New Health Care plan


http://f385.mail.yahoo.com/ya/download?mid=1%5f15070%5fADV9v9EAAUM%2fSwtK2Q5VWwJ aCF4&pid=2&fid=Inbox&inline=1





Let me get this straight.




We're going to pass a health care plan
written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it,
passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, but exempts themselves from it,
signed by a president that also hasn't read it, and who smokes,
with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes,
overseen by a Surgeon General who is obese, and
financed by a country that's already broke.







What could possibly go wrong?
[CENTER]

When I saw that the plan is over 2,000 pages, I don't see how the politicians could ever find time to read it, unless that is all they did day and night for months, with barely any breaks. The language is not entirely understandable either... so, if it is passed, do you think it is just to possibly not have to deal with it anymore? Who really knows.

It is the product of smoke filled back room dealing where holdout so called moderates like Mary Landrieu and others negotiate $300 million in pork for their states in return for selling out their principles (if they have any) .

Hello Padre:

I'd be able to read 2,000 pages in 72 hours. Most college grads could too... That's what the Republicans asked for, and that's what Harry Reid gave them. I'd also be able to understand it.

As sophisticated as tom is, he doesn't know that real legislation gets DONE because of horse trading - unless it's Republicans doing it.

Having said that, I agree with you. The bill stinks, and it's going to get worse. It's going to get worse because these feckless Democrats couldn't legislate their way out of a paper bag.

excon

I'll hold legislators feet to the fire who buy into cr@p legislation anytime I see it . At least with moonbats like the Schmuckster I know he is doing it out of conviction. So called moderates on both sides of the aisle would sell their soul for a kickback .

Excon, I am sure we agree on the general idea what padre is saying. It's just that there is a difference between reading 2,000 pages and having to analyze it, understand it, pull apart your differences you have in each paragraph, and apply it to 50 states in their own ability to follow the rules. All with plenty of health professionals that are more educated in how the system actually works than the politician. The point is not that it really many pages, it is just that you know the politicians have plenty of other responsibilities other than this.

And how educated are they really to make decisions in such a short amount of time, if ever?

excon is well aware that there is a difference between reading it and understanding it. He knows it is written in legalese by the Senator's staffers and K Street lobbyists. He knows that even though we have too many lawyers serving in Congress now that they only understand the rudimentary issues . And he knows that when and if this bill does become law you can add 100 pages of regulatory language to implement the law for every page of the bill .

Hello again, r:

Tom also knows that I prefer a shorter bill, like one page. It would say something like this:

Medicare for all.

Then I'd have to fill all that space up on the first page - like this.




























excon

Katie Couric wrote a poem about Obamacare:


Twas just weeks before Christmas and what do you know
Senate Democrats are once again praying for Snowe.
They won 60 votes to start the debate
But they're back to square one and the just have to wait.
Wait for Blue Dogs like Nelson and Lincoln
Who say a public option would mean the economy sinkin'.
Wait for Joe Lieberman who says it won't pass
And hope Mary Landrieu can change her mind fast.

The Republican votes right now total zero
But a trigger could make one woman a hero.
The moderate who hails from the land way up north
Could save Harry Reid's Christmas with a deal she brought forth.
Urging government plans for when private ones fail
To think: both sides happy, can both sides prevail?
At this point no compromise looms within sight
That means after Thanksgiving it's on with the fight.
Enjoy your turkey and know we'll be here
To help make this tough topic just a little more clear.

As Bill the Cat would say...
http://henrystrongingoldberg.blogspot.com/bill_the_cat.gif

Apparently how they look at health care in the UK is "people now go into hospital to die rather than to be cured (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/simonheffer/6672409/Want-to-fix-the-NHS-Go-private.html)." The solution? Privatize failing providers. Ironic how Brits are now calling for more privatization and Canada is seeing explosive growth in private care facilities - while the Dems are stubbornly pushing the U.S. in the other direction.

What could possibly go wrong? Everything? According to John "what good is reading the bill" Conyers, Obama doesn't care what's in the bill (get the irony in that one?).


Conyers said on the Bill Press Radio Show, as covered by Sam Stein at the Huffington Post: "I'm getting tired of saving Obama's can in the White House. I mean, he only won (health care reform) by five votes in the House, and this bill wasn't anything to write home about. The public option is only available, which is the only way you manage cost and get some competition to 1,300 other health insurance companies, the only way he could have got that through is that progressives held their nose and voted for it anyway."...

"That is essentially what Rahm Emanuel has said: Just give us anything (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/12/white-house-has-no-comment-on-conyers-dishing-on-presidential-phone-call.html) and we will declare victory," said Conyers.

What a way to run a country- smart power (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703558004574582312065087466.html?m od=rss_opinion_main).

Essentially that is Obama's governing style, give him anything and he'll just declare victory. Unemployment? Victory. Economy? Victory. Foreign policy? Victory. Stimulus program? Victory. Afghanistan? Never mind...

Here's a new plan...

Or in the alternative... if you don't like the government's version of "health care" you can use your own version instead provided you can find those pesky bullets to even buy anymore.

In spite of the fact that some polls show support for Obamacare at 30 percent the goons in Congress keep pressing on (except for Harry Reid, who unlike his last call for a working Saturday must attend a $1,000 plus per plate fundraiser for himself).

The ruse is that their much heralded dropping of the public option is replaced by expanding Medicare (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Obama-other-Dems-praise-new-apf-585761823.html?x=0), opening the door to single payer. Not true you say?

Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y. called it “an unvarnished, complete victory for people like me who have been arguing for a single-payer system.”

The One really likes it, “I support this effort, especially since it’s aimed at increasing choice and competition and lowering cost.”

I don't think it's aimed at either. I agree with the Mayo Clinic that this is disastrous (http://healthpolicyblog.mayoclinic.org/2009/12/09/medicare-expansion-wont-get-us-there/), it's worse than the public option.

"U.S. healthcare spending would rise by about $234 billion over the next decade under the Senate Democrats' overhaul bill and some of the proposed savings might never be achieved, a U.S. agency said in a report released on Friday.

It was the latest in a series of reports issued by the agency that oversees Medicare that cast doubt on some of the savings claims made by Democrats about one of President Barack Obama's top domestic priorities."
U.S. agency sees more health spending with reform | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1114313420091211?type=marketsNews)

"Senate Democrats' plan to expand Medicare -- a program careening toward bankruptcy -- likely would hasten the demise of the health care safety net for seniors and spell financial disaster for consumers and health care providers who already are getting shortchanged by the program, critics say." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/11/expanding-medicare-punish-health-care-providers-raise-taxes-critics-say/

We had to rush the bill through and pass it... it was an emergency... the sky was falling... and see what a great job they did... the sky didn't fall

Hmmm that sounded like a previous bill...

Bail outs... hurry quick... the sky is falling... oh wait... umm you... why read bills, that's far too much work to hold people acocuntable and stuff...

Both parties should be hung~

We had to rush the bill through and pass it...it was an emergency...the sky was falling...and see what a great job they did...the sky didn't fall

Hmmm that sounded like a previous bill....

Bail outs...hurry quick...the sky is falling....oh wait...umm ya...why read bills, thats far too much work to hold people acocuntable and stuff...

Both parties should be hung~

Thus the Tea Party popularity and Libertarian registration going up.

And I thought you guys had this debate already, well as they say, I guess it isn't over till the fat lady sings

Thus the Tea Party popularity and Libertarian registration going up.

I wish the tea party were a real independent movement, with the Sarah Palin and super conservatives running to jump on board, it looks more like the right wing of the republican party's baby now. Sadly.

If it were a truly fiscally conservative, yet socially liberal/libertarian group I would be all for it!

Personally, I couldn't care less who marries who or who sleeps with who... I do care who gives My tax money to AIG, Goldman and the like without reading the damn bill... and then tries to convince me that as bad as it is, it would have been so much worse if we hadn't... ya? How do we know that? UGH... thats what I thought the experts... umm you... those same experts who got us in trouble in the first place... great advice... not!

and then tries to convince me that as bad as it is, it would have been so much worse if we hadn't...ya? how do we know that? UGH....thats what I thought the experts...umm ya.Hello Mr. President adthern:

Let me see. YOUR Treasury Secretary, and YOUR head of the Federal Reserve visited you and told you that if you DIDN'T do this, the country would spiral into a depression WORSE than the '30's. And, you're going to do what??

I know EXACTLY what you're going to do. So do you.

excon

If it were a truly fiscally conservative, yet socially liberal/libertarian group I would be all for it!

Well , narrow the parameters enough and you can have a movement of one.

Truth be told ,it was those rabid rightwingers;and "super conservatives " in the Republican Congressional caucus who did oppose the TARP and bailouts from the beginning.

Speaking of it being "all how you look at it," Pelosi sees Obamacare as an 'entrepreneurial' opportunity to quit your job (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/65950) and let some other entrepreneurial individuals pay for your health care while you pursue your passion.


“We see it as an entrepreneurial bill,” Pelosi said, “a bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative and be a musician or whatever, you can leave your work, focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations because you will have health care.”

In other words, the Democrats really do aspire to be just like Greece.

Strangely enough, I wouldn't. First, this was a policy that started under bush and was continued under obama.

While I am all for putitng really smart people in their fields into key positions to advise, I am not going to just blindly follow their advise. There were plenty of people who were outraged at the idea of handing over money to the banks.

And even if I did, I would certainly have put some strings on the money, I mean for gods sake they put strings on everything.

Well , narrow the parameters enough and you can have a movement of one.

Truth be told ,it was those rabid rightwingers;and "super conservatives " in the Republican Congressional caucus who did oppose the TARP and bailouts from the beginning.

I don't think I am narrowing the parameters to a party of one, I think the vast majority of people who fall in the middle would absolutely support someone who was very much tight fisted with taxpayer money, yet believed in keeping the gov's hands off our personal lives.

Tom, you can't seriously say that you think the Feds should make the decisions on who sleeps with who, who works where, and who lives where do you? When it comes to morality, that's between a person and his god/s.

No I don't think the majority of the people have the libertarian inclinations you think they do . If they did the Libertarian efforts would draw more than single digits in elections.

You simplify the conservative position into strawmen [you can't seriously say that you think the Feds should make the decisions on who sleeps with who, who works where, and who lives where do you? ]. (local zoning laws answers 2 of these 3 points right off the bat )
There wasn't a founder who thought our system would work in a society without morals.
I think the people of the country have a moral standard based in tradition that they would like their government to recognize and support in law .

No I don't think the majority of the people have the libertarian inclinations you think they do . If they did the Libertarian efforts would draw more than single digits in elections.

Well, the libertarian candidates and the lib party tend to be extremely conservative and include a lot of religious/moral elements and are not the socially libertarian ideals I mentioned.

You simplify the conservative position into strawmen [you can't seriously say that you think the Feds should make the decisions on who sleeps with who, who works where, and who lives where do you? ]. (local zoning laws answers 2 of these 3 points right off the bat )

I am not sure what you mean by the "local zoning laws..." comment, but I will make clear I was talking about the federal gov not state and local govs.

There wasn't a founder who thought our system would work in a society without morals.

I think Ben Franklin and T Jefferson might disagree.

I think the people of the country have a moral standard based in tradition that they would like their government to recognize and support in law .

You may feel that way, however I don't believe that most voters do, additionally the whole point of the "free exercise" and "Establishment" clauses was to keep religion out of Gov and Gov out of Religion.

Though, I don't particularly care about phrases that were characteristic of the time "under God"; " so help you god" etc... I am more concerned with religious morals being adopted by the federal Gov.

Morals in the sense of thou shalt not kill=criminal murder; of course no one has an issue with things like that, but when you are taking parts of the bible and trying to adopt them into the US code thats another issue.

Resonse to Obamacare debate that drifted over to the border op:

No you can't keep your own plan ;and the President knew this would happen
Scott Gottlieb: No, You Can't Keep Your Health Plan - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703315404575250264210294510.html)

The goal always was to move the country towards a universal single payer system ;and like good Fabians, the Obots decided to mask language of comprehensive reform into what was in fact an incremental steps towards that goal . Obamacare will be revised and revised again ;and each time it will be on the pretext of fixing flaws in the last law while they move the goal post 3 yards and a cloud of dust at a time.

The goal always was to move the country towards a universal single payer system ;and like good Fabians, the Obots decided to mask language of comprehensive reform into what was in fact an incremental steps towards that goal . Obamacare will be revised and revised again ;and each time it will be on the pretext of fixing flaws in the last law while they move the goal post 3 yards and a cloud of dust at a time.Hello again, tom:

Each incremental step along the way has to happen in congress, where you have representatives who vote the way you want them to. Sometimes, when you lose an election, you don't have enough votes to do much, so all that's left is complaining.

When these changes come up, if you have the votes, defeat them. Otherwise, that's the American lawmaking process at work.

excon

Yeah yeah but how many lawmakers would vote for the pig in a poke?
The problem is when the government starts voting entitlements with someone else's money it becomes very difficult to roll back . As an example ;we already know
Social security is a ponzi scheme. But try to reform it and everyone talks about "the third rail " of American politics as if it is sancrosanct. Why ? Because people were sold a bill of goods and were suckered into believing that an additional tax on their income was an insurance policy.

yeah yeah but how many lawmakers would vote for the pig in a poke?Hello again, tom:

Like the Patriot Act?? All of 'em. Talk about a bill of goods...

excon

Ex the Patriot Act has an expiration date ,and in fact ,has already come up for a revote.

Entitlements quickly become the third rail of American politics where they become engraved in stone and it becomes unthinkable to even modestly reform them .

That is why the Obot/Fabians know that they can succeed with these small incrimental changes.

But the problem with that mentality is soon you become another Greece.

But the problem with that mentality is soon you become another Greece.

Add another chapter of "pass it to find out what's in it." This time it's an additional day's worth of paperwork per quarter to buy gasoline.

Stealth IRS campaign mandates millions of new 1099 tax forms - May. 21, 2010 (http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/21/smallbusiness/1099_deluge/index.htm?source=cnn_bin&hpt=Sbin)

Hello again,

I don't know. Didn't we just see a post from you guys about the NJ governor who isn't going to raise taxes even though his state is broke. He's trying to be Greece too.

excon

Hello agian,

I dunno. Didn't we just see a post from you guys about the NJ governor who isn't going to raise taxes even though his state is broke. He's trying to be Greece too.

excon

Hope he does it the resposible way - stop spending money he doesn't have. Kind of a TEA party idea.

Hope he does it the resposible way - stop spending money he doesn't have. Kind of a TEA party idea.Hello again, Cats:

I didn't see anything about him stopping spending... All I saw was that he's not going to raise taxes... That's the easy part, though. It gets you guys all stirred up. But, let's see how many services he cuts.

excon

Hello agian, Cats:

I didn't see anything about him stopping spending... All I saw was that he's not gonna raise taxes.... That's the easy part, though. It gets you guys all stirred up. But, let's see how many services he cuts.

excon

Hi, Ex.

Yes, let's.

Maybe a good place to start would be the mob payoffs. This is Jersey, after all. How about government cars, pension calculations based on overtime, and maybe salary caps?

Hello Wingers:

Let me ask you this. Most of you are staunch supporters of Israel. Because WE, the US taxpayer fund the Israeli military, to the tune of billions of $$$'s, the Israeli government has enough money left over to provide universal health coverage for all their citizens...

So, in effect, we're paying for every Israeli citizens health care. Hmmm. Why would you do that, but you're not willing to pay for your OWN citizens health care? You like Jews that much?

I'm just saying.

excon

Hello Wingers:

Lemme ask you this. Most of you are staunch supporters of Israel. Because WE, the US taxpayer fund the Israeli military, to the tune of billions of $$$'s, the Israeli government has enough money left over to provide universal health coverage for all their citizens...

So, in effect, we're paying for every Israeli citizens health care. Hmmm. Why would you do that, but you're not willing to pay for your OWN citizens health care? You like Jews that much?

I'm just sayin.

excon

I like having a major military base in Asia Minor, especially since it has it's own serious military (Ranked right behind our 3rd ID and Brit SAS Division by Jane's).

Hello again, Cats:

Me too. But, this is one of those things that make you go, hmmmm.

excon

Hello again, Cats:

Me too. But, this is one of those things that make you go, hmmmm.

excon

Okay. Hmmmm.

editors at Cornell University Press write:

“In its early years, Israel’s dominant ideology led to public provision of health care for all Jewish citizens-regardless of their age, income, or ability to pay. However, the system has shifted in recent decades, becoming increasingly privatized and market-based. In a familiar paradox, the wealthy, the young, and the healthy have relatively easy access to health care, and the poor, the old, and the very sick confront increasing obstacles to medical treatment.

New book examines Israeli health care system - PNHP's Official Blog (http://pnhp.org/blog/2010/01/07/new-book-examines-israeli-health-care-system/)

Hmmm. Since we're humming, here's something else that should make you go hmmm...

Soaring costs force Canada to reassess health model (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100531/hl_nm/us_health_3)

Just a reminder or two...

Health overhaul may mean longer ER waits, crowding
(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100702/ap_on_he_me/us_med_er_crowding)

CHICAGO – Emergency rooms, the only choice for patients who can't find care elsewhere, may grow even more crowded with longer wait times under the nation's new health law.

Really? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.


That might come as a surprise to those who thought getting 32 million more people covered by health insurance would ease ER crowding. It would seem these patients would be able to get routine health care by visiting a doctor's office, as most of the insured do.

Who's surprised? Raise your hand!


But it's not that simple. Consider:

_There's already a shortage of front-line family physicians in some places and experts think that will get worse.

_People without insurance aren't the ones filling up the nation's emergency rooms. Far from it. The uninsured are no more likely to use ERs than people with private insurance, perhaps because they're wary of huge bills.

_The biggest users of emergency rooms by far are Medicaid recipients. And the new health insurance law will increase their ranks by about 16 million. Medicaid is the state and federal program for low-income families and the disabled. And many family doctors limit the number of Medicaid patients they take because of low government reimbursements.

More crowded ER's, longer waits, a shortage of doctors, doctors opting out of treating Medicaid patients... gee, haven't you heard that warning before?

!



More crowded ER's, longer waits, a shortage of doctors, doctors opting out of treating Medicaid patients ... gee, haven't you heard that warning before?

Welcome to the real world, or is that the third world?

Hello again, Steve:

-----------------------
"People without insurance aren't the ones filling up the nation's emergency rooms. Far from it. The uninsured are no more likely to use ERs than people with private insurance, perhaps because they're wary of huge bills.

_The biggest users of emergency rooms by far are Medicaid recipients. And the new health insurance law will increase their ranks by about 16 million."

----------------------
Sounds like rank speculation to me. I'm surprised he didn't predict a death panel. The law isn't fully in effect yet. The guy you quoted (whomever he is) doesn't know what's going to happen. He sounds like Sarah Palin. Actually, he sounds SMARTER than Sarah Palin.

excon

-----------------------
"People without insurance aren't the ones filling up the nation's emergency rooms. Far from it. The uninsured are no more likely to use ERs than people with private insurance, perhaps because they're wary of huge bills.

_The biggest users of emergency rooms by far are Medicaid recipients. And the new health insurance law will increase their ranks by about 16 million."

----------------------
Sounds like rank speculation to me. I'm surprised he didn't predict a death panel. The law isn't fully in effect yet. The guy you quoted (whomever he is) doesn't know what's going to happen. He sounds like Sarah Palin. Actually, he sounds SMARTER than Sarah Palin.

"The guy" is CARLA K. JOHNSON, AP Medical Writer. "The guy" cited plenty of evidence that I welcome you to disprove. Have at it.

Hello again, Steve:

I didn't see ANY evidence - just talk. When the law is fully implemented, I'll disprove anything you like. But, let's start with this. End of life counseling is NOT a death panel, and I don't care what CARLA says about it.

excon

Um, you cited some of it. Here's an easy to read list:


There's already a shortage of front-line family physicians in some places and experts think that will get worse.

People without insurance aren't the ones filling up the nation's emergency rooms.

The biggest users of emergency rooms by far are Medicaid recipients.

the new health insurance law will increase their ranks by about 16 million.

many family doctors limit the number of Medicaid patients they take because of low government reimbursements.

ERs are already crowded

Kellermann and other experts point to Massachusetts, the model for federal health overhaul...Reports from the state find ER visits continuing to rise since the law passed — contrary to hopes of its backers who reasoned that expanding coverage would give many people access to doctors offices.

Massachusetts reported a 7 percent increase in ER visits between 2005 and 2007. A more recent estimate drawn from Boston area hospitals showed an ER visit increase of 4 percent from 2006 to 2008

"They're coming to the emergency department because they don't have access to alternatives."

Crowding and long waits have plagued U.S. emergency departments for years. A 2009 report by the Government Accountability Office, Congress' investigative arm, found ER patients who should have been seen immediately waited nearly a half-hour.


That's what you call evidence, and it wasn't from some conservative blog. I welcome you to disprove it... with facts, not rhetoric.