What is going to happen when the Supreme Court stops this paticular plan on Constitutional Grounds?

It's a great time to be a free loader in America.. All Hail Obama!

With the Obamacare small companies will not be able to provide private insurance, this is socialism, this administration lie saying we can keep our insurance . If you think that the cost of the premium of your insurance is not going to rise keeping your 26 yrs. old child under your umbrella, you drink the Kool-Aid.

"Sticker shock" is coming, and that's when the "fun" begins, as people find out how much more expensive their insurance will be.

Anyone that thought that the increased costs to insurance companies for covering "pre-existing conditions", children to age 26, and higher lifetime costs would not be passed on through higher insurance premiums needs to take a simple economics class.

Of course, Obama will complain when these higher costs become known (so much for "lowering the cost curve"), but the realities of life are not always easy.

Bri-1732738 " What is going to happen when the Supreme Court stops this paticular plan on Constitutional Grounds?"

If the Supreme Court rules against "mandatory coverage", then most of the costs increases for required coverage will remain (premiums will skyrocket), and even more people will be unable to afford insurance coverage.

I'm glad they are publishing the benefits of what has been enacted so people can see how it affects them. Please read the article.

Americans are going to like the benefits. Over time costs will come down. It still needs a tweak or two.

Expect answers like "socialism" in this thread. It's not socialism it uses private insurance companies and doctors.

If you believe that not every American is entitled to health care then I guess you believe that health care is only for the wealthy.

Seven falsehoods about health care: http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/

Entitled??? Your entitled to breath, that's it. Your grand socialist experiment is coming to an end Eric, it's being rejected by America. I'll bring you some tissue in November to wipe away those tears of loss.

Bri,

Then we won't have to wear our seat belts anymore either.

It appears that the increasing costs to business are not being addressed. What prevents the 15% annual costs, and 100% of those costs and sometime more are being passed onto the consumer?

American needs universal coverage, but the question remains, who is going to pay for it. I don't see anything in this plan that addresses costs. Can someone help point me in the right direction and show me where the plan addresses the annual double digit increases?

It's Cloudy,

Try repealing health care and see how many votes you get. Americans want the law tweaked not replaced.

How can the "Party of Life" be against health care for everyone. You don't want abortions, but the you don't want to cover the children that are born.

Your taxes are going to go up because the company paid portion of your health care will now be taxable income to you. For me and my peers that means an extra 2k a year we will pay in taxes. The media is not covering this.

Your taxes are going to go up because the company paid portion of your health care will now be taxable income to you. For me and my peers that means an extra 2k a year we will pay in taxes. The media is not covering this.

Expect answers like "socialism" in this thread. It's not socialism it uses private insurance companies and doctors.

I love the knee jerk lib response of "it's not socialism".

Webster has 3 definitions of socialism. This is the third one.

: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Any form of welfare moves you to somewhere "between capitalism and communism". When the government takes money from one person, and gives it to another, that's socialism.

individuals whose incomes are up to 400 percent of poverty — $88,200 for a family of four at the current poverty level — will qualify for subsidies to help purchase health insurance on exchanges, marketplaces where consumers can shop for coverage.

This is socialism.

Not all forms of socialism are bad. When a mother of 5 kids loses her husband, and has to go on food stamps to get by, that's socialism.

When all of these people lost their jobs when the economy tanked, money coming from the general fund to extend unemployment it's socialism.

Any society that doesn't let the old, sick, or poor starve to death is socialist to some degree.

That being said, this comment is not an argument against obamacare. (Though I am against it) This is to clear up the libs missunderstanding of the word socialism.

If this health care plan uses the exact same private health insurance companies that have existed for the last 20 years, then it is doomed to fail it's purpose.

Spencer so your saying that we have socialism now. They take money from my paycheck in the form of tax to pay for Police, Fire Roads etc so what is the differnce

I'm always sick. Sick of hearing about everybody blaming obama administration and his administration blaming bushy boy (see how I kept their name all lower case.) Blame the whole government and the lobbyist for the f***** mess we're in. I'm just plain SICK of it. Now I have to go to the doctor cause I'm sick of reading and writting. There goes the medical neighborhood.

Yes dean, we have socialism. I thought I made that pretty clear. When people complain about obamacare, they're upset about the degree of socialism. Not the fact that it's socialism.

Ah, "the degree of socialism". So who doesn't get health care? I guess Republicans just like playing God.

It's like being a liberal prevents you from comprehending what you read.

So, here it is again. My comment was about your misuse of the word socialism. It was NOT about Obamacare.

Wow It's Cloudy, I"ll pray for you. Ever heard of Christian compassion, caring as much for a child after its born as before its born? How about pregnant women who need food and healthcare to bring a healthy child into the world to put up for adoption or keep that child. Why is it okay for a Christian to be condescending and rude to someone because they are a "lib" and you assume they are godless, do you believe that tone is likely to bring that person to God? Does your pastor speak to his congregation that way or do you just throw around words like "I will pray for you"? BTW I don't need you to provide healthcare for my children, they have it,but I hope to be able to help many children in this country in need. There are many. Walk through a county hospital waiting room sometime and see. Walk through a county healthy department and see. Though it may not change your politics it may soften your heart and hopefully your prayers will be directed in a much needed direction.

When I saw the headline, I assumed this was an Administration propaganda piece, which for the most part it is. I did like the chestnut they threw in from Kaiser concerning increased costs. But even that was propaganda as they did not include the data for 2010 and what has happened to companies who have renewed their plans since the bill was signed. I would love to see how many companies were actually able to keep the plan they had. (We couldn't, 27% increase was not reasonable.) And how much the new average increase is. I foresee that all small businesses will be forced to drop their coverage by 2014. The large businesses, I feel so sorry for them. They have little choice left to them. (Although it will be cheaper to drop all coverage for the large businesses than pay for the plan.) And no Eric, unless you are on the entitlement bandwagon, the "advantages" of Obamacare will not offset the skyrocketing cost and ultimately rationing of care that will occur if this plan is allowed to be fully implemented. We need something done to fix this disaster long before that and we have to make sure Congress is placed in the position to override the President's veto.

Cloudy: The US Constitution says we are entitled to a LOT more than breath!! MANY laws of the United States say we are ENTITLED to a lot more than breath!

PS. propaganda comes mostly from Fox News and those of their ilk! !

What a lot of folks may not realize is that if you or someone in your family has incurred major medical expenses and, more than likely, you've made arrangements to pay; now, in addition to those payments you'll be paying hugh healthcare insurance premiums to boot. Those bills aren't forgiven. Granted, the government may assist you in your premiums, but you're going to pay what you can afford to. I've already seen posters quoting $2,000 a month in premiums. There's no free ride here unless you're on medicaid and , if you are, HCR has nothing for you. As Roy Wilson stated, sticker shock is on the way.

And Eric,

I suppose that you are for everyone getting covered, and everyone paying some form of premium tied to their income. Or should those pesky wealthy pick up the tab for everyone?

I am for every American getting covered and having financial skin in the game. Or it becomes and entitlement that grows out of control.

oskar,

Just in case you missed the part about small businesses I am going to copy and paste it for you...

"A: No business owner — small or large — is required to offer coverage. But small businesses with 25 or fewer full-time employees who earn an average yearly salary of $50,000 or less will qualify for a tax credit up to 35 percent of the cost of premiums. The credit increases to 50 percent in 2014 for most small employers. To qualify for the credits, businesses must cover at least 50 percent of the cost of workers’ insurance."

How does this mean small businesses will not be able to offer healthcare to their employees???

Did you read the article at all???

Heidi,

Good point, but it doesn't cover "large" small businesses, which are 500 or fewer employees, and 500M or less in revenue. I own a small business with 120 employees and we are watching the costs very carefully........

@ Heidi - Today is the first time I have seen the small business credit increasing in 2014. The original fact sheet said the credit will diminish and end by 2014. Additionally, that 35% is a double decreasing % as you not only get closer to 25 employees but as the average pay gets closer to $50,000 as well. According to the information we received, ALL businesses will start paying taxes for health care. We don't have a choice on the taxes, we do on the plan. I think, (as of my last calculation for our small business a couple of months ago) we "might" get a credit reduction of 3-4%. Our compromise increase on our Health Plan (Renewal date 8/1) was 14.7%. If we would have kept the policy we had 27%. Had we gone to another carrier, 54-178% increase. 3-4% is not enough and certainly won't be enough when the taxes kick in.

Hope this answers your question.

PS. propaganda comes mostly from Fox News and those of their ilk! !

That's funny!

Is that one of those "liberal facts"?

If you work for a small business of 26 employees you better go start kissing up to your boss. No matter what you do you won't be worth keeping around.

I also just love how our medical benefits are going to be considered taxable income. Thanks for nothing Obama.

It's not socialism it uses private insurance companies and doctors.

Only those private insurance companies that Sebelius doesn't consider enemies of the state.

Over time costs will come down.

Sure, like that's happened before. < /sarc>

Explain please.

Over a four month period I needed to have the same procedure done twice to check for cancer. During that time I lost my health insurance benefits and could not afford the full cost of COBRA. When I got my bill from the exam with no insurance it was $1,200 more that what they billed the insurance company. I know insurance companies have deals with health care providers. So I have been making monthly payments to the hospital and have paid about 1/3 of the bill off in the last 6 months. They just turned me into a collection agency because I am not paying fast enough. I just hope my cancer is terminal so I don't have to put up with this crap anymore. I can't afford the treatments, so just let me die.

It's a great time to be a free loader in America

You fail to observe that this law requires everyone to be responsible for their own medical contingencies. In other words, it's no longer okay to be a free loader. Wake up!

Spencer, please go back to the dictionary and look up the word "socialism" again. Then go to an encyclopedia. The third definition of socialism in your Webster's does not mean "anything that is neither capitalism nor communism". Somehow the words "a stage of society in Marxist theory" escaped your attention. Those words are not gratuitous. Perhaps the dictionary should have said, "According to Marxist theory, a stage of society..."

When a mother of 5 kids loses her husband and has to go on food stamps, that's NOT socialism. You can describe it as welfare, charity, a social safety net, or a hundred other ways, but socialism has nothing to do with it.

When the government takes money from one person and gives it to another, that's not socialism either. It's redistribution of income.

By convention, words have agreed upon definitions. We adopt these conventions so that it is clear what we mean when we use a certain word. When you assign your own idiosyncratic definitions to words, you fail to communicate accurately. Or was that your intention?

Medicare, Welfare, and other programs like this are "Social Programs", not socialism. Forcing all U.S. citizens to participate in a program like this IS socialism.

I know of larger companies (200-500 employees) that will find it cheaper to pay the $2000 per employee fine to NOT carry insurance and force those employees to take the government program, than to just continue a program of their own. Thankfully that won't kick in for another few years, well after Obama is ousted and someone with some fiscal sense is in power and able to fix this fiasco.

In the mean time, I think it was stated here already - what you don't read in this liberal article is that everyone that has insurance through their employer will take a HUGE hike in rates when it is no longer a pre-tax expense. For most Americans, that means anywhere from about 8% to about 30% increase in your premiums, and it isn't your employer or insurance provider that is increasing it, it is the government taxing you on your insurance to pay for the program. This hits the middle class harder than anyone.

Farm.Family

I will pray for you, Your plight is what HCR is all about. I conclude those on this thread that are against a program that is designed to relieve Americans of their suffering and feelings of hopelessness as you have expressed never ever find themselves in your position. If they do and they lack adequate insurance coverage they may find themselves eating their words they are expressing here. Today I helped out a lady in distress with her 19mth old daughter. Stranded, low on gas heading to San Diego and daughter crying due to hunger. I was coming out of a store and she stopped me, asked for assistance. I did not hesitate, I did not judge her, I filled up her tank and took both of them into the store and made sure they had enough to eat for the trip. To me, this is the right thing to do, You treat people with dignity no matter what the situation is. You treat people the way you wish to be treated if you found yourself unable to help yourself. Those that demonize HCR and the President in my view, illustrates a spirit that truly doesn't care about a fellow human being. They choose to judge, expect for others to live up to their expectations of life. The saying "God help's those who helpls themselves" is a lie and was never spoken by God. It was spoken by man in his attempts to justify behavior of selfishness. I pray for you, I feel your pain and those that don't demonstrate compassion toward those that have not should be ashamed.. As for me I will always attempt to help those less fortunate than I, I will never judge, some may call me a fool, I'd rather be a fool than an individual who only thinks of himself.... HCR is an attempt to bless those who have little or nothing and a lot of people don't see it or just don't care... God Bless You...

Well said!

When I was young PoliticoMan, it was normal for people to do what you did, and they did not have to bring up a political sentiment to justify it.

Of course, people were gleefully moral back then.

One of my father's favorite quotes:

"There but for the grace of God go I"

If teabaggers were true to their "no entitlement" ideology they should refuse the monetary subsidies the government gives cattle ranchers to keep the price of burgers low.

So next time a teabagger asks for a burger and he's asked to pay $5 or so, he should pay $15 and say "I refuse to recognize government entitlements so please keep the change".

Do the same when buying chicken and pork. Instead of paying $5/lb at the supermarket go ahead and give the cashier $15/lb, and show them what a rightful person a teabagger is! Right?

So should we be exempt from taxes then Olias?

I'll make that deal!

That gives me an extra $12,000 a year to DECIDE whether I want or NEED that "pork"......................RIGHT?

Exactly, clint. And do the same for the police and fire department, only pay when they come to your rescue. Oh, and don't forget school and education, but you probably don't see any need for that just so you can save $5000/per child.

And don't forget to burn your parents medicare cards so you can pay for all their medical expenses. And I'm sure they'll love the idea of never being able to retire since they won't be getting any SS payments.

Gosh, you sure got it together, don't you?

I thought we were talking about ENTITLEMENTS and SUBSIDIES Olias!

My parents, who are dead now, paid their entire lives into SS, just as I have. That's NOT an entitlement! That's their/my money!

That pittance of a monthly check didn't come NEAR covering their expenses. Guess who picked up the difference? If you say government...WRONG! We children did.

I don't have any children, and I'll never see MY SS, but I don't have a problem paying MY FAIR SHARE for schools and SS and whatever NECESSARY governmental programs exist.

Calling for the government to rein in their spending on ENTITLEMENT programs and "subsidies" (paying farmers to NOT grow a crop?), or other such UNSUSTAINABLE PORK, is NOT asking too much if you ask me.

And there are about 250 million more people in this country who feel the same way I do!

I ain't arguing with a teabagger. You guys live in your own world and act as if everyone else was born yesterday. Your way of thinking and the proposals you make are so primitive it'd takes us to the time when humans were a bunch of nomads. Go live in the jungle if you like but I want my government to help me out and I''ll never apologize for that.

I want my government to help me out and I''ll never apologize for that.

Don't you mean you want YOUR government to TAKE CARE OF YOU?

That's the typical mindset of the younger, ME generation.

Well, no IPod for you and no computer for THREE WEEKS!

BTW, I've never attended a Tea Party, and your "teabagger" comments show your immaturity.

Now I feel sicker

This has nothing to do with Obama health care, my families insurance has gone up every year at a minimum of 12% and in most cases more.

This is the insurance company realizing you need insurance (regardless of the governemnt saying so) and raising the rates. Just like those states that don't or didn't require mandatory car insurance, the rates are lower then those in the mandatory states.

Why is it you don't see Blue Cross Blue Shield trying to get little companies together to form a larger bargaining bunch of people? Because they would have to lower prices. Back in the old days places like IBM and Kodak paid very low rates because the number of employees being covered and the large amount of $$$ they got from one place, they lower the rates to make sure the other guy isn't getting any of the $$$.

It will cost the insurance companies more for mandated requirements than previously, that increase is already being passed to subscribers. You never get something for nothing. You can expect premiums to increase by 20-25% rather then the 5-10% we were seeing previously. It has already happened to my family. Even with pre-tax premiums withheld, paychecks decreased.

My point is, just like banks and credit cards, the insurance companies are going to continue to screw us in every legal manner possible, and rape us on everything they can between now and when the "reforms" kick in, most not until 2011.

LPJ - The insurance companies have a license to steal even after the insurance reforms kick in, but after that time they'll be stealing a larger percentage of tax money.

I wish we could just get rid of the insurance companies and their corporate greed.

There were members of Congress who wanted to allow us working folks to pay into Medicare. I would gladly do it if it were open to me and my family. Then, the insurance will have some competition. That's the problem, there's no real competition for insurance companies.

The Democrats really screwed-up this health plan. As stated, no competition-- the Democrats did not remove the block that makes it illegal for insurance companies to compete nationally instead of state by state.

Dennis you can get rid of the insurance companies in your own personal life all you have to do is to stop using the insurance company and pay your bills out of you own pocket! It is not until 2014 that the democrats have made it mandatory for you to purchase insurance from a private company or pay a Federal Government fine collected by the Federal Governments Tax Collection Agency just because you happen to have been born, breathe and are a CITIZEN.

But up until then it is a free market and you are not required to purchase the product from the supplier unless you want to. You can just pay right out of your pocket! If you want to know where the real costs of healthcare are do just that and then see how much the health care providers charge you! Remember there are no cost reduction provisions in the bill to keep health care providers from charging you more money for the same service.

Interesting rant there - I didn't know any tea party members had been elected to the House and only one to the Senate. Must have been a pretty powerful guy if he could have done all that after being seated after all of the debate and votes were completed and they were into reconciliation.

Maybe you should look at this from a different perspective. The real reason behind health care cost increases is that consumers want things to be "free" - meaning they want insurance to pay for increasingly more and more. This then feeds bad behavior - because things are free, people don't govern their use - they over-consume, meaning there are shortages and long waits. If you think about it for more than about 30 seconds it's really quite obvious.

BTW - I am not a fan of the health insurance companies, they have been in on this all along... just like the drug dealer giving someone the first dose of crack or whatever... Now you're hooked on their ever increasing coverage because it makes your health care "free". Newsflash - nothing is free. We should be allowedd to buy whatever health insurance we want - just like car and house insurance. And stop this ridiculous belief that our employer should provide this. That would eliminate a lot of the BS - but it's far too much common sense for the elite in DC to ever consider doing this... and it certainly doesn't placate liberal/progressives or hard-core conservatives...

As for me - I've been to Tea Part rallies. I'm tired of being raped by DC. I'm one of the people that actually pays federal income tax - consistently, year-in year-out, and a pretty hefty sum.

