2. Comment by Robert B. (AZ2213)— November 27,2009 @ 1:43AM
Ratings:-19+51
If health care costs are soaring, it is because people expect more advanced care which is more expensive, and because too many people expect other people to pay for their care. Unless we want the government to force the medical industry to provide lower-quality, cheap, and less expensive care, the only alternatives are for the government to ration the care (like getting fewer mammograms) or to focus more on self reliance where people get the health care that they can afford to pay for themselves. The reform that I have in mind is to remove the government as much a possible from the process.
4. Comment by David H. (DABears)— November 27,2009 @ 3:15AM
Ratings:-19+64
What these idiots in Washington are proposing, is not Health care reform. It is government take over of our freedoms.
Real Health care reform would start with tort reform, then allow interstate competition, and tax breaks and pooling together for free market competition.
This bill does none of that but will instead raise the cost of our insurance, it will reduce our freedoms and the quality of health care to our seniors, and will give unprecedented power to our government over every aspect of our lives.
We need to kill this bill and start over with real health care reform. What the democrats are ramming down our throats, is nothing close to health care reform. Why is there no tort reform in this bill? Is it because the lawyer bought and paid for their vote. Sounds disgusting to me.
Gabby Giffords voted for this piece of slim, called health care. We need to get rid of lap dogs that vote the party line and don't represent the people of Arizona.
6. Comment by serena l. (BTW)— November 27,2009 @ 4:22AM
Ratings:-16+56
Any bill IS NOT better than no bill when you look at this nightmare for our country. This is pure political grabbing at its ugliest. Out with Gabby and Raul!...and anyone else who has voted for this.
7. Comment by Phillip D. (pdavid)— November 27,2009 @ 4:38AM
Ratings:-38+24
#4
Tort reform is just a distraction. If you made a list of the things that made health care expensive, frivilous lawsuits wouldn't even be in the top ten.The CBO did a study on Tort Reform and found at the most a .5% saving . Insurer WellPoint Inc. has also said that liability awards are not what’s driving premiums .
How about price controls on prescription drugs? How about some true competition that a real public option would provide?
Personally, if I have recurring headaches, I want my doctor to practice defensive medicine. I want a CAT Scan, I want every test possible. Forget tort reform. That won't save any money.
8. Comment by Kevin B. (2218)— November 27,2009 @ 4:45AM
Ratings:-26+27
We must have <the Healthcare Bill, Cap and Trade, Stimulus> or the world will end - there is no room for debate about that. Thousands of people will lose their <health care, polar bears, jobs and homes> each day if we don't ram this through without reading the bill. Anyone who opposes <the Healthcare Bill, Cap and Trade, Stimulus> is a tool of the <Big Insurance Companies, Big Oil Companies, Far Right>.
10. Comment by Hugh J. (1406)— November 27,2009 @ 5:07AM
Ratings:-10+36
Piece is rife with phrases like "Supporters of reform are frustrated" , and "Reform backers" as if only those that support what the Democrats are trying to pull here want reform.
You see, if you are against what they want, you're "anti-reform".
Not true. The three biggest reasons that health care costs are out of whack are that one, the government allows the insurance industry to operate in a monopolistic manner within State boundaries. If the proposed Bills forced these companies to compete nationwide coverage costs would drop and the variety of plans that would accommodate women that wanted abortion coverage and men that wanted things that socialized medicine will not pay for could have what they wanted.
Two, tort reform. There is a significant portion of wasted money that simply goes to bottom feeding lawyers. and three, even this administration admits that there are millions in fraud and waste in the current government operated plans. But they are telling us that they need "reform" to clean it up (yes, they think we're that stupid).
12. Comment by Bill B. (4485)— November 27,2009 @ 5:29AM
Ratings:-11+36
Medicare is broke and collapsing.. you just have'nt noticed yet. They are keeping those sweeping changes to put the provides for that program out of business a little complex secret, the gov't actions on so many fronts, from so many directions at those suppliers that its an ambush against those vendors. Ask someone on oxygen what been happening to their services in the last year, three years see what type of response you get.. is but one example of what's coming down the track.. its called a 'train wreck'.
13. Comment by Robert R. (gaijin)— November 27,2009 @ 5:34AM
Ratings:-49+11
So tell me...What if...You lose your job and with it your health insurance. Later that week you learn your child has cancer and will need years of treatment. What do you do ?? Borrow ??
Sell your house, your car...everything you own ?? Or go on the public welfare rolls and have the taxpayer pay for all the medical care ?? Thusly..you get off scott free and I end up paying (along with others) for your childs care. Is that right.???
16. Comment by J. R. M. (Mr Optimistic)— November 27,2009 @ 5:42AM
Ratings:-11+31
Health care reform is necessary, no doubt, but what is now being considered is not refrom, but a powergrab of unprecedented proportion!
I am constantly amazed by those who cite, "we are the only industrialed nation that doesn't offer nationalized healthcare for it's citizens". Thank you very much for proving that since we are indeed the only superpower, maybe the rest of the world should be following OUR lead, not vise-versa!!!!!
We are the greatest, and most successful nation on planet earth, and that is precisely why 17% of the worlds population still wants to come to AMERICA! It is the free market that made us what we are, not the federal government.
17. Comment by J. R. M. (Mr Optimistic)— November 27,2009 @ 5:47AM
Ratings:-9+36
People really need to familiarize themselves with the ramifications of UNFUNDED MANDATES!!!! Nationalized healthcare is UNSUSTAINABLE and UNNECESSARY! We need the politicians to get out of the way, not line their pockets, and secure their own political futures by making us more dependent upon the government!!!!!!
19. Comment by J. R. M. (Mr Optimistic)— November 27,2009 @ 5:54AM
Ratings:-10+31
The Democrats have huge majorities in both houses, and occupy the White House, and they still face enormous difficulty passing this albatross. That says all I need to know!
20. Comment by wit w. (Wit)— November 27,2009 @ 5:56AM
Ratings:-10+25
First reform welfare and immigration, and I don't mean amnesty. Then we will see great healthcare savings when we stop giving deadbeats and criminals free services.
If we want to see costs of healthcare drop, let's stop sending all the money through a middleman, be it insurance or government. Instead pay doctors directly. We do this with veterinarians, and get great service at reasonable cost.
Insurance should be for emergencies only, not routine matters. Healthcare is not an industrial activity, and does not require a system. Doctors. running their own P.C.s in a competitive environment, will keep costs reasonable and will compete to improve the quality of care.
23. Comment by wit w. (Wit)— November 27,2009 @ 6:09AM
Ratings:-8+18
74 cents out of every dollar sounds quite efficient, but how is it computed ? Does the spending on actual healthcare include the doctor's cost of processing insurance claims ? Each doctor's office has a room full of salaried administrators who submit and re-submit insurance claims all day. Their work does not contribute to our health.
How much of that remaining 74% is malpractice insurance ? How much is servicing of young doctors' school loans ?
24. Comment by J. R. M. (Mr Optimistic)— November 27,2009 @ 6:18AM
Ratings:-9+27
The DOE was created almost 40 years ago with one goal, "to lessen our dependency on foreign oil". With an annual budget in excess of 25 BILLION dollars a year, 34,000 plus full time employees, and over 125,000 sub contracted employees, we are now more dependent on foreign oil than ever before. To be more precise, we are over twice as dependent on foreign oil now, than when it was created. Please do not allow politicians, of any stripe, to take control of your healthcare!!!!!!!
26. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 6:53AM
Ratings:-9+21
#7 - And by the way, you can have all that right now, today, this morning. All it takes is for you to pay for it yourself with your very own money. And the providers take credit cards and payment plans. See how easy!
27. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 6:58AM
Ratings:-8+21
#5 - "No Medicare patient has had their policy rescinded because they made a claim or because they had a pre-existing condition."
Just wait until the $500 BILLION cut that the Dems are proposing occurs. Oh wait - you say they will never cut that? Oh, then just wait til the debt increases by another $500 BILLION!
32. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 7:19AM
Ratings:-8+21
#2 Robert - "it is because people expect more advanced care which is more expensive, and because too many people expect other people to pay for their care"
You forgot, people also expect to be able to do whatever they want with their bodies, see: drugs, alcohol, smoking, sex, not exercise
...and expect me to pick up the tab.
33. Comment by Phillip D. (pdavid)— November 27,2009 @ 7:28AM
Ratings:-19+7
Howard F #25
"Do you want to pay for it? Or do you expect someone else to pay?"
I want my insurance company to pay.
The point is, I want my doctor to practice defensive medicine! I want all the tests necessary. The arguments for Tort Reform are so inane. People say we'll save money because doctors won't have to practice defensive medicine and perform unnecessary tests. But I want the tests and so do you!!!
So it's a stupid argument. The amount of unnecessary lawsuits is minimal. Look it up. Only 7% ever get to trial. And many states limit awards for "pain and suffering" at 250,000. So this is not a big problem and Tort reform is not a solution to anything...it actually works against what I want, which is very good medical care.
34. Comment by K S. (sherwink)— November 27,2009 @ 7:29AM
Ratings:-5+20
If Congress thinks there's so much waste in Medicare, why don't thy fix that instead? They don't need to foist 2000 page bills on us to do it either. Why can't they change cross state health insurance without a huge government-run program proposal? We don't need a monstrous bill like this. We don't want it and you can't afford it.
36. Comment by J. R. M. (Mr Optimistic)— November 27,2009 @ 7:30AM
Ratings:-6+18
Contrary to current adminstrative philosophy, we do not need to lower our standard of living here in the United States, we need to raise everyone elses!!!!!!!!
39. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 7:33AM
Ratings:-3+19
#7 Phil - "How about some true competition that a real public option would provide?"
How about some real competition...by giving me my healthcare dollars and letting me choose which plan to buy. Not just choose between individual or family coverage at my employer ?
Or real competition by being able to buy a policy from a company in New Jersey or Florida. Like Federal employees have the ability to do
40. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 7:34AM
Ratings:-5+11
We pay for our own insurance (hard for many to imagine) and they will cover just about any procedure available. It's easy, simple. But then again, if you expect someone else to pay for your insurance or your services, then you are dependent and will get only what someone else has decided you are 'entitled' to.
41. Comment by Joe S. (Joe Saba)— November 27,2009 @ 7:39AM
Ratings:-13+16
for an CAT scan in Japan it cost $160
in the US - insurers pay $1,700
guy on the street - over $2,600
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
44. Comment by Toris O. (Clia)— November 27,2009 @ 7:49AM
Ratings:-6+18
I hate to sound rude or even uncaring and heartless, but where is it guaranteed that we all get a heart transplant, chemotherapy, brain surgery, etc? These are all things that cost $250,000 or more.
