Reconciling Reconciliation (No. 1 in a Series) – Lieberman Has Shpilkes

And rightfully so. Obama says that if it is not passed now, they will not have another opportunity. FALSE. The country is open to starting over and creating a much smaller bill to start correcting the ills of the current system and then building on the successes. But, until delivery systems are improved (drug costs; hospitals; cost of malpractice insurance; medical device costs, etc) are changed, then the current bill is a total sham. Insurance is high because health care delivery is high. Compare your car insurance costs for the services you get. More service, higher cost. The Obama plan will cost more (in Obama’s words) because it will offer more. Imagine what your car insurance would be if it included routine and emergency maintenance. Currently, it only covers for “catastrophic” events – an accident!!. START OVER – the process can happen as soon as we quit talking about this bill. And, have the benefits start Oh so much sooner than the Obama bill if it is such an important piece of legislation. And quit trying to say it is budge neutral – if I pay for something for 10 years, but only get 6 years of benefit, then it has cost me more!!!

“Lieberman said an unnamed GOP senator told him…”
Maverick John McCain perhaps? Where the heck is McCain and the GANG OF 14 on THIS one? I actually agreed with him then and feel he and Joe should be stopping this now.

As I posted in my previous post, TRUST seems to be the big issue in this debate. It is at about 50/50. I am amazed that it is that high. RICH/ELITE bought out by the RICH/ELITE running our Country?? Where most of us are middle class and below.

“Americans remain more confident in the healthcare reform recommendations of President Obama (49%) than in the recommendations of the Democratic (37%) or Republican (32%) leaders in Congress.”
Gallup
March 5, 2010

Most of the public would rather watch Lost than the State of the Union addy.

Most of the public would rather watch Lost than the State of the Union addy.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | Mar 5, 2010 3:43:46 PM
You must be talking about the SOU address where the President stated, “Jobs must be our number one focus in 2010.”
And where he vowed to double American exports over the next two years, which he said would support two million new jobs. (I’m sure he’ll tap-dance out of that one somehow – “vow” will be his way out – saying the GOP thwarted his efforts no doubt.)

Lieberman cracks me up.. I wouldn’t want to see him paint himself into a corner.

What planet is Lieberman living on? Why does ABC give him so much press? What more are the non-cooperating Republicans going to do, not cooperate more?
How many times do you have to have 99-0 votes on something that they attempted to filibuster before the press wakes up?

The Republicans haven’t been co-operating for a long time.
It is pitiful that they would make such a threat. It is their job to tackle the problems that face our nation.

Americans want cheaper health care! We do not want more of the same we REQUIRE a real solution. USA pays almost DOUBLE what Canadians do for health care.
Canada simply removed the private health insurance for profit insurance companies from the health care system and cut the costs of health care by almost one half.
So why would that work you ask? Why have private for profit health insurance have become the merchants of misery in our health care system?
I think the reason is so simple we tend to overlook it. In order to become Doctors, Doctors take an oath to do good for their patients and not to harm anyone. Essentially Doctors promise not to enrich their pocketbook at the expense of our health. That is not to say Doctors always live up to that oath but private for profit insurance companies never took that oath and in fact do exactly the opposite.
Health insurance companies spend huge amounts of money doing what we do not want them to do. Insurance companies have no business being in the business of deciding our health care system, our health policy, and deciding who gets what medical service and who doesn’t!
They are NOT serving our best interests, they are serving theirs!

Lydia wrote:We can opt out of owning an auto, opting out of owning your own body sounds a little silly.
Lydia of course you don’t understand.
You voted for President Obama!
You completely missed the point.
The Government, State or Federal,
cannot order any citizen to buy a
specific product.
That is unconstitutional!
The distinction here is Choice.
If I choose to buy auto insurance I
will.
If I choose to purchase health
insurance I will.
I do not have to purchase either one
and no one can make me.
If I choose to smoke I will or I won’t.
If I want a cheeseburger I don’t have to
ask the government’s permission to do
so.
Once you allow the government either
Federal or State to take away your
choices you are under
totalitarian rule!
We the people will not let Obama and
the Dems take away out freedoms!

tierra:
It will be ruled unconstitutional and
will be set aside by the Supreme Court!
The President and he Dems should scrap
this bill and start over working with
the Republicans this time to solve
the problem.

