• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

G.O.P. Newcomers Set Out to Undo Obama Victories

Hicup said:
Do tell, or at least can you point me to a link that sums it up?


Tim-
Click to expand...


I think it was during the many health care threads, I seem to recall that it was actually pretty good.


j-mac
 
So, they're admitting that they were victories.

And they're going to devote themselves entirely to meaningless political showboating instead of serving the people. (it beats working for a living)

GO Tea Party!!:roll::roll:

30% of the (misinformed) people want health care repealed.

30% DOES NOT = a majority, morons.
 
Whovian said:
The masses don't NEED to understand the health care bill (now, for the moment, law). They simply need to sit down, shut up, and do what the liberals say they should do. :ninja:
Click to expand...

I thought it was that they need to sit down, shut up, and do what the conservatives say they should do. You must have your wires crossed. :mrgreen:
 
Hicup said:
Do tell, or at least can you point me to a link that sums it up?


Tim-
Click to expand...

I've posted it a couple of times in a couple of threads. Here you go:

I posted this nearly 18 months ago. I've mentioned it to a few posters recently, who liked it... and I got a bit of support across the political spectrum when I originally posted it. So, I figured I'd post it, again, and ask for feedback, thoughts, and ways to augment my "Plan" into something that we would think would be a viable compromised to everything that has been suggested. So, here is my plan:

Heath care would be broken up into a three-tiered program:

1) Tier 1: Government subsidized health care. Plans paid for and monitored by the government. These plans would be universal and would be paid for via taxes of folks who "opted in" to this plan. It would be "one size fits all" with no variation on the plan itself. Any treatment deemed medically necessary by the treating physician would be covered. No elective, non-necessary or experimental procedures would be, however.

2) Tier 2: Private insurance, Similar to what we have now with some notable exceptions. No utilization review, Insurance companies no longer have the right to deny coverage for any reason, as long as the benefit is available. Only the treating medical professional can decide whether a treatment is appropriate or not. Strict government regulations aimed at streamlining the paperwork aspect, including mandatory centralization both of billing locations and of billing and other forms. Failure to comply with these regulations, suspend the company's ability to do business.

Folks who go this route, automatically "opt out" of the government plan and are not due to pay the taxes that subsidize that plan.

Borrowing from HarryGuerilla, plans are developed on an "ala carte" basis. You want coverage for catastrophic illness only? No problem. How about physicals and x-rays, only? Easy peasy. What about the works, except for obstetrics? Good to go. This kind of choice will allow for folks to get precisely the kind of coverage they want, rather than getting coverage for things they do not.

3) Tier 3: Private Pay. Complete out of pocket, pay for service plan. No insurance whatsoever. "Opt out" of government plan and related government taxes in total effect.

Additional parts to this.

1) Under no circumstances are illegal aliens covered under any health plan, government or private.

2) If you opt out of the government plan, and you do not have catastrophic coverage under your private plan, under no circumstances will the government subsidize your care. If a doctor chooses to see you, unsure of your ability to pay for the service, even with a catastrophic illness, even if it is a child, it is then on the doctor to collect fees. The government will NOT subsidize in any way, nor is any doctor or hospital required to provide any charity care. You make a choice, you need to live with it.

3) Bankruptcies will NOT eliminate medical costs. They must be paid in full, no matter what.

4) TORT reform with reasonable caps on any suing for malpractice.

5) The ability to sue an insurance company for not paying for services that are in a patient's benefit package. Yes, this happens more often than you think, currently.

6) I love the "apprentice" program that has been suggested in this thread, and am incorporating it in my plan. As one who has trained and supervised many professionals, I would like to see this expanded. Getting appropriate experience is one of the major challenges to entering this field.

7) Denial for pre-existing conditions is eliminated in both the government and the private insurance plans.

8) Preventative care is covered fully by both the government and private insurance plans. No co-pays whatsoever. Tax breaks could be given to insurance companies and doctors who encourage preventative care, and to citizens who engage in this.

