But Republicans in Congress have time and again proven themselves to be craven, spineless, individuals, willing to cave in or compromise on a moment's notice – rather than picking up their swords and shields in defense of our rights. Their idea of opposition is to craft a universal health care reform measure of their own.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=107170
Red almost all your posts come from world net daily. (wnd.com) Just about anyone can have a column there. I also, read wnd but I am more interested in what you have to say more than any of the people on World Net Daily. I just want to emphasize I would rather read your column than some blogger on WND. That being said I also appreciate that you are a frequent poster whether it comes from WND or not.
David
Keep in mind that most editorials on wnd are available thru other sources too.
The writers that I read on wnd are Sowell, Williams, Massie, Washington, Parker, and Mercer.
WND is a good place to find their writings.
Otherwise, I'm not into reading anything else on wnd and I don't know much else about the wnd
website.
Thank you.
Well, I just call 'em as I see 'em and don't express myself often.
It's up to you whether to accept sociialism or not.
Yesterday, in the check-out line at Walmart, I struck-up a conversation
with a fireman. He said that we could sit down and have a long talk and
probably agree on everything. Yeah, he was opposed to grants and I can
say that it was good to see a man who is a public employee having strong principles.
Need more of 'em don't you think?
Quote from: redcliffsw on August 19, 2009, 09:06:01 AM
Well, I just call 'em as I see 'em and don't express myself often.
It's up to you whether to accept sociialism or not.
Yesterday, in the check-out line at Walmart, I struck-up a conversation
with a fireman. He said that we could sit down and have a long talk and
probably agree on everything. Yeah, he was opposed to grants and I can
say that it was good to see a man who is a public employee having strong principles.
Need more of 'em don't you think?
I thought we were avoiding walmart and trying to buy American?
We? I buy mostly American stuff at Walmart when I can.
You keep supporting the Federal health care and it becomes law,
we'll get even more foreign stuff than we're getting now.
Quote from: redcliffsw on August 19, 2009, 09:19:32 AM
You keep supporting the Federal health care and it becomes law,
we'll get even more foreign stuff than we're getting now.
???????????????
As for supportin it I haven't seen ANYbody say they really SUPPORT it.......some I'm watchins and a few we'll sees but that's about it...nobody has actually said it's a GOOD idea
Is it that difficult of an issue to reach a decision whether to support it or not?
How many more facts and how much more info do you need you need before
making up your mind?
In the first place, as Americans, we ought to know that kind of stuff is not right.
Quote from: redcliffsw on August 19, 2009, 09:36:57 AM
Is it that difficult of an issue to reach a decision whether to support it or not?
How many more facts and how much more info do you need you need before
making up your mind?
In the first place, as Americans, we ought to know that kind of stuff is not right.
Need some honest to God nuts and bolts information not a bunch of screamin and hollerin and propaganda from EITHER side.
Being American doesn't have anything to do with knowing what's right.......What's "RIGHT" is not a big American virtue when you get right down to it. For the simple reason that what's RIGHT depends on who you listen to and which SIDE you are on and is as changable as dirty underwear or Congressmen or political power.
Pam-
It sounds like that you are ready to hear a Republican proposal
for Federal health care.
If you just gotta have Federal health care, what else do you believe
that the Federal government ought to take over to do for you?
Dude....Chick....whatever you are you REALLY get on my nerves sometimes.........You are so smug and SO sure everybody who doesn't TOTally agree with you or the fine people at WOrld Net Daily is on the government tit that is actually makes me laugh when it doesn't piss me off.
Do you like ever read what people say? The WHOLE thing or just the parts you can twist to mean what you want?
I'm ready to hear the STORY the WHOLE story not the *&^%$#^ propaganda that is being thrown around. The government is GONNA do SOMEthin and I want to be INformed so I know what me and mine are IN for.
I don't want or take anything.......I don't WANT any government interferance in my family which is why I have never signed my daughter up for the Well Kids or any OTHER program. I and my HUSband pay cash when we go to the doctor when we are SICK which is not very often.
I'm not gonna sign up for any program they come up with NOW. If they try to force me I'm gonna raise hell and put a chunk under it. Now I'm hopin that is plain enough english for ya bud.
So quit yankin my chain just to see if you can piss me off K?
Quote from: redcliffsw on August 19, 2009, 11:31:58 AM
Pam-
It sounds like that you are ready to hear a Republican proposal
for Federal health care.
I've been ready to hear one, but they haven't come up with anything. They are too busy pandering to the insurance companies i think. There needs to be Health Care Reform, just about everyone close to the issue agrees on that.
I hope there's no more health care proposals as the Fed's ought
to forget it. There's other things that ought to be done like
repealing the 16th amendment and abolishing the Federal reserve.
Good artcile here by James Kennedy
http://www.kennedytwins.com/oped.htm
yeah they should repeal the 16 amendment but then what would all them politicians do for a job :P
Quote from: Anmar on August 19, 2009, 03:36:53 PM
I've been ready to hear one, but they haven't come up with anything. They are too busy pandering to the insurance companies i think. There needs to be Health Care Reform, just about everyone close to the issue agrees on that.
I agree we need health care reform.... what do think of these w/o government intervention?
**Stopping insurance companies from charging older Americans unaffordable premiums because of their age.
**Ending the practice of excluding people from insurance because of pre-existing conditions.
**Holding down health costs and making insurance coverage more affordable for all Americans.
**Making prescription drugs more affordable by narrowing the Medicare doughnut hole, bringing generics to market faster, and allowing Medicare to negotiate better drug prices
Quote from: Warph on August 19, 2009, 05:19:02 PM
Quote from: Anmar on August 19, 2009, 03:36:53 PM
I've been ready to hear one, but they haven't come up with anything. They are too busy pandering to the insurance companies i think. There needs to be Health Care Reform, just about everyone close to the issue agrees on that.
I agree we need health care reform.... what do think of these w/o government intervention?
**Stopping insurance companies from charging older Americans unaffordable premiums because of their age.
**Ending the practice of excluding people from insurance because of pre-existing conditions.
**Holding down health costs and making insurance coverage more affordable for all Americans.
**Making prescription drugs more affordable by narrowing the Medicare doughnut hole, bringing generics to market faster, and allowing Medicare to negotiate better drug prices
Warph, i'm in agreement with 1, 2 and 4. I'm not sure if putting price controls on health costs would be the best course of action. I think a better solution would be to find a way to reduce costs by giving doctors some protection from over the top lawsuiits, by not asking people who pay to make up for those who don't, and by not allowing the insurance companies (or private organization)to spend so much money lobbying politicians.
Warph, those points are what President Obama campaigned on. Where have you been guy?
Basically Diane they( which I am) have to practice as many preVENtive measures as they can, educate themselves as much about home remedies as they can, and make their peace with the fact that if somethin horrendous happens they willl just have to make the best of it.
Somthin has to be done about premium prices.........they want 500 dollars a month for coverage( for us anyway)for 1500 deductible...if you never USE it that adds up pretty damn quick.(not countin what you spend tryin to meet the deductible)....multiply that by the number of OTHER people who never make a claim and you have a DAMN good racket.
Pam it only takes one event to get the expense to $500,000.00 and more pretty quick. You are playing with a time bomb having no coverage. Check into the averages, that is why the price is expensive. People get sick on a regular basis, and unfortunately the older you get the more likely it is you will get sick. I had a friend a few years back whose Mom got sick before her medicare kicked in. She had a long illness and eventually died. My friend accepted responsibility for her Mothers' treatment, and as a result lost her home when the hospital pressed for payment. Too sad, she had little resources and it took a long while for her to even partially recover. One more thing, with no coverage, you get charged the very maximum. There is no adjustment on the cost as there is done for the insurance companies. I am currently covered by Medicare and a pretty good supplemental policy that will get me just about the best there is available in this area. Could I use that money for something else? Sure I could, but I don't worry about leaving a lot of expense for someone else to be responsible for either. I don't expect that the reform will look too much different for seniors, and will probably look a lot better for some others. I am sitting back to see what happens.
I was typin an answer last night when the tornado warnings came and we had to go hide for awhile :P Interestin night around here :P
Anyway....SDM I am gonna tell yall my philosophy and don't expect it to be agreed with......What you said about one episode rackin up half a mill or so......I made the decision a long time ago that if I turned up with somethin that was gonna cause that kind of bill...it was probly goin to get me in the end anyway so I will just go till I can't go and then they can burn me and spread me in the wind. I don't want to spend boocoo bucks and the last of my time tryin to get more time that ain't gonna happen. Just live it till it's gone.
Diane...I'm fixin to be 50....I have lived a VERY active life and one thing I DON'T want to think about is when I can't get around and do anymore. Actually...no I wouldn't accept it beCAUSE I'm gettin to the age where I would just be grabbin for more no matter how and I really don't believe in that anymore.
My KIDS HAVE insurance thru their jobs. If they needed a kidney I'd give it to em and figure out how to pay for it. Ashley is the only one still at home and Joes insurance from work covers her. Everybody in my family knows my wishes and will respect them.
Yeah shit happens...people end up in debt....people make payments.
And no I ain't ready to die...hope I live to be a hundred long as I have my mind and can get around......but if I get where I don't even remember who I am or who my family is? Just let me die. If I get cancer? Just let me go. If all I can do is sit and slobber down my chin? Just let me go on Home. And that's the way I actually feel about it. I was makin an observation.... this really ain't up for argument yknow? :)
Quote from: Warph on August 19, 2009, 05:19:02 PM
I agree we need health care reform.... what do think of these w/o government intervention?
**Stopping insurance companies from charging older Americans unaffordable premiums because of their age.
**Ending the practice of excluding people from insurance because of pre-existing conditions.
**Holding down health costs and making insurance coverage more affordable for all Americans.
**Making prescription drugs more affordable by narrowing the Medicare doughnut hole, bringing generics to market faster, and allowing Medicare to negotiate better drug prices
Warph, I have to disagree with you here. In my opinion, we need tort reform, not healthcare reform. I don't think the gov't should be telling any company (not just insurance compaines) what they can or can't charge. As folks get older, the risk for insurance companies goes up, so the premiums go up. To me, its like a bank charging someone with bad credit a higher interest rate for a loan. Also, insurance companies should have the same basic rights as every other private business in that they should be allowed to refuse service to anyone they choose.
Get credit??? I don't think so. Just because you didn't need to use the insurance, doesn't mean the service wasn't there. If you needed it then you had it. It is an insurance policy, not a savings account. Should we not pay police officers just because they hadn't needed to make an arrest in a while?
Quote from: BillyakaVarmit on August 22, 2009, 05:36:38 AM
Get credit??? I don't think so. Just because you didn't need to use the insurance, doesn't mean the service wasn't there. If you needed it then you had it. It is an insurance policy, not a savings account. Should we not pay police officers just because they hadn't needed to make an arrest in a while?
I totally get Dianes point on this Varmit....I've been payin car insurance since I was 18 and have NEVER had a claim of any kind....think what I could do with THAT chunk of change........
I understand what you are saying about insurance. However, I think you missed my point. Just because a person has never had to file a claim doesn't mean that they didn't use their insurance. Most insurance is purchased on a time line, meaning that it has a starting and ending point. Car insruance for example is purchased to cover the owner from having to pay 100% of the cost of a claim, or damages. Just because the car owner never had an accident doesn't mean that their insurance wasn't used. They were covered by their insurance for term length of their policy. So it is not as if the insurance companies just took their money without returning a service.
Gee Billy thanks for explaining the complex theory of how insurance works to me ::) I never knew that before......(that's sarcasm for those of you who don't get it)
just explaining my point of view.
Billy,
I'm not sure what world you are living in, but health insurance companies are pretty much committing fraud on a large scale basis. Imagine that you have been paying health care premiums for a few years now, and one day you get diagnosed with prostate cancer. you start treatment right away at your local hospital and a few days later you get a letter from your insurance company saying that they aren't going to pay the bills and that you've been dropped from the policy. You've already displayed that you know how insurance works, so I'm going to assume that you realize that in this scenario, the insurance company is not coming through on their end of the deal. This is is one of the things they are trying to reform. How can you not see a problem here? Even the most ardent conservatives in the congress believe that something needs to be done (the sell-outs not included)
Anmar, I agree that something like that is wrong. And if it were happening on the scale that healthcare propents say that it is, then yes, the gov't should step in to protect the people. However, from what I have seen with the expirence of all but one of my grandparents dying of cancer, that is not the case. I think that issues like the one you mentioned should be dealt with in the courts, not in congress.
Quote from: Anmar on August 23, 2009, 12:47:41 PM
Billy,
I'm not sure what world you are living in, but health insurance companies are pretty much committing fraud on a large scale basis. Imagine that you have been paying health care premiums for a few years now, and one day you get diagnosed with prostate cancer. you start treatment right away at your local hospital and a few days later you get a letter from your insurance company saying that they aren't going to pay the bills and that you've been dropped from the policy. You've already displayed that you know how insurance works, so I'm going to assume that you realize that in this scenario, the insurance company is not coming through on their end of the deal. This is is one of the things they are trying to reform. How can you not see a problem here? Even the most ardent conservatives in the congress believe that something needs to be done (the sell-outs not included)
Well most health insurance has a exclusion for cancer, you can buy a rider to cover cancer but if it is normally covered under the policy then if they insurance company drops you file a complaint with the insurance commissioner. IF nothing is done then he is not doing his job. Take it to his boss.
Out here in the bay area, this kind of thing happens a lot. I've lost a friend and a young girl i used to coach to cancer. Both had insurance, both were denied treatment by their insurance companies that could have saved their lives.
Billy, it can't be taken to the courts because first, it's not illegal, and second, usually the plaintiff is dead by the time anything would get going. The government should be protecting the people, which is what health care reform is all about. This bill isn't about death panels, the bill isn't about the government taking over health care. Those things do not exist, they are propaganda tools that have been fed to you by the sellouts. The bill is about getting insurance companies and the health care indsutry to do whats right for the patient.
Been at the doctor this mornin for my annual visit.................just for all yall who worry bout havin to pay for people like me with no insurance I paid cash ::) so rest easy......so I asked him what doctors think of the healthcare bill and he said most of them don't like it but THEN he said somthing DOES need to be done because there are TOO many people who fall in the group of not being POOR enough to get medicaid....... and not being RICH enough to afford the high premiums on their own......THEN he said he thought we should all get the same healthcare plan that our CONGRESSMEN get....full coverage..no premiums...no deductible.....after all WE pay for it and it's good enough for THEM it ought to be good enough for the rest of us.
That's the reason I asked him because I figured whatever a doctor thought was worth thinkin about.
Thanks, Pam !
I have asked it once, and I will ask it again...how can the gov't provide health coverage for all without rationing? It has been tried, and they can't do it.
Quote from: Anmar on August 24, 2009, 09:27:27 AM
The bill is about getting insurance companies and the health care indsutry to do whats right for the patient.
That is propaganda being fed to you by those who want this bill to pass. If the gov't wasn't trying to take over there wouldn't be stipulations in the bill about private insurance becoming null and void is a policy changes, or private insurance compaines not being able to take on new clients after the bill is passed, or a regulatory board being set up to decide who gets what treatment.
Quote from: pamsback on August 24, 2009, 12:05:57 PM
That's the reason I asked him because I figured whatever a doctor thought was worth thinkin about.
Excellent point, and thanks for it, makes a lot of sense.
Quote from: BillyakaVarmit on August 24, 2009, 08:37:11 PM
I have asked it once, and I will ask it again...how can the gov't provide health coverage for all without rationing? It has been tried, and they can't do it.
Quote from: Anmar on August 24, 2009, 09:27:27 AM
The bill is about getting insurance companies and the health care indsutry to do whats right for the patient.
That is propaganda being fed to you by those who want this bill to pass. If the gov't wasn't trying to take over there wouldn't be stipulations in the bill about private insurance becoming null and void is a policy changes, or private insurance compaines not being able to take on new clients after the bill is passed, or a regulatory board being set up to decide who gets what treatment.
