Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: 2009 Health Care Financing Reform
C-Span sucks community > politics > Political Soapbox
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86
Repub_Bub
QUOTE (arebuntz @ Sep 9 2009, 08:19 PM) *
Several sections I liked. One was how important it was for everyone especially individuals and employers to be in and pay something then immediately went on to say how some individuals and some employers would be exempt from being in. Another was the old you like your plan you can keep your plan, well unless it does not meet the exchange standard in 5 years like a HDHP with HSA. If he can do Medical Malpractice reform without Congress he should be able to do Health Insurance Reform without Congress.

Not much new ... mainly turned up the intensity on the rhetoric.

Really too bad since there might actually be ways to implement a feasable HCP short of emotional appeals and political grandstanding.
Lord_Proprietor
QUOTE (patheticJT @ Sep 10 2009, 03:21 AM) *
lies tonight leading to healthcare
lies that led to a phoney stimulus

America is deciding and it aint for obama anymore



Yes, dry.gif he is still skirting the question about illegal, undocumented, aliens and such. There is a regulation which forbids the questioning of anyone for documents ohmy.gif - can't ask: "are you a citizen of the US?" huh.gif So that is certainly making him out to be untruthful when he made his statement. wink.gif
Davis 2.0
Someone should have screamed YOU LIE! at Bush when he spewed his mushroom cloud BULLSHEIT.

Davis 2.0
The Heckler

On the live-stream I didn't catch what the heckler actually said. Was it "Liar!" or "You lie!" It was an ugly moment in the Congress and I don't remember anyone heckling a president's speech before. But it is, in fact, the GOP's current position. Their position is to demonize this man. Karl Rove's op-ed on the speech went up on the WSJ website before the speech was even over, declaring it a failure and nothing new.

But there was something clarifying about a Southern good ol' boy yelling "Liar" at the president over illegal immigration. That's what the GOP now is: the worst aspects of the old Democratic party combined with a nihilism that is only eclipsed by its catastrophic governance for the past eight years. Defeating these morons and actually creating a discourse for reform is what we elected Obama to do.

But they still insist on doing it to themselves, don't they? That's the silver lining.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...he-heckler.html
Davis 2.0

GOP Lawmakers Treat President Obama’s Joint Address To Congress Like A Town Hall Protest »

Tonight during his joint address to Congress, President Obama attempted to set the record straight on some of the “key controversies” surrounding the health care debate. While it’s normal for members of the opposition party to occasionally not clap at statements with which they disagree, congressional Republicans went further tonight, being outright rude at times.

At one point, President Obama addressed the myth that his health care proposals would insure undocumented immigrants: “This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.”

In response, Republicans not only began booing him, but Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) shouted out, “LIE!” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) shot an angry look in his direction, and Vice President Biden shook his head. The rudeness shocked even veteran political observers such as NBC’s Chuck Todd, who wrote on Twitter, “Wow. What’s next a duel?” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough also wrote, “Whoever shouted out that the president was lying is a dumbass who should show the President respect.” On MSNBC after the speech, Newsweek reporter Howard Fineman said, “The Republicans were mostly stage props in this speech tonight and they behaved like it.”

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) could also be seen wearing a homemade sign — similar to the ones seen at town hall protests — around his neck, which read, “What bill?” Watch it:

Various Republican lawmakers were also holding up draft GOP bills during the speech:

fnc090909204439

Transcript: More »« Less
Update Republicans are now coming out and condemning their colleague. On CNN, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said that Wilson's outburst was "totally disrespectful": "He should apologize immediately." Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) said, "I thought that was unfortunate. [Obama's] the president. He deserves more respect than that."
Update CNN has posted a picture of Wilson's heckling:

hecklerjoewi

Update On Fox Business News, Karl Rove and host Neil Cavuto thought Wilson shouting at the President was hilarious. "Joe Wilson, good guy," said Rove. "Lovely," agreed Cavuto.
Update Wilson apologizes:

“This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the President’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill. While I disagree with the President’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility.”

Update After Obama's speech, chief of staff Rahm Emanuel reportedly "approached two Republican House leaders, Roy Blunt and Paul Ryan and said, 'No president has ever had that happen,' and urged them to have the lawmaker 'apologize immediately.'"


http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/09/obama-joint-address/
Repub_Bub
QUOTE (Davis 2.0 @ Sep 10 2009, 05:14 AM) *
The Heckler

What a distorted perspective.

Charlie Rangel evades taxes for years and nothin' ... someone call out the Pres for lying and the house comes down.
arebuntz
QUOTE
Although neither the House nor the Senate passed a health care bill by President Obama’s August deadline, various pieces of legislation have made it through committee, and they provide a concrete basis for analyzing what the proposed health care reform would and would not do. Looking at the various bills that are moving on Capitol Hill, we can determine the following:

• Contrary to the Obama administration’s repeated assurances, millions of Americanswho are happy with their current health insurance will not be able to keep it. As many as 89.5 million people may be dumped into a government-run plan.

