstate.com/blog/2009/07/24/rep-tonko-aide-%e2%80%94-solve-the-prolonging-of-life-issue/
The Future in Rep. Tonko's and Barack Obama's America
Some terminally ill patients in Oregon who turned to their state for health care were denied treatment and offered doctor-assisted suicide instead, a proposal some experts have called a "chilling" corruption of medical ethics.
Since the spread of his prostate cancer, 53-year-old Randy Stroup of Dexter, Ore., has been in a fight for his life. Uninsured and unable to pay for expensive chemotherapy, he applied to Oregon's state-run health plan for help.
Lane Individual Practice Association (LIPA), which administers the Oregon Health Plan in Lane County, responded to Stroup's request with a letter saying the state would not cover Stroup's pricey treatment, but would pay for the cost of physician-assisted suicide.
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/07/24/the-future-in-rep-tonkos-and-barack-obamas-america/
New Hampshire Democrat: 'My Constituents Would Love to Wait in Line for Medical Care'
http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2009/07/23/new-hampshire-democrat-my-constituents-would-love-to-wait-in-line-for-medical-care/
The Folly of Obamacare
Under his plan, an official body -- staffed with government doctors, actuaries, economists and other experts -- will determine which health-care treatments, procedures and remedies are cost-effective and which are not. Then it will decide which ones will get paid for, and which won't. Would a 70-year-old woman be able to get a hip replacement, or would that not be considered a wise allocation of resources? The Democrats call this "cost-controls."
http://townhall.com/columnists/JonahGoldberg/2009/07/24/the_folly_of_obamacare?page=full
And people are starting to catch on.
http://townhall.com/columnists/KenKlukowski/2009/07/24/healthcare_numbers_prove_the_white_house_wrong?page=full
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/payn090720_07_cmyk20090723100233.jpg
GOP Not Allowed to Say 'Government-Run Healthcare'
"Heil" Queen Nancy!
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32856
Desperation Does Not Become Him
Obama's Health Care plan is in trouble, and so is he
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32845
Loophole for illegals in 'Obamacare'?
No clear plan to stop aliens from enrolling in government health plan
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104812
Did Michelle Obama start patient dumping program?
Chicago critics say scheme used to avoid dealing with Medicare/Medicaid patients
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/23/video-did-michelle-obama-start-a-patient-dumping-program/
Why won't Congress enroll in gov't health care?
Democrats exempt themselves from own 'reform'
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104716
ObamaCare harms low-income workers
Linda Halderman, M.D., explains plan's high costs to both businesses, patients
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104821
Thomas Sowell notes how prez distracts us with non-issues to hide health care horrors
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=104841
http://www.wnd.com/images/toon090724.jpg
The reign of The One is beginning to crash
Gerald Warner --London Telegraph: '6 months into the great adventure and our hero is in deep doo-doo'
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100004404/barack-obama-discovers-socialist-projects-at-home-and-a-pro-marxist-foreign-policy-are-making-him-unpopular/
Crap Talk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRRy-QlQyUw
Obama laying the ground work for middle class tax hike
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/07/obama_laying_the_ground_work_f.html
Me neither, which I never cite them. You do sometimes though. Illuminating.
Obama: "I'm always worried about using the word 'victory,' because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,"
It does? Hirohito?
By all means let's trust this man with our health care. He's an expert historian and an expert at local police matters, and an even bigger Ear, Nose, and Throat specialist.
Doesn't like the word "victory".
We are in the midst of a major recession and Obama, who is now tending to make stupid remarks, wants to put the entire United States government into tremendous debt by massively changing health care and also how we pay for energy. He would be much better off to fix the recession by encouraging businesses to hire more people with tax incentives to help the economy and making smaller affordable fixes to health care such as automating record keeping and decreasing pharmaceutical prices rather than printing more money to pay for his massive changes.
The massive debts he is proposing to pass will 'kill' the United States as a major world power! China and other countries will eventually refuse to purchase any of our Bonds and we will have hyper-inflation which personally, I could not afford to suffer through since I have a fixed income and a fixed amount of savings with extremely low interest rates.
The key thing anyone must do before agreeing to the Obama Health Care proposal is to surrender to our individual freedom. Liberals have no problem there because they surrendered it in the formative stages of their ideological indoctrination.
As far as fixing the problems in our national health care system, government is the primary cause of the problems it faces, and they can all be better fixed by getting government out of the health care business (and all other economic issues except a minimal monetary and legitimate regulatory role) and letting the free markets function properly. Obama would like Americans to believe that our economic woes are the result of the capitalist system and corrupt business practices. Wrong. Our current problems are the result of government intervention, nothing more, nothing less.
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae contaminated the money markets and the liberal refusal to pursue energy alternatives including drilling for oil here in American set the stage for the melt-down last year and sustained spikes in transportation costs due to the increases in oil prices knocked over the most vulnerable American's household budgets. As long as our policy makers ignore this fact and refuse to resolve the solutions to their source they will only continue to confuse the issues and make our economic problems worse.
As demonstrated in excruciating detail here at SP over and over and over again by the likes of Rizzo, Mike Boy Scout, Mike, tc, torture liar and others, liberals have no arguments worth considering and no solutions except blind obedience to Obamunism. They made their case as best they were able, and we have read them all. Obama showed clearly the other night that he is clueless about what to do, doesn't even understand his own proposal, and willingly passes judgment without knowing what he is judging.
