Healthcare Bill Passes. (elephant in the room)

[KatRN05]

I'm not opposed to the reform, I'm just curious to see what happens. From what I've heard, the bill will take a year to go into effect so there will probably be changes made to it along the way.

[KatRN05]

There are other forms of Universal Health Care besides the single payer system.

To me, this is not universal health care, just insurance reform.

Edited March 24, 2010 by KatRN05

[the eternal]

That's my take as well.

It's supposed to go into effect in November right before the mid-term elections.

It's convenient but not on purpose.

Obama wanted this passed over a year ago.

Apparently with re-convening sessions and whatnot the soonest this can now go into effect is November.

[creatureofthenyte]

Personally, I like Canada's health care system and I hope The States adapts to it. I like that we have health care for our children, that we don’t pay for any of their shots and we get flu shots for free. I like that when we go to a doctor/ clinic we don’t have to pay 40 something bucks just to see someone, get a prescription and a kick out the door. That I can to get my back x-rayed (which I have) for free and not have to worry about a bill coming at me. I like that when I was in the hospital (because of my dads insurance plan) I got my own room and free care, and knowing that even if I wasn’t on my dad’s insurance that I would still get free care.

I do think that we have way to long of lines for surgeries and thing and that we should be able to pay someone, somewhere to get something fixed quicker if we wanted.

I know this is mostly about Canada heath care, but I do believe that everyone should get help if they need it and not get turned away. And not die from the cost afterward.

You may be one of the Only Canadians that has something good to say about your healthcare system.

Massachusetts has your system; and they are getting closer and closer to being bankrupt every day.

[Msterbeau]

Does that mean I will get kicked off of Medicaid and put back on my father's insurance even though we have no idea how long he's going to have it now that he can't work? What about the "children" who have nothing to do with their parents and don't want to be on their insurance? There are A LOT of questions that still need to be answered.

I believe it means dependent children... as in: You're still living in your parents home.

[creatureofthenyte]

That's my take as well.

It's supposed to go into effect in November right before the mid-term elections.

It's convenient but not on purpose.

Obama wanted this passed over a year ago.

Apparently with re-convening sessions and whatnot the soonest this can now go into effect is November.

Not on purpose....that's a tough sell.

I saw a state government rep from Massachusetts doing a tv interview the other day, he said if this gets implemented,

the US will be bankrupt within 4 yrs time.

If this is sooo good, why are NONE of the Democrats signing on for it????

Oh and Yes it DOES fund abortions; Obama's executive order doesn't mean shit, legally.

37 states are filing lawsuits against the government on grounds of Unconstitutionality.

This is a bad bill, and will hopefully get shot down.

Edited March 24, 2010 by creatureofthenyte

[TitsMcGee]

I believe it means dependent children... as in: You're still living in your parents home.

I still live in my parents home but they cannot claim me as a dependent since I get state assistance benefits. Which might make me look like a hypocrite for my beliefs and the fact I get state assistance, but with my families current situation I'm just using any resource I can.

[Rev.Reverence]

IS IT PERFECT?

HELL NO!

IS IT COMPREHENSIVE UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE?

YOU'RE KIDDING RIGHT!

BUT

It is designed to allow 32 million Americans to get coverage over the next four years, and unlike under Bush THIS is truly a plan where no child is left behind.

A sneek peek at what will go into effect in November if it passes unchanged

•This year, children with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied health insurance coverage.

Once the new health insurance exchanges begin in the coming years, pre-existing condition discrimination will become a thing of the past for everyone.

•This year, health care plans will allow young people to remain on their parents' insurance policy up until their 26th birthday.

•This year, insurance companies will be banned from dropping people from coverage when they get sick, and they will be banned from implementing lifetime caps on coverage. This year, restrictive annual limits on coverage will be banned for certain plans.

•This year, adults who are uninsured because of pre-existing conditions will have access to insurance through a temporary subsidized high-risk pool.

•In the next fiscal year, the bill increases funding for community health centers, so they can treat nearly double the number of patients over the next five years.

