Health Care Bill

[Aisling]

Just curious what BOLers think about this major news event...

[Alaskan Rover]

Actually I am both happy and sad about it's passing...happy because I have been sick of the status qou health system in this country...and this bill, soon to be signed into law (finally!), sends a signal to the insurance companies and the lawyers, shareholders and bean-counters who run them...that the status quo is no longer good enough.

I am saddened (and disgusted), though, by the conservative right, who managed to pummel and pillage the very best part of the ORIGINAL plan right out of the bill and into submission...the "single-payer public option". This was the only ingredient in the original plan that would have given NEEDED competition to an industry gone totally and selfishly AWRY. The health of the American people should NEVER have become merely another market from which to make a profit...and Americans should never be held hostage by the health insurance capitalists. Health is NOT a commodity to be bought and sold like some silly derivative.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Don't understand why so many 'murricans got their panties in a bunch over this stuff. Your system be broke, fix it.

[Petrol]

Health is NOT a commodity

Services ARE.

btw, health is NOT a 'right' either

besides government, the main problems were/are TORT, inability to purchase across statelines & 'third-party-payer'

big gov will grow greatly and intrude in your lives in ways previously unimagined while innovation, quality and availibility of service plummet

enjoy

[Alaskan Rover]

Petrol posted:

"Services ARE.

btw, health is NOT a 'right' either, besides government, the main problems were/are TORT, inability to purchase across statelines & 'third-party-payer'

big gov will grow greatly and intrude in your lives in ways previously unimagined while innovation, quality and availibility of service plummet."

Petrol: Please take note of the wording of the following famous writs:

Preamble to the U.S. Constitution:

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

My take on what the Constitution means by "promote the general welfare" is to do that which is necessary to ensure that the health of the american people is not run a sunder by matters of profit and greed.

While the Declaration of Independence is more diffuse on the matter, I take the words "Life" and the "pursuit of Happiness" to mean in part, a right to be able to afford care of health that would in fact sustain life...and a pursuit of happiness UNENCUMBERED by thoughts of having the health of one's family CO-OPTED by a capitalist health-care system, to the extent that one cannot afford proper health care for one's family.

I, believe, in essence, that health is indeed a right...because how can we have "Life"

without health?

[Gecko]

Don't understand why so many 'murricans got their panties in a bunch over this stuff. Your system be broke, fix it.

exactly....not that this bill does a lot to do so

[pebu]

The version of "no" in this poll does not even begin to express my feelings for the subject.

[scrapster]

A pretty interesting interactive tool to see how the new law might affect you. (I made out pretty good with a possible tax credit--though I doubt much will change for me at all as I already have decent health coverage, thankfully!)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/what-health-bill-means-for-you/?hpid=topnews

[murphy12]

A step in the right direction, but I'm not convinced it will fix what's broken.

[Alaskan Rover]

Given my above statement, however...let it be known that I DO have many problems with the bill...my biggest being the present MANDATE that ALL citizens be REQUIRED to purchase a plan. As, a student of the U.S. Constitution, this one facet is to me an acute anathema...and strikes against the very freedoms that the Constitution tries to defend.

By the way, this requirement that ALL Americans be REQUIRED to PURCHASE a plan was ORIGINALLY put forward by the Republicans in a rendition of the plan from last year. The fact that it stayed in the present bill is a disgrace.

[boarderboy]

Several decades ago, a newly-elected President empaneled a group (its exact composition is foggy in my mind) of doctors, theologians, economists, etc., to consider this very question.

That President? - Ronald Reagan

The Panel's Conclusion? - Health Care is a Right!

To me, in the richest, most powerful society the world has ever known, the unfettered opportunity for robust health - mental and physical - of every citizen - every man, woman, and child - is the dearest and most sacred of rights - from the day we're born to the day we die!! That requires, unquestioned, and (reasonably) unrestricted access to high-quality, comprehensive health care, cradle to grave.

Of the world's developed countries, the United States, that "most Christian of Nations", has, alone, been the most negligent, the most restrictive, and the most rabidly mercenary in shirking our obligation to fulfill that moral absolute, that simple human commitment to our fellow woman.

The struggle to right that atrocity is far from over - it will likely take decades to play out.

But last night, a very fallible and very divided Democratic Party finally had the guts to proclaim,

YES WE CAN!!

[bobdea]

the bill is so weakened it's now a handout to insurance companies essentially. like romneycare here in MA.

while it's still a good first step it's really not what it should be but we have enough *******s in the US and enough corporate interests that little legislation get through un-tainted.

now that this is done though it's on to stage two which I don't think the dems have the sack for, stick it to the drug companies and pass some sort of the dreaded socialist scary public option.

[scrapster]

Boarderboy, say Amen!

Not to mention the fact that a healthier workforce means a more productive workforce. This thing should really cut across partisan grounds.

As for the mandate for everyone to carry insurance--I don't see any way around it if you don't offer a public option for individuals who cost more to care for (those with pre-existing conditions, etc.)--which would have been my preference. It is, as Obama said, a very moderate, centrist bill in that way.

[two_ravens]

There's no option for "Hmmm.... we'll see how this actually works out."

I find it a bit perplexing that in one swell foop I will go from being uninsurable (due to a genetic autoimmune disease) to being a criminal if I don't buy insurance.... And since western medicine offers absolutely nothing to treat my illness, I'm wondering how I will afford both the insurance that I will be forced to buy, and the alternative treatments that I use extensively to actually improve my health.

So, I am thrilled that a least this token action has been taken to improve health care access, but not so sure this particular bill is all that useful.

[Aisling]

as a nurse, i am not pleased because of the way the bill was passed, with a completely torn congress, not one bipartisan vote, with the majority of Americans opposing it.

on top of that, I simply don't trust the government to run healthcare. Whilst telling everyone how corrupt medicare and medicaid are they say they can fix it by running the whole shebang? sheesh you guys couldn't even control what you had going already. the idea that bureaucrats in Washington think they know better than myself and other healthcare workers is appalling.

Add to that, the services won't really be available for several years while you are mandated to pay for them.

The govt should have taken small steps with Tort reform, allowing cross-state insurance, and hell, FIXING the medicare and medicaid systems already in place rather than trying to overhaul everything in one fell swoop. if you're going to do something, do it right. Its tantamount to tearing down an entire building because a few windows were broken.

[Petrol]

for the socialist, er ah "progressive" political leaders of the former democrate party, it was never about "healthcare", it was always about Big-Gov and furthering recruitment of dependents on said same

...I, believe, in essence, that health is indeed a right...because how can we have "Life"

without health?

your belief is mistaken. case in point the lawful killing of innocent children...

[Jack M]

Buy gold.

[Jack M]

can we outlaw smoking and fat people now?

health as a right fails the two people on a desert island test.

[Arclite]

Any one else find it a tad ironic that Aisling starts this thread.... like how she started OT: Waaaaaaay OT...

[RobertAlexander]

1984?

[Aisling]

Any one else find it a tad ironic that Aisling starts this thread.... like how she started OT: Waaaaaaay OT...

what's ironic about it?

[Alaskan Rover]

....//....with the majority of Americans opposing it.

on top of that, I simply don't trust the government to run healthcare....//....the idea that bureaucrats in Washington think they know better than myself and other healthcare workers is appalling....//....Its tantamount to tearing down an entire building because a few windows were broken.

Aisling: Sorry for redacting the quote of your post, but such was done for space-saving.

As for your first point: I believe the NATIONWIDE polls show that 55% or more were actually IN FAVOR of the healthcare bill. You apparently fell for the diatribe based upon a few regional polls largely taken in "red states". The overall polls (if one believes partial polls) still show a majority in favor.