Barack Hussein Obama is an empty suit full of slick talk, no substance, and virulent anti-American racism.
Speak out openly about the fact that Obama is ruining America by applying berserk ideas in order to destroy everything that is good about the American economic system. Be prepared to fight with everything you have or lose your freedom. If this goes too far it will end up in our streets because there are many like me who will not abide this fundamental breach of my god given freedom and right to choose for myself the health care I will use.
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on July 24, 2009 02:04 PMBlack storms shake the sky
Dark clouds blind us
Although death and pain await us
Duty calls us against the enemy
The most precious good
is freedom
And we have to defend it
With courage and faith
Raise the revolutionary flag
Which carries the people to emancipation
Raise the revolutionary flag
Which carries the people to emancipation
Working people march onwards to the battle
We have to smash the reaction
To the Barricades! To the Barricades!
For the triumph of the Status Quo!
To the Barricades! To the Barricades!
For the triumph of the Status Quo!
Dan, you are repeatedly lying. You lie about some poll results, and mostly selectively quote others.
John, I don't think you know what the word "lying" means. Please see Zogby or Rasmussen. Obama's below 50% approval.
So I guess either you're lying, or you don't understand the meaning of the word?
You lie about this being a "public takeover" since the vast majority of Americans will not be permitted to join the health care exchange because they work for large businesses who offer health care coverage.
OK, so it's that you actually lie. In fact, there is NO guarantee this will happen. Who's to say that big companies must continue insuring their employees? Is that in your vaunted HR 3200? If so, section please?
The FACT is that all existing plans may not qualify AT ALL for the new Health Care Exchange. There are NO set requirements or qualifications right now, so making a blanket statement about what will happen or who will be allowed is rather disingenuous at best.
Tell me, John, which plan qualifies for the health care exchange? Which plan, John? Just one, please!
These scare tactics are designed to derail the bill and defeat the President.
Good. Bad bills SHOULD be defeated. This bill will do a tremendous amount of harm, starting with the $239 BILLION increase in the deficits thanks to this piece of trash legislation.
It's not personal, John. It's principle. And the principle is called freedom, something you apparently do not understand or support. Bills that limit freedom are bad bills, John.
Presidents that take actions harmful to the viability of the United States - eliminating freedoms, nationalizing industries, racking up debt at record rates - should be opposed on principle.
Apparently your principles support nationalization, less freedom, and more debt. At least we know where you stand!
They are not designed to have a realistic discussion about health care reform.
Three times President Bush and the GOP led Senate tried to take up health care malpractice award reform, as a step in the right direction to cut one of the biggest costs of medical providers. It was you jackasses in the Slavery Party who threatened to filibuster the bill, killing it off.
Tell me, John, why the concern over Gary, me, the GOP? Don't you slack-jawed mouth-breathers in the Slavery Party understand you have enough comrades to pass whatever you want, without a thing the GOP can do to stop you? Why the concern over the GOP position?
Oh, that's right - no political cover that way. You would actually have to grow a set and take a stand, and for panty-waists like you that's a scary thing to imagine!
For people like Dan and Gary it's not about fixing health care, it's about defeating Obama.
Health care's not broken, John. Why fix what isn't broken? Unless you just want to be an anarchist and destroy things for the fun of it?
Gary and Dan's health care plan for the next ten years is the status quo: crushing health-related deficits, health cost explosions, and millions losing their coverage.
Liar. And like you said in another thread, please don't presume to speak for me. You haven't the intellectual brainpower to comprehend half of what I'm writing here, let alone begin to understand what a reasonable, real, freedom enhancing position would be.
As I've stated before, you want to debate fur or leather lined shackles to wear. I'd rather not not even consider the shackles at all.
I want HR 3200 to have more cost controls, for example. But the fools who criticize the lack of cost controls in the bill are the same as those who ridicule and paint negatively the most basic forms of cost controls such as seeing if treatments are actually effective.
That's a stupid position, John. How about HR 3200 guaranteeing freedom of choice of health care plans? How about making it illegal for States or Congress to dictate what I must carry in my insurance?
No, you want to talk about those shackles. Choose yourself a nice, fluffy fur lined pink pair, John, they'll fit you nicely!
I keep on forgetting that you guys don't deserve complexity or intelligence, you just want to "HURR HURR" on with your screams of socialism no matter how stupid they are.
Yet you cannot comprehend that a person actually holds a position of ELIMINATING this bill on principle? You believe that everyone must agree with your position? How utterly egotistical of you, John!
Guess what - a valid response to HR 3200 is "NO". A valid plan is to either cap malpractice awards, or provide Federal funding of malpractice insurance. A valid plan is to remove Government's demands on what coverage I must purchase (if I'm never going to use chiropractic or naturopathic treatment because I do not accept them as a reasonable means of treatment, why must I pay for them?).
The GOP presented a plan for health care reform and your close-minded leaders in the House essentially ignored it. Some way to have honest debate about health care; ignore ideas alternative to yours and sit around and have a circle-jerk over your own pathetic plan.
You simply refuse to learn, John. You are the angry little kid who can't understand that sometimes grown-ups want to make their own decisions, and the fact that little Sally got a nice health care plan does not mean you're being mistreated.
Get a job, get a life, get an education and grow up.
Oh, and John?
HOPE AND CHANGE!
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on July 24, 2009 02:29 PMFor the triumph of the Status Quo!
To the Barricades! To the Barricades!