•This year, it'll also establish an independent commission to advise on how best to build the health care workforce and increase the number of nurses, doctors and other professionals to meet our country's needs. Going forward, it will provide $1.5 billion in funding to support the next generation of doctors, nurses and other primary care practitioners -- on top of a $500 million investment from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Health insurance reform will also curb some of the worst insurance industry practices and strengthen consumer protections:

•This year, this bill creates a new, independent appeals process that ensures consumers in new private plans have access to an effective process to appeal decisions made by their insurer.

•This year, discrimination based on salary will be outlawed. New group health plans will be prohibited from establishing any eligibility rules for health care coverage that discriminate in favor of higher-wage employees. (They carve out great benefits for the top people and screw the rest)

•Beginning this fiscal year, this bill provides funding to states to help establish offices of health insurance consumer assistance in order to help individuals in the process of filing complaints or appeals against insurance companies.

•Starting January 1, 2011, insurers in the individual and small group market will be required to spend 80 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Insurers in the large group market will be required to spend 85 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Any insurers who don't meet those thresholds will be required to provide rebates to their policyholders.

•Starting in 2011, this bill helps states require insurance companies to submit justification for requested premium increases. Any company with excessive or unjustified premium increases may not be able to participate in the new health insurance exchanges.

Reform immediately begins to lower health care costs for American families and small businesses:

•This year, small businesses that choose to offer coverage will begin to receive tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help make employee coverage more affordable. (Small businesses with less than 50 employees are NOT required to insure their workers)

•This year, new private plans will be required to provide free preventive care: no co-payments and no deductibles for preventive services. And beginning January 1, 2011, Medicare will do the same.

•This year, this bill will provide help for early retirees by creating a temporary re-insurance program to help offset the costs of expensive premiums for employers and retirees age 55-64.

•This year, this bill starts to close the Medicare Part D 'donut hole' by providing a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the gap in prescription drug coverage. And beginning in 2011, the bill institutes a 50% discount on prescription drugs in the 'donut hole.'

THIS YEAR..

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

FORCES IT'S CITIZENS

(we're supposed to be the bosses, not them)

TO BUY A PRODUCT

WHETHER IT WANTS IT

OR NOT.

Where's the Constitution now?

Edited March 24, 2010 by Rev.Reverence

[n0Mad]

As for Jobs, he passed a bill last year. He was still a pussy last year, so he didn't do it along the Keynesian model, which he should've.

The GOP would've hated him no matter what, so why not go all the way?

That was Bush's philosophy, and in retrospect, I'm starting to respect it.

I want a T-shirt that says:

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't, so you might as well do. That way, you've at least done something." -the eternal

[candyman]

I worry that you've been poisoned by the liberal activist machine in Madison, WI. I had the same when I lived in a college town.

I'm a fervent Zionist and I thought everyone was a Palestinian freedom fighter.

I don't know anyone that hasn't commented on his performance.

He's been tauting this plan forever, playing kissy games with Maine republicans when, in the end, the GOP and Dems are more polarized and ideologically partisan than anytime in history.

I'm pleased to see over the past couple weeks Obama finally growing a pair and acting like a leader.

(Bush may have stunk, but no one can argue he was a leader. When he wanted something done, he got it done)

My list is not full of pie in the sky claims.

They're provisions fleshed out in detail in the bill.

Once the 5000 constitutional protests go away they may actually go into law.

As for Jobs, he passed a bill last year. He was still a pussy last year, so he didn't do it along the Keynesian model, which he should've.

The GOP would've hated him no matter what, so why not go all the way?

That was Bush's philosophy, and in retrospect, I'm starting to respect it.

There is more work to be done, and it remains to be seen if the bill will get reconciled with the Senate with all those provisions intact.

But I sure hope so

---------

Trust me I can see your side.

We have completely opposite philosophies here.

You both view this as wasteful spending that doesn't target what it needs to.

And I may be wrong and this may not work.

But the 800 lb elephant in the room is that the GOP leadership didn't give a g-d damn about health care reform until Obama put it on the table, and didn't take a second to work on it despite having all the branches under their control for several years

Now it's the Dems turn.