Healthcare providers get paid pennies on the dollar for healthcare. Many providers charge outlandish fees (approved by medicare) knowing they will only get about 30% reimbursement. Often less that the cost of supplies. The cost of heathcare is multifaceted. Unfair lawsuits. Cost of bringing product or pharm. to the market in this country. Bottom line is....We still have the best healthcare in the world. I hope we don't lose that.

greed ruined the industry !!..don't call me, I'll call you, if I need you !!..as for the Insurance Industry; Stick IT, Where The Sun Don't Shine !!.. I'm in good health, I am up to date on personal self care, and if I'm destined to die; SO WHAT !!..we're All going to die at some point in Our Lifetime..in the meantime; No One will Stop Me from Surviving and I Will NOT Let Them Put THEIR GREEDY HANDS on MY WALLET !!!........

Two years ago, due to a change in employment, Blue criss Blue Shield raised my premiums from $285/month to $2700/month. All of those covered had no pre-existing conditions, no hospitalizations for many years, and were all in good health.

Anyone care to explain how the same coverage on the same people suddenly became work 10X the price?

Agree with Dennis - greedy insurance monopolies can go to h*ll as far as I'm concerned. And as a small businessman, I get really tired of retirees saying I'm the freeloader.

Frankly, I'd LOVE the chance to pay into Medicare at cost to have the benefits.

I'm calling BS

Blueingoregon, that's Kaiser for you. In my experience, they have some of the *worst* doctors on staff. I almost lost my daughter when she was 3 because of their negligence. However, you can call them as soon as they open in the morning to get a same day appointment. You just have to be quick with the speed dial.

Reasonable care isn't going to happen. Every medical office is going to be like Kaiser soon.

Hard to believe some of the comments registered in this thread - but one of the most naive is from Dennis-816242 post 2.6.

I wish we could just get rid of the insurance companies and their corporate greed.

It is as if we all had the personal financial resources to cover all of life's hazards from health, property, pre-mature death (aren't they all premature from the decedents perspective?). The homeowners in San Bruno, California despised paying annual homewners premiums are now beneficiaries after their houses burned down. Sure, insurance companies can't replace family and life momentos, but the benefits will put a roof back over the beneficary's heads. Health care insurance is as unpredictable to the individual as property and liability insurance. But insurers do try to get the rates right by applying risk over a large pools of potential losses mitigating loses under the concept of the law of large numbers. The new law applys new mandates that include covered breast exams, immunizations, etc...the increases in insurance rates include the calculation these new mandates will cost the insurer. So yes, expect rates to continue to increase during the phase in of the new health care legislation - but at the end of the phase in, also expect that with everyone (93% or more) paying into the health care insurance system - rates should level off and increase along with inflation as opposed to 2 ,3, or 6 times inflation.

Like Obama told you, if you liked the coverage you had, you could keep it. Ha ha. He is still laughing at the people who believed that.

Brian, insurance companies are trying to get what they can before the law is enacted.

It's a stretch to say that "increases have been passed on" to the consumer. This is for the insurance companies profit. It's America, change insurance companies if you find their rates too high.

Except for the part where homeowner's insurance isn't going to cover the San Bruno fire until they have finished their lawsuits with PG&E, which will be ???

Physicians are rejecting Medicare patients because the government pay too little, you who demonize private insurances, with this law you will end that industry putting your health in hands of the government. It is very easy what will be the future for Doctors and patients.

Eric - Insurance rate increases are already state regulated. They have to justify those increases through claims predictions. The law mandated changes they have quantified and justified to the state regulators in addition to normal adjustments. In most states that was gooing on back in May and June. That's the business model. Insurance companies are required to maintain liquidity based on projected payouts for claims and increase premiums as needed to do that.

Who are they regulated by? Other insurance companies?

Eric - come on...you insurance companies are regulated by each of the individual States. Brian illustrates this point perfectly in post 2.22

Since the new reforms have not gone into effect yet, the increases are due to the greed in the Insurance Companies that have been socking it to all of us for years. Also, your Employer may have decided to cut his costs by passing them on to the employees. Sorry either way, but things will change for the better once the reforms in the law phase in and once Congress can make needed changes to the new laws which were not what we desired by rather what was watered down due to the lack of help from the party of "no"! At least now, with a bill in place it can be amended to add back in the needed reforms that were left out in order to make some progress towards changing the broken system we had.

I wish we could just get rid of the insurance companies and their corporate greed.

Me too. However, the Revenue Act of 1954 codified a wartime regulation that allowed anyone buying or providing health insurance to do so on a tax deductible basis. Employers began offering it as a benefit because at the time it was cheaper than raising pay. By the end of the 50s, more than half of Americans had health insurance for the first time. This was in effect a tipping point that had the effect of entrenching the insurance companies.

It's a stretch to say that "increases have been passed on" to the consumer. This is for the insurance companies profit. It's America, change insurance companies if you find their rates too high.

Actually, it's not a stretch at all. Health cost management has become a shell game in which insurance companies, businesses, and the medical establishment have shifted the cost burden onto the group with the least influence: Patients.

Also, because of restrictions involving pre-existing conditions, the system discourages changing insurance companies regardless of rates. The new law will ameliorate this somewhat, but it's basically cost-neutral legislation aimed at bringing more people into the existing system. Given the way we legislate, that's the most that could be expected, but it didn't address the issue of costs.

Unfortunately, we get a terrible bang for our buck in the United States. Despite what some would have us believe, we do not have the best health care system in the world. What we have is a system that rations ruthlessly, has virtually no metrics for measuring outcome, still makes ineffective use of information technology, and operates with wildly varying degrees of efficiency (or inefficiency). What it comes down to is this: If you live in an affluent suburban hospital district, you're in better shape than someone who lives in a rural district or an urban district.

We have work to do.

Dennis-816242, I myself had really hoped that was the point of this whole escapade.

AF Chief, you didn't answer my question. I know the states regulate, but who picks the regulators?

Eric. In most states the voters select the regulators. We have a State Insurance Commissioner that is elected to regulate insurance companies. Yes, the voters need to do a better job.

I am reading all these references to socialism and communism and how this plan will be a complete disaster. Doing nothing is a complete disaster. But just a reminder: We already have a socialized medical program- a couple of them- but one in particular will make the naysayers think twice- maybe.

The VA Medical Systems has their own doctors, hospitals, and seem to be very successful. The doctors are paid by the government, the hospitals too, as are the treatments medications etc. Do you think we should get rid of it as well? AND what about Medicare???

We cannot afford to hire our own personal police officers to sit in our house to protect us. We cannot afford to have a personal fireman and fire company sit in the driveway in case something happens. Our public schools are government regulated and paid for. Is that not also "socialism"? Maybe "socialism" is ok in some instances??

And maybe to improve the overall health of a nation, we need to think about a bigger picture. Nearly 67% of those on disability (in my area anyway) would NOT have been unrecoverable had they had access to care or preventative care when they became symptomatic. Think about that.

While you are at it, remember a 12 year old child living in poverty who died after an infected tooth abscessed, the infection going into his brain, because no one would treat him. His death is a by product of the "I got mine, you get yours" society we have created. What ever happened to uplifting your community and man kind? We can reach out to the victims of a terrible earth quake in a foreign land but we brush past the same poverty stricken children and families in our country because we think they are less deserving of our charity.

So just how civilized are we really?

If you saw Obama's speech, he clearly said that they didn't expect to stop insurance increases; maybe, cut them in half or atleast peg them near inflation. They would consider that to be a success. Every year, I have no tickets or accidents, my auto insurance went from $1,001 to$1,236 for 2 cars. That's a 23% increase and I did nothing. Health insurance will be the same way. As costs increase, premiums will go right there with them.

I am reading all these references to socialism and communism and how this plan will be a complete disaster. Doing nothing is a complete disaster

Absolutely right. Nothing is not an option. The system was closer to collapse than anyone knows.

If you saw Obama's speech, he clearly said that they didn't expect to stop insurance increases; maybe, cut them in half or atleast peg them near inflation

Correct. The new law is designed to grow coverage in a relatively cost-neutral fashion (in terms of the overall economy). It does not tackle costs, which is the next step and which will be much harder to address.

The current law passed because Obama neutralized insurance company opposition by expanding the existing system. This approach was originally conceived by the Eisenhower administration, with the policy work being done by the Nixon and Bush I administrations. By working with the existing system, you minimize opposition (true, believe it or not) at the cost of leaving in place a setup with far too many moving parts to be cost effective.

Addressing costs will be difficult, because this goes straight for the bottom lines of the insurance and medical industries. Strictly in terms of policy, single-payer is the most efficient in terms of cost and delivery, but there's no real constituency for it that makes life miserable for elected officials. Without that, single payer is unlikely.

In a nutshell, business small and large -- the ones who along with patients bear the costs -- will have to become major players in the health care debate if anyone expects costs to be contained.

Eric -

Where do you think the regulators will come from for the national health insurance board?

The cost of "employer provided" health insurance for my family just went up $4,200 annually starting Aug 2010. On top of that, we had to switch all physicians, hospitals, and prescriptions to avoid paying out even MORE for the same services that we had been getting.

Which illustrates why health care reform was so necessary.

blueinoregon - Sorry to hear about your husband and your situation, but you REALLY need to reign in the hate and stop and think for just a minute. Do you honestly think that, in a country that already has a severe shortage of physicians and millions more now getting free access to those Dr.'s that you will EVER be able to get in quicker? In 2014 if you don't make an appt. at least 6mo in advance you will ONLY have access to emergency medical care.

The biggest problem is the libs choose to ignore the realities of the numbers, both the number of patients to Dr.'s as well as the financial realities, because of course those realities don't make them "feel good", and that's what being a lib is really all about. The repubs ONLY want to focus on the money and ignore the harshness of our health care system and throw compassion to the wind on the flag of personal responsibility, because being responsible and self sufficent make them "fel good", and that's what being a con is all about as well. You all want it your way and your way only. You are ALL pathetic, worthless and weak.

And THAT is what is tearing this country apart.

The cost of "employer provided" health insurance for my family just went up $4,200 annually starting Aug 2010. On top of that, we had to switch all physicians, hospitals, and prescriptions to avoid paying out even MORE for the same services that we had been getting

Then you are in for a shock when next year, you will no longer get that rate before taxes, but instead have to pay taxes on it too. So the price of insurance has gone up, but Obama decided to add taxes to it as well just so he could force insurance on people who can't afford it, at the expense of the middle class.

Keep in mind, most employers use a "self insured" system where they pay a premium based on the number of employees, but it doesn't kick in until an individual employee exceeds $50,000 of medical expense in one year. So each time you go to the emergency room because your kid has a runny nose, the $30 co-pay you shell out means little when the other $570 for that visit gets charged to your employer and he has to pay it out of your premium. Add a few employees with chronic health problems who are racking up 30-40k per year in expenses but only paying 5-7k in premiums and co-pays, and you are making up the difference. In the private world, the solution is to make the program mandatory for even the young single employees who never get sick. Put 100 people with families or medical problems on a plan like this and premiums are high.. add 300 younger single people and they end up paying a lot of the expense despite not ever using the insurance, effectively reducing the premiums for everyone, and preventing costs from skyrocketing. Now imagine that in a business with 40 people, 12 of which are on the company health plan.. At that point you might as well just go out and get $1500 per month private insurance because your employer can't get it to you cheaper.

The question is, will this work on a national level where people are taxed if they don't get in a plan? And on top of this, if they do get insurance, they will still be paying taxes on the money they pay in, so either way you look at it the government found a way to add taxes to everyone under the guise of socialized medicine. The only ones who win are the ones who don't make enough to contribute to taxes or to society. Socialism isn't much more clear than that.

Kathy1571680,thank you for making it simple,but I doubt that you got through because we have some slow learners on here.

Thanks John. You got it, right? One person at a time.

The health care bill isn't designed to lower your insurance premiums. Thats a whole other issue. Premiums won't be lowered until the actual cost of health care is addressed. What the health care bill does if you read the article carefully is it puts some rules into place that the insurance companies must follow, so that they don't get away with denying us benefits. It is a consumer protection plan plain and simple. The health insurance companies would just love to see the republicans repeal what they call "Obama Care" so they can continue to charge us outrageous premiums while giving us less and less coverage. The insurance companies want to continue to pick and choose who they insure , and what services they decide to cover. This health bill stops them from doing that. This health care bill is to help our citizens from being screwed further by the big insurance companies but the republicans want to take that away. Just unreal. As long as they keep getting their great federaly covered cadilac health plans for themselves, it doesn't matter how the people they are commited to serve have to suffer.

The HCR program as now going into effect is only the first step in a process that ultimately should lead to major reforms of the reimbursement system, and finally a more balanced and accessible universal health care program. At the moment, however, HCR is in fact a major milestone in history - for nearly 80 years, there have been efforts to create an American universal health care program, and this is the first time anything close has finally gotten off the ground.

Citizen K-2113048, you made some excellent points. Cost containment was not addressed in HCR, and for frankly good reasons. It is too substantial an issue to have been included in this already-large and complex matter. "Reforms" under the Reagan Administration are actually why rural areas today have such poor health services.

Taking a fairly modest effort begun under Jimmy Carter - a means of attempting cost containment by tying reimbursement to a standardized schedule of reasonable activities in various treatments, known as "Diagnostic Related Groups" (DRGs) - the Reagan Administration rapidly altered the reimbursement program to establish each and every aspect of medical care as its own individual profit center. Along with a system called the "Prospective Payment System" (PPS), the new method of calculating payments was tied to a massive shift in government approval of hospital construction, operations, equipment, and competition. Most people do not know that the government oversight program became a means of restricting availability of medical care by protecting established or favored suppliers and preventing "duplications" from operating if they ever wished to treat even ONE patient whose medical reimbursements came from any government-sponsored coverage (Medicare, Medicaid, etc.). This was not, as Reagan at the time said, letting the market operate in health care – it was a government-driven “club” for health care providers, essentially, an oligarchy fueled by excess profits.

The Reagan reforms effectively shifted centralized care out of hospitals, for the most part. There is a reason that now so many stand-alone diagnostic facilities or large group practices exist - they are operating on a separate profit center basis for each and every type of service, item of medical supply, or consultation that they provide. The Reagan reforms dramatically raised the cost of medical services by expanding administrative obligations and allowing indefensible profit margins on even a Band Aid.

At the same time, most non-profit medical institutions in rural areas discovered that they were simply shoved out of the market and forced to close. More than 1,000 such hospitals disappeared in a matter of months. Even worse, facilities such as hospital trauma centers found they were unable to operate in the "reformed" climate.

Restructuring health care delivery by means of a more sensible reimbursement and regulatory system is an immense task. It is certain to be so controversial that every doctor who now owns a license to print money - meaning, owns a large group practice (at which are employed many doctors on very low relative wages), or one of the various outpatient diagnostic facilities, etc. - is going to be fighting reforms with every ounce of strength. Some hospitals will join in, but others should be thrilled at a more practical, sensisble method. Insurance companies have both incentives and dis-incentives to support reforms.

And unfortunately, the people who will benefit most, health care consumers, will never in a million years understand what the fuss is about - some idiots will certainly be trumpeting "Socialism! Marxism! Rationing!" when none of those apply.

Ultimately, a simplified universal health care program to absorb the current HCR will probably make the reimbursement reforms possible. Germany, for example, has a superb universal health care system that embraces private insurers but also sharply restrains costs without rationing or any of the other dire mutterings read variously here. Converting either Medicaid or Medicare to a universal system could be accomplished in a stroke - and their engagement already in reimbursement management would immediately enable reforms to take shape.

A universal system far more simplified and advanced than the current HCR (which is at least a start) would be embraced and produce great benefits:

• Employers would discover that many kinds of insurance besides health care for employees would be eliminated or greatly reduced in cost - just consider workers' compensation, for one, and the medical coverage in vehicle insurance, which would completely disappear.
• Any revised structure of taxes that helps cover a universal program will be far, far cheaper than costs employers now bear.
• Individuals also reap the same benefits, especially in their vehicle and homeowner insurance policies.
• Trial lawyers might gripe some, because universal health care takes away a huge percentage of lawsuits.

This will become a job-creator because there will be a rational expansion in the delivery of health services and all the supporting industries - medical supplies, records management, even janitorial services to clean increased facilities. Home health care services will certainly expand, and the quality of care in nursing homes and convalescent facilities will improve instantly.

Obama's health care reform is only a starting point, a necessary one. Ultimately a genuine universal health care system must take this over, and lead the route to true cost containment and re-structuring of the medical industry. But just imagine suddenly not having to make 75 appointments at different spots all over town just to treat an illness!

usmcvet5711 what if we started by extending military health care to all vets, for the rest of their lives?

I would jump on that in a heartbeat. You serve the country, and the country rewards you. It's a start. Then, we just have to extend that to our kids too....

LPJ-887011, HCR is not going to control the cost of group insurance and a $4,200 increase in your cost. As a matter of fact, what happened to you is exactly what I feared might happen to us. Employers will pass their increased costs to employees or reduce benefits. People have to realize that HCR is not a free ride. It will cost the taxpayers trillions to implement and run. Guess who makes the bucks? The insurers. They have a 50 million person new market to insure.

...or i will join the revolution that will follow

I just don't understand that logic. If the Democrats had their way, we might have had Universal Health Care. What that means is that you pay higher taxes, but no insurance premiums. Everyone pays according to their means, which means poop folks get a break, and everyone receives according to their needs, which means the very ill get care regardless of their income.

Republicans have lost my support because they insist that the insurance companies should remain in charge of my health and my health should be their profit. I am offended by that.

I agree, the paper work to change your options does not even come out until Oct. and you have until Jan 1 for the changes to take effect. Unless LPJ works for a very small company, I can't see it.

My employer changes health insurance when their new fiscal year begins...and as little as Mrindia knows about stuff.....employers can change health benefits when the normally would. All fiscal years do not begin on Jan 1. Surprise!! Yes, our contribution to our health plan went up on July 1st. I know of a number of small business organizations that changed their health plans almost immediately upon passage of the health bill, given their fiscal year and preparing for the additional costs that the bill requires them to pay. A couple of them also laid off workers in anticipation of the increased expenses. It will indeed come out of the middle Americans pocket again.... Lets be sure to thank Congress for this new expense that all of us who work will pay for those who choose not to work. Its that wealth transfer thing again or I think they call it..."redistribution" ....those who work...pay for those who don't.

[Most consumers, however, won't see any changes until after Jan. 1 when their new health plan year begins.] so some could see it sooner than that, our plan year began Sept. 1 and our ins. company has already made changes. [your plan won't be able to set a lifetime limit on coverage] so if there's no limit, how do you think this will be paid for? a. raise premiums, b. deny coverage elsewhere (can't be done with the new law), c. operate at a loss (how long will the insurance company last before they go broke and go out of business?), d. money will magically appear via pixie dust

Go USA -

1. No limit - mandated,

2. Deny coverage - limited

3. Operate at a loss - Guaranteed 85% claims paid maximum for exchange members.

4. Pixie dust - That's where it's going to come from.

One of the things that was not adequately addressed when this law was being debated was the cost/premium increases to people who did not qualify for government subsidies. Wasn't in the government estimates because it won't impact budget expenditures. Pretty much ignored by everone who wasn't paying attention to the reality.

So Brian here you are complaining about "1. No limit - mandated" and not too long ago you were complaining about Death Panels that would allegedly LIMIT the options for the elderly.

So are you for LIMITS or against LIMITS ? Make up your mind - will ya ?

Also, i understand you are FOR unlimited denial of coverage ? Hmmm ......

our open enrollment is always July. Also, this is a NEW insurance plan. My husbands employer (a large, nationwide company) has changed our insurance 3 times since Jan 2008. This time they tried to give us insurance with no prenatal care, but enough employees had fits that the employer is willing to pay for the "gold plan" until next July. Also, we have to meet a $3000 deductible that starts over in Jan (I know, it is suppossed to be prorated for a half year, right?)

Mrinda - A fact is a fact, if you choose to read that fact as a complaint that's up to you. If you can find a thread in which I ever said anything about death panels feel free to publish it here. But you can save your effort , because I never have. The are several Brian ####### in the -vine and you may have mistaken me for someone else. My primary complaint regarding this law has always been that it was nothing more than a federally subsidized insurance mandate that will do nothing to reduce cost or improve healthcare. All it does is institutionalize the insurance separation between the healthcare consumer and healthcare provider, and it guarantees the insurance middle-man his 15% cut.

I vote for pixie dust.

All the plan really is is a tax on the working Americans to pay for the increased governments panels, offices and administrations it's going to take to force everyone working to pay the tax. The plan does not address rising healthcare costs, rising insurance premiums, or covering the un-insured because they were already being paid for by the working American middle class in the ER's across the nation.

Furthermore it addressed nothing about tort reform which is one of the biggest reasons of costs increases in medical care because the damn TAX increase was written by a bunch of damn lawyers who call themselves Congressmen and Presidents and they weren't about to cut that freebie out or regulate it.

This is nothing but another lie covered with smoke from the great smooth talking gangster from Chicago the POTUS, about what he's gonna do for the middle class along with all the other lies he's come up with, and the majority of the American public keeps falling for it hook ,line and sinker.

How's that hope and change working for ya after almost two years guys. You'll be darn lucky if you can afford to eat after this president and his gang of administrative hoodlums along with that POS we call congress finishes stealing the rest of the working class' spendable income giving it away to unions, big business, and the supposedly poor.

Vote them all out in November---incumbent is a nasty word.

Mine also start at the beginning of our fiscal year, which is JULY!!!! I don't work for a small business, either.

Oh, one more thing, my husband's employer changed our medical insurance carrier in April...Our open enrollment is in July. Guess who had to pay double for deductibles??? Yep, that was us. Talk about getting kicked in the shins twice!

These businesses can do what ever they want with their insurance companies. We have no say, we just buy in to it.

Those of you with big hikes, its not due to the health care law, it's insurance companies gathering all the profit they can.

USA, please "operate at a loss", whatever, they consistently make profits.

www.politifact.com or www.factcheck.org have the facts on heallth care. Go there and look for yourself.

Eric,

If they're not supposed to increase premiums and payout more (unlimited coverage and not denying coverage) how in the world are they not going to go broke? Do YOU have the pixie dust that turns into money? Where can I get it? What is the insurance companies' return for the shareholder as a percentage, not a dollar figure. Eventually if they cannot provide a good enough return for the shareholder, the shareholder gets out and if enough do, the company goes out of business. That's how the real world works. If the people want the insurance companies to give them more 'free' care, they're going to have to pay more. Doesn't matter if its private or government, the more you get for 'free' the more it costs you somewhere else.

A lot of businesses change their health care plans and premium amounts in the middle of the year. Some do this according to their fiscal year and some do this according to when their particular health plan started. My company's insurance change date & premium adjustment is on Feb 1st.

Go USA, if they were going to go broke we would have heard it from them. My guess is that people that are high utilizers will be pooled to share the cost.

I'm not worried about insurance companies making a profit they helped to negotiate the deal.

Eric,

1. If the head of HHS says their premium increases are unjustified (even if they really are) and denies their request, they're going to go broke. I think that's already been mentioned by the HHS that she "thinks" the rate increases are unjustified. I hope she starts looking at facts and not just what she thinks.

2. Pooling certain groups is profiling, I thought that was wrong and unfair.

3. 'not worried about insurance companies' When we're down to 1 or no private insurance companies, do you think big brother is going to be better?!

sorry, independent agent here, we have small employer groups with plans starting and/or renewing every MONTH of the year. We even have group that do "off renewal changes".

Furthermore it addressed nothing about tort reform which is one of the biggest reasons of costs increases in medical care because the damn TAX increase was written by a bunch of damn lawyers who call themselves Congressmen and Presidents and they weren't about to cut that freebie out or regulate it.

The amount of money spent on malpractice insurance, settlements, and judgments compared with overall health care expenditures is so minute as to be a sampling error. It has virtually no direct impact on costs.

However, there is some indication that physicians in certain fields (obstetrics, for example) practice overly defensive medicine out of fear of lawsuits. This may well contribute to higher costs, although it's hard to know because no one has ever measured it. We do know that states like Texas that restrict judgments have seen no decline in overall costs. Texas, in fact, is one of the most inefficient states when it comes to health care, having some of the highest costs and poorest outcomes.

Moreover, tort "reform" removes one of the few alternatives afforded patients by the health care system: The right for a jury to determine damages in a lawsuit. As costs are shifted onto patients, it seems counterproductive to remove one of their few recourses. Although as things stand, patients get less than 50% of the dollars spent on malpractice -- if anything, laws should be reformed so that they get more, not less.

All the plan really is is a tax on the working Americans to pay for the increased governments panels, offices and administrations it's going to take to force everyone working to pay the tax.

This is bloviating. It adds nothing to the discussion.

The plan does not address rising healthcare costs, rising insurance premiums, or covering the un-insured because they were already being paid for by the working American middle class in the ER's across the nation.

No one ever said it is supposed to do this. What you are describing will require a larger political presence by the large and small businesses footing the bill, as well as bipartisanship. Since today's Republican party is philosophically opposed to any government regulation of the health care system, bipartisanship is unlikely.

Didn't they mention the subsidy for those that make less than 400% more than the poverty level? I think unemployed would qualify.

So how much is that subsidy? Anyone know?

not to mention that who is paying the subsidy. The government may be cutting you a check but the taxpayers are paying for it. So those who make over the subsidy amount will have to help pay for those who make under. Certainly sounds like a redistribution of wealth to me.

For the unemployed that meet income guidelines you'll be eligible for medicaid or medicare enrollment in 2011.

Bravo Kevin....... My hat's off to you sir

So those who make over the subsidy amount will have to help pay for those who make under.

I see your point. So, we should just let them die, right? I mean, that's what it comes down to. That's what this is about. Aren't you willing to help your fellow Americans? I read at least a little of that spirit in your name.

I am from the Insurance Company. Trust me.

I'm from wall street and big biz - trust me!

I am from FOX news. I do it fair and balanced.

I am a republican. I actually read stuff and can think for myself.

I am pro-life. I am gonna kill you you SOB if you even utter the word abortion in my presence.

I'm from the tea party. No taxation without representation! A penny saved is a penny earned! Subvert the dominant paradigm!Kill the umpire!

So Joe, when my insurance premimum goes up I can send YOU the bill right??? You don't mind giving billion dollar corporations ALL your money so they can cut OUR benefits!!!! Just give me your address so I can send you a the bill!!! I don't like being gouged from the government or A GREEDY HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY, that throws people out the door the minute they get sick but keeps all the premimums we have paid over twenty years!!

Because of people like you, that sided with the UBER MUTLI-BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATIONS THAT AREN"T EVEN AMERICAN COMPANIES we blew probably the only chance we will have in OUR lifetimes to correct this misjustice that has been strangling the middle class over the past two decades!!! I hope when serious catastrophic illness hits your family, that you realize what a dump stand you took on this issue!!! Those of us facing an increase of premimums this year thank you for aiding an Overly GREEDY industry to further take what little the middle class has!!! These companies will not be happy until they are taking 100% of OUR salaries as their premimums and YOU and those other TEA People certain threw the door wide open for them to continue to gouge the middle class!!!

A penny saved, is 10 pennies we will have to pay for health care insurance premimums thanks to YOU!!!

I'm a liberal. I'm not particulalry bright, mom cuts my meat and I can't make it in the real world. I need the government.

I have a job but they are so greedy. The guy who owns it actually thinks he has a right to make a profit for risking his capital. Must be a dirty tea bagger.

My bank rips off everyone.

Everyone on Wall Street is a crook.

All union leaders are as honest as the day is long.

I am so glad that public union employees can retire at full or more than full benefits at 55 while all of the other poor saps have to pay my way.

Why should I work hard. The world owes me a favor.

I'm black and support the Dems at 93% even though I'm no better off than thirty years ago. Woe is me.

Barack Obama is great. If you disagree you are a racist.

Don't like the mosque near the trade centers? You sir are a Islamophobe!

Don't agree with gay marriage? You sir are a homophobe!

Why can't we have single payor healthcare just like Canada? I mean the only fastest growing industry in Canada are private, for profit healthcare centers.

And on and on and on.

blueingoregon: Poor joe mota was being satirical. :) Note the use of every founding father's quote being shotgunned randomly in all directions. I know it's hard to tell the difference, with the neo-patriots shouting "WE THE PEOPLE" in caps constantly.

joe mota's one of the good 'uns.

John Boehner: "I'm going to repeal the tanning tax"

Hi, I'm a parent of 5 children, and since the premiums cover myself, my spouse and one of our children and call it the family plan, that means I get coverage for my other 4 kids virtually free.

I love my guns, and pack damn near everywhere I go...Legally.

I think people on welfare should have a limit of children the state will cover...For a limited amount of time. Then they should sterilize the parents...And get a job.

I hate bullies

I think that if you complain about the way our government is run, THEN GET OUT THERE AND VOTE! Too many whiny people don't vote. Make a difference, make some noise!

blue, your hostile response is unwarranted...I'm not really from the tea party... It was an (apparently failed) attempt at humor.... you know, tea partiers running around muttering slogans, many of which don't make any sense in the context of reality.

I was a supporter of reform, though what they passed was not the option I wanted. I support some of what they passed, and was disappointed in some parts of it. I'm no fan of the health care system as it existed before the reform bill.

I'm Nancy Pelosi and I NEED the Botox benefits!

Kevin bravo... Very well played. My hats off to you sir.

"I am so glad that public union employees can retire at full or more than full benefits at 55 . . ." Only true for upper echelon administrators, and those designated as professionals.

I am an American. I just think we can do it better than the 36 countries that already are... doing it better. I want to be #1 again.

Out of all that, you could only comment on "Adult Child"?

This is my son. This is my daughter. They are over the age of 18.

It's not that you don't understand what is being said... It's that you don't like it. Do a better job of expressing that next time.

Adult Child = Tea Party Signs ?

Wall street will still manage healthcare. The new law ensured that the insurance companies will be in bed with regulators to decide what is best for all of us. Insurance companies have now officially been institutionalized and guaranteed their cut.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/03/19/fact-sheet-the-truth-about-the-health-care-bill/

Thanks for the link. Myth #2 is my favorite, but no one has really listened.

I'm tired of the blanketing of "Wall Street". If an industry is corrupt, call out that industry: like big banks or big insurance companies. There's a lot of decent businesses on Wall Street plus if you have a 401K, you're invested in Wall Street as well.

So when President Obama says "you want to go back and give them (insurance) control?", it's really b.s. because insurance companies wrote the law in the first place. Let the fox build the henhouse and point fingers at the foxes like you're trying to help/save the common folk.

I guess we're just not intelligent enough to know how much they're really 'helping' us. Can't wait to see just how much more government 'help' will cost.

Authoritarianism is bad for your health.

Americans just cannot take responsibility for themselves anymore. They want government to protect and provide. How do you take responsibility? You work. You save. You make critical decisions about your daily life and family. You decide what you can afford...and don't plan on Uncle Sammy to take care of you. Responsibility is YOURS....not those who work.

For now, a responsible person would begin buying insurance company stock......LOL LOL.

Please note: USA's link is prior to the passage of the bill.

For up to date facts on health care go to www.politifact.com or www.factcheck.org

Additional information can be found at http://www.kff.org/healthreform/8061.cfm

nm195231nm

How do you take responsibility? You work. You save. You make critical decisions about your daily life and family. You decide what you can afford...and don't plan on Uncle Sammy to take care of you. Responsibility is YOURS....not those who work.

Save? How the hell do you save when your choices is to pay the rent or get food? and you are already working 2 jobs? When you are given a raise yet prices keep going up, explain to me how are you supposed to save? I know college graduates who are only making enough to starve to death. When people balk at forcing companies to pay a living wage and social services are for the ones who don't work at all, where do we get the money to save?

I'll drink to that JW. Where's my smokes? Ooops..I was layin' on em. Gotta go, Jerry Springer is startin'

Yes.

"...lazy obese bums who overeat, take no personal responsibilty for their health, smoke, drink and drive, etc?????"

So you've been to the Tea Party rallies then?

jw- no more than what you're paying for those who find themselves in the hospital emergency rooms for what may be basic care because they are uninsured and that no hospital or doctor can refuse healthcare service. Tha cost is passed to us in those increased premiums. Unless you believe the hippocratic oath of which health professional pledge should be rescinded or deemed meaningless, that a way to just let the indigent eat cake and die. That's why the mandate that all be insured since care cannot be denied.

The hippocratic oath is generally not administered by American medical schools.

I think that there is nothing wrong with our current health care/insurance system. It needs A LOT of tweaking and reigning in on cost. If health care cost less insurance would cost less. If insurance cost less then we could spend our money elsewhere. We never needed to overhaul our health care system. We need to reign it in. It has gotten way out of control, and a lot of that is the fault of the sue happy generation. Get rid of these frivolous lawsuits.

Let the tort reform begin and respect your dying relatives' wishes to not be recussitated; you will thank them (postumously) when you get the bill especially if they had no life insurance.

People with a week to live do not need MRI's or surgery or another battery of tests but need to accept the fact that they are mortal.

Personally I would like to dedicate my body to science (fiction) but the lines are too long.

cuddzy, tell that to the judge who just found out that they left a one square foot sponge inside him. How about the 90k+ people who die yearly of an infection they get IN THE HOSPITAL. Texas has the toughest Tort laws in the country. Do they have the least expensive insurance premiums? Anyone have a link? Livid, we don't know when people have a week left to die and frequently there is no one to sign a DNR (do not resuscitate). I've seen several times that 70% of the cost of healthcare occurs in the last year of life. But we are a civilized society and just killing off the sick, lame, lazy, old, or unuseful is not the way we do things. If it was the cockroaches would be running this planet.

Anyone who does not think that the actual practice of medicine does not need to be reformed is either trying to defend their paycheck; or they have had a very sheltered life; or they are very naive.

Tort reform might help. Slashing the amounts Lawyers are allowed to earn for such cases is a good place to start.

just to let you know the congress was taken over by the democrats in 06. so they have been in charge for 4 years. also bush was a lame duck pres. his final 2 years. and really had no power to change anything unless the dems agreed.

Confused (and dazed, like the rest of us), think this through. An insurance company may not go broke (right away, anyway), but if it loses money because of the new caps you can bet it will raise premiums, probably on everyone. And you can expect the other companies to behave similarly. This is the American way. Ever wonder why gas costs almost exactly the same everywhere?

Seriously? You think it would not have gone up anyways without reform? So...no cap for coverage is a bad thing??? Not being able to drop a person because they get sick or into a accident a bad thing???

Seriously, you're sickened alright!

No cap for coverage is a bad thing. For those who work. Those who pay taxes. No cap for coverage doesn't mean somebody isn't paying, we are. I work. I pay taxes. I am SURE not many of you on this site are paying a damn thing, including Just Another. There is NO FREE LUNCH.

Just Another....is just another unable to demonstrate any critical thinking skills whatsoever. So you really thought the doctors, hospitals, nurses, and ALL the operational expenses of keeping a dork like you in good physical health wasn't going to cost anything? No cap on coverage!! Right.......Applause for the idiots.

And you still get to vote. OUCH!!

58% of the American people voted for health care reform in November,the majority is suppose to rule.

Who voted for healthcare? I never did. In fact I was never given a ballot with that on it.

This is a republic, not a democracy. We do not vote for every item that comes up. We vote for representation, who then vote on the bills.

Of course I voted for representation that voted against the healthcare bill, yet I am having it shoved down my throat anyway.

I will see if I can make it any simpler for you to understand.

When Obama campaigned for pres.,his main objective was health care for every American just like he and every other politician has that we the tax payers pickup part of the bill for,58% of the voters voted for him and I believe that was a majority of the people that voted in the pres. election,now that might not have included you.

I'm sorry, I don't remember anyone asking me if I wanted a Health Care reform bill passed.

We had an election. It was an issue. The majority in congress, both houses, felt this was the best we could do for now.

I'm not sure on the child up to 26 coverage. I mean, my sister was married with children at 26. If a kid is in school, then the college offers health benefits as part of the tuition (full time students are usually covered or the insurance costs $100). If they aren't in college, won't one expect a 26-year-old to have a job by then and not living off their parents?

I mean, there maybe circumstances that may warrant this (like discharged military to get back on their feet), but shouldn't it be the exception and not the rule?

Some children start their own business, etc., and don't have the funds for health insurance, or they are getting doctorate degrees. I don't think 26 is too old to qualify under certain circumstances.

Being able to have children under 26 on their parents insurance is a good thing, especially considering the economy and how tons of you 20 somethings are out of college and cannot find a job. How can they be expected to afford health insurance on their own, when they aren't in school and don't have a job that offers benefits.

oh yeah, and the fact that the economy sucks is another reason why most 20-25 year olds aren't hurrying to get married and start a family, they are waiting longer before getting married and especially having kids. Therefore if they are smart enough to take their time before rushing to start a family and struggling to make ends meet by having to ensure themselves and their children, there should be something out their that will help single 24, 25 & 26 year olds. I was kicked off my parents insurance after I graduated college, and guess what, I can't get a job that offers me benefits (don't get me wrong, I am working a full time job though). I am able to pay for insurance but only because I get help from other family members for other things. If I was single and had no one helping me out, I wouldn't be able to afford insurance and make ends meet with the amount of money I make now. Being able to help people stay on their parents insurance till 26 will be a great thing for those that need it. Just wish it went into action sooner.

The military have insurance,I doubt that you will find to many 26 year old retires.

I have government run health care, from payment to service, to the doctors and nurses in the hospitals, for a decade. It was a lot better than what I have now, and no co-payments!

VotingMad, the proposals to bring down HC costs, including a government run program and health care co-ops (my favorite) were screamed down by republicans. That's one reason why HCR is light on the cost controls. Another is that they did nothing to solve malpractice costs. I do thank Obama for getting HC reform started, but there's still a huge amount of room for improvement.

Also, you are completely wrong about mandated coverage increasing cost. Mandated coverage will force young and healthy people who are willing to let the public assume the risk that they'll require care to buy into the system. That will expand the base with people who will place lower than average demands on the system, lowering costs overall.

I already have, because now I might not die in the next year for lack of access to care.

Voting Mad, #15. I'm not listening to anybody except the fact that I can not afford what just went through as an abomination of a health care bill.

The 1st. to be included in this bill are those of us who are uninsured. In July, we WERE to have been provided by our local States ( some are not & are suing) with AFFORDABLE coverage as pre-existing conditions who formerly were rejected by insurance companies.

I live in a State that covers uninsured, pre-existing for coverage as mandated by the B.O. health reform bill. I am retired & not quite eligible for Medicare ( 15 months to go ). My insurance lapsed when my husband retired. The premiums to pay for just a portion of what would happen IF I were to get sick or injured are more than I can afford.

My pre-existing condition? Well, besides being overwt. ( part of my medical condition that precludes the exercise I'd LOVE to be getting & being on a long-term steroid), I actually have a copy of a rejection letter sent to me last yr. that listed VERBATIM every thing I ever had as I listed it on my required application. I guess having 2 C-Sections 42/36 yrs. ago & Carpel Tunnel qualify as a reason to reject anyone.

So Mr. Obama, how do I get affordable insurance until I turn 65?

Joe, I agree with you about the reasoning that by forcing people to buy coverage will increase the pool and reduce the costs of purchasing that coverage, but lets get back into reality. Think for a minute about how corporate america has been operating:

What this bill has done is handed the insurance companies more customers on a silver platter. I remember when I got my first car, auto insurance wasnt a requirement but I purchased it. A year or so after I started driving, the state made it a requirement, my rates doubled even though I had no accidents or tickets. The auto insurance compnay took advantage of the fact that instead of choosing to purchase thier product, we now HAD to get it.

The same thing is going to happen here. Due to the fact that the govt is now going to REQUIRE people to get health insurance, the insurance companies are going to take full advantage of that. Add to the fact that the insurance companies will not be able to terminate coverage willy-nilly like the did before, and our rates are going the keep going up.

awake, I supported the idea of health care co-ops, which are to health care what credit unions are to banking.... co-ops were under discussion on the senate panel when that a$$hole Palin came out with her Death Panels garbage, and the concept just died out.

the mandate dosen't force people to buy insurance. if they choose not to, they'll pay a fine via income tax, which will help cover the risk that the public will have to pay for their health care. it's better than nothing.

The actual bill is 974 pages long. Have YOU read the entire bill?? Maybe you should take your own advise and read the entire bill. Here I took the liberty of pulling up a PDF version for you...

http://docs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf

Read the bill then point out which pages back up what you've said..

Joe...I totally agree with you, but give it up. These people will not listen. It's their own Republicans that they can blame for the high health care costs. If we could have at least gotten the public option, costs could have started to come down because of the competition. Republicans blocked that option. Why don't people understand this? So damn frustrating!

Joe, paying a fine instead of getting health insurance is the same option that you ahve when you get a car. If I wanted to, I could go and buy an old beater for cash and drive it around without insurance. If I got a ticket, I'd get a fine for not having insurance, but I can pay that and keep going right? Diminishing returns for me to go that route, so I have insurance.

Katie, I'm more conservative than liberal (if you couldn't tell by my posts already) but I figured that a public option would be a better step towards the problem with affording health insurance (as long as people actually paid for it). if you are going to mandate health insurance, then there should have been some kind of public option or expansion of medicare that people could pay for in order to keep it from being a giveaway for the insurance companies who are under no limit as to what they can charge you. The bill that was passed WAS a big givaway to the insurance companies (it forces us to buy insurance from a private company and if you cant afford it, the govt will pay them for you through subsidies) and it will not lower the costs of health insurance.

I guess we will see in the next few years which one of us is right.

Air is free.

Hate is free, but then so is love.

I want full coverage, and I don't want some corporate employee telling me I can't have that medication, or I can't have this treatment because it's not covered by your policy. You know, the policy selected by your employer.

I don't ever want to hear about another victim of circumstance being denied medical care because of an insurance company. You really think the government is incapable of running quality health care? Then why do we have the government running our military health systems? Our public school systems? Our police and firefighters?

I have never heard of a place where the police denied coverage because someone didn't pay their taxes, or it wasn't a covered expense.

We have fallen to 37th in the world in health care. How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?

Ya see Joe... here's the base problem with your sarcasm. You continue to look at insurance as a 'right' and not a commodity. There are those who made life decisions based upon getting a job that provided group coverage for them and their family. There are those who decided that they would only do what pleased them in life and who cared about benefits. Well now that it has become something they need, they are like the grasshopper in the Grasshopper and Ant story.

number, there are also those who pay their premiums every month then get sick whereupon the insurance company refuses to pay. There are those who made a life decision to work for a company for 30 years, only to have that company be taken over by some corporate raider who drains the pension fund. They are like Bambi in the Bambi vs. Godzilla clip.

Absolutly. Health care is a commodity, not a right.

Why?

I wish both sides would spend more time educating themselves on the issues and less time sounding like an mouthpiece for their favorite political party.

(no comment, it was just good enough to repeat.)

Your are NOT paying for those of us hard working taxpaying Americans that didn't have insurance. I was excluded by the for insurance companies, because I have a pre existing condition. As of October 1, I am insured BUT I AM PAYING THE PREMIUM. get your facts atraight

It wasn't the hard working taxpayers with pre existing that the health care bill will pay for, it's the 35 million with no health care because they were below poverty. You weren't even counted in the 35 million.

Because the law of averages doesn't allow for that unless you can somehow increase the number of people in your insurance pool which diffuses the risk. This is why larger companies usually get a "group discount" on their premiums.

Callie -

Actually SOME insurance policies DO give rebates and rewards for people who make the effort to stay healthy and reduce health risks.

I worked in HR for a major retailer that had such a plan - if you voluntarily participated in a health /lifestyle screening to identify risks (weight, smoking, stress, diabetes, heart disease) and if your scores showed you might be at risk, you were given an option to participate in further free programs to work at reducing your risk and improving your health. If you worked with the programs offered and reduced your score from year to year, and/or kept it below a certain risk level (if you started healthy and stayed healthy) then you got a rebate at the end of the year on your premiums and additional free/low cost services for those health risks.

Of course, most of the employees were up in arms over this new program when it was introduced - they thought that 'big brother' was going to use the info to fire out or demote all the overweight/ diabetic/ smokers in the company.

I have a private plan now that incorporates a rebate that increases every year I keep the plan and do NOT have any hospitalization costs in the previous year. Similar for a Dental plan - Every year I go without needing major dental work, (more than cleanings and fillings) I get a refund of part of my premiums paid that year. Since I 've needed only one filling in the past 15 yrs, that's pretty slick deal for me!

The problem is that most American do NOT really have a much 'choice' in health insurance plans - they simply take what they are offered by their employer, and THEY usually had no input into the packages the company purchased. When they DO shop around, the choices they DO have are beyond the understanding of the average person. The programs are too complicated: full of loopholes and legaleze- you need a degree in insurance to understand them.

Yes, I know we should all read this stuff, but the hundreds of people I 'enrolled' each year into our company's plans were store clerks, auto mechanics, security officers, construction /sales people, managers, truck drivers, cashiers, office workers... They were NOT dumb, but the majority did not have the background or language ability to really understand the policies offered, and since most were working their tails off and raising families, they didn't have the time to 'study' insurance, either!

Now, it's great that Obamacare wants everyone to have insurance. But they kinda skidded over the cost issue. With unemployment around 10% (and like many, I don't count, as I've been umnemployed for a year and did not qualify for unemployment insurance - nor do I qualify for state medical insurance as I'm not an illegal alien, pregnant or have kids under 18)

When I was fired from my job as a retail manager, making about $28,000/ yr. I was offered to extend my company policy under COBRA at $830/ month! That's for me, alone, a 48 yr old, non-smoking, healthy female - at a cost that was more than my mortgage payment, inclucing taxes! For me AND my 19 yr old college student son - the cost was over $1300/month

Instead, I looked for a private policy - and got one - except that it is about $350 per month for major medical and high deductables, and it does not cover my son. He's covered now by his father's policy which I don't have to pay for but which doesn't cover prescriptions he needs for ADHD - which costs an additional $200 per month.

All of which is moot - because we have NO INCOME. Not unemployment, state aid, nothing. We get food stamps. My son got fired from the same retailer/ different store - 2 weeks before I did. Since it was a high school PT job, he can't get unemployment either. He collects metal for recycling, mows lawns, babysits - any odd job for cash. The $ I had saved for a car is paying our utilities this year. Thank God my parents hold the mortgage on my home, or we would have lost it to forclosure. I worked for the US CENSUS in May, going door-to-door - it was my only income this year.... and I counted dozens of households like ours in every neighborhood I covered.

So how are families like ours supposed to afford the medical care they need?

I'm talking about Ann, a 58 yr old neighbor who had a stroke this morning - and the cost of the ambulance, hospital stay, and long convalesence, or Salvatore, my retired neighbor who fell off his roof last spring and broke his hip, or Shawn, the 40 something neighbor & divorced dad of 2, who was unemployed and uninsured 2 yrs ago when he found out he had cancer, can't GET insurance because of the cancer, had to move back home with his folks and can't get a job, either, because who's going to hire someone already dying of pancreatic cancer?

These are families that worked and saved, have small modest homes and raised families, and they can't afford to go to the Doctor when they are sick or pay for basic medications, because the insurance companies have run the costs up so high with their dealings that NO ONE WITHOUT insurance can pay for what they need.

Why is it that a drug can cost hundreds of dollars in the US - but in Canada, Cuba, England or Australia, the same drug can cost under $10?

Why can an american citizen on vacation in Australia, get a sinus infection while there, go to the Dr (for free) and get a prescription for Zythromax (an expensive brand name/5 day antibiotic) for $3 US?

Because the insurance companies control us and our government, instead of the other way around.

We don't need Obama care - what we need is our government to work for US and put a muzzle on the insurance companies and bring them back under control. Better yet, get rid of them completely. And yeah - from what I hear from my friends in Canada, England and Australia - I would vote for socialized medicine in a heartbeat!

This is something I have posted about several times. Just because someone is employed is no guarantee that they are insured. Most service sector low wage jobs do not have benefits. Exclusion for pre-existing conditions is the norm. Most people who have always had coverage through an employer based group plan are used to going and getting a scrip for whatever ails them, whether it is caused by true illness or just by lifestyle, pay the co-pay for both and go on their way. I am getting sick and tired of posts claiming that the un-insured do not work, are mooching, or lazy. That is real easy to say unless you have been there, and I have. I happen to guard my health carefully, and go for my annual checkups and bloodwork, paid for out of my own checking account. I have been uninsured due to job loss and/or change. I have some knowledge of the system. At this time my family has purchased a high deductible plan. I believe that all Americans should have affordable healthcare/healthcare insurance coverage and that it should be available for purchase separate from employment. Americans who are below certain monthly income levels and without resources are eligible for healthcare through Medicaid. Working Americans are not eligilbe for Medicaid, so it follows that many of the uninsured are what , oh yes, that would be.............WORKERS! Working Americans. Not the lazy, shiftless, no goods that many would have you believe. I just do not know how people can remain so uninformed about the situation of health care in America. Yes, it is grand if you have insurance, if you don't, forget it you are SOL! Sure you can afford to pay out of pocket for the occaisional office visit, blood work, maybe an x-ray. If you have a major illness, accident, or healthcare crisis such as a chronic illness, or disease and require testing, chemo, surgery, treatments, rehabilitation services and you are uninsured and do not qualify for Medicare and Medicaid, and do not have upwards of 100k (for starters) to spend, forget it, you will waste away. The new requirements for insurance companies are a starting point with more change needed. People we need to inform ourselves, be sure our elected officials are informed, and use our voices and our votes. The way we deliver health care in America is unacceptable to the rest of the developed world.

...I just do not know how people can remain so uninformed about the situation of health care in America.

I think it's becoming a religious thing. The Party Line is the new dogma.

Believe what you are told, don't look for facts that don't fit your world view. Then get mad at anyone who looks at other facts, because they are the wrong facts, the propaganda of the other side, and the other side are all liars anyway, so their facts are not facts, all lies. The other side become the betrayers, the liars and the fools. Only your side can see the light. Only your side makes enough sense to be true.

It sounds very holy to me.

Especially since the "socialist" parts of the bill were the GOP's idea to begin with.

We also need to vote out those who call themselves Democrats that side with the republicans for the same reason.

We don't need a public insurance option. We need to increase funding to the Public Health Service to the extent they can provide benchmark level services, make it available to everyone and charge users at point of service based on ability to pay. The infrastructure is already in place. Unfortunately the current law has probably soured everyone enough that this won't be revisited for decades and we'll be stuck with this insurance subsidy albatros.

YES!!! on both counts!!! We really DON'T have the majority to get stuff done because of the Bluedawgs!! We need to get real progressives in office who will vote for the NEEDS of the middle class, no just those rich enough to make sizable campaign contributions, like the republicans!!! We need people who know what it is like to live paycheck to paycheck, not which uber expensive resort island to vacation at, we need people who have been to a grocery store and had to stand at the register mentally adding up everything in a cart to make sure you have enough to pay for the groceries, not some one who can tell you where the premier cavier can be purchased!!! We need people who are "real" people not Paris Hilton wannabes!!! We need people who know what it feels like to have dirt under their nails not men with manicures and fake tans!!

If you vote republican or tea party in Nov, your voting in the same bad economics that put us in this recession, your voting for people who obviously care more about getting billionaires tax cuts than you, your voting for the same people who think giving tax cuts and subsidies to UBER Billion dollar corporations who have off shored US jobs is going to "stimulate" the economy (it has worked over the past 10 years, in fact, we have tripled the number of corporations going off shore in the same time period.) If you want MORE government dicating what you can or can't do in your bedroom, (really making masterbation illegal, would that require a camera in everyones bedroom/bathroom?? ), making laws telling you who you can and can't marry based on THEIR religious restrictions, forbidding gay marriage, interracial marriage, interfaith marriage.

If you want the government to waste million on supoeneas, and "witch hunts" while our economy still declines (michelle bauchman said that would be the first order of a republican held house), vote repbulican!!

If you sick of doing the same old thing over and over and still expecting different results vote dem. Vote against the Repbulicans and TEA Party

Where is all of the money going to come from for a public option or an increase public health services funding? Where is the money going to come from for the subsidies that ARE in the bill now? Would you prefer the congress just swipe the credit card again? Because that's what it's going to take to fund it.

The mantra now seems to be "Fuk the rich! tax them more! They can pay for all of it!" Then what? Soon enough you will run out of rich and then you will have to redefine what "rich" is.

If you are sick of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results quit voting for the same idiots to go to washington! Vote against the incumbents who have lost sight of the reason they are there. "R" and "D" are two sides of the same coin.

When we run out of "rich" we will have a nation of people who help their fellow man, who band together in all times, who is safe because they stand up for each other, who is not hungry, because we make sure our fellow man is fed, whether he has a job or not, who is a leader in education because all the children are taught at the same rate with the same consideration, a nation of people who are "indivisable" , with liberty and justice for all! naaaaww you are right, it is Much better the way it is now.

Hi Disgusted with heartless. Gosh, your sentiments sound positively Christian. I just wish that this Nation was founded on the principles of Christianity. .... Wait a minute, the TeaParty and the Conservatives keep insisting that it was. How come then, that when push comes to shove, those speaking out the most loudly about this being a Christian Nation deliberately choose to not follow Christian principles?

Haven't you heard? God took his hand off of America because of us Atheists and the homosexuals. The big man in the sky is destroying America because we fail to believe in Him.

Thanks to TEA BAGGERS, I don't think we will get the opportunity to have a public option!! They yell about "free trade" but then don't want the poor multi-billion dollar health care industry to have competition from the government!!! I guess they think the government will do too good of a job and put those other companies out of business!!

The government can NEVER compete with private medical. They have proven that with the broken VA healthcare system

Actually VA health care is really good, funding is the main issue, what about Medicare too. If funded properly these programs would be top of the line. Also most medical innovations in the pass couple of decades were funding by government dollars. Quick using lame ass talking points, check your facts first.

blue, just like the post office is putting Fedex and UPS out of business?

insightful: Your first sentence is spot on. The second is not. There are some bad VA hospitals just as there are bad private hospitals. But overall, the VA does very well, and I know because I use the VA system - by choice. I have medicare and military tricare, but use the VA because their preventive medicine program is excellent. They have identified and corrected two potentially fatal conditions I didn't even know I had. Stop listening to the mainstream media and loudmouthed politicians trying to harvest votes!

Private Insurances will not be able to compete with government, that will use out taxes to cover their expenses, and inefficiency, Obamacare a big monster created for this administration. Another lever of entitlements that the government have to take care , in the future it will be SS and Medicare that are in disastrous conditions and no private insurance where to go. You got it, live with it ......or vote Republican and change your future.

oskar you are a real comedian, republicans have changed my future!

blue, just like the post office is putting Fedex and UPS out of business?

Yeah, that's funny. Government run entity, competing with free enterprise... I wonder how much it would cost to ship a package without the USPS? I bet it would be a little bit more, eh?

So why are people so afraid of a public option in health care?