I, for one, and very thankful that Ms Giffords has access to a government run health insurance policy. Why, then, do the republicans want to prevent the rest of us from having a similar option?

Isn't it fascinating that republican members of congress gleefully enroll in, and benefit from, government run health insurance plans for themselves and their families and then turn around and insist that the rest of us should not be allowed to CHOOSE a similar plan if we want?

everybody seems to be confused- poor people are disposable- one elected republican stated publically a few years back about how america wouldnt need illegals aliens if abortions were illegal. the poor are of little value as they now have many more than they need. instead of the poor demanding to have the same as the middle class, the rich, with the help of fow and the other ilk like that, have convinced the poor to demand the middle class become poor too- truly sad. i hope gifford recovers and then fights to get the changes needed in america.

This story speaks for itself is right. People don't miss the message. How can a person vote for something they themselves are not going to be subject to. If I take a hit on insurance why are the people voting on it not taking the same hit. This is a good example of hypocrisy, These are not the people I see every day. I wonder how she will feel next time on the health care votes???

You don't get it. The rich, famous and powerful are better than common peasants so they deserve better healthcare. If you want better healthcare too then stop being so poor.

MGRochester,Do you really believe that you are going to get the SAME coverage?GET REAL---

OMG people - do you NOT understand the difference between WORKERS COMPENSATION insurance and HEALTH insurance?

Sad story. This is where America is broken. We all knew it. Health care needs reform. Even after the HCR bill passed, it's not good enough. We can do better. We can build a better system. But we have to do it together. We have to do it as Americans first, not Democrats, and not Republicans. Americans, pure and simple.

...

But 284 miles away, in Anna, Texas, another gunshot brain injury victim has not been so fortunate.

Steven Jones, 18, has struggled to access rehabilitation care for four years, ever since he was shot in the face in 2006 by a neighbor boy messing around with a 9-millimeter handgun.

So Sad but True as I was a victim of TBI - (Traumatic Brain Injury) but, got the help that I needed... I was lucky...

I want to hear opposition of Health Care Reform on this story....?

I'm sure Gifford wouldm say we could always eat cake.

from the article:

Nationwide, costs for inpatient acute rehabilitation average at least $1,600 a day, according to a 2003 analysis of brain injury patients published in the journal Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. They follow intensive care costs that can range from $150,000 to $200,000 a week, plus other medical expenses. Outpatient care can run from $350 to $1,000 a day, depending on the level of treatment.

Is it just me, or do these numbers seem outrageously high? Maybe the real problem lies in the exorbitant costs for care. What are they doing in one week that could legitimately cost $200,000? I guess if the hospital can charge your insurance company 20 bucks for an aspirin, they can inflate charges for anything they want to whatever they want.

I wish Gifford the best, However.....

Remember that "We the People" are paying for this Health Care and the GOP wants to take "We the peoples" away!

Can't wait for 2012!!!

Dick Taylor:...Not even worth responding to as the story speaks for itself.

The story indirectly says I should run for an office to do away with all these crap. Since I can not do it all by myself you have to give me more young and willing to change representatives from as many states so this nonsense in DC ends.

Good Luck Gifford with your rehab. I still feel bad about that little girl of Nine.

My insurance provider would have told the doctors what they could and could not pay for. I would have been treated @ home or died.. A poor nation is easier to govern..

Health Insurance is a Policy that an individual buys to reduce out of pocket costs for any medical expenses they may have.

Workers Compensation Insurance is something that every employer must pay, by law, because if anything happens to an employee while they are on the job, the company is 100% liable and the medical bills for that individual will be paid by Workman's Compensation Insurance. An individual Health Insurance Policy would not come into play.

Rep. Gifford was on the job when the shooting happened. Therefore this is a Wokers Compensation Insurance issue not a Health Insurance Issue.

So, skelmcb is exactly correct. If this poor boy would have been shot while at work, they would have been 100% liable for his medical expenses and he could possibly have received comparable medical care.

Mcgin

I, for one, and very thankful that Ms Giffords has access to a government run health insurance policy.

Where on earth did you get that idea?

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/health-care-for-members-of-congress/

Giffords purchased a premium health care package - and has paid a lot for it. you can have it too - if you make health care your priorty - which probably would mean sacrificing other wants for the security of everything paid for. BTW - when you purchase these plans you most likely will never use the whole value of the plan - which that money is used for someone who did.

I'm affraid to dissapoint you NC Girl - but workmans comp only permits the most minimal of treatment and costs. For Giffords to get this kind of coverage - her insurance is paying and will exact what it can from workman's comp. The fact that this was a shooting may even exempt Workmans comp from paying.

Arizona's workmans comp. will only HELP pay. All other insurances have to cover the rest. This is important because there are those who say the workman's comp will cover everything - IT WON'T!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/us/04tucson.html?pagewanted=all

She was on the job? I thought it was some kind of rally, or speech-making. Or fund raising. Seriously, what exactly WAS she doing there?

While you people argue about the difference between health insurance and workers compensation I think you are missing the REAL story here which is the fact that two people were shot in the head and there were two vastly different outcomes.

Seriously ask yourself what this means...all bull crap about different insurance plans aside!

DBAkron;REP guifford does'nt pay a single cent for premium coverage you and I pay for her entire coverage as our ever wise politicians voted for us to pay for thier healthcare,heathcare coverage I might add that is government run

NCgirl1: She has a FEDERAL worker's comp plan, which is different than an every day Joe's worker's comp plan.

Federal plans are very generous with requested health care, while the every day Joe's plan, providers must fight for every medical request.

She was on the job? I thought it was some kind of rally, or speech-making. Or fund raising. Seriously, what exactly WAS she doing there

She was meeting with her constituent's ...Of course she was on the job. Right now we do not know if she is being treated for Comp or her regular medical insurance or even a government funded sponsored and backed insurance that kicks in after say and assassination attempt.

Of course there are going to be different outcomes and the HC people want to keep it that way. As long as they have the GOP in their pocket nothing will ever come of it that will benefit you or I. What astounds me is in the face of it people still vote against their best interests.

NCGirl1-

It almost doesn't even matter if it's Worker's Comp. or health ins., because, just like ins., not all WC policies are created equal. I'd be willing to bet that if Giffords worked for Wal Mart instead of the Fed. Gov't. when she was shot, there would be a great disparity in the quality of her care.

Furthermore, in my experience of doing admin in Dr.'s offices for years, WC can actually be a lot more difficult to deal with than most health ins. companies. BEFORE they cover medical costs, you have to prove that the person's claim is legitimate. So many people file false claims, that people who are genuinely suffering have to wait for every single office visit, test or procedure to be approved before they are treated. Not all the time, of course, but I've seen it a lot.

During his campaign, President Obama clearly stated that his goal was for every American to have access to the health plan he had access to. That is the same plan Congresswoman Giffords has as a Representative in Congress.

He tried. Many Democrats tried. What got passed was a shadow of what they wanted. But it is way better than nothing at all.

Because of the high profile of Ms. Giffords' situation, no insurance company in its right mind would deny or limit her coverage. Really! Perhaps Steven will get better and more consistent care now that his case has become public.

It's too bad that things work that way. Maybe -- with Congresswoman Giffords leading the way, at first in spirit and then hopefully in person -- getting necessary health care can stop being a political issue and start being a human issue.

DB - You're not hurting my feelings. This was in the article that you so nicely provided me a link to.

Ron Barber, district director for Ms. Giffords’s Congressional office who was hit twice in the shooting, said he expected to emerge from the shooting without any financial cost.

“I was thinking at first about what kind of deductible I’d have to pay, but then I learned that workers’ compensation will cover everything,” said Mr. Barber, who was working when he was shot.

I understand what you guys are saying about how it is terrible that others will not get the same health care as she will because of who she is. That is completely the truth. However, that is the truth everywhere. If you have the money, you will receive better quality health care. It is a travesty. However, it is sad a fact.

I used to be the Benefits Director for a large company. Workers Compensation does have to be proved. However, nothing in the way of medical expenses incurred should come out of the employee's pocket unless in the end they are denied WC.

What we should do is cover every single ailment to whatever degree the patient wants. Cover everything. Whether it be single payer or private health insurance we wouldn't be able to pay the cost. Maybe with a nationalized health care system but don't fool yourself into thinking that the care would be even close to what Rep Giffords is getting. I could write a million sob stories about a million different sad cases. The reality is our resources are finite. We can't cover everything to the extent each individual wants. People need to grow up.

Just a reminder, but economics are not only about money. And here, the social costs are truely tragic.

Right on Rhino40. It is amazing to me how many people crawl out of the woodwork to bash and not even think for one minute that if this same thing had happened 20 years ago the possibility of survival would have been drastically reduced. In a perfect world we would all never get sick or have to deal with these traumatic types of events however we all live in the real world!

Looks like a case for single payer to me.

Time is of the essence with a head injury of any kind. If you don't get the care your recovery is limited.

The righties will try and explain it all away in this thread. Go ahead repeal health care, you haven't even put forth a plan to replace it with. You just tell lies: "it's a job killer", "it will raise the deficit".

Really !!!???

#1.16 DBAkron:

"Giffords purchased a premium health care package - and has paid a lot for it. you can have it too - if you make health care your priorty -"

Really? How does one who lost their mediocre insurance from a company that is a division of the Washington Post, go about getting private -good-insurance. I lost it when Hubby retired & if you are from Akron, Ohio, ck. out what the State of Ohio offers retirees & their deductibles.

IF I could get the kind of insurance you are talking about, (insurance companies like Giffords have her on a group policy with no pre-existing conditions exclusion. And you bet your booties that they don't F*** with Congress people's bills in the denial column) I would have no money for food, heat, real estate taxes, petrol, etc. Unfortunately, those NEEDS ( not WANTS) have to have a priority.

Luckily I'm healthy, but I've had private companies deny me coverage for a hysterectomy done 24 yrs. ago for non-cancerous reasons. Hell, it makes me a BETTER risk since I can't get Ovarian/Uterine Cancer.

I watched my patients as a Home Health Nurse slowly begin losing what little care they were receiving & it went against everything we were taught in Nursing School. I am reasonable enough to know that things aren't going to be textbook, but we'd have been thrown out of school if we'd practiced some of what was starting when I retired.

Medicare-here I come! I'm counting the days!

Great post Lu!

Lu: I currently have a non profit insurance company plan and they behave no differently than for profit. Your option #2 would not change anything.

DB: Correction: You and I paid for the Giffords' premium health care policy, not the Giffords.

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, ³⁶ I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me."

"They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

Good ideas Lu -- but here's another, and I've proposed it many times.

Federally FUNDED Health Insurance (note, NOT federal health care).

Here's how it works (my numbers are NOT real, just easy to work with).

1. Determine what level of health care that every legal resident of the U.S.A. is entitled to. What services, etc. This would probably need to be divided into three groups: pediatric, adult, geriatric. An across-the-board panel of medical experts can put this together.

2. Determine what it would cost to insure EVERY LEGAL RESIDENT of the U.S.A. under this plan. Because you are including young, healthy people, you'd be surprised at how much that would drop premiums. A board of actuaries can determine this, but let's say it comes to $100/month/person.

3. Plan into action. Any private insurance company can participate. They must agree to provide the agreed upon services for the agreed upon price. They can "lure" customers by having additional plans and services or GASP great customer service. Customers would have one month each year (similar to Medicare) to change companies. The government sends the money directly to the customers.

Now ... will this be expensive. Of course. But realize, that Medicaid and Medicare would be eliminated under this plan. Also realize that, because EVERYONE is insured, doctors and hospitals would be assured of getting paid. That's one thing that drives up medical costs -- people who can't (or don't) pay the bills.

In the long run, I don't think that it would be a much more expensive health care system than what we have now, and Americans in general would be much better off.

It really is, "Who you are" that determines the "kind of care" you receive. If you are a member of the "Politburo" (federal employee) or very wealthy, the "sky is the limit" especially if you are "injured on the 'Job.'" I am a disabled Vet, and I am here to tell you, the VA employees have much better health coverage than I do as a fully compensated combat Vet. I have to wait for months or years to see a specialist, I am commonly denied consults with "outside" doctors. Given "substitute" medicines. Denied medicines that are not in the VA recommended formulary. If a VA employee were injured on the job, he/she would have it "made" for the rest of their life, special care, best doctors, best meds, Viagra if they needed it, me, I settle for the bits and pieces I have to beg for, and denied meds that are "not essential." So, it is true, if you are among the "elite" you get "good care," if not, you settle for handouts or nothing.

For all those screaming the gospel according to Workman's Comp....you may be accurate in your state but the laws are not the same everywhere. Arizona may cover more than other states. So unless you know every state's laws by heart....you really can't make an educated comment about it.

I had to go through a workman's comp case in NY and their laws are the most criminal one could imagine. I was burned at work when I was 19. 30% of my body was burned, 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree. I was in the hospital for a month and had 3 skin graft surgeries. My parents had to give their insurance information when I first arrived at the emergency room....just in case workman's comp wasn't approved. I fought in court for 5 years to get my medical bills paid for. The insurance company that provided my employers workers comp benefits kept fighting me because they thought I didn't want to work for the rest of my life and they'd have to pay. All I wanted was my medical bills paid for so I could move on.

My boss was in the wrong by cleaning out hot grease fryers without letting the grease cool....in most states I would have been allowed to sue him for negligence as well. Not in NY. There had to be someone behind the counter at the time of the accident to witness it and they couldn't be a direct employee of the company (ie. customer, delivery guy). Ya starting to see who workman's comp laws benefit in NY? In most states I could have been compensated for the significant scarring. In NY I had to be scarred from the neck up....essentially saying I could be dipped in hot grease from the neck down and get absolutely nothing for the scars. Thankfully the burns on my face healed and there are no scars....but my arm, leg, and chest didn't fare so well. Getting surgery to correct the scars in on me. I've taken to them as more of a conversation piece over the years.....so I won't be doing that. But....this should give you an idea of how different every state can be. NY laws are old....and were created to protect the employer more so than the employee. They were created back in the day when the Mafia ran a lot of NY businesses and had politicians in their pockets. Not all states are like that. It sounds like Arizona isn't but who knows.

So, like I said...unless you are versed in every workman's comp law...in every state....you shouldn't comment on what benefits she is or isn't getting....since you simply do not know. And if the comp she's on is Federal....well that's a whole other animal! And I'm guessing if you aren't a federal employee who has gone through a workman's comp case.....ya still aren't educated enough to comment on it.

Beth 440386

That sounds like an excellent idea!

For those who are stating that anyone who is injured on the job will have fully covered quality care covered under Worker's Comp...I can tell you from experience that employers ( Corporations) have high paid attorneys who fight legitimate claims, thus many never get any coverage at all through Worker's Comp. I suffered a TBI in an accident at work and trying to navigate the Worker's Comp. court system is really near impossible for a person with a head injury. I was denied. I could not afford a recommended treatment, so I did without it, even though I have spent many thousands of dollars out of my own pocket for the help I have been able to get. Trust me when I tell you that work related accident victims are too often discredited, discarded and forgotten...left on their own...in many instances. Without going into all the details, know that corporations have many techniques they utilize to avoid assuming any responsibility or paying out anything to help the injured employee. My employer was a large medical center, whom you would think would live up to their promise of caring for the sick and injured...in reality, they simply have even more resources and ability to medically and otherwise discredit employees.

I am glad Representative Giffords is getting the excellent care she is receiving, and hope she fully recovers and maybe her tragedy may put some light on the plight of so many who cannot obtain necessary care...and maybe we can identify the problems in the system and decide to no longer tolerate them. A government health plan option was a great offer and benefit for the average American citizen, and sadly too many allowed corporate insurance and big business healthcare to deceive the masses with lies and fabrications...leading the public to shoot themselves in the foot in fighting for their corporate agenda that only hurts the public.

Stang Salie...

I did not see your comment before posting mine, but as you can see, I totally agree. Until someone has tried to navigate the WC system (in a particular state), they have no idea how the system really works. Very corrupt and unethical system was my impression from my experience.

You people making comments like "why government health care is great" crack me up, do you really thing our government will give we the people the same healthcare THEY get? HAHAHAHAHA

96ws6...

Maybe check out the "socialized" government healthcare that covers ALL Israeli citizens. Israel has had a government oversight healthcare system since the country was established in 1948...and has a system that is nationally rated much above our U.S. system...and Israel brings in many millions of dollars from foreigners who choose to travel to Israel for medical care/procedures. Sounds like Israel has been able to put a healthcare system in place that provides good care to all Israeli citizens...so I am guessing it could be done here, as well, if all were on the same page to accomplish it.

I'm wondering why we even bother to pay taxes to police this kind of shooting, or spend the money for the ambulance to pick up the bodies. When are we going to just take care of ourselves and let the dead and wounded rot in the streets so we don't have to "waste another dime" on these lazy bum that get shot in the face?

DB...usually I do agree with you but your are a little off in your work comp assessment. Workers compensation pays for all medical, any lost wages and a settlement for any permanent/partial disability. If Giffords put this through her health insurance carrier, they will pay, and then subrogate the claim back against the employer's Work Comp.

Eric...once again...what would a single payer system solve? The medical bills would be covered by health insurance. Time is only a factor when it comes to ongoing care. Ongoing care is not covered by health insurance, pre-reform or post-reform. That is a separate insurance and it is called Long Term Care.

If it is a concern, you can purchase long term care and be covered for incidents like that....or, you can take the risk and self-fund it. That is your freedom of choice.

Insurance is just a mechanism to manage risk, it isn't what determines care, that is up to you and if you choose not to pay for the care, that is also up to you.

Just because your injury is covered by workers comp does not mean you do not have to deal with the BS the insurance companies throw at you. They still constantly try to deny and delay outpatient care whenever they can. I can testify to that. Sure, you can hire an attorney and force the insurance company to pay up. But who wants to deal with the extra headache when you are already caring for a loved one who desperately needs medical care.

Joe having lived in two countries with universal health care, where I never waited in lines, doctors and nurses came to my house, my sister-in law had a baby and had a nurse come to her house for two weeks after the birth.

....the answer is easy....its more affordable care and better.

The 2011 FEHB edition includes 208 plan choice and the Fed (us) now only pays 70% of the premium. So Giffords pays 30% for the plan.

http://www.opm.gov/insure/openseason/FEHBP_FactSheet.pdf

The Fed used to pay it all, but a number of years ago, they too began requiring participants to pay part of the premiums. I know VP Biden had talked about he had to choose between plans and had to pay part of the premium during the 2008 election campaign. I looked it up and yes they all share paying the premiums.

Many of you need to go back and read the article. She is on worker's comp. The funny thing is, did her family have to fight to get her treatment approved? Most Worker's Comp. cases are very slow. It can takes weeks just to get a hearing to approve the claim. Most likely, that was not the case here since this was a very public injury. But, I wonder just how "rich" the benefits are for a Federal Employee claim..... (Benefits WE are paying for, yet we don't have the same benefits for ourselves.)

Second, the child shouldn't have been used as a contrasting example. To compare a Worker's Comp case to a private injury of a child on MEDICAID is not apples to apples. If anything, the parents are partly to blame. Benefits would have been better and quicker thru the parent's plan. Most Teacher's plans are usually in the catagory of Union plans, (quite rich in benefits) These folks could afford to pay for their children's health care, yet chose to "let someone else" (the state) pay for their responsibility. I have nothing against those who truly cannot afford health care and qualify for Medicaid, but these folks were playing the system and their son's care suffered for it.

The rush is on by medical insurance providers, drug companies, etc., to increase their fees. Like the credit card companies, they are gouging and want to assure huge profits before controls are mandated. The long bumpy road to a compassionate and equitable national health care system would be a reality, if not for the powerful voices of greed.

America may attract the best doctors and healthcare, but, in many cases, service is limited to the very wealthy or our government.

PLEASE READ: her reimbursement comes from federal worker's comp...this is NOT insurance. The current health care "reform" law does nothing to address this.

The real issue is the COST of the procedure, not who is PAYING for it! Underlying issues must be addressed to bring down health care costs, restructuring insurance and payors will only artificially deflate set prices. Meanwhile med tech, medical mistakes, and over-treating will continue unchecked. Again this joke of a health care "reform" law does nothing to address this.

There will always be the haves and have nots. And the vast majority of the reason of whether you are a "have" or a "have not" is free will. The majority of us have the oppotunities in this country to attain to what we choose. That is what a free market democracy is about. We are not equal when it comes to what we have and what we attain to. Some people are poor, some are middle-class some are wealthy - period! That's life - there are no guarantees, and a society full of people with their hands out is just that, a useless society with people with their hands out.

For all those that think the article portrays the need for National Health Care, aka, "Cradle to Grave Care" - do you honestly think under socialized health care that everyone would get the same level of care? Are you that naive?

You want rehab covered under your health care plan? Pay for it. Make it a priority. Get rid of the cable, internet, cell phone, smoking, drinking, eating out, our any number of other luxuries in your life to buy a policy that will cover cream of the crop care. If not or you truly can't afford it, you will need to rely and be satisfied with what others give you in charity and entitlements!

The only health care reform that should happen is that the Legislature should be subject to the same health care we all are subject too. Insurance companies. Their raises should be tied to voter approval, also.

Unless they can find a good way to cover everyone, the only government workers who should receive fully paid health care and rehab is the military.

Hopeful American: What are you hopeful for? There is little hope for the "have nots", who have a serious brain injury. Why is it acceptable to let them rot? Is this the best we can do?

It is possible to have a vibrant health care system for all citizens.

JM California:

I'm hopeful that people will take some responsibility for themselves! Or do you want to pay for a Cadillac plan for every person in this country? How about a house for everyone? How about a car for everyone? Where do the entitlements end?

It is not possible for every person in this country to have Cadillac health care. Just like it is not possible for every person in this country to have a beautiful house, a beautiful car, and all the other luxuries out there. And try finding people that will want to become doctors when the government pays the small amount they would pay to doctors. Hell, there's doctors that won't even take Medicare anymore unless you have a supplemental. They aren't performing a charity - they want to make good money for the 10 years and huge cost of becoming a doctor.

You want good health care? Work hard and buy it! A lot of times, people just don't want to make good choices. Cable, cell phones, internet, smoking, drinking, eating out, movies, and many other choices we make would go a long way to taking care of ourselves and purchasing a true necessity in life - health care!

@KJR

Stang Salie...

I did not see your comment before posting mine, but as you can see, I totally agree. Until someone has tried to navigate the WC system (in a particular state), they have no idea how the system really works. Very corrupt and unethical system was my impression from my experience.

What most people don't get is workman's comp is paid for by an insurance company that is being paid by your employer. They don't WANT to pay anything....it's just like regular health care...you just didn't pay for it. ITT Hartford was the insurance company that had my employer's workman's comp policy. They were so cold. I was 19 when that happened....scared half to death...and just suffered through what is probably the most painful recovery you can imagine....and they didn't think I should get a dime. Even my employer apologized to me for what he had done....but that didn't matter. 5 years later my bills were paid and I got 2 weeks pay plus a small settlement for partial loss of use of my ankle where the 3rd degree burn was. It still turns purple in the winter because of poor circulation. I was 19...working through college....did nothing wrong....and felt like I was being punished. It was horrible. I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

You Liberals are truly amazing. I see very little here other than Liberals blaming Conservatives/Reublicans for all of the ills of the world!

Do not forget that YOUR Liberal Democrat President of the United States of America had two full years of a Democratically controlled US Congress.

Since it is now a historical fact that the Republicans opposed almost all the Liberal Bills voted upon and PASSED by OUR Liberal Democrat President and OUR Liberal Democrat Congress, why are the streets not now paved with gold?

Why are the fountains not flowing with MILK and HONEY?

Why are there not two new cars in every garage and two chickens in every pot?

The article misleads, making things sound like all government workers are on a health plan equivalent to the congress woman's; nothing could be further from the truth.

And for those who think that a national plan will be a waste, just remember that all that tax money still goes somewhere, and these days, probably nowhere that benefits you.

JFKDemocrat - obviously your "handle" is sarcasm! And, as far as the "blame game" goes -- looks like you're winning THAT race.

Morrigan

Come on, you intrinsically dishonest and self-deluding Liberal Democrats...where is your BEEF? With whom should you be having your BEEF with?

Republicans who HONESTLY objected to Legislation with which they philosophically and fundamentally disagreed or the Democrats who DID NOT deliver on their PROMISES?

The Democrat controlled White House, US Senate and US House of Representatives had the votes to deliver up the Liberal Manifesto of "Everything for Everybody and Pass On the Cost?"

Why did they fail to do so?

Simple, even to Delusional Liberals who have only two synapses firing at the same time...The Democrats wanted to get re-elected.

YOUR LIBERAL DREAMS were sold out by LIBERAL CONGRESSIONAL DREAMS OF GETTING RE_ELECTED!

Beth 440386

Surely your institutional ignorance cannot be of such depth that you do not know the difference between a JFK Democrat and a Clinton Democrat?

A JFK Democrat asks "...What can I do for my country?" while a Clinton Democrat asks..."what's in it for me?"

I do not have to be a knee-jerk, party line spouting, party handle pulling Liberal to also be a Democrat!

It is obvious from the posts available that very, very few "Liberal Democrats" who post on these "comments" sections have much by way of either original thought or independent research when it comes to anything that even closely smacks of politics or philosophy.

Prove me wrong, dear.

JM California: Having a supplemental to Medicare only means an insurance company will pick up the 20% co-insurance that you, the patient, owes.

Having a supplemental or not, the doctor still receives the 20% Medicare does not pay, whether from you or your supplemental policy.

Why would a supplemental determine whether or not a doctor will see you?

Hi Debi, Not sure why you're asking me that question.

Surely your institutional ignorance cannot be of such depth that you do not know the difference between a JFK Democrat and a Clinton Democrat?

Since I don't "label" liberals (JFK OR Clinton) or conservatives (Reagan or whoever) I guess my "institutional ignorance" will have to stand. Frankly I don't see many people "thinking" up here.

But I also find your posturing somewhat ridiculous as well ... thus my comment.

"Posturing'?

Well, Beth I find that those who act in accordance with Political Correctness must be the lowest forms mankind has ever spawned.

Political Correctness is nothing other than institutionalized cowardice.

I used to hold as most despised those who pull the "Party Lever" in the election booth. Now, those miserable excuses for citizens can only rank a distant second to those who will not make a stand, take a stand or ask a question for fear of not being one of the herd.

So, if my "posturing", as you call it, puts you off then I am proud of it. Perhaps the result of any such "posturing" is that you might actually get off your intellectually lazy ass and do a little research before you besmirch anyone, anything or any institution of which you are completely ignorant.

As for JFk or Clinton", you should pay attention. The first will want to do what is best for you and the Nation, the second will be looking out for No. 1. Period.

Sorry JM, the question should have been posed to Hopeful American. :)

Hopeful American was responding to you.

So, if my "posturing", as you call it, puts you off then I am proud of it. Perhaps the result of any such "posturing" is that you might actually get off your intellectually lazy ass and do a little research before you besmirch anyone, anything or any institution of which you are completely ignorant.

LOL I'm hardly "Politically Correct" or "ignorant" just because I don't agree with you or your labels and your attempts to neatly place people into their "proper" categories. But if it makes you feel nice and superior to think so, so be it. I don't mind giving out a warm fuzzy now and again.

And, as it's very obvious you love the last word -- it's all yours! Enjoy!

So, on what basis was my comment collapsed? Was it because there were good ideas there?

Darned if I know. I thought they were definitely worth discussing.

Lu, it was a very long post. It didn't contain anything that was negative and it was a very well thought out post. I didn't agree with everything you said, but you made some good points.

Obamacare as you call it wouldn't force you to pay 8000 a year plus a 2K deductible. If everyone bought in, your cost would be WAY lower. What everyone also fails to mention is that the insurance lobby spent half a trillion dollars to try to defeat health care reform, and now they are passing that cost on to you.

Maybe it's because members of Congress have the best possible coverage that a person can possibly have and they don't have to pay for it????? Now, if Obamacare gave us that same coverage, I would be more happy about paying in our hard-earned money in taxes every quarter.

Bullhaulerwife the new HCR is a small imperfect step in the right direction. Consider that the next time you hear someone say the government is coming between you and your primary care. Its a lie plain and simple. The truth is insurance companies have always been and will be the only thing between you and your provider. If we had a one-payer system the government could drive down the cost of healthcare for everyone and keep it down. Simple Economics 101.

Carl - there is NO government health care plan. Only a agency that keeps an up to date list of private health insurers with around 150 different insurance plans. Federal employees can purchase their insurance there or buy it elsewhere. The fed pays for up to 72% of the premiums. In the private world employers pay for 0 - 100% of your premiums. Normally employers pay for 40 - 60% of the Health Insurance premiums of the employees.

DB; not sure where you got that 72% thing but as a former government employee I never paid a dime out of pocket for my insurance

Arguing that everyone should have the same health care as out reps is like arguing we should all have the same health care as the President of a large corporation. Never going to happen as long as there are enough Republicans sent to Washington to stall delay and amend any reform.

Carl

Are you that damn naive? there are over 700 (that's right SEVEN H-U-N-D-R-E-D ) Exclusions from obomacare, this is merely 1 of them. Try googleing it and check out this "great" plan.

Nice, everyone is missing the point: Why isn't the family that had the gun paying everything they have? It is their fault. It isn't society's fault.

Won't happen, but with ownership of guns comes responsibility. The owner of that gun and their family should be paying for the rehab of Steven for the rest of his life.

la. ScooterTramp --

What we have now is NOT Obamacare. If you recall, his original goal was to provide ALL Americans with the health care he had access to as a Representative. Those exclusions were put in to get the thing passed.

Some call it compromise. Some call it negotiating with terrorists (here at home -- legislative terrorists, economic terrorists, not outside terrorists).

We have more protection now than we did before the Affordable Health Care pacakge was passed. We could have even more. If our legislators cooperated (?) we could find ourselves in the place bullhaulerwife spoke about:

"Now, if Obamacare gave us that same coverage, I would be more happy about paying in our hard-earned money in taxes every quarter."

Fix the health care law, don't scrap it.

hey a hole that is not the same insurance that they voted on for you

and me that's top shelf she somebody we are not get that through your

thick leftwing head they don't pay for there insurance we pay it

The fact we are all missing is that Rep Giffords receives the best care at the best facilities because they can afford to hire the best doctors and staff. These specialist have spent hundreds of thousands of their own money to get the training and experience they bring to the table and ObamaCare will attempt to limit what they can charge. If we as a society want the best doctors, we have to pay for them. I don't think we'd have half the good doctors we have today if the government put a pay cap on them.

Perhaps the best solution to health care is to add an amendment to the Constitution that would require all elected representatives to be subjected to anything they put on the people. It's amazing what you can get when you can vote for your own direct benefits.

Look, Obamacare isn't federal health care. It's meerly a law that states that ins companies can't deny coverage to people and that people must have coverage. The govt isn't actually providing healthcare. And Medicaid and Medicare are an example. If you read the article it states that it covered as much as it could, but bc of budget restraints, obviously he wasn't able to recieve all the outpatient tools needed to assist in his recovery. (the only difference between govt run and private run ins is the govt is held back by lack of funds rather than a "case worker" that just gets to "make the call")

On that note. Obamacare, even if it were actual insurance, would never allow us the coverage that most federal workers get. (it would be too costly)Especially not that of a member of Congress. They are valued more than other citizens. Which is why it's a seperate law to to harm to a federal employee than sommebody else. Which is also why they are afforded the "special" benefits they are given for life.

The Congresswoman doesn't have 'government health insurance': that would be medicare/medicaid. She has federally funded health insurance, aka 'cadillac' insurance. I suffered a traumatic brain injury and my insurance covered almost none of it. I had to apply for medicaid (or file bankruptcy) which was infuriating. People don't pay 100-300 dollars a month for insurance to cover well-care/office visits, which is manageable in cash. Because medicaid was footing the bill I had no rehabillitation and minimal follow up care, because medicaid pays only a fraction of what private health insurance would. As far as I can tell there is nothing in the nearly 2000 page Health Care Bill that would make QUALITY insurance more affordable for folks like me. It would seem, in contrast, to expand Medicaid. If Congress, teapublicans and all, can revamp and improve Obama-Care, good for them and better for us.

becuase we will NEVER get the same healthcare our government does you moron!

@ SoCAL: Chances are that after the accident, there were payments made on behalf of the parents of the kid who shot the gun. Problem there is that there are CAP LIMITS. From the sounds of what his costs were in the beginning, they were staggering and the family homeowner's insurance probably covered all that initially until the policy was exhausted. After that, there were probably some payments from another area of their policy for negligence, etc. Either way, to say 'they should pay for the rest of his life' isn't happening. If they sued that family for everything they had, that's all you would get. Once that's gone, that's all you could get. The other family was probably forced into bankruptcy over this. Either way, enough time has passed and all the insurance money that was in play--has been played and he's receiving other grants or state-funded aide. There's nothing more. That is, unless you're in a position to send a nice donation to the kid's family to help.

Carl W

If Government health care is so bad, why do so many teapublicans complain when members of Congress have it and they don't?

Because we're paying for these millionaires health insurance.

Eric-913730

Fix the health care law, don't scrap it.

Scrapping it is the only way to fix this mess. The healthcare law does nothing but increase costs.

Some one accidentally got shot in the face? I thought gun owners didn't make mistakes, guns are just inanimate objects that never ever hurt people wha?

DB Akron is absolutely right about the government employee health plans. I work for the Federal Goverment and I am allowed to pick from a list of FEHB plans available from OPM. These are the same plans that are available for the same cost to members of Congress and their staffs. The post office is handled seperately and costs less. The one I picked is the Blue Cross Standard option and it costs me $431.60 per month. The govenment picks up the rest. This insurance is much like any other employer based policy. Some years I have paid in excess for $12000 for premiums and copays. Anyone who says members of congress and federal workers get free health insurance, don't know what the hell they are talking about. The goverment pays a portion, but it sure as hell is not free, and it does not pay for everything. In my case the govenment pays 67% of the premium I pay the rest plus any co-pays. The amount and percentages vary depending on the policy you pick from the list.

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/rates/nonpostalffs2011.pdf

SoCal,

Nice thought... but how exactly is that supposed to work? You can't take more money from someone than they have and I'll bet you the owner of the gun doesn't have the money to pay for the care needed -- even if there was some legal way to hold them financial responsible indefinitely. If you took away every spare dollar they have -- no more extras in life ever again (no eating out, no TV, no entertainment of any kind) -- there still wouldn't be enough. Take even more, they lose their house, lose their car... how can they continue to support themselves well enough to hold down a job? They lose their job and no one gets any money... Are you seeing the flaw in that reasoning yet?

Again, nice thought. Seems fair. Wouldn't work.

Ron in Seattle...it is rather, a running leap aimed at a very high cliff!

It is a bad Bill. It is only slightly worse than the Energy Bill that the Bush administration allowed the Oil Industry to write for us.

Why is it so darned bad when Republicans get a little help from their industry friends, but just hunky dory when the Democrats get a little help from our industry friends.

The Health Care Bill will cost us more, and arguably, do more harm to the US Taxpayer than the Bush Energy Bill.

That, my friend is elementary Politics 101!

Loughner was an adult under Arizona and US legal definition when he purchased his Glock. He was a legal adult when he went to Safeway and started pulling the trigger.

He was NOT an adult when he began smoking a psychoactive substance legally available to anyone who wants it.

Go figure.

Which do you think led to the current state of events vis a vis Loughner and Giffords? A legally purchased Glock or a legally available psychoactive substance?

Why should his poor parents be required to pay for his actions.

Sorry Joe, the health care law saves 140 billion over 10 years, and only has minimal impact on jobs.

Check for yourself www.factcheck.org

Hi Eric...actually, the 'savings' are one of those imaginary things Congress comes up when it is deducting or spending money that it does not have.

A savings is when they will not have to take money already allocated to other projects and a cost is when they do have to take allocated money from other projects.

No actual savings to the tax payers as the insurance companies have been raising their rates since the Bill passed to compensate for the future outlays they will endure for those future customers considered uninsurable now.

Facts are facts.

Factcheck just reads the Bill and calls a few Congressmen. They are not necessarily the most 'objective' source of information around.

IF odumbocare was the exact same medical care provided to senators and congressmen I would be first in line to push for it. But you cant be silly enough for a minute to believe that the government health care you and I are forced to obtain will be even close to what the elite politicians keep for themselves??

That was exactly my complaint...if odumbocare is Sooooo good then why dont the politicians use it like the rest of us will be forced to do????

We would not have access to the same level of care that our representatives in congress pay if the coverage was truly "free." I put it in quotations because only the naive actually believe it's free.

Government run health care isn't as great as many of you think it would be. I lived in the UK and I remember a friend throwing out his back and being told it would take him 9 months to get in to see a specialist. A friend was diagnosed with late stage cervical cancer because they don't have annual pap smears there, they're only every 3 years. And when I had mine, I never saw a doctor, it was a nurse with a swab and that was it - no breast exam either. But I remember the docs saying they couldn't do anything to help her (the government wouldn't pay for her care because they didn't believe she was likely to live, so they basically left her to die - she came to the US for treatment and is recovering).

The care Giffords is receiving is not what you and I should expect if we ever do get government run health care. Obamacare won't provide anything close either (it's probably worse, honestly).

Under Obama Care,places like the one Giffords is in won't be funded as they are too expensive.You'll only be able to get the care that 18 year old kid gets now.Nothing will change,the wealthy will pay out of pocket for Giffords type care and you'll still be here moaning about things you apparently have no knowledge of.

Oh good god. Where the hell did you get that crap from? "Obama care" doesn't change much of anything. Stop drinking the damn tea and get some facts.

Nut - please understand that this story has massive spin, which has obviously gone over the head of just about everyone posting. This is a case of WORKERS COMPENSATION insurance, NOT HEALTH insurance. If the poor teen was shot while working at McDonald's, he would be afforded all of the benefits because he would have been injured at WORK, thereby making McDonald's responsible for all of his medical bills. Giffords medical bills are being paid by Federal WORKERS COMPENSATION, not Federal HEALTH insurance. It is two totally and separate types of insurance.

Once again, the media has spun the article, cast it's line, and you all have swallowed, hook, line and sinker. Congrats!

How do you propose we attain the money needed to insure 40 million people will top notch coverage? I'm a conservative, but would love to see that happen! I don't make alot of money, and recently had to have surgery. i was only able to do that b/c of a scholarship fund through the hospital. So, i as much as anyone would like to have everyone covered! However, the cost would bankrupt the country. That is indisputable.

Skelmcb,

I agree. Facts are there but folks see and hear what they want. Sad but true.

Ellanoah--simple way all of our citizens could get the same medical coveage--stop lining the politicians' pockets, quit funding pork barrel projects, close bases abroad, bring our troops home, stop paying exessive amounts to war contractors, stop all foreign aid except for assisting with natural disasters and close loopholes and tax the big corporations and the wealthy so they are paying their fair share of the taxes. Stoping the war spending alone could fund healthcare for all citizens! We spend so much on "nation building" all over the world--we need to invest in our citizens for a change!

Ellanoah....it's all a matter of what our priorities are! We chose to have a military that's huge. We could use that money for something different if we choose to.

My granddaughter hit her hand while skiing, it hurt. Ski patrol suggested that we take her to the ER. After about an hours worth of paperwork, an x-ray, an elastic bandage, a dose of childrens motrin and an ice pack we left. Total time in the ER including paperwork...about an hour and a half. The hand was bruised. My daughter just received the bill....over two thousand dollars. Now...I understand there might be a difference...but I went to the dentist and they did an x-ray on my entire mouth and it was less than a hundred dollars! The x-ray for her hand was over $600 dollars.....does that seem right? I'm sure there's an explanation for it....it's probably BS...but it's an explanation! Those might some of the reasons why we can't afford it!

"How do you propose we attain the money needed to insure 40 million people will top notch coverage?"

If we stopped spending billions of dollars to bomb other countries' hospitals and schools by bringing our bloated defense budget into line with the rest of the world, we would be more than able to provide adequate funds for our own health and educational systems.

It's just a question of priorities, and ours are seriously screwed up.

The coverage that these politicians have will not change. Because they voted not to change it. Politicians know it's a garbage plan that's why they are not subject to it.

It seems that the people who actually insure themselves are the suckers. We pay $500 a month for insurance. I had to go to the Hospital for a scratched cornea. The bill I had to pay was $500. The total was $850 insurance covered $350 of it. I was at the hospital for 30 minutes.

Now if you do the math I would of been better off not having insurance and paying the $850 myself. Instead of $6500 through out the year. We all know that the insured pay for the uninsured. Just another handout that this system is filled with. Anyone who thinks that Obama Care is going to reduce the amount of money that the already insured pay is in for a rude awakening.

NutGrape: I'm a rightwinger and I'm glad to chime in. Your right, the system is working as it is supposed to. a 14 year old kid gets shot in the face and has to have 40% of his brain removed, yet 4 years later, he is still a live and still getting rehab and he got it all for free, having never lifted a finger of his own to help pay for any of it.

Well aren't we just a bunch of greedy b@st@rds

Nutgrape: What does this have to do with "Right" or "Left?" Giffords is a DEMOCRAT. They ALL ( Congress) have this kind of health care!

As a retired nurse, I saw this time after time. We will NEVER have decent health care UNTIL we have care like other 1st. world countries-UNIVERSAL!

Maybe what's needed is for the good, old fashioned protest of the 60's on & around the Mall looking like Egypt does now. Maybe constant pressure at all meetings all congresspeople attend, maybe protests on-going at their offices in their home districts, maybe we can show the world like in Viet Nam, IT AIN'T WORKING!

Nothing, repeat nothing affects ALL of the people in the United States as does health care! It's OUR Universal Problem!

nutgrape,

Yes isn't it terrible that in a "real" world people actually have to work and earn what they get?

What exactly do you believe will happen when and IF (which will hopefully be NEVER) Obamacare is in full operation? Do you truly believe all people will get the quality of health care that Mrs. Giffords is getting? If you do then you can count yourself as one of the many Obamasheep who are still letting him pull your own wool over your own eyes. "It is not a matter of if we will ration Medicare but when." A quote from Obama's own Medicare Czar that will no doubt directly influence if not control Obamacare. So if you think life is going to be sooooo much better with Obamacare in full operation and with con-man, impostor in chief, limp wrist-ed libels in charge like Obama, Reid and Pelosi, standby and hold on because you are in for the shock of your pampered little, give me this, I deserve that, I don't want to work for it because as an American it is my right, life. You are about to come face to face with your worst nightmare and I can sum it up in one word. REALITY! You want the best quality health care possible? Strange as it may seem to you there is only one way to get it, Education, hard work and actually EARN IT! Unless you are born into money there is only one legal way to get it and at least Obama, Reid and Pelosi have not taken that right away from us,,,,,,YET!

I for one am glad that Mrs. Giffords is getting the very best care possible and wish it were possible that all people in her situation could get the same, but alas I live in the real world where I know you can't wash dishes at McDonalds and based on that income walk into a BMW dealership and drive away with a new top of the line BMW. You have to get and education, get a good paying JOB and earn the money to purchase the new car. home or any other thing of value and this includes top of the line health care.

Before you rant and rave, YES I am WHITE, College educated, and retired from a good paying job with, among the best quality of health care provided for me for the rest of my life by my former employer and no I am not a retired federal employee of any type. I simply did what is fast becoming a past way of life here in this country and EARNED what I have. I did not demand, expect or feel entitled to anything I did not EARN!

Rhino, would you feel the same way if your 14 year old son was shot in the face?

And he got great immediate care, but then for four years you couldn't access the uninterrupted rehabilitation he should have been receiving in order to limit the damage and maximize his recovery?

Yes, it is wonderful that they were able to save his life. But most of the parents I know would also be concerned about the quality of the rest of his life!

Sorry Ernie, but I think you missed the point. Hubby was President of a company, division of the Washington Post. He worked damn hard & his insurance was mediocre at best AND I am now w/o any insurance until I can hit Medicare. No retirement insurance for THIS employee & his wife. No more bonuses, no more stock options, no more defined pension benefits, no more "nuttin'."

It's not just the "rank & file" who are having a difficult time of it, but 6 figure top executives are also getting shafted; he was not alone per his comparison with others. How the hell do we "plan" on no health care in retirement ( for me) when it was ripped out from under our feet with no time to even TRY to build a savings for it?

He had a chance to go to Canada back in the 1970's to run a company in Toronto; I wish to hell we had gone. Canada had just granted us "landed immigrancy" status when he was promoted here. At least we'd have SOME insurance for me until Medicare.

Gifford won't pay for any rehab, the taxpayers will.

V. Bevis- So you are telling me that your husband was the president of a company and I am inferring that he made over 100k a year. That's more than enough to establish some sort of savings that could have covered you until you are old enough for Medicare. Are you too disabled to work?

Bevis,

Pay for it yourself. Poor top exec. has no insurance. Maybe if you didn't have that huge house, or didn't "need" the cars and toys. Maybe if you had your priorities straight from the beginning you will be fine.

It is absolutetly hilarious that someone who has had what your husband worked for can turn around and cry about the system. Your the reason the system is so messed up. The people who can pay for it don't want to either. You are probably worse then the handout babies.

How the hell do we "plan" on no health care in retirement ( for me) when it was ripped out from under our feet with no time to even TRY to build a savings for it?

Here's a secret you "PLAN" to save money period for whatever you need. I have never made more than $40,000 in a year and am still buying my own private health insurance, saving money and raising kids. I don't cry about it I am lucky I live somewhere I can do that. Canada is calling don't miss the plane.

Wow bobby, I hope you never lose your job or have a real medical emergency. For all your smugness your life could change in an instant.

Nurse...I think you have hit the proverbial nail on the head there, but Harry Reid, the President of the Democrat controlled Senate has told President Obama that, flat out, there will be NO RESTRICTIONS on "Ear Marks" or "Pork Barrel Projects" while HE is President of the US Senate!

Too bad the Nevadans had to pick Angle to run against him as just about anyone else, literally anyone else, would have beat him and freed the US Taxpayers of Harry Reid!

So much for all the Bi-Partisan bull crap we heard from the Dems when it became obvious they were going to have their lunch handed to them in the recent elections.

Same old same old and guess which Party is being the bestest at the old "same old, same old"?

Morrigan:would you settle for a nephew? I do have a son and I'm am certainly grateful that he is healthy. But, my sisters son was involved in a "near" drowning when he was 4. Near drowning in this case means he was clinically dead for a good 15 minutes before he was pulled from the water and we began to administer CPR. The next day he actually woke up and was able to hug his mother. Then the brain swelling started. By the time it stopped 3 days later he had turned into a complete vegetable. The only voluntary muscle movement he is capable of is to blink his eyes and even then we are not sure. That was 11 years ago. During that time he has received round the clock nursing care. He is fed through a tube, he needs no less than $500.00 per month in anti-seizure medication alone. and guess what, medicaid has paid for all of it. They even pay for diapers and shaving supplies. (think about that, a 4 year old kid in a complete vegetative state has now lived so long that he could actually grow a beard if left unattended)

So why we all feel bad for what happened to the kid in Texas, I seriously doubt that there is much room for complaint about the kind of care he receives. I served in a third world country for 2 years when I was younger and recently returned for a couple of weeks with my wife and was given a stark reminder of what real poverty and a true lack of medical care looks like.

So how do I feel about our current system? Actually I think it's pretty damn amazing. And my sister (who is also a nurse by the way) agrees with me. She has told me many times how grateful she is that this kind of help is available. And then, in almost the same breath she actually on occasion will lament that our health care system is too good because to use her words "there are some things that are worse than death"

So Morrigan, do you have any more hypotheticals for me?

If any of you are truly unsatisfied with our current medical system then by all means, get up and do something about it. But if all you are going to do is complain about why our government does not do more for us, quite frankly as a patriotic American who has paid his dues and pays his taxes, I would prefer you just shut the hell up.

BYL,

That is why I have insurance, I lost my job two years ago and use the money I saved when I had a job to pay for it. Life is good when you plan for it, instead of waiting for someone else to give you the "good life" I do not collect unemployment either.

Why do you think the entire world is so messed up? I think it's because Americans have portrayed this endless loop of prosperity and jobs over the last two decades. That time is over because Americans never saved their money and wanted more...more....more while they had a job. Sorry if doing the right thing is "Smugness" to you. If more people did what I did we would never of had this recession. It's not corporations that ruined the American life style it was the consumer buying all kinds of stuff they never needed.

That's a lot of crap! My husband works for the guvamint and trust me, our insurance is pretty crappy! Only the high ups get great insurance, not the people who do the work. You want good insurance, go to Congress! They get the greatest and the next best is the post office! They pay very little for great insurance. My husband is still in his guvamint job and has been there for 43 years and they simply change the rules for the insurance. Every year we get less and less and you never know if anything will be covered until after you have something done. The insurance co will not even tell you if some procedure for cancer will be covered! I am there right now and have to decide if I can afford to have it done! So don't believe all guvamint employees get great insurance.....

Meezermom59..

I was thinking along the same lines. Lets say a federal worker who cleans the offices occupied by our Congress gets shot in the head while at work.... I seriously doubt that person would receive the same kind of care that Giffords is getting. Am I totally off the mark here? Somehow I don't think so.

I hear you on getting less and less every year -- welcome to what we experience in the private sector all the time. The only way we're going to be able to sustain our country is if government workers receive the same benefits (or lack there of) as the private sector. This means --- more ease in firing/laying off workers, no guaranteed pensions for only a few years of work, retirement plans which are employee funded with only limited matching by the employer, crappy healthcare coverage which is outrageously expensive, working 80 hours a week with limited staff support -- and the list goes on. Also, keeping your job based on merit. When I go to places like the DMV and see the waste and lack of motivation/ambition among people who work there, it drives me absolutely crazy. Those people would be fired immediately in the private sector. Everyone in the government should be concerned about keeping their jobs just like we have to be constantly concerned in the private sector.

laurazz -- I think you have it backwards.

You're saying all of us need to settle for inferior and demeaning conditions. The lowest common denominator.

How about this -- Health care for EVERYBODY who wants it will automatically be provided just because they are an American citizen. If you do your job well, you will keep it -- they can't fire you just because they want someone cheaper. There is a limit on how many hours your employer can require you to work -- no repercussions. We need to address unemployment, so your employer will provide you with adequate staff. And you will have retirement plans that give you true options.

The trade-off?

-- You get public sector pay. (No deal, you say? Well that says something...)

-- Corporations need to behave differently. We need reform of corporate law more than we need education reform. The people who work for them have to matter, and corporations need to be oriented toward the well being of our whole country rather than simply amassing whatever profits they can, at whatever cost to us.

-- And the super rich will have to pay their fair share in taxes, no loopholes, so their pay is maybe 100 times what you make instead of 1000 or 10,000 times what you make.

What do you think?

morrigan,

Sounds good but how did that work out for U.S.S.R?

funny

Hmmm, the super rich are already in the highest tax bracket, meaning they pay MORE than their fair share. Those who are on welfare or have too many kids don't pay their fair share. How can you even consider it "paying" taxes if your refund is bigger than what you paid? Flat or consumption tax is the only "fair" tax. Everyone benefits, everyone should pay.

The super rich pay less than their secretaries Todd. How can you say people on welfare aren't worth as much as anyone else? Considering the type of injuries being discussed in the article would bankrupt anyone but the upper 2% Who should be allowed to survive this type of event? The rich only? You want to whine about socialism or the rich not being treated fairly? There are people dying.

Bobby Jones -- I don't think they had corporations in the USSR, and if they did they sure weren't looking out for the people.

Besides, the USSR wasn't really able to make it work -- "All people are created equal, but some people are more equal than others." Sounds a lot like us, right now. (That's what this article was about.)

And Todd -- these days the super rich are paying the lowest tax rate since 1950.

Think about it. If your yearly income is that high, even a 50% tax would not affect your life very much.

(Hell, even a 90% tax -- even on the lower echelons of the super weathy -- wouldn't leave them paupers. I use Sarah Palin as an example. Her recently reported yearly income was $12 million. If she paid a 90% tax on that she would be left with $1.2 million. For one year. How many Americans do you know who manage to 'get by' on $1.2 million a year?)

Whereas for those of us with ordinary incomes, the amount we pay at our designated percentage rate affects us significantly. Don't you think the tax rates should be adjusted so that they reflect the impact they have on the taxpayer's life?

Byl...that is a lie.

Do some research before you simply regurgitate some tired, old rhetoric and Party Line.

The boss may qualify for more deductions, proportionately than his secretary, but dollar-for-dollar he still pays more taxes.

Ah, once again a white (?), middle class, Liberal female has to pick on poor old Sarah Palin! I couldn't help but note you didn't put forward JOhn Karry as a candidate to give up 90% of his 'acquired' wealth? How about Barbara Streisand? The Kennedy's? Good ol', unsavory Whiskey smuggling fortune there?

All I hear (read) about her on these sites is about how intellectually challenged she is and how poorly she maintains her humanity.

So tell me, morrigan-1568233...since you are obviously a product of a fine American education, at least a top ten grad of your college class I assume and as brilliant as a fine cut diamond, how is it that that stupid piece of Alaskan trailer trash earns $12 mill + and you are only pulling in an "ordinary income..."?

She has been the Governor of the largest state in the Union. I'm sure your resume shows you have at least been president of a prestigious University?

She has a large family and is successfully giving her family the very best of creature and spiritual comforts she is able. I am certain you do at least the same for your family/loved ones.

She is actively involved in a positive campaign to proselytize her beliefs and the benefits of those beliefs as she sees them. Do you do more for your nation and community than just villianize Republicans, Conservatives and Sarah Palin on these "commentary" boards?

It is apropos of the average Liberal's understanding of political realities that you paraphrase Orwell's "Animal Farm; A Fairy Story" when you describe Obama and the Democrat's Health Care Bill ..."all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

She is insurance poor. She has Fed workers comp, her health insurance, and because her husband is active duty military, she has military health care (TRICARE.) People just do not seem to understand how all of this works together. Primary payer, secondary payer, and additional payer with possibly a small co-pay.

JFKDemocrat: well said sir, well said. As I read all these posts about how inadequate our health care is and how the greedy rich need to pay their fair share, all I can think of is JFK's immortal words "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country".

Quite frankly all these people who are supposedly crying out for the welfare of the underpriveledged are really just holding out their own hands. I for one have never held my hand out. I grew up as poor as anybody but I have no complaints and living in America, neither should any of you. You want to change things, then feel free to do something about it. You think we should all pay more taxes then feel free to send the Government an extra check. I'm sure they would take it. But stop your whining already.

Well, JFKDemocrat, I am assuming you are a white middle-class male 'conservative' with credentials not unlike the ones you attribute to me.

I know there is a rule on this board that we are not to vilify one another, and I feel you're being at least a bit snarky here. But I do want to answer your question.

Yes, I have done something that is very important to my nation and my community. I have taught elementary school for close to 40 years. Not a lot of money. But money can't buy the satisfaction of knowing that I have made a positive difference in the lives of my students.

Sure, I'd like to have an income of $12 million a year. And I could get along on $1.2 million a year if they took 90% in taxes. Really. On my middle income salary, I have done what I can to give my family "the very best of creature and spiritual comforts" I am able.

And along literary lines, I heard today a wonderful description of the dominant Republican take on "political realities" (yes, of course from a liberal source) -- they called it "magical realism." Love it.

Morrigan, First let me preface this by saying I have the highest respect for teachers. My wife is a teacher and I know how hard she works and how much of an impact she has on the children she teaches. That said, couple questions for you?

1. on that 40K salary, how much do you actually pay in taxes?

2. How many people have you hired to work for you in your teaching posistion?

We pay somewhere around 30 percent. Occasional small deductions, no loopholes.

If the point of that question was relative amounts, in relative terms we pay peanuts compared to the rich guys. However, there is a saying "to whomever much is given, of him much will be required; and to whom much was entrusted, of him more will be asked." Those who have benefited much from the opportunities that America has offered them can reasonably be asked to 'pay back' in proportion.

The only people I have 'hired' are the people who applied for open positions on my grade level -- I was on the interviewing committee and made recommendations.

My job as a teacher is to provide an education for the children in my classes so that they can become thoughtful and productive citizens. Their job is to work for me (but really for themselves) -- their pay is learning. I do not get to hire them -- as a teacher, you play the hand you're dealt. And I can't fire them if they don't work. As you probably know -- since your wife is a teacher -- every year, you do the best you can with the students you're working with.

Among others, I have taught the head of a major department at an Ivy League medical school, an Assistant District Attorney for a large city, a person who supervises the plumbing maintenance at another Ivy League college, a sprinkling of CEOs, COOs and CFOs, teachers, lawyers, doctors, entrepreneurs, artists, journalists... I am proud of them.

Morrigan, let me first say thank you for your years of dedication as a teacher. I believe there is no nobler profession and that it is one that is grossly underpaid and under valued.

That said, if you are paying 30% taxes on a 40K salary then you really should get somebody else to do your taxes since the maximum federal tax rate for your level of income is only 15%.

The point of my question is this. People who make a lot of money tend to spend a lot of money which creates jobs. For example, I could mow my lawn myself but I prefer to pay a neighborhood boy to do it. If the government were to raise my taxes then I may not be able to give that boy a job and what would I get in return for my raised taxes? Answer, not a thing. My roads would not be any nicer. My military would not be any stronger. Our government seems to treat the American tax payer like their own personal piggy bank and it's apparently not enough to spent every dime they take, they then borrow trillions fomr foreign government and expect me to pay the interest. When washington figures out how they are going to drop spending and come up with a balanced budget then I may consider paying even more than my already considerable tax bill, but not wile there is even the tinest chance that my tax dollars might go to fund some damn museum in another state so a congressman I can't even vote for will get re-elected.

Rhino40, thank you for your kind words about teaching. Kind words for teachers are few and far between these days.

Maybe our family's tax rate is higher because my husband and I pay taxes jointly. He is a retired state employee.

I tend to agree with Paul Krugman and other economists who say that the wealthy do NOT contrbute as much to the strength of the economy as less wealthy people do.

The least wealthy HAVE to spend their money on things they need, thereby pumping whatever money they receive right back into the economy. Middle class people do the same, but they usually also have some discretionary money which they can use as you suggested -- hiring someone to mow their lawn, paint their house, pave their driveway, maybe even remodel the kitchen.

The very wealthy may do those things, too. But the greater part of their money does not go into strengthening the economy. They use it to make more money -- and it is not unusual for them to take it out of the country.

My point in my original post was that someone earning 12 million dollars a year can afford to have his or her taxes go up. The 90% tax rate I used was what I understand the very wealthy were paying back in the 1950's. And I still maintain that getting by on even a paltry 1.2 million dollars a year does not sound like a hardship -- although I would not actually suggest that high a rate.

I would respectfully suggest that if you are earning multiple millions of dollars a year, you probably do not need to worry about having enough to pay the boy who mows your lawn -- even if your taxes do go up. :-)

I suspect, however, that you -- like many of us -- are someplace in the middle. I believe that we need to insist that corporations and the very wealthy should shoulder a tax burden proportional to the burden those of us in the middle have to carry. They should not have loopholes that allow them to pay next to nothing.

That would go a LONG way toward balancing the budget!

Found this in my e-mail this morning. It explains some of what I was trying to say, probably better than I expressed it.

Last year, America’s top thirteen hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1 billion each. One of them took home $5 billion. Much of their income is taxed as capital gains – at 15 percent – due to a tax loophole that Republican members of Congress have steadfastly guarded.

If the earnings of those thirteen hedge-fund managers were taxed as ordinary income, the revenues generated would pay the salaries and benefits of 300,000 teachers. Who is more valuable to our society – thirteen hedge-fund managers or 300,000 teachers? Let’s make the question even simpler. Who is more valuable: One hedge fund manager or one teacher?

I'm pretty sure he meant 'valuable to us as a society.'

I agree the rich should pay more and I think they do to. I believe the evidence is Philanthropy. There are currently 38 US billionaires that pledge to give away at least half of there money. Sure it is a tax deduction. I would rather they pick charities instead of the government getting it.

Reason for public school teacher income being low is an ugly one. Taxpayers period, no matter the system or the rate.

Some people dodge taxes completely even our elected politicians. Even those of us who do pay taxes use every available option we can find to pay less. When a vote comes up in our districts to increase any form tax we almost automatically vote it down.

Add that to the fact that our taxable income and the amount of working tax payers have been going down for years how do districts get the money? Unless I am wrong local districts get there funding through property taxes.

Parents could do a lot more to make teachers lives easier as well.

Reason for public school teacher income being low is an ugly one. Taxpayers period, no matter the system or the rate.

otally disagree....the wages are set based upon the laws of economy.. they pay 'teachers' and everyone else what they are 'worth', i.e. what they are willing to accept to do the job...

If they paid the teachers $1, or some amount that was way below what people thought it was worht, no one would be a teacher... the few that would say, they would do it for teh satisfaction and feelings of accomplishment, etc, are full of it... let them do it for free...

if you paid them double what they are getting paid now, there would be a line thru the roof of applicants...

should teachers get more, yes.. should janitors get more, yes, should cops get more, should mcdonald workers should everyone, yes...but it dont work that way..

employers will pay the least amount they can, and still attract the level of skill they want. if you apy too little, then 'qualified' workers wont line up... as they can get more money elsewhere doing anything else...

How do they not have to comply with OSHA, equal protection and minimum wage?

They make the laws and they exempt themselves from those laws. As to truth I don't know, but there is an email going around that says that they are exempted from the sexual harrassment law.

I only ask that they have to abide by any law they pass. And not be able to get raises by NOT voting against it.

They are not special - even though they think they are. I wish I had their retirement plan instead of mine. Then I could have quit work at 65 instead of still working 5 years later.

No. And it wouldn't happen in Cuba, either.

Sherri you have a source for that?

Sherri great point! Let's all be communist/socialist like Cuba. We won't have any freedom and will risk our lives to escape, but we will all have free 2nd rate medical care available.

Todd, for your information the US is ranked 37th in the world health care rankings and Cuba is 39th. Not too much difference if you ask me.

As to Cuba:

Despite the economic blockade we crippled that country with, followed by the loss of their chief ally and trading partner, all of which resulted in horrible privations of their people, they still manage to have a mortality rate only slightly below ours.

For that, they deserve kudos. It proves that they must be doing something right as regards their health care system.

That is not to say that Cuba is doing EVERYTHING right.

I realize that some people are unable to acknowledge the successes of other nations without feeling threatened by them. That is too bad. Given the alarming downward spiral this country is in, our leaders would be well advised to look hard at other countries who don't suffer from our particular ailments, and see what they do that we might be able to incorporate over here.

It might lead to progression, instead of stagnation.

Thank you teapublicans for stopping health care reform before it got to the people!

Then that makes me one of the priviliged. I have government health care.

This is the greatest country on the face of the planet yet so many face the torture described above by essie. Is this really what we want in America? Why is this still the fate of the working class?

The sad thing is too many people who at this level of society and are at risk of losing everthing if hurt or ill still vote GOP. go figure.

Tired: its because there are voting blocks and voting flocks....take a guess which one they belong to.

Maybe universal healthcare would be more affordable to the US if EVERYONE paid taxes! When only about half of working Americans actually pay federal taxes, it becomes much harder for the federal government to fund things like healthcare.

Pay taxes? Life is so much better when you're on the public dole. Walmart commercial: couple brags that they can save $200 per year cashing payroll, government checks and tax refunds at Walmart. Then they can take their savings and buy a LCD tv! If you can afford an LCD tv you have no business collecting government checks.

If you honestly believe that our elected officials would ever allow that, you are hopelessly naive.

Unfortunately it won't work that way. Universal healthcare will be for the "rest of us". The government will be exempt and still have better care. They have better pensions and other benefits -- so I just don't see a day when they'll wait in line for care like the rest of us.

Fiscal... A girl can dream, can't she? I know... we are all screwed in the end!

Yes, silver, you're right. And it infuriates me that our elected officials keep helping themselves to our money while there are so many people going without.

I feel the same way. I just keep hoping that we are better than that. I keep pushing forward, knowing in my heart that we Americans can do it better.

Fiscal

You're right... The time has come for the government to stop helping (and helping) itself to the money that should be there for the citizens.

The Founders expected the responsibility of the representatives to be a privledge... Not to be privledged. This is something forgotten by our 'royalty'.

You know, like the majority of my fellow Americans, I was pretty dead set against Obamacare... but when I look at the rest of the world, and see a country like Canada, who is able to offer a universal plan to it's citizens and has been doing it for years!! It makes me question why the greatest nation in the world can't do the same for it's citizens?

If we all paid, for example, $25 dollars a month per person (population 312 million 2008 estimate)towards our share of a Universal Plan, the government would collect monthly, at least $7,800,000,000 ($7.8 billion) to pay for healthcare for everyone! I think we all could sacrifice a couple trips a month to Walmart or the Outback Steakhouse, so we all could have AFFORDABLE healthcare available when we need it!

Many like to bring up that you have to wait for care in Canada... So, no care is better than a wait? Really?

We should be able to do better here. Let's not forget that it's the Medical Assc that controls how many doctors will be accepted into Medical School each year.

Silver Sin
Last year we spent 2.5 TRILLION on HC... your 7.8 Billion is only .3% of the total cost...

Some people need to think first!

People in Canada DIE waiting for life saving treatment.

Chip D-2844144

Silver Sin
Last year we spent 2.5 TRILLION on HC... your 7.8 Billion is only .3% of the total cost...

Some people need to think first!

Chip

I don't know if $25 would be enough, but most people pay a lot more than that now but that 2.5 Trillion would go down because everyone would have healthcare so people would be getting preventive care, dealing with issues before they become very bad, not going to the ER for routine care(which is the most expensive care and definately contributed to that 2.5T).

Sorry Andie but your WRONG, long term care is the most expensive portion of our HC bills!

In fact ER visits only make up about 7% of NYS total HC bill, long term care is almost 35%!

Well, as the vast majority of the Federal Debt can be laid at the feet of "conservatives", I believe it is not only "the liberals" who suffer from mental illness.

fiscalconservative: The failure on the part of liberals to accept that fact is indicative of the mental illness they almost universally suffer from.

Well, I'd love to get treatment for my mental illness but...you see... I can't afford it because you republicans shot down the public plan option.

However, the reality is that we do not have unlimited resources.

Unless, of course, those resources are for the military. When the cause is dropping bombs on other people's children, republicans have no problem with big spending. They only object to using tax dollars to save our own children.

Hey,MG,The Republicans did get Prescription Drug Coverage passed for Medicare so you can now get meds for your psychosis

MG - I don't see Obama doing much to change our military involvement throughout the world. It was easy for him to talk big when he wasn't the guy making the decisions. Apparently he got a big dose of reality-whoop a$$ when he got in office.

We need a strong military. And yes, it costs money. Lots of it. This isn't Disney World we're all living in, in case you haven't noticed (Oh that's right, liberals DO think we all live in Disney World. I forgot.)

And nutgrape, seriously? Do a little research on just how much the debt has increased since Obama took office.

I.M.Curious - yes, you're right Bush did get prescription coverage passed - at great expense - and than STUPID LIBERALS actually complain about the spending Bush did.

At what cost to the deficit and national debt? This was one of those unfunded things the republicans touted that added $1 trillion to the national debt.

rag - that's the point. He SHOULDN'T HAVE passed it!!! It was a liberal/progressive handout and he shouldn't have.

But the colossal hypocrisy of liberals who than complain about his spending is just mind-blowing.

fiscalconservative

Seriously, is that the best you can do? Why don't you take the time to do a little research. Pointing your finger and shouting "they did it to", is not a very good response. Especially in light of the vast majority of the debt being a direct result of "conservative" policies.

Don't forget, they call Democrats "tax & spend" for a reason, its what they do. Republicans need to be called "borrow & spend, because its what they do.

Why is it hypocritical for liberals? The "conservatives" lie about their spending.

If you look up the national debt by presidential term on the web, any fool can see the graph going up, up, up starting with Reagan and Bush I, then going down under Clinton, then up, up, straight up, under Bush II. The rise in debt that started with Reagan also coincides with our lower and middle class paychecks and benefits flattening out and going down in relation to cost of living. Trickle down my fanny!

Then we act like idiots when Obama actually cares and tries to enact a little benefit for us average people. Nothing like shooting ourselves in the foot as we swallow the cool-aid the GOP hands out.

nutgrape, I do not have the time to give you a lesson on government spending right now.

But I will point out that YOU did the very thing you accused me of doing. YOU shouted "the vast majority of the federal debt can be laid at the feet of the conservatives" AND "The vast majority of the debt being a direct result of conservative policies" with absolutely not one shred of evidence to back up your claim.

Hypocrite much?

The bill always comes at the end of the 'party'. The two unfunded wars started years ago by the "Spend as you go" GOP are just now coming due. The TARP and the Bailouts are a small fraction of the previous debt carried over from DUH... and the TARP may make a profit.

The care for our Vets is still not funded. Replacement cost for Mil. equipment, still not funded. It will take decades to recover from the mis-management of the previous regime.

Medicare Part D is the biggest farce on the face of the earth. Those of you who don't think so obviously have not had the joyful experience of trying to deal with it. Furthermore, if you do not sign up for the POS as soon as you are eligible, you are punished financially by being charged a 1% increase in your premium if you DO ever sign up. Of course, you are also punished if you REALLY need the coverage by the donut hole, where you not only get no coverage but are forced to pay pharmaceutical company-set prices for brand name drugs....no less expensive generics for you....which for many simply means no meds....until they feel that you have been sufficiently cowed that you will not ask the hard questions like, say, "What moron thought this was a good idea?"

That was nothing more or less than a good press moment for Bush that meant nothing to the folks who are supposedly being helped by it except yet another lesson regarding just how worthless their lives are to the Republican Party.

Retired RN - my parents ARE on Medicare and DO use Medicare Part D. And it's paying for some very expensive cancer medication for my dad. I'm sure there are lots of people just like my dad who are very glad to have it.

But I still didn't support this program being implemented without a way to pay for it. It's too costly to the taxpayers. And perhaps the cost of some of those medications would go down if the pharmaceutical companies couldn't rely on medicare to pay thousands of dollars a month for one presecription.

"Among the 11 health plans, the federal employee share of monthly premiums ranges from a low of $55.58 per month to a high of $354.08 per month. These premiums compare with Medicare Part A hospital insurance and Medicare Part B doctors' and outpatient services. But, they also include prescription drug coverage. Medicare Part B premiums in 2002 are $54 per month. Most Medicare beneficiaries pay nothing for Medicare Part A, but most supplement Medicare, and pay additional premiums for Medigap policies."

Fiscal, wait until they hit the donut hole and their meds are suddenly out of their reach. Are you prepared to support their care until their Part D kicks back in? Are you OK with them going without for the remainder of the year because they have hit the black hole and don't have the money to spend to get themselves out of it? And remember that this is individual, not one amount for both of them.

Oh, and for those of you who are depending on being able to supplement their Medicare with a Medigap policy, you had better hope that nothing happens to you prior to your eligibility by age to Medicare. The premiums are astronomical if you are.

As for the pharmaceutical companies charging outrageously, Bush built that ability into the Part D plan for them.

fiscalconservative

Go to the Treasuries website and you can look up the Federal debt by date to the penny. You will notice the dramatic increases all come when the country is under Republican control.

While there, you can also look up the yearly deficit both by the dollar amount and as a percentage of GDP. You will notice that in both categories it grows under Republicans and usually shrinks, at least by GDP%, under Democrats.

Now tell me again how you don't have time to give me a lesson.

PS perhaps you should look up the definition of hypocrite before you attempt to use it in a sentence.

retired RN - they hit the "donut hole" already. No big deal. They have money. They worked hard, didn't live beyond their means and did the responsible thing and bought enough insurance, etc. So I don't HAVE to support them.

See what being responsible does for a family?

And nutgrape - here's a little lesson for you - the President doesn't hold the purse strings. CONGRESS does. And there has been a democratically controlled congress for the last 3 1/2 years. The years that our national debt has increased over $5 TRILLION dollars since Pelosi vowed "no new deficit spending."

Oops. I'm sorry, make that over FOUR YEARS that the democrats have been controlling congress and astronomically increasing our debt.

fiscalconservative We need a strong military. And yes, it costs money. Lots of it.

Of course! Like I said -- republicans have no problem at all with big spending as long as it involves killing. But....health care for American children? Nope. Can't afford that.

What an absolutely pathetic worldview.

Will it still be a "pathetic worldview" when we are left defenseless by gutless liberal apologists who would hand this country over to enemies of democracy on a silver platter?

In my view, what's pathetic is someone who buries their head in the sand, refuses to see reality and refuses to act like a grown-up, refuses to be responsible for themselves and whines all the time about how "mean" conservatives are.

A strong military doesn't mean invading and occupying other countries, policing the world, telling other countries not to do x, y, and z but then when it is convenient for us, doing the same as we tell them not to.

Also, with regard to the Medicare Part D coverage it sucks. Did you know that to get to the donut hole . . . it's not what you spend out of pocket nor is it what the gov't spends for the meds it is the entire amount (isn't that a crock) also as someone mentioned before the law specifically doesn't allow for medicare to negotiate to get lower prices on pharmaceuticals like other insurance companies can. This plan was a give away to big Pharma not a needed help to seniors.

Retired RN-439841
I can find no late fee for joining Part D at a later date. Part B does charge you if you do not take it when you become eligible. You really should pay more attention to what info you put out as those that do not know will believe you.

Yes, there is one. I am over 65 and still working, so I have insurance from work for my husband and myself. But I get a letter every year from the insurance company verifying that we have comparable drug coverage. If we didn't have the comparable coverage, we would have to pay the penalty when I retire next year. This is per my insurance company.

fiscalconservative, what I find pathetic is the utterly naive belief that we're going to spread democracy or make the world safer by invading other countries and starting wars. We are now widely perceived as an imperialistic bully and this perception is a powerful motivation for many countries to do everything they can to obtain nuclear weapons as quickly as possible and at all costs.

The notion that we're going to successfully combat terrorism by starting wars and slaughtering untold thousands of people is absurd on its face. Terrorism springs from hate. It's bizarre to suggest that we're going to somehow improve that by wars that -- as wars always do -- involve the wholesale slaughter of thousands of innocent people. What we conveniently dismiss as "collateral damage" is someone's child, wife, mother, or daddy. The family will then hate us FOREVER.

I, for one, don't want to be the world's policeman. It's certainly not the vision of America that our founding fathers believed in. Most of them were VERY wary of getting our country involved in foreign entanglements like that. More than 200 years later, their wisdom still shines through. The only way democracy will ever spread to the middle east (or anywhere) is if the people want it. And history tells us that, if the people truly demand freedom for themselves, they don't need a foreign power to start bombing them to force them to take it.

Amen, brother!

Amen

Who's going to pay for it? Right after The Health Care Plan was passed, over 200 huge companies, including Mc Donalds contacted Congress and said that if they were forced to pay premiums for that kind of coverage, it would bankrupt them. What did Obama do??? Gave them all an exemption. So if Mc Donalds would go bankrupt, who do you think could afford it? It's illogical. Even Canada says Universal Health care doesn't work well....and they would know.

When the health care bill is the same for the government employees as for the people who pay for it, I'll be in favor. Today, if it isn't good enough for our employees, it shouldn't be good enough for us. Or might we say until they stop thinking they can endlessly dip into our pockets, their health insurance shouldn't be acceptable to those of us who pay for it. Either way, it can't work when those paying aren't entitled to equal treatment.

Did you miss the part that says most of these people are already on govt health care?? You all want a single payer system, but medicaid and Medicare (single payer) are failing these people just as bad!

Todds.... you have it right.

LOL,then explain why for 40 years under Democratic Congresses they never enacted a Prescription Drug Plan for Medicare?Bush and his Republican Congress got that accomplished.

Another unfunded socialist entitlement for seniors...tax cuts and new spending, so easy even a republican can do it.

AMEN!!

No tcable, the Democrats have NOT been trying to "make things better", they've only been buying constituents with handouts paid for with other people's money.

Liberals keep clamoring for things like "redistribution of wealth." Well, there aren't enough truly wealthy people in the country to pay for all the stuff liberals want, so the government has to constantly ratchet down the definition of who is "wealthy."

So right now, according to the feds, anyone who earns more than $200,000 a year is 'wealthy."

Except that even Obama doesn't really believe that. He SAID that the $175,000 a year Robert Gibbs was getting paid as the press secretary was a "modest salary."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2011/01/president_obama_robert_gibbs_a.html

So, what, another $25,000 a year and you suddenly go from "modest salary" to "wealthy"? Obama and his merry band of thieves are nothing but humongous hypocrites.

And "wealth redistribution" is just another word for stealing from the middle class to give away to the poor. The very wealthiest are ALWAYS protected by BOTH parties.

Why is it hypocritical for liberals? The "conservatives" lie about their spending.

If you look up the national debt by presidential term on the web, any fool can see the graph going up, up, up starting with Reagan and Bush I, then going down under Clinton, then up, up, straight up, under Bush II. The rise in debt that started with Reagan also coincides with our lower and middle class paychecks and benefits flattening out and going down in relation to cost of living. Trickle down my fanny!

Then we act like idiots when Obama actually cares and tries to enact a little benefit for us average people. Nothing like shooting ourselves in the foot as we swallow the cool-aid the GOP hands out.

So, in other words, Amy, you're perfectly FINE with stealing from the middle class.

Republicans and "Big Money"?

What would you describe as Democrats and the Banking Industry helping write the Bank and Financial Institution Reform legislation?

How about the Democrats and the Insurance Industry 'helping' with that little thing called Obamacare?

Is that still republicans and "Big Money"?

To paraphrase: "I love the smell of hypocrites in the morning".

Tom-355574 ...I'm sure the Poor ,Homeless, and Hungry would want no part of Obama..

She is being treated like an employee, she was injured on the job and her employer.... tax payers are taking care of her... the same your employer would if you were injured on the job... its not her fault her compensation is better... if you don't like it do something about it other than run your gums. And as far as children getting a 10 second spot on the news when something happens to them.... what a load of crap I have seen multiple follow up stories when children are harmed.... put your pitty fiddle away and get real.

The political parties both claim the other is to blame, so we dont realize that BOTH parties are to blame, because they really are different only at the margin.

We fight among ourselves, Dem vs GOP, so we dont realize that all in DC are corrupt and are in fact the problem.

Bill, that's EXACTLY why the tea party came into being. Liberals like to think it was all about them, but it's really more about true conservatives being tired of the RINOs in the republican party.

But the voters can't get complacent. They need to constantly be contacting their representatives and telling them what they expect from them - including that they need to STOP enriching themselves at the expense of the taxpayers. And if they don't hear us, the voters need to keep voting them out until they do.

Why did Obama invite the wealthy,well to do and well fed to a super bowl party instead of the poor,homeless and hungry?

Because the poor, homeless and hungry can't do anything to get Obama re-elected, and that's all ANY politician cares about. What can YOU do for ME?

Scott

No one is saying she is getting more than what her 'employer' granted her... It's just that her 'employer', the US Tax Payers, is no longer willing to take it in the shorts anymore.

We no longer want to be treated like the Serbs of old Russia. The royalty has been taking too much too long, mis-managing too long.

The 'employer' is tired of the employees (Senators, Representatives, Appointees, etc) dictating salary and benifits for themselves.

Whining and crying on a message board does nothing to change anything. It will never change, politicians have been the same way since this country was founded and a democracy was established, it hasn't changed and it won't change... get used to it.

Do you think if we rioted in the streets here, the media would cover it ?

Would the government allow the media to cover it?

Protests in Egypt are headline news; while anti-war protests here are ignored.

Well, if you treat the average politician as just an ordinary "Joe", then you run the real possibility of getting imprisoned or shot.

That is a realistic reason why the average, well informed, American doesn't treat national level politicians just like an average "Joe".

LOL! Try to get a Federal Judge to admit Section C part 861 of the Tax Code into evidence or that he has even read or studied the section C 861 portion of the Individual Tax laws.

THAT "treating a Federal [Judge] like and ordinary Joe" will get you imprisoned for contempt of court.

Tri-Care Prime is not free. It is, in fact, A purchased healthcare contracted and managed by one of four contractors depending upon the area you live in. Tricare starndard is what most fall under. If you wonder about the care our vets are receiving, please ask the next GI you meet with that incurred injuries from an IED or a well placed shot from his enemy. I am sure they have an opinion. It is easy to sit and complain about a problem, but the a person that is truly concerned will rise up and take action. Are you still sitting on your hands?

My son is able and willing to talk about the problems of Federal Health care. His Military injuries and the care he has received from the Federal Health Care system have not made him a devotee of either a Federal Health Care or Insurance Program.

He is medically discharged and due to patient loads and Dr. shortages, he is not well taken care of. He often defers his place in line or at appointments to those worse injured or with fewer or no other options for a private physician.

He signed a contract when he enlisted that included a GI Bill Education Clause. When the Democrat controlled Congress sensed a lessening of public support for our wars and coincidentally, our troops, Congress gutted that GI Education portion of his contract.

Ask a returned or returning Vet what he thinks of the 'new' Gi Bill education benefits and you just may get an earful.

Often lately, I am more ashamed of my party than proud.

Have any Democrats made the statement ?

How many Tea Party Candidates have pledged to reform our system of patronage and favoritism?

Quite simply, they will suffer the same fate as many Democrats and Republicans have this past election if they do not "walk the talk" to which they committed during their campaigns.

A lot of my fellow Democrats as well as most Republicans make the mistake of thinking the Tea Party candidates are simply New Republicans. It appears the Republican Institution is also making the same mistake.

I think the next Congressional election will find many of both parties out the door for their past voting records and actions. The Tea Party went to Congress on the Republican ticket as there was no other, viable, vehicle for the journey.

The Republicans seem to think they have co-opted the Tea Party, but I wouldn't bet the next House or Senate Majority on that assumption.

Yes but they do not and that is why they really have no idea how to fix what is broken about this system. They never have to experience it for themselves.

Johnny - wish that could happen. In the mean time I haven't heard anyone addressing the $20 aspirin tablets or the $25 icepacks or the extreme wages of hospital CEOs and other administrators and doctors. Shareholders who need to be paid behind a hospital is another problem.

Each day I wake up healthy I feel grateful. When I get sick it's crash and burn. If I had to pay for insurance my utilities would be shut off and my other small bills won't get paid. That's life. Them's who's got SIX or EIGHT mansions, cars, servants, etc live a heck of a lifestyle while others like me live at the edge. Internet is my BIG luxury.

There's a problem with our system. It didn't get this way overnight and probably won't be solved any time soon. In fact, read some old TIME magazines from the mid-fifties - ALL THE PROBLEMS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME!! Only the names and dates are different. Politicians talk talk talk; unfortunately nothing much gets actually DONE.

I have news for you slick.Under obama Care you'll still have a deductible so you'd still owe 3000.Did you honestly think you'd not have to pay anything except a monthly premium.You must be smoking some really good sheet,buddy!

intexas - you have a $3000 hospital bill you're wondering how you're going to pay for? So, what, you expect EVERYONE ELSE to pay for it?!? Why shouldn't YOU be responsible for it?

That right there is the kind of attitude that is destroying the country. No one should have to be responsible for anything any more. The goverment should just take care of everyone. We're doomed.

"EVERYONE ELSE" is paying for excellent health care for Congressional members, why not the rest of us? Why not?

The idea of people helping people is NOT going to --excuse me--DESTROY the country! I don't think you really even believe that, you're just angry on some level and talking crazy. And no I'm not talking about relieving people of responsibility, I'm talking about HELPING those who need it.

If your heart is too crusted over to help people who genuinely need it, there's no point talking to you anyway.

Why is it hypocritical for liberals? The "conservatives" lie about their spending.

If you look up the national debt by presidential term on the web, any fool can see the graph going up, up, up starting with Reagan and Bush I, then going down under Clinton, then up, up, straight up, under Bush II. The rise in debt that started with Reagan also coincides with our lower and middle class paychecks and benefits flattening out and going down in relation to cost of living. Trickle down my fanny!

Then we act like idiots when Obama actually cares and tries to enact a little benefit for us average people. Nothing like shooting ourselves in the foot as we swallow the cool-aid the GOP hands out.

Tao, in order to give to one person, you have to be taking from someone else. What is so hard to understand about that?

It's crazy for people like you to believe there are endless pots of money. It's NOT crazy for me to not want my family to go bankrupt in order to pay for YOUR medical bills etc. And my family is being taxed to death. We are at our limit. I am NOT willing to pay one more thin red dime for any more government handouts.

My question to you is, when are people finally taxed high enough to satisfy people like you? Because my family is ALREADY paying far more than our fair share. Enough!!!

TaoMokoda-There is a big difference in the cost of paying for Gov. officials healthcare, and paying for everyone in America. Seriously???

@ intexas, I have news for you, you are not alone. A vast majority of people in this country have that same problem. I am paying on around $40,000 worth of medical bills from my wife two unexpected surgeries from last year and we had good health care coverage. To go on top of that I will be having a surgery of my own in about three weeks. On top of putting our two kids through school and a house and cars and insurance and food and gas and so on and so on. Life is a constant struggle for us all. I know you will be ok. Just send them as much as you can on the bill every month. As long as you are making an attempt to pay you are good to go.

Intexas: Funny, you demand that Republicans pass a healthcare plan that they can live with and make it apply to themselves yet the Democrats did pass a healthcare plan and made sure they were EXEMPT from it. So if Obamacare is so great then why did they specifically EXEMPT THEMSELVES from it? That fact alone is a red flag to me.

Second, if you think Obamacare is bringing to the American people what Congress gets in health benefits you are sadly mistaken. Their plans are very expensive (and administered by a PRIVATE insurance provider, by the way) and this country couldn't possibly borrow enough money to give every American that level of coverage and follow through with it. The fact is that under Obamacare, there will be one healthcare system for them and one for us and when the blinders are removed and we see what we are really going to get for our money we will be greatly disappointed.

As long as govt can raid the taxpayer's money there will ALWAYS be an elite group of privledged govt workers.

Please read the article and understand the difference between WORKERS COMPENSATION and PRIVATE INSURANCE. They are totally different beasts.

Ms. Giffords' care is being paid through WORKERS COMPENSATION since it was an injury received ON THE JOB...not private insurance. The youngman in the article injury was NOT JOB RELATED and only coveralble under private insurance, out of pocket, or through Medicaid.

Therefore, the situations are totally different. Had he been injured on the job he would have been covered under Workers Compensation and have been afforded the same type of access to treatment that Ms Giffords has for her injury.

If you've ever dealt with worker's compensation, you'd know that your employer would balk at having to treat your injury and would find someway to find you negligent. You'd have to hire a lawyer who might be successful, might not. No, your average worker would not receive this level of care under a workers' compensation plan.

sad to say, not even our soldiers who are also doing jobs on behalf of the country, get the kind of care given to Mrs. Giffords. They are typically dumped in veterans' hospitals, which have been ghastly.

Yep, my mom has FEHBP, too. Dad was a civilian working for the Air Force. Never a problem with it. They do not have Medicare.

We, on the other hand have no insurance, pay everything out of pocket. Neither of our employers offer any benefit compensation (or very little). It's too expensive for us due to past history of cancer, and stroke. (Also, no "go to ER, they won't charge you" either. That's a fallacy.)

I would gladly pay my share to get reasonable and good health insurance so I could have the "best health care in the world" when I needed it.

Unfortunately, most people wouldn't gladly pay for it. The rates are astronomical when it comes to a premium plan, and people don't have that kind of money. So, we either go broke covering everyone, or stick with the privatized mess we have now.

You don't have to choose a premium plan. I have a $10K deductible and it's affordable. If I didn't have that I would have lost everything when my wife had cancer. My two sister-in-laws have catastrophic coverage only, it's all they can afford. Their deductible is in the $100k.

When the law takes effect, you will pick what works for you.

The problem is most people will go broke trying to pay for health care. The costs are outrageous and I believe they are inflated. Your average working person cannot afford premiums, deductibles if their family has a member who has a condition. You'd have to claim bankruptcy and then go on medicaid.

A $100K deductible is ridiculous. A public option would have provided reasonable care for those who could not get a group plan on a job, and with nearly 10% unemployed that means people do not have reasonable access to health care.

Of course, you can say, "tough, let them die then." But they will go to the hospital for treatment and they'll get it, including illegal immigrants. And that means that you'll pay for it with higher and higher premiums or your job will eventually have to decline offering health care and set you loose on your own.

Nobody should feel secure about their health care arrangement...only our elected officials are certain they'll get the best care that money can buy.

Amen!! Make it affordable and I'll happily buy into it! Being self employed, it is next to impossible to find affordable quality healthcare. The last time I got a quote a few years ago for a family of four it was going to cost over $1100 a month... plus we would still have to pay a copay for every visit, which would be limited to 3 doctor visits a year per person, after which they would have to be approved by the insurance company. I told the dude pitching his plan, "What's the use of paying $1100 a month for his insurance if you can't use it!!" The kicker for me was this affordable plan had a deductible of $5000 that would have to be paid before they would even begin to cover any costs.

It's hard to justify this cost... when you see it will take at least 25% of your yearly income to pay for this... That doesn't leave much to live on after paying Uncle Sam as well, let alone trying to save for the $5000 yearly deductible if something drastic should happen to one of us...

AMEN!!!

People who make any payments to a healthcare provider should be given an equivalent tax credit to offset the annual cost. Fair because the poor and unemployed can apply for hand-outs the way they always do. But those of us who still work should be helped just like deadbeats are.

Why do you want government health care. look at facts:

medicare, medicad, and social security are all bankrupt (and they where made specificly to last after the baby boom.)

there's 1K's of dollars in fees if you chose to exercise your freedom not to have health care thru the government (thought it was unconstitutional to be forced to do a activity against your will)

the money you save in health care is taken out in taxes (cant get lower costs of care without diminishing the care)

no country has a government plan that really works ask any Communist country(oh wait you cant ask them they will have another sort of punishment for standing against it.)

i can go on but i doubt your read this.

Are you so dense that you can't even absorb the massive data on just how bad the US health care system is? Cuba and Albania are more successful in some respects. We can't come close to western Europe or Canada! The only reason medicare has financial problems is, it's always been treated as a pot of found money by a greed-driven system which lacks moral and ethical standards found in other countries. The solution is to remove the entire industry from the private, profit driven sector, which doesn't seem to run things all that well these days, and let the government set compensation and price levels. That's what's being done in other nations, and that's why government run health care is so successful.

Oooh yeah, AndiM! Let the Government run things as we all know and I am sure this board is replete with those who can write at length concerning just how much better is the Federal Government at running and administering complex institutions such as the National Health Care System.

I know that the US Federal Government is sure doing a fine job with the whole food safety thing, aren't they?

And how about all those Drug safety programs and a whole agency to administer tand certify that the drugs and medications intended for your children are the best they can be and not at all influenced by either influence peddlers or corruption!

Since the Congress and White House allowed the Medical/Insurance lobbyists to write the Obama Health Care Bill, why do you think they would not be hiring the same, so-called 'experts' from the Health Care Industry to run that government agency?

After all, they are the experts, right?

Contrary to what you think, American food safety is actually pretty good, and in world rankings is much better than our antiquated, patchwork, screwball "health system".

Government workers insurance plans are quite good. Mysteriously, the private sector feels that regular folks just aren't worth it. That isn't a fault of government-which by some people's logic has no business stopping insurance from dealing terrible packages to people.

Her husband is active duty Navy so she has TriCare Health coverage for military spouses anyway.

Hear, Hear! It is absurd that members of Congress get lifetime healthcard and pension after serving a few years. Congress should be subject to the same policies as THEIR EMPLOYERS. If and when they have put in sufficient time, then they should be funded with pension according to a vesting schedule, as is done in the private sector.