By Kristina Wong

Mar 30, 2010 8:28pm

How Will It Impact You?

For seniors, parents, and students, our World News look at how the bill the president signed today could impact your lives:


- jpt

User Comments

Forgive for asking the obvious question, but where were these reports BEFORE the bill was made law?

Posted by: Woody | March 30, 2010, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm

For starters
1. Our Healthcare Premium has already gone up more the 1 dime, and no we don’t make $250,000.
2. My husbands retiree insurance most likely will cease forcing him into Medicare.
3. Ahh, Medicare, which fewer providers are will take like the Mayo Clinic in AZ or Walgreens.
So far it’s lose lose for us

Posted by: Sally | March 30, 2010, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm

This ill-conceived legislation will affect you in more ways than you can possibly imagine. Better to ask this question in 2 or 3 years…

Posted by: Quo Warranto | March 30, 2010, 10:39 pm 10:39 pm

This ill-conceived legislation will affect you in more ways than you can possibly imagine.
Posted by: Quo Warranto | Mar 30, 2010 10:39:54 PM
_______________________________________
So you say . . . so what? You oppose everything . . .

Posted by: barb-savage | March 30, 2010, 11:06 pm 11:06 pm

AMTRAK, Post Office, VA, Medicare (going bankrupt) Social Security (going bankrupt) Involvement in education, Fanny May, Freddie Mac… the list goes on… whatever would make one think the Federal Government could even do a mediocre job of managing health care. Stand by for exploding national debt (even more than now), wrenching tax increases, heartless rationing, and the general decline of the quality of life in America. The only thing that might change this is the tidal wave of debt that is about to sweep over the country. No one will escape the consequences, not one, not you. There is a good chance the resulting economic turmoil will cause the dramatic dismembering of the entitlement programs and force a return to self-reliance and and the private sector.

Posted by: Quo Warranto | March 30, 2010, 11:33 pm 11:33 pm

and the general decline of the quality of life in America.
_____________________________________
The quality of life in America – like all other empires – has had its ups and it will have its downs. No country has been able to maintain dominion. It is highly dubious the level of consumption on the planet can continue at its television soap opera/dumbed-down, consume-everything programming rate. People seem to smugly think they’re smart. We may have to learn we haven’t been behaving that smartly, and things will have to change.
We will get better at what we do.

Posted by: tierra | March 30, 2010, 11:44 pm 11:44 pm

There is a good chance the resulting economic turmoil will cause the dramatic dismembering of the entitlement programs and force a return to self-reliance and and the private sector.
___________________________________
One can only hope. Unfortunately from what is on display by the unions in Greece and now the students in California there’s a deep seated level of entitlement that demands payment for things but balks mightily at any hint of sacrifice to make those things achievable. The idea seems to be we’re charitable when we spend other people’s money but don’t ask for a dime of ours.

Posted by: GO | March 31, 2010, 12:36 am 12:36 am

The idea seems to be we’re charitable when we spend other people’s money but don’t ask for a dime of ours.
Posted by: GO | Mar 31, 2010 12:36:53 AM
_______________________________________
Do you mean like when Bush felt entitled to spend all that taxpayer’s money, but didn’t even bother to tax people? Figured he could just spend other people’s money while ‘lowering’ taxes? No accountability.
Unfortunate the economy also collapsed on his watch. Bad combination left us where we are . ..
What kind of entitlement program is that?

Posted by: tierra | March 31, 2010, 3:14 am 3:14 am

I really love the way Obama(lets not seperate Obama from his administration)is going to grill the insurance companies in hearings because they admitted the bill (ahem, law) will cause insurance premiums to go up. Does that chill any of you robots or is that fine with you? Hard to believe, the age we are living in…

Posted by: mjishernameo | March 31, 2010, 7:02 am 7:02 am

Forgive for asking the obvious question, but where were these reports BEFORE the bill was made law?
—————
Nancy told us…and she was speaking truth for once in her demented life;
pass the bill to see what’s in the bill.
My question is why aren’t there riots in the streets?

Posted by: mjishernameo | March 31, 2010, 7:04 am 7:04 am

Here’s how it was always going to work..
- poor people get some sort of coverage and will pay the same amount of taxes.. plus a few sin taxes (which is a killer for them)
- middle class will get a wash, better coverage, limited premium increases and slightly higher taxes
- people who the government considers rich will pay more for care and pay way higher taxes

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | March 31, 2010, 7:46 am 7:46 am

***The idea seems to be we’re charitable when we spend other people’s money but don’t ask for a dime of ours.
Posted by: GO | Mar 31, 2010 12:36:53 AM
_______________________________________
Do you mean like when Bush felt entitled to spend all that taxpayer’s money, but didn’t even bother to tax people? Figured he could just spend other people’s money while ‘lowering’ taxes? No accountability.
Unfortunate the economy also collapsed on his watch. Bad combination left us where we are . ..
What kind of entitlement program is that?
Posted by: tierra | Mar 31, 2010 3:14:31 AM***
‘Morning tierra. Quick question, if you have a moment?
Does the errors/crimes/mistakes of one person absolve the errors/crimes/mistakes of another?

Posted by: bobtherepublican | March 31, 2010, 9:05 am 9:05 am

Is our sister country now Venezuela? I’m serious, these are the questions we need to now ask. Reforming health care is one thing, trusting that the federal government will handle health care with the golden touch – you’re only kidding yourselves.

Posted by: EPU | March 31, 2010, 9:39 am 9:39 am

Here’s the bottom line: FACT – the American 55% majority didn’t want this bill. Obama rams this bill down our throats with Pelosi saying “you have to vote for the bill to find out what’s in it”. What kind of governing is that? Then, why would Obama also say “I’d rather be a really good one term president”? If he was a really good president the people would support his actions and reelect him. But Obama knows the American people don’t support his actions so he’s got his sights set on a one term presidency saying things like ‘really good one termer’. He calls being “a good president” forcing his radical ideas down our throats against the will of Americans. How is this being a good president? Good for the 35% who supported his bill, not for the majority of Americans.
Cue tierra talking about Bush . . . I love it how tierra always takes legitimate arguments and suddenly changes the subject. It’s like a conservative going into Bill Clinton’s presidency when it comes to Iraq – you don’t hear conservatives doing that the way tierra ducks and dives into Bush’s presidency.

Posted by: EPU | March 31, 2010, 9:51 am 9:51 am

Does the errors/crimes/mistakes of one person absolve the errors/crimes/mistakes of another?
Posted by: bobtherepublican | Mar 31, 2010 9:05:09 AM
____________________________________
If you have a basic understanding of what happens when an economy collapses and the effect that has on government deficits and budgets – yes.
There are repercussions to Bush having doubled the national debt and having overseen the free-fall collapse of the economy. Very real repercussions.

Posted by: tierra | March 31, 2010, 11:14 am 11:14 am

It means I pay more, for less. On top of that, I pay more taxes to pay for someone else.

Posted by: Rick McDaniel | March 31, 2010, 11:15 am 11:15 am

Very real repercussions.
________________________________
What are they when you know it’s in bad shape and pile another $2 trillion onto the balance sheet, grossly increase the size of gov’t (while the private sector is losing the bulk of the jobs) then for icing pass a new entitlement that further increases expenses without seriously addressing costs. Why yes very real repercussions.
BTW regarding your comment about reducing taxes below it is not an entilement to return people’s own money to them. Entitlemnet is when you give someone something the want but don’t have.
At least it was across the board tax cuts (although the timing of being done during wars was a concern many including myself had at the time) where this healthcare is so unfair in it’s policies and deal making it’s it’s the worst part about it. It would be hard to sacrifice if there was more expense for helping those truly in need but to have more expense for bribes and a system, historically structured to cultivate overblown expenses and corruption is just sickening. Also the increased role of HHS this creates is really something to take a serious look at. While I may have serious reservations about the current HHS how about if a real different one was in there say someone who said no coverage for any kind of research or payment for stem cell treatments would you still like your one size fits all fed insurance policy. It really is something to be careful what you wish for.