From everything I've seen, it makes sense

For all our sakes, and our health I sure hope I'm right.

(edited so I could hit spellcheck)

Yes Madison can have that effect on you. And to tell you the truth I was one of the very few people in class that actually supported what Israel was doing over there...everyone else said they were starting all the trouble...but that is for another thread.

I would like to say that I would like to see some reform in the area of health care and in other areas. However I don't believe that this is the right course of action. I do hope that is this really passes that it will do some good. I also feel like even though we would like it right now because fast food owns us that something like this SHOULD take forever to iron out. We are talking about a huge chunk of something that is very important to the lives of many people and in my opinion it should take a couple years to get it right. Hopefully if it passes the next few years aren't spent perfecting it...not a huge "we won" party by the Dems.

It is only wasteful spending if it missed the target or hits the wrong one...I will remain skeptical until stuff works out.

So far I can say that this could go 3 ways although more are possible. The Dems could be right and everything will get better. The Reps could be right and this will make things worse. And the one I believe will happen is we will have slightly similar shit, different day and leadership. Usually we jump from one pile of poop into another that we think will be better.

[the eternal]

Not on purpose....that's a tough sell.

I saw a state government rep from Massachusetts doing a tv interview the other day, he said if this gets implemented,

the US will be bankrupt within 4 yrs time.

If this is sooo good, why are NONE of the Democrats signing on for it????

Oh and Yes it DOES fund abortions; Obama's executive order doesn't mean shit, legally.

37 states are filing lawsuits against the government on grounds of Unconstitutionality.

This is a bad bill, and will hopefully get shot down.

They did sign on. It wouldn't have passed otherwise.

The ones that didn't are nervous because they are either Freshman or they are conservative Democrats in traditionally Rep. areas, and were worried that the results wouldn't be evident enough in time.

I would love to think the Dems planned it and I know it's a tough sell, but frankly I don't think they're that smart.

Besides, it would have been much more advantageous for the bill to pass a year ago so we could have a year of saying

"Look at how good this has been"

I'm sorry but I think the whole funding abortions thing is a scare tactic used by the GOP who are quite frankly desperate to get this killed. If this bill gets killed, the midterms'll be brutal for the democrats and Obama doesn't get re-elected.

The Repubs are so hungry to stop this bill they can taste its demise.

ABORTION--

You have Catholic hospitals across the country and vigilantly pro-life Congressmen like Bart Stupak of MI signing on, which I strongly doubt they'd do if it funded abortions.

Now I know the talk show hosts are throwing out everything right now. I just can't put on an equal plain---a spokesperson for the party that has everything to gain with killing this bill vs. a Congressman who believes eternal salvation rests on preventing abortions who then went ahead and voted for it.

If necessary I can find the documentation to prove this out.

I still live in my parents home but they cannot claim me as a dependent since I get state assistance benefits. Which might make me look like a hypocrite for my beliefs and the fact I get state assistance, but with my families current situation I'm just using any resource I can.

You have to do what you have to do. No one should judge you based on that.

THIS YEAR..

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

FORCES IT'S CITIZENS

(we're supposed to be the bosses, not them)

TO BUY A PRODUCT

WHETHER IT WANTS IT

OR NOT.

Where's the Constitution now?

I resized it a bit because I quoted so many people here.

That's a very good question.

First of all, it's a service, not a product.

It is a service that has saved the lives of those who had it, and ensured an early grave for those who were forced to go without

And as the bosses in a republic, we elect our leaders to serve the greater good.

It is their job to run this country so we can do our job to make this country great.

And if we don't like the job they've done, we can vote them out.

But back to your question, where is the Constitution?

The constitution is in the EXACT same place it was in 1935, against protests that we were going to become a fascist state, when Social Security was passed.

And I am PROUD to have SS tax taken out of my check, because I know that because of that social safety net provision,

my Grandma is able to eat.

And the Constitution is in the EXACT same place as it was in 1956, when it was expanded in order to create the Social Security disability program.

AND due to that, a few cents of my tax money go to the people on disability who depend on it to live.