Also, you as a nurse should know full well that doctors have basically been in bed with the drug industry for at least the last 30 years....and at points have sunken to little more than street-corner "pushers" for the ever growing number of prescription drugs that are flooding our society. Quite a few doctors have been shown to have been getting "kickbacks" from the drug companies and "favors" from drug salesmen. And yet do they get their license to practice taken away?...No, most certainly not.

There are more than a few broken windows in our health-care system...the only people that are happy with the status quo are the insurance companies which are getting filthy rich off the atrocious insurance fees; and the Galtian, head-in-the-sand conservatives that blanche at ANY type of government intervention, be it good or bad...perhaps the very same people that would be yelling out of the other side of their mouths if their Social Security were ever taken away.

Good Grief, Charllie Brown...who opened up this "can o' worms" of a thread??? ;)

[Jon Dahl]

IF, and I do mean if, the bill falls completely under Title 26 as does, I believe, the collection part of it will, it is smoke and mirrors. Due to the definitions in Title 26 of who actually is taxable due to taxable activity as defined there, most aren't within the power of this bill. It sure looks like you are, doesn't it??

[pebu]

Health may be a right in the sense that everybody here has a right to be healthy. Nobody can take your health from you. Not in the sense that we're going to take from somebody else to force health down your throat.

The Declaration of Independence lists things that the government and others cannot take away from the individual, it does not list stuff that the government and John Q. Taxpayer is required to supply to the masses.

[Aisling]

Aisling: Sorry for redacting the quote of your post, but such was done for space-saving.

As for your first point: I believe the NATIONWIDE polls show that 55% or more were actually IN FAVOR of the healthcare bill. You apparently fell for the diatribe based upon a few regional polls largely taken in "red states". The overall polls (if one believes partial polls) still show a majority in favor.

Also, you as a nurse should know full well that doctors have basically been in bed with the drug industry for at least the last 30 years....and at points have sunken to little more than street-corner "pushers" for the ever growing number of prescription drugs that are flooding our society. Quite a few doctors have been shown to have been getting "kickbacks" from the drug companies and "favors" from drug salesmen. And yet do they get their license to practice taken away?...No, most certainly not.

There are more than a few windows broken in our health-care system...the only people that are happy with the status quo are the insurance companies which are getting filthy rich of the atrocious insurance fees; and the Galtian, head-in-the-sand conservatives that blanche at ANY type of government intervention, be it good or bad...perhaps the very same people that would be yelling out of the other side of their mouth if their Social Security were taken away.

If Social Security is taken away? i'm pretty much betting there won't be any for me by the time I retire despite what I've put in through working. I didn't say the government shouldn't do ANYTHING i said they should start small and do it right. anything worth fixing should be done right not in one giant ass-hammering swoop.

I don't know what docs you've been dealing with but the ones with whom I work are for natural remedies, homeopathy, etc.. they don't PUSH drugs on people. if they believe the drug will help they will tell their patients and often prescribe the generic to save the patient money. They encourage losing weight with diet and exercise instead of drastic surgery and/or drugs. I guess you fall for the "evil rich doctor" rhetoric.

one of the parts which rub me the wrong way... this is in regards to "high risk" people... ie the ones that congress were so intensely worried about not being covered... seems if the money runs out, guess what... you get waitlisted... or someone else or you, lose some benefits... or they cut money from other people's funds. how is that helpful or making anything better? seems the same as an insurance company decreasing your benefits, cutting costs by disallowing (usually a waitlist til a doctor writes to insist that this person needs the treatment).

(2) INSUFFICIENT FUNDS.—If the Secretary es23

timates for any fiscal year that the aggregate

24 amounts available for payment of expenses of the

25 high-risk pool will be less than the amount of the ex-

VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:56 Oct 30, 2009 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3962.IH H3962 rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with BILLS

26

•HR 3962 IH

1 penses, the Secretary shall make such adjustments

2 as are necessary to eliminate such deficit, including

3 reducing benefits, increasing premiums, or estab4

lishing waiting lists.

Also, are Rasmussen polls fixed?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform