E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSWednesday’s vote in the House on repeal of the Affordable Care Act will make clear one more time where each House member stands, but it won’t change the law. Unless Mitt Romney wins the presidency on Nov. 6 and Republicans gain control of the Senate and keep the House majority, the law is on course to take effect, with employer mandates, for example, becoming binding in 2014.
“Our health care law was the right thing to do,” President Barack Obama told a crowd as he campaigned in Cedar Rapids, Iowa Tuesday. “I will work with anybody to improve the health care law where we can, but this law is here to stay.”
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, and other GOP House leaders face reporters after a closed-door political strategy session.
Oh no, it’s not, contend conservative health care policy experts and leading GOP lawmakers. They say even in their worst-case scenario -- Obama’s re-election -- fiscal pressures will force Congress to rethink the law.
“This is unsettled business. Even if the election goes the way (so) that this president gets re-elected, it’s inevitable that they are going to have to re-open this health care law,” said Nina Owcharenko, director of health policy at the Heritage Foundation, a right-of-center think tank in Washington.
MSNBC's Richard Lui breaks down what happens if certain state governors decide not to go along with the health care law. Strategists Ted Strickland and Rick Tyler discuss.
Speaking alongside other conservative policy experts at a panel sponsored by the American Action Network and Crossroads GPS Tuesday, she said, “I think even in a worst-case scenario, there’s an opportunity” for conservatives to push for their own reforms, such as allowing individuals to carry the insurance tax break with them throughout their career, no matter which firm they work for, or if they’re self-employed.
To win the struggle for the hearts and minds of voters, conservatives aim to persuade middle-income and upper-income workers, 160 million of whom already have employer-provided health insurance, that they’ll be made worse off by “Obamacare.”
When it comes to health care as a campaign issue, the already-insured may be one of the two crucial swing voter groups, the other being the 40 million seniors covered by Medicare.
The already-insured voters are critical because as income go up, so does the propensity to vote: nearly four out of five of those with incomes of $100,000 or more voted in 2008 – while only 54 percent of those with incomes under $30,000 voted. As income goes up, so, too, does likelihood of having employer-provided coverage.
House Speaker John Boehner mocks reporters who continue to ask him why Republicans once again are trying to repeal the 2010 health care law. Msnbc's Craig Melvin reports.
For Republican candidates to win the debate, they must make the case that the 160 million who have employer-provided health insurance will see their plans weakened or ended outright.
One big change the ACA makes is to set up regulated insurance marketplaces or “exchanges” where uninsured people can purchase coverage, using federal subsidies available for families with incomes of up to $92,200 for a family of four.
“I think there’s too much money on the table in these exchanges” for employers to being to resist the opportunity of stopping coverage, paying the penalty for not offering coverage, and letting their workers migrate to the exchanges, said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who served as chief of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) under President George W. Bush and now heads the American Action Forum, a conservative advocacy group.
“You’re not doing your job as a business owner or a corporate executive if you haven’t thought: ‘Can we be better off letting our employees get health insurance in another way?’ And they’ve all done the math,” he said.
The CBO found in its assessment in March that “about 3 million to 5 million fewer people, on net, will obtain coverage through their employer each year from 2019 through 2022 than would have been the case under prior law.”
Holtz-Eakin said the fact that ACA creates subsidized insurance exchanges as a fallback may lead to the scenario of “employers never getting in the business of offering insurance so that over time it becomes acceptable to not offer it, and then employers begin dropping it. The bottom line is that it is profitable for both employees and employers to not offer insurance, so I expect norms to shift.”
Current CBO chief Doug Elmendorf pointed out on his blog that “there is clearly a tremendous amount of uncertainty about how employers and employees will respond to the set of opportunities and incentives under that legislation.”
But he also noted that ACA “creates new financial incentives for firms to offer and for many people to obtain health insurance coverage through their employers” – which may mean that conservatives’ fears are unwarranted or exaggerated.
But CBO did note in its March report that the penalties facing firms that don’t offer coverage “are much smaller than the costs of insurance; and not offering insurance allows firms to avoid some complexity and uncertainty.” Both those points support Holtz-Eakin’s forecast that many employers will drop coverage.
Yet the CBO report also notes that “employers may decide to keep offering coverage because they and their employees are accustomed to their doing so.” And defenders of the law say firms would run the risk of alienating their workers and damaging their ability to attract new employees if they stopped offering coverage, which is an attractive tax-free form of compensation for workers.
That tax-free status begins to end in 2018 when the ACA begins taxing high-cost, so-called “Cadillac” health insurance plans. But the tax on Cadillac plans is unpopular with labor unions so it’s possible congressional Democrats would seek to weaken or postpone it.
Conservative policy wonks say they don’t plan to offer all-encompassing systems and grand blueprints as an alternative to the president’s plan. After all, the very thing they reject in “Obamacare” is its command-and-control attempt to remake the U.S. health care sector. Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, said “To begin to change a $2.5 trillion health sector – one-sixth of our economy” would be to succumb to the same kind of overreaching that conservatives accused Democrats of when they passed the ACA.
“We don’t we have any better ideas of how to re-engineer that all at once than we what’ve seen” in the ACA, Turner said.
Sen. John Barrasso, R - Wyo., who, who practiced as an orthopedic surgeon before going to the Senate, said, “You’re not going to see a 2,700-page health care law coming from us. I just don’t think government does big things well. I’m much more interested in a step-by-step, common-sense approach….”
Barrasso has sponsored a State Health Care Choice Act that allows states to opt out of the individual mandate, the employer mandate and benefit mandates. States should innovate and devise with their own solutions, he said.
Leave a Comment:
0bamascare is going to be the absolute worst thing our economy has experienced in the last half century.
This is a huge step away from a free market.
Ending slavery was also a huge step away from a free market. "Free market" does not automatically mean it's good. Insurance companies are claiming that newborns have "preexisting conditions" to get out of paying. Every year my health insurance dividend goes up. Republicans have no ideas of their own. Oh wait - I forgot: let's cut taxes for the rich, that'll fix everything from potholes to cancer.
Are you seriously saying slavery was a free market principal?
Try to keep up. Slavery involves the involuntary use of ones labor--hardly a free market.
If you want to fix anything, be it potholes or cancer, do it yourself; the government is not capable of fixing problems as efficiently as the free market and never will be.
The problem is people, including you Darius, think that insurance companies are the gatekeepers to healthcare. You think insurance should be responsible for paying for everything from papercuts to birth control to your broken ego. When, in fact, INSURANCE is merely a reflection of overall healthcare costs and only a means to pay for costly incidents should, unluckily, anything happen to you. It is not a mechanism to pay for all your crap. By and large, most people should pay more into insurance than they receive.
Healthcare is the reason insurance is so expensive. You remove the $12-13 billion in profits of insurance companies, and you only remove a fraction of a percent of the cost of healthcare.
I like the idea of higher deductibles to discourage people from going to the doctor for every scrape and bruise. Then maybe people will be interested in the cost of procedures and be more likely to shop around.
First, it is well known by economists that healthcare does not follow the free market because everyone HAS to use it sometime.
However, making insurances compete in the exchanges is EXACTLY how the free market works.
The problem with higher deductibles is that it kills people.
People determine whether they should go to the doctor based on their finances, not their symptoms.
How do you know know if that cough is a cold or cancer?
People would not want a truly free market. That would mean no inspections or consumer protections, no labeling or ingredients requirements, no restriction on sales by age or people with criminal records, no restriction on drugs, weapons, or poisons of any kind, no criminal liabilities, etc...
Well, some people would like that. They're the ones that support Ron Paul and believe in a utopia where business does the right thing based on market competition and not like the examples of businesses in China exporting poison and dangerous products with fraudulent labeling to make a quick buck (or more accurately Yuan).
elliot,
Really?
One of the core principles of the ACA is access for PREVENTATIVE CARE and that those examinations would be covered by insurance. Focusing on the prevention and healthy choices is one of the key themes of this administration.
Mike, so you don't think that the buyers of products would like to know what's in them?
If one company isn't doing quality control or letting consumers what is in their products and the consumer wants these controls and labels, another company will come out and give the consumer what it wants and corner the market. This will force the first company to change or leave the market.
The consumers don't need the government to tell them what they want. The collective power of all consumers dwarfs the power of any government regulation (which is why we have black markets), anything consumers want will be provided by the free market.
This is simple stuff, its human nature, not politics.
"If one company isn't doing quality control or letting consumers what is in their products and the consumer wants these controls and labels, another company will come out and give the consumer what it wants and corner the market. This will force the first company to change or leave the market."
That's a free market, Ayn Rand fantasy that doesn't work in reality. Read "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair, about the meat industry a century ago. The industry won't regulate itself or worry about worker safety as long as its main concern is maximizing profits.
The AMA was just one of many earlier rather than waiting for treatment until they are sicker and care is more expensive."medical groups praising the fact that the new law will "allow patients to see their doctors.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/09/mitt-romney/health-law-puts-government-between-patients-and-do/
Other arguments and criticisms aside, government is MUCH more efficient at health care administration than private insurance companies, who have to spend your premiums on lobbyists, advertising and marketing. IN the U.K. for example, which has nationalized health care, about 5% of the revenue goes to administrative costs. U.S. insurance companies spend about 30-40% on administrative costs.
Of course, Obamacare requires insurance providers to spend a minimum of 85% of your premiums on actual health care, so that should help.
Elliot:
Absolutely! If we let "free markets" decide what's acceptable, then we'd have slavery. Look at it this way: are there people out there who want slaves and would pay money to have them? Yes, there are. A "free market" would absolutely cater to this demand. And, just btw, learn the damn difference between principle and principal, will ya??
Darius, you have no idea what you are talking about. Newborns are not subject to pre-existing exclusions currently under both HIPAA and state laws. Nice try at throwing out a blatently false statement as fact.
Nonsense.
Clotho, I am familiar with The Jungle. What did it trigger first, public outcry for better quality control or the EPA?
The answer is public outcry, which moved to implement controls before the EPA. The consumer was no longer happy with the product, therefore, the companies changed. The EPA then passed regulations to lock in the new standard set by the consumers.
Upton Sinclair was a socialist who wanted cradle to grave government involvement in his life by the way.
dslsca, In a free market even those some wish to enslave have a say in it. To force someone to work for the good of another is not possible in a free market.
Nice segway though.
elliot: if I have a say in it, then why don't I have a pulbic option for my health insurance. Could it be that the private insurance companies don't want any of that "competition" that capitalism says is so healthy?
My point was that market are amoral. Conservatives want to let markets "decide" everything, so I say, "OK! Is there a market for abortion? Is there market for same sex marriage?" [i.e., would people pay for those things?] Yes, there is. But all of a sudden conservatives don't want markets deciding those things.
Bro, learn the difference between Segway (a brand name for a scooter) and the verb segue.