• Some Americans may find themselves forced into a new insurance plan that no longer includes their current doctor.

• Americans will pay more than $820 billion in additional taxes over the next 10 years, and could see their insurance premiums riseas much as 95 percent.

• The current health care bills will increase the budget deficit by at least $239 billion over the next 10 years, and far more in the years beyond that. If the new health care entitlement were subject to the same 75-year actuarial standards as Social Security or Medicare, its unfunded liabilities would exceed $9.2 trillion.

• While the bills contain no direct provisions for rationing care, they nonetheless increase the likelihood of government rationing and interference with how doctors practice medicine.

• Contrary to assertions of some opponents,the bills contain no provision for euthanasia or mandatory end-of-life counseling. The bills’ provisions on abortion coverage are far murkier.

In short, Americans will pay more and get less. Whatever the variation, however these bills are merged or compromised, this would be bad news for Americans.


http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10515

QUOTE
Both the House and HELP bills say that after its initial establishment (financed bya $2 billion interest-free loan from taxpayers), the program would have to cover administrative and benefit costs entirely out of premium revenues.

The government program would also be required to maintain a reserve or “contingency margin,” although the size of that reserve is not specified.

However, there is ample reason to be skeptical about just how “self-sustaining” such a program will be. After all, Medicare Part B (physician services) was originally supposed to support 50 percent of its costs through premiums. That has shrunk to the point where premiums pay for less than 25 percent of the program’s cost.


QUOTE
Health Savings Accounts

Roughly eight million Americans currently have a health savings account.

However,it seems unlikely that such plans could continue under any of the bills currently being considered. Under the Senate HELP bill, insurance payouts must cover at least 76 percent of the plan’s benefits.

The House bill mandates that the insurance payout cover 70 percent.

The billsalso require that all insurance cover preventive care, including annual physicals, prenatal and well-child, immunizations, smoking cessation,weight loss programs, and early screening services, on a first-dollar basis.
arebuntz
QUOTE
Using the same 75-year actuarial period that the government applies to other entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, the net present value of the program’s unfunded liabilities would exceed $9.2 trillion. That would be on top of the cumulative $51.3 trillion (discounted present value) unfunded liabilities in Social Security and Medicare.
arebuntz
QUOTE
In the long run, the only way to spend less on health care is to consume less health care. And, since the current trajectory for healthcare spending is unsustainable, there is nothing inherently wrong with refusing to pay for some services or procedures, particularly with programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Indeed, there has been a certain amount of hypocrisy—or perhaps schadenfreude, given how often Republican health care reformers have been criticized for wanting to “slash Grandma’s Medicare”—in conservative complaints about Medicare cuts. Almost certainly any free market reform effort would also seek to reduce Medicare (and Medicaid) spending.

The real health care debate, therefore, is not about whether we should ration care, but about who should ration it. Thus, while freemarket health care reformers want to shift more of the decisions (and therefore the financial responsibility) back to the individual, there is reason to believe that the current reform legislation would ultimately put the government in charge of those decisions, if for no other reason than the fact that if most Americans are ultimately pushed into the government-run plan, that plan plus existing government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid will account for nearly all health care spending. Indeed, this trend is already playing out in Massachusetts. With the cost of the state’s reform becoming unsustainable, the legislature established a special commission to investigate the health payment system in a search for ways to control costs.

In March 2009, the commission released a list of options that it was considering, including “exclud[ing] cover-age of services of low priority/low value” under insurance plans offered through Commonwealth Care. Along the same lines, it has also suggested that Commonwealth Care plans “limit coverage to services that produce the highest value when considering both clinical effectiveness and cost.”
arebuntz
QUOTE
Conclusion
There has been a great deal of misinformation in the debate over health care reform. Opponents have sometimes been hyperbolic indescribing death panels and forced euthanasia. At the same time, supporters have been disingenuous in promising that people will be able to keep their doctors and current insurance plans. The confusion has been magnified by the lack of a single health care bill. At least three different versions are currently making their way slowly toward the House floor. A fourth version has passed the Senate HELP Committee, and a fifth still-inchoate version is being negotiated behind closed doors by six members of the Senate Finance Committee. This makes it hard to pin down specific details and easy for representatives to duck questions on the issue. However, if one reads through the different bills and proposals, it becomes clear that under all the current versions of health reform, Americans will end up paying more and getting less. In fact, Americans will pay more than $820 billion in higher taxes over the next 10 years and could see their insurance premiums rise as much as 95 percent.
Lord_Proprietor
QUOTE (Davis 2.0 @ Sep 10 2009, 08:10 AM) *
Someone should have screamed YOU LIE! at Bush when he spewed his mushroom cloud BULLSHEIT.


On drudge!
Go check it out for yourself!


Obama: Time for 'bickering' over on health care...

WHIP COUNT: DEMS LACK THE VOTES...

POLL HELL: Obama disapproval on health care up to 52%...

WIll Plan Lead to Forced Unionization of Health Workers?


FLASHBACK: Top Dem calls Bush 'loser' and liar...

FLASHBACK: Dems booed Bush during State of the Union Speech...
Lord_Proprietor
QUOTE (Repub_Bub @ Sep 10 2009, 07:50 AM) *
Not much new ... mainly turned up the intensity on the rhetoric.

Really too bad since there might actually be ways to implement a feasable HCP short of emotional appeals and political grandstanding.



He is using the "Black Church" (Rev. Dr. Wright) techniques (loud, "mesmerizing chants/mantras") on all America now and it's not working - most have caught on to what he is doing! (kinda of an old JJ trick and we certainly can remember his fake - personal gain rants -) Again he is an empty suit with lots of moxie in how to work a crowd - any good politician must know that and he is a master having been to, and manager of, the Saul Alinsky school of Community Organizers.
Davis 2.0
You scumbags are polluting every god damned forum I've been to with the same forking bullsheit.
arebuntz
Why is it that Davey Doo thinks everyone else is doing what he is doing?
Lord_Proprietor
QUOTE (arebuntz @ Sep 10 2009, 10:41 AM) *
Why is it that Davey Doo thinks everyone else is doing what he is doing?



laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
Kinda of a liberal democrat thing; you know, "Liberalism is a mental disorder"!
Lord_Proprietor
DOES HE REALLY KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT?

By Neal Boortz @ September 10, 2009 9:05 AM
http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/index.html

Have you considered the possibility that Obama simply doesn't understand the American health care system? To put it bluntly ... is it possible that he simply doesn't know what he's talking about? Consider two points:

President Obama famously suggested that a doctor, faced with a child with a persistent sore throat, might simply decide to take the child's tonsils out in order to earn a bigger payday. Almost every mother who has taken her child to a pediatrician knows that a tonsillectomy would not be performed by the family doctor, but by a surgeon. Obama didn't know what he was talking about.

Obama also suggested that a doctor treating a patient with diabetes might just decide to amputate the patient's foot or leg in order to earn a $40,000 or $50,000 payday. Once again Obama fails to recognize that it would not be the diabetic's primary physician that would perform that surgery. He also didn't seem to know that the surgeon who does the actual amputation would make hundreds, not thousands.

This is basic stuff. Pediatricians don't do the tonsil surgery. Primary care physicians don't amputate limbs. Basic stuff --- but Obama was clueless. So this is the guy you want to trust to overhaul our health care systems? Yeah .. .works for me.

http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/index.html
Nomarchy
QUOTE (Lord_Proprietor @ Sep 10 2009, 08:06 AM) *
laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
Kinda of a liberal democrat thing; you know, "Liberalism is a mental disorder"!



LPism is a mental disorder.
Lord_Proprietor
GOP leader: Obama 'thumbed his nose at the American people;' speech 'remarkable in its arrogance'

By: BYRON YORK

Chief Political Correspondent
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/...e-58494912.html

09/10/09 11:10 AM EDT

I just got off the phone with Rep. Tom Price, the Georgia congressman who heads the Republican Study Committee. Price called the president's last night address to a joint session of Congress a "classic campaign speech" with little new to offer.

"He was clearly trying to bolster his folks to vote for a plan that the American people don't support," Price said. "I think he probably helped his cause. I think it will be temporary. It really was remarkable in its arrogance and its dismissive attitude toward anybody who disagrees with the president." But I think he also thumbed his nose at the American people in not recognizing or even acknowledging their sincere concerns and fears and anger that they articulated over the month of August.

I asked Price about Republican Rep. Joe Wilson's "You lie!" outburst during Obama's speech. "It's remarkably unfortunate that it happened," Price said. "My sense is that Joe was just caught up in the moment and felt like he was watching television and had yelled at the TV so often when the president came on that he just blurted it out. It was terribly unfortunate. Joe is one of the nicest guys in the world and one of the most honorable and hardworking individuals in the House of Representatives." Price said that it was "absolutely appropriate" that Wilson apologized to the president.

I asked whether Wilson's words had damaged the Republican side in the debate. (One GOP aide told me earlier today that Wilson's shouted accusation was "sucking the air out" of the Republican argument today.) "What it has done has drawn attention to the fact that the president's statements so often are at variance with the truth," Price said. "As Ronald Reagan famously said, it's not that our friends on the left are ignorant, it's just that so much of what they know just isn't so. And that's the case with this leadership right now, or lack of leadership, on the other side. They say things that just aren't so, and that's what angers the American people."