Billy,
I have to say i'm getting slightly annoyed with you. None of those things are in the bill. Where are you getting your info? Do you even know what the bill is about? It's health care reform, not government takeover of healthcare. The private insurance companies are not going away. What's being proposed is a government alternative. You can argue that the government shouldn't be in the healthcare business, thats a valid argument because that is one of the ideas being proposed. Let me say this again, THERE IS NO PROPOSAL FOR A COMPLETE GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE.
As far as a regulatory board to decide who gets treatment, with your expert knowledge of how health care works, you should already know that an insurance adjuster currently makes those decisions, not the doctors. Their priority is the bottom line, not your health, so thats not exactly the best thing for the patient.
Oh really...
• Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the government option!
• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
From CMS at freerepublic.com
So tell me, where did I go wrong again?
Oh, one more thing, if I go in for emergency treatment that is not covered by my insurance, I will still get it, but I will be responsible for paying for it.
While I am at it let me add this little gem...
Personally I think they've lost their momentum........missed their window of opportunity.
kinda renders this argument moot.
They may have lost momentum but don't think for a second that they have given up the fight. Nancy Pelosi has said that they don't need Republican support and Charles Schumer is pushing for the use of "budget reconciliation" to pass a public option healthcare bill. Meaning, that all they would need is 51 votes instead of 60.
Didn't say "they" had given up the fight I said they had lost their window of opportunity to sneak it past everybody.
Even Pelosi has that deer in the headlights "shit the people are PISSED" "maybe I better not do this if I want to keep my job" look on her face most of the times she's been on tv lately.
Quote from: pamsback on August 25, 2009, 06:23:00 AM
Didn't say "they" had given up the fight I said they had lost their window of opportunity to sneak it past everybody.
Even Pelosi has that deer in the headlights "shit the people are PISSED" "maybe I better not do this if I want to keep my job" look on her face most of the times she's been on tv lately.
GOOD, they SHOULD fear us!
Quote from: srkruzich on August 25, 2009, 07:11:34 AM
Quote from: pamsback on August 25, 2009, 06:23:00 AM
Didn't say "they" had given up the fight I said they had lost their window of opportunity to sneak it past everybody.
Even Pelosi has that deer in the headlights "shit the people are PISSED" "maybe I better not do this if I want to keep my job" look on her face most of the times she's been on tv lately.
GOOD, they SHOULD fear us!
DUH
Billy,
you continue to list things that aren't in the bill. You copy and pasted from someone else's old post, but you didnt provide the link to the actual text. Many of those things have been grossly distorted by the original author and some of them are outright lies. Take your claim about illegal aliens, the proposed bill does not provide free health care to illegal aliens, not matter which way you look at it. You are being dishonest here, maybe unintentionally, but the fact remains.
Anmar.. bless your heart............. I have to give you credit.....
you're trying to get that dead horse up so you can ride... but I don't think its gonna work.
Lie #1: 'You Keep Your Doctor, You Keep Your Insurer'
This is a complete fabrication.
Under plans Obama has backed in the House and the Senate, almost any business can opt their employees into the "public option" — the government health plan.
That means you could lose your insurer. And if your doctor is worth his salt, you'll lose him or her as well.
Why? Because great doctors probably will not want to get the very low rates the government will pay private doctors who are part of the new government system.
So, without your consent, you very easily could lose your insurer and your doctor.
Lie #2: The Elderly Will Not Face Rationing or Medicare Cuts
More baloney.
In fact, just last week, The New York Times, a very liberal and very pro-Obama newspaper, admitted that fears of rationing for elderly patients are "not irrational."
The truth is that Obamacare would almost 50 million new patients to government care.
Who would pay for it. You would!
Seniors on Medicare will be the first hit.
Here's what the Times reported: "Bills now in Congress would squeeze savings out of Medicare, a lifeline for the elderly, on the assumption that doctors and hospitals can be more efficient."
This means that faceless bureaucrats will decide the type and quality of your care.
It is a very dangerous thing to give our life and well-being over to government bureaucrats!
Imagine if you or a loved one is older than 80 years and critically needs heart surgery.
Instead of getting the heart procedure, you or that loved one could be informed that you are simply too old.
We at the League of American Voters have been warning of this danger and have a powerful TV commercial exposing the risks to seniors.
Lie #3: There Will Be No "Death Panels."
More lies.
Sure, they don't call them "death panels" in the legislation, but that's what their job will be.
These committee members will set guidelines with which faceless bureaucrats will make decisions about you and your healthcare.
They will decide who lives and who dies. They decide who gets critical procedures and expensive medicines.
Again, according to the New York Times, the Democratic plans call for saving money by creating new oversight committees.
The Times says that Medicare and insurers would be expected to follow "advice from a new federal panel of medical experts on 'what treatments work best.'"
Again, this very liberal paper concluded: "The zeal for cutting health costs, combined with proposals to compare the effectiveness of various treatments and to counsel seniors on end-of-life care, may explain why some people think the legislation is about rationing, which could affect access to the most expensive services in the final months of life."
Lie #4: The Obama Plan Contains Costs
Absolute nonsense.
The Obama plan will cost more than $1 trillion in new federal outlays, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
This past weekend, Sen. Joe Lieberman claimed that most of this cost comes from adding 50 million people, currently uninsured, to the government health system.
But as Lieberman pointed out, we just don't have the money to do this right now.
You can add only so many people to the government system by cutting medical care to seniors on Medicare and raising taxes.
Democrats clearly plan to do both.
Lie #5: Illegals Are Not Covered by Obamacare
President Obama has stated time and again that illegal aliens are not covered under his new plan.
Still, Democrats say they want to add almost 50 million uninsured. Yet almost one-quarter of these uninsured are illegal aliens.
None of the Democratic plans excludes illegal aliens.
In fact, when Republicans proposed an amendment to the House plan to block illegals from getting free government healthcare, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her minions soundly defeated the motion.
When Obama tells you something listen to his exact words very carefully. He and his cohorts are so slick they tell you something you think he said, but he didn't.
For example. He said "No one is talking about health care for illegal aliens". That's true. No one is talking about it. But, in all the bills being worked on, they are included in vague and convoluted wording and provisions. You thought you heard him say "no health care for illegals". Well, you are wrong. It is there, it's just that "no one is talking about it", and that is what he told you.
Anytime Obama says "I want to make that perfectly clear" it's he's just lied or is going to lie.
ID is only required for Town Halls, right? Yes, you need to have proper ID to attend a Town Hall meeting to talk with your Congressman. But, the illegal won't need that worrisome detail to sign up for free medical coverage. No ID required.
(CNSNews.com) – The health care reform bills Congress is considering would not require people who sign up for government health care programs to verify their eligibility. That opens the door for millions of illegal aliens and other non-citizens to receive medical services paid for by taxpayers, a panel of experts from the conservative Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and The Heritage Foundation said Wednesday.
"This takes an unprecedented step in opening up the U.S. welfare system to illegal immigrants," Robert Rector, senior fellow on domestic policy at The Heritage Foundation, told an audience at the National Press Club in Washington.
"We have had a system of identity checks that largely prevents adult illegal immigrants from getting onto these means-tested welfare programs," Rector added.
Title II, Subtitle C, Section 246 of the House health care bill (H.R. 3200) stipulates "no federal payment for undocumented aliens." The Senate bill states that beneficiaries of federal health care programs must be a citizen or national or an alien lawfully admitted to the United States.
But neither bill has a provision for verifying citizenship status, according to these experts.
Rector said people signing up for government-run health care programs would not have to substantiate that they are in this country legally. "The health care reform legislation turns that on its back and tramples it into the dust," Rector said. "It basically says, 'We will not verify, we will not check, we have a complete open door for every illegal immigrant, current and in the future, to simply enroll and receive benefits under this program.' .... Edwards said two amendments proposed in the House to require verification of citizenship and other qualifications were voted down and that Senate legislation also lacks any kind of verification provision.
"Congressman Dean Heller (R-Nev.) offered an amendment in the Ways and Means Committee to correct that, but it was defeated along party lines," Edwards said. .... The Senate Finance Committee has released only an outline of its health care plan -- not a full draft -- and that outline penalizes U.S. citizens and legal residents while allowing illegal aliens access to free health care, Edwards said.
"The Finance Committee outline, like the HELP and the House bills, mandates that individuals must carry health insurance or else face a fine," Edwards said. "The Finance outline says that illegal aliens will be exempt from that individual mandate. It sets up a system where you've got Americans and legal immigrants who have to have coverage or else pay a fine," Edwards said. "But illegal aliens would escape the mandate and any fine for not being insured.
....
Panelists said the current health care legislation could, in fact, not only benefit illegal aliens but actually encourage more people to come into this country illegally. Rector called it a system that would establish "transnational welfare outreach."
....
Rector said immigrants already account for $100 billion of the $700 billion spent annually in the United States helping low-income people, including health care services.
Just a question, in the post who is "Edwards". The introduction of Edwards appears to have got lost in the truncation. Not disagreeing!
Charles
Quote from: pamsback on August 25, 2009, 06:23:00 AM
Even Pelosi has that deer in the headlights "shit the people are PISSED" "maybe I better not do this if I want to keep my job" look on her face most of the times she's been on tv lately.
Pam Pelosi always has that deer in the headlights look. I think she gets botox shots. :D
David
CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress -- while pushing their own health care overhauls -- have criticized Republicans as offering only opposition and no ideas for reform, but the GOP, despite the lack of media attention, has introduced three health care bills.
The three Republican bills total almost 400 pages and have been on the table since May and June.
In May, Republicans in the House and the Senate formed a bicameral coalition to produce the130-page "Patients Choice Act of 2009."
In June, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) introduced the "Health Care Freedom Plan," a 41-page proposal.
And in July, the Republican Study Committee, under the leadership of Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), unveiled the "Empowering Patients First Act," a 130-page plan.
Some of the provisions included in one or more of the bills include:
Read the story:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/52896
The Problem is that if the proposed bill is less than 1000 pages they can't slip in things like this
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_23-2009_08_29.shtml#1251206908
James Peasley [1]uncovers another goody buried in the House health
care reform bill: Strict liability for accidental underpayment of
income taxes.
Under current law, taxpayers who lose an argument with the IRS can
generally avoid penalties by showing they tried in good faith to
comply with the tax law. In a broad range of circumstances, the
health-care bill would change the law to impose strict liability
penalties for income-tax underpayments, meaning that taxpayers will
no longer have the luxury of making an honest mistake. The ability
of even the IRS to waive penalties in sympathetic cases would be
sharply curtailed.
The proposed changes in penalty rules have largely escaped notice
because they are buried in a part of the bill that purports to deal
with abusive tax shelters. They are barely mentioned in the Ways
and Means Committee summary. Their inclusion in the bill
underscores the need to read it closely. If anyone had doubts about
the value of loading the text of the bill into a wheelbarrow and
bringing it to the beach this August, the proposed changes to tax
penalties should dispel them.
Of course, it would be silly to expect legislators to actually [2]read
the whole bill before they vote for it (that would prevent them from
blaming the IRS for enforcing the law as Congress enacted it).
References
1. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203550604574358882642883214.html
2. http://www.volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_06_28-2009_07_04.shtml#1246236289
Sorry Teresa, I was at the bottom of the previous page when I started this reply, totally missed your two posts above.
My take on the Health-Care quasi debate going on in Congress, in so-called town hall meetings, here on the forum, and in the mainstream media:
Doing nothing is worse than doing something. The old saying is, if it ain't broke . . . don't fix it. Well IMHO the American health care system ( health insurance costs and coverage, provision of care, malpractice premiums, . . ) is broke, and needs fixing.
Do I have a inkling of an idea as to how to do it. No.
Do I believe the true left liberals have the answer. Not just no, but h... no.
Do I believe the answer lies somewhere between "Do Nothing" and what others call "ObamaCare" YES!
This nation, in the aggregate, spends way too much of it's Gross Demestic Product on health care. And for many the level of care is way less than what it should be for the price being paid. For others the care doesn't exist at all, or not at a cost that is within their means. We can't go on with the status quo.
Did I just restate other points espoused on this thread? Probably.
Do I have links to information that would refute certain parts of specific posts? Yes.
Could I post them just to show everyone I can? Yes.
Am I going to? Not unless I read a post that is, IMO, so patently false, inflamatory, or intentionally misleading that I feel compelled to respond.
From the Center
Charles