No Elliot -- the absolute worst thing our economy has experienced in the last half century is the adoption of supply side economics. Tax cuts for the richest of the rich DO NOT create jobs. DEMAND creates jobs and demand comes from the middle class. As Bob Dole said in the early 902 --- the definition of a sad sight --- a 747 filled with supply siders crashing into a mountain whit 2 empty seats.
Right, Elliot...
After a few thousand children die because of baby food made with melamine and a few other of the cheapest fillers possible, people will rise up and buy the competition's product that has only killed hundreds due to poor sanitation practices in the packaging. It may cost a little more, but it's a higher quality product that the buyers recognize.
And what good is labeling if it doesn't have to be accurate. Without regulations, it may say 100% apple juice with no preservatives, but it could be flavored antifreeze, and who'll be able to verify every or even more than a few labels for accuracy? Consumer Reports?
It's cpmpletely irresponsible and cavalier to continue to lead half a nation. It is not Presidential. The decision to pass the Healthcare law without full support from the American people is nothing more than political. It's not the right thing to do, it's the politically beneficial thing to do.
"newborns are not subject to pre-existing exclusions currently under both HIPAA and state laws. "
Uh, yeah, it can happen under laws prior to PPACA. See here: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/HeartFailureNews/newborns-family-learns-pre-existing-conditions-apply-birth/story?id=10218514
"The decision to pass the Healthcare law without full support from the American people is nothing more than political."
If you insist on 100% agreement with policy changes, there will never be another one. And you'll note that the vast majority of folks think it's just fine to raise taxes on the wealthy, but the GOP has blocked this for several years now. Are you complaining as much about that?
Almost three years into recovery, the U.S. economy added only 80,000 jobs in June, marking its third consecutive month of poor job growth. The Wall Street Journal noted that the United States gained just 225,000 jobs in the past three months combined, making it the weakest quarter of job growth since the labor market began to recover in 2010. The unemployment rate, still 8.2%, has been stuck above 8% for 41 straight months, the longest streak since the Great Depression.
This is all about making Obama a "one term president"
Conservative heads continue to explode every day that the communist, socialist, educated elitist man of color sleeps in the white house.
Don't write me back and say, "No, its free enterprise that I care about." Malarkey. Obamacare is modeled after Romney care, and in fact the mandate was a conservative idea.
How far will conservatives go to remove Obama from the whitehouse? Will you destroy your own country, in order to save it from, "that man?"
Pathetic time in our country.
ctdad, unfortunately I am not sure there is anything we can agree on 100% at this moment unless we are caught off guard from some unforseen enemy.
So once again you favor a system that inherently damages the middle class and poor while holding the wealthy harmless. How about we disband the military and police and the wealthy can hire the rest of us to protect them. Then we let "the market decide" and if we feel we aren't paid enough, we simply turn our guns on our employers and take what we were once protecting.
ctdad: I don't know what you mean by "half a nation." The PPACA passed the US House, passed the Senate by a supermajority, was signed by the President, and upheld by the SCOTUS (including the most conservative Chief Justice in US history). That just isn't "half a nation."
Can we move on please! This is law now.. on to more important things like, i dont know.. how about jobs!! Oh yeah, Obama addressed jobs on this bill too.. with the growing retirement community in the next decade, health care jobs will need to be increased to service those elderly folks and all the new folks from red states that will now have access to jobs.
BTW, I never took a job without talking about the bennefits offered. So if i have a choice to work for someone that can give me better benefits vs one that does not I am going to go with the one that does if all other factors are equal. I am still preplexed that a person would take a position without the employer offering health care. But I guess that is the entitlement I get from not living in a Right To Work For Less southern state.. Love the northeast!
Yes elliot ----- I agree 100% deductibles should all be raised to keep people from running to the doctor for every little bruise or cut. In the case of Medicare, this may not be a solution as the well-to-do lonely widows seem to have a habit to run to the doctor just to have a conversation about the TV commercials they saw last night that told them to, "Ask your Dr. about" or "check with your Dr. first" or my neighbor said "so and so's Dr. said" -------- Well, it's enough to drive the medical industry nutz and drive up the cost of Medicare.
Bart Connor ---- If you're one of "those" expecting free medical care, don't hold your breath. Ever heard the expression, "Save for a rainy day"? Got a news flash for you fella ---- illness is a rainy day!
dslsca...I don't know if you realize that it passed when the DEMS held the majority in the House and Senate...This was purely political.
The law does a great deal of good. It also has a great deal of detail... health care is complex and this is one thorough piece of legislation (enter GOP talking points here). Being so detailed, however, it has to be one of the easiest laws on earth to change... it's detailed... read it... don't like it? Offer a change to THE DETAIL. Can't read? Get a new job.
In the meantime the asswipes are wasting everyone's time and money making politics out of this... over and over and over...
The economic advantages of insuring 30 million people is a win both personally for the newly insured and nationally by finally allowing people to work themselves out of poverty without getting slapped down by a health induced bankruptcy.
You idiots carrying this NEW republican parties lies are truly idiots. Polarized to the point of complete ignorance and stupidity. I AM LOVING shoving the ACA even deeper down your already Koch bros filled throats. Time to move on you cry baby washrags . You lost. You are gonna lose a lot more in the near future. That is why this NEW gop is acting so desperate, dysfunctional and unhonorably. So obvious children see it. lol You idiots need leadership, rightous leadership. NONE of you can see past the nose on your face to realize it. Not an american bone in your collective bodies. Pathetic. Truly pathetic. lol Wonder if you all will continue to muck up our daily lives after the election? I hope so so we can put an end to the waste of time and treasure you pathetic losers have brought us ALL!
Isn’t it about time that the Conservatives get off their behinds and get some real work done? Also, the law is not called, Obamacare. The law was passed by Congress (both the House and the Senate)and not by Obama. Romney is one of the most deceitful, flip-flopping, political liars in the U.S. He claims the new healthcare law is immoral, unlawful, horrific, etc. etc. Yet, ROMNEY IS THE ONE, who set up the model (for this new healthcare act) in Massachusetts while serving as their Governor. If the bozo were smart enough, he would campaign that he was the developer/initiator of this Healthcare Bill and signed it into law for his own state, rather than admitting it was lawful then, but now claims just the opposite with this new National Healthcare Law. It’s amazing that the Republican Party cannot come up with anything better than a person, who talks out of both sides of his mouth. But then that tends to be the nature of the Republican way nowadays.
The only thing I fear is the elimination of all checks and balances in our government.
The only thing these republicans are interested in is getting this repealed, (Never), so that IF Romney is elected President, the republicans will re-introduce it as "RomneyCare," get the republican Congress to pass it, and call it their own.
That's their game plan.
OBAMA/BIDEN/HOLDER....2012!!!!
Darius Jones-5131204
The dumb logic that simpletons use toestablish another way the government can dictate our lives.
Release from slavery was freedom. The Obamacare program is enslavement to the Federal Government!
GET A CLUE!!!!
Elliot, It is a well-documented fact slavery WAS a free market idea, otherwise there would have been no slave trade. The "Free market" is also the reason there was a civil war.
I don't particularly like aspects of the new health care law, but calling it "Obamacare" is highly distasteful and completely dishonest. The law wasn't written by President Obama, or his administration. It was written behind closed doors, but a BI-PARTISAN commerce committee headed by Max Baucus and insurance companies.
The only viable solution to this entire charade is a single-payer system, which the vast majority of Americans want and which both parties and the president don't want. When more people finally wake up and understand neither party wants what's best for the people, but what's best for corporations, we'll finally see solutions that benefit everyone equally and fairly.
Until then, the corporate-pandering and moronic Republicans will continue their political grandstanding and symbolic voting with no viable alternatives and the corporate-pandering and self-serving Democrats will continue to pretend they represent the peoples interests.
Meanwhile, Americans by the millions will get left behind and die. That is the truth and that is why America is NOT the greatest nation on earth.
Looks like the anti free speech collapse goons are out in full force.
I would really like to know why you liberals collapse something just because you don't agree with it; I thought you folks were all about tolerance.
Thats ok I guess I will just have to tolerate your intolerance.
Enjoy life under the warm wing of governance.
Elliot, the "free market" is killing us, we did much better with the system that teddy Roosevelt left behind. "regulated capitalism"
That expression doesn't apply here. My mother spent six months in the hospital with an illness and it cost her 135K a month.
That's one hell of a rainy day. There is no saving for a serious illness. Are you willing to pick up the 800K tab for her?
It appears that Elliot has a different definition of the concept of free market. It might help if he were to enlighten us as to what it is.
Probably why congress has a 9% approval rating.
Proof the government is out of touch with the common man.
Yet these clowns get re-elected over and ove.r
eliot @ 1.3, says slavery was not a function of a free market. To the the slave owners for whom slaves were property, slavery was a free market. The US Constitution enshrined the free market as part of our political system, and that Constitution recognized people who were not free.
Article 1, Section 2 of the US Constitution says,
The Constitutions delineates between "free persons" , indentured servants, untaxed Indians and and "all other persons", Now I wonder, just what did they mean by "all other persons"?
Just because slavery is not illegal today does not mean that it was not completely consistent with free market principle when it was legal.
So Darius Jones-5131204 at # 1.2 is correct in saying that abolishing slavery was a major step away from the free market principles of that day.
Wow, you are green.
Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but increased it over the northern position.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise
How could you seriously write that garbage. Take a history class.
dslsca---Absolutely! If we let "free markets" decide what's acceptable, then we'd have slavery.
we will be a slave to pay this healthcare. then if you don't get preventative test the gov rules you must have, being as they are unaffordable because worthless unaffordable plan won't cover them, the gov adds $25 a mon extra the following year.
then there's the "civilian national security force" thrown in with affordable care for "emergency" that's "just as important, just as well funded as the military".
LMarcT:
Please list five (5) from the ACA.
elliot,
Thank you for that history lesson demonstrating the recognition and acceptance in the Constitution of slavery as a legitimate enterprise - howbeit without any mention of "slave" or "slavery".
chartsweb,
You gotta get out more-
Text of the speech you refer to-"
This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.
Scary stuff huh?
civilian national security force,
this is what the pres has been spending his time doing? not a care about our economy-jobs-budget.
"then if you don't get preventative test the gov rules you must have, being as they are unaffordable because worthless unaffordable plan won't cover them, the gov adds $25 a mon extra the following year."
Totally false. You just made that stuff up. Preventative coverage, like yearly check-ups, pap smears, etc. must be covered by health insurance for no copay according to PPACA. There is no fine if you don't.
"then there's the "civilian national security force" thrown in with affordable care for "emergency" that's "just as important, just as well funded as the military".
This is to provide a large number of health care providers (I'm proud to say I'm one) who are trained and ready to assist should there be a national pandemic.
Next.
who always complains the republicans spend too much for the military? now this civilian national security force will be just as well funded? we can't afford it or the affordable healthcare that's now 3x obamas estimated cost. we can't afford it. what dosesn't anyone understand?
The Republican senator is so brilliant - "I just don't think government does big things well".
