Republicans question health care improvements

[Dan J 277]

.....who the heck is left to pay for this?

the ones that want it so bad.

Everyone pays. Whether you want it or not. That truly is the American way.

Umm, that's not the "American" way.....We are Capatalist, not Socialist and I don't want to pay for your freebie.....

As for the timing of all this; it's absurd in the midst of the worst recession ever and with the debt and deficit this President's run up to record levels, it's simply absurd to do this now.

Republicans have it right: TORT REFORM (Obama as a Laywer himself is resisting this), fix MEDICARE and MEDICAID first and wait for a recovery before throwing the monkey wrench into the HC system......

Try again, even states with low malpractice insurance premiums pay higher than average health insurance premiums. Malpractice insruance rates when down in 2008, do you think your health insurnace rates did too?

[kaydee457 13]

The liberals plan to impose fines on employers who don't provide health care for their employees. This will incentivize employers to terminate their current health-benefits and simply pay the fine, which is sure to be less expensive.

This will force at least 100 million employees (who are happy with their current health care) into the government plan, as well as create a new bureaucracy to impose and enforce the fines. The millions of workers who now have employer-paid health insurance will be very unhappy when they realize that nationalized health care makes them the losers.

link

Don't belive this will happen? I have a bridge to sell you!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Congress has already exempted itself from Public Option

By: Mark Tapscott

Editorial Page Editor

09/08/09 6:41 PM EDT

One of the clearest messages from the Town Hall forums during the August congressional recess was that people want Congress to be covered by the same health care reform plan they impose on the rest of us.

Members of Congress presently get health insurance coverage through the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), which offers enrollees nearly 300 choices among a variety of plans, coverages and costs.

The FEHBP covers federal employees and retirees, as well as Members of Congress, though the latter have additional perks of office that make their health coverage far better than that available - or affordable - for the vast majority of working Americans.

Public anger may explain why the White House is now insisting that Congress has not exempted itself from the Public Option, most notably in this new "Reality Check" video on the White House web site featuring former ABC reporter Linda Douglas, who now flaks for Obama as communications director for the White House Office of Health Care Reform.

The problem is, according to The Heritage Foundation's Robert Moffitt, the White House assertion is "incorrect."

And in this video Moffit points to an amendment offered by Rep. Dean Heller, R-NV, during a House Ways and Means Committee meeting just before the recess began that would have required Members to be covered by the Public Option plan if they approve it for private citizens.

Predictably, however, the Heller amendment was defeated, with all 21 committee Democrats voting against it. That vote is indicative of the reality that any bill requiring Congress to be covered by the same health care as the public has the proverbial snow ball in Hades' chances of being enacted.

Moffitt is presently director of health policy studies at Heritage. During the Reagan administrtion, he was assistant director for congressional relations at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which manages the government's health care program. (FULL DISCLOSURE: I also served as a Reagan appointee with Moffit at OPM, during my pre-journalism career days). In short, Moffit knows Congress and he knows FEHBP.

Moffitt is awfully diplomatic in terming the White House video "incorrect." Something more along the lines of "outrageous propaganda" comes to my mind.

One thing is certain, though - as a journalist who presumably knows the critical importance of getting the facts, Linda Douglas ought to be ashamed of herself, especially since she covered Congress for nearly a decade and thus presumably knows a thing or two about how Members of Congress have given themselves all sorts of perks, including a special place in FEHBP.

Just because you signed up to be a political appointee and left the newsroom behind doesn't mean you have to check your journalistic integrity at the door.

link

Well, I wholeheartedly disagree! The proposals being put forth now are designed to entice your employer to drop your coverage in favor of paying a token fee (fine) for each employee they don't provide medical coverage for.

There will be an avalange of employees forced into the public plan by design.

If this doesn't happen, those of us that do keep employer based HC plans will be forced to subsidize the public plan through exorbitant taxes imposed on us that the Feds have exempted themselves from having to pay.....

