Healthcare
- Thread starter Al Wohlstrom
- Start date
Keith, I almost feel a need to apologize for Marc/MadMax's comments, but I'll refrain for his sake as I'm sure he'd rather be held responsible on his own for his statements. This sort of radical rhetoric has become more common since the most recent presidential election. People who were aligned with the "conservative" agenda were outvoted by the majority of Americans, who quite honestly and justifiably felt disenfranchised by the Republicans and their "...win at all costs" philosophy. In a sense, and to plagarize GeeDub, America "...gave them a thumpin''. Now, as you can imagine, those who didn't like that have rallied around an ever more radical approach, you're just seeing the evidence of that here.
I'm not a liberal, nor am I a conservative, most assuredly not a Demopublican or a Republicrat, I tend to consider myself a progressive, although that isn't really correct, either, as I long for the U.S. to return to the "...kindler, gentler nation" that we were at one time. I must admit, I think the current administration is trying to bring us back to the nation that welcomed all who wished to immigrate legally, welcomed by the inscription on our Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, your homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door".
We are what we are, a mixed blessing coming from the melting pot we seem to be. Among us will be those who have no charity in their hearts, it's just natural. Please don't judge all of us Americans by what you read from our fellow forum member, Marc......
In the end, America is a land ruled by the majority.....the majority spoke during the last election, tossing the undesirables and seating a legislative and executive majority that is more in line with the true state of life in the U.S. As always, we welcome the opposition, but in the end, as I've said before, the pendulum does swing back and forth in the U.S. and I'm sure the radical conservatives will have their way again in the future. At that time, I'm sure the "universal health-care" gains (this thread is about health care, right?) made under the current administration will be overturned, and the poor and unhealthy will once again be without a fighting chance. On that sad day our great lady, that gift from the French standing over our most famous port of all, would surely weep if she could.
Doug
I'm not a liberal, nor am I a conservative, most assuredly not a Demopublican or a Republicrat, I tend to consider myself a progressive, although that isn't really correct, either, as I long for the U.S. to return to the "...kindler, gentler nation" that we were at one time. I must admit, I think the current administration is trying to bring us back to the nation that welcomed all who wished to immigrate legally, welcomed by the inscription on our Statue of Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, your homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door".
We are what we are, a mixed blessing coming from the melting pot we seem to be. Among us will be those who have no charity in their hearts, it's just natural. Please don't judge all of us Americans by what you read from our fellow forum member, Marc......
In the end, America is a land ruled by the majority.....the majority spoke during the last election, tossing the undesirables and seating a legislative and executive majority that is more in line with the true state of life in the U.S. As always, we welcome the opposition, but in the end, as I've said before, the pendulum does swing back and forth in the U.S. and I'm sure the radical conservatives will have their way again in the future. At that time, I'm sure the "universal health-care" gains (this thread is about health care, right?) made under the current administration will be overturned, and the poor and unhealthy will once again be without a fighting chance. On that sad day our great lady, that gift from the French standing over our most famous port of all, would surely weep if she could.
Doug
Last edited:
Hey Doug - no big deal mate but thanks. We seem to have a growing problem engaging in debate in the world today when the Pros and Cons cannot discuss varying points of view without descending into personal attacks rhetoric and just plain naysaying what the other guy's position is without mature reflection,
I do enjoy this forum in all aspects for just one main reason - I learn.
Here I learn about cars and I learn about people especially those from other countries. I do not engage with social networking sites as they are infested with 300lb 50 year old truck drivers called Lorraine, and there are some pretty unpleasant people trawling through the personal info. So this forum tends to be my window on the world, plus you're all clever people and I feel we have much in common.
I am not or ever have been that entrenched in a point of view even though I can put them across in a quite forceful manner. I use humour, irony and light friendly sarcasm to carry a message. Dogma I detest and hyprocrisy sucks. What I want to hear, is the other persons point of view so I can keep learning and thus advise my children about world events which they will never hear on MTV.
I have only ever met 4 persons on this forum, but I love all of you just the same. You are great people.
So now - bring it on!
I do enjoy this forum in all aspects for just one main reason - I learn.
Here I learn about cars and I learn about people especially those from other countries. I do not engage with social networking sites as they are infested with 300lb 50 year old truck drivers called Lorraine, and there are some pretty unpleasant people trawling through the personal info. So this forum tends to be my window on the world, plus you're all clever people and I feel we have much in common.
I am not or ever have been that entrenched in a point of view even though I can put them across in a quite forceful manner. I use humour, irony and light friendly sarcasm to carry a message. Dogma I detest and hyprocrisy sucks. What I want to hear, is the other persons point of view so I can keep learning and thus advise my children about world events which they will never hear on MTV.
I have only ever met 4 persons on this forum, but I love all of you just the same. You are great people.
So now - bring it on!
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Doug,
Thank you, that needed to be said and you said it very well!
I wish to let you Brits know that people who think like Marc are very, very few, and I like most Americans do not harbor such feelings. I have a great fondness for the Brits. (gt40, Lotus, Beatles.....)
I for one, would like the thank the Brits for your support in our most recent "wars". You can't say that about too many other countries.
History will show if these wars were right or wrong, but you stood with us and I thank you!
Thank you, that needed to be said and you said it very well!
I wish to let you Brits know that people who think like Marc are very, very few, and I like most Americans do not harbor such feelings. I have a great fondness for the Brits. (gt40, Lotus, Beatles.....)
I for one, would like the thank the Brits for your support in our most recent "wars". You can't say that about too many other countries.
History will show if these wars were right or wrong, but you stood with us and I thank you!
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Plus, they gave us Black Sabbath and the Rover V8.
Oh, wait, we gave them the Rover V8.
But anyway, thanks for the Sabbath1
Seriously, it is good for the US and good for the World that the UK/US/Canada/Australia share a tight common bond and similar legal and political systems. Despite our differences, we always know that democracy is paramount, and that we are all coming at problems from essentially the same perspective.
Oh, wait, we gave them the Rover V8.
But anyway, thanks for the Sabbath1
Seriously, it is good for the US and good for the World that the UK/US/Canada/Australia share a tight common bond and similar legal and political systems. Despite our differences, we always know that democracy is paramount, and that we are all coming at problems from essentially the same perspective.
Barack Obowma : "Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this Presidency"
Obviously transparency has multiple meanings that we are not aware of yet!
2012 can't come quick enough! How are all you sheep doing, having fun yet? Beware of the 1/2 black man with hipboots!
Obviously transparency has multiple meanings that we are not aware of yet!
2012 can't come quick enough! How are all you sheep doing, having fun yet? Beware of the 1/2 black man with hipboots!
I think it's pretty obvious (transparent?), Al.....the Democrats have adopted the Republican's bullying tactics from when the Republicans were the majority. Tom Delay was the Speaker of the House (Tom Delay just happens to be from my area of TX, and I can't tell you how embarrased I am to have to be associated with that criminal in any manner, even geographically) and Nancy Pelosi isn't doing anything Delay didn't do, in fact probably less, the current administration just seems to be only too happy to publicize the facts whereas the previous administration seemed to want to do it behind closed doors (and then smile for the mug shot).
I agree......2012 is going to be a VERY interesting year. I'm not as certain as you seem to be that things will change drastically, as I believe the majority of Americans feel the change was for the good, but I do think we ought to eliminate the "supermajority" that the Democrats have in the senate. When you have any one party that can bully its agenda through, you lose the benefits of diplomatic opposition (we saw that during the reign of Tom Delay and his "Win at all costs" philosophy). If we elect just enough Republican senators to leave the Democrats without that supermajority, then people will HAVE to work TOGETHER (now, that's a unique concept, eh :idea: ) and then some semblance of common sense may again prevail. In the end, though, the only thing that will return the U.S. political process to the power of the population is a viable third party so that NO party will have a majority in any form.......IMHO, of course.
Hi, Lomaria, I see you're new to the forum with only 3 posts, perhaps you haven't heard about the "Paddock".
It's a subforum for "...anything goes", whereas the remainder of the subforums all have a specific relatiionship (the "link" you are searching for ) to the GT40.
Latley it's become rather politically heavy, but if you desire some hilarity (other than that in the political topics), check out the "Jokes, anyone?" thread.......still no "link" to the GT40, but not so serious as this current topic.
Doug
It would be great to have an honest bunch of people representing us, maybe with term limits so the power hungry couldn't get a foothold. Both parties are power whores now with no regard for the will of their constituents. Doesn't hurt to dream I guess!
Good question. Why not leave color out of the argument. Just my 2 cents...
I was just listening to Michael Savage (you can have your own opinion about him), and he said that the Democrats will push something called "reconciliation" and will only need 51 votes to get healthcare passed through congress and introduce it as law. That effectively eliminates the Mass. election on tuesday.
I don't know anything about Savage, but I do know something about reconciliation. It is an action that allows a bill to come up for a vote without the possibility of a filibuster, and which will allow the bill to be passed without need for the 60 vote Democratic "supermajority". Here's what Wikipedia has to say about it (not much more than what I wrote):
"Reconciliation is a legislative process of the United States Senate intended to allow a contentious budget bill to be considered without being subject to filibuster. Because reconciliation limits debate and amendment, the process empowers the majority party. Reconciliation also applies in the United States House of Representatives, but since the House regularly passes rules that constrain debate and amendment, the reconciliation process represented less of a change in that body."
Gee, imagine that. I can't imagine that the Republicans could have been daft enough to miss out on this dirty trick under Tom Delay's majority leadership, sounds like business as usual to me.
Or, in other words, "....much ado about nothing", unless you happen to be upset with the change of direction the American majority enforced at our most recent national election.
Have no fear, the pendulum will swing back to the Conservative agenda soon enough and the health-care "reforms" will be repealed or essentially gutted. Not a good idea, IMHO, as we taxpayers ALREADY pay for "indigent health care" out of the taxes we pay on our real estate and our purchases, at least if we allow the administration's mandate that everyone carry insurance or pay a fine for not doing so it will reduce the already oppressive burden on us individuals responsible enough to carry our own insurance AND pay our taxes, too.
In the end, though, reconciliation is just a time-saving measure, there are already enough Democratic votes in the Senate to pass the health care bill even if the Mass. election were to deprive the Democrats of their "supermajority"--it will just save the time involved in the inevitable, but imminently ineffective, Republican filibuster. The only way we'll ever ensure true non-partisan progress is if there emerges a viable 3rd party so that no single party even has a majority......not holding my breath.
Doug
"Reconciliation is a legislative process of the United States Senate intended to allow a contentious budget bill to be considered without being subject to filibuster. Because reconciliation limits debate and amendment, the process empowers the majority party. Reconciliation also applies in the United States House of Representatives, but since the House regularly passes rules that constrain debate and amendment, the reconciliation process represented less of a change in that body."
Gee, imagine that. I can't imagine that the Republicans could have been daft enough to miss out on this dirty trick under Tom Delay's majority leadership, sounds like business as usual to me.
Or, in other words, "....much ado about nothing", unless you happen to be upset with the change of direction the American majority enforced at our most recent national election.
Have no fear, the pendulum will swing back to the Conservative agenda soon enough and the health-care "reforms" will be repealed or essentially gutted. Not a good idea, IMHO, as we taxpayers ALREADY pay for "indigent health care" out of the taxes we pay on our real estate and our purchases, at least if we allow the administration's mandate that everyone carry insurance or pay a fine for not doing so it will reduce the already oppressive burden on us individuals responsible enough to carry our own insurance AND pay our taxes, too.
In the end, though, reconciliation is just a time-saving measure, there are already enough Democratic votes in the Senate to pass the health care bill even if the Mass. election were to deprive the Democrats of their "supermajority"--it will just save the time involved in the inevitable, but imminently ineffective, Republican filibuster. The only way we'll ever ensure true non-partisan progress is if there emerges a viable 3rd party so that no single party even has a majority......not holding my breath.
Doug
Would 1/2 white have suited you better. I am not offended by either. You're too politically aware of color.
You're not that naive, use your imagination!
If you want to know what this country is in for, I would suggest that you(figuratively) get busy and do some REAL research into this monstrosity of a bill. Yes it is long and very involved. Yes it is changing every day, but the core of the bill is the same. Once you see SOME of the aspects of it you SHOULD get in touch with your congressman and voice your opinion.
Honestly, I can't see how anyone would be for this bill. The Republicans have written what I think is a better alternative in HB 3400. It address the problem and has some solutions in it, and it isn't 2000 pages long. Yes we have problems, and yes we need to address them, but not with the giveaways that are in this bill. Every group that has or is supporting the Democratic Party is getting something with this bill, and you and I are going to pay for it. I will leave it up to you to look it up. Some of it is obscene and much of it, I consider, is unconstitutional.
I will give you some information about the bill that ought to scare the pants off of you. It is far worse than the giveaways.
I recieved an email with an article written by
Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas
This is a real person and his web site is:
Home - Connelly
On his home page he outlines 9 points as to why this is a bad bill and what you need to let your representative know about them.
As to his article here it is and there are numerous references on the internet. This is the web page for his original piece.
The Truth About the Health Care Bills - Connelly
I am including the article. I would suggest that you read ALL of the questions and answers if you want a REAL education. You will find out that you can't just undo this with the next administration, nor can you rely on the Supreme Court. The blog started on August 12 2009 and its last post was #239 on Jan. 16. There is some REAL information in these comments. Some of the up to the minute comments address the real problems with the bill as we know it today. #225, 229, 232, but I think #234 sums it up best.
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.
However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4<sup>th</sup> Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3<sup>rd</sup> and 4<sup>th</sup> Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5<sup>th</sup> Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9<sup>th</sup> Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10<sup>th</sup> Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.
For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.
Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas
[email protected]
Craig Lummus August 22, 2009Hello, Michael. Thanks for your time to read through the entire bill and for your comments and analyzations. I do have a question in regards to the possible passing of the health care reform legislation that I have yet to hear anyone address: Should Congress pass this piece of legislation, couldn't another Congress come in behind them and undo the legislation? To put it simply, if Congress passes this, can't Congress undo it? What would it take? Will the Supreme Court ultimately be called upon to hear whether or not this legislation is unconstitutional? One more question: since an individual has to have permission from the federal government to sue the federal government, how will that work with governmnet run health care? Will patients be able to sue these doctors for what will be most likely crappy practice since most of the exceptional and competent doctors will have most likely left or chosen not to enter the profession after this fiasco passes? Thank you very much.
Hi Craig:
Thanks you for your comments and I will try to answer your questions. Unfortunately our Congress has a very poor record when it comes to reversing previous legislation, no matter how bad it is. Only during the years of the Reagan Administration and for a few years thereafter did Congress take steps to reverse the disasters of things like the Welfare system. In the case of the current health care proposals this could be very difficult. If Congress and the Obama administration succeed in destroying the private system of health care and insurance, which is clearly their goal, it may be virtually impossible to restore after a few years have passed. Doctors will have stopped practicing and private insurance companies will have shut down. This is precisely the situation that has occurred in Great Britain and Canada.
The government will be in control of everything relating to health care and you will only be allowed to see the doctors that the government approves. As for the Supreme Court, I don't trust them to save us. When the Obama administration decided to take control of General Motors and void private contacts in favor of giving labor unions the benefits of helping to run the company the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene, despite the fact that this was clearly unconstitutional. I no longer trust the court to rescue us. We must do it ourselves by keeping this legislation from ever passing. I hope this answers your questions.
Please look at this. It is too important not to.
Honestly, I can't see how anyone would be for this bill. The Republicans have written what I think is a better alternative in HB 3400. It address the problem and has some solutions in it, and it isn't 2000 pages long. Yes we have problems, and yes we need to address them, but not with the giveaways that are in this bill. Every group that has or is supporting the Democratic Party is getting something with this bill, and you and I are going to pay for it. I will leave it up to you to look it up. Some of it is obscene and much of it, I consider, is unconstitutional.
I will give you some information about the bill that ought to scare the pants off of you. It is far worse than the giveaways.
I recieved an email with an article written by
Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas
This is a real person and his web site is:
Home - Connelly
On his home page he outlines 9 points as to why this is a bad bill and what you need to let your representative know about them.
As to his article here it is and there are numerous references on the internet. This is the web page for his original piece.
The Truth About the Health Care Bills - Connelly
I am including the article. I would suggest that you read ALL of the questions and answers if you want a REAL education. You will find out that you can't just undo this with the next administration, nor can you rely on the Supreme Court. The blog started on August 12 2009 and its last post was #239 on Jan. 16. There is some REAL information in these comments. Some of the up to the minute comments address the real problems with the bill as we know it today. #225, 229, 232, but I think #234 sums it up best.
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.
However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.
The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.
This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4<sup>th</sup> Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3<sup>rd</sup> and 4<sup>th</sup> Amendments may provide.
If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5<sup>th</sup> Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.
So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9<sup>th</sup> Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10<sup>th</sup> Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.
I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.
For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.
Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas
[email protected]
Craig Lummus August 22, 2009Hello, Michael. Thanks for your time to read through the entire bill and for your comments and analyzations. I do have a question in regards to the possible passing of the health care reform legislation that I have yet to hear anyone address: Should Congress pass this piece of legislation, couldn't another Congress come in behind them and undo the legislation? To put it simply, if Congress passes this, can't Congress undo it? What would it take? Will the Supreme Court ultimately be called upon to hear whether or not this legislation is unconstitutional? One more question: since an individual has to have permission from the federal government to sue the federal government, how will that work with governmnet run health care? Will patients be able to sue these doctors for what will be most likely crappy practice since most of the exceptional and competent doctors will have most likely left or chosen not to enter the profession after this fiasco passes? Thank you very much.
Hi Craig:
Thanks you for your comments and I will try to answer your questions. Unfortunately our Congress has a very poor record when it comes to reversing previous legislation, no matter how bad it is. Only during the years of the Reagan Administration and for a few years thereafter did Congress take steps to reverse the disasters of things like the Welfare system. In the case of the current health care proposals this could be very difficult. If Congress and the Obama administration succeed in destroying the private system of health care and insurance, which is clearly their goal, it may be virtually impossible to restore after a few years have passed. Doctors will have stopped practicing and private insurance companies will have shut down. This is precisely the situation that has occurred in Great Britain and Canada.
The government will be in control of everything relating to health care and you will only be allowed to see the doctors that the government approves. As for the Supreme Court, I don't trust them to save us. When the Obama administration decided to take control of General Motors and void private contacts in favor of giving labor unions the benefits of helping to run the company the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene, despite the fact that this was clearly unconstitutional. I no longer trust the court to rescue us. We must do it ourselves by keeping this legislation from ever passing. I hope this answers your questions.
Please look at this. It is too important not to.
Unfortunately, most Obamaites think that anything that goes against what this administration is doing, is either a fabrication or an outright lie. They are for the most part totally uniformed of the content of this bill, and even if they do see bad things in the bill they are sure that it can be explained in a good way or that "it's just a little bad thing". Absolutely no one in this country is refused medical treatment whether they have money or not when they enter an Emergency room at a clinic or hospital. This bill is not about fixing healthcare, that could be done by deregulating health insurance companies and other easy fixes. It's about the Federal Government controling a huge part of the economy and our lives! TRANSPARENCY and the rule of law!! The Pied Piper had nothing on this guy! This by definition means that you can debate and form a bill between the congress and senate behind closed doors without the nuisance of the opposing party bothering you. It also means that as president you can meet with union members behind closed doors to give them a deal that will exempt only their members from a tax on a Cadillac insurance plan while everyone else will pay the tax. It means that you can use billions in taxpayer money to bribe for votes, exempt some states from paying and let the other states take up the slack. Obamaites will say "The republicans did it before" We have had corruption in politics before on both sides, but nowhere near this level. These lowlifes bribe and steal with impunity. America has come to a new low, which I see being eclipsed over and over in the future. These people have no shame or honor!
You want to see no shame and no honor, Al?
Just look to the last Republican administration and their criminal henchman--Tom Delay. Talk about back-room deals! Talk about bribing and stealing (Gee, I guess Delay did get caught stealing campaign funds, but I'd wager a paycheck that's just the tip of that iceberg).
The only difference I can see is that perhaps your political beliefs are more closely aligned with those of the past administration than the current one.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, no?
Now, having said that, I have to admit that both political parties are pretty much morally bankrupt, no disagreement about that. We need a viable 3rd party to put the two present parties in their rightful places.
However, IMHO your protestations that this administration is worse than the prior one is, once again.........much ado about nothing.
As for deregulating the health care industry, IMHO that would be a financial disaster of proportions that this country has never seen. Deregulation will do ABSOLUTELY nothing to help those who need it the most, the poor. I live in a state that deregulated public utilities. My cost for electrical service per kilowatt hour is over twice what I pay at my "project" home in Kansas. When I brought this to the attention of the supervisor at Reliant Energy in Houston, TX, he acknowledged the fact and attributed it to deregulation. So, believing that the public utility inudstry is a good gauge of the effects of deregulation, you can imagine that I am not a fan of deregulation of the health care industry. Who could afford to pay greater than twice what we already pay? And, who pays for those uninsured who get health care at the emergency room----you and I and the rest of the honorable Americans who DO maintain our own insurance and pay our taxes. Wouldn't you rather see that those who were uninsured were forced to start to pay their share? And if you believe that the only health care those uninsured get at an emergency room is truly EMERGENCY care, you're sorely misinformed....I've worked as an EMT and I see what goes on, it's not unusual for the illegal alien population to clog our ER's attempting to get routine immunizations (and succeeding in many cases).
I'm not an Obamaite, don't get the wrong impression, I just believe that everyone should carry their share of the load, and I have no problem with respectfully proposing that the wealthy can afford to shoulder a larger share than those who struggle on a daily basis to put food on the table (and keep the electricity on in a deregulated state).
Doug
Deregulation of insurance would allow people to shop for insurance in different states, making more competitive pricing. As it is now, you pay the rates established in your state with little or no competition. As far as corruption, no medicaid payments for Nebraska forever? $300 million to Louisiana, $600 million to Vermont, $300 million to Mass., $100 million to Connecticut, and more. And I am certainly not aligned with the last administration.
Small business is going to get hammered the hardest for taxes, and they will down size rather than expand, making unemployment higher. In a Harvard study, the only stimulus that ever worked consistently is reducing small business tax and personal income tax, it worked 100% of the time. Pouring billions into useless projects has a very, very small success rate, and the chance for corruption through lost funds is higher. The last stimulus is a prime example. We don't have a clue where that went.
Small business is going to get hammered the hardest for taxes, and they will down size rather than expand, making unemployment higher. In a Harvard study, the only stimulus that ever worked consistently is reducing small business tax and personal income tax, it worked 100% of the time. Pouring billions into useless projects has a very, very small success rate, and the chance for corruption through lost funds is higher. The last stimulus is a prime example. We don't have a clue where that went.
Similar threads