Ever heard of World War II, idiot? Don't push your small thinking and lack of ambition onto other people. Just another idiot tea bagger.
Note, he's an orthopedic surgeon. He hates Obamacare because he knows doctors' salaries will go down.
Specialists' salaries will go down. Primary care doctors' salaries will go up, according to the AMA. But your overall point is still correct.
Has it occurred to anyone that if you elect someone to government, who doesn't believe government works you are setting up a self fulfilling prophesy?
Conversely, Ol_Doc, if you elect someone to government who thinks government has all the answers, are you not setting up a poor government?
Ever hear of Vietnam? Or Korea? Or invasion of Iraq? Or Afghanistan? WW2 was successful because the vast majority of the American people worked to make it successful. The government totally fails when it works against the interests or will of the majority of the American people. So lets compare health care to the governments ability to manage war. Do you want the successes of WW2 or the Failures of Vietnam? And if you want to make this about party ideology the don't forget that that WW2 was under a Democrat and Vietnam was under both Democrats and Republican Presidents.
Republicans lied again. They didn't come up with ANY replacements to the Affordable Care Act, in fact,
they are all for de-insuring over 50 million people.
Over the past three years Republicans have not created a SINGLE job. Obama has advances 12 bills to do just that and each bill was voted down by the republican-controlled house.
Wise up guys.
No one in their right mind thinks that government has all the answers. The difference between the two parties is that only the extreme liberal fringe thinks that government has all the answers. However, government has really good answers. Every single government in the advanced world has implemented healthcare more efficiently than the US. Americans pay more than 2.5 times as much as citizens who have socialized healthcare, and we live less than anyone else in the industrialized world.
For anyone who isn't blinded by religious belief this obviously shows that government works much better than the free market. It's that simple. You could probably come up with individual reasons if we were somewhere in the middle, but we are the absolute worst.
The idea that "government can never be better than the free market" is just a religious belief. There are no facts to back it up where healthcare is concerned, in fact, they all point towards the opposite.
Washington State is creating our own health insurance exchange and I really don't care what the other states do. I just think there should be a residency requirement so you have to live in our state for two to five years before being able to participate in the exchange if you come from a non-exchange state. I don't want people coming here just when they get sick.
"Think about going to Amazon to buy your health insurance. Select how much coverage you want, what kind of benefits, and Health Insurance Exchanges will give you a list of multiple insurance companies for you to choose from. That's how it's going to work for you to buy your own health insurance plan. Turns out, it's estimated that up to 30% of employers will stop offering health insurance coverage to their employees, and instead offer vouchers to be used on the Health Insurance Exchanges. In other words, employers are getting out of the health insurance business and letting you decide what's best for your family.
You might get a $400/month voucher from your employer and you go to the Exchange and buy whatever insurance plan fits your budget and meet your needs. Well, for the same amount of money you can actually get the exact same plan, being employed by your employer or not. If your next employer also offers vouchers (or plain cash) you can keep the exact same health plan without sweat. Same doctors, same coverage, same cost, same co-pay, same everything!"
http://www.geekwire.com/2012/healthcare-reform-todays-ruling-great-news-startups/
set up regulated insurance marketplaces or “exchanges” where uninsured people can purchase coverage
The GOP had MANY opportunities to do this move BEFORE the law was passed. Now they are desperate to score with the American people, but we are tired of "last minute" alternatives that are only meant to ridicule the efforts of the President.
Exactly. Now the Tea Partiers are pleading with Republican governors not to implement the health exchanges. So if you live in the red state, you would not get the bulk purchasing power of your state the way blue states would have.
Obama could be right.
It could be here to stay...until we collapse.
you know... like California
Wow, another government employee full of self loathing:
Must have come from the Home School 'Em branch of the Republican party. You know, the earth is flat, we can't put a man on the moon, the we can't build "the Hoover Dam, St. Louis Arch, the Empire State Building, the Sears Tower, the The Brooklyn Bridge, the San Francisco Bay Bridge or the entire US Interstate system" group. The same group which would insist on fighting all wars with flint lock rifles, bows and arrows owned by individuals in an all volunteer state militia, since that was what the founding fathers meant when they passed the 2nd Amendment.
The Republican party is the party that firmly believes "WE CAN'T."
The Democratic party is the party that firmly believes "WE CAN and WE WILL."
They are both right on this point.
In November, you have a choice, vote for a party and a man who looks to the future and says "Corporations are people, my friend" or one who looks to the future and says "Yes, WE CAN!"
Jemma77: That is exactly what will happen and will be another example of how the Republican Party shows that they do not care about the average citizen in their states. Yet those same states will keep electing the same idiots again and again. Another poster said there should be a need for residency requirement and that will happen in states that implement the new Healyh Care provisions.
Shame we can't repeal stupidity and recall all Republicans.
The Gross Old People, yet again on the wrong side of history.
Isn’t it about time that the Conservatives get off their behinds and get some real work done? Also, the law is not called, Obamacare. The law was passed by Congress (both the House and the Senate)and not by Obama. Romney is one of the most deceitful, flip-flopping, political liars in the U.S. He claims the new healthcare law is immoral, unlawful, horrific, etc. etc. Yet, ROMNEY IS THE ONE, who set up the model (for this new healthcare act) in Massachusetts while serving as their Governor. If the bozo were smart enough, he would campaign that he was the developer/initiator of this Healthcare Bill and signed it into law for his own state, rather than admitting it was lawful then, but now claims just the opposite with this new National Healthcare Law. It’s amazing that the Republican Party cannot come up with anything better than a person, who talks out of both sides of his mouth. But then that tends to be the nature of the Republican way nowadays.
Bookem' Danno
Thus we should elect people with a more realistic idea about the powers and limitations of government. Voting in extermeists who think that government has all the answers or converely that it has no answers at all probably do no one any good.
I resent the government forcing me to pay insurance companies thousands of dollars in premiums I don't want, and will vote consistantly against any politician running for office that supports such a thing. I'm not tea party or republican, probably more democrat but not hack democrat.
Anybody that supports Obama is surely supporting "BIG BROTHER" in telling us - the people - what we need to do. That was not the intention of our Founding Fathers!! Obama needs to go.....the sooner, the better!
Right justoneguy, instead the government should TOTALLY be telling us what we should do with our uteruses, or with whom we should be sleeping with, right??
Despite Obamacare, republicans have managed to wrestle the title of Big Brother party away from the democrats by their insistence that the government involve itself intimately in the lives of gays and women.
"That was not the intention of our Founding Fathers!!"
The founding fathers (Washington especially) would aghast at the fact the US currently spends as much each year on its military budget as the rest of the world combined. They would also be heartbroken by their beloved country being dragged into two foreign wars (one illegally) that were started and fumbled by a Republican president. The founding fathers would be far less concerned about health care than the vast amount of tax dollars being squandered to fund the direction in which the right-wing, militaristic GOP has been trying to drag this country.
"The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without any thing more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations." -George Washington in his Farewell Address
http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp
Good gosh, Bonner looks like he's been crying all day in this picture.
The republicans are tenacious yet misguided. This can be said of several destructive leaders who screwed up their countries during the last century. I hope rational, progressive thinkers can prevail! In the meantime, does anyone have a Kleenex for John?
“I think even in a worst-case scenario, there’s an opportunity” for conservatives to push for their own reforms,
ohhhh reforms like more unfunded wars, fist-@!$%#ing pregnant women, disenfranchising voters that might so much as look Democratic, gutting the education system, awarding more contracts for 20year/90% occupancy For Profit Prisons. Ohh reforms like smaller government that requires federal agents 1-on-1 with every woman's period, a watchman in every bedroom and Law Monkeys that dance to every tune they play. Reforms such as raising their pay and staff, paid for by the People, guaranteeing their paid for by the People Health Insurance that does not discriminate on basis of the number of family members or pre-existing conditions! Ohhh maybe reforms like No Tax for the 1% and homogenizing their vision of G-d in every Living Room. Maybe all volunteer firefighters and constabulary because they have a day job behind the gates of the Glorious Communities scrubbing toilets, shoveling @!$%# and kissing ass!
Ohhh and as a last thing, are not Conservatives a contraindication of the position of Reform?
The Republican Congress does a great job of showing us how inept our Government is.
Pst... Republicans, that wasn't a compliment. Read between the lines. :)
Explain it in detail which premiums are those, how it really effects you and as close to an actual dollar amount it is costing you. :)
I am waiting for this to be realistic. I honestly think you're just spouting off made-up crap you were programed to say and have no real facts to back up your lazy assertions.
So again, prove me wrong and provide facts you personally have. :)
Typical Republican politicking. The House, in it's infinite wisdom, has now voted to repeal all or part of the ACA thirty-three times. Thirty-three! Meanwhile, John Boehner's claims that the GOP would create jobs have gone the way of Darrell Issa and his witch hunt. Neither has done diddly squat to create jobs. And the only thing the GOP can come up with is to cut taxes for the "job creators", i.e. the wealthy. Job creators my @$$! Their taxes have been drastically lower since the Bush tax cuts went into effect, first in '01 and then in '03. Instead of creating jobs they just pocketed the money (or put it in their Swiss and Cayman bank accounts a la Mitt Romney), so how do you expect anyone to believe them now?
The GOP only represents old, rich white men. I'm old, and white (but not rich), and I don't trust them as far as I can throw them. I can't understand why anyone except old, rich white guys would vote for Romney. He offers nothing, no idea aside from tax cuts for the rich, no jobs plan except to say "I'm going to create jobs" (way to be specific, Mitt!), no specifics on what he would cut in government...no specifics on anything aside from those tax cuts.
IMO those voting for Romney are simply voting against Obama...and that's a lame reason to vote...
Z1P2
So so off topic. Typical veering off the subject. Obama = Epic Fail....
Anybody that thinks that our health care will get better under Obumacare is either working for an insurance company and collecting their gainsharing or braindead aka a DuMOCRAT. And no I am not a republican but work for an insurance company and love the excellent pay, great benefits, gainsharing and FREE HEALTH INSURANCE.
And there they are, posing for the camera with their $300 haircuts and $3,000 suits....
And they want us to believe that they know what it is really like to NOT be able to afford health insurance.
These pathetic attempts by liberals to put down the GOP are amusing, at best. Do me a favor, turn off msnbc, brush up on the constitution, actually READ Paul Ryans plan and then give an honest opinion, not that you just hate conservatives.There are actually some parts of the new law I agree with, but as a whole it stinks.
Just one more thing. We were promised this would cost under 900 million.CBO's recalculation is now over 2 trillion....OVER 10 YEARS!! Just sayin
A line in the article stated that employers will continue to offer coverage so that they won't risk alienating their employees or impairing their ability to attract new employees. Apparently I have missed something. Are we now in a situation where jobs are plentiful? Let's get real here. Employers don't have to worry about those things right now. Thanks to Obama, there are way too few jobs to go around.