We all want Cadillac care at Chevy Chevette prices, which just can't happen unless we all want to be taxed into poverty.
If you who think the government should run health care want the "best" free health care, then you need to get us to all agree to give up 15% more of our pretax income--across the board--to cover that fact that health care is 15% of the GNP. And that means even if you are poor enough to pay no taxes, you still must give up 15% of what you make, and if you are on the govt dole for welfare, social security, etc, then you lost 15% of that.
49. Comment by francis w. (6565)— November 27,2009 @ 8:13AM
Ratings:-4+14
Other than trying to win the war in Afghanistan, is there anything this administration is trying to do that doesn't have the "urgent" label? The current health care bill, if passed, isn't scheduled to go into effect for several years in order to balance their phony budget. They'll have to start collecting taxes years ahead of time in order to avoid the red ink that will be created for the next generation of taxpayers when the program actually takes effect.
50. Comment by Vincent K. (HippieHunter)— November 27,2009 @ 8:17AM
Ratings:-8+9
49. Comment by francis w.
Francis...you're a good candidate for a re education camp. Providing the health care is not what's important...obtaining the tax dollars is. C'mon, think progressive.
52. Comment by Peter K. (Sweet Pete)— November 27,2009 @ 8:25AM
Ratings:-18+6
Of course the GOP and the corporations don't want this bill to go through, they want the right to continue to rape the American middle class. Since 2000 we've witness the greatist transfer of wealth in history from middle America to the wealthy. As Warren Buffet put it "This was a class war, and we (the wealthy) have won!"
53. Comment by c b. (race)— November 27,2009 @ 8:25AM
Ratings:-3+13
Not urgent...not even needed...just more enslavement of the middle class to give more of what they earn to those who do not earn.
A Public plan called Medicaid already covers the poor and disabled (22% of national budget).Medicare covers seniors over 65 and it is anotheer 22% of budget.Veterans have health care if needed and active military and all of the public Sector,education,county,city,state and federal employess have health care,So why is it so urgent and needed ???????
56. Comment by Larry W. (Truth Only)— November 27,2009 @ 8:32AM
Ratings:-5+14
I have been reading it. I am really feeling like i will no longer be able to get health care and will be dead before long as my illnesses can be sent to the COMITTEE for approval. If that is the case the way this bill is written now then I am a dead man.
The taxes, fees, and penalties along with the national health card that is required takes away mor eright than the past administration ever thought of doing. Oh yeah and the illegals get it TOO, free medical. GOOD BYE AMERICA HELLO MARXIST bHo Land.
57. Comment by Jefferson C. (commandermarcos)— November 27,2009 @ 8:35AM
Ratings:-4+9
Skyrocketing costs are a function of supply and demand.
Freshman economics tell you that the WRONG way to address the problem is by trying to manipulate DEMAND.
The right way is by removing costs of and impediments to SUPPLY. Lower AMA standards for certain types of health care professionals; allow trained non-doctors to treat more types of illness, accelerate FDA approval of new drugs, limit malpractice liability, especially in ER situations. Allow insurance companies to sell medical policies across state lines.
Do these obvious things first. If these steps don't solve the problem, talk to me about government run health care, but not before.
59. Comment by alan y. (ayoung)— November 27,2009 @ 8:38AM
Ratings:-4+11
#14
I just recieved my Social Security Statement of estimated benefits. It contanis the following line in bold print:
*Your estimated benefits are based on current law. Congress has made changes to the law in the past and can do so at any time. The law governing benefits may change because, by 2037, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to only pay about 76% of scheduled benefits.
61. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 8:46AM
Ratings:-5+10
52 Peter - "the greatist transfer of wealth in history from middle America to the wealthy"
Wow. Through health insurance premiums.
Funny, I didn't see any insurance company CEO's in the top ten of Forbes' "richest" list. Mostly entertainers of one sort or another.
btw - if we seize all of Warren Buffet's, Bill Gates and Larry Ellison's collective wealth, we'll have more than enough to pay for the first year of "reform"
62. Comment by Kim H. (Kimwal)— November 27,2009 @ 9:05AM
Ratings:-2+9
#7 Phillip D. It is not the increasing threat of lawsuits, but the defensive medicine (CYA) costs that are massive burdens to the current system. Common sense by our doctors is out the window....cover yourself with unnecessary testing. This is why we need tort refom.
64. Comment by Phillip D. (pdavid)— November 27,2009 @ 9:19AM
Ratings:-9+2
Howard F #38
"Who do you expect to pay for your insurance? The answer must be, anybody but you."
My insurance is paid for by me, supplied through my employer, which puts me in a "group", which means cost is lower than if I bought as just an individual.
My group is teachers in TUSD. Fairly large, but not nearly large enough to make the kind of significant difference we're all looking for. I can't get into the same "group" other state employees are in, which would make my costs lower, because my group, teachers, statistically use a lot of prescription drug coverage, way more than say policemen. So state employee group that policemen are in won't allow teachers.
The point being, this is not about having somebody else pay for our insurance, it's about getting the largest group we can in order to have significant buying power and significant bargaining power.
If we had a true public option, where all people in America could participate, we would have truly significant buying power and truly significant bargaining power. Costs would come down. My income would go up. A good thing.
65. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 9:30AM
Ratings:-4+8
#64 - Unfortunately, your union has saddled you with the most expensive and least efficient format of health insurance ever devised, an HMO. If you were willing to pay out of pocket for routine care, your monthly premiums would be a quarter of what you now pay. But HMO's are the king at insulating the cost of medical care from the recipient, which is exactly why it is the most expensive form available.
66. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 9:32AM
Ratings:-3+8
#64 - "My group is teachers in TUSD."
Then you should take up your problems with YOUR employer and YOUR union. You made the choice to work for them, noone forced you and you have no right forcing others to pick up the tab for you.
67. Comment by Phillip D. (pdavid)— November 27,2009 @ 9:48AM
Ratings:-9+1
Kim H #62
Tort reform will not stop "defensive medicine."
If malpractice occurs, lawsuits will result. Patients can still get money for lost wages and lost income. Many states have already limited "pain and suffering" awards at $250,000 (where the money is) so the number of lawsuits has already declined drastically. Go look at Texas and Florida.
Tort reform just means place a limit on "pain and suffering" awards so the motive for lawyers filing suits is diminished. If doctors screw you up, they should pay, just like if a car company sold you a car that will explode if rear-ended, they should pay.
As a consumer, I want all the tests they can give me. I don't want them to miss anything. I want them to practice "defensive" medicine to the max!
The way to save money is for the government to negotiate prices for doctors, hospitals and prescription drugs. Or, instead of governmnt, then a huge public option pool of people to negotiate.
Second, reduce the huge and wasteful on administrative costs for marketing, underwriting and managing complex insurance reimbursement rules. In short, cut out the costs of the middle man, the insurance companies -- in America, that is about 30%.
68. Comment by Larry S. (Newsnabber)— November 27,2009 @ 9:53AM
Ratings:-1+12
Answer to comment#22
The effective date of health care reform will br delayed until 2013 because Obama knows he will only be a one term president and he wants to be gone before the s**t hits the fan.
69. Comment by Kim H. (Kimwal)— November 27,2009 @ 9:57AM
Ratings:-4+9
Here is a little information from the House Bill that may
just get your blood boiling enough to take action:
SEC 59B (PP 297-299) WHEN YOU FILE YOUR TAXES, YOU MUST INCLUDE PROOF THAT YOU ARE IN A QUALIFIED HEALTH PLAN.
IF NOT, YOU WILL BE FINED THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ARE EXEMPT FROM THIS REQUIREMENT.
THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE HEALTH BILL RELEASED
A FEW WEEKS BACK CONTROLS DOCTORS BY CUTTING THEIR PAY
IF THEY GIVE OLDER PATIENTS MORE CARE THAN THE GOVERNMENT DEEMS APPROPRIATE. SEC 3003 (b( (P. 683) PUNISHES DOCTORS WHO LAND IN THE 90TH PERCENTILE OR ABOVE
ON WHAT THEY PROVIDE FOR SENIORS ON MEDICARE
BY WITHHOLDING 5 PERCENT OF THEIR COMPENSATION.
70. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 10:03AM
Ratings:-2+8
68 - "The effective date of health care reform will br delayed until 2013"
Not the "revenue" portions of the bill. They start immediately.
That's one of the creative accounting methods they use to make it cost "only" $900 Billion over ten years.
Another is the CBO stating (more or less) "Congress has to pass additional legislation that will effect the cost savings envisioned in the current plans. We can't be sure they will do this, so our estimates are, for lack of better term, guesses"
71. Comment by Peter V. (Peter V)— November 27,2009 @ 10:03AM
Ratings:-2+12
The best debate plan is to read aloud the whole damn thing, every page of it.
The way it is crafted is dreadful, a crashing mess that will cause confusion from the lowest to the highest levels; and it will spread Fear and Anxiety among the general populace, worse of course in the Middle Class, the hated Bourgeoisie.
72. Comment by Peter V. (Peter V)— November 27,2009 @ 10:12AM
Ratings:-6+13
This is NOT "health reform," this is Government Health Takeover, in fact "Socialized Medicine" according to every definition of the term with all its faults and then some that have been exposed in the benighted lands of Europe.
A more rational approach would be to point up the most plausible "problems" to fix and then to fix them in a bipartisan manner one at a time.
If the Democrats pull this off in such an obviously blatant Ram It Down Their Throats fashion, when it bombs "Democrat" might suddenly become a truly endangered species. They are already setting themselves up for it.
75. Comment by Brenda J. (psiartist)— November 27,2009 @ 10:40AM
Ratings:-13+3
Let's see ... no health care reform needed, it works fine as it is. Sure. Like for my sister who has been a registered nurse for 35 years. She once opened a 'free clinic' where the poor were not billed. She travels around bringing health care to the poor in her area. She has always payed her Blue Cross-Blue Shield premium. Yet when she recently got sick and had to go to the hospital the cost of tests her health care provider would not pay for means her one pride and joy in the world, her small log cabin house in the woods is up for sale to pay for the tests. Wonderful system we have.
77. Comment by Joe J. (Joe N)— November 27,2009 @ 10:48AM
Ratings:-8+3
Peter - This "government health takeover" will, according to CBO, result in 3 million more customers of private insurance, not less.
"CBO and the JCT staff estimate that about 165 million people would have their primary insurance coverage through an employer, or about 3 million more than under current law."
78. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 10:51AM
Ratings:-6+9
#75 - So if I had a $500k Ferrari that I really, really liked but I got sick and had to pay xx amount of dollars to save my life, I should expect someone else to pay those medical bills so I could keep my Ferrari?
