Health Care

[pattygreen 5]

"What we are getting here is a clear indication that most plans will have to change," said James Gelfand, health policy director for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "From an employer's point of view that's a bad thing. These changes, whether or not they're good for consumers, are most certainly accompanied by a cost."Imagine my surprise at this coming from the worker friendly Chamber of Commerce.

PLANS WILL HAVE TO CHANGE!!!! This is my point. Obama said they wouldn't. He lied! These changes,whether for the good or not, will cost us more. You and I will both be paying more for our insurance coverage, another broken promise from Obama! He is a LIAR!!!!

[pattygreen 5]

Again, it's if your EMPLOYER likes it, unless you buy it privately.

No kidding! And everyone knew they wouldn't like it. This is why before the vote came into being people were pissed and knew that Obama was full of Crap when he told the people their plan wouldn't change! LIAR!!!!

[Cleo's Mom 257]

The people who get to keep THEIR plan are those who buy directly from a private insurance company. For those (the majority of us) who get their insurance through their employer, it was NEVER THEIR PLAN - IT WAS THE EMPLOYER'S PLAN. Duh! Unless they negotiated it with the employers, which they can still do.

What a cop out!!!! It was THEIR plan. The plan they had. Their plan. Now, because of Obamacare, that will change. WHO does the changing (employer or private person who purchases insurance) is irrelivent.

Leave it to a democrat! A war on words. You know FULL well that when Obama said that you'd be able to keep your plan, that he meant the plan you have right now, whether you get it from your employer or you get it privately through your own purchasing.

Before the healthcare bill passed I did not have the option of changing my plan unless I opted out of the employer sponsored plan and bought my own. That hasn't changed now.

And yes, it makes a HUGE difference who provides your plan. If you get your insurance through your employer, then your employer has always decided your plan, unless you negotiate for it.

And yes, the employer can keep the current plan that it offers you, like it always has been able to do, and the employer has the right to change that plan, like they have always been able to do. This healthcare plan doesn't change this. I don't know what is so hard to understand. Geez

[Cleo's Mom 257]

"What we are getting here is a clear indication that most plans will have to change," said James Gelfand, health policy director for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "From an employer's point of view that's a bad thing. These changes, whether or not they're good for consumers, are most certainly accompanied by a cost."Imagine my surprise at this coming from the worker friendly Chamber of Commerce.

PLANS WILL HAVE TO CHANGE!!!! This is my point. Obama said they wouldn't. He lied! These changes,whether for the good or not, will cost us more. You and I will both be paying more for our insurance coverage, another broken promise from Obama! He is a LIAR!!!!

Obama never promised that the greedy insurance companies wouldn't try to raise rates. The only thing that would have had REAL cost controls in this bill would have been the public option. But you neocons didn't want that and now you are going to complain about the rising costs? What typical neocon hypocrisy.

Of course those plans not grandfathered will have to change. That was the whole point of the healthcare. To offer it to the uninsured and to end insurance abuses. If the new plans don't reflect the end of the abuses, then what is the point?

If the healthcare plans don't reflect the new rules about covering pre-existing conditions, covering children to age 26 and not dropping you when you get sick, then what would be the point?

Seriously, I don't understand what is so hard to get here.

Why would anyone think we passed the healthcare with new consumer protection and then the plans would continue to abuse? Very strange logic and thinking among those who don't get it.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Again, it's if your EMPLOYER likes it, unless you buy it privately.

No kidding! And everyone knew they wouldn't like it. This is why before the vote came into being people were pissed and knew that Obama was full of Crap when he told the people their plan wouldn't change! LIAR!!!!

He never said plans wouldn't change. That was the whole point - to end insurance abuses. Duh.

But if your employer chooses to continue to offer you the same plan (with the implemented changes) they can - or a different plan -it is up to your employer, like it's always been, even before this healthcare plan.

Only an idiot would be opposed to changes in his/her healthcare plan that ends abuses.

No, no, give me the same plan that allows them to drop me when I get sick.

No, I want the plan that allow them to not cover pre-existing conditions for my cancer stricken son.

No, please give me the plan that kicks my children off at age 18.

Maybe they should offer a separate plan continuing and containing all the abuses to all those neocons who seem to prefer it.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

This healthcare bill is not perfect. It would have been so much better if it had contained a public option or just offered a medicare buy in but it didn't do either so the insurance companies still have pretty much carte blanche to raise rates. But the following changes are good changes:

48 million uninsured Americans will have new, affordable insurance options

Through the new health insurance exchanges or through employers, Americans will be able to purchase affordable health coverage at lower rates, and many will be eligible for tax credits to help lower costs.

