Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,756

    Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    It may be the longest chain e-mail we've ever received. A page-by-page analysis of the House health care bill argues that reform will end the health care system as we know it: "Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed! ... Page 42: The 'Health Choices Commissioner' will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. ... Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services."
    So what about these claims? Most are untrue, and some of them have even earned the distinction of "Pants on Fire". But read the article and see for yourself.

    there are plenty of honest and effective ways to hit Obama's health care plan. This chain email is not one of them, nor is any other writing from "Looney Tunes Land".

    Article is here
    .
    Last edited by danarhea; 08-07-09 at 03:11 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Walk with me in hell.
    stekim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    09-21-10 @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,106

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    A good rule of thumb is to reject such dumb ass sources out of hand. Of course it's not true. And, of course, those prone to believing it will. I heard about 5 minutes of a conversation between some Congressman and his constituents in Alabama today. They were criticizing things that the Congressman (who is AGAINST the plan) had to tell them were not even in the current bill. Idiots. And where did they get the wrong info? Likely from another idiot who got it from a chain e-mail.

    Plus, the likelihood of the bill that passed through commitee getting passed is very slim. It needs to go to the House, where people will change things, then to the Senate, where people will change things, then the two bills need to be reconciled.
    Last edited by stekim; 08-07-09 at 03:28 PM.
    Wow. Am I awesome or what?

  3. #3
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    I started reading the bill last night and I'm up to page 51. So far, I'd say the things PolitiFact has called out are correct insofar as how far I've gotten. The bill is abit hard to follow because it's broken up into several Divisions, Titles, Subtitles, sections and subparagraphs. In some cases, it references a subtitle or section, but it doesn't stipulate which Division or Title the subtitle or section is part of. It also references at least three other Acts - the Employee Retirement Income Act, the Public Health Service Act and the Social Security Act - as well as the Internal Revenue Code and the U.S. Code.

    In all honesty, in order to really get to the detailed nuts and bolts of the bill, you really do need the other references. But if all you're trying to do is get the general scope of the bill, reading it as a standalone document should suffice. The only thing I've found questionable about the bill so far is in Division A, Title I, Subtitle A, Section 116(a): Rebates to Enrollees. This section doesn't say how much the rebates will be worth or who pays for them. I'm sure if I keep reading I'll find it, but so far I haven't found the answer to that question. Again, I just got started.

  4. #4
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    In all honesty, in order to really get to the detailed nuts and bolts of the bill, you really do need the other references. But if all you're trying to do is get the general scope of the bill, reading it as a standalone document should suffice. The only thing I've found questionable about the bill so far is in Division A, Title I, Subtitle A, Section 116(a): Rebates to Enrollees. This section doesn't say how much the rebates will be worth or who pays for them. I'm sure if I keep reading I'll find it, but so far I haven't found the answer to that question. Again, I just got started.
    What is most disturbing about HR3200 is precisely this: It is so complex, so tortured, so byzantine, that it is highly unlikely anyone has a full and complete grasp of what is in the bill.

    There is no way for Congress to argue this is a good bill, because they do not know its contents. They cannot assert with sincerity the net positive nature of the bill, because such an assertion requires a degree of knowledge that arguably cannot be had, and almost certainly cannot be had in the compressed time frame afforded Congress on this matter. Neither the Congress nor the Administration have so much as a clue as to the practical consequences that will arise from this bill--they have their hopes and they have their dreams, but they do not have factual support that this bill will realize those hopes and those dreams.

    As a matter of practical governance, a bill which cannot be demonstrably defended to be a good bill should be regarded as a bad bill, and rejected on that basis alone.

  5. #5
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,756

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    What is most disturbing about HR3200 is precisely this: It is so complex, so tortured, so byzantine, that it is highly unlikely anyone has a full and complete grasp of what is in the bill.

    There is no way for Congress to argue this is a good bill, because they do not know its contents. They cannot assert with sincerity the net positive nature of the bill, because such an assertion requires a degree of knowledge that arguably cannot be had, and almost certainly cannot be had in the compressed time frame afforded Congress on this matter. Neither the Congress nor the Administration have so much as a clue as to the practical consequences that will arise from this bill--they have their hopes and they have their dreams, but they do not have factual support that this bill will realize those hopes and those dreams.

    As a matter of practical governance, a bill which cannot be demonstrably defended to be a good bill should be regarded as a bad bill, and rejected on that basis alone.
    The same reasoning that applies to scientific theories, and clearly shows that this kind of reasoning applies equally well outside of science.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  6. #6
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    What is most disturbing about HR3200 is precisely this: It is so complex, so tortured, so byzantine, that it is highly unlikely anyone has a full and complete grasp of what is in the bill.

    There is no way for Congress to argue this is a good bill, because they do not know its contents. They cannot assert with sincerity the net positive nature of the bill, because such an assertion requires a degree of knowledge that arguably cannot be had, and almost certainly cannot be had in the compressed time frame afforded Congress on this matter. Neither the Congress nor the Administration have so much as a clue as to the practical consequences that will arise from this bill--they have their hopes and they have their dreams, but they do not have factual support that this bill will realize those hopes and those dreams.

    As a matter of practical governance, a bill which cannot be demonstrably defended to be a good bill should be regarded as a bad bill, and rejected on that basis alone.
    That's why they have committees to review such complex documents. I agree with everyone who believed that because of the complexity of our nation's health care system, this health care reform bill did NOT need to be rushed through the House. But I also believe that a overhaul of our health system is necessary.

  7. #7
    Conservative Independent
    DarkWizard12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tyler TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,562

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    the chain-mail didn't even bother to copy-paste! although full-government run health care can be considered rationed-health care, regardless, isn't it easier just to read the actual bill and attack what is in the actual bill?

  8. #8
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    That's why they have committees to review such complex documents. I agree with everyone who believed that because of the complexity of our nation's health care system, this health care reform bill did NOT need to be rushed through the House. But I also believe that a overhaul of our health system is necessary.
    If it's too complicated for the folks doing the actual voting to comprehend it, it's too complicated, period.

    Break it down, simplify it. There's no limit to the number of bills Congress can enact into law, so if it takes 1,000 simple bills, let it take 1,000 simple bills.

    If it can't be done that way, perhaps that's nature's way of telling Congress it is on the wrong path, and should find a different approach.

    If solving a problem requires growing government, the solution is most likely worse than the original problem.

  9. #9
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    So far, I haven't read anything in the bill that would increase the size of government. If anything, the bill formulates a committee that was already established by a previous law from the last administration. All this bill is doing is putting that committee into affect. Nothing more. I've been reading the darn thing off and on all day (up to page 68 from page 51 from this morning; I do have a life afterall), and I have yet to come across any aspect of the bill that creates another possition, branch or office of government that wasn't already established by another law that was already in place from some previous piece of legistlation. So far, I haven't been able to find one thing that the opposition has claimed to be so bad about the bill. Again, I'm just really getting started, but I have yet to see the bad things folk have said is in it.

    Not saying there isn't something negative about it; I just haven't come across anything...yet.

    I will say this about the bill; there are alot of amendments (changes) in it that changes some things from other Acts that are law, i.e., there are some pen-n-ink changes to the Social Security Act, for example, that are addressed in the bill. You'd think those changes would be incorporated into the SS Act itself, but since they affect health insurance issues w/those receiving Social Security, I can understand why the changes are address herein. But to that I'd agree; they could have simply did a bill that modified the SS Act instead of putting it in the HCF bill. But again for the sake of consistency since they are health insurance related issues, I can understand why they'd incorporate the changes herein.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 08-09-09 at 01:58 AM.

  10. #10
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Politifact weighs in on chain email criticizing Obama's health care plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    So far, I haven't read anything in the bill that would increase the size of government.
    Language creating new agencies/commissions/officials:

    SEC. 141. HEALTH CHOICES ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH CHOICES COMMISSIONER.
    There is hereby established, as an independent agency in the executive branch of the Government, a Health Choices Administration (in this division referred to as the `Administration').
    SEC. 1401. COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH.
    `(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall establish within the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality a Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (in this section referred to as the `Center') to conduct, support, and synthesize research (including research conducted or supported under section 1013 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003) with respect to the outcomes, effectiveness, and appropriateness of health care services and procedures in order to identify the manner in which diseases, disorders, and other health conditions can most effectively and appropriately be prevented, diagnosed, treated, and managed clinically.
    SEC. 1802. COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH TRUST FUND; FINANCING FOR TRUST FUND.
    `(a) Creation of Trust Fund- There is established in the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the `Health Care Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund' (hereinafter in this section referred to as the `CERTF'), consisting of such amounts as may be appropriated or credited to such Trust Fund as provided in this section and section 9602(b).
    SEC. 2231. PUBLIC HEALTH WORKFORCE CORPS.
    `(a) Establishment- There is established, within the Service, the Public Health Workforce Corps (in this subpart referred to as the `Corps'), for the purpose of ensuring an adequate supply of public health professionals throughout the Nation. The Corps shall consist of--
    SEC. 3131. TASK FORCE ON CLINICAL PREVENTIVE SERVICES.
    `(a) In General- The Secretary, acting through the Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, shall establish a permanent task force to be known as the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services (in this section referred to as the `Task Force').
    SEC. 3132. TASK FORCE ON COMMUNITY PREVENTIVE SERVICES.
    `(a) In General- The Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shall establish a permanent task force to be known as the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (in this section referred to as the `Task Force').
    SEC. 2401. IMPLEMENTATION OF BEST PRACTICES IN THE DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE.
    (a) In General- There is established the Center for Quality Improvement (referred to in this part as the `Center'), to be headed by the Director.
    SEC. 2402. ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HEALTH INFORMATION.
    (a) In General- There is established within the Department an Assistant Secretary for Health Information (in this section referred to as the `Assistant Secretary'), to be appointed by the Secretary.
    SEC. 2521. NATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICE REGISTRY.
    (g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the `registry') to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that--

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •