|
|
Topic started on 13-10-2009 @ 02:15 PM by nixie_nox
|

WASHINGTON – With support from a lone Republican, a key Senate committee Tuesday approved a middle-of-the-road health care plan that moves
President Barack Obama's goal of wider and affordable coverage a giant step closer to becoming law.
I knew it was gonna end up in the middle of the road. One step closer. Whether you agree with it or not.
yahoo
edited to add additional linkies for the news hounds
reuters
cnn
[edit on 13-10-2009 by nixie_nox]
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Breaking Political News topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 02:27 PM by nixie_nox
|
Now the Finance Committee has cleared the bill, the focus will quickly shift to the closed doors of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's
office.
The Nevada Democrat must merge the conservative-leaning Finance Committee legislation with a more liberally drawn bill approved by the Senate
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
The primary difference between the Finance Committee bill and the health committee legislation involves a government-run insurance company -- the
public option.
Oh I guess the public option still has to be decided.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 02:35 PM by lernmore
|
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 02:39 PM by octotom
|
Can it really be called "middle of the road" when only one person from the opposing party vote in favor of the plan? I don't think it can.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 02:41 PM by nixie_nox
|
reply to post by lernmore
Thank you but there really is no way to tell. Unless the mods have more specific numbers.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 02:44 PM by nixie_nox
|
reply to post by octotom
I would say yes if that party has genuine intentions. But since the only intentions are to bring down the democratic party right now, then I would say
that one vote is significant.
I know that the vote has to be washed, dried, pressed, signed, notarized, buried flown like a kite before we know what the final product is.
But I thought that what the majority of the conservative party was against was the public option.
So if they managed to reform without a public option, I would say that is a success for both sides.
quite frankly, I am getting to the point where I don't care what they decide, as long as I never have to hear about it again. XD
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 03:02 PM by lernmore
|
reply to post by nixie_nox
Sure there is.. a quick glance at the "newest threads" will show you which one posted first..
Either way, they're in different areas, so it's no biggie to have both active... it's just harder to follow both discussions.
As for the OP, wasn't it Snowe that also ensured the nearly trillion dollar bailout got pushed through without any support from the republicans?
In my opinion, health care reform is needed, but I think they're making a huge mistake here. Support from one (R) will now be portrayed by the most
of the MSM as overwhelming partisan support.
Personally, I think if this continues, the Democrats have just sealed their fate.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 03:03 PM by Phlynx
|
Originally posted by nixie_nox
WASHINGTON – With support from a lone Republican, a key Senate committee Tuesday approved a middle-of-the-road health care plan that moves
President Barack Obama's goal of wider and affordable coverage a giant step closer to becoming law.
I knew it was gonna end up in the middle of the road. One step closer. Whether you agree with it or not.
yahoo
edited to add additional linkies for the news hounds
reuters
cnn
[edit on 13-10-2009 by nixie_nox]
If America is such a democracy like they say it is, why don't they let the people vote on it?
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 03:04 PM by total_slacker
|
  
The sad thing is that the bill as it sits now will not do anything significant to control healthcare costs. As long as we continue to pay doctors
like sweatshop workers....based on the number of procedures/office visits they can grind out......there will never be any market pressure for them to
cut costs. Any healthcare reform that doesn't contain a fundamental restructuring in how we pay the providers is going to fail to address the
biggest problem, which is that the care is rapidly becoming too expensive for the American public to afford.
The trouble with being "middle of the road" is that you tend to get run over there.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 03:49 PM by charlie0
|
We must not forget the attitude of Republicans. When it comes time we must vote them out of the office for not giving us One payer public option
health Plan. Middle class is the one that suffering the most and we as middle class can stick it to them.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 04:01 PM by Sestias
|
Originally posted by nixie_nox
I knew it was gonna end up in the middle of the road. One step closer. Whether you agree with it or not.
I don't think it's "middle of the road" at all. It's a huge multi-billion-dollar giveaway to the insurance industry. No wonder Olympia Snowe
voted for it.
If Congress mandates that everybody in the country must have health insurance, but there are no curbs on what the insurance companies can charge, they
can raise their rates to whatever they want and people will have to pay them. And then, of course, they will have the additional bonanza of millions
of new customers on top of greater revenues.
The only way to keep the insurance companies honest is to offer a not-for-profit option--a "public option" funded by the government. Then the
insurance companies will have to compete with the government for cost and coverage and they will have to keep their rates lower and cover more people
and conditions.
I do not support any bill that will force me to buy whatever the insurance companies want to offer.
Without the "public option" health insurance reform will only benefit the mega-corporations, not the American people. I will not support
legislation that doesn't have one.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 04:04 PM by Benevolent Heretic
|
Originally posted by Sestias
The only way to keep the insurance companies honest is to offer a not-for-profit option--a "public option" funded by the government. Then the
insurance companies will have to compete with the government for cost and coverage and they will have to keep their rates lower and cover more people
and conditions.
I agree completely! I still have hope that the final bill could possibly have a public option, but I'm not holding my breath. All I can do is call my
congressmen!
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 04:06 PM by David9176
|
I don't trust anything that comes out of Washington right now. We're going to get screwed...I know it...you know it...we all do.
But it gets even better.
Goldman Sach's employees make 23 BILLION in bonuses in 2009!
I simply can't believe it....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 06:50 PM by sos37
|
The answer isn't a public option or regulations by the government - if you want to keep the insurance industry honest and competitive you do the
exact same thing you do in any industry - you keep competition alive so that the true winners are customers. And the government should NOT be in
business competing with anyone, period.
The only way to keep insurance competition alive and healthy is to open up private insurance purchasing across state lines so that you increase the
number of players in the pool - give people far more choices AND make it easier for people to buy insurance; those insurance companies that remain
competitive will stay afloat and those that don't will go bankrupt. That much is assured.
[edit on 13-10-2009 by sos37]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 07:06 PM by David9176
|
reply to post by sos37
Well, we don't enforce anti-trust laws in this country anymore so that won't work. Small competitors cannot compete against the big boys as they
can undercut prices much easier.
Health insurance should be non profit...which doesn't mean it needs to be run by government.
Health insurance companies supply nothing and produce nothing. They push numbers around. That's it...they are nothing but banks.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 07:13 PM by marg6043
|
This health care reform shows to those that wants to see, who our government is working for, when we the people are going to be forced to support
by law private entities in this nation.
Servants and slaves are just the beginning of the list of names we the people can be call for in the New Amerika.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 07:29 PM by Mailman
|
reply to post by Sestias
If there were more open jobs for people to contribute to a companies healthcare, those prices would be stable and affordable. There is no way to fix
this problem if there are no jobs for people to pay for it.
Create jobs first then reform healthcare, i'll bet ya it wouldnt need to be anything like what they are trying to promote at the moment.
This is the last economical giant the Government wants to get their tentacles wrapped around.
[edit on 13-10-2009 by Mailman]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 07:34 PM by marg6043
|
reply to post by Mailman
I wish it was the government working for the people the one wrapping its tentacles around the corrupted private insurances business, but I am afraid
that is the corrupted private insurance business the one that have our government wrapped around with its tentacles, now we the tax payer will be
investing trillions to support that big monster, or in lame terms bail them out.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 08:46 PM by carewemust
|
If the Senate Finance bill becomes the type of health reform we will
eventually get, the premiums will skyrocket well beyond what any
meager government subsidies can cover. The insurance industry
said this themselves via the Price-Waterhouse report on 10/12/09.
And remember, the subsidy payments to individuals and families
are highest for the poorest and the least for the middle class. A
family earning more than $79,000 a year will get ZILCH from the
Fed Government, but a 100% increase in health insurance premiums
over the next 8 years. Can you say "OUCH?".
There can be a government health insurance plan if the President
removes his $900 billion dollar 10 year cost cap. Not every family
can afford the estimated $350 to $500 a month in premiums to the
government though. This range is the estimated family monthly cost
after applying the government subsidy.
There's no in-expensive solution because we're some of the sickest
people in the industrialized would. The fat person's diseases along
with mental issues are rampant in this country. Medical and prescription
costs per-person beat every other country by a long shot.
-cwm
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 08:58 PM by Mailman
|
reply to post by marg6043
I knew I spelled tantacles wrong, thanks.
Why were we not looking at these big insurance companies ten twenty years ago? This crisis unfolded yesterday because its sombodies agenda, not
because it needs adressed.
They will go ahead and pass this, and the unemployment rate will continue to rise... Why enable the problem with such a massive change,
that will keep things mostly the way they are?
|
copyright & usage
|
 |