And the Constitution is in the EXACT same place as it was in 1965, when against the vigilant protest of the leader of the modern conservative movement, a man who deserves everyone's respect, if not for policy, than for how he shaped national discourse, Ronald Reagan, who warned this great nation was going to become a communist state when Medicare and Medicaid was passed.

And I am proud to have taxes taken out of my check, because I know that although we share nothing in common with Marx and Engels or Chairman Mao, that because of that bill, those too young to speak up and those too old to protest will have good sound government health insurance.

That's right! Medicare, the health coverage EVERY politician of EVERY political stripe cries about saving is a

GOVERNMENT RUN-ENTITY!!!

Every American is worth giving a chance.

And I believe in the philosophy of Tikun Olam, repairing the world

And we can't make the world better if people are starving because they are disabled and can't work and have no income,

or sick and can't get better, because they can't afford to both eat and buy their medicine.

Or dying because they were denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition and now can't afford their life-saving surgery.

AND I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT FEELS THIS WAY!

The VAST majority of Americans feel as I do, that we ARE our brother's keeper.

That it IS the government's privilege and responsibility to help those in the most need.

That it is NOT socialism to keep people from starving or dying.

And I know this, because throughout history, despite cries of socialism or fascism or totalitarianism, that Americans of all stripes, all races, all religions, all political persuasions overwhelmingly supported.-----

Social Security

Disability

Medicare

Medicaid

BUT THAT WAS A DIFFERENT TIME

There wasn't the same level of fear-mongering that there is today.

There wasn't the same level of partisanship that there is today.

You had blue blood moderate Republicans and conservative Dixiecrats and all in between.

And discourse was welcomed not vilified.

And there is so much slander and misinformation, it's hard to wade through the muck and lies to know what is true and what this bill will mean in the end.

AND EVEN I HAVE MY DOUBTS

And I don't know if this will go far enough.

And I don't know if this will save us money on our premiums.

And I don't know exactly how many millions of people will end up with coverage in the end

BUT I can say with certainty, that IF it does pass, there WILL be people that will get the treatment they need,

the medicine they need, the preventive care that just months prior would not be able to.

And if an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure, IMAGINE how many millions of dollars WE, THE TAXPAYERS will save in emergency room visits and our fellow man will save in pain, excruciating pain that they endured until an emergency room visit WE PAY FOR was required.

And to me, that alone makes this bill worthwhile

He who saves a single life, saves the entire world. ~Talmud

PS.

I want a T-shirt that says:

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't, so you might as well do. That way, you've at least done something." -the eternal

I love you

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

I find the whole thing confusing personally. Like they're trying to make it so much more complicated and harder to understand than it needs to be, and that in good cause, none the less is still heading in the wrong direction than intended.

I do feel that everyone deserves health care, yes you're gonna have the dirtbags that get fucked up from sharing needles and take advantage, but that's already going on right now. One of the biggest drugs being sold out there are medical drugs such as vicodin.

I just don't understand, they want so hard to make an improvement, yet it's looking like the pointless squabbling is getting it set up to be worse than what we currently have.

I feel in principal, some things need to be a social effort, like firefighting, police forces, military, education, and medical. Most of firefighting now is volunteer work, police are underpaid, military is over deployed, education is on it's death bed now, and the medical system we have is just as bad as canada's. There's other countries, like England and Germany that have such awesome health care. And they set it up to work!!

If you ask me, it won't work because our government is already wayyy too backwards. Spending loads of money on stuff that's absolutely pointless (like the war on drugs (mainly pot) other drugs should be illeagle imo) and this constant war with iraq, afganistan, and the ever present iran scare of nukes. How about stop wasting so much money on this crap, and start investing it towards things that matter, like on everything i listed above. It would bring some quality back to these public services as well as let the additon to medical care be a success!

Just to me, throwing a big fearful tempertantrum about this isn't helping matters, in principal it's like saying ok lets get rid of public education, are private schools really a better alternative? Only ones i seen are the religeous ones and eh.. imo.. no... disband the police force and have paid contractors play by their own rules instead of playing by the rules they are meant to enforce? What about our military, just do contracted mercenaries like BLACKWATER??

