An outsider watching the US health care debate

[Beagle]

The real problem here is while the Repubs are owned outright by big corporations, there are enough dem's who have also been bought out that the first thing that happened was the best thing, single payer, was totally taken off the table without there being any discussion of it. It should make your blood run cold that an idea at least 70% of Americans support cannot make any headway.

Ray,

Do you really believe that at least 70% of Americans want a State run single payer?

If this is the case, then why don't the Democrats just pass their plan? According to you they would be the heroes of the people?

If this is the case why are the Democrats continuing to revise and revamp their plan?

I'll tell you why. The Democrats will not pass a single payer or even a public option plan because the majority of Americans don't want it.

These Democrats went back to their constituents and got the riot act read to them. They won't pass such a plan because they want to keep their jobs.

[Beagle]

...The administration gave no indication that it was opposed to comprehensive tort reform.

I agree the cost of malpractice insurance needs to be reduced. But tort reform won’t solve the problem of high health care costs. Moreover, if tort reform is done carefully it will, as I said above, endanger patients.

Trish,

The administration didn't take a single step to do anything about tort reform either.

True, tort reform by itself won't solve the entire problem but it would make a huge difference.

Obama's (and the Dems) public option doesn't solve the problem of high health care costs either. Or I guess we're not supposed to believe the OMB either.

And why should we believe Obama?

Every government run health/service organization we have today is a disaster. From Social Security to Medicare to Medicaid and so on, these plans are mismanaged boondoggles that are heading for bankruptcy.

Here's some boring history that was sent to me just the other day...

Our Social Security

Franklin Delano Roosevelt a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He Promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,
3.) That the money the participants elected to put Into the Program would be deductible from Their income for tax purposes each year,
4.) That the money the participants put into the Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would Only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to 'Put Away' -- you may be interested in the following:

----------THEN---------------------------------------------------


In 1958 Congress, not President Eisenhower, voted to remove funds from Social Security and put it into the General Fund for Congress to spend. If I recall correctly, it was a democratically controlled Congress. From what I understand, Congress logic at that time was that there was so much money in Social Security Fund that it would never run out / be used up for the purpose it was intended / set aside for.

-------------WORSE STILL------------------------------------------------

Lyndon Baines Johnson 36th. President, Democrat

Question: Which Political Party took Social Security from the Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the General Fund so that Congress could spend it?

Answer: It was Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat, Term of Office: November 22,1963 to January 20, 1969) and the democratically Controlled House and Senate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Question: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax Deduction for Social Security
(FICA) withholding?

Answer: The Democratic Party.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Question: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?
Answer: The Democratic Party, with Albert Arnold Gore, Jr. (Al Gore) [Vice President Term of Office: January 10, 1993 to January 20, 2001] casting the 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US ...

------------------THE STRAW THAT BROKE THE CAMEL'S BACK !!-----------------------


James Earl Carter, Jr
(Jimmy Carter)
39th President, Democrat
Term of Office: January 20, 1977 to January 20, 1981


Question: Which Political Party decided to start giving Annuity payments to immigrants?

AND MY FAVORITE:

ANSWER: That's right! JAMES EARL CARTER, JR. ( JIMMY CARTER) (DEMOCRAT, TERM OF OFFICE: JANUARY 20, 1977 TO JANUARY 20, 1981 AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
IMMIGRANTS MOVED INTO THIS COUNTRY, AND AT AGE 65, BEGAN TO RECEIVE SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENTS: THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY GAVE THESE PAYMENTS TO THEM, EVEN THOUGH THEY NEVER PAID A DIME INTO IT!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!

If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of Awareness will be planted and maybe changes WILL evolve! Maybe not, some Democrats are awfully sure of what isn't so. But it's worth a try. How many people can YOU send this to?

Actions speak louder than bumper stickers..

AND CONGRESS GIVES THEMSELVES 100% RETIREMENT FOR ONLY SERVING ONE TERM!!!


----------------------------------------------------------------------


Thomas Jefferson
3rd. President, Democrat
Term of Office: January 20, 1777 to January 20, 1781


"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have".
Thomas Jefferson

[yosi]

Here is the Republican response on Health Care.

“Replacing your family’s current health care with government-run health care is not the answer. In fact, it’ll make health care much more expensive. That’s not just my personal diagnosis as a doctor or a Republican; it’s the conclusion of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office – the neutral scorekeeper that determines the cost of major bills.
”

the FACTS in some other countries that do have government-run health program show otherwise , healthcare is NOT more expensive.

healthcare is not important for healthy poeple who think health problems will never happen to them personaly , some of them might be proven wrong. the very hard way.

I was one of those who never got sick until out of the blue , I was notified that I had a cancer , with 3 more months to live............

if my country ( I am not an American ) didn't have government-run healthcare program , I won't be sitting here writing these words.

as simple as that

[Realgirls4me]

Regarding the numbers of the size of the protest...

I've heard all sorts of estimates. From a ridiculously low estimate of 70,000 to 2 million.

I had often thought all that one would need to do is to work with aerial views and calculate a real estimate.

Well, it turns out that someone actually did a technical analysis and he believes the number is closer to 1.7 million.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19743935/T...n?classic_ui=1

I am sure that Moilanen's paper will be discredited by the left, I decided to use a more conservative estimate of 1 million.

Wait a minute?! You -- YOU -- decided for a conservative estimate of one million? Well then, it must be an accurate count then.

Beagle exemplifies how the Far-Right operates today. They pull their figures from the most remote, unproven, invalid, unreliable, and discredited corners of the internet (read:their ass); apply a contingency clause (I am sure that Moilanen's paper will be discredited by the left...); cement it as fact, and viola, a new reality comes into being.

Yeah, why take the word of the Washington DC Fire Department, or the hotels and restaurants of the DC area, etc., who actually have had experience with DC Mall crowds and realize the boon a million person strong mass does for business, when one can just go to the blog of a ROTC undergrad (This must have been the paper Glen Beck could not remember, right?) with no background or expertise on crowd size counts, and thus questionable methods and conclusions, and make it reality. To further buttress this reality, the paper's writer lists none other than lunatic rightwinger Michelle Malkin, WorldNetDaily, and Godlike productions, among other sources, as references. Yep, that appears pretty sound to me.

Yeah, now why would anyone discredit that figure? Why not make it 30 million? Hey, if it means making Obama and his policies look bad, do it!

... You're so full of shit, Beagle, it is oozing out of you ears.

[giovanni_hotel]

Jay,

So is Obama a war criminal too?

He hasn't brought home the troops.

He supports the Bush Patriot Act.

If you're honest you would have to agree that the level of hatred and Hitler comparison were SO much more open and prevalent against Bush than Obama.

And I'm not condoning either one. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of the left.

Look, this health care debate has nothing to do with this Hitler nonsense.

It's about the vast majority of Americans who DO NOT want the government in the health care business. Plain and simple.

No matter how you slice and dice it, it is that simple. The Democrats in this country hold all the strings. They could have voted this thing in months ago if they wanted to. Why havent they?

Because in a massive grass roots effort, the voters of all these Democratic congressmen and Senators have wrote them and told them in no uncertain terms that they DON'T WANT any more government health care debacles.

It's very simple. The people have spoken.

But 8 months into his 1st term as POTUS, who was protesting against Bush and comparing him to Hitler??

It's the relative instantaneous rebuke of Obama, for a President who has very little track record so far to criticize, that's hypocrital.

Right wingers are mobilizing against Obama as if he's in the third year of his 3nd term, not less than a year into his first term.

Bush 'earned' that level of animus from the American people, Obama so far has not.

[giovanni_hotel]

Regarding the numbers of the size of the protest...

I've heard all sorts of estimates. From a ridiculously low estimate of 70,000 to 2 million.

I had often thought all that one would need to do is to work with aerial views and calculate a real estimate.

Well, it turns out that someone actually did a technical analysis and he believes the number is closer to 1.7 million.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19743935/T...n?classic_ui=1

I am sure that Moilanen's paper will be discredited by the left, I decided to use a more conservative estimate of 1 million.

I live in DC, and if the protesters numbered in excess of a million, if they had lined up vetically along the Mall, they would have stretched well past the Washington Monument. This would have been the largest demonstration/organizing event in the history of the city.

There weren't THAT many people there. I will say this, because the protesters fanned out horizontally in front of the Capitol instead of vertically along the Mall, it was difficult to calculate the true size of the crowd using the normal estimates.

After looking at the first few minutes of the crowd video from C-SPAN which took a wide pan shot, I would think there were more than 70,000 people there, but less than 500,000. Not quite the 1 million number quoted, but far greater than the less than 100,000 cited by major news outlets.

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/20...lly+in+DC.aspx

BTW, health insurance companies are not a vital cog in the U.S. economy. They aren't physicians and they don't provide care. They're middle men attempting to make a buck, and in the process have degraded the overall quality of American health care.

IMO, no one has a right to make a profit of the plight of sick people, and for those who advocate their 'right' to be gouged by Health insurance companies and to receive progressively less care the sicker they become, these people need to have their heads readjusted.

Barack and the Feds are correct in offering a public option to consumers, one that's not driven by profit and instead whose only priority is the health of its policy holders.

Unbridled capitalism will be the downfall of the United States, if it hasn't been already.
We are the only nation in the world where private entities are allowed to profit from the medical care given to sick people.

That's just plain wrong, un-American, and against many of the values we as citizens hold dear.

Sometimes I wish Obama had not spent one cent on bailing out the big banks, sat on his ass in the WH and didn't do a damn thing.

No bailout, no healthcare reform, no nothing.
Sometimes republicans need to be forced to look into the mirror to see how crazy some of their ideas really are.

Also, the reason why there has been such a delay in dispersing the stimulus funds nationwide is because behind closed doors conservatives politicians have repeated blocked the confirmation of bureaucrats responsible for the approval and to oversee many shovel ready projects.

Why? To make the President look bad so conservatives can say the stimulus package isn't working.

GOP = the slow road to hell.

[duplicatt]

He's attempting to shut down Guantanamo, he's relocating troops to Afghanistan (where they should've been in the first place looking for Osama).

Why? If Osama is even alive (have we seen any video of Osama? we know one of his sons sounds just like him), he's in Pakistan. Should we invade our putative ally Pakistan willy-nilly?

[TommyFoxtrot]

Here is the Republican response on Health Care. Instead of just dismissing it like Ray did, perhaps you can read it.



Rep. Boustany Delivers Republican Health Care Address

Washington, Sep 9 - Below is the full text (as prepared) of tonight’s Republican address on health care, delivered by Dr. Charles Boustany (R-LA) following President Obama’s speech to a Joint Session of Congress:

“Good evening. I’m Dr. Charles Boustany, and I’m proud to serve the people of Louisiana’s Seventh Congressional District. I’m also a heart surgeon with more than 20 years of experience, during which I saw first-hand the need for lowering health care costs.

“Republicans are pleased that President Obama came to the Capitol tonight. We agree much needs to be done to lower the cost of health care for all Americans. On that goal, Republicans are ready – and we’ve been ready – to work with the President for common-sense reforms that our nation can afford.

“Afford is an important word. Our country is facing many challenges. The cost of health care is rising. Federal spending is soaring. We’re piling huge debt on our children. And families and small businesses are struggling through a jobless recovery, with more than 2.4 million private-sector jobs lost since February.

“It’s clear the American people want health care reform, but they want their elected leaders to get it right. Most Americans wanted to hear the President tell Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and the rest of Congress that it’s time to start over on a common-sense, bipartisan plan focused on lowering the cost of health care while improving quality. That’s what I heard over the past several months in talking to thousands of my constituents.

“Replacing your family’s current health care with government-run health care is not the answer. In fact, it’ll make health care much more expensive. That’s not just my personal diagnosis as a doctor or a Republican; it’s the conclusion of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office – the neutral scorekeeper that determines the cost of major bills.

“I read the bill Democrats passed through committee in July. It creates 53 new government bureaucracies, adds hundreds of billions to our national debt, and raises taxes on job-creators by $600 billion. And, it cuts Medicare by $500 billion, while doing virtually nothing to make the program better for our seniors.

“The President had a chance tonight to take government-run health care off the table. Unfortunately, he didn’t do it.

“We can do better, with a targeted approach that tackles the biggest problems. Here are four important areas where we can agree, right now:

“One, all individuals should have access to coverage, regardless of preexisting conditions.

“Two, individuals, small businesses and other groups should be able to join together to get health insurance at lower prices, the same way large businesses and labor unions do.

“Three, we can provide assistance to those who still cannot access a doctor.

“And, four, insurers should be able to offer incentives for wellness care and prevention – something particularly important to me. I operated on too many people who could have avoided surgery if they’d simply made healthier choices earlier in life.

“We do have ideas the President hasn’t agreed with. We’re grateful the President mentioned medical liability reform, and we hope he’s serious. We need to establish tough liability reform standards, encourage speedy resolution of claims, and deter junk lawsuits that drive up the cost of care. Real reform must do this.

“Let’s also talk about letting families and businesses buy insurance across state lines. I and many other Republicans believe that that will provide real choice and competition to lower the cost of health insurance. Unfortunately, the President disagrees.

“You can read more about all these reforms at healthcare.gop.gov. These are common-sense reforms we can achieve right away – without destroying jobs, exploding the deficit, rationing care, or taking away the freedom American families cherish.

“This Congress can pass meaningful reform soon to reduce some of the fear and anxiety families are feeling in these very difficult times. Working together in a bipartisan way, we can truly lower the cost of health care while improving quality for the American people.

“I’m Dr. Charles Boustany. Thanks for listening.”

This was almost completely ignored by the press because Rep. Wilson decided to throw decorum out the window.

[duplicatt]

The real problem here is while the Repubs are owned outright by big corporations, there are enough dem's who have also been bought out that the first thing that happened was the best thing, single payer, was totally taken off the table without there being any discussion of it. It should make your blood run cold that an idea at least 70% of Americans support cannot make any headway.

Gee, Ray...

If the Republicans are owned outright by the big corporations, why did so many big corporation types (like Warren Buffett and George Soros) support Obama?

[TommyFoxtrot]

Here is the Republican response on Health Care. Instead of just dismissing it like Ray did, perhaps you can read it.



Rep. Boustany Delivers Republican Health Care Address

Washington, Sep 9 - Below is the full text (as prepared) of tonight’s Republican address on health care, delivered by Dr. Charles Boustany (R-LA) following President Obama’s speech to a Joint Session of Congress:

“Good evening. I’m Dr. Charles Boustany, and I’m proud to serve the people of Louisiana’s Seventh Congressional District. I’m also a heart surgeon with more than 20 years of experience, during which I saw first-hand the need for lowering health care costs.

“Republicans are pleased that President Obama came to the Capitol tonight. We agree much needs to be done to lower the cost of health care for all Americans. On that goal, Republicans are ready – and we’ve been ready – to work with the President for common-sense reforms that our nation can afford.

“Afford is an important word. Our country is facing many challenges. The cost of health care is rising. Federal spending is soaring. We’re piling huge debt on our children. And families and small businesses are struggling through a jobless recovery, with more than 2.4 million private-sector jobs lost since February.

“It’s clear the American people want health care reform, but they want their elected leaders to get it right. Most Americans wanted to hear the President tell Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and the rest of Congress that it’s time to start over on a common-sense, bipartisan plan focused on lowering the cost of health care while improving quality. That’s what I heard over the past several months in talking to thousands of my constituents.

“Replacing your family’s current health care with government-run health care is not the answer. In fact, it’ll make health care much more expensive. That’s not just my personal diagnosis as a doctor or a Republican; it’s the conclusion of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office – the neutral scorekeeper that determines the cost of major bills.

“I read the bill Democrats passed through committee in July. It creates 53 new government bureaucracies, adds hundreds of billions to our national debt, and raises taxes on job-creators by $600 billion. And, it cuts Medicare by $500 billion, while doing virtually nothing to make the program better for our seniors.

“The President had a chance tonight to take government-run health care off the table. Unfortunately, he didn’t do it.

“We can do better, with a targeted approach that tackles the biggest problems. Here are four important areas where we can agree, right now:

“One, all individuals should have access to coverage, regardless of preexisting conditions.

“Two, individuals, small businesses and other groups should be able to join together to get health insurance at lower prices, the same way large businesses and labor unions do.

“Three, we can provide assistance to those who still cannot access a doctor.

“And, four, insurers should be able to offer incentives for wellness care and prevention – something particularly important to me. I operated on too many people who could have avoided surgery if they’d simply made healthier choices earlier in life.

“We do have ideas the President hasn’t agreed with. We’re grateful the President mentioned medical liability reform, and we hope he’s serious. We need to establish tough liability reform standards, encourage speedy resolution of claims, and deter junk lawsuits that drive up the cost of care. Real reform must do this.

“Let’s also talk about letting families and businesses buy insurance across state lines. I and many other Republicans believe that that will provide real choice and competition to lower the cost of health insurance. Unfortunately, the President disagrees.

“You can read more about all these reforms at healthcare.gop.gov. These are common-sense reforms we can achieve right away – without destroying jobs, exploding the deficit, rationing care, or taking away the freedom American families cherish.

“This Congress can pass meaningful reform soon to reduce some of the fear and anxiety families are feeling in these very difficult times. Working together in a bipartisan way, we can truly lower the cost of health care while improving quality for the American people.

“I’m Dr. Charles Boustany. Thanks for listening.”

This was almost completely ignored by the press because Rep. Wilson decided to throw decorum out the window.