It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Republicans Are Truly Against the Healthcare Bill

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 08:56 AM
link   
ACK, I hate quoting quotes, on quotes. I will do my very best to keep this neat but can't promise a thing.




Originally posted by Xtinguish

Originally posted by nixie_nox

That they are running a survey to see the cost difference of large insured companies and self insured companies all over the country? *gasp* the horrors?


SEC. 113. INSURANCE RATING RULES (b) STUDY AND REPORTS.—

(1) STUDY.—The Commissioner, in coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of Labor, shall conduct a study of the large group insured and self-insured employer health care markets. Such study shall examine the following:

(C) The financial solvency and capital reserve levels of employers that self-insure by employer size.


Where's the detail on the information they can go after? There is none, it leaves the door wide open FOR ANYTHING. What's to stop the information from being required by the IRS or SEC?


Most likely the IRS already knows. I still consider the IRS to be the biggest, scrariest agency of all. One of the platforms that Nader ran on that I totally agreed with is that people shouldn't tremble in fear of the IRS.
anywhoo I am pretty sure that the companies have to report it to the IRS.

As for leaving the door open, that could be said about any bill.

I don't think it unreasonable to do a study to make sure that insurance rates are evenly distributed. The main reason health care reform is on the books is to make sure small businesses can have affordable access. I wouldn't put it past insurance companies to give higher rates to smaller businesses in case that business absolves.


Originally posted by nixie_nox

So that insurance companies can't limit the in network provider so they can rake people over the coals when they can't see an in-network provider? Or the few choices they have are not reasonable.

People who live in big cities with lots of providers forget that many Americans live in areas that have few options.

And considering that the number of PCP or general practitioners are declining(because of private health insurance demanding much but paying little) those options are getting slimmer.

I have known women who have had to drive to another state to see an ob/gyn because their areas didn't have any.


Page 2 Sec. 116 - Ensuring value and lower premiums, requires qualified plans to meet a specified medical loss ratio as defined by the Health Choices Commissioner. If plans exceed that limit, rebates to enrollees are required.

What's to stop a regulation of high required loss ratio could limiting how much participating private plans could charge?



Originally posted by nixie_nox

No, you have to be a legal citizen to get the healthcare.


THE BILL: SEC. 152. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services.


Where's the specific exemption to bar illegals from U.S. health care? Find it for me.


CNSNews.com) – Both the House and Senate versions of President Obama’s health care reform plans contain passages explicitly excluding illegal immigrants from receiving federal money to purchase health insurance from either a private or government-run health plan.

link


But there is a hole that doesn't prevent employers from giving it to illegal employees. That is somethign that does need to be addressed. I think there should be mandated that any employer committing fraud has to pay a serious fine.




Originally posted by nixie_nox

THE BILL SAYS "APPROPRIATE ENTITIES" WILL HELP WITH ENROLLMENT. DOESN'T MENTION ACORN OR AMERICORPS.


It doesn't specify any group! ACORN is already providing our census services. Give me one reason why we should think they wouldn't be used in this manner as well?

So? just still pure speculation.


Originally posted by nixie_nox

But if public insurance is so horrible and can't run insurance or anything else for that matter, how could they be so sauve? And, if they are that bad, then that will drive customers to the private sector.


Not if the private insurance is unaffordable.


Originally posted by nixie_nox

I wonder how many people who say this supported the war in Iraq. "to thwart terrorism and keep us safe."

But since when should we have to pay to keep others safe?

Everyone will be paying. I fail to see how people won't pay for it.

The old America: Let a for profit company inflate prices at will, keep it unafforadable for many, and not even gaurentee services despite people being insured.


A study by the non-partisan Tax Foundation finds that the 5.4% surtax on top wage-earners proposed by House Democrats to help fund health care reform would push top tax rates over 50% in 39 states.

"That means government would be taking more than half of every additional dollar from high-income taxpayers,” said Tax Foundation President Scott Hodge. “The lowest top tax rate would be about 47% --and that's in the nine states that don't tax wages."

The proposal imposes a new surtax of 1 percent on married couples who earn between $350,000 and $500,000 (singles between $280,000 and $400,000). Couples with incomes between $500,000 and $1 million (singles earning between $400,000and $800,000) would have a 1.5 percent surtax imposes. Couples who make more than $1 million, and singles who make more than $800,000, would face a 5.4% surtax.


