Let me count the idiots, Charley can't figure out his taxes or so he says, Reid can't figure out what day it is most of the time, Pelosi has her nose so far up Obama's rear she can't see the light of day, Biden can't even figure out how to control what comes out of his cake hole, and last but not least Obama can't figure out how to lead.

The punjab: Wish I could vote for you twice on that one.

Jason M. I promise you the "takes one to know one" cliche doesn't apply here. Members of one political party can very accurately spot another.

Talk about a convoluted "answer" in this "news story". I suspect the reality is it is going to be at least double the original numbers presented to Congress and was voted in before it's all said and done.

To be honest? I suspect many democrats in DC actually hope the Supreme Court will rule against the bill or enough parts of the bill as to render it null and void, so they can have a way out of the stupidest thing ever passed into law in recent history and so they can sleep better at night, and save face.

If you think you can make better decisions for the masses in this world of massive change and wide spectrum of needs and priorities, you must be an idiot.

Therein lies a HUGE problem.

Why the hell is anyone making decisions for "the masses"?

"The Masses" should be making decisions for themselves.

The reason there is a "wide spectrum of needs and priorities" is because the federal government has seen fit the last 20 years or so to provide solutions to not yet developed problems and expand solutions of prior "problems". Furthermore, the government has spent years and trillions of dollars insuring that it MUST be thought of as the answer to problems instead of the cause of the problems that it is in reality.

The human individual is the most resourceful, productive, and effective being on the planet if left to his/her own devices and allowed to take care of himself and can remain unimpeded and unregulated.

Well said @John-424417

the health care costs , projected over the next 10 years are based at almost full employment, (3% unemployed), inflation at less than 1% per year, and a static population growth; all these are impossible to obtain, many of the best actuary's are predicting a real cost over the 10 year period of 2.1-2.7 trillion dollars, the budget for the next 10 years for Obama care is is only 960 billion, how on earth are they going to make up the difference ?

Where oh where are all those declaring, "The CBO ran the numbers and Obamacare willl be paid for!"

There is a lot of words that can describe the bastards in this picture (of which I see no one in the picture that is exempted from that description). The Punjab of Java Pour (post #1) accurately described these morons by calling them "idiots"! Idiots they definitely are!

Idiots, maybe not. But weasels, definitely.

Well, when Obama, Lord of the Idiots and Master of the New Barak Math, claims he can save a family $8000 a year on their $3000 a year gas expenses, anyone can clearly see that all 'estimates' of the costs for ObamaCare are purely fiction.

Hey DB that was a great socialist statement, the only problem is you made it to a society of free people. Free people make their own decisions and the sooner you and the opressors in the picture figure that out the better off you will be. And don't think for once that you or the people in the picture will stand between this great society and freedom because you won't, get it.

Let me make sure I understand this article. Because of higher than expected unemployment, the cost of Obamacare will be LOWER because more people will be eligible for Medicaid? And apparently no one cares about the extra costs with more people being eligible for Medicaid? I thought the Medicaid budget was being cut to help pay for Obamacare?

Everyone should know by now that Obamacare is going to be more expensive than originally thought, and will serve to be the single largest cost shifting mechanism from the private sector to the backs of taxpayers in our nations history.

Punjab, were the Republicans in Congress who created the model for the ACA also idiots?

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

The estimated gross cost of providing coverage to uninsured people will be a little higher than the CBO predicted a year ago but the net cost will be a little lower than in the CBO’s previous estimate.

Article author, lets cut all the bull @!$%# and post the real numbers. Here is the report.

http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-13-Coverage%20Estimates.pdf

Two core provisions of the law do not take effect until 2014: expanded Medicare eligibility for the poor and the insurance subsidies for middle-income people. And the tax on high-cost so-called “Cadillac” health insurance plans does not start until 2018.

The increase to the cost of ACA is just to provide the service, the increase does not include the start up cost for getting the ACA off the ground and running.

Most excellent comment. They are all a bunch of hideous embarrassments to the United States.

Mark Twain once referred to three kinds of lies ....... "Lies, damned lies and statistics".

With Obamacare the Democrats managed to use all three of them in ramming through this hor$e$hit legislation. Our federal government already has serious issues in funding Medicare and Social Security. So, what's there answer ? We must have more government so we can f — — — it up even worse !

Hurry November ! We must rid our country of this total financial moron who has yet to present a realistis budget proposal as he pushes our country to the brink of bankruptcy. Obama must be defeated.

.......and Republicans have no plan to replace the affordable health care law. So, they really have nothing to bitch about.

To answer your repeaded question, Eric, the plan is to repeal the bill and replace it with . . . the absence of the bill. This is a matter for the states to legislate if their citizens are so inclined, not the federal government. And you may want to check your logic. If you defecate in my living room, am I not entitled to complain about it unless I have a plan to not only remove the feces (the Republican repeal initiative) but also replace it with a different, somehow less fragrant specimen?

@factcheckero, then the Republican party has lied to America. They have said they will repeal it and replace it. If they fail to replace it they will have lied to the American people.

The US could benefit from Universal Health care. It will end up saving lots of money. Other countries do it cheaper and better with Universal coverage. The US ranks 37th in the world.

If the Health care reform is so good why does it Exempt You, Michelle Obama, Congress, Senators and

their Families. Page 114 Line 22 ???????????????????????????

I work in health care and I deal with costs and insurance. As a provider and consumer I can tell you that 95% of the people in this country are NOT capable of even managing their own healthcare let alone insurance coverage. Obamacare is a good step forward but it needs a public option to get costs under control. If Obamacare gets repealed then republicans need to repeal EMTALA too. If you're too stupid to get adequate health care coverage and you can't pay upfront then you die.

Eric - Your comments get minimal vote up - that should tell you something.

Noah - That is all a part of evolution...

The repugnicant plan to do nothing about healthcare is not acceptable !!!

Medicare 4 for all..........

total bs ---- the stock market has nothing to do with this. ---- one or two stocks may be affected by policies, but that is all ---- not the stock market in general.

Ronpal, if you don't think the stock market is influenced by politics, you don't pay enough attention to the stock market.

Obama has already said that the market is out of his control so you can't now start giving him credit for any gains.

it is affected by politics, but not in the long term --- i have computer-related stocks --- i don't buy or sell just because some politician says something. ----- what affects the stock market day to day are people like my brother, who own a 1000 shares of some stock, and see a chance to make a 2 or 3 cent profit per share. ---- then they wait until it drops a little, and start all over again.

"bushman"....talk about a racial slur... Obama was never in the bush.....oh, my bad.

lol

The reason the stock market continues up is because of the continual influx of 401K money. The money has to go somewhere and the more dollars that chase any product, more that product can command in value. This could set us up for another bubble burst at some point, unless thing are really expanding economically.

leroy ---- not only can they NOT put you in prison for non-payment, they cannot even charge you interest on that non-payment ---- all they can do is send you a bill, and at worst , maybe have it deducted from your wages. ----- and if you are healthy person, like me, and simply don't want it, you can pay a $600 a year tax instead of $3600 per year premiums.

You have absolutely no clue! Just think about it, the Fed "prints" $50 trillion and hands it out to the Wall Street banksters and the stock market goes up, while over volume drops like a rock. The stock market has gone up, because of the trillions of new dollars available to those "playing" the market. There has been no value added at all!

The reason the cost of ObamaCare keeps rising is simple, we had to pass it first so everyone could find out what was in it. Written by the Democrats behind closed doors at secret locations by the most transparent administration of all time. Hey, we are borrowing over a trillion a year and printing money out of thin air, so whats another couple trillion or so for a healthcare law nobody wanted? We can probably afford it, after all we haven't even tapped into the the 23rd century yet.

Sorry Merrill - you are way off.

The stock market is riding a new free money party, courtesy of Obama. The prime rate has been 3.25% forever and we still have an anemic 1% growth rate. When Obama's bills come due with higher inflation we all will be screwed. You will dream of the old days with $4.00 per gallon gas.

The reason the cost keeps going up, $2.5 trillion so far, is 1) Obama Pelosi, Reid all lied, 2) The $900 billion in ten years was based upon five years costs over ten years. It was a scam. He lied. They lied and they will be done in Nov....Write it down.

Rick-3416939

I could have sworn that bill was posted weeks in advance of the vote. You didn't read it?

You probably still haven't. Here...

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/

John-2032532, what scam? Sounds very interesting. So they lied to us? You do realize the CBO that is quoted in the article is the same CBO that gave us the first figures, right?

Besides, deficits don't matter, ask Cheney.

"The full accounting of the bill is $2.6 trillion. That's a fair and accurate analysis of what the bill would cost, according to CBO,"

Obamacare is going to crush the economy in 2014... a farewell gift from dictator B.O.

U.S. will pay for half of all health care costs by 2020 - July 28, 2011

"Total health care spending is expected to nearly double to $4.6 trillion in 2020, from $2.6 trillion in 2010.

Health care spending per capita is forecast to increase to $13,708 in 2020 from $8,327 in 2010, the report said.

By 2020, nearly 30 million additional people are expected to have health insurance because of reform.

Over the 10-year period, the report showed that the biggest annual jump in health care spending will happen in 2014 when health reform is fully implemented.

CMS estimates that in 2014 about 23 million uninsured consumers will gain access to health insurance, mainly through government programs such as Medicaid and through the creation of federal and state-funded health insurance exchanges.

As a result, the government expects Medicaid spending to surge 20% in 2014 and private health insurance spending to increase 9.4%.

Norwalk said the estimated sharp surge in Medicaid spending just in one year, is very concerning given that states are already struggling with their budgets.

As millions more gain access to health insurance, the government expects spending on prescription drugs, physician and hospital services to increase as well.

CMS expects prescription drug spending to jump by 10.7% in 2014 and to account for 11% of national health spending by 2020. Spending on physician and clinical services is forecast to rise by 8.9% by 2014, representing 19% of overall health care spending."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spending_forecast/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=hp_bn3

P.S. Keep in mind these are even the government released numbers, the reality will be much worse.

pjam09

I'm missing the point. If you are trying to convince me that everyone in the medical field will have a huge windfall of money, I don't see the argument.

If you're saying that the tax payers are going to pay more taxes, I've missed the detail.

If you're complaining that 23 million more Americans will have access to health insurance, I've missed the problem.

I'm missing the "much worse" part. A human life is priceless. If it saves some, what does the "cost" matter? What could possibly more "worse" than dying?

If you're trying to tell me that healthcare reform was needed, I get that.

Bosslimo,

Not sure how hard it was for you to understand.

