E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe House voted Thursday to repeal a central provision of the 2010 health care overhaul, the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).
The vote was 223 to 181, with seven Democrats voting with most Republicans to abolish IPAB. Ten Republicans voted against the effort to kill IPAB.
The board’s job is to propose cost-saving changes to Medicare if per capita spending on that program exceeds a target, the national income growth rate, plus 1 percent. The IPAB changes would automatically take effect unless Congress blocked them or enacted its own cost-saving measures.
The House vote took place only four days before the Supreme Court begins hearing oral arguments on the constitutionality of other provision of the 2010 law.
Thursday’s vote will have little more than a symbolic election-year effect since if the Senate were to vote on IPAB, Democrats have enough votes to keep it alive.
And the board, which is supposed to have 15 members with expertise in medical care and economics, still exists only on paper: President Obama has not yet nominated anyone to serve on it. Its members are subject to Senate confirmation.
But the White House has issued a veto threat against the House bill, saying it would dismantle IPAB “even before it has a chance to work. The bill would eliminate an important safeguard that… will help reduce the rate of Medicare cost growth responsibly while protecting Medicare beneficiaries….”
The 2010 Affordable Care Act which created the board, says IPAB can’t ration care, restrict benefits, increase the premiums Medicare recipients must pay, or alter the eligibility for Medicare. But it can limit or change payments to doctors, hospitals, hospices, and other providers.
After the vote, the chief proponent of IPAB, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D- W.V., issued a statement denouncing the move to abolish it.
“Today’s House vote is a good example of what happens when special interests win – seniors lose,” he said. “The Independent Payment Advisory Board was created to protect Medicare for seniors – by improving the quality of Medicare services and by extending the life of Medicare for years to come."
In House debate Wednesday, Rep. Sander Levin, D- Mich., defended IPAB, saying, “For conservatives who talk about the importance of cost containment, they want to repeal an act that has within it not only the seeds of cost containment, but the instrumentalities of it. In fact, they’re beginning to work well enough. That’s why CBO (Congressional Budget Office) says that it’s going to be 10 years before IPAB is triggered.”
But Rep. Dan Lungren, R- Calif., said, “The idea that 15 unelected individuals on the Independent Payment Advisory Board have been empowered by the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to ration health care for seniors—and that’s for all seniors— is as Orwellian as these titles crafted by the previous Congress to divert attention from what’s really being done here.”
He said that IPAB “raises the most serious ethical concerns about respect for the dignity of our seniors. This is the unfortunate consequence of a world view which favors the notion of bureaucratic expertise and efficiency as a solution to the challenges facing our health care system today.”
The House bill also included a provision to impose a $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages and to limit the contingency fees lawyers can charge in medical malpractice cases.
Leave a Comment:
When are you Republicans officials going to realize that most of Joe American no longer believes or trusts you guys anymore?? There have been FAR too many lies and FAR too many breaches of trust. When you guys tell the corporate and wealthy elite to take a hike and start working for Joe America, THEN MAYBE you'll have the change regain the trust, contingent on your good behavior over some period of time! You've caused too many disasters to get that trust back quickly.
This is nuts. The Republicans in the House are so out of touch with what really matters these days.
Sorry, pal. It's you liberals who are out of touch. The American people have finally seen the light of day.
Look dude- Get with the program- Democrats are bankrupting this country. Pay your own share rather than having someone else pay-
Republican Rep. Paul Ryan: we have to contain the cost of Medicare by giving it to private industry and giving senior citizens coupons.
Republican Rep. Dan Lungren: we can't have Medicare cost containment, that will hurt seniors.
Republican hypocracy at its finest.
The following is the ranking of each state based on how much federal tax dollars it receives for every $1 of federal taxes paid by the residents of that state (if it says $2.00 the state received twice as much as it paid, if it says $0.50 it received half as much as it paid). All states follow the same Federal Tax Code. I also included whether the state is considered republican, democrat or swing state based on current 2012 presidential polls. All this information was gathered from the IRS and the most recent census data.
1. Mississippi (R) $2.83
2. West Virginia (R) $2.82
3. New Mexico (D) $2.80
4. Hawaii (D) $2.38
5. Alaska (R) $2.24
6. Alabama (R) $2.21
7. South Carolina (R) $2.13
8. Montana (R) $2.13
9. Maine (D) $2.00
10. Kentucky (R) $1.96
11. North Dakota (R) $1.93
12. Virginia (S) $1.90
13. South Dakota (R) $1.82
14. Vermont (D) $1.69
15. Arizona (R) $1.59
16. Maryland (D) $1.53
17. Idaho (R) $1.48
18. Louisiana (R) $1.35
19. Iowa (S) $1.34
20. Wyoming (R) $1.30
21. Missouri (S) $1.30
22. Kansas (R) $1.29
23. Michigan (D) $1.28
24. Indiana (R) $1.26
25. Tennessee (R) $1.26
26. Florida (S) $1.24
27. Oregon (D) $1.21
28. Oklahoma (R) $1.20
29. Utah (R) $1.18
30. Georgia (R) $1.14
31. Pennsylvania (S) $1.12
32. New Hampshire (S) $1.11
33. Wisconsin (D) $1.09
34. North Carolina (S) $1.04
35. Nevada (S) $1.03
36. Washington (D) $1.03
37. California (D) $1.00
38. Massachusettes (D) $0.95
39. Ohio (S) $0.95
40. Texas (R) $0.92
41. Arkansas (R) $0.92
42. Colorado (S) $0.90
43. Rhode Island (D) $0.89
44. Nebraska (R) $0.82
45. New York (D) $0.79
46. Illinois (D) $0.79
47. Connecticut (D) $0.74
48. New Jersey (D) $0.62
49. Minnesota (D) $0.54
50. Delaware (D) $0.40
To break that down for you:
$0.40-$0.80 - 6 Democrat, 0 Republican, 0 Swing States
$0.81-$1.00 - 3 Democrat, 3 Republican, 2 Swing States
$1.01-$1.50 - 4 Democrat, 9 Republican, 7 Swing States
$1.51-$2.00 - 3 Democrat, 4 Republican, 1 Swing States
$2.01-$2.50 - 1 Democrat, 4 Republican, 0 Swing States
$2.51-$2.83 - 1 Democrat, 2 Republican, 0 Swing States
Republicans talk a lot about "personal responsibility" and not being "dependent on government", but turns out it is mostly Republican states that are a drain on federal tax dollars while it is mostly Democrat states that foot the bill.
Well Tom, you are half right. It is both sides that you can not trust; only a fool would no recognize that.
So this bill would protect seniors health care, cuts costs and limit the amount lawyers can leech from law suits? No wonder the republicans don't like it.
Let us take a look at their alternative proposal. ( ) There, did you see it? As usual...nothing.
I understand that progressive p_kes only condone polls that favor their view but Americans don't want obamacare.
These progressive posters on this vine are enough reason for me to vote anyone but obama!!!!
LMAO at the Lemmings who actually believe the 15 Panel Death Squad was a good thing...You people are sick......or young and don't have a clue what is coming in Obama care unless it is stopped..But the again Demoncrats rely on the uneducated lowest life forms in the nation to stay in office...
@eddie, the "death panel" thing was given Politifacts 2009 Lie of the Year Award. Perhaps you need to do a little more research yourself.
IPAB was one of the strongest ways to decrease costs and increase quality in American healthcare. A large committee would be able to work without special interest pressure to come up with recommendations which Congress could vote up or down.
Sadly, special interests by way of drug companies and doctors groups, afraid of losing profits, convinced conservatives to try to get rid of this.
OBAMA MUST VETO THIS IF IT EVER GETS THROUGH THE SENATE!
It's ironic that Republicans are complaining about this rationing healthcare for seniors--what do they think the Ryan plan does???
Wow. Republicans are douchebags.
Death squads. Death panels. Same old song and dance in a field of fresh, old BS. Talk about lemmings. This has been disproven so long ago that it was funny to see it again. Thanks ed. Now go handle that rattlesnake.
whose the lemming eddie
sounds liek someone using the term "Death Panel" is the obvious lemming. Where have we heard that before.. oh yeah it was parroted attack from the far right wing that had no substance to being with.
Then you go off on a uneducated rant.. That's even funnier. Progressives out educate tea partiers and the far rihgt wing by a wide wide margin
Ahh Eddie, bringing up the Death Panel lie again. What can't find any other valid arguement.??? No, I didn't think so.
WORST. CONGRESS. EVER.
MY health and MY health care is MY business and the federal government, with it's useless CEO can stay the phuck out of it, PERIOD
Another Obama billions of dollars debacle ....
Now they are saying it will take more than 60 years to pay down Obama's crushing debt ....
Obama must go ....
JonSmith-agreed !
Tim- nice research
The reason all of the politicians who voted for this latest attempt to gut the ACA (aside from notching a political "win" against "That man in the Whitehouse") is that the IPAB effectively removes the politicians ability to take
bribescampaign contributions from health care lobbyists.This board is perfectly legal. Like law which ennpowered the board to close military bases, this law requires Congressmen to do what they say they want to do, contain the cost of Medicare. Congress will be required to vote against the cost changes or put in place other, equal saving changes.
Congress, and Republicans in particular, really hates doing what they said they would do. Using the force of law to require it absolutely drives them insane (or should I say more insane.)
Hahahahahaha! Funniest comment I've seen in a long time . . . but, I suspect, for very different reasons than eddie intended.
This is a great example of the distortions that Republicans like create to base their fear-mongering tactics on. I'm surprised they are not calling it a death panel, but I am sure they have some ad agency figuring out how to put some terrifying spin on it.
This kind of action is only useful for political posturing. They are already laying the groundwork for business as usual - lies and distortions on the campaign trail. The Republican Presidential candidates are leading the way, with a jump from 6% negative ads during the 2008 cycle to 50% during the current cycle.
Well, I guess this kind of political fight is all that is left to them, because they certainly cannot win on the truth - the fact is that their policies nearly destroyed this country and its economy, and it was rescued by the legislative initiatives of the Democratic President and Congress in the early months of the Obama administration. PPACA is just one piece of the that successful effort which is all that is carrying us through the Congressional paralysis induced by the political extremism of the Tea - whatevers.
We need a Congress that is moderate, sane and focused on what works - which means the far right Republicans have to go.
Realist: are you over 65 ?
You know the Republican saying, "keep the governments hands off my Medicare."
Considering the "Death Panel" was shown to be a Republican Lie before...are you sure you want to go there?
Tom, this is not matter of trust, Republican listen what most American want , Repeal Obamacare , because it is difficult repeal the law in one struck ,they will do little by little until all is gone. Democrats will fight for a law that nobody read and nobody knew what was in it. General Pelosi give the orders ann everybody vote Yes, like sheep's.
For all the people that saying Republicans want to destroy Medicare, Obamacare steal 500 millions from Medicare.
“Today’s House vote is a good example of what happens when special interests win – seniors lose,”
Boy, talk about a 'spin'. How can keeping a provision in Obamacare that says costs will automatically be cut for seniors a 'win' for seniors?
Hey Democrats, try using some logic for a change. Claiming that having a board appointed by the President with the authority to cut care for seniors if the cost goes up too fast can hardly be presented as somehow 'making seniors win'.
Everybody knows that this is what Sarah Palin characterized as 'Death Panels', where the President's 'board' decides whether life-saving procedures will be authorized for Medicare recipients. They will begin to say "That life-saving procedure/drug is too expensive, so we will not cover it any longer".
It would appear that the Democratic plan is to tell seniors "Die early, it will save us money".
IPAB is not in the favor of us seniors. I want my doctor to decide what I need not any group of bureaucrats.
And why should citizens be saddled with paying for contraceptives..birth control even for other uses, like harmon replacement therpy? This is ludicrus, if is not the governments to pay for that if so why not pay for every dang Rx in the country then...what is the difference?
Republicans are out of touch with the American People because they have not been working for the American People. Republicans work for whoever can increase their own private bank accounts.
Obama / Biden 2012
So, let me get this straight. During the whole health care debate, it was pointed out that there would be rationing bodies (or "death panels" if you prefer) within the bureacracy who would make decisions about who would or wouldn't get care. This was called a lie. People who mentioned it were called every name in the book and denounced. Now, we are debating whether or not this rationing body should be the ones to make these decisions and some people here are defending the thing they said was a lie and didn't exist? Nope, no hypocrisy there.
@Tom In NH.........Don't forget the democrats dude. All politicians are liars and crooks. Anyone who believes otherwise is either totaly ignorant or extremely naive to say the least.
To Tim; I hate half truths so here is the information actually gather by one Erza Klein about aid to the states-
Counting for Dollars: States and District of Columbia
Table 1: Federal Assistance Distributed on the Basis of Census-Related Statistics, 50 States And the District of Columbia, Fiscal Year 2008
1.California- D
2. New York-D
3.Texas-R
4.Illinois-D
5.Florida -D/R
6.Pennsylvania -D
6. Michigan-D
So as you can see the most populous states get most of the aid and they happen to be democrats- the numbers you posted before do not take into account population. You should know that most "welfare" programs are based on the US census and population information. Stop with the lies.
oh goody, another jobs bill by the republicons. keeping up on that promise in 2010 of "joBS, joBS, joBS.....
Ivonne, nice half truth there. You're info doesn't take into account how much they pay in the first place, mine does. Yours is based solely on dollars in, and ignores how much they are paying in relation to how much they get back. More fudging the numbers from the righties. Democrat states do a better job of paying their own bill, Republican states require the most outside help.
Tim-1040943 "The following is the ranking of each state based on how much federal tax dollars it receives for every $1 of federal taxes paid by the residents of that state"
So what you're saying is that the Liberal States that vote Democrat and pay lots of taxes are paying to support the Republican voting States.
Now that's what I call 'the ultimate irony'.
Keep up the good work, Liberals, and thank you.
You made my day, Tim.
Yes the average Joe America no longer trust those darn republican officials. So much so that they voted those Republican officials into the US House and the State governments two years ago at an historical number.
eddie s-802886, you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
Members of congress enjoy Free health care, unlimited payed sick days, over 60 paid holidays, 3 weeks of paid vacation, ridiculous retirement pensions all courtesy of our tax dollars all taken from the general fund. They pay nothing for these benefits. This is a non- entitlement. I have payed taxes every day of my working life over 30 years into social security and med. and you @!$%#s think my entitlements are the problem? This is where I would start making cuts if I was in office and you watch how fast Obamacare would become Americare. People like Eddie just want the world to burn. They never get laid and have no respect for other human beings because they get picked on and are weak unless they hide behind a PC in Alabama. Antiquated talking points don't cut it anymore. The only folks you are scaring are yourselves. Here is a fact for you... Education and propaganda are not the same thing. Your party is only organized because people of vast wealth are conducting your ideology and because you have some fantasy about winning the lottery you think some day it will benefit you. Meanwhile you are sitting on your ass working for 9 dollars an hour for the Cock Bros computer anti liberal bank... Whatever pays the bills homie.
Tom in NH,
You are only as good as your last game. Your team got clobbered in 2010, and the talent level looks no better this time. The community organizer will get fired in 229 days and you can look for a new head coach.
Your retarded. Take a class in statistics before you tell anyone to stop with lies!
This board would only be there to find ways to consider savings in health care costs. They have no authority whatsoever to approve or deny any service or coverage to anyone or to put any changes they come up with into effect. They are an independent advisory board whose task is to propose actions to improve medical care while reducing costs.
What so bad about that? That they're independent and not tied to a political party? Or that they will find ways to reduce costs to taxpayers and the government by streamlining processes and negotiating with healthcare and drug companies for lower prices?
It is ethically wrong and I wish it was illegal for the way that the GOP and anti-Obama people are scaring the hell out of people telling them that this board is some kind of death squad, which is totally false in every aspect and has been fact checked and verified to be nothing but a big lie with no basis for any of it. This is exactly why I don't want Republicans in charge of the White House, Congress, or anything else. Spreading fear through propaganda to the population to gain power is by any reasonable definition terrorism. I thought we were fighting terrorists, not electing them into office. The GOP would love to turn our nation into a fascist terror state with no one accountable for power grabs and concentrating more and more wealth to the top few at the expense of the rest of us.
@eddie s.. The majority of Americans want and deserve UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE (NON-PROFIT) like every other CIVILIZED nation has. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness cannot be achieved without it. Only a sociopath believes that people should suffer and die because they cannot "afford" health care. BTW,it would save Americans million$ a year. Check the figures out at the CBO.
Maybe President Obama can borrow Governor Schweitzer's VETO brands...
Well this U.S. House of Representative vote proves, once again, that the vast majority of Republicans are STILL working for the Medical Insurance Companies and Pharmacuetical Companies special interests as opposed to the American Public who elected them. They are serial liers and are NOT to be trusted or believed. They vote with THEIR best interests in mind to the exclusion of what is good for the American Taxpayers and the elderly! Shame on them!
Hey rethugli-cons,
How is the job creating scenario you were elected to take care of working out? Pretty good, I guess, since you seem to have all kinds of time to pass legislation you know is meaningless and doesn't stand a chance of passing. Still playing your partisan BS I see.
To those of you who vote republican, I saw this on FaceBook. The redneck on the left states: I vote republican to keep foreigners, women, minorities, socialists, gays and liberals from ruining my life. The business man on the right (holding a big bag of money) states: I vote republican to keep this moron, pointing to the redneck, from realizing I am the only one ruining his life. So much truth and so much stupidity.
Bart Conner "WORST. CONGRESS. EVER."
Gee, I wonder why? Perhaps because the Republican House has passed over 30 bills to improve the economy/jobs, but Harry Reid and his Democrats in the Senate have blocked virtually every one of them, not even allowing them to have a debate or offer amendments. 'Good ole Harry' doesn't seem to be able to get around to passing a Budget every year either - he hasn't passed one for about 4 years now.
If this is the "WORST CONGRESS EVER", it's because of Harry Reid, who apparently has decided to do absolutely nothing on jobs or the economy, and then hypocritically blame the Republicans.
And still no real jobs bill from the House of Representatives. Every supposed jobs bill passed by the house just continues to make the rich richer and the poor poorer and the environment worse. I wish they would really get a clue and do something any thing that would benefit everyone instead of the select few they want to make richer.
Ivonne-411507 I know math iz hard, but you can do it if you try.
It is disingenuous to rank the states based on the amounts of dollars received because that does not take into account the amounts of dollars that they paid in. the size of the population is not relevent. That is the point of the table, to contrast what is gained to what is lost.
Once again, "the ranking of each state is based on how much federal tax dollars it receives for every $1 of federal taxes paid by the residents of that state." So, re: your little list, California broke even, New York lost 21%, Texas lost 8%, Illinois lost 21%, Florida gained 24% etc., etc.
Jon, at 1.8. You say this will protect seniors' health care. Perhaps, you didn't know that Obama is robbing a huge sum from medicare to fund other parts of the program. And, Yes, that means when the panel sets policy there will be LESS money to be used for seniors health care. You really think that's "protecting" their health care. BS.
A committee to contain costs and reduce expenditures so that the medicare program continues to be affordable for decades into the future? That's "death panelling" Grandma!! That's "rationing" of care. Better to just completely do away with Medicare all together. Definitely a MUCH better way to take care of our seniors.
Gotta love that republican 'logic'.
These numbers are valid and are per capita. The poster up the line after you wishes to use gross receipt of states of Federal funds. In as much as I lived a long time in South Dakota, I'll address that state. No state income tax, constantly at the Federal feed though to cover their shortcomings by under taxation at the state level. There are sparsely traveled roads that were widened to 4 lanes--time and time again. A state of 840K attempts to be the poster child for fiscal sanity, yet they bleed the Federal Government and, for years, they sat atop the list usually fighting Mississippi for the spot.
The last time they voted for the Democratic Party in a Presidential election was LBJ and "states rights" became that state's belief that they were fiscally Conservative, while they were tax leeches.
Good post. I appreciate it.
To all you Obama haters (GET A LIFE!
It seems to me that the very fact that this board is to be made up people who know something and are, indeed, unelected, ensures that they'll actually be able to get something done. I guess that's what the GOP/TP is worried about.
The only problem with your information is that these 2010 Census figures are based on payments that were allocated in 2009. And the budget which approves those payments is done in 2008. The State has to make their request the year before the Federal budget. So the request would have been made in 2007. The party you have in control would have not necessarily been the party in control the year the census released their data. You'll need to go back and research who was in control in 2007 for each State. I can tell you that in 2007 Louisiana's Governor was Democrat. There election was in Oct of 2007 which ousted the Democrat and put in a Republican who took the office in 2008. Back to the drawing board you go.....
FOX News watcher are you? Medicare is Government run, period. Meanwhile, Insurance Companies are in the business to make money, part of the new Health-care laws keep Insurance Companies from cutting paying customers off when the care gets too expensive.
Have you not lived in the real world? Have you not seen Greedy Insurance Companies cut people off when it got too expensive to treat them? Even with the patients doctors saying treatment is needed? Insurance Companies are the true "Death Panels".
It's obvious you've never had a friend or family member cut off continued treatment and left to die so the Insurance Company does not need to cut into it's large profit margin.
So Republicans yell "cut costs" over and over... but then vote to remove the one part of the bill that has a built in "cost cutting" function.
Why would they do that if they are so set on cutting costs? Ohhhhh... that's right. Because that part of the ACA also removes their ability to take special interest bribes. Once again, Republicans prove that they only care about lobbyists and special interest groups.
Sorry GOP, but the mere fact that the ACA requires insurance companies to use the majority of their funds on healthcare costs, and NOT executive salaries, is enough to get most Americans to support it. I know that most Republicans love having their "hard earned money" go towards executive salaries of insurance companies... but the rest of us would rather have the money we give to health insurance companies actually go towards... oh, you know... HEALTH CARE. (I know, it's a crazy idea)
So that is what this entire debate comes down to: Republicans side with lobbyists and want their healthcare insurance money to go to executive salaries. Liberals side with patients and want their healthcare insurance money to go to health care costs. Pick your side.
Wow - I'm sorry, but all the seniors commenting on this board are overwhelming republican, misinformed, and possibly senile. If you're reading this article on the internet, you can make the font bigger and actually read what the words say.
They just vetoed the creation of a board that cannot limit benefits, ration care, or restrict any style of treatment. The board was created to negotiate and propose cost-savings directly with doctors and hospitals (read: getting them to accept lower rates) in order to keep the ponzi scheme that is social security and medicare from sucking this country die faster than it already is.
I love the old idiots on here about keeping government bureaucrats out of medicare - faith in humanity + respect for senior citizens = officially gone.
The republicans just voted with their Big Pharma, Big Insurance, and Big Medical cronies to keep our medical care costs the highest on this planet. Nothing more, nothing less, and not only that, but medicare will damn well run out faster this way.
Senile idiots.
The real question is-why do we need medicare if we have Obamacare? Obama said that everyone would have the same healthcare. That couldn't be furthur from the truth. What about welfare? The congress and all other federal plans for politicians? How many back door deals do we not even know about yet? Remember Pelosi-DON'T READ IT-JUST SIGN IT!! That couldn't go against the people more than just telling us we're screwed and can't do anything about.
This will go down as the worst bill in the history of not just our country but ALL countries! The lies, fraud and blantant deceit is punishable by law. Anyone who signed this bill should be found guilty of treason and put in a public hanging with no exceptions!!
@ Tyler - What a joke. There are others in the thread whose comments are as inflammatory, if not more than eddies but he's the only one suspended. You must agree with their viewpoint then. Some moderator.
Reading though just this top thread I found ~ 15 comment collapsed by the community. I opened each one and found only one that might be offensive. The others were well stated even if I didn't agree with what they said.
There sure are a bunch of narrow minded folks on this board. It appears that they think because they disagree with a statement, then everyone else should also.
MSNBC - take away the collapse button as there are too many idiots here that abuse it.
For folks reading the threads, you might find it worthwhile to un-collapse a comment and read it.
A response to #1.29
Roy’s Tale
Washington D.C., March 30, 2012 – In a stunning reversal of prior Supreme Court rulings, the Supreme Court ruled that the “Affordable Care Act” is unconstitutional and can not be enacted, by a vote of 5-4. While concurrently the Ryan Budget was pushed through both Houses of Congress and awaits the lame duck President’s signature. Both actions indicating a decided move to the right by a significant majority of the population and their elected representatives.
Within weeks all entitlement programs will be slashed to minimal levels of funding if not abolished altogether. The voucher program for healthcare will be instituted across the board. The Department of Education will be abolished and Pell grants rescinded. Dodd-Frank will be repealed and the free-market will be allowed to function as theorized. Roe vs Wade will be overturned and abortion outlawed. The de-unionization of the United States will be accomplished with all states becoming “right-to-work” states. Prayer will be reintroduced to all public schools and universities, to be said prior to the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of every morning.
This is a Republican’s wet dream.
The mind boggles at the resultant society that this would bring about. Let’s just take a brief look at the voucher program. Those same senior citizens you were worried about (along with everyone else) will now have the ability to shop through a myriad of insurance companies trying to find that elusive combination of cheapest rates and broadest coverage. This will entail many hours of combing through fine print. And when they settle on an insurance package their voucher will only cover 65% of the cost (if that). When they then get diagnosed with a massive coronary blockage at age 85 their insurance company says they will only cover 80% of the $500,000 + coronary by-pass procedure (or the actuarials at the insurance company will review the case and inform the patient that at their age that procedure is not covered under their policy, didn’t they read Section 71 Sub Section 38b Clause 15 when they signed up with the insurance company? Or the hospital ethicist may determine that it’s not the best use of the hospital’s resources and maybe a non-invasive form of treatment may be more approriate.)
The bottom line is: unless you are paying with 100% cash for any health procedure, someone other than you is making decisions about your treatment or lack thereof, based on age, health history and ability to pay. That’s just the way it is. In our society hospitals and doctors are not in the business of saving lives, they’re in the business of making money.
Granted, this is just a rough sketch and I could go on and on, especially about education, but it will fall on deaf ears. Just like I could listen to you state your case about the appropriateness of the first two paragraphs above without you having much impact on my beliefs.
What we are witnessing is the culmination of the “Me Decade” under cowboy Ron with an attempt to engineer the “Me Milennium” before anglo-Americans are relegated to minority status in 2040. If the “ME-lennium” ever comes to fruition may somebody have mercy on our souls.
Death Panels, Roy? Really? You're on the side that continually talk about cutting costs and less spending and blah, blah, blah, bull@!$%#. So what do you guys want? Do you want less spending or do you want to continue hiding your spending and then blaming it on the Democrats?
I read your bull@!$%# lies every day and try to figure out whether you are that pathetically ignorant, willing to rant about things you know obviously nothing about, or are you a lying sack of @!$%# just like the rest of your ilk?
You can't really believe the bull@!$%# you spread, can you?
Justin-3280449, you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
When will everyone in America give up on the D's and R's and start to put their faith back in the Creator. I for the life of me can't believe how far left and how far right people have gone and look at where it has got us, basically the bridge to nowhere. This country was founded on One nation under God and unless we return to this, he is going to wash his hands with the American's no matter what race, color, and or political party you belong to. Our family nucleous is so out of whack and ignored that our children and grandchildren don't stand a chance in this life as we know it and will become so confused that only thing that will be normal will be Chaos. It is exactly what Saul Alynsky predicted and professed so the people would have to rely on the Gov't. Well, were just about there. No need to vote one way or another if all we have to choose from is those who create chaos. Our country is so divided that what will be next is civil war amongst ourselves. Just keep complaining and denying the Truth and you'll see what the future holds. I am so disgusted with the whole political scene that I just want to live on the food I catch and get away from any socialized medicine or whatever. WE are all appointed to die some day. and when that day comes you are going to meet the Maker or the baker, it's your choice. Stop the divisiveness and create unison or this life as you know it will be short lived.
Robert, Please look up some facts. All the god stuff had nothing to do with the founding of America. All that stuff has only came about in the last 60 years.
The Pledge of Allegiance of the United States is an expression of loyalty to the federal flag and the republic of the United States of America, originally composed by Christian Socialist Francis Bellamy (1855-1931) in 1892 and formally adopted by Congress as the pledge in 1942.[1] The Pledge has been modified four times since its composition, with the most recent change adding the words "under God" in 1954. In God We Trust" was adopted as the official motto of the United States in 1956 and on paper currency since 1957.
Oh come on! This board is of TRAINED PROFESSIONALS in the medical business (who as far as I'm concerned are FAR more suitable for cutting costs then elected representatives) who actually know a thing or two about healthcare and actually give a damn to the state of our healthcare system. It offers to cut costs reasonably (something the GOP wants), and yet they STILL say no. I have always wondered why people tend to hate bureaucrats; essentially they hate people who aren't elected and who are perceived to be inefficient. Little do they know that it is much harder to influence bureaucrats than actual politicians because bureaucrats are chosen because of skill, not because of popularity. And they don't need campaign funds. I say take the ACA a step further by instituting a huge mandate for the healthcare industry: the government will take control of distribution (aka universal healthcare), and they will be contracted to deliver healthcare to people. The system will be modeled after the Top 5 nations based on healthcare efficiency and effectiveness (health rates, average life expectancy, system's influence on national welfare, etc). THAT would go a long way in decreasing costs.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
YES TO OBAMACARE 2012
DEMOCRATS 2012
DEATH TO THE FASCIST CLASS WARFARE INSTIGATING GOP 2012
Roy,
You said:
Republican House has passed over 30 bills to improve the economy/jobs, but Harry Reid and his Democrats in the Senate have blocked virtually every one of them
You don't mean "bills". You mean "poison pills"! Those Republicans knew those so-called bills were never going to go anywhere, right from the beginning, so they don't count. You have to write bills you seriously might pass after a little discussion and compromise with the opposition, before you can seriously claim that the other side is not working with you. If you pepper your legislation with all sorts of garbage you know the other side will never accept, but also that you will insist upon or else, then forget about it. Just go home. But don't complain about it. Don't tout those "bills" as an accomplishment. That's just a political side-show. You were never serious about it in the first place. We're on to you! I have a feeling you will feel great disappointment come November when Republicans lose big time!
RMJ, Winterland, Ky "Death Panels, Roy? Really? You're on the side that continually talk about cutting costs and less spending and blah, blah, blah, bull@!$%#. So what do you guys want?"
What I'm REALLY for is fully funding these programs. The payroll taxes for Medicare only cover a fraction of the cost of Medicare, so if we want full benefits, let's raise payroll taxes to pay the true cost. YES, I SAID RAISE TAXES. I also support a National Sales tax to help cover universal health care for all legal residents.
Go figure.
PhilZZZ "Roy, You said: Republican House has passed over 30 bills to improve the economy/jobs, but Harry Reid and his Democrats in the Senate have blocked virtually every one of them............You don't mean "bills". You mean "poison pills"! Those Republicans knew those so-called bills were never going to go anywhere, right from the beginning, so they don't count"
Many of those bills would indeed help create jobs, but the whole point is the legislative process that the Democratic Senate is ignoring - here's how it is supposed to work;
1 - The House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate for consideration.
2 - The Senate reviews it, and amends it to their liking, and sends it back to a joint conference committee, where the differences are ironed out, and they jointly agree to a bill which is then passed by both chambers and sent to the President.
In Harry Reid's Senate, this is how it works;
1 - The House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate for consideration.
2 - Harry Reid hides it in his drawer and says "I'm not even going to allow the Senate to discuss, much less amend the bill".
The reason that he won't allow consideration of the House passed bills is because some of them may actually pass with Democratic support, but by ignoring them, he can still call the Republicans the 'do-nothing Congress', when it's HE that is causing the stalemate, but the biased media will not call him out on it.
It has gotten so bad with Harry Reid's control of the Senate that he hasn't even allowed the Senate to even vote on a timely spending Budget for the last 4 years (most under total Democratic control of Congress). He's ignoring his constitutional duties and needs to be replaced.
Lots of talk about hurting seniors with medicare cuts. First of all every plan put out there states that anybody who is already a senior gets to keep theirs. Second of all, are you forgetting that there are a lot of people on medicare right now who are not seniors yet? The senior thing is pure scare tactic.
Can someone explain why this comment at #1.48 deserves to be 'collapsed', other than it doesn't cater to a liberal philosophy?
Bart Conner "WORST. CONGRESS. EVER." Gee, I wonder why? Perhaps because the Republican House has passed over 30 bills to improve the economy/jobs, but Harry Reid and his Democrats in the Senate have blocked virtually every one of them, not even allowing them to have a debate or offer amendments. 'Good ole Harry' doesn't seem to be able to get around to passing a Budget every year either - he hasn't passed one for about 4 years now...If this is the "WORST CONGRESS EVER", it's because of Harry Reid, who apparently has decided to do absolutely nothing on jobs or the economy, and then hypocritically blame the Republicans."
Someone needs to remind the writer of this article Tom Curry that the headline should read "The 2010 Affordable Health Care Act" not the Karl Rove "Obama Care". I'm so sick of the media parroting everything these right wing extremists say. All the Republican 'spin' AKA 'lies' are only designed to insult, distort and divide the country. In the entire history of America there has never been a more hateful, corrupt or dishonest group of politicians.
Lots of people seem to be confused about this 'panel', so let's review the recent actions.
1 - Obamacare says that if Medicare costs continue to rise faster than inflation, a 'panel' appointed by the President gets to cut the amount spent by deciding which 'procedures and drugs' will be covered and which will not, regardless of what your doctor recommends. Some have called these 'Death Panels' because they could actually decide that expensive life-extending drugs or procedures are not worth the cost.
2 - The Republicans voted to eliminate giving that authority to these appointed 'panels' to limit drugs and procedures, and allow the patient and doctor to make medical decisions. For this, the Democrats are calling the Republicans "heartless", but which side is REALLY the "heartless" side?
It's never ceases to amaze me how some people, no matter the issue, have their typical 'knee-jerk' reaction and say 'Whatever the Republicans do must be bad, and whatever the Democrats do must be 'compassionate', regardless of any realities.
I must say to moderator Tyler either it is a mistake or a double standard to suspend eddie for a day for this comment
eddie s-802886, you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
utahmom67 you also need to look up some facts
Utahmom67
Robert, Please look up some facts. All the god stuff had nothing to do with the founding of America. All that stuff has only came about in the last 60 years.
The founding document of our country The Declaration of Independence talks about " THE CREATOR"
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
A qoute from one of the authors of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson
Believe me, dear Sir: there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament propose; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America. 1775
Benjamin Franklin proposed that prayers be said in the Constitutional Convention of 1787
Both houses of congress open with a prayer and have since the begining
Shortly after the Senate first convened in April 1789 in New York City, one of its "first orders of business" was to convene a committee to recommend a Chaplain, selecting the Right Reverend Samuel Provoost, Episcopal Bishop of New York
The election of William Linn as Chaplain of the House on May 1, 1789, continued the tradition established by the Continental Congresses of each day's proceedings opening with a prayer by a chaplain. The early Chaplains alternated duties with their Senate counterparts on a weekly basis, covering the House one week and the Senate the next. The two Chaplains also conducted Sunday services for the Washington community in the House chamber every other week.
Both houses select a CHAPLIN to oversee various duties. There a numerous other examples of god in our heritage of the start of this country to say it has only started in the last 60 years is a blatant misstatement
Don't worry about it Mr. Obama. Mr. Reid will ENSURE the legislation gets thrown into the back of his closet and will never make it to the Senate floor for voting.
And, you don't have to worry about selecting the:
Since the Mandated Universal Health Care Reform legislation will be deemed UNCONSTITUTIONAL by the SCOTUS.
Ido, couldn't agree more; it WILL be judged UNCONSTITUTIONAL if the SCOTUS is judging according to THE LAW and not Bozobama rhetoric. And to all you demlibs and Bozobamacare supporters - what are you going to say when his idiot, unelected and unaccountable panels and bureaucrats deny YOUR mother, father, OR YOU the life-saving medicine and treatment you need? Will Bozobamacare be wonderful when he tells YOU to "Just take an aspirin."? Better think about that NOW people, while this socialist horse dung can still be gotten rid of.
So that is what this entire debate comes down to: Republicans side with lobbyists and want their health care insurance money to go to executive salaries. Liberals side with patients and want their health care insurance money to go to health care costs. Pick your side.
Great analogy Indie Party... This is a nice condensed version of what rings true.
Kraussk uhh that's the way it works now so if what you say is true then we are already used to it. Try to get your poop in a group and watching fox is a step in the wrong direction and consequently a step into the horse crap you speak of. Another Kochroach earns a spray... Pssssssht!!!
This effort seems to be premature. The President promised that he would go over the health care law, "line by line", with my congressman and any other law maker in Washington who requested it and that all proceedings will be broadcast on CSPAN. The enactment of the law should be delayed until the broadcasts have concluded so that the public has a better understanding of the law and will be in a better position to advise their representatives in congress. Does anyone know when the broadcasts are scheduled to begin and how long it is going to take to go over each and every line in the health care law and both analyze and discuss each line fully so that we all understand this new law? I assume that to help understand the law both my President and my congressman will bring in experts on medical science, health care practices, economics, health care related law, politics, and constitutional law. In particular I would like the experts, on a line by line basis, to make a determination as whether the law does what the President said it would.
I would question who is really out of touch, according to a recent Rasmussen poll 56% Favor Repeal of Health Care Law
According to a poll run run by ABC News and the Washington Post, 67% Oppose Obamacare's Individual Mandate.
ROY WILSON,
RE: your post #1.48
Come on Roy, your much too smart for that post, I believe. Any bills but forth to the senate regarding jobs have had an abundant requsite number of "poison pills" so they made the bill just absolutely impassable in the Senate. You know, or should know this is FACT! I will judge the Congress by the poll number of 11.8% approval rating by a very recent (March 7, 2012) Real Clear Politics Poll, which is a combination of polls by Fox, CBS, Gallup, and Politico. The highest rating was 13% by, you guessed it, Fox. The lowest 10% by CBS.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html
The 11.8% Congrssional Approval Rating is in a dead heat with the PORN business, which has an approval rating of 11%. The United States going Comunist garnered another 11% approval. More people approve of polygamy than of Congress.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/16/congress-approval-rating-porn-polygamy_n_1098497.html
For God's sake Roy, more people,15%, approve of Paris Hilon. 16% approve of the BP Oil Spill. There are more here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/congress-approval-problem-in-one-chart/2011/11/15/gIQAkHmtON_blog.html
These idiots, Red and Blue, are COLLECTIVELY destroying our entire country and you want to blame one man, Harry Reid?
ah,,,.another day in the house doing absolutely nothing. Bureaucratic nonsense...
On days like this, they need not be paid.
Seems they did something. You just don't like what they did so you consider it nothing. I would imagine you would consider something being accomplished if they were to, say, take earnings from one group to give it to another.
Wouldn't it be nice if the Senate would vote on some of the numerous jobs bills the House passed?
Wait... wouldn't it be nice if the Senate would pass a budget, something Reid has not done in nearly 3 years?
I agree, history will show that this current congress wasted a lot of time casting votes which will never be counted. Any attempt to kill programs passed by a previous congrees that aren't even given a chance to see how they work is futile.
Hopefully, the freshmen congressmen (those belonging to the tea party) won't get their office rent at the Capitol renewed in November. If America renews their rent, then America needs to get used to gridlock in Washington. The news media will need to stop reporting the dysfunctional national government and recognize it as old news. Should congress actually agree on something, THAT would be news. In the meantime, we should keep strong leadership in the Whitehouse to keep at least one arm of the government working. VOTE Democrat this November.
Daryl, or should I say this is my other brother Daryl. You sir should really get informed. The house has and did pass a budget last year and the do Nothing Dem sentate and Harry Reid sat on it. Stop the non-sense. Cut the spending and maybe we will recover from this rediculus administration.
Wouldn't it be nice if the House actually passed a jobs bill that will actually create jobs rather than passing bills called "jobs bill" but actually decrease access to abortions.
Thank goodness Reid has the sense to not even bring up this nonsense to the Senate Floor.
Daryl... you should read more and broaden your news source. Start with reading Greg-3975041.
Daryl, did you see the report from the tax analysis office that just came out re: the Buffett Rule? It would result in $47 billion in revenue...over 11 years! At Obama's spending rate, that would cover about 10 days of government operation for this year only! And, the rule would eliminate the Minimum Alternative Tax rule that makes sure the wealthiest pay more. And, if you took all the earnings of the top group it would amount to be $3 trillion, far under the estimated $3.7 trillion Obama plans to spend this year. So tax away. But, until somebody gets the spending straightened out, it will make hardly any difference. And, if you do that, they'll take their money out of the investment market and/or out of the country.
that Budget was a colossal waste of congress's time. They were chocked full of tax breaks and cuts against those who couldn't afford them.
We have seen over and over again what Republicans offer.. why even waste time with it. I support Reid's decision to not waste time with that BS and you have nobody but yourself to blame, because it is republicans who refuse to support what the democrats put forth from 2006-2010 and you filibustered and id whatever you could to stop those bills
turn about is fair play, and you over played your hand
Obama will go down as the worst president in the history of history ....
Actually, I think that NO politician should get ANY pay during elections years, as they don't do the job they are being paid for, just out campaigning.
All of these seperate panels are just another way for ALL of congress to avoid taking responsibility for their actions, and at the same time, get more taxpayer dollars for THEIR wallets, by being on the different committees, they established, to set these "panels" up.
Time to get rid of ALL of them, and get a breath of fresh air in Washington, D.C.
Hey Big Ben,
Did you see the ad for the new Obama movie, which will be released this summer? Check it out!
@Obama, a failed experiment, have you read those "jobs" bills? Probably not. But you did notice they were called "jobs" bills though... Good for you!
Labeling bills that don't create jobs as "jobs bills" is a good way to keep rebubatards angry at liberals....
Oh ben, you so silly!
At least somebody is proposing budgets! The Democrats are just ordering more checks!
Have you seen this? This comes from a liberal propaganda site, it is supposed to show how bad Bush was! But what it shows is, no matter what Bush did, Obama is still creating more debt, quicker! So, Bush is a non issue! Its all on Obama now!
http://zfacts.com/p/461.html
Hey rethugli-cons,
How is the job creating scenario you were elected to take care of working out? Pretty good, I guess, since you seem to have all kinds of time to pass legislation you know is meaningless and doesn't stand a chance of passing. Still playing your partisan BS I see.
To those of you who vote republican, I saw this on FaceBook. The redneck on the left states: I vote republican to keep foreigners, women, minorities, socialists, gays and liberals from ruining my life. The business man on the right (holding a big bag of money) states: I vote republican to keep this moron, pointing to the redneck, from realizing I am the only one ruining his life. So much truth and so much stupidity.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bigbenalaska
Obama will go down as the worst president in the history of history-----------------------bigben, seems you have spent way too much time in the frozen north. Obama has a long, long way to go to even come close to george bush, or was it dick cheney.
“Today’s House vote is a good example of what happens when special interests win – seniors lose,”
Boy, talk about a 'spin'. How can keeping a provision in Obamacare that says costs will automatically be cut for seniors a 'win' for seniors?
Hey Democrats, try using some logic for a change. Claiming that having a board appointed by the President with the authority to cut care for seniors if the cost goes up too fast can hardly be presented as somehow 'making seniors win'.
Everybody knows that this is what Sarah Palin characterized as 'Death Panels', where the President's 'board' decides whether life-saving procedures will be authorized for Medicare recipients. They will begin to say "That life-saving procedure/drug is too expensive, so we will not cover it any longer".
It would appear that the Democratic plan is to tell seniors "Die early, it will save us money".
@bigben littlebrain: bush has that ranking locked up. then again, you probably think Reagan was good.
LOL I just love how the Tea Party Think uniform.
This is a vote that is a TREMENDOUS waste of time and tax payers money.
Where are the jobs Mr Boehner?
Oh government can't create jobs,...don't tell HUD, DOD, and the EPA.
OBAMA IN 2012
70+ SEATS FOR DEMS IN THE SENATE
CONTROL OF THE HOUSE
If you love this country:
Put John 'I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a scotch and soda today' Boehner, Eric 'Can't Do Anything but whine' Cantor, and Mitch 'the Peabody' McConnell on a slow 'pink' boat to China.
DAryl, the figures I quoted are from the office of tax analysis, not from Fox. The truth's sometimes hard to swallow, isn't it? Regarding the wealthy taking funds out of the country, it's their choice; it's still a free country. If you take all that investment capital out of the country, though, we will be in a world of hurt! My point was that you wind up with unintended consequences sometimes and wind up cutting your nose off in spite of your face when you don't think through all the possible outcomes.
Unlike you, i will not blame one party for the debt; they're all guilty. And, when I say "all", that does include Obama who has spent prolifically and has no plan to change that.
@bigben. It WAS Saint Ronnie who said that "deficits don't matter." Was that before or after he imposed the largest tax increase in history? hmmm
Just FYI, the deficit is DOWN under Obama, relative to Bush. It was 1.3 trillion when he took office, it has gone down slowly each year, and it is 1.1 trillion this year. If you add the cost of the Bush wars (which Bush didn't include in the budget - what honest folk call 'cooking the books') the deficit is WAY down. This means that he could not be adding to the debt faster than Bush.
Sorry to interrupt. Now, back to 'death panels'.
Wow - I'm sorry, but all the seniors commenting on this board are overwhelming republican, misinformed, and possibly senile. If you're reading this article on the internet, you can make the font bigger and actually read what the words say.
They just vetoed the creation of a board that cannot limit benefits, ration care, or restrict any style of treatment. The board was created to negotiate and propose cost-savings directly with doctors and hospitals (read: getting them to accept lower rates) in order to keep the ponzi scheme that is social security and medicare from sucking this country dry faster than it already is.
I love the old idiots on here about keeping government bureaucrats out of medicare - faith in humanity + respect for senior citizens = officially gone.
The republicans just voted with their Big Pharma, Big Insurance, and Big Medical cronies to keep our medical care costs the highest on this planet. Nothing more, nothing less, and not only that, but medicare will damn well run out faster this way.
Senile idiots.
The AMT really doesn't affect the very wealthiest. It tends to affect those that the Democrats would call "wealthy", but whom the Republicans don't consider wealthy. The AMT, if not "patched" each year by Congress, would also hit many who are solidly in the middle class. All because Congress failed to include an inflation adjustment when the passed the AMT. Someone should be sued for legislative malpractice.
Even if the net affect of instituting the Buffet Rule and repealing the AMT was zero, it should still be done as a matter of fairness.
Snakebone, did you look at the link? Where is your source? Or are you just commenting based on emotion?
Its funny that liberals don't even like their own liberal propaganda!
LOLOLOL.......... My first comment at the very beginning gets "collapsed by the community" DESPITE it being the highest rated comment on this thread!! WHO IS "the community"??
Ron in Seattle...very creative and on the mark. Silver spoon mouth Ryan's budget proposal was reviewed by our nation's top analysts. Here's a twist Ryans bill eliminates or reduces some of the most coveted programs for seniors. Ryans's (Repub's/Tea Baggers) budget cuts Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security respectively and measurably. So I can't wait until the Dems really get out on the campaign trail and use this cheap shot document for reference. Health Care Reform has repeatedly been endorsed and is supported by highly respected sources and organizations including our top economists. Those whose news source is the GOP/Tea Baggers and Fox (master of disguise) network are a group of...duh's.
Actually, the Buffet rule should be enacted and the AMT left alone.
The effect would be to balance out the tax code.
Also, the "carried interest" rule should be repealed and capital gains taxed as what they are, ordinary income.
Travis+ numbers you seemed to have the tainted spin and not the memo of why this board was commissioned. Their charter specifically prohibits those things you mention in your post, and others that are simply technically inaccurate, and down right ludicrous i.e., negotiating directly with specific providers. The intent of this board is to recommend changes healthcare delivery systems that ultimately result in better health outcomes and beneficiary satisfaction.
You Sir are making the same argument that lead to the circus during the healthcare debate, while with the other hand behind your back must also in turn support the suppression of womens' rights to equal and affordable access to healthcare.
OBAMA IN 2012
70+ SEATS FOR DEMS IN THE SENATE
CONTROL OF THE HOUSE
If you love this country:
Put John 'I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a scotch and soda today' Boehner, Eric 'Can't Do Anything but whine' Cantor, and Mitch 'the Peabody' McConnell on a slow 'pink' boat to China.
Yeah, looked at the link. Not sure what in that document you thought supported your contentions. So would you like a liberal 'source', which shows the deficit Bush left and how Obama has improved those numbers in spite of the spending required to pull us out of the 'great recession', or would you like a conservative 'source', which averages out 8 years of Bush spending (including the surplus Clinton left him), and then assumes Obama will continue to 'stimulus spend' for the next 5 years, then compares those numbers?
I like this one:
The facts that we all lived through are this: Reagan/Bush daddy took us to record deficits and two 'small' recessions, Clinton reversed the trend, pulled us out of recession and ultimately took us to a deficit surplus, Bush baby took us right back down to record deficits and another - very big - recession, Obama has reversed the trend again, is pulling us out of recession and reducing the deficit. Go ahead and cook those numbers however you need to make republicans good at fiscal matters...
For some reason the link I put in didn't show. Let me try again:
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/obamas-and-bushs-effect-on-the-deficit-in-one-graph/2011/07/25/gIQAELOrYI_blog.html
The link is for the washington post, it is a graph on the effects on the deficit by both Bush and Obama, posted by Ezra Klein.
It's because all those brains can only form one single thought. LOL
Not according to Mark Knoller at CBS news:
Ok, so that is total debt and not simply the "deficit".
A listed goal rom Obama's own website:
Deficit for 2012 is $1.2 trillion. I am thinking he is going to slightly miss cutting $1.3 trillion deficit in half at this rate, hence the bad Deficit numbers in the CBS story. So Bush sets an extremely low (or high) bar for a deficit in his final year, Obama says he can cut the deficit in half and we get a miniscule $100 billion in Obama's 3rd year? This is including the end of Iraq folks. We spent gobs of money in Iraq and ending the war results in a tiny reduction of 100 Billion from the Deficit?
Everyone likes to talk about Clinton's "surpluses" which didn't actually decrease the debt due to IOUs to the Social Security Trust Fund. How can it be a surplus if we went further into debt? Anyways, why don't the Dems and Reps just agree to go back to the Spending levels during the Clinton years? As the democrats like to point out, life wasn't so bad in the mid to late 90's. As republicans like to point out, we can't continue to spend 1.2 trillion a year in deficits. Sounds like a nice bipartisan idea to me...
Snakebone, Just poking fun at the graph at the site I posted that said
where we would be if the GOP didn't do what they did and the Dems continued
with what they did. It showed Obama still racking up debt! Ironically, at the
same rate whether Bush is involved or not!
To address your graph, it’s funny how TARP, and the ’08 Stimulus
is pinned on Bush, when Obama voted for it too. As I recall, that was a
Democrat Congress! Not to mention Obama continued the Bush tax cuts and the
wars still waged on! As for the tax cuts for the rich, we all know they are irrelevant,
it’s the tax loop-holes for the rich and corporations that is the biggest
problem! GE getting a refund???!!!!! That’s all Obama there!
Of course information and statistics can be spun to reflect whatever you want to
believe!
And, of course, 911 didn’t happen, the UN didn’t believe Saddam had WMD’s, and we weren’t
already slipping into recession as a result of 911. All of which did happen,
and the Bush tax cuts where in response to it. The '60's are catching up with the lib's, your collective memory is fading!
I also find it hilarious that my comment was collapsed! You
liberals love to stifle free speech!
Link to the CBS story mentioned above:
National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush
So, since in your opinion the deficit isn't going down fast enough, your conclusion is that it isn't going down at all? Bush ran increasingly larger deficits over his terms, and a 1.3 trillion deficit his last year in office. Obama ran a 1.3 trillion deficit his first year in office (facing the biggest financial crisis is 80 years), and has decreased it to a 1.1 trillion deficit this year, with CBO projections of about .5 trillion in 2 years. What part of the trend line makes you think we're going the wrong way? Or do you think the 'great recession' was no big deal, government shouldn't have gotten involved, the debt was much more important? How long exactly is your memory span? I seem to remember a country-wide panic.
In fact, there have only been two major bipartisan agreements in the last decade, both due to panic. The first was initiating war with Afghanistan, because of 9/11. The second was stimulus spending, because of the great recession. To hear you guys tell it, Obama should have let America go bankrupt. Oh my God, Obama spent money to keep our economy from failing! Throw the bum out! (hey look, I have a job) Socialist! (hey I'm making money) Keep yer guvmint hands off my money!
I just heard a republican say the UE rate went up because Americans are more lazy, not because of some intangible 'financial crisis'! It's as if it never existed.
Yep, life wasn't so bad in the mid to late 90's. Less spending, higher taxes (oops, you forgot about the taxes, didn't you?) It would be a nice goal, barring some other republican president taking us back into recession.
Jobless: I agree with much of your post, especially about spinning numbers, which is always easy. I have put much more import on the trend lines, which I find a more practical indicator, and which are undeniably going the right way, if WAY too slowly for my taste. I also, like you, keep in mind the situations involved; I have never argued that Bush would have spent so much in his last year were he not responding to financial catastrophe (though I do blame him for causing it). Republicans are quick to say, however, that Obama spent that much in his first year because he's just a big spender trying to turn us into socialists. Whatever.
I had not heard 9/11 caused the housing bubble, rampant speculation in the market on derivatives whose value was hidden and severely overpriced, and the back-loaded boutique loans the Bush guys extolled when touting their 'homeownership society' in the 2004 election. I don't buy it.
A little reminder: at no time could the UN be said to 'think Iraq had WMD'. Most members at first took it seriously but simply didn't know. The UN decision (1441) was to FIND OUT if Iraq had illegal weapons, not to declare that they had. Bush never let that play out, he just declared Iraq in violation and attacked unilaterally, but prior to our invasion, because of the reports they were given, NO member state believed they were developing nukes, and VERY FEW thought they were working on any WMD at all. Off subject, but you started it...
Sorry for all you fool dreamers, but it's one and done for Bozobama and the socialist spin machine, then Republicans take the senate from useless Dingy Harry, hold the house and repeal Bozobamacare, then undo the damage the socialist-in-chief has done to our great, free country.
Wow, all of your oh-so clever puns on peoples names and titles has opened my eyes to the gentle wisdom of your ways.
The President of the United States of America promised the people of America that he would go over the health care law "line by line" with my congressman and any other law maker in Washington who requested it and that all proceedings would be broadcast on CSPAN. This will help us citizens to better understand the health care law so that we can better advise our representatives in congress as to how to proceed. Hopefully each line of the law will be analyzed in terms of the promise that the President made regarding the law, effects on state and local government, constitutionality, the effects on those providing medical services, the law in general, cost to the tax payers, and the over all effect on the cost of medical care. Remember the whole purpose of this new law is to reduce the cost of medical care. The implementation of this law should be suspended until these broadcasts that the President has promised, have taken place. The more that people understand the law the better they can council their representatives in government so that any action that they might want to take will be most appropriate. I think that it is worth time to get it right and to fully take advantage of an action that the President promised that he would take. Does anyone know when the broadcasts are scheduled to begin and how long it is projected that it will take to go completely through the law "line by line" as promised by our President.
Will Haas
The purpose of the HCR is to enable more coverage as 45 million go without it. Secondly, it was to remove the unfair clauses in policies, like dumping you the second you need it.
The president did offer and nobody took him up on it. Sorry, your representative didn't care enough about you or your desires.
Roy Wilson, we already have this. It's the insurance company. Experimental drugs or procedures - not covered. Lifetime caps, not covering pre-existing conditions, dumping you when you get sick becasue of some technicality in the application....death panels run by insurance company bureaucrats.
Where are your complaints about those??? That's what market-based solutions get you.
Weasel, we will...if you agree to bring the tax rates to that same level too. That was called the "grand bargain".
Strange politicians call these programs "entitlement" programs in spite of the fact that they are not because everyone working pays into these programs meaning that we are at least owed every single penny we have paid into them. Then the politicians say these programs need to be reformed to reduce costs, yet they are voting to abolish parts of the healthcare law specifically designed to try and do just that. These politicians couldn't speak truth even if truth was physically branded onto their brains. Funny thing is they would not need to be reformed at all if the politicians had not raided the fund to only squander the money, its my understanding that in 2005 our politicians raided the fund yet again and now the fund is beyond empty now. So if that is true then we have been completely robbed of the trillions of dollars we have worked for and put into the fund.
Morlack, you are correct everyone does pay into those insurance policy's. They are not entitlement programs. But the pigbags cannot understand that. And what do you expect from a Congress that hasn't done anything in the last year and a half, except try to control women's bodies?
SallyAnn: that's not true, they've been able to force through an extension of the Bush tax cuts; extension of the Patriot Act; military arrest and permanent military prison for US citizens without trial; oh, and naming Post Offices (which will soon be closed because they force the USPS to pay for the next 75 years health and retirement benefits in advance.)
See, the Republican House has accomplished some things.
Thanks Morlack. I am sick and tired of these programs being called entitlements....I have paid in for 50 years. And as a biz owner I paid both sides for my employees for 35 years of that...it is time to set the political bureaucrats straight. They have their cake and it too...why shouldn't we? Of course we CAN'T THE GOV CAN AFFORD IT. They spent it already on bs programs and graft.
What we have in Congress is a dis-ease, not unlike cancer, or mental illness. It is a mirror image of a combination of the ugly extreme under belly of our society and GREED.
We were warned of the defense industrialization and how 75 years ago, and now those concerns have come home to roost in ways that are so complicated and intertwined few can agree on how to approach the problem. I say the first step is a collective recognition, the next includes understanding the problem, e.g., we have the technology to employ smart defense versus mass defense. This is relevant to making balanced cuts in ALL government allocations.
Politicians are only interested in re-election, gaining and remaining in power. Americans are guilty of being stubbornly ignorant and are responsible for allowing this national disease to flourish. If you love this country we must speak long term with one voice. Good ideas have NO POLITICAL affiliation but intended to benefit all. No idea works if expectations and barriers to success are not clearly defined, and if the executable is not given reasonable time to work. We must stand by our commitments.
You cannot raise a barn with telepathy, so if you love this country give this President what he needs to finish the job.
OBAMA IN 2012
70+ SEATS FOR DEMS (KILL THE FILIBUSTER)
CONTROL OF THE HOUSE
Then this...
So are you really against politicians concerned with re-election, or just those politicians with whom you disagree?
Hell, I'm with you Ron in Seattle. I say clone a bunch of Max Bauchuses and Bernie Sanders and Henry Reids and let them run!!! I'd say those three men alone are smarter than the entire GOP Congress.
Face it conservatives: we need higher taxes right now, and the most obvious choice for them are those who have made a lot during the past 30 years (the 1%). I say repeal the Bush tax cuts for everyone, expand Obamacare to form a semi-government run healthcare system, reform the tax code and AMT (keep it), and curtail defense spending. Then hike up the rate for the 1% to 45%. it's about time they paid their fair share. Then we invest more into education reform, innovation, clean energy, and put those on Wall Street who caused the recession in jail.
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
DEMOCRAT SENATE AND HOUSE 2012
DEATH TO THE GOP IN 2012
lower taxes, get rid of obamacare, make sure our defense budget allows for protecting us from our enemies, get rid of the federal energy and education depts, keep the Bush tax cuts, the 1% already pay their fair share, close our borders, protect us citizens from social security numbers theft and fraud and stop the feds from continuing to raise our country's debt and stop obama's runaway spending. As President Reagan said ;government isn"t the solution to our problems, government is the problem.
no more obama in 2012
conservative house and senate in 2012
may democrats take a permenent vacation in 2012
sandtrich---That only proves the Democrats tax their states higher which makes the ratio lower. The Federal money received may be higher than other states because of this. I live in Illinois and can tell you that for a fact. Over 9% sales tax (in Galesburg) high modifiers on property tax and then of coarse the state income tax. Then the over charges for license of any kind. Then the third highest tax on gasoline in America and cigarettes and candy. The list goes on so I feel you statement can not hold water.
Juanita, I'm afraid that you've bought into the conservative BS. For one thing, we need taxes to fund the government, and the Bush tax cuts have drained trillions from the Treasury. The Education Department and the Energy Department are necessary to handle their administrative areas (don't even think about touching my education). The 1% DO NOT pay their fair share. Their taxes have gone down as their salaries have gone up. I say raise their taxes to 50% and stop the flow of wealth from the middle class to the rich via tax cuts and reduced benefits. Obama did NOT increase spending; (check http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/ezra-klein-doing-the-math-on-obamas-deficits/2012/01/31/gIQAnRs7fQ_story.html); he even reduced it. The spending was automatically increased because of increasing costs for social safety nets and revenues collapsed dramatically. THAT is why the debt is increasing.
Oh and Ronald Reagan was a right-wing idiot. He deliberately brainwashed a generation of Americans into becoming right-wing small-government idiots (like Grover Norquist). I will concede that the government is not always the solution, but nor is it always the problem. Do you want to know why we had the recession?? Because the damn "free market" (as you right-wing loons like to refer to) can't be trusted to keep the sandbox clean. Wanna know why we are in debt??? Because of the recession and stupid tax cuts issued in part to "starve the beast." Government is NOT always the problem. Reagan was wrong, and the sooner you learn that the betters.
Second term for Obama in 2012
Liberal and moderate House and Senate in 2012
May conservatives and Teapublicans take a permanent vacation in 2012
DEATH TO THE FASCIST GOP 2012
DEMOCRAT CONGRESS 2012
The Independent Panel is a rationing mechanism designed to give bureaucrats not chosen by you or your physician the power to disallow your treatment via the "we won't pay for that mechanism". In short - it's the Death Panel that all the liberal/progressive dimwits said "didn't exist".
Now you know, children.
I see you read just as well as Rep. Lungren does. The provision for IPAB explicitly FORBIDS it from rationing care or restricting benefits.
did you read the article? It specifically said what they will actually be doing. They also specifically said it wouldnt ration care and that that was a scare tactic used by the right media (fox news and right radio) to turn the public against it. Using fear as usual, the republicans' favorite weapon. If you think they are lying then state it, but how can you completely ignore the millions of frepeated explanations they have given, especially in this article, about what they exactly do.
Oh they don't ration care as is done in Canada. They just refuse to pay for it by creating "authorized" or "recognized" treatment modalities depending upon age, etc. That amounts to the same thing as rationing. You may want to check with your physician. They are generally more reliable than the word of a politician.
1 The death panel republicans argued about was a provision that required doctors be paid for time spent discussing treatment options/end of life care with patients. what you are talking about already exists in the health care system via insurance companies, and would require a step towards socialism to remove.
2 the panel's authority pertains to systematic changes not changes to individaul care, had you read the third paragraph (by spacing) you would have already known that:
"The board’s job is to propose cost-saving changes to Medicare if per capita spending on that program exceeds a target, the national income growth rate, plus 1 percent. The IPAB changes would automatically take effect unless Congress blocked them or enacted its own cost-saving measures."
I thought the Republican model of "pay for what you use" was the ideal? If medicare doesn't cover it, that's what cash money is for, right?
also, canadian health care rationing is a myth.
"Rick you are so far in the Forest you can even see straight.
Strangely the only people I ever see complaining about Canadian health care arent even Canadian.
Actually, it is no such thing Rick. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Rick, what are you referring to???? Here is the "mission statement" of "The Independent Panel":
The Independent Panel on International Criminal Court Judicial Elections (Panel) assesses judicial candidates for the International Criminal Court (ICC or Court) based on the requirements of the ICC’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute. The ICC is a permanent international court which investigates and tries individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
@Bany he's refering to the panel mentioned in the article, the Independent Payment Advisory Board
Ash, they will set the policy for how the budgeted funds will be spent. When the money runs out, it will be gone and it will be rationing then. Among Indian tribes who receive federal money for health care, there's a saying "If you're going to get sick, do it before July". Why? Because they receive a finite of money for their health care programs. When it's gone, it's gone.
Canada budgets a certain number of knee and hip replacements each year. When they run out - there are no more medical devices available for the procedure until the next budget year and the patient is put on a waiting list. Now if that isn't rationing - what is?
Why add more bureaucratic non sense to what is already there? MEDPAC
If it counts as "rationing" because they're not able to magically create more replacement knees and hips out of thin air, then "rationing" is officially a stupid thing to get upset about.
Mike, how come the governor of, I think it was Nova Scotia, came down to the States for a heart operation, something that could have been accomplished at any of their major city hospitals? And how come my brother, a Canadian, had to wait for several years to get a hip repair operation?
Wife and I live 65 miles south of Montreal, and a lot of Canadians come down to our hospitals, as they can get just as good treatment, and sooner, more handily, and with less bureaucracy, than up there. On top of that, quite a few doctors, from up there, have relocated down here, mainly because of the hassles with their medical system.
I will say that same system saved my younger brothers life, with cancer surgery, and it was prompt.
Can we get input from a verifiable Canadian on this?
Insurance is the reason health care is so expensive. If there was no such thing as health insurance the hospitals and doctors would have to charge at rates people could afford.
In 2005 I got ecoli and it nearly killed me, the hospital here couldn't do a thing and what they did do made me worse. I was finally rushed to University of Utah where I spent a week in ICU. I needed home-health care for 2 months afterward. I had a good job with good insurance that cost me $250 a month and my employer another $250 a month. So at $500 a month for five years you would think my insurance would cover just about anything that happened to me, HELL NO. When they found out I was rushed to U of U they decided they didn't want to pay for any of it. all of the sudden Ecoli was a pre-existing condition and they stuck me with $50,000 worth of doctor bills they were supposedly liable for. And of course when the collection agencies went to collect the money they didn't go after the real criminals, the insurance company, they went after ME.
My medical was rationed by some greedy little insurance worker who didn't want to lose her bonus for the year by paying out a big claim.
Ash at 4.16. It's not the Canadians can't "manufacture" more devices it's that they're NOT going to BUY more. They have a BUDGET which I know is a foreign concept to some Dems. If they budget for the cost of 10 hips and the demand is 15, #11-15 have to wait until next year. And, that's where we are headed with ACA. Remember, Nancy Pelosi told you "you'll have to read it to know what's in it'. People are finding out now the truth of what's in it along with the fact it's going to costs twice what Obama said it would.
Frosty if you "think it was" then obviously you dont have a source for the BS you are spewing. I leave Wyoming and go to Utah for medical care as do most people in Wyoming and Wyoming is in the US. I know people from Utah who go to the Hospital in Evanston Wyoming for medical care. My neighbor went all the way to Italy to get medical care because they had the best doctor for MS in the world and they have, dare I say it, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE in Italy.
People from every part of the world travel to every other part of the world to get treatment mainly because they have a doctor that specializes in the specific illness.
I know lots of Canucks and not one of them have came down here to get treated for an illness, I am sure some Canadians have but I bet the ratio is less than it is for Americans going to other countries for treatment.
dirt-
Ah, I see. So which are you arguing in favor of: rationing non-lifesaving care, or ignoring budgets?
I worked for one of those insurance companies once, back a few years. The highest payed employee in our office was the lady who sat in her office and concocted ways to deny claims. She did not evaluate them per se, she really just figured out ways to deny them, plain and simple. Why? She was paid a cash bonus directly related to the amount of money she saved the company in denied claims. She was certainly worth it; I was constantly amazed at the creative interpretations she employed to let grandma die for greater profitability and a bigger paycheck. I am sure she now joins the republicans in wanting to keep the government out of healthcare; if we no longer have the 'freedom' to kill people for profit, how can people like her make an honest buck?
Ah, the good old days, before we had socialist 'death panels'...
Prick in the forest - I am not your child - your condescending attitude is as offensive as your ignorance.
all we have to do is fire these crazy republicans in november.
Working on it...Got the worst one out of the white house, working on the rest.
This may have been a waste of time. The Supreme Court will doom Obamacare as being unconstitutional to fine or charge a fee solely for the fact that they are Americans.
Stop inhaling. It makes you say foolish things.
Thank you Republicans, for once again showing us that wasting time, paid for by American taxpayers, is your specialty.
I attended a conference a couple of weeks ago where a legal affairs analyst who worked for several newspapers made the case that he didn't think the court would rule the mandate unconstitutional. His rationale was that he believed the court would find the commerce clause did allow for the mandate. However; what he did say was that the commerce clause has never addressed activity versus inactivity, which may be a wild card.
Bookem'... If it's not found illegal what will happen to the people that won't pay as you know many won't. Also the number of people not paying will grow as the fines increase in size yearly. It's a formula for economic disaster and I believe the court will nix it.
Rocco... Ignorance is bliss so you may not realize who is foolish.
I dare you repugnants to come back here and post your unconstitutional crap once the supreme court upholds the healthcare bill! I am going to LMAO! Just like we are all going to be laughing when you all LOSE in November!
Daryl... You were wrong in your earlier post. You're wrong again. I'm guess that after a while you get used to it. Am I right?
Do you mean the same supreme court that passed CITIZENS UNITED which decided that corporations were people and money is speech? That is a wonderful bunch of Non-Americans there. Neo-CONS.
daryl, I don't think there is too much that can't be classified as interstate commerce anymore. Heck the court found that someone growing wheat for his own use affected commerce. I really wish the court would go back to the founding times and read the debate regarding the reasoning behind the commerce clause: to prevent one state from imposing tarrifs on products from another state. Too bad the courts have read so much into it that it really has no meaning anymore.
You republicans want people to stop using your tax dollars yet you do not think that it is a good idea to mandate health insurance. I do not understand either you do want to pay for others health care or you don't which is it.
Daryl... read post 2.5
There are few people in America less effective, reasonable or trustworthy than our elected officials; no wonder they feel threatened by the unelected IPAB, it takes away a vote-buying tool.
and what is really being done here Dan?
We leave it up to politicians to make serious and informed decisions much like you have been doing all along?
This is all just a waste of time, posturing in an election season just to make an impression for when you have to run for election again?
and we elect these people.
Dream on, The only failed experiment is giving morons a voice in the government (republicans in congress).
The same can be said for the dems
Right, AL, because all the democratic programs, policies and laws have been such great successes. Well, maybe they are to those who choose to keep doing less but still want more.
Yeah, cuz the republicans have done such a great job at "helping" us...deregulating banking and wall street, destroying the housing market, tripling unemployment, 5 trillion war debt...we don't need their help.
daryl, for that profit figure, can you tell me if that is profit before taxes, depreciation, etc.?
Who is saying that anyone should be paying a 30% tax rate except democrats. Those Bush tax cuts, which I would assume you hate, lowered the bottom bracket to 10% from 15%. That meant that many of the XX% (depends on the day and source for the number) that don't pay a federal income tax are that way because of those tax cuts.
Also, name anyone who pays 30% of their income in income taxes. There are very few because taxes are progressive based on income levels.
I'm for ending corporate welfare too - farm subsidies, green energy subsidies (these are true subsidies), the small oil subsidies, the special tax breaks for certain industries. I'm also for eliminating welfare for people who could work but choose not after a certain period of time. We can certainly give a hand up, but let's end the hand out.
Book em, include Earned Income Tax Credit on your list of items to eliminate. Another form of welfare snuck in on another bill. Why are people who paid no taxes getting a credit for not paying taxes?
Danno ... Daryl makes some good points, while you're doing a fine job of mangling the distinction between the tax rate and what people actually pay in taxes. Most people don't pay 30% in federal taxes, but many are subject to a 30%+ marginal tax RATE.
When the Speaker of the house is dumb, what would you expect from the House , its members and its solutions. Boehner is without a doubt the absolute worst leader the US could ever have. He gives the appearance that he is drunk most of the time and his crying and stupid licking of his lips seem to verify those actions. Dumb does as Dumb is and this GOP house has destroyed the reputation of the house of representatives as a viable part of the Government. The tanning tub King and his FREIND Cantor have destroyed the viability of this part of our government. Come November the election will take care of the problem, and the speaker can go back to cleaning bars like he started as a kid.
Republicans are absolutely tactless in their efforts to destroy Obama simply out of hatred and spite, regardless of the details or consequences.
Blind admiration for someone is just as bad. Have you critically looked at what will happen because of the ACA? One example is the Student Health Insurance market. Right now, schools can offer limited policies which don't cost the student but a few hundred dollars per year. With ACA and HHS rulings, they now have to offer full major medical policies which will cost students thousands per year. It will add more costs to the students, even if the "experts" at CMS don't think it has an effect as was pointed out to them by many schools.
No, Daryl, I didn't forget. And, by the way, it is 26 and not 25.
But, according the HHS there will be 1.3 million students in the 2012-2013 who will be on student health plans sponsored by schools. So, sorry, but that doesn't end my "pathetic scenario". It only makes it stronger because 1.3 million students will be paying about 2,000 more per year. That is about $2.6 billion more will come out of students pockets for plans that aren't needed.
I don't hate liberals or Obama. I do disagree with their philosophy and what they think works best. By the way, I think the same thing about many republicans too.
Daryl-2183015,
I enjoy reading your posts; they are thoughtful and fact based. Something I never see from the Right. I thank you..Keep up the fight.
Whatever it takes get rid of Obamacare.
I wonder if you'd say that if your insurance dropped you once you were diagnosed with cancer? That's what Blue Cross did to my mom.
Yes, yes, the horrors of Obamacare. Go ahead, explain to the rest of us how it is just DESTROYING America?
... crickets ....
That's what I thought.
seeing as how Obamacare hasn't even been fully implemented, anyone who says we need to repeal it is purely ignorant.
SF, my wife had cancer and Blue Cross / Blue Shield didn't drop her. As a matter of fact they worked very hard for us during that difficult time.
Common Man, good, I am glad that your wife got decent health care and the insurance company worked on your behalf. Extrapolating your particular instance to the entire health care system which everyone unanimously agrees is not sustainable is not logical.
Tens of millions of Americans, 92% of them citizens, have no insurance. We as a country pay 25% more for health care than the next highest payer on the scale - health care that declines on the indicators for quality, effectiveness and efficiency every year to the point where we are at the same level as Cuba. We each individually have more out of pocket expenses than any other country with teh exception of East Timor.
Speaking of exceptions, that is what your experience was, not the general rule for the vast majority of Americans.
JonSmith....if you truly researched Obamacare to any degree at all, you'd be more careful when you ask "what's wrong with it". Do you realize what the first part of the "plan" that was implemented? No, you don't...but I'll tell you. It was a tax on tanning parlors. The "plan" decided that tanning parlors weren't necessary and provided a potentially dangerous, unhealthy service. Originally, the plan was to add a special tax onto cosmetic surgeries - the dem's changed their mind when they realized they'd gain more money into the plan by taxing tanning parlors instead. Now someone like yourself, so open-minded and all, would say, "well tanning beds are dangerous and so they SHOULD put a tax on their use". Sure....but some people use tanning beds to treat skin conditions, too. Kinda like your liberal stance on the whole birth control issue....."not everyone uses it to prevent pregnancy - some women use it to treat health conditions, treating cysts, etc.
But anyway, back to my original point.....the FIRST part of Obamacare was to impose a tax - on tanning bed users. A TAX....get it? That thing you libs want so badly for the 1 percent because you're too economically uneducated to understand what that does to businesses, job creation, etc.
Now, what ultimately happens if Obamacare goes unopposed until it fully kicks in (in a few more years), is this (and this is in a nutshell, because I can't write 3000 pages that you or Nancy Pelosi could either one understand - remember that from Pelosi? A classic...when asked what was in the bill she said, "well if you want to know what's in it we'll have to pass it". Ah yes Nancy....benefited from the last second decision to tax tanning parlors instead of cosmetic surgeries - but she ought to sue her surgeon for mal-practice, obviously. ) But this is what will happen, and it'll happen so slowly over time that you won't even realize that what you will be crying about in the future is a result of what you debated with the use of 1 to 2 sentence incoherent blurbs on boards like this. If unopposed, Obamacare will systematically impose so many regulations on private insurance over time that they will no longer be able to stay in business. That's the whole idea behind it - if you read some of those upcoming proposed regulations, you'd put a cork in it I can guarantee you that. And here's what happens if we don't have private insurance companies to choose from. To put it quite simply, "you'll get what you get". No competition means no quality. Doctors are already retiring early - they have no desire to put up with the red tape of Obamacare. I know this because my doctor explained it to me right before he told me he would be retiring and why.
Are you familiar with communism and socialism, Jon? Sure you are - you're a smart guy...why am I asking? Decades ago if a Russian citizen wanted to buy a pair of blue jeans it wasn't hard to do.....they walked into the local blue jean shop and they went to the rack with their size posted, and grabbed a pair to purchase - of course, it would cost them a month's salary, because the government had control and when they needed money they simply upped the cost and made the citizens pay. If you didn't want to save a month (or two) salary for a new pair of jeans, then it was no problem....you just got to wear jeans with holes in them. But the REALLY "cool" thing about communism (and socialism, which is exactly what Obama stands for, isn't much different than communism - look it up and study a little) - anyway, the REALLY cool thing about it was, when those people went to buy their jeans there were no name brands to buy. There was one brand. You picked out a size, and you liked it. No competition from other blue jean makers, because there WERE NO OTHER blue jean makers. One style....period.
Under communism, you got one style of jeans. Under Obamacare (after he runs private insurance into bankruptcy because he regulates them to death), you'll get one means of health care.....government run and funded. And THAT is where you'll be crying like a baby when you have to get that liver transplant.
You wanna get a true sense of government run health care? Find a Canadian (not some young punk who's never needed it), and ask them if they like their health "plan". Nobody will tell you they like it. They pay about 40% (last time I checked) in taxes, and that's largely to pay for health care. They're put on waiting lists (maybe up to a year) for things like a hip replacement.....and guess where they send critically diseased patients for treatment?? That's right - right here to the good ol' USA....home of the finest health care system in the world. But not for long if your beloved Obama has his way.
@common man(?), yes, the good old "pre-existing conditions" that make it impossible to get insurance, the "life-time limits" that guarantee you're going to die if you get cancer...anything to KILL obamacare...Einstein.
JonSmith93903
seeing as how Obamacare hasn't even been fully implemented, anyone who says we need to repeal it is purely ignorant.
Many of us have the ability to perceive potential problems. But some of you just have to urinate on the electric fence to figure it out.
@jalenorigby...yuck. You "1%" (I doubt you really are) are doing a great job of creating jobs,BTW. Any sociopath who denies that America should go back to actually taxing the wealthy, is wealthy or dim.
Obamacare, no more "life-time limits" on what your insurance company pays for. Damn, if you aren't in the 1% and you get a long-term illness, you may live, (not necessarily in a country that ranks 37th in health care...America). We are getting close to the time that "pre-existing conditions" can no longer stop you from getting reasonably priced health care..oh my.
America is the only FOR-PROFIT, health-care system in the entire civilized world. Wow, many of them have much stronger economies than America. You obviously think that only the wealthy or healthy should survive. IF you are in the 1%, you should be taxed accordingly. Just like the tax system was designed to do. In the 1950's the top tax bracket was over 90% and most wealthy people wore this as a badge of honor. They were still very wealthy. At that time CEO's "earned" about 40x what the average worker made. Now that same CEO earns as much in 2-3 hours of "work" as the typical worker earns in a year. Only now (since the corporate take-over of America), the average worker pays almost 2x as much, as a percentage of their earnings, in taxes, than the wealthy. Sociopathy is the key word. You fit right in.
@jalenorigby #12.7 - And I thought I was long-winded. In any situation and under any system you will always find discontents/complainers. It is human nature. However, I would appreciate a link or some kind of substantiation that a majority of Canadians disapprove their health care system. Britons pay at a 50% tax level with a 20% national sales tax thrown in to help pay for their state controlled health system. The citizens never pay a penny directly into healthcare and while I'm sure there are complaints for the most part they seem to approve.
Personally I believe a one-payer health care system would be great and am upset that "ObamaCare" didn't take us there. That system seems to be working wonders in Taiwan. And if you want to see the "Affordable Care Act" in use check out Switzerland. It's been working just fine for them for roughly 18 years.
Also please explain why job growth increased during tax hikes under both Reagan and Clinton, and were stagnant or decreasing after the Bush tax cuts? I'm a bit of an economic dimwit and would appreciate your expertise. It certainly is an anomaly, no?
Fine Jalan, We get your opinion. But you have the same responce as all the Presidentail candidates. Repeal the Healthcare act, Then what? Can you honestly say that there was not a issue with the healthcare we had. The cost of healthcare insurance is about $500 a month for our portion/ after company share, a $5000 deduct. They will not fill perscription at any location that offers discounts such as walmart, walgreeen or either of the warehouse stores. Had a pap a few years back and they did not pay because of pre-existing...Yeah..still have no clue to this day how that one came about. So in the end because we do not meet our deductable we pay all our medical costs out of pocket while paying 10% of our gross to the insureance company. Something needs to change, if you can't come up with a better idea then atleast give this a chance to work.
If they cut their noses off to spite their face, they would improve their looks, but then they would not be able to sue for deliberately doing so. Democrats voting for this should have other parts removed.
when did conservative become a synonym for crazy uneducated moron.
let's see....when did Reagen get into office?
Well Al let me list when, or maybe who cemented the synonym. .
Sarah ( Damn that wasteful fruit fly research benefiting downs syndrome,,,,wait what) Palin - conservative VP candidate
Michelle (our founding fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery)Bachman - conservative congress woman and former conservative candidate for President
Christine (I'm not a witch, and wtf, it really addresses separation of church and state in the constitution) O'Donnell - conservative candidate for congress
Sue (pay your doctor with a chicken) Louden - conservative candidate for congress
Sharon (2nd amendment remedies) Angle - conservative candidate for congress
Joe (I don't pay my taxes and I'm not really a plumber) the Plumber - conservative candidate for congress
Joe (the deadbeat dad) Walsh - conservative congressman
Pete (what, I have to be sworn in to vote) Sessions - conservative congressman
Mike (Pete told me swearing in was only sympolic) Fitzpatrick - conservative congressman
John (I didn't know house member really had to be sworn in before voting) Boehner - current speaker of the house
George W. ( I can't grasp the English language) Bush - conservative former President
Newt (I will put a colony on the moon) Gingrich - conservative former speaker of the house. Only speaker to get tossed out.
Rick (there is quite a lot but who can forget: Man on dog) Santorum - conservative candidate for president former conservative congressman
Herman (Sim City 999) Cain - conservative candidate for president
Donald (I have investigators with the proof in Hawaii) Trump - wanna be elected official. Never ran for anything but CONSERVATIVES had him polling high
And there are many more. And it's conservatives, who support ALL of the morons on this list! That answer your question?
obama: 57 states
obama: navy corpsman
people in glass houses shouldn"t throw stones
lol ...it will be struct down by the spc anyway ...... a waste of 2 years
Who's the spc? If you are fererring to the Supreme Court, note, it's only 2 words.
Gotta protect those medical sector investments *eyeroll*
I have a pretty good job, but my psychologist, who has very little overhead (one part-time assistant), makes as much in a day and a half as I do in a month. I don't think he'll struggle too much if he's limited to rate increases of inflation + 1%. Sign me up for that.
He probably won't but you may. Your costs will increase to cover what he loses from any Medicare/Medicaid patient he sees.
My costs would already increase if medicare payout increased. It's a net-zero change. The only difference would be that the government handles less of my money as an intermediary.
daryl, you are pathetic, as you claim me to be. Where did I ever say that people should be moved over to private insurance. Just because you want to believe something does not make it true.
The private insurance industry would not write policies to cover medicare eligible people because it would be a major loss, unless you were going to charge those over 65 about $2,500 a month. Therefore, even though Ryan may think that the market will cover these people, it wouldn't.
Also, I probably know more about the ACA than you do having not only read it, but also having to implement many of the policies from it. Much of what I am talking about comes from trade journals and the mouths of the politicians who wrote the legislation (Sen. Max Baucas as an example). So before you continue to try to show your superior intellect (sarc), you should really improve your ability to read what is in others thoughts because you don't seem to be able to comprehend the written word.
Republicans: "PROTECT OUR KIDS FROM HEALTH CARE!"
Well, I for one consider Obamacare an Obamination - hammered together behind closed doors, aspects of it not even understood by those who were part of the hammering process, and shoved down the throats of Americans without so much as "excuse me while I shove you out of my way" by the POTUS to the Constitution.
As for Congress: both sides of the aisles look filled with something other than LEADERS to me. The House and Senate appear to be filled with nothing but self-serving, or special interest serving, POLITICIANS that have no real concerns about the people who voted them into office. The Executive and Legislative branches of our government are supposed to represent us and LEAD us toward our expressed goals. I've seen no such leadership from either of those branches of late.
All I have to say is "anyone but Obama" - heaven help us if the masses fall for his snake oil sales pitches again this time around. The country cannot stand another four years of ineffective leadership supported by another four years of a mindlessly milling mass we call the House and Senate.
Name one thing wrong with Obama care?
We're still waiting. Are you frantically googling something from Rush or Fox?
JonSmith93903
Name one thing wrong with Obama care?
IT SPRUNG FROM THE MIND OF AN APE! That's enough bad for me, but actually it's just the beginning.
You consider the republicans at the Heritage Foundation apes? Sweet!
These are in MANY ways entitlement programs. I pay my taxes and yet when my family NEEDED these services we weren't "qualified" for them. The government only helps people who wont help themselves.
Were they denied because of a preexisting condition? Obamacare does away with that, too bad they want to do away with it. sucks to be you.
Well april since we are talking about ACA and medicare, then I think you must be confused. What specific "entitlements" were you not qualified for?
Good move Congress- you can only eat an elephant one bite at a time!
I see the also limited the amount of money you can receive for pain and suffering - $250K for a lifetime of pain and suffering - 20, 30, 40, 50 years of pain and suffering - So they took off the wrong leg, get on with your life- no they don't want the government to impose anything on the american people. I would love to see if someone committed a surgical disaster to each one of them on either their knee or elbow or hand and let them see if $250K is enough for a lifetime of pain and suffering. They say the government shouldn't be involved and yet they pull that type of Crap - with a capital C. Why don't they set up responsible review committees - if they would pull the license on the 5% of doctors who shouldn't be practicing they would probably eliminate 50% of the lawsuits. But the doctors don't want to police themselves either - no just screw the guy who already been screwed. Make sure the insurance companies are protected.
Don't those costs fall under compensatory damages? What they limited would be punitive damages - you cut off the wrong leg so not only will we make you pay for 50 years worth of loss, but also millions more because you made a bad mistake. By the way, that millions more doesn't necessarily go to you. Much of it will go to your lawyer.
Do you know how much it cost to prosecute a personal injury case? It isn't uncommon for a lawyer to spend $100K-250K hiring the court mandated expert witnesses necessary just to file a claim. A good personal injury lawyer will win about half of his or her cases. So you can imagine how much they pay out of their pockets on behalf of their clients.
Take away contingency fees and you take away access to the court system. Cap damages and you take away access to the court system. Nursing home leaves grandma in a van overnight and she suffers multiple strokes and a heart attack before she dies. No economic damages (she doesn't work and she doesn't have any medical bills to pay because she never got treatment). $250K in noneconomic pain and suffering damages isn't enough to cover the cost of the suit. So the nursing home is free to keep killing grandmas with impunity.
Again? No, again? Man, I'm just absolutely sick to my stomach with this Congress. It's OK to preach and harp on about our children's future when crying about the deficit but, to do it without regard to the future of health care for our children? Must they be forced to deal with HMO's and health insurance companies that mimic the Republiclowns and say NO to all claims or pay pennies toward the charges? Idiocy at it's finest. Oh well, it'll stir up the base. The face of the angry white paranoid American.
You do know of the S-chip program, don't you? Any child under 18 who is not covered on parent's insurance, is covered through a state insurance program. It's been in place several years and has been successful. One thing I like about this program is children aren't forced to suffer because of their parents AND the parents don't get their hands on any cash that they can use for other purposes.
Cost saving panel.. no cuts in benefits with additions of preventive care... and the Republicans want to through it out... just like old times under Bush.. Spend Spend Spend!!
The block everything do nothing Republicans can spin all they want about the deficit ... but the deficit belongs to them/Bush and the continued idiocy of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy that are suppose to create jobs! They started the massive job losses, the bank failures, the auto industry in bankruptcy all with a needless unpaid for war. I'll take the present economy any day to those idiots. We've got an effective pragmatic leader in Obama who is cleaning up the mess with no help from them so celebrate our success in avoiding a massive depression caused by Republican leadership and the needless war! The deficit is coming down and will come down further!
How things are better in the last 31/2 years: I know the list of successes for this President will never be long enough for the Republicans..... even when the Dow hit 14,000 and their 401Ks have spilled over with money!......it will still be about banning contraception and going to war with them.
Negotiated a nuclear moratorium with North Korea!
24 months of job growth, rather than the 4,000, 000 jobs lost in the last 3 months of Bush
Bin Laden dead, Bush said he didn't care where he was..he didn't think about him much
Kaddaffi dead
Auto industry back and growing
Health care reform.. with preventive care which saves you money
401 Ks back
Credit card protection reform
Banking protection reform
Equal pay for women in the work force
TAX CUTS PROVIDED TO YOU unless you make over $250,000
A positive GDP
Ending of a useless war In Iraq
Stock Market back
Student loan reform
Pell Grant reform
Lowest interest rates in 50 years!!!
Killed 11 times as many terrorists as GW - That is a bonus
Started the withdrawal from Afghanistan
Removal of DADT
Managed a Natural disaster in the Gulf better than Bush handled a hurricane response.
Oil production coming from the US is at an all time high..rising oil and gas production, and a greater mix of energy sources and decreased consumption.
Stopped a pipeline that was opposed by the state it was going to run through until they can reroute it away from the aquifer.
Did I help you out and answer your question… Obama 2012
There ya go, making sense. That is what the republicans can't see.
Cut and pasted list - this list was already posted two weeks ago. People cut and paste lists on message boards because they can't figure it out for themselves - they don't even know if it's reality or not, but if Obama stands at a podium and says it, it MUST be true. Most of the items on the list are simply not factual.....the others are a REAL stretch of the facts. My favorite is, "Wall Street's Back"......you mean that thing that all you 99 percenters love to hate??!! Make up your mind, would ya? And oil production in the U.S. is ABSOLUTELY NOT at an all time high. (Of course, Obama tells you it is, and so you believe him because he knows you're not smart enough to research it for yourself.....so allow me to do that for you.) Oil production on PRIVATELY HELD LAND is up in the U.S......and you know why? BECAUSE IT'S ON PRIVATELY HELD LAND.....in other words, OBAMA CAN'T REGULATE IT......yet. (But he's workin' on it.) Oil production on government owned land is almost non-existent and it's down 30 percent in the Gulf. THOSE are facts. You see, this is exactly what Obama does. He takes credit for things that he has absolutely no control over....and that he'd kill if he had the power to do so. You'll figure it out some day.
Doesnt matter what anyone says really, we all have just one vote and that's it. This health care bill will stay as written i think. It will cost more to start taking it out than it did to put it in place. The big republican brass want it anyway, they just talk like they dont because their overall brand will suffer. Sirius XM had 2 republican lawyers on a program last year and both of them said the bill isn't going anywhere.
The entire platform of the Republican party is a fallacie. "I don't want my money paying for other's or things I don't want" Cry me a friggin river you idiotic simpletons. The entire premiss of taxes is all of us paying for programs we may or may not want. Programs enacted by our democratically elected officials. I'm sorry, but American said, as a democracy in 2008 that we want universal health care.
I don't want my taxes paying for oil subsidies, corn subsidies, imprisoning pot users, death penalty, unjust wars, and on and on and on... Yet we all have to swallow the pill of election consequences.
So suck it all your redneck non-thinkers who have yet to present a single, sound, logical retort.
antiRush - you are wrong about the entire premise of taxes. Taxes are to pay for public goods - in otherwords something that benefits everyone and that would not be provided by the private market.
You are also wrong that Americans said, as a democracy in 2008 that we want universal health care. First, it was not put to the vote of the people therefore it wasn't done as a democracy but rather as a representative republic. Second, the majority did not want this and that is why there had to be rule changes and "bribes" to even get it passed.
And finally before you call those with whom you disagree non-thinkers, you should at least present an argument that does not call the vote a democracy.
Oh give it a rest genius. Everyone knows this country functions as a representative republic. Just because someone refers to the system we have as a democracy doesnt mean they think it functions as a literal democracy.
you sound like a misinformed idiot
...where are all these Dumbocrats going to get the money to pay for Obamacare when they are complaining now that they can't afford healthcare insurance......Obamacare is only going to increase the cost and Obama is already exempting his buddies in the unions from participating......why?????
Mike, if everyone knew that, why don't they say that instead of democracy.
I suppose someone in the House decided instead of just saying "No" all the time lets waste some time voting on a bill to nowhere. They have passed a bunch of such nonsense.
So what's their plan for the 40 million uninsured Americans? A short life? Or "just don't get sick"?
They go to the "free" clinic, just like they have for years.
Real funny! Ha! Ha! Here is someone who truly believes in two America's! One for the haves and one for the have-nots! Of course you are hardly alone. You do realize for the "free clinic" to be "free" you have to show you are homeless and have no income. Meaning you cannot hold a job and get assistance.