Are you giving half your wages to taxes?

The amount I paid up until recently for healthcare, took my budget 55%.

Our healthcare took over a third of our salary. WE could of bought a very nice house.

And we still have a stack of bills we can't pay.







[edit on 8-8-2009 by Xtinguish]




posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
That war was foisted on the American People through lies, lies and more lies.


That war was foisted on the American People by the U.S. Congress, and Democrats such as Hillary Clinton voted in favor of that war. Don't give me that crap about George Bush and the CIA deceiving the Democrats. The Congressional Democrats independently researched the case for WMD in Iraq and they independently made the decision to invade Iraq.

Take your liberal lies elsewhere, missy.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
That war was foisted on the American People through lies, lies and more lies.


That war was foisted on the American People by the U.S. Congress, and Democrats such as Hillary Clinton voted in favor of that war. Don't give me that crap about George Bush and the CIA deceiving the Democrats. The Congressional Democrats independently researched the case for WMD in Iraq and they independently made the decision to invade Iraq.Take your liberal lies elsewhere, missy.


Firstly, I would like to say that you are RUDE and owe the lady an apology.

Secondly, I would like to offer that your post was an attempt to re-write history by implying the Vote to invade Iraq was evenly split among party lines. (Not sure why Hillary was mentioned unless you simply have Mommy issues.) Crap as you put it indeed.

Thirdly, I'd like to get some FACTS straight to prove that the Vote to Invade Iraq was OVERWHELMING granted by Republican's in both the House and Senate in which the Republican party had majority and control.

For starters, as an acknowlegement of the Brave few who saw through this ruse and voted AGAINST the rush to war:


UNITED STATES SENATE
In the Senate, 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent who courageously voted their consciences in 2002 against the War in Iraq

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Six House Republicans and one independent joined 126 Democratic members of the House of Representatives in voting NAY, on October 11, 2002, to the unprovoked use of force against Iraq.



126 (61%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.


Source

Here are the actual tallies by party.


Source

Doc, your blatant attempt to distort the truth is pathetic.

"History is the distillation of rumour." - Thomas Carlyle


[edit on 12-8-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Double post & video.

Mod please remove.

Thank you
edit on 9-5-2011 by ofhumandescent because: Senior moment



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by fraterormus
 


Republicans (in my humble opinon) lean more towards war and corporate power vs peace and people power.

Everyone reading this, simply research the medical healthcare and retirement package our Senate and House Members have vs what the common man has.

Haven't any of you folks notice they are more out of session than in session?????

Who in sam heck works for who?

We are up to paying about 40% in taxes....................our taxes fund their salaries and benefits.

Now come on, why don't we all petition that we all, everyone, including our house and senate have exactly the same healthcare program?

Why, because our government no longer works for us, they are owned and run by............well read my location.




posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


Excellent post.............how come I can't give you a star? There is no place near your post for a star?

Well here are five ***** and a Bender applause.




posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh another good insightful ATSer banned.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm when am I next?

I tell you ATS has been infiltrated.

Can you say CIA, FBI, NSA, etc?

I would like to suggest each time someone is banned a reason and link to the posts that got them banned be placed in their profile.

Otherwise ATS is like our country, a dictatorship.

Respectfully suggested - OfhumanDescent.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rams59lb
reply to post by fraterormus
 


Both GOP and DNC are in the pockets of the Big Pharma and Insurance Companies! It's all again calling Healthcare reform when it is all a distraction period. It's not reform, it's rebuilding it all together. Both parties suck, we do need real reform but neither party will do anything to fix it.


Ditto.... This "HealthCare Bill" is NOT the very best healthcare you will receive, it's the very best healthcare for those that can AFFORD their own and mediocre for those that get reduced or government funded healthcare. It's really no different than what it already is today, except you can get fined or jailed if you do not have any healthcare, so there's that, too. This is the worst form of so-called "reform" I have ever witnessed. If you want to see a good healthcare system google Uk and Canada healthcare.

edit on 9-5-2011 by ldyserenity because: spelling

edit on 9-5-2011 by ldyserenity because: spelling again



new topics




 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join