Obamacare is not healthcare, it is government requiring you to buy health insurance, or pay a fine, or etc. If you are low on funds you would be put on a State 50% and Federal 50 % Medicaid (which is why states are screaming hey we are broke cannot afford it). One only has to look at Medicare and Medicaid to see a problem with expanding this, Doctors are refusing it at ever increasing numbers due to low and slow pay.

Another problem with this is some companies that were carring health insurance see the $1000 fine as a lot cheaper than $12,000 insurance the pay for healthcare and are planning to drop coverage. Many big names have stated this infact even as it was being written up many were asking to be let off the hook.

Fact that not a single politician elect to change their insurance to it speaks for itself.

If you have Crap for data and add more crap it will still equal crap.

Glad we had to sign it before the democraps could read it. Now repeal it and trash it.

yeppers and no one seems to remember the over 1,200 waivers given to unions, large corporations and states so that they wouldn't go bankrupt attempting to meet the requirements. Ostensibly the waivers were granted so that said entities could have time to come into compliance with the new laws. The non-favored groups not being granted waivers will have to take it in the shorts.

Interesting how all of this is slated to happen in 2014. After the elections. No time to blame Obama after the deed is done, if, God forbid, he gets re-elected, then Molly-bar-the-door because he can't borrow or tax or spend fast enough to stop the hemorrhaging of money. Fiat money. The numbers were phoney numbers, pulled out of thin air and attached to a 2,300 page tome that no one could really understand or were given the opportunity to read before it's enactment. Half a trillion was pulled from Medicare to cover Obamacare, once again, ostensibly to cover the costs for the companies and union pensions. Public sector pensions. Said money was supposed to last for several years and is now almost gone.

It made no sense, the insurance companies and big pharma (the bad guys) will make out like bandits and the government will bankrupt taxpayers to pay for ever increasing costs and no end in sight.

Get ready for this boondoggle to cost well in excess of double what these idiots current claim it will. When Obama, Lord of the Idiots and Master of the New Barak Math, claims he can save a family $8000 a year on their $3000 a year gas expenses, anyone can clearly see that all 'estimates' of the costs for ObamaCare are purely fiction.

The stock market? ROFL.

The reason the price of Obamacare continues to rise is because it was designed that way. To sell the bill to the American people the Democrats intentionally back loaded the bill so that while revenues started upon it's passage, the costs don't kick in until 2014. This is why the 10-year cost continues to rise. Every year we get closer 2014, one of these all revenue, cost-free years falls out of the estimate and the CBO gets closer to the actual cost of the bill. By 2014 the 10-year cost will be accurate at about 2.5 trillion dollars and yes, that equals a staggering 250 billion dollars a year.

SI

alienjon-819068

Another problem with this is some companies that were carring health insurance see the $1000 fine as a lot cheaper than $12,000 insurance the pay for healthcare and are planning to drop coverage. Many big names have stated this infact even as it was being written up many were asking to be let off the hook.

Any company dropping health insurance on its employee's will see a mass exodus of their talent. Period.

When Obama 'sold' this fiasco to the public, his cost estimate was $940 Billion.

The latest CBO cost estimate is $1.76 TRILLION, a cost increase of $836 Billion. You won't see THAT reported by Obama's favorite network - NBC

Let's see now how Obama's doing;

Stimulus Bill (ineffective) Cost = $862 Billion.

Obamacare Cost = $1,760 Billion.

The National Debt for today has increased from FY 2008 ($9.986 Trillion) to $15.524 Trillion in only 3.5 years.

Net jobs since he took office = 2,000,000 jobs LOST.

Unemployment Rate = 8.3%, an increase from when he was elected (6.5% for Oct. 2008) of almost 2%.

The 'recovery' is almost 3 years old, yet we are still waiting.

Gasoline prices increased from when he took office ($1.84/Gal) to almost $5 per gallon.

We're losing the war in Afghanistan, and lost a friendly Egypt to radicals.

By all reasonable measures - OBAMA IS A HUGE FAILURE. Of course, he's become quite good at finding someone else to 'blame'.

Any company dropping health insurance on its employee's will see a mass exodus of their talent. Period.

Not if most companies are doing it, which they will.

The Canadian Patients’ Remedy for Health Care: Go to America!

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/09/the-canadian-patients%E2%80%99-remedy-for-health-care-go-to-america/

One common assertion among the left is that other industrialized nations, such as Canada, achieved great success in health care within their collectivist framework. This, then, begs the question: why is the head of an east coast Canadian province coming to the United States for medical treatment?

ACA, an invention of the (hypocritical) Republican Party:

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

ronpal -

Not so fast. For years I listened to the Democrats scream and whine about corporate greed, whose executives steal from the American people, and take advantage of employees in order to drive up their stock prices. The stock market was evil. It was unfair because poor people couldn't participate. When the stock market was high when Bush was President, that was proof that the Republicans were corrupt and favored big business over the American people.

So which is it? Is the stock market bad, or not? Are Democrats equally corrupt because the stock market is high?

in an effort and show of respect to all of those who support president
obama all business leaders should consider when reducing their work force to
eliminate those that support obama and this administration first.

after all it is unemployment benefits that boost the economy

and it is taxing the rich that boost the economy

and instituting obamacare that boost the economy

by firing or laying of supporters of obama first you are helping them to do
what they really believe in.

new campaign.

FIRE OBAMA SUPPORTERS FIRST.

HELP THEM TO REALIZE THE DREAM.

WHY DO WE NEED OBAMA CARE. LOUISIANA ALREADY HAS FREE HEALTHCARE.

http://www.mclno.org/MCLNO/Menu/Hospital/History/CharitysBeginnings.aspx

The Beginnings of Charity Hospital
Charity Hospital opened it doors at
Chartres and Bienville streets on May 10, 1736. It is the second oldest
continuing public hospital in the United States. The oldest is Bellevue in New
York which opened its doors on March 31, 1736, 1 1/2 months before Charity.
Charity Hospital was initially called Hospital of Saint John or L’Hospital des
Pauvres de la Charite` (Hospital for the Poor). There were a lot of poor in New
Orleans at that time. The original settlers of the colony in 1718 were recruited
from French jails, streets and poorhouses when appeals to other members of
French society failed.

basically if you live in Louisiana and you do not have healthcare you can get free health care at the Charity (LSU MedicalCenter)

if you have a job they base what you pay on what you make. if you have no job it's free and always has been since 1736.

If 23 million people are added to the HCA, good we will be saving lives. Regardless of how the GOPRWNJ"s spin/lie complain about the cost of it. What about the cost of a human life? If we can help those other conutries we can help ourselves as well. Regardless of the cost PERIOD. We must not concentrate on making the HCA more efficient to save lives and money now.

Lets be fair now people, the original estimate on the cost of ObamaCare was the best guess the Democrats could come up with to ensure it would pass. The new estimates still fall within the Democrats margin of error for any appropriations of taxpayer dollars, plus or minus 3000%.

The spend baby spend policies of President Obama sure make Bush's 4 trillion contribution to our national debt look frugal. But mention the Obama spend baby spend policies and you are met with his blame baby blame excuses. Lets face it, this country has no hope for real change from Obama.

health care for our people in our country should be a given. As long as we support other countries, subsidize large corporations, pay for politicians huge pensions and health care, pay for wars with the world, spend money on pork fat projects,let politicians participate in corrupt dealings making them billions of dollars in their careers, pay for a black budget that we do not even know what is in it and what we pay for, make back door deals for money to be spent on wasted projects, continue to watch the local new reports of fraud and waste with in the local government and every other monies spent on crap! Get rid of all these corrupt and fraudulent supported projects that do nothing for the tax payer , but suck us dry. If i am going to be nickled and dimmed i would rather have my money go to save a life right here in the United States.

Solutions - how will buying insurance save lives? It will certainly put money in the pockets of the insurance companies, but it won't result in new advances in medicine or the development of new drugs. Everyone that needs life saving care is able to get it now, they just don't all have to buy insurance.

that is not true about life saving care i am a retired nurse, and i am not saying buying ins is the ans either. I have had pts that could not recieve chemo due to no ins and they made too much for medicaid, i have had transplant pt's that have had to have fund raiser after fundraiser so they could continue to take the meds that keep them alive that are not covered from ins, i have seen ppl turned away without care due to no ins, i have seen people with pre existing conditions go without care. The elderly are not taking meds in order to feed themselves and many many more disturbing situations. We have one of the highest mortality rates in the world unless you are rich.

Solutions539 "If 23 million people are added to the HCA, good we will be saving lives."

You still don't get it, do you.

Obamacare was never about providing health care to people - everyone already had it - 85% of Americans had health insurance (typically through their employer), and the other 15% either paid out of pocket or used hospital emergency rooms and ignored the bills.

It was always about finding someone to PAY for it, and Obamacare is sticking the taxpayers for the latest estimated cost of $1.76 Trillion (up from Obama's original estimate of $940 Billion over 10 years).

Where is the Republican plan to replace the affordable health care law? (*hears crickets chirping*)

honest jo:

The basis for that blog article about Canadians is kinda skewed. Of course people are opting to go to the Mayo Clinic and the Cleveland Clinic, they are the best at what they do and they have a humongous pool of talent that collaborates for specialized and cutting edge treatments. Heck, if I had the need, so would I. If you want the best possible outcome, you go to the best place that can provide it.

And about the waits for a specialist... that's BS, those waits happen here too. I was looking for a dermatologist here in the U.S., it took me 6 tries to find one that would take me in the short term, everyone else had a waiting list of 6 to 8 months. Same thing when I needed an ENT, it was 4 to 6 months at the minimum.

Not only that, but every single Canadian person I've met is pretty happy with their system, and they call that kind of assessment of their system "Propaganda". Of course this is anecdotal evidence based on my personal observation.

We have one of the highest mortality rates in the world unless you are rich.

You mean there are places where people never die? To the best of my knowledge all countries have a 100% mortality rate. Furthermore, I have yet to hear of a person that was able to elude death by being rich.

Interesting how people are beginning to wake up about the reality of Obamacare. Not all, but more now ask questions and actually seem to think about what the costs will really be and the bigger problem of how to pay for it. Raising taxes (ok, fees which are the new term for taxes) is the built in solution. Lots of hidden 'fees' to pay for Obamacare. Not too many are aware of the bank transaction fee. Nor are too many aware of the added tax on properties selling for over a specified amount. Obama's 'investments' (yet another new term for taxation) will start to add up and he can still claim he didn't raise taxes on the middle class. Nope, he just upped their 'investment fees.'

It sounds like all of you idiots here who do not like the individual mandate are a bunch of freeloading socialists. I am so healthy I dont need insurance-- then of course you have to go to the hospital and we the people get charged for it.

And for the morons out there who do not like social legislature, tell that to all of the troops who go to school on the GI bill. You people are so backwards.

tell that to all of the troops who go to school on the GI bill.

