Senate votes to invoke cloture on health care bill
-
I Wear Pants
You really don't think we need tort reform?derek bomar wrote: Watching Morning Joe this morning Joe basically said there were 3 things right now 80% of congressman and senators would support without a fight:
1) end the anti-trust exemption for the health insurance industry
2) tort reform (I'm not sold on this, but not really that opposed to it)
3) allow people to buy across state lines
these would be a slam-dunk and would actually bring down costs...wtf is going on? Do I think a public option would be beneficial also? Yea...do I need one? No, if you make the reforms mentioned above I think we all win. The winners currently aren't us but the insurance industry because they just got 30 million new customers. This.Fucking.Blows. -
CenterBHSFan
I would say - sometimes! -
believer
Let me elaborate on that...YES.ptown_trojans_1 wrote:Does that apply to foreign policy and the DoD as well? -
BoatShoes
In regards to Tort Reform,I Wear Pants wrote:
You really don't think we need tort reform?derek bomar wrote: Watching Morning Joe this morning Joe basically said there were 3 things right now 80% of congressman and senators would support without a fight:
1) end the anti-trust exemption for the health insurance industry
2) tort reform (I'm not sold on this, but not really that opposed to it)
3) allow people to buy across state lines
1. Most of Tort law has traditionally been handled in the judicial systems of our Sovereign States and many of those States, such as Texas and Ohio have already enacted tort reform. Hence, a Federal intervention in Tort law would be just a different kind of federal intrusion into state sovereignty. If you say are against big government it would absolutely and unequivocally be against all of your principles to advocate for federal tort reforms in the mold being argued by republicans.
2. The problem with Med Mal torts, isn't the action for damages in and of itself...it is the costs associated with defensive medicine as a reaction to any potential tort action. IMHO, the defensive medicine you see is largely like an irrational fear of spiders...the fear is irrational in comparison to the potential harm..very few doctor's are sued and even less people who are injured and have a case, sue.
The unjustifiably high med mal insurance premiums are also like an irrational fear of spiders...and it's just another way for insurance companies to improve their bottom line and rather than reveal the true reason, that they just want to make more money, a facade is created that suing doctor's who fall below the standard of care is wrong.
What is wrong is that when an insurance company insures a doctor who gets sued, successfully, the insurance companies are not eating their losses and having to be held accountable for making a bad choice as to who they insure because they will raise the rates on everyone they insure to cover their loss. This is not just because they doctor's they insure, who've done the right thing, are in an unfair bargaining position with their insurers, because they are colluding together.
3. The current bill includes a proposal for the Secretary of Health and Human Services to oversee and examine defensive medicine practices in hopes of improving them and reducing costs...this was a republican idea and a good one.
In regards to buying insurance across state lines.
1. This is a good idea...And, I think this idea will somewhat be accomplished by the current bills with the national, federally regulated insurance "exchanges." People will be able to buy insurance from any company in the U.S. in these exchanges except that the market will be federally regulated. Perhaps not good enough for the capitalists with a Capital "C", but perhaps satisfying for capitalists with a lower-case "c"
In regards to this Bill that got through the Senate so far;
1. You have to be impressed by the lack of balls that the liberal senators have and the PR job being done by the right.
Republicans can pass the 1.2 trillion dollar Medicare Modernization Act in 2003 on the credit card, while massively cutting taxes....the most fiscally irresponsible bill and largest expansion of the welfare state since the 1960's, and are still getting away with calling themselves "conservative" and grandstanding about how this current bill will add to the deficit (even though the CBO says this bill will not...It probably will but the point is, the R's didn't give a crap about deficits 6 years ago and there was no debate the socialist bill they passed was going to add to it).
AND, the republicans are actually swaying public opinion! I have no idea how they're pulling this off given the aforementioned.
The progressive democrats have zero testicular fortitude and cannot even get their precious public option with a near supermajority and 100 years of trying to get this issue passed. The republicans can pass twice the social welfare legislation and still get away with being the party of small government. Hat off to the Republicans and their brilliant smoke and mirrors.
2. How's about Joe Lieberman sticking it to the Democrats for trying to run him out of the Senate a couple years back? There's a guy with stones. So funny that he stuck it to them after the shit they pulled on him.
3. Oh, and how about the Republicans COMPLAINING about cuts to medicare!?!?! What!??! A Social program that they wailed against in the 60's!??! I thought you wanted to keep your own money in your pocket and not have to work so others can take your money...old people included! This is unreal! The basic foundation of the conservative's beliefs are supposed to be that cutting social programs are good because, that means we're less socialist and that means we are more free.