I understand exactly how you republicans feel. I felt the same way with seat belt laws. I felt the same with mandatory auto insurance. You say there's no similarity. I say there is no differance. I chose to drive so I already had insurance. I chose mine and my own families health over saving a buck so I've had health insurance right along. I used seat belts before it became mandatory. I didn't need laws to force me to do these things but I clearly remember a sponsor of the seat belt law say that he felt he needed a law in place to remind him to use his seat belt. Auto insurers claimed it would help to keep my auto insurance down by forcing all other drivers to purchase auto insurance as it was uninsured motorists that were causing the premiums to climb. Well, I was already doing those things before their laws and I continue today. Never missed an insurance payment, never been ticketed for not wearing a seat belt. I didn't need the laws but they were forced on me then so enjoy it now. It really isn't going to effect me any as I already pay for health insurance and the premiums climb anyways. I love my life and I love my family and I am already doing the responsible thing. If you aren't and haven't been, then you sure as heck will now.
I am sure that all of our questions concerning the health care law will be answered when the President goes over the health care bill with my congreaaman and every other law maker in Washington who requests it, "line by line", on CSPAN as the President promised that he would. Does anyone know when the broadcasts are scheduled to begin?
Here's a thought. Why not "work together" to make the law work better. Not one Democrat has said this is a perfect law, all of them said they were willing to make it better.
Bottom line, doing nothing is not an option. At the rate of increase, insurance would only be for the wealthy within 10 yrs.
Those that don't want the mandate, simply want the tax payers to pay for their healthcare. You either pay your own way or you are a Freeloader. It's that simple.
Darius Jones, you picked out the choice comment of the repealers when you wrote,
And the space program, and the elimination of polio and measles, the Interstate Highway system, the Louisianna Purchase.
Of course there's that little thing called the US Constitution which was created by the representatives of the government set up by the Articles of Confederation.
The asininity of Republicans in a circular firing position, shooting from the hip, is astounding.
It would be nice is you all remembered the promise of transparent process on CSPAN with copies of the bill as it developed so we could make comment and ask important questions. Instead we got back room middle of the night deals for some and not so much for others. And when these mental pygmies (legislators of both parties) got ready to present the final document we got "we have to pass it to find out what is inside". That is reveling and an indictment to both the legislators and the process. Is it not the responsibility of the members to read, review, analyze and understand the laws they are saddling this country with? These are the same incompetents who can't follow the laws they swore in a public oath to defend. These are the same individuals who vote pay raises in the middle of the night to avoid our questions. These are the same individuals who think illegal immigration is not a problem all 11 million of them. The cost of health care in this country has been impacted by billions of dollars of fraud allowed by the members. Their response is to pass a back room deal on health care to make the middle class pay for the years of abuse by illegal aliens. Just watch the video of the "investigation" by congress on the depth of the problem where many hospital executives laid out the cost just for their hospitals in loss due to health care fraud. You know the trick of an illegal using a false name, address and social security card for free health care and laughing in the collector's face when they discover the false identity. You can't expect legal participants in the system to feel good about this abusive health care act when it is just a cover up for the legislators illegal acts to not uphold the laws they swore to. The problem of health care cost start at the top of the mess through the malfeasance and neglect of the members of our legislature. I have had enough of their outright lies and disregard for established law. They should all face jail time and impeachment for not discharging the responsibilities of their office. Instead they have the nerve to concoct a half baked reform to hide the results of their mismanagement and disregard for law and the people of the United States. These members have no shame and no regard for the Constitution or the "little people" who elected them. Time for a real change, time to strip all the incumbents from office and replace them with people who are unemployed by them and their careless actions. It is time for a voter revolution.
He was right in that respect, the govt. does not do things well. If the govt. had done things well, we would not have the economy we have now.
Facts don't lie people. You liberals can all pretend that this is going to make your life better, until you find out that some doctors won't take the govt. health insurance. ( And as doctors they have that right).
Try to get to see a dentist or a doctor with Medicaid right now, and you will be in for a long wait. Those doctors like to cap the number of Medicaid patients they see.
Specialists don't make as money as you think they do, unless they are neurosurgeons.
It'ssimple: By the way, does this healthcare plan also address Planned Parenthood? Because afterall, aren't all those people freeloading?
If we have to have Obamacare, why should I have to pay for that clinic?
"Specialists don't make as money as you think they do, unless they are neurosurgeons."
According to WebMD, Orthopedic surgeons and radiologists top the earnings chart at an average income of $315,000 a year. Right behind them are the cardiologists and anesthesiologists at $314,000 and $309,000, respectively. At the bottom of the scale are family practitioners, internists, and pediatricians at $158,000 to $165,000. However, A Medical Group Management Association report based on 2010 data, found the median compensation for radiologists was $471,253 and $192,148 for pediatricians.
Don't listen to Unhappy's nonsense. Specialists do very well.
independent thinker--Romney is one of the most deceitful, flip-flopping, political liars in the U.S
think again... when obama ran against hillary he said an individual mandate would be no good to anyone bla bla lying flip flopper
Doctors put in a lot of time and money to finally set up practice. Why should they make less money than a plumber or an electrician? Or an elected official for that matter. As doctors they will be penalized and the possibility of being thrown in jail because they don't do what some bureaucrat sitting in a cubicle somewhere tells them to do in regards to a patients care and who have no medical training. AND, how did a 3.8% tax on the sale of your home become part of Obamacare? It will take affect January 2013, right after the election. Obamacare is a tax and this is yet another tax that will affect the middle class.
http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/obamacare-flatlines-obamacare-taxes-home
Doctors are planning on retiring now that the Supreme Court ruled it was constitutional. I worked with a doctor who retired after all this nonsense began. Is the following our future now? Will these elite politicians who voted for this be exempt from participating in Obamacare like they are with other laws that they pass with our welfare in mind. Do as I say, not as I do it seems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6e3udzHIiVs
dslsca---Absolutely! If we let "free markets" decide what's acceptable, then we'd have slavery.
we will be a slave to pay this healthcare. then if you don't get preventative test the gov rules you must have, being as they are unaffordable because worthless unaffordable plan won't cover them, the gov adds $25 a mon extra the following year.
then there's the "civilian national security force" thrown in with affordable care for "emergency" that's "just as important, just as well funded as the military".
Sailcat,
Those wages sound a lot less than the legislators who passed the law at the behest of the insurance lobby. Does that even make you question the direction the law of "we have to pass it so we can find out what is inside"? Many of our legislators made more money in stock options (insider trading) than the physicians who busted their tails and paid the bills for education to arrive with student loans that would make most of us give up. The other thing you have to understand is average...not all make the big bucks. Some teach, do research, and practice in small communities for way less.
How about the billion dollars we wasted getting President Obama elected? How about the billions spent trying to get someone else elected? Who do you think will expect to be compensated after the election? Just follow the money and you see the physicians in this county will get the short end compared to the insurance execs.
Before you jump to conclusions I am not a physician but I have plenty of friends who are and they work very hard at all hours of the day and night to provide care for their patients. The long hours are not over after residency it continues their whole working life. When did you have to work 12-14 hours a day and then get called in the middle of the night to save someones life because they drank too much and had a wreck? Do you know how much the insurance premium is for a neurosurgeon? Look up that number and be amazed. I can't earn enough in ten years to pay one years premium. No insurance no practice. You have no idea the overhead due to government documentation and insurance company policies. How would you like to work for 6-8 months before getting paid by the insurance companies for the work you did 6-8 months before. You wonder why health care is so costly...doctors have to pay to live on loans until the insurance companies get around to paying them. Who pays for the loan cost...the consumer and taxpayer. Try looking at a total business model before you make assumptions about how well physicians do. None of the drivers of health care cost are addressed by this poorly written bill...it is a windfall for insurance companies...30 million more forced subscribers with the same results...denied claims, delayed payments to providers, more government jobs with pay higher than the private sector and lower quality health care.
Sailcat: WebMD is very hyped up on doctors' salaries. Most orthopedic surgeons tend to the elderly which have Medicare or Medicaid as their insurance plan. Don't kid yourself in the slightest. I know plenty of Orthopedic surgeons.
I going to call bull@!$%# on that one, Unhappy. I quoted two different studies and the conclusions were very similar. You have nothing but your highly suspicious association with "plenty of Orthopedic surgeons".
Fail.
DG_W:
Just go to his website - he is very specific. Please tell us what President Obama has offered for 2013 to 2016, and please be specific.
Wow, how many here think this is the most pressing issue America is confronting at this moment?, JOBS are the most pressing matter, when people don't make money because they don't have a job that puts a strain on America economical, right now We are spending a lot more than what is coming in TAXES, and as long as the GOP MORONS play their games of distracting us from the real problem like their TAX PLEDGE so they are not capable of doing their jobs and should be removed from office, they promised JOB CREATION if elected well where are the jobs, since they got in there they have not made any real attempts to make good their promises, it's time they be held accountable for not doing what they are paid to do. These people are greedy and two faced to boot, lets kick them the HELL OUT!
Bart Conner:
Where is that is the PP or ACA?
Sailcat: I know plenty of orthopedic surgeons. How many do you know personally? Anytime you look on a website you will see an inflation of salaries. That goes with any profession. They always tend to pick the highest salaries they can find for comparison.
Your argument fails.
The only real reason the U.S. came out of World War II on top was because we were fortunate enough that virtually all of the petroleum was either under the control of the allies in the first place or in places we were able to gain control of it. The primary reason the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor is because we stopped selling them American oil and to take it from other places the U.S. Navy's Pacific Fleet would have to be gotten out of the way. Hitler was fully expecting to negotiate a treaty with the US shortly after declaring war on us, not at all unreasonable given the lousy state of our military establishment in 1941 and the startling amount of help that various American corporations and industrialists had given Germany up to that point. It stood to reason that if he couldn't exactly enlist America as an ally, Hitler could at least pressure us to agree to keep out of it.
For cutting oil sales to Japan and not responding to Germany's declaration of war on us with a treaty right away, we ended up with well over 300,000 killed, nearly 700,000 wounded, and things such as virtually all citizens having to live on tightly rationed food and supplies while the those of Japanese descent were rounded up and held in captivity. And to top it off, for ultimately prevailing in WWII, our reward was ending up in the 'Cold War' with the Soviet Union for over 40 years, without which we would not have been in Korea or Viet Nam. All courtesy of the U.S. Government, and all of it was entirely avoidable.
Greentimer (post 2.36)...
Best check out the history of the CDC and that of jonas salk. Not exactly an example of a "big government" sponsered project consisting of 2700 pages of legislation to impliment. The measles vaccine is also likely to fall into this category as well.
The space program comparison is weak as well. Perhaps you have forgotten its origins. Strategic military advantage over the soviet union or at least an equivalency in defence capability. ie an appropriate analogy to it was that by throwing a lot of mud against the wall some of it was bound to stick.
Interstate highways? Not really a program of government cost savings, but rather one of strategic value from both a military and private sector POV. But hey, it was a good plan for the public good.
Louisianna purchase and even alaskas purchase are good examples of the value of buying real estate from sellers who are desperate for cash flow. Hardly something to be compared with the effectiveness of big government planning.
WWll, A very good example of what happens when there is a unity of purpose between both the government and and its people. Notice how it applies to both sides, axis and ally? Then take into account the fact that America was not subject to widespread intense domestic attack. I wonder where that unity of purpose went to in obamacare?
The US constitution, a wonderful document of simplicity and interpretive flexability took years to develope and consists of what, less than ten pages?
Yet the HCR and ACA consists of over 2500 pages and was generated in under a year without any real bipartisan support because obama and company said that some of its ideas were supported by republicans in the past. Who can even forget pelosi's insistance that the bill need not be read, just sign it.
#2.51, that post was just full of fail. Trying to claim that the space program wasn't government doing something well because it started out as a military project... fail. You're like that little old lady at the TEA party ralleys that held up the sign saying "keep the government out of my medicare"
It's pretty simple..You want to get rid of this Healthcare fiasco? Vote out of office all its supporters. Starting with Obozo.
Again, Unhappy, I quoted two authoritative sources while you simply pretend to know a doctor. Your painfully obvious lies do not change the facts. Specialists are well paid professionals.
Sailcat, would you also be willing to post cost of setting up a practice, average operating costs, Malpractice insurance, etc,??? I have looked them up....amazing!! The nerve of those doctors thinking just because they spent ten years, or more, in education, owe loads ofcash in loans to repay, then expect to make a living???? (sarcasm)
the TiGor
Ya TiGor, we should have had a 'treaty' with Hitler. Think it through before posting. Good Grief...Liberals
American # 2.51, thanks for the measured reply.
The quote from the Republican senator was
Now "big" is relative term, with no absolute value. So I accept that the items mentioned may not appear big to you.
However, while the motivations, opportunities, cost savings, defense capability, unity of purpose, that you mention as disqualifying attributes, are all legitimate measurements of almost any activitiy, the Republican senator relied only on size as his criteria to judge the government's outcomes. My response cited only projects I considered large and somewhat complex.
As to developement time, bear in mind that universal health care advocacy and study goes back at least to President Truman. The (unAmerican, freedom-killing) mandate to purchase insurance has been around at least since the Heritage Foundation presented it in 1989, and was introduced in Congress as part of health care bills presented by Republicans in 1993. And, of course, the ACA is alleged to closely follow Gov. Romney's MA plan from 2006.
The ACA has a lot longer history of developement than just 1 year. To say ACA took a year to develope is to say the Constitution was developed in 4 months.
My reference to polio and measles was meant to allude to the government's program of nation-wide innoculation that has virtually eradicated those maladies in the US.
The government has demonstrated that it "does big things well".
While 2700 pages seems like over kill, the 2000 edition of the International Building Code runs over 700 pages, and that does not include separate codes for plumbing, electrical or mechanical - just to build a new house. Providing for the health care/insurance of a living human being should take a bit more into account than building a house.
While I agree that 2700 pages is still a lot, that does not automatically make it bad law (but it is definitely "big").
Thanks for the discourse.
sam---they promised JOB CREATION if elected well where are the jobs, since they got in there they have not made any real attempts to make good their promises, it's time they be held accountable for not doing what they are paid to do. These people are greedy and two faced to boot, lets kick them the HELL OUT!
your job making promising president did NOTHING not even a budget. he was so anal to get "affordable healthcare" passed and did not give a damn, and still doesn't, about our economy. so don't tell me we can begin to afford this bill that's 3x more than obama predicted. he's a lunatic.
"AND, how did a 3.8% tax on the sale of your home become part of Obamacare? It will take affect January 2013, right after the election."
Uh, yeah, it's not on every home for every person. It's only for those making more than $250K PROFIT if their income is above $200K individually or $250K filing jointly.
You know, I just don't understand you people. You screamed for years (beginning January 2009) about deficit, deficit, deficit. And yet, when implementing a program that is at least partially paid for by savings in some areas and increased fees, taxes, and fines in other places, mostly from those who either benefit most or whose products are linked to poorer health outcomes (tanning beds), you're still screaming.
Oh, and this: "your job making promising president did NOTHING not even a budget. "
Obama has submitted a budget each year in February as required by law. Look it up.
Romney will win in November ..people who work for a living are fed up with Obamacare and sick of hearing about it. I dont want nothing that was pushed down my throat just to make some feel big and important.. Those who want it all free go find a job.
Romney can even get his own party excited. He'll be defeated easily.
Plus why would people replace Obama with someone who invented Obamacare as Romneycare?
Joe66 - I've worked for a living ... for 36 years, bright eyes and think a lot of you conservatives are small minded or completely brain dead.
"I dont want nothing that was pushed down my throat ... " ???? WOW, speak english much? I rest my case, no wonder you don't understand.
I bet Joe66 supported two wars that were pushed down our throats.
I love how people like Joe thinks that the only people who hold down jobs are the ones who would vote for Romney. Surprise Joe! Many of us work 40 hours or more a week, we just feel secure enough in our self esteem not to shove it down everyone else's throats every five minutes the way your ilk seems to enjoy doing. But please, continue to tell us how much harder you work than the rest of us. I'm on pins and needles.
I think Joe66 probably sums up the general feeling on the right about this issue. They think the only ones to benefit are those that are unemployed. They think this law, somehow unique in the history of laws, compels citizens to do or not do something (spoiler, basically every law does that). They incorrectly think that their lives will somehow change for the worse. They believe that death panels exist. Given the $250 million spent on disinformation, I can see why they believe those things, even if they are completely untrue. The problem is that their Republican leaders (the only people they listen to) are not doing anything to help them learn the truth. They keep lying. So while I can understand the mindset based on misinformation, at some point people have to do their own research.
Yes ... and we all know Republicans are extraordinary liars!!!
so who is going to pay for the universal healthcare???
I work for a living and I'm beginning to wonder whether Conservatives have brains OR souls. ACA is the law of the land. Deal with it.
oh miss Tracey, all of us working will be "dealing with it" as you put it. HAVE FUN!!
TraceyS, yes, it is the law of the land today, but as the court said, it can be changed. So if it changes, I sure hope you don't BMG and just dealt with it.
"so who is going to pay for the universal healthcare???"
Why would you care since we don't have universal healthcare now and PPACA is not universal healthcare?
Joe,
Please, someone explain to me what is really to fear about the AHCA--the more I get into it the better and better it is for the vast majority of Americans. Whats wrong with ex-changes, individual mandate, pre-existing condition coverage, women's healh coverage, keeping your kids healthy, preventive health care coverage, 80% Insurance premiums going to actual care, no-life time limits. A small example: ex-changes--we lived in St. Tammany Parish, LA (husband in oil and gas industry), lived there for 10 years, o.k. his Co. did not offer enough health insurance coverage (even with personal contribution) we shopped around and found out that we could not purchase health care fom certain companies because different parishes, could by state law, sell only certain companies products. At that time United Health could not sell their product in our parish, you either took Blue Cross or you were completely SOL. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most private companies require employee contributions for health care coverage, so whats the big deal here? I simply do not know a single company that pays the entire cost of health care coverage to their average employee, and oh bye the bye, health care is already rationed, just check your EOBs.
OBAMA 21012
Hey Joe, you wouldn't happen to be a former "non-licensed" plumber now running for office would you? ROFLMAO
What universal healthcare? Hell, we didn't even get a public option. Considering that every non-third world democracy on the face of the earth provides universal healthcare...except us, is it possible that we could be wrong, or is it just the rest of the world?
If we did have universal health care did it ever occur to you that the amount of extra taxes you would pay is still less than what you pay now for health insurance premiums?
Not even in your wildest dreams!
Yes, in my wildest dreams. I pay $565 every month for health insurance just for myself (which I only have because of the Affordable Care Act, by the way). With universal care I would most likely pay an additional $270 a month in taxes, and have better coverage. No $7,000 deductible. If you can add and subtract (somehow I'm not so sure) its a win for me. Without the Affordable care Act, I would probably quit my job and let you folks who hate it so much pay my medical bills, probably well over $25,000 a year
Hey Joe66,
Good job eliciting responses from all those who have a hard time spotting an obvious troll, right down to the double negative. I outrank you with a third 6.
Nope. But then again you guys are so delusional I could imagine even after Obama's win in November for a 2nd term you guys will think it was Mitt who won. :)
I resent the government forcing me to pay insurance companies thousands of dollars in premiums I don't want, and will vote consistantly against any politician running for office that supports such a thing. I'm not tea party or republican, probably more democrat but not hack democrat.
Hey GOPers! You're forgetting that a LOT of those employed, high earners are Baby Boomers who are going to be retiring soon. They don't give much of a cr@p, personally, if employer healthcare suffers or goes away. They will be retiring SOON and will expect their Social Security and Medicare and maybe Medicaid. That's what they care about and you stupid GOPers are trying to take that away from them. Do you really think a lot of the employed high earners are going to vote for Mittens, when he wants to take away the benefits they have paid into all their working lives? NOT A CHANCE!
Here's the thing so few of these "I like what I have" people don't seem to get: you have insurance because your employers have OPTED to give it to you. They are under no obligation to do so. They can take it away tomorrow, and if ACA is repealed and costs continue to skyrocket, I'd imagine more and more of them are going to take it away. {And by the way, while they're having to spend tons of money to give it to you, guess what they're NOT spending it on? Raising Your Salary.} This whole system of employer-provided insurance is a historical anomaly that is now simply nonsensical and will ultimately become unsustainable. ACA doesn't go nearly far enough, thanks to lots of insurance lobby dollars behind it, but it is a step in the right direction.
Marc: If you are going to make fun of someone's grammar, make sure you don't fall victim to the same trap! "... for 36 years, bright eyes and think a lot of you" ......What is that?
Shouldn't it be " I think a lot of you".... I can't believe 27 people agreed with what you said on grammar.
Well I have one suggestion: Get over it T-Publicans!
It is one thing to steal and election but it is a whole other thing to outright obstruct governance once you have lost and the opposing side is attempting to govern as mandated by a majority vote. The T-publican party have lost their integrity and moral compass and I for one will not reward cheating.....it is simply Un American. I never liked their policies or their leanings but I respected them as a fair player in the game but not anymore. I hold this party beneath contempt and frankly I find it unworthy of representing the true grit American conservatism it touts.
Heartlight, care to show those numbers you speak about in post 3.15?
----------------------------------
GA girl - how droll, looks like you only care about wanting (or supporting) change if it suits you. makes me wonder on how you apply your bias to others that have a viewpoint different than yours?
You and your kind wrote the book on only caring about yourself. You espouse one reality which is in stark contrast to how you live, or govern so don't be shocked when folks start to connect to dots and see the picture of hypocrisy you create. The purging on civil middle of the road conservatives from your ranks all but absolute and you have the unmitigated gall to accuse someone else of being intolerant of differing views! Call me when you tent get bigger T-Publican!
the "affordable healthcare" is now estimated at THREE times more than obama's estimation. how smart is it for the dems to believe they would support this? they wouldn't. they lie.
