Speaker of the House, Pelosi

"I heard the candidate in Massachusetts, the Republican candidate, say, 'Let's go back to the drawing board,'" she continued. "The drawing board for the Republican Party on health care is to tear it up and throw it away, and shred it and never revisit it. This is the opportunity of a generation. If this opportunity is not realized, there won't be health care for all Americans."

Uh, this is the people of Massachusetts and the United States who are saying this. Are you not listening. By all means let us revisit this and make it right, with transparency and without the special favors to the elite few.

J,

Can PELOSI be removed from office on the basis that SHE is UNHINGED?

"Mass. election could unhinge health care"

Thank God!

Pelosi isn't unhinged, she's just proving she is a radical. Saul Alinski would be proud. "When failure is evident, accelerate."

For the first time in my life I donated to a political campaign. I am not rich, but I sent Brown a check for $20. Mass's health care is a state example of what will happen on a national level. Some of you may know that it is over 80% over budget and not working as promised.

Anyone who thinks the national health care will work as advertised or budgeted, is a fool.

Best wishes for Brown to save Mass, and the nation.

No, something is better than nothing is simply more Democratic stupidity. If something is worth doing do it right. Any meaningful Health Care legislation must begin with TORT REFORM to bring down costs.

From the beginning, B.O. completely ruled out Tort Reform because so much of his support comes from the trial lawyers. Tort Reform will enable doctors, hospitals and other care givers to do their jobs with less unnecessary tests and procedures. What doctors pay for malpractice insurance is obscene.

B.O. does not want to face this.......the trial lawyers are his money. The Obamacare is simply BAD LEGISLATION, filled with corrupt deals.

The word is that Turnout is light in the cities, heavy in the suburbs. The guess of the election turnout mix.

1)Independents

2) Republicans

3) Democrats

Florida

lmk02They also know the out come of the Mass. Election before they know what will happen!!! Could it be because they fixed that election like They did Texas & Forida???

Here ya go. A little food for thought on that subject courtesy of the Wall Street Journal:

One out of four Massachusetts voters think ACORN will try to steal the election.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703837004575013111682315540.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion

Apparently it isn't the Republicans that people are worried about.

Ink02,

You and you're lunatic statements just turn up all over the place. Thats like me saying that Obama is really a muslim mole, here to destroy our country under the guise of a raical liberal...no, wait, I have said that

I think we really need to fix health care, and it doesn't come from making backroom deals to appease the Democratic support base (unions, etc).

Hopefully the Republicans can succeed in fixing our broken health care system, because the Democrats clearly did not.

lmk, prove it. Otherwise it is YOU who is lying like the Nazi's. Just comparing Republicans representing 70% of the country's current view on this bill to Nazi's shows you're getting desperate for talking points. You don't even know what this bill has in it and are calling others liars? The Republicans are telling you what ISN'T in it. Of course they know what's NOT in it. Obama told us already. I can see your confusion though. Republicans repeating what Obama said and you think they're lying.

And the whole "something is better than nothing" statement the article quotes is political lying at it's finest. If it were better, they Congressmen would include themselves in the plan. For them, current is better than proposed.

Rodney - your are a great American.

lnk02 - pull out the Obama-IV-Drip and think for yourself. No, wait, I have a better idea; watch for those balck helicopters on the horizon. They have a special message just for you. They'll be arriving any minute now.

lmk02

I saw today in front of the Post Office today... The Nazi Republicans feeding Their lies just like Hitler did in Germany about the Jewish People & Gypsy... The only difference is they are lying about the Democrats & the Poor & Middle People instead!!! They know before the Democrats what the Health Plan will be... They also know the out come of the Mass. Election before they know what will happen!!! Could it be because they fixed that election like They did Texas & Forida???

Okay I had to correct someone on another thread about Nazism...

Drexler proposed that the party be named the German-Socialist Workers Party, but Harrer objected to using the term "socialist" in the name, the issue was settled by removing the term from the name, and it was agreed that the party was named the German Workers' Party (Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, DAP).^[11] To ease concerns among potential middle-class nationalist supporters, Drexler made clear that unlike Marxists, the party supported middle-class citizens, and that the party's socialist policy was meant to give social welfare to German citizens deemed part of the Aryan race.^[9] They became one of many völkisch movements that existed in Germany at the time. Like other völkisch groups, the DAP advocated the belief that Germany should become a unified "national community" (Volksgemeinschaft) rather than a society divided along class and party lines.

So, you see the founding tenets of the Nazi Party do not fall in line with the Republican Party and it's ideals of being self-sufficient, no government involvement and personal responsibility.

Meanwhile, the Democratic party fits like a glove following the very ideals that created the Nazi Party movement.

Therfore; you are the Nazi.

Oh, you all think the Republicans are GOING to fix our healthcare. They had 8 years....and did diddly.

Something is better than nothing. Social Security and Medicare both were amended over the years to a better program. No one can deny that we can do this with healthcare, but you have to START SOMEWHERE.

Note to Republican supporters: HOW about participating instead only dissing???

Nitwit, the socialists won't unlock the door to their transparent negotiations.

"That would force Obama and Democratic leaders to consider a series of wrenching short cuts involving escalating political risk" Short cuts are not the way to run this country...tooo many back room deals are selling this country out as it is...yet congress still claims how good it is for us...when actually it is good for them along...along with wall street of course. It is time for some honest, if possible, up front work to be done...however I do have my doubts that we have an elected that can actually do the jobs they were elected to do...they have lived with back room deals for so long it is the norm for them all.

The country was behind health care reform; until the politicians gave the duty to write the bill to the lunatic fringe; any one that still supports this legislation has not read the two versions; it is unreal,unconstitutional,unaffordable and unwise, in its present form. Health care reform yes, this legislation no.

Hey Dumocrates did it ever occur to you that two things that scare people about the Health Insurance Reform? bill is that for the first time we are being socialist FORCING people to pay for insurance that they cannot afford and by doing so basically giving insurance companies more control on the rates (look at what happened when car insurance became manditory). Another thing I don't think any of you can say everything that is in the bill let alone explain it to us. Think, read, explain don't expect us to follow like sheep, the fact that you had to make questionable deals with some senators to get it through makes one wonder if it is good for us.

Days before the vote, White House advisers and other Democrats in Washington began making excuses for they called a poorly run campaign on Coakley's part.

Of course. The political SNOBS in Washington are so egotestical and out of touch. It can't be because of YOU.

The Democrats are in trouble in November regardless of the outcome of this special election!! The fact that a "legacy" seat is in play in Massachusetts shows that. I certainly hope Scott Brown wins but even if Coakley squeaks out a victory November is gonna be a bad month to be a Democrat, barring some economic miracle that can be proven to be due to the "Tax and Spend" policies of the Democrats!!

It never ceases to amaze me how arragant obama , peolsi, reid frank and their thugs are. It will be interesting to see what they do if Brown wins the Mass. elections. Way to go Massachusetts!!!!!!!!!

Did you all hear what the ignorant MSNBC's Ed Schultz said on his radio show? He wishes he could vote in the Mass. election 10 times. He would if he could [he said]. He stated he would cheat to keep "those bastards" out.

A CLOSE eye MUST be kept on this one! ACORN will be shipping people in...but pets & dead folks do not qualify to vote, remember.

You weren't hearing President Pelosi say we will pass the bill like it is then, we WILL pass this health care, REGARDLESS of the Mass outcome, man they had better be packed for November, Pelosi wont be returning, nor Dodd, Reid, and many others. Buh Bye! You all called Bush arrogant, wow that's truly the pot calling the kettle!

Lets, see, you prepare a 2,000 page bill no one gets to read, you shut the Republicans out completely, you negotiate with the dems who are not in favor of it behind closed doors and you vote on it at 1 AM. And they want us to trust them? That's like trusting a known robber with the keys to the cash register. And yes, Pelosi is unhinged.

It's over and the good guys won!! Now watch the Democrats squirm as they get ready for another beating in November!! Congratulations Scott Brown!! Thank you Massachusetts!!

S T E A K - N I G H T

"There is much work to do to address the problems Democrats inherited last year, and we plan to move full speed ahead." Nice comment Harry but the FACT remains YOU'VE HAD CONTROL OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE FOR THREE YEARS NOT ONE!!! To try and blame all of our troubles on "W" alone is a perfect example of why you guys got your a$$es kicked in one of the most liberal states in the nation!! Obviously the good people of Massachusetts weren't buying the "blame everything on Bush" BULL$H*T today!!

When will the goddamn Democrats get the message?

Americans obviously don't like the health bill. So stop trying to push it on us.

And when will the goddamn Republicans stop being so self-centered and start thinking about other people?

"Democrats think the glass is half full. Republicans think the glass is theirs."

Well, just what will Mrs. Speaker of the House, and her cronies, cook up to get the President;s MANDATED UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE BILL rammed through prior to the swearing in of "SENATOR BROWN" ???

It is time the Democrats woke up and realize that the voters in Massachusetts are the tip of the iceberg for dismantling the failed legislation of this Administration and the majority controlled House and Senate.

Who is going to be next to have the President STOMP FOR THEM ???

the liberals will never get respect because they do not promote self sufficiency. it is really all based on non-whites claiming and coveting the white man's money. really...that is it.

and then you people cry about the USA not paying for Mexico's health insurance. and then cry about amnesty with 17% USA citizen unemployment. i mean, come on...no wonder you lost MA after 50 years of Kennedy's.

Let's put the responsibility for the "Death nell" for the healthcare deform at the feet of where it truly belongs: Obama. He has ignored double digit unemployment; over 3 million foreclosures; strong-armed Nelson and bribed other politicians such as Landry with hundreds of millions in tax dollars. All the while, polls indicate that over 70% of Americans do NOT want their closed-door head gathering (of Pelosi, Reid & Obama) of this monstrosity of a healthcare bill that even the 2nd highest ranking Democrat knew nothing of it's content......

I believe that Obama is either a megalomaniac who is so grandiose he feels that there is no accountability for his actions whatsoever, or he is more mentally ill than just the narcissism we have seen. Either way, he is a horrible president and not good for this country.

One can only hope that this will kill the Nazi's takeover of healthcare. We want less Govt. intrusion into our lives, not more! Why is that is so difficult to understand?

If tonight’s upset in Massachusetts is any indication of what’s going to happen in the 2010 mid-term elections Obama and the country should be relieved to know that like Bill Clinton in 1994, Obama will be able to coast to a balanced budget with Republicans doing all the heavy lifting while he takes all the credit.

Brown win could be death knell for Democrat's health care bill?

I'm on the left and I say, GOOD.

It's a foul Frankenstein of a bill that is mainly designed to gut Medicare and deliver 32 million americans into the money sucking embrace of the insurance corporations.

It's not about providing quality health care to ALL Americans it's about lowering the cost of health care for corporations and bailing out the insurance industry.

Brown is a shallow, fraud and a corporate puppet but if he wins and knocks out the Health care bill he will unintentionally do a big favor for most Americans.

Once again Mass. fires "The shot heard around the world"(or at least across America), lets hope revolution follows once again. Way to go Mass. and Brown!

Healthcare reform undid itself---too many things the public didn't like or want---too many backroom deals----and above all else the Dem majority pushing it down our throats. All we have is the power of the vote. For me, it's not over until Nov. and we get our house in order. We need a rebalancing and I believe the country is center--right, not left at all. Mass. voters have spoken. Now, it's time for the rest of us. Here in Pa., I believe Specter is fini and I'd like to see Casey go with him. We'll be getting a new Gov. We still have things to do.

Democrats, start getting tough. Start getting mean. Put on the gloves and hit 'em back harder. If you have any doubts about the greatness of the Democratic cause, or the utter abomination of the Republican cause, simply look across the aisle at Sarah Palin and remove all doubts from your minds. You are a champ, you are lean and mean and built to win, and they are nothing. You are the best. Now, go back in the ring and hit 'em harder.

Reading the article just shows how evil and twisted these politicians are. They do not take into consideration the wish of voters at all. Just ignore that Mass. voters said your agenda is garbage. You are going to force your looting agenda down our throats anyway?

Pass legislation that hands trillions over to big business and special interest groups while taking away the individuals right of choice. These people are without a doubt criminals.

I like what happened in Mass., but it's nothing more than the first shot fired. A battle won. A war yet to be decided. Do you figure the Dems will just throw their hands up in the air and say it's over? BO and company have said nothing changes. It's still a go as far as they're concerned. It'll take far more than one defeat to send the message home. Nov. is coming. We can't relent and say "Well, we showed them". We need to finish the job. The lesson learned here is we're far better off with a balance in government than either party having a large majority. 100% social medicine may come, but not this hodge podge of garbage they're trying to push through.

This is the most depressing news I've heard since the last Diebold-stolen election. Today I am ashamed to be from Massachusetts. And yes, I voted against the monstrous republican party.

I believe that the health care issue was a major factor in Scott Brown's win. But as was said earlier in this thread, and last night when I was watching the news, Americans are a center-right nation with 40%+ conservative, 29% liberal/progressive and 31% independent/moderate. To win an election you need to win over the conservatives and the independent/moderates most of the time. Obama won and the dems got control because the republicans forgot middle America, trying to out democrat the democrats with their pitiful attempts to buy votes.

America has seen the failings of the progressive movement and shot it down last night in Mass. We do not need a group of elitists in Washingtoon micromanaging our lives, telling us that they know what's best for us. A majority of Americans have voiced their dislike of this health care fiasco, and their voices were ignored by the crazed progressives in the Senate and House which led to Scott Brown's victory. It is funny, how politicians can think they are better than the rest of us, and it is refreshing to see Mass. lob a cannon ball across the progressives bow. It has been almost 50 years since Mass. had a republican Senator, and it is hopefully a reality check for Pelosi and Reid to know that their house of cards (all jokers) is falling down. America needs to remember last night this fall and continue to "clean House"! Congratulations and Thanks to Massachusetts!

Now is the time for Washingtoon to wake up and do the bidding of the people! Reform health care! But fix what is wrong with the current system (something the republicans were shouted down in congress for attempting) do not start from scratch, screwing people to buy the support of special interests. By the way, I am a 27+ year union member, and even I was not brainwashed by the BS of my leadership and the clowns in Washingtoon.

Rep Patrick Kennedy said that it is easier to pass something and fix it later. He seems to think that he was elected to have it easy. No we don’t want you to just pass something; if you pass something it should be right. The only special interest that should be considered is the public. Make no deals if it is not right don’t pass it. Don’t have bills that are so long that you don’t read it and so complicated that you can’t understand it. Don’t try to hide pork in it, if you want to study why water is wet that should be a separate bill. I’m sure that you have been sent many copies of the Constitution try reading one of them. You work for us and we can fire you.

There was never any intention of doing anything about health care anyway.

I hope the issue just goes away. I'm sad for the millions of people who won't get health care, but they certainly weren't going to get it anyway under the bills being considered.

I'm all for genuine health care reform just as I'm all for genuine environmental protection. That said I can't support bills that do nothing to slow the ever rising costs of health care or energy and as usual the liberal answers will cause more harm than good. I hope both parties get together and figure out real solutions to all our pressing issues, the first of which should be JOBS!!! None of the other issues can be solved if there is no money coming in. I hope Scott Brown listens to the people that elected him and does what is in their (and our) best interest. If not I'm sure the people of Massachusetts will be happy to show him the way out after one term.

Best wishes for Brown to save Mass, and the nation.

"Save" the nation? You've got to be joking. So it seems you've a 'messiah' of your own.

The Republicans got their way, as usual, and the rest of us will suffer. Expect absolutely nothing to get done by this Congress, now. At least the Dems were TRYING. The Republicans are more concerned with seeing OUR President fail at everything he proposes than the citizens of this country. I hope you understand that failure to get anything passed does not necessarily ensure the Republicans will be back in 'power' - however, should they gain back their 'power' (which is all they want) be prepared. Be careful what you wish for.

BTW - Brown will be up for reelection in 2012.

Thank you MA voters, you saved our country! The tide is turning, we'll wrench our country back from the destroying grip of the liberals and their socialist agendas.

I certainly hope so!

This could be the end of this health care abomination but if so, it would not entirely be the win by Brown in Mass that caused it but more likely by the showing of the people’s disgust at the polls.

Those in congress now see what awaits them in their home states/districts.

Not that I am a big proponent of the current health care bills in front of the Senate or the House, I would prefer a health care similar to Canada, but the majority of USA citizens did NOT place their vote against the current bills.....Massachusetts did.

Someone explain how that extrapolates into a "national" plebiscite? Again in general, I vote very conservative (I do not buy into "party" platforms either), yet our health care system is out of control and NOT a freemarket industry. Otherwise the industry would not be exempt from anti-trust laws and we would have the option of the cheapest bidder. As it is now less than 59% of the population has access to employer offered/supported health care. Tell me what will happen when it is less than 50%....do you not think there will be a backlash? Especially when pre-existing conditions and bankruptcy will be the reality for the majority of the citizens when faced with health issues. What about pharmaceuticals? The pundits keep spouting that we need our current system of inflated, protected pricing to accommodate research and development, did you know that the USA generates less than 3% of the "new" drugs that have come on the market? Germany and Switzerland dominate in "new" drug development by a long shot, and OUR market is the one paying for that, not the majority of the rest of the world.

They've been working on Olympia Snowe to get her to crossover again and give them that 60th vote. It isn't over yet. Brown or no Brown, they figure they can get Snowe to vote for it and they'll push it through anyway. So, there it is.

As usual the thread is dominated by either 1) political party hack types who support the idea of no government except for wars and the rich; 2)people who go against their own interests and/or the interests of the whole of Americans, such as health care for all 3)insurance company executives, etc., 4) neo-con non- carers of humanity and those who support Crimes Against Peace and "wars"; 5) Those in the government, or connected thereto who live off the government now and are "Socialized" already.

The government is the biggest SOCIALIST out there. Their pensions and benefits are breaking the taxpayers' backs,(50% to 70% in the 30 plus taxes, licenses, fees, hidden charges, etc. that we are burdened with) and you see Brown as a "savior". He's another "republicannot" who doesn't care for the common person and is immediately part of the problem. "Republicannots" didn't give a crap when Bush was spending right and left, they passed everything, and the "democrapps" wimped out on everything and joined all these terrible legislations that brought this economy to its knees by allowing the rich to rob us by speculating with supposedly people's own savings and and with commodities without taking control of same, i.e., oil, which left the "rich" and politically connected super and extremely and super greedily well off and the "middle class" and common people as dead as they could do.

"CEO'S" going into corporations, firing workers, selling assets, exporting jobs and demanding outrageous "pay" for making the "corporation" "healthy', which it then was not, except for those "rich" multi nationalists who were involved.

Massachusetts has universal health care for it's citizens and in this day and age, they give a sh-- about paying for the rest of the country.

The "democrappy" party is so wimpy and bought out that even with a majority everywhere, they haven't and can't seem to get a decent health care bill passed

Yet with the government in some areas having as much as 70%% OF OUR BACKBREAKING "TAXES" "supporting a budget for criminal pensions and health benefits for it's own wretched "government" selves, THAT'S 70% - you all are talking about it as if the middle class and the common people are sucking the treasury dry - THEY ARE PAYING FOR IT. "Healthcare" premiums are wretched for individuals, and unpayble; yet you all are arguing against single-payer (or any health care for all) as if it's bad when it would cover every individual in America. All I can imagine is that you're insane to the situation. "Government" having criminal pensions, expanding everywhere, passing legislation for the "rich" and super greedy piglets, having total and complete health care for themselves, and EVERY DECENT AND INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD having universal health care, and you argue for this "wretched" "government" that doesn't represent the interests of the people at all.

So spread your nightmare ideas on on these threads with your ideas of "less" government for the common person, because we have little to nothing for these monstrous and backbreaking "taxes" we pay now; the government puts the old "communist party members" to shame with there greed, self-serving, and helping themserlves to become super greedily rich, with connections to making millions if they ever can be pried from their supported and funded by the fat-cats positions. Support these cretins except when they could do something for all the humanity in the U.S. of A by passing health care for all with little problem for the budget COMPARED TO WHAT THEY NOW SPEND ANNUALLY FOR THEIR OWN GREED AND THE GREED OF OTHERS and let's bring this country down more. SOCIALISM FOR THE RICH AND POLITICIANS, CAPITALISM FOR THE COMMON PERSON TAXED TO DEATH.

It was the Scott heard 'round the world!! I'm glad the people of Massachusetts sent D.C. a strong message that the people are tired of business as usual !! I hope that the message is heard but if not I suspect we'll be repeating it as a nation starting with the primary process and continuing with the mid-term general election!!! I hope there are lots of new faces in a year for both parties as D.C. needs an enema from the career politicians!!

This is a piece of illegal work crafted in back rooms with nothing but special interest in mind and a agenda for taking control of one sixth of the American economy. It was fraud at it's best and it was perpetrated by a congressional party bent on deciet and intent on breaking any and all constitutional law no matter how loudly the voters and taxpayers protested, even showing up in person at the capitol in mass did little to sway this group of criminals from the pupose of lying, breaking the laws and defrauding the tax payers. They are still at it and there is every reason to run these folks out on a rail and then tar and feather them, I am confident they will regret this plot to take power from the people at any cost.

"There is only one guarantee — that if we don't pass something the notion of trying to put Humpty Dumpty together again is a real long shot," said Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., son of the late senator. "If you understand the legislative process, it's a lot easier to pass something and fix it later."

This statement is a prime example of what is wrong with Washington politics today. Their don't worry about doing it right the first time, just pass something while you can. Then you can spend the next 30 years or more trying to fix what you screwed up in the first place. I guess this is their idea of job security? I wonder how long Ford would last if they did business this way? Just mass produce the cars and worry about quality control later? Perhaps let the consumer be the test subjects. This seems to be congress's mindset at present.

This 1/6 of our economy is on a fast track to becoming 1/3 of our economy in a decade or so. That means another 14% of everything we earn as a country will be spent on healthcare, on top of the 16% we spend now.

One thing Pelosi spoke truly about is that if this does not get done, it will not be revisited voluntarily by republicans.

What do you think we should do about it Madison?

And when? Because if healthcare spending is left unchecked it WILL bankrupt the economy. Can you afford to spend 30% of what you earn on healthcare alone?

Clarke,

Obamacare RAISES PREMIUMS on the middle class VERSES NO OBAMACARE especially on YOUNG WORKERS.

It does the OPPOSITE of what you claim needs to be done.

Answer?

Write some legislation that cuts costs like tort reform, competition across State lines, permitting foreign drug imports and cleaning up Medicare and Medicaid waste. Doesn't cost a cent out of pocket and will do a lot to achieve the goals we all want.

Discuss it openly.

If it is worthwhile it will pass WITHOUT payoffs, bribes, threats and backroom deals.

Or there will be voter backlash.

Simple. Doesn't take 2,000 plus pages, new Federal Agencies, $trillions in taxes and losses of freedom.

Clarke the Obama Health Care IS healthcare by the Insurance companies. Coakley's last fundraiser was in Washington DC Jan 12, 2010, and was all Big Pharma and Big Health Care Insurance.

Simply put. They are telling you they are reigning in Big Health, while instead they reign in YOU.

And you believe that left to their own devices the republican party will voluntarily take up the cause of getting spending under control while at the same time increasing access to all Americans?

Has the past been any indicator that they will?

Madison - that is not really true... Most reports do indicate a cost savings from this health care reform. You are also missing some of the point.

Some young people may have to pay higher premiums, but that's compared to no premiums and no coverage so if the point is getting the uninsured insured, the uninsured would pay into the system. You didn't want a "socialized" health care system but you want people to may less (or none for it). that makes no sense.

People also seem to want something for nothing - it is naive to think that a health care overhaul would cost nothing. I guess you believe the system is fine, and paying more than any other country while still leaving a huge number of people without coverage makes sense...

Maybe we don't deserve reform. Maybe poor people don't deserve food or shelter or the chance for their kids to get educated...

I don't really believe that, but if that's the way things go - it's everyones fault. I don't love the health care reform bill, but it's a start. The GOP won't do anything and has offered no ideas to the contrary

Competition across state lines is a states issue anyway. States regulate insurance. There are several states that recently had this on a ballot and it was defeated. If you are an advocate of states rights, you would oppose mandatory competition across state lines.

Isn't republican philosophy a states rights philosophy?

That being said, I will agree if minimum standards are set at the federal level, leaving states the right to supercede those standards.

minimum standards are set at the federal level, leaving states the right to supercede those standards

That sounds like something U'd read in a 29CFR 1910.

Clarke, how can you defend a proposal that puts some Americans above others? e.g.

1. Union vs. no-union

2. Pay offs for Nebraska, Louisiana, etc

3. One that has no tort reform because Trial Attorneys contribute so much to the dems, etc., etc...

No Clark people like you are the problem. So desperate to pass anything you will pass something that makes the situation worse. Have the courage to say the emperor is not wearing any clothes.

No Rodney, people like you and I are not the problem.

The 2 percent will do anything so that They can keep being Rich off the Rest of The Country!!!

you obviously have no concept of economics

Clarke, interstate commerce which would allow companies to sell insurance across state lines is controlled by the feds, not the individual states.

Any party that is slow in bringing health care issues to the forefront will in fact be looked upon in a negative light. That will force both major parties to sit down across from each other and work toward a common goal. You won't see much progress toward this end until after the mid term elections, the democrats will not want to bring this up in either the senate or the house for fear of reminding the voting public of what they tried to do.

clarke ong

And you believe that left to their own devices the republican party will voluntarily take up the cause of getting spending under control while at the same time increasing access to all Americans?

Has the past been any indicator that they will?

Absolutely. The Democrats have shot the plans down to do just that 3 times since 1980. Those who read only liberal news don't know this though and are subject to believing only spoon fed information.

July 2009 - Empowering Patients First Act
June 2009 - Health Care Freedom Plan
May 2009 - Patients Choice Act of 2009
So on & so forth all the way back to 1992 http://www.google.com/search?q=republican+health+care+history&hl=en&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=BxBWS9POO5PUNfWknYoJ&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=13&ved=0CCkQ5wIwDA

TJM

The Maine House of Representatives has rejected a proposal to allow out-of-state health insurers to sell individual policies in Maine.

Supporters of LD 290, An Act to Allow Maine Residents to Buy Health Insurance From Out-of-State Insurers, offered the bill as an effort to expand residents’ health insurance options.

“All this bill is doing is offering people a choice,” said Rep. L. Gary Knight (R-Livermore Falls) on the floor of the House before the bill was defeated by an 82-63 vote. “We have a monopolistic situation now.”

It would be subject to interstate commerce laws, but the federal government does not disallow it. It is a states rights issue alone.

Colorado had a similar bill defeated recently.

This 1/6 of our economy is on a fast track to becoming 1/3 of our economy in a decade or so. That means another 14% of everything we earn as a country will be spent on healthcare, on top of the 16% we spend now.

It is definitely on the fast track, since the current Administration/Congress is unwilling to admit and recognize that legislation as it stands and future legislation (cap and trade, energey requirements, mandatory insurance et al) are going to kill anything that could conceivably add to the GDP as a percentage.

TAKING OVER WHAT?

There has NEVER been a plan to socialize or take over the industry of medical services, never was.

More lies and misinformation to politize this issue instead of actually dealing with the problems.

Madison - Please stop complaining about the length of the Health Care Legislation. No matter what party proposes legislation of this nature, the legislation has to be comprehensive to address the several agencies, private insurers, medical providers, citizens....you name it.... that are affected by such sweeping legislation. For example, in 2003, President Bush signed Public Law 108-73, MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG, IMPROVEMENT, AND MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2003. This 2,066 page $400 million bill over 10 years affected 40 million seniors on Medicare and Medicaid. (Retrieved, Jan 19, 2010; http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/public-affairs/hsa/pdf/pl108-173.pdf)

My real hope is that the legislation passes. Even if Massachusetts elects a Republican Brown. Then I want see the Republicans and Democrats get to work reforming the reformed Health Care.

The argument about Health Care has been polarized by negativity from the Republicans from the beginning. Not unexpected - it is part of the party's belief in less government. So less government, and less entitlement programs. But many Republican initiatives have been included in this Health Care legislation. Certainly there are going to be more disagreements about tort reform, abortion, illegal aliens, 'death-panels', etc.

My Republican Senators (Crapo, and Rische, Idaho) have never responded with a letter providing a Republican Health Care proposal. Senator Crapo specifically has replied in 6 different replies like this: "In my weekly travels through Idaho, I have had the opportunity to listen to my fellow Idahoans' ideas and concerns regarding our nation's health care system. In doing so, I have heard overwhelming opposition from Idahoans regarding the prospect of the federal government further encroaching upon their lives. They continually express their distrust of a government plan, losing their existing coverage, and paying more money for an inadequate health plan." (Letter from Senator Crapo, Jan 14, 2010). I have never received a response from either Senator with a comprehensive proposal - like Senator Bacus proposed in his White Paper in June 2009. The point is we can all find fault with any legislation that is proposed because it does not meet the needs or desires of a group of special interest. However to be in the political game as the Republicans have stated in many cases - they are for Health Care Reform. If Republicans are truly for Health Care Reform, why have there been no bills submitted to the House or Senate since President Nixon stated in his State of the Union address in 1974 “The time is at hand this year to bring comprehensive, high quality health care within the reach of every American.” Nixon’s own past experience with poverty and family illness made this a personal issue for the President. (Retrieved from suite101.com; Jan 19, 2010; http://modern-us-history.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_nixonkennedy_healthcare_plan

In short, I want serious issues resolved by our elected officials. The deal making and filibusters are part of the political process. Health Care Reform is a serious issue that needs immediate resolution.

Years ago these politicians could run all their 'scams,' bribes, etc & we the people were unaware....NOW it's hard to hide this crap from 'we the people'!

The House will just pass the Senate bill on a majority vote and the President will sign it.

THANK YOU MASSACHUSETTS! And, may this trend continue all the way to California! Especially California-as we, the people need to clean out Corrupt Hill!

AF Chief -

Is it okay if I complain about the length of your post?

clark, the problem is that the bill was a shame. obimbo didn't want to reform healthcare, hell he didn't even want torte reform. he wanted to transform the white man's money to the blacks and hispanics via free health insurance for them...but less services and more fees for whites. that's legislative racism. call it what you want.

listen, i never had a slave and don't feel the need to pay for anybody's anything. you can't use the same ole guilt trip either...it is funny.

JQ 12261891 - Complain all you want - comprehensive responses with references take more time and space than opinionated comments without basis. I will not subscribe to the mindless 142 character responses.

I can't believe you actually counted the number of characters in my post; now, did you include the spaces, because I think it is only fair to include the spaces. Afterall, I did have to hit the space bar for those.

There is a reason people have a problem with needlessly superfluous bills; they have a habit of containing hidden earmarks and dubious policies. Long/burdensome bills are Machiavellian by nature; notwithstanding the fact that the length of a particular bill does not make it more virtuous. A good bill should be concise and direct, otherwise we may wind up paying for the construction of a turtle tunnel under an interstate in Florida.

I'm just thankful all current versions of the health care reform bills will just go away.

They are all a joke anyway, with no intention of helping anyone in the first place.

AF Chief, excellent post!

How are things going in Mountain Home?

Roger

Can you explain how the economy can be dealt with outside of healthcare reform? It is 16% of our GDP now, and will be 30% in a decade or so.

clarke

In the 1960's, before government got "involved" in HC, we spent 5.3% of GDP on HC. Since the governments involvement, HC costs have risen faster than any section of our economy. The government now spends near 58% of every dollar that is spent on HC. Now, I ask you, how good have they been at controlling costs for the last 50 years? Now please explain to me, what makes you think these current legislators will improve on that?

Clarke - the HMO was formally established by federal in 1973. The Bill was Co-Authored by Sen. Kennedy. That is when health care costs began to accelerate. History is more than just the few years you have been told about.

So what is your answer to expanding access to all Americans? Or, does "deserve" come into the equation?

And again, I ask how to deal with the economy outside of healthcare reform?

You want to make it political DB? Nixon was the one to really push for this, it's on the whitehouse tapes. I believe you have probably heard them.

clarke ong, you'd have a legitimate argument..... if this healthcare bill actually did something to fix it. Healthcare costs as a percentage of GDP will only keep going up regardless of the Dem healthcare legislation.

dcisshovelready,

health care is very different and costly for a number of reasons, do you want life expectancies to go back to that time - do you want all those other people to die of cancer? let's turn back the clock to an even more simple time, who needs the germ theory of disease?

The health care reform in the 60's that the government is involved with has always been half pregnant because of GOP objections - we have a messy health care system with private, government and employer contributions and socialized medicine, etc... if it were the same for everyone it would be cheaper... that's how other countries do it

What about the insurance exchange, where buyers could look at each company and the companies had to take on all comers? Would that be an incentive for private companies to sell a better product at a better rate?

This WILL cut costs.

clarke ong

So what is your answer to expanding access to all Americans? Or, does "deserve" come into the equation?

You're changing the argument now. You were concerned about healthcare costs before and now you're talking about expanding coverage to all Americans. I feel covering all Americans would be an ideal situation. However, it's not realistic. If healthcare is a right, then why isn't eating? If you don't eat you die. My groceries should be provided to me by the US Government!

And again, I ask how to deal with the economy outside of healthcare reform?

And again... I ask you what the current legislation will do to IMPROVE this?

What about the insurance exchange, where buyers could look at each company and the companies had to take on all comers?

And all "comers" were mandated to do so by law.

Can you say PRICE FIXING?

clarke,

What about the insurance exchange, where buyers could look at each company and the companies had to take on all comers? Would that be an incentive for private companies to sell a better product at a better rate?

The problem is, and will continue to be under the proposed HCR, that Health Care Insurance companies are not free to operate and offer products and services to the consumer. They are a state sanctioned monopoly operated in a state-regulated environment.

Nothing good can come to the consumer when you have Big Business in bed with Big Government. This was precisely the problem with the Ma' Bell telephone company...you essentially had a state-regulated and approved monopoly. Prior to the breakup of Ma' Bell and deregulation of the phone industry, service, product offerings and innovation were terrible or non-existent!

If you turn Health Care into a state run utility (as this legislation aims to do), you will destroy quality, service and access.

Real healthcare reform starts with actually creating a competitive environment for companies to operate in and giving consumers the financial incentives to participate in that environment. That is the only way to drive down costs , improve access and foster innovation.

They are both part of the equation. Getting all americans insured is a step towards cost reduction because it spreads risk over a larger amount of people., lets people set appointments with a general care practioner as opposed to costly emergency room visits, frees up emergency rooms to do what they are designed for, etc.

Power

A National insurance exchange does precisely that. It is by far the best route that doesn't involve direct government involvement in the insurance business (public option) to create competition among insurance companies.

Its a great idea.

Clarke,

They are both part of the equation. Getting all americans insured is a step towards cost reduction because it spreads risk over a larger amount of people.

The economic problem with the "individual mandate" approach is that the Government is highly inefficient at establishing and transmitting price signals. As you can see from the current horse-trading that has occurred, special interest groups have been able to carve out loopholes for themselves and thus thwart the "market" established by the Government.

At what price (cost, tax, whatever) do you set the payment for non-compliance with the mandate?

Right now, most healthcare economists say it is set too low. That even at 2% of your income for non-compliance, it is cheaper for a healthy young person to pay the "fine" rather than buy the insurance. Thus, the healthy person will still wait until they are sick or hurt, then use the healthcare system.

What's your solution? Turn them away at the Emergency room and say too bad?

You see, that's why the Government can't run the insurance business, it is too inefficient at price setting. Real free-markets are instantaneous in their price signals and THAT IS WHAT DRIVES DOWN COSTS.

Clarke,

You're not listening. Health Insurance as a government run utility will not work. It is not a free market.

Do you really think in a National or State exchange that any insurance company will be allowed to offer products and services?

Do you really think that State and National politicians will set up an exchange and allow it to run without political intervention on behalf of special interests?

Do you think insurance companies will simply go to an exchange and take a "come what may" attitude or do you think they'll call up their local politician and have lunch with them to discuss their needs?

The hand writing is already on the wall. Look at what the Unions did with the Cadillac tax? They fought it and the politicians caved like paper bags. Under the latest variation, Union workers now are exempt from paying a tax on their "excessive" benefits...and white-collar workers who have a similar level of coverage, oh well, too bad...

Again Clarke, only truly free markets can establish and transmit price signals without interference because it is impossible for a single politician or special interest group to influence millions of consumers.

How is setting up an exchange equating to the government running the insurance business? Now, about the fines. True that it may be cheaper to pay the fines than buy insurance, but that is still money coming in that wasn't before.

Describe what a "real free-market" for insurance would look like. And has the "free-market" done what you claim it would up till now? Remember, interstate competition is a state's rights issue at the present. Any state that wants to allow it's citizens to buy across state lines is free to do so, there is no federal law against it. Yet the republican congress is for dismantling the states right to regulate insurance in that state.

The Democrats can't afford to lose that... Because if they do... This Country will go further back wards than We are now!!! The Health Plan is just a start to getting This Country back to The People...

Clarke,

How is setting up an exchange equating to the government running the insurance business?

You need to stop taking ideas out of their context. In the current legislation, the proposed Exchanges are mired in Government regulations and bureaucratic panels that will decide which companies will be allowed in, what policies they will be allowed to offer AND, now stay with me here, WHAT PRICES THEY WILL BE ALLOWED TO CHARGE AND WHAT PERCENTAGE PROFITS THEY WILL BE ALLOWED TO MAKE.

That last part, about the Government setting an administrative fee to take any profits over X% and give it back to the consumer (which I highly doubt will happen in practice. I'm certain the Government will find a way of taking those funds and using them for other purposes), was the subject of an excellent Constitutional review by a Chicago law professor. In his analysis, which is based on Supreme Court precedence, it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the government to set a limit on a private companies profits gained from asset-related investments (precisely what an insurance company does with your premiums) when that company is forced to operate in a Government-regulated market.

So NO, the exchanges being proposed are far far from free.

And has the "free-market" done what you claim it would up till now?

The answer is yes. One example is the telephone market. I'm not sure when you were born so you may want to go read the history books on this (I lived through it), prior to deregulation you telephone service was a Government sanctioned monopoly as a regulated utility. Ma' Bell was her name and her prices, service and offerings were terrible -

1. People almost NEVER made long distance calls because the charges associated with them were astronomical,

2. If you wanted a phone with one of those shoulder cradles on it, you had to call up the phone company and schedule them to come in and install it because, get this, the phone company LEGALLY owned your telephone and it was considered their equipment.

3. Prices for phone service were expensive and customer service was terrible.

Enter deregulation and the breakup of Ma' Bell....you now have your choice of almost any phone carrier you want, prices reflect market demands and only got cheaper, cell phones were invented and, after enough time, became incredibly cheap, you can talk over the internet, etc., etc.

If the phone system was still operated as a Government run utility/monopoly, none of the above innovations or cost controls would ever have come to existence because Ma' Bell would have had them killed.

As for State's rights and interstate commerce, once insurance is allowed to be purchased across State boundaries, it becomes a matter of interstate commerce and it is regulated at the Federal level. Current laws that prohibit inter-State sale of insurance are a political fabrication of the Government created by politicians so that States could regulate and tax the companies. The notion that it is being done to protect the consumer is complete BS.

So now let me ask you the same question. On what basis do you believe the Federal Government is able to create and regulate a market so that consumers have choice, access and the lowest available prices?

Who broke up Ma Bell? In that light, who is responsible for the proliferation of reasonably priced phone services?

Government intervention into predatory practices cause the proliferation of reasonably priced and technologically advanced phone service.

Government intervention into the medical insurance industry will accomplish the same thing.

Nice twist with the government sanctioned/government run thing. Not at all the same or necessarily even related.

The fact is that Government intervention is what brought real competition about in the telecommunications industry.

Since when does free market equal autonomous market? Do you believe freedom can operate outside of a system of controls. Doesn't real freedom truly exist only in a framework of controls?

Free Market and Autonomous Market are not synonymous.

And you misinform with your statement that government panels will decide which companies can participate, and that their premium rates will be dictated. Those are false statements. They ARE considering setting a profit/expense ratio. All insurers will be required to offer a particular guaranteed set of minimum benefits, including guaranteed issue and not be able to charge a person more on the basis of a pre-existing condition.

All insurers will be part of the exchange. This will GUARANTEE competition. How is it that you cannot see this?

Government intervention into predatory practices cause the proliferation of reasonably priced and technologically advanced phone service.

Honestly Clarke, I can do without the snarky comments. You know full well that the Ma' Bell was DEREGULATED....ie, the Government got out of the phone business.

It was done under the Regan Administration.

So yes, you seem to agree then that if reasonably priced and innovative products and services are desired, THEN THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD GET OUT OF THE BUSINESS OF SANCTIONING MONOPOLIES AND EXCESSIVELY REGULATING MARKETS (as it does now with the current health care system).

Thanks for letting me convince you of the folly of your ways.....now run along and go vote for Scott Brown.

clarke --

A good starting point would be for the federal goverment to pass only REGULATIONS to correct our current HC system. It would cost the American people nothing and cost saving would be huge.

1) Tort Reform -- I do not mean tort reform as it only applies to medical malpractice either. These multi-million dollar payout for so-called "pain and suffering" are just an antithema to what our justice system should be.

2) Interstate Competition -- I am a state's rights advocate, but this is a national issue. Breaking down the fifedoms that currently exist would force the insurance companies to have to become more efficient and have to work to get new customers. There are currently 1300 HC insurance companies in the US -- let them have to compete with each other.

3)Minimum Coverage -- Have the government regulate what the minimum coverage will include, and this should be the coverage that a healthy person should have. Then have ala carte options that can be added -- cancer, major medical, mental, etc, at the consumers request.

4)Pre-existing Conditions and Recission(sp?) -- Make those practices illegal

5) International Drug Sales -- I will agree to this ONLY if the US drug manufactures are given proper protections for their patents. The US is currently having to pay for the R&D of drugs that save people worldwide. That is wrong and needs to be changed.

If we start with common sense regulations like those above we can reduce the cost of our healthcare, which is something that neither the House or Senate bills currently do. Then in a few years the system can be tweaked further.

Government intervention, that FORCED a free market - not stifled it.

The HCR bill does the exact opposite.

How so Prag?

Wizard,

4)Pre-existing Conditions and Recission(sp?) -- Make those practices illegal

I take exception to this. While recission (cancelling a policy when someone gets sick) is an appalling practice and should be outlawed, using pre-existing conditions is actuarially necessary for any insurance company.

Listen, Insurance Companies are just that, they sell insurance. One part of the insurance process is adjusting the price of coverage to take into account the risk involved.

If you have 4 DUI's on your driving record, don't you think it is right for an auto insurance company to charge you more for a policy or deny you coverage?

With Healthcare, there has to be a nuance between what is bad personal choices (like smoking or being over weight) and what are uncontrolled factors (like cancer, people don't choose to get cancer). Once can imagine a rational policy for differentiating bewteen the two while protecting a patients privacy at the same time.

However, to ask an insurer to cover a person regardless of what the counter party brings to the table, is not a viable solution.

Wizard

I agree with everything you posted.

Basic minimum standards through a federal insurance exchange will guarantee competition. The exchange effectively is the same as interstate competition.

using pre-existing conditions is actuarially necessary for any insurance company.

I was not saying that someone with a pre-existing condition should not be charged more, common sense says that they should pay additional if they change insurance companies. They should not be DENIED cover age just because they have a pre-existing condition, that is what I was getting at.

Power

How can a pre-existing condition be defined to be self-imposed or not? Too many grey areas for litigation there, too many exploitable loopholes.

Clarke and Wizard, first cost will be impacted and driven down by tort reform and by competition. When they allow insurance to be shopped and purchased from different states, the competitive forces of the market place will drive cost down. Second, allow drugs to be brought in from less expensive countries, that will also reduce the cost of medical treatment.

Lastly, in order to address the issue of pre-existing conditions, make insurance portable, you take it from job to job with you, and into retirement.

Wizard,

Thanks for the clarification.

Clarke,

I'm not going to write a policy paper on the Newsvine regarding the classification of pre-existing conditions. With thought and input from all sides, they are possible to define, classify and amend as needed and it can be based, as any health policy should be, on evidence-based medicine. It's already done to this day in the actuarial tables and all insurance companies have multipliers that they add to policies for these factors. Part of sensible regulation would be for the Government to work with insurance companies to set reasonable standards.

To simply say we're going to ignore the root cause of all pre-existing conditions and force insurance companies to take any and all applicants with no adjustment in price, is absurd in it's simplicity and ignores the fundamental idea of what insurance is.

If you want the Government to simply provide health care with no thought about the underlying fundamentals of what personal health is, then the only option is a payroll tax along the lines of Medicaid/Medicare and the government sets up a single-payer system....highly unlikely....

As for loopholes, the legislation proposed thus far has more holes than a block of swiss cheese...

clarke ong

Getting all americans insured is a step towards cost reduction because it spreads risk over a larger amount of people.

How is forcing individuals with pre-existing conditions to purchase health care and become part of the overall cost going to lower prices? The law of averages says otherwise. ESPECIALLY when you throw in those who can't afford it as well and have everyone else cover their costs too.

In it's simplest form using theoretical #s for an example:
$150 current cost average
$450 theoretical cost of pre-existing
$150 additional cost spread amongs 60% of the country - about $80 extra

So you would go from an average of $150 to an average of $340. All #'s are theoretical. Could be higher, could be lower, but it's a guarantee that covering the uninsured on top of your current bill + pre-existing conditions averaged into it is going to be much higher, not lower.

What we NEED is to address the steaming piece of lead in the wound that is health care costs rather than throw a $500 band-aid over the wound and spread the cost of the band-aid around.

Wizard

I agree with everything you posted.

Basic minimum standards through a federal insurance exchange will guarantee competition. The exchange effectively is the same as interstate competition.

clarke --

This is where you and I differ. If this truely is a IC issue then regulate is as such, and from my standpoint it is. I see no point in creating another government agency to do insurance exchanges.

Bring the insurance comptrollers from each state to a meeting and hammer out what the minimum requirements will be for a healthy individual and make that the standard for the nation. Then break the imposed monopolies and let the consumer choose what they want and need for coverage.

Less government intervention, more choice, lower costs and retained freedoms.

Sounds good to me

I'll agree. I really don't see much practical difference though. Sure, regulate basics at the national level and leave states to supercede if they want. Similar to environmental standards.

As long as it eventually leads to all americans having a shot at affordable healthcare, I really don't care what mechanisms are used.

But you're really only talking about a federal program being administered through the states. As for me again, I don't care what its called, I just want it done and to work.

If Obama, Pelosi, and Reid try something tricky to over ride the outcome in Massachusets, then what happened there will be nothing to what will happen in November. Democrats in centrist districts or states; look over your shoulder and watch what's coming at you. You messed with the wrong people.

A lot of pre-existing conditions would be eliminated if your health insurance was tied to you instead of your employment. You lose your job, you lose your insurance. With a pre-existing condition some employers cannot put you on their insurance plan, nor can you get on a plan of your own easily.

great!! now send all of the mexicans back to mexico...clean out CA. clean house america. YES we can...get rid of obama d o u c h e b a g.

Clarke -

This thread's probably dead, and the other posters pretty much gave all the answers I would have given.

Basically, adding a layer of government in between the consumer and the insurance companies via the exchanges just adds another layer of unnecessary cost.

Reregulate, as others have detailed, and let the market forces work. They DO work, when the government lets them and gets the hell out of the way.

The exchanges are the government telling us they know best, and as the good people of MA said loud and clear yesterday on behalf of the rest of us, We The People aren't buying that horsecrap.

The Democrats and Obama better hope they're listening.

The other aspect of this is as follows:

NOTHING IS PERFECT. It never will be, and the utopian expectation on the part of too many Democrats and liberals is that somehow it can be GUARANTEED that everyone has something, that everything will be equal and no one will EVER slip between the cracks. People will ALWAYS slip between the cracks, it is unavoidable and flinging mountains of cash at a problem does not solve it. The public education system in this country, the disaster that it has become, is a monumental testament to the fact that you can lead a horse to water, but you CANNOT make them drink.

Case in point: Approximately 6 million of the currently uninsured are ALREADY eligible for an existing government program, and just aren't enrolled.

....what's with me and horses today.

dcisshovelready,

In the 1960's, before government got "involved" in HC, we spent 5.3% of GDP on HC. Since the governments involvement,

This is a false statement as the government really got started by allowing tax-free insurance from employers to employees from 1939 - 1945 as by government edict, wage freezes were imposed. On January 19, 1946, Harry Truman stood in front of Congress and forecast the culmination of what has now happened to our "worst" in world health care delivery system (it might be best for a small portion of our society, but not for the majority). Congress ignored him and listened instead to the lobbyists of big business voting to not only allow the status quo for having an employer based system to help "keep the cattle in the pens" so to speak, but also allowing an exemption of anti-trust laws to the insurance providers. Based on this, our only "non" profit insurance providers, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, eventually turned to being "public" for profit companies. So based on these two criteria the ball started rolling down hill with companies using the carrot of the benefit of insurance to retain employees, but having the force in numbers to get a "better" deal and insurance companies manipulating pricing to maximize profits by increasing rates over those not covered by employers. Then again in 1955 almost 85% (actually looked it up, 91% of employers offered it)of the population worked for companies that had employee insurance. Moving to today, what is it at last count, I believe the forecast for 2010 is around 52% of employers sponsoring a health care plan and let's not even get into what percentage is paid for by the employer. As our nation grows more and more to small businesses and individual employment it is inevitable that this percentage will decrease. Oh yea, at one time, 1929, the Dallas teachers association started the first "group" insurance (non profit of course) and one of the caveats was that they had to offer it to ALL at the same cost, irrelevant as to "pre existing" conditions. The pre-existing and rescission stuff didn't get started until the anti-trust exemption and for-profit insurance companies came into vogue. Just a little history.

That would be a real lose to the whole Country... It would be sad that They turn out to be no better than The Republicans with Their greed!!! Because the Republicans are for The Haves not for The Have Not...

I hardly consider myself a "Have". I work for what I have all though not much. I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I vote for whomever most closely aligns with my beliefs. I feel that Health Care reform is necessary, however, not as how it is currenlty presented. It has been rushed and the concequences not thought through. What I am saying is that the People of MASS now have the RIGHT to choose whom they want to fill that seat and we need to take a close look as to WHY Health Care costs are so high. Haveing an Uncle who is a retired OBGYN, I know that for a fact he paid out over $100,000.00 a year alone in malpratice insurance that is required by the State to operate his practice. He passes those costs along as any business man would. Have you ever taken a look at a Medical Bill from a Hosptial? When I have my son, my insurance was charged $14.00 to adminster to me 2 over the counter Motrin. These costs, ect need to be looked at too

lmk, your posts make no sense and are filled with nothing but blind hate for Republicans. You don't even make sense on your reasoning for your hate of them.

You do know that every single Congressman and the president are "The Haves", right? They aren't going to contribute to the cost of this plan and aren't even going to be a part of it.

The only "greed" I see is people like you thinking the rest of us owe you $$. I paid my own way through college with credit cards and part time work. It took me 20 years to pay the cards off, but I did without defaulting on a single one. I went to school with some real winners who dropped out against the recommendation of those who warned them about what life was going to be like making minimum wage without insurance. I don't owe them ANYTHING. They made a choice to do that and there are already scholarships for them to go back & finish for free in place. They just don't want to.

Why are you so dead set against fixing Medicare, Medicaid, Free Clinic, VA, etc? Those exist for the sole purpose of helping those who can't afford it and are broken examples of what government run health plans are like. Do YOU want the people who depend on that to die so YOUR health care will be free in a "better than nothing" (Pelosi's own words) plan? Who's being greedy?

Good post JLMyers,

We have all had "sticker shock" from visits to the hospital or emergency room.

One of the absolute, key weaknesses to this entire Obamacare health bill is that the Democrats have conspired on this BS legislation to "fix" healthcare, without EVER STUDYING AND DEFINING THE PROBLEMS. Most people of common sense realize that you must first figure out what is wrong with something before you can fix it.

Find out why meical costs are so high. Find out why Doctors and hospitals have to pay exhorbitant amounts for malpractice insurance, even if they are solid in their practice of medicine. Find out why so many people run to the doctors when they may simply need an over-the-counter med from the drug store. STUDY, RESEARCH, WORK DILIGENTLY and HONESTLY !

Truth is sometimes hard to find, but you can never find the reasons if you don't look for them in the first place.

Thanks Jim, You said it much more eloquently than I did

the new political parties are now...democrat and non-democrat. as long as the candidate is NOT a Democrat, we will take them.

bush & cheney great handle by the way , voted twice for em . We are not dealing with democrats or republicans now , government has been taken over by progressives , that are using the dems to achieve their goals ie pelosie , ried , obama , , franks , and many more , the dems that took the bribes were true dems I think but were afraid of consequences for bucking the system , believe me there are progressive republicans too , they are parasites using both parties , I heard a comment from micheal moore , that if the dems didn't stick to their plan they would jump to the other party , people just need to pay attention to what these politicians are saying , and you can pick them out just like a tick , this IMK02 dude is a progresive , ya see how easy this is

Fred from NC -

Really? Are you that ignorant and short-sighted? Really? The Democrats may have had control of the Senate and House for 3 years - but 2 of those years Bush vetoed everything they presented. Get out of your red-neck bubble! God, I wish we had let the South split from the rest of us. You conservative, ignorant, rednecks have taken 25 cents from every dollar from states that actually generate revenue for decades - you dictated this Country's direction for 8 years and ran it into the ground. Even the Bush/Cheney administration was laughting at you - they used you to win the election. Unbelievable. Stay in NC please!

Are they INSANE or just hell bent on achieving their Communist dreams irrespective of cost?

If a communist had a dream about all people having access to healthcare, would that be a good dream Madison?

If Ong had a baby... and named it B...

Arr, ar ar ar

I never disappoint, eh ong?

I don't think a straight jacket would even fit 'em.

You never do axl. Of course, in order to dissappoint you'd have to have some original ideas for me to disagree with.

Cracker?

Cracker? The pot calling the kettle black.

Whats it like living over all those old newspapers?

If it doesn't pass... It will cause a big hardship to The People of The United States!!! Because the Majority Of The People need help with Their Health Care Plan are Getting Insurance...

No, clarke, people do not "deserve" health care - with no expectation of having to pay for it, or with the expectation that they should pay less than someone else for the same services.

Or, as in this bill, that they should pay less than someone else who pays more, because that person paying more is also paying for THEIRS.

The entitlement mentality is what is dragging this country to the ground. Welfare in all its forms, Medicare/caid and Social Security are prime examples of good, well-intentioned ideas gone horribly wrong via abuse, blatant government malfeasance in the managment of those programs, a sloppy system that allows abuse and ever-increasing demands from the people who receive some of those benefits and make them a lifestyle choice - which the sloppy system and ongoing liberalism of our government allows and encourages.

We simply cannot afford the entitlement programs we already have, they are trillions of dollars overspent in unfunded liabilities. Adding another one at this point in time, with 17% un/underemployment is ludicrous.

So are you advocating doing away with social security, medicaid, medicare, va, and etc? Or do you just want to see it administered correctly?

Why do you think those programs came into existence? For no reason?

Do you think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater? Why should hardworking people who contribute to society be unable to share in its blessings because of monitization?

We absolutely should do all possible to eliminate abuses, but not at the cost of depriving the "worthy".

The simple fact is that healthcare costs will not only bankrupt our economy within a few short years if left unchecked, but EVERY year that passes, less and less people have access to insurance.

When healthcare reaches 30% of GDP (anyone care to deny that it will?) How many fewer Americans will be able to afford it?

Are we going to be the Healthcare for the Wealthy only country? Because we are headed there fast.

clarke ong

If a communist had a dream about all people having access to healthcare, would that be a good dream Madison?

Why don't you ask the Russians. They already did this exact same thing when they cited that health care was a right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Russia

Article 41 of the 1993 constitution confirmed a citizen's right to healthcare and medical assistance free of charge

Mortality among Russian men rose by 60% since 1991, four to five times higher than European average.

clarke ong

So are you advocating doing away with social security, medicaid, medicare, va, and etc? Or do you just want to see it administered correctly?

Why do you think those programs came into existence? For no reason?

Funny you should ask that when the current bill does nothing to fix those. They're all failing and that's a fact. With the cost of this new health care bill, there will be no $$ left over to fix them, effectively "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" when they fold.

I don't think I said anything about free of charge. I just said having access. There's where your agrument breaks down.

Going broke and failing are not necessarily synonomous either. That would be like denying that social security or medicaid ever helped anyone. Can you quantify the number of people who have been helped by these programs?

What is your alternative? Darwinism? Survival of the fittest?

In its essence this is a battle of differing moralities.

Can we agree that SOME people are deserving of healthcare even if they do not have the financial means? Or does "deserve" truly equal "can afford"?

Gee clarke ong,

At 5.5, you just made it clear to everyone on the vine that you are a racist.

Original ideas are here if you will but open your mind to the possibilities. BAD LEGISLATION can be perfumed, sold, spiked with bribes, payoffs and corruption ....all in an attempt to sell it. At the end of the day, it is still BAD LEGISLATION.

Define the problems with health care in the U.S. today, consider ideas to improve the existing system, propose solutions for remedy, study, evaluate and study again. Don't try to ram this horse@!$%# legislation down the throats of the American people.

The voters of Massachusetts already have their own health care plan and it's like a broken Cadillac (sorry for the analogy GM). Why do you think they are opposed to B.O.'s new plan ?

Evidently you don't know the difference between racism and my allusion to axl PARROTING. So, I offered him a cracker.

Get it? Polly wanna cracker?

Just exactly how do you know that everything you listed is not already part of the legislation? How do you know that its bad legislation, other than what someone else told you?

Hey Clark I think most people want access to qaulty affordable health care that dosen't cost an arm and a leg. But the so call free (it's not really free everything the goverment does has to come from tax's somewhere) health care people don't want because the taxes will kill the jobs in a recession got it.

No if She wins... Then The Democrats will know that This Country need the Senate Health Plan!!!

lmk02

No if She wins... Then The Democrats will know that This Country need the Senate Health Plan!!!

1) Thank you for finally stopping the use of the word "reform" in your arguments. It was getting on my nerves.
2) "This Country" != 30% who approve.
3) If it requires all 60 votes from one party to pass a fillibuster proof super majority and you have to include the individual state bribes to get some of the Democrat votes, you are a hippocrit for supporting that party while calling Republicans greedy. How many more Democrat Congressmen are going to get greedy and ask for special treatment for their vote?

Jim: I Pray to GOD if This Bill doesn't pass... That You will be able to afford to take care of Your Daughter if She gets sick!!! Because if Your Insurance doesn't take care of all the expenses... You will be in the same situation as the rest of us are in!!! I lot of People lose everything because of a illness i9n Their Family...

lmk, call your representatives and ask them why they have been shooting down health care bills for 30 years. Also ask them why they are using this opportunity of having a supermajority passing a bill that doesn't even address your concerns.

The Dems had their chance to get what you (& Republicans without) needed. This bill isn't even close.

imk02, if the government takes over, your services will be going to Mexican citizens who are not required to serve in US military. if that isn't treason, i don't know what is. and you can shove all of your racism b u l l s h i t back up your a s s h o l e because we aren't buying it anymore.

By Joe I think You got the Republican Thinking!!! Because the Republicans are for the Rich & the Democrats are for everyone else... That way the Republicans way is better for This Country right???

The Democrats want power. Power to control people's lives by Socializing all of our institutions.

Then, they can force their will, as they are fervently trying to do now.

Once as many people as possible are dependent on the Fed for everything they can proudly proclaim that "electing Democrats will keep you fed and healthy".

The Democrats of today are Socialists. They cannot understand that little Johnny finishing last doesn't deserve a trophy. Dems hate musical chairs, dodgeball and any form of competition. Don't grade schoolwork in red pens! You'll hurt little Suzie's feelings.

Well, I have a bulletin for you: That's not reality.

lmk02

By Joe I think You got the Republican Thinking!!! Because the Republicans are for the Rich & the Democrats are for everyone else

So 30% approve of this bill. The Democrats (60% Congress) are for this bill (some requiring bribes) and Republicans are not. 70% of the country are rich Republicans? Wow. That's some deep thougth you put into that statement. You just dissed your own party in quite a few ways.

"The purpose of power is power."

-- George Orwell

The left wing dems understand this concept all too well.

lmk02 Republicans are sometimes not true to conservative values but basically conservatives believe the Constitution is a good document and Democrats believe you must keep adding new interpretations and more Goverment workers to go with those interpretations.

Don't believe the Democratic party propaganda that Republicans are for the rich and Democrats for everyone else its really just the opposite. The Republicans are for average jills and joes and the Democrats are for the elitists.

i will be so glad to see that pompus look wiped off obimbos ugly face.

The People spoke already... The problem is the Republicans won't listen to Them!!! They rather lie to get what they want... If they can't steal another Presidential Election!!!

lmk - clearly you have an overly simplistic, partisan view of the American people. Time to move on from the 2000 election my simple friend...

lmk02

The People spoke already... The problem is the Republicans won't listen to Them!!!

You have some serious issues with facts. 30% approval rating means 100% of Republicans in Congress are listening to the majority and 0% of the Democrats.

lmk02, Listen up in November you'll hear us speak loud and clear.

Right GOD is on the Republican side right??? That is why 9/11 happen when Bush was President!!!

LOL You're terribly misguided. 9-11 took place because of Clinton's pathetic performances in Somalia, the first WTC attack and the USS Cole.

Want to know where I learned that, Imk02?

From Osama bin Laden.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/interview.html

Now, I know you are not going to actually read the article. it's from PBS, and they're controlled by the evil Republicans, right?

I am amazed that you continually spout 'facts' that are repeatedly shot down as falsehoods.

And, with equal vigor you disregard actual, verifiable information.

You're quite interesting.

From the broken inflection, I am guessing IMK02 to be a non-native English speaker - not that there's anything wrong with that (had to use the Sienfeldian disclaimer there for all the bleedin' hearts). That would also explain the giant lapses of political memory timeline so evident here. The poorly constructed sentences and misspellings would indicate a different native tongue, and quite possibly the failure to understand the nuances of American politics in the 20th and 21st centuries.

lmk is either:

A) Someone who just likes to start arguments
B) Pelosi
C) I LIKE TATER TOTS!!!

That is why They kept voting Him into office right??? Because they hated Him so much!!! If they vote Republican... They will be a greedy as the Republicans are!!! That would be a sad day for the United States...

Do you capitalize "Him" because he is your deity?

lmk02

That is why They kept voting Him into office right??? Because they hated Him so much!!! If they vote Republican... They will be a greedy as the Republicans are!!!

Translation:

"I LIKE TATER TOTS!!!"

You don't even know why they kept voting for him? It's a Democrat majority state. You know why they might lose this election? It'd be because of what the Democrats as citizens want vs what the Democrats are offering.

If they vote Republican... They will be a greedy as the Republicans are!!!

Are you seriously slamming your own fellow Democrats now? All because you won't get your way? Do you know what greed is?

Geez,

After reading the continous stream of remarks from lmk02, I ALMOST, be really careful now, ALMOST miss the remarks of Nite Owlett today. At least her grammar is usually a little better.

If he actually made a meaningful remark about what the Massachusetts election means, he would ALMOST be worth reading.

This guy continuously ignores the topic of the article and attacks the Republicans.

why the American people blame the liberals for this mess.

Eliminating the massive fraud and waste in the existing Government managed welfare systems.

Tort reform.

Allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines.

No federal funding for non-life-threatening abortions.

No coverage for illegal immigrants.

Legislature, executive and judiciary having the same plan that they would have for us.

If it wasn't for 3 people... The first plan They had would have been passed... That was the plan that would have stopped the Insurance Company & attorneys... But thanks to the Republicans lies... The People are fooled again!!!

Great post Steven B.....not just good but great ! You forgot one thing however. The current MESS of this OBAMACARE legislation rides entirely on the shoulder of the Democrats....... and they must accept responsibility for the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Union sellout over taxation of Cadillac health plans and all the other corruption incorporated into this horrendous legislation.

The doors were locked on Republicans very early in the process, and all the special deals were done behind closed doors. Good luck Scott Brown for you, and for all the millions of Americans who are praying for your success !

Pat,

On certain matters, one cannot take polls and votes, one has to do what is necessary for the good of the country. However, this is not one of them. This is piece of major social legislation and prudence dictates that it should be generally bipartisan to ensure its future viability. The public has been treated with what I can only describe as "arrogant disdain" by those it has been elected to serve. Hell, even in matters as important as war, good presidents understand that a concensus has to be built. FDR knew we had to go to war with Japan and Germany and was working on mobilizing support. Obviously Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor and Hitler's silly declaration of war against the US made all of that unnecessary.

Well made points I concur I just feel the American people are being forgotten and assumed to be unimportant and beneath "Professional Politicians"

Pat H: The People did vote for change when They voted Obama & the Democrats in office... It is the Republicans & the 3 People that is stopping it from happening!!! What ever happen to the Majority rules???

The People did vote for change when They voted Obama & the Democrats in office...

Based on current polls, I would contend that there are a lot of people that aren't quite happy, not with the choice they made at the time, but with the decisions that have been made over the past year, and as such, are getting ready to do something about it since it's time to vote again...

What ever happen to the Majority rules???

Right now the majority does NOT want the current bill (on both sides of the aisle, and for a variety of reasons) - roughly 32% thinking it's a good idea. But it seems that message falls on the deaf ears of Nancy that has said she'll push it through whether we want it or not.

Guess it helps that it won't impact her medically or financially...since they're exempt on both counts for the remainder of their days - how convenient.

IMKO2

you are correct that the people voted "for change" in the last election, however I contend that the vote percentage was skewed by several factors. President Obama is a great orator and I will not take that from him even though I didnt vote for him. He was smart enough to "market" himself via the internet and capture the imaginations of young voters. Much as in the 60's when the youth of America clamored for change and most of them were only doing it because it was trendy to be in the peace movement.(I grew up in this era) Good marketing on Pres. Obamas part; additionally he garnered votes based on race and being the first African American President; certainly an historic event and one not to be taken lightly. But one needs to question if those votes were cast on polcy or on race. Unfortunately being a great speaker does not make a great leader and I believe past history proves this in many cases. More government intervention is not the answer to this countries problems and the Federal government has gotten too big and too intrusive.

lmk, super majority and filibuster proof means Republicans can lie all they want and it would still pass.

What ever happen to the Majority rules???

3/5 majority rules in the senate

Right how Bush cut taxes & paid for His War??? You think The Republicans would learn already... You have to raise taxes & spend money in order to make This Country go in the right way again!!! We already know You don't know Your ass from a hole in the ground...

lmk02

Obama's fighting the same war right now. He hasn't closed GITMO, he's abandoned his promises for transparency, vetoing pork-laden bills, same-sex couples, lobbyists and many more.

"If health reform fails, it's going to cause enormous political hardship for members of Congress and the White House,"

I wonder why only the 30% that approve matter. What are they planning on doing with the other 70% of us that is going to make them not go through a "hardship" when it comes time to vote?

IMKO2

Does the ward superviser at whatever state institution you're in know you are on the internet?

I wonder if you be saying that if Your Parents were not paying for Your Health Insurance???

lmk02

I wonder if you be saying that if Your Parents were not paying for Your Health Insurance???

What? Is that a lie I hear you speaking so you can get something for free? Where did you even come up with that?

Right that is why The Insurance Company, Big Business & Republicans are spending Millions to fight it!!!

lmk you have NO CLUE what is going on. The Insurance Companies are FOR this! No wonder you support it.

lmk02,

You just don't get it do you ? Everday, working people such as myself are opposed to this bill because it is BAD LEGISLATION, filled with horrendous pork-barrel legislation and back-room deals for all those who will back it. Votes have been bought with threats and bribes.

By the way, I work for a small to medium business, I am a controller who watches financial matters. I have 3 children, my wife works full-time also, and we do not want to pay for other people's insurance. We have planned our lives for the future to some degree and we do not want the government to take over our lives.

Apparently, you must be on government welfare since we never hear you talk about a real job.

lmk02, The insurance companies will get an extra $12Billion/yr out of the so called 'reform' bill. So they are most likely to be siding with Democrats on this one. It forces everyone to buy insurance from insurance companies or pay a fine.

Because the Insurance Company are charging Them to much money to cover the suites That Attorney falsely sue the Doctor & Hospital with all Their fake suites!!! If you want everything to go down... Obama's way is the way to do it...

Obama's way is the way to do it...

Why?

lmk, now you're just cut/pasting what the ppl say who are against this bill say. It's the closest thing you've posted that resembles a logical response with a reason though so I'll join Steven B in asking "Why?". I'd love to hear what part of this bill is going to lower the costs.

Your talking to People that has everything... They want to make sure the others don't take it away from Them!!!

Our children and grandchildren have enough on their shoulders with the huge financial burden placed upon them by our free-spending Federal Government "stimulus".

You're right Steve, the GOP's b**ls**t war in iraq over the past 8 years has been an unfortunate burden for future generations to bear

lmk

WHY should we not fight to be able keep something we've worked for and paid for - we should just shut up and let it be taken away by the government, who decides someone else should have it at our expense? Sorry, but a third of every one of my paychecks is already forcibly taken from me to GIVE TO SOMEONE ELSE. At what point do I get to keep what I earn, and pay my own way?

Would YOU give up your Social Security, just so someone else could have it?

Stop being such in imbecile.

"TKS the Engineer"

You're right Steve, the GOP's b**ls**t war in iraq over the past 8 years has been an unfortunate burden for future generations to bear

You're as bad as lmk at spewing inaccurate accusations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq
Jan 2010 - March 2003 != 8 years. As a matter of fact, we're 2 months short of making it 7 even.

Look up the cost of the war. It's a tiny fraction of this years Stimulous and projected cost of the health care plan. Obama and Congress already took what Bush did in 8 years and multiplied it several times in just 12 months.