9) Reduction of the time period that pharmaceutical companies hold patents on medications, preventing generics from being produced. My thought would be no more than 5 years.

One thing of note. #6... the apprentice plan was actually suggested by LaMidRighter... and now again in the Welfare thread by reefedjib. It was a good idea then, and still a good idea, now. As you can also see, my "plans" tend to be tiered, with different levels of control and freedom, attempting to cater to all sides of the political spectrum, socio-economic levels, but with allowing for the least amount of manipulation.
 
hazlnut said:
So, they're admitting that they were victories.

And they're going to devote themselves entirely to meaningless political showboating instead of serving the people. (it beats working for a living)

GO Tea Party!!:roll::roll:

30% of the (misinformed) people want health care repealed.

30% DOES NOT = a majority, morons.
Click to expand...

Passing a healthcare bill that is more new tax law than health care and authorizes funding for the president's private army is, "serving the people"?

Is killing jobs, "serving the people"?

The Dems, "served the people", alright. Served us up for supper.
 
apdst said:
Passing a healthcare bill that is more new tax law than health care and authorizes funding for the president's private army is, "serving the people"?

Is killing jobs, "serving the people"?

The Dems, "served the people", alright. Served us up for supper.
Click to expand...

Now no - don't go thinking for a single Moment that Obama ever gave a **** :)
 
Chappy said:
I thought the election was about the economy and specifically jobs. Jobs! Where's the jobs, Mr. Boehner?

Rehashing past debates and past votes doesn't get the economy rolling again. Republicans are making a huge error.
Click to expand...

It's not government's job to create jobs. Their job is to create a friendly envirionment for the private sector to create jobs. That might mean something like getting the hec out of the way. Something this administration has been a failure at. All it knows how to create is uncertainty.
 
Deuce said:
So what's your healthcare reform plan?
Click to expand...

along with giving individuals the same tax benefits as corporations get for money spent on health insurance or care? and getting rid of border restrictions?

In Indiana's HSA, the state deposits $2,750 per year into an account controlled by the employee, out of which he pays all his health bills. Indiana covers the premium for the plan. The intent is that participants will become more cost-conscious and careful about overpayment or overutilization.

Unused funds in the account—to date some $30 million or about $2,000 per employee and growing fast—are the worker's permanent property. For the very small number of employees (about 6% last year) who use their entire account balance, the state shares further health costs up to an out-of-pocket maximum of $8,000, after which the employee is completely protected.

The HSA option has proven highly popular. This year, over 70% of our 30,000 Indiana state workers chose it, by far the highest in public-sector America. Due to the rejection of these plans by government unions, the average use of HSAs in the public sector across the country is just 2%...

State employees enrolled in the consumer-driven plan will save more than $8 million in 2010 compared to their coworkers in the old-fashioned preferred provider organization (PPO) alternative. In the second straight year in which we've been forced to skip salary increases, workers switching to the HSA are adding thousands of dollars to their take-home pay. (Even if an employee had health issues and incurred the maximum out-of-pocket expenses, he would still be hundreds of dollars ahead.) HSA customers seem highly satisfied; only 3% have opted to switch back to the PPO.

The state is saving, too. In a time of severe budgetary stress, Indiana will save at least $20 million in 2010 because of our high HSA enrollment. Mercer calculates the state's total costs are being reduced by 11% solely due to the HSA option...

The Indiana experience confirms what common sense already tells us: A system built on "cost-plus" reimbursement (i.e., the more a physician does, the more he or she gets paid) coupled with "free" to the purchaser consumption, is a machine perfectly designed to overconsume and overspend. It will never be controlled by top-down balloon-squeezing by insurance companies or the government. There will be no meaningful cost control until we are all cost controllers in our own right.
 
Deuce said:
I hope they also plan to allow hospitals to turn away ER patients who can't afford to pay. You know, since paying for the healthcare of others is so terrible for us. If we're not going to do it efficiently, maybe we should stop doing it.
Click to expand...

How does the cost of ER services in Houston TX affect people in Indianapolis, Indiana? That is a typical liberal argument without thinking this through at all. Local and states pay the bills for ER Service and it is up to the state and local communities to solve the problem. One way of reducing costs would be to deduct the cost of illegal alien ER services from foreign aid to the country of their origin.
 
cpwill said:
along with giving individuals the same tax benefits as corporations get for money spent on health insurance or care? and getting rid of border restrictions?

In Indiana's HSA, the state deposits $2,750 per year into an account controlled by the employee, out of which he pays all his health bills. Indiana covers the premium for the plan. The intent is that participants will become more cost-conscious and careful about overpayment or overutilization.

Unused funds in the account—to date some $30 million or about $2,000 per employee and growing fast—are the worker's permanent property. For the very small number of employees (about 6% last year) who use their entire account balance, the state shares further health costs up to an out-of-pocket maximum of $8,000, after which the employee is completely protected.

The HSA option has proven highly popular. This year, over 70% of our 30,000 Indiana state workers chose it, by far the highest in public-sector America. Due to the rejection of these plans by government unions, the average use of HSAs in the public sector across the country is just 2%...

State employees enrolled in the consumer-driven plan will save more than $8 million in 2010 compared to their coworkers in the old-fashioned preferred provider organization (PPO) alternative. In the second straight year in which we've been forced to skip salary increases, workers switching to the HSA are adding thousands of dollars to their take-home pay. (Even if an employee had health issues and incurred the maximum out-of-pocket expenses, he would still be hundreds of dollars ahead.) HSA customers seem highly satisfied; only 3% have opted to switch back to the PPO.

The state is saving, too. In a time of severe budgetary stress, Indiana will save at least $20 million in 2010 because of our high HSA enrollment. Mercer calculates the state's total costs are being reduced by 11% solely due to the HSA option...

The Indiana experience confirms what common sense already tells us: A system built on "cost-plus" reimbursement (i.e., the more a physician does, the more he or she gets paid) coupled with "free" to the purchaser consumption, is a machine perfectly designed to overconsume and overspend. It will never be controlled by top-down balloon-squeezing by insurance companies or the government. There will be no meaningful cost control until we are all cost controllers in our own right.
Click to expand...

I keep hearing a lot of good things about Daniels and what he is doing in Indiana. I lived in Carmel for 14 years and loved my days in Indiana. It was terrible seeing that state go Blue in 2008 but glad to hear that the sanity is back.
 
there are plenty of people who want him to run for President in '12. i would rather have him than any of the other big-name contenders, but i wonder if he could win.
 
hazlnut said:
So, they're admitting that they were victories.

And they're going to devote themselves entirely to meaningless political showboating instead of serving the people. (it beats working for a living)

GO Tea Party!!:roll::roll:

30% of the (misinformed) people want health care repealed.

30% DOES NOT = a majority, morons.
Click to expand...

If you say so. Only 15% want to keep it as.
Americans Split on Health Care Repeal, Poll Shows | CNSnews.com
Overall, Americans remain divided about the changes. Among likely voters, 52 percent oppose the legislation, compared with 41 percent who said they support it. Strong opponents outnumber strong supporters by 2-to-1.

Among likely voters, 36 percent said they want to revise the law so it does more to change the health care system. A nearly identical share -- 37 percent -- said they want to repeal it completely.
In the poll, only 15 percent said they would leave the overhaul as it is. And 10 percent wanted modifications to narrow its scope.

An Associated Press-GfK poll found likely voters evenly split on whether the law should be scrapped or retooled to make even bigger changes in the way Americans get their health care.
Poll: Support for Repeal of Health-Care Reform Law Increases After One Month | CNSnews.com

Behind the Numbers - Health care opponents divided on repeal
Overall, 52 percent of those polled oppose the overhaul to the health care system, 43 percent are supportive of it. Fully 86 percent of Republicans are against the legislation; 67 percent of Democrats support it. Independents divide down the middle, with 47 percent in favor and the same number opposed.
Most of those who oppose the health care changes - 59 percent - want the law repealed, but 38 percent would prefer a "wait and see" approach. Moreover, those who favor repeal are split about evenly between a complete rollback (29 percent of all opponents) and a one that's limited to parts of the law (30 percent).
 
If we're not going to do it efficiently, maybe we should stop doing it.
Click to expand...

As it is the ER cost for indigents is paid for by the insurance and health care bureaucracies which are more efficient and less corrupt than the government would be.

So what's your healthcare reform plan?
Click to expand...

Turn all health care over to the health care providers managed by the AMA and pay for it with taxes. A small tax based on income – taxes based on life style – taxes on employers based on work safety – share traffic fines with health care – share sin taxes with health care – tax fat people – we already tax smokers so all of that should go to the health care system – no rebates for the thin.

All health care providers would be paid a small salary – procedure fees and then a big bonus based on customer satisfaction and a pear review. All malpractice would be decided by a special court of five doctors and the compensation for accidents would come out of all health care providers’ bonus pool. Real malpractice would come our of the guilty health care providers pay.
 
zimmer said:
how many Dems that voted for the stink bomb called ObamaKare will vote to repeal it?
Click to expand...

there are 19 dems still in the house who voted NO on obamacare in march

there are 242 republicans in JOHN BOEHNER'S bailiwick

this appears a done deal

next wednesday the united states house of representatives will REPEAL the president's prime piece, which even progressives support but tepidly

the voice of the voter was unequivocal in november, elections have consequences

if REPEAL does proceed to upper parliament, it will likely lose

but MOMENTUM for defunding, for holding hearings on a dozen topics, like the individual mandate, the burden on the states, the half T cuts to medicare, the 1099's, the exemptions allowed for SOME of the toobigs, the govt's compilation of personal data on ALL OF US, even FUNDING OF ABORTION has been bruited...

momentum at the STATE levels for gubs and legs and INSURANCE COMMISSIONERS to withhold their cooperation...

and, of course, our campaign continues in the courts

it appears unstoppable---REPEAL in pelosi's previous place

by a margin of something like 250 to 180...

you progressives are just gonna have to punish us reprobates in the presidential, seeya then

we'll see whom mom and pop approve
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
along with giving individuals the same tax benefits as corporations get for money spent on health insurance or care? and getting rid of border restrictions?

In Indiana's HSA, the state deposits $2,750 per year into an account controlled by the employee, out of which he pays all his health bills. Indiana covers the premium for the plan. The intent is that participants will become more cost-conscious and careful about overpayment or overutilization.

Unused funds in the account—to date some $30 million or about $2,000 per employee and growing fast—are the worker's permanent property. For the very small number of employees (about 6% last year) who use their entire account balance, the state shares further health costs up to an out-of-pocket maximum of $8,000, after which the employee is completely protected.

The HSA option has proven highly popular. This year, over 70% of our 30,000 Indiana state workers chose it, by far the highest in public-sector America. Due to the rejection of these plans by government unions, the average use of HSAs in the public sector across the country is just 2%...

State employees enrolled in the consumer-driven plan will save more than $8 million in 2010 compared to their coworkers in the old-fashioned preferred provider organization (PPO) alternative. In the second straight year in which we've been forced to skip salary increases, workers switching to the HSA are adding thousands of dollars to their take-home pay. (Even if an employee had health issues and incurred the maximum out-of-pocket expenses, he would still be hundreds of dollars ahead.) HSA customers seem highly satisfied; only 3% have opted to switch back to the PPO.

The state is saving, too. In a time of severe budgetary stress, Indiana will save at least $20 million in 2010 because of our high HSA enrollment. Mercer calculates the state's total costs are being reduced by 11% solely due to the HSA option...

The Indiana experience confirms what common sense already tells us: A system built on "cost-plus" reimbursement (i.e., the more a physician does, the more he or she gets paid) coupled with "free" to the purchaser consumption, is a machine perfectly designed to overconsume and overspend. It will never be controlled by top-down balloon-squeezing by insurance companies or the government. There will be no meaningful cost control until we are all cost controllers in our own right.
Click to expand...

CC I read your plan, and although I like aspects of it, it really doesn't say anything about the economics of it. Nor does it roll out how it all might play out in practicality.

cpwill.. This plan here is more closely aligned with my plan that I developed 6 years ago on another forum, and am still working out the math aspects, but suffice it to say that health savings plans are similar to my health savings plan with government matching. Similar to stock matching by corporations. The idea is to be completely bi-partisan (We all seem to have that goal and I wish our politicians would too) but also phase it in. I see no way to phase in this plan in Indiana, and although it works on a micro level, it could not work if you place all the people in the USA into it at point zero. This plan could not work without it being fine tuned to allow for a phased in approach.

My plan actually phases out medicare and medicaid, and allows for the addition of phasing out part of the burden on SS. It very complex, but it is not complete, and I'm sorry to tease you with it, but I simply haven't finished it yet, and it needs some work. Mainly on the math, and getting it correct so that it is self sustaining at the magic 10 year mark. The plan itself is self sustaining when fully implemented, but I'm trying to get the math correct so that it could be so in 10 years.


tim-
 
GOP-seal.jpg
 
You gotta love these GOP and teabaggers. They bitched and moaned that Obama didn't focus on the economy...and what are their first two issues: A pointless symbolic vote to repeal healthcare (which they know is a waste of time and will never happen) and subpoenas and witchhunts. What ever happened to their "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs"?
What a bunch of hypocrites!!!!
 
Barbbtx said:
Make that the FORMER Republican Party. Their heads has been pulled out of their asses. It's a new day. Time to get some new material. :)
Click to expand...

Its a "new day"...really? Then why is it the same ole ****?
 
disneydude said:
You gotta love these GOP and teabaggers. They bitched and moaned that Obama didn't focus on the economy...and what are their first two issues: A pointless symbolic vote to repeal healthcare (which they know is a waste of time and will never happen) and subpoenas and witchhunts. What ever happened to their "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs"?
What a bunch of hypocrites!!!!
Click to expand...

stopping Obamacare is all about saving the economy.
 
cpwill said:
stopping Obamacare is all about saving the economy.
Click to expand...

Nice stretch, but even the stauchiest Republican knows that there is absolutely ZERO chance that repeal is going to happen. Its a waste of taxpayers money...a waste of time and the Republicans are content to engage in these silly tactics rather than focus on improving the economy. It is hypocrisy at its finest.
 
disneydude said:
You gotta love these GOP and teabaggers. They bitched and moaned that Obama didn't focus on the economy...and what are their first two issues: A pointless symbolic vote to repeal healthcare (which they know is a waste of time and will never happen) and subpoenas and witchhunts. What ever happened to their "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs"?
What a bunch of hypocrites!!!!
Click to expand...

It's not the job of government to create jobs. There job is to create a business friendly environment which the Dems haven't done. The healthcare bill in adding to the uncertainty for job creaters.
 
disneydude said:
Nice stretch, but even the stauchiest Republican knows that there is absolutely ZERO chance that repeal is going to happen. Its a waste of taxpayers money...a waste of time and the Republicans are content to engage in these silly tactics rather than focus on improving the economy. It is hypocrisy at its finest.
Click to expand...

That garbage called Obamacare is one 6th of the economy.
It will be repealed or defunded to the point it's worthless and will be replaced by something that works.
 
Barbbtx said:
It's not the job of government to create jobs. There job is to create a business friendly environment which the Dems haven't done. The healthcare bill in adding to the uncertainty for job creaters.
Click to expand...

Beside the point. The GOP hypocrites argued time and again....Why hasn't Obama focused on Jobs Jobs Jobs....then we see their agenda and the first two things they put on the agenda....Witchhunts and a waste of taxpayer money on a "symbolic" vote that they know is a waste of time.

Where is their Job JOb Job plans?

Hypocrites....nothing more. At least it is glaringly obvious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom