Kyl: ‘No Chance’ Health Reform By August
Despite President Obama’s calls for health care reform legislation before congress leaves for its August recess, the GOP Senate minority whip told me today there is “no chance” it’ll get done. “Republicans very much want reform but not on the backs of the American people with the kind of taxes and potential rationing of care that would result,” Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said, “There is no chance that it’s going to be done by August.” Kyl argued Obama wants a speedy bill because “the longer it hangs out there, the more the American people are skeptical, anxious..” But Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., was more optimistic on bipartisan negotiations. President Obama went overseas for critically important meetings with world leaders, now I’m glad that he’s home. He’s going to be rolling up his sleeves, we’ve already been in communication with the White House,” Durbin told me, “He wants to get this job done and that means the senate should move in an expeditious way to finish our committee hearings, bring this bill to the floor before the August recess.” –George Stephanopoulos
Email
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
The Republicans do not want reform. They want a system which will put the most possible money into the pockets of the health, insurance and drug companies. Looked at the Medicare Drug Plan they passed under Bush. It had a big donut hole and insurance and drug prices skyrocketed after the first year. It was written by the industry.
Reform will provide good health insurance for the uninsured and under insured. It will deal with people who are excluded because of pre-existing illness. It will deal with rescissions, cutting off paid-up plans when someone gets an expensive illness. I was just reading about another example of that on the KC Star editorial page today.
Congress has the best public option health insurance plan available. Why don’t they just vote to let all of us but into that. To do otherwise is to treat their constituents as dirt.
Posted by: JAB | July 12, 2009, 11:45 am 11:45 am
This is really not something that should be rushed through….
Posted by: Gauston in DC | July 12, 2009, 11:50 am 11:50 am
As usual the republicans will do anything to keep the health insurence companies and drug company CEO and boards of directors get there 12 million a year saleries and there by keep the republicans that have there wives on these boards getting the kick backs. Im not just ranting either do some research yo will find out that the republicans are getting millions in there pockets to keep things just the way they are. After all the people that voted them into office cant make them rich.
Posted by: mike | July 12, 2009, 12:21 pm 12:21 pm
Kyl does not represent the average American, so what he is really saying is there is no way it will be done by August if any of his wealthy constituents will be required to cough up .01% of their millions to do it. He’s a typical Arizona corporate tool and, unfortunately, my Senator.
Gauston in DC,
That would be a concern if this really was a ‘rush.’ Plans for healthcare reform have been in the works for decades. It’s not the careful planning that is lacking, it’s the political will to actually implement a plan.
Posted by: Mickey7 | July 12, 2009, 12:21 pm 12:21 pm
“the longer it hangs out there, the more the American people are skeptical” – Yes, I agree. The longer the Republicans put this off the more skeptical I am that the GOP will do the right thing for the American people. Why are the Democrats bothering with trying to negotiate with the them? I am no Democrat, but the longer the GOP leadership plays politics with this crucial issue – the better the worse they look.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
Does this mean that if we give up those “notions” about healthcare reform, we’ll be rewarded with a cursory torture inquiry?
Consider me skeptical, if not outright cynical.
Posted by: jan | July 12, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
i can see why some people would be skeptical of a national program. The current medicare program is 50 trillion dollars in debt and they take a nice chunk out of my paycheck. (thank god its not attached to our national real debt) If people think this national program is going to be free, i laugh at them. Its going to come out of all of our paychecks just like medicare.
Posted by: be natural | July 12, 2009, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm
The Health Reform like the Cap and Tax bill is a major rip off for taxpayers. It’s a scam to give demmies and their corrupt buddies more power and more money. This bill will lead to rationing of health care and cost many their lives all while costing taxpayers billions for less service. It’s a fricking nightmare.
Posted by: PotatoeGater22 | July 12, 2009, 1:23 pm 1:23 pm
“emotional venting is repugnant and, if done at all, is best done in private.” – If anything folks havent gotten emotional enough. America has the lowest life expectancy and infant mortality rates among technologically advanced countries. People are dying because of our healthcare system doesnt that make you angry? Instead we have politicians playing ideological games. Sure we got to make the numbers work but what about throwing a little compassion into the mix too?
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 1:25 pm 1:25 pm
Obama supports the Daschle plan which advocates not treating seniors because they are not worth it. Sorry, but this is a fact. So if your grannie needs Hip replacement, she is out of luck because under socialized care elderly aren’t deemed worth the cost to the government. Socialized care is practiced in Canada and hence they have a much higher death rate for things like Breast and Prostate Cancer than the US. Rationed care causes death and costs much much more.
Posted by: PotatoeGater22 | July 12, 2009, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm
Correction on my last post: I meant to say the U.S. has the highest infant mortality rate among technologically advanced countries (I guess I was getting a little too emotional!).
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 1:28 pm 1:28 pm
The health care situation is spiraling out of control and the Dems understand this…the Republicans merely care for their sponsors money account….Medicare and especially Medicaid are exploding! The fact is its a lot easier to treat someone with a regular physician than it is when they wind up in the emergency room with no money and no insurance, and then YOU MUST BY LAW TREAT THEM ANYWAY!!!! THE REPUBLICANS BEING , QUITE POSSIBLY, THE WORST GROUP OF POLITICIANS EVER IN THE HISTORY OF OUR NATION DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS…You either treat these people at the beginning of their illness with health insurance options that are feasible and reasonable, or you can wait till YOU HAVE TO TREAT THEM LEGALLY AND MORALLY IN AN EMERGENCY ROOM WITH COSTS THAT CAN RUN TWENTY TO THIRTY TIMES WHAT A MANAGED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM CLIENT WOULD COST THE GOVERNMENT.In the end the managed care specialists(the insurance companies) take money right off the top in the billions of dollars and do virtually NOTHING FOR THE PATIENT…NOTHING!!! BUT THE REPUBLICANS BEING ON THE DOLE OF THESE COMPANIES, AND LIKE THE CRIMINALS THEY REALLY ARE, WILL DO NOTHING ABOUT PROVIDING REASONABLE INSURANCE TO OUR PEOPLE.
Posted by: TruthSaves | July 12, 2009, 1:29 pm 1:29 pm
One of the false analogies that republicans like to indulge themselves in as far as universal signle payer healthcare; the fact that they would essentially be trading their current private healthcare premiums in for payments on universal single payer healthcare and, if implemented as in Canada and Britain, no bill when they leave the hospital.
Posted by: jan | July 12, 2009, 1:34 pm 1:34 pm
Should have proof-read better.
One of the false analogies that republicans like to overlook when it comes to universal single payer healthcare; the fact that they would essentially be trading their current private healthcare premiums in for payments on universal single payer healthcare and, if implemented as in Canada and Britain, no bill when they leave the hospital.
Apparently they prefer to be fleeced.
Posted by: jan | July 12, 2009, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm
“Socialized care is practiced in Canada and hence they have a much higher death rate for things like Breast and Prostate Cancer” – Where do you get your stats? According to the CDC and thw WHO the Canadians have higher life spans and lower infant death rates than we do. Those stats correlate with good quality, accessible primary care. Primary care detects and treats heart disease, diabetes and other preventable illnesses. If fewer folks are dying of the preventable conditions that means more live to succumb to illnesses that often do not respond to treatment, such as cancer. Epidemiology is a complicated field. I appreciate your attempt to use data, but its important to analyse the data before cherry picking “facts” to back up your arguements.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 1:44 pm 1:44 pm
No, Republicans like Kyl do not want reform. They belong in the company of those who wish to see the Obama agenda fail. It’s time we see them for what they are–obstructionists, period. That they cannot see with urgent clarity the need for immediate health care reform, pushes them into the camp of the morally indefensible.
Posted by: perumal11 | July 12, 2009, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm
I love how Kyl’s so sure about himself, as if the GOP had anything left. Power, credibility, potential. Their party is a laughing stock.
Posted by: matchew | July 12, 2009, 2:06 pm 2:06 pm
I am 44 year old a conservative who can’t get insurance because of two degenerative disks. BUT, I oppose any health care plan until Democrats start talking about personal responsibility. 30% of adults are obese and it seems everyone is diabetic. 20% smoke. Unless people with mostly preventable conditions are going to be spanked (through some form of premium or co-pay) for their lack of discipline, taxpayers can’t bail out everyone’s health condition. Tax health care benefits…for everyone!!
Posted by: Me | July 12, 2009, 2:14 pm 2:14 pm
I don’t believe this should be rushed. But we do need healthcare reform. Absolutely.
3 out of 5 bankruptcies are caused by medical bills. Thousands who do not have insurance clog our emergency rooms to get care for minor issues.
Don’t people realize that we are already paying for those people with increased premiums?
This needs to get done and a robust public option needs to be part of the plan.
Posted by: SBA | July 12, 2009, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
“people with mostly preventable conditions are going to be spanked (through some form of premium or co-pay) for their lack of discipline, taxpayers can’t bail out everyone’s health condition” – There are strong genetic components to obesity and diabetes (as well as disk disease), how do you suggest we seperate those who have these conditions due to their DNA from those whose conditions relate to lifestyle? Take your disc disease – did you always lift with your legs, have good posture, use a good mattress and ergonomic furniture? Those with preventable illness do need to mind their lifestyles, but they also need access to quality primary care to learn what lifestyle changes can help resolve their conditions.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm
Most Republicans are better off than Dems financially…Essentially they have rather good health care THEY CAN AFFORD IT….Moreover, if they own stock with Empire, or US Healthcare, or HIP etc they get a dividend off the government as is, since those companies make most of their money off MEDICAID AND MEDICARE….so for Republicans there is really no point in moving on…even if the health care system does collapse for the rest of us, the way they see it, they save on taxes, and when the weak amongst us dies, they get to hire the stronger for less than they paid the guy who died. You see the ordinary people of our nation must begin to understand that the REPUBLICANS SIMPLY CARE FOR THE UPPER CLASSES, THE PRIVILEGED…the rest of us are LOSERS AND SO WE MUST PAY FOR OUR LOSSES WITH OUR VERY LIVES. TO THE REPUBLICANS LIFE IS A LOTTERY..THE WINNER GETS EVERYTHING, THE LOSER GETS NOTHING….THIS REALLY IS THEIR PHILOSOPHY…
Posted by: TruthSaves | July 12, 2009, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
“REPUBLICANS SIMPLY CARE FOR THE UPPER CLASSES, THE PRIVILEGED.”
==================
Wow, for a second there I thought I stumbled upon the Democrat Underground.
Seriously, is this a joke or is this poster just an agent trying to spread DNC talking points (i.e. lies).
Republicans are the party of the wealthy? I guess Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and George Soros are all big GOP supporters then right?
This is just another trick by the libs to try and paint conservatives as “rich” where “rich” can be defined as anyone that makes enough money to pay income taxes.
Posted by: Dan In SC | July 12, 2009, 2:45 pm 2:45 pm
You cant just give a free total package to all Americans. Not only is it a recipe for financial disaster, it encourages the welfare-state kind of mindset that we have gotten way too involved in already.
What I feel we need to do is very much like France has done. We need to provide some basic-level of services to everyone. To go beyond that, you either need to pay on your own (either out-of-pocket or with supplemental insurance). Those who cannot afford anything would of course get federal subsidies. We then add to this – a large dose of health industry regulation. Insurers have to take everyone at the same costs, and keep those costs down by capping their profits. The health industry itself could be forced to cap billing rates at certain levels, etc. To counter that, we would increase our support of medical school expenses, etc.
What I don’t want to see is a system where there are people scrambling to get something for nothing that they have the means to pay for. That has become the “American way” in the past 30-40 years and has got to stop. You can’t pay for everyone’s coverage if they can afford to pay for it themselves. Its just wrong. Conversely, you cannot expect a small group of individuals to pay for everyone else’s coverage either.
This is a complex issue and needs far more time for debate and thought that Obama wants it to have. Like everything else, he wants this done “fast and dirty”. Well, the American people deserve better than that. It takes time to overhaul a system. I am totally clueless as to why Congress doesn’t opt for incremental reform each year. Why they have to design everything from scratch all at once is beyond me!
Posted by: Jon F | July 12, 2009, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm
I really think that people are a lot more worried about the economy than health care. If you can’t afford to eat health care has no meaning. I wonder if all you libs stay up at night thinking about hateful things to say about republicans. We all are Americans but liberals seem to hate what America stands for and what we have done to be the best country in the world. We owe no appologies to anyone.
Posted by: john | July 12, 2009, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm
“REPUBLICANS SIMPLY CARE FOR THE UPPER CLASSES” – I share your frustration, but I think most Republicans are good folks who are just trying to do what they think is best for their families and their country (remember that half of all Republicans support a public option). Now the GOP leadership is a different story. From what I have seen in regards to this healthcare reform debate the GOP politicians seem to be putting narrow ideology above the health of men, women and children. Its very sad.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm
Oh yeah, this Republican vs. Democrat class war thing has got to stop! Most Republicans are not rich, nor most Democrats poor. This screaming back and forth is nonsense, inaccurate, and does not help the discussion one bit.
The traditional party dominance has flip-flopped over the years. So don’t get too complacent with your chosen enemies now. In a few years that can change. Remember, we vote for these people, and Republicans in the past have been the power in dominance too – just like the Democrats are now. Give it 5 years and this may very well change again. We are all part of this, and the most unimaginable – only one party in government – would signal the loss of the America and democracy we have all grown to cherish and respect.
Posted by: Jon F | July 12, 2009, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm
“I am totally clueless as to why Congress doesn’t opt for incremental reform each year. Why they have to design everything from scratch” – Actually they are suggesting incremental change. If they were to take your suggestion and have a French model of nationalized healthcare, that would probably take starting from scratch. What they are currently proposing is very modest, but the corporations and their proxies in Congress are so intent on keeping their profit margins high they oppose even small changes. Who loses in all this? The folks who are literally dying to get medical care.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
“this Republican vs. Democrat class war thing has got to stop!” – Amen to that.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm
Lets see here.. Durbin says that 3/4′s of Americans are covered by a PUBLIC PLAN already and wondered on TW why everyone cannot have that choice.
The Medicare Trustee released a report this year that Medicare will go BANKRUPT in 2017 if not sooner. Medicaid is hitting state budgets big time. Do we really think the Government can run a public plan. If so, they shoudl first fix Medicare to make it solvent and introduce their cost savings with IT and outcome procedures in Medicare first.
Many of the best doctors do not accept medicare. My parents found this out when they joined Medicare and had to find other doctors.
The public plan is wrong and is not needed at this time.
Posted by: scott jeffries | July 12, 2009, 3:31 pm 3:31 pm
In doing some research, many health plans are non-profit, Sen. Durbin, where are their profits? While some that report earnings pubically are quite profitable, their earnings seem to be in line as a percentage of revenues and assets as compared to other large companies.
They do not appear to be making MSFT or GOOG types of profits.
Posted by: scott jeffries | July 12, 2009, 3:35 pm 3:35 pm
What are the other ways of introducing more competition to the insurance market? How come Congress has not explored these?
It seems that the congressinoal leadership and White House came with the idea that health care reform is a single payer big governmetn burecracy.
This does nto sound like what Obama promised when he was going to extend coverage to many and allow those that are happy with what they have to mainatin it.
This is not the CHANGE we need!