Sadly, it could be a wonderful improvement, but due to the usual clusterfuck that happenes in politics, they're going to most likely send this great idea of potential down the shitter.

[taysteewonderbunny]

I find it interesting that it has a provision for people to be fined around 700 bucks for not having health insurance, unless you're poor.

However, I've not been able to find out what the bill's definition of "poor" is.

And a tax hike for tanning? Weird.

Poor = federal poverty level.

Yes, a tax hike on tanning.

My source.

Health Care Reform Bill Summary: A Look At What's in the Bill

Updated March 23, 5 p.m. ET

By CBS News Capitol Hill Producers Jill Jackson and John Nolen

Cost:

• $940 billion over ten years.

Deficit:

• Would reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the first ten years. That is an updated CBO estimate. Their first preliminary estimate said it would reduce the deficit by $130 billion over ten years. Would reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion dollars in the second ten years.

(Note added by taystee: the cost and deficit figures are confusing, I know. What they mean is that though the program itself is expected to cost $940 billion over ten years, the program is expected to replace other costlier programs resulting in a reduction of the deficit overall.)

Coverage:

• Would expand coverage to 32 million Americans who are currently uninsured.

Health Insurance Exchanges:

• The uninsured and self-employed would be able to purchase insurance through state-based exchanges with subsidies available to individuals and families with income between the 133 percent and 400 percent of poverty level.

(Another note from taystee: this means that if your income is above 400% poverty level--no dice; you must buy health insurance and you will not be receiving a subsidy. However, those with income levels UNDER 133% poverty level will not be required to buy health insurance (and may be eligible for Medicaid type programs). The most of us (those who are not rich, but aren't exactly poor either) are supposed to get money from the government (I believe, as it stands, as tax refunds) to help offset the cost of health insurance.)

• Separate exchanges would be created for small businesses to purchase coverage -- effective 2014.
• Funding available to states to establish exchanges within one year of enactment and until January 1, 2015.

Subsidies:

• Individuals and families who make between 100 percent - 400 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) and want to purchase their own health insurance on an exchange are eligible for subsidies. They cannot be eligible for Medicare, Medicaid and cannot be covered by an employer. Eligible buyers receive premium credits and there is a cap for how much they have to contribute to their premiums on a sliding scale.

Federal Poverty Level for family of four is $22,050

(Yet another note from taystee: that means a family of four with an income of $90,000 will still be eligible for a subsidy to offset the cost of health insurance, albeit a smaller one than those who have less would receive.)

Paying for the Plan:

• Medicare Payroll tax on investment income -- Starting in 2012, the Medicare Payroll Tax will be expanded to include unearned income. That will be a 3.8 percent tax on investment income for families making more than $250,000 per year ($200,000 for individuals).

[still another taystee tidbit: currently rich people do NOT pay any social security or medicare payroll taxes on income earned over a quarter million.]

• Excise Tax -- Beginning in 2018, insurance companies will pay a 40 percent excise tax on so-called "Cadillac" high-end insurance plans worth over $27,500 for families ($10,200 for individuals). Dental and vision plans are exempt and will not be counted in the total cost of a family's plan.
• Tanning Tax -- 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning services.

(Note from taystee: okay, I think the tanning tax is a bad idea, unless they plan on killing the industry, which I don't think is too terrible an idea except that right now, do we want anyone else out of work? Simple economics shows that in any industry that is highly elastic, a tax greatly reduces sales. I hope they aren't trying to make much money from this. The plan SHOULD help reduce the number of skin cancers, though. And this kind of ugly.)

Medicare:

• Closes the Medicare prescription drug "donut hole" by 2020. Seniors who hit the donut hole by 2010 will receive a $250 rebate.
• Beginning in 2011, seniors in the gap will receive a 50 percent discount on brand name drugs. The bill also includes $500 billion in Medicare cuts over the next decade.

Medicaid:

• Expands Medicaid to include 133 percent of federal poverty level which is $29,327 for a family of four.
• Requires states to expand Medicaid to include childless adults starting in 2014.
• Federal Government pays 100 percent of costs for covering newly eligible individuals through 2016.
• Illegal immigrants are not eligible for Medicaid.