There is no fixing the current bill – it needs to die. Real reform, at a bare minimum, was a reform package with a legitimate public option, available to all Americans – something which is absent from the current bill. The bill, as it stands, is an evil abomination which will destroy the very people it was originally intended to help.
Frankly, I don’t think this country will survive the next three years intact if this bill becomes law.

reaganfan, if you don’t buy auto insurance in most states, you face a suspension of your license and registration, as well as fines and restoration fees. Sure, no one can force you to buy insurance but you are choosing to risk the consequence of fines and loss of license. Why not go one step further and complain about needing a license as well?
And of course you can smoke if you want to take the risk of dying horribly of lung cancer or heart disease. You can eat hamburgers for three meals a day and clog up your arteries.
Your reasoning shows why everyone should buy health care insurance. Otherwise you will cost society a lot of money when the doctors and nurses try to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. And believe me, even years of paying premiums won’t cover the expenses a confirmed smoker or serial fast food eater will incur.

Lydia – A “good bill” would eliminate Health Insurance companies from our health care system and reduce the cost of insurance by about one half. Other countries have done it, why can’t we!

Hopefully, the bill doesn’t get to the Senate. I will actively campaign against any Ohio Rep that votes for the “Lousiana Purchase”, “Cornhusker Kickback”, “Florida Flim-Flam”, and 9000+ earmarks.
The Bill that the House will have to vote for is unconstitutional as the “Cornhusker Kickback” violates Article I Section 8: “,,,, but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”

“The public so overwhelmingly despises this bill because of the glimpse of it they got while the libs were arguing and buying one another’s votes.”
smart, all indications are that the public holds this particular bill in disfavor primarily because it doesn’t go far enough to provide health care reform.

smart, all indications are that the public holds this particular bill in disfavor primarily because it doesn’t go far enough to provide health care reform.
Posted by: Flash Override
—
Of course. But public opinion/poll numbers (even the 1.5% you speak of)didn’t do a complete nosedive until the deals started being cut. That’s when the radical left realized what wasn’t going to be included, even after the money changed hands.

Flash — “all indications are that the public holds this particular bill in disfavor primarily because it doesn’t go far enough to provide health care reform.”
Please aim us in the direction of a polling outfit that reached that conclusion. I believe you will find that the Berkley, CA crowd believes the bill doesn’t go far enough. Conservatives consider it an overreach of government and fiscally irresponsible. I believe that independents are disappointed that the tactics used to pass the bill fly in the face of the campaign promise of a post-partisanship.
Reid & Pelosi, in their arrogance, decided that a bipartisan bill wouldn’t meet the litmus test of their left-fringe ideology. They made the decision to go it alone and still haven’t gotten the job done. We would be looking forward to the benefits of a bipartisan bill by now if all the campaign rhetoric contained an ounce of truth.

mitchscove, good question!
Feb 26-28 McClatchy/Ipsos poll
“Thirty-seven percent [of those who oppose health care reform] said it was because the proposals don’t go far enough. The overall numbers switch to 59 percent in favor of health care reform, 30 percent against. Putting aside those with no opinion, it becomes 66 percent in favor of health care reform, 34 percent against. Some would call that a consensus, or these days, a super majority.”
This has been the case since the January 11 CBS survey: a plurality of those against the bill take that position because it doesn’t go far enough.
There are particular provisions that are more or less popular than others, but as a whole, that is the public sentiment.

mitch, ’9000+ earmarks’ is clearly hyperbole. I could make a good case that it is a lie, but I take it on good faith since I am as offended at the deals you speak of as you are. Of course, it is also true that if the Senate Republicans would have allowed an up or down vote on the measure, none of those would have been included in the first place.

Structurally, flash, both the Senate bill and the bill that passed the House are big government bills based on the Democratic ideology. That the Republicans may have tried to help them out by pointing out some issues is a tribute to the Republicans. I admit that I haven’t chased all the amendments on the Senate site — I saw an awful lot of rejections — I will give you the benefit of the doubt for now.
The heartburn the bill gives me is that it ‘assumes’ the cost problem is the insurance companies. I have checked annual reports — I know it’s not there.
The bill does not attack healthcare costs – just health insurance costs. The reason is simple — people don’t understand insurance — just the bills. So we have built a massive body of laws around a lie.

Some part of 27% that favors comprehensive that goes farther than the current bills — is not a majority.

The bill does not attack healthcare costs – just health insurance costs.
_____________________________________
It actually does both.

yes Bill do the attack on Health care..