Posted by: scott jeffries | July 12, 2009, 3:37 pm 3:37 pm
For six years my physician of record was WebMD. When the small company I worked for relocated the operations offshore, they killed the healthcare here. Not even Cobra was available since they left owing a pile to Aetna. I applied to Blue Cross and several other carriers and was turned down flat by everyone of them. Seemslike my history of extremely mild childhood asthma and “pre high blood pressure”. The state has a “high risk pool” policy which you are guaranteed access to….but the premium was $2,500 a month. Not exactly doable on unemployment. I volunteered for clinical trials and tests at every facility doing any testing. I know my situation is not unique since I see a lot of people doing the same thing I am doing for healthcare. The only people who think the healthcare is working are insurance companies and people with enough money not to bat an eye at an annual premium higher than many families take home in a year. And this did not cover prescription drugs. Instead of putting the insurance industry shills on the talk shows, you should talk to real people whose lives are being destroyed by the wonderful US healthcare system.
Posted by: ChiDem | July 12, 2009, 3:39 pm 3:39 pm
“Many of the best doctors do not accept medicare” – Unless your private plan is one of those high premium, “boutique” plans your private plan also limits which doctors you can see. As far as Medicaid effecting states financially – in this economy EVERYTHING is effecting state budgets whether its the prison systems, parks or highway construction. This is a good reason why we need a national health plan so your healthcare is not dependent on which state you happen to live in.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
Why, oh why, do Republicans have invisivision regarding people dying due to the greed of monopolised, profit driven health insurance companies? Is such lack of compassion seen as strength? Is “Be the shark or be the bait” truly the American credo? The Insurance companies will drop coverage of customers who forget to mention trivial problems in their history. The healthcare insurance executives behind the table this week in Congress remind me 100% of Tobacco executives who occupied those seats in our recent past. Absolute lack of concern for the dying uninsured. These companies give exceptional scrutiny to anyone who drops to a marginally profitable level. Any unselfreported incidence, acne for instance, acne…can be used as reason for disqualification. The insurance companies don’t even care if dropped coverage equals denial of life-saving treatment. Profit potential must be met at expectation or these companies will lose money. Problem is, those who are not profitable to insure, the sick, do not meet profit expectation and are, therefore dropped if at all possible from the rolls. The numbers of uninsured are growing. Darwinism in action. Survival of the fittest. Compassion and empathy are not profitable for the American health care system.
Posted by: Charles Carruth | July 12, 2009, 3:45 pm 3:45 pm
Impeach Kyl – his is evi to the core
Posted by: eyeonyour | July 12, 2009, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
“I volunteered for clinical trials and tests at every facility doing any testing.” – Its sickening that folks such as yourself have to resort to these kinds of measures in order to get healthcare. My prayers are with you, buddy.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 4:03 pm 4:03 pm
The citizens have really got to keep the heat on our elected representatives to keep this alive. This issue needs to stay on the front burner. I saw a Bill Moyers program on this issue Friday and it was a real eye-opener. The private insurance companies really need to be confronted. They are actively working to sabotage what is happening. Sen. Kyle’s comments are parroting of insurance company memos on the type of language (‘rationing”, “bureaucrats making health care decisions” ) they are using to frame this debate.
I also think the people have to realize that we are all going to have to pay something to make this work. Ideas of pushing to whole expense onto the wealthy are absurd. If all the people benefit from something, all should be willing to contribute a fair share to make it happen.
Be sure to write or call your legislators and the President to let them know where you stand on this issue.
Posted by: David W. | July 12, 2009, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
JAB – You said “Congress has the best public option health insurance plan available. Why don’t they just vote to let all of us but into that.”
You need to do some research so that you don’t make yourself look like an idiot.
Congress does not have “public option health insurance”, The healthcare insurance available to the members of Congress is through private insurance companies (Blue Cross, Aetna, Group Health, Kaiser, etc). The federal government as the employer pays a portion of their monthly premium (just as many private employers do) as part of their compensation package and the Congressman pays the remainder from his salary. When the Congressman uses the services of a health care provider he (not the government) is responsible for any co-pays or deductibles which are due to the provider at the time of service. For reference just Google “fehb”.
As far as letting the rest of us into their plans this could be a viable option but it would cost us all money. If Congress were to open these plans to the public the monthly premiums for a family plan would roughly be between $425.00 and $1300.00, for an individual the monthly premium would roughly be between $177.00 and $550.00 (premiums could be shared between the employer and employee if an employer chose to provide healthcare as an employee benefit). One of the differences in the plan costs is the level of benefits provided and the amount the patient pays when receiving healthcare. To me this would be a viable option as the government would not have to make a large outlay to open these plans to the public and they already negotiate the cost and benefits each year with the plan providers.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | July 12, 2009, 4:15 pm 4:15 pm
“No, Republicans like Kyl do not want reform. They belong in the company of those who wish to see the Obama agenda fail. It’s time we see them for what they are–obstructionists, period.”
LOL! Obstructionists? Democrats control the executive and legislative branches. They have the numbers to ram through whatever they want. Seems to me the real problem is the PARTY OF YES.
Oh, and Obama will definitely fail, but it’ll have nothing to do with Republicans. It’ll have more to do with mind-numbingly stupid liberal economic policies that are currently accelerating job losses. Enjoy the Change!
Posted by: Jenn | July 12, 2009, 4:36 pm 4:36 pm
jacksmith – You said “Coverage can begin immediately through our current medicare system.”
When Medicare was created in 1965, benefits were relatively limited and retirees paid a substantial percentage of the costs of their own care. In 1965, Congressional actuaries expected Medicare to cost $3.1 billion by 1970. In 1969, that estimate was revised to $5 billion, and it actually came in at $6.8 billion. Things have gotten worse since, and Medicare today costs $455 billion and rising. Medicaid was intended as a last resort for the poor but now covers one-third of all long-term care expenses in the U.S. — that is, it has become a middle-class subsidy for aging parents of the Baby Boomers. Its annual bill is $227 billion, and so far this fiscal year is rising by 17%. Schip was pitched a decade ago as a safety net for poor kids, Schip is now open to families that earn up to 300% of the poverty level, or $63,081 for a family of four. Any new federal health plan will inevitably follow the same trajectory, no matter how much Senators might claim they’ve guaranteed otherwise. The Lewin Group consultants estimate that 119 million people who now have private insurance could potentially be captured by the government under the Obama public option. This is on top of the 90 million already in Medicare or Medicaid. This would guarantee a spending explosion that would over time lift federal outlays as a share of GDP into the upper 20% range or higher. This health-care debate isn’t like the “stimulus” bill, which was largely about short-term spending and deficits. This one is about whether to turn 17% of the U.S. economy entirely and permanently into the arms of the government.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | July 12, 2009, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
i have a question.since when did health care become a right? when did it become the responsibility of the govt to provide healthcare? nowhere in the constitution is it indicated.
Posted by: joe | July 12, 2009, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm
What is being proposed is a system is already in place in Massachusetts. It is so cumbersome and costly that they have raised their sin taxes, their sales taxes their tolls, the governor as proposed a 27 cent per gallon fuel tax and they continue to bleed cash so badly that all of the local news out of Massachusetts included a story on how they needed to close Zoos and euthanize some of the animals. All of this might be worth it if the system worked . It doesn’t they have even more people using emergency rooms as primary care the number of uninsured continues to go up and the cost of medical care is rising faster than ever. The plan being pushed by the administration is a 10 to 20 trillion dollar plan to fail all so democrats can say “See we did something” I don’t see the republican as my friends either but this is shamefully dishonest on the part of the Democrats.