Insurance Reforms:

• Six months after enactment, insurance companies could no longer deny children coverage based on a preexisting condition.
• Starting in 2014, insurance companies cannot deny coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions.
• Insurance companies must allow children to stay on their parents' insurance plans until age 26.

Abortion:

• The bill segregates private insurance premium funds from taxpayer funds. Individuals would have to pay for abortion coverage by making two separate payments, private funds would have to be kept in a separate account from federal and taxpayer funds.
• No health care plan would be required to offer abortion coverage. States could pass legislation choosing to opt out of offering abortion coverage through the exchange.

**Separately, anti-abortion Democrats worked out language with the White House on an executive order that would state that no federal funds can be used to pay for abortions except in the case of rape, incest or health of the mother.

Edited March 25, 2010 by taysteewonderbunny

[KatRN05]

The government can't even run the post office correctly, do they really think they can run health-care? Taxing tanning services? Strange idea, I think. Why tanning? The legislation in regards to abortion, I agree with. Again, this is going to be a very big wait and see deal.

Edited March 25, 2010 by KatRN05

[KatRN05]

"[still another taystee tidbit: currently rich people do NOT pay any social security or medicare payroll taxes on income earned over a quarter million.]"

Are ya serious?

Edited March 25, 2010 by KatRN05

[TitsMcGee]

Poor = federal poverty level.

Yes, a tax hike on tanning.

My source.

I'd just like to point out that Medicaid already covers childless adults, it's called the Adult Medical Program. You just have to get in during open enrollment, which should be coming up here shortly.

[the eternal]

TWB--you're awesome!

Thank you for finding a source that so clearly lays everything out.

And proving COTN right. It DOES allow for abortion---

if the woman was raped by her friend,

raped by her father,

or could die if she didn't get an abortion.

I think those are pretty damn good exceptions. I'd justify them.

And look at all the extensions on what income level people are eligible to get coverage at.

From the outset, it appears that it's not so much going to lower our health premiums,

but rather expand who qualifies for coverage in the first place.

One thing the GOP leaders undoubtedly hate is that it is largely funded by a small tax on investment income on those earning OVER $250K/yr!

Investment income! That's not even their job. It's the SECOND paycheck they get from the dividends of investing all that extra money that they don't know what to do with.

Boohoo!

Jenny can't get a new Porsche for her super sweet 16 at the Gross Pointe Yacht Club, so that way Roger, the guy who cleans the galley can get affordable health care for him an his family.

Cry me a river.

Here's the only thing that I'm not on board with.

"It would reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the first ten years. That is an updated CBO estimate. Their first preliminary estimate said it would reduce the deficit by $130 billion over ten years. Would reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion dollars in the second ten years."

I do believe that if there's a clause that says abortion isn't federally funded that abortion isn't federally funded.

What I'm not sure of is how the CBO came to the estimate, and more importantly, if that will actually happen once the program gets going.

In other words, the actual provisions will be there, but since we're working with private insurers and people's health care costs can go up and down, how can anyone really say they know exactly how much it's going to cost, or save, at this point?

STILL, a health care plan, that has as its goal, self-sufficiency and even debt reduction, is pretty impressive.

Iraq and Afghanistan have gone over $1 trillion and I can't say for absolute certainty all the benefits we reaped there.

It certainly hasn't been economic and I guarantee we're never gonna see a dime back of that money.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I have only a few things to say.

This bill is the exact bill that the Senate passed last year. What is being debated in the Senate is the fix it bill the House passed on Sunday. Thier going to make changes and it's going to go back to the house until it dies.

