Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Let's discuss what's in the Health Care Bill

page: 3
53
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


This post right here is why I am loving this thread. Are some of the claims made in the original list true? Absolutely! But there are also some that are quite a bit of a stretch. If I wasn't at work i'd be helping you guys/gals out. Keep up the good work on this.




posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by redhatty
"THERE WILL BE A Government COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get"
"The Government will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Government HealthCare plan"
 

Why do I get the feeling that this is a one side interpretation of these clauses that suit a political agenda. YOURS. When there is a fair and accurate study of this bill then I will join but this is just politcal fodder for the right wing cows. Good Luck. Oh wait a minute only those that agree with you are allowed to snipe sorry.......



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   
I'm back. Had to buy school clothes for my little guy. . . .


PG 65 Line 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community organizations (ACORN).

I don't see community organizations here. I see retirees but no mention is made of anyone excluded who is over the age of 55.

I can look harder (tthe copy I have is a pdf) but I just don't see it. Have to give a pass on this one for now.

This is the area noted and where I looked.



SEC. 164. REINSURANCE PROGRAM FOR RETIREES.
13 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—
14 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after
15 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
16 of Health and Human Services shall establish a tem17
porary reinsurance program (in this section referred
18 to as the ‘‘reinsurance program’’) to provide reim19
bursement to assist participating employment-based
20 plans with the cost of providing health benefits to
21 retirees and to eligible spouses, surviving spouses
22 and dependents of such retirees.
23 (2) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this sec24
tion:
VerDate Nov 24 2008 23:22 Jul 14, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3200.IH H3200 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
66
•HR 3200 IH
1 (A) The term ‘‘eligible employment-based
2 plan’’ means a group health benefits plan
3 that—
4 (i) is maintained by one or more em5
ployers, former employers or employee as6
sociations, or a voluntary employees’ bene7
ficiary association, or a committee or board
8 of individuals appointed to administer such
9 plan, and
10 (ii) provides health benefits to retir11
ees.
12 (B) The term ‘‘health benefits’’ means
13 medical, surgical, hospital, prescription drug,
14 and such other benefits as shall be determined
15 by the Secretary, whether self-funded or deliv16
ered through the purchase of insurance or oth17
erwise.
18 (C) The term ‘‘participating employment19
based plan’’ means an eligible employment
20based plan that is participating in the reinsur
21ance program.
22 (D) The term ‘‘retiree’’ means, with re23
spect to a participating employment-benefit
24 plan, an individual who—
25 (i) is 55 years of age or older;
VerDate Nov



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by kenton1234
 


You make a mistake in assuming everyone that questions this health bill is right wing. I sit in the middle of the road on most political issues and I still find some things that I most certainly do not agree with in this bill. I don't agree with Obama on a good many things, nor did I agree with McCain or Palin or Bush for that matter.

You can disagree with your government and not be a nutcase. I know that's hard to understand but it's true. Also you can disagree with someone else's views on the government and still respect their opinion and not resort to name calling or labeling.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by kenton1234
 
Not true Kenton, I can't stand Obama or the possible healthcare plan, but I am interpreting this as honestly as because we are ALL going to have to live with this # so we might as well get used to all the tripe.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   
"Uncle Obama Wants You!"

… as long as you’re willing to work for peanuts.

Health Care Bill (HR 3200) provides illegal immigrants, with carte blanche.

"Se Habla Español"


[edit on 8-8-2009 by seasoul]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   
PG 100 Line 15-19 The Government Will be using ACORN and other community groups to promote & enroll.


15 (3) USE OF OTHER ENTITIES.—In carrying out
16 this subsection, the Commissioner may work with
17 other appropriate entities to facilitate the dissemina18
tion of information under this subsection and to pro19
vide assistance as described in paragraph (2).


Now it could be argued the ACORN is not mentioned, and rightly and legally so. But who is the Commissioner going to be? It will be his determination, to do so if he/she wishes.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by redhatty
 


oh boy:
PG 58 Government will have real-time access to individuals’ finances & a National ID HealthCare Card will be issued!

who didnt see this one coming eh?
A national ID card (rfid no doubt) and access to our bank accounts...

Well, it doesnt matter for me since I'm over $100K in debt (student loans), but I still dont like the sound of it.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Hypntick
 


Thanks!
There'll be plenty of claims left for you to help with when you have time I'm sure. Way too many for just one person to go through on their own and keep track of.


_________

reply to post by mikerussellus
 


I couldn't figure out where they were getting that one from either and came to to same conclusions you did about it. Probably safe to call this one unfounded when it comes to ACORN and other community groups.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   

PG 58 Government will have real-time access to individuals’ finances & a National ID HealthCare Card will be issued!


Page 58:

(D) enable the real-time (or near real time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card;
(E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims;


So it's possible there will be a national health care card that is machine-readable. What strikes me as more odd is the line before the one I have bolded. Prior to service they're going to determine if someone is eligible for "specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility"? Sounds worse then going to an out-of-network provider now.

The real-time determination of financial responsibility also concerns me a little. As it is now we can receive care even if we can't afford it. Is this going to change it?

This also leads into the next claim:


PG 59 Line 21-24 Government will have direct access to your banks accounts for electronic funds transfer!


Page 59 Lines 21-24

(C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice;


I'm curious how they are going to do an electronic funds transfer if we don't authorize it.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Hey folks! Let me jump in the party here, I'm going to work backwards through the bill maybe we can meet somewhere in the middle...

Claim:

PG 1018 States give up some of their State Sovereignty.


What the Bill Says:

Subtitle E—States Failing to Ad7
here to Certain Employment Ob8
ligations
9 SEC. 2541. LIMITATION ON FEDERAL FUNDS.
10 A State is eligible for Federal funds under the provi-
11 sions of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et
12 seq.) only if the State—
13 (1) agrees to be subject in its capacity as an
14 employer to each obligation under division A of this
15 Act and the amendments made by such division ap-
16 plicable to persons in their capacity as an employer;
17 and
18 (2) assures that all political subdivisions in the
19 State will do the same.


This says to me that, the states don't have to give up any of their sovereignty, but they will be expected fund it themselves if they chose not to comply. If they do choose to comply the gov will fund it but they will be subject the federal mandates.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   

PG 61 Line 22-24 Congress has no clue what Electronic Medical Records will cost. Asks for estimate.


From Page 61 Line 22-24

‘‘(E) an estimate of total funds needed to ensure timely completion of the implementation plan;


This one is true as far as I can tell. If they need an estimate on costs then they obviously don't already have one.


PG 62 Protection of Data, Government shows they will have database of your personal & financial info.


From Page 62

(c) PROTECTION OF DATA.—The Secretary shall ensure (through the promulgation of regulations or otherwise) that all data collected pursuant to subsection (a) are—
(1) used and disclosed in a manner that meets the HIPAA privacy and security law (as defined in section 3009(a)(2) of the Public Health Service Act), including any privacy or security standard adopted under section 3004 of such Act; and
(2) protected from all inappropriate internal use by any entity that collects, stores, or receives the data, including use of such data in determinations of eligibility (or continued eligibility) in health plans, and from other inappropriate uses, as defined by the Secretary.’’.


It doesn't specifically say anything about financial info, but your personal health info will certainly be part of their records. That is what the HIPPA laws are there to protect. If they are concerned with protecting information from inappropriate internal use in determinations of eligibility in health plans, then that information would have to contain your personal health information. Otherwise there would be no need to insure it's protected.


OK peeps a big one – PG 64 Line 21-25, pg65 Line 1-5 which refers to processing payment transactions by financial institutions


From page 64 Lines 21-25 and Page 65 Lines 1-5:

(2) REVISION IN PROCESSING PAYMENT TRANSACTIONS BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Section 1179 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d–8) is amended, in the matter before paragraph (1)—
(i) by striking ‘‘or is engaged’’ and inserting ‘‘and is engaged’’; and
(ii) by inserting ‘‘(other than as a business associate for a covered entity)’’
after ‘‘for a financial institution’’.


This one's a bit trickier since I had to hunt down the mentioned section of the SSA which reads:


Sec. 1179. [42 U.S.C. 1320d–8] To the extent that an entity is engaged in activities of a financial institution (as defined in section 1101 of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978), or is engaged in authorizing, processing, clearing, settling, billing, transferring, reconciling, or collecting payments, for a financial institution, this part, and any standard adopted under this part, shall not apply to the entity with respect to such activities, including the following:
(1) The use or disclosure of information by the entity for authorizing, processing, clearing, settling, billing, transferring, reconciling or collecting, a payment for, or related to, health plan premiums or health care, where such payment is made by any means, including a credit, debit, or other payment card, an account, check, or electronic funds transfer.
(2) The request for, or the use of disclosure of, information by the entity with respect to a payment described in paragraph (1)—
(A) for transferring receivables;
(B) for auditing;
(C) in connection with—
(i) a customer dispute; or
(ii) an inquiry from, or to, a customer;
(D) in a communication to a customer of the entity regarding the customer's transactions, payment card, account, check, or electronic funds transfer;
(E) for reporting to consumer reporting agencies; or
(F) for complying with—
(i) a civil or criminal subpoena; or
(ii) a Federal or State law regulating the entity.


The bolded sections are the parts that the health care bill will change. I'm not really sure what exactly the claim is supposed to mean here. The text of the bill will alter this section of the SSA, but I don't understand what's wrong with the proposed change.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
Claims:

PG 1001 The Government will establish a National Medical Device Registry. Will you be tracked?



PG 1003 9-11 National Medical Dev Reg ''(iii) other postmarket device surveillance activities" you WILL be tracked.




What the Bill Says:

‘‘(iii) other postmarket device surveillance
10 activities of the Secretary authorized by this
11 chapter; and


That is what he is referring too, but the section is about medical device implants, such as:


SEC. 2521. NATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICE REGISTRY.
12 (a) REGISTRY.—
13 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 519 of the Federal
14 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360i) is
15 amended—
16 (A) by redesignating subsection (g) as sub17 section (h); and
18 (B) by inserting after subsection (f) the
19 following:
20 ‘‘National Medical Device Registry
21 ‘‘(g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national med
22 ical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the
23 ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and
24 outcomes data on each device that—
25 ‘‘(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; and
1 ‘‘(B) is—
2 ‘‘(i) a class III device; or
3 ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable,
4 life-supporting, or life-sustaining.


So what I gather from this is that, if you get a medical implant they will keep data on the implant to determine how effective it is, etc.

The kicker is though is that they said the records will comply to privacy standards and what not, but this gives them the option for addiction tracking.

[edit on 8-8-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


Welcome to the party!


I read that pretty much the same way you do. If the states want the funding, they have to do as the federal government says. It could be argued that doing so entails giving up sovereignty, but I don't see this as being any different than what the states already do to receive funding for public schools. They follow federal mandates on educational requirements and in return receive funding for it.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   
So do all you ANTI-BIRTHERS still think we should't try to get Obama and his administration out the door after looking at this monstrosity. Your out of your friggin mind if you don't want this guy gone and his socialist agendas.

This proposal is an absolute nightmare. I particularly like the part where all non-US citizens will receive care as well.

WAKE UP!!!!!

This legislation has North American Union written all over it!

We have got to remove this idiot.( This is not about race to the morons who think it is)



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


Thanks!
Glad to be here!

I agree, that section is nothing different then what has been going on with all federal programs.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Claims:

PG 993 Government will establish school based health clinics. Your kids wont have a chance.

PG 994 School Based Health Clinic will be integrated into the school environment. Say Government Brainwash!


What it says:

993
1 Subtitle B—School-Based Health
2 Clinics
3 SEC. 2511. SCHOOL-BASED HEALTH CLINICS.
4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Part Q of title III (42 U.S.C.
5 280h et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the fol6
lowing:
7 ‘‘SEC. 399Z–1. SCHOOL-BASED HEALTH CLINICS.
8 ‘‘(a) PROGRAM.—The Secretary shall establish a
9 school-based health clinic program consisting of awarding
10 grants to eligible entities to support the operation of
11 school-based health clinics (referred to in this section as
12 ‘SBHCs’).
13 ‘‘(b) ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible for a grant under
14 this section, an entity shall—
15 ‘‘(1) be an SBHC (as defined in subsection
16 (l)(4)); and
17 ‘‘(2) submit an application at such time, in
18 such manner, and containing such information as
19 the Secretary may require, including at a min20
imum—
21 ‘‘(A) evidence that the applicant meets all
22 criteria necessary to be designated as an
23 SBHC;
24 ‘‘(B) evidence of local need for the services
25 to be provided by the SBHC;
1 ‘‘(C) an assurance that—
2 ‘‘(i) SBHC services will be provided in
3 accordance with Federal, State, and local
4 laws governing—
5 ‘‘(I) obtaining parental or guard6
ian consent; and
7 ‘‘(II) patient privacy and student
8 records, including section 264 of the
9 Health Insurance Portability and Ac10
countability Act of 1996 and section
11 444 of the General Education Provi12
sions Act;
13 ‘‘(ii) the SBHC has established and
14 maintains collaborative relationships with
15 other health care providers in the
16 catchment area of the SBHC;
17 ‘‘(iii) the SBHC will provide on-site
18 access during the academic day when
19 school is in session and has an established
20 network of support and access to services
21 with backup health providers when the
22 school or SBHC is closed;
23 ‘‘(iv) the SBHC will be integrated into
24 the school environment and will coordinate
25 health services with appropriate school per-
1 sonnel and other community providers co2
located at the school; and
3 ‘‘(v) the SBHC sponsoring facility as4
sumes all responsibility for the SBHC ad5
ministration, operations, and oversight;
6 and
7 ‘‘(D) such other information as the Sec8
retary may require.


Nothing to sinister as long as you don't mind expanding the school nurse into a doctors office, what does disturb me though is this part:


‘‘(2) Communities or populations in which chil7
dren and adolescents have difficulty accessing health
8 and mental health services.


So it looks like they will also be doing mental health exams. That is just asking for bad news in my opinion. But to use the services they will need parental consent.

So these claims are false.



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:26 PM
link   

PG 72 Line 8-14 Government is creating an HealthCare Exchange to bring private HealthCare plans under Government control.


Page 72 Lines 4-14:

Subtitle A—Health Insurance Exchange
SEC. 201. ESTABLISHMENT OF HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE; OUTLINE OF DUTIES; DEFINITIONS.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established within the Health Choices Administration and under the direction of the Commissioner a Health Insurance Exchange in order to facilitate access of individuals and employers, through a transparent process, to a variety of choices of affordable, quality health insurance coverage, including a public health insurance option.


There will be a Health Insurance Exchange. Further down from the lines referenced in the claim is this:


(1) under section 204 establish standards for, accept bids from, and negotiate and enter into contracts with, QHBP offering entities for the offering of health benefits plans through the Health Insurance Exchange, with different levels of benefits required under section 203, and including with respect to oversight and enforcement;


Any insurance provider who wants to offer health benefits through the exchange will have to go through the Commissioner. Only plans he/she approves will be offered through the exchange.


PG 84 Line 203 Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private. HealthCare plans in the Exchange.



SEC. 203. BENEFITS PACKAGE LEVELS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner shall specify the benefits to be made available under Exchange-participating health benefits plans during each plan year, consistent with subtitle C of title I and this section.
(b) LIMITATION ON HEALTH BENEFITS PLANS OFFERED BY OFFERING ENTITIES.—The Commissioner may not enter into a contract with a QHBP offering entity under section 204(c) for the offering of an Exchange-participating health benefits plan in a service area unless the following requirements are met:
(1) REQUIRED OFFERING OF BASIC PLAN.—The entity offers only one basic plan for such service area.
(2) OPTIONAL OFFERING OF ENHANCED PLAN.—If and only if the entity offers a basic plan for such service area, the entity may offer one enhanced plan for such area.
(3) OPTIONAL OFFERING OF PREMIUM PLAN.— If and only if the entity offers an enhanced plan for such service area, the entity may offer one premium
plan for such area.
(4) OPTIONAL OFFERING OF PREMIUM-PLUS PLANS.—If and only if the entity offers a premium plan for such service area, the entity may offer one or more premium-plus plans for such area.


EDIT: Inserted claim since I had already posted the relevant section unknowingly.


[edit on 8-8-2009 by Jenna]



posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by die_another_day
 


how have i ever screwed up the lives of blacks and hispanics? i am an american first and foremost! sorry my descendants aren't from a tropical region. i was never involved in slavery-nor anyone i know- which you are getting at. you are an *SNIP* racist- how can you judge people just because of color? my gf is filipino and a LEGAL us resident(and no i did not buy her)
back on topic- i think this bill sucks *SNIP* and will further destroy our country.
i esp. like how the 10th amendment will be overridden. hmm how many states are already looking for a reason to secede?how many amendments can they override before total control?so far i have counted the 1st,2nd,4th,5th(with new census)and 10th
anymore i forgot?
so that is 1/2 of the bill of rights

not to mention i hopeACORN shows up at MY door- they will have a suprise coming


*Mod Edit: Nope on the swears. Cheers -alien

[edit on 9-8-2009 by alien]





new topics




 
53
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join