Posted by: Rick P | July 12, 2009, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm
Compassion and empathy are simply not profitable for American Health insurance companies.. Companies that do not meet profit expectation will lose investment capital. These companies, therefore, drop folks who are not profitable if at all possible. Excessive scrutiny which may reveal unreported cases of acne can result in dropped policies. Required self reporting puts consumers into the role of expert testifiers. Miss a detail and your health and very life may, can, and will be put at risk. Tobacco executives testimony before congress was on display this week in the guise of health insurance company executives. Just put on the invisivision glasses and poof…all the images of sick and dying Americans just disappear. No concern. Darwinism, “survival of the fittest” in action.
Posted by: truthpooper | July 12, 2009, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm
“What is being proposed is a system is already in place in Massachusetts.” – Which plan is like the one in Mass.? I have heard at least a half dozen different plans from Congress. How can you know know which one will pass? As far as the financial stability of the Mass. plan goes – name me more than a few states that are not having financial problems with any of their programs – from law enforcement, to parks to transpirtation, they are all struggling. We all know that privatized insurance has been an abject failure too and you make a good argument for why we need a national health plan – the states cant handle it either.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
“when did it become the responsibility of the govt to provide healthcare?” – Good point, but please realize that the constitution also does not give you the right to drink clean water or breathe clean air. Most Americans believe the government has a role in insuring those rights, just like the right to health care.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 5:37 pm 5:37 pm
Sandcrab – you said that folks dropping their private plans to buy into the public option “would guarantee a spending explosion that would over time lift federal outlays as a share of GDP.” If they are paying premiums like they were with their private plans how does that increase federal spending? Just curious.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm
SBA said: “3 out of 5 bankruptcies are caused by medical bills.”
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is highly doubtful. I’ve been a bankruptcy attorney for over 12 years and maybe 10% of my cases involve bankruptcies due to medical bills. The vast majority are credit card-related (huge amounts of overspending for their income), but I’m now seeing a lot who are dealing with Option ARM loans resetting and the larger payments are putting them under (even when they’re still employed).
Very few of my clients ever have a budget or emergency savings. When these folks are hit by some financial shock like a job loss and can no longer get credit to pay their bills, they come to me. Financial education might have helped them but health reform? Not so much.
Posted by: JD | July 12, 2009, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
John, we are all Americans and liberals do not hate conservatives. We want the same thing for everyone — universal access to quality care. Yes, many of us are worried about the “current” economy. But we need to be thinking long-term — not just about today. As a nation, we cannot put off dealing with the most serious problem our economy has, paying for our healthcare. The biggest mistake we could make as a people is to do nothing. In three years, we will be bankrupt if we do nothing.
Posted by: Kent | July 12, 2009, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
By watching the GOP over the last 7 months, I am convinced that they really don’t care if we get real comprehensive healthcare reform by August or even in the next year… The longer they can hold it off, the better for them, or so they think.
Keep in mind that Health care to the GOP mind set is not a right, it is a Privilege for the privileged…
Look at the way the GOP has performed since this last election. They have taken a definite stance of opposition to anything and everything the President has promised.
They care only about themselves and the lobbyists that support them… not the average working stiff that can no longer get insurance through their employer and couldn’t afford to use it when they had it…
Its up to the Democrats to pass a comprehensive healthcare reform they will have to take up the slack and get the job done…
Posted by: theafalcon200 | July 12, 2009, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
BEST NEWS I’VE HEARD IN MONTHS. NO, NOT A FAT CAT OR BUSINESS OWNER – JUST AN AUTO PARTS DRIVER WHO KNOWS A HECK OF A LOT MORE ABOUT ECONOMICS 101 THAN HIS HIGHNESS!!
Posted by: Jimbo | July 12, 2009, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm
“Name ONE government program that is well-managed.” – OK, the CDC, the U.S. Public Health Service and the Coast Guard. Now try this one: Name one national private insurance company that provides good quality coverage to folks with pre-existing conditions at a reasonable price.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
“I’ve been a bankruptcy attorney for over 12 years and maybe 10% of my cases involve bankruptcies due to medical bills.” – That may be your experience with your clients but according to a Harvard University study 68% of all personal bankruptcies in the U.S. relate to health costs. There are several reasons why your clients to not fit into this profile: Are they high income? Medical costs are a much lower percentage of thier worth and they are more likely to have already had good insurance. Also, the state you are in may have laws that ameliorate medical costs. Just a thought.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | July 12, 2009, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
AS REAGAN ONCE SAID “GOVERNMENT CANNOT SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS – GOVERNMENT IS THE PROBLEM.” CONTRARY TO MUCH LIB BELIEF, THERE ARE MILLIONS OF US REPUBLICANS WHO ARE NEITHER FAT CATS OR BUSINESS OWNERS, WHO TRULY BELIEVE THAT OLD SAYING “THE GOVERNMENT THAT GOVERNS LEAST, GOVERNS BEST.” THIS GUIDES OUR POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
Posted by: Jimbo | July 12, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
“PUBLIC OPTION,” BY ITS VERY NATURE, WILL VERY SOON CAUSE PRIVATE INSURERS TO FOLD. THIS IS THE REASON WHY SO MANY OF US CONS DO NOT LIKE THIS OPTION. MANY OF US BELIEVE THAT WE CAN REFORM THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM WITHOUT CREATING ANOTHER MONSTER PROGRAM, WHICH BY THE WAY CANNOT BE FUNDED EXCEPT THROUGH PRINTING MORE MONEY(INFLATION)OR BORROWING FROM CHINA. FAT CATS PAYING THE BILL – DON’T BELIEVE IT.
Posted by: Jimbo | July 12, 2009, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm
Funny…what do we need insurance for???? Just give health care to anyone who needs it…including illegal aliens…deadbeats who live unhealthy lifestyles and fat stupid lazy people who sit on the couch eating junk food…
insurance isn’t necessary if you are going to provide healthcare…in fact, just cut out insurers altogether, and the money saved would go a long way to help taxpayers bear the burden of free healthcare to all….this is what it really means…reform…Obama just wants to liberalize it for the trailer park trash who refuse to work….hope this stirs up you liberals who think govt. should provide everything from the cradle to the grave….might as well, they already have to give home loans to those who can’t afford them…GM autos will be next…free food would help too…
Posted by: Badboy | July 12, 2009, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
The idea that large numbers of Americans are declaring bankruptcy due to medical expenses is a myth. Therefore, the introduction of government-run health insurance in the United States will do nothing to reduce personal bankruptcies, concludes a new study by the Fraser Institute.
The current debate about reforming U.S. health care policy has included suggestions that nearly two-thirds of personal bankruptcies in the United States result from uninsured medical expenses or loss of income due to illness. Advocates of socialized medicine argue that this would not occur if the United States adopted a government-run health system similar to Canada’s. However, if socialized medicine played a role in reducing personal bankruptcies, we would expect to see a lower rate of personal bankruptcy in Canada compared to the United States.
To the contrary, says Fraser:
- The personal bankruptcy rate was actually higher in Canada in 2006 and 2007 (0.30 percent for both years) than in the United States (0.20 percent and .27 percent).
- Medical spending was only one of several contributing factors in 17 percent of U.S. bankruptcies — medical debts accounted for only 12 to 13 percent of the total debts among American bankruptcy filers who cited medical debt as one of their reasons for bankruptcy.
- Medical reasons were cited as the primary cause of bankruptcy by approximately 15 percent of bankrupt Canadian seniors (55 years of age and older).
- Non-medical expenditures comprise the majority of debt among bankrupt consumers in both Canada and the United States; the inability to earn sufficient income to cover these costs — not exposure to uninsured medical costs — is the real explanation for almost all bankruptcies in either country.
Thus, bankruptcy statistics do not support arguments for a government-run, single-payer, socialized health insurance system, says Fraser.
Source: Brett J. Skinner and Mark Rovere, “U.S. Medical Bankruptcies a Myth; Personal Bankruptcy Rate Higher in Canada,” Fraser Institute, July 7, 2009.
Posted by: Stacey | July 12, 2009, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm
Obama and the Democrats do not want real reform. The insurance companies have proven they can’t be trusted with our health, yet Obama’s agenda keeps these companies in control of the system, and would even force consumers to buy their product (the so-called “mandate”). Maybe, if we’re lucky, the Democrats and their insurance industry backers will throw us a few crumbs in the form of the ill-defined “public option.” What a disgrace that Obama is squandering his historic mandate by capitulating to this unscrupulous industry.
Posted by: JN | July 12, 2009, 8:09 pm 8:09 pm
Those who think Republicans run big insurance better take a good look at who is funding the Democrat campaigns… mostly insurance giants like Peter B Lewis and others.
Insurance companies have more money to lobby than any other industry. Wonder why we aren’t considering a single-payer system like has worked in most other countries? Who would lose out? Insurance companies!!!
Follow the money people! Your republican and democrat congressmen, senators, and presidents sure do.
Posted by: Tim | July 12, 2009, 8:10 pm 8:10 pm
Kyl is clearly looking at the obstructionist calendar…The congress, UNDER DEMOCRATIC CONTROL, does NOT function by this demagogue’s schedule any more.
Kyl and his buddy Cornyn have nothing better to do than try to raise money by selling republican LIES, then it’s time they retired since they bring NOTHING to the table.
Posted by: Winski | July 12, 2009, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm
Yes, there are people who don’t have health care. However, there are many, many more who do have health care through their employers, which the company pays part, and the employee pays part. My husband and I pay about 300 dollars a month. Then we have to meet our deductible and pay 20% after that. Why on earth should we be FORCED to have even more taxes taken out of our paychecks to provide free or nearly free to those who don’t work, or those that are self-employed and would rather spend their money on big screen t.v’s, cable t.v. cell phones, etc… NO!!!!!
Posted by: mom | July 12, 2009, 9:18 pm 9:18 pm
Anyone who thinks that conservatives are in favor of a public option is delusional.
Posted by: mom | July 12, 2009, 9:19 pm 9:19 pm
Mark from atlanta – If each person is currently paying $1.00 per year for healthcare and they are captured by the government plan then they wouldn’t have that $1.00 in their pocket, it just wouldn’t go to the insurance company they now have but would have to go to the government to pay for the government healthcare plan. The increase would come from the inefficiency that government has when they become involved in any venture. If they pay $1.00 for an item, in this case healthcare then we still have to add in the cost of the bureaucrats who are running and administrating the program. The government would have to pay overhead (lights, water, computers, rent, etc.) just like any private industry which will run the cost of healthcare up beyond the $1.00. If the government runs the program like Medicare then the cost are guaranteed to skyrocket. Let the government get Medicare into a state where it is self sustaining and then we can evaluate their ability to run healthcare for all. No matter what if they start covering everything regardless of pre-existing conditions or rarity of the problem then once again the costs are guaranteed to skyrocket. There has to be a line in the sand where they say no we won’t pay for that and with the increase in the aging population the healthcare spending will increase with respect to the younger working population which will be paying for the healthcare. The government plan is not self sustaining over time, it will cause a bigger drain on the government. Until they can come up with a plan which can be demonstrated to be 100% self sustaining then they shouldn’t pass anything. That is the biggest reason that I feel they should open the insurance plans that the government uses to all. If you read the FEHB site they have no limits on pre-existing conditions but each plan does have limits as to how much they will pay each year. Everyone could have access to health insurance and Medicade, Medicare, and SCHIP would take care of those who are lower income.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | July 12, 2009, 9:27 pm 9:27 pm
The republicans say they want health care reform ONLY because the Democrats are pushing it. The republicans will do everything in their power to keep things the way they are. Health care for the rich only is their view.
Posted by: gop screw job | July 12, 2009, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm
Given the status of the stimulus package and it utter failure, does anybody trust Obama or the Democrats to get anything right regarding health care? Nobody is asking one simple question. Why did health care costs accelerate our of control? Answer: government programs like Medicare and Medicaid drove costs crazy and introduced so much fraud and abuse that there is no efficiency in health care delivery. Plus, outrageous malpractice awards means insurance costs are too high. These costs are passed to consumers.
Posted by: brian | July 12, 2009, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
Democrats want reform….they want to reform everything. Start with taxing the rich into the middle class. Distribute that wealth to the poor and bring them up into the middle class and then the government can regulate the lives of everyone since we will all be “equal.”
today and tomorrow it may be nice to tax the wealthy to pay the costs of the poor, but one day they won’t be able to get anything out of the rich and then they won’t have the money to pay the bills of the poor….What happens then?
Posted by: Kris in AL | July 12, 2009, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm
The entire “Health Care Crisis” was created by the government via Medicare. Most of you probably don’t remember going to the doctor and paying the $5 or $10, sometimes with some medication thrown in too. Then our wise government created Medicare. In theory it is great, but what happened was not only did doctors and hospitals realize they could do about whatever they wanted to a patient and get paid for it, but the patients realized that they could go to as many doctors they wanted to for everything from having their toenails clipped (honest) to massages by a chiropractor. Greed all the way around. And, I bet most of you don’t know this either, but remember President Clinton’s welfare reform? Guess what happened to all these folks….they all got qualified as disabled and get MEDICARE, plus a monthly check. They are set for life. Our country cannot afford another disastrous social program. Politicians are destroying our country with all their socialistic programs at one of the worst financial times in our history. We are headed for a worse mess than the “Healthcare Crisis.” Try a major financial breakdown. My family owns a small business and our income has steadily declined the last 5 years. We cannot afford more taxes and like others we know, will either lay people off close our business.
Posted by: Louise | July 12, 2009, 10:52 pm 10:52 pm
Oh, and before I get reamed by everyone for being a conservative nut, I voted for Obama. I had hopes he could pull our country together and get things settled in Iraq, but his spending is way out of control. Why can’t his administration look at countries that over spent and over taxed their citizens and see what happened. It does not work. We need to hold off on any sort of healthcare reform until our economy stabilizes. Let’s be responsible and reasonable is all I am asking.
Posted by: Louise | July 12, 2009, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm
Oh, and before I get reamed by everyone for being a conservative nut, I voted for Obama. I had hopes he could pull our country together and get things settled in Iraq, but his spending is way out of control. Why can’t his administration look at countries that over spent and over taxed their citizens and see what happened. It does not work. We need to hold off on any sort of healthcare reform until our economy stabilizes. Let’s be responsible and reasonable is all I am asking.
Posted by: Louise | July 12, 2009, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm
IF WE CAN ONLY LEARN from looking at current models, we have Medicare going broke, and Medicaid and Schip which are free care subsidized by tax payers. They cost billions in fraud and abuse and are run inefficiently. A government option will dictate reimbursements to providers, (which is already being reduced again in Medicare) so possibly providers whose patient loads are primarily covered by Medicare and/or Medicaid need to see as many patients (or ration) as they can to stay afloat. And now we want to create another government entity like that? The costs projections are not absolute, and the government option cannot guarantee even with the astronomical costs that it will cover all the uninsured. Has anyone talked about reform to the insurance companies? Restructing so that they compete better to drive costs down without the government option? Mandate they cannot cancel anyone after illnesses, refuse anyone with pre-existing conditions, and cover the folks who fall through the cracks. The government could give the insurance companies tax incentives to cover this uninsured group. There is room for reform, but a government option will be another large subsidized black hole in our economy. And the first thing the white house, senate and congress should do is automatically sign up for any public option they ask us to pay for – mandate nothing for the people you will not mandate for yourself.
Posted by: TK | July 13, 2009, 12:33 am 12:33 am
If you really think a public option will be a great advance in health care – think again. Without trillions of dollars to throw that way, we are talking about sub-standard, rationed care – that will make todays inequities look like a cake-walk. We will be pulling the plug on people left and right to make ends meet. Who here wants to be not valuable enough to save? Well, lots of us will be.
Obama has made it clear that his financial priorities are in other areas. To do a public option right – we need to put America’s health care fist. But Obama doesn’t want to do that. It has to be done on the cheap because he wants to save the money for other things.
A public option done correctly would be great. But done by rationing care and giving less care overall – we will be severely disappointed. On top of that they want to stiff the elderly by cutting Medicare – the model they are using for all of this. Well, if they can cut Medicare to pay for something else – just think that they could very well cut our public option to pay for something else someday.
Posted by: Jon F | July 13, 2009, 5:54 am 5:54 am
Kyl does not represent the average American, so what he is really saying is there is no way it will be done by August if any of his wealthy constituents will be required to cough up .01% of their millions to do it. He’s a typical Arizona corporate tool and, unfortunately, my Senator.
Gauston in DC,
That would be a concern if this really was a ‘rush.’ Plans for healthcare reform have been in the works for decades. It’s not the careful planning that is lacking, it’s the political will to actually implement a plan.
Posted by: Mickey7
=====================================
You do not represent the average American either. You represent the lazy people that do not want to work and just looking for a free ride. You need to spend a year in England and a year in Canada under their plan and then you will see what Obama wants for you.
Posted by: barefootboy | July 13, 2009, 7:21 am 7:21 am
Jon Kyl’s ideology has no bearing on what does or does not get done on Capitol Hill.
Posted by: matt | July 13, 2009, 8:02 am 8:02 am
It’s time to end the phony baloney parasitic republican created HMO markets. They eat up almost almost half the money spent on healthcare pushing billing. GOP will suffer big time for standing in the way of fixing healthcare The good news is, 18 more republican senate seats on the ballot in 2010. The bad news is we have to wait until November of 2010 to send more of them packing.
Posted by: rightbehind | July 13, 2009, 8:08 am 8:08 am
one poster wrote “This bill will lead to rationing of health care and cost many their lives all while costing taxpayers billions for less service.”
that’s what we have now….how can it get any worse. Apparently you have employer-sponsored coverage
Posted by: MAry | July 13, 2009, 8:47 am 8:47 am
“Republicans very much want reform but not on the backs of the American people with the kind of taxes and potential rationing of care that would result,” (Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz)
======================================
I would have to agree with Senator Kyl (Republican from AZ)…. LOL.
Let’s finance Health Reform the same way the Republicans financed everything else during the past 8 years of Bush/Cheney…. by borrowing to pay for it and increasing our National Debt even more.
The National Debt increased during the Bush/Cheney years from $5 TRILLION to $10 TRILLION, and we ONLY paid $451 Billion in INTEREST ONLY on the National Debt during FY 2008….. (almost equivalent to the annual Department of Defense Budget).
We can surely afford to tack on more to our National Debt, just like the Republicans did during the past 8 years. What’s another $50 Billion in interest payments this year…. not a problem!
Posted by: X-Republican Because of Bush | July 13, 2009, 9:03 am 9:03 am
Some have mentioned Medicare Part D. It was repubs that refused to let Medicare negotiate directly with the pharmaceutical companies on part D (prescription meds). When the democrats took over control in 07 they tried to fix that and when it got to Bush he vetoed it. That is costing the taxpayers billions of dollars a year! Taxpayer vs pharmaceutical/insurance companies, Repubs voted against taxpayers.
Posted by: rickyt1234 | July 13, 2009, 9:23 am 9:23 am
“We all know that privatized insurance has been an abject failure too and you make a good argument for why we need a national health plan – the states cant handle it either.”
Mark from atlanta,
Are you on dope? Who is “we”? Hell, we would all love to pay $100 or less per month for complete coverage anywhere in the country. No decudtibles, no limits on treatments or anything. It’s a great DREAM, but thats all.
While what we have may not be the best system, it is the only one I know of that has provided for the vast majority of Americans. It has hardly been an “abject failure”. The number varies around the 87-88 %. That means over 300 MILLION people are part of it. Is it perfect, Hell no. But what on earth makes any rational person think that turning this over to the gov’t is REALLY going to give us a better system? Lower costs…EXACTLY HOW? no pie in the sky pipe dreams…but details..PLEASE!!!!
You libbies were out here crying for years about no exit strategy in ?Iraq. How about a DETAILED ENTRY strategy if we think we are gonig to turn over healthcare to the gov’t?
Dems, are whining…whining…and whining even more. Shut Up already! …If the Dems & libs had the b@lls, they can make this thing happen without a single Republican vote. So, the real question is , if this thing is the “answer” to all our healthcare issues, WHY dont the Dems just PASS IT ALREADY???
Answer… BECAUSE ITS NOT !!!! AND THEY ALL KNOW IT!!!
ALL…and I do mean ALL the rrhetoric from anyone…Left, Rehight & Center is useless without the details! Simply passing some Blob healthcare bill only passes the problem onto some foolish committee where the people will have no idea what the final outcome will be.
Force the Congress to produce a plan that results in a sheet of paper with coverages and premiums that each and everyone of us can use to compare with our current insurance or any other plan currently available.
If we do not do this, the only absolute about this plan will be that we the Taxpayers will get hosed AGAIN!
Posted by: Mike_C | July 13, 2009, 9:33 am 9:33 am
Like a lot of folks in this country, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test with which I have no problem. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don’t have to pass a urine test.
Shouldn’t one have to pass a urine test to get a government check/benifit (unemployment, medicaide, SCHIP, welfare, etc.) because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.
I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their ass, doing drugs, while I work. . .. . Can you imagine how much money the government would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a government check/benifit?
I guess we could title that program, ‘ Urine or You’re Out ‘ .
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | July 13, 2009, 9:48 am 9:48 am
What President Obama needs to do is take away health insurance coverage for ALL our representatives and start them from the bottom…….where we are now, and see how fast health care gets fixed. We should have the same health care that our representatives have PERIOD!
Posted by: js45601 | July 13, 2009, 10:02 am 10:02 am
js45601 – You said “What President Obama needs to do is take away health insurance coverage for ALL our representatives and start them from the bottom…….where we are now, and see how fast health care gets fixed. We should have the same health care that our representatives have PERIOD!”
Do you realize what that would cost you?
If Congress were to open the plans they have access to for the public the monthly premiums for a family plan would roughly be between $425.00 and $1300.00, for an individual the monthly premium would roughly be between $177.00 and $550.00 (premiums could be shared between the employer and employee if an employer chose to provide healthcare as an employee benefit). One of the differences in the plan costs is the level of benefits provided and the amount the patient pays when receiving healthcare. To me this would be a viable option as the government would not have to make a large outlay to open these plans to the public and they already negotiate the cost and benefits each year with the plan providers.
Congress does not have “public option health insurance”, The healthcare insurance available to the members of Congress is through private insurance companies (Blue Cross, Aetna, Group Health, Kaiser, etc). The federal government as the employer pays a portion of their monthly premium (just as many private employers do) as part of their compensation package and the Congressman pays the remainder from his salary. When the Congressman uses the services of a health care provider he (not the government) is responsible for any co-pays or deductibles which are due to the provider at the time of service. For reference just Google “fehb”.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | July 13, 2009, 10:17 am 10:17 am
Thank you for your input. I wasn’t necessarily saying that we should have the same heath plan congress has now. We all should be under the same umbrella, everything being equal. Maybe I should have made that more clear. If congress were on the same level that most americans are on health care wise, the bickering would be at a minimum and everybody would be covered at an affordable rate. If that includes public option, so be it.
Posted by: js45601 | July 13, 2009, 11:28 am 11:28 am
“everybody would be covered at an affordable rate.”