If they (the Dems) continue with this craziness they will pay dearly on 2010.....

Well, you're wholeheartedly wrong. I take the assessment of the CBO over that of political hacks any day of the week. And the CBO is on record saying that...:

... a health care reform bill that includes a public option sought by Democrats would result in 3 million more people enrolled in employer-sponsored coverage by 2016, compared with what would happen under current laws.

I think not...

Yes, the CBO knows nothing and the radical right knows it all. Thank you.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

.....who the heck is left to pay for this?

the ones that want it so bad.

Everyone pays. Whether you want it or not. That truly is the American way.

Umm, that's not the "American" way.....We are Capatalist, not Socialist and I don't want to pay for your freebie.....

As for the timing of all this; it's absurd in the midst of the worst recession ever and with the debt and deficit this President's run up to record levels, it's simply absurd to do this now.

Republicans have it right: TORT REFORM (Obama as a Laywer himself is resisting this), fix MEDICARE and MEDICAID first and wait for a recovery before throwing the monkey wrench into the HC system......

If it passes, you pay whether you like it or not. You pay for two wars, whether you like it or not. Got the idea?

[dalegg 143]

• "To the recent college graduate burdened with student loans: you'll be forced to buy health insurance the government mandates, and if you refuse, you'll be hit with a penalty."

I don't know why you would oppose this part. If you don't want to pay for anyone's freebie then you should support this clause. Unless you are going to flat out deny someone entry into a hospital emergency room who does not have insurance, cash, or an unrejected credit card I don't see how else you can prevent people from getting by without paying. Since denial is not going to happen- face it- I don't see how we have a choice.

Plus, the people who this is going to affect the most are probably the young voters who put the Democrats in office in the first place.

[kaydee457 13]

.....who the heck is left to pay for this?

the ones that want it so bad.

Everyone pays. Whether you want it or not. That truly is the American way.

Umm, that's not the "American" way.....We are Capatalist, not Socialist and I don't want to pay for your freebie.....

As for the timing of all this; it's absurd in the midst of the worst recession ever and with the debt and deficit this President's run up to record levels, it's simply absurd to do this now.

Republicans have it right: TORT REFORM (Obama as a Laywer himself is resisting this), fix MEDICARE and MEDICAID first and wait for a recovery before throwing the monkey wrench into the HC system......

If it passes, you pay whether you like it or not. You pay for two wars, whether you like it or not. Got the idea?

Oh I see, war and healthcare.....Listen, the PRIMARY function of the Federal Govt is to wage war on behalf of its citizens. Not to provide entitlements.....

If you don't see the differnce then move to Sweden, you'll be happier there!

[kaydee457 13]

• "To the recent college graduate burdened with student loans: you'll be forced to buy health insurance the government mandates, and if you refuse, you'll be hit with a penalty."

I don't know why you would oppose this part. If you don't want to pay for anyone's freebie then you should support this clause. Unless you are going to flat out deny someone entry into a hospital emergency room who does not have insurance, cash, or an unrejected credit card I don't see how else you can prevent people from getting by without paying. Since denial is not going to happen- face it- I don't see how we have a choice.

Plus, the people who this is going to affect the most are probably the young voters who put the Democrats in office in the first place.

It's because the "fines" are rediculously low and will not achieve its intended purpose; to punish those that refuse to participate.....

all Americans get health insurance once the system is overhauled to make premiums more stable and affordable. Penalties for failing to do so would start at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families. Households making more than three times the federal poverty level – about $66,000 for a family of four – would face the maximum fines. For families, it would be $3,800, and for individuals, $950.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/08/f...omment_30582432

Most will simply pay the fine, its cheaper. When they get sick they cannot be denied coverage. Only the Dems could come up with such a moronic approach.

[DEDixon 39]

If you are never going to be wealthy, may as well jump on the gov'ts HC offerings. I've never ever ever taken anything free from gov't, but I'm ready. I'm finally getting to the point that I'm saying to myself 'fxck ego' and get something, anything, for nothing. I will figure out a way to get even more than HC.

I hope as USCs we can get gov't health care oversea? Anyone know if claims will be paid when outside the US?

On a side note, the gov't is already picking up my trash for FREE!!!!, yeah, I found a spot close to where a lot of illegal immigrants live and they so happen to take old wash machines, mattresses, wood scraps and more and just dump it all along the roadside... the county picks it up every few days so guess what, I joined the club. Taxes going through the roof in California so I'm finding my way to get back at gov't.... #### them!!!!! No worries though people, I can't turn this particular spot of California into Mexico, the Mexicans have already did it.

Next, my research is to figure out how to get on SSI... get my SS benefits early and then go live in a cheap foreign country is my goal. Go ahead, flame away, at this point, I HAVE NO SHAME!!!!!

Next stop, I'm going to start check out some non-profit food pantries... see what's available for free!!!

Edited October 24, 2009 by DEDixon

[웃 910]

If you want universal health coverage move to Massachusetts (Now that I am looking at the word, what a strange name for a state).

[AlHayatZween 2]

• "To the recent college graduate burdened with student loans: you'll be forced to buy health insurance the government mandates, and if you refuse, you'll be hit with a penalty."

I don't know why you would oppose this part. If you don't want to pay for anyone's freebie then you should support this clause. Unless you are going to flat out deny someone entry into a hospital emergency room who does not have insurance, cash, or an unrejected credit card I don't see how else you can prevent people from getting by without paying. Since denial is not going to happen- face it- I don't see how we have a choice.

Plus, the people who this is going to affect the most are probably the young voters who put the Democrats in office in the first place.

The alternative is to keep recent grads in the place where they are now:

Recently graduated, burdened with exorbitant student loans, too old to be on Mom & Pop's insurance plan, but underemployed due to the recession so may not have their own insurance. (Or better yet, have a pre-existing condition so they can't purchase individual insurance even if they wanted to.) Then, Johnny's appendix breaks suddenly, how is he going to pay for it?

Why isn't it better to provide recent grads (and everyone who wants it) with a low cost insurance option?

[AlHayatZween 2]

get my SS benefits early and then go live in a cheap foreign country is my goal. Go ahead, flame away, at this point, I HAVE NO SHAME!!!!!

The only problem is that in the "cheap foreign country" you might have to wait in line next to all the brown people to see the doctor.

[kaydee457 13]

• "To the recent college graduate burdened with student loans: you'll be forced to buy health insurance the government mandates, and if you refuse, you'll be hit with a penalty."

I don't know why you would oppose this part. If you don't want to pay for anyone's freebie then you should support this clause. Unless you are going to flat out deny someone entry into a hospital emergency room who does not have insurance, cash, or an unrejected credit card I don't see how else you can prevent people from getting by without paying. Since denial is not going to happen- face it- I don't see how we have a choice.

Plus, the people who this is going to affect the most are probably the young voters who put the Democrats in office in the first place.

The alternative is to keep recent grads in the place where they are now:

Recently graduated, burdened with exorbitant student loans, too old to be on Mom & Pop's insurance plan, but underemployed due to the recession so may not have their own insurance. (Or better yet, have a pre-existing condition so they can't purchase individual insurance even if they wanted to.) Then, Johnny's appendix breaks suddenly, how is he going to pay for it?

Why isn't it better to provide recent grads (and everyone who wants it) with a low cost insurance option?

Firstly, INSURANCE is not an entitlement it's a product that one buys when one is healthy to possibly use sometime in the future if he/she is unlucky enough to fall ill or be in an accident.

What's being discussed here is an entitlement whereby prexisting conditions are moot; anyone supposedly can aquire medical attention anytime they please.

Who pays for this under this proposed plan; you, me and just about everyone employed.

It's not the Federal Government's mandate usder the Constitution to take money from you and I and give it to others although that's exactly what the Democratic party and this President is engaged in.