Prag,

It's no use wasting logic on him. He likes Obama's concept to "redistribute the wealth". lmk02 needs to get an education, get a job and learn what hard work is about.....working hard to plan for one's own future and not to expect Uncle Sugar to provide for you. It is the socialist mentality.

Egninner I think this bill is the wrong place to start, first off it's unconstituinal and so many ways, including expecting people to buy something in other not to be fined or sent to jail among many other things. If Washington really wants health care reform start with small bills that are easy to read and understand and tackle one problem with helathcare. A helath care bill for tort reform, another for regulating pre-existing conditions, another for allowing people to buy accross state lines. This big bill is nothing but higher taxes and pay offs to special intrests

IMK your the reason Glen Beck wrote arguing with idiots. The haves has you seem to call them pay 90% of the taxes in this country it's progressive enough has it is. Also if you tax the rich and tax busniess to much they move there jobs over seas.

I'm sorry - I said 8 as opposed to 7 years... I was close, and the exact duration of the war doesn't matter as far as my comment goes.

Health care reform is not a redistribution of wealth - it's an acknowledgement that the system is messed up and needs to be fixed. Regular americans should not go bankrupt because they get sick. People should not have to choose between sending their kid to school or medical treatment... Taking your money and using it elsewhere is exactly how insurance companies work - is that redistribution of wealth? or pooled risk?

And the reason the rich pay 90% of the taxes is because they make more than 90% of the income in this country...

All this taking my paycheck away crap is so typical - it just deflects the argument to something else... the fact is, nobody likes paying taxes but they are necessary - and you do actually get something out of them.

And the majority of americans would agree with you what the problem is. But this system the presedent wants will cause more problems. The reason is so high is because of 2 things.

1st Supply and demand no matter what type of ecnomy you try to have you can't escape this old ecnomic addage. Even if you pay the bills you can't create more doctors and more medicine out of thine air. Sure eveyrbody now gets there doctor visits but if the doctors swamp they can't get in.

2nd. Lack of competion and lack of people who are insured carring. Insurance companies don't compete like car companies. Imagine if your state only allowed you to buy Geico car insurance and they had no competion, car insurance would go sky high and service would go to hell in a hand basket, why bother who are you going to turn to. Same thing has happen to helath insurance. But up intill recently very few people cared because there employer handled it. And since health insurance covers most of peoples drugs, exams, and tests they don't care about the prices for that either. So hospitals don't have to comete over who has the best MRI's for the best prices.

All Obama care is going to do is make health care more expensive, the only change is what you pay for it. Higher taxes is best case your life is the worst

Those are employees of the state. If a state or business wants to offer health care to employees so be it. No problem. I and the majority of Americans don't want the Federal government anywhere near health care.

Could that be because the Government takes it from Their pay checks before They get Their money??? I'm on Social Security... They take $97.85 month out of & give me a check of $881.00month check... Who can afford to pay for Medical Insurance on that when it cost $325.00 month for 20 percent pay back!!!

I'm on Social Security...

Yes, we know. That's why you're going on and on about someone else paying to take care of you.

Get a job. Contribute!

You'll be happier for it.

By the way, your SSI seems to be enough to afford you a computer and internet access...

I suggest you give up the excesses and pay for your own health insurance.

lmk02

Could that be because the Government takes it from Their pay checks before They get Their money??? I'm on Social Security... They take $97.85 month out of & give me a check of $881.00month check... Who can afford to pay for Medical Insurance on that when it cost $325.00 month for 20 percent pay back!!!

And you're in favor of this bill vs fixing Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid?

News flash (a little late for you). Social Security is NOT a retirement plan. It's a retirement SUPPLEMENT. No socialist plan has ever been put in place to take care of 100% of costs in ANY country that hasn't folded already.

I cannot believe the callousness of this comment. I do not know the situation but Social Security is there for when you retire, an item you have paid for your entire working career and you have the gall to tell this gentleman to get a job and contribute....you should be ashamed of yourself.

Pat-H740780 - I'd have to agree with some of Allan-968499 comments - Social Security is not a retirement plan - it has always been a supplement. Complaining about the amount of benefit suggest IMK02 failed to live within his means during his employment years and did not save or invest enough for retirement. In that case - getting a job to supplement social security seems to be good advise. Harsh - but real. I had maintenance technicians working for me past age 65 closely managing their work time - (instead of milking me for overtime like most union employees). The 65 and over group loved getting both a working salary and drawing social security.

Maybe some people do not like ripping off their fellow citizens for their retirement.

All the health care experts on this board...

What would be a better health care proposal in your opinion? How would you fix it?

H Stowell: Like You would know the truth to a lie!!! The truth is the Democrats win... The People win... If the Republican wins... It's the same old thing for the Country!!!

People have answered you, and you argue with them too.

What's the point? You agree with Hoyer, it turns out the majority of the people in this country don't.

40% support this bill, that affects every single American.

Shouldn't we demand from Congress a bill that at least 2/3's of the people support, since it affects 100%?

"It's a starting point."

No, it's a disaster that the democrats had to bribe each other to vote for. Doesn't that tell you something about exactly how bad this bill is, that they couldn't get to cloture - much less passage - without about $35 billion in taxpayer money allocated to inter-party bribery?

Just remember, even if Brown wins, the Dems still have a majority.

If this bill dies, and I hope it does, it's up to them as the majority party to continue to pursue the issue.

If they refuse to do so, DO NOT blame the Republicans.

The difference is, they will HAVE to include the Republicans in the discussions this time around - or face filibuster. That is the checks and balances the Constitution intends.

People have answered you, and you argue with them too. What?

What's the point? You agree with Hoyer, it turns out the majority of the people in this country don't.

I disagree - I think people hate seeing politicians work. And their disgust and impatience is percived as a lack of support.

40% support this bill, that affects every single American.

It does not affect every single american. It will not effect people receiving employer-provided health care.

"It's a starting point."

No, it's a disaster that the democrats had to bribe each other to vote for. Doesn't that tell you something about exactly how bad this bill is, that they couldn't get to cloture - much less passage - without about $35 billion in taxpayer money allocated to inter-party bribery?

No, it tells me how crooked and opportunistic all politicians are - and Besides, one persons "bribe" is a huge win for some representative's consituents.

Just remember, even if Brown wins, the Dems still have a majority.

If this bill dies, and I hope it does, it's up to them as the majority party to continue to pursue the issue.

If they refuse to do so, DO NOT blame the Republicans.

The difference is, they will HAVE to include the Republicans in the discussions this time around - or face filibuster. That is the checks and balances the Constitution intends.

Actually, the constitution intends for the majority party to pass legislation without a 60-vote supermajority in the senate. The Filibuster was intended to be a last-resort check on majority power, not the procedural hurdle it has become.

I mean seriously, as a GOP supporter, what sort of health care reform would you like to see? What would you do to control costs and increase coverage to people who are currently without coverage? It's the biggest cause of personal bankruptcy in this country and I would assume the GOP has an interest in helping out "Joe Six-Pack" when he's down on his luck... Or has it just become the party of "no abortion, no queer marriage and Joe the hedge fund manager"... GOP health reform is non-existant

IMK, if the people win then why are the majority against this bill? This bill and they way they are trying to get it through stinks. Really stinks.

I've answered what I would rather see in this bill repeatedly over the months, TKS, and frankly I'm sick of answering it.

One thing I will point out to you:

Depending on what exactly - if anything - gets passed, it WILL affect millions of people with employer provided insurance - potentially forcing them out of it.

There was language in the bill that outlawed high deductible, HSA plans. Approximately 5 million people have these plans, by choice, and will no longer be able to have them. Instead, they'll be pushed into higher out of pocket plans they may not be able to afford.

I'm one of those 5 million. We have willingly paid into our insurance plan, and met our own deductibles and co-pays, for 20 years. If this garbage bill passes, we'll no longer be able to afford the premiums, which will at least double and possibly triple. And since we live in a major metro area, we make a bit too much for the subsidies - WHICH I DO NOT WANT ANYWAY.

We have, for 20 years, worked hard to meet our own needs. And along come these thugs and take away our ability to do that?

10-12 million people in this country actually need help. If this bill manages to cover all of them, but COSTS 5 million people their coverage, why is that okay with you?

And I'll tell you what I'll be doing, if this passes and we loose our coverage: I'll be paying the fine, and screwing ALL OF YOU by waiting until I need insurance to buy it. Just like it happened in MA, ME and TN, millions and millions of people will do this - and break the system.

That's what this congress of statists is counting on, setting off a Cloward Piven strategy to collapse the system under its own weight, so they can rush in and take over the whole shootin match.

Well, not if Scott Brown get elected. Nothing else will stop them.

PragmaticToAFault

And I'll tell you what I'll be doing, if this passes and we loose our coverage: I'll be paying the fine, and screwing ALL OF YOU by waiting until I need insurance to buy it.

As long as they take pre-existing conditions, that car accident I had 5 mins ago counts, right? Where do I sign to pay my 1 month coverage?

H Stowell,

Yes indeed B.O. stinks.....the entire process through which this RAW ABUSE OF POWER has been used to bring about this bill stinks, the buyout's and bribes to move it through the House and Senate stink, and the results of having us pay in for years before it takes effect stinks.

Like I said previously, this PIECE OF CRAP legislation must be defeated, and an honest process toward meaningful, bi-partisan health reform started.

Pelosi wants it her way only! No other way but her's and I thought she was working for what the people wanted! All I have heard from her is it will be our way any way...I've had enough of her too..Unhinged and power crazy is what comes to mind. Health care she and her family will never have to use. Right. When I see her have to use it, I might be willing to go for it. NOPE! Can't do it as it is

and the left blames the right when their own party can't agree.

the left is killing themselves.

Actually they just want to get re-elected and could care less about the public.

If Democrats see the Health Reform bill as the kiss of death in Mass. they plan to retreat.

If they see it as the way to get the swing vote they will be for it. That is why they are doing the Potomac two step...

how about waste reform?

I've been pushing this since day one (can review my history of postings of evidence to the fact).

They'd get many more people on board if they cut the waste, showed the monies gained after a given period of time and then said they are going to use THOSE funds to fund new projects, not yet another shallow promise held together with lies, shady deals, and bribery behind closed doors...