Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Wading through health care bill

Whenever adriana71 would give her opinion on iReport.com and elsewhere supporting President Obama’s health care proposals, she kept getting asked the same question over and over again: “Did you read the bill?” She soon decided that she didn’t want to know what people thought the bill said; she wanted to find out for herself what it said.


So last night the stay-at-home mom, who often shares her strong views on political issues, sat down and started reading. When she reached page 150, she decided to post a video to iReport.com. She continued reading through the night and got up to page 450 (out of 1,015 pages).


From her understanding of what she read so far, adriana71 felt that many things she had heard about health care reform, including things she had heard from those in Congress, were not reflected in the bill. “You don’t craft legislation by intimidation or fear,” she said, adding that this was not the way for a new American system to be formed.


Are you reading the bill as well? If so, share your thoughts on video. And in the meantime, watch adriana71’s full video here.

UPDATE: infoaddict plans to read through the bill as well.

236 Comments
August 12, 2009
Click to view curiouser's profile

Where did you find the bill...I would like to read it too

August 12, 2009
Click to view USABeard's profile

at least someone is reading the bill.  Tell us if it says anything about Socialism.  Most of the morons I'm running into keep bringing this up.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Chooch0253's profile

You can find the pdf of the Proposal here:

 

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf

 

Fastest place to download the proposal I found

August 12, 2009
Click to view RobT1965's profile
August 12, 2009
Click to view Chooch0253's profile

USABEARD you are not the only one that is running into the "socialist" stigma. It comes from the terminology of single-payer system. There is an assumption by many that the proposed reform if enacted, will lead to the U.S. Government becoming the single-payer in relationship to health care insurance, medical providers, and those enrolled. It is assumed that the U.S. government would collect the funds and disperse them accordingly. To some this means a socialist take over. If there were any basis in fact to this claim, I would think they would be saying the same thing about the Internal Revenue Service. It works on the same principle. Each entity, be it an individual or a company that pays taxes, pay them to the IRS (not counting states). The IRS also disburses those funds thru refunds. Does that make it a "socialist" system? It's purely hype and paranoia.

August 12, 2009
Click to view atlnative's profile
August 12, 2009
Click to view Mungles's profile

TO USABeard:

 

since you say morons are claiming this is socialism....let's look at the definition of socialism:

 

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy

 

So when the government controls the means for producing and distributing health care, is this not at least a step towards socialism.

 

In a capitalist society, which I prefer, private enterprise would SOLELY control the cost of health care.

 

Our problem right now is that we have private and governmental controls which leads to wastefull use of resouces.  Another problem is the standard of care which Americans expect.  If you expect the best coverage, you have to pay for it.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Mungles's profile

And not to Chooch....

 

The IRS collects taxes for the daily operations of the government.  Even pure capitalist societies collect taxes.  Your example of the IRS is a stretch.  You can join your conterparts as a spreader of hype.

August 12, 2009
Click to view carsonroy's profile

I have been reading the, as well.  I have also been reading emails that bring interpretations of certain aspects of the bill and challenging the content.  I agree, with 4 forms of the bill out there, time and balanced consideration, will bring us a good health care reform bill.  People are afraid because this came so quickly and forcefully bu the Obama Administration.  Right now what content that is out there isn't as transparent as it could be.  Many of the baby boomers are challenging this because they grew up in a world that brought double messages.....the Vietnam war which brought protests and a draft that took away choices, the Nixon administration and its cover-ups, the art of politics became dangerously deceptive over the year, the Iraq War is said to have been created with deception, etc.  This generation has reason to be concerned, but I am also afraid there are people out there feeding on this concern.  They, along with other generation don't want more stuff just dumped on them.  We need clear information so there can be good choices.  Some of the bill is very clear and some of it is like walking in a fog.  Much of what I read is very similar to how Medicare and Medicaid is already run and that isn't always cost effective.  I have a question as to whether it is going to be an administrative or regulatory program or maybe a bit of both.  I think we are just asking for clarity and choice.

Margaret

August 12, 2009
Click to view MillieBea's profile

Obama campaigned on the notion that the people should get what their taxes pay for- a government that repsonds to them.  Yet, this health care bill- the most personal of all subjects- no one in the Administration or the Congress seems to really interested in learning from the constituency- that we want to stop our insurance companies from denying the fisrst of each claim as a matter of SOP- requiring us to appeal.  That we want them to fix the VA and get the fraud out of Medicare before we will really look at a Public Insurance to replace the bad private policy.  My coverage is crushing to navigate past the simplest things- but at least I do not have to go to providers who could potentially give me HIV or Hepatitis when I thought I was just getting a colonoscopy.  Why is dental care- at leat El-Hi, not included in the public policy?  Arlen Specter yelled at a woman yesterday who was merely working off of information she had received- had the Administration and the Democrats put out their own information instead of the beautiful generalities of the promised land in the future- he could have saved himself an argument.  The administration will now have to back away from some potentially important areas of the overall legislation because they did not work the system properly the first time. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view jbroui42's profile

• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!

• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!

• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there

will be no appeals process)

• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.

• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Health card.

• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for

electronic funds transfer.

• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU,

UAW and ACORN)

• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.

• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control

of private plans)

• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens

• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run

Health Care plan.

• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.

• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government

monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.

• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.

• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.

• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.

• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8%

tax on payroll

• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays

a 2 to 6% tax on payroll

• Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be

taxed 2.5% of income.

• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).

• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL

American financial and personal records.

• Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.

• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."

• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)

• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.

• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.

• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.

• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!

• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.

• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be

penalized by the government.

• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!

• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.

• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.

• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.

• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.

• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.

• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).

• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?

• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory.

Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.

• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.

• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.

• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates.

This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.

• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.

• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.

• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.

August 12, 2009
Click to view greenflag90's profile

I'm close to done with this thing, after more than a week.  The biggest problem is having to go look at the other U.S. laws/codes, etc to see what this bill refers back to.  The IRS is going to have access to YOUR bank account.  This IS socialist or worse.  Just reading this bill for reading's sake will not give you much but legal mumbo jumbo.  This bill is a crafty way to simply take your CHOICE away, and we know how liberals are about CHOICE, huh??

August 12, 2009
Click to view Chooch0253's profile

The major objections to health care (insurance) reform that I encounter is from those that believe they will have no choice to continue an existing plan they are now enrolled in, and will be forced to "accept" government insurance. This they believe is an intrusion to their to lives by the government. It's pure nonsense because there are rules to protect the consumer from that happening.  Of course if you tell someone these things they still don't believe it. Sec 102 in the proposal.

August 12, 2009
Click to view carsonroy's profile

I have seen this list via email as well.  I went through each interpretation list and found some interpretations to be faulty, yet some were okay.  This is the kind of information that creates serious unrest.  How many people actually take the time to go through the list and challenge what they see or do they read the information and pass it on in fear creatinghalf truth propaganda.

August 12, 2009
Click to view carsonroy's profile

I am just wondering if this health care reform bill is a way to get more regulation of the health insurance industry except now the burden is placed on the people and not the actual health insurers.  It seem there was no way to reach the health insurers due to lobbyists and the almighty dollar, but by shifting the burden to the people it may be one way to create a stronger regulatory system.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Chooch0253's profile

jbroui42 : That is a pretty large cut and paste operation there with a whole lot of opinion. Not much fact but a whole bunch of opinion. You must have been preparing that for weeks. How long have you been a member of ACORN. You mention them enough times its like free advertisement. You must be fond of them.

August 12, 2009
Click to view mkulacz's profile

This is not socialism.

 

It is government takeover of a major US industry, where the government will decide who gets what healthcare, the government will redistribute money, the government will control basically everything related to healthcare.

 

Just because the government will control everything, that doesnt mean its socialism.

 

Of course, now with the US government offering free health care, every US corporation will drop health care coverage and ultimately we will all be on government health care. The socialists will not admit the OBVIOUS implications of their work. Of course the bill doesnt say everyone will be forced to US health care. However.. that is what WILL happen. Sort of like how welfare keeps people poor. Sort of like how corn subsidies lead to HFCS which lead to obesity. Sort of like every other well intended government program that backfires and burns us all.

August 12, 2009
Click to view cfh's profile
cfh

Regarding the socialism discussion...America is not a purely capitalist state; nor is it a Socialistic state. We have a complex mix of the two. If we operated on purely capitalistic principles, unregulated by government, only the strong would survive--reminiscent of feudal societies. Our government redistributes the wealth through social services. As a caring society, we have agreed that the weak should be helped by the strong. I appreciate living in a society that cares for its members. Unless we are willing to do that ourselves (as the Amish do), we are dependent on government to provide needed services.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Stratford's profile

This is a typical use of a word to scare people who believe people who sound like they know what they are talking about instead of explaining the detail of the comments.

 

I am a Canadian, have lived with our Health Care system for 58years and NEVER has it been referred to as 'socialist'. Warts and all, I feel it is THE best system for everyone. I have never been denied care, never asked to decide on good care versus bad care because of what my insurance said I could or could not do. I have always felt that the level of care was the best regardless of my income. That doesn't even factor into it.

 

Health Care is expensive because we demand the best when, sometimes, something less expensive would do as well. We waste more on this continent regardless of what system we're talking about. Take a look where the real power is and you'll find  out where the waste really comes from and I ain't talking about the government either!

 

I have been hospitalized and all care provided, never bankrupted by an operation or illness and not 'nickel and dimed' for aspirin or a bandaid either!

 

When you have to ask if you have the money before you take yourself, your child or your parent toemergency or a health care provider, that is a sad state of affairs for the richest country in the world. The more that happens, the less healthy the person becomes and ERs get overloaded. FORGET User fees, too - they don't work. I'll save you on that ineffective idea!

 

What about your fellow citizens who don't have benefits at work> tough-toodles to them? What about he person who can't or won't leave a job because their kids may have benefits discontinued between the change of job?? Pretty sad. You won't see any of that here.

 

And those 'Committees or Panels' that tell people who lives and who dies don't exist either. Enough of the fear-mongering.

 

As a Canadian watching this 'battle' being waged, this will be the American downfall before any other topic is.

If what exists currently is so great, why are Americans less healthy than other countries? why the booming obesity epidemic? what about your cancer rates? waaay too many C-sections?

 

Let's look at the best of a number of systems and work toward something rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater...stay calm, folks - this won't happen overnight! Let calmer heads prevail and I wish you the best!

 

Stay healthy,

Concerned Canadian

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view MelissaF's profile

Here's the long and short of it all:

 

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-306371

August 12, 2009
Click to view arise23's profile

Hey jbroui42

Did you actually read that or did you just post that from somewhere else??? Now I am interested and might just see if your correct... I highly dought thats what is says and alot of what you posted was interpretation (the whole READ: X Y or Z). Hopefully others won't just listen to whats posted online by a faceless individual.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view ooshie's profile

Yes Bungles (oops, Mungles), let's rid ourselves of anything smacking of socialism!  Here's just a beginning of a list of things to axe and let the free market take over:

 

1. All govt owned roads (you can drive to work on the private roads of your choice).

2. All state universities (you can go to Harvard, Princeton or Bob Jones instead, at least the BCS football issue would disappear)

3. the National Weather Service (next time Katrina hits, lick your finger and put it to the wind to assess strike probability, its all about individual responsibility afterall)

4.  Yellowstone National Park (my backyard is better anyway)

5.  The US Armed Forces (private militias motivated by market-determined salaries would be more efficient at protecting us from the bad guys).

6. Government supported health care.

 

All of these things (and others!)provide economic services and value that the free market is better suited to handle.  Death to socialism.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Mungles's profile

i agree cfh with your analysis.  as I hope most people as yourself understand, the difference between the two is measured in steps.  Some people, including myself, fear that this kind of health care reform is a STEP towards socialism and will be a bloated beuracracy in 20 years like all other government programs.  Because I have that fear does not make me a moron or ill-informed as USAbeard would like you to believe. 

 

Why not limit mal-practice claims to bring down insurance cost?  This would help as well.  Who needs 200 million dollars if a family member is killed in a malpractice suit?  Why don't we all insist that members of congress use this plan with no option for them to buy a private plan?  This would make them think twice on what goes in.  There has to be some good middle ground choices for all Americans.

August 12, 2009
Click to view mumbojumbo's profile

Just to be clear on the "Health bill issue", please be advised that it is in the proposal and framing stage.  It is not a bill.  What everyone is reading, hearing, making up etc. are considerations.  I am simply amazed listening to town hall people and blogers alike who truly don't have a clear understanding of how a bill becomes a law and the working of the Constitution itself.

It's fascinating that 18% of Americans believe the Sun revolves around the Earth. Looks like our education system needs work as soon as possible.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Mungles's profile

ok ooshie.  once again, i am just pointing out that taxes have to be collected for the daily operations of the government.  read chooch's previous blog and you will understand what I was talking about.  another example of taking words out of context.  thanks for not reading the whole blog before spouting off.

August 12, 2009
Click to view jbroui42's profile

 

One example of "Big Brother" in action:

 

Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.

 

‘‘(C) PROHIBITION ON EXPANSION OF FA22

CILITY CAPACITY.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), the number of operating rooms, procedure rooms, or beds of the hospital at any time on or after the date of the enactment of

1 this subsection are no greater than the number

2 of operating rooms, procedure rooms, or beds,

3 respectively, as of such date.

August 12, 2009
Click to view jobhelp's profile

http://www.homeofthefree.info for real health care options.

August 12, 2009
Click to view kell010's profile

jbroui42

 

Look at the section in its entirety. Pg 58 you claim 

"Every person will be issued a National ID Health card."

 

My version reads exactly

‘‘(D) enable the real-time (or near real

time) determination of an individual’s financial

7 responsibility at the point of service and, to the

8 extent possible, prior to service, including

9 whether the individual is eligible for a specific

10 service with a specific physician at a specific fa1

cility, which may include utilization of a ma

chine-readable health plan beneficiary identi

fication card;"

 

"which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card"

 

Now its my turn to read into it.

 

It sounds to me like you would be issued a card with exactly what you are eligible for so there will not be miscommunication with insurance companies and lengthy phone calls. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view RoadKillz's profile

WOW!  jbroui42... you wear funny glasses!

August 12, 2009
Click to view BostonDan's profile

"Just because the government will control everything, that doesnt mean its socialism."  Yep, that's called totalitarianism.

Obama and his Congressional leaders could defuse this whole issue right now by promising to have a 30 day "reading and discussion" period between a "final version" and a vote.  This would give constituents time to read it, try to understand it, and tell their reps and senators what they think of it.

By trying to ram this through (similiar to the stimulus bill..and we will pay a HUGE price for that one) before the Congressional break, Congress and the President just raised more suspcicions and distrust.  Rightly so.

More suspcions and distrust arise when you produce a 1000 page document with ambiguities all over the place, that, according to some of our elected officials, takes a lawyer to understand.  That's a great recipe for disaster along the lines of unintended consequences.

 

I suspect a lot of the debate is between those who are True Believers In Government and those who are skeptical of centralized government monopolies, of private monopolies, and of government in general.

 

I heard a great quote years ago:  "Government is Greedy, both for Power and Money".  Give me less government run programs, and more cutthroat competition with government's role that of refereee to insure free markets and fair competition. 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view notsilent's profile

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm

is a good site to not only download the bill but the comparisons as well.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view jbroui42's profile

Here is an even better one (Remember 1984):

 

Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Health card.

 

‘‘(D) enable the real-time (or near realtime) determination of an individual’s financial

responsibility at the point of service and, to the

extent possible, prior to service, including

whether the individual is eligible for a specific

service with a specific physician at a specific fa11

cility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card

August 12, 2009
Click to view DaDan's profile

There was an incorrect analogy between the IRS and the takeover of our nathions healthcare. Health care is an industry. It is a business. It is not a service or branch of the government.

August 12, 2009

nice, I printed up the bill just yesterday for the same reasons (mine is a thick little pocket version that I will have at my side until this bill is put to a vote). I am sick of the opposition falling back on "have you read the bill?" - I am currently reading the bill as well. I was actually putting together an ireport hopefully to inspire others to read for themselves. Good Job, Hanks, for posting this. adrianna71 - rockin the boat, time to fight fire with fire, eh? Cheers!

August 12, 2009
Click to view ndacboss's profile

Simply look at page 5 line 9: 9 (C) includes sliding scale affordability

10 credits; and....

 

this pertains to premiums and payouts. It means that some folks will pay less than others. Marxism. It means that some folks will be subsidizing the costs of others.

 

http://www.federalbudget.com

August 12, 2009
Click to view ooshie's profile

 

Mungles, I think you and are close to agreement.  I've slightly altered your previous post by changing "controls" to "supports" and inserted my earlier list.  Note that some things in my list are in fact "controlled" rather than simply supported.  Still, I think I'm with you on this.