For the triumph of the Status Quo!
Posted by: VOFernandez on July 24, 2009 02:32 PM
Snort! Really? You and a few dozen other loonies with teabags dangling from your hats? I take it you won't be amused if it comes to that, but I sure will be!
I'll be sure to toot my horn when I drive by...
I'm wondering why they haven't passed their thing yet. What's the hold-up?
Which carries the people to emancipation
Raise the revolutionary TEA bags
Which carry the people to emancipation
Wingnuts march onwards to the battle
We have to smash the reaction
Posted by: VOFernandez on July 24, 2009 02:39 PM
You're a joke.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 02:42 PMAll in good time, Gary... but, first we need a few weeks so the congresscritters can strut their stuff and show their donors how important they are.
Posted by: scottd on July 24, 2009 02:46 PM"Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, regardless of pre-existing health conditions." HOW?
"give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs." HOW?
"Makes it easier for Americans to keep health care coverage regardless of a change in or loss of a job." HOW?
"The plan does this by encouraging employers to move to optout, rather than opt-in rules." HOW?
"The plan allows states, small businesses, associations, and other organizations to band together and offer health insurance at lower costs." HOW? (Sounds like an insurance exchange.)
And just like everything from the party of no, it has a many tax credits and handouts but absolutely no funding for it.
That isn't a plan. The GOP has no plan. They don't have a bill. They have nothing but cries of socialism. This is about defeating Obama, not getting the concessions necessary to reform health care.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 02:53 PMNope - I am not old enough to be on Medicare! I do have Tricare Prime which does have a network of Doctors here in the Seattle/Tacoma area and I am also eligible for PacMed which I will probably change to. I previously worked for Boeing with their medical insurance. They proposed to have a Tricare supplement for those folks eligible for Tricare so they would not have pay ~$10K for my insurance. The U. S. Government told Boeing and other companies that was out of the question.
Your question to me about Medicare is pertinent as that needs to fixed as the cost has always been a drag on the economy. (And Yes - Medicare is a single payer system and Yes any of Obama's health care bills passed will really be a drag on the economy and Yes the reduction of the Doctor's payments for Medicare hurts the care of the patients and reduces the number of Doctors that will support Medicare!!). So, if Obama fixed Medicare first then he would have a pertinent example that could be used for the rest of us; however, that would be an almost impossible feat!
My two other areas mentioned above such as automating medical record keeping and making pills cheaper also need to be fixed and should be affordable to the economy and would also present some good features for Obama to tout.
The proposed fixes by Obama by massively increasing our National Debt for Energy and Health Care costs just won't work!! (And neither of us will be able to afford it!)
The Federal Government has a limited income based on the economy that Obama can increase by fixing the economy first rather than trying to RAM through his massive expenditures. He apparently has no understanding about how a free economy works! It would be interesting to see his transcripts and grades in the area! If Obama tried to meet the budget goals that President Clinton had (and yes he did balance his budget!!) I would not be complaining!
BTW - If Obama did balance the budget first then he would have the "SAY SO and impetus" to fix more things with health care and energy expenditures but until he does that then he is not a leader!
So what medical insurance do you have?
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 03:00 PMUmm... how? How can the GOP do this again? Can't you guys get anything done?
There are legitimate problems with the bill that should be addressed. Those problems need to be fixed before the bill should pass.
But these problems have nothing to do with the "problems" you and Dan are going nuts about. There are real concerns with the bill, and then there are wingnut, made up concerns that have nothing to do with what's in the bill but have everything with trying to break Obama.
Dissent is completely fine, sure. But misleading and scaring people instead of informing the actual debate? Scummy and partisan.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 03:07 PMIf they did, you'd probably hear a LOT more about the Kidney dealer connected to the case and to the crooked politicians.
Illegal human organ trafficing and crooked politicians --- Nah, there's no way something like this could every happen again if the GOVERNMENT took over our healthcare right??
Posted by: johnny on July 24, 2009 03:10 PMWhat are the problems?
I have a Regence plan, but I'm familiar with TriCare Prime -- my dad was in the military for more than 20 years. I wouldn't worry too much about Medicare. Both my parents and my sister have used it and it works fine. No problem finding doctors or getting treatment. Right now, funding projections look bad in a few years, but it will get straightened out. Medicare is too popular and has too large a constituency to let it collapse.
We probably disagree on this, but I think reforming health insurance is part of fixing Medicare and the economy.
Anyway, thanks for answering my question.
Posted by: scottd on July 24, 2009 03:18 PMThe White House has already proposed giving MedPAC a stronger voice, which is common sense reform. Also, I'm concerned about the revenue base/tax for the reform, its implementation timeline, and some other cost-control issues. I recognize whatever bill passes will not be perfect, but
I don't get your point with asking "WHY ISN'T IT PASSED YET?!?!?!?" Obviously a) if the Democrats could just force through legislation at any point, and b) all Democrats wanted to pass this bill right now, then we it would pass. But Democrats can't get their entire caucus to vote on every issue blindly, because we live in reality. And many Democrats want to improve the bill a bit before it goes to vote.
In other words, this is how the legislative process works. What is your expectation of things? Medicare Part D passed by one vote in the House, and they had to keep the votes running for many many hours. Getting major bills passed is tough work.
I'm not worried about the bill passing. I'm worried about the very negative attitude of the GOP making the bill worse because some red-state Democrats may not be willing to make the though choice necessary for a good bill.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 03:21 PMFor some reason, I cant' get the link to work, but check out this link.
http://www.chamberpost.com/images/health_reg_both.pdf
The U.S. Government has a darn lousy history of administrating health plans of any kind, and so far the things the Obama administration has touched haven't exactly shown any "hope or change" that things will be different.
(Remember, for instance, the promise that all that stimulus money would head off more unemployment? It's already 25% higher than what was promised.)
I know one of the socialist morons on this board will post about how this comes from the Chamber of Commerce, so it's all corrupt, etc. I guess it bares repeating that a hole lot of those U.S. businesses consider insuring their employees to be something of a headache, and would love to offload the problem. If they thought this was a good plan, they'd be on board.
Posted by: johnny on July 24, 2009 03:23 PMHey, I'm still waiting to see the "plan" that your Obamassiah had back last summer! A full health care plan with a plan to implement it...
Considering we've seen NOTHING about it (complete vaporware) it seems the GOP plan is infinitely more defined.
And it's a LOT more concrete than your pronouncements about which plans will survive, what employers will do with their own plans. Come on, John, I've asked you dozens of times and like the good little Marxist you are, you simply ignore the question:
Tell me, John, which private health insurance plan today will be covered in the new Health Insurance Exchange system?
Failure to answer this shows the vacuity of your position. Pomp and circumstance and nothing more... Ruffled feathers all around!
But what you would know? You just want to sit back and get fitted with your new collar and shackles and then beg your masters for new scraps of food while licking at their boots.
Sit up, John, sit up! That's a good boy! An extra ration of flu vaccine for you! Good boy!
Now go out and fetch some HOPE AND CHANGE!
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on July 24, 2009 03:23 PMOkay.
Henry Waxman is telling the Blue Dogs (the ones who share your concerns) to go pound sand. He's been told by the President to pass *anything* and that's just what he's trying to do. They'll pass something, and then write it later, just like with cap-and-trade.
Oh, I'm also worried about the complete inability to have a logical discussion about this because the right feels the need to misrepresent the bill to make their case
Yes, like you are COMPLETELY INNOCENT of that action? Hypocrisy, thy name is Jensen!
Hey John, here's a legitimate, principled position on this bill: kill it. It represents an unacceptable intrusion into the private marketplace and an unconstitutional expansion of Federal power.
See, I don't want to debate about refining some parts of the bill because the entire bill is bad!
I told you what I would do to address health care insurance; you refused to accept or acknowledge it. Who's the one being disingenuous John? Who's the close-minded twit spewing the words of his masters? Just one hint: his initials are JJ.
So John, you want to talk about fixing health care insurance costs? Great. Then let's start by eliminating HR 3200.
Tell me what you would do. I've told you what I would do. But lay out what you would do - clean sheet, if you will. Come on, lay it out. Start from scratch.
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on July 24, 2009 03:30 PM
Dan, Hey, I'm still waiting to see the "plan" that your Obamassiah had back last summer! A full health care plan with a plan to implement it...
HR 3200 is a full plan -- over a thousands pages of it. It has flaws and I hope they get fixed.
The GOP "plan" is a four page document that is full of bullshit. It has absolutely no cost controls for Medicare. It doesn't just have flaws -- the whole thing is a flaw and an embarrassment.
Tell me, John, which private health insurance plan today will be covered in the new Health Insurance Exchange system?
Your question is stupid and not worth addressing. The question should be: Is there a framework for deciding which private insurance plans are offered on the excahnge. The answer is: Yes. Just because that process has not concluded does not mean there is a flaw.
You just want to sit back and get fitted with your new collar and shackles and then beg your masters for new scraps of food while licking at their boots.
Insurance plans having to provide a minimum amount of benefits is really equivalent to being imprisoned?
This is truly the type of intellectual crap coming from the right that causes me so much consternation. You have ABSOLUTELY NO PLAN at all. NONE. No solutions. No ideas. Just whining about FREEDOM. As if we fought WWII for the right of private insurance companies to screw people over time and time again.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 03:33 PMYeah! Look at how good Britain's economy is.
You wanna fix out economy, get the big, fat federal government out of the way, and allow Americans to produce and trade.
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 03:41 PM"..fixing our economy how?"
- Medicare is only a small part of our budget at this point - Obama and you need to fix it to provide the proper examples. Extending the budget to totally beyond what we have today will bankrupt the United States. Do you understand that?
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 03:43 PMHell, government spending is rising even faster than that. Is that the "best thing for our economy right now"?
Medicare and Medicaid are the single biggest slice of the US budget. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png) In addition, Medicare is the fastest growing budgetary expense.
The most responsible thing to do for our budget is to bend the cost curve for Medicare. We can finance this bill in a deficit neutral.
I do not want deficit spending, but leaving our budgetary problems to fester isn't good for our economy.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 03:52 PMHealth care costs are rising but spending a trillion dollars to try to fix it won't work!! Additionally, spending another trillion of dollars to try and fix energy problems is absurd!!
Your democratic response to totally put the United State Government into debt to where we can not ever recover is not the answer!!
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 03:54 PMSure, we should try to tackle this as well. However, screaming SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM isn't the way to get your priorities into legislation.
Hell, government spending is rising even faster than that. Is that the "best thing for our economy right now"?
Government spending pays for jobs. In the long-term, you could argue that it's irresponsible. You could argue that the effects take too long to have an impact. But in the short term, of course tax cuts and government spending help the economy.
Medical spending, however, is a serious burden on our economy. Almost all businesses shoulder the burden of medical inflation and much of that money is wasted -- literally, wasted -- on useless tests or hospital stays that don't actually fix anything.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 04:02 PMSo why aren't we? What do you think?
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 04:04 PMSays who, John?
Oh, and who has tried to introduce Tort Reform, John?
Health care costs are rising but spending a trillion dollars to try to fix it won't work!!
How do you know? The $1T isn't just for cost-savings, but also to bring the rest of America into the system. Practically and politically, you will never be able to pass a bill that has cost savings measures without expanding access. You'll never find the votes for it.
It's not another $1T to our budget. And it's about $100bn a year. That's a lot of money, of course, but less than the Iraq war and less than Bush's tax cuts. And most of that money isn't new taxes, it's savings in Medicare and Medicaid.
Additionally, spending another trillion of dollars to try and fix energy problems is absurd!!
I just want to note that cap and trade raises revenue -- it's not a spending bill.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 04:13 PMStudies, Gary.
Oh, and who has tried to introduce Tort Reform, John?
I don't know, Gary.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 04:16 PMI don't know, Gary. What do you think?
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 04:17 PMI'll answer, because I do like 'em. The Dems haven't gone for Tort Reform because they get money from lawyers.
There. Easy.
You don't know who has tried to introduce tort reform? You need better sources of information.
Posted by: Gary on July 24, 2009 04:20 PMDo I hope it's included? Yes. Would I support a specific amendment on it? Yes.
Does it not being addressed greatly hurt the bill? No. Malpractice is not responsible for the vast inflation in medical spending. And it can always be addressed in separate legislation if it has the votes. But right now, given that we need to get all of our votes from Democrats, why should we give into GOP demands if they're not at the table?
Would you support this bill if it had malpractice reform, Gary?
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 04:29 PM"How do you know? The $1T isn't just for cost-savings, but also to bring the rest of America into the system. Practically and politically, you will never be able to pass a bill that has cost savings measures without expanding access. You'll never find the votes for it."
- So lets save the money first - make the economy better - and then fix the problems one at a time in our budget!!!!
What is wrong with that??
How do you spend your income? Are you always in debt and going bankrupt?
The government needs one step at a time within the budget and with agreement of our populace!! Having 53% voting for Obama was not an agreement to bankrupt our United States!!
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 04:50 PMWhy don't we fix the problem of spending and access in one shot? Why do we have to keep on waiting to fix health care?
Simply waiting on health care doesn't fix our deficit. The deficit's biggest contributors have been recessions that are lowering tax revenues.
Posted by: John Jensen on July 24, 2009 04:57 PMAs demonstrated again here in more excruciating detail than I mentioned earlier at #118 over and over and over again the liberal mutts prove that they have no arguments worth considering and no solutions except lies and blind obedience to Obamunism.
They have made their case about this subject as best they were able on many threads and scores of posts, and we have read and carefully considered them all.
In rational arguments we have refuted their every point with clear reasoning and they reply with silly tactics and blatant lies. Their failure of reason will be thier downfall. Their twaddle deserves no more attention except as indicia of their desperation to win and panic over the coming defeat.
Liberals believe that repeating lies over and over again makes them something more than lies. The other night their messiah Obama showed everyone who is rational that he is clueless about what to do, doesn't understand his own proposal, and is willing to openly lie about vitally important details because he is confident that his supporters are too slavishly stupid to think for themselves. In view of the liberal posts here, he was correct.
Bright Sun fills the sky
Joy moves us
Although death and pain certainly await them
Duty calls us against the enemy
The most precious good
is freedom
And we have to defend it
With courage and faith
Raise the revolutionary flag
Which carries decent people to emancipation
Raise the revolutionary flag
Which signals emancipation from liberal stupidity
Working people march onwards to the battle
Its time to smash the morons
To the Ranks! To the Ranks!
For the triumph of Freedom
To the Ranks! To the Ranks!
For the triumph of decency over cowardly liberalism
Barack Hussein Obama is an empty suit full of slick talk, no substance, and virulent anti-American racism, and he is going down hard. His moron supporters are going down with him.
The writing is on the wall and even he instinctively knows it.
Amusing indeed
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on July 24, 2009 05:00 PM"...The deficit's biggest contributors have been recessions that are lowering tax revenues"
Fix the recession first and then you have the room and money to fix other problems!
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 05:28 PMPrevious Presidents and Congresses have fixed problems with the economy. An example is Clinton! So back to my original post..
"Fix the recession first and then you have the room and money to fix other problems!"
(and you are wrong!)
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 05:40 PMDhimmicrats can't help but overreach
Universally, their "fixes" are worse than the problems
rizzo is reliably FOS
Happy days!
BTW rizzo - odds of obamacare even seeing the light of day are now lower than your chance of getting laid...
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on July 24, 2009 06:16 PMThe GOP "plan" is a four page document that is full of bullshit.
I see. So when then-candidate Obama pitched his "plan" in 2008 that was only two pages, that was a solid plan. A proposal to start working from that is four pages is BS.
And who's the one being partisan? Check the nearest mirror, meathead!
Your question is stupid and not worth addressing. The question should be: Is there a framework for deciding which private insurance plans are offered on the excahnge. The answer is: Yes. Just because that process has not concluded does not mean there is a flaw.
OK, then you can stop your fanatical LYING about the "plan" and stating unequivocally what will be the result of the process given that it hasn't even started NOR has it been defined.
Insurance plans having to provide a minimum amount of benefits is really equivalent to being imprisoned?
Why should the Government dictate what are the benefits I have to purchase? If another man forces me to personally buy products that I do not want, then that is economic slavery. But I wouldn't expect you to understand...
You have ABSOLUTELY NO PLAN at all. NONE. No solutions. No ideas.
Liar. I have told you many times what my plan is:
1. Get the Government out of the upcoming process by killing HR 3200.
2. Eliminate Government mandates regarding minimum levels and coverages for insurance plans.
3. Limit control of health insurance programs to that over life insurance programs: fiscal solvency and legal obligation disclosures in all contracts.
That's the plan. You don't like it, so you call it no plan. Well, that's your problem. And it shows that for all your tantrums, you really don't want to have a debate about health care insurance. You just want to stroke your ego, and you want to sit around with fellow leftists patting each other on the back about how good you are.
The most responsible thing to do for our budget is to bend the cost curve for Medicare. We can finance this bill in a deficit neutral.
How do you reduce spending by adding total dollars outlaid? If I have 1,000 clients each costing me $1,000 per month, that's $1,000,000 monthly outlay. What if I lower that per-person cost to $900, but at the cost of taking my client count to 1,200 people? I now have $1,080,000 monthly outlay. Yes, it's lower per person, but the total dollars are higher.
THIS is the fact that all the "save money by adding more people" leftists simply refuse to acknowledge. Hey, you can talk all about saving 15% per person, but when you add 30% more people to the plan your total dollars go up. And that does NOT cut your budget rate.
It's called economic ignorance, and not one of you leftists have shown an ounce of learning.
And most of that money isn't new taxes, it's savings in Medicare and Medicaid.
Now who's spewing bullshit? That would be JOHN JENSEN! The CBO Director states that there will be $583 billion in revenues (taxes), and $219 billion in savings. That's a 70/30 split of taxes/savings, which is about exactly OPPOSITE of what you state.
You can't even get the basic facts right, John. I assume it's because you want to ignore the FACT that the plan greatly increases taxes and still ends up a blowing $239 billion hole in the national debt.
So, here's the FACTS (with references, unlike your inane ramblings with nary a reference included):
- HR 3200 does NOT define which plans will be acceptable, thus making it impossible to determine who will be able to keep their insurance.
- HR 3200 will blow a $239 billion hole in our budget
- HR 3200 adds $583 billion in new taxes
- HR 3200 eliminates choice by restricting what health plans can be offered
So how about addressing those FACTS, John?
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on July 24, 2009 06:28 PMThank you for the necessary details on HR 3200!!
Posted by: Tim on July 24, 2009 07:03 PMFacts shine the light of truth on the subject. And in this case, health care will add hundreds of billions to our national debt, and hundreds of billions more in taxes.
And it will not reduce the amount of Federal spending one dollar.
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on July 24, 2009 07:22 PMIt had be to very embarrassing for him to hold a press conference on the need for urgent action on healthcare reform only to have the Senate Democrat Leader announce hours later that nothing would happen on the issue in the upper chamber anytime soon.
"Please go back to cleaning your sniper rifle . . . "
Thanks, I will.
As a matter of fact I shot a great score today at the range.
Care to join me and try your luck?
Rizzo made his case about this subject as best he was able on many threads and scores of posts, and we have read and carefully considered them all. In rational arguments we have refuted their every point with clear reasoning and Rizzo only replies with silly tactics that he is utterly incapable of backing up with any action.
Rizzo believes that repeating lies over and over again makes his nonsense something more than lies.
The other night his messiah Obama showed everyone who is rational that he is clueless about what to do, doesn't understand his own proposal, and is willing to openly lie about vitally important details because he is confident that his supporters are too slavishly stupid to think for themselves, and Rizzo's posts here, prove he was correct.
Barack Hussein Obama is an empty suit full of slick talk, no substance, and virulent anti-American racism, and he is going down hard. His moron supporters like Rizzo are going down on whomever with him. The writing is on the wall and Rizzo instinctively knows it. That is why his pretense at arguments don't even make the shallow appearance of reasoning any longer.
Rizzo . . . amusing liberal punk indeed
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on July 24, 2009 08:09 PM 17 United States 47,103 2008 est.
18 Canada 47,090 2008 est.
19 France 46,489 2008 est.
20 Germany 46,352 2008 est.
21 United Kingdom 45,731 2008 est
The % diff for Britain is 3% of oru per cap gdp....for Canada it's miniscule.
Let's do the math, okay?
103- 90 = 13
13 as % of 47103 = 0.0002759 -- wow that's really a tiny percentage difference.
Conclusion:
socialized medicine doesn't mean your gdp per capita is less in any significant ways.
So which are those nations that are richer than us?
Here's the list
1 Liechtenstein 145,734 2007
2 Qatar 141,733 2008 est.
3 Luxembourg 118,538 2008 est.
4 Norway 103,586 2008 est.
5 Ireland 68,574 2008 est.
6 Denmark 67,387 2008 est.
7 Switzerland 64,974 2008 est.
8 Iceland 62,490 2008 est.
9 Kuwait 61,499 2008 est.
10 United Arab Emirates 58,424 2008 est.
11 Sweden 56,703 2008 est.
-- Jersey 56,231 2005 est.
12 Netherlands 54,640 2008 est.
13 Finland 53,616 2008 est.
14 Austria 52,696 2008 est.
15 Australia 50,887 2008 est.
16 Belgium 47617
Now a couple of points conservative friends.
This is from the CIA world factbook, not the IMF or world bank, ok?
Now look at the nations richer than us. Obviously the tax havens and oil states don't count, and you can include Norway in that. So we're left with these nations being richer than us:
Ireland Denmark Switzerland Iceland Sweden Netherlands Finland Austria Australia and Belgium.
Now what do they all hve in common? For large parts of the post ww2 era they were governed by SOCIALISTS including labor and social democratic parties. and those parties put into effect the SOCIALIST programs y'all love to hate. Including SOCIALIZED health care as you call it. Then go back to the above list, right after the USA we have Canada, France Germany and UK.
What this means is your continual arguments that this kind of system wrecks the economy is a lie, or tomfoolery...kind of like saying Obama wasn't gborn in Hawaii, or that Sarah Palin is qualified, or that there were no blacks dying at Vicksburg, or the earth is flat, and there is no evolution, or that torture is legal and waterboarding isn't torture. You're just wrong, and for your own personal reasons, can't see it, mainly due to a need to have enemies, feel like victims and project all kinds of fear.
Now when you say it means rationaing of course it does or longer lines for elective, of course, and of coursed is you ahve some huge philospophical objection to the govt. desiging the health care system (while your'e mainly okay with it designing the educational system and the auto liaiblity insurance systema nd the unemplyoment insurance system and the tort system, and so on) then that principled obojection makes at least some kind of sense. But the notion that SOCIALIZED MEDICINE MAKES a NATION POOR is literally evidence of a learning disability; you simply can't see the facts.
Canada is as rich as us, and you're telling us our system is better ? Because single payer brings you down? What a joke.
Posted by: Torture Lawyer on July 24, 2009 08:10 PMDid you read # 173?
This torture liar character is desperate to make a point that has al;ready been discussed and disproven over and over again. Having nothing else, he re-hashes the same bullshit over and over in the hopes that we will ride the merry-go round with him.
Like I said at # 172, The other night his messiah Obama showed everyone who is rational that he is clueless about what to do, doesn't understand his own proposal, and is willing to openly lie about vitally important details because he is confident that his supporters are too slavishly stupid to think for themselves, and torture liars' post here proves he was correct."
Obama's Health Care proposal is flat-lining in the Congress and public opinion because he has been caught lying and people are finally realizing that it is such a terrible idea for America. This torture liar character doesn't seem to get it through his peanut sized brain the we don't wnat to be like Europe or other countries because we are better than they are.
Amusingly block-headed liberal obduracy on parade.
Thanks
Posted by: Amused by Liberals on July 24, 2009 08:28 PMObama proposed a terrible grab of our economy in order to seize control of the Freedoms of Americans and called it Health Care Reform.
The American people are recognizing that Barack Hussein Obama is an empty suit full of slick talk, no substance, and virulent anti-American racism, and he is going down hard.
If you are liberal, you won the election and you can gloat about the fact that you elected a shiftless racist asshole for President who will hose you and your family in a second and laugh about doing it.
If you are a conservative, you need to realize that these petty criminals know where to break into your hose the next time and you need to install new locks. We have specific details and information now about what Obama was trying to ram down our throats, and we need to discuss it openly like Ragnar did at #113.
Obama lost his silly honey-moon mojo with the liberal dripspittlers and he is going down hard. Obama exposed his racist desires with the Crowley affair and we should help him go face first by repeating the true facts about the proposal that he lied and obfuscated to cover up. Then watch his ego-maniacal gourd explode like a firecracker in a cantaloupe.
Rizzo and his ilk will continue to defend him anyway (they are demented), but it will be entertaining to watch.
Arrogant self-righteous liberals have a funny sort-of strut and insane quality about them
But once all of the Seniors, many of whom voted for Obama and who are Black and Latino, get word of what this plan does to their Medicare Advantage by forcing them back to Medicare, that will be the end of Hope and Change. He's already looking very Bushy with approval ratings now below 50%.
I would agree with you but my parents are elderly and in need of care and I speak with their senior neighbors who voted for Obama.
What this plan will do to them is cruel and unusual. Liberal a**holes worry about water boarding terrorists to get vital information that saves our lives, but not removing care for seniors on the arbitrary basis of age. Thy will sanction the death of seniors just as they do babies in the name of their Godless social utopia.
Liberals deserve all of the punishment anyone can dish out, but many seniors are just confused and need the care they worked hard all of their lives for. My parents are conservative and they are worried because they played by the rules and now see this jive-ass posturing to rip them off.
Besides, we can stop this idiotic nonsense.
Blue dog rats are running from this proposal largely because they were put into office by seniors.
Pg 22 of the HC Bill mandates the Government will audit books of all employers that self insure. Can you imagine what that will do to small businesses? Every one will abandon "self insurance" and go on Government insurance. So when Obama says that there will still be private health care, it's simply a lie: this mandate will force employers to abandon their private plans.
Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - a Government committee (good luck with that!) will decide what treatments/benefits a person may receive.
Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE WILL BE RATIONED! (We all knew this, because health care is rationed in Canada and Britain, but Obama kept saying it would not be).
Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you. You will have no choice!
PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Pg 58 HC Bill - Government will have real-time access to individual's finances and a National ID Healthcard will be issued!
Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Government will have direct access to your bank accts for election funds transfer
PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community organizations (read: ACORN).
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Government will create an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Government control.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the Exchange.
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Government will ration your Healthcare!
PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Government mandates linguistic appropriate services. Example - Translation for illegal aliens.
Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Government will use groups, i.e. ACORN & Americorps, to sign up individuals for Government HC plan.
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans. AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed.
-PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice.
pg 124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue Government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Government Monopoly.
pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ AMA - The Government will tell YOU what you can earn.
Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE.
Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.
Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with payroll $400k & above who does not provide public option pays 8% tax on all payroll.
pg 150 Lines 9-13 Businesses with payroll between $251k & $400k who don't provide public option pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.
Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to Government will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (the GOVERNMENT) will have access to ALL Americans' finances and personal records.
PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that.
Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor affected.
Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors - doesn't matter what specialty - will all be paid the same.
PG 253 Line 10-18 Government sets value of Doctor's time, professional judgment, etc. Literally, value of humans.
PG 265 Sec 1131Government mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries.
PG 268 Sec 1141 Federal Government regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs.
PG 272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151 The Government will penalize hospitals for what Government deems preventable readmissions.
Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors who treat a patient during initial admission that results in a readmission - Government will penalize you.
Pg 317 L 13-20 OMG!! PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government tells Doctors what/how much they can own.
Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion - Government will mandate hospitals cannot expand.
pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can u say ACORN?!
Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 - Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures which of course forces health care rationing.
Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc., forcing people into Government plan.
Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Government will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs people!
Pg 379 Sec 1191 Government creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Committee. HC by phone.
PG 425 Lines 4-12 Government mandates Advance Care Planning Consultations. Think Senior Citizens end of life prodding.
Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Government will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney. Mandatory!
PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Government provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in how to die.
PG 427 Lines 15-24 Government mandates program for orders for end of life. The Government has a say in how your life ends.
Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "advanced care planning consultant" will be used frequently as patients' health deteriorates.
PG 429 Lines 10-12 "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from the Government to end a life!
Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The Government will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.
PG 430 Lines 11-15 The Government will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life.
Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services/Non profit orgs. (ACORN Medical Services here?)
Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATION. 1 monthly payment to a community-based organization. (Like ACORN?)
PG 489 Sec 1308 The Government will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Government into our marriages.
Pg 494-498 Government will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services. You'd better speak up now before you are on the "advanced care consultation" list.
you seem so worried about your parents, but you don't seem to be bothered that bushco made medicare/medicaid worse and a huge gift to big pharma.
Liberal a**holes worry about water boarding terrorists to get vital information that saves our lives
um, what does this have to do with healthcare?
oh yeah, it shows that dems actually seem to care about human rights, even suspected terrorists. and besides, waterboarding doesn't work.
My parents are conservative and they are worried because they played by the rules and now see this jive-ass posturing to rip them off.
what does the political addiliation of your parents have to do w/ healthcare? obama's not going to kill them, and he's especially not going to kill them because they are highly misinformed conservatives. they're probably worried because they listen to the same BS lies and misinformation you spread here.
jive-ass posturing
nice dog whistle, racist much?
blue dogs are running from this cos they are almost as owned by pharma and insurance companies than the treasonous dbag republicans.
remove the blinders, dude.
Posted by: mike on July 26, 2009 08:41 AMaffiliation, not addiliation.
Posted by: mike on July 26, 2009 08:45 AMaffiliation, not addiliation.
Posted by: mike on July 26, 2009 08:45 AMThe proposed health-insurance bill from the House of Representatives refers to mentally disabled people as "retarded" -- a term advocates, relatives and physicians find outdated and offensive."A hospital or a nursing facility or intermediate-care facility for the mentally retarded . . ."
The phrase could cause more problems with groups for the developmentally disabled, who were angered when President Obama referred to his poor bowling skills on "The Tonight Show" as "like the Special Olympics." Obama later apologized
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 26, 2009 09:34 AM
Posted by: Gary on July 26, 2009 02:19 PM
"Read the bill,What good is reading the bill if it's a thousand pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?"
-
By all means let's jam this thing through. He is a Congressman. He doesn't know what the hell the bill even means, and he doesn't care.
And there are *still* people here who want (whatever this is) passed... RIGHT NOW!
http://www.reznetnews.org/article/indian-health-cares-broken-promises-35270
Waits, rationing, lack of facilities, etc etc.
Posted by: Gary on July 27, 2009 07:29 AMthe us policies towards native americans has always been atrocious.
the u.s. spends about $7400 pp on health care costs.
indian health services covers 2,000,000 people w/ a budget of $3.6 billion.
@ $7400 pp, their budget should be $14.8 billion.
almost nothing is more appaling in this nation than the way we've treated native americans.
however, the chances of that happening to the general population are almost nil.
Posted by: mike on July 27, 2009 08:27 AMworks pretty effectively, and you seem to agree as well, since wingnuts are all so fixated on ted kennedy's health.
cherry picking doesn't make you less or more right.
if any program is underfunded, it will fail. (bush was pretty effective at proving this)
the solution is to make sure it's funded properly.
"the solution is to make sure it's funded properly."
Reminds me of a Steve Martin routine, "How to become a millionaire... first, get a million dollars!"
It's just that easy. Are schools funded properly?
Should everyone have the same health care plan as Ted Kennedy?