Every single person who calls themself a conservative, according to the modern definition and the catch phrases I see on all of their bumper stickers should be applauding this bill for cutting medicare...They should justifiably hate all of the new spending...but they should applaud the cuts to medicare...But again, as evidenced by the MMA of 2003, the Republicans have about as much principle as the Democrats have back bone.
4. I wish people would stop calling it "government run health care" because at this point the thing is nothing close to "government run health care" and actually cuts more money from a government social program than it creates...
5. Hats off to clumps of embrionic cells that experience no pain or have any sentience or experience of the world as they still prove to have more sway over politics than any other constituency.
And, isn't this ironic...if Conservatives and Ben Nelson had their way, and abortion was illegal...there'd probably be enough little poor, abortion-surviving socialists running around to have voted in a couple more democratic senators and then there'd be a public option, etc. for the dems. Oh the Irony.
6. I'm tired of hearing about how "most of the nation doesn't want this bill." For one, most of the public doesn't want us in Iraq or Afghanistan any more (not me, just sayin), but you will never hear republicans give two shits about the people's opinion in that area. Now, I"m not saying that means it's a good bill...I just want them to get off their high horse...you don't care what the people want either...you will just yell as loud as you can about any point that you think has relevance. r
This is really the best the "progressives" can do with their charismatic, "Change we can believe in" leader, a massive Republican, laissez-faire and Bush hangover, and both houses well entact?
President Obama's going to sign this bill and say he did what he came to Washington to do and he's gonna say it with a straight face and he's going to be a bigger fraud than Tiger Woods. -
CenterBHSFan
^^ hahaha!!! W/B Shoes!
-
HitsRus
It was a nice rant....kinda hard to read...but I think he has a fascination with testicles. -
Writerbuckeye
I have news for you boat: Obama already IS a bigger fraud than Tiger Woods.
He took that honor when he began campaigning for the office he now holds. -
ptown_trojans_1
That is a nice partisan attack. But, I've seen someone who is not a fraud, just overwhelmed and troubled by domestic politics and calm, calculated on foreign policy.Writerbuckeye wrote: I have news for you boat: Obama already IS a bigger fraud than Tiger Woods.
He took that honor when he began campaigning for the office he now holds. -
Manhattan Buckeye" just overwhelmed and troubled by domestic politics and calm, calculated on foreign policy. "
LOL what is calm and calculated about what happened in Copenhagen? I'm willing to believe that we should reduce our energy output for many reasons, but that was a poor showing by Obama, and it isn't "domestic politics", it is domestic reality, you're from Portsmouth, right? What is the real unemployment rate there? 30%? 35%? I'm going to Huntington this weekend, I expect to see a lot of situations that would remind me of a 3rd world country. Heck, my Facebook page is filled by people that are looking for work. Things are not good, saying he's overwhelmed is a pretty big understatement. IMO he had no idea what he was getting involved with (to hang a preposition). -
ptown_trojans_1
I take climate change as a domestic issue, and like the President has a very restricted view on the international aspect, and am against the treaty. In a broader sense, whether Iraq, Afghanistan, arms control, and many other foreign policy issues, so far we have seen a calm, calculated and realist foreign policy. Some may call it appeasement or weak, but I simply do not see it. His NSC structure, relationship with State and Defense are really good (not seen in a long time) and policy is slowing starting to come out.Manhattan Buckeye wrote: " just overwhelmed and troubled by domestic politics and calm, calculated on foreign policy. "
LOL what is calm and calculated about what happened in Copenhagen? I'm willing to believe that we should reduce our energy output for many reasons, but that was a poor showing by Obama, and it isn't "domestic politics", it is domestic reality, you're from Portsmouth, right? What is the real unemployment rate there? 30%? 35%? I'm going to Huntington this weekend, I expect to see a lot of situations that would remind me of a 3rd world country. Heck, my Facebook page is filled by people that are looking for work. Things are not good, saying he's overwhelmed is a pretty big understatement. IMO he had no idea what he was getting involved with (to hang a preposition).
Yes, I'm from Portsmouth, but Obama is not the reason why it has high unemployment. That has been around since the 1980s. The main reason is piss poor, corrupt, local leadership and the state simply not giving a damn about south central Ohio. Obama does have a large influence in the area.
I say overwhelmed and troubled as he has been taken hostage by the radical elements of his party and made huge mistakes in giving power to Congress. But, in terms of domestic issues, Congress does reign supreme, and it seems that Obama has been blindsided by the partisan nature of everything. He did think he could reform DC, but has had no luck and it is taking a toll on him. The LBJ effect is killing him, as he is becoming powerless on the issues in comparison to Senators and local officials. That is what I meant by overwhelmed. I am disappointed in his domestic policy, but knew going in that Presidents have more influence on foreign policy than domestic policy. -
believer
The bizarre rise of BHO to POTUS after blowing past Clinton - who was a shoe-in to get her party's nomination - coupled with the absolutely shameful manner in which the mainstream media stuck its collective head up Obama's ass to help convince the American public that he was the Second Coming make him - if not fraudulent - at least in waaaaaaaaaaaaay over his head.ptown_trojans_1 wrote:That is a nice partisan attack. But, I've seen someone who is not a fraud, just overwhelmed and troubled by domestic politics and calm, calculated on foreign policy.
So yeah - I agree - he's "overwhelmed." -
HitsRus
OVERWHELMED?
Experience was a campaign issue that was overlooked/downplayed by the media and the people who voted for him. Instead experience became an issue with Palin, rather than the guy who was actually running for POTUS.
Seriously, how do you not see this coming? Lacking experience he had to rely on old Washington insiders. What would happen should have been obvious.
As flawed as John McCain is as a conservative, at least you had a guy who would stand up for what he believed was right for America and Americans. We would have already had health insurance for the 30 40 million uninsured not ALREADY covered by a government program or thru their employer.... in the form of a tax credit for that select group only. The cost $10- 30 billion. Nothing else required from the government except a stroke of the pen and a little regulation. Instead we now have this bloated, pendulous, pork laden piece of crap before us. But the issue has never been only about getting people covered, is it? Stupid, stupid people. -
Hesston
To me this says it all about concerning reform.
Please meet Dr Starner Jones from Jackson, Mississippi.
His short 2-paragraph letter to the White House accurately puts the blame on a "Culture Crisis" instead of a "Health Care Crisis". Its worth a quick read:
Starner Jones, MD
I am a seventh generation Mississippian and wanted to come back here after going somewhere else for college and medical school.. My extracurricular interests are golf, hunting, fishing and college football.
Dear Sirs:
"During my last night's shift in the ER, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient with an expensive shiny gold tooth, multiple elaborate expensive tattoos, a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and a new cellular telephone equipped with her favorite R&B tune for a ringtone.. Glancing over the chart, one could not help noticing her payer status: Medicaid. She smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and, somehow, still has money to buy beer.
And our Congress expects me to pay for this woman's health care? Our nation's health care crisis is not a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. It is a crisis of culture ˜ a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on vices while refusing to take care of one's self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance. A culture that thinks "I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me". Life is really not that hard. Most of us reap what we sow. Don't you agree?
STARNER JONES, MD
Jackson , MS -
captain_obviousThe reason selling HCI across state lines won't make as big of an impact as you would think is that States mandate different things that have to be covered by insurance. So plans would not be able to be the same, thus adding to cost to manage. But still will help add a little competition which will be good.
Why do people not get why it does not make sense to mandate Insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions? If it will cost $100,000 in yearly medical bills to cover you due to a pre-existing condition, why would an insurance company cover you for $400 a month? What kind of business model is that? They would either go bankrupt or have to drastically raise their premiums. It would not take long for all healthy people to drop their insurance plan until they to have an health event (pre-existing condition) that would cause on going $s, then they would go get the best insurance plan for their particular health problem. That provision would just encourage even more people to not get insurance or get crappy insurance until they have an expensive health condition. Without the "healthy" people to bring the premiums down, guess how much insurance will now cost... -
ross ford81"The Insirance Companies are laughing all the way to the bank." This direct quote from a senator voting YES on the bill.
-
captain_obviousIf you really want to make a dent, tort reform is nice, selling across state lines is great. Make any govt. "assistance" based on a major medical insurance plan. They pay the first $5,000 as a family, first $2,500 individually. After that it is covered. Then let the hospitals, doctors, etc. have teeth on collections. They can garnish wages, they can garnish Unemployment checks, they can take tax refunds, they can take possessions and auction them, they can put them in jail just like tax fraud etc. They can also use compassion for those that need it, just like hospitals do right now. I don't know why this isn't in the mix and is not that expensive to begin with and I believe is cheaper than the current system. As a taxpayer I am not opposed since it actually allows the person to maintain some independence, but covers the catastrophe when it gets out of hand for both everyone else and the person being covered. It also will also teach consumers to price shop when possible and skip the ER for the common cold, tooth ache, etc. which will bring down price for everyone.
The Pre-existing condition issue is difficult, but I believe a start would be to not allow insurance companies to drop you due to health changes. Possibly set up a Super Fund that is paid into by all insurance companies that helps them to all hedge their bets against expensive ongoing health issues without driving one carrier out of business or having to drop the person. A general idea would be to have all customers that develop on ongoing expensive health issue over $50,000 annually would be covered by this joint fund. They would maintain the same insurance, and their insurance company's fund contributions or payments would go up or down depending on the health of the fund and how much they are paying out above the $50,000 mark to patients. This would share the risk across other companies so that people would not be dropped or rate hiked. And it doesn't punish the best insurance plans that would have people with expensive conditions flock to them, and quickly push them out of business. -
QuakerOatsElliot Stabler wrote: by a vote of 60-40
Final Vote to be held Christmas Eve at around 7:00pm
Thursday Night can't get here soon enough
Glenn,Rush,and Sean,and all reform haters will be crying tomorrow...I love it
This is NOT "reform". It is anything but reform. It IS a massive transfer of power and control to the executive branch, it IS a violation of untold numbers of provisions in the constitution, it IS legislation that will lead to higher costs, higher taxes, higher deficits. It IS a DISASTER. -
believer
Welcome to the American version of European socialism. God bless Amerika.QuakerOats wrote:This is NOT "reform". It is anything but reform. It IS a massive transfer of power and control to the executive branch, it IS a violation of untold numbers of provisions in the constitution, it IS legislation that will lead to higher costs, higher taxes, higher deficits. It IS a DISASTER. -
David St. Hubbins
Elliot Stabler=ArmedForces
Anyone else think so? -
derek bomar
nah...elliots young, armed forces was old -
believer
Nope...Elliot is AF's cousin twice removed.David St. Hubbins wrote: Elliot Stabler=ArmedForces
Anyone else think so? -
Elliot Stabler
Do you have ANY proof to back up ANY of those claims??QuakerOats wrote:Elliot Stabler wrote: by a vote of 60-40
Final Vote to be held Christmas Eve at around 7:00pm
Thursday Night can't get here soon enough
Glenn,Rush,and Sean,and all reform haters will be crying tomorrow...I love it
This is NOT "reform". It is anything but reform. It IS a massive transfer of power and control to the executive branch, it IS a violation of untold numbers of provisions in the constitution, it IS legislation that will lead to higher costs, higher taxes, higher deficits. It IS a DISASTER.
I doubt it
Please show me where it will increase costs,taxes,and deficits. As a matter a fact,I can disprove that one quite easily.
Please show me where is violates provisions in the constitution
Please show me how it is a MASSIVE TRANSFER OF POWER to the president?? Is he himself going to run the program??
I'll be waiting for your response...but I get the feeling I'll be waiting for awhile -
fish82
Yeah....the POTUS is the only guy who works in the Executive Branch of government. :rolleyes:Elliot Stabler wrote:
Do you have ANY proof to back up ANY of those claims??QuakerOats wrote:Elliot Stabler wrote: by a vote of 60-40
Final Vote to be held Christmas Eve at around 7:00pm
Thursday Night can't get here soon enough
Glenn,Rush,and Sean,and all reform haters will be crying tomorrow...I love it
This is NOT "reform". It is anything but reform. It IS a massive transfer of power and control to the executive branch, it IS a violation of untold numbers of provisions in the constitution, it IS legislation that will lead to higher costs, higher taxes, higher deficits. It IS a DISASTER.
I doubt it
Please show me where it will increase costs,taxes,and deficits. As a matter a fact,I can disprove that one quite easily.
Please show me where is violates provisions in the constitution
Please show me how it is a MASSIVE TRANSFER OF POWER to the president?? Is he himself going to run the program??
I'll be waiting for your response...but I get the feeling I'll be waiting for awhile -
fan_from_texas
Good post.derek bomar wrote: Watching Morning Joe this morning Joe basically said there were 3 things right now 80% of congressman and senators would support without a fight:
1) end the anti-trust exemption for the health insurance industry
2) tort reform (I'm not sold on this, but not really that opposed to it)
3) allow people to buy across state lines
these would be a slam-dunk and would actually bring down costs...wtf is going on? Do I think a public option would be beneficial also? Yea...do I need one? No, if you make the reforms mentioned above I think we all win. The winners currently aren't us but the insurance industry because they just got 30 million new customers. This.Fucking.Blows. -
cbus4life
Well said, Derek.fan_from_texas wrote:
Good post.derek bomar wrote: Watching Morning Joe this morning Joe basically said there were 3 things right now 80% of congressman and senators would support without a fight:
1) end the anti-trust exemption for the health insurance industry
2) tort reform (I'm not sold on this, but not really that opposed to it)
3) allow people to buy across state lines
these would be a slam-dunk and would actually bring down costs...wtf is going on? Do I think a public option would be beneficial also? Yea...do I need one? No, if you make the reforms mentioned above I think we all win. The winners currently aren't us but the insurance industry because they just got 30 million new customers. This.Fucking.Blows.