• 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!

Health Care Bill has passed

You mean when he said that people can go to the emergency room for healthcare?

;)

Just joking....in all seriousness, I don't remember Bush bringing a heathcare reform bill to congress. It could be my memory, but I honestly don't recall it.

I remember him talking a lot about it during the campaign against Kerry, but I don't remember him putting forth any plan to address the healthcare problem.

If I'm wrong...I'm wrong...like I said, I don't recall any.

Medicare Part D was one of the things.

Although I disagree with that legislation.
 
who really believes that 2/3 of the revenues cbo depends upon to pay for all this can come from recovered waste, fraud and abuse?
 
Good luck with that.

By the way, thank you for at least trying to have a reasoned discussion here on the bill. You are all right for a conservative and being wrong about everything.

The whole thing about this is that no one should be opposed to major health care reform. It's all a matter of what we see reform as being and how we want the government to play a role in that.

The bill, for the most part, from what I have read is a disaster waiting to be enacted. Now that's based on less than 200 pages of it being read, but it's not looking good.

I want to see tort reform.
I want to see grant structures for more public clinics and urgent cares to keep people out of emergency rooms.
I want to see the establishment of health courts.
I like the pre-existing condition reforms.
I am frightened by the "Health Choices Commissioner" that this bill establishes.
I am deeply concerned about the fed having real time, total access to individual bank accounts.
I don't see a true public option and a means to pay for it.
I don't see a plan to increase the number of doctors to keep pace with the amount of newly insured.

There's so much wrong with this bill.
 
Medicare Part D was one of the things.

Although I disagree with that legislation.

Just to make the point, Medicare Part D, 550 billion over ten years, no funding or cuts to pay for it in the bill.
 
The whole thing about this is that no one should be opposed to major health care reform. It's all a matter of what we see reform as being and how we want the government to play a role in that.

The bill, for the most part, from what I have read is a disaster waiting to be enacted. Now that's based on less than 200 pages of it being read, but it's not looking good.

I want to see tort reform.
I want to see grant structures for more public clinics and urgent cares to keep people out of emergency rooms.
I want to see the establishment of health courts.
I like the pre-existing condition reforms.
I am frightened by the "Health Choices Commissioner" that this bill establishes.
I am deeply concerned about the fed having real time, total access to individual bank accounts.
I don't see a true public option and a means to pay for it.
I don't see a plan to increase the number of doctors to keep pace with the amount of newly insured.

There's so much wrong with this bill.


Tort reform is good...but is so overhyped. It is a great talking point and sounds good, but the reality is...it will have very little impact at all on the costs of healthcare.

I like the ideas of grants for public clinics and urgent cares

You don't see a true public option because there isn't one. One of the best parts of the bill was taken out through scare tactics despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in the United States think it is a good idea.


As for the # of doctors....I don't know the numbers...but I think there will always be an incentive for people to go to law school. Is there a doctor shortage in this country? I'm not aware of one.
 
The whole thing about this is that no one should be opposed to major health care reform. It's all a matter of what we see reform as being and how we want the government to play a role in that.

The bill, for the most part, from what I have read is a disaster waiting to be enacted. Now that's based on less than 200 pages of it being read, but it's not looking good.

I want to see tort reform.
I want to see grant structures for more public clinics and urgent cares to keep people out of emergency rooms.
I want to see the establishment of health courts.
I like the pre-existing condition reforms.
I am frightened by the "Health Choices Commissioner" that this bill establishes.
I am deeply concerned about the fed having real time, total access to individual bank accounts.
I don't see a true public option and a means to pay for it.
I don't see a plan to increase the number of doctors to keep pace with the amount of newly insured.

There's so much wrong with this bill.

I wrote a nice long post on what I thought of the bill, not going to rehash it. Suffice to say, I got real concerns, but think we had to get something passed. I don't necessarily agree with all your conclusions, but at least it's from a educated position, and you are not going way overboard with the rhetoric.
 
Round 45,000 American deaths associated with lack of insurance. Research released this week in the American Journal of Public Health estimates that 45,000 deaths per year in the United States are associated with the lack of health insurance. If a person is uninsured, "it means you're at mortal risk," said one of the authors, Dr. David Himmelstein, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School.

45,000 American deaths associated with lack of insurance - CNN.com

Absolute bullsh. How could you possible know that? Completely fabricated data.

Here's one for you. 118,000 people died last year from eating Big Macs. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
 
how do you massively expand m and m while simultaneously cutting funds half a T?

1) By marketing them properly, such as this m&m Easter promotion.
Pastel%20M%20and%20Ms.jpg

2) By charging enough for them so that you make a profit.

3) By not charging so much for them so that you can't sell any.

4) By making sure that they still melt in your mouth and not in your hand.

5) By not selling them in school lunch programs. That is just politically incorrect.

6) By having enough TV commercials and advertising.

7) By offering free tours of the processing plant, in order to generate good will, which translates into more sales.

8) By the way, where did you get the idea

9) That a bag of candy

10) Costs one trillion dollars?

:mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
how do YOU feel about this mandate on individuals to go out and buy blue cross else face fines, criminalization and threats of jail?

Buy Insurance or Go to Jail? - The Note

prudent politics?

I haven't really seen many people on the left defend that portion of the bill. I also seem to recall Obama dodging that question during the debates with McCain. I personally think it's stupid.

By the way, I thought it was just a $300 or so fine that people would be charged with.
 
I haven't really seen many people on the left defend that portion of the bill. I also seem to recall Obama dodging that question during the debates with McCain. I personally think it's stupid.

By the way, I thought it was just a $300 or so fine that people would be charged with.

$695, it's cheaper than insurance.
 
Tort reform is good...but is so overhyped. It is a great talking point and sounds good, but the reality is...it will have very little impact at all on the costs of healthcare.

I like the ideas of grants for public clinics and urgent cares

You don't see a true public option because there isn't one. One of the best parts of the bill was taken out through scare tactics despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in the United States think it is a good idea.


As for the # of doctors....I don't know the numbers...but I think there will always be an incentive for people to go to law school. Is there a doctor shortage in this country? I'm not aware of one.

I know there is a shortage of qualified nurses in many areas and there is a shortage of doctors in rural and economically depressed areas where there is likely to be a swell in teh numbers of newly insured. Further, you can't inject 30 million people into the health system and not increase manpower to go along with it.

There are a few other things I haven't seen so far but don't know if they will come later in the bill. For one, I don't see any mandates for stream-lining and standardizing our medical records system electronically. That's a huge sticking point with me.

And the public option was necessary. Right now I see a bill that is going to leave most people with an easy choice: pay the 2% or so of your income in a fine or pay 5 times that amount buying an insurance policy you weren't buying anyway. :shrug:
 

Funny...the map you posted now here comes close to what you are purporting.

For the GOP to regain the house they would have to:

(1) Maintain every seat that they already hold (178), including to the ones that are leaning democrat at this time.

(2) Would have to pick up all of the Democratic seats that currently lean Republican (18)

(3) Win 22 of the 29 "toss up" seats that are currently Democrat.

While technically possible, it is extreme unlikely that this scenario will unfold, barring a complete collapse of the economy.
 
it's the president's people who feel they need to change perceptions

the admin's new spin is wall to wall

Next front: Selling what Congress did - Jeanne Cummings - POLITICO.com

It took a 3 pm meaningless "executive order" to get Stupak and his cronies to change their mind. That's as good as chicken scratch on a napkin; it means absolutely nothing, and it can not be entered into the bill.

Without Stupak, the bill is voted down. Obama and Pelosi must have been pulling their hair out.

I wonder what threats were made. What do they have on him? Stupak actually voted against legislation that HE WROTE HIMSELF. lol

Some MAJOR shenanigans ensued yesterday. And the truth will start trickling out.

This thing is a long way from being over.
 
While technically possible, it is extreme unlikely that this scenario will unfold, barring a complete collapse of the economy.

This bill, if it remains passed (which I bet it doesn't), will ensure that unemployment and the economy remain as is. Awful.
 
I haven't really seen many people on the left defend that portion of the bill. I also seem to recall Obama dodging that question during the debates with McCain. I personally think it's stupid.

By the way, I thought it was just a $300 or so fine that people would be charged with.

The idea behind this has to do with requiring insurance companies to insure those with pre-existing conditions. The theory is that without requiring insurance, what some people will do is wait till they get sick, then get insurance since they now have to be accepted. Left alone, this could cause more problems than it solved, so the requirement to have insurance was added to solve the problem. Whether there is a better way to handle the problem, I dunno, but I can't think of one offhand.
 
Please don't threaten other forum members, even obliquely.
It's unbecoming.
Where is the threat? He said he would see you in line, that's not a threat.
 
"Health care has emerged as a major issue in national debates leading up to the 2008 presidential election, with surveys finding that it ranks among the top three issues for voters, after the economy and the war in Iraq."
Health Care as a 2008 Election Issue:*Background Brief

Representatives doing what people voted them in office to do is historic!!!

Gives me more hope in our system of government.
Healthcare reform...yes; this bill, no.
 
I just started a nasty reply to this, then I read the last sentence. Even though the post did not make it, sorry for thinking bad at you incorrectly.

If we could lock the over the top people away, we might be able to have a decent discussion. Right now it's not worth bothering.
You can't sugar coat this bill, conservatives don't like it. To them it is not reform.
 
You can't sugar coat this bill, conservatives don't like it. To them it is not reform.

Which has exactly what to do with what I said in the post you quoted?
 
Back
Top Bottom