79. Comment by Joe J. (Joe N)— November 27,2009 @ 11:02AM
Ratings:-11+4
Howard - If you have a $500,000 Ferrari that you really like, you probably regularly pay premiums on an insurance policy that you would expect to cover you if you got really sick.
However what is actually happening is when you get really sick you have around a 50% chance of having your policy cancelled, not-renewed, or rescinded.
"alf of the insured population uses virtually no health care at all. The 80th percentile uses only $3,000 (2002 dollars, adjust a bit up for today). You have to hit the 95th percentile to get anywhere interesting, and even there you have only $11,487 in costs. It’s the 99th percentile, the people with over $35,000 of medical costs, who represent fully 22% of the entire nation’s medical costs. These people have chronic, expensive conditions. They are, to use a technical term, sick.
...
If the top 5% is the absolute largest population for whom rescission would make sense, the probability of having your policy cancelled given that you have filed a claim is fully 10% (0.5% rescission/5.0% of the population). If, as I suspect, rescission is targeted toward the truly bankrupting cases – the top 1%, the folks with over $35,000 of annual claims who could never be profitable for the carrier – then the probability of having your policy torn up given a massively expensive condition is pushing 50%. One in two. You have three times better odds playing Russian Roulette."
80. Comment by Thomas B. (Tmax)— November 27,2009 @ 11:04AM
Ratings:-11+4
#69: That is not information from the bill, it is lies and distortions from Betsy McCaughey, the idiot who gave us the "death panel" nonsense. Puttting it in all caps does not make it any more palatable.
81. Comment by Robert L. (Zino)— November 27,2009 @ 11:10AM
Ratings:-1+11
Joe S your CAT scan quotes are either a lie or you're repeating a lie you heard.
Just had 17 scans on my knee at Tucson Orthopedic Imaging, 45 minutes, scan after scan and total bill was just over $400 and that was before the insurance got their discount
82. Comment by harold w. (harold westberg)— November 27,2009 @ 11:13AM
Ratings:-1+11
because Hussein, Harry and Nancy say so.
How ridiculous is that. They probably have not even read the bill in it's entirety (if they can absorb anything that full of pork)
83. Comment by Thomas B. (Tmax)— November 27,2009 @ 11:21AM
Ratings:-6+3
81: I think that Joe"s statistic was actually for an MRI, not a CAT scan. The point remains the same, our system highly inflates the costs of routine procedures and tests compared to Japan's and many other "socialist" systems.
85. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 11:36AM
Ratings:-6+5
#83 - It doesn't inflate at all, except just the opposite, except for the portion where insurance instead of the consumer is paying. In socialized cases, the price of the delivered care has nothing to do with the cost. TAXES. Socialist systems steal money from the citizens to subsidize that care, then prices are set to redistribute the wealth. Of course the price from the socialist is lower, but the cost is much, much higher.
But hide the tax - that's why the marxists now prefer the value added tax, because even though you are going to pay 20-30% more, the tax portion will never be broken out so we'll all be happy lemmings praising the Lord, God Obama for all He has given us.
The most efficient system is where the consumer pays the provider.
86. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 11:38AM
Ratings:-4+5
#79 - "Howard - If you have a $500,000 Ferrari that you really like, you probably regularly pay premiums on an insurance policy that you would expect to cover you if you got really sick."
EXCUSE ME! I don't have a little cabin in the mountains retreat. And I'm going to be one that to has to pay for her medical bills.
88. Comment by james d. (james a d)— November 27,2009 @ 11:49AM
Ratings:-4+4
#69, Not real sure where you are gathering your info from, I suspect some sort of chain e-mail.
I suggest Fact Checking (SEC 59B) and you will find that 26 of those statements are false and the rest are absolutely positively misleading, only four of the contrived statements are proven to be correct.
Of course if you want to believe the lies and fabrications, that's your business.
89. Comment by Howard F. (Howwie)— November 27,2009 @ 12:02PM
Ratings:-5+5
#87 Quite obviously, you did not.
"The point remains the same, our system highly inflates the costs of routine procedures and tests compared to Japan's and many other "socialist" systems."
#79 - Anybody's ability to pay for them and their family has nothing to do with subsidizing others so they can have their mountain retreats. Just because someone is responsible and places priority on the health of their family does not make them targets to be enslaved to others who do not value their health by spending their money on other priorities.
90. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 12:46PM
Ratings:-1+6
77 Joe -
Cute CBO study.
It was from July.
How many times has the three card Monte dealer shuffled the cards since then ??
(psst - did you notice this line ? "enacting legislation that embodied those specifications would result in a net increase in federal budget deficits of $1,042 billion over the 2010–2019 period"
But don't worry. The deck they're playing with now "Reduces the Federal Deficit !!!!" (if all cost savings are found...and no more than the number of people they are estimating sign up....and the ones that sign up for "The Option" are as healthy as they think they are)
92. Comment by Brenda J. (psiartist)— November 27,2009 @ 1:09PM
Ratings:-11+5
Well Howard, I guess when you get sick and lose your 900 sq foot house valued at $185,000 you built when you were married to Eastern 'money person' I guess you would prefer to lose the house rather than request help from a person who helps poor sick people, like my sister. And if you did ask for help I suspect she would not arrive in her Ferrari. But then, she mainly helps people with sick bodies, not people with sick minds.
93. Comment by Lisbeth B. (Benks)— November 27,2009 @ 1:12PM
Ratings:-4+8
Health care reform is only urgent because Obama needs something with a semblance of success to run his mouth of about during his "dismal state of the union" address in seven weeks.
Other than that, it's nothing more than more big government, more fraud, waste and abuse, and more corrupt politicians paying each other off to screw the little guy out of every last cent they can get their grubby hands on.
94. Comment by Thomas B. (Tmax)— November 27,2009 @ 1:14PM
Ratings:-6+6
"Oh goody! Wage and price controls! "
Right, without them you get what we have in this country, a free market system without the free market constraints of competition. Runaway healthcare costs.
95. Comment by Lisbeth B. (Benks)— November 27,2009 @ 1:22PM
Ratings:-1+7
#75 & #76,
Health care reform is needed. You will find very few people who disagree with that from either side of the aisle.
What the democrats single-handedly put together, without any input from republicans, industry specialists, or anyone in the American tax paying, voting, and health care paying public is not a reform.
It's an overhaul of the entire system from the ground up, which includes completely changing the health care structure of providers as well as insurers. Changing the care level of 85% of Americans who are not unhappy with the insurance they currently have and pay for.
Instead of fixing what's wrong with the system, the democrats want to create a completely new, and completely screwed up system so everyone has the same lousy, pitiful excuse for health care coverage.
Instead of bringing up the level of coverage and care for the fifteen percent that don't have adequate coverage, their solution, as it always has been, is to bring down the level of coverage for the other eighty five percent to "level the playing field".
99. Comment by Joe J. (Joe N)— November 27,2009 @ 1:38PM
Ratings:-7+3
People who prioritize their health are being hurt by insurance companies who take their customers' premiums as long as they are healthy and then cancel them if they get sick.
In front of Congress the CEOs of three large insurers were asked if they would agree to stop rescinding the policies of sick patients except in cases of fraud (where the customers lied on their insurance applications) and all three said no they would not promise to stop rescinding policies. That's why we need a public option.
Robin Beaton found out last June she had an aggressive form of breast cancer and needed surgery -- immediately.
Robin Beaton, 59, found out just days before her mastectomy that her insurance provider would not cover the procedure.
Her insurance carrier precertified her for a double mastectomy and hospital stay. But three days before the operation, the insurance company called and told her they had red-flagged her chart and she would not be able to have her surgery.
The reason? In May 2008, Beaton had visited a dermatologist for acne.
Still, the insurance carrier decided to rescind her coverage. The company said it had reviewed her medical records and found out that she had misinformed them about some of her medical history.
Beaton had listed her weight incorrectly. She also didn't disclose medication she had taken for a pre-existing heart condition -- medicine she wasn't taking when she originally applied for coverage.
"I didn't know what to do. The hospital wanted a $30,000 deposit. I was by myself. I didn't have that kind of money," Beaton said through tears. "Can you imagine, having to walk around with cancer growing in your body? With no insurance. It's the most terrifying thing in the world to not have anybody to turn to or anywhere to go."
100. Comment by Bev M. (Bev4824)— November 27,2009 @ 1:40PM
Ratings:-3+8
Some GREAT news!!!
Obama's Approval Slide Finds Whites Down to 39%
Gallup Polls/Reports
November 24, 2009
Compared with his approval rating during his first full week in office, Barack Obama’s approval last week is down 17 points, from 66% to 49%. His decline in support comes disproportionately from whites -- down 22 points to 39%. Approval among nonwhites is down 7 points to 73%.
102. Comment by Thomas B. (Tmax)— November 27,2009 @ 1:42PM
Ratings:-8+4
"What the democrats single-handedly put together, without any input from republicans, industry specialists, or anyone in the American tax paying, voting, and health care paying public is not a reform"
That's not true.
"It's an overhaul of the entire system from the ground up, which includes completely changing the health care structure of providers as well as insurers. Changing the care level of 85% of Americans who are not unhappy with the insurance they currently have and pay for."
Not really.
"Instead of fixing what's wrong with the system, the democrats want to create a completely new, and completely screwed up system so everyone has the same lousy, pitiful excuse for health care coverage."
Not so.
"Instead of bringing up the level of coverage and care for the fifteen percent that don't have adequate coverage, their solution, as it always has been, is to bring down the level of coverage for the other eighty five percent to "level the playing field"."
You seem to be badly misinformed. Though given the number of voices intent on obfuscating the issue, not too surprising.
An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.
It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for rescission and that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating the policies of customers with expensive illnesses.
106. Comment by Rachel C. (RachelCos)— November 27,2009 @ 2:02PM
Ratings:-5+1
<<<Medicare is broke and collapsing.. >>>
One easy way to save a number of bucks for Medicare:
I, and all younger than I am, don't get our full social security until at least age 66+...why require us to sign up for Medicare at age 65 when we're still working and have our own insurance?? Let us sign up for Medicare when we sign up for Social Security???
108. Comment by Lisbeth B. (Benks)— November 27,2009 @ 2:03PM
Ratings:-3+6
#102,
You are the one who is badly misinformed
This plan relies on eight to fourteen million people not signing up to fund 168 billion dollars of it's costs. In other words, the government knows the "public option sucks so badly" that eight to fourteen million people would rather pay the fine or go to jail than sign up for it.
The taxes for this plan go into effect in 2010, yet none of the changes or coverages go into effect until after 2013. In other words, "We'll calculate the savings by collecting the funding up front. Then if it doesn't work out the way we predicted, or if we have to spend the money on something else, we can always blame it on the changing economy."
Bernie Madoff is in prison for just a scheme. It's called "ponzi".
Congress, the Senate, and other high paid, well insured political figures are exempt from participating in the plan they are dictating for the little people, AND they're exempt from the "Cadillac plan tax" of 45% they propose to enact on the private sector who have identical coverage at their own expense.
111. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 2:54PM
Ratings:-2+7
109 Thomas -
From your link: "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. The perpetuation of the returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises and pays requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors to keep the scheme going"
113. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 3:00PM
Ratings:-2+3
94 Thomas - "without the free market constraints of competition. Runaway healthcare costs"
Here's $1.
Buy a clue.
Half of ALL healthcare spending in this country is already done by the Government.
To provide coverage to about 90 million people. Out of 305.
Free market constraints of competition.
You just can't buy a policy from a company in New Jersey, if you live in Wyoming.
Oh and you have to have 'x' minimal coverage. Oh and you have to cover this or that . Oh and gosh forbid you should keep your healthcare dollars and be able to shop for your own coverage. You will take what your employer offers, and you will like.
btw - who set up the rules over time that allowed/caused the system to morph into what it is today. (hint: Congress)
114. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 3:02PM
Ratings:-1+4
112 George - "we're all screwed"
Not all. The politicians (read: ruling class elite) will be able to get a multi-million dollar a year "lobbying" gig once they "retire" (see: BJ Clinton, T Daschele et al) They'll be just fine.
117. Comment by Lisbeth B. (Benks)— November 27,2009 @ 3:43PM
Ratings:-2+4
If you get a flat tire, you don't smash up your whole car to match it. You fix the tire.
If someone breaks a window, you don't tear your house down to match it. You fix the window.
If 15% of the people in the U.S. have inadequate or no health insurance, we don't need to ruin health care for the other 85% to fix the problem. We need to fix the 15% that isn't right.
118. Comment by vincent m. (3942)— November 27,2009 @ 3:44PM
Ratings:-2+6
This is about CONTROL OVER YOU!!!!!!
If it was about reform we would have them pushing laws to take control of the companies NOT YOU! They could pass a law to cap premiums, prevent the big bad insurance companies from denying benefits on preexisting conditions.
Thwy want control over YOU!
120. Comment by Angelo F. (angfil)— November 27,2009 @ 4:13PM
Ratings:-3+3
#117. That sounds so logical that it would never pass congress.
For those of you who keep criticizing the bill, have yo read it? Do you really know what's in it? I doubt it.
122. Comment by Thomas B. (Tmax)— November 27,2009 @ 4:56PM
Ratings:-4+3
#120
They haven't read it, but they are eager to tell you what it REALLY means. It's all about CONTROL, don't cha know. It's a POWER grab. It's a diabolical Marxist scheme (hey, maybe a Ponzi scheme?) to RUIN the health care of Republicans and other upstanding Americans. It's a plot to give freebies to ILLEGALS. Be AFRAID, be very AFRAID! Reform could happen, and the world could come crashing down around you. Resist change! Embrace the status quo. Support your Congressmen who believe that the Government is incapable of doing anything for it's people. They are doing all they can to clog up any and every initiative, to insure that Obama fails, the Congress fails, and America fails, because their ideology demands it. And Lord knows, they couldn't possibly be wrong, could they? No, only Democrats are wrong. Remember, the Government is your enemy! Don't forget to vote. :)
124. Comment by Rodney S. (rodshort)— November 27,2009 @ 5:23PM
Ratings:-2+6
122, it is not only about power, it is about a bill that was written, not to benefit the health and well being of the citizens, but to line the pockets of trial lawyers. This is a bad bill and should be stricken. We should not be dumb enough to allow our reps to vote yes for it.
127. Comment by Lynn P. (zugu)— November 27,2009 @ 6:19PM
Ratings:-1+3
"Unless there is a debate, as Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., pointed out, there is no opportunity to fix what is wrong with the nation's health-care system ...
...the evidence has continued to accumulate that the current system needs to be changed.
The pharmaceutical industry, for instance, has raised the wholesale prices of brand-name prescription drugs by about 9 percent in the last year, the highest rate of increase in more than a decade.
This underlines the problems consumers face. Costs are soaring out of control and will continue their upward path unless a reform measure becomes law.
Another example: A Senate analysis earlier this month found that the largest for-profit health-insurance companies spend an average of 74 cents out of every dollar, paid in premiums by individuals, on medical care — a figure far lower than that claimed by the industry.
...but reforming the health-care system remains a national priority. Every passing day makes the task more urgent."
These are the best symptoms of the need for reform that could be found?
Problem definition seems to be the problem.
Surely, the best and brightest minds of the nation reside in and around The House, Senate, and the current administration. This can't be the best that they can do. These examples reek of intellectual laziness at best and dereliction of duty at worst.
This is definitely the best case seen to date for term limits. It would seem that a majority of lawmakers and administration teams have reached the positions referred to in the Peter Principle. Lead or get out of the way.
A great nation' population deserves and needs great leaders and problem solvers. The current crop is failing to produce the fruit necessary to sustain and promote growth in the population.
Term limits will introduce fresh minds and fresh ideas to the situation. The up side is up, because that seems to be the only direction of travel open.
128. Comment by Jim b. (2980)— November 27,2009 @ 6:57PM
Ratings:-2+3
When this health care debacle fails at least we'll know who to blame. Probably why the republicans and any reasonably minded moderate democrats are staying away from it.
129. Comment by Fred B. (whuh)— November 27,2009 @ 7:06PM
Ratings:-1+2
122 - "Support your Congressmen who believe that the Government is incapable of doing anything for it's people"
Far better than believing the Government should do everything for me. To think, I'm not even smart enough to shop for my own health insurance. (But the obese, drug using alcoholics are smart enough to not buy any and ask me to pay for it)
The Government in its various Federal, State, local etc, etc, etc already TAKE of 40% of my income. And they're worried about how much I pay for insurance !?!
I'm more worried about indentured servitude.
130. Comment by Rob S. (azrob)— November 27,2009 @ 8:43PM
Ratings:-0+0
Reform to lower costs yes---Reform to have another government bureacracy NO!
Let's include TORT reform-- Malpractice insurance is going thru the roof causing docs to practice DEFENSIVE medicine!
Let's include NATIONWIDE insurance competition.
Let's include our Congress AND Presidents in this reform--it is ridiculous for them to vote on things for US which they are not included.
Let's keep the GOVERNMENT out of these plans---PERIOD!
Why is it that our (so-called) leadership (Administration) is ignoring all these things? VOTE THE BUMS OUT!
131. Comment by vincent m. (3942)— November 27,2009 @ 8:52PM
Ratings:-0+0
The Funniest thing I have read about this issue so far "For those of you who keep criticizing the bill, have yo read it? Do you really know what's in it? I doubt it."
With the changing of one word you can get at the truth. 'For those of you who keep PRAISING the bill, have yo read it? Do you really know what's in it? I doubt it.' But hey lets pass it and spend a few TRILLION DOLLARS and see how it works out.
132. Comment by Peter V. (Peter V)— November 27,2009 @ 10:04PM
Ratings:-1+0
The bill will force all private insurance to quit the health field altogether because they must make a profit to pay their operating expenses and the interest on their use of capital. They MUST have the power to accept or reject "prior conditions" in lieu of doubling or tripling or sky rocketing their premiums.
They'll just quit, so the government "estimates" of private insurance support is just fantasy. They'll QUIT in droves. That's the way Free Enterprise works.
The government pays its 'crats with tax money and promises. The government can afford to cover all prior conditions and even to cover all the illegals because it has an unlimited source of cash, YOU AND YOU AND YOU, and yes even that little self-reliant citizen huddled in the corner. You will ALL pay and pay and pay. It won't be pretty.
133. Comment by Marco L. (marsgorski)— November 28,2009 @ 12:12AM
Ratings:-0+0
It is perfectly understandable to be distrustful of lawmakers. But, leaving something like health care management to for-profit entities alone is dehumanizing, as we have seen in the HMO's blatant abuses.
Health care reform is basically about greater government involvement, not about a complete take-over as detractors will say.
As distrustful as I am of lawmakers, I trust more lawmakers to do the right thing (which at least can be voted out of office) than I do a bunch of people whose main concern is to fill their very deep pockets.
Put simply, I would not leave too much of our health care management in the hands of private interests for the same reasons I would not want to privatise our fire departments and public schools. Health care (like safety, and education) should be guaranteed for all, not just our seniors and veterans.
We've added a feature to the comments pages - the ability to easily add paragraph breaks, boldface type and a few other typographical aids to your comments. Launch toolbar
Use single or double carriage returns to put line breaks or paragraph breaks in your comments.
At the same time, we removed the ability to put HTML coding into the comments. People were misusing that feature by pulling in cartoons, photos and other copyrighted materials from publications elsewhere. We won't allow you to use our pages to violate other publications' copyrights.
We've added a story to the site that includes a few tips to resolve common problems. You can use the comment thread attached to that story for practice and testing of the markup tools: Go to story | Go to the practice thread
General Instructions
Welcome to the story comments section of StarNet. Here are some helpful hints with you:
You must be logged in to comment or rate comments. Log in or create an account through our registration system.
All comments are subject to our guidelines (listed below) and our user agreement.
Comment Reporting
You can report other users' comments that are in violation of the StarNet User Guidelines. Users are limited to three (3) reports per day and are not allowed to report their own comments.
Any comment that has been reported will be moderated by StarNet. The comment will either be approved or rejected. Approval or rejection is based solely on the StarNet User Guidelines. Comments are only able to be reported once and are not viewable while awaiting moderation.
If you are a registered site user and are logged in, you can vote thumbs up or thumbs down on the comments.
The total votes of approval and disapproval on that comment will be updated when you vote — including your vote and any other votes that have been cast since your browser last loaded this page.
Votes by users who have been banned from commenting don't count in the totals.
User Guidelines
We welcome your comments on articles, editorials, columns, other topics on StarNet or any subjects important to you. Commentary submitted to StarNet (www.azstarnet.com) may be published or distributed in print, electronically or other forms. Opinions expressed in www.azstarnet.com's comments reflect the opinions of the author, and are not necessarily the opinions of the Star, StarNet, or its parent company. See terms of service for more information.
Our guidelines prohibit the solicitation of products or services, the impersonation of another site user, threatening or harassing postings and the use of vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language, defamatory or illegal material. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. It's fine to criticize ideas, but ad hominem attacks are prohibited. Users who violate those standards may lose their privileges on azstarnet.com.
Don't violate other publications' copyrights.
Do we edit user comments? No. The writers are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. StarNet reserves the right to remove comments that violate our guidelines policy.
Health-care reform is urgent; here's why
The following editorial appeared in the Miami Herald on Tuesday:Ya it was so right they had to bribe members to vote for it.
Report this comment
If health care costs are soaring, it is because people expect more advanced care which is more expensive, and because too many people expect other people to pay for their care. Unless we want the government to force the medical industry to provide lower-quality, cheap, and less expensive care, the only alternatives are for the government to ration the care (like getting fewer mammograms) or to focus more on self reliance where people get the health care that they can afford to pay for themselves. The reform that I have in mind is to remove the government as much a possible from the process.
Report this comment
I don't understand why we are "throwing out the baby with the bath water".
This guy is and idiot and the Red Star perpetuates the stupidity.
Report this comment
What these idiots in Washington are proposing, is not Health care reform. It is government take over of our freedoms.
Real Health care reform would start with tort reform, then allow interstate competition, and tax breaks and pooling together for free market competition.
This bill does none of that but will instead raise the cost of our insurance, it will reduce our freedoms and the quality of health care to our seniors, and will give unprecedented power to our government over every aspect of our lives.
We need to kill this bill and start over with real health care reform. What the democrats are ramming down our throats, is nothing close to health care reform. Why is there no tort reform in this bill? Is it because the lawyer bought and paid for their vote. Sounds disgusting to me.
Gabby Giffords voted for this piece of slim, called health care. We need to get rid of lap dogs that vote the party line and don't represent the people of Arizona.
Report this comment
No Medicare patient has had their policy rescinded because they made a claim or because they had a pre-existing condition.
Report this comment
Any bill IS NOT better than no bill when you look at this nightmare for our country. This is pure political grabbing at its ugliest. Out with Gabby and Raul!...and anyone else who has voted for this.
Report this comment
#4
Tort reform is just a distraction. If you made a list of the things that made health care expensive, frivilous lawsuits wouldn't even be in the top ten.The CBO did a study on Tort Reform and found at the most a .5% saving . Insurer WellPoint Inc. has also said that liability awards are not what’s driving premiums .
How about price controls on prescription drugs? How about some true competition that a real public option would provide?
Personally, if I have recurring headaches, I want my doctor to practice defensive medicine. I want a CAT Scan, I want every test possible. Forget tort reform. That won't save any money.
Report this comment
We must have <the Healthcare Bill, Cap and Trade, Stimulus> or the world will end - there is no room for debate about that. Thousands of people will lose their <health care, polar bears, jobs and homes> each day if we don't ram this through without reading the bill. Anyone who opposes <the Healthcare Bill, Cap and Trade, Stimulus> is a tool of the <Big Insurance Companies, Big Oil Companies, Far Right>.
Report this comment
and so just because you think health care is broken, you want the govt to take it over.???
Report this comment
Piece is rife with phrases like "Supporters of reform are frustrated" , and "Reform backers" as if only those that support what the Democrats are trying to pull here want reform.
You see, if you are against what they want, you're "anti-reform".
Not true. The three biggest reasons that health care costs are out of whack are that one, the government allows the insurance industry to operate in a monopolistic manner within State boundaries. If the proposed Bills forced these companies to compete nationwide coverage costs would drop and the variety of plans that would accommodate women that wanted abortion coverage and men that wanted things that socialized medicine will not pay for could have what they wanted.
Two, tort reform. There is a significant portion of wasted money that simply goes to bottom feeding lawyers. and three, even this administration admits that there are millions in fraud and waste in the current government operated plans. But they are telling us that they need "reform" to clean it up (yes, they think we're that stupid).
The House and Senate Bills, as noted by others above are not about health care, they are about power and control and are very dangerous.
Report this comment
#4 says "What these idiots in Washington are proposing, is not Health care reform. It is government take over of our freedoms."
GOP neobot talking point #1. Heard it all before. Blah blah blah
Report this comment
Medicare is broke and collapsing.. you just have'nt noticed yet. They are keeping those sweeping changes to put the provides for that program out of business a little complex secret, the gov't actions on so many fronts, from so many directions at those suppliers that its an ambush against those vendors. Ask someone on oxygen what been happening to their services in the last year, three years see what type of response you get.. is but one example of what's coming down the track.. its called a 'train wreck'.
Report this comment
So tell me...What if...You lose your job and with it your health insurance. Later that week you learn your child has cancer and will need years of treatment. What do you do ?? Borrow ??
Sell your house, your car...everything you own ?? Or go on the public welfare rolls and have the taxpayer pay for all the medical care ?? Thusly..you get off scott free and I end up paying (along with others) for your childs care. Is that right.???
Tell me...what would you do ???
Report this comment
#12 says "Medicare is broke and collapsing.. you just have'nt noticed yet"
No it's not. Just another neobot claim along with social securiy collapsing. Neither are collapsing no matter what Rush and Hannity say.
Report this comment
#4 Robert R. (gaijin)
"GOP neobot Talking Point #1. Heard it all before. Blah blah blah"
That is leftist, dominant media culture talking point #2. Heard it all before. Blah blah blah.
P.S. You forgot to blame Bush, too!
Report this comment
Health care reform is necessary, no doubt, but what is now being considered is not refrom, but a powergrab of unprecedented proportion!
I am constantly amazed by those who cite, "we are the only industrialed nation that doesn't offer nationalized healthcare for it's citizens". Thank you very much for proving that since we are indeed the only superpower, maybe the rest of the world should be following OUR lead, not vise-versa!!!!!
We are the greatest, and most successful nation on planet earth, and that is precisely why 17% of the worlds population still wants to come to AMERICA! It is the free market that made us what we are, not the federal government.
Report this comment
People really need to familiarize themselves with the ramifications of UNFUNDED MANDATES!!!! Nationalized healthcare is UNSUSTAINABLE and UNNECESSARY! We need the politicians to get out of the way, not line their pockets, and secure their own political futures by making us more dependent upon the government!!!!!!
Report this comment
the evidence has continued to accumulate that the current system needs to be changed.
I believe that the current system is called capitalism. The alternative can be found in the paradises of the collapsed statist nations.
Report this comment
The Democrats have huge majorities in both houses, and occupy the White House, and they still face enormous difficulty passing this albatross. That says all I need to know!
Report this comment
First reform welfare and immigration, and I don't mean amnesty. Then we will see great healthcare savings when we stop giving deadbeats and criminals free services.
If we want to see costs of healthcare drop, let's stop sending all the money through a middleman, be it insurance or government. Instead pay doctors directly. We do this with veterinarians, and get great service at reasonable cost.
Insurance should be for emergencies only, not routine matters. Healthcare is not an industrial activity, and does not require a system. Doctors. running their own P.C.s in a competitive environment, will keep costs reasonable and will compete to improve the quality of care.
Report this comment
#15 Heard what you're saying before as well. The media is all against "us" . GOP neobot talking point #2.
Report this comment
"Health-care reform is urgent"
If it is so urgent, why do the reforms take effect in 2013?
Report this comment
74 cents out of every dollar sounds quite efficient, but how is it computed ? Does the spending on actual healthcare include the doctor's cost of processing insurance claims ? Each doctor's office has a room full of salaried administrators who submit and re-submit insurance claims all day. Their work does not contribute to our health.
How much of that remaining 74% is malpractice insurance ? How much is servicing of young doctors' school loans ?
Report this comment
The DOE was created almost 40 years ago with one goal, "to lessen our dependency on foreign oil". With an annual budget in excess of 25 BILLION dollars a year, 34,000 plus full time employees, and over 125,000 sub contracted employees, we are now more dependent on foreign oil than ever before. To be more precise, we are over twice as dependent on foreign oil now, than when it was created. Please do not allow politicians, of any stripe, to take control of your healthcare!!!!!!!
Report this comment
#7 - " I want my doctor to practice defensive medicine. I want a CAT Scan, I want every test possible. "
Do you want to pay for it? Or do you expect someone else to pay?
Report this comment
#7 - And by the way, you can have all that right now, today, this morning. All it takes is for you to pay for it yourself with your very own money. And the providers take credit cards and payment plans. See how easy!
Report this comment
#5 - "No Medicare patient has had their policy rescinded because they made a claim or because they had a pre-existing condition."
Just wait until the $500 BILLION cut that the Dems are proposing occurs. Oh wait - you say they will never cut that? Oh, then just wait til the debt increases by another $500 BILLION!
Report this comment
Why would anyone trust the government to improve something as complex as health care?
Report this comment
Here we go again, the world is falling apart. Was it not a "crisis" over a decade ago also
Report this comment
#13 - "So tell me...What if...You lose your job and with it your health insurance."
If I'm a responsible parent, I purchase major medical insurance. Problem solved for a total cost of about $200 per month, maybe $250.
What would a liberal do? Whine and cry and become dependent on the government.
Report this comment
"Costs are soaring out of control and will continue their upward path unless a reform measure becomes law"
That's why when Democrats talk about what is good in their bill, the first thing they mention is that it reduces the Federal deficit.
Not that insurance premiums will go down 'x'%.
Report this comment
#2 Robert -
"it is because people expect more advanced care which is more expensive, and because too many people expect other people to pay for their care"
You forgot, people also expect to be able to do whatever they want with their bodies, see: drugs, alcohol, smoking, sex, not exercise
...and expect me to pick up the tab.
Individualized pleasure. Socialized risk.
Report this comment
Howard F #25
"Do you want to pay for it? Or do you expect someone else to pay?"
I want my insurance company to pay.
The point is, I want my doctor to practice defensive medicine! I want all the tests necessary. The arguments for Tort Reform are so inane. People say we'll save money because doctors won't have to practice defensive medicine and perform unnecessary tests. But I want the tests and so do you!!!
So it's a stupid argument. The amount of unnecessary lawsuits is minimal. Look it up. Only 7% ever get to trial. And many states limit awards for "pain and suffering" at 250,000. So this is not a big problem and Tort reform is not a solution to anything...it actually works against what I want, which is very good medical care.
Report this comment
If Congress thinks there's so much waste in Medicare, why don't thy fix that instead? They don't need to foist 2000 page bills on us to do it either. Why can't they change cross state health insurance without a huge government-run program proposal? We don't need a monstrous bill like this. We don't want it and you can't afford it.
Report this comment
#5 Joe says:
"No Medicare patient has had their policy rescinded"
Forgetting that 20% of medical bankruptcies are people on Medicare, Medicaid and VA Health. Source (page 4 of the pdf)
And if Medicare is so all encompassing and wonderful...
why is there the need for Medicare "Supplemental Insurance" and "Gap Coverage" ?
Report this comment
Contrary to current adminstrative philosophy, we do not need to lower our standard of living here in the United States, we need to raise everyone elses!!!!!!!!
Report this comment
Freedom is the answer, not the question!!!!
Report this comment
#33 - "I want my insurance company to pay."
Who do you expect to pay for your insurance? The answer must be, anybody but you.
They are more than happy to pay, depending on the premiums they are paid.
Report this comment
#7 Phil -
"How about some true competition that a real public option would provide?"
How about some real competition...by giving me my healthcare dollars and letting me choose which plan to buy. Not just choose between individual or family coverage at my employer ?
Or real competition by being able to buy a policy from a company in New Jersey or Florida. Like Federal employees have the ability to do
Report this comment
We pay for our own insurance (hard for many to imagine) and they will cover just about any procedure available. It's easy, simple. But then again, if you expect someone else to pay for your insurance or your services, then you are dependent and will get only what someone else has decided you are 'entitled' to.
Report this comment
for an CAT scan in Japan it cost $160
in the US - insurers pay $1,700
guy on the street - over $2,600
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
this does not compute
Report this comment
#29 Michael -
"Was it not a "crisis" over a decade ago also"
Yes. And if you look at this HHS Study from 1999 you'll see that as a percentage of the population, there were more uninsured in '99.
"17.9 percent of the population (42.6 million people) lacked health care coverage"
In 1999, the population of the US was 273 million Today we have 305 million + people, an increase of 32 million or more. The rolls of the uninsured only went up 3 million.
Report this comment
Doesn't the Federal Government already do half of the Healthcare spending in the US ?
Providing coverage to how many ?
And the problem is my insurance ?
Report this comment
I hate to sound rude or even uncaring and heartless, but where is it guaranteed that we all get a heart transplant, chemotherapy, brain surgery, etc? These are all things that cost $250,000 or more.
We all want Cadillac care at Chevy Chevette prices, which just can't happen unless we all want to be taxed into poverty.
If you who think the government should run health care want the "best" free health care, then you need to get us to all agree to give up 15% more of our pretax income--across the board--to cover that fact that health care is 15% of the GNP. And that means even if you are poor enough to pay no taxes, you still must give up 15% of what you make, and if you are on the govt dole for welfare, social security, etc, then you lost 15% of that.
Give it up if you want it people.
NOTHING IS FREE.
Report this comment
Tort Reform.
Tort Reform.
Tort Reform.
Report this comment
We keep talking about insurance company profits.
How much of a medical malpractice award goes to the attorneys ?
How much of that is profit ?
Report this comment
I resent my tax dollars being used for bribery.
Report this comment
75% of the worlds population doesn't have running water or electricity, and we are squabbling over heathcare! WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!
Report this comment
Other than trying to win the war in Afghanistan, is there anything this administration is trying to do that doesn't have the "urgent" label? The current health care bill, if passed, isn't scheduled to go into effect for several years in order to balance their phony budget. They'll have to start collecting taxes years ahead of time in order to avoid the red ink that will be created for the next generation of taxpayers when the program actually takes effect.
Report this comment
49. Comment by francis w.
Francis...you're a good candidate for a re education camp. Providing the health care is not what's important...obtaining the tax dollars is. C'mon, think progressive.
Report this comment
21. Comment by Robert R. (gaijin) — November 27,2009 @ 6:02AM
Ratings: -17 +7
#15 Heard what you're saying before as well. The media is all against "us" . GOP neobot talking point #2.
-- High school remarks (naming calling) Liberal talking point #1, lol
Report this comment
Of course the GOP and the corporations don't want this bill to go through, they want the right to continue to rape the American middle class. Since 2000 we've witness the greatist transfer of wealth in history from middle America to the wealthy. As Warren Buffet put it "This was a class war, and we (the wealthy) have won!"
Report this comment
Not urgent...not even needed...just more enslavement of the middle class to give more of what they earn to those who do not earn.
A Public plan called Medicaid already covers the poor and disabled (22% of national budget).Medicare covers seniors over 65 and it is anotheer 22% of budget.Veterans have health care if needed and active military and all of the public Sector,education,county,city,state and federal employess have health care,So why is it so urgent and needed ???????
Report this comment
The Herald is wrong. The Senate bill is unaffordable, and the House bill is worse.
Start over, Congress, and this time don't "forget" medical malpractice tort reform.
Report this comment
Why couldn't this be done in phases instead one one big, huge bill put together at the last minute with who know what in it?
Yes, we do need reform but they're going about it the wrong way. Why don't they fix Medicare first and prove that it can be done efficiently?
Report this comment
I have been reading it. I am really feeling like i will no longer be able to get health care and will be dead before long as my illnesses can be sent to the COMITTEE for approval. If that is the case the way this bill is written now then I am a dead man.
The taxes, fees, and penalties along with the national health card that is required takes away mor eright than the past administration ever thought of doing. Oh yeah and the illegals get it TOO, free medical.
GOOD BYE AMERICA HELLO MARXIST bHo Land.
Report this comment
Skyrocketing costs are a function of supply and demand.
Freshman economics tell you that the WRONG way to address the problem is by trying to manipulate DEMAND.
The right way is by removing costs of and impediments to SUPPLY. Lower AMA standards for certain types of health care professionals; allow trained non-doctors to treat more types of illness, accelerate FDA approval of new drugs, limit malpractice liability, especially in ER situations. Allow insurance companies to sell medical policies across state lines.
Do these obvious things first. If these steps don't solve the problem, talk to me about government run health care, but not before.
Report this comment
Kill the bill.
Report this comment
#14
I just recieved my Social Security Statement of estimated benefits. It contanis the following line in bold print:
*Your estimated benefits are based on current law. Congress has made changes to the law in the past and can do so at any time. The law governing benefits may change because, by 2037, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to only pay about 76% of scheduled benefits.
Not broke, but headed that way.
Report this comment
Here is one reason the pukes want this shoved through so fast:
LINK
Report this comment
52 Peter -
"the greatist transfer of wealth in history from middle America to the wealthy"
Wow. Through health insurance premiums.
Funny, I didn't see any insurance company CEO's in the top ten of Forbes' "richest" list. Mostly entertainers of one sort or another.
btw - if we seize all of Warren Buffet's, Bill Gates and Larry Ellison's collective wealth, we'll have more than enough to pay for the first year of "reform"
Report this comment
#7 Phillip D. It is not the increasing threat of lawsuits, but the defensive medicine (CYA) costs that are massive burdens to the current system. Common sense by our doctors is out the window....cover yourself with unnecessary testing. This is why we need tort refom.
Report this comment
Healthcare’s dealbreakers: Mary Landrieu likes her $300 million
That $300 million is from the taxpayers. Of course, it hasn't actually been made yet.
Vote selling. Disgusting.
Report this comment
Howard F #38
"Who do you expect to pay for your insurance? The answer must be, anybody but you."
My insurance is paid for by me, supplied through my employer, which puts me in a "group", which means cost is lower than if I bought as just an individual.
My group is teachers in TUSD. Fairly large, but not nearly large enough to make the kind of significant difference we're all looking for. I can't get into the same "group" other state employees are in, which would make my costs lower, because my group, teachers, statistically use a lot of prescription drug coverage, way more than say policemen. So state employee group that policemen are in won't allow teachers.
The point being, this is not about having somebody else pay for our insurance, it's about getting the largest group we can in order to have significant buying power and significant bargaining power.
If we had a true public option, where all people in America could participate, we would have truly significant buying power and truly significant bargaining power. Costs would come down. My income would go up. A good thing.
"
Report this comment
#64 - Unfortunately, your union has saddled you with the most expensive and least efficient format of health insurance ever devised, an HMO. If you were willing to pay out of pocket for routine care, your monthly premiums would be a quarter of what you now pay. But HMO's are the king at insulating the cost of medical care from the recipient, which is exactly why it is the most expensive form available.
Report this comment
#64 - "My group is teachers in TUSD."
Then you should take up your problems with YOUR employer and YOUR union. You made the choice to work for them, noone forced you and you have no right forcing others to pick up the tab for you.
Report this comment
Kim H #62
Tort reform will not stop "defensive medicine."
If malpractice occurs, lawsuits will result. Patients can still get money for lost wages and lost income. Many states have already limited "pain and suffering" awards at $250,000 (where the money is) so the number of lawsuits has already declined drastically. Go look at Texas and Florida.
Tort reform just means place a limit on "pain and suffering" awards so the motive for lawyers filing suits is diminished. If doctors screw you up, they should pay, just like if a car company sold you a car that will explode if rear-ended, they should pay.
As a consumer, I want all the tests they can give me. I don't want them to miss anything. I want them to practice "defensive" medicine to the max!
The way to save money is for the government to negotiate prices for doctors, hospitals and prescription drugs. Or, instead of governmnt, then a huge public option pool of people to negotiate.
Second, reduce the huge and wasteful on administrative costs for marketing, underwriting and managing complex insurance reimbursement rules. In short, cut out the costs of the middle man, the insurance companies -- in America, that is about 30%.
Report this comment
Answer to comment#22
The effective date of health care reform will br delayed until 2013 because Obama knows he will only be a one term president and he wants to be gone before the s**t hits the fan.
Report this comment
Here is a little information from the House Bill that may
just get your blood boiling enough to take action:
SEC 59B (PP 297-299) WHEN YOU FILE YOUR TAXES,
YOU MUST INCLUDE PROOF THAT YOU ARE IN A QUALIFIED HEALTH PLAN.
IF NOT, YOU WILL BE FINED THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ARE EXEMPT FROM THIS REQUIREMENT.
THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE HEALTH BILL RELEASED
A FEW WEEKS BACK CONTROLS DOCTORS BY CUTTING THEIR PAY
IF THEY GIVE OLDER PATIENTS MORE CARE THAN THE GOVERNMENT
DEEMS APPROPRIATE. SEC 3003 (b( (P. 683) PUNISHES DOCTORS
WHO LAND IN THE 90TH PERCENTILE OR ABOVE
ON WHAT THEY PROVIDE FOR SENIORS ON MEDICARE
BY WITHHOLDING 5 PERCENT OF THEIR COMPENSATION.
Report this comment
68 -
"The effective date of health care reform will br delayed until 2013"
Not the "revenue" portions of the bill. They start immediately.
That's one of the creative accounting methods they use to make it cost "only" $900 Billion over ten years.
Another is the CBO stating (more or less) "Congress has to pass additional legislation that will effect the cost savings envisioned in the current plans. We can't be sure they will do this, so our estimates are, for lack of better term, guesses"
Report this comment
The best debate plan is to read aloud the whole damn thing, every page of it.
The way it is crafted is dreadful, a crashing mess that will cause confusion from the lowest to the highest levels; and it will spread Fear and Anxiety among the general populace, worse of course in the Middle Class, the hated Bourgeoisie.
Report this comment
This is NOT "health reform," this is Government Health Takeover, in fact "Socialized Medicine" according to every definition of the term with all its faults and then some that have been exposed in the benighted lands of Europe.
A more rational approach would be to point up the most plausible "problems" to fix and then to fix them in a bipartisan manner one at a time.
If the Democrats pull this off in such an obviously blatant Ram It Down Their Throats fashion, when it bombs "Democrat" might suddenly become a truly endangered species. They are already setting themselves up for it.
Report this comment
If they bought off the "moderate Democrats" and they lost ALL of the Republicans, then who passed the bill?
EXTREME DEMOCRATS.
Report this comment
really amazing how apparently the Constitution includes a guarantee on the right to be bilked by an insurance company...
and a strange freedom to 'defend'...
Report this comment
Let's see ... no health care reform needed, it works fine as it is. Sure. Like for my sister who has been a registered nurse for 35 years. She once opened a 'free clinic' where the poor were not billed. She travels around bringing health care to the poor in her area. She has always payed her Blue Cross-Blue Shield premium. Yet when she recently got sick and had to go to the hospital the cost of tests her health care provider would not pay for means her one pride and joy in the world, her small log cabin house in the woods is up for sale to pay for the tests. Wonderful system we have.
Report this comment
In fact, I think my sister is such a glaring example of why health care reform is needed I think the reform should be called The Letty Bill.
Report this comment
Peter - This "government health takeover" will, according to CBO, result in 3 million more customers of private insurance, not less.
"CBO and the JCT staff estimate that about 165 million people would have their primary insurance coverage through an employer, or about 3 million more than under current law."
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/104xx/doc10430/House_Tri-Committee-Rangel.pdf
Report this comment
#75 - So if I had a $500k Ferrari that I really, really liked but I got sick and had to pay xx amount of dollars to save my life, I should expect someone else to pay those medical bills so I could keep my Ferrari?
What a country!
Report this comment
Howard - If you have a $500,000 Ferrari that you really like, you probably regularly pay premiums on an insurance policy that you would expect to cover you if you got really sick.
However what is actually happening is when you get really sick you have around a 50% chance of having your policy cancelled, not-renewed, or rescinded.
Unconscionable Math
"alf of the insured population uses virtually no health care at all. The 80th percentile uses only $3,000 (2002 dollars, adjust a bit up for today). You have to hit the 95th percentile to get anywhere interesting, and even there you have only $11,487 in costs. It’s the 99th percentile, the people with over $35,000 of medical costs, who represent fully 22% of the entire nation’s medical costs. These people have chronic, expensive conditions. They are, to use a technical term, sick.
...
If the top 5% is the absolute largest population for whom rescission would make sense, the probability of having your policy cancelled given that you have filed a claim is fully 10% (0.5% rescission/5.0% of the population). If, as I suspect, rescission is targeted toward the truly bankrupting cases – the top 1%, the folks with over $35,000 of annual claims who could never be profitable for the carrier – then the probability of having your policy torn up given a massively expensive condition is pushing 50%. One in two. You have three times better odds playing Russian Roulette."
Report this comment
#69: That is not information from the bill, it is lies and distortions from Betsy McCaughey, the idiot who gave us the "death panel" nonsense. Puttting it in all caps does not make it any more palatable.
Report this comment
Joe S your CAT scan quotes are either a lie or you're repeating a lie you heard.
Just had 17 scans on my knee at Tucson Orthopedic Imaging, 45 minutes, scan after scan and total bill was just over $400 and that was before the insurance got their discount
Report this comment
because Hussein, Harry and Nancy say so.
How ridiculous is that. They probably have not even read the bill in it's entirety (if they can absorb anything that full of pork)
Report this comment
Report this comment
The MRI statistic comes from a piece on NPR.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120545569
Report this comment
#83 - It doesn't inflate at all, except just the opposite, except for the portion where insurance instead of the consumer is paying. In socialized cases, the price of the delivered care has nothing to do with the cost. TAXES. Socialist systems steal money from the citizens to subsidize that care, then prices are set to redistribute the wealth. Of course the price from the socialist is lower, but the cost is much, much higher.
But hide the tax - that's why the marxists now prefer the value added tax, because even though you are going to pay 20-30% more, the tax portion will never be broken out so we'll all be happy lemmings praising the Lord, God Obama for all He has given us.
The most efficient system is where the consumer pays the provider.
Report this comment
#79 - "Howard - If you have a $500,000 Ferrari that you really like, you probably regularly pay premiums on an insurance policy that you would expect to cover you if you got really sick."
EXCUSE ME! I don't have a little cabin in the mountains retreat. And I'm going to be one that to has to pay for her medical bills.
And that's why we have a second amendment!
Report this comment
" Of course the price from the socialist is lower, but the cost is much, much higher." Wowwie Howwie, I never would have thought of that!
Report this comment
#69, Not real sure where you are gathering your info from, I suspect some sort of chain e-mail.
I suggest Fact Checking (SEC 59B) and you will find that 26 of those statements are false and the rest are absolutely positively misleading, only four of the contrived statements are proven to be correct.
Of course if you want to believe the lies and fabrications, that's your business.
Report this comment
#87 Quite obviously, you did not.
"The point remains the same, our system highly inflates the costs of routine procedures and tests compared to Japan's and many other "socialist" systems."
#79 - Anybody's ability to pay for them and their family has nothing to do with subsidizing others so they can have their mountain retreats. Just because someone is responsible and places priority on the health of their family does not make them targets to be enslaved to others who do not value their health by spending their money on other priorities.
Pure communistic fascism.
Report this comment
77 Joe -
Cute CBO study.
It was from July.
How many times has the three card Monte dealer shuffled the cards since then ??
(psst - did you notice this line ? "enacting legislation that embodied those specifications would result in a net increase in federal budget deficits of $1,042 billion over the 2010–2019 period"
But don't worry. The deck they're playing with now "Reduces the Federal Deficit !!!!" (if all cost savings are found...and no more than the number of people they are estimating sign up....and the ones that sign up for "The Option" are as healthy as they think they are)
Report this comment
84 -
"The MRI statistic comes from a piece on NPR"
Also from the NPR story...
"So, how does Japan work this incredible magic? By law. The government sets the prices"
Oh goody! Wage and price controls! Someone wake Dick Nixon...let's ask him how his experiment in that turned out.
"Japan sets the price they pay for MRIs super low. And so to get into the Japanese market, the manufacturers lower their prices"
I thought people were pissed at Wal-mart when they do the same thing...
Report this comment
Well Howard, I guess when you get sick and lose your 900 sq foot house valued at $185,000 you built when you were married to Eastern 'money person' I guess you would prefer to lose the house rather than request help from a person who helps poor sick people, like my sister. And if you did ask for help I suspect she would not arrive in her Ferrari. But then, she mainly helps people with sick bodies, not people with sick minds.
Report this comment
Health care reform is only urgent because Obama needs something with a semblance of success to run his mouth of about during his "dismal state of the union" address in seven weeks.
Other than that, it's nothing more than more big government, more fraud, waste and abuse, and more corrupt politicians paying each other off to screw the little guy out of every last cent they can get their grubby hands on.
Report this comment
"Oh goody! Wage and price controls! "
Right, without them you get what we have in this country, a free market system without the free market constraints of competition. Runaway healthcare costs.
Report this comment
#75 & #76,
Health care reform is needed. You will find very few people who disagree with that from either side of the aisle.
What the democrats single-handedly put together, without any input from republicans, industry specialists, or anyone in the American tax paying, voting, and health care paying public is not a reform.
It's an overhaul of the entire system from the ground up, which includes completely changing the health care structure of providers as well as insurers. Changing the care level of 85% of Americans who are not unhappy with the insurance they currently have and pay for.
Instead of fixing what's wrong with the system, the democrats want to create a completely new, and completely screwed up system so everyone has the same lousy, pitiful excuse for health care coverage.
Instead of bringing up the level of coverage and care for the fifteen percent that don't have adequate coverage, their solution, as it always has been, is to bring down the level of coverage for the other eighty five percent to "level the playing field".
Report this comment
Public Option = competition
Who's fighting against competition in Health care reform?
The health care industry = a legal monopoly.
Report this comment
I can't wait until free health-care!!!!
Report this comment
Public Option = competition
Who's fighting against competition in Health care reform?
The health care industry = a legal monopoly.
Report this comment
People who prioritize their health are being hurt by insurance companies who take their customers' premiums as long as they are healthy and then cancel them if they get sick.
In front of Congress the CEOs of three large insurers were asked if they would agree to stop rescinding the policies of sick patients except in cases of fraud (where the customers lied on their insurance applications) and all three said no they would not promise to stop rescinding policies. That's why we need a public option.
Cancer patient tells of rips in health insurance safety net
Robin Beaton found out last June she had an aggressive form of breast cancer and needed surgery -- immediately.
Robin Beaton, 59, found out just days before her mastectomy that her insurance provider would not cover the procedure.
Her insurance carrier precertified her for a double mastectomy and hospital stay. But three days before the operation, the insurance company called and told her they had red-flagged her chart and she would not be able to have her surgery.
The reason? In May 2008, Beaton had visited a dermatologist for acne.
Still, the insurance carrier decided to rescind her coverage. The company said it had reviewed her medical records and found out that she had misinformed them about some of her medical history.
Beaton had listed her weight incorrectly. She also didn't disclose medication she had taken for a pre-existing heart condition -- medicine she wasn't taking when she originally applied for coverage.
"I didn't know what to do. The hospital wanted a $30,000 deposit. I was by myself. I didn't have that kind of money," Beaton said through tears. "Can you imagine, having to walk around with cancer growing in your body? With no insurance. It's the most terrifying thing in the world to not have anybody to turn to or anywhere to go."
Report this comment
Some GREAT news!!!
Obama's Approval Slide Finds Whites Down to 39%
Gallup Polls/Reports
November 24, 2009
Compared with his approval rating during his first full week in office, Barack Obama’s approval last week is down 17 points, from 66% to 49%. His decline in support comes disproportionately from whites -- down 22 points to 39%. Approval among nonwhites is down 7 points to 73%.
http://www.gallup.com/Home.aspx
Report this comment
Democrats at risk in 2010 shift from offense to defense
John Fritze
USA Today
November 24, 2009
www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-23-midterm-elections-2010-tossups_N.htm
Report this comment
"What the democrats single-handedly put together, without any input from republicans, industry specialists, or anyone in the American tax paying, voting, and health care paying public is not a reform"
That's not true.
"It's an overhaul of the entire system from the ground up, which includes completely changing the health care structure of providers as well as insurers. Changing the care level of 85% of Americans who are not unhappy with the insurance they currently have and pay for."