The law DOES allow for abortions to be paid for with Federal (Our) moneys. Stupack (sp) only voted yes AFTER Obama promised to use a signing statement baring Federal funds to be used for abortions with the exceptions of Rape, Incest and Extreme dangure to the mother. As a side, this is another thing Obama promised her wouldnever do; fundimentaly change a law with a signing statement. A signing statement does not change the law, it only directs people to not enforce it... but has no teeth to back up that order. (Michigan did get 3 new Airports out of the deal though)

According to the CBO and every independant analisys I can find, this does nothing to lower costs. It has a pretty good chance of raising premiums. It is also NOT going to lower the deficit as so claimed by Obama. The only way it does what Obama claims is if you look at only the main bill and ingore the fix it bill. The fix it bill contains the plug for the medicaid donut hole and the cost of the plug makes the whole bill add 56 BILLION to the deficit. Please, read the whole CBO report, not just the tlaking points.

Follow the money. Ignore the adds on TV from the insurance lobby and the pharma companys. Look and find where they really spent their money. Why did thier stocks jump so much on Monday? Why are they still climbing?

and in closing... I can't decide if I want to say 5th Column or Manchurian Canidate.

[Reaper]

I don't see why they can't include other options to include like cross-state insurance bartering, TORT reform, as well as the dems side of this bill. Why not make it a super-bill that takes the best of both worlds? I know for one thing, charging me a "fine" for not opting health insurance is not my idea of a good bill. So far I have been without insurance for a long time. Anytime I needed to go to the hospital, I was able to pay for it in a lump sum, or in payments. As long as I HAVE A JOB, I can keep this up, and better yet with a job that offers health coverage. Seeing as the economy is seriously lacking in jobs, I don't see how passing health care will help right now. Seems an endless chasing of the tail maneuver.

I say its great to have children covered in this health care bill, but don't mandate it on everyone just so you can cover the bill. But then, I guess this is what Obama was talking about when he explained to Joe the Plumber, "..spreading the wealth around..." was what he planned to do. Getting exactly what he said.

I just hope that they can somehow keep the irresponsible bums out there from abusing my taxpayer money. There are a lot out there who give up on everything and soak up what they can from unemployment, health care, or any other avenue they have to get what they can before going on the side of the street panhandling. Personally, I have too much respect for myself to get down to that level and would starve before asking people to pity me. But if we can't get job growth in this country, the dividing line between the rich and poor is going to be significant. I just think that they need to do something about jobs before healthcare.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Reaper

[LittleMissLuckyCunt (1)]

I was debating with this on facebook a few days ago. Got the best comment ever out of it.

"a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a president who also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his ......taxes, to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke."

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

You missed the part about signed by a President who's Doctor thinks he drinks too much.

[Rev.Reverence]

First of all, it's a service, not a product.

Get a dictionary.

Main Entry: prod·uct

Pronunciation: \ˈprä-(ˌ)dəkt\

Function: noun

Etymology: in sense 1, from Middle English, from Medieval Latin productum, from Latin, something produced, from neuter of productus, past participle of producere; in other senses, from Latin productum

Date: 15th century

1 : the number or expression resulting from the multiplication together of two or more numbers or expressions

2 a (1) : something produced; especially : commodity 1 (2) : something (as a service) that is marketed or sold as a commodity b : something resulting from or necessarily following from a set of conditions <a product of his environment>

3 : the amount, quantity, or total produced

4 : conjunction 5

They help us to understand each other when communicating.

Also; please, stop ranting at me, like I'm against healthcare....I am only against being FORCED, to purchase a product..& a service, is a product!

[phee]

You missed the part about signed by a President who's Doctor thinks he drinks too much.

LOL

[KatRN05]

Iraq and Afghanistan have gone over $1 trillion and I can't say for absolute certainty all the benefits we reaped there.

It certainly hasn't been economic and I guarantee we're never gonna see a dime back of that money.

As far as I am concerned, both countries are lost causes. The Taliban is getting stronger again. The human rights situation sure as hell has not changed over in either country. The Iraq government is corrupt. Insurgents are coming in from Iran and who knows from where else and fucking everything up in Iraq. I wish Obama would just nut-up and pull our troops out but I doubt that will happen any time soon. So in the meantime, we have to keep paying to help supply our troops over there.

Edited March 25, 2010 by KatRN05

[Reaper]

I was debating with this on facebook a few days ago. Got the best comment ever out of it.

"a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a president who also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his ......taxes, to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke."

LOL and damn, but it only makes sense!