It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


a question about health care and tort reform

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:26 PM
If obama care passes and the rights worst fears are realized and it takes out private health care,would that eliminate malpractice suits?You can't sue the government(unless you get their permission).also I believe it will remove professional responsibility on the doctors part they can just blame it on the government.What do you think?

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:36 PM
reply to post by genius/idoit

It's in the bill my friend. You definitely won't be able to sue. Let me look up the link. . .

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:45 PM
The "arguments" of a "public option" needs to change from how good or bad the pubic option will be to "Why" do we need a public option when we have a perfectly good "Federal Employee Insurance" program.

We pay taxes to support Federal jobs AND their benefit plans... Why don't WE get the option of the same plan at the same cost as Federal Employees?

Why are we getting the (real or perceived) sub-standard "public option"?

We Need insurance reform but we don't need a sub-standard public option.

Demand the same coverage as our Federal Employees!!!!!

You pay taxes, why should YOU get stuck with something sub-standard?

If the public option is so good, why did congress vote to be EXEMPT from it and stay with the Federal Employee plan?

You know why... Demand Better! Demand Equality!

We pay the taxes, we support the Federal Jobs, We should have access to the Federal Insurance Plan at the same cost!

I do not believe the public option can be good if our leaders who are trying to push it on us are exempt and stick with their current plans (that we pay for but cannot have ourselves... screw that, we should all have this plan at the SAME cost as our Federal employees).

[edit on 27-8-2009 by infolurker]

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:48 PM

LIMITATIONS ON REVIEW.—There shall be no administrative or judicial review of a payment rate or methology established under this section or under section

Page 124 lines 24 and 25

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:50 PM
reply to post by infolurker

while I agree with all that, there has to be something were not seeing.I thought this could be it.Why would the democrats risk what they have on a plan the majority don't want?Maybe this bill will give government so much power that it is the end all be all?I'm just asking.

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:52 PM
reply to post by mikerussellus always your on it!

new topics

top topics

log in