Congress: Health-care challenges

Clayton Poole, Indiana — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:22:37 GMT

Health Care - DOA.

Nice try though Dems.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Eric, Salinas, CA — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:43:22 GMT

There are plenty of ways to pay for health care with the public option and the best way is to end Raygunz's tax cut welfare for the richest and greediest. Time to replace the two top tax brackets that Raygunz got rid of and once again make the richest and greediest pay their fair share of taxes once again. Anyone who isn't making a million dollars or more poer year is an idiot to not support bringing back these top tax brackets because they are foolish enough to pay higher taxes to ensure the richest and greediest don't pay their fair share. I like Obama's attempts to limit the tax deductions that allow the richest and greediest to skip paying their fair share of taxes.

We need the public option for health care because the private insurance companies will never cover the poor and middle class who can't afford their ripoff insurance rates.

Support the Public Option for Health Care Reform!

Congress: Health-care challenges

DG, Houston, TX — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:55:16 GMT

I think FR wrongly categorizes level headed Democrats as "conservative." The are actually moderates. Those in support of sweeping government takeovers of everything from the auto industry, banks, and healthcare would be considered liberal.

Eric in Salinas, You're contempt for "rich" people seems to drive just about all your comments. All rich people are not greedy and they are the job producers in this country. If you haven't noticed, more and more people are unemployed each month. It doesn't make a lot of sense to increase their tax burden so that more jobs are eliminated.

The public option is completely unnecessary and the idea gets in the way of the real work that needs to be done to lower healthcare cost. Anyone that thinks that a public option is the only way to do this, is certainly applying limited thinking. There are so many ways to cut healthcare cost and regulate the industry, but so many liberals just say public option, public option, public option. Open your minds liberals.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Juan,Ft Lauderdale,Fl — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:56:23 GMT

Small businesses who have say 10 employees could care less about offering hlth benefits because it's about profit first and if just 1 employee gets sick for awhile it's YOUR FIRED. Theirfore, it makes alot of since for them to fall back to the federal government to step up and offer an alternative hlth coverage. What's wrong w/ offerring real compassion that the Rethuglicans parrot everytime they are running for office.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Kelly (from Pittsburgh) — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:59:31 GMT

Keep the pressure on the Blue Dogs to vote for a public option.I am so sick of hearing the arguement that the public option will lead to single payer. If the insurers can't compete with the big bureaucratic goverment in this area, then it should be a private business. I am for whatever plan offers the medicine to all americans with the best care and best price. Clearly private insurers have had chances and are failing on all fronts. This isn't socialism, it is capitalism. Compete or Die.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Cub Reporter, Portland, Maine — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:01:07 GMT

Senate Democrats opposing the public option will back down when Obama gets back in town.

House Democrats opposing real health reform will be whipped into compliance because they come up for re-election and can't susatin the pressure of 72% of the American people who want the public option, ie. real reform. Even so-called 'Blue Dogs' understand that health reform cuts across class, party and ethnic lines.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Carly,NY,NY — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:06:41 GMT

It is time for real healthcare reform. Americans need to know that they have coverage no matter what happens in their lives. Insurance companies need to be controlled. There is a related post at http://iamsoannoyed.com/?page_id=588

Congress: Health-care challenges

eagle1776 — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:07:07 GMT

Senator Sanders is just now figuring out that the health care revolution will not be bi-partisan? Where has he been? The party of NO won't let anything FOR THE PEOPLE pass if they can help it. Now, if it were to benefit the wealthy or huge corporations the party of NO would say yes, yes ,definately yes.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Feisty Brownhair — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:10:22 GMT

Congress: Health-care challenges

Anna Molly — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:17:13 GMT

Issa is apparently a typical republican -- blame the victim.

It isn't lawmakers who should take the lie-detector tests before RECEIVING briefings; it's the CIA who should take the tests before GIVING briefings.

Because then we wouldn't have to worry about the lawmakers, would we?

Congress: Health-care challenges

Tim D., Harrisburg, PA — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:17:48 GMT

Eric,

How do people who pay more taxes that you not "pay their fair share"? A family making $250,000 a year pays much more in taxes, but doesn't receive additional government services. Actually, they receive substantially less, since they aren't eligible for government programs, including student loans. So on top of paying higher taxes, that family is likely going to have to pay 100% of the cost of their children's higher education, which can be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Sorry you're so bitter about not being successful, but it's wrong that others aren't paying their fair share. But you'll keep calling people names while you wait for the next government handout.

Congress: Health-care challenges

no joe, no bo, nj — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:41:20 GMT

How about a little history lesson-

before I ever learned to drive, my state enacted legislation makin automobile insurance mandatory. In order to cover those who cuold not afford car insurance, but who needed their vehicles in order to work, the state also enacted a 'public option' of sorts-payhment to the state that put them in a state pool. This would have been in the late'60's, early '70's.

It didn't take too long before everybody and his little brother was in the state pool. So, they enacted an income cap on the 'public option'. Nope, still too many people in the pool. So, they eradicated it, and forced insurers to cover people for 'reasonable rates'. Of course, most of the people forced into the market were poorer, and lived in cities. Therefore, their actuarial risks were higher than someone who lived in a more rural part of the state. Since it was 'unfair' for those who lived in the rural parts of the state to pay lower rates than those who lived in the cities, the state attempted to equalize rates, which, of course, forced up rates for EVERYBODY.

There were also numerous mandates on coverage, insurance surcharges to lessen rates in the cities, etc., etc. That caused such an outcry that the state put a lot of regulations on the insurers. THAT, in turn, caused many insurers to leave the state, leaving us with the highest rates in the country, (yes, including NYC, Chicago, and LA), AND fewer choices.

Finally, we got a republican governor AND legislature, and they removed most of the mandates and regulations. The people in the cities SCREAMED about the increase in their rates, but more insurers came into the state, and the competition drove the price down. While many democrats continue to wail about the exhorbitant prices paid by city residents, none of them actually do anything about it, because they have learned from that particular mistake.

Now, imagine if this had been a national system. Once the insurers were gone, they would not come back. We'd be left with no competition to drive down the price, so the only way to do it would be to cut service.

Today, we are greeted with the fact that 'mammograms result in over-treatment'. Think that has anything to do with the billions being cut from Medicaid/Medicare? I don't see anyone in the media drawing a straight line between the two, but it is there, people.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Ivoted — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:44:18 GMT

Stop the crap we have the money just look at that waste on NASA which has no definite help or affect on our Nation except for the waste of billions of dollars for the fascination that is imaginary and tearing big wholes in the ozone layer which is a main source of Global warming not to mention we donate plenty of money to other nations we are going to pay somehow someday just look at it like this some of us who just received a boost in our pay from President Obama can have 8$ a week tooken back or 16$ byweekly taken back or 5$ from the entitlement folfs for it is money that we didn't have before but should be willing to pitch in that;s what Vice President Biden was hinting at earlier this year the OLd Politics must stop now

Congress: Health-care challenges

Ivoted — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:44:28 GMT

Congress: Health-care challenges

Historian — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:53:19 GMT

Name one social program by the democrats that works?
You can't.
BTW, where would the million of jobs promised by Obama be?

Feisty Brownhair (Sent Friday, July 10, 2009 10:10 AM)

Social Security has prevents millions of older Americans from living in poverty. Medicare has provided millions of older Americans with healthcare that they otherwise would not be able to afford. While I agree that these programs are in trouble financially and need to be reformed, their historic success is apparent. Your partisan blinders just prevents you from seeing that.

Congress: Health-care challenges

32 czars for 150 milion a year — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:21:57 GMT

What most of you dunderhead librals don't understand is that nobody is against health care reform. It is a matter of paying for it. It appears that some dems are beginning to realize there are consequences to decisons rather that BoBo's plan off pass bills now and figure out how to pay for them later. The lack of thought put into the porkulus bill in an effort to pass it quickly is coming home to roost. I doubt that you people would buy something for your own households without knowing the cost. Why should the government be any differrant. After all , it is our money , not theirs. Change for the sake of change doesn't work. The republicans do offer alternatives even though your lefty talking points won't allow you to admit it. They just have the foresight to know that you have to have a way to pay for it. Just common sense but it is apparant that the libs don't have any. That is why they want to live off someones elese income. The rich are an easy target. They already have to work 5 months just to pay there taxes while you libs live off governemnet handouts. Your solution is to have them work 7 months to pay their taxes before they can keep a dime. How do they employ someone with that burden?

Congress: Health-care challenges

Jim — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:23:25 GMT

Anyone who thinks the public option will work has obviously never worked for the government. Pretty much anything the government runs is expensive, inefficient and poor quality. Also those who talk about private not being able to compete with public as a joke, dont know what they are talking about. Private has to worry about costs that the government doesn't. Thats unfair by definition. We need reform but not that. And thats all beside the fact that we cant afford a public option along with everything else Obama is committed to.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Mo — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:33:54 GMT

The public option is completely unnecessary and the idea gets in the way of the real work that needs to be done to lower healthcare cost. Anyone that thinks that a public option is the only way to do this, is certainly applying limited thinking. There are so many ways to cut healthcare cost and regulate the industry, but so many liberals just say public option, public option, public option. Open your minds liberals.

DG, Houston, TX (Sent Friday, July 10, 2009 9:55 AM)

You neo-cons are very good at saying there are many ways to cut health care costs. If there are so many ways why don't you tell us what they are not just generalize. Personally I don't think you know what your talking about, just spouting the neo-con talking points.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Bisu, Ann Arbor, MI — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:39:48 GMT

If we do not pass serious reform this country is doomed. We will go the way of GM. Republicans fought against raising mileage standards and now this country is years behind the World in that respect. If this country is financially ruined because of healthcare, the Republicans will not understand that it is their fault and we will all suffer. To give power or any credibility to them is foolish. Do we still blame the Republicans for GM's fall? Do you remember the people who brought down Rome? They still thought they were right and never took any blame for it. Same with the Republicans.

We cannot wait for this country to fall and say to the Republicans, told you so. It has happened with mileage standards, the financial system and so on.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Mo — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:41:41 GMT

Name one social program by the democrats that works?
You can't.
BTW, where would the million of jobs promised by Obama be?

Feisty Brownhair (Sent Friday, July 10, 2009 10:10 AM)

Brownhair ask that question when you start collecting your social security check, medicare payments, and how is that health care for congress working, do you ever think about what your saying before you say it? How dump can you neo-cons actually be

Congress: Health-care challenges

attaturk, wildwood, fl — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:41:49 GMT

I see three myths blatantly shown on this page - One is the rich are overtaxed, (and I don't hate the rich)I'll get nailed in the tax hike and I don't consider myself rich), the fact is 2-3% surtax on a million net, net not gross is 20grand that's like hitting me up for a thousand, chump change. It is beyond foolishness to say that for 20grand they will quit producing jobs, a good portion of them don't produce anything, anyhow.
Second, somehow illegal aliens are to to blame - these martians keep popping up in the argument, they are illegal they hide more than they run out and say see me.
Third, that it is possible to contain health care costs without a public option. Please don't talk stupid - private health insurance got us here, the change from non-profit hospitals and insurers to for-profit got us here, they have proved themselves incapable of providing across the board health-care. Without a public option to hold their feet to the fire, to hopefully reignite the non-profit vision of healthcare there is no hope of reducing costs. Who ever said that this nation would reduce itself to saving lives for profit.

Congress: Health-care challenges

A Voice — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:47:01 GMT

Please tell me:

... how taking money from one person and giving it to someone else is compassion? That is stealing. compassion is when the someone willingly gives of time and/or money to aid someone else. Force has no place in compassion.

... how the public option is fair competetion? If a business over-runs its funds, it goes belly up. If the public option goes over budget, it takes tax money. There cannot be fair competetion. This is not capitalism.

... how many of you think this public plan will cover ALL americans? The CBO said the plan is only to cover about 16 million (a third of those not currently covered). The plan is not full medical coverage, but just insurance. There would still be potential copays, deductibles, coverage maximums, and the administrative decisions of what is covered and what is not. Everything you hate about your current healthcare insurance still applies.

... how can you support a system that does not change anything you currently hate about healthcare? The only thing changing is that the government would be the insurance company. Government plans always go overbudget, are slow to provide any service, and don't actually fix the healthcare problems.

No matter how you look at it, this plan does not lower costs, does not provide the medical needs for all americans, does not even provide for the medical needs of the uninsured.

No matter how you look at it, the benefits offered are sub-par, the price tag (if you believe the current $700 billion) is too high for the planned benefits, and the plan will go overbudget.

How can you support the public option?

Congress: Health-care challenges

George, Oklahoma — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:59:21 GMT

Have any of you even had to try to health insurance from a private company if you are over 50? Some think it is just a matter of paying the premium, but guess what, the companies cherry pick. Did you know that if you have one high blood pressure reading on record, denied, if you have sleep aphnea, denied, if you have high cholesterol, denied.

So don't just think people who don't have it, are lazy or not trying to get it. the undersriting rules prevent it.

Did you know that even if you can get it, for a $5000 deductable, with no doctor visit coverage, no drug coverage, for two, it can cost $700 per month and will climb 20% EACH YEAR.

So give me a break on anyone can get it if they just pay for it.

I am a conservative and we need something that at least forces insurance companies to not reject and to provide reasonable rates at a minimum. Public option is not the total solution, quaranteed coverage, with paying for it a reasonable cost, is what we need now

Yes I am willing to pay for it at a reasonable cost, just give me that opportunity.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Jez Wondering — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:10:40 GMT

Why should we pay for illegal aliens, people too lazy to sign up for other health care options and kids who think that they don't need health insurance by adding trillion more debt to Joe Taxpayer? Name one social program by the democrats that works?
You can't.
BTW, where would the million of jobs promised by Obama be?
Feisty Brownhair (Sent Friday, July 10, 2009 10:10 AM)

Hey feisty..any of your loser relatives on medicare or social security or employer subsidized healthcare?

Congress: Health-care challenges

jacksmith, Dallas, Texas. — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:21:17 GMT

AMERICA’S NATIONAL HEALTHCARE EMERGENCY!

It’s official. America and the World are now in a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. A World EPIDEMIC with potential catastrophic consequences for ALL of the American people. The first PANDEMIC in 41 years. And WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES will have to face this PANDEMIC with the 37th worst quality of healthcare in the developed World.

STAND READY AMERICA TO SEIZE CONTROL OF YOUR NATIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.

We spend over twice as much of our GDP on healthcare as any other country in the World. And Individual American spend about ten times as much out of pocket on healthcare as any other people in the World. All because of GREED! And the PRIVATE FOR PROFIT healthcare system in America.

And while all this is going on, some members of congress seem mostly concern about how to protect the corporate PROFITS! of our GREED DRIVEN, PRIVATE FOR PROFIT NATIONAL DISGRACE. A PRIVATE FOR PROFIT DISGRACE that is in fact, totally valueless to the public health. And a detriment to national security, public safety, and the public health.

Progressive democrats the Tri-Caucus and others should stand firm in their demand for a robust public option for all Americans, with all of the minimum requirements progressive democrats demanded. If congress can not pass a robust public option with at least 51 votes and all robust minimum requirements, congress should immediately move to scrap healthcare reform and request that President Obama declare a state of NATIONAL HEALTHCARE EMERGENCY! Seizing and replacing all PRIVATE FOR PROFIT health insurance plans with the immediate implementation of National Healthcare for all Americans under the provisions of HR676 (A Single-payer National Healthcare Plan For All).

Coverage can begin immediately through our current medicare system. With immediate expansion through recruitment of displaced workers from the canceled private sector insurance industry. Funding can also begin immediately by substitution of payroll deductions for private insurance plans with payroll deductions for the national healthcare plan. This is what the vast majority of the American people want. And this is what all objective experts unanimously agree would be the best, and most cost effective for the American people and our economy.

In Mexico on average people who received medical care for A-H1N1 (Swine Flu) with in 3 days survived. People who did not receive medical care until 7 days or more died. This has been the same results in the US. But 50 million Americans don’t even have any healthcare coverage. And at least 200 million of you with insurance could not get in to see your private insurance plans doctors in 2 or 3 days, even if your life depended on it. WHICH IT DOES!

If President Obama has to declare a NATIONAL STATE OF EMERGENCY to rescue the American people from our healthcare crisis, he will need all the sustained support you can give him. STICK WITH HIM! He’s doing a brilliant job.

THIS IS THE BIG ONE!

THE BATTLE OF GOOD Vs EVIL!

Join the fight.

Contact congress and your representatives NOW! AND SPREAD THE WORD!

God Bless You

Jacksmith – WORKING CLASS

Congress: Health-care challenges

Cathy M, Newport, KY — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:28:48 GMT

The public option is completely unnecessary and the idea gets in the way of the real work that needs to be done to lower healthcare cost. Anyone that thinks that a public option is the only way to do this, is certainly applying limited thinking. There are so many ways to cut healthcare cost and regulate the industry, but so many liberals just say public option, public option, public option. Open your minds liberals.
DG, Houston, TX (Sent Friday, July 10, 2009 9:55 AM)

So please explain and put forth the good plans that you want us to opt for. What are these plans? Please state how to cut costs that you are speaing about. State how to do this. What does your party say about how to do this? Please make that statement, we are all waiting with bated breath.

Congress: Health-care challenges

Scott Greene, Temple City, California — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:07:44 GMT

The product of health insurance is to provide you with medical coverage when you need it.
Unlike other businesses that need to provide you with their product in order to make any money, health insurance companies actually make more money for themselves when they restrict and do not pay claims.
In other words, they make more money when they do NOT provide the product that you have paid them for.

Read the 50 to 70 pages of your health insurance contract.
Pay particular attention to the section entitled “limitations and exclusions”.
People’s health is not a product that needs to be left to the whims of money motivated CEO’s and stockholders.
If that is your thinking, you might as well have your police and fire department protection based on insurance premiums you pay.
Then you can go to the police and fire protection insurance page for ‘limitations and exclusions’ on whether or not the police or fire department would come out to your house in the event of an emergency.

The point is, you would never think of discriminating against another citizen if he was the victim of a fire or crime.
So why would you be ok with health insurance companies discriminating against fellow citizens who have pre-existing medical conditions?