Not really.
"Instead of fixing what's wrong with the system, the democrats want to create a completely new, and completely screwed up system so everyone has the same lousy, pitiful excuse for health care coverage."
Not so.
"Instead of bringing up the level of coverage and care for the fifteen percent that don't have adequate coverage, their solution, as it always has been, is to bring down the level of coverage for the other eighty five percent to "level the playing field"."
You seem to be badly misinformed. Though given the number of voices intent on obfuscating the issue, not too surprising.
Report this comment
Opposition to health care legislation lingers
Susan Page
USA Today
November 24, 2009
---A new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds Americans inclined to oppose congressional passage of the legislation this year.
The survey, taken Friday through Sunday, finds 42% against a bill, 35% in support of it.
.......Independents were against it by 53% to 37%."
Cont'd...................
www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-24-healthcare-poll_N.htm
Report this comment
Health Care Reform
Support for Health Care Plan Falls to New Low
Monday, November 23, 2009
Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats.
--Among the nationâs senior citizens, 34% favor the health care plan and 60% are opposed.
--The plan is opposed by 70% of unaffiliated voters. (Independents)
www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform
Report this comment
Blue Cross praised employees who dropped sick policyholders, lawmaker say
An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.
It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for rescission and that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating the policies of customers with expensive illnesses.
Report this comment
<<<Medicare is broke and collapsing.. >>>
One easy way to save a number of bucks for Medicare:
I, and all younger than I am, don't get our full social security until at least age 66+...why require us to sign up for Medicare at age 65 when we're still working and have our own insurance?? Let us sign up for Medicare when we sign up for Social Security???
Report this comment
#68
Prbably the best comment on this thread today!
Here! Here!
Report this comment
#102,
You are the one who is badly misinformed
This plan relies on eight to fourteen million people not signing up to fund 168 billion dollars of it's costs. In other words, the government knows the "public option sucks so badly" that eight to fourteen million people would rather pay the fine or go to jail than sign up for it.
The taxes for this plan go into effect in 2010, yet none of the changes or coverages go into effect until after 2013. In other words, "We'll calculate the savings by collecting the funding up front. Then if it doesn't work out the way we predicted, or if we have to spend the money on something else, we can always blame it on the changing economy."
Bernie Madoff is in prison for just a scheme. It's called "ponzi".
Congress, the Senate, and other high paid, well insured political figures are exempt from participating in the plan they are dictating for the little people, AND they're exempt from the "Cadillac plan tax" of 45% they propose to enact on the private sector who have identical coverage at their own expense.
Report this comment
Lisbeth, you and Senator Kyle should look up the meaning of the term "Ponzi scheme". Let me help you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme
Report this comment
Urgent means its inacted immediately not after BO goes one and done. Smells like that stimulus was "urgent?"
This is about a cradle to grave power grab over our liberty and freedom.
Report this comment
109 Thomas -
From your link:
"A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent. The perpetuation of the returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises and pays requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors to keep the scheme going"
Sounds like Social Security.
Report this comment
#111
Social Security IS a ponzi scheme, but unlike Bernie Madoff, we can't send the Federal government to jail.
...And like Bernie Madoff's investors, we're all screwed.
Report this comment
94 Thomas -
"without the free market constraints of competition. Runaway healthcare costs"
Here's $1.
Buy a clue.
Half of ALL healthcare spending in this country is already done by the Government.
To provide coverage to about 90 million people. Out of 305.
Free market constraints of competition.
You just can't buy a policy from a company in New Jersey, if you live in Wyoming.
Oh and you have to have 'x' minimal coverage. Oh and you have to cover this or that . Oh and gosh forbid you should keep your healthcare dollars and be able to shop for your own coverage. You will take what your employer offers, and you will like.
btw - who set up the rules over time that allowed/caused the system to morph into what it is today. (hint: Congress)
Report this comment
112 George -
"we're all screwed"
Not all. The politicians (read: ruling class elite) will be able to get a multi-million dollar a year "lobbying" gig once they "retire" (see: BJ Clinton, T Daschele et al) They'll be just fine.
Report this comment
#111: "Sounds like Social Security."
Ha! A lot closer than the healthcare bill.
Report this comment
whuh?
Report this comment
If you get a flat tire, you don't smash up your whole car to match it. You fix the tire.
If someone breaks a window, you don't tear your house down to match it. You fix the window.
If 15% of the people in the U.S. have inadequate or no health insurance, we don't need to ruin health care for the other 85% to fix the problem. We need to fix the 15% that isn't right.
Report this comment
This is about CONTROL OVER YOU!!!!!!
If it was about reform we would have them pushing laws to take control of the companies NOT YOU! They could pass a law to cap premiums, prevent the big bad insurance companies from denying benefits on preexisting conditions.
Thwy want control over YOU!
Report this comment
118
This is about CONTROL OVER YOU!!!!!!
I agree No Health Care!
Report this comment
#117. That sounds so logical that it would never pass congress.
For those of you who keep criticizing the bill, have yo read it? Do you really know what's in it? I doubt it.
Report this comment
120 it is not the final bill that will be passed at 3 am on a Saturday night..
You just keep reading the dream and then see what they pass.
Report this comment
#120
They haven't read it, but they are eager to tell you what it REALLY means. It's all about CONTROL, don't cha know. It's a POWER grab. It's a diabolical Marxist scheme (hey, maybe a Ponzi scheme?) to RUIN the health care of Republicans and other upstanding Americans. It's a plot to give freebies to ILLEGALS. Be AFRAID, be very AFRAID! Reform could happen, and the world could come crashing down around you. Resist change! Embrace the status quo. Support your Congressmen who believe that the Government is incapable of doing anything for it's people. They are doing all they can to clog up any and every initiative, to insure that Obama fails, the Congress fails, and America fails, because their ideology demands it. And Lord knows, they couldn't possibly be wrong, could they? No, only Democrats are wrong. Remember, the Government is your enemy! Don't forget to vote. :)
Report this comment
122
Just said it is not racist to hate repugs?
What if they are black repugs?
What if they are women Repugs?
etc...
Report this comment
122, it is not only about power, it is about a bill that was written, not to benefit the health and well being of the citizens, but to line the pockets of trial lawyers. This is a bad bill and should be stricken. We should not be dumb enough to allow our reps to vote yes for it.
Report this comment
If you wanted change you would eliminate both Parties!
Report this comment
But you just keep voting for one or the other and Hope for change!
Report this comment
"Unless there is a debate, as Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., pointed out, there is no opportunity to fix what is wrong with the nation's health-care system ...
...the evidence has continued to accumulate that the current system needs to be changed.
The pharmaceutical industry, for instance, has raised the wholesale prices of brand-name prescription drugs by about 9 percent in the last year, the highest rate of increase in more than a decade.
This underlines the problems consumers face. Costs are soaring out of control and will continue their upward path unless a reform measure becomes law.
Another example: A Senate analysis earlier this month found that the largest for-profit health-insurance companies spend an average of 74 cents out of every dollar, paid in premiums by individuals, on medical care — a figure far lower than that claimed by the industry.
...but reforming the health-care system remains a national priority. Every passing day makes the task more urgent."
These are the best symptoms of the need for reform that could be found?
Problem definition seems to be the problem.
Surely, the best and brightest minds of the nation reside in and around The House, Senate, and the current administration. This can't be the best that they can do. These examples reek of intellectual laziness at best and dereliction of duty at worst.
This is definitely the best case seen to date for term limits. It would seem that a majority of lawmakers and administration teams have reached the positions referred to in the Peter Principle. Lead or get out of the way.
A great nation' population deserves and needs great leaders and problem solvers. The current crop is failing to produce the fruit necessary to sustain and promote growth in the population.
Term limits will introduce fresh minds and fresh ideas to the situation. The up side is up, because that seems to be the only direction of travel open.
Report this comment
When this health care debacle fails at least we'll know who to blame. Probably why the republicans and any reasonably minded moderate democrats are staying away from it.
Report this comment
122 -
"Support your Congressmen who believe that the Government is incapable of doing anything for it's people"
Far better than believing the Government should do everything for me. To think, I'm not even smart enough to shop for my own health insurance. (But the obese, drug using alcoholics are smart enough to not buy any and ask me to pay for it)
The Government in its various Federal, State, local etc, etc, etc already TAKE of 40% of my income. And they're worried about how much I pay for insurance !?!
I'm more worried about indentured servitude.
Report this comment
Reform to lower costs yes---Reform to have another government bureacracy NO!
Let's include TORT reform-- Malpractice insurance is going thru the roof causing docs to practice DEFENSIVE medicine!
Let's include NATIONWIDE insurance competition.
Let's include our Congress AND Presidents in this reform--it is ridiculous for them to vote on things for US which they are not included.
Let's keep the GOVERNMENT out of these plans---PERIOD!
Why is it that our (so-called) leadership (Administration) is ignoring all these things?
VOTE THE BUMS OUT!
Report this comment
The Funniest thing I have read about this issue so far "For those of you who keep criticizing the bill, have yo read it? Do you really know what's in it? I doubt it."
With the changing of one word you can get at the truth. 'For those of you who keep PRAISING the bill, have yo read it? Do you really know what's in it? I doubt it.' But hey lets pass it and spend a few TRILLION DOLLARS and see how it works out.
Report this comment
The bill will force all private insurance to quit the health field altogether because they must make a profit to pay their operating expenses and the interest on their use of capital. They MUST have the power to accept or reject "prior conditions" in lieu of doubling or tripling or sky rocketing their premiums.
They'll just quit, so the government "estimates" of private insurance support is just fantasy. They'll QUIT in droves. That's the way Free Enterprise works.
The government pays its 'crats with tax money and promises. The government can afford to cover all prior conditions and even to cover all the illegals because it has an unlimited source of cash, YOU AND YOU AND YOU, and yes even that little self-reliant citizen huddled in the corner. You will ALL pay and pay and pay. It won't be pretty.
Report this comment
It is perfectly understandable to be distrustful of lawmakers. But, leaving something like health care management to for-profit entities alone is dehumanizing, as we have seen in the HMO's blatant abuses.
Health care reform is basically about greater government involvement, not about a complete take-over as detractors will say.
As distrustful as I am of lawmakers, I trust more lawmakers to do the right thing (which at least can be voted out of office) than I do a bunch of people whose main concern is to fill their very deep pockets.
Put simply, I would not leave too much of our health care management in the hands of private interests for the same reasons I would not want to privatise our fire departments and public schools. Health care (like safety, and education) should be guaranteed for all, not just our seniors and veterans.
Report this comment
133 Marco -
"as we have seen in the HMO's blatant abuses"
Who gave us HMO's ?
"greater government involvement"
Report this comment