On Yahoo today, they said the Democrats are "scrambling" to get votes to back the public healthcare plan: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091023/ap_ … e_overhaul
Can someone please tell me why this issue has been a "rush" to get done??
I feel like the Democrats are just trying to hurry and push this through without going through every detail thoroughly. I've even read Congress is against putting up the final version of the Bill 48 hours online before the vote.
I like the public option and I'm glad they are reconsidering it but I don't want a rushed bill voted on in a hurry, just to get it passed. Because who will pay if things weren't properly thought out? Taxpayers.
I also like the idea of a public option. It does seem like it is important enough to actually take a bit of time on it tho. I am not sure what valid reason there could be for rushing it. I wonder if its the speed that is upsetting so many people. It can take some of us a while to get our heads around an idea and giving the public that time could be a greater benefit then rushing it.
Yeah, I think it is the "rushing" that is scaring most people. Or that they feel uninformed.
I seriously want Ross Perot to pay for a 30-minute infomercial and bust out his charts and explain this thing to me in detail...haha.
Obama is so good with speeches, yet, he has failed to go over this plan thoroughly with people. Granted, it's still being put together but I don't even think the common person (including myself) knows the basics of it.
They're rushing it through because if anyone really looks at it it won't get passed!
Everything about this process is a game of deception.
First there's the cost, 900 billion. They needed to get it under 1 trillion to get people to vote for it!
The deception here is the cost is over ten years, but for the first 5 years there are no benefits, just the collection of money!! So the actual cost of this bill is 900 billion over 5 years!
Oh and the other deception, they extracted the medicare payments to doctors (200 billion) and put that in a separate bill!!! Otherwise this one would have been 1.1 trillion!!
Now why would you want a "public option"? Why would you want the government to get into the insurance business?
Well, thats what I mean. I need to take a class on this plan just to understand it.
I think options are good for people.
But what I would prefer is a UNIVERSAL system like Europe and I'll gladly pay more taxes for it.
But, again, I need to see details of everything.
Well good luck with that! The bill is over 1500 pages right now of legal mumbo jumbo! You should take a look at it I think you'll be shocked at just what they are trying to do! And after all this there will still be 20 million uninsured!
It would have been nice to have conservatives acknowledge the reality that universal coverage can cost a lot less, cover everyone, and have better outcomes. You're the first I've ever seen that's done that.
You don't get something for nothing! Europe controls the cost by limiting care, it's that simple. In any market it's suplly and demand that drives pricing. Health care costs run higher here because the people that are using it aren't paying for it, if they were, they wouldn't use it as much and the costs would be lower.
These bills for universal care do nothing to lower the cost. The hope is, and it is just a hope, that by having a public option, insurance companies will lower their costs. They won't because they can't. As it stands the big HMOs only had a profit less than 4%. Microsoft had a 24% profit to put this in perspective. If they were to reduce this to 2% or 1% what would the "public option" pricing be 1 to 2% lower?
So the "savings" is all in the profit, but that won't stop costs from rising as more people will be using the system and still (as far as they are concerned) won't be paying for it (it's free!)
Of course universal health care isn't free, but the costs are borne across the entire population and across all age groups. Europe controls costs by limiting care, but not as much as our private-insurance system does. Are you really unaware that insurance companies' business involves limiting care?
Look at the outcomes. European countries, despite spending substantially less than us, have better health outcomes that we do. So if they're limiting care, they're doing it far more judiciously, or less, than we do.
I'm not sure there is quite so much of a rush when the concept of reform has been around for ages.
Its not like the idea came up yesterday and they want to pass it today.
I remain intrigued by how afraid many Americans are of health care reform. Will it make your life so bad? You don't think it will make you a communist do you?
How communist is Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom?
They have all been doing it for years and yet they survive. Wow
It's not that. We don't know how we are going to pay for all the reform. We are already in debt of trillions to China.
Americans aren't scared of reform but how is it going to happen, how much will it cost, who is paying for it and what exactly will change?
If this were health care reform we might not be against it, this is the first step into a single payer system accompanied by rationing. Health care reform would actually be great but nobody seems interested in that!
Well, large parts of the Uk are predominately Muslim and acting under Sharia law... Don't know much about Australia or Canada. But what I do know about America is the government has no business deciding or running my healthcare choices for me.
This statement is incorrect. Around 2.5% of the population are muslims, and vast majority of them happy to abide by UK law.
Are you serious? That's your argument against the vastly better system that exists in the UK? Muslims in the UK cannot practice Sharia... they follow British laws.
Do you realize who IS deciding your healthcare for you now? BUREAUCRATS. Except instead of government bureaucrats, it is private insurance company bureaucrats who are only interested in making money.
Well, when you get to age 65 I assume you will decline to be covered by Medicare and pay your own hospital and medical bills which may well reach 100s of thousands of dollars. Or maybe you'll be lucky and drop dead on your 65th birthday.
The idea is as old as Ted Kennedy.....however they are trying rush something through while they have a majority and a popular sitting President.
What's crazy about the rush is they want it passed now, but not effective until after the next election...is it just me or does that make absolutely no sense?
They won't have the money later either! As it stands they are playing tricks to get the CBO to rate it as deficit neutral, showing a 250 billion dollar cut in Medicare to pay for it in the health care bill, but adding that money back in a separate bill! And as you say the benefits don't kick in until after the elections in 2013, so the costs don't include any payments for benefits in the beginning years while they collect money to get it started.
It's likely the 10 years after 2013 this bill will cost 2 trillion dollars! Bend over America the government is going to stick it to ya once again!
Boo! Hiss! Bad Government! Bad Government! Go sit in the corner and take a time out Government. Leave us alone.
Whats your point without the bias.
Bias? What bias? Those are the facts and as usual when the left is confronted with the facts a sleight of hand is used to change the subject.
My point is the government is lying about the cost. They are doing so in order to make it more palatable to congress and the American people and to provide the cover of ignorance when their lies are uncovered.
They'll never have the money to do it-they'll be robbing peter to pay paul so to speak for years. Our children and grnadchildren will be paying for this for decades to come.
You know, if I don't have the money for something, I just don't buy it. Government has no concept of this.
I think at this point it is a matter of passing any kind of healthcare reform. Is it going to cost money? Everything does; so no 'Bad Government', that's just the way it is. Spending has gone haywire, yes, but no fix is really not an option. The healthcare system is broken. This 'rush' has really been going on for quite some time. An answer is needed, but it needs to be a consensus effort, not that of a divided congress.
It's been a rush since Obama took office. And the funny thing is that it's not UNIVERSAL. About 19 million Americans will still not have health insurance. And the others who don't have it but will have it under this new bill, will be FORCED to get it or face a fine.
Create a truly UNIVERSAL plan that helps everyone and not forcing people to buy insurance.
Mandating car insurance is obviously needed because you can kill innocent people with your car. The last time I checked, eating fast food for years won't kill anyone but myself.
Making people buy health insurance is not a good road to go down. Where will it end?
We need to have a system based on European countries but even those are flawed.
In the end, the people with good insurance will be pissed about this bill. And the people without insurance will be pissed that they have to buy it.
Quality of insurance will go down and no one will win.
The amount of time and resources spent on this bill is ridiculous considering there are far bigger worries in the world and in our own country.
First of all you DON"T have to buy insurance to drive a car. You only have to show proof of financial ability in the amount specified by law. Most people buy insurance rather than tying up their assets.
Secondly, the States control insurance law, not the feds. The federal government DOES NOT have the constitutional authority to FORCE citizens to BUY anything let alone health insurance! They would need a constitutional amendment to do so!
Where do you live? I want to get my car registered in your state. Here in Maryland car insurance is mandatory. One day without insurance coverage and you are fined $150.00 and I believe $35.00 every day after that up to I believe $3,500.00. There is no wiggle room with this. And if you never pay the fine you can't register any car in your name until the fine is paid. I don't think they care about your assets.
Quite sure. We have a no fault based system where the insurance companies duke it out with each other. Not a fair fight when it comes to the individual kind of thing. The state wants the insurance companies to have quick access to cash to settle disputes. Of course if there is extreme circumstances such as negligent vehicular homocide there are a whole new bunch of people you will meet in civil court and circuit court at the cost of your freedom and money.
The fines are up to $900 for an individual and $1,400 for a family if they don't get insurance under this bill. Or it was one of the bills.
And I've never heard that you didn't have to buy car insurance. No one has ever given me the option to have assets of "X" amount as to not get insurance.
All states are different of course and as I said most people elect to buy insurance rather than post a million dollar bond but there is that option, at least in my state.
So the drug and insurance companies won't have time to shoot it down?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3q6Walwg … r_embedded
I think everyone should read some of the bill before they say anything about it. There's even plain english summaries of the more salient details out there. Give it a whirl.
by Jezzzz 13 years ago
I hear every day about how Obama is not telling the truth about health care reform. I would like to be educated about the subject. What is he saying that just get under your skin about health care reform. And if it get under your skin, how would he need to change to have you to...
by Charles Mark Walker 9 years ago
Shouldn't there have been healthcare reform before Obamacare is implemented?Healthcare reform would mean looking into a countless number of things wrong with the system.Yet now we are getting a new insurance that there are so many concerns about. It's like rebuilding an engine without taking it...
by fishskinfreak2008 13 years ago
Web-site/URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100326/ts … RoY2FyZXJlObviously, states with higher unemployment rates will need more help as far as insurance is concerned. WINNERSArizona (Unemployment Rate: 9.7%) Home state of REPUBLICAN Sen. JOHN MCCAIN; OK, 9.7% unemployment IS highDelaware...
by Georgiakevin 13 years ago
I simply do not understand why people are fighting health care reform. I have heard the arguments against it and I keep saying how is that worse than being held hostage by the insurance companies? My insurance cost keeps going and in turn I get less and less coverage. They say the govt run...
by rhamson 13 years ago
These statistics come from 1991 but show a trend that needs looking at when we are fed the line about the best healthcare system in the world.http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-healthcare.htmHealth Care Expenditures (percent of GDP) (1)United States 13.4%Canada ...
by Jack Lee 5 years ago
Here are the 7 -"Arizona's John McCain, Alaska's Lisa Murkowski, Ohio's Rob Portman, Tennessee's Lamar Alexander, West Virginia's Shelley Moore Capito, Nevada's Dean Heller, and Maine's Susan Collins were the dissenting GOP Senators on the Obamacare Repeal Reconciliation Act (ORRA) Wednesday....
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|