Comments on: HEALTH CARE REFORM ‘ENDGAME’ AFOOT?

By: Paul

Paul — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 03:22:07 +0000

Just wish that the Republicans would advocate for reforms to occur closer to the people. At least, they could call attention to the fact that the Obama administration is thwarting state plans to insure more people:

http://www.gopideas.com/~gopideas/page/obama-denies-hoosiers-subsidized-health-insuarance

By: charles

charles — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 23:46:19 +0000

Listen obama tried to do the opposite of Clinton and that was letting Congress write a bill. Now what happened is it became to expensive and there was a serious of other problems. Now pretty much the same thing came with Clinton, but him and Hillary wrote the bill. So the only way this would ever get passed would be if they offered way to much pork in the bill, because they would just say hey hears 500 million dollars so you can build a memorial to Martin Van Buren.

By: Dred Dog

Dred Dog — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:34:16 +0000

If a real,100% publicly funded health care system were on the table, things would be different. Compromise is killing the bill. Compromise exposes weakness and the right has been able to take advantage of it. The people would be behind a system were they didn’t have to pay anything for health care.

You’re joking, right? You’re talking 1/6 of the economy just being handed out for “free?” Doctors going to work for “free?” Hospitals treat you for “free?” Drug makers come up with miracle drugs for “free?”

You must be very young - or incredibly stupid. Everybody would pay for that “free health care” in the form of taxes - unsustainably high, economy killing, job destroying, massively unfair taxes.

Get a life, kid. Get a job.

ed.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:48:19 +0000

If you watch cable news at all, you’ve seen the ads for “health care reform”, now being called “health insurance reform”. “It is an interesting subtle switch in language”. Mike Oliphant runs a small Utah health insurance website http://www.dentalinsuranceutah.net whom deals with people day to day struggling to find affordable coverage. “I think it’s important to not understate the huge difference in meaning between “health insurance reform” and “health care reform”. Let’s not lose focus on the need to reform a broken health care system which includes not only health insurance carriers but also billing practices of medical providers. Why isn’t TORT reform part of the national discussion? Studies show that alone could lower costs by 15% for both the medical professionals and health insurance carriers (Humana). Perhaps the federal government should take notice of what Utah has accomplished with first step of health insurance reform and promises for reform in the medical provider arena. Several interesting changes took place with the passage of H.B. 188. House Speaker Clark has championed the need for change while recognizing the experience of the private health insurance sector. To see more about this visit http://www.prweb.com/releases/utah_health_insurance/health_care_reform/prweb2614544.htm

By: lionheart

lionheart — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:01:16 +0000

The endgame is afoot… but it is a feint. Embedding a “trigger” is nothing more than a trojan horse to enable their ultimate implementation. Any Senator that changes their mind because of this subterfuge is either too stupid to hold office or is looking for any excuse to be able to vote for it (and I think a lot of Blue-dogs are both).

By: Eric

Eric — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:47:31 +0000

Yeah, what they said: it seems to me that by forcing Democrats onto that “thin limb” Obama is courting the very implosion you believe is fading. Also, I really don’t see how legislation can pass, especially in light of today’s unemployment numbers. Americans care about jobs (with health insurance) and not about spending another trillion dollars.

By: charles

charles — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:13:37 +0000

The Democrats and obama had absolutely zero plans to cut care on middle class Americans. The first thing to do would be allow people to purchase care from other states to get better cheaper care. Than you would get rid of the FDA to make it so drug prices go down and we can drug prices down quicker. And there still will be a market for FDA approved drugs if you want them. Yet if you had a choice between paying 50$ less for a drug that has been on the market for two years would you take it. Than through tort reform like loser pays to get rid of the slip and fall lawyers. Also lets just look at it like this another way to cut the price of care would be through insurance companies not making profit through selling the insurance, but by people accessing the insurance. Which lets say you break your arm you pay 50 to a 100 bucks to access the care. And I wouldn’t force any insurance companies to do this, because if one company does this than they all will or else there out of business. Also to get everyone care you would replace medicaid and medicare with private investment accounts in renewable energy such as Nuclear and Geothermal energy. So when you are retired or out of work you can be giving money from these accounts to purchase care. And by giving everybody a thousand dollars at birth and by revenues from that going to purchase more care you would get more stock in the plants so you’ll be able to save taxpayer money and get everybody care, because this sure beats obama’s plan.

By: John

John — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:06:43 +0000

The minimal November mid-terms take on a bigger role now, especially if nothing’s passed before Nov. 3. There aren’t all that many races up for grabs, but people (especially politicians) remember the Republican wipe-out of the Dems in the ‘93 midterms was a portent for things to come in 1994, and candidate filing time starts in some places just a month after the elections. If you see similar results to ‘93 this time around, it’s hard to picture some of the Democrats in the purple or red areas suddenly becoming emboldened to push forward on health care, especially since the House’s version in likely to be more liberal than what comes out of the Senate.

By: Travis Monitor

Travis Monitor — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 04:16:47 +0000

“The chances of the White House and the Democratic party imploding over reform are fading as Obama becomes more engaged on the issue.”

That increases the implosion factor. Imagine if Bush spent all of 2006 being ‘all Iraq, all the time’… oh wait, no need to imagine.

By: Travis Monitor

Travis Monitor — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 04:15:34 +0000

Keep your mandates off your prostates.

The Rubicon is not Public Option. It’s the mandates. Any bill that has individual mandates is Unconstitutional.