Tax credits for up to 29 million individuals to help pay for health insurance

Starting in 2014, middle-class families and individuals who don't have insurance through work can get tax credits to help them buy affordable coverage on the new health insurance exchanges.

5.6 million people with pre-existing conditions will no longer be denied insurance

Starting this year, children will no longer be denied insurance due to pre-existing conditions, and adults with pre-existing conditions will have access to a temporary high-risk insurance pool. Starting in 2014, discrimination against pre-existing conditions will be banned completely.

500,000 families saved from bankruptcy in just one year

In 2007, 62% of all bankruptcies filed in the United States were linked to medical expenses. Health reform will prevent bankruptcies by capping annual out-of-pocket costs for families who receive insurance through the exchanges or a small business.

Tax cuts for up to 3.5 million small businesses to help pay for employee coverage

Employers who choose to offer employees health insurance can receive tax cuts of up to 35% of premiums this year, and up to 50% in 2014. More than 60% of small employers will be eligible for these tax cuts.

[pattygreen 5]

Rep. Murphy toes the party line in touting Obamacare

Recently I wrote to Rep. Christopher Murphy, D-5th District, in response to his correspondence to me regarding the new health-care legislation. I disagreed strongly with everything he listed as benefits of the bill.

For example, his claim of transparency is weak. There's no denying that secret deals sealed the bill's passage, and those deals reeked. The one televised "hearing" was nothing more than a staged event to give credence to President Obama's promise of transparency. The meeting did not result in any meaningful change to the legislation.

Murphy also claimed the bill is not a government takeover of health care; I would add the qualifier "yet." It is a steppingstone to the single-payer system progressives have been advocating for decades. It creates more than 100 new federal agencies, commissions, boards to implement and oversee health care. Four years of revenue collection would take place before many of the benefits are offered. The secretary of Health and Human Services will determine "acceptable" coverage. Thousands of additional IRS agents would be needed to enforce the individual mandate. All of these elements indicate an increased role for the federal government and much less individual responsibility for or choice in health insurance.

Murphy noted the Congressional Budget Office predicted deficit reduction as a result of the bill. The CBO numbers depend on revenue and expenses Congress projects. Additionally, I have read of discrepancies in the Medicare numbers and the lack of the physicians' "fix" in the legislation. I don't believe the CBO numbers or any others coming from a congressional organization.

How can Medicare be expanded and remain solvent, given its tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities, and how can the budget deficit be reduced over the next 10 years? This too-good-to-be-true scenario is financed by raising taxes, starting with eliminating the Bush tax cuts on "the rich," which includes small businesses. Plus, new taxes will be applied to capital gains, interest and dividends, and new taxes on medical equipment, which increases costs.

Murphy claimed the bill will help small businesses provide insurance by subsidizing their costs. Some of those businesses don't provide insurance because they can't afford it. Even if the government kicks in half of the cost, these businesses still will incur a new expense, which gets passed along to the consumer through higher prices.

As for pre-existing conditions, simply requiring insurance companies to accept all people without an appropriate premium adjustment is ignorant of actuarial science. For companies to stay in business, premiums for everyone necessarily will rise. The industry will have no choice but to pay claims. This is a recipe for failure which, again, presents the opportunity for a full government takeover of health care.

As for children remaining on their parents' policies until they're 26, this provision baffles me. If there is a real need for a child to remain on his parents' policy, there should be enough flexibility in the system for him to work out a contractual arrangement with the insurance company. There is no need for the government to get involved.

This bill does very little to control costs: no tort reform, no buying insurance across state lines, no tax credits for people who buy their own insurance, no incentives for people to live healthy lifestyles. Instead, this bill continues the trend in which the federal government decides what is "good for" the public.

Murphy and I have corresponded several times, and each time I have come to the conclusion we have different ideas about the role of government. He believes it is the government's purpose to solve everyone's problems; I believe it is the government's responsibility to protect individual liberty so we can solve our own problems.

Karen Dignacco

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Rep. Murphy toes the party line in touting Obamacare

Recently I wrote to Rep. Christopher Murphy, D-5th District, in response to his correspondence to me regarding the new health-care legislation. I disagreed strongly with everything he listed as benefits of the bill.

For example, his claim of transparency is weak. There's no denying that secret deals sealed the bill's passage, and those deals reeked. The one televised "hearing" was nothing more than a staged event to give credence to President Obama's promise of transparency. The meeting did not result in any meaningful change to the legislation.

Murphy also claimed the bill is not a government takeover of health care; I would add the qualifier "yet."Here's more of that "just you wait and see" from those who have nothing else. It is a steppingstone to the single-payer system progressives have been advocating for decades.If they had wanted a single payer system they would have passed it or at least a public option.:waytogo: It creates more than 100 new federal agencies, commissions, boards to implement and oversee health care.Prove this by listing all of them. Four years of revenue collection would take place before many of the benefits are offered. The secretary of Health and Human Services will determine "acceptable" coverage. Thousands of additional IRS agents would be needed to enforce the individual mandate.Is this back to that old 16,000 IRS agents will be hired lie that has been debunked? All of these elements indicate an increased role for the federal government and much less individual responsibility for or choice in health insurance.

Murphy noted the Congressional Budget Office predicted deficit reduction as a result of the bill. The CBO numbers depend on revenue and expenses Congress projects. Additionally, I have read of discrepancies in the Medicare numbers and the lack of the physicians' "fix" in the legislation. I don't believe the CBO numbers or any others coming from a congressional organization.

How can Medicare be expanded and remain solvent, given its tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities, and how can the budget deficit be reduced over the next 10 years? This too-good-to-be-true scenario is financed by raising taxes, starting with eliminating the Bush tax cuts on "the rich," which includes small businesses. Plus, new taxes will be applied to capital gains, interest and dividends, and new taxes on medical equipment, which increases costs.

Murphy claimed the bill will help small businesses provide insurance by subsidizing their costs. Some of those businesses don't provide insurance because they can't afford it. Even if the government kicks in half of the cost, these businesses still will incur a new expense, which gets passed along to the consumer through higher prices.

As for pre-existing conditions, simply requiring insurance companies to accept all people without an appropriate premium adjustment is ignorant of actuarial science. For companies to stay in business, premiums for everyone necessarily will rise. The industry will have no choice but to pay claims.Isn't that what they're supposed to do? Geez. Seriously, what don't you people get? This is a recipe for failure which, again, presents the opportunity for a full government takeover of health care.

As for children remaining on their parents' policies until they're 26, this provision baffles me. If there is a real need for a child to remain on his parents' policy, there should be enough flexibility in the system for him to work out a contractual arrangement with the insurance company.Meaning that the children will be carried on their parents policy to age 26 because of the good heartedness of the insurance companies? :thumbup: There is no need for the government to get involved.Yeah, there is or the insurance companies wouldn't have done this.

This bill does very little to control costs: no tort reform, no buying insurance across state lines, no tax credits for people who buy their own insurance, no incentives for people to live healthy lifestyles. Instead, this bill continues the trend in which the federal government decides what is "good for" the public.

Murphy and I have corresponded several times, and each time I have come to the conclusion we have different ideas about the role of government. He believes it is the government's purpose to solve everyone's problems; I believe it is the government's responsibility to protect individual liberty so we can solve our own problems.How was that working out for the uninsured? Oh, I know, many of them died. Then I remembered that that is the republican plan for healthcare (re: Alan Grayson)- don't get sick and if you do, die quickly. I can see how the cold-hearted republicans would embrace that " solution"

[loserbob 11]

AP-GFK poll shows gain for healthcare overhaul!

45% favor

42% oppose

Last month(May), poll showed 39% for, 46% oppose!

Electrical contractor(Republican)43, "People are starting to get nuts and bolts information".

Since May the approval went from 36-46% for men

People in prime workyears(30-48yrs. old) 35-49%

Republicans 8-17%

Majority of 56-65 years old dont like law!

51% of people polled trust Dems

38% trust reps

Random landline and cell phone poll of 1044 people between June 9-14, margin of error 4.3%

Its on the Comcast webpage.

See Patty, Im being hypocritical here. I always accuse you of using polls and here I am!

[pattygreen 5]

The same polling company you used also says that the country is heading in the wrong direction. Remember, THIS Health Care plan is NOT the one Obama wanted. He wanted government insurance for everyone. Conservatives had to work very HARD to keep Obama from ruining us with government run HI.

Americans live in the here and now. People tend to ignore the consequences until they are upon them. This HC bill may seem to them like it's getting better, but wait till they have to pay for it in the form of higher taxes or a higher cost of living. And, they will have to pay for it in one way or the other. Nothing is free in life. What one person gets for nothing, someone else has to work hard for.

Edited June 18, 2010 by pattygreen

[Cleo's Mom 257]

The same polling company you used also says that the country is heading in the wrong direction. Remember, THIS Health Care plan is NOT the one Obama wanted. He wanted government insurance for everyone. Conservatives had to work very HARD to keep Obama from ruining us with government run HI. A government public option would have been the part of this healthcare reform that could have had real cost savings, but the neocons and blue dog democrats (DINOs) ruined that so they don't get to complain about any cost increases by the insurance companies. A public option would have kept those increases in line and put those private insurance companies in their place.

Americans live in the here and now. People tend to ignore the consequences until they are upon them. This HC bill may seem to them like it's getting better, but wait till they have to pay for it in the form of higher taxes or a higher cost of living. And, they will have to pay for it in one way or the other. Nothing is free in life. What one person gets for nothing, someone else has to work hard for.

We all work for the benefit of each other. We don't each live on an island isolated from the dynamics of a democratic society. My taxes pay for your roads in Connecticut, your taxes pay for corporate welfare for the oil companies in Texas, etc...People who receive government aid are human beings who need help for life's basic needs. Some abuse this, but there is far more corporate abuse, costing us a lot more, and that should be painfully evident to any thinking, intelligent person, since we are living with an economy reflective of this corporate abuse.

[loserbob 11]

The same polling company you used also says that the country is heading in the wrong direction. Remember, THIS Health Care plan is NOT the one Obama wanted. He wanted government insurance for everyone. Conservatives had to work very HARD to keep Obama from ruining us with government run HI.

Americans live in the here and now. People tend to ignore the consequences until they are upon them. This HC bill may seem to them like it's getting better, but wait till they have to pay for it in the form of higher taxes or a higher cost of living. And, they will have to pay for it in one way or the other. Nothing is free in life. What one person gets for nothing, someone else has to work hard for.

Im not sure where you found the info that Obama wanted everyone on gov plan. He wanted gov plan as an option to existing insurance which would have been great. I dont care who runs it as long as its top quality and more affordable! The 7-11 guy who cried about the "gov run plan" , how he'd be paying too much now says he hates the b ill because the gov plan is what he wanted!

[pattygreen 5]

Im not sure where you found the info that Obama wanted everyone on gov plan. He wanted gov plan as an option to existing insurance which would have been great. I dont care who runs it as long as its top quality and more affordable! The 7-11 guy who cried about the "gov run plan" , how he'd be paying too much now says he hates the b ill because the gov plan is what he wanted!

From his very own lips. When he first started talking about HC for all, he said he wanted government run HC for ALL.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

People are coming around as time passes and as they see that the lies spread by the healthcare opponents were just that - lies- and they start to see the benefits of the healthcare reform like:

• This week, www.HealthCare.gov, a new online portal where anyone can go to find insurance options in their state, went live. It's a very handy resource for information that used to be difficult to find. It's available to help millions who need insurance find it, and as a resource for those who want to shop around for new options or find out their new benefits under the new law.
  

• States are starting to create new insurance pools for hundreds of thousands of people with serious medical conditions who had previously been unable to get insurance. Federal grants to help with setup are on their way to states right now.
  
• In June, 80,000 checks were mailed to seniors to help with prescription drug costs not covered by Medicare. By the end of the year, an estimated 4 million checks will go out.
  
• And of course, many of the key insurance reforms—allowing young adults to stay on their parents' insurance until age 26, and making it illegal to deny a child or baby insurance because of a "pre-existing condition"—have already started to take effect.
  

As the following poll shows, except for the 65+ age group (who have government run healthcare) - in all the other age groups, the majority think healthcare is a good thing.

And the polling for those over 65 will improve as 4 million get those checks.

Edited July 3, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[loserbob 11]

From his very own lips. When he first started talking about HC for all, he said he wanted government run HC for ALL.

I like the way you put your spin on this! He said he wanted a gov run plan as an option "for all" to what we already have, not the only option. Thats the part he got rid of to make the reps happy, then they found more to be unhappy with, even though they originally supported alot of these issues! I dont understand why you dont see this as a good thing, he took some of the power from the big corps running everything and gave it to the average person who was being screwed, oh thats right, your for everything thats "big corp"! You say you dont want the gov making your decisions for you but I guess your fine with the big, greedy corps deciding your fate, god forbid you ever have a life threatening illness! Put political views aside, Again god forbid you(general, not you specifically)have a lifethreatening illness, do you want Blue-Cross who is paying your med bills to decide whether your covered or not, or would you feel better knowing they have to pay for your care because the "anti-christ" put the decision in your hands instead of theirs! Thats all it comes down to, Its not that complicated, even though you reps want to make it about much more! I wouldnt care if Bush came up with the Idea, I would support it because to me its not about politics its about logic. In America you get to make the decisions on alot of less important issues, why not on your med care! Your choice of insurers was never the issue even though you spun it that way, it is who has the power to decide, you or the people paying for your care!