What is your definition of an affordable rate?
What coverages does that rate include?
What will the co-pays be (if any)?
What will the deductubls be (if any)?
Posted by: Mike_C | July 13, 2009, 11:40 am 11:40 am
js45601 – I think that Congress is on the “same level” (as you call it) as most Americans. Their employer (the federal government) pays a portion of their health insurance as a benifit of their employment. You will find that the larger the employer the healthcare offered is ususally less costly to the employee. This is primarly due to the fact that the employer is able to get a better package for the employee due to the larger pool of employees who will be covered. In the case of the Federal Government due to its size they are able to offer a range of plans to their employees.
I don’t look at the Congress as having any better healthcare package than any other American as it is through the employer who through the sheer number of employees is able to offer several packages to choose from.
Posted by: Sandcrab1612 | July 13, 2009, 12:00 pm 12:00 pm
Here’s what I think. Everytime a (typically ignorant) Democrat tells me that taxes should be increased, I tell him/her that there is nothing stopping him/her from personally paying more taxes, writing a check to the IRS, or giving more to help the poor. Every time, without exception, the Democrat balks and backpeddles…… and does not like that idea.
Democrats are only for spreading the wealth if they do not have to provide any of the wealth being spread. Democrats spread other stuff.
Democrats ARE all about having other people provide for THEM, and against personally having to provide anything for OTHERS. Democrats are all about being taken care of by other people.
That is why they support the liberal policies, including having the tax-base give them healthcare.
Posted by: Democrats for Narcissism | July 13, 2009, 12:08 pm 12:08 pm
Let us look at this issue rationally: there simply is no constitutional support for the notion of taking money from one group of citizens and forcing them to pay for medical insurance for another group. Just try to imagine the reaction of our founding fathers to that proposition during the Constitutional Convention.
The idea of yet again attacking those who have greater earnings may be politically easy, but it is a form of tyranny. Taxation ought only be used insofar as is necessary to provide for the common defense of our nation or to support those elements of society which directly contribute to us all (roads, schools, etc.) and which require a national effort because of the scale of the project. Medical care, however, is a personal, one-on-one relationship that requires no such national effort.
Make no mistake, what is being proposed is greed and envy, no different than street theft, a forced tax payment from some to give a benefit to others which they could equally provide for themselves if they worked for it and if they planned their futures as carefully as we have.
For those who feel it is appropriate, feel free to contribute from your own pocket, but for me and my family we only want to be left alone and we will provide for ourselves.
You likely can predict this, but I could care less what you think of me, that is if you think I am “hard hearted” or selfish. I actually think I am supremely fair minded and it is those of you on the left who are playing selfish games. Leave me out of this nightmare.
Posted by: Protect Freedom | July 13, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
Doesn’t matter whether you’re Republican or Democrat, Kyl is right on this one.
Everyone wants reform – no one likes the idea of people needing medical care going without – but its crucial to the country’s well-being that this piece of legislation be thoroughly well-thought through as the current proposal is flawed.
Insurance companies are the problem — they are not the solution. Take them out of the equation and start the conversation all over again.
Posted by: Waiting for the New World Order | July 13, 2009, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm
Unless your private plan is one of those high premium, “boutique” plans your private plan also limits which doctors you can see. — posted by Mark.
On the contrary, insurance companies can not stop you from seeing the doctor of your choice. If your doctor is not covered by their plan, you can still go to that doctor, but the insurance company will only pay their allowed amount (say $45 for an office visit, but your doctor charges $70 for each visit) — the patient simply pays the difference.
In our current system, cash is still accepted at doctor’s offices and hospitals (that may end soon) and lots of people do use cash to fill in those areas that insurance does not cover. Medical savings accounts allow people to set money aside tax-free for medical care.
Posted by: Au contraire | July 13, 2009, 1:56 pm 1:56 pm
give me som freee stuff please i am a small business and you are making it too expensive to employ everyone. give me a tax break for employing people…do something obama that CREATES JOBS
Posted by: catman | July 13, 2009, 3:25 pm 3:25 pm
so, Senator Kyle,you would prefer to keep the status quo: millions of Americans die because they can’t get a private plan due to pre-existing conditions and/or cost. You would rather them all die of their illness than fix the system. I just want to be clear.
Posted by: am burke | July 13, 2009, 3:39 pm 3:39 pm
America is the only western/modern country that doesn’t provide health care for its citizens. How long can the stingy conservatives put this off? Keeping our citizens covered should be a matter of national pride!!! Give me a break, Senator Kyle.
Posted by: am burke | July 13, 2009, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
am burke:
The issue is who pays for this. There is absolutely no justice in forcing me to pay for your insurance. Pay your own way and stop mooching.
Posted by: Protect Freedom | July 13, 2009, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm
Protect Freedom: surely you dont’ believe you arent’ already paying for the ER visits by the uncovered? I’m trying to save you some money. Seriously, I’d much rather live in a society knowing everyone has coverage. It’s not mooching, that argument is so old and unfounded.
Posted by: am burke | July 13, 2009, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
I want healthcare reform and need it because I don’t have healthcare. It is crazy, just crazy to think that it could happen by August. I want good, solid healthcare that benefits all of us, not reform that just benefits Obama.
Posted by: BonnieInTexas | July 13, 2009, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm
When you or one of your parents are denied medical care due to rationing and age, then tell everyone republicans only care for the upper class, or will the rationed care only apply to republicans?
Posted by: ZK | July 13, 2009, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm
I just wanted to express a few thoughts about Health Insurance:
1.) No More DEBT: Any insurance program must be 100% PAID for. We cannot afford to put America in any more debt.
2.) Proper Funding: Any insurance program must be properly funded. Any time the American govt. plans a program it is ALWAYS underfunded. The savings that were planned are never realized (just look at Medicare and Medicaid). We must properly fund the system.
3.) How to Make Insurance Affordable: One of the biggest issues is how to make it affordable. We should create a public program for the chronically ill people. IT is the chronically ill people that are increasing costs for everyone else. If we take them out of the system…the other 90% of people can afford the new and much lower rates. (Insurance companies must agree to lower rates dramatically, especially since their costs will drop dramatically without the chronically ill people in their system.) We’ll just have to face that we will have to pay for this group of people for the rest of their lives.
4.) No Compete Clause: By having only the chronically ill people in the govt. program, there is no competition between a public program and the private insurance programs. We need to preserve the capitalistic system we have…public programs don’t work! The capitalistic system is the best in the world, that is why everyone comes here, the questions is how to make it affordable.
5.) Simplify the Type of Programs: Insurance companies have to create separate companies and policies for each state, because each state has different requirements of what needs to be covered. This is a waste of money. Make 4 or 5 simple NATIONAL programs that cover everything.
6.) Punish Irresponsible Parents/People: Every state has low cost insurance for children etc., yet parents don’t enroll their children. People will buy cell phones and cable TV and $5.00 coffees, yet they won’t buy insurance. People who are not responsible need to be penalized (Just LOOK how many people weren’t ready for the TV conversion!! Even though…they had OVER ONE YEAR to get ready…people still weren’t ready. People like this need to be pushed into doing what is right.)
7. Reward Good Behavior: Car Insurance rates are affected by your behavior…why not health insurance? If you smoke, are overweight or don’t go for your yearly check ups….you should pay more because these are preventable. (I would not add too many things to list except these simple preventable items.)
Posted by: Mike | July 13, 2009, 7:44 pm 7:44 pm
The product of health insurance is to provide you with medical coverage when you need it.
Unlike other businesses that need to provide you with their product in order to make any money, health insurance companies actually make more money for themselves when they restrict and do not pay claims.
In other words, they make more money when they do NOT provide the product that you have paid them for.