Wilson's outburst came after Obama had said that Republican charges about end-of-life counseling in some of the Democratic health care bills are "a lie, plain and simple." The phrase didn't sit well with Price. "The president had an opportunity to elevate the level of the debate, and he didn't take that opportunity," Price said. "Instead, he got down in the gutter with the partisan campaign speech to his own folks and really threatened anybody who doesn't agree with him. It was a remarkably arrogant display."
Nomarchy
The liars have lied so effectively that they now believe their own lies as the truth. Thus, when they're told that they're lying, they genuinely feel aggrieved and moved to tell whoever said that they lie that HE lies.

I am positive that outburst rallied the already-converted. What it did to middle-of-the-roaders is another matter.
patheticJT
Call bushie a liar for 8 years then wet the bed when someone calls Obama what he is.

whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
SpaceCowboy
QUOTE (patheticJT @ Sep 10 2009, 11:54 AM) *
Call bushie a liar for 8 years then wet the bed when someone calls Obama what he is.

whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

Goose food for all!
Nomarchy
QUOTE (patheticJT @ Sep 10 2009, 09:54 AM) *
Call bushie a liar for 8 years then wet the bed when someone calls Obama what he is.

whats good for the goose is good for the gander.


Whom are you accusing of having "wet the bed" when someone called Obama a liar?

I said that Rep. Price's outburst would be good for the already converted, the Republican base.

How is that wetting the bed?

If anything, it's other Republicans and the Rep. himself who 'wet the bed'.
Repub_Bub
QUOTE (Lord_Proprietor @ Sep 10 2009, 08:06 AM) *
laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
Kinda of a liberal democrat thing; you know, "Liberalism is a mental disorder"!

I guess it's no more complicated than that...the poor little ranting farkhead is simply insane.
Repub_Bub
QUOTE (Nomarchy @ Sep 10 2009, 09:48 AM) *
The liars have lied so effectively that they now believe their own lies as the truth. Thus, when they're told that they're lying, they genuinely feel aggrieved and moved to tell whoever said that they lie that HE lies.

I am positive that outburst rallied the already-converted. What it did to middle-of-the-roaders is another matter.

I think we're way past that. However ill-mannerd the outburst or the Dems booing Bush are hardly rallying points.

Most folks are simply tired of the rhetoric and are looking past the goofy smiles of the pundits ... wanting some semblance of detail, explanation, realistic televised debate...ANYTHING APPROACHING MEANINGFUL CONSIDERATION.
underhi2p
I thought Puggs Pelosi looked baked out of her farking mind last night.

inyerface
Arturo_Vandelay
The can't decide if it's healthcare or insurance reform, so lately it's just "reform".

It sure as hell isn't care reform. Insurance maybe.
arebuntz
QUOTE (Nomarchy @ Sep 10 2009, 12:48 PM) *
The liars have lied so effectively that they now believe their own lies as the truth. Thus, when they're told that they're lying, they genuinely feel aggrieved and moved to tell whoever said that they lie that HE lies.

I am positive that outburst rallied the already-converted. What it did to middle-of-the-roaders is another matter.

A lie - no, being disingenuous - yes. While the text of the plan says no coverage for those here without proper gubment documents when an amendment was offered to do the same proper gubment documents check as Medicaid it was voted down on party lines. So it is in the plan that there is no coverage for those here without proper gubment documents however it is not required that anyone actually check to see if those here have the proper gubment papers.

What is a lie is the everybody who likes their current plan can keep it. That is not within either Congress or the Executive to control and the bill over several years will impose minimum requirements on healthcare plans nationwide that some healthcare plans in existence today will not meet going by what is in the House bills to this point. Many HDHP/HSA plans for instance. Why the gubment thinks they should tell me how much out of pocket I can afford in exchange for a lower premium is a mystery to me... but it seems to happen on one thing or another just about everyday. I wouldn't let any of them 537 elected Federal officials near my finances.
arebuntz
QUOTE
As a result of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA), since July
1, 2006, most U.S. citizens and nationals applying for or
renewing their Medicaid coverage have been required to provide
documentation of their citizenship status. In recent months,
federal legislative and regulatory changes have limited the
application of the new requirement in the case of certain groups
of Medicaid beneficiaries. This fact sheet provides current
information on the citizenship documentation requirement and
discusses its implications for Medicaid beneficiaries, providers,
and the states.

Medicaid citizenship requirements

Under federal law, all U.S. citizens and certain legal immigrants
who meet Medicaid’s financial and non-financial eligibility criteria
are entitled to Medicaid. The Medicaid program has long
required states to establish that individuals applying for Medicaid
are U.S. citizens or satisfy the immigration restrictions. Prior to
DRA, state Medicaid programs could determine citizenship by
requiring applicants, under penalty of perjury, to attest to their
citizenship in writing. All states except Montana, New
Hampshire, New York, and Georgia used this self-declaration
option to establish U.S. citizenship.

DRA requirement to provide citizenship documents

The DRA introduced a new citizenship documentation
requirement for U.S. citizens seeking Medicaid coverage. The
law does not alter Medicaid eligibility criteria, but for U.S. citizens,
it imposes a new requirement to establish eligibility.
Under Section 6036 of the DRA, effective July 1, 2006, citizens
applying for or renewing their Medicaid coverage must provide
“satisfactory documentary evidence of citizenship or nationality.”

The DRA specifies documents that are acceptable for this
purpose and authorizes the HHS Secretary to designate
additional acceptable documents. No federal matching funds are
available for services provided to individuals who declare they
are citizens or nationals unless the state obtains satisfactory
evidence of their citizenship or determines that they are subject
to a statutory exemption, discussed below.

The citizenship documentation requirement does not affect
Medicaid rules relating to immigrants: most new legal immigrants
are excluded from Medicaid during their first five years in the U.S.
and undocumented immigrants remain eligible for Medicaid
emergency services only.


http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7533-02.pdf
Davis 2.0
Then they came for the non-union retirees.




Non-union Cat retirees get new health deal
Lump-sum payments will be dispersed each year for medical expenses


Non-union retirees from Caterpillar Inc. say they are concerned about changes coming in the way the company provides them with health coverage, or at least the means to get it.

On Jan. 1, Caterpillar will begin giving 9,000-plus non-union employees who retired on or after Feb. 1, 1991, and their spouses or surviving spouses lump sum annual payments from which they will pay for their own health needs.

And despite pages of information they've received in recent weeks from the company and informational meetings the company conducted at its various facilities nationwide, some of those retirees say their concerns were not allayed.

"I think it's only natural to be worried when we're told our health care coverage is going to change. Anybody would be concerned, especially when there is little you can do about it," said one man who didn't want his name used.

Another said he's not concerned about the immediate future because he and his wife are in good health. "But I don't know about down the road, whether the money the company gives out will be enough for those with a lot of health problems or who need a lot of prescription medicine. That's kind of scary, I guess."

According to information sent retirees, Caterpillar will enroll eligible retirees and spouses age 65 and older in Health Reimbursement Arrangement accounts that will be administered by Extend Health, a Utah-based health insurance brokerage. Retirees and/or spouses younger than 65 will continue to be covered under Caterpillar's group health plan, as before. That will end at age 65, when the person will be enrolled in an HRA.

Each year, on Jan. 1, the company will put benefit dollars - starting with $3,000 on Jan. 1, 2010 - into each person's HRA account.

It then will be up to the retiree and/or spouse to spend the money to meet their needs, be it for general health expenses, premiums for Medicare Part B or D, dental and vision insurance or other out-of-pocket expenses. Caterpillar had been paying for Part B before this.

Caterpillar said in a prepared statement that it first informed retirees back in March that changes would be coming.

"This change will be cost beneficial or cost neutral to the majority of the nearly 9,000 impacted participants. Under the new program, retirees will have greater choice regarding what they get for the money spent on health care.

"There are many ever-changing factors that we will be considering as we look to the future of Caterpillar health care benefits. As always, we remain committed to keeping our employees and retirees informed about their health care benefits," the company said.

Bridget Young, a Caterpillar spokeswoman, said the new program is intended to allow retirees to supplement Medicare. People become eligible for Medicare at age 65, but most want or need supplemental coverage.

"They are not required to enroll in a supplement through Extend Health, but they must do so to be eligible for an HRA," she said.

One woman who also did not want her name used said she's concerned about the stipulation that retirees will pay for their needs up front, submit a claim to Extend Health and then be reimbursed from their HRA account.

"What if I don't have the money to pay for all this up front? And what if $3,000 isn't enough? I think we need more answers," she said.

On the other hand, if the entire $3,000 is not used, it will roll over to the next year and will not affect future disbursements into the HRA, the company documents said.

Another retiree said he made calls to Extend Health and didn't feel that company was forthcoming with information. Some of what he heard, however, he termed "frightening," including on his questions about billing, reimbursements and the like.

"I walked out (of an informational meeting) feeling very discouraged and disgruntled. It seems to me a lot of those supplemental plans like Medicare Part B will eat up a lot of that $3,000," he said.

http://www.pjstar.com/business/x302142795/...new-health-deal
Davis 2.0
"I was incredibly disappointed in the tone of his speech,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).”At times, I found his tone to be overly combative and believe he behaved in a manner beneath the dignity of the office. I fear his speech tonight has made it more difficult — not less — to find common ground.

"He appeared to be angry at his critics and disappointed the American people were not buying the proposals he has been selling. ... If the Obama administration and congressional Democrats go down this path and push a bill on the American people they do not want, it could be the beginning of the end of the Obama presidency."

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who is running for Obama's old Senate seat, said, "He talked at us. He didn't listen to us ... It was a missed opportunity."



http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090910/pl_politico/26970

How about all you Republican axholes go fork yourself? You have a lot of nerve talking smack about Obama being combative after the Republicans' reign of terror.


Like I told LP, y'all have balls the size of the moon.
SpaceCowboy
QUOTE (Davis 2.0 @ Sep 10 2009, 02:37 PM) *
Then they came for the non-union retirees.




Non-union Cat retirees get new health deal
Lump-sum payments will be dispersed each year for medical expenses


Non-union retirees from Caterpillar Inc. say they are concerned about changes coming in the way the company provides them with health coverage, or at least the means to get it.

On Jan. 1, Caterpillar will begin giving 9,000-plus non-union employees who retired on or after Feb. 1, 1991, and their spouses or surviving spouses lump sum annual payments from which they will pay for their own health needs.

I wasn't even aware that there were companies out there which were offering significant health benefits to retirees who qualify for Medicare.(other than the automakers, I suppose.)
Lord_Proprietor
QUOTE (Davis 2.0 @ Sep 10 2009, 08:14 AM) *
The Heckler

On the live-stream I didn't catch what the heckler actually said. Was it "Liar!" or "You lie!" It was an ugly moment in the Congress and I don't remember anyone heckling a president's speech before. But it is, in fact, the GOP's current position. Their position is to demonize this man. Karl Rove's op-ed on the speech went up on the WSJ website before the speech was even over, declaring it a failure and nothing new.

But there was something clarifying about a Southern good ol' boy yelling "Liar" at the president over illegal immigration. That's what the GOP now is: the worst aspects of the old Democratic party combined with a nihilism that is only eclipsed by its catastrophic governance for the past eight years. Defeating these morons and actually creating a discourse for reform is what we elected Obama to do.

But they still insist on doing it to themselves, don't they? That's the silver lining.



Obama Won’t Give Federal Insurance Benefits to Illegal Aliens,

He’ll Make Them Legal First


Cybercast News Service,
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53814

by Terrence P. Jeffrey

9/10/2009 2:52:12 PM

In his speech to a joint session of Congress last night, President Obama said that his health care reform plan will not insure ''illegal immigrants.'' The statement instantly became a matter of controversy when Rep. Joe Wilson (R.-S.C.) yelled out in the House chamber, ''You lie.'' (Snip) But President Obama has stated as recently as last month at a press conference in Mexico that he will seek ''comprehensive immigration reform'' legislation that will put illegal aliens on a “pathway to citizenship.” ....


http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53814
Davis 2.0
You don't like the Bush/Kennedy/McCain immigration bill?
Arturo_Vandelay
QUOTE (Davis 2.0 @ Sep 10 2009, 12:37 PM) *
Then they came for the non-union retirees.




Non-union Cat retirees get new health deal
Lump-sum payments will be dispersed each year for medical expenses


Non-union retirees from Caterpillar Inc. say they are concerned about changes coming in the way the company provides them with health coverage, or at least the means to get it.

On Jan. 1, Caterpillar will begin giving 9,000-plus non-union employees who retired on or after Feb. 1, 1991, and their spouses or surviving spouses lump sum annual payments from which they will pay for their own health needs.



Most folks should have some input and control over spending and costs. The cost to the company is what it is, but if the employee has a reason to shop around they probably will. PJ's first method of spending. You buy your own. You care what you get and what it costs. This is fairly close to that. Considering money is limited regardless everyone ought to have some "skin in the game". You do even if the company buys something on your behalf.
Lord_Proprietor
QUOTE (Davis 2.0 @ Sep 10 2009, 05:45 PM) *
You don't like the Bush/Kennedy/McCain immigration bill?



I've never have liked illegal immigrants any way, shape, or form! We have rules to get over here and become a citizen! We also have rules for immigrant workers and those who want to work go through the process! We have many GC workers here (locally) in construction and farm produce work!
Nomarchy
QUOTE (Lord_Proprietor @ Sep 10 2009, 03:24 PM) *
I've never have liked illegal immigrants any way, shape, or form! We have rules to get over here and become a citizen! We also have rules for immigrant workers and those who want to work go through the process! We have many GC workers here (locally) in construction and farm produce work!


What were the rules when your ancestors came over, LP?

I figure, if they were good enough for them, they should be good enough for current prospective immigrants. No?
Arturo_Vandelay
Some places are harder to get here from than others. If you have to walk a day it's cheaper and easier than several days stowed away or on a raft. It's so easy from Mexico that millions of Mexicans are already here. Past and present rules barely apply since they're already in.
Nomarchy
QUOTE (Arturo_Vandelay @ Sep 10 2009, 05:10 PM) *
Some places are harder to get here from than others. If you have to walk a day it's cheaper and easier than several days stowed away or on a raft. It's so easy from Mexico that millions of Mexicans are already here. Past and present rules barely apply since they're already in.


So, what were the rules when LP's ancestors came over as immigrants, again?
underhi2p
QUOTE (Nomarchy @ Sep 10 2009, 07:40 PM) *
So, what were the rules when LP's ancestors came over as immigrants, again?



Dunno.

I'm clueless regarding what immigration rules were in place the LP's ancestors came over.


I do know, that when my ancestors came over here, there were no immigration rules.

Nomarchy
QUOTE (underhi2p @ Sep 10 2009, 05:48 PM) *
Dunno.

I'm clueless regarding what immigration rules were in place the LP's ancestors came over.


I do know, that when my ancestors came over here, there were no immigration rules.


Easy to follow and abide by. Cool.
hunin
QUOTE (arebuntz @ Sep 9 2009, 11:53 AM) *
The current system, half private, half gubment in payments, extensive gubment regulation and taxation of private system and extensive mismanagement of gubment system, stinks.



God forbid the gov't would regulate anything so inconsequential as health insurance.

Shouldn't regulate scrips either, right? No FDA. No EPA.

Shouldn't regulate nada, right?

Much better.

bartender, I'll have what he's having


There is stink for sure.
underhi2p
QUOTE (Nomarchy @ Sep 10 2009, 07:54 PM) *
Easy to follow and abide by. Cool.



I've been promoting Vermont to any immigrants I can communicate with in Chelsea.

California seems to be the best at recruiting immigrant talent but I'm giving it my best to get the whitest state in the nation, Vermont, a little more brown.

The bennies in Vermont are outstanding.

hunin
QUOTE (arebuntz @ Sep 9 2009, 11:54 AM) *
Same could be said of US K-12 education which is roughly 90% gubment funded and operated. Going from 50% to 90% in healthcare will not turn out any better.


wtf?

gov't funded? Shirley, you don't mean federal gov't?

Public schools are of course gov't funded, Shirley.

As I recall the average like 80% local. County.

15% state. 5% federal.

It would help if Congress funded its mandates on local schools. 100% not 20%.
hunin
QUOTE (arebuntz @ Sep 9 2009, 11:56 AM) *
VA has no "profit" motive, except the gubment bureaucrats that work for it and they are doing real good, and it really stinks. See rat infested rooms in DC area.



That was under Bushie's er, rule.
hunin
QUOTE (gtessex @ Sep 9 2009, 08:45 PM) *
I have mixed reviews on Obama's speech.

I am giving him credit for being passionate on the issue and for at least trying.

This wasn't a particular good speech. Still way to much partisan politicing....and way to much blame on the interpretation of HR3200....which should
have never made it out of committee, let alone posted for the masses to read. IMHO, the rush to put that bill (HR3200) into law will be the main reason
Health care reform goes down the crapper.

The country IMHO is too divided to come to any compromise on the passage of Health Care reform.

One side will never go along with a plan without the public option.
And the otherside will never go along with a plan with the public option.

There lies the stalemate.

I recall when the Clinton's health care reform went down the crapper. This one will be flushed down the crapper
even sooner. JMHO



If nothing happens, the GOP will take it in the balls.

Dems may also take it in the balls, but GOP far worse.

The Party of No.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

QUOTE
Sept. 10, 2009 -- The number of Americans without health insurance rose slightly to 46.3 million in 2008, as enrollment growth in safety-net programs helped counter the continued slippage in job-based coverage.

The annual Census Bureau report, released Thursday, shows that an additional 680,000 people had no health insurance last year.

But wait till the next Census report, health care analysts warn.

The data on 2009 will likely show a much bigger jump in the uninsured, when the full brunt of the recession will be documented.

"This is only the tip of the iceberg,’" says Elise Gould, director of health policy research for the Economic Policy Institute. "It's a virtual certainty that with the deepening of the recession this year, more Americans are losing health insurance.’"

The current uninsured number is likely approaching 50 million, Gould says.

Uninsured in America

The overall percentage of Americans without health coverage in 2008, 15.4%, is statistically unchanged from the year before.

"I'm a little surprised that the number of uninsured didn't climb more,"’ says Bill Custer, a health insurance expert at Georgia State University.

But Custer also notes that the Census asked people whether they had insurance coverage at any time last year. So if someone lost job-based insurance in February of last year, that person would be counted as being insured in 2008.

A fuller picture of the recession's impact on the uninsured will be seen in next year's Census report, Custer says.

The new Census report, tracking the first full year of the recession, also shows that the nation's poverty rate increased to 13.2%, up from 12.5% in 2007, and representing the highest rate since 1997. Median household income fell 3.6% to $50,303.

The 46.3 million uninsured figure is still below a high of 47 million reported in 2006....



While the number of uninsured children declined, the figure for adults rose. Many older adults below age 65 - when they're eligible for Medicare - are likely to have significant health care needs, Custer says. "Older adults need health care the most."

The troubling decline in employment-based health coverage has continued. The 2008 report showed job-based coverage dropped for the eighth year in a row -- from 59.3% of Americans in 2007 to 58.5%.

"Smaller firms will find it increasingly difficult to maintain or afford coverage," says Peter Cunningham, a senior fellow at the Center for Studying Health System Change. "It's likely we'll see an even bigger drop [in job-based coverage] next year. It will reflect the higher unemployment rate in 2009."

The Census report shows about 20% of the uninsured are in households making $75,000 or more.

"Some of these individuals have health conditions that may mean insurers won't cover them," Custer says. "....


http://www.webmd.com/healthy-aging/news/20...ealth-insurance

hunin
QUOTE (Arturo_Vandelay @ Sep 10 2009, 01:50 PM) *
The can't decide if it's healthcare or insurance reform, so lately it's just "reform".

It sure as hell isn't care reform. Insurance maybe.



Entirely about insurance. Entirely.

Not about care.
inyerface
make it work as well for the sick as it does for the insurers
hunin
QUOTE (Davis 2.0 @ Sep 10 2009, 02:37 PM) *
Then they came for the non-union retirees.





Non-union Cat retirees get new health deal
Lump-sum payments will be dispersed each year for medical expenses


Non-union retirees from Caterpillar Inc. say they are concerned about changes coming in the way the company provides them with health coverage, or at least the means to get it.

On Jan. 1, Caterpillar will begin giving 9,000-plus non-union employees who retired on or after Feb. 1, 1991, and their spouses or surviving spouses lump sum annual payments from which they will pay for their own health needs.

And despite pages of information they've received in recent weeks from the company and informational meetings the company conducted at its various facilities nationwide, some of those retirees say their concerns were not allayed.

"I think it's only natural to be worried when we're told our health care coverage is going to change. Anybody would be concerned, especially when there is little you can do about it," said one man who didn't want his name used.

Another said he's not concerned about the immediate future because he and his wife are in good health. "But I don't know about down the road, whether the money the company gives out will be enough for those with a lot of health problems or who need a lot of prescription medicine. That's kind of scary, I guess."

According to information sent retirees, Caterpillar will enroll eligible retirees and spouses age 65 and older in Health Reimbursement Arrangement accounts that will be administered by Extend Health, a Utah-based health insurance brokerage. Retirees and/or spouses younger than 65 will continue to be covered under Caterpillar's group health plan, as before. That will end at age 65, when the person will be enrolled in an HRA.

Each year, on Jan. 1, the company will put benefit dollars - starting with $3,000 on Jan. 1, 2010 - into each person's HRA account.

It then will be up to the retiree and/or spouse to spend the money to meet their needs, be it for general health expenses, premiums for Medicare Part B or D, dental and vision insurance or other out-of-pocket expenses. Caterpillar had been paying for Part B before this.

Caterpillar said in a prepared statement that it first informed retirees back in March that changes would be coming.

"This change will be cost beneficial or cost neutral to the majority of the nearly 9,000 impacted participants. Under the new program, retirees will have greater choice regarding what they get for the money spent on health care.

"There are many ever-changing factors that we will be considering as we look to the future of Caterpillar health care benefits. As always, we remain committed to keeping our employees and retirees informed about their health care benefits," the company said.

Bridget Young, a Caterpillar spokeswoman, said the new program is intended to allow retirees to supplement Medicare. People become eligible for Medicare at age 65, but most want or need supplemental coverage.

"They are not required to enroll in a supplement through Extend Health, but they must do so to be eligible for an HRA," she said.

One woman who also did not want her name used said she's concerned about the stipulation that retirees will pay for their needs up front, submit a claim to Extend Health and then be reimbursed from their HRA account.

"What if I don't have the money to pay for all this up front? And what if $3,000 isn't enough? I think we need more answers," she said.

On the other hand, if the entire $3,000 is not used, it will roll over to the next year and will not affect future disbursements into the HRA, the company documents said.

Another retiree said he made calls to Extend Health and didn't feel that company was forthcoming with information. Some of what he heard, however, he termed "frightening," including on his questions about billing, reimbursements and the like.

"I walked out (of an informational meeting) feeling very discouraged and disgruntled. It seems to me a lot of those supplemental plans like Medicare Part B will eat up a lot of that $3,000," he said.

http://www.pjstar.com/business/x302142795/...new-health-deal



Cobra has run out for many. And that was never cheap.

Only more will be afraid of the path we are on. As they should be.

Our HC system is in meltdown.
CFKane_
Obama supports the BIMBO plan (Big Insurance Monopoly Bail Out)

I don't like this plan at all.

First it is going to force people to buy insurance from private businesses. This is government extortion on behalf of private enterprise and it is wrong, and likely unconstitutional.

Second, it is going to let private insurers continue to cherry pick clientele and put the sick into a "public plan" that isn't an option even which means that the insurers will basically just print money without risk.

Third, leverage remains as it is today in the hands of big insurance companies who can and will continue to roll over their insureds.

I'm sorry I ain't buying.

Medicare for All or I March on Washington and so should you. Big corporations are happy and drooling over this CORPORATIST plan advanced by Obama, and they with their media cohorts and the other half of the Corporate sales team, the Republicans are fooling way too many Americans with a TERRIBLE DEAL that WILL NOT control costs and will not fix anything.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2010 Invision Power Services, Inc.