Receiving benefits for services rendered is not a socialistic concept - it is based on capitalist principles.

Because the nation's economy and the value of a dollar are constantly shifting, it's typically not a great idea for politicians to lay out a plan running years into the future and then have the audacity to tell the nation exactly what those next 10-12 years will end up costing us.

I'd doubt there's been many decade-long plans that ending up costing the taxpayers less than advertised. Heck...a town rarely builds a school and a state rarely builds a highway that doesn't end up costing more than was originally described.

And some folks actually held their noses and bought the healthcare package a young and inexperienced president with a lot of gab but no grip, had sold them on.

We have a decade of financial Pandora's Boxes waiting to be opened !

Marshal 2837579 - You are wrong on Oct 12 2007 the Dow Jowns was14093.It was also Clinton that help the banks make bad loans to people not Bush. Obamacare is going to ruin this country. But don't let the facts get in your way of you spreading your propaganda about your president. Just saying it doesn't make it so.

But the stock market added over 200 pts yesterday. It was already at all time obama highs. Challenging all time stock market highs when the bushman was robo signing those bad home loans. New market highs would not be happening w/o the cost controls of obamacare.

http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/charts?symbol=$US:INDU#symbol=$INDU&event=&BB=off&CCI=off&EMA=off&MACD=off&MFI=off&PSAR=off&RSI=off&SMA=off&FSO=off&SSO=off&Volume=off&period=10y&linetype=Line&scale=Auto&comparelist=$indu,$compx,$inx

BTW, based on my basic recollection of the price of milk and just about everything else (gas, etc.), the change in the value of the stock market mimics the increase in prices of food over the past 3 years...about double...Obama, Geitner's and the Fed's policies have devalued the dollar. Hence, the cost of many items have doubled. It'd make sense that the value of the stock market would mimic that. Coupled with companies' fears of hiring due to unknown costs associated with Obamacare and Dood/Frank...makes perfect sense that the stock market goes up. And, Obama does get some credit, just like he should get credit for increased gas, milk, and food prices...

Rick-3416939 "Lets be fair now people, the original estimate on the cost of ObamaCare was the best guess the Democrats could come up with to ensure it would pass. The new estimates still fall within the Democrats margin of error for any appropriations of taxpayer dollars, plus or minus 3000%."

Thanks for the laugh - gotta give you a vote for that.

Bosslimo...don't come crying to me in 2015 when there is no more money for your food stamps, medicade or SSI because Obammy screwed the pooch.

JC-1439099 "You mean there are places where people never die?"

Did you know that about 20% of the people born over the last 6,000 years never died?

Yes, it actually IS TRUE.

Yep Roy. With the population growing at the rate it is, I'd guess that about 20% is alive right now. :)

JC...

And that is truly the planet's problem...as population outpaces food production and the ability of a few to feed the many.

I'm not really sure that we've reached that point yet. There are actually vast expanses of land that are virtually untouched because of the instability of local governments - particularly on the African continent.

It's too bad Mitt Romney plans on closing Planned Parenthood (if he became president) and the frwnj's, like Sanatarium DON'T believe in contraceptives AT ALL!

85% of Americans had health insurance (typically through their employer), and the other 15% either paid out of pocket or used hospital emergency rooms and ignored the bills................... I would love to see these numbers. And the patients walking into Emergency Rooms and not paying is just one of the reasons that Ins rates are going up.. And the people walking in are not the ones on Medicaid either. You know who they are People like my sister that claims to be against any form of entitlements, that was a business owner, that got sick and never paid her bills and claimed them on a charity, because all her money was hidden. Then when they were covered by charities went and had a 17 thousand dollar face lift. Now if she is living like this how many other business owners are? With their 2 sets of books so they always show a lose? And then there are the working poor that fall just above the poverty levels that can not get any assistance at all. The Gop has no one unless you want to vote for a nut. Where are the Rep moderates? These nuts are ruining the rep party. Yes the plan has to be tweaked, but there is not one program that doesn't go through many changes in order to succeed.

@Kim, while some do what you just said, there are a MUCH greater number of average Americans, working for $10-$12 an hour, supporting a family, while making TOO much for medicaid, but not enough to buy insurance. A family of 4 needs to make LESS THAN $15,000 a year to qualify for help!

It's a sad reality!

@ Jo i agree completely, i don't know what the solution is. I lived in Niag Falls new York until 3 years ago and have many Canadian friends and although it is not a perfect system there are not one of them that would trade with us. In fact many people i know have gone over the river for dental care because it was so much cheaper not to mention medications. I have a good friend that had prostrate cancer and had no propbem receiving care. The places where it is difficult are the very rural areas where they have a hard time getting doctors. My cousin married a Canadian and she is a Nurse in the US , but they live in Canada for the many programs they offer and the health care is just one of them.

Couldn't agree more! I'm Canadian, born & raised, married an American, I posted earlier about Canadian healthcare, won't repeat myself, but I agree!
:)

The problem with the Affordable care act isn't just that it really isn't affordable for the country. Its the way they keep slipping little things out but never all at the same time and there is no way to actually go and check the bill itself because it isn't online. The latest is a surcharge of $1 for abortions every month on top of your premiums. Can't they just be transparent and let us see this darn bill all at one time? Don't they trust the American people to know what is best for themselves? I mean medicare isn't free on SS they take the premiums out of your check. Didn't know that did you? Thought it was free didn't you?

I'm sure you were trying to be funny about SS, was the $1 abortion surcharge a joke, as well ? If you were serious, post link to such nonsense...

Jo-An...

That's where my problem lies...those that have the least are asked nothing about showing just a whisp of responsibility in their lives. People earning $10-12 per hour should not have started a "family of 4". Can't we ask that people consider delaying having children until they have both feet planted on the ground ? Is that too much to ask ?

We spend a lot of money trying to assist the least fortunate in many, many ways. Despite that help, we can't even ask for a bit of cooperation. I've known many couples with good incomes who delayed having kids until they felt financially sound enough to raise them. Cannot the same planning be asked of those on the lower end of the income scale ?

You might want to tell the GOP gangsters to stop saying NO to birth control!

Tony, you say those people earning $10-$12 an hour should not have "children"? A lot of these people will NEVER earn MORE than THAT!

These people are victims of their "poor choice" of being born into low income families, themselves, and NOT having the options, and choices afforded to people coming from more affluent homes. They are the hardworking middle of America people...working menial jobs, at Walmart, McDonald's, child care centers, convenience stores, auto part stores, restaurants, bars, hotels, etc, etc....

They DON'T WANT your crumbs, they just want to take care of their families!

those that have the least are asked nothing about showing just a whisp of responsibility in their lives.

We spend a lot of money trying to assist the least fortunate in many, many ways. Despite that help, we can't even ask for a bit of cooperation

Your ignorance is ASTOUNDING! I feel sick that people like you walk the streets, with your smug judgement of the less fortunate!

How about the TOP 1% "JOB CREATORS" start PAYING DECENT WAGES to the REST of the 99%!!!

Jo-an,

It's too bad Mitt Romney plans on closing Planned Parenthood

What a crock. If you disagree with his policy that's one thing, but out and out lies is another. He does not and cannot "close" Planned Parenthood - he would simply stop the government from giving money to the organization. They get much of their money from private sources now, they would simply need to increase their private funding to offset the lack of government funds.

Really JC, why would I lie? Here, watch AND listen....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/13/mitt-romney-planned-parenthood_n_1343450.html

Of course we ALL KNOW he will flip and flop back and forth on his actual stand!

LOL

JC, why SHOULD Planned Parenthood NOT receive the SAME government funding, that all other medical businesses, that offer women's health care for low income women, receive??

hmmm....now Romney gets to "pick winners and losers"???

Doesn't seem like the American way to me?

Jo-An...

You're nasty to people you cannot see. You're "sick" that I even "walk the streets"...it must be my "smug judgement of the less fortunate".

That's a pretty far out depiction of someone you deciphered from a few written sentences.

There are a few of those "less fortunate" people out there who greatly appreciate the contributions that my wife and I make. Those folks are pleased that my wife and I "walk the streets". I have photographs and thank you notes on my refrigerator from two American soldiers who lost their legs in Afghanistan...they are happy I'm around.

I don't need to be spat on because some nameless Jo doesn't like that I believe the less fortunate should show some responsibility...which always raises hackles on this site.

And yes...I wish less money was taken away from me in taxes to pay for the irresponsible decisions of those needing financial help so I'd have more money to spend on responsible people like those two soldiers. I wish I could help them more.

And enough with the dopey "1%" and "99%"....I make you "sick" ? Good. The 'Occupy' movement makes me sick.

.those that have the least are asked nothing about showing just a whisp of responsibility in their lives. People earning $10-12 per hour should not have started a "family of 4". Can't we ask that people consider delaying having children until they have both feet planted on the ground ? Is that too much to ask ?

When they NOTHING LEFT TO GIVE, what, their BLOOD?

I believe the less fortunate should show some responsibility...which always raises hackles on this site.

To imply the "less fortunate", are not RESPONSIBLE, is an ignorant IMPLICATION!

I'm glad contributing to

a few of those "less fortunate" people out there who greatly appreciate the contributions that my wife and I make.

helps you sleep at night!

It's always nice to know that the "chosen few" can get YOUR contributions, and the rest can cut their meds in half and eat dog food!

tell that to all of the troops who go to school on the GI bill.

Receiving benefits for services rendered is not a socialistic concept - it is based on capitalist principles

Unless they are benefits paid to SSI for decades, then they are an unaffordable entitlement.

Unless you are public servant, such as a teacher, fireman, or a police officer, then they are an unaffordable entitlement.

Unless you are a postal worker, then they are an unaffordable entitlement.

Unless the corporation you work for mis-managed your retirement fund, and does not want to pay the retirement you were promised, then they are an unaffordable entitlement.

Unless the corporation you work for wants to make their quarterly profit without any innovative ideas, so they cut your agreed upon benefits, then they are an unaffordable entitlement.

Of course getting paid for service is based upon capitalistic principles, unless someone arbitrarily says it is not.

Of course, basing your health care system upon user pay and private insurance is also capitalistic, unless someone arbitrarily says it is not. Even if that someone thought up the idea in the first place.

The Obamacare healthcare law runs on the same principles that Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and all your other entitlements. If you want to look at the future of the law look at Social Security. It may only be about 70 years old, but what are the forecasts? It will fail in a couple of years. Obamacare? It won't even last 30 years, before it goes bankrupt and that is if every thing goes well. The government already doesn't have the ability to finance a major section of the bill. What makes people think that it has the ability to finance the rest?

Sure, Single Payor -- Government run health insurance will lower costs. Just look what its done for Medicare...and Medicaid...and...well....any government agency. You know...lower expenses every year! Oh, and instead of calling it Insurance, we ought to get with the program for the New way of viewing health care as a basic right....it's more aptly called a direct transfer benefit program. There's no "insurance" aspect to it. There's no hedging for risk. It's simply a KNOWN cost to cover whatever ANYONE wants. Yessirreee...Obama Care is going to be great!

leroy ..there are no provisions in the bill to pay for illegal immigrants .... the few times I have been to a hospital I didnt see any ER full of illegal aliens .. matter of fact i didnt see any illegals.. and if you cant pay you will be subsidized to the extent you can pay .. its not a free ride but there are penalties for those that scam the law .. so if your honest your going to be treated as well as any hospital or health care agency can treat you ... just like canada .. tell a canadian you want to take away their health care and you will be run out of the country ..

jim...well here in the southwest we see illegals in the ER all the time. We have a joke that goes along the lines, "If you don't want to wait 3 or 4 hours in the ER, just walk in with a U.S. Border Patrol hat on and the line will instantly get a lot shorter."

hs....and WHO do you think pays for them now? Idiot..we do. That would be a lot easier to know the True cost of illegals, what we Need in this country is for ya al to put on yer BIG boy pants and be an adult. Single payer would bring the USA into this century.

jim ---- just curious, but what does an illegal look like ??? ---- how would you even know if you were standing next to one ??

The Affordable Healthcare Act, invented by Republicans, but passed by Democrats:

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

invented by republicans ??? ---- where, in canada or some european country ?? ----- nationalized healthcare has been around a lot longer than what passed in massachusetts, which btw, is having money issues.

The single payer plan is what medicare is. I'm crossing my fingers it lasts as long as I do. And with some of the new rules already in place here some pharmacies are closing and some Dr's offices are having trouble.

praysalot...all I did was make the point that Jim's comment does not apply to the entire country. I didn't say anything about who pays for illegals free health care cost, which I know the taxpayers and people who use the hospitals pay extra to subsidize their cost. Not sure why you digressed to calling me an idiot.

I really don't have a problem with the government taking my tax dollars to provide healthcare, so long as they do it efficiently. I the government is going to take my money, they better not waste it. Sadly, the governments track record is one of waste and inefficiency, e.g. Medicare, which is over $20 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities. And now the CBO comes out and says Obamacare is in the hole.

Here are some interesting numbers:

Health Care Reform Cost Estimates: What is the Track Record?

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/08/04/health-care-reform-cost-estimates-what-is-the-track-record/

Medicare (hospital insurance). In 1965, as Congress considered legislation to establish a national Medicare program, the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that the hospital insurance portion of the program, Part A, would cost about $9 billion annually by 1990.v Actual Part A spending in 1990 was $67 billion. The actuary who provided the original cost estimates acknowledged in 1994 that, even after conservatively discounting for the unexpectedly high inflation rates of the early ‘70s and other factors, “the actual [Part A] experience was 165% higher than the estimate.”

Medicare (entire program). In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee predicted that the new Medicare program, launched the previous year, would cost about $12 billion in 1990. Actual Medicare spending in 1990 was $110 billion—off by nearly a factor of 10.

Medicaid DSH program. In 1987, Congress estimated that Medicaid’s disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments—which states use to provide relief to hospitals that serve especially large numbers of Medicaid and uninsured patients—would cost less than $1 billion in 1992. The actual cost that year was a staggering $17 billion. Among other things, federal lawmakers had failed to detect loopholes in the legislation that enabled states to draw significantly more money from the federal treasury than they would otherwise have been entitled to claim under the program’s traditional 50-50 funding scheme.

Medicare home care benefit. When Congress debated changes to Medicare’s home care benefit in 1988, the projected 1993 cost of the benefit was $4 billion. The actual 1993 cost was more than twice that amount, $10 billion.

Medicare catastrophic coverage benefit. In 1988, Congress added a catastrophic coverage benefit to Medicare, to take effect in 1990. In July 1989, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) doubled its cost estimate for the program, for the four-year period 1990-1993, from $5.7 billion to $11.8 billion. CBO explained that it had received newer data showing it had significantly under-estimated prescription drug cost growth, and it warned Congress that even this revised estimate might be too low. This was a principal reason Congress repealed the program before it could take effect.

SCHIP. In 1997, Congress established the State Children’s Health Insurance Program as a capped grant program to states, and appropriated $40 billion to be doled out to states over 10 years at a rate of roughly $5 billion per year, once implemented. In each year, some states exceeded their allotments, requiring shifts of funds from other states that had not done so. By 2006, unspent reserves from prior years were nearly exhausted. To avert mass disenrollments, Congress decided to appropriate an additional $283 million in FY 2006 and an additional $650 million in FY 2007.

Most states do exactly the same with their automobile insurance. Somehow the level of uninsured does not collapse the system.

Why would anyone want everyone to have health coverage anyway? Why would someone expect their UNIVERSAL health care program to approach 100% coverage? It is almost as if universal and 100% were synonyms. Very strange indeed.

Medicare reimbursement rates are 30% under market driving up the costs of private insurance costs. How do you suppose that States/Feds can survive when all of a sudden their biggest cost driver outside of payroll increases 30%?

Actually, under Obamacare, the insurance companies are limited to a certain percentage of administrative costs. The biggest driver of insurance premiums is cost of care. That includes what providers bill the carriers. Office visits in the 80's before Reganomics before the privatization of health care was low. Now after the privatization of health care, the same services are inflated to extremes. Its administrative law 101 and public administration 101. Now what is happening, to keep premiums low is health carriers are outsourcing their claims administration to Asia. If you love calling a call center over there, just wait till you have to deal with that getting your claims paid right.

WHAT???? When was the insurance of and provision of health care not a "private" affair??? Love the "administrative and public administrative 101" reference...wow... a true government believer. Mandating costs has never worked in the history of mankind. You can not cap the expense of something without also capping its utilization or you cause shortages...which then put immense pressure on fueling costs to rise. That's real world economics 101. Something that those advocating for more and more government involvement will never get but always suffer the invariable consequences from. Socialized medicine has not driven costs down anywhere...not in England, Canada, or Venezula.

5 Myths About Health Care Around the World

By T.R. Reid

Sunday,
August 23, 2009

As Americans search for the cure to what ails our health-care system we've overlooked an invaluable source of ideas and solutions: the rest of the world. All the other industrialized democracies have face problems like ours, yet they've found ways to cover everybody – and still spend far less than we do.

I've traveled the world from Oslo to Osaka to see how other developed democracies provide health care. Instead of dismissing these models as "socialist," we could adapt their solutions to fix our problems. To do that, we first have to dispel a few myths about health care abroad:

1. It's all socialized medicine out there.

Not so. Some countries, such as Britain, New Zealand and Cuba, do provide health care in government hospitals, with the government paying the bills. Others -- for instance, Canada and Taiwan -- rely on private-sector providers, paid for by government-run insurance. But many wealthy countries -- including Germany, the Netherlands, Japan and Switzerland -- provide universal coverage using private doctors, private hospitals and private insurance plans.

In some ways health care is less "socialized" overseas than in the United States. Almost all Americans sign up for government insurance (Medicare) at age 65. In Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands seniors stick with private insurance plans for life. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is one of the planet's purest examples of government-run health care.

2. Overseas, care is rationed through limited choices or long lines.

Generally, no. Germans can sign up for any of the nation's 200 private health insurance plans -- a broader choice than any American has. If a German doesn't like her insurance company, she can switch to another, with no increase in premium.

The Swiss, too, can choose any insurance plan in the country. In France and Japan, you don't get a choice of insurance provider; you have to use the one designated for your company or your industry. But patients can go to any doctor, any hospital, any traditional healer. There are no U.S.-style limits such as "in-network" lists of doctors or "pre-authorization" for surgery. You pick any doctor, you get treatment --
and insurance has to pay.

Canadians have their choice of providers. In Austria and Germany, if a doctor diagnoses a person as "stressed," medical insurance pays for weekends at a health spa. As for those notorious waiting lists, some countries are indeed plagued by them. Canada makes patients wait weeks or months for nonemergency care, as a way to keep costs down. But studies by the Commonwealth Fund and others report that many nations -- Germany, Britain, Austria -- outperform the United States on measures such as waiting times for appointments and for elective surgeries.

In Japan waiting times are so short that most patients don't bother to make an appointment. One Thursday morning in Tokyo, I called the prestigious orthopedic clinic at Keio University Hospital to schedule a consultation about my aching shoulder. "Why don't you just drop by?" the receptionist said. That same afternoon, I was in the surgeon's office. Dr. Nakamichi recommended an operation. "When could we do it?" I asked. The doctor checked his computer and said, "Tomorrow would be pretty
difficult, perhaps someday next week?"

3. Foreign health-care systems are inefficient, bloated bureaucracies.

Much less so than here. It may seem to Americans that U.S.-style free enterprise -- private-sector, for-profit health insurance – is naturally the most cost-effective way to pay for health care. But in fact, all the
other payment systems are more efficient than ours.

U.S. health insurance companies have the highest administrative costs in the world; they spend roughly 20 cents of every dollar for nonmedical costs, such as paperwork, reviewing claims and marketing.

France's health insurance industry, in contrast, covers everybody and spends about 4 percent on administration. Canada's universal insurance system, run by government bureaucrats, spends 6 percent on administration. In Taiwan, a leaner version of the Canadian model has administrative costs of 1.5 percent; one year, this figure ballooned to 2 percent, and the opposition parties savaged the government for wasting money.

The world champion at controlling medical costs is Japan, even though its aging population is a profligate consumer of medical care. On average, the Japanese go to the doctor 15 times a year, three times the U.S. rate. They have twice as many MRI scans and X-rays. Quality is high; life expectancy and recovery rates for major diseases are better than in the United States and yet Japan spends about $3,400 per person annually on health care; the United States spends more than $7,000.

4. Cost controls stifle innovation.

False. The United States is home to groundbreaking medical research, but so are other countries with much lower cost structures. Any American who's had a hip or knee replacement is standing on French innovation. Deep-brain stimulation to treat depression is a Canadian breakthrough. Many of the wonder drugs promoted endlessly on American television, including Viagra, come from British, Swiss or Japanese labs.

Overseas, strict cost controls actually drive innovation. In the United States, an MRI scan of the neck region costs about $1,500. In Japan, the identical scan costs $98. Under the pressure of cost controls, Japanese researchers found ways to perform the same diagnostic technique for one fifteenth the American price. (And Japanese labs still make a profit.)