 

"So when the government 'supports' the means for producing and distributing 'transportation networks, university education, weather information, recreation areas, and the military' is this not at least a step towards socialism."

 

It sounds to me like it is.

 

 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view timetoread's profile

Ideally, the government would back health care provided to US citizens.  This is not the case.  The government is making an attempt to allow every citizen (unfortunately it includes documented non citizens) to have insurance that will allow them health care regardless of their needs.  The government is attempting to standardize and provide more stability to a process bogged down in codes, chaos and inflated costs.  When Clinton looked at the health care industry, they quietly maintained their costs, but when the spot light was off them, premiums jumped as much as 50%.  The industry does not police itself, only counts its profits. I applaud our government in the attempt to relieve and protect the US citizens from fraud, waste and abuse inflicted by the current health care industry.  Their greed should not cost the life of an individual.  I do not see this as socialism. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view ndacboss's profile

jbroui42, your quote from page 58 has Marxism written all over it. It is basically the definition of Marxism.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Steve51's profile

jbroui42

 

Why would you misrepresent what we can obvioulsy look up and read.  Page 318 and the subsequent paragraph (2) are about containing costs.  Evidently you do not want to contain costs of healthcare.  Remember it is Big Brother in "1984" that misrepresented facts and distorted data to force people to it's will.  That is the exact thing that you are doing.  You probably don't believe that Obama was born in the U.S. either.

August 12, 2009
Click to view nathanm412's profile

Hi jbroui42:

I read through your list and compared it to the actual bill. Most of the items in the list are phrases picked out of context and twisted. The rest is unsubstantiated opinion. It's this kind of fear-mongering that will lose it for anyone who might have a legitimate problem with the bill.

Some of the language provided in the bill enforces a minimum set of coverages to protect people from other insurance companies dropping them as soon as they file a claim. The majority of the rest provides for the government to create a public alternative policy that people can join if they so desire.

 

Everybody's worse case scenario is the thought of people abandoning their current insurer which will leave the government as the only choice. If everyone leaves their current insurer for the government plan, that was a matter of choice. It's true that the insurance companies will have to compete with a policy that has helping people higher on it's priority list than making money. I don't see a problem with any of this. If you don't want to be on the government plan, you still have a choice.

 

Page 26-

"(3) CONTINUATION OF OFFERING OF SEPARATE EXCEPTED BENEFITS COVERAGE.

—Nothing in this division shall be construed as affecting the offering of health benefits in the form of excepted benefits (described in section 102(b)(1)(B)(ii)) if such benefits are offered under a separate policy, contract, or certificate of insurance."

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view ndacboss's profile

The healthcare bill is still a moving target. It's not even out of committee in the House and we see numerous problems of complexities and conflicts.

 

We haven't seen the Senate version.

 

Whatever the compromise, it will be a disaster of conflicts and more complexities.

 

Ask the President if he'll agree to give us (the U. S. Citizens) 30 days to read the final bill and comment before he rejects or signs. Ask us if he'll give us an official web site to post comments (like this would really work).

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view jbroui42's profile

Anyone out there with special needs children?  Make sure you know the limited period you can get coverage for your special needs child...

 

SEC. 1176. LIMITATION ON ENROLLMENT OUTSIDE OPEN

ENROLLMENT PERIOD OF INDIVIDUALS INTO

CHRONIC CARE SPECIALIZED MA PLANS FOR

SPECIAL NEEDS INDIVIDUALS.

August 12, 2009
Click to view LPLT's profile

jbroui42, every single item on your list (clearly not based on your own reading of the bill) has been debunked time and again. To put it simply, these statements are WRONG!!!

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

WOW, I can't believe what I am reading.  It is very obvious who, no matter what, will not budge on their opinion.  What is the point of having a debate (which is designed to allow all voices to shape a law/bill) when people have already made up their mind on what is good/evil, right/wrong or which political side you are on.  I live in Canada, and I listen to the US news all the time and I hear about how people in Canada have to wait for their health care, I even heard a Canadian telling some horror story about Canadian Health Care justifying her move to the US.  Just to clear some this up.....

 

1) If I break my arm today, I will get x-rays and a cast in about 2-4 hours and cost nothing in Toronto, largest city in Canada.  What about in the US, because I don't know.

 

2) If I want my Medication ect paid for, I need a health plan (yes in Canada we need health plans as well) and these health plans are run my private companies my Sunlife and other publically traded companies.

 

3) If I want a private room in a hospital, I must pay for it if I don't have my own coverage.

 

4) My health Premiums for a great plan costs me $15 per month, so when I needed my wisdom teeth out the insurance company covered 50% of it as it is not covered under the standard Canadian Coverage.

 

My point is, please please please, get the facts, I LOVE America and can't stand to see the country being torn apart like this, weather it be from actual fears or people telling other people 1/2 truths or only the info to push their own view.  It is sad.  

 

When the law makers have finished their chess game, read the info and for the love of America do it with an open mind.

 

Thank you for your time.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view timetoread's profile

Jbroui42,

  A nice conservative "the sky is falling" spin on the bill.  This is how fires get stoked.  For example there is no mention in this bill of a mandatory "National ID health card".

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view drmammal's profile

I am concered about the post by jbroui42 and how many of you are taking his/her comments to heart. Most of the statements provided are taken totally out of context.  They are summaries of a single line, not even a complete sentence, on a page without any context.  For example, on Page 30 yes they will determine what is covered, anyone who has health coverage has a book or a website that they have access to that tells you what's covered and what's not (e.g., no payment for boob-jobs, but breast reconstruction as a result of cancer or other accident, illness or injury is).  Page 29 rationing, please, the $5,000 and $10,000 are the maximum annual out of pocket expenses not how much they will pay for.  I could easily refute with context every single one of jbroui42's statements and, quite frankly, so could anyone else who actually took the time to read and understand the entire thing.  It is impossible to have a rational and intelligent discussion about any of this if you don't actually READ THE ENTIRE BILL and not cherry-pick and present phrases out of context it or depend on "sound-bites" from any news outlet for your information.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Jefe23's profile

Mungles and Chooch, I think a more clear picture will arise when we take into account what "healthcare" means.  Mungles' definition of Socialism is correct, but I think the definition of "health care" is in question.

 

IF we switched to a single-payer (gov't) health insurance system, then health INSURANCE would be socialized.  Health CARE, however, would still be in the hands of private practices, hospital corporations, pharmeceutical corporations, etc.  When people are throwing the term "socialism" around, they are applying it to health care, when they should be applying it to health insurance.

 

Health insurance is the middle-man who drastically raises the costs for everyone involved, through their expenses and profits, and in return, they spread costs beyond a certain amount (i.e. deductible) around equally to all in the insurance program. In a way, it is a decidedly socialist industry already.

 

What some on the Ultra-Right believe is that the government is proposing to own the hospitals, drug manufacturers, doctor's offices, etc. This is simply far beyond the realm of Limbaughian fantaasy.

August 12, 2009
Click to view ndacboss's profile

Well, now we have seen how much conflict and confusion there is in this particular bill. Whatever compromise becomes the final bill, will be very complex and confusing, with conflicts (ie: which section applies); and more.

 

A bill this size cannot be developed without internal conflict.

 

Resolving the conflicting elements of the subsequent law will keep the legals busy forever. Who's going to pay for that?

August 12, 2009
Click to view jshack's profile

The government already dabbled enough in health care over the last 20 years to completely destroy the system.  This happens through thousands of federal and state laws that keep pharmaceutical companies and healthcare providers "locked in" with no real competition bringing prices down to a realistic level.   Here's the problem...  the medical procedures available to people today are the most complex and costly they've ever been in history.    When you put the artifically high prices aside for a second... there are 2 kinds of people in this country.   There are people who pay enough into the system to cover the cost of the medicine and services they receive and there are those who cannot pay enough to cover the cost of the medicine and services they receive.  The people who can't pay still want their medicine and services  and the people who can pay don't want to pay for the people who can't pay.  Stacking 100 levels of bureaucracy in the middle WILL NOT change this.. in fact history tells us it would be far worse than the current system (which isn't working either... due to the reasons above...not because of the lack of a bunch of bureaucrats collecting paychecks and eventually 30 years of pension to rubber stamp a stack of papers on their desk) 

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

In response to jbroui42. I received an email from a co-worker dated 7/31 with citation of page number and content that was verbatim to your post. The email was authored by a lobbying firm called KMac & Associates, LLC. If you really read the bill you will see that most of what is stated is grossly misrepresented.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Fej's profile
Fej

I too looked at Jbroui42's list.  I randomly picked one point,

 

• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for

electronic funds transfer.

 

compared to:

 

"‘(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in

22 order to allow automated reconciliation with the

23 related health care payment and remittance ad24

vice;"

 

Yes..... we will have EFT capability in our health care system... sorry if this is too much for you to handle but this is 2009.  How foolish to you have to be to think that the entire system should be paper based?  Costing trillions more to run.. so then you could cry about the cost?

 

It is no wonder that you have resorted to acting like a mindless mob in public meetings, yelling and screaming as fools.  Any type of coherent debate would shoot down your silly assertions in seconds.

 

August 12, 2009

www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text - you can comment and discuss line by line here. This is the Rangel, Waxman, Miller, Stark, Pallone, and Andrews version introduced in House as H.R. 3200 - Americas Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009

 

(for those of you looking for some light reading)

August 12, 2009
Click to view AK10708's profile

USABEARD you are an idiot. Socialism is clearly defined when the GOVT expenditure exceeds a certain level of the GDP....if this bill passes and the GOVT expands to a certain point - it will - by definition - be Socialism.

August 12, 2009
Click to view lalieth's profile

Chooch0253: "If there were any basis in fact to this claim, I would think they would be saying the same thing about the Internal Revenue Service. It works on the same principle."

 

Ah, yes, yes indeed it does. Though you are right, the charge is not exactly correct. Socialism is about state ownership. And yeah sure, the goverment has been taking over everything from banks to auto manufacturers, but I think you could make the argument that we're not quite there yet.

 

State seizure of goods for redistribution in order to make everyone equal and eradicate class differences is more like communism.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Fej's profile
Fej

Yes JBroui42, you will need an ID card to use the health care system (yawn).  Just like I have by BCBS ID card now, get over it.  And the page you refer too doesn't even mention ID cards in detail.  You are obviously just regurgitating whatever spam email you are receiving.  Its that type that is easy to convince to enter a public meeting and begin screaming.

August 12, 2009
Click to view jbroui42's profile

Welcome to the Abortion Bailout Bill:

 

Don't Be Deceived: Abortion Mandate NOT Removed from Health Care

There are reports circulating that the abortion mandate has been removed from the health care legislation. I want to be very clear; these reports are simply not accurate. While there was a flurry of activity in the House at the end of last week, I wanted to let you know that there's still very troubling abortion language in all of the versions of the bills being debated.

 

These erroneous reports stem from an amendment that was approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Thursday.  This amendment, authored by pro-abortion Representative Lois Capps (D-CA), is being billed as an abortion compromise, but it is nothing of the sort.  In, fact, it causes more problems than it fixes.  If enacted, it appears the amendment would help to preserve pro-life State laws, but that is where the good news ends. You can read more about this amendment in our memo posted here.

 

Not only would abortion services still be permitted under the amendment, but they would actually be required in many cases.  The amendment would mandate that the public health care plan include abortion, and that abortion coverage be available nationwide.  This is the most overt inclusion of an abortion mandate yet, and would undoubtedly result in taxpayer-subsidizing abortion.

 

Don't be deceived.  The national health care legislation under consideration still includes an abortion mandate.  In fact, it’s gone from a back-door approach to one the clearly states the mandate in the legislation.  The only fix is an explicit exemption of abortion services from the legislation.  And, that's why it is critical for you to stand with us - and put pressure on members of the House during this recess period. 

 

When your Representative returns home, let them know that an abortion mandate in health care is unacceptable.  And, if you haven't done so already, add your name to our petition demanding that Congress enact the legislative remedy needed to keep mandatory abortion coverage from becoming part of our national health care plan.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Blackened144's profile

Stratford:   Im glad you are happy with your healthcare there in Canada.   What you fail to mention is that your government only had to provide care for the 30million Canadians living in the country.   Here in America, we have over 300million citizens, PLUS 30 million illegals.   Please show me a country on this planet that has nationalized health care and that can adequately provide care for 330million people.

August 12, 2009
Click to view drmammal's profile

here is the link to the current Senate version of the health care bill:  http://help.senate.gov/BAI09A84_xml.pdf

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

To Blackened :  I understand your point, but we also only have 30 million people paying taxes so we have less of a pool of money to draw from.  if you make under $100,000 in Canada you pay less then 24% tax.  I would be curious to see what the total tax rate is in the U.S.  It would range from state to state I assume, please correct me if I am wrong. 

 

Also, I doubt non-American citizens will be able to get health care for free, in Canada, if you are not a citizen you pay the normal prices any visitor would.  Once I left my health card expire and had to pay $800 to get in a hospital, once I renewed my card I we given back the money.  Just seems fair.

 

If for some reason it was included that non-americans could access this health care the same way as an american, THAT is what I would be making an issue of.

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

Page 16: SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT

2 COVERAGE.

• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure! This is true. Large companies often self insure their employees. It would be good to know if the company has the financial capacity to self insure its employees.

Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there  TRUE IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be a

panel of medical and other experts to be known as

the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced,

and premium plans. My insurance company has a board that determines what the policy will cover.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Jerry75's profile

Mathematics never lie. The Health Care Reform will ran out of money too fast, my reasons below:

 

 

The administration plans to expend 1 trillion in 10 years.

 

Lets do the math:

 

1. As of now there are around 50 million people uninsured. (Source nchc.org/documents/Kellogg%20General%20Coverage%20Fact%20Sheet%2008-11-2009.pdf)

 

2.There is 1 Trillion dollars for 10 years.

 

3.Lets divide 1 Trillion/50 million that is $20,000 per person in 10 years, therefore is $2,000 per year.

 

4.So $2,000 per year is $153 a month per person.

 

5. Basically $153 per month will be the cap of how much a doctor can spend on a patient to not go over the budget.

 

 

Math never lies. It will be impossible to treat anything with $153 a month per person, unless the doctors do it for free. Also remember I just used 50 million which are the originally uninsured, Im not counting the extra millions of people that the system will eventually cover.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view taytay01's profile

Hello all. As this is such a touchy subject ... I also chose to download and read the proposal. I've not completed it yet, but I have done a search for the word "socialism" and it's various forms. Not ONCE has this word been typed in the proposal. Now I know that some people will be aggressive in the opinion that there is an underlying meaning within the verbiage ... to them, I say READ it for yourself and make up YOUR OWN MIND! People ... lets try to keep things in perspective! How can someone understand what is really being proposed WITHOUT reading it? Only we are responsible for what level of understanding we have on the world around us, and no one else can force us to think a certain way if we are properly informed. READ READ READ!!!!

Taylor

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

Thank you Fej. It seems that jbroui42 did not read the bill for himself/herself. Just spouting opposition talking points

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

Here is what people fail to see. As someone stated there is a cause and effect. They are mandating all employers to provide coverage. A company will still produce there projected profit. Yes we won't see a direct tax but unemployment will increase. Companies will just move more jobs overseas. This will reduce head count for them. More people without jobs. Yet you will get unemployment which is considered taxable income. Your are required to get insurance or get peialized 2.5% income tax but i thought no taxes to people making less than 250. Hmmmm. So now your unemployment take home is less by getting insurance. We also have a 30% doctor shortage. I also know a fair amount of doctors that won't participate. So you might have a pretty card with no where to go. There is a need for some changes but this is too far reaching and too fast especially in this economy.

August 12, 2009
Click to view TammiT's profile

Note to JBROUI42.

 

This would be great if it were TRUE!  Unfortunately, it is NOT!

 

I searched for your "comments" below and found NOTHING, ZIPPO on what you're stating below in the bill or you've carefully reworded or repurposed what the bill states.  You can search the entire 1K pages and find no word "ration", etc.

 

People -- get ahold of yourselves.  READ THE DOCUMENT BEFORE PASSING JUDGEMENT.  This person "jbroui42" is apparently a hack and is only using copy/paste from a right wing email that he got. 

 

      • USE YOUR GOD GIVEN BRAIN AND ACTUALLY DO SOME READING!!***

 

 

 

jbroui42 • Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!

• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!

• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there

will be no appeals process)

• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.

• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Health card.

• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for

electronic funds transfer.

• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU,

UAW and ACORN)

• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.

• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control

of private plans)

• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens

• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run

Health Care plan.

• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.

• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government

monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.

• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.

• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.

• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.

• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8%

tax on payroll

• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays

a 2 to 6% tax on payroll

• Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be

taxed 2.5% of income.

• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).

• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL

American financial and personal records.

• Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.

• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."

• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)

• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.

• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.

• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.

• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!

• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.

• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be

penalized by the government.

• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!

• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.

• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.

• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.

• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.

• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.

• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).

• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?

• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory.

Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.

• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.

• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.

• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates.

This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.

• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.

• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.

• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

Oh those of such simple minds the big bad insurance company of course wasn't this the story with big bad oil companies last year... People give it a rest an average Health insurance company pays out 70% in benefits (that of course is your Doctors bills and other medical needs), 15% for taxes (yes the big bad insurance company pays those too), and about 5-7% for SG&A (Yes they are also required to pay employees, I know it is shame) so that is what 6-10% percent annual profit wow they are big and bad compared to Software industries 20% and Drug companies 17% profit yep bad scary people who make the big bux chaa right wake up people... Know all the facts before blindly following any which way... I was once on a Gov't system it is called Tricare the Military system and it was wretched no recourse for malpactrice and only being treated when approved.  And additionally I really think Canadians need to mind their own biz we don't interfere with your Socialist practices so "Don't Tread on Us"

August 12, 2009
Click to view ELW5149's profile

jbroui42

I looked through the section you referenced on Page 318.  The whole section deals with physician owned hospitals.  It states that if a physician(s) own more than a specified percentage of a hospital, they must report it to the Secretary of health.  This will assist in the prevention and detection of fraud by having a doctor refer you to a hospital for procedures you do not need.  A classic conflict of interest in that he/she can catch you coming and going.

 

Regarding the specific section you pulled, it applies only in the above mentioned situation.  This prevents an hospital expansion resulting from fraudulent procedures because said doctor(s) are referring you to the hospital they own for procedures you may not need.

 

I see nothing wrong with this oversight.

August 12, 2009
Click to view CraigMD's profile

Simpler Solution - Why not use the existing Insurance company infrastructure instead of building a new one?  Use all that govt. cash to subsidize/contract existing insurance companies that want to to provide health care for the currently uninsured.  Standardize the paperwork for those companies that participate to cut costs, and then do your cost-benefit analysis of each company to determine if they can continue or not.  Like awarding a government contract to an existing company or companies.

 

Is anyone aware of what happens to private insurance companies that exist(ed) in countries that provide universal coverage?  They go out of business.  Adding to the ranks of the unemployed and uninsured.  Decreasing tax revenue.  If you pump money into these companies to provide their services to the public, you INCREASE jobs, tax revenue and coverage. Just like they are doing with the car companies now.

 

That way, the 100 million plus who DO have insurance now can keep it, the 50 million or so who don't can choose a company that ALREADY provides the service they want and the gov't can pick up part or all of the tab, and we can concentrate on fixing the already strained Medicare/Medicaid/VA systems.  Hell, offer the Veterans subsidies for nice private insurance - I would be HAPPY for my tax dollars to pay for that.

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

Opionated598 The State of Hawaii mandates companies with employees working over 20 hours a week there are however exceptions. If you look back at Hawaii's unemployment figures we rank among the lowest in the nation. BTW no hospital can refuse an emergency (legally that is) if someone who cannot afford health insurance WE ALL PAY in higher hospital costs.

August 12, 2009
Click to view cufulloit's profile

A worthless proposal from a worthless administration.

 

Four years before these incompetents are ousted .. wish it was sooner.

August 12, 2009
Click to view nevada39's profile

OK, enough..some of you lie because of the abortion thing, (thats called the ends justify the means) so you will lie and cheat to stop the bill.

Some, distort what we really need, just because they HATE Obama and the Dems.

Some just support anything the Dems do.

 

I am a registered independent, make your own choices.

 

We need a goverment option that has no "pre-exsisting" garbage and automatic denial on first claims. I have United healthcare and four children, we are always having to appeal to get anything approved. Yet the CEO makes millions plus stock options on my money, enough. I would like an option to choose from, thank you.

 

I think that anyone complaining who has medicare and is againest the bill should drop medicare or stop whining. Medicare, VA care, fire paramedics, police protection, highways, parks, etc. are all socialism at its best ( not communisim) which people are confused over.

 

United healthcare and all the health companies operate to make the most, spend less, and deny as much as possible, thats a basic business truth in the real world. There will never be a perfect system, but our current system is for profit only and cares not for people at all.

 

I like some things in the bill, dislike others, I hope for seroius talks and enough morons yelling, the louder you yell, the more you know your lying.

August 12, 2009
Click to view FrustratedMI's profile

99.99% of us offering opinions on this issue have not read the bill...of course, it's written in a way that discourages us from reading it.

 

What I would suggest, is that anyone FOR or AGAINST reform (in whatever fashion) read the entire bill...as I plan to do this weekend.

 

Then we need to contact our congresspeople and senators - and SPECIFICALLY discuss what we don't like, understand or require from this bill, or any health care reform.

 

My biggest bone of contention, is why exactly the GOVT has to create this seperate option to compete with for-profit private insuranace? it seems we could invest the funds in already existing insurance companies that would be willing to merge, and become non-profit insurance companies...that could legitimately rival for-profit private insurance.

 

The bottom line most people are willing to understand - concessions will have to be made, they already ARE being made via our private insurance.

 

The complaints about CHOICE - what planet are you living on if you actually think you have choice within your existing insurance?

So - is yours so better and different from mine?

Because my insurers approves everything - not me. My insurer dictates what meds they cover, not me. My insurer dictates what drs I can see, not me. My ins requires my dr refer me for surgeries, tests, ect...not me.

 

Am i missing the boat on the choices I have?

 

And let's not even start with Insurers denying claims, or preventing people from accessing insurance because they are sick...and claiming some previously reported issue wasnt addressed, therefore sorry charlie - your're out of luck. I'm sorry, where is your choice there?

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

Truth : Your business is our "Biz"  do you know how many US companies have Canadian parts, are you stupid enough to think that outside perspectives are not important in a debate.  Because people offer Facts instead of rhetoric you get upset with Canadian, define "Don't Tread on Us"  What vote power do we have in the US, Nothing.  How could we possible TREAD on you"  Very sad.  Period.

 

As I said I love America, what it stands for and the people in it, it makes me sad and discouraged when some people have such a "socialist" view of Canada.

 

So what because our system is different, we have no imput in how the world works, please Truth26 get off your high horse.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

cufullofit

 

You are probably the most intelligent person on this blog I need to get away from these sheeple ASAP!!!

August 12, 2009
Click to view lsamz53's profile

There is no "Bill" as in a single piece of pending legislation.  There are multiple "Bills".  For a side-by-side comparison go here http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm

and click on the side-by-side oomparison pdf of all the competing "Bills".  Once you've done that then you might be a little more educated about the healthcare reform "Bills".

August 12, 2009
Click to view BostonDan's profile

Anyone know how much of today's health care cost is the cost of litigation, and litigation insurance?  Anyone know if health care tort reform is addressed anywhere in the 1000+ pages?

I have not heard anything about this issue, strange.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

SgtSerge82

 

Look They can have their plan is all I am saying... Just because something works well there (which I don't agree with) doesn't mean it is right for us.  As I stated I have experience in US run Healthcare.  Do you? Nope didn't think so!  So I think that given my experience I know a little more on the subject of how the US runs it's current HC system. P.S. I notice you didn't pick apart anything else I said why not some may ask because it is all true you pick out any small detail to make your case and that is pathetic.  Oppose me on actual HC next time buddy.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

Look at Turth26, Attacking his own people for having a debate, so hate filled. 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

SgtSerge82

 

P.S. No high horse here, though I did ride a Camel in the desert once very fun...

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

Well how can you have experience with it, if it does not exist is my only question, and I am not being sarcastic, I would like to know.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

Of course it exists what do you think Congress members, Military members, and Medicare recipients recieve.

August 12, 2009
Click to view jobhelp's profile

http://www.homeofthefree.info for real health care options.

August 12, 2009
Click to view elbegewa's profile

Curioser:

You can find thje full bill at:

http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

 

I've read it and compared it to the comments that Tammit, JBroui42, and others have copied and pasted from other sources.

Almost all of their comments (referenced by them by page number) were either misreadings or deliberate distortions of what the bill actually says ... or taking a few words out of context without regard to the paragraph it was in.

 

Private insurers right now limit ("ration") the healthcare each of their plans cover. The proposed federal plan does, too ... but it leaves open for each of us to chose which of the various plans is best for each of us.

 

There are lots of things about the plan that I like, and lots I dislike. But in general, IMHO it is a reasonable attempt at fixing our broken healthcare system.

August 12, 2009
Click to view 3227SH's profile

I hope nobody is taking jbroui42 seriously. If you don't have time to read the entire bill, you can go to factcheck.org to read the facts about abortion, euthanasia, death panels, and all the other lies being perpetuated by those who have nothing factual or productive to add to the debate. 

 

Then ask yourself, why are these people (mostly Republicans) lying? Its because they are desperately trying to protect the status quo which is to keep control away from the consumer and in the hands of the corporations and special interests. Every criticism they have of Obama's plan (i.e. lack of choices and control) can be directly applied to the current private-based system. FOr example, I am in need of medication that can only be prescribed by a type of doctor I can't see because it is not covered by my private insurance. But the money keeps coming out of my paycheck anyway.

 

Obama is a guy who despite research that suggests we shouldn't privatize our public schools, is a huge supporter of charter-based reform. Sounds like the complete opposite of Socialism to me. Besides, every time someone criticizes the "socialist" Canadian system, a bunch of Canadians post blogs in its defense.

 

Read the facts, think, repeat.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

Truth - If it was a simple as applying what processes they already have, then the bill would be done. 

 

That is what I am trying to say, the proposal is not even done yet and you have decided it will be the same as the 3 you listed.

 

They are trying to re-invent the system, I don't personally think it can be done without costing the US WAY too much money, but it should at least be looked at and debated as an option and then tossed out as too costly.

 

I just find it odd that people are pushing opinions on a plan that does not exist.

August 12, 2009
Click to view GVSULakerFan's profile

Jbroui42-

 

way to go! just using this as another forum to try and scare people into a frenzy... a quick google search of the first sentence of each of your posts leads to regurgitated info that you are just spamming this blog with....

 

example: google your "breakdown" of the bill and the first hit is a verbatim copy on some conservative blog

http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/square/topic_print.php?t=2735

 

how about you come up with your own opinions? or you could just drink the convervative cough syrup a little more...

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

SgtSerge82

 

Actually I would never attack my own people.  I proudly served for the people you say I attack.  And just because I don't agree with HC for all means I am attacking I think not buddy.  For the record I am a Vet and personnally will never have to pay for private insurance if I don't want to because of my service but I choose private because there are options and quality.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

SgtSerge82

 

Well reform is completely different than trying to enact a national plan!  Reform is good trying to create a whole new Gov't run option when we are already in economic distress is foolhardy.. P.S. I am a lady thank you very much.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

Truth - I serve my country as we speak.  I have much respect for all Americans serving.

 

I find calling people who differ opion Sheeple, as bad taste from a vet.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

Lol I didn't actually make that up (although I wish I had ;) A Russian wrote a nice commentary about how America was becoming Socialist and weak and said that we as Americans are "Sheeple" for blindly allowing our Government to become more powerful.  So now that you hear this part you would know exactly why a Vet would say that because this Vet believes in her country and the constitution and will not blindly stand by as the government tries to control us.  That is not what America is all about.  The Pres and Congrees work for the American people and need not forget.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

I understand and stand corrected.

 

I am sorry I took the words to heart.

 

And I fully agree with your last statement.

August 12, 2009
Click to view DigitalMax's profile

Look folks, there are some things that government just does better than the private industry.  We need a government-run ("socialist") military to defend our non-socialist way of life because government can do that function better than industry.  Get over it!   Private industry has shown us that they cannot effectively run our health industry.  They have destroyed it.  Those people crying about the Socialist boogieman are just trying to stop the debate because they cannot win the debate.

August 12, 2009
Click to view arj6000's profile

Read more at http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/2009/07/deconstructing-the-right-wing-lies-health-bill.html

 

 

Page 22:  Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!

 

 

First of all, it starts on page 21, not 22, and it simply mandates a study of risk on the part of all companies that choose to provide self-insurance, to make sure they are capitalized properly. This is something that private insurance companies are required to do; it's to protect the consumer. Say you work at a company with their own health insurance system; how would you like to find out after you've received a $100,000 bill for a hospital stay, that the insurance pool can't pay the bill?

 

 

This is also important because when they can't pay the bills, then everyone else with insurance ends up picking up the slack. Got that? That's the reason health insurance premiums have more than doubled in the last ten years, and are scheduled to double again in the next ten, if nothing changes.

 

 

Anyway, why should companies acting as health insurance companies be allowed to operate under different rules than insurance companies? Isn't that unfair competition?

 

 

• Page 29:  Admission: your health care will be rationed!

 

 

The section actually starts on page 26, and it's entitled:

 

SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.

 

 

 

 

There is absolutely NO section in there, from page 26 through page 30, that indicates rationing of any kind. Looking at Page 29 specifically, it contains a section called "Annual Limitation." A-HA! See? It's a LIMITATION! That's the same as rationing, right? Didn't they admit rationing?

 

 

Well, no. Because the limit is on the amount that people will have to pay out in cost-sharing, should the agency implementing the bill decide to use a version of cost-sharing. The limit is on how much a patient will have to pay, not a limit on the health care the patient receives.Watch how many times these tools bring up the "rationing" canard. It's almost as often as they mention ACORN. (I kid you not. Just wait.)

 

 

See what I mean when I say we have to watch these people, and check their "facts?"

 

 

• Page 30:  A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)

 

 

The section on Page 30 establishes an advisory committee, and yes; they will decide which treatments and benefits you get. I'm unsure as to why this is a bad thing. I don't want my health insurance premiums going to Britney's boob job, even if I have private insurance. Which reminds me; does this bozo actually think private insurance companies don't have a list of acceptable treatments and benefits? 

 

 

There is one difference here, though. The committee's recommendations will be published and the public will have access to them. Which means they will be able to offer input to the process.

 

 

Oh, and there is nothing here about "no appeals process." The Committee will simply recommend processes for implementation. Not only that, but varying appeals processes are laid out in detail throughout the bill. So, he lied about that...

 

 

• Page 42:  The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you.  You will have no choice.  None.

 

 

See above.  The Commissioner will simply oversee implementation of the rules that are decided upon by the Commission. He or she will be responsible for making sure that everyone is held accountable up and down the line. Nothing in the bill gives power to a "czar," who will make health benefits decisions. The commission and the Secretary will make decisions on benefits as changes become necessary. Again; I'm not sure why this is a bad thing, except that right wingers don't seem fond of accountability.Well, unless we're talking about unskilled poor people who get welfare money.

 

 

• Page 50:  All non-U.S. citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

 

 

Now, when you read something like this, you half expect to see something mandating that non-US citizens be given "free health care."

 

 

The funny thing is, the word FREE only appears one time in the entire bill, and it is not coupled with the term "health care." People will be provided with a new health care choice, based on their income, to a certain extent. So we can toss that little red herring off the boat right away. NO ONE will receive free health care. I mean, unless they win some sort of sweepstakes or something.I guess that's possible.

 

 

No, the section the wingnut refers to is entitled:

 

SEC. 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE.

 

What is says is:

 

"… All health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services."

 

The word "free" isn't in there. It just means that no one can be denied insurance coverage or health care because of their looks, or because they're wearing robes or a burqa. But nothing in there says undocumented immigrants will be able to scam "free" health care. In other words, you can only call that a lie.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

SgtSerg82

Here is my source:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/

pretty bad when even the Russians see our plight.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

SgtSerg82

 

Look u seem very respectable let's just agree to disagree ;) anyway I def was a little harsh to our lovely Canadians thank you for pointing out my unecessary bash lol.. Nice debate!

August 12, 2009
Click to view MikeOO's profile

Can we all at least agree that the president and congress should have:

 

1. Clearly defined the problems

 

2. Clearly laid out proposed solutions

 

3. Put them in writing

 

We are all being asked to believe things we cannot read "in final form", and there is room for skepticism on both sides.

 

OK?

August 12, 2009
Click to view pungsu's profile

we should have some form government run hospitals. This will keep public health sector in check and not charge any amount by our doctors. Also healthcare should reduce secondary costs like receptionist in the doctor's office whose job is to just sit and listen to radio and have an attitude if you ask a question. you don't need seperate billing, receptionist to schedule appts. doctor's can schedule their own appts and we can insurance processing online. this will help patients look up their co pays themselves instead of keeping them hanging about the costs and then stick them with $100 after the treatments.

 

What about fertility treatments is that covered by public owned health care. I think they should for atleast  2 - 3 times ( or until atleast 1 kid is born). fertility treatments centers charge a whole lot and this can also make a couple bankrupt when they don't have nay child at all let alone mental and emotioanl stress.

 

Also it is necessary to manage and prevent diseases. E.g. Charge extra taxes for people who are obese or smoke etc in both health care industry and food industry. This will help to managethe health. Why should people who take care of their health pay for taxes for people who are obese and don't care what they eat or drink?

August 12, 2009
Click to view DigitalMax's profile

Truth26:  Russian sociologists have been writing about the imminent collapse of America for over 100 years.  Much of it was required reading when I was in high school 40 years ago.  That's nothing new.  They weren't correct then and they aren't correct now. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view cameron816's profile

I went to the healthcare town hall meeting in my county to do my civic duty and be active in my government.  Healthcare is a big concern to me.  I am always fearful of how "quality of life" will somehow be sold to corporate America, all the while lining the coffers of government campaign funds.  I did not vote in the last presidential election. My choice would have been Ron Paul. 

 

As the meeting started, all appeared to be civil, with “pockets” of tension mixed though out.  It was not far into the meeting when the senator began to give out more of the details of what congress and the senate are working towards for our healthcare, when things got rowdy.  Downright rowdy.  Have we come to the point where we cannot even govern ourselves?  This is still a democracy.  Being loud and vulgar does not make you a majority.  Are all venues we attend for communicating to our government going to end up as something between a soccer match and "get 'er done" concert?    I thought we were a society of "order."  Sure I believe that our senators and congressmen work for us, but in what civilized world would it be OK for employers to speak to their employees in such a fashion?

 

I went with the intention of asking my question, and getting an answer from my senator.   I wanted to press the senator on cost and exactly what are our LONG TERM plans?  However, the oxygen had been sucked out of the room and I decided against making my voice heard.  I will probably not go back to other town hall meetings, whether for health care or any other discussion, because I fear what could come out of such public anarchy.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view habsfan's profile

Let’s face it, very few of us working middle and lower class folks have a significant say in how this country operates. Decisions are being made by the wealthy (who generally are tied into corporate America) simply on the basis of what is best for the wealthy (and corporate America). That’s why we went to war in Iraq, that’s why we subsidize crooked industries, that’s why we bail out unethical banks, all while middle class homeowners sink into foreclosure and debt. Sure, the pendulum swings small amounts from the right to the left, from Bush to Obama, but if you really think we’re talking about major policy changes here or anywhere else, you’re really fooling yourself. This country hasn’t changed significantly with the election of Obama, and it won’t change significantly with or without the passage of this health bill. The power elites on both sides of the aisle and the corporate lobbyists simply have too much to lose with any real change in the status quo. The notion that this nation is becoming socialist is laughable.

 

This all really comes down to a very simple debate. Who do you trust more when it comes to making potentially life and death financing and care decisions for you and your family, private corporations or governments? Right now we have a system in place that puts those decisions in some profit-motivated insurance company for whom the thumbs up or thumbs down is based purely on a coast/benefit analysis. Personally, after watching the Monsantos & Dows and Halliburtons and AIGs rape and pillage and lie and cheat their way to massive profits at the expense of the environment and public health and the economy, I’d rather rely on a government bureaucrat than an industry bean counter.  And, as a person who has paid his taxes every year since I started working over 30 years ago at the age of 17,  I think I have the right to take advantage of that preference, while those of you happy with the Cignas and UHC’s remain where you are. 

 

And for those who embrace the market-based, capital system for health care without a public OPTION, isn’t it a bit disingenuous to claim that a public OPTION is bad because the private companies won’t be able to compete. I mean, isn’t the market all about competition?

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

CraigMD - you hit the nail on the head. Can't agree with you more.

 

Right now this bill is a government takeover of the insurance companies. There is no way they can administer coverage to all people. The bill say participants in the Exchange. I no one participates, where is your insurance. Otherwise this is a mute point. And right now, I know for a fact, the government just made the insurance companies upset.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SgtSerge82's profile

Turth- JUst read the article, found it a little harsh, but reality is harsh, the article kind of reminded me of the zietguist movie ;)

 

I enjoyed the debate as well!

 

So we Agree to Disagree, one thing I think we can agree on is that we are both concerned about the direction and all the un-spoken words (not to speak for you)

 

Glad we had this chat, sorry for taking over the board

 

I am done...... I promise =)

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

Plus there plan is to implement this in 3 years. Your short 30% in docs today and it takes more than 3 years of education. This will impact quality by adding 50 mil more.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

DigitalMax

 

Well I disagree with you the Russian has a valid point or at least did until the this whole Healthcare debacle came to light.  Americans are becoming more dissident we fight for nothing.  Before this awesome HC debate I didn't think Americans would ever get all riled up ever again plus I mean you can't deny the Mickey D's statement we are fat and most things we fight over is if Government has a right to say we can't supersize.  Another thing if you were in Highschool 40 years ago you should be approaching the age of Medicare here in at least what the next 7 or so years, Medicare is already underfunded and impoverished an dwith this new bill they say and I am quoting the Pres some of the funds will come from Medicare so do you not think that would affect you??? Yea there is room for cutting costs from Medicare from the Greed I can see that but, come on most of the opposition to this bill are the elderly.

August 12, 2009
Click to view coachrich's profile

JBROUI42 is posting lies.

If you look at the bill none of the pages he sites has that information on it. These are lies. He also states the bill will have federally funded abortions, another lie. It is against the law to federally fund abortions and this statement is completely false.

Go to opencongress.com and read the bill for yourself don't believe these lies.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Paradis's profile

Good for you!

These people at the town halls don't even realize what they're whining and yelling about.  The only things they seem to hear is what comes out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Truth26's profile

Paradis

 

just so you know not everyone opposed to this bill listens to Rush just like not all of the opposers are Republican... Yes the people who yell and scream are not very educated but you make yourself look just as uneducated by a statement like that.

August 12, 2009
Click to view DigitalMax's profile

Habsfan, you are right!  That was a very well written post.  Thank you so much. 

 

After working in US private industry for 35 years, if I have to decide whether to place the health care of my family in the hands of private industry or government, I'll chose government every time.  Despite all the rhetoric, US private industry is really not very good at getting things done where quality matters.   

August 12, 2009
Click to view WiseCouncil's profile

Can we have an honest discussion here? Most of the naysayers to Health Care Reform? Are Republican's some even independents that probably feel a bit slighted by Obama's election victory and McCain and Palin terrible defeat right? With that said why in the hec would any sane person listen to and believe a word you all say, because 1) you are biased 2) you are probably racist 3) you would like to see Obama fail by any means necessary with hopes that in 2012 he doesnt get re-elected.  You folks eventhough I'm sure you have someone that doesnt have good healthcare right now, and you yourself are probably lacking in proper healthcare, but you will cut of your nose to spite your face, just because....What idiots!!!!

August 12, 2009
Click to view bjgreen's profile

I'm surprised that people are interested in the government's involvement in such an important aspect of their lives.  The track record of government involvement is not top notch.  USPS for example.  They think of the "good" ideas but don't completly think through the cause and effects.  Look at the cash for clunkers.  Now used car prices will go up and the folks that can afford an expensive car will have a more difficult time finding a reasonable car as the "clunkers" are off the road.  BUT I'm sure the big "O" will find a way to have government assistance with that as well.  Some may not be able to get to work but they won't have to worry about global warming while they starve to death.  

August 12, 2009
Click to view isaiahscry's profile

Does anyone honestly trust our politicians and goverment to run anything effectively? They are no different than the so called big evil corporations you say you hate. In fact, the politicians are the ones who in many cases pass the laws that allow the big corporations to make more money. 

 

The only difference is the government wants more power to control people, and the private industries want more money. So in turn, lobbyists give money to create more power for our politicians who in turn create more money for private industry.  

 

These are the practices by both Republicans and Democrats. Do you really believe healthcare will be any better off with the Government getting involved? You've got to be kidding if you believe that. The biggest issue we face today as Americans are career politicians.

 

How do we get rid of them? I think career politicians contribute to corruptions that happen in private industry as much as the private industry contributes on its own. That's why Americans are fed up with our politicians and we get tired of hearing them talk. We can't believe a word any of them say.      

August 12, 2009
Click to view Nafstejyn's profile

Right WiseCouncil, it's not possible for anyone to disagree with the left without being some sort of sore-loser fanatic.  Save it.  Before spending time reading the 1000+ pages of the bill, I suggest most folks just read one amendment from the U.S. Constitution.  The 10th Amendment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."  Not reading anything in the Constitution that gives the federal government the powers to fire CEOs, take over a majority stake in a private business (i.e. GM), dictate how the private financial industry will be run, or delve into the health insurance business.  See, Mr. UnWiseCouncil, some of us Americans actually support and believe in the authority of that little document called the Constitution.  And you call us idiots.  Jeez.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view WiseCouncil's profile

For all of you on here claiming to have read the Health Care reform bill, STOP LYING!! especially when you right down absolute lies about the bill.  For all of you interested in reading it.  Here you go for your own eyes!!! Straight from the official website of the US Congress

 

http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

August 12, 2009
Click to view Americans4Am's profile

There is no health care bill only a few proposals that still have to be worked out, but probably won't. I belive the discussions taking place now using the healthcare reform debate as a vehical are about the role of the US government in the life of everyday America.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Orrie's profile

Sadly, this thing could have been written so a human could easily understand it, or at least cross-reference all the various definitions and subclauses. And, to understand it and sort the crap and BS on the blogs and news from the truth, you've got to read it.

 

If you're wading through the bill, try using the search feature to speed things up, esp. when you're trying to get answers to a particular question or concern.

 

For example, some folks are screaming about the bill covering illegal immigrants. But, if you search for "alien", pretty quickly you can find on page 143, lines 3-7, where it states in Section 246 - "NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS." This reads: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."

 

Another good one - the so called "Death Panels". After searching on "death" and "terminal" I stumbled across the sections discussing all the required counseling and consultation on "advance planning." After wading through it, I am left with the impression that a) people don't like to think about dying, b) they therefore don't make their wishes clear (like, "keep me alive no matter what!" or "If I'm braindead for sure, don't keep me alive" or "I don't want to be a vegetable in a bed for the rest of whatever"). So...if people don't specify their wishes and doctors are obligated to make all "reasonable" (conservative butt-covering and expensive) efforts to keep them going until all hope is lost, costs go up. Nothing about death panels; lots about counseling people about advance directives, living wills, etc. and making sure that their wishes are backed up by a doctor's order. Initially we all say "pull out the stops", and of course the circumstances are different for every case. But, at some point, in specific cases, more care isn't going to help and may even make the person feel more like a cog in the system than a human being. If another couple of months of being jabbed, isolated, wheeled around, and living in the hospital isn't going to help, would you choose to do that w/the time you had remaining? You should at least have that choice and it appears the bill expressly requires health professionals to clarify this up front with you.

 

AFTER READING IT, others may interpret this differently. But, I think the only way to get at the truth and substance of this debate is to grab a cup of coffee or tea and dig into this bill. Otherwise, there are a lot of BS artists out there, and bafflegab pundits, who will tell you "what the bill says" when they're just blowin' hot air or spouting off made up or planted fears.

August 12, 2009
Click to view richard2's profile

After reading comments/exerts from the Health Care Bill, I have a few comments:

 

1.     How to Reduce the Number of Uninsured:

a.     Any person employed (full time, part time, or temporary) by the government (Federal, State, Local) must be provided health care, includes dental*.

b.     Any company doing business with a government agency must provide health care, includes dental.

c.     Any company with a government contract must provide health care, includes dental.

d.     Any sub-contractor to a company with a government contract must provide health care, includes dental.

e.     This includes state and local governments.

f.     The government mandates the size of companies that must provide health insurance (similar to what is in the bill now).

This step would reduce the number of persons without health insurance 40 – 60 %.

*Dental coverage is extremely important as it can definitely affect your health.

 

2.     Keep the current Health Care System the way it is.  Doing step 1 brings the number of uninsured to a more manageable level. 

 

3.     The govern needs to not get into the Health Care business. The government would create an exceptionally large department to oversee who gets what and how much health care.  Creating more overhead and needless expense.  Every dollar spent on overhead is one less dollar spent on actual health care. The insurance companies still get theirs.

 

4.     The government should provide health insurance for the uninsured. The government should provide for “free” clinics with adequate staff and medical coverage paid for by the government.  The attending doctor would determine what care is needed.  All persons would be eligible to attend these clinics even if they have health insurance. You must have a national health card to receive service.  A national data base would be in place to identify eligible persons.

 

5.     The government must put a cap on Medical Malpractice Suits. This would reduce the amount of money doctors have to pay for Medical Malpractice Insurance, reducing their overhead and possibly their fees.  Doctors deserve to be paid well for what they do.

 

6.     Drugs.  There must be some way that the cost of medicine in this country could be reduced.  More and more people are getting their drugs from other countries.  Reduce the amount of time before a generic substitute can be sold.  I know the drug companies need to recoup their research costs, but all at once?

 

7.     Those who are on welfare and physically/mentally able should be put to work doing something, picking up trash, cleaning streets, neighborhood watch, etc. These persons would receive additional payments. This would create more government jobs just to manage this, result: more people who are covered. 

 

8.     Illegal immigrants should be covered also, but only for emergency services, and turned over to the INS for consideration for deportation. Repeat offenders would not be afforded any health coverage.

 

 

Our current Health Care System works.  It may need some fine tuning or modification, not a complete overhaul with government appointees in charge.

Think more on the line of how to reduce the number of uninsured and once you have done that, then on how to provide coverage to the rest.

 

Don’t go out of your way to provide total health coverage to those who are here illegally. 

 

I don’t understand why congress continues to insist on supporting illegal immigration by providing them all the benefits of citizenship and sometimes more.

 

     Congressmen shouldn’t receive government sponsored/paid Health Care after leaving office.

 

Congressmen shouldn’t receive any retired pay either…serve your country then continue with your chosen vocation.  Government shouldn’t be a lifetime endeavor.

 

     Congressmen have this thing about “Entitlement”… for them.  Get all they can…you’re on your own.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view OSUBUXS's profile

For those of you who don't think that Obama isn't in favor of a single payer system maybe you see this speech he gave to the AFL-CIO in 2003 long before he ran for president.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE

 

He is in favor of this and it’s inevitable that this is where we are headed some years down the road. It’s nothing more than a government power grab. Why wouldn't they (government both Democrat and Republican) want to control almost 20% of the economy? This will pass because none of them care how Middle America feels or what their concerns are. They are only interested in power and giving back to campaign donors.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view RoadKillz's profile

I googled for the Republican Health Reform Plan... Opps, nothing.  But, I did find this:

 

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski says there's no need to lie about the proposed health care reform bill. The Republican told an audience in Anchorage yesterday that critics aren't helping the debate by throwing out false claims. She says portions "are bad enough that we don't need to be making things up."

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view habsfan's profile

Yes, Isaiahscry, we are certainly talking about the lesser of two evils here. And I fully support the notion of term limits, election finance reform and third party politics. But i'm afraid the only way we get there is through a revolution. And that's not happeneing anytime soon.

 

So in the meantime, we have inept Dem/Rep governments and greedy corporations to choose from. Tough choice - it really is. But I can fight ineptitude. Greed's a little harder.

 

And I do believe that basic fundamental rights should be part of government's burden and obligation to its people - public education, public clean water supplies, and yes, public health care. And when public systems are broken, I do not believe the answer is to privatize them. Again, this is from a fundamental distrust of corporate America. Others have a similar distrust of government. It's not for me to convince them otherwise. Let's just have choices here.

August 12, 2009
Click to view BlackConvoy's profile

To: BostonDan

 

Here's my thing about the free market and letting the government act as referee. They haven't been acting as referee at all. It has been a no holds bared, no elimination, no rules, pin fall counts anywhere wrestling match. If the government was acting as ref, then why were these financial institutions allowed to get so big, so intertwined in our economy, that if they fail our whole economy fails? Why are the health insurance companies allowed to get away with what they've been getting away with? Maybe if there was some oversight, and also maybe if politicians didn't take money from these companies, maybe we wouldn't be in the shape that we're in.

 

Now, the private industry has shown that they can not be trusted at all. All the arguments I hear about how the private health insurance companies won't be able to compete with a government plan. If they can't compete, then they are weak and deserve to be phased out. But, maybe the government will be able to level the playing field. Maybe the insurance companies will be able to compete, and people will be able to have their government health care, or if the choose their private health care.

 

I will say this though. It was fooling to try and rush this health care bill through before the August recess. I'm all for the public option, but I want to know what is in it. I want to know how much its going to cost. Something as important as this can't just be rushed through. I understand why, but it can't, and I think it shows Obama's inexperience.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Orrie's profile

Folks. It's a pain to read, but don't let that stop you. It's easily, freely available. And a lot of the specific scare claims on this blog (let alone on many others) are just not true.

 

Shame on the Congress for not publishing this in a form that makes it easy to understand. Shame on you if you make claims about it w/o having read it or verified that they are true. Shame on you too if you buy into what people are saying, pro or con, without checking it out yourself. Don't let any special interest group tell you what to believe about your health care benefits - heck, not even your insurer (assuming you HAVE one!). Read the contract, or in this case the Bill.

 

I've lived in the UK and in Canada, and I'm a natural born American citizen. The average level of care in the UK and Canada is actually very, very good. Less stress about it; little to no chance of it bankrupting you if you have a catastrophic illness. We (Americans) spend more on the administration of health care than either of those countries, and we spend more overall for health care than pretty much any other country. Yet a lot of folks with insurance basically use it as a hedge against disaster, not a way to stay healthy. Why? Because after paying for insurance they can't afford to pay for routine care. That's just not right. And that doesn't even begin to touch on all the people who can't afford ANY kind of care.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Rationality1's profile

You know I haven't read the bill, nor am I going too. what will happen will happen and the little people will ultimately have no say. however I would argue that what all the fear mongers are shouting about a "government ran healthcare system" such as the government deciding what treatments you can have, are allready done by the private sector; ie. experimental procedures dubbed so because "they are too costly" whether or not the are 100% succesful as many are. Furthermore it's common practice that if you get "TOO" sick your beloved private sector insurance are quick to cancel your coverage because you become a "profit liability". last time I checked the vast majority of people in america are on PPO's and HMO's which choose the pools of doc's you can pick from. thus "out of network or in network" expenses.  as it is now if you change your insurance you might just have to get a new doctor. so in the end it's really the pot calling the kettle black.  And hey the reason health insurance is so outrageously expensive anyway is because they have no real competition and more often than not work in collusion. it's one of the few industries where if one company raises their prices, the other ones do too. so heaven forbid an enity such as government health insurance comes and in and forces prices to drop which "NEEEEEDS" to happen anyway. Private health insurance companies will compete, they will lower prices, and they will always be around.  go look at some of the annual reports of companies like aetna, blue cross blue shield, they have plenty of room to absorb a profit shrinkage. yeah the share holders might not get as large of a divendend payment as they do know, but then boo hoo. and in the event that some companies fail, be rest that most americans will shed a tear so big their cheek will be dry. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Orrie's profile

3227SH - GREAT SUGGESTION! Wish I'd thought to say that.

 

WWW.FACTCHECK.ORG

 

That website was ruthlessly unbiased throughout the elections, held both parties accountable to the facts and provided great, accurate summary analyses of the issues.

 

For those of you who are "concerned" yet not concerned enough to take the time to browse the bill (but still want to avoid the BS and the bafflegab w/o 1018 pages of tortuous reading!)go to www.factcheck.org

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view jonathanyc's profile

Just remember, this is the House version.  The Senate does not have a bill yet, and there has not been a bill comprised of both houses of Congress that has been presented to the President.  Although I am sure this is worth reading, and may be useful to pull some useful legislation, I think we should wait for the finished product before judging.  I don't let clients at my work look at my projects before they're done.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Orrie's profile

jonathanyc - Point. Unfortunately, a lot of the "debate" (or, more pointedly, fear mongering mixed with genuine concern and questions) may distort the debate in the Senate.

 

If either the House or the Senate could figure out how to publish this stuff so a human could read it with relative ease and a good chance of understanding it, it would help. The language of the document is about as tortured as it gets.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Jenrose's profile

jbroui42, I've read the bill, and you are either foolish or deliberately making things up.

 

1. The plan does not allow employers who already carry insurance to pick the public option. In fact, there's not much in there that indicates that employers can choose the public option, I looked for that, as it would be cheaper for the employers.

 

2. There were ample provisions for appeal throughout the bill.

 

3. The goals indicated in the bill were to make essential care as broad as possible. In fact, they make most routine preventive care free.

 

4. Doctors can certainly choose not to be "in network" for the public option plan.

 

5. Medicaid rates are being brought up to medicare levels. Right now medicaid is 80% of medicare, which doctors do not like at all.

 

6. In fact, not only don't they limit benefits, they expand benefits for most people. Had we had a plan like that last year, we would have spent about $6000 less on health care for our family. And they allow for FOUR levels of coverage. Basic, Enhanced, Premium, and Premium Plus.

 

7. Larger employers will have to pay for insurance for part time employees... AT A PROPORTIONAL RATE. That means, if a full time employee is 36 hours, and a part time employee is 12 hours, if the company is paying 90% of the amount for the full time employee, the company will only pay 30% of the amount for the part time employee. This is a GREAT thing... it takes away the incentive for companies to use part time contract workers rather than full time regular employees, while also making it less critical for someone to work full time just to keep benefits. Talk about encouraging workplace flexibility... It also provides for smaller companies to not have to provide insurance... and not be fined for choosing that option.

 

8. Not all people who speak another language are illegal immigrants. In fact, there are many LEGAL immigrants, and children born in the US who have parents who speak another language at home. Medicaid already is not allowed to pay for illegal immigrants, and this bill specifically continues that prohibition. It is bigotry to assume that anyone who does not speak English well is not a "legal" American. In fact, my daughter's primary language is American Sign Language... and thank GOD if Deaf people can get better care because someone helps translate for them. Or the legal immigrants. I hope we are better than letting close minded stupidity get in the way of providing effective insurance and treatment.

 

I have a special needs child. And the many exceptions to the "limitation on enrollment outside open enrollment" include: Changes in medical status (i.e. going from non special needs to special needs), changes in income, moving out of an enrollment area.... and there are others. So quit scare-mongering.

 

As for the non-resident aliens.... If they're non-resident, they're not insured in the US, and therefor why should they pay the tax? Wouldn't you bitch if you went to another country and they said, "Hi, we're going to tax you for insurance, even though you're only here for a few days out of the year to manage your business and are covered by your travel insurance."

 

Those eligible for medicaid will be automatically enrolled UNLESS they specifically opt out or choose another option.

 

I could go on and on. But the fact of the matter is that you are lying and scaremongering and you need to stop.

August 12, 2009
Click to view sgtbusmc's profile

Hey USABeard!  It is not going to say SOCIALISM in the bill you MORON.  You have to know the form of government, and recognize the same characteristics in the legislation.  Maybe you should read up forms of goverment.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Sk33T's profile

You can read it on line at the library of congress. Just type in HR 3200 in your browser.

Collecting (strongarming) money from anyone to disperse it to everyone is..absurd. Socialist comes from that idea and YES SSI is socialist. But what I want to know is why does everyone think their employer should pay for it? Whay stop there, maybe they should buy us all cars. By the way, while you are reading section 312 notice a typo at (c)(1). Then read sections 59b, and 801 - 806. (for starters.

August 12, 2009
Click to view randomeight's profile

Everyone's concerns are understandable; government controlled health care may not seem reasonable, however it might be the only solution.

 

Currently the government pays for 65% of the nation's health care policies; these include: Medicare, welfare, military, government employees (civilian and enlisted,) uninsured children, institutionalized, etc.

 

Generation X, which I am part of, at most 60% are employed (not a strong generation on worth ethics, lets be truthful).  The retiring baby boomers will equal or out number Generation X'rs who work and pay taxes.

 

Generation X will not be able to fund health care for those who receive it from the government (not a debate on whether they should receive it or not.)

 

If it takes government control to supply health care, its better then the alternative which we are headed too.  As always with a democracy laws and rules can be changed.

 

No matter what comes from this debate, we will all be better off then if this debate didn't occur.  Let's be proactive, debate logically and form solution without bashing each other.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view fedupnmad's profile

I have only read excerpts from the bill and frankly have some reservations about some of the points.

My main complaint is that this bill is being presented in typical Obama Fashion....i.e. too quickly and without adequate review.  Who actually wrote the bill??  Did the elements come from the desires and needs of the American people or is it something that Obama and congress crafted with heavy input from lobbyists and then thrust upon us in a "let's get this into law now before anybody scrutinizes it" fashion.  I believe most people are just becomming wise to his heavy-handed loose-cannon tactics and are saying whooooa, just a minute.  We want to read this thing before it's crammed down our throats.

 

Look at his previous rushed legislation and the effects...stimulus funds totalling over a trillion dollars with little oversight, the boondoggle Cash-for-Clunkers, the rush to close Guantanamo but little thought for the repurcusions.  A black president with little experience who promised us what we wanted to hear was certainly novel (plus, I might add, a no-brainer considering the weak offering of the Republican party) but little more than six months into his term we're beginning to sour on his style.

This health care bill might be just what we need, or not.  But the American people are tired of being taxed to death and tired of having to put up with bad direction and poor results from Washington.  It's like buying a car that's a lemon....now we want to see what's under the hood before we put our signature on the bottom line.

The angry town hall meetings aren't just a small group of anti-government citizens....they're America finally standing up for their rights.  IF THIS IS A GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE THEN PROVE IT.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view mikegmikeg's profile

you should read page 1008 to the end.  It details the lack of nurses and then the grants that will be made available to school etc that will create formats to push nurses thru the system.  It also allows for stipends for current nurses so they can take further courses.  It also outlines nurses that want to teach etc.

 

Here's how you fix health care, if anyone is really interested;  1) allow insurance to be bought across state lines just as auto insurance can be, that creates a true open market and real competition between carriers which ALWAYS makes quality of service go UP and costs of policies go DOWN  2) treat health insurance just like auto insurance using the same formula that EVERYONE already understands ie: if you get a ticket your insurance goes up because you are a risk, it is proven you are a risk because studies show that driving fast causes more accidents (simple right?) but, if you want to speed that is YOUR choice, you are free to speed.  If you are a smoker or overweight your costs for health insurance go up because it is proven in studies that those two conditions deteriorate your health and the costs to treat you go up...  you are still free to smoke or be fat, your choice but YOU are responsible for the additional costs.  SImple right? sort of makes everyone responsible to take care of themselves OR, not if they choose the other path.  3) clamp down on medical malpractice lawsuits, its killing doctors thru the insurance they have to carry to practice.

 

this bill is NOT about health care it is about control and once established the reins will get tighter, no doubt, government NEVER lets go of anything it gets its hands on.

 

lets all just push for a national referendum on health care reform, let everyone have a vote on this turd of a bill, and then a breakdown of specific areas of healthcare coverage that might need fixing so the American people actually have a say in drafting this reform policy.

 

just my 2 cents

August 12, 2009
Click to view mslman71's profile

I'm not quite as far along. I will say I am not comfortable at all with "expediting" pay via electronic funds transfer and that includes on the fly determination of what is decided I should pay at the time of service (pp 60-80 ish). Allowing this sort of access to my account is unacceptable because there is no clear mechanism for redress. Sure, you can complain, but how long before they deal with it? Why do they care if it takes two months if they overcharge you, whereas you might go broke? Also, broad claims of rights to account privacy are not convincing. Saying they won't share the informationn doesn't fly. Period.

August 12, 2009
Click to view mrisheill's profile

I think a key question to ask all of our congressmen and senators is:  With this new health care bill will you be covered by the same plan as the rest of the country?  The information that I have is that have exempted themselves from this plan and that they will have a much better plan.  Why do they not play by the same rules that we have to play by?

August 12, 2009
Click to view SystemXpert's profile

Congrads to adriana71. She has read more of the bill than most members of congress. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view KS67's profile

Mungles wrote:

"So when the government controls the means for producing and distributing health care, is this not at least a step towards socialism."

 

I wanted to say thanks. In typing what you thought to be the reason you can call it socialism, you actually give the basis of why the claim that this is socialism is only a thought shared by morons. Notice the your quoted section. It is the whole basis of your reason for calling it a socialist program. The word "CONTROLS' is the key. The government does not CONTROL the means to producing health care, nor distributing it. At worse doctors do, at best, supply and demand does. Not the government.

 

But, we know. Your kind will say, man never walked on the moon and the earth is flat. Reality, is a luxury that only people who support this plan have.

August 12, 2009
Click to view VelveteenLdy's profile

After reading through JBROUI42's post and comparing what he/she wrote to HR 3200, I found that every point that I read in the Bill was misrepresented by JBROUI42. If you are going to take part in the debate, research your facts and make sure that you know about which you write. Your talking points are itemized, verbatim, at democraticunderground.com under the title "Top Health Reform Bill Lies Debunked." These items are also posted on various sites on the Internet. You did not credit your source and you conveniently omitted the truth for each item as written on those web pages. So, you plagiarized and omitted the truth. This is the slippery slope upon which we find ourselves when vociferous and disrespectful folks choose to use emotion rather than intellect to examine a very serious issue. Do your homework and do your own work.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view think4myself's profile

jbroui42 list is equal to radio talk show hosts playing pieces of someone's comments to fit their personal agenda.  I hope no one forms their opinion based on a personally edited view.  As a person with a disability and almost 60 years old, the "option"-  "available covered service" of a Dr. appointment to discuss choices for end of life care is a very good thing.  How can allowing people to see their Dr. before a serious/life threatening illness occurs to discuss what your choices are be a bad thing.  Isn't it better to discuss your wishes with your health care provider ahead of time and not put your family in the awful position of making a decision you don't want and they can't make.    I believe if anyone reads the section about this, you will see it will be a covered service not mandatory to anyone.    All health care plans have covered and not covered services, I personally think this would be a good one for those who want to use it.   jbroui42 personal editing - turning optional Advanced Care Planning into assisted suicide & euthanasia is  the worst kind of scare tactics.

August 12, 2009
Click to view PacificView's profile

jbrui42's posting is copied from postings on Obama hate web sites.  He hasn't read the bill obviously.

August 12, 2009
Click to view JFK2008's profile

COULD SOMEONE PLEASE HELP ME? I'm confused about the democratic process.  It has always been my understanding that our representatives in congress were just that.  They speak with their constituents; take that input to Washington; see if they can plead our case and then attempt to vote it through the process.  In other words, they REPRESENT us.  What I'm seeing now is that our duly elected Representatives and Senators taking what is dictated by the government and bringing it back to us to "explain" it all.  ISN'T THAT A LITTLE BIT OF REVERSAL IN THE PROCESS?

August 12, 2009
Click to view JFK2008's profile

COULD SOMEONE PLEASE HELP ME? I'm confused about the democratic process.  It has always been my understanding that our representatives in congress were just that.  They speak with their constituents; take that input to Washington; see if they can plead our case and then attempt to vote it through the process.  In other words, they REPRESENT us.  What I'm seeing now is that our duly elected Representatives and Senators taking what is dictated by the government and bringing it back to us to "explain" it all.  ISN'T THAT A LITTLE BIT OF REVERSAL IN THE PROCESS?

August 12, 2009
Click to view PDXSerric's profile

I have nothing but respect for those of you who choose to read the bill, even if only the parts you feel impact you personally. For those who would rather, out of laziness, ignorance or both, allow others to tell you what their interpretation of the bill is and how it relates to you, me and the nation as a whole, I have nothing but contempt.

 

And for those of you still clinging desperately to this 'Socialism' claim, I have one question - show me a single president that hasn't supported or enacted a bill or measure that wasn't seen as "socialist" by someone, usually in the opposing party.

August 12, 2009
Click to view PDXSerric's profile

For those interested and still unable to find a copy of HR-3200, I have a link to the .PDF posted here: http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-312356

 

Feel free to read and comment.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Minam2000's profile

http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

 

It is all here and really scary stuff.  Do not be fooled, we are in for a horrible mess!

August 12, 2009
Click to view rglaze's profile

Ignorance is running amuck!  Too many people are parroting the comments that they hear elswhere (esp. talk radio) without bothering to think for themselves. to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson: "The only man who is more ignorant than the one who listens to nothing at all is the one who listens to nothing but talk radio."

August 12, 2009
Click to view PacificView's profile

To Mungles.

 

If the government owned the hospitals, owned all of the medical equipment, and all of the doctors were government employees, we could call this socialized health care. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view imiga's profile

This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

 

I then took a shower in the clean water provided by a municipal water utility.

 

After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC-regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like, using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

 

I watched this while eating my breakfast of U.S. Department of Agriculture-inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

 

At the appropriate time, as regulated by the U.S. Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the U.S. Naval Observatory, I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal Departments of Transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank.

 

On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the U.S. Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.

 

After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to my house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and Fire Marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all its valuables thanks to the local police department.

 

And then I log on to the internet -- which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration -- and post on Freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.

August 12, 2009
Click to view mbrown's profile

Well, I am one of those angry taxpayers that is seeing Billions of dollars in spending, stimulus, TARP, pork and earmarks in Bills that are 1000 pages long, that our representatives do not even read.  I am not sure how these Town Hall meetings can be held by people that don't read these blasted things.

 

Since this appears to be a good debate here, and I have not seen this addressed, I will raise the issue.  In what I will follow up with, does this or does this not say that an insurer cannot enroll new members after the implementation of this bill???

If I am reading this correctly, the health insurance companies will be out of business eventually.....maybe I am not reading it right.

 

 

•HR 3200 IH

1 SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT

2 COVERAGE.

3 (a) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COV4

ERAGE DEFINED.—Subject to the succeeding provisions of

5 this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable cov6

erage under this division, the term ‘‘grandfathered health

7 insurance coverage’’ means individual health insurance

8 coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the

9 first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:

10 (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.—

11 (A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in

12 this paragraph, the individual health insurance

13 issuer offering such coverage does not enroll

14 any individual in such coverage if the first ef15

fective date of coverage is on or after the first

16 day of Y1.

17 (B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PER18

MITTED.—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect

19 the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an

20 individual who is covered as of such first day.

21 (2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR

22 CONDITIONS.—Subject to paragraph (3) and except

23 as required by law, the issuer does not change any

24 of its terms or conditions, including benefits and

25 cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day be-

26 fore the first day of Y1.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Fej's profile
Fej

JFK2008, I am not sure what you are referring to...

 

"They speak with their constituents; take that input to Washington; see if they can plead our case and then attempt to vote it through the process.  In other words, they REPRESENT us."

 

Yes... myself along with a majority of Americans voted people into office who supported healthcare reform.  And yes, I do have experience with the current system both as an insured individual, and someone whose parents have had to deal with health insurance issues.  I have also worked as a systems developer for the billing of private insurers and Medicare etc.

 

I am NOT satisfied with the status quo and can point to many, many examples of abuse by private insurers that already occur.

 

And for the poster above who pointed out that the financing of the health care proposals on the table are not sustainable - I agree.  The current solutions being proposed are not the best we can come up with and frankly fail to address some of the most critical problems.  Irregardless a solution is needed.  By acting foolishly we are losing an opportunity to solve a serious issue in this country.  We are not showing the intelligence and leadership that is expected of Americans and so far it has been unbelievably dissapointing.  I have lost significant respect for the conservatives in this country, many of whom used to have admirable ideas and perspectives.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

1) The OP/video has shown her ignorance and lack of logical thinking by making it through the first 150 pages and not raising the glaring issue on page 16.  Page 16 provides that you can keep your current insurance until such time as you change jobs.  After that point you can no longer subscribe to ANY private insurance period forever and ever.  Change jobs, etc. you are stuck on government insurance. 

 

It's merely a mater of time before everyone is on government insurance.

 

2)  Many of you are completely missing the mark.  And some of your analogies or the refutation of such analogies are simply wrong. 

 

   1)  If it can be misinterpreted in any shape or form by you, it can be misinterpreted by the government against you by the courts when you seek redress in the courts. 

 

   2)  It is the governments (state and federal) responsibility to provide roads, military, police, k-12 education, etc.  Those functions don't equal socialism.  The government taking over banks, health care, etc. or otherwise normal market functions is a socialist activity e.g., see Venezuela.  Putting the businesses out of business through forced attrition is just as bad.

 

   3)  You aren't entitled to health care.  Work for it.  Save for it.  Just because the government can take from those who have and give you something for free doesn't make it right.  See the following article.  This is what is currently happening in this country and will be the fall of this country. 

 

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?15ba16ea-e2fa-49e2-bfb0-03a852e4c86c

 

   4)  A majority in Congress can't take the time to read through the Stimulus bill much less read this.  They can't get many of the issues they discuss in public correct.  If they are going to vote, then that have to read the bill.  End of story.  If they can't take the time to actually read the bill, understand its impact, then they are morally obligated to vote against the bill.  

August 12, 2009
Click to view drhall's profile

For Those Who Already support this or any facsimile of a health bill:

 

"This resolution (not a bill yet) is not perfectly clear, nor is it well presented, opens more questions than presents answers and on the H.R.3200 face of the effort, a failure  under any measure of circumstances"

 

To Those Opposing, I think I understand why, yet the final format has yet to be penned (thank God), so remain diligent, read the final passage for yourself taking nobody's word for what you are reading and

 

Forget legal form documents & typical meandering - for something this big and this encompassing, the document must be clear as crystal and simple as JellO to rally the population of over 330 million.

 

Jamming another useless piece of work through will not endear Obama to anyone, when those anyone's become personally affected by the negative results.

 

First to clarify my point, this document appeared overnite - at a thousand pages! That fact tells me somebody was either thinking well ahead of the game OR somebody(s) has MUCH TO gain from this passing.

 

Too quickly.

 

Our country has suffered from eight long years of the worst administration in USA history and already reaping the whirlwind failing of the Obama administration. (Bush failed us on 9/11, HomeLand Security, Declaring War, Failing to nab Bin Laden multiple times, KATRINA, etc.) (Obama supported Nab and Torture policy of Bush upon taking oath, Immediately swamped the House and Senate with a "bailout" (those bastards on laughing at us on the beach even as we lament this resolution)

 

Secondly, Obama tried to jam this H.R.3200 into a bill before August break - bad form. He who yells loudest may have something to hide after all. However, the bill does attempt to do something nobody else would have dared dream of ... break up the trainwreck call health insurance.

 

Thirdly, the methods and explanations for addressing who may be covered, for what and under what circumstances is almost pure doubletalk ... one minute you think it makes sense, another, it harkens of George Orwell. guess all those interns did the best they could to confuse us.

 

Fourth, the Canadian government has nothing to prove for the vast difference in populations in comparison, in fact, no nation on earth, the size of America, can applaud Universal Healthcare.

 

Fifth and lastly, America is not going to take a bad deal and swallow.

So, maybe for the very first time in history, The Federal government may actually be forced to become what it was designed to be -

"The Voice of the People".

 

Opinions are good. Good clean facts in debate are good. Exposing sheep in wolves clothing is good. Having a voice in government is good. Realizing people really do manipulate people and not letting that happen to you, is good.

 

This healthcare action is AS IMPORTANT AS WAS THE PENNING OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES ... not one iota less, if people perceive the import of their voices, behave according and give according to the respect they deserve, this just might turn out ok.

 

Don't be a wuss but don't be an uninformed loudmouth bully either.

Ok, carry on.

 

 

 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

mbrown - you are reading that correct.  See above post. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

imiga

 

Look at SSI, Medicare, the VA system.  They can't do anything that involves significant amounts of money without either screwing it up, or it being subject to huge amounts of waste.

 

I don't want Government making decisions about my healthcare for me. Stop pushing it on me.

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view timkim's profile

The only people bitching are... people who have health care, come on.. what about me?? I NEED AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE!!!

August 12, 2009
Click to view BlueEyedLion's profile

I started to read the bill, while it shows 1017 pages long, it's double spaced in large fonts. It's really about 300 pages worth of content. C'mon, if there's really socialism crammed into this, you should be able to find it.

August 12, 2009
Click to view MBWC's profile

Given that the government can not balance Social Security, Medicare, VA,and a host of other programs what would ANYONE think they can do it for our health care?? this is not political it is people expecting something for Nothing! Wake up America you and your children will pay for everything. Just like the $2B cash for clunkers. Did you get your $? not me, but I will be paying for it just like you whether you got a car or not

August 12, 2009
Click to view jam23sam's profile

Any legislation that upsets the Republican party and it's followers I am all for. After watching BUSH run our economy in the ground for the last 8 years, it's refreshing to see the Republican's on the defensive.

The majority of those complaining at the Town Hall meetings look like they were pulled from a Jerry Springer episode.

They don't represent my America, only the nearest trailer park.

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

Mbrown Please read page 14

Line 14 TITLE I—PROTECTIONS AND STANDARDS FOR QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLANS Subtitle A—General Standards

PURPOSE.—The purpose of this title is to establish standards to ensure that new health insurance coverage and employment-based health plans that are offered

meet standards guaranteeing access to affordable coverage, essential benefits, and other consumer protections.

If you read up to the Grandfathered portion on page 16. It says to me that the insurance can still offer a plan to present subscribers, but cannot enroll any new participants in that plan. The plan in other words does not have to comply with some of new standards and protections of the proposed bill. All subsequent policies must conform to new standards.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

Ok - that's it!  Let's be solution oriented people!  1018 pages is a monstrous task, no matter how fast you can read.  People that oppose and support alike - get at least 5 friends together - and each take a part of the bill - read it in a few days - get together and create an HR3200 party.  Get a bottle of wine and some tacos - compare notes and discuss.

 

In the very first line of the title - it mentions the word "choice".  Think of your fellow man.  Choice means what is not good for you may be good for another.  That is why America is what it is.  Not being able to be covered because of a preexisting condition, or being denied because a treatment is experimental, or not being able to have insurance because you can't afford it robs you of your ability to have a CHOICE!  And it will get worst, because as soon as this dies down - insurance is going to bite back.

 

I am fiscally conservative but socially liberal.  The biggest problem in these town halls is that the conservatives have no real representation, other than media talking heads - unelected, overly vicious and closed minded - that speak to an ideal of what was.  Limbaugh has absolutely NOTHING in common with a Wisconsin rancher, or an Pennsylvanian truck driver - but is only loyal to his sponsors that count on Limbaugh to hit a nerve amongst this population - a population that have no where to turn for honest, intelligent, calm, conservative reason. 

 

That is the real tragedy of the present state of the Repub party - and those not willing to "do their homework" and read - fall prey to those that ignite anger - and the talking heads are laughing their way to the bank...

 

August 12, 2009

The only people that want this bill are the entitlement crowd.  As far as I am concerned, the government takes way too much of my money and I want out of it.  I certainly do not want to support the unemployed, welfare scum, lazy, illegals, hoodrats, etc.  I do not want the government having any access to any of my records.  Healthcare or financial.  I am not a social person, and only really care about my family and my bottom line.  Start this program, and watch the new underground economy flourish.  Cash money and bartering will rule the day.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

jam23sam - you don't represent my America either - if you want Single Payer health care go to Canada.

 

daimyo60 - Mrbrown isn't referring to that, but the inability to get new insurance upon changing jobs.

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

cshilly - honestly - you need to go live in a cave.  If you do not care to live in a civil society - than you should remove yourself from it.  I for one, love humanity in all of its ugly glory. 

 

If you do not want anyone in your pocket - than you should not want your children educated (teachers are paid by your taxes) - or you streets paved or your policemen paid.  If you have had such great luck in your life avoiding unemployment, welfare, hoodrats etc - I wish you the best. 

 

I guess people like you have never had real hardships, and always make their mortgage payments on time and never have gotten seriously ill either.  So be it.  Perhaps a one-way ticket to Utopia-ville would be a better place for you... and you can leave us adults with real world experience and trials alone to lick our wounds...

 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

SeldonWI. I was responding to Mbrown's concern that the insurance companies were going to go out of business. Mbrown says,  "If I am reading this correctly, the health insurance companies will be out of business eventually.....maybe I am not reading it right." Portability of existing plans are not addressed. Any person will still be able to get health insurance but all policies must comply with the certain standards i.e. non-discrimination of  preexisting conditions, maintaining affordable coverage, essential benefits, and basic consumer protection

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

tuliplady - just like you live in this rosy garden where everyone will provide your every need?  I'm tired of working my butt off so people who don't put forth any effort can have everything they've always wanted - my money.

 

Get a job, get an education, get a grip.  Life isn't easy and it's definitely not free.  Quit pulling the teacher, police, road card.  That ship doesn't sail.  Those are traditional functions that are supposed to be rights and protection provided by the government.  Show me in the Constitution where it says Healthcare is a right?

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

Succession is looking mighty good right now.  I pick Sodom (New York) and Gomorrah (take your pick, Cali or Vegas) - and all you "perfect" "government out of my pocket" people can take the rest!

August 12, 2009
Click to view WendyWill's profile

Clearly there are some iReport users that get the news (and their reading comprehension skills) from the bottom feeders of this world.

 

My observation is: CNN is allegedly a news organization. Yet they have done NOTHING to explain what's in the bill. The fact that CNN doesn't even have a link to the bill from and center on cnn.com speaks volumes about their motives. Keep the public confused and uninformed. Good job.

 

Does everything have to be a matter of opinion with CNN? There are FACTs and CNN needs to start reporting facts on the healthcare bill.

 

I'm sick and tired of all of the headlines that read like this: "Are the protests orchestrated?","Could better economy stop health care bill?", etc. Those are not headlines. Report some facts and stop asking questions.

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

SeldonWI BTW Nowhere in Mbrown's post does he refer to "inability to get new insurance upon changing jobs"

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

daimyo60 - and his question doesn't have to do with portability and I know they aren't addressed.

 

His statement refers to page 16 where the bill so eloquently states: ""Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law."  Subject to 1 other exception.

 

After that time you will be forced to accept the government option.

August 12, 2009
Click to view fromohio1's profile

I don't know what others feel about JBROUI42  misrepresenting HR 3200 with the intention of deceiving people. 

 

It seems there should be a legal remedy to prevent people like JBROUI42 from doing this.  There is a difference between an opinion and libel. 

 

To date the internet has not provided case law on libel,  and you won't find a clearer case.

 

How does one find out who JBROUI42 is to take this to the next level?

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

You can have both Sodom and Gomorrah.  Just don't expect any help when Cali falls into the Ocean and the governor of NY taxes you to death to provide for all the welfare recipients. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

SeldonWI

Nowhere in the proposed bill does it state that. It is just inference on your part. Private insurers should have to provide policies that conform to some standards that protect the policy holder.

BTW I like my present insurance policy and feel in no way threatened by the language of this proposal.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

Fromohio1 - Do you even know what liable is, who can bring an action for liable, or what you would call JBROUI42's statements?  Figure that out and then come back.

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

SeldonWI

If you are going to cite elements of the proposed bill, please cite it correctly.

LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.—

11 (A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in

12 this paragraph, the individual health insurance

13 issuer offering such coverage does not enroll

14 any individual in such coverage if the first ef15

fective date of coverage is on or after the first

16 day of Y1.

August 12, 2009
Click to view alienx's profile

Whats so wrong with Socialism anyways?

There are several portions of not only the US government but European governments that have Socialistic roots and in some cases outright Socialistic in function.

I think people need to get a good understanding of what Communism and Socialism truly is, as it is very appearent that American Media has drilled fear into the minds of Americans in such a way the very term "Socialism, Communism" is some sick abomination and muttered in the darkest slur's possible.

 

China is Communist,and that government over see's it's people with many beneficial programs and is despite what critic's of Communism have to say, China is living breathing proof that the system does work and as of late with some of the reforms the Chinese government is doing in the hands of responsible and astute Communist Politicians the people of China are celebrating a very prosperous time over all.

 

Is Socialism coming to America? Well its already here and been here for quite sometime! It's just not branded as such and the fact is some elements of Socialism are required by all civilised societies but it's just packaged differently. Look at your Drivers License, look at the roads you drive on. Look at the UPS, look at the

 

Bill of Rights...

 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

 

Read the Federalist. IN short, Socialist Programs can be and have been Instituted in America already and been in place for a very long time at the state levels!

 

SO next time some fool starts spouting off about how bad Socialism is and Communism one might want to consider some of it's root results! In regards to Healthcare...

 

It's kinda weird but the average cost of a European or Canandian's health coverage is $2000 a year, while an Americans Health Coverage is on average $16,000.

 

Now try and tell me the system does not heed reform...

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

WHAT! - That's exactly what it says on page 16!  Are you blind?

 

BTW I like my present insurance and feel completely threatened by it and don't want so clown in Congress dictating what my coverage can and should be.  Thanks.

 

Oh did you know that in Canada - this great and wonderful shiny example of health care.  If you need a hip replacement - get ready to wait over a year.  If your dog needs ones, next week.  Thanks!  I will stick with what I have.

 

You want good doctors, don't tell them they are going to make $120k a year.  You want good surgeons, don't tell them they are going to make $120k a year.  I for one want the best damn heart surgeon I can get that didn't AA his way into Med school and made it to the top through hard-work!

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

AlienX - so ask many from the UK and Canada why they come here for specialized treatment. 

 

Daisy - I did quote it correctly, thanks.  Copying and pasting isn't quoting,  "blah blah blah" is quoting.

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

SeldonWI - show me in the Constitution where it says that you are entitled to shout about how hard you work and entitled to have something to show for it.  Tired of people screaming about how "hard they work" - like no one else can possibly work as hard as them. 

 

That is the problem with our society - we are so disconnected that we cannot possibly fathom that others work just as hard as us.  What SeldonWI - are you the only one that gets taxes taken out of every check?  Sorry - but you don't work harder than me or anyone else - know how I know??  Because you are on this blog too.  If you had real work to do - you would be doing it! 

 

You know who works hard?  The people that make the crap they sell at Walmart - working 14 hour days 6 days a week and living in dorms in China.  I can give you many more examples - yes, even here in the US.  So please - you have 24/7 just like I do - and you are wasting time here - just like I am...  so that argument is out the window...  come up with something more justifiable.  Thanks!

 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

SeldonWI

Also on Page 16 which you so conveniently forgot to post.

Line 10 (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.—

I don't live in Canada either I live in the US. OH that's right. Some people don't consider Hawaii as part of the United States. Besides I am a year older than the POTUS so I guess that my birth certificate wont satisfy you either.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

Know what?

 

DNFTTs - and let's talk about what HR3200 really says.  Explaining the pros and cons to someone's who made up their mind is an exercise in futility... 

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

Crazylady - I don't think I was shouting first all.  And as for hard work, I got to where I am through busting my ass day in and day out in school while my friends were off drinking, smoking dope, and having a good time.  I chose to get an education several times over. 

 

I started out as a waiter, installing cable during the summer in the south, doing others things that I didn't really enjoy doing.  I decided screw this I'm getting an education so I don't have to do physical labor, but I promise you I still work hard regardless of whether I'm on here or not.  I've put in my 12 hour day for the day and will do so tomorrow and the next day and the next.  I usually do take Sunday off for myself.

 

Did I ever say that I'm the only one that gets taxed.  I'm tired of people wanting more taxes from me to pay for entitlement programs because you think you DESERVE (yes I yelled then) something.  Screw that, you want something work for it, save for it.  Don't like your circumstances in life?  Change them.  Thanks.  By-Bye.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

Damn do you not know how to freaking read.  Yes, I quoted section 1, read the entire thing.  The only thing that allows you the ability to change is a change in circumstances such as getting married and adding someone to the plan.  Once you change your job and go to a new company you cannot enroll on their plan.  READ THE LANGUAGE.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

I have no issue with Hawaii.  But since you brought it up, why does he have a problem showing his live birth certificate?  Because he doesn't have one.  If he did he would have no problem showing it rather than spending millions of taxpayer $$$ trying to keep it hidden.  Every copy he's tried posting is a fake. 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view alienx's profile

SeldonWI - They may come here for Specialised treatment because they also have private insurance! Humm let's see... Last time I read this reform of healthcare is not out to eliminate private healthcare providers!

 

Duh...

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

I never complained about the work I do or the taxes I pay - and I certainly never felt like I had to give my life stories (I dunno who actually cares) in order to justify myself.  Seems like someone's bitter.  Maybe you won;t be so quick to judge when you turn 65 and start begging for your own handouts (Social Security or Medicare sound familiar)?

 

Well - off to more important things - like how we are all going to pass this bill!

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

Oh God - I cannot believe I have stooped to the level of arguing with a Birther.  I feel dirty... 

August 12, 2009
Click to view MallSecurity's profile

I just skipped to the last page and it says, "Free ice-cream on Wednesdays"  They probably thought they could sneak that in.

August 12, 2009
Click to view alienx's profile

The Ten Health Care Talking Points EVERY PUBLIC OPTION SUPPORTER MUST REPEAT:

 

When you need life-saving care, private insurance companies only profit by denying you and letting you die. If you have paid your premiums on time all your life, you're as likely to be dropped by your private insurance company when you need life-saving care as you are to get treated. A public option gives you a lifeline.

Private insurance companies are spending over a million dollars a day to kill the public option by inventing phony citizen groups, and trying to scare the elderly about euthanasia and pro-lifers with abortion; they know the only way to kill reform is to get people of good conscience fighting each other over misinformation, while they laugh all the way to the bank. They don't think very highly of our intelligence.

We pay more than any other country to be 24th in life expectancy: while the average Canadian family spends less than $2000 a year on health care with no waiting periods for life-saving care, the average American family spends $16,800 a year, waiting for private insurance companies to approve life-saving treatments.

Fourteen thousand Americans lose their health insurance every day; over forty-six million are currently uninsured.

Eighteen thousand Americans DIE each year due to lack of health care: THAT'S 50 A DAY.

Nearly two-thirds of American personal bankruptcies are related to health care costs.

Businesses - particularly small businesses - cannot afford to provide health insurance for their employees under the current employer based private insurance system, and will be forced to either drop their coverage or go out of business unless a public option is passed.

One-sixth of all our government spending is on health care, twice as much as any other country spends out of its budget. Our nation pays $2.5 trillion for care costing $912 billion.

Every independent estimate says the public option will save us money, from saving 150 billion dollars (CBO) to saving 265 billion dollars (Commonwealth). The Congressional Budget Office estimates the current bill in the House would actually leave a 6 billion dollar surplus.

So - if you'd rather spend more taxpayer money, bankrupt businesses, AND pay $16,800 a year for your family's private insurance coverage in exchange for a policy that can be dumped the second you actually need it, then the current system is great for you. If you'd rather spend less, wait less, have less of a chance of dying, and want to remove the corporate bureaucrat from between you and your doctor, then a public option is the way to go. Right now, even if you're lucky enough not to be dropped by your provider when you need urgent medical care, your private insurance company can overrule your doctor's advice for life-saving treatment and only offer to cover something cheaper; a public option would remove that middleman and leave these decisions where they belong, between the patient and doctor.

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

Totally with you WendyWill!  I saw something last night briefly with Dr. Gupta - but it was by no means a comprehensive discussion...  Guess we will have to do our own research and...

 

...come to our own conclusions...

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

And let me make one last point.  I'm not against Health care reform, I'm against the government getting involved.  I don't think the government should be paying for abortions, or providing care to illegals.  Yes the bill is not intended for illegals, but without some provision penalizing someone or some hospital for allowing illegals into the system (some sort of check and balance), then there will be abuses.

 

The government should reform by requiring Health Care companies to insure everyone and set reasonable cost levels.  If the government wants to subsidize insurance for those that truely can't afford it, I'm fine with that also.  But the government needs to stay the hell out of the insurance business.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

I never said I was a Birther, I just think it's funny that he can't provide it.  I can't believe I'm arguing with a moron.  :)

August 12, 2009
Click to view alienx's profile

Wut? LOL I had to read you twice SeldonWI!

 

".  I'm not against Health care reform, I'm against the government getting involved." - SeldonWI 2009.

 

Then you say...

"The government should reform by requiring Health Care companies to insure everyone and set reasonable cost levels."

 

So what are you saying?

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

To your comment about Obama never showing his birth certificate - SeldonWI - um, yeah - that's where I draw that conclusion.  Apparently your memory skills are not on par - maybe closer to that age group needing that Medicare gov. hand out, no?

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

Government should not be in the business of PROVIDING insurance.  Reform it, and leave it alone.  They should not be an insurance company.  You shouldn't present (unless your on Medicare,etc.) USA Insurance card to the hospital. 

 

Make the changes that need to be made and get out.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

Tulip - No, actually I'm still in my prime.  But show me 1 BC that's not been proven a fake?  You can't do it. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view alienx's profile

Whats really disgusting about Health Care Reform is for some reason it's a debate.

 

I for one would certainly feel more comfortable knowing that everyone in my Neighborhood has some sort of Health Coverage because as it stands right now in my Neighborhood people are paying to much, having disputes with their insurer or simply have no insurance.

 

But then I am a good neighbor sort of person. All Americans deserve Coverage and if you ask me Each and every single American has a Right to Medical Coverage rich or poor because at the end of the day we all are in this together like it our not. I for one do not like the concept that some people are more equal than others in our current system.

August 12, 2009
Click to view bfoto's profile

If you think health care is bad with the insurance companies running things just wait until the government is in charge. It is very clear that Obama's long term goal in single payor (government) run healthcare. Name one thing that the government has touched that's not screwed up. Why is it that private schools and bottled water are so popular? The alternatives are unacceptable. You want the same people to run health care that run the postal service?! I want choice, even if I have to pay for it; not some beaucrat in a cubicle deciding what care I am allowed acces to. But hey if that's what you want, vote for Obamacare! 

August 12, 2009
Click to view tuliplady's profile

Well SeldonWI - to that I say - show him yours, and he may show you his.  Would you do this?

 

Above all - this is besides the point!  I am still an advocate for the HR3200 party...  Sort of like a book discussion group - but much more important!

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

LOL.  That's a crock.  Whatever, that has to be the dumbest thing I've heard.  I want what's best for my neighbors, but not at my expense or my kids expense. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

See that's the thing.  I will show him mine, but I don't have to.  I'm not seeking a position that the Constitution requires citizenship to hold.  He does, and should therefore be required to show it.

 

But you're right, CNN is known for it's left wing kooks and you aren't really having any type of intelligent discussion about the bill, but rather just parroting what Pelosi and Obama tell you to parrot.  But anywho, no worries, I'm done arguing with a group that wants the government to do the thinking for them. 

August 12, 2009
Click to view alienx's profile

" I want what's best for my neighbors, but not at my expense or my kids expense" - SeldonWI

 

Well that pretty much decides what kind of person you are right there. How do you feel about American Sodlier's in Iraq or Afghanistan? Every American Soldier's life is valued very highly and yet your nieghbor can die just because he has no Medical Coverage?

 

American's right now are dieing in droves way more so daily from lack of medical coverage than Afghanistan or Iraq combined. In America right now 50 Americans die from lack of medical coverage.

 

And it's fair to you?

August 12, 2009
Click to view alienx's profile

That is 50 Americans Die daily from not having any Medical Care simply because they can not afford it.

 

That is what the News Headlines should be showing.

 

50 Americans Died today from Lack of Health Coverage.

Thats right from Dusk to Dawn 50 Americans will die when all they needed was some Medical Coverage they couldnt afford.

 

For the people that say "We can not afford to cover everyone" I simply got this. "Yes we can" and if it's not possible we all better make it possible because we as a people have done everything else under the sun nothing is impossible...

August 12, 2009
Click to view dmmidwest's profile

Another place to learn about health care proposals are some of the larger health care facilities that have health care policy centers, such as Kaiser Permanente Health Policy Center and the Mayo Clinic Health Policy Center. 

 

I don't think either of these organizations are viewed as liberal left-wing places, I encourage you do take a look at what they are encouraging.

 

I keep hearing come conservatives and/or Republicans say that every one has access to health care....just go to the ER.  Even if the patient cannot afford to pay the bill...someone has to.  Do you have any idea has to how much hospitals write off because of bad debt, etc?  Even if they write them off, the services provided still have to be paid for, wages, materials, etc.  Providing health care coverage upfront is so much more cost effective than paying for it at the end.

 

And people, when ill, need to be concerned about getting well, not about having a bake sale to pay for their health care.

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

I highly suspect your facts are correct, but if they are then 1) my guess is they would still die for whatever cause even with health care 2) they can go to the ER and get care even if they can't afford it.

 

Quit being a bleeding heart.  I care for mine, you care for yours.  I'm not asking for your help nor do I feel entitled to yours.

August 12, 2009
Click to view erich's profile

I have read the bill cover to cover. Twice.

 

It is packed to the teeth with government micromanagement of health care. The majority of the bill has to do with government management, auditing, and absolute iron-fisted control over your health care by government bureaucrats.

 

It's just as much socialist as it is fascist and totalitarian. The goal of the bill is quite clear if you read it: the total elimination of private health care - not just private insurance, but private health care as well. It is debatable whether you will even be allowed to go to a doctor to pay cash, because a government bureau will decide which doctors get to see which patients.

 

Doctors will be under the complete control of the government under this proposal. When you go to medical school, the government will tell you what you can specialize in. When you graduate from medical school, the government will decide where you do your residency. When you finish your residency, the government will decide where you go to practice, and how much you get paid, IF you get paid at all. There are a million different reasons the government can withhold payment.

 

People, this is truly a debacle of a bill. It will not do anything to make health care more available. If anything, it will cause a shortage of health care because nobody will want to become a doctor under the intense micromanagement by the government.

 

Yes, health care in this country has problems, but this bill is NOT the solution. It cannot be a solution if it creates more problems and doesn't solve any of the existing ones.

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view mbrown's profile

Daimy, you make a good point.  The insurance companies would have to meet all the federal standards maybe....

So any loss of current coverage would force people into the new federal standard insurance policies ...You might be right on that.  Not sure I like that though.

I read somewhere that there is a $5000/$10000 ind or family costs that cannot be paid by coinsurance.  Not sure where to refind that part.

August 12, 2009
Click to view tally0413's profile

OK. Someone decipher this for me. Because to me it says that after the first year I am stuck on whatever plan I have now and if I leave my employer than I must go on the government plan.

 

SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT

2 COVERAGE.

3 (a) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COV4

ERAGE DEFINED.—Subject to the succeeding provisions of

5 this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable 6 coverage under this division, the term ‘‘grandfathered health

7 insurance coverage’’ means individual health insurance

8 coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the

9 first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:

10 (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.—

11 (A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in

12 this paragraph, the individual health insurance

13 issuer offering such coverage does not enroll

14 any individual in such coverage if the first ef

15 fective date of coverage is on or after the first

16 day of Y1.

17 (B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PER18

MITTED.—Subparagraph (A) shall not affect

19 the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an

20 individual who is covered as of such first day.

21 (2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR

22 CONDITIONS.—Subject to paragraph (3) and except

23 as required by law, the issuer does not change any

24 of its terms or conditions, including benefits and

25 cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day be26

fore the first day of Y1.

VerDate Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS

17

•HR 3200 IH

1 (3) RESTRICTIONS ON PREMIUM INCREASES.—

2 The issuer cannot vary the percentage increase in

3 the premium for a risk group of enrollees in specific

4 grandfathered health insurance coverage without

5 changing the premium for all enrollees in the same

6 risk group at the same rate, as specified by the

7 Commissioner.

8 (b) GRACE PERIOD FOR CURRENT EMPLOYMENT9

BASED HEALTH PLANS.—

10 (1) GRACE PERIOD.—

11 (A) IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner

12 shall establish a grace period whereby, for plan

13 years beginning after the end of the 5-year pe14

riod beginning with Y1, an employment-based

15 health plan in operation as of the day before

16 the first day of Y1 must meet the same require

17 ments as apply to a qualified health benefits

18 plan under section 101, including the essential

19 benefit package requirement under section 121.

20 (B) EXCEPTION FOR LIMITED BENEFITS

21 PLANS.—Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to

22 an employment-based health plan in which the

23 coverage consists only of one or more of the fol24

lowing:

VerDate Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS

18

•HR 3200 IH

1 (i) Any coverage described in section

2 3001(a)(1)(B)(ii)(IV) of division B of the

3 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

4 of 2009 (Public Law 111–5).

5 (ii) Excepted benefits (as defined in

6 section 733(c) of the Employee Retirement

7 Income Security Act of 1974), including

8 coverage under a specified disease or ill9

ness policy described in paragraph (3)(A)

10 of such section.

11 (iii) Such other limited benefits as the

12 Commissioner may specify.

13 In no case shall an employment-based health

14 plan in which the coverage consists only of one

15 or more of the coverage or benefits described in

16 clauses (i) through (iii) be treated as acceptable

17 coverage under this division

18 (2) TRANSITIONAL TREATMENT AS ACCEPT19

ABLE COVERAGE.—During the grace period specified

20 in paragraph (1)(A), an employment-based health

21 plan that is described in such paragraph shall be

22 treated as acceptable coverage under this division.

23 (c) LIMITATION ON INDIVIDUAL HEALTH INSURANCE

24 COVERAGE.—

VerDate Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS

19

•HR 3200 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Individual health insurance

2 coverage that is not grandfathered health insurance

3 coverage under subsection (a) may only be offered

4 on or after the first day of Y1 as an Exchange-par5

ticipating health benefits plan.

6 (2) SEPARATE, EXCEPTED COVERAGE PER7

MITTED.—Excepted benefits (as defined in section

8 2791(c) of the Public Health Service Act) are not

9 included within the definition of health insurance

10 coverage. Nothing in paragraph (1) shall prevent the

11 offering, other than through the Health Insurance

12 Exchange, of excepted benefits so long as it is of13

fered and priced separately from health insurance

August 12, 2009
Click to view SeldonWI's profile

That's what it says.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

Here ya go. people are denying that Obama is against figureing your end of life

http://radioviceonline.com/obama-to-heart-patient-take-a-pill/

He basically says someone will determine if you should no longer need health care and you shou;ld take a pill to reduce the pain. Pretty sad coming from a president.

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

Iy says eliminate HC companies. Yey they are taking them over to buy time to create there own. That what it says.

August 12, 2009
Click to view C33's profile
C33

Many of you have argued that the federal government is more capable of managing a health care system than private industry.  You have analogized the military (largely operated by the federal government).  Our military does a wonderful job; however, have you forgotten the stories that circulated not long ago about the horrible conditions of military health care or the utter lack of body armor and necessary equipment.  Even if government runs some things well, it doesn't mean it will run all things well.  Do you remember FEMA's failure after hurricane katrina?  Let's not forget Social Security.  Now that I think of it, there has been a push to replace or delete (at least in part) these government programs with private industry in both the Clinton and Bush administrations. 

 

In the current wars and hurricane Katrina, private industry is and was instrumental in accomplishing necessary tasks.  The difference in those situations is that an economic demand was created by the wars/disasters - which was paid for by government.  Even if poor government health care creates a demand for a private alternative, private industry has no incentive to participate, because it cannot compete with an entity (the government) that only has to survive on taxpayer revenue, rather than make a profit (a word that is not in the government's vocabulary). 

 

Finally, you like the idea of a deeply involved government now that Obama is in office.  Ask yourself, how did you like government involvement, and how much confidence did you have in the government, when Bush was in office.  A new government run healthcare plan will not cease the moment Obama leaves office, and his successor may not be quite as attractive to you. 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view jbroui42's profile

A live example of what "Big Government" will lead us to:

 

 

Thursday July 23,2009

By Alison Little 

 

THOUSANDS of the worst families in England are to be put in “sin bins” in a bid to change their bad behaviour, Ed Balls announced yesterday.

 

 

The Children’s Secretary set out £400million plans to put 20,000 problem families under 24-hour CCTV super-vision in their own homes.

 

They will be monitored to ensure that children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.

 

Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks, while parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction.

 

Around 2,000 families have gone through these Family Intervention Projects so far.

 

But ministers want to target 20,000 more in the next two years, with each costing between £5,000 and £20,000 – a potential total bill of £400million.

 

Ministers hope the move will reduce the number of youngsters who get drawn into crime because of their chaotic family lives, as portrayed in Channel 4 comedy drama Shameless.

 

Sin bin projects operate in half of council areas already but Mr Balls wants every local authority to fund them.

 

He said: “This is pretty tough and non-negotiable support for families to get to the root of the problem. There should be Family Intervention Projects in every local authority area because every area has families that need support.”

 

But Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: “This is all much too little, much too late.

 

“This Government has been in power for more than a decade during which time anti-social behaviour, family breakdown and problems like alcohol abuse and truancy have just got worse and worse.”

 

Mr Balls also said responsible parents who make sure their children behave in school will get new rights to complain about those who allow their children to disrupt lessons.

Pupils and their families will have to sign behaviour contracts known as Home School Agreements before the start of every year, which will set out parents’ duties to ensure children behave and do their homework.

 

The updated Youth Crime Action Plan also called for a crackdown on violent girl gangs as well as drug and alcohol abuse among young women.

 

But a decision to give ministers new powers to intervene with failing local authority Youth Offending Teams was criticised by council leaders.

 

Les Lawrence, of the Local Government Association, said they did “crucial” work and such intervention was “completely unnecessary”.

 

 

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view KCPA's profile

alienx, "Well that pretty much decides what kind of person you are right there."

The difference is:

The conservative realizes the money needed to pay for this is theirs.

You realize the money needed to pay for this is "theirs"!

August 12, 2009
Click to view daimyo60's profile

Mbrown

I think you may be referring to page 29 starting at line 3

ANNUAL LIMITATION.—The cost-sharing incurred under the essential benefits package with respect to an individual (or family) for a year does not exceed the applicable level specified in subparagraph (B).

(B) APPLICABLE LEVEL.—The applicable level specified in this subparagraph for Y1 is $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family. Such levels shall be increased (rounded to the nearest $100) for each subsequent year

by the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (United States city average)

applicable to such year.

Cost sharing is defined as "includes deductibles, coinsurance, copayments, and similar charges but does not include premiums or any network payment differential for covered services or spending for non-covered services."

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

Tierd of the lies. The Dems seem to be the biggest offender. The one liners from the bill also add. some are true and some are opinion. All in a nut shell the Dems are posting ficticous report and the repubs are on the defense. The real liers are the dems. No one is saying anything for the free. This is my opinion. This is my right. Who is lying now. The dems are saying we need this now. They do not care what anyone of you people think. Please let me see that they care about there own supports.

August 12, 2009
Click to view bakersdozen's profile

A parable that I PROMISE is pertinent to the discussion, if you will:

 

My wife and I run a small bakery.  Recently a large grocery chain located two blocks from our store opened a new bakery department. 

New options are great for the consumer for sure, but these guys have an inifinte marketing budget, can lower their prices to the floor and are located in the "high traffic" zone of a grocery store so they have convenience as well.

 

We now must decide to:

 

1.  Lower our costs (and our quality) so we can lower our prices and compete

 

2.  Raise our prices and offer a superior product that is targeted to our high end clientel.

 

3.  Stay the course and likely go out of business

 

I imagine a similar "Wal Mart" effect will occur in the healthcare industry REGARDLESS of how the government participates.  When a "new kid" comes onto the scene with infinitely deep pockets and no requirement to run a "profitable business" the other players will have to change or go out of business.  Basically, they have the same alternatives I do...go up, go down or go out.  So as private insurance companies stop offering policies that "compete" with the government's offering they will likely carve out a premium niche offering "gold plated" insurance to those few who can afford it.  Very few private employers can or will be able to offer this "gold plated" option leaving them with fewer options in the private sector or simply leaving their employees to participate in the government program.  It puts us right back where we are.... great coverage for those who can afford it, and a bureaucratic government option for the rest of us with few alternatives as those who chose to stay the course and compete have likely gone out of business .  Thoughts or comments?

August 12, 2009
Click to view morecoffeeee's profile

Look... the IRS, USPS, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, Freddy Mac Fredd bla, bla... Amtrak!!! c'mon guys, the government is not good at running things, and they don't want to be - more room for corruption, kick backs and pork...

Barack said "Look at UPS and FedEx" compared to the USPS... what does this mean... we all know the USPS is in the toilet, so are we comfortable with our president suggesting we should be comforted that this will be just another failed system, what was the point??

If constituents (us) were more engaged - like the "Nazis"

at town halls, we would not be here... reform would be enacted... ,we don't care!, but now we do!!!

I've been to dozens of countries (living overseas, business and pleasure) and have, unfortunately, experienced alternative medical care, not to mention what is being said within these systems and the desire to come HERE... and also not to mention these systems as a whole aside from there medical care - we can't afford to go there - physically or financially!

Let's not just look at what we are trying to do, but where we might end up if we don't do this right.

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view mumbojumbo's profile

TO: tally 0423

 

This means you keep what you got if you want, before

the start of the enactment of the law which will begin

as Y1.

 

I have download HR 3200 in PDF format which I obtained from the GPO offical site.  It's very easy to find what your looking for and all sections are clear and numbered.

 

 

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

I have not seen anu opposition to my posts. I am neither a dem or a repub. This is my opinion and it is getting sad over the left and the right.Obama does beleive that there is a time to end life but morally there is nonr. Did anyone look at he town hall vodeo? Value opinions. If there is none the guess what, HCR is wrong.

 

 

 

the one liners do have to bre

August 12, 2009
Click to view Opionated598's profile

We need to stop the lawsuites. Son/daughter dies from simple surgury. You sue for 50mil. Jury awards 40mil. They are dead but we make them pay Why. They are dead and any award will not bring them back. So now the doc had to pay malpractice imsurane for this problem. People need to loook at the real problem/

August 12, 2009
Click to view bakersdozen's profile

In an attempt to find common ground.  Is ANYONE opposed to:

 

1.  Elected officials having to participate and live by any law or scheme they pass

 

2.  Tort reform being included in this bill, recognizing that it IS a cost driver no matter how you politically feel about it.

August 13, 2009
Click to view just4discush's profile

TO GET THE FACTS ON PUBLIC HEALTH CARE REFORM GOTO: www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck

August 14, 2009
Click to view hartsafire's profile

My husband lost his job of 30 years in January because they did not have a union.  The company he worked for has been getting rid of the managers and the highest paid employees because they can. He is 52 and not ready for retirement.  We are now under cobra until January 9th 2010 with the help of the government for $247.  In January it goes back up to $706 for 9 more months (which is unaffordable).  Everyone is talking about free abortions...with title 19 WE ALREADY HAVE FREE ABORTIONS, so this issue is mute. 

 

Our biggest problem (besides finding a job) is we took out $60,000 from our 401k to settle with our creditors.  Now we'll be getting taxed on what we SUPPOSEDLY gained (the interest was eliminated but for 10 years they made their $$$$$) and in addition we'll also be taxed on what we took out of our 401k to get out of debt, and regain our credit so my husband can have a better chance to find a job. 

 

August 18, 2009
Click to view johnn4girls's profile

for all those people who don't want goverment in health care then i would say this  let the goverment refund everybodys money that they paid towards medicare and let them get there own insurance and see what they can afford and you will see everybody crying foul but there is nothing in the constitution that says goverment has to offer medicare. I have been watching the news and everybody keeps saying read the constitution. when somebody has to pay at least 1,000.00 a month for insurance and that is basic for family of 5(no frills)then maybe they might think twice about the goverment getting involved. I have already told my wife if get sick and i can't afford it to take me out back and shoot me so I say let the goverment help the people and not the money hungry insurance companies that realy don't care weather we live or die as long as they make money

August 19, 2009
Click to view ananp's profile
Killing health care reform has always been easier than creating consensus (especially if you're willing to demagogue the issue with "death panels"). But amid all the screaming, here's a point that adds important contextual ballast: Americans don't really think their health care is so hot. People wonder who is behind the town hall riots when anyone discusses health care reform, or Obamacare – the answer is Conservatives for Patients' Rights. Conservatives for Patients Rights, or the CPR, is headed by one Rick Scott – who isn't a doctor – but used to be the CEO of a hospital, and under his watch, his medical administration defrauded Medicare of $1.7 billion through a practice called upcoding, wherein a Medicare patient gets treated, but Medicare is billed for additional tests that never took place. (That's fraud.) Realistically, Conservatives for Patients Rights and Mr. Scott will never need short term loans, and the only reason why they oppose the bill is that they want the money from the program for themselves.
September 4, 2009
Click to view canadareport's profile

Hey

  I'm from Canada where the gov't takes care of our health care. It's great we don't have to worry about hospital visits or doctors appointments. We get no bill after that we can't afford because the gov't pays for it. We all get the same level of care no matter how much money or insurance we make or have. When this bill was passed there was the same up roar as you guys are having now. But now the priminister who passed the healthcare is a national hero for doing so.

December 6, 2009
n Jimmy Choo Wallet-JM002-White replica watches cost. replica handbag Although relatively new Thomaswylde handbags to the watchmaking cheap Versace handbags industry, Louis Vuitton Prada handbags replica is an old Dolce&Gabbana handbags and respected company. cheap Cartier handbags Best known as handbag replicas a suitcase/luggage maker, Replica Motorcycle Balenciaga Vuitton started his designer inspired Hermes handbags business in 1854. Over the years, his descendents expanded their travel industry business and ventured into the handn replica Ulysse Nardin Maxi Marine Chronometer Mens Watch 263-66-3.62 replica watches cost. Emporio Armani Replica Watches Although relatively new replica watches release to the watchmaking Chopard Happy Snowflake watches industry, Louis Vuitton luxury swiss is an old replica Omega Constellation Diamond Steel Black Mini Ladies Watch 1566.56 and respected company. high quality swiss Best known as Rado Replica Watches a suitcase/luggage maker, Omega Deville 18kt Yellow Gold and Steel Mens Watch 4310.11 watch Vuitton started his replica watches release business in 1854. Over the years, his descendents expanded their travel industry business and ventured into the handn Omega De Ville Co-Axial Chronograph Ladies Quartz replica watch replica watches cost. Rado Jubile Quartz replica watch Although relatively new PAM039 Panerai Luminor Submersible Automatic replica watch to the watchmaking Replica Cartier phasa white ss case with diamond Quartz Movement industry, Louis Vuitton Patek Philippe Grand Complications Replica Watch is an old womens Bell-Ross Watches Bell-Ross Watches and respected company. Audemars Piguet Quartz Chronograph replica watch Best known as discount rolex replicas a suitcase/luggage maker, Alain Silberstein Krono Automatic replica watch Vuitton started his imitation Hublot Watches business in 1854. Over the years, his descendents expanded their travel industry business and ventured into the hand
December 6, 2009
Chanel New2009 Chanel bag and respected company. Thomaswylde knockoff handbags Best known as Replica Bottega Veneta Bottega Veneta a suitcase/luggage maker, Gucci small sabrina-dark brown Vuitton started his Chanel knockoff handbags business in 1854. Mulberry Handbag 20054-03-Black Over the years, Chanel 35474-Gold his descendents expanded Gucci G189835-guccisima leather in black their travel industry discount replica handbags business and ventured handbag replica into the handbag market in 1892. In 1997, the company offered a line of pens, and then entered the fashion jewelr replica watches and respected company. fake swiss Best known as IWC Da Vinci replicas a suitcase/luggage maker, Louis Vuitton Tambour Chronographs Ladies Tambour Watch LV031 watch Vuitton started his Bedat & CO Replica Watches business in 1854. Rado Replica Watches Over the years, Roger Dubuis Golden Square Mens Watch G40.5739.5.3.62 watch his descendents expanded replica Tag Heuer Formula 1 Midsize Watch WAC1213.BA0851 their travel industry Zenith Replica Watches business and ventured swiss watch replicas into the handbag market in 1892. In 1997, the company offered a line of pens, and then entered the fashion jewelr Louis Vuitton Watches Louis Vuitton Watches and respected company. Omega Watches watch Constellation Best known as Best Replica watches a suitcase/luggage maker, Panerai Luminor Marina Automatic replica watch Vuitton started his exact rolex replica business in 1854. Chopard Replica Watches - Chopard Happy LOVE Over the years, swiss Breguet Watches replica his descendents expanded replica Glashutte Watches watch their travel industry high replica Ferrari Watches business and ventured Romain Jerome Watches copy into the handbag market in 1892. In 1997, the company offered a line of pens, and then entered the fashion jewelr
January 2, 2010
January 2, 2010
January 4, 2010
Click to view Nicka's profile
Nice Post.
January 12, 2010
Buy low and sell high. There is a good source to help your business grow and profitable to buy handbags at wholesale prices from our best China wholesale online stores offering wide range of wholesale products including cheap handbags, designer handbags, wholesale handbags, replica handbags, UGG boots, shoes, clothing, watches, jewelry, wallets, wholesale shoes, wholesale clothing, wholesale watches, wholesale jewelry, wholesale wallets, wholesale UGG boots and many more. Whatever style you choose, you would get a good price!
March 3, 2010
Click to view 65wef's profile
t watches

Longines Master Collection Mens Watch L2.629.4.51.2 For Sale

leave hunt for if

replica Tag Heuer Exclusive 2000 Mens Watch WN2110.BA0359

anyone who. Pc, we

Cartier Pasha 18kt Rose Gold Mens Watch W3019051 For Sale

already her vehicle, which lehman spoken accumulation verbal

cheap Cartier Ballon Bleu CART-21-304 watch replica

sgt. Exchange, both genius

cheap Panerai Luminor QUARTZ Chronograph PANE-18-716 watch replica

and russert cede cut

cheap C1 Chronograph CC-5-409 watch replica

werken met custer.Swiss haste reflection Watches Thank

replica louis vuitton handbags

a skipper ii, a

designer bag

affliction due to greco-roman

designer bags

wrestling. Marks obamas swell answ writer, i cook

cubic zirconia jewelry

swiss alertness figure watches

fake Plum Cultured Freshwater Pearl Stretch Bracelet

this gain orders. Felony

Sterling Silver Classic Bezel Set CZ Necklace outlet

encounter of vintages smelled gasoline come

replica jewelry

across due to disposition

replica tiffany jewelry

possibility. Altman creator swiss

replica tiffany & co

going likeness watches of sections 3,

replica watches

5, the choice mood

replica watches

spare colloquial election.Replica Watches

replica watches

prominence The Uk Recognizes real
March 12, 2010
Considerably, the post is actually the greatest on this precious subject. I concur with your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your coming updates. Saying thanks will not just be sufficient, for the superb clarity in your writing. I will instantly grab your feeds to stay informed of any updates. Good work and much success in your business dealings! Best regards, Angelina!. free online games | escape games | adventure games | dress up games | download free games| racing games
March 16, 2010
April 17, 2010
Click to view haciabbas's profile
April 17, 2010
ucvhost is a leading web site hosting service provider that is known to provide reliable and affordable hosting packages to customers. cheap hosting company believes in providing absolute and superior control to the customer as well as complete security and flexibility through its many packages. windows hosting Moreover, the company provides technical support as well as customer service 24x7, in order to enable its customer price. Thanks instaspace
April 17, 2010
ucvhost is a leading web site hosting service provider that is known to provide reliable and affordable hosting packages to customers. cheap hosting company believes in providing absolute and superior control to the customer as well as complete security and flexibility through its many packages. windows hosting Moreover, the company provides technical support as well as customer service 24x7, in order to enable its customer price. Thanks instaspace
You must be logged in to post a comment.



About the iReport Blog

The latest and greatest on CNN iReport, brought to you by Team iReport.


Categories Recent posts Monthly Subscribe