| Author | Message | ||
     Sifo |
So what's known about the Obama Care plan that's being pushed so hard? Is it good for the country? I'd like to see some facts with credible sources for the opinions. I'll start with an article from CNN Money. http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/healt h_care_reform_obama.fortune/ ******************************* 5 freedoms you'd lose in health care reform If you read the fine print in the Congressional plans, you'll find that a lot of cherished aspects of the current system would disappear. By Shawn Tully, editor at large July 24, 2009: 10:17 AM ET NEW YORK (Fortune) -- In promoting his health-care agenda, President Obama has repeatedly reassured Americans that they can keep their existing health plans -- and that the benefits and access they prize will be enhanced through reform. A close reading of the two main bills, one backed by Democrats in the House and the other issued by Sen. Edward Kennedy's Health committee, contradict the President's assurances. To be sure, it isn't easy to comb through their 2,000 pages of tortured legal language. But page by page, the bills reveal a web of restrictions, fines, and mandates that would radically change your health-care coverage. If you prize choosing your own cardiologist or urologist under your company's Preferred Provider Organization plan (PPO), if your employer rewards your non-smoking, healthy lifestyle with reduced premiums, if you love the bargain Health Savings Account (HSA) that insures you just for the essentials, or if you simply take comfort in the freedom to spend your own money for a policy that covers the newest drugs and diagnostic tests -- you may be shocked to learn that you could lose all of those good things under the rules proposed in the two bills that herald a health-care revolution. In short, the Obama platform would mandate extremely full, expensive, and highly subsidized coverage -- including a lot of benefits people would never pay for with their own money -- but deliver it through a highly restrictive, HMO-style plan that will determine what care and tests you can and can't have. It's a revolution, all right, but in the wrong direction. Let's explore the five freedoms that Americans would lose under Obamacare: 1. Freedom to choose what's in your plan The bills in both houses require that Americans purchase insurance through "qualified" plans offered by health-care "exchanges" that would be set up in each state. The rub is that the plans can't really compete based on what they offer. The reason: The federal government will impose a minimum list of benefits that each plan is required to offer. Today, many states require these "standard benefits packages" -- and they're a major cause for the rise in health-care costs. Every group, from chiropractors to alcohol-abuse counselors, do lobbying to get included. Connecticut, for example, requires reimbursement for hair transplants, hearing aids, and in vitro fertilization. The Senate bill would require coverage for prescription drugs, mental-health benefits, and substance-abuse services. It also requires policies to insure "children" until the age of 26. That's just the starting list. The bills would allow the Department of Health and Human Services to add to the list of required benefits, based on recommendations from a committee of experts. Americans, therefore, wouldn't even know what's in their plans and what they're required to pay for, directly or indirectly, until after the bills become law. 2. Freedom to be rewarded for healthy living, or pay your real costs As with the previous example, the Obama plan enshrines into federal law one of the worst features of state legislation: community rating. Eleven states, ranging from New York to Oregon, have some form of community rating. In its purest form, community rating requires that all patients pay the same rates for their level of coverage regardless of their age or medical condition. Americans with pre-existing conditions need subsidies under any plan, but community rating is a dubious way to bring fairness to health care. The reason is twofold: First, it forces young people, who typically have lower incomes than older workers, to pay far more than their actual cost, and gives older workers, who can afford to pay more, a big discount. The state laws gouging the young are a major reason so many of them have joined the ranks of uninsured. Under the Senate plan, insurers would be barred from charging any more than twice as much for one patient vs. any other patient with the same coverage. So if a 20-year-old who costs just $800 a year to insure is forced to pay $2,500, a 62-year-old who costs $7,500 would pay no more than $5,000. Second, the bills would ban insurers from charging differing premiums based on the health of their customers. Again, that's understandable for folks with diabetes or cancer. But the bills would bar rewarding people who pursue a healthy lifestyle of exercise or a cholesterol-conscious diet. That's hardly a formula for lower costs. It's as if car insurers had to charge the same rates to safe drivers as to chronic speeders with a history of accidents. 3. Freedom to choose high-deductible coverage The bills threaten to eliminate the one part of the market truly driven by consumers spending their own money. That's what makes a market, and health care needs more of it, not less. Hundreds of companies now offer Health Savings Accounts to about 5 million employees. Those workers deposit tax-free money in the accounts and get a matching contribution from their employer. They can use the funds to buy a high-deductible plan -- say for major medical costs over $12,000. Preventive care is reimbursed, but patients pay all other routine doctor visits and tests with their own money from the HSA account. As a result, HSA users are far more cost-conscious than customers who are reimbursed for the majority of their care. The bills seriously endanger the trend toward consumer-driven care in general. By requiring minimum packages, they would prevent patients from choosing stripped-down plans that cover only major medical expenses. "The government could set extremely low deductibles that would eliminate HSAs," says John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis, a free-market research group. "And they could do it after the bills are passed." 4. Freedom to keep your existing plan This is the freedom that the President keeps emphasizing. Yet the bills appear to say otherwise. It's worth diving into the weeds -- the territory where most pundits and politicians don't seem to have ventured. The legislation divides the insured into two main groups, and those two groups are treated differently with respect to their current plans. The first are employees covered by the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974. ERISA regulates companies that are self-insured, meaning they pay claims out of their cash flow, and don't have real insurance. Those are the GEs (GE, Fortune 500) and Time Warners (TWX, Fortune 500) and most other big companies. The House bill states that employees covered by ERISA plans are "grandfathered." Under ERISA, the plans can do pretty much what they want -- they're exempt from standard packages and community rating and can reward employees for healthy lifestyles even in restrictive states. But read on. The bill gives ERISA employers a five-year grace period when they can keep offering plans free from the restrictions of the "qualified" policies offered on the exchanges. But after five years, they would have to offer only approved plans, with the myriad rules we've already discussed. So for Americans in large corporations, "keeping your own plan" has a strict deadline. In five years, like it or not, you'll get dumped into the exchange. As we'll see, it could happen a lot earlier. The outlook is worse for the second group. It encompasses employees who aren't under ERISA but get actual insurance either on their own or through small businesses. After the legislation passes, all insurers that offer a wide range of plans to these employees will be forced to offer only "qualified" plans to new customers, via the exchanges. The employees who got their coverage before the law goes into effect can keep their plans, but once again, there's a catch. If the plan changes in any way -- by altering co-pays, deductibles, or even switching coverage for this or that drug -- the employee must drop out and shop through the exchange. Since these plans generally change their policies every year, it's likely that millions of employees will lose their plans in 12 months. 5. Freedom to choose your doctors The Senate bill requires that Americans buying through the exchanges -- and as we've seen, that will soon be most Americans -- must get their care through something called "medical home." Medical home is similar to an HMO. You're assigned a primary care doctor, and the doctor controls your access to specialists. The primary care physicians will decide which services, like MRIs and other diagnostic scans, are best for you, and will decide when you really need to see a cardiologists or orthopedists. Under the proposals, the gatekeepers would theoretically guide patients to tests and treatments that have proved most cost-effective. The danger is that doctors will be financially rewarded for denying care, as were HMO physicians more than a decade ago. It was consumer outrage over despotic gatekeepers that made the HMOs so unpopular, and killed what was billed as the solution to America's health-care cost explosion. The bills do not specifically rule out fee-for-service plans as options to be offered through the exchanges. But remember, those plans -- if they exist -- would be barred from charging sick or elderly patients more than young and healthy ones. So patients would be inclined to game the system, staying in the HMO while they're healthy and switching to fee-for-service when they become seriously ill. "That would kill fee-for-service in a hurry," says Goodman. In reality, the flexible, employer-based plans that now dominate the landscape, and that Americans so cherish, could disappear far faster than the 5 year "grace period" that's barely being discussed. Companies would have the option of paying an 8% payroll tax into a fund that pays for coverage for Americans who aren't covered by their employers. It won't happen right away -- large companies must wait a couple of years before they opt out. But it will happen, since it's likely that the tax will rise a lot more slowly than corporate health-care costs, especially since they'll be lobbying Washington to keep the tax under control in the righteous name of job creation. The best solution is to move to a let-freedom-ring regime of high deductibles, no community rating, no standard benefits, and cross-state shopping for bargains (another market-based reform that's strictly taboo in the bills). I'll propose my own solution in another piece soon on Fortune.com. For now, we suffer with a flawed health-care system, but we still have our Five Freedoms. Call them the Five Endangered Freedoms. ***************************** I'm on an HSA system at the moment. It is affordable compared to other comparable insurance. It also gets the consumer to control costs. Encouraging personal responsibility is always a great way to control costs while providing a quality product. Government programs on the other hand are virtually always sure losers in quality and price. The time to get informed on this is now. A government that is making this kind of sweeping change in haste is not acting in the peoples best interest. | ||
| Cataract2 |
But remember, good ol POTUS has said all of us who are questioning this are nothing more than an uninformed mob.  | ||
| Bikertrash05 |
And this is from CNN, not FOX. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
NEVER believe only what the sales guy says. Confirm his statements in the contract. Obama is a used car salesman who refuses to show you the Carfax. Democrats HAVE to lie about the agenda or they can't be elected or get their policies enacted. | ||
| Deadduck |
I'll start with this, proof is in the pudding. If you want to truely know the intent of this bill, do not count on the media to get the facts accurate. HR3200 is the bill. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200: I will be starting to verify what others claim they have found in the bills and have sent out in emails. another intersting little piece of legislation that was put forth as an ammendment is House Resolution 615. http://fleming.house.gov/uploads/HR%20615.pdf Congressman Fleming urges the American people to sign his petition that will force legislators to undergo the same health plan as they are pushing onto others. more to come when I take the time to research HR3200 and the things people have claimed to find in it. This is a list I will start to verify, and I will report my findings on each. Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self insure!! Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments / benefits you get. Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!! Page 42 of HC Bill:The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you. You have no choice! Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise Page 58 HC Bill: Govt will have real-time access to individuals finances and a National ID Healthcard will be issued! Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer. Page 65 Sec 164: is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community organizations: (ACORN?). Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private Health Care plans. Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration your Healthcare! Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. Translation: coverage for illegal aliens. Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan. Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed. Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill: Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice. Page 124 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt Monopoly. Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU what you can make! (salary) Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE! Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families. Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll who does not provide Govt public option pays 8% tax on all payroll. Page 150 Lines 9-13: Business's with payroll between 251k & 400k who doesn't provide public option pays 2-6% tax on all payroll. Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income. Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes.(American citizens will pay) Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans finances /personal records. Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that! Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors, low income and poor are affected. Page 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors, doesn't matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same! Page 253 Line 10-18: Govt sets value of Doctor's time, proffession, judgment etc. Literally decides the value of humans. Page 265 Sec 1131: Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries. Page 268 Sec 1141: Federal Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs. Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing! Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever Govt deems preventable re-admissions. Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors, treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission -Govt will penalize you. Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership / investment. Govt tells Doctors what / how much they can own! Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt is mandating hospitals cannot expand. Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required. Can you say ACORN?!! Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: Govt mandates establishment of outcome based measures. HC the way they want. Rationing. Page 341 Lines 3-9: Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing people into Govt plan. Page 354 Sec 1177: Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs people! Unbelievable! Page 379 Sec 1191: Govt creates more bureaucracy - > Tele-health Advisory Comittee. Can you say HC by phone? Page 425 Lines 4-12: Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consult. Think Senior Citizens end of life patients. Page 425 Lines 17-19: Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney. Mandatory! Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: Govt provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death. (assisted suicide?) Page 427 Lines 15-24: Govt mandates program for orders for end of life. The Govt has a say in how your life ends. Page 429 Lines 1-9: An "advanced care planning consultant" will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates. Page 429 Lines 10-12: "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. An ORDER from GOVT! Page 429 Lines 13-25: The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order. Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life! Page 469: Community Based Home Medical Services = Non profit organizations. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!? Page 472 Lines 14-17: PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORIGINATION. 1 monthly payment to a community-based organization. Like ACORN? [...And for what purpose?] Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Govt into your marriage. Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services. This list was compiled by Stephen E. Fraser MD. As always, trust but verify! (Message edited by deadduck on August 09, 2009) (Message edited by deadduck on August 09, 2009) | ||
| Sifo |
Thanks Deadduck. That's going to provide some interesting reading. Your link wont work correctly though. Anyone that wants to see it click here. The part about "HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise" certainly gives me some concern. If I understand that we will be covering every person in the world. Can anyone see another way to read that? | ||
| Court |
This whole "Representation" thing is looking funny. How do you like all these Democratic Congressmen/woman who are holding "BY INVITATION ONLY" Town Hall meetings and then issuing the press release announcing the meeting after the fact. | ||
| Teddagreek |
Court, wouldn't you agree a lot of these town-hall meetings have gotten out of control? http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/ http://factcheck.org/the-factcheck-wire/  (Message edited by teddagreek on August 09, 2009) | ||
| Mesa_cityx |
Riiiight...There were NO invitation only meets when the last occupant of the White House was in charge, now were there?.... Think for yourself. Do not single source your information. And always know that you do not have all the facts. None of us do. | ||
| Sifo |
I can kind of see that coming from this...
Of course you need to find any "Except as otherwise explicitly permitted". It's essentially the equivalent of if you walk into an ER you get treated. Big difference is that now we are talking about complete health care coverage. This is probably one of the easier to read sections of the bill that I've scanned. Most of it is very incomprehensible and much refers to other legislation that if you aren't familiar with you are hopelessly lost. One this is very clear. This is not a bill that should be passed in haste, as the Democrats are hell bent on doing. This is exactly why people are showing up angry at town hall meetings. When they get dismissed as "astroturf" or "manufactured outrage" that only heightened the anger. When the White House said to "punch back twice as hard" and union members started physically assaulting people, yes it was out of hand. The violence has been against the people who are against the HC bill though, not the other way around. Now all of that is being used as an excuse to not face constituents. Talk about manufactured! | ||
| Chellem |
The town hall meetings are absolutely out of control. The nerve of these people against health care. In the 60s, people who were against what the government was dishing out were HEROES, organized grassroots pseudo-soldiers and they had the sympathy of the media. I'll bet a bunch of the current administration - certainly a czar or two - were involved in their orchestration. They pushed and pushed until someone got violent, and then used that violence to prove their point. Now a bunch of people - old, young, employed, unemployed, from different stations of life - are speaking out on their own behalf, and they are belittled and treated like they're idiots. Astroturf? As if ANY protest just spontaneously occurs? Isn't Obama a grassroots organizer by TRADE? Can you imagine if all the pissed off people actually DID organize? It would take a few more union thugs to push them back. I freakin' HATE the way this administration talks down to us, treats us like children, and acts as if they know what's best for us, never mind about our pesky opinions. THEY WORK FOR US!!! Obama's "agenda" should be whatever the hell we SAY it is, not what he feels like doing for his money. With our money! I'm about done listening to him. I can't even sit through a speech of his with his condescending attitude - I can't stand it - it makes my blood boil. ARGH. ->ChelleM | ||
| Sifo |
Just a headline on DrudgeReport.com at the moment...
These are people trying to get their representatives to hear their voices for crying out loud! | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Obama is destroying the Democratic party from within. He, Reid, and Pelosi have finally lifted the skirt of the DNC and John Q Public is appalled at the color of it's panties. Comrade Red.  | ||
| Court |
I'm seeing the bumper stickers coming off the Kia and Toyotas. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
We let a guy come to our house a couple weeks ago to price us some new windows. By the end of the quote he wanted us to commit that night and not price compare or do research. He said that quote was good for one day only. That about sums up this health care plan to me. Luckily it was stalled. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I HATE $hitty sales people. | ||
| Deadduck |
Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self insure!! Such study shall examine the following: (A) The types of employers by key characteristics, including size, that purchase insured products versus those that self-insure. (B) The similarities and differences between typical insured and self-insured health plans. (C) The financial solvency and capital re10 serve levels of employers that self-insure by employer size. (D) The risk of self-insured employers not being able to pay obligations or otherwise becoming financially insolvent. (E) The extent to which rating rules are likely to cause adverse selection in the large group market or to encourage small and midsize employers to self-insure (2) REPORTS.—Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner shall submit to Congress and the applicable agencies a report on the study conducted under paragraph (1). Such report shall include any recommendations the Commissioner deems appropriate to ensure that the law does not provide incentives for small and mid-size employers to self-insure or create adverse selection in the risk pools of large group insurers and self-insured employers. Not later than 18 months after the first day of Y1, the Commissioner shall submit to Congress and the applicable agencies an updated report on such study, including updates on such recommendations. Looks like audits are in the works to me. | ||
| Deadduck |
Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments / benefits you get. (1) RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STANDARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this subtitle referred to as the‘‘Secretary’’) benefit standards (as defined in paragraph (4)), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities. This is probably the way that currnet insurance companies do business, what concerns me the most about this section is who makes up the advisory committee more than anything. It is a "Private-Public" Committee Chair- Surgoen General 9 members non federal employees appointed by the President 9 members nonfederal employees appointed by the Comptroller General (C) Such even number of members (not to 12 exceed 8) who are Federal employees and officers, as the President may appoint. So if I am reading this correctly, the president will appoint up to 17 members to the board, 18 if you count the Surgeon General, all of them if you consider the political appointment of the Comptroller General. The board scares me worse of all. | ||
| Deadduck |
Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!! SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED. (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage, consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that— (1) provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice; (2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health care items and services in accordance with such benefit standards, consistent with subsection (c); (3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services; (4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and (5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage. (b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The items and services described in this subsection are the following: (1) Hospitalization. (2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services. (3) Professional services of physicians and other health professionals. (4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate. (5) Prescription drugs. (6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services. (7) Mental health and substance use disorder services. (8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (9) Maternity care. (10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, and supplies at least for children under 21 years of age. (c) REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO COST-SHARING AND MINIMUM ACTUARIAL VALUE.— (1) NO COST-SHARING FOR PREVENTIVE SERVICES.—There shall be no cost-sharing under the essential benefits package for preventive items and services (as specified under the benefit standards), including well baby and well child care. (2) ANNUAL LIMITATION.— (A) ANNUAL LIMITATION.—The cost-sharing incurred under the essential benefits package with respect to an individual (or family) for a year does not exceed the applicable level specified in subparagraph (B). (B) APPLICABLE LEVEL.—The applicable level specified in this subparagraph for Y1 is $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family. Such levels shall be increased (rounded to the nearest $100) for each subsequent year by the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (United States city average)applicable to such year. (C) USE OF COPAYMENTS.—In establishing cost-sharing levels for basic, enhanced, and premium plans under this subsection, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent possible, use only copayments and not coinsurance. (3) MINIMUM ACTUARIAL VALUE.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The cost-sharing under the essential benefits package shall be designed to provide a level of coverage that is designed to provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to approximately 70 percent of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the reference benefits package described in subparagraph (B). (B) REFERENCE BENEFITS PACKAGE DESCRIBED.—The reference benefits package described in this subparagraph is the essential benefits package if there were no cost-sharing imposed. What I get out of this is basic care, preventative, amongst others listed are covered for a single person up to 5000 dollars a year. Anything accrued after that 5000 dollars is covered at 70%. 10,000 dollars for a family. So yes, health care could and will be rationed, maybe not by the government, but out of your own economic decision. I know I would have to severely ration much of the medication that I've been taking the last couple of years....looking over the list again, 5000 even 10000 dollars could be depleted with one accident, child birth, or medication. Kinda looks like one trip to the hospital with no charge (except for taxes) is all you'll get here. | ||
| Sifo |
Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise Not only doe the language in the bill seem to support this, but BO's own rhetoric seems to support it too. BO has included "undocumented citizens" in the ranks of the uninsured that need to be covered by O'care. If an undocumented person can get O'care, how do you prevent anyone from getting O'care? You can't! Are we about to see a new age of health care tourism to the US? I don't see how you could possibly stop it. | ||
| Deadduck |
Okay, looking around on the net today trying to find a good copy of HR3200 to send to the Whitehouse courtesy of Flag@whitehouse.gov, I ran across this: http://higgins.house.gov/healthreform/pdf/7-31-09_ Myths_Facts_about_HR_3200.pdf Is there anyone willing to help me debunk the debunkment document. What my plan is is to take this "myth and fact" document and place the appropriate portion of the legislation to it to let people actually read both the myth and fact with the portion of legislation instead of having to bounce around different windows. Most people will not go through the trouble of organizing such a document, the administration won't even do it. My goal is to make a single document so that people can truly make an informed decision. If there is anyone willing to help me out? I would like to keep track of things by email to make it easier to place in a final document. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Ft, thanks for the visual !!! You know, Pelosi's panties ......  | ||
| Cityxslicker |
