Gillespie: Health Care Stakes – Dems Could Lose House

Once people find out that nobody can get the public option that has insurance,and those who will be forced to buy insurance and the premiums are just as high as ever, will really be mad the insurance companies gain 47 million new customers.

Reduced deficits (as some may promise) do nothing to resolve the debt, it keeps growing. It would take many zero deficit budgets with a line item to pay down the debt to resolve it!
Does anyone believe that will happen? It certainly won’t happen if we keep crying for healthcare and other unaffordables! It’s time to realize the “deep pockets” aren’t really there and deal with reality!
Ed Taylor | Nov 1, 2009 12:35:10 PM
Reality is that taxes have to go up. Over 40% of people pay zero national income taxes. Zero. Taxes haven’t been this low for almost a century – is it any surprise that the national credit card is being run up? Increase taxes across the board is the only way to eliminate the debt, short of eliminating 75% of the military and halving social security benefits. (No other budget items are big enough to really have an impact.)

They could if they turn their backs on the people that put them in office. Tank this current house health care bill and replace it with the robust public option. I would rather a good bill fail than have a bad one pass. Lets see which dogs vote against that bill because if they do they are done. More than 60% of this nation wants public health care. My bets would be the democrats better at least be voting on a bill that gives it to them. The republicans have warned them it’s theirs to loose. Give me public health care or give me a list of politicians to send packing. I’m OK with either.

George, I am really tired of watching how unnecessarily aggressive you are in questioning your guests. It’s not just this week – it’s every week, and you’re not alone – David Gregory is no better. Neither of you are any Tim Russert, that’s for sure, who managed to ask the same question, get the same information, without bordering on rudeness in the process. You don’t have to behave in that manner to be a good journalist.
I’m happy to see that Liz Cheney hasn’t been on recently. She gets debunked in statement after statement and finds the most mundane things to criticize. The most recent false statement she made involved her criticism of Obama for paying respects to fallen soldiers at Dover and having the press there. She stated that George Bush NEVER had press there when he paid his respects. She could get by with statements like this if they were true, but the lie was that Bush NEVER paid respects to fallen soldiers at Dover.
Today’s round table was generally OK. The only bothersome part was Ed Gillespie spouting the meaningless Republican talking points that generally aren’t true without any data to back them up. I’m not sure I understand your role as moderator. When people make false statements, I don’t hear any questioning from you and that troubles me.

They will lose it all due to their irresponsible spending.

The current health bill is an attempt to make life easier for conservative and moderate Democrats. I agree that we need to allow any one to opt out of the current system of for-profit health care. The best way to do this is to allow everyone to buy Medicare. The problem is either that the public is not ready for this option, or if they are, they have not made their wishes known to their representatives. In addition, way to many people on both sides of the aisle depend on health insurance companies for campaign contributions. That’s where the real crime lies.
In the meantime, according to a recent study by the Harvard University Medical School 44,000 people die each year because of inadequate insurance. According to a report by John Hopkins university, between 1988 and 2005, 17,000 children died because they did not have health insurance. According to the 2009 CIA Fact book, our infant mortality rate is twice as high as the infant mortality rate of Sweden or France. And many women must pay as much as 48% more for health insurance than men, and if they are diagnoses with breast cancer, they are condemned to death because health insurance companies will find an endless number of reasons to drop them,
We are supposed to be a Christian nation. When Jesus healed the sick did he ask about their HMO’s? He also told the rich man to sell all he had and give to the poor.
If we are really a Christian nation, then we must follow Jesus’ example.

The problem with that whole theory is that this country is comprised of more than moderate and conservative Democrats, the Independents and Republicans need to be figured in! Meicare for everyone????? Medicare doesn’t currently reimburse at the cost of delivery, great plan, there is a disaster ahead.

All you naysayers to limited government run health care do not realize that doing nothing or just opening up the borders to insurance companies will just cost more in the long run.

Oh, and it didn’t cost a trillion dollars.

“Most of the dissent is within the Democratic party, not with Republican party, and “do it with us or we’ll do it anyway” is not being bipartisan.” —— I agree with you about the dissent in the Democratic party. That’s the problem, and if they are not careful, it’s going to cost them. It has nothing to do with the Republicans — there’s complete dissent there and there should be. As for “do it with us or we’ll do it anyway,” some are saying it, but it’s not happening because of dissent within the party. Again, that’s the problem.

How about a comment from a Poirot Independent, who doesn’t have dog in this fight and who actually lives outside the Beltway?
Their are only two choices in 2010. A low turn out and a high turn out.
A low turn out (a nasty and acrimonious election) favors the incumbents.
A high turn out (an upturn in the economy or a national crisis) favors people coming out in support of the President.
In which one of these two scenarios do the Republicans gain seats?
George just let me know when an Independent, unbiased thinker is allowed a seat at the Round table?

It’s interesting that Republicans are so supportive of removing states’ rights to regulate insurance. I thought Republicans were supposed to favor states’ rights.
If insurance companies are allowed to pick and choose from 50 states for the most lax regulation, people will certainly need to read the very fine print. Be prepared to find that when you need surgery you’re policy stipulates that you have to travel to Mexico. It would make perfect business sense for insurance companies if they are not prohibited by regulation.
Perhaps we should go one step further in deregulating medicine. I’m a reasonably smart guy that took science in school. I think 80% of my routine medical care could be taken care of by myself. Why am I forced by government to pay a doctor to write a prescription for routine stuff like allergy meds and antibiotics, for which I could read the same reference books the doctor reads to figure out the contraindications and dosage? Deregulate… allow individuals to order tests and prescribe their own medications.
We’re heading down the path of likely getting the worst of both world’s from the Dems and Repubs… mandated insurance which is so lightly regulated as to be useless and with little that contributes to cost controls.