"the "affordable healthcare" is now estimated at THREE times more than obama's estimation."
That's false. CBO has even estimated that the net cost will go DOWN by $50B from last year's estimates.
That's false. CBO has even estimated that the net cost will go DOWN by $50B from last year's estimates
true. the fees collected from the non-insured will offset the previous estimates. how wonderful of a plan.
I don't get my car insurance or homeowner insurance from my employer. Why should I get my healthcare insurance from them. Let employers give employees a "health insurance" voucher which can be used to purchase insurance on the exchange. If making medicare into a voucher program is the "conservative" thing to do why isn't a similar voucher program for employer insurance a conservative principle.
I decline employer health coverage and negotiate higher pay. I then take my higher pay and buy the closest coverage i can get to exactly what i need.
Now if we were able to buy coverage for just what we need, the prices could come down. Right now all men are paying premiums that are used to cover female health issues; and women are paying to cover male health issues. We have healthy young people paying for the cost of elderly services too.
Think of it like a cable TV bill; wouldn't it be nice to only pay for the 5 channels that you watched instead of the 100 you don't watch?
And further more, if i am a healthy young person in a state with unhealthy people who raise the rates for the whole state, why shouldn't i be able to buy insurance from a state that has a healthier population and lower insurance cost?
There are so many things that could have been fixed about the health care system before 0bamascare was implemented. Damn shame we got 2700 pages of crap to sift through to get anything close to what we need.
That's fine, but I bet you're not getting enough of a higher pay to compensate for the amount your employer would contribute to your healthcare. You're also no benefiting from the cheaper price your employer gets because he has many employees.
Sure, I'm all for ending the link between employment and insurance, but until people can negotiate the same prices on their own, it's a no-go.
Also, why don't you actually look at the what those 2000 pages contain before calling it crap. Go to www.healthcare.gov. There are great summaries about everything Obamacare does.
Obamacare HAS exchanges where people can buy their own insurance. The poor get subsidies.
See, you wish has come true.
Where can I get that cable where I only pay for the five channels I watch?
elliott, most people here don't actually understand the true purpose of insurance. It is not for pre-paid medical care as the health insurance market has morphed into in the past few decades. It is to cover those catastrophic claims - which may not be too much, like home or auto insurance.
The reason we have employer sponsored health insurance was because government implemented wage controls in the 40s. Employers, to attract employees when they couldn't pay more offered health insurance (catastrophic plans without the mandates that exist today). Congress then gave tax deductions to employers for offering the insurance and also employe contributions were pre-tax.
Remove the tax exemption from the employer and give it directly to the purchaser of insurance. Also remove the rediculous mandates from insurance plans and allow people to purchase a cafeteria style plan that fits their needs. The price of insurance will go down. The price of care will go down and people shop more for their doctor.
Unfortunately, mine is not a one-size-fits-all government solution so people won't think it will work.
Elliot, you are partially right. We all want to be the in the insurance pool with no sick, old, or females in it. Unfortunately, your strategy works for you (I assume you are young and single), but as your life situation changes, under your scenario, your rates would go up, possibly making it impossible for you to get insured at all. The exchange pools are intended to mix a bunch of different types of folks in a pool which, unfortunately, when you are young, you will pay more but when you are older you will pay less. The primary reason for the mandate is it forces young people to get into the system which essentially subsidizes the old. (Presently, there is only one way to avoid getting old and it does not require any insurance at all.) The notion of removing the employer from the equation is to make you really think about the cost of insurance and the type of coverage you would want (not necessarily based on what kind of people are in your pool).
I resent the government forcing me to pay insurance companies thousands of dollars in premiums I don't want, and will vote consistantly against any politician running for office that supports such a thing. I'm not tea party or republican, probably more democrat but not hack democrat.
It's no different for the govt. forcing you to pay for Planned Parenthood. I guess we can close down those clinics because those people should be buying their own coverage.
Why should I have to pay for them again?
I heard Mr. Boehner's comment on the Affordable Care Act:
According to the World Health Organization our healthcare system is ranked 33rd…just behind Costa Rica. We are 14th in preventable deaths, 24th in life expectancy, 34th in infant mortality and ranked 72nd in quality of care. However, we are ranked 2nd on percent of GDP spent on healthcare.
If these numbers do not compel you to seriously consider that our current system is in dire need of help, and certainly not "the best healthcare delivery system the world has ever seen" I don't know what would.
I understand "shading" or "spinning" the truth in politics, but outright lying?
Anyone who says we have the best healthcare system in the world is lying to us (and that includes Repubs and Dems).
Nearly EVERY measure shows we rank near the bottom but spend way more than anyone else. Who profits? Insurance companies.
It just occured to me; Speaker Boehner may have been speaking about his own healthcare system. The government plan.
"Speaker Boehner may have been speaking about his own healthcare system. The government plan."
Which will be from the exchanges beginning in 2014 with the rest of Congress.
Where do you get that federal employees are going to exchanges? It is not listed anywhere on OPMs site in all their FAQ and FastFacts regarding impacts of PPACA on the FEHBP.
Dr,
Too bad Congress isn't made to pay for their own up-keep now. How about a pay cut to help bring down the deficite.
I don't know about all federal employees, but all of Congress and their staffs are required to buy their insurance from the exchanges in 2014. See here: http://healthreform.kff.org/faq/will-congress-buy-their-health-insurance-in-new-exchanges.aspx and http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/congress-exempt-from-health-bill/
The USA does have the best health care system that money can buy. It is perhaps the most technologically advanced healthcare in the world. Unfortunately, for much of the population access to that system is either denied or severely rationed.
If the poor get subsidies for their healthcare plan, aren't we all STILL paying for it?
It just means that the govt. now has more of us they can screw over, right?
We would paying less in taxes under Single Payer that offers comprehensive health care coverage to everyone, than compared to what we pay for in monthly costs for inadequate coverage under our current system of dependence on private sector insurance companies.
The only people currently getting comprehensive health care in the U.S. are politicians, select employees or employers in the insurance industry, and the wealthy. Union labor used to get full coverage, but union envy and conservative efforts to take away health care, take away labor rights, and repeal Obamacare, is on the upswing in this country.
What will the Regressive Right replace Obamacare with? The so called, "free markets"? What will that get us ... other than insurance oligarchies, collusion, denial of claims, pre-existing condition denials of coverage, etc.
This is a real pickle for the GOP to be in.
As more people actually found out more details about what is actually in the ACA BECAUSE of the SCOTUS arguments and decision forced by the GOP, the more they found things in it they liked. The evident popularity with many of those pieces of the legislation is why the GOP will put this issue on the back burner and not turn off more voters with talk of repeal. Romney hasn't gotten the new talking points memo yet. He's a little slow and always a few days behind the GOP establishment and then he'll fall in line. That pretty much sums up what kind of president he'd be.
Meanwhile, repealing "Obamacare" is red meat to the Tea Party and far right, who won't take it too well that this is not a popular enough position to push anymore. Neither is outlawing abortion or a supposed attack on religious freedom or most of the other mantras they feel so strongly about. It could be hard to keep them under the tent when Romney goes all moderate on them to pander for swing votes.
I still think this election will have a third party candidate that will try to carry the Tea Party and the far right who feel the GOP is moving too far back to center by their standards. If they feel Romney is going to lose anyway or can't support his current change in positions, they may feel that they'd have much more power as a voting block independent of the GOP.
Actually Mike polls consistently show that the level of approve or disapprove of the law remain more or less static. Plus the nature of the polls need to considered. A poll that presupposes Obamacare will cost less money draws higher support than a polls that says it will cost more money and the reality is that the law as it was passed is so bad, so filled with loopholes and open to so many exceptions that no one can claim to know what will happen. If it works as promised by Obama then it will be good. If it fails according to The Republicans then it will be a disaster from which the country may never recover. So do you want a new law and a new tax that might a help a little bit today but runs the risk of destroying the country for our children or a law that helps a lot without having all the risks that this bill has concealed within its many, many flaws?
Don't forget about Ron Paul's army. I think he is going to ruffle some feathers this fall.
The clown show aint over yet.
Stupid posers, wasting their time in Congress again. This class of Republicans really make lousy public servants.
Even Republicans can see this vote for what it is. Force Democrats come out and support this toxic waste dump of legislative policy and let their constituents kick their rears out. Republicans don't need to go on the stump and preach against it - The mear mention of ObamaCare get's conservatives and independents in a boil.
Keep preaching taxes and a horrific economy and keep the foot on the gas peddle. Oh the Dems will keep pressing the IBF (It's Bush's Fault) but that is a losing argument. Serves nothing and will keep their own voters home in the end.
I'm telling you now Romney is in the driver seat. If he plays his cards right he will be the 45th POTUS.
He hasn't the chance of a fart in a whirlwind.... Dream On ...
From NinjaCodeMan: "He (Romney) hasn't the chance of a fart in a whirlwind.... Dream On ..." I seem to recall the same thing was said of Lincoln and he won. And again about a certain Catholic (gasp) named Kennedy and he won... And about an aging actor named Reagan and he won... And about a guy named GW Bush and he won. And I seem to recall that in 2008 Hillary Clinton was supposed to win by a large margin. After all she was running against a guy no one had ever heard of and a dottering old man.
So there is your chance of a fart in a whirlwind.
GW did not win, by the way.
The Utility Companies investigate who you are! Voter rolls have been checked for years by both Parties! The amount of this kind of fraud is almost nothing! .00001 or less! This is voter suppression! Older Veterans and Seniors, College Students I.d.'s not good, but NRA memberships are??
What Jim Crow , anti-American, Racist steaming manure!
We didn't get enough of them in the last Civil War, and, here they are asking for it again! Well, good luck, our ten year old Wars have given free military training to 2 million minority soldiers! The White Supremacists would be gone in the first round !
Silly little girly men, should not pick fights with real men!
Their liable to get their wish!
A losing arguement"? Were still in the Bush/Cheney Economic mess! Were still giving unpaid for tax breaks to the upper 2% and adding to the deficit!
Were just getting out of the two unpaid for Wars, one a complete lie! Were still paying for all that! Republicans are still laying off workers and doing everything they can to damage the Economy, everyday!
And here's Romney, surrounding himself with all the same Neo Cons that got us into these messes! Every one of his advisors are Bush advisors!
Cheney is even giving him a fund raising dinner at his house, in dreams of another Haliburton score in a new War!
This is Bush/Cheney and even worse!
This is a winning arguement!
and you know it!
The ONLY way Romney wins is if the states pursuing their 11th hour attempts to block gigantic voting blocks is successful. Romney will NEVER win on the merits of himself, his integrity, his honesty, his experience or his policies.
Ah - The "We are disinfranchised" "voter suppression" speel. Another losing argument. Ever wonder why you never see a poll on this topic in the media? Because 4 out of 5 see no problem with presenting a valid ID in order to vote. Don't have an ID? Quit making excuses. Get one. Their free.
And please spare us the old and the poor "don't have the means to get one". No one is buying that either.
David: My state recently passed a voter ID law (now on hold pending US DOJ action) to "prevent felons from voting." I don't know about your driver's license, but mine doesn't say whether I'm a felon. And, just fyi, my driver's license wasn't free--$30 for ten years--and they're raising the price on them to make up for budget shortfalls.
Actually my state has had the voter id law in place since before 2008. I can tell you that not only did this not suppress the vote but that President Obama was the first Democrat to win this state in over 40 years. And voting participation in 08 was the highest in a generation from what I recall.
And you can get a free ID here by proving proof of citizenship (several options available) which virtually everyone would have in some way.
And I would bet there is (in your state) a way to get that ID at no charge for those that need it. If not voter ID never would have passed here and I would bet won't there either.
People see the DOJ action for what it is - and I bet you do to.
But romney will win on obama's lack of integrity, dishonesty and failed policies.
In fact, he could win on only one of his failed items.
But all three?
Romney by alandslide!
David,
Got one for you here in Florida: my Dad is 92 yrs. old, went to renew his drivers liscense--he doesn't drive, just makes him feel good, took his birth certificate and other revelant docs. handed over same and was told his birthcerticate was invalid because a DOCTOR signed it. Give me a break, Doctor, really, at least there was a Doctor in attendance. He was born on a farm in KY, 1921. We go it straightened out he can now vote which he has done for the past 70 yrs. plus. And oh bye the bye, there is no voter fraud made up BS.
skyparrot - Let me get this straight. Your 92 year old father was denied a license due to a clerical issue. You got the issue straightened out and he was able to vote. Hrm, sounds like a system that works just fine to me. A problem was found, it was addressed and corrected.
Republicans are REALLY for rooting out voter fraud. They have to be, since they spent five years and tens of millions of dollars to come up with 32 cases of fraud...each one of which was a single person casting an invalid vote. Five years, tens of millions, 32 votes. Geez. And in the process they brought down on themselves the whole firing of the US Attorneys scandal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/13/AR2007051301106.html) And yet, not one Republican...not a single one in congress or the senate...saw fit to look into the possability of tens of thousands of fradulent votes being cast by Diebold voting machines, even after it was proven that they were easily hackable.
David-2977666
Huh? I don't know what your states policy is but here in Kansas they charge you money for a Valid state photo ID card.
Bear in mind that it is a violation of your constitutional rights to make you pay money for the right to vote. So if they are going to require you to have state issued ID to vote they must give them out for free.
Seriously? I have been paying for my identification cards for years. I have never heard of a free one.
A state id is FREE in WI for voting purposes only. Big signs posted on the front door, the wall, the reader board, etc. In English and Espanol'. The DMV we use is right across the street from WalMart, 3 clinics, a dentist and Good Will, on the bus, taxi and bicycle route. Has handicapped access, you can fill stuff out on line at your home, school or library, print it off and bring it along. The proof of birth etc, need is the exact same thing you need to collect any form of welfare soooooo the reasoning of not being able to get one just doesn't fly with me. If you can get to any of the other places you can get to the DMV. AND it's free other then the ride there-but it's called combined errands. People little gas $ have been combing errands for years. Some even go in groups to shop! Imagine that.
My Father was a Republican all his life, he quit when Reagan retro-actively got rid of the investment tax credit for new manufacturing equipment! This at a time when our antiquated factories needed re-tooling to keep up with the rest of the World! He did this to triple American middle income jobs and push them to China's slave labor camp! Good for the Rich bad for middle class!
Don't tell me Republicans have a plan for Health Care! Their plan is here! Nixon allowed the Banks, who own the Insurance Companies a full monopoly and buy all the Hospitals, thereby owning the Doctors and our Health! Were living in their plan! Nixon sold the Country down the river and so did Reagan! Romney will do the same!
No good has come from the Republican Party, their the Party of the Wigs, the lackey boys for the Kings! They follow the lobbyists not the people!
Nobody should ever vote for or be a Republican anymore. Its now Un-American and a full blown, prove ably Fascist Party!
Anti-Democracy, Anti-Workers rights, Anti-W omens Rights, Anti-Health Care Rights, Anti-Consumer Rights, Anti-Voters Rights etc etc etc!
In other words against everything our Patriots fought and died for!
The G.I. bill wasn't a hand out, the men fought for it and deserved it and with it built the strongest middle class Economy the World has ever seen!
Obama is the only choice to get back American inventiveness, pride and honor!
Joe Scarborough is like a whiney child, he couldn't debate anyone in open debate because he always has his facts wrong! His talking points are all just watered down GOP debunked talking points! Historically proven false over and over again, but , he keeps saying them? Debate Joe or get off the air! At least Limpballs doesn't hide his disgusting policies! He is the animal he appears to be, Joe is a wolf in sheeps clothing and he things Progressives don't easily see thru his manure!
But, they do!
Nikiz
States (Such as Kansas), where they implemented these new boter ID laws have started to issue "free" ID cards for the purposes of voting.
Since the only negotiable requirement for getting a state photo ID in Kansas is to pay 22 dollars, the only people who qualify for a free ID are people who are pretty much destitute. However, given that the government can't make you pay money for the right to vote, unless they make these photo ID free to everyone then these laws are likely to get shot down by the federal courts.
The truth is the Republicans don't have any healthcare plan. If they did, they would have passed something in the 12 years they led Congress.
The truth is, beyond pampering the Koch bros, the republicans have NO plans of any kind.
The Truth is, neither do the democrats other than making other people pay for something which they aren't even getting.
Stop calling it Obamacare. If you going to report on a National level it is the "AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE ACT". NBC/MSNBC and entire Media Empire are going to be responsible for more deaths in one week than the entire Iraq/Afganistan CONFLICT! A National Health Care program is better than no Health Care program under the Republicans.
The Obama administration stopped worrying about semantics and embraced the name months ago. You can even get "I [heart] Obamacare" bumper stickers now. "Obama" plus "care" equals a positive message.
If your going to complain about it being called Obamacare, at least get the name right: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) or Affordable Care Act for short.
It will go down in history as Obamacare, one of the greatest achievements for one of the Top 3 President's in history, having achieved it all while in the sights of a firing squad . Too bad the history books that will prove my point will be written after we are all gone. Clearer heads always prevail and speak truth to power.
@ tc-3804346: I disagree. With technology today....it wont take years for your point to be proven. Most already are with you. The others....are called the Party of NOooooo.
So if the poor are getting subsidiaries for their healthcare plan, how is it that "everyone should be paying into the healthcare system" and " paying their fair share"? LOL
This is why Republicans laugh at you. You are just screwing the middle class even more.
I'm hoping the PPACA is just the first step which will lead to single payer (Medicare for all) and finally (soon, I hope) to socialized medicine.
That occurred to me when I read this article. I think the ACA puts us on the inevitable path to a single payer system. The level of healthcare available to Germans, Brits, and Canadians reassures me that that outcome will not only be fine, but a welcome relief from what we have now. And I have excellent health insurance (BCBS; aka Cadillac plan).
I sure hope it leads to single payer.
The best health care reform would have happened if the left and the right had been willing to negotiate. The right came forward with some good ideas--competition across state lines and tort reform are two examples. I will also add drug re-importation, which neither party supports. But, at the end of the day it was the intractability of the Republican party--a "do nothing to give the appearance of success for this administration we hate so vehemently" attitude--that caused the best possible health care reform to never materialize. I blame the Democrats a little, but the Republicans mostly. And they have continued that in virtually all other policy initiatives. This failure to compromise must be solved.
--mark d.
Mark: I've heard the "competition across state lines" and "tort reform" before, and I don't buy either one. First, no insurance company in my state will sell me affordable insurance because I have pre-existing conditions, but I'm supposed to believe there's an insurance company in Wyoming that's just dying to sell it to me but can't because of regulations? I don't believe that. Second, are you arguing with "tort reform" that a legislature knows more what an injured person's disability, pain, and suffering are worth than a jury that's actually seen those things? I don't believe that.
Tort reform is important, in fact critical, in this process of reshaping US health care. You are already pinching specialist salaries, you can't let malpractice premiums go unchecked (liberal doctor speaking, here). No one will pursue training (check to see if you can find an American-born OB-GYN, for instance). If Republicans spent their time on this rather than repeal, I think they could get something done.
Competition across state lines is an exceptionally bad idea, at least the proposals I've seen. This would have the effect of diminishing the quality of care in short order and reducing the pool of money available for health care in certain states. If you allow competition across state lines you have to take state gov completely out of the equation for Medicare. This may be possible (though not advisable), but only after the ACA has gotten fully established and we see how the states behave post-SCOTUS ruling.
And, one of the main reasons you don't get as many going into OBGYN is because of government intervention on women's care...the GOP through the IRS harrassed my doctor out of business because he was one of the few in our area who would do what the GOP found repugnant and actually helped women...the thanks he got was IRS at his office every year for weeks...thanks GOP for nothing
Tort reform didn't lower Texas' healthcare costs. See here: http://www.statesman.com/news/local/new-study-tort-reform-has-not-reduced-health-2402096.html?viewAsSinglePage=true
Insurance has nothing to do with the quality of care other than if the insurance plan has a quality component to paying the bill. Quality of care is on the providers and not the payors.
Again, tort reform is not about lowering costs for consumers. The primary motive is about reducing costs for physicians. I am not surprised that it had no effect on health care costs. If you expect tort reform to lower consumer or payor costs, you will be disappointed every time. Tort reform is to make sure that physicians are not priced out of business by malpractice insurance premiums and to ensure that docs will actually choose/continue to practice high risk health care (like OB-GYN).
The worst thing for the economy is the incompetence of Congress, and the two guys running for President.
Because they dont really know what to do, they distract the voters with these side shows.
Just as an example, Medicare is basically has all claims filed by paper. This leads to a nine month delay in government accounting, and allows all kinds of fraud to enter the system. Thailand, a poor third world country has a computerized Medicare system for all citizens, where each citizen gets a health card. This allows the government instant access to the claims, and instant checking for fraud.
We have a government that barely functions, where services are outdated, slow and expensive. We spend more for health care than any other country, and get poor service and poor access.
Obamacare will do nothing to solve this, and the GOP has no plan to fix it either. We have two failed parties arguing with each other about which of them is worse, they are both awful and failing the voters.
Where in the world did you come up with that one? Medicare has had electronic claims submission for a number of years now. My wife's claims are submitted, processed, and paid in less that a month. My parents' claims took months, but that was pre-e-sub. Try learning about the process before you start spouting off about it. BTW, I have been a pharmacist and dealt with e-sub programs for years now. Believe me, it beats the pants off individual claim forms that we had to submit when I started.
So in other words, you are already involved in govt. sponsored care. What ever happened to people like you " paying their fair share"?
Obama's plan is still a plan to suck money from the rich and middle class to pay for the poor. And the rich can always opt out, which means.......