Posted by: GO | March 31, 2010, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm

***Does the errors/crimes/mistakes of one person absolve the errors/crimes/mistakes of another?
Posted by: bobtherepublican | Mar 31, 2010 9:05:09 AM
____________________________________
If you have a basic understanding of what happens when an economy collapses and the effect that has on government deficits and budgets – yes.
There are repercussions to Bush having doubled the national debt and having overseen the free-fall collapse of the economy. Very real repercussions.
Posted by: tierra | Mar 31, 2010 11:14:37 AM***
I cannot agree with your version of situational ethics.
If something was wrong then, and the Bush administration and every serving member of the 107-110th congresses did make grevious errors in fiscal policy, then those same errors compounded by President Obama and every serving member of the 111th congress are equally at fault for committing them once again.
Saying they are not at fault for their mistakes because they were trying to fix the problem doesn’t hold alot of water.
Its like saying a guy shouldn’t be charged for robbing a bank, because the investor that he was investing his savings with squandered the money in bad investments.
Both of them have stolen money. The first crime doesn’t absolve the second crime.

Posted by: bobtherepublican | March 31, 2010, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm

EPU, here’s the facts. Americans, by a wide majority liked the individual components of the health care bill but some voted against the bill as a whole because of the huge amount of negative faux media like Fox news, the right-wing talking heads on radio and t.v. and right-wing newspaper coverage blasting the bill for the past year.
As people actually are finding out the details of the bill, the polls are changing to be in favor of it.
The ideas in this bill aren’t ‘radical’ as you put it. Every other major industrialized nation has better coverage for its citizens than what this bill gives. The bill is actually conservative, compared to a one payer system, for instance.
But I guess if you are looking at it with the eyes of someone who doesn’t care about their fellow American’s, or thinks it is a warped idea that working together we can achieve a better country, it might appear radical. So let me ask, does pooling our taxes to provide police, fire protection, roads, bridges, airports, our armed services sound like radical socialism to you?

Posted by: Lydia | March 31, 2010, 1:12 pm 1:12 pm

Woody, I agree with you questioning why media wasn’t covering all the positives about this bill. Instead they seemed to cover the outrage of the far right against it.
They did the same thing with global climate change, giving the handful of scientist debunking it, the same credibility as the 97% of climatologists who believe it is happening. Ignoring the facts in favor of stirring up controversy for ratings.

Posted by: Lydia | March 31, 2010, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm

Lydia, what polls are you looking at, with people happy with the bill as a whole? And that the polls are improving as people learn about it?
rasmussen reports:
One Week Later, 54% Favor Repeal of Health Care Bill
19% Say Their Health Is Worse Now Than A Year Ago
55% Favor Repeal of Health Care Bill
49% Support State Lawsuits Against Health Care Plan
43% Say Cost of Prescription Drugs Will Go Up If Health Plan Becomes Law
Seems like more of an even split or a slight leaning to against the bill to me.

Posted by: bobtherepublican | March 31, 2010, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm

“Bush doubled the national debt” posted by tierra, Pres Obama tripled the debt in just 1 year just think what he can do in 4.

Posted by: Lizzie | March 31, 2010, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm

Rick McDaniel, isn’t that called redistribution???????

Posted by: Lizzie | March 31, 2010, 2:18 pm 2:18 pm

tierra, you always forget that the democrats where in power when the whole thing fell apart.

Posted by: Lizzie | March 31, 2010, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm

bobtherepublican, the poll showing the opinion of Americans changing to support the health care bill are the USAtoday/gallup poll from March 24, 2010, showing 49% think the bill is a good thing, while 40% do not.
On the other hand, the poll you cited was done on March 19, well before the national media started covering the good things this bill would do for seniors, young people, those with pre-existing conditions,how it will help keep premiums down for us, not to mention how insurance companies won’t be able to cancel your policy when you get sick by using trumped up charges.
Folks just needed a little factual information, instead of the personal conclusions by famous but uninformed ‘talking heads’ that we’ve all heard too much of this past year.

Posted by: Lydia | March 31, 2010, 4:52 pm 4:52 pm

Just watched an ABC video about a newborn in Texas born with serious defects that needed surgery but their insurance company is denying the claims as the newborn infant had a pre-existing condition!
This is the kind of greed that is so hard to understand. How illogical is it to claim a newborn had a pre-existing condition? Thank goodness this health care bill passed.

Posted by: Lydia | March 31, 2010, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.