It wont work, the system will fall flat on its face from cost overruns, poor administration and shoddy eligibility rules. I propose they do a test amnesty city to see just how ineffective it is. Say Washington DC, free state sponsored care for everyone in DC that is a resident at time of legislation and everyone that has moved and has a 6 month residence eligility. You will see businesses LEAVING the district to avoid the taxes. You will see Dr. LEAVING practice to go do elective services, or to leave the Amnesty zone, and you will see in influx of dead beat plocostomases moving into the district. Run it for the rest of the O term. It will be abysmall, but it will table the idea of national health care for once and all. Name one healthcare company, insurance company, provider network, or benifits organization that has endorsed this beast. | ||
| Cowboy |
The democrats have told so damn many lies I dont trust them to do any thing right for the good of the people. | ||
| Ratyson |
It's not only democrats Cowboy. The lies have come from both sides, neither side cares about the "good of the people" any longer. The only thing they care about is "how do I get re-elected". Plain and simple. | ||
| Deadduck |
MYTH: HR 3200 will lead to out-of-control deficit spending. FACT: HR 3200 is 100 percent paid for. It is financed through a combination of payment reforms from within the health care sector and a new surcharge on the richest Americans. This bill meets President Obama’s commitment to only sign a health reform bill that is fully paid for. CBO cites an increase in the federal budget deficit of $239 billion over 10 years, however under statutory House pay-go adopted in July, this new spending is already set aside and does not count toward the cost of the bill. This is spending to fix the flawed payment system for physicians in Medicare (the SGR), preventing an automatic 20 percent decrease in reimbursement in 2010 and even greater reductions in subsequent years, and corrects a legacy problem from a Republican policy. There is bipartisan agreement to resolve this longstanding Medicare problem. There are only 5 myths listed on the above mentioned sights that I posted previously. So far my searches on the long list I posted before have turned out to be true. Myth 1 is an absolute outrage! How can Healthcare Reform be paid 100% when we currently have a 10 trillion plus dollar deficit? And they wonder (House Ways & Means Committee) why the housing market crumbled. These people are a bunch of incompetent idiots! | ||
| Benm2 |
The congress believe that We The People are the easiest target, hence the new taxes. Robin Hood syndrome is always popular as well. The bill does NOTHING that I can discern to control costs. In fact its easily identified as NOT controlling costs, since it in fact is projected to cost one trillion. They are cowards, pure and simple. Turning to face the insurers & lawyers is what's required, but they haven't the courage. Next time you go to the doctor's office consider this: 1. His stethescope is a medical device. Its manufacturer has to pay exorbitant product liability insurance, as it is a medical device. 2. His x-ray is a medical device. See item 1. 3. The little table your sitting on is a medical device. See item 1. 4. The little paper package he tears open to get a clean tongue depressor is a medical device. See item 1. 5. He's a doctor. He has to pay exorbitant rates for malpractice insurance. Consider this as well: businesses are in business to make money. If they expect to make 10% profit (as their shareholders may expect), that profit is measured AFTER expenses. What do the expenses include for hospitals & device manufacturers? INSURANCE. If a device has an associated cost of say 20% of its value for insurance, then in order to maintain a nice looking profit number, the device price will include a 10% profit on the insurance cost. The company almost has no practical choice but to do so, if it doesn't it wont be able to keep / attract shareholders. The money doesn't disappear into the medical system. It seems clear enough the doctors aren't getting the money. Who is? Insurance & lawyers. THAT's the battle front. I am a firm believer that health care reform IS required, but TORT REFORM is the hurdle that must be tackled first. If the current administration can't grasp that, then we all need to do our part and replace who we can AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. Protests at a town meeting are "un-American"? I'd consider such disrespect for our Constitution to be grounds for impeachment. | ||
| Blake |
>>>The lies have come from both sides, neither side cares about the "good of the people" any longer. Only one side is intending to cram their socialist agenda down our throats. Only one side is characterizing opposition from ordinary citizens as "un-American". When it comes to dishonesty, one side, at least its far left leadership, employs it as standard operating procedure. Obama himself failed to keep his word twice leading up to his election. I don't trust anything he says. I too have been very irritated by what seems to be an over-abundance of arrogance and condescension along with a complete lack of any ability to speak plainly and directly and meaningfully on the contentious issues of the day. Then there is the whole whitehouse.gov, informant citizens, campaign. The benefit of doubt has been absolutely and entirely. wiped from my mind. | ||
| Jumpinjewels |
IMPEACH OBAMA (Message edited by Jumpinjewels on August 11, 2009) | ||
| Oldog |
Protests at a town meeting are "un-American"? I'd consider such disrespect for our Constitution to be grounds for impeachment A-MEN!, TIME FOR "MAC-DADDY" AND HIS CRONIES TO GO! HOUSE KEEPIN ON DA HILL! |