It's not their (congress') money to spend as they please. It's ours. The majority opposition to this plan is that there is no advantage to those of us that have adequate medical plans and in facct it appears that we will loose benefits as well as having to subsidize others in this country, including illegals regardless of the language in the current legislation.

Most Law Scholars agree that if an entitlement is created it cannot be withheld from illegals. We now educate their children and this would be a similar circumstance.

Obama and the Dems are well aware of this........

[rebeccajo 14]

Firstly, INSURANCE is not an entitlement it's a product that one buys when one is healthy to possibly use sometime in the future if he/she is unlucky enough to fall ill or be in an accident.

What's being discussed here is an entitlement whereby prexisting conditions are moot; anyone supposedly can aquire medical attention anytime they please.

Who pays for this under this proposed plan; you, me and just about everyone employed.

It's not the Federal Government's mandate usder the Constitution to take money from you and I and give it to others although that's exactly what the Democratic party and this President is engaged in.

It's not their (congress') money to spend as they please. It's ours. The majority opposition to this plan is that there is no advantage to those of us that have adequate medical plans and in facct it appears that we will loose benefits as well as having to subsidize others in this country, including illegals regardless of the language in the current legislation.

Most Law Scholars agree that if an entitlement is created it cannot be withheld from illegals. We now educate their children and this would be a similar circumstance.

Obama and the Dems are well aware of this........

Do you pay attention to life in the United States at all?

Since when is health insurance a product purchased when we are healthy? Last time I looked most people get their insurance when they get a job. Did you run out and buy your insurance like a can of beans off the shelf and mail in a questionnaire while you were at it about your health?

And in case you hadn't heard, we've all been paying taxes for about 80 years or so wherein the government takes from some to give to others. They especially like to give to defense contractors to build planes and bombs. So it ain't like this is something that just started with this President.

And it's perfectly LEGAL to ask a recipient of a social service their immigrant status. Smart states ask this question before they provide Medicaid coverage.

[kaydee457 13]

Firstly, INSURANCE is not an entitlement it's a product that one buys when one is healthy to possibly use sometime in the future if he/she is unlucky enough to fall ill or be in an accident.

What's being discussed here is an entitlement whereby prexisting conditions are moot; anyone supposedly can aquire medical attention anytime they please.

Who pays for this under this proposed plan; you, me and just about everyone employed.

It's not the Federal Government's mandate usder the Constitution to take money from you and I and give it to others although that's exactly what the Democratic party and this President is engaged in.

It's not their (congress') money to spend as they please. It's ours. The majority opposition to this plan is that there is no advantage to those of us that have adequate medical plans and in facct it appears that we will loose benefits as well as having to subsidize others in this country, including illegals regardless of the language in the current legislation.

Most Law Scholars agree that if an entitlement is created it cannot be withheld from illegals. We now educate their children and this would be a similar circumstance.

Obama and the Dems are well aware of this........

Do you pay attention to life in the United States at all?

Since when is health insurance a product purchased when we are healthy? Last time I looked most people get their insurance when they get a job. Did you run out and buy your insurance like a can of beans off the shelf and mail in a questionnaire while you were at it about your health?

And in case you hadn't heard, we've all been paying taxes for about 80 years or so wherein the government takes from some to give to others. They especially like to give to defense contractors to build planes and bombs. So it ain't like this is something that just started with this President.

And it's perfectly LEGAL to ask a recipient of a social service their immigrant status. Smart states ask this question before they provide Medicaid coverage.

Remarkable!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The proposals being put forth now are designed to entice your employer to drop your coverage in favor of paying a token fee (fine) for each employee they don't provide medical coverage for.

Under the system we have today, what does it cost the employer to drop employees off health insurance coverage? Right. Nothing. Not a dime. Following your logic, employers are more enticed right now or - if nothing changes in the future - to drop coverage than they will be if law is changed. In fact, if your argument would hold any water at all, then employers simply wouldn't offer health insurance.

Edited October 24, 2009 by Mr. Big Dog