5. Health insurance has to be cruel.

Not really. American health insurance companies routinely reject applicants with a "preexisting condition" -- precisely the people most likely to need the insurers' service. They employ armies of adjusters to deny
claims. If a customer is hit by a truck and faces big medical bills, the insurer's "rescission department" digs through the records looking for grounds to cancel the policy, often while the victim is still in the
hospital. The companies say they have to do this stuff to survive in a tough business.

Foreign health insurance companies, in contrast, must accept all applicants, and they can't cancel as long as you pay your premiums.

The plans are required to pay any claim submitted by a doctor or hospital (or health spa), usually within tight time limits. The big Swiss insurer Groupe Mutuel promises to pay all claims within five days.
"Our customers love it," the group's chief executive told me. The corollary is that everyone is mandated to buy insurance, to give the plans an adequate pool of rate-payers.

The key difference is that foreign health insurance plans exist only to pay people's medical bills, not to make a profit. The United States is the only developed country that lets insurance companies profit from basic health coverage.

In many ways, foreign health-care models are not really "foreign" to America, because our crazy-quilt health-care system uses elements of all of them. For Native Americans or veterans, we're Britain: The government provides health care, funding it through general taxes, and patients get no bills. For people who get insurance through their jobs, we're Germany: Premiums are split between workers and employers, and private insurance plans pay private doctors and hospitals. For people over 65, we're Canada: Everyone pays premiums for an insurance plan run by the government, and the public plan pays private doctors and hospitals according to a set fee schedule. And for the tens of millions without insurance coverage, we're Burundi or Burma: In the world's poor nations, sick people pay out of pocket for medical care; those who can't pay stay sick or die.

This fragmentation is another reason that we spend more than anybody else and still leave millions without coverage. All the other developed countries have settled on one model for health-care delivery and finance; we've blended them all into a costly, confusing bureaucratic mess. Which, in
turn, punctures the most persistent myth of all: that America has "the finest health care" in the world. We don't. In terms of results, almost all advanced countries have better national health statistics than the United States does. In terms of finance, we force700,000 Americans into bankruptcy each year because of medical bills.

In France, the number of medical bankruptcies is zero. Britain: zero. Japan: zero. Germany: zero. Given our remarkable medical assets -- the best-educated doctors and nurses, the most advanced hospitals, world-class research – the United States could be, and should be, the best in the world. To get there,
though, we have to be willing to learn some lessons about health-care administration from the other industrialized democracies.

Kayless, the biggest problem is the government not allowing competition across state lines. As it is now, only a few insurance providers exist in each state and they can only operate in that state. If we had a system that was closer to a free market, the prices would drop due to competition. But the medical providers do not want that so they control the government. Look at laser eye surgery not covered by insurance. When it first came to the U.S., it was very expensive. But as more and more doctors started competing for patients, the prices dropped dramatically.

The government does not want prices to drop because that is how they are justifying single-payer. It's about control, not your health.

Hs321 and Oh_No. both very good points!!!

The Affordable Healthcare Act: created by the Republican Party, passed by the Democratic Party:

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

oh no -

Great article, very thought provoking. I read an article in AARP magazine some time ago that said that even if we got rid of insurance companies and switched to a super-efficient single payer system (such as Canada's), we are only talking about 1/7 of the total dollars spent on healthcare in the U.S. per year. A tidy sum, to be sure, but that doesn't really seem to be a solution. It went on to explain that the single largest driver of healthcare costs in this country is "over-treatment." It compared treatment of certain diseases that are treated very aggressively in this country at a large expense to other countries that don't treat the same disease as aggressively, with no improvement in the outcome here in the U.S. for all the extra money spent. what are your thoughts?

An important point that is left out of the article you posted, is the effects of the millions of illegal immigrants using our healthcare system at little or no cost to them.

And for the tens of millions without insurance coverage, we're Burundi or Burma: In the world's poor nations, sick people pay out of pocket for medical care; those who can't pay stay sick or die.

If I didn't have insurance and got denied treatment, I'd be a rich man, because I'd sue the pants off the hospital because they're violating federal law. This claim of "you either have insurance or you die" is not only a completely irrational argument, but it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

kg,

Only about 1.5% of total healthcare dollars go toward illegal immigrants (RAND Corp estimate). That is still a problem, but it's far from the huge "boogie-man" they are painting it to be, specially when you take into account that illegal immigrants make for at least double that as a percentage of the population.

Your senator and Obama both get much better than medicare coverage.

What ALL this comes down to is another Bozobama lie to get his socialist crap passed, nothing new here.

it's obamacare, because obama is taking credit for getting it passed. ----- read page 131 of the act, and you will understand why it will fail ---- it has no enforcement mechanism. ---- it was poorly designed, and needs to be revised, not repealed.

And Eugenics was pushed by liberals in the 1920s. Do we still claim liberals are for eugenics?

obama is taking credit for obamacare in his campaign speeches ---- if he wants the credit for passing it, then i am willing to assign him the credit he wants.

Thanks to the Republican Party for giving us most of the ideas reflected in the Affordable Healthcare Act. Thanks to the Democratic Party for passing it.

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

Thanks to the Republican Party for giving us most of the ideas reflected in the Affordable Healthcare Act. Thanks to the Democratic Party for passing it.

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

Ronpal, Obama in his campaign speeches was pushing universal healthcare, NOT the so-called Obamacare, which is actually an invention of the Republican Party: http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

Do I need to show you his actual campaign speeches? I heard them, so I know what you're saying is complete b.s.

yes ---- you need to show me the actual speeches ---- he was the one touting a healthcare program ---- he was the one bragging about it when it got passed. ----- and this summer, you can bet he will mention it while campaigning as one of HIS accomplishments.

Wow, ronpal, you must have been living in a Fox News bubble all this time. Sure, Obama was touting "a healthcare program" during his campaign, but most certainly not the one that got passed. Do you have amnesia? Do you not remember progressive Democrats fighting for universal healthcare? Then giving into a compromise (public option)? What ultimately got passed was a very watered down bill that did NOT give liberals what they wanted, and was designed to appeal to conseratives and Republicans to win their votes as it was, in essence, the bill the Republicans put forward in 1993 to counter Hillary Clinton's proposal:

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/graphics/2010/022310-bill-comparison.aspx

But as Mitch McConnell made clear, the number one objective of Republicans is to defeat Obama So they were not going to give one inch in support of anything he put forth, even something like the ACA, which has Republican footprints all over it (e.g., the healthcare mandate, which Republicans were pushing since the days of Richard Nixon).

As for Obama and his 2008 campaign, here's what he was pledging:

"I have made a solemn pledge that I will sign a universal health care bill into
law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and
cut the cost of a typical family's premium by up to $2,500 a year."—6/23/07,
Hartford, Conn.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-5326987.html

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1860289_1860561_1860651,00.html

The 5000th time I've read a repeat of a single sentence spoken once by Mitch McConnell.

Should we start repeating every dumb thing said over the past three years by Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, President Obama and the rest of the cast of characters we've had to suffer through ?

Tony - you mean like "This war is lost"?

Or "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor" ... "If you like your insurance company, you can keep your insurance company"... or "Our healthcare reform plan will reduce costs".

Only those sentences were spoken 5000 times and we won't be hearing them again.

If only one section of the bill bothered me I could work with it but I have questions on what I have been able to find out about 7 sections of the bill. I can't check the actual bill because the government printing office took it off their online website. My senator can't tell me where I can find it and admits she doesn't know whats in it. WTF kind of government is this?

loner...

It's the kind of government you get in a 'one man-one vote' society that pays little attention to what is going on and allows politicians to get elected and policies put in place based on the success of what have become advertising campaigns.

I would not make a bet on that outcome.

I doubt that you are correct, but God help us if you are. Everyone agrees that something needs to be done to get health care costs under control. If we end up reverting to what we have I guarantee you will see horrendous price increases as the private insurance companies up their premiums in order to wring more profit out of the system.

You might as well because if you loose all your money is gone and if you win same outcome!

Allow for health care companies to cross state lines - hence allow competition. This alone will bring costs down. You never hear this come up during any debates, why? Am I missing something?

And on another issue, we already have mandated insurance coverage (here in Va.) or else pay the "unisured motorist" fees each year you register your vehicle.

This is not contested by anyone, is it because driving is considered a "priviledge" and not a right?

Maui Jim you are right that competition would bring the health costs down, but a underfunded government program won't do it. It would be just as successful as Social Security, actually SS would be more successful.

Maui,

Here is some information on crossing state lines for insurance:

http://www.newamerica.net/pressroom/2008/across_state_lines_explained_why_selling_health_insurance_across_state_lines_not_answer

Note: Before the HCL, there were nearly 600 health insurance companies, many of which were already not for profit. We are now less than 500. Within 3 years after enacting the HCL - you will be down to 1.

DB Akron

I don't find your numbers valid. Although I can't confirm or deny your numbers without a link you referred to, I did find that the amount of your 600 companies led me to:

Most insurance companies are subsidaries of bigger insurance companies.

http://www.iii.org/media/facts/statsbyissue/industry/

I even searched for health insurance companies that have gone bankrupt. The best I got was that it could happen but "rare".

Will, obama is just a liar. No intelligent person believes what comes out of his mouth.

John, I heard him myself make such promises. The President said that he would go over the health care bill "line by line" with any law maker in Washington who requested it. My congressman was one of those who requested it. Many times I heard the President on tv talk about broadcasting all proceedings regarding the health care bill on CSPAN yet to date virtually nothing has been shown. I want what the President promised the American people on health care. When the President said that he would not raise taxes on 95% of Americans he said all taxes. He did not exempt health care related taxes.

Jeff, you may be right.

the great divider liar in chief strikes again.

ABO 2012

Obama 2012!!

Anyone But Obama 2012 !!!!!!!!!!! The end of an error is at hand.

Will...

The president often ended that sentence by adding "not one dime".

Well if it happens that will be a full congress. My senator has already had hundreds of constituents write and complain that they don't know whats in it and all she can tell us is that she doesn't either.Please tell me when it is on because I have 7 different sections I would like to hear explained.

that's the whole problem ---- not everyone will buy in, and that's why it will not work.

There's a cash penalty if you don't. Problem solved.

the penalty is only $600 per year, and premiums for a single adult male are more like $3600 per year ----- which would you choose if you were a person who didn't want this insurance ??

So a $700.00 penalty will solve the problem? I don't think so.

Steve in CO: Whatever do you mean when you say "requiring everyone to buy in means fewer emergency room visits"? The same people who have no coverage now will have no coverage if Obamacare is allowed to go into effect. It's been said there will be penalties for those who don't sign up, but that's a crock. There will be millions who won't pay a dime toward a premium and the gov't can't possibly pay insurance premiums for them. The only way Obamacare will work is essentially the way the present system works, medicare and medicaid. People who have no income cannot pay Obamacare premiums, and there are millions of them.

The cheapest option is to take ALL of the money going to health insurance and use about half of it to fund the national health care program, or Medicare for all, and give the rest of the money back to the employees. That way every person is covered, we decouple it from employers, and worries about being covered go away. Employee mobility will then explode, which is a very good thing.

There are no downsides to a national health system, especially when compared with what we have to deal with now.

A "disaster only" plan, which I purchased after college, was about $650/yr. So considering that is essentially what an uninsured person has (thanks to the gov't for covering their emergency room visits), I'd say that actually works out quite nicely.

steve ---- guess what ---- those plans will no longer be considered adequate coverage. ---- you should go back and revisit some of the comments of sebelius. ------ if they were going to let people slide by with catastrophic coverage, i would be ecstatic.

Even if I take all of these points at face-value, I fail to see how this is supposed to cost me more money. I already have insurance through my employer and I already pay for the uninsured. Whether the system works or whether it's more of the same really does not matter to me financially.

well.... that is the point ----- nothing much will change for most people ---- but that, however, was not how this law was promoted. ----- the whole idea of forcing HEALTHY young people into the pool was to help reduce costs for everyone.

Steve and ronpal: read this article about Obamacare and rethink your comments about the propaganda put out there where you can keep you present coverage. It will change fellows, and not in your favor.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2011/06/20/will-employer-sponsored-health-insurance-survive-obamacare/

that was my point, the areas which you MUST cover may change, and for many people, that will not be a good thing.

Well there is a mis-match of information and understanding here and I might be wrong but so far this is my experience.

I can't buy affordable health insurance on the open market as an individual. If I earn over $3,300/month my cost for single coverage would be $1200/month and the coverage is high deductibles/co-pays and no primary care office visits payed for.

The company my wife and I work for (two different companies) offer health care coverage but we pay the full cost...it cost the employer $0. We pay the full cost at $700+/month for two. The employer does not have to pay but the insurance companies will give them good group coverage which they pass directly 100% to the employees.

This is in keeping with the AHCA. For those employers who are crying about their cost going up is a mystery to me. If they are paying the cost then it is a benefit they are offering and not something they have to pay...so I don't get it I guess.

The Health Care System is so large that there is no way to pinpoint anything and besides, no one know what in the Hell they are doing and the system goes on, ho hum ho hum hohum.

Steve in Co - "I can't figure out why so many people are upset about this."

Wow. Its time for you to move to lower elevation and get some oxygen. After Obamacare it is going to take a LOT, LOT more of your taxdollars to pay for everyone's healthcare.

U.S. will pay for half of all health care costs by 2020 - July 28, 2011

"Total health care spending is expected to nearly double to $4.6 trillion in 2020, from $2.6 trillion in 2010.

Health care spending per capita is forecast to increase to $13,708 in 2020 from $8,327 in 2010, the report said.

By 2020, nearly 30 million additional people are expected to have health insurance because of reform.

Over the 10-year period, the report showed that the biggest annual jump in health care spending will happen in 2014 when health reform is fully implemented.

CMS estimates that in 2014 about 23 million uninsured consumers will gain access to health insurance, mainly through government programs such as Medicaid and through the creation of federal and state-funded health insurance exchanges.

As a result, the government expects Medicaid spending to surge 20% in 2014 and private health insurance spending to increase 9.4%.

Norwalk said the estimated sharp surge in Medicaid spending just in one year, is very concerning given that states are already struggling with their budgets.

As millions more gain access to health insurance, the government expects spending on prescription drugs, physician and hospital services to increase as well.

CMS expects prescription drug spending to jump by 10.7% in 2014 and to account for 11% of national health spending by 2020. Spending on physician and clinical services is forecast to rise by 8.9% by 2014, representing 19% of overall health care spending."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spending_forecast/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=hp_bn3

P.S. Keep in mind these are even the government released numbers, the reality will be much worse.

pjam09

Nope, Norquist made republicans promise not to raise taxes so it doesn't matter how much it costs, we will pay the same taxes.

And... if the taxes are good enough for me to pay, it can be just as good for my kids and grandkids to pay.

Besides, Cheney told me "Deficits don't matter."

Umm, the premise behind not raising taxes is that spending must be cut substantially before taxes are raised. Raising taxes and not cutting spending accomplishes what? Well, it gives the government more money to squander while ignoring the debt. Kinda like giving someone a credit card, they max it out and make little payments towards the principle. Debt grows via interest and the principle is essentially untouched so the government borrow what it can't make up.

Guess you don't care too much for your kids and grandkids. They're saddled with approximately $45,000. worth of debt...today.

Oh_No....your getting screwed for your health insurance. My entire family without employer coverage is only about $500 a month without maternity and with dental, prescripts and vision. thats 2 children and two adults. Now my mother who works for a hospital and insures only my baby brother (20 not really a baby) and she pays the same amount I do for employer coverage. Do some more research on your insurance company. We also only pay 100 dollars a month for two full coverage vehicles and it includes a 100k personal injury protection, per person, per accident, per vehicle. with a $500 deductible.

Seems like the costs of so many things...proper education, medical care, criminal justice, housing, etc. are so high due to the growing number of people living in poverty and people who are non-citizens. And our political leaders are barely ever able to say a single word about asking for some "responsibility" from either of these groups.

Children giving birth to children is the nation's anchor holding it down. Which politician has the guts to speak about this problem ?

...

That is the correct answer.

Both commercial and Medicare healthcare costs
decelerated in January. http://www.healthcaretownhall.com/?p=4954

Medicaid in many states is already being forced to cut some payments to those eligilble for bothe medicare and medicaid ( really poor and really old)Pretty much used to be 100% between both of them. Now the states are hurting so much if medicare has paid what medicaid will cover they won't cover the difference. It is hurting Doctors offices and they aren't taking on new patients under the system.

KRAIG: Agreed but sadly there are way too many blatantly stupid and ignorant people in this nation who will scream socialism, should Obama try for that.

Yep, and those stupid and ignorant people continue to vote against their best interest. Look at what we have in Kansas now. The governor is doing all he can to turn Medicaid and other services over to private companies, and can't guarantee that all the existing services will survive the transition. Even the republicans are screaming that they did not vote for the idiots for that. Wisconsin is dealing with Walker, somehow we need to get rid of Brownback.

@John Mack #13.2,

"continue to vote against their best interest" ??????

People always vote for what they perceive to be their best self-interest. Your arrogant remark, however, simply shows the haughty concept existing among self-proclaimed "Progressives" that they actually think they are smarter than everyone else. What nonsense !!!

Voting for a monstrous piece of legislation (over 2,700 pages) that most of the idiots voting for it ... had not READ the damn thing ..... that is not voting for your best interests ! The rules and regulations being churned out to ENFORCE this monstrosity were last reported to be about double the length of the original bill itself !! And who in the hell is making these rules ? Who do they answer to ?? Where is there accountability ???

The massive lincrease in government agencies, bureaus and departments ..... just to administer the damn law ..... that alone should tell you that putting the government in charge of health care in our country, when it has already proven to be incompetent and fiscally irresponsible in administering Medicare and Social Security ..... IT IS NOT A GOOD LAW !

Government in the U.S. is inefficient and costly. Growing government at all costs is a GOAL of the Obama administration, but it sure as hell is not in our best interests. Only the truly naive believe that.

Well Kraig the states have a real good sytem for controlling reimbursment costs since they are basically broke and can't print their own money and most have a balenced budget in their constitution. They are setting caps on medicaid payments. Of course some doctors offices down here are taking money out of personel savings to cover office expenses. But it is cutting the cost to the state.

LMAO!! Just who IS a "real news network"? (I can't wait to hear this answer!!)

Dude, our healthcare system has been destroyed for years, ever since it went to being a for-profit enterprise.

JEFF: Sorry buddy, your boy Dubya already bankrupted this country. He beat Obama to it by a country mile. Where the hell was your moral outrage when he started 2 unfunded wars, lied about not only the reason for the wars but how "underestimated" the costs 20 fold while handing out irresponsible tax cuts at the same time?

In case you are unaward, your don't cut taxes in wartime, you RAISE them in order to pay for the war. But that would have meant honesty and SACRAFICE from the American people which would never do, now would it?

Ozzie,

Why do you assume that if somebody complains about the deficits of Obama that they were happy with the deficits of Bush? A deficit is a deficit and at the size they are at it hurts the whole country.

Remember President Obama ran on a platform of having the solutions and a promise to cut the then deficit in half by the end of his first term, which is another missed promise.

I would sure hate to do time because I can't afford Obamacare. How much do you think a person would have to do? 6 Months? And then what? Come out homeless and still sick?

JERRY: Why? I'll tell you why, cause for the 8 years of Bush I never heard a peep from the Right. I also never had even heard of the Tea Party UNTIL 15 MINUTES AFTER OBAMA WAS SWORN IN. Then there were suddenly millions of outraged, born again, fiscal conservatives. There is a word for this, it's called HYPOCRISY.

That's because of Dems dodging town hall meetings and nobody understanding how this can work. How will they get Mexicans to pay? Dems had to pay off their own people to get the votes. Dems forced this crap down our throats.

jerry - you maybe very right about what Obama promised but like everyone he and us had no idea just how bad things would become once he got into office, things he had no control over and was a surprise to all of us.

You don't cut spending when you have 10 million people out of work...we learned this lesson in 1929. I quite often sit and take a deep breath just thinking what would have happened if the old man and the ding bat were to have won the election. Be thankful Mr Obama was the man because he kept us out of a depression he had no choice but to spend.

Oh_no EXACTLY your totally right, when obama took office the def was 10T and today its 15T ! yep, he's done a helluva job with the spending . . .. . . . btw, I have oceanfront property in kansas if your interested in buying , I swear its a great view

Oh_no, when Obama was campaigning for the presidency he stated, "This is the worst recession since the Great Depression". To me, I think he had a general idea of how bad the economy was.

All this it's Obamas fault it's Bush's fault isn't going to fix the dang problem. The problem is that government is out of control. They no longer think they report to us. It doesn't matter which party is in power and as soon as you all stop drinking the koolaid and start thinking for yourself the sooner we can fix this situation before we end up worse than Greece.

RIDGE: Then you must think the GOP is the party of Commies, cause THEY ARE THE ONES WHO DREAMED UP THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE the the Right is screaming about.

The Heritage Foundation, a far Right think tank and none other than Newt Gingrich were in on this as well as many other conservatives. Not to mention that the soon to be GOP candidate, Willard, created the IDENTICAL plan in Massachussetts. How are you going to explain that away once the real campaign begins?

Obama used the very same M.I.T. professor that Willard did to work out the nuts and bolts of the plan. He was interviewed and said there was not a dimes worth of difference between the two programs. THIS IS NOT AS "SOCIALIST" PROGRAM. You can keep lying about it but it won't make it any truer. I wish it were a true single payer SOCIALIST plan but heaven forbid, then we'd have the same kind of health care that EVERY OTHER MODERN INDUSTRIALIZED NATION HAS.

Mama said,"If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you jump too?"

Just because they are all doing it doesn't make it right for America.

justthinkin-2898128

And momma also said, "If it's good enough for them then it's good enough for you."

You want to demonize the rest of the world with a record as poor as the United States???

Please read up on Japan's healthcare system. Or, at least one of them, before you tongue lash it.

Your argument is mute as the top rated healthcare countries are democratic, you know, like we are.

bosslimo,

That analogy fails flat on its face. The Japanese have an entirely different culture. "Honor" is important to them to the point that money found during the tsunami aftermath was returned to its owners on many occasions.

We have a mixed society here in the U.S. and some will steal you blind if you turn your head at the wrong time. A gentleman in Vegas told me once it was not a "good" town to live in.

Bosslimo Japans program is run by the Japanese ours will be run by our government nuff said. In Japan if they screw up they kill themselves in our country if they screw up they blame us.

But the President promised that the bill would be budget neutral and would not add to the deficit. I want what the President promised on health care and the current law is not it.

HATHAWAY. What brilliiant insight. And just let health care costs keep on rising every year, is that it?

And what's your solution for the 50 Million American who are not insured not to mention tens of millions who are under insured??? I know, cause I'm one of them. And every single year my health insurance rates keep rising and rising. I'll bet that your answer is to let people die, right? That's the typical GOP mentality.

You are aware of course that we have by far, the world's most expensive health care system and yet we rank 26th in terms of quality of care??? You did know that, right???

that is the whole point ---- the idea was that by getting the HEALTHY people into the pool, it would reduce healthcare costs for everyone, but because of how the law was written, that will not occur.

Ozzie,

Agreed about the cost, but the health care act gave the insurance companies and pharmaceuticals almost everything they wanted in return for their support. For example, why not allow drugs to be imported from Canada which was a promise by the President but he gave in to the drug companies.

One last point, when the Newfoundland Premier needed heart surgery he went to Denver instead of staying in Canada.

Here's a crazy idea. Get rid of all Health insurance. 80% of medical expenses are tied to paperwork. I had 5 minutes of treatment at an emergency room, one tetnus shot. $ 350 One 5 minute adjustment at a chiropractor $65 Take my shirt off for skin cancer screening. less than 5 minutes $120. Have the government only cover catastrophic things over $10,000.

JERRY: The bill is far from perfect. I had hoped for a true single payer plan like NORMAL countries have. But we are so averse to "socialism" (gasp) that Obama was afraid to try for it. Yes, the insurance companies make out like the bandits that they are. But it's better than nothing.

As for your example of Canadian Premier, I don't think many people dispute that we have some of the finest specialists in the world. The problem is, that's great for the few who can afford them but does little or nothing for the average working stiff seeking decent health care. Our child mortality rate is deplorable, especially in the RED STATES who don't give a damn about their poor.

LEROY: What do you think Single Payer health care is??? It is vastly more cost effective but I can hear cries of COMMIE already.

I have no idea what it is. It seems that most of this was done behind closed doors. I don't know if anyone understands all of this. If I can't pay what happens?

I do not think it is better than nothing because now people think we have something and will not make the drastic changes needed.

Why should Alabama along with many other states only have one or two companies, or why can't I buy a policy from a company in Texas if they have better rates than the ones in my state. I do not know if that was addressed in the program.

Alabama is dominated by BlueCross-BlueShield of Alabama. Not too long back, they were ranked by Consumer Reports as having the second-best PPO plan in the country. Look it up. They do not have as much competition because they have done a good job overall.

Now, I know that will blow the minds of libtards everywhere, but only one plan in the country was rated higher, and I believe that was in Connecticut.

Nothing in Obamacare will lower costs and that is one reason why the bill is a failure. If you lower costs, more will be able to afford coverage. Obamacare will "subsidize" those who cannot "afford to pay" so this is simply another disguised form of welfare.

It already has so many entrenched enemies and they are growing day by day. The way they passed it is half the problem the way the president is trying to run roughshod over everybody is the rest of the problem. Even if it was a good bill it would fail. It isn't a good bill that makes it worse.

total bs ---- it has nothing to do with that.

Marshall wall street is like Vegas black jack. Nothing is produced it is just a bunch of idiots running around selling pieces of paper to each other if more pieces get bought than sold the market goes up if more get sold than bought the market goes down If somebody sneezes in Iran the whole thing could drop by 500 points overnight.

According to the While House 33 million Americans with be excluded from getting any health care services or treaments under the Afordable health care act.

Since Health care is defined as a humanitarian need of people and not a profit for insurance companies please tell me how the Affordable health care act is nothing but another Obama bail out only this time for the insurance companies.

Do tell me how our government is going to purchase health insurance policies for the 46% of our population that is living in or at the edge of poverty when it can't even operate without a debt crises every couple of months?

Yeah I have been wondering if my friends child will be excluded under Sec 1177. I also wonder what outcome based measures means and section1751 Government will decide which healthcare conditions will be paid Doesn't really sound like the utopian plan they sold us to pass it.

ARIZONA; You feel better now that you've puked up your daily ration of childish insults and infantile names??? My, but you make a cogent argument for your side. LOL

Yes, nothing is free, which is why I'm so confused that you folks on the Right are screaming about the INDIVIDUAL MANDATE, created by CONSERVATIVES and used first by none other than Willard Romney is not something for nothing, it MANDATES that everyone PAY something into the program. Where do you figure it's free???

Go see you boyfreind rump ranger.

ARIZONA; Now that hurt. I mean that was really just a bit to much, even for an uneducated dirtbag like you. LOL

I just love the way you addressed the points I made it my post. What's the matter buddy, you can't come up with a single, objective rebuttal? Of course you can't, you border on being a semi-illiterate mutant.

Ozzie, it's called Republican feeding frenzy. Any thing goes so don't get to close to anyone or you will be eaten. I think they'd eat their young.

Ever see perrona fish eat? Wicked scene. That's another way to describe Republicans. Dangerous to all.

Ozzie, don't feed the trolls bro.. You're smarter than that.

now you all HAVE to admit that was one of the dumbest statements from a elected official. . . . .for gods sakes, no wonder these morons steal from you, you defend a traitor like pelosi . . . STOP defending MORONS , , , damn, thats why this country is fubar

OzzieBoy,

Obamacare was passed by Democrats. You guys own it ! You are already desperately trying to lay part of it back on the Republicans, but you guys OWN it ! When the $hit begins to hit the fan, don't start pointing back to the Republicans ! It will be a financial tsunami of biblical proportions that will devastate our country's economy worse than it is now. Our national debt has risen under Obama significantly and bogus cost projections finagled to SELL this crappy legislation will only make it worse.

Man up, if you can. Republicans were locked out and Democrats "negotiated" with other Democrats behind closed doors.

Democrats did pass the AHCA. They tried to get the Republicans to help, and as has been stated above, most of the plan was supported by Republicans in the past, indeed many of the items were invented by Republicans. Of course, being the cowards they are, once it started to become a reality, they ran a lying campaign to dis-avow any support for their own ideas. The famous "you need to pass it to find out whats in it" quote from Speaker Pelosi, was merely in response to endless amendments put forth by Republicans, cynically, in order to stall and defeat the bill. They didn't negotiate in good faith because they do not want Americans to have affordable health care. They would rather employers, the Catholic Church and insurance companies continue free reign over our healthcare. Over fifty per cent of employers "offer" no insurance or insurance that covers practically nothing, meanwhile insurance companies enjoy great profitability, and more and more Americans have no coverage at all. The Republican response, eloquently stated during their debates was "let em die". Wake up America, fair wages and benefits for fair work are rapidly disappearing, although economists say how productivity has increased, and a Republican assault on the middle class will ensure a return to America before the days of the middle class.

Pat - Republicans were smart enough to look at the approach Governor Romney took in Massachusetts (based on input from conservative think tanks and people like Newt Gingrich and other Republicans) and see that it wasn't the right solution for the country. It's actually a good thing to look at similar programs and assess their effectiveness. If the Democrats had done that they would have realized that it only works in MA because the Federal government helps to subsidize part of the program and because the residents are predominately Democrat and don't necessarily object to government intrusion in their life. However, since there is obviously nobody to subsidize the program for the Federal government, it is much too costly and makes no sense to implement it at a national level.

The funniest (saddest) part of this insanity was when I e-mailed my senator. The answer was I didn't know what was in it when it came up for a vote insert Nancy Pelosi quote But please don't blame me or your congressman because we didn't vote for it. You have senators apologising to constituents for this insanity.

Ozzieboy You can say the republicans did this and the republicans did that but there is one provable fact on public record that NO republican senator or congressman voted for THIS bill.

Ozzieboy, IF you was to go to a bank and get a loan for a house, would you READ the documents BEFORE or AFTER you signed your name at the bottom of the page?

BEAN: Sure buddy, cause as we all know, health care costs had not been skyrocketing for the last 25 years, right???

And in case you are unaware, 90% of the program has not even gone into effect yet so how to you blame it for all of these price increases???

And I'm just curious, do you care about all for the tens of millions of Americans who had no health care and will now be covered???

The parts that did go into effect are no preexisting conditions so I G-d forbid I do not have insurance (which I do) and I find out that I have cancer I cannot be turned down, or the cap that used to be at $2m was removed. I am not saying these are bad things but they did drive prices up. In the policy I have for my employees they went up last year 20% with a 15% reduction in benefits.

I would also add getting rid of the HSA's which this program does makes no sense at all.

Bean - you have no clue.

The situation you are talking about started with me in 2007...I guess they knew then Obamacare was coming?

When I retired in 2006 the company I worked for raised our medical insurance from $490/month to $2,200/month...why because they could and not because they paid that much for us.

The two companies my wife and I work for now can get group insurance coverage for us but we pay 100% of the cost which comes to total of $700/month for two. The problem is it is a big game the insurance companies and employers play.

Employers don't have to pay for your insurance, they just have to make it available to you.

Oh man... I gota chime in..... did I read "a liitle higher"... this is why MSNBC sometime is the Main Support Network for oBama Channel..... there initial estimate was 900 Billion with just ONE year added the cost projection SKYROCKETED to 1.7 TRILLION.... " November will not be a vote for Newt or Torum or Mitt..... it will be a vote against Obama.

Oh No the last job I had they did pay half and I left in 2010 retired with bad knees. We didn't have that problem then but I'll bet my friends do now. Don't like it they'll tell you its a right to work state which means you have the right not to work to.

November will not be a vote for Newt or Torum or Mitt..... it will be a vote against Obama.

Absolutely! That's why they are all fighting so hard for the nomination.....

I could be convinced of that if they had better candidates. The ones they have make it look like the GOP have given up before it started.

no. ----- read page 131 of the law.

Ozzie boy

Your "I love Obama card" won't get you jack anything , expecially free health care. What it migh get you is a place at the back of the bread line when Obama bankrupts this country and turns us into a third world country.

No, you have me wrong rump ranger. But, I pegged you right.

Better enjoy the next 2 years, Obamacare is going crush just the economy just as soon as the new president begins to restore it.

U.S. will pay for half of all health care costs by 2020 - July 28, 2011

"Total health care spending is expected to nearly double to $4.6 trillion in 2020, from $2.6 trillion in 2010.

Health care spending per capita is forecast to increase to $13,708 in 2020 from $8,327 in 2010, the report said.

By 2020, nearly 30 million additional people are expected to have health insurance because of reform.

Over the 10-year period, the report showed that the biggest annual jump in health care spending will happen in 2014 when health reform is fully implemented.

CMS estimates that in 2014 about 23 million uninsured consumers will gain access to health insurance, mainly through government programs such as Medicaid and through the creation of federal and state-funded health insurance exchanges.

As a result, the government expects Medicaid spending to surge 20% in 2014 and private health insurance spending to increase 9.4%.

Norwalk said the estimated sharp surge in Medicaid spending just in one year, is very concerning given that states are already struggling with their budgets.

As millions more gain access to health insurance, the government expects spending on prescription drugs, physician and hospital services to increase as well.

CMS expects prescription drug spending to jump by 10.7% in 2014 and to account for 11% of national health spending by 2020. Spending on physician and clinical services is forecast to rise by 8.9% by 2014, representing 19% of overall health care spending."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spending_forecast/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=hp_bn3

P.S. Keep in mind these are even the government released numbers, the reality will be much worse.

pjam09

Ok, I get it, you're just a troll. No responses from you on my previous responses to this same copy/paste you have put everywhere.

I haven't got anyone on my ignore list, you might be the first in 3 years.

Bosslimo:

The reason the CBO estimates the cost to be more than it did last year is pretty simple.

The AHCA that was given to the CBO had ten years worth of money coming in and 6 years a money going out.

The AHCA will be fully implemented in 2014. So every year we get closer to 2014 is one more year of cost that the CBO did not score. This was a shame right from the start and the Republicans was telling everyone that from the beginning.

So what happens when the CBO can score 10 years of money coming in and 10 years of money going out.

You can type in all of the arguments that you want be these are the facts and the CBO new reports reflets those facts.

In the END the AHCA will end up adding 2.7 Trillion dollars to the budget every year. How much revenue is the Government collecting this year 2.5 Trillion! So the math says the AHCA will end up costing people almost twice as much in HeathCare then it did three years ago. Period end of story so shut your pie hole please!

3 Chics Politico gives mad props to President Obama on his accomplishments since being in office. It’s pretty impressive!

Hat-tip: Political Carnival

1. Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut spending

2. Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices

3. Instituted enforcement for equal pay for women

4. Beginning the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq

5. Families of fallen soldiers have expenses covered to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB

6 Ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information

7. Ended media blackout on covering the return of fallen soldiers to
Dover AFB; the media is now permitted to do so pending adherence to
respectful rules and approval of fallen soldier’s family

8. The White House and federal government are respecting the Freedom of Information Act

9. Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible

10. Limits on lobbyist’s access to the White House

11. Limits on White House aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration

12. Ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date

13. Phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons
systems, which weren’t even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan

14. Removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research

15. Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research

16. New federal funding for science and research labs

17. States are permitted to enact federal fuel efficiency standards above federal standards

18. Increased infrastructure spending (roads, bridges, power plants) after years of neglect

19. Funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools

20. New funds for school construction

21 The prison at Guantanamo Bay is being phased out

22. US Auto industry rescue plan

23. Housing rescue plan

24. $789 billion economic stimulus plan

25. The public can meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (the
new plan can be completed in one day) a mortgage if they are having
trouble paying

26. US financial and banking rescue plan

27. The secret detention facilities in Eastern Europe and elsewhere are being closed

28. Ended the previous policy; the US now has a no torture policy and is in compliance with theGeneva Convention standards

29. Better body armor is now being provided to our troops

30. The missile defense program is being cut by $1.4 billion in 2010

31. Restarted the nuclear nonproliferation talks and building back up the nuclear inspection infrastructure/protocols

32. Reengaged in the treaties/agreements to protect the Antarctic

33. Reengaged in the agreements/talks on global warming and greenhouse gas emissions

34. Visited more countries and met with more world leaders than any president in his first six months in office

35. Successful release of US captain held bySomali pirates; authorized the SEALS to do their job

36. US Navy increasing patrols off Somali coast

37. Attractive tax write-offs for those who buy hybrid automobiles

38. Cash for clunkers program offers vouchers to trade in fuel
inefficient, polluting old cars for new cars; stimulated auto sales

39. Announced plans to purchase fuel efficient American-made fleet for the federal government

40. Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children

41. Signed national service legislation; expandednational youth service program

42. Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return home to visit loved ones

43. Ended the previous policy of not regulating and labeling carbon dioxide emissions

44. Expanding vaccination programs

45. Immediate and efficient response to the floods in North Dakota and other natural disasters

46. Closed offshore tax safe havens

47. Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals

48. Ended the previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations
who outsource American jobs; the new policy is to promote in-sourcing to
bring jobs back

49.. Ended the previous practice of protecting credit card companies; in
place of it are new consumer protections from credit card industry’s
predatory practices

50. Energy producing plants must begin preparing to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources

51. Lower drug costs for seniors

52. Ended the previous practice of forbidding Medicare from negotiating
with drug manufacturers for cheaper drugs; the federal government is now
realizing hundreds of millions in savings

53. Increasing pay and benefits for military personnel

54. Improved housing for military personnel

55. Initiating a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses

56. Improved conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other military hospitals

57 Increasing student loans

58. Increasing opportunities in AmeriCorps program

59. Sent envoys to Middle East and other parts of the world that had
been neglected for years; reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks
and diplomacy

60. Established a new cyber security office

61. Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military 20
years after the Cold War to a more modern fighting force; this includes
new procurement policies, increasing size of military, new technology
and cyber units and operations, etc.

62. Ended previous policy of awarding no-bid defense contracts

63. Ordered a review of hurricane and natural disaster preparedness

64. Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the
federal government money and making federal operations more efficient

65. Students struggling to make college loan payments can have their loans refinanced

66. Improving benefits for veterans

67. Many more press conferences and town halls and much more media access than previous administration

68. Instituted a new focus on mortgage fraud

69. The FDA is now regulating tobacco

70. Ended previous policy of cutting the FDA and circumventing FDA rules

71. Ended previous practice of having White House aides rewrite scientific and environmental rules, regulations, and reports

72. Authorized discussions with North Korea and private mission by Pres.
Bill Clinton to secure the release of two Americans held in prisons

73. Authorized discussions with Myanmar and mission by Sen. Jim Web to secure the release of an American held captive

74. Making more loans available to small businesses

75. Established independent commission to make recommendations on slowing the costs of Medicare

76. Appointment of first Latina to the Supreme Court

77. Authorized construction/opening of additional health centers to care for veterans

78. Limited salaries of senior White House aides; cut to $100,000

79. Renewed loan guarantees for Israel

80. Changed the failing/status quo military command in Afghanistan

81. Deployed additional troops to Afghanistan

82. New Afghan War policy that limits aerial bombing and prioritizes
aid, development of infrastructure, diplomacy, and good government
practices by Afghans

83. Announced the long-term development of a national energy grid with
renewable sources and cleaner, efficient energy production

84. Returned money authorized for refurbishment of White House offices and private living quarters

85. Paid for redecoration of White House living quarters out of his own pocket

86. Held first Seder in White House

87. Attempting to reform the nation’s healthcare system which is the
most expensive in the world yet leaves almost 50 million without health
insurance and millions more under insured

88. Has put the ball in play for comprehensive immigration reform

89. Has announced his intention to push for energy reform

90. Has announced his intention to push for education reform

The secret detention facilities in Eastern Europe and elsewhere are being closed

Just out of curiosity, since they are secret facilities, how do we know that they were actually closed? By their very nature, covert operations are intended to be secretive and make use of disinformation.....

.....lol...gee, with that release, hot off the presses of the DNC Propaganda headquarters, you would think that the country would have two nickels to rub together and full employment.......guess again......

@ #25.4,

What garbage (said with a French accent) ! Points # 89 and # 90 are laughable !

"Has announced his intention to .....". Since when has "announcing intentions" qualified as "accomplishing something" ?? Only in the minds of idolatrous libtards would this qualify as accomplishing something.

#17 is pretty laughable as well !

Whole states get Waivers? I'm in Reno. Do I not have to get it? When does it start?

The Affordable health care act is a joke, but what can you expect from a President who is a Joke.

why the cost keep changing....

because the whole health care plan is a mess. nothing but smoking mirrors and hidden policy aimed at government control.

i have cancer and if all that i had was government health care i would be scared to death with no hope of living.

the thought of my health in the hands of the government!!!

not for me thank you.

if we ever get to the point when government healthcare is all that we have i will have to find some other country to go to for my health care needs because health care in the US will be worthless.

why do unions get an exemtion from this heal care plan. do they know something that the rest of you (who can't wait to get it) don't.

That's because most of your list is a type of co-op healthcare group package, and they feel their coverage is adequate, but don't think for a moment that those health care co-op wouldn't put a nix to a stem cell transplant that they would think is too expensive and not effective to warrant the money. And nothing in the list tells the outrageous premiums and co-pays that must come out of pocket.

What you mean you have cancer and you can't imagine in a govt. health care plan your cancer would leave you with NO HOPE OF LIVING??? I treat radiation therapy patients all the time with medicaid and medicare that are living fine, are these not government health care programs???? And as far as going to another country? Explain then according to the World Health Organization we spend $6,000 per capita income in this country compared to the next highest industrial country- Japan at a little over $3000. And our outcomes for cancer, diabetes, pulmonary and cardiovascular care as well as arthritis are no better and in many cases WORSE?? Why then do we spend 2X as much as other countries??

Could it be that we are experts at triple by-pass surgery at a cost of$250,000 but are clueless about how to make that patient healthy enough over a lifetime so they don't need the by pass?????? You have plenty of physicians who could CARE LESS about your health, they just want to perform that interventional procedure they makes most patients go bankrupt.