See, I saw the opposite. I see only the rich getting hit with taxes while providing greater safe-guards for the average American and providing Medicaid to the poorest Americans. Sounds pretty good to me.

Consider the source. KHN is Kaiser (health insurer and hospital operator) Health News.

That may make it biased, but not necessarily invalid. I have read the same information from a variety of sources including fox, this is a good synopsis of the information.

I'm one of those people who will fall in the category of people who will get hurt the most. We make 50k a year on our tax return. 28k from my wife (who has insurance), 15k from me (working for a hiring hall, multiple employers), and 7k from continual unemployment. I can't afford the $300 a month premium. I don't qualify typically for insurance through the hiring hall (240 hours a month minimum). I'm generally healthy. We have savings for hospital emergencies instead of buying insurance (Case in point, I had a kidney stone recently and the hospital bills were just over $8k, and I was still able to pay them).

Yet, both versions will hit me with a penalty for having no insurance. That penalty doesn't go anywhere that helps me. It just takes money out of my pocket that would go into our savings for catastrophes. The house version, with a penalty of 2.5% raises more questions than answers. Whose 2.5%? Both of our incomes? My income with or without UI?

Either way, it's ridiculous. It'll be cheaper to pay the penalty than to get insurance for me. I'm hoping the senate version gets through with it's provisions that essentially make the fine uncollectable. Then I'll just make sure nothing is being paid in taxes on my W-2s, pay only the tax I would normally pay, sans fees, and watch the IRS be helpless to do anything about it. *shrug*

I am a moderate with a slight left leaning. I was hoping for health care to be revised. I was initially rooting for Obama and the Dems. Somehow they managed to come up with this monster than doesn't really do anything but make things more complicated. Should've known the dems would screw things up again. Of course, I hate the Republicans too. They like nothing more than to put their hands over their eyes and sing "lalala". They haven't actually DONE anything or contributed to the conversation other than be against everything and anything.

Bryan, just be glad you make that much money. It is considerably more than what half of Americans make. Also sounds like you need to get a permanent job rather than continued unemployment. Unemployment is meant for a one time emergency, not just the winter when construction is down.

If your wife has insurance through her company. And if $300 a month while making $50,000 a year is so tough, you need to change your lifestyle. Most Americans make it on considerably less.

Glad you could cover the $8000, but what if you needed a bypass that costs $250,000? Could you still pay for that? Or would the tax payer have to pick up the cost?

Let me be clear, myself, I only made $14k. The unemployment part is the nature of my work, it's unpredictable. If no one was a stagehand, people wouldn't be going to concerts or the theatre.

Anyways, combined I make $21k a year. That's not that much. It's only WITH my wife that we afford things. What kind of lifestyle do you think we have? We don't have many toys. Our vehicles are newer, but still under $16k. Our TV is 10 years old. We live in a one bedroom apartment. But between cars necessary to get to work, rent (high in Seattle area!) bills, student loans, etc it goes quickly.

It's not that I can't afford insurance per se. Yes, we could probably pay $300 a month. But there goes the money we put into savings to cover catastrophes, or God forbid, a future home down payment. It would leave us with nothing. Since I'm generally healthy it makes MUCH more financial sense to put away money. Even with insurance, a 250k operation will STILL cost tons of money out of pocket.

My point is that this bill takes away choices. If they're going to take away my right to choose whether to buy insurance or put the money in savings, they should have done something else. They SHOULD have passed single-payer. Instead we get this junk.

It is exactly the same thing as the state of Washington forcing you to have automobile insurance. It is a just in case.

I agree about needing to pass the single-payer option, but unfortunately the insurance companies are too entrenched in D.C. I have to say again, that if the 2 of you are making $50,000 a year you should not be having problems (it also sounds like you aren't married, otherwise you would automatically be on her insurance and there would be no problem). Also, if you as a couple make 50 grand a year you should not be getting one penny on unemployment. You are abusing the system. Become more responsible, move, become more frugal, whatever. But the key is that there are probably thousands of people living and making it, with a family, that make much less than you and recieve no government aid. I felt pity at first, but not anymore.

PS. even as a single, making $21,000 a year is $5000 a year more than the poverty level of a family of 4. Quit whining!!!

This is not remotely close to the requirement for auto insurance. Auto ownership and driving is a privilege, not a right. You are not REQUIRED to own a car. The condition of living is a right, not a privilege. No person should be required to purchase insurance because of the fact they are a living individual.

kbee, if you follow your logic then if you don't have insurance the hospital should not have to treat you. Doesn't sound quite as clean and easy anymore does it?

I agree but it would never have been approved. The Right would never have allowed it. Now more people are going to work "under-the-table" just like some of the poorest (old or partialy diabled) Americans already have to in order to not lose the pitiful help they recieve now.

Sorry, I missed the announcement, who is the Propaganda Czar?

Being married does NOT put me on her health insurance automatically (we are married BTW). I would still have to pay about the same $300 a month for insurance. It's not like auto insurance either. I have a CHOICE to park my car and shut off insurance if I choose not to drive. I don't have a choice in this matter at all now.

....so what's next? Let's take care of all the homeless by providing free housing. Then, years later, lets pass a law that everyone has to buy a house. Of course we'll give you governement subsidies if you make 300% the poverty level. The rational is that if you don't buy a house, you're costing the tax payers money for all that free housing. I guess we're all indentured servants to the government.

What about the millions of Americans who have been denied coverage due to their existing health issues? This will help them. I am one of them. I was denied and told not to bother reapplying to that company and told not to bother applying anywhere else as the result will be the same.

Yes single payer would be best and we will eventually get there or we will regulate the private health insurance industry like a utility, but until then we have 10's of millions of Americans who are going without care and they need some help now. Did anyone really think we could or would get single payer in one fell swoop?

Patients before profits and country before party.

The purpose of this bill started out being to get 53 million Americans insured in one way or another. Then, it started going all over the place until no one's apple cart was safe. We were fine with our health insurance exactly the way it was. We didn't need BO and company getting their little grubby hands into OUR business. Now, we wonder at 62 and 56 just how badly this little fiasco is going to affect us. A simple expansion of Medicaid would have accomplished it's original intent without sticking their noses into everybody's life. Everyday, government is just getting more and more into our lives. Granted, there are needs for them to serve. I, for one, don't like government telling me that I have to buy this and buy that and NO you don't have to have car insurance. You just pay your monies into the state's little uninsured pool and you can drive without it. With us, you just needed to leave us alone and NO I don't care if Bob, Sue, and Billy Bob don't have health insurance.

The purpose of this bill started out being to get 53 million Americans insured in one way or another.

That's still the ultimate goal. However...

Then, it started going all over the place until no one's apple cart was safe.

It started going all over the place because the original bill had to be watered down and hacked to bits, owing to the fact that the Democratic majority in Congress made the foolish mistake of hoping that their Republican colleagues were actually interested in finding a bipartisan solution to the health care crisis. Unfortunately, the Republicans were only interested in derailing the process from the get-go, since they suspect (and rightly so) that health care reform will eventually turn out to be a very successful thing that most Americans will appreciate, thereby securing a legislative "win" for the Democratic Party and the Obama Administration, which the Republican Party doesn't want. Making matters worse, you have a rather large and quite rabid horde of Republican voters in this country who, owing to their religious superstitions, racial bigotry, and general paranoia, are adamantly opposed to the Democratic Party, and by way of that, anything the Democratic Party supports (e.g., minimum wage increases, increased funding for public education, environmental quality standards, labor unions, civil rights, etc.), despite the fact that most of these political causes are specifically to the benefit of the working class. This ironic fact is really a sad and unfortunate homage to the skill of Republican politicians at duping a segment of the middle class into actually voting against it's own best interests. Of course, when you convince paranoid people that there's a conspiracy afoot ("Obama's secretly a Muslim!" or "Nancy Pelosi wants to take your guns away!"), these people (who, let's face it, aren't generally too bright to begin with) are all too willing to sacrifice something beneficial like health care reform in order to vent their anger and frustration at the other segment of society -- the educated, secular masses -- whom they fear and, deep down inside, secretly envy.

With us, you just needed to leave us alone and NO I don't care if Bob, Sue, and Billy Bob don't have health insurance.

Too bad. We're all sharing in and benefiting from the Democratic experiment, which means that we are all obligated to look out after each other. Quite frankly, legislation such as this is specifically designed to address needs in this country that result from people like you who aren't willing to elect leaders who believe that everyone should have access to the resources necessary to guarantee of life of at least minimum standards. As such, this bill isn't really so much reforming the health care system as it's addressing the lackluster voting record of people like you.

i think this obama plan is the end of america as we knew it...what i am asking in november to vote out all democrats..washington thinks they dont work for us..we pay them...so i say lets rally and show them .they dont listen to words so lets take action...i know there some good democrats but there good americans also who well be effected by this stupid bill of obama..so americans stand up to washington lets show them in november were not going to take this anymore!!!do it for our grandkids and there kids......we can take our country back!!!then let impeach a few...!!!

"People who are sick might face lower premiums than otherwise; healthier people might pay more."

HAHAHAHA In what UNIVERSE does that logic connect the dots. So... the people with more costs will pay less while the people who incur no costs will pay more........ o...k... We're doomed with these people in charge.

Terra Incognita, First, you have no idea what my voting record is or isn't. Secondly, you come into this world and leave it without anyone ever knowing you came and left. Last, you spend your money as you see fit----don't tell me how to spend mine. I'm glad you called it a "Democratic Experiment". That pretty much sums it up. You must think that everything good in this country is the result of Democratic effort and Republicans do nothing but tear the place apart? The public majority opposed this bill. All you need do is look at the poll on Newsvine and the "ticked off" outnumber the "pleased" almost 3-1. BUT, we're nothing but the people. My friend, watch Nov. and you'll get a real good idea what my voting record is.

Terra, You had your say and I had mine. See ya!

i would like to know who in the &*(^%$%#$ obama thinks hes helping by making it manditory to buy health insurance, and how does he think that most americans can afford to add more debt to already mountains of money that we already owe, and how are all those people on unemployment going to afford that? man it just gets better and better doesnt it!!! grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

I dn't care how EITHER of you vote. This bill is one HUGE pile of un-Constitutionally passed crap, and the final results are going to sicken and horrify EVERYONE who has a conscience and a brain, and thrill the hell out of the deadbeats and (current definition)liberals. I plan to support EVERY state lawsuit against this, refuse to provide any proof of insurance to the IRS, and do evrything in my power to defeat this imense rip-off of the American people. Anything else is a waste of time.

stspecialK...

You obviously did not read any parts of the bill, only the article.

Did you know that with the new bill the Federal Staford loan will NO LONGER be offered to middle class... No definition as to what middle class is based on.

Billions to Historically Black colleges, and colleges with a number of minorities but does not define the numbers or minority... but "Historically Black Colleges" is totally definitive.

This Bill is loaded with S%^%%$%$&***(

What the heck am I reading here. Ultimately, FREEDOM should prevail. I should have the freedom to choose what I do with MY money. It is Health insurance people. Emphasis on INSURANCE. You are not owed your very existance. You make life decisions that make your life better and one of the OPTIONS out there is Health Insurance. You will live another day if you do not have insurance. I choose to have Health Insurance and adjust that insurance to the way I want it. That is FREEDOM of choice. You talk about single payer people, well just kick the lawyer to the curb and open out-of-state insurers to bring down costs of insurance. This keeps our FREEDOMS intact and will bring down costs. That will not cost well into the TRILLIONS of dollars, of which we do not have.

So, I guess only 180,000 more people without health insurance will have to die over the next four years until everyone gets covered. Except that the bill only extend coverage for 30 million people and there are 47 million people without coverage. What about the other 17 million? For those who say I need healthcare now, well I hope you can last four years.

Concerning polls of registered voters, read Rassmussen. They specialize in polling registered voters.

Terra

The problem with you is that you think that everyone is a winner. The fact is that we all just lost. This bill isn't free and I'm sorry but the wealthy will pass their costs onto the consumer which is you and me. I agree we needed reform, but I don't appreciate the fact that now I have to spend my money on something that I didn't need to in the first place. My savings went down the tubes when they passed this bill. The costs will be put on the states and the states will raise taxes to fund it, again you just lost. Money is an issue when you don't have much to spend in the first place. I also have to give more of my money to those that can't afford it, well soon I'll be in that boat and that isn't a good thing.

This is a country that was about being self reliant, responsible for your own actions, doing what you needed to do to survive, make a living, being independent and free from tyranny. Well that all changed and last night it effected everyone American CITIZEN. Life just became a lot more unbearable. If I want to be charitable it is up to me, not the government what I spend my money on, now I don't get a choice and that is wrong!

This bill won't do what it says on the terms it says it. the CBO admitted to making up the numbers... READ all the polls, ALL the polls said americans wanted health care REFORM NOT this POS bill.

Thirdly... the republicans DID put forth SEVERAL bills, all of which cost the taxpayers NOTHING and accomplished MORE than this bill does.

Yesterday was the day that congress (DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED CONGRESS for those of you who aren't paying attention has been that way since the second part of GW's term) voted this in, they DIDN"T LISTEN to their VOTERs..

THEY aren't on this plan, many who were in the swing vote got BOUGHT OUT.. promises of jobs, monies etc. THE TN dude got a promise of a NASA job after he is out of OFFICE!!! This bill will cost the STATE of TN 1.1 BILLION dollars it doesn't have..

AND IN CASE THOSE OF YOU UP HERE WEREN"T LOOKING. the US is BROKE!!!! We don't have the money to fund this.

You all need to go back and read history. THE REAL HISTORY not the stuff the textbook crap is telling you. Our founding fathers are turning over in their graves right now.

Three years from now they'll be blaming Obama-scare on Bush.

No "JerryCurl" for this guy, he uses teflon all over his stickman body.

And Pelosi uses too much starch.

The bottom line, Neale, is that you and your teabagging brethren aren't ticked off about the cost of health care reform. You're ticked off that it's the Democrats who are pushing it through, and doing it at the behest of -- GASP -- a black president.

The ONLY reason it passed is BECAUSE he's a black president!

the insurance companies and their bought and paid for lovers in your government. Vote out all incumbents.

Even though a couple is married - it does so cost extra to go from single coverage to husband wife - I'm not sure where you get your information. This is a government take over not reform - why don't you ask your Congress person why they are not subjected to the same healthcare that is being forced upon us. This is going to cost the average American more money - if they can't pay it they will fined. Well if they could not pay for the insurance how are they going to pay for the fine? If they don't pay the fine - they could go to jail. I'm all for regulations on the insurance companies so that they can't turn away someone with pre-existing conditions, safe guard for the people who have worked all their lives and recently lost their job due to our economic situation. I don't want the IRS or anyone from the gov't for that matter in my personal finances. If you're sick - your premium will go down? If you're not sick you're premium may go up? Redistribute the wealth - ridiculous. When there is no reward what is there to work towards? This socialized medicine - hold on to your hats and see what they do about the issue they should really be addressing - the ECONOMY - then they will move onto Cap & Trade, etc. This is one huge step towards Socialism - history has proved that it doesn't work.

If you can't afford coverage, there are breaks and incentives for you. This does address the economy. Look at states that have funding crises. The problem there is healthcare costs. Look at employers that aren't giving raises this year - thir employees will still costs them more this year because of health insurance premiums. Addressing the cost of health care is addressing the economy.

Terra, what if I don't want to pay for someone else's bad genes or poor lifestyle choices? What good is it for me to remain healthy, work hard to make more that 200K per year, make wise investments, when the government feels its ok to raid my income and savings, to limit my doctor's Medicare pay (set to drop 21% this year!), to monitor more and more of my private activities? If you don't care about this, you must be one of the deadbeats the tea partiers are complaining about.

Get ready for the waiting lists to fix that non-urgent medical problem you or your family has. Make friends with the nurse practitioner in the office, because they will be managing your care. Doctors will no longer be able to afford practicing; their expenses are not dropping, but their pay and their taxes are. A double squeeze. Unsustainable.

How can you believe that the figures used by the CBO will remain true? You can't get something for nothing, which means either 1) it's a giant Ponzi, or 2) let's tax the "rich" some more. As far as 2 is concerned, let's take a look at the Alternative Minimum Tax. It was originally designed to affect only the very rich, but the threshold has edged downward every year, so now it affects many upper-middle income families. Do you think that 200K threshold is going to remain, Pollyanna? Well, do you?

I think allot of people are missing how un constitutional this is. I really hope Idaho and Virginia file the lawsuites against this bill. There is nothing in the constitution that garentees everyone health care.

One has the right to pursue Life liberty and happiness. Pursue is the key word. There is nothing about all will have the government shove a bill and force the people to do anything.

The problem with you is that you think that everyone is a winner. The fact is that we all just lost.

First off, where did I make such a claim? Secondly, all you're doing with above comment is attributing an unprovable, straw-man argument dripping with hyperbole to me, and then rebuffing it with an equally unprovable, hyperbolic assertion.

This bill isn't free and I'm sorry but the wealthy will pass their costs onto the consumer which is you and me.

Well, I can't speak for you, but my health insurance policy isn't underwritten by some dark, nefarious organization called "the wealthy". It's true, however, that there's the potential for premiums to go up, but that can only happen because of corporate greed trying to capitalize on the situation in order to justify hiking rates (which insurance companies already have to the tune of close to 70% in many states over the last decade alone). I GUARANTEE you: your insurance company will claim that its inevitable rate increases -- which were going to happen with or without this bill -- are the sole product of this new law, before it even goes into effect, and it will be a total sham that teabaggers fall for. Truth be told, the government just won the insurance companies a lot more paying subscribers, and they have no reason other than greed to raise insurance premiums. That said, I'm perfectly fine paying a little more for my health insurance if it means insuring more of my fellow Americans. And truth be told, had you anti-reform people not derailed the public option addendum in the original bill, this wouldn't have been an issue. But, of course, that's exactly what you did, and you only have yourselves to blame.

My savings went down the tubes when they passed this bill.

Your savings just disappeared down plumbing, like that?

The costs will be put on the states and the states will raise taxes to fund it ...

Prove it.

Money is an issue when you don't have much to spend in the first place.

If money is an issue for you with regard to paying for your own health insurance, it sounds pretty likely that the public subsidies in this law will play to your favor, not against it. I don't know how much you make or what you're currently paying for health insurance, but I'd urge you to actually crunch the numbers and see for yourself.

This is a country that was about being self reliant, responsible for your own actions, doing what you needed to do to survive, make a living, being independent and free from tyranny.

No, that's the mythical mantra that the Right always chants when it has to justify its persistent lack of regard for the poor and downtrodden -- a demographic they don't generally care about since it doesn't vote for them. While it's true that our democracy absolves us of having to live under tyrannical rule, it doesn't absolve us from the responsibility of stewardship to our fellow man. This is a lesson you right wingers need to learn, and learn well.

So why weren't these details available to the public BEFORE their representatives voted on the bill?

Terra, stewardship to my fellow man? To the extent defined by whose morals..yours? Forced upon me at gunpoint, even if voted upon me by the "majority"? How much autonomy are you willing to sacrifice for that lofty goal? If I am not willing to, then it's OK to force me, apparently. Are you so naive as to believe this bill and its sponsors care about their "fellow man"?

I can see where some would be all for this monstrosity.

There must be some pretty sweet provisions for the "BLIND"?

Terra, what if I don't want to pay for someone else's bad genes or poor lifestyle choices?

Your post further down states that you, either in actuality or simply hypothetically, make more than $200,000 per year, thereby arguing that your taxes are going to go increase in order to fund this law. First off, you don't have a choice in the matter. Secondly, and more importantly, your (and my) tax dollars are already used to fund a whole horde of far worse things that I personally think your anti-tax rhetoric would be better spent on (you could start with the $800 billion -- a year -- we currently spend on the military). Thirdly, you need to understand that the money you pay in taxes was never yours to begin with. That's the money you, I, and every other wage-earner in this country owes the government for providing the enormity of useful, life-bettering services that allow us to live much healthier and happier lives than we otherwise would. If you're scoffing at this, I'd urge you to consider a life without public education, a criminal justice system, a police department, federal aviation standards, or the Food and Drug Administration.

... when the government feels its ok to ... monitor more and more of my private activities?

If you're referring to the practice of illegal wiretaps under the Bush Administration, I agree.

If you don't care about this, you must be one of the deadbeats the tea partiers are complaining about.

No, I'm just a sensible guy with a college education who feels concern for the welfare of his fellow man and who doesn't mind having a black president. Of course, that's in reality exactly what the teabaggers are complaining about -- their dissatisfaction with their own miserable, paranoid lives while the rest of us live happily and contently knowing that we can read above a seventh grade level and get along peacefully with "the coloreds".

Do you think that 200K threshold is going to remain, Pollyanna? Well, do you?

That's sort of the whole point of making it a law. In the absence of any evidence suggesting that it would change, it's silly to invoke these kinds of hypothetical "slippery slope" arguments.

The big winners here are hospitals, doctors, and drug manufacturers. More patients without any one questioning how much they are billing or why. Woohoo!!!

Terra -

In response to your foolish post:

"This bill is one HUGE pile of un-Constitutionally passed crap...

How's it unconstitutional?"

This whole bill flies in the face of the Constitution. NO WHERE in the Constitution does it say that the Government is to provide anything for its citizens other than to protect them. The ONLY job of the Government is provide the military, so your uninformed remarks about the military are just that. Any war we enter the government provides the funding for. Insurance--no. And now the IRS will enforce the health reform bill? These people in office right now are making themselves a threat to our Nation, which is a Republic, not a democracy. I don't agree with many of the social programs that are in place now and would like to see them end. And, no, I don't think it is my responsibility to feed and clothe the entire world nor to provide them with insurance. I work for what is mine. I take care of my family without government assistance. Laid off is no excuse--you are just collecting welfare by another name--unemployment. If this administration really wanted to do something they would have gotten rid of the government mandates that caused the insurance to rise and further --allowed the free enterprise system to work without interference. Then, there would be jobs. This is not what this administration wants and it shows in every move that they make. Next comes amnesty for the illegal aliens in this country. They will also be covered using my tax dollars, but NO ONE will get anything for four years. How long does your unemployment last?

Terra, stewardship to my fellow man? To the extent defined by whose morals..yours?

So, you don't have a problem with, say, tens of thousands of people dying needless deaths every year simply because they can't afford to go to the doctor? If that's morally acceptable in your book, then I guess you're right -- we do have a problem of indeterminable moral values. But in that case, more socially concerned heads must prevail over yours. The reality of the situation, however, is that this isn't rocket science. We don't need to invoke some kind of high-minded, philosophical algebra to arrive at a reasonable agreement on what's morally acceptable. After all, the preamble to the U.S. Constitution sums it up pretty well:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, 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.

I want you to pay special attention to that part about promoting the "general Welfare" of the people of this country.

Forced upon me at gunpoint, even if voted upon me by the "majority"?

Ugh, again with the hyperbole. Who's forcing you at gunpoint to do anything? If you guys keep up with the paranoia, you're just going to get yourselves all worked up into a right-wing fit of cardiac arrest-inducing hypertension, thereby increasing my insurance premiums, so ditch the phony, nonsensical arguments and relax already.

Are you so naive as to believe this bill and its sponsors care about their "fellow man"?

Honestly, can you think of another reason?... one that doesn't rely on a Glenn Beck-inspired conspiracy theory?

The fact that at least 37 states are passing or proposing legislation to countermand this monstrosity should say it all. That is 74% of the states in the Union that have pending legislation or have passed legislation to fight this new bill.

becuase they knew that folks would be very mad and protest. It's the King mentallity. "what they say goes and no matter how much proof you have he's wrong he would rather have a bad idea and run with it than be proven wrong in front of his people.

Just like every dictator in the world they rather pass a death sentence on the masses than be seen making a bad decision.

They will beome sharecroppers like the idiots in Europe.

The ones that lead longer, more healthy lives?

Terra, I don't like the neocons any more than you do. I didn't agree with the Iraq war, and you can track my past posts on the subject. I don't agree with our Mideast policy in general, nor the Afghanistan war in particular, but you assume I must be for those things because I am against this B.S. health care bill.

Your other points are, by and large, semantic tricks. Quoting the Constitution is priceless. Whose welfare, by the way? As far as the gunpoint is concerned, what do you think would happen if you refused to pay that portion of your Federal tax which was earmarked for military action with which you disagree, and then kept refusing to participate in the Federally-mandated legal actions against you? At some point (probably when you refused to vacate your house after seizure for unpaid tax), someone in uniform will be holding a gun on you.

Terra Incognito, you are chiding others for their hyperbole? I do care about those that don't have health insurance. However, your "touchy-feely" rants can't blind everyone to the fact that what is wrong with this bill is that it doesn't even begin to address the cost. It basically says that we realize that health care costs are out of control, but, let's require everyone to pay those costs. If anything, the way the bill is set up, there are no safeguards on how much a hospital or drug manufacturer can charge for their services. It's like handing your doctor your credit card, sending him to Vegas, and telling him to have a good time. And, if you have insurance, you know what happens when the Hospital charges you more than your insurance will cover don't you?

Good points terra. It's a shame that some of your comments were collapsed by "the community", but it just invokes the don't-run-with-scissors rule; the curious will read them.

Terra -- Obviously you know nothing about anything and should stop now. If you had ever watched Glenn Beck you would know that he is not Republican or Democrat, and provides information about our Constitution, regardless of which party is wrong and they both frequently are. He does not support violence and feels this can be resolved peacefully. Like him, I favor a smaller, less intrusive government. I would like to live my life without Big Brother over my shoulder. What kind of country would enforce a mandatory insurance program by sending the IRS after its citizens? Not the U.S. I knew. There are many things wrong with our system, but lets just start with the obvious--entitlement programs. Obama wants you to believe that you have a Right to insurance. You have the right to live your life as you choose in pursuit of happiness. Why are you so against people who have worked to earn enough money to be what you consider "wealthy"? Simple jealousy? That's how all you "poor" people sound, like jealous children. I do make enough money to get by and now I have to pay more for something I don't want.

Good point RobWI, except that Europeans live healthier lives because of their lifestyles not their health care. Shove taco bell, twinkies, and mcdonald's down their throat 5 days a week while removing any semblence of physical activity from their daily routine and those numbers would fall. Really, the only problem with our health care system is cost. That costs makes it prohibitive for people lower in the economic chain and places large burden's on families that get hit with unexpected illness. The only good thing to come from this legislation is that people can't get turned down for pre-existing conditions. I think they could have achieved that for less than $940 billion.

Obama,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, one BIG ASS mistake America!!

.

Let's be sure to fix it come the 2010 & 2012 elections!!!

This whole bill flies in the face of the Constitution. NO WHERE in the Constitution does it say that the Government is to provide anything for its citizens other than to protect them.

The U.S. Constitution also doesn't specifically say anything about guaranteeing me the right to lounge on my sofa every Sunday during football season to drink beer while watching the Lions get pounced game after game. Nor does it say anything about providing public education, or traffic safety, or fire departments -- all of which contribute to the greater public good. The problem with you Constitution Partiers is that your entire anti-government rant is predicated on nothing more than a word game: in your view, because the Constitution doesn't say anything about "providing" this service or that, every useful service that the government does provide is technically "unconstitutional".

The truth is, the Constitution isn't meant to be interpreted by a bunch of anti-government loons playing a semantics sleight-of-hand: the Constitution explicitly places value on promoting the general welfare of its people, which unambiguously necessitates providing for things other than the military.

Any war we enter the government provides the funding for.

I'm not disputing that (although I would dispute your careless insinuation that somehow the government is magically providing military funding on their own, and without the use of tax revenues). The point I raised -- and you seem to have failed to understand it -- was that people who get upset over spending $940 billion over ten years to fund health care reform, but don't mind spending far more than that to fund disasters like the War in Iraq, are being utterly disingenuous about their real motives for opposing health care reform when they claim to do it out of concern for the federal budget deficit. It's not about money for these people: it's purely about politics. They don't like Democrats; ergo, they don't like anything Democrats support. That's been the GOP strategy for years -- sit back, do nothing, wait to see what the Democrats come up with, and then complain like hell about it. The GOP has NO ideas. Nada. Their health care reform "plan" was a 219-page legislative treatise WITHOUT A SINGLE BUDGETARY NUMBER. It amounted to: "It would be a good idea to do this, that, and the other thing, but we have no idea how to do it nor how much it would cost. Oh, and Democrats suck."

our Nation ... is a Republic, not a democracy.

This is like saying: "Roses aren't plants, they're flowers." I know that "D-word" really gets your blood boiling... it's just too close to that other "D-word" that the enemy goes by!

Next comes amnesty for the illegal aliens in this country. They will also be covered using my tax dollars ...

If you really care about budgetary spending, you better pray we start extending health care coverage to illegal immigrants, as that would save huge amounts of government money that are already being used to pay for one of the most expensive forms of health care coverage for those who don't have it -- namely, emergency room visits. Of course, again, let's face it -- the primary opposition to this idea has less to do with concern for budgetary responsibility as it has to do with paranoia about extending a helping hand to "the other".

Terra -

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, 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.

The General Welfare referred to was not the Welfare entitlements, it was our protection by the military. Seriously, Welfare programs were not even in existence at the time our Founding Fathers created the Constitution. That is a typical Liberal misinterpretation. IF you were truly as educated as you proclaim you would know this.

My insurance premium for a POS (Point of Service) plan, a very limited avenue for health insurance and overall care, is approximately $900.00 a month / $10,800.00 a year. All of that just for me to have to get permission from my doctor before I can go to the emergency room. And should I go without getting that permission and my doctor tells me that I could have waited or that it wasn't an emergency - I end up paying for the entire thing out of pocket.

Do I support the bill - YES - as long as Congress gets off their arse and implements health care cost control measures. We all understand that more people in the pool should translate in lower premiums but it will never happen with the likes of certain pharmaceutical company's raping Americans blind and not even giving us the common courtesy of a decent reach around.

The bottom line is this - we need a major over-hall on the health care/insurance industry - I understand insurance is about risk, but not at deaths profit...and I believe our health care industry would prefer to have more sick people...especially those with life threatening diseases...because it means more money for them. Please enjoy the $10,800.00 a year I'm giving to you.

Good points terra. It's a shame that some of your comments were collapsed by "the community", but it just invokes the don't-run-with-scissors rule; the curious will read them.

Thanks. The fact that so many of my posts have been collapsed without containing inflammatory content only demonstrates the fear that these right wingers feel for people who can speak logic to their paranoid nonsense. The irony is, I'm in the Middle East right now where censorship runs rampant, and these Teabagger types -- who otherwise mostly regard fanatical Muslims with disdain -- don't realize just how much they actually have in common with them. I'm convinced that if you put Focus on the Family and the Iranian Guardian Council in a room together and told them to hash out plans for a new government, they'd come out a few hours later arm-in-arm and grinning ear to ear.

Exactly UncleSams. This reminds me of the housing situation. Sure, let's buy a house at an inflated cost using an ARM. Having a house is better than renting and we can figure out how to pay for it 3 years from now. Right now, the only people getting squeezed are the insurers since now they have less room to bargain with customers and the hospitals and Drug manufacturers just had money trees planted in their backyards with potentially 30 million + new customers and no one questioning the rates they are charging or the tests and scans they are requiring.

Common Sense-1506918

The General Welfare referred to was not the Welfare entitlements, it was our protection by the military. Seriously, Welfare programs were not even in existence at the time our Founding Fathers created the Constitution. That is a typical Liberal misinterpretation. IF you were truly as educated as you proclaim you would know this.

First, you're seriously wrong on the military front - had nothing to do with it.

"Mentioned in the United States' Preamble to the Constitution, "Welfare" means health, happiness, prosperity or well-being. The country has an interest in promoting or maintaining the well-being and liberty of its people."

"A common misconception is that the "General Welfare" mentioned in the constitution is synonymous with our modern "welfare" programs."

"Congress was granted the power to promote the general welfare of the nation by the Constitution of the United States. It means that Congress should provide laws that are in keeping with the principles of the self governed. It means that Congress may provide legislation that acts in a general best interest of a nation"

Now to answer the question of welfare entitlements...tell that to the French during the American Revolution. Or...how about the Germans. Both countries provided considerable wealth in blood and treasure to a fledgling nation that couldn't afford to pay it back at the time. How about the Chinese, today - as we owe them close to a trillion dollars. GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE AND GET AN EDUCATION - present the fact as they should be - not as a typical republican would - stright up B.S.

The General Welfare referred to was not the Welfare entitlements, it was our protection by the military. Seriously, Welfare programs were not even in existence at the time our Founding Fathers created the Constitution. That is a typical Liberal misinterpretation. IF you were truly as educated as you proclaim you would know this.

I didn't say that the word "Welfare" as used in the preamble related specifically to "welfare programs". Welfare is a general term relating to the physical and emotional health of people. You're simply inventing a straw-man argument. Try again.

It's not so much about FUNDING Terra, as it is about CONTROL!

You jockey back and forth between the two trying to bolster your argument.

Since when is it constitutional to tell someone they're not allowed to get fat?

Don't even pretend that's not where this is going!

I guess it's time to set me straight on the Constitution now, right?

Too bad. We're all sharing in and benefiting from the Democratic experiment, which means that we are all obligated to look out after each other. - Terra Incognita

Hmm, must have missed that clause in the Constitution. Actually, we are not obligated to look out for anyone else. In addition, I don't see where in the Constitution is says Government has the right to force citizens to buy anything. It also does NOT say that health insurance is a god-given right. If you go to the hospital, they treat you until you are stablized. They do not kick you out based on whether or not you have the means to pay for treatment. Last year, $13 million was picked up by taxpayers for unfunded hospital visits. I would much rather be on the hook for $13 million/year than $940 billion over ten years, and we all know that figure is going to balloon into the trillions!

Furthermore, I like how this bill was supposed to address healthcare reform, but yet it also ended up addressing education reform. Now, the government will decide who is qualified and worthy to receive federal funding for college. Just another entitlement program for the hard-working, taxpaying citizens to fund. And, those same hard-working, taxpaying citizens will probably learn that after paying for everyone else's college, they make too much to qualify for a government handout. Sounds like reverse discrimination.

stspecialk, You may want to get rid of your rose colored glasses, they seem to be blinding reality from you. Those same rose colored glasses that you are wearing must be preventing you from being able to evaluate how our politicians have handled any aspect relating to finances. If you watch closely, and remove your rose colored glasses, you may catch on to the greatest "shell" game ever played.

Since when is it constitutional to tell someone they're not allowed to get fat?

Don't even pretend that's not where this is going!

Don't even pretend that it is.

I guess it's time to set me straight on the Constitution now, right?

Well, judging by your propensity for resorting to hysterics, you may require being set straight on a number of things. Time will tell.

Why didn't you just respond with "nanny nanny boo boo" or "I know you are but what am I"?

Excellent retort!

Let's not get let blood-pressure suffer too much. After all 66% of taxpayers are angry at the outcome of the vote on this bill. In November, there shall be a badly-needed House (Of Representatives) cleaning. Those of whom voted for the bill should start packing there bags now, and that is a lot of baggage to pack, I am sure......

For those of you who do not wish to buy insurance, you may find this blog that was sent to me very interesting. It appears that this bill does not really have any teeth to force you to purchase insurance OR pay a fine. I am going to go on as if this bill never passed. I will simply ignore any provision in the tax form relating to health insurance, and I will not include any payment or fine for not having insurance on my tax form. I don't really have anything worth taking (they can have my underwater house if they want it) and I will simply refuse to pay any fine or tax penalties. If they throw me in tax prison for resisting, then I will spend all of my time rabble rousing in the prison. "Don't throw me in that thar briar patch". Heh Heh, they will soon let me go because I will have become a greater problem in prison than out, and they won't soon want me back. I don't think I have to worry about any of that anyway. Civil disobedience can bring down this power grab.

Health Reform and "Massive Resistance"
What would happen if people just refused to buy health insurance even if a law ordered them to?
By Timothy Noah
Posted Thursday, March 11, 2010, at 6:54 PM ET

The state of Virginia has a nutty new law prohibiting the federal government from compelling anyone in the commonwealth to purchase health insurance. Thirty-four other states are weighing similar laws nullifying health care reform's "individual mandate." Timothy S. Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee who favors passage of the bill, argues reassuringly in this essay on the New England Journal of Medicine's Web site that such challenges have no legal standing whatsoever. "We fought a war about that," Jost ! reminded me, "and the states lost." Jost is similarly reassuring about the constitutionality of the individual mandate itself. Like most legal scholars, he finds the argument in its favor "overwhelming" (though he concedes "it is hard to think of a direct precedent").

But Jost admits to some uncertainty about how easy it will be to enforce the individual mandate, citing two disquieting antecedents. The first is the "massive resistance" at the state level against 1954's Supreme Court school-desegregation decision (spearheaded, coincidentally, by a senator from Virginia). The second is California's defiance of 2005's Supreme Court ruling against the use of marijuana for medical purposes.

As currently devised, the individual mandate, which would be phased in between 2014 and 2016, would impose a tax penalty on people who fail to acquire health insurance. Under the Obama proposal, it would be 2.5 percent of income or $695 (whichever is higher), with exemptions for people who either fall under the tax-filing threshold or who, if forced to purchase health insurance, would end up spending more than 8 percent of their annual income. The majority of those subject to the mandate would receive a government subsidy whose precise size is being worked out in House-Senate negotiations.

The answer, then, to th! e question What happens to people who don't buy health insurance?< /em> is simple: They have to pay a $695 fine. But as Jost points out, that begs the question, What happens to people who don't pay the fine? Uh … nothing. Please turn to Page 336 of the Senate bill, whose language has been adopted in the Obama proposal:

In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.

On that same page, it says the Health and Human Services secretary shall not

file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty … or levy on any such property with respect to such failure.

Huh. "Compliance," Jost concludes,

will therefore be largely voluntary! (although the IRS can still make a tax resister's life miserable, whether or not it can ultimately collect). The state [nullification] bills can thus be seen as invitations to civil disobedience that counsel state citizens to "violate the federal law, wave this statute in their face, and dare them to come after you."

When the late Virginia Sen. Harry Byrd declared war on Brown v. Board of Ed., the result was a few years of defiance at the state level, a lot of newspaper columns and public statements that James J. Kilpatrick came to regret, and eventual capitulation. When the state of California maintained its medical marijuana program in defiance of federal law, the result wa! s a lot of busts by the feds followed by a decision by Attorney General Eric Holder that he had better things to do than prosecute a lot of dopers with medical conditions.

In both those instances, defiance led to legal battles and sometimes to prison sentences. Defying the individual mandate will probably lead to some court battles, too, but once the constitutional issues are settled (probably in the individual mandate's favor), there won't be much left to fight about. And apparently there won't be any threat of prison time or financial penalty. There will only be the threat of pissing off the IRS—and Republicans in Congress may be hyper-vigilant about policing any audits perceived to be retribution for noncompliance.

On the other hand, health insurance is in many ways quite different from school integration and medical marijuana. To white segregationists, letting blacks into ! white schools was an intolerable reordering of society. To consumers of medical marijuana, giving this form of therapy up would be forgoing medication that eases the symptoms of disease. One was a dose of unpleasant medicine; the other a dose of, well, pleasant medicine. Health insurance is something altogether different. Almost nobody actively opposes the idea of being insured. Resistance to the individual mandate isn't about health insurance per se; it's about being told how to spend your money. And most of us got used to the idea long ago that the government needs to help itself to some of that money in order to make the society work.

Another matter to consider is that in Massachusetts, the one state where an individual mandate has actually been tried, people aren't marching in the streets against it. "We have not seen a popular backlash," Jon Kingsdale, executive director of the Massachusetts Connector (the prototype for Obamacare's state exchanges), assu! red me by e-mail. "Only several thousand taxpayers followed through wi th a formal appeal of their tax penalty for 2007 or again for 2008. (The 2009 tax filings are still largely ahead of us.) A handful of appellants have tried to take this sort of case to court, but all have been … dismissed without the full case being argued before the court."

In Massachusetts, the individual mandate has reduced the state's uninsured to 2.7 percent. Some of those folks are paying the fine, some are exempt based on income, and presumably some are neither paying the fine nor exempt; I couldn't tell you how many. With the Bay state's uninsured below 3 percent, it doesn't seem a particularly urgent question. If it rises above 5 percent, I'll get back to you.

E-mail Timothy Noah at chatterbox@slate.com

Actually, we are not obligated to look out for anyone else.

Since altruism is a part of our evolutionary heritage, we don't have much choice in the matter. Regardless, the fact that someone in the 21st Century is actually using this argument to justify their political opposition to a piece of legislation shows just how far you guys have let your moral sensibilities go. Now there's a slippery slope I can believe in.

Last year, $13 million was picked up by taxpayers for unfunded hospital visits.

You're nuts if you think the tax payers paid for only $13 million in unpaid emergency room visits in 2009. The Nationwide Emergency Department Sample report from 2006 shows that almost one-fifth of the 120 million emergency room visits that year were made by the uninsured seeking primary care, with half of those being paid for by the government. At an average of $1,000 a visit, that's $12 billion in one year. When the data for 2009 comes out, it will assuredly prove to have been no different, and probably much worse.

Bryan S 42--- #1.4 You are foolish to think the IRS can do nothing to collect, if they can't get your tax return. There are bank accounts they can go after or attach a lien if you own a home. They might even send a collection agency after you. If tbe government wants, there is not much they can't do. You are only fooling yourself.

Too bad that there are so many peolpe who do not know anything about the world. A lot of those so called "third world" countries have a good medical coverage for EVERYONE! It is a shame that this country, being the best country in the world had never addressed the problem of millions of people with no way to take care of their medical needs, until now, when a president with more vission and who realy cares for ALL PEOPLE has taken a step ahead to change that. Those who oppose this reform are the rich, the ones that never had to go without insurance and had to fear for the life of their children! People who were getting even richer from the illnesses of others. People who are bigots and think that this change will favour those who they hate! Thanks President Obama for passing this changes and thanks to all of those who worked with you!

I have to get back in on this debate. IF what I saw is correct and I believe it to be, there will be a 2.4 or 2.8% Medicare tax on unearned income for everyone---that's 1099's---CD's, interest, capital gains, and I guess IRA distributions? We know that the GWB tax cuts expire in 2011. That's a 4-5% tax increase in the top tax bracket. IF you hire someone in 2010 that has been out of work for 60 days, you will get a $500 tax credit plus pay no employer SS tax for that employee in 2010. I'm not sure on Cap gains, but I figure they're going up. This is only what I know so far. This I do believe. You cannot insure another 30 million people and claim it doesn't cost money. It does and that cost is being offset by a 500 billion cut in Medicare and tax increases. It's deficit neutral because it's offset by tax increases and benefit cuts.

Gotta love it...just because you have possibly been somewhat successful with your job entitles you to pay up to 75% more for the same service as someone else who may no have worked as hard, or just doesn't make as much.

Clint,

Terra must be making some sense to you because now all you're doing is saying "na-na boo-boo, you're a poopy head." And that's not a very cohesive and adult argument.

As a matter of fact, the only ones who have legitimately been able to refute Terra are those who are willing to flat out admit that they just don't care what happens to those around them. It's sad but true. It's the only time Terra doesn't have a well thought out reply other than to say that you are morally lacking, which frankly I have to agree (not that it matters to you because you don't care, right?). Granted, selfishness is not the only reason one could oppose this bill. I for one wish it had the public option.

Well, as a nation we are selfish. I mean, every day we jump into our cars that we feel entitled to knowing that we have signed the death warrant of hundreds of people who will die in car accidents to support our privelege to drive. What's your point?

So after reading this artical how many liberals still think they've won something.

This bill is designed to collapse the exisisting system so a universal / socialist system will seem like a better option.

(And) that's the truth, just look at what Senator Obama was saying 3 years ago.

This is really happening people!!!

I know it's seems futile some times but you'll be surprised at how far a little bit of push back goes.

America has a history of being the most prosperous country ever under individual freedom & free enterprise.

Socialism has always lead to assured collapse under the weight of a growing dependent class and a shrinking production class.

This is just simple fact & it can and will happen in the USA unless we take a real sharp turn back in the direction of free enterprise & all of the values that made our country great to begin with.

God Bless America!!!!!!!

All I kept seeing was: you may be entitled to..., you may receive subsidies for...., etc. Where is all of the money to pay for all of this coming from? That I do not see, other than higher taxes on the "wealthy", those making $200,00 (really? I don't believe that for a second), and employers that offer health insurance plans - excluding the President and Congress and anyone else who works for the government that is...just my and your employers will be hit with the increased fines and taxes if they dare to offer us a nice insurance plan. We should never ever have anything more than the common, poor person is able to afford - excluding of course the President and Congress and government workers who will have their "Cadillac"plans without penalty of course.

I want to pull my hair out - this is a huge joke on America. Very funny Democrats! you can come out now and give us the ole' "we were just kidding" line now! Anyone? Anyone?

Not until we are all on welfare, food stamps, public health care and under the thumb of the "ruling class" - our political leaders - will these guys be happy. Sound familiar? Just go look up any dictator/socialist nation and it early days.

Yes cmac, this thing isn't funded. If you look at the CBO report, nearly 1/3 of funding is dependent on "expected" fines for people who don't have insurance, increased taxes on capital gains, and increased taxes on corporations who offer "cadillac" health plans (cadillac plans must be a euphamism for plans that cost a lot but aren't reliable). Another $400 billion is being ripped out of medicare. As usual, the costs are assured, the means of paying for from assured. Some will have you believe that if you don't support this bill you are selfish and don't care about people. That's the equivalent to those who claim that if you support health care, you kill babies and old people. Reality is, most people would love to have health care provided to everyone. What they don't want is to provide that health care at any cost. Unfortunately, in thier zeal to make history, the Democrats didn't think as much about how to reduce costs and just decided they'd provide everyone with pricey insurance. This bill isn't going to make it without a government bailout. That, or someone with some intelligence coming in and focusing on what Obama originally promised...AFFORDABLE health insurance.

Justaman, I was on my Wife's Insurance and we had to pay $365.00 a month. That didn't count her, The bank paid for hers.
At one time I was paying Blue Cross and Blue Shield of NC, $1535. a month just for myself. That was because a Doctor killed my Right Kidney, so I was a risk. Not my fault but the Doctors. Went to Sue him BUT COULDN'T GET ANOTHER DOCTOR TO TESTIFY on my Behalf.

I am poor. Not dirt poor, but everything I have ever earned has gone to my children. I am 55 years old and in poor health. I have virtually no savings and no cushy pension. I intend to work until I cannot work any longer, and then I will either be dependent on others, or die. I am not complaining -- this is life, and I have enjoyed living. I don't expect help from anybody and I will not ask for help. However, I will not spend my remaining life investing my time and efforts paying for other poor peoples needs when my own needs are not met. I will keep what I have for me. If you don't like my attitude and think I am cruel and selfish because I do not believe in self immolation for the "good of society" then tough s**t. I don't believe that medical care has much to offer. Doctors like a good "diagnosis", but even when they can identify a disease or symptoms, they can seldom provide any treatment that I am not already doing myself if I am willing to do it. If I am not willing to do it then I don't want the doctor's interference. So, what is the benefit of paying my hard earned money into this system that I would rather have in my pocket to enjoy my life right now. I have decided that I will just ignore this whole scheme, spend my money on things I enjoy, and then let the government and fellow citizens do what ever they think they need to do to me because I chose to make choices they would not make. If I end up in prison for this then that will be a testament to the injustice of the society you are creating.

Terra, agree with the above objections to collapsing your comments. Totally lame of you Newsviners! Also agree with your observation that the Repubs have been generally worthless for the last 9 years.

Nevertheless, you cannot deny that voluntary altruism is one thing, but state-enforced altruism is something else. Your interpretation of "promoting the general welfare" is far from secure. Robbing Peter to pay for Paul's drug habit or Mary's abortion (even if I'm pro-choice) is not my idea of promoting the general welfare, even if a democratic (as in democracy) majority votes for it.

I always find it amusing and disturbing that people like Terra seem to think that just because some of us are against this government sponsored health care plan, that means we are:

A. Obviously racist because this bill has been driven by a "gasp" black President.

B. Don't care about people who needlessly die because they don't have health care or couldn't afford the treatment or procedure that could have saved their lives

Considering the fact that neither of the above is true where I am concerned, where does that put me?

Yes, I am against this health care bill. For a number of reasons.

First off, I don't trust the government. Our government has a long history of being inefficient and outright incompetent in the area of large scale social programs. Why should they suddenly get this one right? That would be an irrational assumption based on historical facts.

Secondly, I don't approve or appreciate the fact that this law would FORCE me to purchase health insurance or be fined if I don't. That is tyranny, pure and simple. And please don't use the auto insurance argument because it is a false argument. You don't HAVE to have auto insurance. You only have to have it if you CHOOSE to drive. This law would leave a person with no alternative option.

Thirdly, and most importantly, it is not MY responsibility to pay for YOUR health insurance. Get that through your heads. I don't care what your moral viewpoint is or whether or not you think I am "my brother's keeper". I refuse to accept that responsibility because it is NOT by my choice, it is by yours. Feel free to give up your paychecks to help the less fortunate, but don't EVER think you have the right to FORCE me to do so.

I am responsible for myself and whoever else I CHOOSE to be responsible for. You do not have the right to make that decision for me...and neither does the federal government.

Who is the most incorrectly used word I've seen in the English language.

Whom is the least used.

What health care reform means to us??? A Value Added Tax and a Federal Sales tax, that's what it means to us...

I personally don't know who or how comments get collapsed on. I've never been directly collapsed on, but I've been part of a series that's gotten collapsed before. I try never to directly attack or dispute someone's comments. I probably went 1 comment too far with Terra. Sometimes, very rarely, people will come back on what I write. I don't attempt to be smarter than anyone or correct anybody. Your opinion is yours and mine is mine. During the campaign, there was plenty of nasties written on these blogs. Some name calling, some racial---both ways. If that stuff bothers you, you don't want to writing too much here. It's pretty decent now, but those of us who wrote then know.

I see this getting repealed because it is poorly done. Yes, health insurance in the country needs reform but this isn't it. This is an ego bill for a quite useless president and legislative branch...

Indeed Mike. Again, this comes back to whether some change - any change - is better than doing nothing? I think the text of this bill proves without a doubt that the answer is no.

Isn't it great the reform they are shoving down our throats they are all exempt from Congress, Senate and the President....and their benefits last their entire lives. I see that in the law if your company covers your health insurance as of 2013 any $ above 10,200 cost you will be taxed at 40% for those dollars. Isn't it nice that the Congress, Senate and the President who have the 'golden parachute beneftits' paid for by taxpayers dollars are exempt from the taxes they will be imposing on us. They vote themselves raises the make sure they are exempt from the taxes.........they make themselves exempt from participating in the reform they cram down our throats because they think they are better than us. Just wait november is coming and anyone running that voted for this garbage I will be voting against.

So the way I understand it, a company that didn't offer coverage for its employees( having 50+ employees) would pay a yearly fine of 2k per employee. And those of you who worry about corporations only in it for money better start to worry. 2k/year is a lot cheaper to pay than for a company to pay for their employees coverage. If you want to know how much your company pays, talk to someone who paid for a COBRA extension. At 2k/ person, that would be a bargain for a company.

Let's see how well the government has run the other two big programs they've taken over - Social Security and Medicare;

"The 2009 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports show the combined unfunded liability of these two programs has reached nearly $107 trillion in today's dollars! That is about seven times the size of the U.S. economy and 10 times the size of the outstanding national debt. The unfunded liability is the difference between the benefits that have been promised to current and future retirees and what will be collected in dedicated taxes and Medicare premiums. Last year alone, this debt rose by $5 trillion. If no other reform is enacted, this funding gap can only be closed in future years by substantial tax increases, large benefit cuts or both."

Social Security and Medicare are only a small % of the economy, but now they're taking over 18% of the economy with this bill.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

How's that "Hope and change" thing working out for you?????????

Bryan, at my company it costs $85/month to insure a family of 4 at Basic/Managed level and $107 for Premium. That's for COMPLETE health coverage. If it costs you guys $300/month (for just you two?) then maybe her company isn't big enough to get better rates. And that's what this bill does, help smaller companies give their employees better plans. It's not just the government that going to do something or not do something, you gotta look at your employer.

Also, don't blame the Dems for not getting the package you want. In Congress, everyone wants what they want, so they have to come together to pass something. The Republicans share the same blame. Actually, if it weren't for the Dems standing in the way of corporate-backed Repubs there would never be healthcare reform and the costs would forever rise and the gap between the rich and the poor would get bigger even faster!

Idaho Dragon, you don't have a clue do you? Forcing everyone to have insurance is one way to CONTROL RISING COSTS and equalize insurance rates. If you have insurance or pay taxes you are ALREADY PAYING FOR PEOPLE WITH NO INSURANCE. Get it?? This way, millions who are getting care and services anyway (at county hospitals and doctors for example) have to pay for a more fair share of their "cost" as a member of this society. Everyone contributes to the cost of running this country no matter how individual you think you are.

And for all you dolts fanning the flames of budget fears (*cough* Roy), this bill is designed to pay for itself in a decade or two. But neither you nor I can sit here and predict doom or success quite yet. I'm tired of everyone being so negative toward everything these days. How about some positive outlook for once. I mean, we got rid of Bush didn't we? Now, we can work on repairing the catostrophic state he & Cheney left the country in. Oh yeah, besides the treasury drain and the wars and the financial meltdown, that includes contributing to the rising cost of healthcare....

at my company it costs $85/month to insure a family of 4 at Basic/Managed level and $107 for Premium. That's for COMPLETE health coverage. If it costs you guys $300/month (for just you two?) then maybe her company isn't big enough to get better rates. And that's what this bill does, help smaller companies give their employees better plans. It's not just the government that going to do something or not do something, you gotta look at your employer.

Steve, from this comment, I hate to say it but you apparently do not have a clue. That $85 a month for basic and $107 for a premium plan has to be what YOU PAY, but I can guarantee on your life that is not what the company pays for those policies. The NATIONAL average is closer to $10k per year or $900 a month for an individual with a run of the mill policy. And if you are self-employed or working for a small company (less than 15% of companies with less than 25 employees offer a sponsered health care plan) your premiums, if you can get insurance, average over $12.5k per year.

Awed and Amazed

Number one, the "nanny nanny boo boo" was intended to mock Terra's lame response to my post. But one would have to read back a few posts to understand that. I'm guessing you didn't bother. Not that it would have done any good for someone who picks and chooses who's post there are going to read and COMPREHEND.

Number two, your argument that people "don't care about others", has got to be the poorest excuse for defending this bill (Obama) of them all.

I care DEEPLY about my country, and that includes the citizens.

However, when someone DENIES the FACT that this bill is just a springboard to your precious public option and it will cost a fortune that we don't have, not to mention it's unconstitutional, was FORCED upon the American public via backroom deals and bribes, and in three years will bankrupt virtually EVERY private insurance company, leaving EVERYONE at the mercy of (GUESS WHO?), I'd have to say you were just a tad OFF with your "reasoning" as to why people are SCREAMING.

Ya know?

I am disabled and lucky to be retired from the military, so I pay smaller premiums for my health insurance. I guess if I want to lower my premiums, I should run for Congress and get free healthcare and a pension for just serving. If Congress had to pay for their health insurance and pay into Social Security and live on those benefits like the rest of us, BOTH would get fixed, pronto.

Steve and everybody -- Usually the premium includes a contribution by both the employer and by the employee, before you can know the total cost of the premium you must include both the employer's contribution and your own.

As usual, the real cost of ANYTHING the government does is totally hidden from the public. As a doctor, I can tell you what's coming from my side of the fence...we have all been placed in a very precarious situation by those who think they deserve everything and will not work and those who believe they control everything and don't HAVE to work (Congress.) You and I will bear the burden for all of these people and now we will pay for those who are, as of now "undocumented." Doctors and nurses will retire as soon as they are able or quit taking insurance as fast as they can. You will be required to pay the Government for this monstrous bill or pay the fine (most will make this a real cost decision.) You will still be able to get your care, but you will essentially be paying for it twice unless you wish to sit in a VERY long line with all of the others at the "free clinic." Welcome to Obamacare and the New World Order.

Remember this, most of this "health care program" "KICKS IN" in a few years.

By then, America will have completely fallen apart economically.

The current government "Ponzi" scheme of robbing one pocket to pay another "pocket" with tax payers dollars, will have emerged as a complete farce, as the "banks" will not loan, no jobs, will lead to chaos in America.

Anyone want to address Social Security running out of money, now?

I did some estimates... under this obamacrap... my family wouyld have to pay 698 per month!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I can barely afford rent, how the fu... am I gonna afford 698.00 a month!!!!!

WAY TO GO OBAMA!!!!!!!! LETS MADATE THAT EVERYONE MUST BUY A CAR..... YOU STUPID HARVARD LIBERAL FREAK....

Where in the constitution does it state that an american can be forced to be healthy and then be penalized for being healthy? My wife and I are pretty healthy and only pay about $2500 a year on medical without any insurance. How does this benefit us?

Bryan you should have spent some of that 8 thousand dollars to get some more education and maybe you could see the benefits.

First I don't believe a word you say about having 8 thousand dollars in savings, if you did you would have no problem paying three hundred a month for health insurance. What idiot would prefer to pay 8 grand out of savings than 3 hundred a month? Second, a kidney stone is minor relatively speaking..........it won't kill you, just hurts alot.

Ever think you might have a baby? How about cancer? It costs between 500 thousand and a million dollars.

Don't count on the fine being uncollectable, the IRS will be the one collecting it and you won't have a say about what comes out of your check.

As far as being for health reform you don't sound like that is true either. What were you expecting?

Bryan my guess is that your 8 thousand dollars was part of what you earned under the table. You obviously just don't want to pay for health insurance. Well I don't want to pay for your medical bills. That is how it is the same as auto insurance. If you don't have any and get in an accident, I have to pay. Same with medical insurance. If you don't have any and get sick, I have to pay for you when you were completely able to pay for health insurance yourself.

davidc your are really good considering that nobody else has anyway to figure out how much it will cost yet.

tpo88, you like paying that much for health? You sounds stupid or rich. I'm guessing rich. Suck it up.

My best friend is paying $600 for Basic Blue Cross. His co-pay and drug costs takes his monthly medical bill towards 1K. Now he also has a car which by law has to have insurance and its a recent model. He gets a break because he is renting an apt and rental insurance is cheap. Now I pay $200 for auto and $500 for home. Though home owners insurance is required only when there is a mortage lien right? Other than that its prudent to have if you own the home. So based on what my friend is paying for Basic Care these MF's Obama and Democrats will add $600 or more to my monthly insurance bill? Lets see I am paying 13K/month for Protection?

This is BS. Obama is a corporate whore who along with the other Dem Dimwits sold out their constituencies because the working classes will be crushed with these insurance costs. And from my experience as a nurse and caregiver this does not mean quality healthcare because I have seen insured get the real shaft consistently for over 20 years.

Nice going Democrats. The Republicans are totally blameless and watched you Fools sell out your own voters. While Teabaggers call you Socialists the truth is you are a bunch of Corporate Fascist Whores who have secured a winfall for Insurance and Pharmaceutical companies while Profit hospital ghouls like Vanguard make moves to benefit by buying distressed Non-profits where there was large numbers of Non-insured patient populations.
Oh and Vanguard offers Insurance plans just like Humana.

You MFing Minstrel piece of work. I thank myself everyday for not voting for your fraudulent arse but am surrounded by naive Blacks and Unionists who believed in your BS.

I am not buying any insurance. I am not paying any penalty. If I get sick I will heal myself as I have been doing. And if I get insured in an auto crash that insurance will cover me. Brave words for a healthy man? I have already walked the walk and took care of my heart injury at home rather than risking a more serious infarct from going to the hospital ER and then getting the bill.

The USA will not accomplish what foreign civilised countries in Europe do because no other nation sets up a large portion of its population to fail and be the cash-cows for corporate herdsmen.

F U Obama.
F.U Biden you Delaware corporate flunky. Never fooled by any of you.
F.U Reid (Where have you pathetic Democrat Chickenhawks hid Jim Webb?)
F.U Pelosi

FU all you Democrats who grandstanded for Single-Payer and Public Option and then caved to this Harvard Wall Street imposter in the White House who posed as an extension of the Civil Rights and Union movement.

I am not paying the private insurance vampires anything. I am not applying to the whorish government who serves as the enforcer for those insurance companies. You want to charge me a Penalty? Then call your bosses at the Federal Reserve and have Treaury print up some more of your worthless Federal Reserve Notes to pay. F. U.

IMPEACH OBAMA
DEMAND his Resignation.
Blacks! Unions! Idealistic Youth! Independents! In the words of Malcolm X, you been had, tricked, bamboozled.

Send this Punk the Message that you have seen enough.
He has consistently bailed out corporations which even Wall Street wouldn't support. All contrary to his campaign promises and these do not fall within the perview of the pragmatism of the Oval Office.

He was a Fraud from Day 1 psoing as one of you and he betrayed you not the Republicans. Get this guy out of there. Sarah Palin may not be as articulate as some would like but on Obama she was absolutely right.

Working Class Americans. Obama is the final nail in your coffin. Hope you wake up soon.

you are sooo right

Agreed, it doesn't solve ALL of the problems, but as you said it may be the best possible at this time. It opens the door to future changes to keep improving our country.

Okay now we agree this bill is one more entitlement program. You will continue to add more and more to it right to the point, where the economic infrastructure collapses.

So explain to me what make you think business and the "rich' will just stay here be productive, continue to provide insurance and pay taxes.

Jerry, Europe and the rest of the industrialized world have been doing it for years and they are farther from economic collapse than we are.

Have you seen the riots in Greece? They went to this freeloader friendly government years ago. Look at the result. the U.K. is close to collapse as is most of Europe--it's just a matter of time.

lucy, where did you get the info that the UK is about to collapse?

Do you watch the news or read newspapers?

Last time I checked, we are not Europe. We were not up against economic collape until we passed this bill "TRILLION DOLLARS". You are willing to hock your kids future for this thing when today we can make the necessary changes needed to bring down costs i.e. tort and cross-border insurance.

No this will end up like Social Security - which was started as a voluntary program that was to kept in a private fund. In my lifetime that's an automatic tax coming out of every paycheck. Johnson did away with the private fund and started putting the funds into the general fund so the government could spend it anyway they wanted it. I don't think this is the best that can be done. It should have been done in steps without all the kickbacks for insurance companies, politicians, etc. The government can't run anything - SS, Medicare, the post office - watch and see. Our politicians are not subject to this healthcare - they have special healthcare. Keep in mind that the government does not generate revenue.

That is true, Ellen. President Bush tried to privatize the social security accounts so that the government could not raid them and Pelosi rallied her followers to defeat this measure. I'm beginning to think that there is not enough money in the world to make that woman happy. But I digress. You are so right -- the government has been unable to successfully run any program from the Post Office to the IRS to Medicare and Social Security.

stspecialk, are you kidding us, Europe is on the verge of bankruptcy. I don't know what you Liberals listen to. You better shut your MSNBC down because they only tell you what the LIBERALS want you to hear.
democrats brag about SS, Medicare, Post Office, Welfare, and they are all losers.
Obama and the Democrats want to Destroy our Economy so the UNITED NATIONS can take over. ONE WORLD ORDER. When we go so will the rest of the WORLD and they know it.
Now I know why the Democrats support Homosexuality, They like giving it to us in the back end.

Fact: Greece is on the verge of economic bankruptcy

Fact: Spain is in severe financial trouble and many economists believe that it is also headed for bankruptcy.

Fact: The U.K. and the United States are both in danger of losing their triple A economic status. If this occurs, the interest rate on their loans will increase, further damaging their economies.

Fact: France and Germany do not have robust economies. While they are not currently in severe economic distress, both countries are not economically sound at this time.

So stspecialk, I fail to see how you can claim that Europe is more economically sound than we are. The facts prove otherwise. Your claim also disregards the fact that the people in those "other industrialized nations" are taxed even more than we are in order to pay for all of their social programs...and they are all in deep financial trouble.

All you people worrying so much about how the uninsured will go to emergency rooms and the taxpayers will pay for it---who do you think is paying for all these subsidies the gov is giving them? The taxpayers! Nothing new is being accomplished here except who is calling the shots.

For all you who say single-payer is what we need--are you really naive enough to believe you won't get denied access to care because of your condition any more? To say that is to show that you have no experience or information about how these single-payer systems operate. In these systems, the bottom line in all that matters--just like you accuse the insurance companies of. You could be denied care, tests, operations or the like depending on if the gov thinks you need them (regardless of what the doc says), how old you are, and how expensive it is. AGain it is no different than now, just a different middleman, one who has the power to make laws that affect your life and the power to enforce it. No choices here. And the taxpayers are footing an even greater bill.

No! The gov has no business "restructuring the economy." You know, don't you, that historically governments use the poverty and health issues of the people to gain greater control and power? You people are walking right into it, taking handouts from big brother. There are other ways, and the Repubs came up with dozens of good ideas, but they don't fit the agenda.

Jerry if your idea of entitlement is the right to buy something well then gee I guess it is. You sit there and groan about how much it will cost and then call it an entitlement. Geez, pick one.

Now you got it! More tax equals more laws, more govt. more pain.

You do realize that the 40% surcharge would only be taken on the amount over the $8500. If your insurance costs $6200 through your employer you must have one darn nice policy, most cost considerably less than that.

Congratulations that you even have a job that pays that much (more than 2X the poverty level).

First of all, the $6200 price tag is a direct result of limited companies that offer coverage in my state (VT).

Second of all, my main point was that while I won't be taxed initially, with inflation and inevitable rising costs, it won't take long for my "benefit" to reach that $8500 threshold and then far exceed it.

Finally, although it may seem like I have a job that pays more than 2x the poverty level, in all actuality the cost of living in Vermont eats up most of that pay rather quickly. Leaving me with very little expendable income.

Join the club, most of us are in the same situation as you are. We have become so accustomed to living beyond our means that we don't even know how lucky we are. Do you have a big screen TV? A car that is less that 2 years old? How often do you go out to dinner or stop by McDonalds? These are all things that we can all live without (and in most cases would be better without).

If your insurances rises to $9000 that would mean a surcharge of $200, not too bad for a great insurance plan that would in addition to giving you cadillac coverage would also help to pay for someone elses chemotherapy. We must learn to share. I wish that the human spirit made people want to give so that they wouldn't have to be forced to take care of their neighbors.

Remember, a healthy citizen is a citizen that can work. Does that mean they will? No, but if they are sick they can't work even if they want to.

No, I don't have a big screen TV, my car is early 2000's & I do most of my cooking at home. You're right, these are all things we can live without & I do. Mainly because my biggest goal right now is to pay down my student loan debts and buy a house.

I do not mean to sound like I am against all healthcare reform, but it needs to be sound & offer real change. Not more bloat & tax!

True, Danielle, but we have to start somewhere. We can't just say NO to all ideas without trying some of them first.

ps. I have the student loan thing too, it sucks. Sure wish my job paid according to my education, but I am a teacher so too bad.

SO, you want to start some where? Okay start here.

I run a company, my average profit for the last few years is 9%.

This insurance bill will cost me 8% in insurance fees and 5.24% in increased taxes. Total increases 13.24% on the insurance bill.

The climate bill will raise the cost of electricity about 30% and my operating costs about 11%

I'm looking at 24.24% in increases in operating costs against a profit margin of 9%.

What should I do?

Jerry, your numbers are so made up it is funny. But let's just go with your numbers. You have a profit margin of 9% (pretty darn good). You will NOT be forced to provide your employees with health care and the only way your taxes would be increased is if you; provided them with a cadillac plan, or you make over $250,000 per year as an individual.

Next, the climate bill would do nothing of the sort unless your business is coal burning. Stop listening to Beck, he is full of it.

Finally let's say your business makes 100 thousand a year gross. You say your profit is 9%. Lets first discuss the energy bill, if it does what you say it would raise your electricity costs by 30%, not your total costs. Next, you add in health insurance (if you choose) and you are looking at a net cost of $0. You do as most other businesses do and you make health insurance a part of the salary.

Any way you look at it saying that your costs are going to go up by a gross figure of 24% is absurd and does not make mathematical sense. Remember, no one will force you to give your employees health care, that will still be your decision and only if you are rich are your taxes going up. Check the accounting of the bills proposed.

You spend to much time listening to Faux News. Remember, even they admit that they only report news for a total of 5 hours per day and the rest is entertainment programing.

I guess the actual math was too confusing.

We have become so accustomed to living beyond our means that we don't even know how lucky we are. Do you have a big screen TV? A car that is less that 2 years old? How often do you go out to dinner or stop by McDonalds?

stspecialk, as I read your posts I cannot decide if you are being sarcastic or if you actually believe such stuff as having a big screen TV or making 2X the poverty level indicates greed and selfishness. I hope that you are just kidding. If you aren't, and if you are a teacher, I sincerely hope that you are not passing your socialist ideals along to your students.

It's just as I suspected. Most of the negative comments on this vine are from company owners. They are going to complain about anything that keeps them from buying that new cabin cruiser, BMW etc. Hey, Mr/Ms business owner, for whatever reason there are folks in the US that will finally get health insurance that was unattainable before. Some are folks with cancer, diabetes and a myriad of other diseases. Consider yourselves lucky to have health care.

The health insurance premium for my employees run about $ 4,000 per month. According to the new reform - I could get up to a 35% tax CREDIT or $16,800. With the new medicare tax - It will now cost me an additional $1,000 per month in taxes - so now my net "savings" would be about $4,200. Sounds good if and only if I have to pay more than $16,800 in taxes.

However - according to the new reform - since I have less than 50 employees - I would be exempt from the $2,000 per employee penalty for not offering health insurance - and since the government is going to subsidize the premiums if my employees have to buy their own - I can ease my conscience in regards to no longer providing health insurance.

So If I discontinue the health insurance my employees currently have - I could save myself approximately $36,000 a year. I wonder how many other small business owners will be taking a look at health care reform like this.

I was not opposed to health care reform - this just isn't reform for me. Currently in Oklahoma they have something called Insure Oklahoma - it reimburses the company for it's premiums (the amount depends on who qualifies according to income level) it will even reimburse up to 85% of the family portion. This is health care reform I can live with. Why wasn't a plan like this proposed. The democrats didn't do a good job of getting input from those who actually currently help to pay for health insurance.

Man, under STSPECIALK's world things must be miserable because anyone getting ahead is suppose to be ashamed that they are succeeding. Man, you need to get an education and go out and try to get a better future job. In these days, people like you are holding down people actually trying to improve there lives. You are not owed anything. If you are lazy, which it sounds like you are, or envious of others that are succeeding dispite people like you, they get with the program and live "The American Dream". This nation is not here to coddle you, it is hear to provide the opportunity accel, if you choose. If you want to be lazy, be lazy however know that you decide your future. This is not Europe and God willing, it will never be!!! I am American and proud of it, can you say the same with out choking!

sts: Not to be rude, but I could use some of what you have to make my life better. My point is that my employer insurance costs me approx. 11-12K a year and is pretty good, not cadillac but good. I live where the cost is high because of locale. I chose higher cost so my minor child, I'm a single parent, wouldn't have to worry if I'm injured in the field about illegally driveing me 50 miles to a hospital or doctor that would accept my insurance. The PPO plan was in no way a benefit. The high cost is so I can be taken 10 miles and not have to pay 50% of the procedure cost. You can't mandate all to be great, it doesn't happen.

I can't believe people are floating the "any change is better than nothing" argument. Seriously? The financial projections rely on over $800 billion from taxes as well as $400 billion of that $800 billion ripped out of medicare. Something like $56 billion is projected to come from fines for people who don't have insurance. LOL. Yeah, anything is better than nothing. Here's an idea, provide a bill that actually addresses the cost of health care rather than provides it to all while providing hospitals and drug manufacturers with a financial windfall? Now, that would be better than nothing.

stspecialk

Jerry, your numbers are so made up it is funny. But let's just go with your numbers. You have a profit margin of 9% (pretty darn good). You will NOT be forced to provide your employees with health care and the only way your taxes would be increased is if you; provided them with a cadillac plan, or you make over $250,000 per year as an individual.

Yes, he won't be forced to buy coverage for his employees. However, it appears that he was willing and happy to provide insurance, until the government stepped in. Now, there is no incentive for small or big business to provide coverage, forcing people onto the government's plan and making those who have achieved financial success to pay for them.

Next, the climate bill would do nothing of the sort unless your business is coal burning. Stop listening to Beck, he is full of it.

The climate bill trickles down to all energy sources and all consumers. The government will regulate how much gas, electricity, coal businesses and consumers use. When businesses use more than the government says they should, they are forced to buy more (which will probably force them to cut labor costs to ensure continued production of their goods/services). Paying to cover the cost of much needed energy supplies, will trickle down to the consumer. From there, people will not be able to afford to buy those goods, causing those companies to go out of business or lay off more workers. The only people not paying more will be those already addicted to the entitlement programs.

stspecialK... a couple questions.... are you still a student? are you still in academia? You seem to speak like a text book...not someone who is in the real world living those numbers day to day. You seem to have something to say to everyone to make this bill seem like it's going to save us all. Maybe you listen to too much MSNBC or drank too much Obama-Aid. You mention that having a big screen TV or 2x the poverty level is in essence being greedy or over indulging (per Chicago's post). I had a job as a waiter hardly making ends meet, but a house of a known welfare recipient had a TV the size of mine. I drove past and saw it through their window. Where is that fair? OR should I feel good for someone having the same as me? Even though they didn't work for it. Now I have a job that is straight commission... if I have a good month, I make more, but am taxed more. Mostly to go towards programs like this. Why should I work harder to make my life better when taxes will only keep me where I was anyway? Where is the government helping me (though I don't want their help, I want them to stay away) make my life better with programs like this?

For employers, if you have more than 50 employees you have to provide insurance to your employees. AND... you'll be penalized individually if you don't buy into the plan. So where does that help those that don't want it.

Also specialK. you told Spud that those companies that can't adjust should collapse. Then what are your thoughts on walmart. From your posts, you seem to lean away from businesses succeeding past what you think they should. So, if a mom and pop goes out of business because they can't compete with their prices/selection, are you going to have the same cold vibe to them? If not, then your thoughts on health care go out the window. If people who can work don't work why should they get benefits? Yes, there are those that can't help themselves, and there should be something to help them without forcing it on everyone. But, this "Step in the right direction" is very naive. You have to know that there are many that don't work on purpose or make life decisions that keep them from working, why should everyone give back to them? Why should I work later at the office to make sure that my tax burden will be handled and to make sure I can have the life I want, while they sit and collect?

You pretty much are happy that those that are rich, in the eyes of the gov and yourself, will be hurt the most by this. Why is that? This country was built on working for what you want and working towards your happiness. So if a person becomes rich, why should they be forced to give to programs they may not support (ie taxes). We wouldn't be here without the innovations and spending of the rich. Take the microwave, extremely expensive when it originally came out. After a while of those purchasing it that could afford it at the time, companies were able to make more microwaves and offer them at a cheaper price, like $30.00. So what's your beef? I mean, who is anyone to say that someone makes too much? What happens if people say you make too much, even though you are the one who worked for it? What do you do then?

Ahtech... why hate on Mr./Mrs. business owner? They are the ones that put their homes, personal financial lives on the line to keep a business going and offer people jobs, quality health care, etc... Along with America's already high taxes...this isn't going to help.

This is not Health Care Reform, This is Government control of your lives, It is call COMMUNISM.

Uh, John, it isn't anything like Communism. Not even sure, in it's current version, that it would pass as Socialism. Really, the bill accomplishes little with a high price tag. So, I guess you could call it irrationalism.

Danielle

This is what I read..........I pasted it, don't know where your figures came from.

Starting in 2018, the bill would also impose a 40 percent excise tax on the portion of most employer-sponsored health coverage (excluding dental and vision) that exceeds $10,200 a year for individuals and $27,500 for families

So it's time to become a freeloader, or illegal and beat them at their own game. Just show up at the emegency room and you can't be denied healhcare or be forced to pay the fees. If enough people do this, the system completley fails. How many people do you really think are going to pay their fines for not purchasing insurance?? Gimme a break the system sucks now and it's going to get worse. Thanks for nothing, Congress !! What a bunch of bubbleheads !!

I work in an ER, and let me tell you, the system has already failed. It collapsed years ago.

I know lots of people who will benefit from this that are not freeloaders or illegals. A grandmother who can't afford her medicine will benefit. A person with a pre-exisiting condition will benefit. A hard working mom who only makes a bit over minimum wage will benefit.

The only people I see having to 'pay' are the rich (those making over 1/4 to 1/2 a million dollars a year), and those who are allready paying WAY too much for their insurance ($8500/yr).

Get off your selfish soapbox and think about someone else.

Yep, my mother-in-law who is 63 and drawing social security from her husband who died 3 years ago. Who also works 2 jobs but got pneumonia and had to go to the emergency room, wait for 5 hours, get a battery of tests, and then refused to stay in the hospital because of what it cost her (and us who paid the $3000 bill for her). She's a freeloader.

Sorry to hear about your Mother-in-law, steve. Hope she is doing better. The problem is that most people don't realize that it truely is a 'there but for the grace of god go I' situation. They don't see that they are so lucky to have what they have and they take it for granted.

$8500/year for insurance may sound like an awful lot but in actuality, at least in my region, it isn't. That's nearly the current going rate for single person coverage. (& with ever rising costs, it won't be long before we reach that $8500!)

Take a look at monthly premiums for yourself: http://www.uvm.edu/hrs/info/benefits/premiums/fy10_rates.pdf

Also take note of the following: http://www.uvm.edu/hrs/info/benefits/premiums/10_nonrep_premiums.pdf

UVM currently pro-rates how much each employee pays based on their salary. Therefore, someone making $22,880 would have 97% of their healthcare costs covered. Someone making $150K+ would have only 70% of their healthcare premiums covered. In terms of taxes, who do you think is going to be paying more to Uncle Sam?

Don't be delusional, this $8500 cap doesn't target the rich! It the middle class who will suffer!

You must live inside a hospital if you think that the average in your area is over $8500 a year for a single person or $23,000 for a family. As a union teacher in CA my insurance (which is great and covers everything) costs me and my district less than $7000 a year. So again, I don't know where you live, but it isn't with the rest of us.

ps. according to your own data from your first link: an employee and their family being covered costs ~$1300/mo that equates to ~$16,000 per year, well below the coverage limits.

You haven't read any of my other posts have you?

My concern was with future costs, not as the currently are. If premiums continue to rise, but the $8500/$23000 threshold does not where do you think you'll be in a few years? Posting on this board "oh no one told me it'd effect meeeeee! I thought it was just going to tax the rich!"

$16,000 to $23,000 is about a 40% jump in premiums, you think that is going to happen overnight?

You did refer to the cost of a single person. According to the chart you providied their current cost is less than $6000 per year. Again it would take an almost 40% increase to hit that $8500 limit, and remember, the surcharge would only be on the amount over the limit not on the whole policy.

I am using your numbers provided. Maybe you need to go back and check your own charts.

Vermont Freedom Plan Monthly Premiums = $520.63 *12 = $6247.56 which last I checked was MORE than $6000!

When I started working at UVM in 2002 total premiums were less than $4000 for VFP- so in about 7 years costs have risen 50% So no, I don't think it will take that long to rise to the $8500 level

You are right, I realized after I posted that it would be over $6000 (not much, $6200, sounds like we are nit-picking). Sounds to me that you need to get together and find another insurance carrier. Any business that increases its' prices by 50% in 7 years needs to get the boot.

Even at the current rate of increase that your insurance company is charging it will take aproximately 5 1/2 years to reach the $8500 limit. Plenty of time to adjust limits. Again it is not going to go up overnight like you are afraid.

Yeah, getting a new insurance company would be great. However, because of various reasons there is limited competition in the area. What may not have been apparently obvious from the charts is that you have two companies (with a few plans each) to choose from: Blue Cross/Blue Shield and MVP.

It does not escape my attention in the least that I am very lucky to have what I have with UVM. However that does not blind me to the negative things in the current legislation. I am not a hardliner against all reform. The costs and benefits must be balanced & if we do not think 5, 10, 50 years down the road when we reach those crossroads we may find ourselves in a much more precarious position than we are currently in.

Instead of trying to push through a 1000+/- page combersome collect-all of a bill that may inadvertantly do more harm than good; I believe the task should be undertaken piecemeal. & One thing that definitly needs to happen is get the lobbiest OUT!

I totally agree about getting the lobbiest out. But, I feel that we had to start somewhere. Is this bill perfect? Far from it. Is it better than the status quo, I believe so. Let's all get together to continue the process of reform immediately and not wait 5 or 10 years. The ball is rolling now, lets see if we can continue to improve the legislation rather than just continuing with a system that we know doesn't work. Now that the precident has been set that we will change the system we can work on greater details to hopefully (in a few years) come up with a much better system than we currently have.

Because I am a 54 year old women - my monthly premiums are around $640 per month. When I turn 55 later this year - you can bet they will go up. My plan is pretty good, but certainly not what I would call a Cadillac plan - I have a $5,000 deductible and a $500 limit on office visits (my average office visit for my semi-annual check ups usually run about $700).

And the only real ailments I have is that my blood pressure is slightly high - which is controlled by medication.

My ideal health care reform would be more about controlling the out of sight increases in premiums. I would expect that my premiums after I turn 55 will be over $700 a month which will definetly put at the $8,500 limit.

Right on Ray! Finally some common sense. Lord help us all! All of this is going to blow up in our faces, everyone will be taxed even more then we already are, illegals and non-contributing society members will be covered, waiting lists will skyrocket and it will be harder to see doctors, people that can't afford to buy government run insurance or pay the penalty simply wont and then the costs to cover them will be passed down to everyone who is paying...that's how it always works! The wonderful Democrats in my state passed a bill to raise taxes to "pay for education so our classrooms don't suffer" then 2 months later the government said oh wait we are 14 million short in the education budget so now we need to shut down schools. The same thing is going to happen here. After a year or so on this program they will realize that it's not working and the numbers aren't adding up and then they will raise taxes on the middle class so that Jose Fernando Migel Hernandez will be able to get him, his wife, and their 5 anchor babies into the doctor while sending money back to Mexico.

If the government can't run social security, medicare, education, etc. how in the world do we think they can run health care?!? Education is bankrupt, social security is bankrupt, medicare is on the verge of bankruptcy, and now let's throw health care in to the fire and bring it down as well.

Way to go Dems...this is all you! At least when this bill sucks the life our of our already struggling economy and crashes our health care system we can all look back and say NOT ONE SINGLE REPUBLICAN VOTED FOR THIS AND THAT THIS IS ALL THE DEMS DOING. Of course I'm sure that fact will be quickly forgotten and somehow it will be blamed on the Republicans. But, as long as Obama's ego is fed and he can go on another talk show and talk about how wonderful he is then that's all that matters.

STSPECIALK, you are nothing but a fraud in here. You are a part of this thing. You spew about how people are going to benefit from this while we are talking about how it is going to effect ME. Go back to lobbying you idiot.

I haven't seen STSpecialK back up any of his comments, though some people have posted verifiable links. Typical of the blind followers who will then claim 'stop watching FAUX NEWS', blah, blah, blah. Personally, I'm an Independent who is sick of both parties, and review as much of both sides as I can before I make up my mind.

The truth is that I hadn't heard ONE SINGLE POLITICIAN claim to have read this bill before they voted for it, nor have I seen ONE QUOTE or section from the bill to support anyone's point of view or opinion.

However, what I did see were 220 representatives vote for a bill that they didn't voluntarily accept for their own insurance. Our politicians have the most generous insurance plans in the country and they are guaranteed for life. I want to see them drop it and pick up their own through this plan. They won't do it.

When the system rewards freeloaders and punishes productivity, then it is time to become an unproductive freeloader and reap the rewards society has to offer. I certainly am not going to be working any harder than I have to in this "take from those with ability and give to those with needs" world. I will hide my abilities and accentuate my needs. I will take my compensation in leisure and enjoy life. I wonder who will pay all the bills? -- Perhaps the young liberals who asked for all of this? Serves them right, I am going to be a grievous burden for them to bear.

Good for you. That's what a good American should do.

Yes, definetly investigate how it will effect you and your family but also look at the common sense things that are out there. How much will it cost to put this thing in place and will it effect your freedom to choose. Our freedoms are slowly being eroded and we need to be aware of that. I cannot build a 8' x 8' in my back yard without getting permits to do so. Hmm, that is pretty stupid, it is a SMALL shed. Anyway, my take is that the bill was done in a partisan fashon and is not really even done. The riders on it are stupid. No one state or organization should benefit from a Healthcare REFORM bill being put in place. Geez, can I get in on the rider bandwagon.

Me too, Red. But while I research and read more about it, I don't see the numbers, or logic, lining up to support the positive claims. We shall see.

If you have that kind of coverage you are either very rich, or paying way too much for your coverage. Also remember that that surcharge is only on the amount over the $8500, not the whole amount. Middle class Americans are not the one's with these plans, they are the one's worried about how to pay for the coverage they do have and what would happen if they lost their jobs.

stspecialk - you may want to mention to most labor union members that they aren't middle class. This will effect them and many other middle class.

Charles, how would this affect them? Working as a union teacher, I know that my health plan costs around $6500 per year for an individual (my cost and district cost included), not even close to the threshold and I have incredible coverage. $8500 per year for an individual or $23000 a year for a family is a huge, luxury health plan, no question about it.

stspecialk - I'm not a union member, but the unions are extremely upset with this Cadillac amendment and are lobbying to get union members exempted. What does that tell you?

It tells me that there are a lot of corrupt unions. I know of one particular union (I won't mention but they do electrical work in So. Cal) got a 15% raise this last year while many people were losing their jobs. Not all unions are corrupt, but many unfortunately are.

Stspecialk,

According to the Democrats speaking last night, the US military are also falling under the Cadillac tax plans, and they are middle class, if that when retired.

Remember the retirees joined 20+years ago with the promise, that the US Government would GIVE them FREE health care for life....... Just ANOTHER promise BROKEN by the US Government...

Presently the retirees have to pay every month, few can use on-base health care, due to the Doctorand RN shortages. And when they turn 65 they are forced into Medicare, which limits their available health care and choices........ Also if they have a job, that company's health coverage takes presidence, because Tricare will NOT pay......... And it is AGAINST-the-LAW for them to pay you extra to use Tricare and not have you on their health care policy.......

AND - the EU which you say, "Has 'Universal Health Care that is working so well." Have to traveled there lately?????? Italy, Portugal, Greece, France, UK, Russia, etc, etc, are ALL cutting health care and the first 3 are in worse shape than CA financially...... With France, UK, and Russia, cutting social programs due to the rising cost......

It kind of amazes me that a lot of you think that 200,000 per year is a lot of money. Now granted I make nowhere near that, it just to me does not seem out of the realm before I die.

250,000 for couples, that's even worse.

But all in all the new law still says to me.....DO NOT BECOME SUCCESSFUL!

Because if you do you will pay more tax's AND have to support anyone that doesn't believe they live in a free society, and are just as capable as I am to make something of themselves.

Granted this is what BIG GOVERNMENT has wanted all along. Every society needs the little worker bees to do everything, and support them.

stspecialk -

It all makes sense now--you are union. Right there is the biggest problem with our Country. Obama has said "I work for SEIU, your agenda is my agenda." UNION! Figures. Unions are exempt from this program due to the back room deals worked out. You have no reason to be in this discussion.

STSpecial, please post where in the bill it specifically states that the 40% excise will be applied to the amount OVER $8,500. It's a valuable point, and since you've read it, please advise to the section or page in the bill it states this.

Secondly, you sound like a hypocritical envious person to be claiming that your insurance plan costs $6,500, but the 'Cadillac' plans to be taxed over $8,500, are 'very rich'? The difference between your current plan and those is $2,000. So tell me, do you honestly believe that your plan won't increase $2k in 8 years when that supposedly kicks in?

You keep making claims but have no 'facts' to back them up, just opinions. Stop watching MSNBC as your only news source (and before you make a comment about FAUX NEWS, I watch them all evenly and no, I'm not a Republican, just an American who is sick of the rhetoric that you and others like you spout off without any facts).

We complain about the people coming into the ER's w/o insurance and the tax payer has to pay for their treatment. The only way to change that is to make sure that everyone has access to health care that includes preventative care. A trip to the doctor for the flu, payed for by the government is about 1/5 the cost of that same trip to the ER, payed for by the government.

Thans for trying to reason with these misinformed and scared people.

stspecialk, everyone has access to healthcare already. No one is turned away if they need it.

I agree soazDan. It used to be a benefit and now all the moochers of the USA expect it as part of employment.

I also don't quite understand the up to 26 years old can stay on mommy and daddies plan....You give a stray cat food and it will continue to want more and more. GET A JOB YOU LAZY BUMS!

If you cannot afford the insurance it will be provided for you through Medicaid for free or reduced cost depending on what you can pay. The only people who face fines are the ones' who choose not to buy insurance; the same ones who will then go to the ER and tax payers will have to pay their bill.

stspecialk, Everyone is stating that those that can not afford ins. will get help getting Medicade. I am disabled, I have medicad, no one, except cheesy clinics and emergency rooms will take it. Go to your phone book, call a dozen doctors and see how many will take medicade. It took me a year to get a doctor, in a clinic set up for the poorest of the poor. I don't like him, I don't trust him. He does little doctoring and a whole lot of pill pushing. With what the govt. is paying for all the drugs he hands out, they could provide good healyh care with a lot less side effects. Clinics, mostly county clinics, employ docs that will fit their budget. They get some good ones but they usually don't stay long. I'm tired of being afraid of going to the doctor.

I worked for the Boulder County Developmentally Disabled Center as a counselor for 3 year and that would never occur. You need to get your DDC to do its' job.

We do care!!! But we also know that just because money is tight we can't just stop the good fight. According to the CBO this will end up saving money in the long run (I know the final figures aren't in, but it gives an idea). It is like saying that you have a small leak in your roof that you ignore b/c money is tight. By the next year you can see the sky through your ceiling and the problem will cost you 10X as much. When it comes to fiscal responsibility we should have been thinking about that before invading Iraq.

ps. Charles, I am enjoying the debate. You seem like an educated man who has done some research. This is more of what Newsvine needs.

I agree Charles but the Republicans in congress decided to take the obstructionist path very early in the process. Instead of negotiating and finding ways to improve the legislation, they denied these problems existed and then distorted and lied about what the bills contained. They used their propaganda arm, Fox News, to further spread lies and distortions. They took, and are taking, a scortched earth strategy. Unfortunately, this will continue. I care how much we are spending, but the cost of doing nothing is far more for individuals, our economy and the federal deficit.

st.... Then you are saying that defeating the terrorist where ever they are isn't good for our heath?

It is easy to spend money that isn't yours. The government finds it easy to pass these bills on the backs of its citizens. If they were the ones working like dogs just to put food on the table for their children they may be more cautious about what they are doing. I dare say that the number of the responsible parties in the passing of this bill have never set foot in a blue collar working situation. Perhaps if they were the ones working 16 hr days just to make ends meet they would better appreciate the position most Americans face today.

stspecialk- I agree with what you're saying about the debate and Charles is to be commended. Most of the usual irrational posters don't respond to articles that have the kind of factual information that this one has. I always go to the sources as well and The Kaiser Foundation is pretty comprehensive. I wish more people who post here would use the internet to find out more about these issues.

stspecialk - you sound intelligent as well - if you really believe the CBO, then you didn't listen to the entire report lately. The reduction in Medicare that was suppose to help pay for the new coverage was also accounted for to reduce the existing Merdicare deficit. They did not realize they were using the same money to do two different reductions equally as large. Secondly, they confirmed the deficit could be reduced by $130B over ten years but they also said insurance rates would increase. And lastly, after looking at Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security emense deficits, you really don't believe this legislation is going to save money. Please tell me you really don't believe it.

Spud, Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorists. You are confused that was Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.

Thanks, steve.

Charles, no, I don't think it will save money. I think it will cost, regardless of what the CBO says. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't spend the money on it. I for one am willing to give up several percentage points of my income if it meant that ALL americans would be insured.

ps. the biggest problem with SSI is that most people think that it is a retirement plan (entitlement) rather than a Welfare program designed to protect our poorer seniors who have worked their whole lives and still were unable to save for retirement. I know several people who net over $200,000 a year from their pensions and retirement and yet still collect SSI. That is just plain disgusting.

sts....That's not possible. The formula for SSI is; with any unerned income (anything you don't get for actual work) you get to keep the first $20. Anything over that is subtracted from SSI. The SSI max is now set at $603 a month. If you make more than the max you no longer qualify for SSI. Even if you work they subtract $1 for every 2 you earn. I can not understand why people think SSI is a path to wealth. I know a few people ( haven't done a questionair) that recieve less than $700 a month. In the last generation of mothers, if you were a single parent that could only work nights in order to be with the kids when they were young, you often had a choice of which waitress job you took. At that point in time most most waitress jobs had no withholding. So even if you paid taxes, which resturants and lounges fround on, you have little or nothing in Soc. Sec. Try to live on $603 a month today.

SSI is a federal welfare program which does not require you to have work credits stored to draw benefits, SSA is a benefit where work credits were earned to draw benefits. And when the taxation for social security began and Americans accepted this arrangement from the government - they believed they were 'investing' on something that would be returned upon retirement. Has the government been good and faithful stewarts to their word? Have they been diligent in the management of the social security/Medicare fund, as if it were their own money?

Since the current health reforms being negotiated don't curb costs, it will cost the whole country. With no tort, no importing of prescriptions, no anti-trust laws lifted across state lines, bribes and closed door deals, special exemptions for states, and penalizing people for not purchasing insurance; these as well as regulating insurance companies without a way to pay for these regulations will only raise the costs of premiums and the costs to everyone. The insurance companies are counting on scores of (young, healthy) people signing up - but I don't think it might pan out that way.

i meant 'stewards' not stewarts. excuse me.

Stspecialk,

So you think Saddam did not have anything to do with the Terrorist?????

What about the $10,000.00USD he was paying to the families of the suicide bombers???

What about him paying money to have GB Sr - KILLED??????

What about him trying to make nuclear weapons?????? The 500 tons of 'Yellow Cake' he had and the enrichment facilities, were for power generation. Isn't that what Iran is now saying???? Ha! Ha!

Or the thousands of his own people he killed with nerve gas....

Or when he invaded Iran and Kuwait......

Just to name a few.......

Glad to see you three liberals Patting each other on the back. Telling each other how SMART each of you are.
Thats what I call Liberalism. We are all so smart with no COMMON SENSE.

Only the ones unable to adjust their policies and procedures. (IMO) If they didn't spend so much on lobbying they could easily afford to cover pre-existing conditions.

Honest Spud - It will not, because they will raise the premiums for everyone else to pay for it. That's one of the reasons this bill will raise the cost of insurance not lower it.

You're kidding right? Private insurance companies will get about 30 Million more customers who have to buy insurance. They will benefit the most from this legislation. I think private insurance will become more competitive, and some insurance companies may lose out, but a few are going to have dramatically increased revenues. I'm buying stock now before people figure this out.

Honest,

This will not only destroy private insurance, it will destroy employers too. If forced to pay for insurance, companies are not going to hire. I recently heard that lowering the minimum wage was one way to get employers to hire. My question is... if we lower the minimum wage, who is going to lower the cost of living?

jrett, it is time for us to stop thinking of employer based insurance as a benefit and instead think of it as part of your wages, it will completely change the prespective.

Steve- smart move, this bill gives them many more customers and does not stop them from increasing premiums to cover pre-existing patients or allowing them to drop patients with limited coverage. It will restrict them to providing a bigger percentage of revenues used directly for reimbursements. However if they can't make a profit under these restrictions, they will be out of business. United Healthcare lead the industry last year with 4% profit. Not exactly earth shattering profits but substantial. If you reduce profit by more than 4%, they are out of business. I'm not an insurance company proponent, but my guess is if we don't reduce health care costs, no insurance program will make it, public or private.

Better yet, don't think of it as a benefit at all.

Charles, I read somewhere (don't quote me on this) that insurance companies spend close to 10% of their revenues on lobbiest, these have got to go.

It brings up the question again of how is it that the rest of the industrialized world spends significantly less per person on health care yet they almost all live longer than we do?

stspecialk - I agree with limiting lobbying budgets, but it has to be done across the board and it must apply to all industries not just insurance. If the number of 10% is accurate, I would guess it was for a specific company not all companies, but like you I can't confirm that number.

I believe the rest of the world human population does not abuse themselves as we do. I believe their diets and exercise programs are far superior to ours, I don't think their health care is superior.

Which leads to the next issues in reducing health care costs, implementing wellness programs that promote proper diet and exercise. Why isn't this in the bill? Another good way to improve health and lower prement costs.

They force you to get auto insurance. The reason is obvious, you may be a great driver, but that doesn't mean you won't make a mistake and have an accident. With health insurance, you may be in great shape, but that doesn't mean you won't break a leg or have a heart attack and need to go to the ER. If you don't have insurance who pays for it? The tax payer.

As for the illegals, this will change nothing positive or negative for them. They will still go to the ER's for care charged to the tax payer. They will not be getting any additional benefit than the fact that if someone is dying on your front step, you don't care who they are or where they came from, you just help because it is the right thing to do.

BD. I would be interested to know if , you work in a practice. does your practice take medicade?

States require auto insurance, that's why the policies differ from state to state.

Sounds like the new owners are ripping you off. If it were a better economy I would say go get a new job, but I know that is tought right now. But things will get better and then you can tell your new boss to go scre@# himself.

If you truely can't afford it, you will be elligable for medicaid for free or at least reduced cost. Lots of people are in the same situation, but if you got sick now, who would pay for it? The tax payer, same difference.

Facts, sts, facts. Please provide FACTS. You're spending an awful lot of energy and time spouting off on this post, regurgitating the same lines that have been put out there by proponents, but no FACTS about the bill.

Of course, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but in several of your posts you appear to stomp on open expression and simply claim, 'You're wrong' without FACTS. Let's see them. FACTS. Where are they? Any links to legitimate, non-propagandized articles? Charts by independent organizations? Any facts?

You can't even spell truly or eligible correctly -you're just another sheep following the heard. Blindly following and believing your own thoughts with no support of FACTS.

I am not sure how they are saying you are not qualified, you must be right at that borderline which I believe is around $16000 a year. Glad that they extended the unemployment benefits. Just wondering why your kids don't attend public schools? If they did they would qualify for free breakfast, lunch, and limited health care. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but I believe that one section of the bill increases the level to above the 'poverty level' for access to medicaid.

I truely hope that you have more success in the new year. There are lots of groups out there willing to help. I know it is hard to swallow your pride (I've been there) but try asking for some help from a local charitable organization, they are out there and really non-judging. Good luck to you and your family.

I'm sure jrett has already tried to get help. Yes ther are places that try to help. First you must take the time off work to wait (most of the day) to apply. Second, most places are now out of funds by the end of the first week of the month. Some places, this includes the Salvation Army, have one day a month for you to call for help with utilities. If you don't make the cut, you must wait untill the next call day, if you can get through to find out when it is. There are no longer any funds for emergency utiliy help that I am aware of. Your chances are just slightly better if you have children. You sound like a concerned and lovley person sts, I just don't think most Americans with average incomes or two incomes can imagine what it is like on your own with a fairly low paying job. I often see myself being called a bum at this site. I think people just don't know.

That online system sounds like it works good for you. Again, I feel your pain durring these times. At least here in CA the lunch program is based on income (up to $20,000) and is a blessing to many children. Keep your head up. As someone working on my PhD in Economics, I can tell you that better times are ahead, we just must have patience. Peace.

ps. we also have programs like CARE that provide lower costs on energy and phone service, it may be something you could look into, I know every little bit counts (like I said, I've been there and done that). Keep your head up.

I live in AZ. I know for a fact the schools here provide free/reduced breakfast and lunch based on income. My kids have been on it and my best friends kids are on it now. I'm glad to hear they will be upping the cut off line for medicade (it's called access here). My friend and her 2 children were removed because she makes $15 over the cut off limit as it stands right now. So my friend who works 10 - 12hrs a day, can't afford the insurance through the employer, is without insurance. I am at the moment unable to get insurance because I had cancer over 5yrs ago and none of the private insurance companies will accept me and my husband's job doesn't offer health insurance. I am also unemployed at the moment and have put in over 100 applications. He brings in about $2400 a month the only thing we can afford is reduced medical through state. I forgot our stupid governor just cut our states ACCESS and they are accepting applications for medical.

Here, here! One thing I have to say is that in Economics we discuss the self-defeating cycle. The key to it is that if you think bad things are coming, you spend less, therefore hurting the economy. But if you think optomistically, you spend more and the economy does better. Now that doesn't do much for you and me as we don't have much to spend, but I believe that the attitude is the key. For me, I will only believe that tomorrow will be better than today, and so on. It is just a philosophy that can benefit everyone and our country as a whole. Happy NEW YEAR!

JAY------ Try to keep in mind, the supporters of the democratic Parasitical party, have a super majority, in both houses.

If the bill isn't passed or it doesn't have something in it, that you think should be there, you will have to discusss it with the democrats.

The republicans are against this bill and have followd the wishes of their constituencies.

The democcrats are following the wishes of Mr. Obama.

Personally, I believe you parasites have gone too far, this time.

I think you are about to see a huge number of democrats removed from office in Nov of next year, Mr Obama removed from office in 2012, .

1/22/2013, you can expect tosee bills introduced repealing this bill, the climate bill and then having warmed up, all of the leech bills that have passed over the years, not going to be much left, of any of them.

A democrat is the only known parasite, that feeds on it's own species.

Jerry, jerry, jerry (I say shaking my head). First, the climate change bill hasn't even been presented yet, and it is far from happening (which is why the EPA stepped in). Second, the Democrats have done everything they can, bending over backwards, to get even one Republican to get involved and all that they get/hear is simply "NO" to the whole idea. Health care reform has been coming for over 100 years. Is this bill perfect? No, is any? But it gets the discussion and momentum moving. My guess is you are over 60 which means that you are close to collecting your senior welfare program called SSI (Social Security Insurance, not Guaranteed retirement) and will probably live long beyond what you have contributed to the program which means that myself and everyone else younger will be giving you welfare. I normally don't make personal attacks, but you just sound like a spoiled brat who refuses to share his toys.

stspecial,

based on your earlier posts, you are a teacher, and I thank you for that, very admirable. I think you lost your cool on Jerry a little bit. Considering you are a teacher you aren't really paying that much into SSI, now are you. You will actually probably be one of the biggest feeders off of the "senior welfare program" when it's all said and done, assuming you are using salary as a basis for your personal attack.

Jerry... wow... parasite eh? I wonder if you consider yourself to be a good christian and american? Sometimes I wonder about the people who make comments like that. To the point... you would think in times of crisis we could just come together as Americans. Money and greed are a powerful thing... so yea.... there are a few Dems who thought about themselfs more than the will of the people who they are supposed to be working for. The times we live in I guess.... Check out the campain contributions from insurance companies to the people obstructing reform. Gives you insite to what's going on. Obama campaigned (and won) on health reform and bipartisanship. Hey.... he tried and got screwed. He tried to include the Rep. I would like to say I wish he didn't and just rolled it though. Then I think that is not the America I want. I did not like it when Bush did it and would not if he did. Oh.... I'm an Independent by the way. These Dem and Rep games are ridiculous.... I watch both sides, fact check, and make up my own mind. You should try it....

sb, what most people don't realize is that we do not pay into SSI, but we are also completely ineligible for benefits. It is a trade off that we make as part of our pension. So even if a teacher works their entire life, they are entitled to an SSI or death benefit of $0.

I agree w/ losing my cool w/ Jerry. For some reason he has a way of getting under my skin.

Good comment, Jay.

sb.... That is funny that out of the 2 posts....you called out the teacher as the one who lost their cool!? Also, it might interest you to know that teacher's statistically retire with AMPLE savings. They learn to live modestly (which is a shame) and save. SS is the based on what you pay in. So she will get what she has earned. But you know what..... considering how underpaid they are for the important work they do.... sugguesting that if she got a little more and labeling here a bottom feeder just made you the @!$%# of the day! Congrats... you had some stiff competition in this room.

Thanks for the backup, Jay. I however have a different take on SSI. The program was never intended to be a retirement savings account. It was designed so that seniors who have worked their whole lives and have been unable to save for retirement don't go hungry. I personally know of several people who bring home more than $200,000 from pensions and personal retirement funds yet still collect SSI. What this means is that the people who truely need the Insurance aspect of the program will be unable to recieve it b/c there will be no funds remaining.

PS. I am a man. (not that it matters, just fyi)

Oh I know... I was misunderstood. I was making a point based on the current system. I just find it frustrating that in comments against reform it turns into some sort of welfare debate. I think the welfare system needs SERIOUS reform. So their is truth in many arguments made here. However, we are not debating welfare.... we are debating healthcare reform. You never really hear arguements about health reform. It's always falsely stating that people are getting screwed because they are hard working and now they will be paying for lazy drug users. This is not the norm. People are working 2 jobs, no health insurance for various reasons and flooding free clinics when they are available only to find managable conditions have gone too long unmanaged. Those people pay for schools whether they have kids or not... pay for libraries whether they use them or not..... pay for wars whether they agree with them or not.... yet have to pay for gov. reps with their tax dollars to have insurance that they are not supposedly not worthy of. At the risk of being called a... socialist...ha... somethings in society should not be for profit. Healthy productive citizens benefits us all.... as well as our american identity that we all enjoy.

Another great comment, Jay. I too believe (shhhhh) that we need to be moving into the region of a socialist democracy. One that realizes that there are things that are better done by the government. The best example is fire and public safety. While they have problems, I sure wouldn't want to discuss how much it is going to cost while my house burns to the ground. The same goes for health care. Everyone wants people to work, but someone who is sick cannot work (whether they want to or not, they just can't). We have forgotten that we are a Union, which implies that we are connected to each other in more ways than just being neighbors, we MUST look out for each other as well. It puts us sometimes in sticky situations between privacy and safety, but that comes with the territory.

Yea I have always been more libitarian leaning more than anything. I want less government in my life. However we are a society, and we have to come together on certain things for the benefit of us all. I really would hate the idea of government run healthcare. You have to live in the hear and now.... capitalism in this industry just isn't working. Currently we are using tax dollars to pay for healthcare for people that have been denied by insurance companies or cannot afford it. Also we are paying 4x as much than most western society and are less healthy overall. I would have been one to support giving pvt ins. companies a shot in the beginning. It just hasn't worked. Time to move on.... People are acting like the insurance companies are managing this well!? I guess they have limited experience. They are lucky. I hope when they get sick and have to test the coverage that they are paying for only to be deemed too expensive and denied... well... I hope they receive more compassion than they give.

France tried to make it as a social democracy. Their unemployment has always been higher then ours due to the extra burden placed on industry to pay for social engineering programs. During the 90's their unemployment was 10% while ours was 4.5%. If you prefer to live in a social democracy I would recommend a move to such a place. I recommend the south of France . Great food and great beaches. But you better move quickly, the French are trying to move away from that failed experiment. Perhaps California is the place for you. Great place, provided you do not need a job. It's attempt at social engineering has rewarded the state with some of the highest unemployment numbers in the country as industries relocate to other more business friendly states or overseas.

Their is always a cost for a "feel good" outlook on government, and that cost over the long term is usually jobs .

BTW, there are still a lot of us that do not need the nanny state, with a government as our new parents. Some people seem to have lost that ability to take care of themselves, others have not. But, if you prefer Nancy Pelosi taking care of you, just continue to vote Democrat.

Ok... I'll follow you for a minute. What is your solution to our healthcare crisis?

Gary, you do realize that France has a bigger immigration problem than we do here in the US.

Jay, Sorry if you don't get it. I just pointed out that the society stspecialk prefers comes with a cost. There are places where that concept of bigger governmnet has been tried and is now going through self induced pains, like California. It all breaks down to cost. What burden of unemployment are you willing to bear to afford the type of government you prefer?

stspecialk, ssi is a federal welfare, please see above post. i wonder where that money comes from? you want atrocity? who made up the rule of lifetime benefits for one term service in congress?

Gary.... you are proving my point. When asked what your ideas are for a solution all you can do is deflect and cite meaningless examples that do not apply. How is health reform tied to unemployment? We have the unemployment that we have now from regulated greed from wall street. So you simply say that the idea of any socialized healthcare will lead to more economic problems. If you believe that than please share why you have came to that conclusion. I am all about new ideas..... I just hate hearing tired soundbites from Fox. If you don't know and just trust the news station so much that you did not feel you need to research the issue for yourself than just say that.

Is the mutual admiration society over Special K and jay10? I must commend your posts though, thoughtful and intelligent, but misinformed. Jay, you sounded great until the wall street remark, who is now parroting the talking points? Let me give you an example (pardon th epun, it is not intended). Say you look at a house and decide to put an offer on it. The offer is accepted and you hire an engineer to inspect the house. The engineer gives the house a great review, not termites or leaks. The sale goes through and you move in and soon discover there is a crack in the foundation, the roof leaks and there is extensive termite damage. Who are you going to blame? The real estate agent, the bank or the home inspector (engineer)? Of course you should blame the engineer, he did not report the problems. But people like you would rather blame the real estate agent, whichis akin to blaming wall street. Your focus of blame should be on the ratings agencies who gave AAA ratings to worthless deals. (in case you didn't get it, the ratings agencies are like the home inspectors).

For all the support you both display, you cannot name one social program (i do not mean police, fire dept. etc they are NOT social programs) that the government has run effectively or efficiently. Secondly, this whole bill was touting as cutting costs, how can th ebill cut costs without addressing the nature of the costs. You, K, yourself stated that illegals will still use the ER's as their primary care physicians. How will this bill help counties such as San Diego county in CA that are going bankrupt from these costs, if these practices are going to continue?

Jay, I'll give you three ideas to lower the costs of health care (and in turn insurance). All three of these ideas have been shot down at one time or another by the Democrats (and before I go any further, I am an Independent who was once a die-hard Dem and will never be a Republican -I know people get it in their head that an idea has to be associated with one political party or the other).

First, education. If people don't understand how their actions, their choices in diet and exercise, their choice to smoke or drink or eat chocolate or drink five cups of coffee a day affects their health, then they won't be healthy. Also, many people turn to prescriptions as the easy cure, but this doesn't often cure anything. Education is the first keystone.

Second, we need real tort reform. This doesn't mean doesn't shouldn't be sued, but there has to be a line drawn within medicine. The human body is an intricate and complicated machine that we still don't know everything about. Misdiagnoses and accidents will happen, but when a doctor has to pay $100,000 a year for malpractice insurance alone, there's an issue. This cost is passed onto hospitals and then insurance companies who then raise prices on the rest of us.

Third, if the government wanted to really take a bite into the health care industry, it should set up free clinics for anyone in every major region. Emergency rooms could then turn away basic conditions and refer them to these clinics. The government could mandate that for a medical license, each doctor would have to donate one day a month to the clinic. When people turn to the hospitals as their primary care, that cost is passed onto the insurance companies and then onto us. Unlike some posters here, like stsecialk who thinks the taxpayers pick up that tab, it's the insurance companies and ultimately those of us who pay the premiums. It's ignorant to believe that our high insurance costs are solely the result of greed.

Last, open competition among insurance companies. The Dems have notoriously sided with insurance companies to restrict competition. This bill supposedly undoes that, but they started it in the first place!

The problem I see with this bill is that it will offer insurance to anyone, pre-existing conditions and all with no limits of coverage. Fine. Noble. Here's the problem. Insurance companies need to make a profit to stay in business. With 32 million people paying in and (most likely due to said pre-existing conditions) taking much more out, the costs will be passed onto the rest of the insured in higher premiums. The spiral will continue -it's basic economics.

Then, when people who don't fall below the subsidy line can't afford the rates, they pay the fines. Then when they get sick, will they call and get insurance? Can't be denied. Raises rates.

30% of the medical doctors have said they will leave the profession if this bill passes. They'll go private to make their money. Will it happen? We'll see, but I don't see why not. Then you have young, inexperienced, underpaid and overworked medical professionals about to make more mistakes, costing more in malpractice suits (both legitimate and illegitimate) which will raise costs more.

I am confused? Insurance plans are the same.... which is the problem. At least now insurance companies cannot deny for preexisting conds, etc. I like where your head is though. Thats why Dems have been pushing for decades for all americans to get the same health plan that they enjoy and that the Rebublicans try and convince you is so horrible.

jay, if the dems were offering the public to participate in the same pool as federal employees, i'd say YES. that purchasing pool has clout and great benefits. the public option they were proposing is a complete nightmare, and so unlike what they currently have.

Thinking..... That is the main goal of the Dem party! It has been since Kennedy. It's one of the main platforms for the Dem party. They were compromising with the public option and then compromised even getting rid of that!!!

Jay, follow the bouncing ball here. It may be tough. The politicians in government get a premium insurance plan paid for by the American people. For the rest of their life, whether they serve one term or ten. It's not the same. Insurance plans are not and will not all be the same. The more you pay, the better your services.

I have been asking this question from the beginning -if this health care reform is such a great idea, then why wouldn't these politicians put their money where their mouth is? Why wouldn't they agree to give up their great government plans for one of these? The answer: they know more than we do about it.

Um.... in a healthcare debate.... France is not one to site if your against socialized healthcare. Ha.... everyone is covered, they have one of the lowest costing programs, and.... THEY ARE NUMBER 1 WORLDWIDE FOR HEALTH AND LIFE EXPENTANCY!!! People... if you have a problem to solve... it's best to look at successful models. See what they are doing right or better.... just to gain some insite. That has me rolling someone would use France as a arguement against healthcare!

Jay, where did I say I was against health care reform? I only pointed out the cost to the economy. You do understand the difference?

True, France struggled for a while. But the question is, 10 years later, who is better off?

I wonder if Gary and Jerry are the same person. They have the same talking points every time. Either that or they both get ALL their news from FAUX

I understand this is a discussion about health reform and you cited the most successful healthcare in the western world as a negative. Do you not understand something must be done about healthcare in this nation? That's where we are... so instead of working that problem people want to tie it to socialism. Can we please get past the soundbites that Rep and such are feeding us and actually come together to fix this? This is America isn't it? The insurance companies are spending record breaking profits to prohibit reform. They are about their bottomline.... of course... but can you really not see past the ads and paid politicians to realize we are paying for a porche and getting a grimlin!!??

stspecialk, ....your not even worth it

Jay, it really doesn't matter what is written on newsvine. Tomorrow or the day after it all goes to bit heaven. Soon some form of a bad bill will get past and what is written here will not make a bit of difference. So agree, disagree, wont make a hill of beans. The politicians are not listening to the left nor the right. So, if you prefer a more socialized version of heath care you are going to have to move, because with the current bill, it's not happening here.

Gary...... I do not want either of us to move. We both obviously have passion for where this county is headed and at the end of the day... your my American brother. I think more debate and discussion is what is needed. I think americans being spoon fed what to believe is the problem. The news networks are again... concerned with profit... not your well being. So... I just suggest listening to all sides before making up you mind on something so important.

I'm not going by Fox News. I go by my my own decisions based upon what I read from all sources. I even listen to Keith O on MSNBC. All I say is while health care does need a major overhaul, I think the insurance companies should be regulated like the utilities, I am also aware that the desire to fix a broken health care system comes with many cost. One of those cost is employment. We need health care reform, not the bill that is being pushed, but we will pay a price.

Well really what you want is what we have. There is no public option.... just more regulations on the insurance companies. The point is the cost of the healthcare problem is already upon us. That what I fail to hear from conservatives now. Again.... we let companies provide a service that is strictly to make them money. So when those people who they deemed to be to costly wait will the last possible minute to get care. It costs us 10x more. We provide universal healthcare in the country already. We just give the insurance companies the most desirable... let them make huge profits... and then pick up those who would cost too much with our tax dollars. Healthcare is a booming industry... if it was managed well and not have billions of dollars wasted on excessive profits and lobbying the government, than we would all reep the benefits. Think outside the box... if all the money was in one pool you would not need workmans comp...etc... we all already pay for universal healthcare. It's just now we have the wall street fat cats taking our money and laughing how stupid we are for not wanting regulations on them to give us what we pay for.

Jay, good points. However, the insurance companies don't set the cost of services, order unneeded tests, or set the costs of prescription drugs. The Insurance companies were an easy target since most people only deal directly with them. When hospital costs aren't covered by insurance, usually because the service wasn't needed or the cost was absorbitant, we blame the insurance company for not covering it. Now, I'm not against trimming some of the fat off insurance companies, however, if you really want to reduce costs, you need to also treat hospitals and drug makers like utilities, curb malpractice settlements, and work on creating a more health conscious America. Until we do that, this bill makes no sense. It would be nice if the government could run these industries efficiently, however, they've proven they can't. I would like to see a public option only if that option was set up as a semi-private entity that was given seed money and had to survive on it's own income. If you set up a public option that can run to the government for money when they can't remain viable with the way they run their business, well, then they aren't really providing a competitive alternative. They are dumping insurance. AKA selling that insurance for less than it costs to provide. Does nothing for me.

jay, Compared to parts of Europe we are doing great. Have you checked the unemployment numbers in France lately. 10 years ago they were at levels we consider horrible. Now we are at those numbers. Where do you think their numbers are?

Gary.... again.... we have a problem with healthcare and some people are trying to solve that problem. I am not sure why you are fixed on this whole france unemployment thing. If your talkin about healthcare... that is some thing they did VERY well. That is not to say that solves all their problems. I mean we are discussing America. If you want to base how we live based surely on unemployment and finance. Well..... I suggest you try living somehere in China. I hear Tokyo is beatiful this time of year. Some of us however, are concerned about moving America forward. You know... the one that the whole world used to look to for Liberty and freedom. We have a set of ideas here that no matter what you financial situation or background, if you work hard enough you can make it. That's why people used to flock to American.... now we are a nation that would rather be entertained by someone to tells you what you want to hear so you tune in so they make a profit. Entertained over informed..... seriously man.... if you like Fox news....watch it... but don't take everyword as the gospel. We have to manage our ideas with innovation. If you keep to the thought that the bottom line is the be all end all of how we will advance.... well.... isn't America founded on the exact opposite of that? I mean that's why our sytem gives everyone the same vote... rich or poor....

Unemployment is a bigger problem than healthcare presently, and this healthcare bill is a big jobkiller. We have a system that is set up to depend on income tax revenue, and the number of unemployed could approach 30 million by the end of 2010.

Might make more sense to lobby for tax reform, such as scrapping the income tax in favor of a VAT.

Ackk!!! Lyle, tax cuts are like trimming a bush. Trimming a little here and there helps it grow. However, at some point, you don't have a bush anymore. No pun intended.

WGAS - I don't understand, you wrote the first five paragraphs above knocking the reform bill, stating very good reasons why it is not good. Then in your sixth paragraph you state its a start and we should support it.

If we want to start something, let's start something good. Let's start by implementing tort reform, and/or importing prescription drugs, and/or fixing Medicare/Medicaid, and/or allowing insurance companies to sell in all states. There are many good, low cost ways to start, why pick a bad one?

i have been retired disabled from a defunct steel corporation now organized in france. my pension and medical insurance disappeared 15 years ago. i am still without correcting surgery for conditons that may have returned me to the work force in another career. i have a state license for a new career but without adequate maintained health i can't be reliable. at the time of my retirement when i started on medicare i had as good of health care as anyone on average in this country. federal courst allowed the company to not fill their obligations to me after a life of earning these benefits. the failure of the judiciary to see eye to eye with the legislative and adminstrative portions of this government over the intervening 15 years ARE VERY INSTRUMENTAL IN CREATING THIS "HEALTH CARE CRISIS". when i plug my situation into the bill i will be fined for not having insurance when the finen begins. i have too much income for medicaid supplement but not enough to enter the pools for federally mandated insurance policies the bill plans to begin. so again and still i guess i am the gap everyone wants dead. the law of the jungle has prevailed under this administration. the best way not to unplug grandma is never plug her in because she has no coverage. i am blessed to be belligerant enough to not lay down and die for those who already have to have more security in what they already have. in health care the fastest way to recover financially is remove the bottom where the most dire expenses are genertated from and split that among the top of the group...again in the history of human beings those who have keep and get more..and the rest get to eat cake...if they can find any BREAD flour to bake it. we are all attracted to the lion sleeping tonight after catching a meal...but as soon as the meal is devoured our attention turns to the "next meal, next victim" go in to the doctor dying sick the first question is no longer where does it hurt. the question is what medical coverage do you have adn Prove it. the influence of capitalism on the hippocratic oath reminds one of other turning points in history...unmentioned here!

But if you'll be getting less for what you are paying, in essence you are "paying" more. If they are going to take away some of my benefits but I still have to pay the same premium every month, then I am paying more, no matter how you look at it.

Wow SidneyDave! Such a simple statement that covers this HEALTHCARE BS exactly! Just doesn't give any incentives to work huh?

I'm glad to see that you understand this. I wish more Americans would. If you are rich they always say you will pay more taxes but they government always puts the loopholes in. If you are poor the give you everyhting with no incentives to better you situation. If you are a working class middle income you get screwed as always. The democrats and the rebublica are both the same. Screwing over the people that pay all the bills.

Why don't Americans just take Canadas healthcare and import it? It works more then well enough. The only issue we have in Canada is lack of workers because the multi-billion dollar American companies just steal them all.

All I can say is that this will hopefully lessen the grasp that the bilionaires have on the American public. Wouldn't you rather have your money going to your country then Mr. Burns sitting atop the hill looking over your poor ol' Springfield? Americans say they're patriotic, but disagree with their government just because the commercial on TV tell them that they can trust the drug makers.

I have several Canadian friends who would disagree with your general statement that Canadian healthcare "works well." Long waiting lists cost the cancer-stricken mother of my friend precious months off her life. MRIs cannot be found anywhere near their town, and the gov doesn't want to pay for them anyway, so it took them a ridiculously long time to diagnose her cancer. Another Canadian friend likes the drug prices in Canada, but said she would choose the medical care in the US over Canada for quality any time.

These Americans disagree with the gov because they are free to do so and think for themselves. Students of history and current events, we do not blindly follow government and think it is somehow more pure and moral than the "evil billionaires." It is not. But politicians have a lust for power and control that must be checked. If not, then they can make laws that significanly affect our lives---and have the power to enforce them ; something that the billionaires cannot do.

Lisa-256867, you are blind if you think this: "something that the billionaires cannot do."

Don't you realize that this country is run by the wealthy? There are more of the wealthy outside of Congress then in it, pulling the strings. As to whether Canada's system would be better than ours? Maybe it depends on who's sick and who's not, or who they know that's sick or not. I know MANY Europeans, and they are very happy with their government-guaranteed healthcare. And they have options too, for the people who can pay extra. But at least they have governments who keep the money-makers in check when it comes to healthcare. You can't prioritize both patient care and profit - one has to give.

Billionaire can do this, but its their money. What gives anyone the right to take more of it away? No, I am not one these.

Well I for one am glad all you asses that are soooo selfish you would let people die rather than get involved with the healthcare reform. I have heard we need it but this isn't it so many times I want to barf. This isn't it is republican for "we don't want anything to change". Suck it up. It did change and you get to pay the same as me. Unless you are very rich, then you get to pay more. Let's see do I feel bad for you? Hell no, you would rather see me die than pay for health reform. I could care less about you anymore. All you selfish rich people have shown your colors right out there for all to see.

This country needs this because the insurance companies have ruined health care as we knew it. It can't be paid for without them so they have the monopoly on healthcare. We are busting that up. Not unlike microsoft. I bet you were all for that. The insurance companies created this mess. If they didn't exist, doctors never would have charged themselves out of the market. Don't feel sorry for them. They are very rich. It is time for them to go away. They are nothing but a middle man, that takes a huge cut.

Hey, I have an idea. Cuba. They would love to have a quality person like you there. Moderate IQ, so you could follow Castro without thinking too much! Yeah, Castro said yesterday that he loves Obama and his new health care system. I think that's a little creepy, but sounds like you would be very happy there. But be careful, unlike this country that lets you spout off on anything and everything, in Cuba they just kill you. Yeah. So you better learn to be a little more polite before you make the trip, otherwise, well, you might just disappear one night. Bon Voyage, Sweetheart!