Read the 50 to 70 pages of your health insurance contract.
Pay particular attention to the section entitled “limitations and exclusions”.
People’s health is not a product that needs to be left to the whims of money motivated CEO’s and stockholders.
If that is your thinking, you might as well have your police and fire department protection based on insurance premiums you pay.
Then you can go to the police and fire protection insurance page for ‘limitations and exclusions’ on whether or not the police or fire department would come out to your house in the event of an emergency.
The point is, you would never think of discriminating against another citizen if he was the victim of a fire or crime.
So why would you be ok with health insurance companies discriminating against fellow citizens who have pre-existing medical conditions?
Posted by: Scott Greene | July 13, 2009, 10:13 pm 10:13 pm
This is beginning to remind me of the small child who keeps bugging his or her parents for ice creame only to get it to find it was the wrong flavor. We need the correct flavor, lets slow down and get it right the first time. Mr. President how long did it take you to get a dog????? Some of us will die in the mean time and that is Ok because or children and grandchildren will have a better medical life plan. Also please tell them when it will really go into effect.
Posted by: william | July 14, 2009, 1:37 am 1:37 am
IF Kyle is so sure about Healthcare Reform NOT going through, Well, I want my TAX dollars that are paying for HIS and his family “cadillac” healthcare to be given back………..then I could afford my Own.
Posted by: tychisum | July 14, 2009, 10:15 am 10:15 am
People are worried about the stability of dollars, i.e. high inflation, high tax, as a result of over one trillion dollar federal annual budget deficit and tens trillion dollars national debt due to years of overspending by government.
Posted by: austin | July 14, 2009, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm
None of the proposals seems to contain costs very effectively. Probably the best way to do that would be to shorten the length of time a drug stays under patent protection.
Posted by: Tom | July 14, 2009, 4:06 pm 4:06 pm
I would like to see a list of all the things we could agree on.
It hurts me to think there are people who will not or cannot go to the doctor or hospital because they do not have insurance. Especially children. For all the people who argue about health care reform, I want to know how many are ok with children, poor people, and non employed people not having access to medical care.
The real first question is should the people of this United States that are born to a contract called the The Constitution of the United States expect something in return? You are law abiding even if you do not work or have high intelligence or ambition. It makes me more comfortable knowing that law abiding people get the minimum needs for health and survival. It’s better for all of us.
I wish Democrats and Republicans would cut to the chase and not argue about who screwed what. Or how it’s going to be paid or who is in charge. First admit what seems morally right. Are you OK with people who deserve health coverage not having it? OK, thats probably 20 Million. Is it OK that if you are not covered with a health plan because you do not have a job or cannot afford it that you may lose everything you own and your quality of life. My guess is a lot of people who are scared of socialized medicine, and big gov or taxes might actually agree on the core concepts. Maybe not, but that’s what I want to hear. What is it you believe? I want more people to be healthy and happy around me. Even if my taxes are used for it. Especially if my taxes are used for it. We need to set our priorities and expect our taxes to be managed. Who cares if the roads are free of pot holes and the illegals are invading if you are sick and your children are sick and your friends are sick. Health trumps all.
Posted by: Larry | July 14, 2009, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
Lets see. Roosevelt tried to get it done, so did Truman, then Nixon, next Clinton and now Obama. So 75 years and no National Health Insurance.
No hurry Senator Kyl; we know what you really want- delay and then deny.
Posted by: david d | July 14, 2009, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm
Republicans simply don’t want to loose the lobby money they get from health care. It is a myth to insist that a private option will have the government making health decisions for us and not our doctors. Who do you think makes those decisions now? The big insurance companies. We won’t be losing control of our health care, we will be making it available to all like any other civilized nation does. We are the only ones who have to suffer this way. Thanks GOP!
Posted by: Kathy | July 15, 2009, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm
What americans need to know is that we are the only major nation in the world that doesn’t have some form of national health care. Why? Greed. Seems to me the people most concerned about going national are people who currently have health care. Why! Scare tactics on the part of the people who’ve had there hands in the cookie jar far to long. The very people who are afraid of it don’t realize we with good jobs and benefits are paying for it any how. We make up the difference with either higher health care premiums or increased taxes.
Posted by: dan | July 16, 2009, 2:07 am 2:07 am
As for the earlier comment by proud conservatives related to liberals. How do you explain giving the people who can most afford to pay taxes the biggest tax breaks. Explain that to me! It sure made no sense to offer tax incentives to ship jobs overseas. All that helped was the wealthy, not the country. Maybe I don’t get it. Sure would like an explanation.
Posted by: dan | July 16, 2009, 2:15 am 2:15 am
The longer Republicans stall health care reform, stem cell research, stimulating the economy -the longer people either die of diseases or in poverty. Every other democracy has health care coverage for all people -including Iraq. It is ironic that Republicans could foot the bill for continuing the war in Iraq, but not for health care of Americans. Disgusting of them to continue to block what will save lives. Reforming health care will save billions just by prevention alone-and save your money on that H1N1- because it will end up making people sick rather than cure a flu bug.
Fire the top management of the FDA and NIH is a good start on health care reform.
Posted by: P Newsman | July 19, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
You people and your LIBS vs Rep….they are all the same. Each and every one of them has an agenda with people in the back pocket waiting for payoffs…they vote the way they do to GAIN themselves or GAIN for the people who gave him the most money or helped get him elected…anyone who does not see this is out of touch. The whole lot of them would stab you and I in the back if it served them well.
I am a conservative. I disagree with SOME Liberal CITIZENS and what I believe to be lazy..”what can America do for me??” attitudes..and their desire to save whales before human lives…That is where my LINE is drawn…Not in politics…
We should question everything coming out of the mouths of these double talkers…
Posted by: ConservativeAmericanInTX | July 20, 2009, 11:13 am 11:13 am
Thomas Jefferson said “The principal of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale”
Ergo a “pork laden” Stimulus package, proposed Healthcare reform, and proposed Cap and Trade, etc.
More examples of how Republicans and Democrats continue to renege on their promises to uphold and protect the Constitution. The unfortunate consequence is that the American sediment is slowly abandoning the wisdom of our Founding Fathers. Congress must remember their oath and put the interest of country before any personal aspirations. We must all remember that we are beneficiaries of our Founding Father’s sacrifices.
Posted by: james | July 20, 2009, 3:56 pm 3:56 pm
Healthcare reform is not Republicans vs. Democrats issue. It is what it is “partisan bickering”. Meaningful reform must not impede on the principals of our Constitution. Congress and every American should take the time to read the Constitution and consider the advice of our Founding Fathers. Then reconvene to state our opinions.
Posted by: kelly | July 20, 2009, 4:16 pm 4:16 pm
Like the lady from NJ said on CNN, why can’t we all be incorporated into the health care system enjoyed by all who work for the governement, and one that is already set up and working? Simple, great group plan, and cheap. So what is all the debate about? We already have a system, why not use it to benefit everyone, not just a few?
Posted by: Larilyn | July 22, 2009, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm
Let us all STOP THIS – and TALK SOLUTIONS.
1. TORT REFORM, 2. REFORM/FIX MEDICARE, 3. REFORM/FIX MEDICAID, 4. ENFORCE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LAWS ON BOOKS, 5. STOP NAFTA, 6. STOP CAP & TRADE.
OUR PRIORITY SHOULD BE JOBS. LET’S HAVE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TO – BUY AMERICAN – THIS WILL BUILD AMERICA.
SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN 1 YEAR – REMEMBER THE ‘BAILOUT’ – HASTE MAKES WASTE.
Posted by: Twyla Edwards | July 24, 2009, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm
Best news that we have heard out of Congress this year. We have another month to enjoy our freedoms. I don’t know about ya’ll but I’m going to see the doc.
Posted by: james T | July 27, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am