What a bunch of sore losers! I've seen children behave better than this. What a bunch of cry babies. Common kids! Pull yourselves up by your boot straps and get to work on Jobs!
Stop crying it's making you look like a spoiled brats that didn't get your way. (repeal attempts 33 times are you kidding me?)
Grow up a little folks!
And to think you're supposed to be our leaders!!
Pathetic!
Totally agree. The House GOP's pay should be docked for wasting time on these meaningless votes! The Supreme Court gave it's approval, move on to a "Jobs" bill, and not those worthless bills that the House has passed so far.
Sore losers? Do you mean the Democrats who were voted out of their majority because the American people were not in favor of the law? Or do you mean the Republicans who vow to repeal a law that by every poll a majority of Americans do not fully support?
"by every poll a majority of Americans do not fully support?"
False. And the latest polls state that folks want Congress to move past healthcare reform and get on with the other pressing issues this nation faces.
@ Candlewycke: While I can agree that some polls, at various times did show many people not liking the overall law...everyone (let me repeat) EVERYONE want's some portions of the ACA. The bill may have turned out a bit different, had republicans not sat around with fingers in their ears, two years ago when this issue was being discussed. People wanted a change, and we got one.
If repubs want to learn something, then try working with the American people, instead of just being against the President.
The right did have some good ideas. Tort reform is not one of them. I live in a state where we have tort reform which translates into an individual giving up the right to collect the full measure of their damages for malpractice (which does happen)in order to keep insurance premiums low. Our premiums have skyrocketed just like everyone else's since it past. Tort reform just means healthier profits for insurance companies. Most of the ideas the right has that are good should have become law two decades ago and I don't know why it didn't. Insurance companies are a business and therefore need to make as much profit as possible. If you have a severe problem that cost 3 or 400 thousand there is no way for an insurance company to ever recoup the cost. Our health care system is broken in that we pay many times more for health care than any other country and do not rank in the top ten in terms of results. We would get much further if people did not look at health care as a conservative or liberal issue but just looked for practical solutions. That will not happen in this enviorment. If you want to know what the republican party is for and what the democrat party is for just "follow the money".
"Tort reform" is code for "the rich should not have to pay the full cost of their negligence or incompetence."
That is either an incorrect description of your state's tort reform legislation, you are not referring to tort reform legislation, or this has got to be the worst example of tort reform I've ever heard of. The ideal goal of tort reform is to mitigate the risk to practicing physicians so that they can afford malpractice premiums. The insurance companies that benefit are not health insurance companies but rather malpractice insurance companies. The fact that your health insurance premiums increased is unrelated to tort reform. Tort reform only reduces premiums for physicians by capping certain damages in malpractice lawsuits. The goal is to defend against frivolous lawsuits while assuring fair compensation to those that actually suffer at the hands of a malpracticing doc. Wording those laws is tricky, but if what you say is true, someone failed miserably.
you realize this Same argument and Supreme Court Decision happened when Social Security was started!!! is anyone complaining about Social Security??? it WAS self funded until the Greedy Republicans started stealing from it to cover their TAX breaks to the RICH...
oh the funny joke is on the Middle Class Republicans when they lose their job and become sick... do rich people care? HECK no... Get in Line, we're all getting screwed by RICH Politicians democrat and republican.
Yeah. Rich people are not even human. They don't have souls and they eat children for breakfast. In fact they get their money by grinding up innocent virgins to make pulp for their private printing presses. When my grandmother got sick we took her to the hospital but were turned away by a rich man shouting No one gets to see the Wizard! And did you know that the Freddy Kruger is actually rich? Yup, a mulch-millionaire disfigured child murderer.
Bob Wakanaka - You would be funny if your ideas were not so poisonous.
Owcharenko's idea is good - let employees take their health insurance with them throughout their careers. Our current policy (using COBRA) allows employees to keep their insurance (by paying in full) for 18 months, after which they're on their own.
However, with ACA in place a new policy to allow employees to retain their insurance permanently should be easy. One approach - at the time of hiring a company buys a policy for the employee through a health exchange. When the employee leaves the company they already own the policy and can take it with them. If that's not currently part of ACA, the Republican-led House can change that tomorrow. I bet Democrats would sign up too.
You're right! Obama Cares!
The GOP = greedy little piggys does NOT care about YOU or YOUR FAMILY!
But they're ok with going to the emergency room and sticking you with THEIR bill. (Now I think I know why they're so mad. No more free rides sticking the rest of us with their bills!! WHOO HOO!!)
No more!
First let me say, Conservative does not mean Republican Mr Curry. I find our President more conservative than a vast majority of Republicans. MSNBC, FOX and all the labels these news organizations label people and parties is a pile of CRAP! Why do they do this, because its easy. Why do local government like dealing with Unions, because its easy to deal wiht one person than many.
In 1997 I hired my Dad to run my warehouse. I could not afford his insurance because of pre-conditions and the company could not afford to pay this. So I paid him for his own coverage out of pocket.
I would ask the readers, "how would you like to go to either parent, friend or even a high-valued employee and tell them this. But this is what happens with today's policies. To this day this still haunts me!
I support this health-care and suggest that all people who are looking out for their constituents, they get to the table and make it better. It is the responsibility of each legislator to make it better and work with their fellow legislators to do so.
If a certain member want to repeal this law, then vote them out!
We have a good start, but like everyone said close to this law, we as a collective, can make it better!
I'm not a Democrat or Republican. I'm an American, what are you?
Have a better day than I am!
Jeff: On every major issue save same sex marriage equality, Obama is to the right of Richard Nixon. He's FAR to the right of Canada's Conservative government (which fully supports Canada's generous health care and retirement benefits, fully supports a clean environment, fully supports an orderly move to a non-carbon energy economy, fully supports same sex marriage equality, etc.)
I was going to slam you about the Nixon comment as being silly, but you are probably right. I did not know about Nixon's presidential career. He would have been labelled a Marxist by the crazy right today. Endorsde the equal rights amendment. Was in favor of starting the EPA (but not the funding level). Started OSHA. He was actually an early environmentalist. Instituted price freezes to stop inflation. Opened up diplomatic ties with China.
Every time someone that is not insured goes to the emergency room or a child from some illegal immigrant has a child Our insurance premiums go up. We that are paying for insurance or our companies paying the amount is tied to part of the hospitals recouping the cost of uninsured. Let's make the health care law better. People in Washington have been trying to do this for years. If it didn't have Obama's name on it would it be lied about as much. It didn't get explained right, to save money is was brought into action in multiple years. Slow effect. You have have a better idea lets have it. Or at least lets make this better for America and AMERICANS.
Don't worry about those premiums going up every time an "illegal" immigrant has a baby. You get them all back when you buy a house cheaply because it was framed and roofed by the "illegals", when you can afford to have your neighborhood's landscape maintained cheaply by "illegal" immigrants. Or when you buy cheaper veggies picked by"illegals" or shop at Walmart that hires those "illegals" cheaply. Or collect Social Security to which those "illegals" contributed but will not be able to collect. JACKASS!!
And don't let my name fool you, I was born legally in Pittsburgh more than forty years ago.
Yeah, conservatives look beyond Obamacare and what do they see? Nothing, because that's all they have. Nothing on this issue and nothing on pretty much everything else except tax cuts for the rich of course or, to use the conservative euphemism, the "job creators".
My mother always warned me to watch what people do, NOT what they say. So, when Senator Barrasso tells me he is sponsoring a bill to get rid of SS, Medicare AND the military (all things government seems to do pretty well), then I might actually take what he says as something he actually believes in...until then, forget it...give us YOUR plan, or shut up
Conservatives who now profess to be "interested in a step-by-step, common-sense approach….” were not interested AT ALL in improving or changing health care before the President and Dems stepped up and did something. Then they threw (and are still throwing) a huge hissy-fit because, naturally, they don't like anything changing in their world. Now they're threatening and blustering all over the place about what they're gonna do if they ever get complete control of the government again. Ridiculous. These people expect to be taken seriously? What a circus they are. Embarrassing. And, fortunately for the rest of us, they're already a scorned political minority, limited by their own thinking and ideas, and their numbers grow smaller with each passing day. Eventually, we'll have an end to their utter nonsense.
here is a thought. Do you think if everyone wasn't so sue happy, insurance would go down?? Or, maybe if we didn't have to pay for all those that don't work and have multiple babies on the system, it might also help the cost of insurance. Just some easy suggestions. I know, how awful, right??
You might try convincing the Republicans and social conservatives that birth control is a good idea.
plsthink, did you ever think that if the standard for being a physician was to actually care for their patients instead of seeking wealth that their would be fewer malpractice suits. Think about the doctor who impregnated Octo-Mom, do you think this doctor was acting responsible? And did you ever think about all those greedy CEO, company presidents, board members and stock holders actually used those tax breaks to increase workers salaries and create the jobs that they keep pushing as to why they need those tax breaks that there would be more federal revenue collected. The fact is that the only thing that these tax breaks have been used for is to line the pockets of CEO's, company presidents, board members and stock holder dividends. All of this should tell you and everyone else that the tax breaks for the wealthy only decreases federal revenue and exponentially increases the deficit. Insurance companies cry about a million or two in losses but bank billions in their reserves. This just doesn't add up and congress puts up a dog and pony show calling these CEO's to answer for increasing rates 50 to 100 percent. Nothing was ever done and there is no reason for these increases except to fleece hard working American policy holders.
Tax increases for the wealthy don't do anything to increase federal revenue by enough to even be recognizable. Tax the wealthiest 1 percent at a 100% tax rate....take all their assets, and sell them. Tomorrow, you will wake up and find that nothing has changed. The debt will have been essentially untouched - unimproved, and now we have a bunch of once wealthy people who we need to stick in a welfare program. You Obama freaks really need to educate yourself about money.....how much is involved in our economy, the debt, etc., instead of believing every word that rat of a President says every time he opens his mouth. If he's re-elected, this ship is sunk.
Oh, and let's not forget. If we take from the wealthy in this country to the point they have nothing.....their money, their businesses, their homes......well, most of YOU will be unemployed seeing as how those "wealthy" folks own the businesses that give you a pay check each week. But don't worry......Mr. Obama will "take care of you". Oh, he'll take care of you alright.
@jalenorigby , I don't think that is correct and I hope you are not suggesting that we just not tax the rich. They should pay their share. According to Romney's tax Return for 2011, he paid less than most middle class taxpayers. Another thing is that taxes are at an all time low -
and by the way, the estimated weath of the 1 percent is estimated at 900 billion dollars. That would reduce our deficit immensely. Just how many drugs are you on?
When a country is charging $60,000 to $200,000 to have a baby when other countries do it for free, there is something very wrong with the system. The mothers' are not the problem it is the hospitals and insurance companies that are out of whack. Obamacare puts a ceiling on this kind of abuse.
They are playing games with tax payers money, Republicans don't seem to care. If they are working for the American people like they should than work together. Looked like they are working for themselves if you want to argue you should have the solutions in your hands.