Anonymous Due to Bigotry

Wed, Mar 24, 2010 : 9:12 a.m.

Jon: Social security would be perfectly fine except that it isn't paid for. Instead the money to pay for it goes to pay for all kinds of other stuff. Any sort of entitlement will be very popular because most people don't realize that they have to pay for it. They always think that it's someone else paying the bill. I personally think the financial projections for the heal care bill are going to prove to be very inaccurate. If nothing else, the projected tax income from taxing "premium" health plans will probably end up being zero because people will just completely work around the tax in some manner using loopholes.

MikeyP

Tue, Mar 23, 2010 : 9:38 p.m.

So I used the Washington Post's calculator to figure out what it means for me. It'd limit my premiums to $5000 per year. Alright... except that's almost exactly TWICE what I paid last year. A limit that is twice what I'm already paying for the same coverage? woo. hoo. Yeah, that was worth shredding the Constitution, thanks 0bama.

tink

Tue, Mar 23, 2010 : 9:26 p.m.

There are a lot of problems with this "reform". Here are a few: 1) It does not bring down the cost of health care, it just spreads it among more people. The cost of health care will continue to rise, more people will be eligible for Medicaid and the states will be even more broke than they are now. Those of us with decent jobs and decent health care will pay more for it, no doubt. Why would we expect a bunch of lawyers to understand this? 2) No tort reform - how many times in a day must we hear that "only Jeffrey Fieger will tell you the truth, not the doctors or nurses". It is generally cheaper to settle a frivilous suit than pursue it. That drives up costs. Ask an OB physician what s/he pays for malpractice insurance. Expecting a bunch of pols to do this would be like suggesting a form of cannibalism, would it? 3) It does not reward those of us who work hard to maintain our health. Four of the major drains on the health care system - Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and Respiratory issues such as emphysema and COPD - are largely preventable if people do not smoke or drink in excess, eat appropriately (just what percentage of our population, including children, is now obese?), and exercise. Why do we have to subsidize this? And I say tax the heck out of the "sins" such as tobacco products, beer, Chicken McNuggets, soda pop, most chewing gum - things that down the line impose weight on the health care system and really add nothing of value to our lives presently. Use the tax monies to pay for the care these patients will need. 4) It does not force patients to be educated, active participants in their own care. In my many years of experience as a nurse, I have seen that those who have no financial stake in their own care are generally the ones who abuse the system the most. They will still be lining up to get their antibiotics for viral infections. Might be generalizing here, but that is what I've experienced. 5) It does not force us as a society to make hard choices and draw the line at what we will pay for. Should an 80 year old who is relatively healthy get a pacemaker? Sure. But should we do a bone marrow transplant at the cost of hundreds of thousands of Medicare dollars for one patient at the age of 74 when there is only a slim chance of survival? We do this now. Someone has to step up and say "enough is enough". Nowhere in this bill. 6) The infrastructure to absorb this mass of people into the system does not exist. There is already an expected shortage of nurses of 260,000, and 40,000 doctors. I am told that the waiting list for nursing at Washtenaw Comm College is 3 years. Not enough instructors. Maybe letting experienced Bachelors level nurses teach would help out there but currently you need a Masters. There, that is a start. Those of you who say that just because we oppose THIS bill and are sickened by the way it was passed means we are meanspirited heartless people are way off base. There just has got to be a better way of going about changing the system. That those in congress said they didn't know what is in this monstrosity of a bill but they have to vote for SOMETHING do not inspire a sense of confidence. As for Medicare, when passed the projection for the cost in 1994 was $12 Billion; it was actually $107 Billion. Doesn't mean we should not have it, but we should at least be honest about these projections. We cannot afford to be off this much this time. And the CBO had to use the rosey numbers provided them, but realistically most of those cuts won't be made. In the end congress will not cut Medicare, they are too afraid of that voting block because they show up at the polls. And as to lumping us with the jerks who supposedly spit at democrats or spewed racial slurs, should we lump you together with those who said that "Bush should die" when he was president? The venom toward that president was much more poisonous than what is going on now. Not that I was a big fan of his but this president has the luxury of not having the country attacked early in his presidency. My biggest issue with all of this - I have children in their twenties. How can we so blindly do this to them?? How on earth will they ever be able to dig out from under the debt we have dumped on them? They cannot afford for us to be wrong.

Jon Saalberg

Tue, Mar 23, 2010 : 1:50 p.m.

I think Paul Krugman speaks well on this topic - Health Care. When you hear the GOP whine about government programs, I guess they don't like Social Security or Medicare. The states, our own included, that foolishly decide to sue to stop health care, will fail, and will waste our tax dollars.It's a bit sad Tea Party folks cannot resort to polite disagreement on this issue, instead resorting to bigoted and homophobic taunts, and even disruption of House proceedings.

oncebitten

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 6:32 p.m.

Gribble - the comment you made about the race of people on welfare was waayyy off base. There are people of all races collecting welfare. Most people wouldn't mind welfare as much if there wasn't so much fraud and abuse of the system going on. I wonder how many college students are collecting food stamps while their parents pay their tuition? This goes on a lot. I saw even way back when I was in school. How many people use those Bridge Cards and go to some little party store and buy things that are NOT supposed to be purchased with that card? How many buy a few items and get cash back? Those abuses cost us money. Frozen Chocolate: (I like frozen chocolate too - with a cup of coffee - OMG that rocks!) Most people who are disabled and/or chronically/acutely/terminally ill can and do qualify for medical benefits. Michigan does have their own Medical coverage - Blue Care (or something like that), people pay for it on a sliding scale. If their income is too high - they don't qualify, but that would be an indication that they can afford insurance of some sort. People without money or insurance are NOT left out on the streets to die. They can't be turned away from public hospitals and if they need more than emergency treatment the hospitals have people who will help patients fill out the necessary paperwork to qualify for emergency/temporary or even fulltime coverage.

Jimmy Olsen

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 6:26 p.m.

This kind of sums it all up.... Congressman John Boccieri admits the health care legislation expected to be voted on in the house Sunday isn't perfect, but said the bill's passage is better than doing nothing. Nothing would have been better. Reform is definitely needed, but ram rodding this through is insane. Why not start with a concerted effort to rid the system of fraud - this costs billions of dollars each year. How about people taking responsibility for taking care of themselves - proper diet and exercise. How many knees, backs and heart attacks for the over-weight? Diabetes from poor diet. This bill is a travesty and will be proven so in the years to come.

Lokalisierung

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 5:33 p.m.

Put me in the "I Don't Know" section. Stuff kepps gettign changed and moved around so much I have no idea what it will mean for me. I followed a link in this story and one article said generic manufactoeres of prescription drugs lost out....so that doesn't sound good.

jjc155

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 5:04 p.m.

Lets see my current out of pocket health care premium for my family of four for BC/BS community blues ppo, presciption, dental and optical is currently 1% of my base pay. This past year I payed $630 dollar for the whole year for my health premiums. For those that read the bill last week you un-doubtedly saw how the new "premiums" will be figured (precentage of your income over the national poverty level figure for the number of people in your family). For the poverty level number the day I read the bill for a family of 4 was aprox 22,000 per year. Last year combined my family made just under 100K which put us roughly 500% above the poverty level. According to the chart in the bill my "Health reformed" premium will be 10.5% of my families gross income thus just aprox 10K dollars per year, which as you see is aprox 10times the amount that I pay now. NOW this is without using a single benefit from the "new" plan. I will continue to pay my 1% to my employer because there is NO way that the.gov will beable to give me anywhere near the coverage that I currently get. BUT you can NOT opt out of the.gov premium (which makes it a tax correct? thought this wasnt going to raise taxes?) The plan may give lower premiums to those who do not have insurance (because after all they dont pay now as is) but those that do likely are gonna take it...well you know where. All this for the good of 10% of our total population. Next stop.... Immigration "Reform" so Obama et al can get an immediate 15-30million voters on their side in one fail swoop. As put so well by Ayn Rand through John Galt " I swear by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man nor ask another to live for mine." Absolutley saddening, J-

blahblahblah

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 4:05 p.m.

We are fast approaching the tipping point when 50% of our population will have to pay ever increasing taxes in order to support the other 50% which will pay little to no taxes.

frozenhotchocolate

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 3:51 p.m.

I am 24, I havnt had health insurance since I was 21. I work in a four floor restaurant, running up and down stairs all day. Health insurance would be nice but I am healthy, I dont need it, I have allergies, but have never had the flu in my life, plus ive donated blood almost 40 times, so I get my vitals checked every two months. Thing is, I make too much money to qualify for free stuff. But I think people with cronic illness should get free coverage no matter what, people like me can go fifty years without a check-up and be ok, if I had insurance it would be cheap, since I wouldnt use it, but people going broke over medical bills is not cool.

Anonymous Due to Bigotry

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 3:42 p.m.

Gribble: He said illegals not "immigrants". Legal immigration is a good thing. Illegal immigration is not a good thing. It's fundamentally unfair to the people who worked hard and went through the trouble to immigrate legally. Illegal immigrants should be deported because they're an insult to the legal ones. I also didn't see him say anything about black people, only people on welfare. It really doesn't matter (except perhaps to you) what ethnicity of people we have on welfare. People being on welfare is a bad thing, a drain on society, and those people should be transitioned into self sufficiency. The people on welfare are generally receiving Medicaid, and one of the things that the bill does is add more people to Medicaid.

whodat

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 3:36 p.m.

Freemind42 - - So why stop at health insurance? If you're so opposed to a corporation making money, why not have the government take control over every other industry in this country if that'll make you happy. It should also be noted that health insurance companies operate on some of, if not the slimmest, profit margins of any industry. I believe it's around 3%. Gribble - - So you're saying that Medicare and Medicaid are flawless? Wow. Maybe those air traffic controllers (you know, the ones that let their children clear airplanes for departure) should be processing claims, because Medicare and Medicaid are far from ideal.

mi4198

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 3:05 p.m.

Just like Democrats want a socialist society. We have to start paying for this now. Well I hope that my employer won't have to start laying off people to pay the tax on this. Actually now that I think about it, I hope he does then I too can live off the government. Because our country is now a society where if you work hard you have everything taken from you to give to illegals and people who get welfare. I am sure that this is not what my grandfather, father, and son fought for in the wars.

Freemind42

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 3 p.m.

The only thing that will fix the healthcare system in this country is to do what every industrialized nation has done. Single-Payer system. When profit is the driving mechanism behind public health there will always be people left out and burned by the system. For all those who think that the evil government is just taking over your life, it was already controlled by the insurance mafia. I'd rather have people who answer to me involved than a bunch of board members and ceo's who are only concerned about their profit margins.

leon

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 2:46 p.m.

Citizens: Although it may make you feel better by venting your joy or disgust on this issue, it won't change a thing!!! Send e-mails to your representative and senators. Let them know where you stand!!! Do it, even though the bill has passed!!! Encourage your friends to write!! Our entrenched political class will do whatever they please unless you get involved!!!

Phineas Gage IV

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 1:28 p.m.

This "health care" bill is pretext for bankrupting the nation. First bankrupt nation, China refuses to buy government debt, sells our debt obligation, if a buyer buys debt, Triple AAA bond rating is degraded, inflation sets in. Then we are at mercy of government and grateful for any crumbs thrown our way as we proceed towards a workers paradise where every one is guaranteed a job. "Shovel ready green jobs"--agrarian that is high hoe/high hoe its off to work we go....

leon

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 1:14 p.m.

Instead of speculating about the impact of ObamaCare, look at the consequences of RomneyCare (MA): Since it was enacted in 2006, premiums in Massachusetts have climbed at an annual rate of 30 percent in the individual market. check it out: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19125&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD

voiceofreason

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 12:56 p.m.

How is it possible that a majority of the U.S. Legislature lacks a rudimentary understanding of economics?

whodat

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 12:44 p.m.

Calling this "health care" reform is wrong to begin with. The only thing reformed was health insurance and this bill does nothing to reduce costs. True reform, one leading to lower costs, begins with the individual. Obesity levels, diabetes level, and any other measure of an unfit nation are on the rise. Until those numbers start decreasing there will be no true health care reform, just more finger pointing at who's to blame for the high cost. Maybe our government should look into offering more subsidies to fruit and vegetable farmers and less in the way of corn and soy.

DonBee

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 12:30 p.m.

Having taken the time to read the bill, all I could do this morning was hang my head in shame. I can not believe that this is what we call health care reform.

blahblahblah

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 12:28 p.m.

Why add one more giant entitlement program to the others (social social security, medicaid and medicare) which are unsustainable and due to run out of money. Why is no one talking about fixing these programs first before creating a new one? All of these entitlement programs are interconnected because they put today's taxpayer and future generations of tax payers on the hook financially. Given the track record of the social security program, etc., whose buying the idea that this new program will reduce the budget deficit in 10 years??

oncebitten

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 12:19 p.m.

This is an apology: Apparently my post was the one that was deleted for 'name calling'. I called the people that made statements on the TV news coverage 'idiots' because they stated that people who are unimsured and receive medical care at hospitals are a burden to the taxpayers because the taxpayers end up paying for their medical care. However, these same people believe that now that everyone is going to have medical coverage they won't be a burden to the taxpayers. Okay - I was very very wrong for saying that. People who think like that are not idiots. They are just probably a little confused about our taxes paying for all that medical coverage those people are going to be getting now. I think perhaps the irony of what I saw as semi-humorous view of the passage of this bill was offensive to someone. I mean really... How ignorant of me to think that there isn't a difference between MY tax dollars paying for medical treatment of the uninsured and MY tax dollars paying for insurance so those same people can be treated are not totally and completely different. I am sooo very sorry I didn't recognize the difference. BTW - I do find it immensely curious that someone would find my comment about the people who made statements on TV were somehow offensive but my statement that our law makes think WE are 'stupid' becuase they chose to ignore what we wanted was okay... We do need reform - we didn't need THIS reform.

Atticus F.

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : noon

I'm so sick of people saying "the American people dont aprove of this bill" as if they speak for every single American citizen in this country. I've got news for you, I'm an American citizen, voter, and a tax payer, and I do approve of the bill...So please speak for yourself and dont envoke my name in opposition.

NoBowl4Blue

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 11:12 a.m.

This wasn't a healthcare bill but rather a take more control over everyones lives bill. How will it affect people. You are being controlled more than ever. This adminstration and congress are evil. I'm ashamed that up until 8 years ago I was a Democrat. I say screw them now like they are doing to us.

Anonymous Due to Bigotry

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:57 a.m.

Finally a poll with reasonably well designed answer choices. The fact that only 25% of people (so far) fully supported the proposal and another 70% at the least thought the proposal was "deeply flawed" or outright opposed it spells big trouble for those who voted for it. I think the real purpose of the current bill was to allow the Democrats to claim victory even if the bill later gets repealed due to serious flaws and everyone ends up with nothing.

Top Cat

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:49 a.m.

No one should think for a moment that this issue is resolved. This bill is a monstrosity and the American people oppose it. The line that this will reduce the deficit is a lie, pure and simple. The fight begins!

Technojunkie

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:36 a.m.

Given that cost estimates for Social Security and Medicare were a wee bit off, what makes anyone think that letting the federal government violate its Constitutional restraints on a massive scale one more time is going to produce different results? What makes anyone think that our best and brightest young adults won't be discouraged from going to med school because of this federal takeover? Why are the Democrats passing a couple of thousand pages of legislation that they haven't read? This problem is easy to solve. High-deductible insurance paired with Health Savings Accounts, with a refundable tax credit to help the poor pay for them, would do the job with very simple legislation. No penalties needed. Breaking the state insurance monopolies, which would be a correct application of the Interstate Commerce Clause, so that people aren't limited to insurance approved by their own state insurance commissioner would help. Sen. McCain more-or-less proposed this during his presidential campaign. It works great if you care about effectively providing health care. It's not so great if you're interested in federal control.

treetowncartel

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 9:46 a.m.

Ok, and instead they will be backing up all this new found fandango health care with our money, good trade off from student loans. Keep drinking the kool aid. I do believe that the Medicare withdrawal from a paycheck will rise about 30%. Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. And yes Medicaid and Medicare are covered under the social security act. Which ironically, are fleeced of millions, if not billions of dollars on an anuual basis. Because why? It is run by the government and not a private business. Now that we have health care reform it is time for spending reform. Or, should we Just keep giving them money?

Jim Mulchay

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 9:30 a.m.

Reform of health care? - perhaps, and possibly this is the best alternative available in March of 2010. What this does not address is that every dollar spent by federal, state and local governments has to come from somewhere - taxes, fees, licenses, etc. - no one really seems to want to stop spending money we don't have. Perhaps the most revealing thing is that congress still operates in the same old fashion - what can I get for "my vote".

Peter A Webb

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 9:23 a.m.

@treetowncartel You and I will simply have to disagree about federal involvement in insurance regulation. I'm not sure what Social Security, a pension program, has to do with health care. It was passed in the 30's by FDR, not the 60's. Perhaps you are thinking of the very effective and popular Medicare program? Any bank can make student loans. The recent changes only mean that the federal government won't be backing up their loans, accepting all the risk of defaults while leaving all the profit on the table. I would think you would find that to be a good thing.

treetowncartel

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 9:08 a.m.

This bill is not the answer. Health care in its entirety should be left to the individual states and is not something the federal government should be inviolved in. Congress ruined health care back in the 60's passing the social security act and now it is even more messed up with this bill. Riddle me this Batman? Why is there now only 1 private bank, in North Dakota for that matter, that can supply student loans?

Peter A Webb

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 9:05 a.m.

@in4mation The one thing I agree with you about is that this bill doesn't do enough to cut costs fundamentally. That won't happen until the fee-for-service model is altered. But it's absurd to argue that a bill which will cover almost all Americans could reduce access to care. The rest of your claims are also highly suspect. Massachusetts, where I lived for two years, is the only state with mandatory health insurance for all citizens. The residents there have seen their premiums drop by as much as 40%. So there is hope even on the cost side. And remember, if you have health insurance, you pay on average over $1000 a year in premium costs to cover the uninsured, because someone is paying for the uninsured that show up and need urgent treatment. That will happen much less in the near future. I call that hope and change.

Jon Saalberg

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 8:28 a.m.

To the current 29% who voted against health care in this poll: I applaud your honesty in saying you are against all Americans having affordable health care. That take a lot of uh, something. If any of you who voted no, have or support Medicare, which does a good job of providing health care to seniors, your "no" doesn't make sense. If you're a senior, it really doesn't make sense.