Health Care Stocks Down

“WASHINGTON (AP) – About 30 unions will run a full-page ad in newspapers Wednesday announcing their opposition to the Senate Finance Committee’s health overhaul bill, a top labor lobbyist said.”
Let the games begin…

The costitutionality of this bill will be a large problem as it is definately in violation of the 10th amendment. This action is not one of the 17 enumerated powers of the federal government and is thus a states power under the 10th amendment.

For $900 billion dollars I think we could just pay their insurance premium.
====
That’s been my idea from the get-go. My Dem husband agrees.
We had bipartisan consensus a long time ago.

“The costitutionality of this bill will be a large problem as it is definately in violation of the 10th amendment. This action is not one of the 17 enumerated powers of the federal government and is thus a states power under the 10th amendment.”
Gee that would mean that Social Security is unconstitutional?
Oh wait the Supreme court ruled that it was in fact Constitutional as is MediCare and MediCaid.
10th amendment nuts are old right wing mainstays going back to the John Birch Society, much like the birthers before them logic, case law and history do not matter

“I’d be interested to read people’s answers to these questions: Assume Joe is healthy, makes $80K per year, and has not purchased health insurance. He decides to remain uninsured but, at age 37, he is diagnosed with diabetes, whereupon he applies for an insurance policy.
Should the company be required to issue a policy? Why or why not?”
I guess covering pre-existing conditions is now out if we are to read the tea leaves of industry shills posting here.

“I guess covering pre-existing conditions is now out if we are to read the tea leaves of industry shills posting here.”
I guess that writer lacks the courage to answer the questions. Evidently he finds them troublesome…

“Now they want to know why a person going without insurance should get coverage should they become ill.”
First I want to know whether he should get coverage. Still awaiting an answer.
I’m also awaiting an answer as to whether a young and healthy person who doesn’t want insurance should be forced to buy it.
Very tough questions, but if you’re a dunce they’re positively scary.

“The insurers’ agenda in autumn 2008 has become Obama’s agenda in autumn 2009. Barack Obama wants to make it illegal for you not to buy Aetna’s or Blue Cross’s product.
Obama opposed an individual mandate on the campaign trail — it was a sticking point between him and Hillary Clinton, who backed it. Obama’s campaign spokesman Bill Burton, now a White House spokesman, attacked Hillary’s proposed individual mandate this way: ‘She’s said she’d ‘go after’ people’s wages if they couldn’t afford health insurance under her plan.’”

The facts establish that Rasmussen is the most accurate, as confirmed by the Fordham study.
In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% and Rasmussen’sf inal poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | Oct 13, 2009 9:12:37 PM
Absolutely ridiculous. Obama won 53%-46% exactly as CNN/Opinion Research and Ipsos/McClatchy had it in their final polls. Rasmussen got it wrong at 52% to 46%.
The “Fordham study” was based on incorrect early vote tallies. The assistant professor’s Nov 5th, 2008 “initial” list was based on an “estimate of a 6.15-point Obama margin.” This ESTIMATE was more than a full point off from the official, final margin of 7.28. The error invalidates his findings and bumps Rasmussen to a runner up position below CNN/Opinion Research and Ipsos/McClatchy who both nailed it.

The games have already begun. The Baucus bill only covers 25 million people, leaving 22 million (or 15 if you take Obama’s latest number) uninsured Americans….
Posted by: Axey | Oct 13, 2009 5:46:19 PM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It keeps getting better and better, doesn’t it?
I bet the ‘Public Option’ is in the final merged bill.
Also in the final will be increased taxes on the rich…>$350,000/year.
On to ‘filibuster’ or ‘floor vote’!

I’ve also wondered about the value of Rasmussen’s likely voter model for a presidential election that takes place in 2012. I suppose there might be something worthwhile in connecting likely voters’ current support for Obama with other current races.
But if the presidential approval poll is supposed to measure how the American people as a whole currently feel about his work, polls of registered voters would be more relevant.

D.C. seems to be addicted to using hammers to fix clocks.

“Ah, that explains why you time and again have ignored questions about the bogus “Fordham study” you cite regarding the accuracy of Rasmussen Report polls.”
Though he is obviously very dishonest, Why should Fascist Hyena be held to a higher standard than Scott Rasmussen who touts the bogus study on his website.
I guess Scott Rasmussen has no problem with cooked numbers provided the results is to his liking.
Geee I wonder what else he cooks numbers for.

The health insurance industry is obviously only concerned with their profit margins, not that 47 million of us have no health insurance, not that those with health insurance and a serious illness still go bankrupt from medical bills at a disturbing rate or that an estimated 47,000 Americans die each year because they don’t have insurance.
We need a public option insurance available to limit the industry’s greed and make available affordable insurance for the uninsured to buy.