22% of Uninsured want B.O.care

[Bob Fechter]

"Rep. Jared Polis said Friday the key problem with health care right now is that illegal immigrants aren’t included in Obamacare, and said part of the solution is to pass a bill granting them citizenship rights.

The House is debating a GOP-written bill that would allow Americans to keep their health plans that have been canceled under Obamacare, but Mr. Polis, a Colorado Democrat, said the chamber should instead be looking at ways to make sure everyone in the country is covered by the Affordable Care Act — including illegal immigrants."

Legalizing illegal immigrants is the solution to Obamacare: Democrat - Washington Times

 

[Bob Fechter]

There is a refrain I'm hearing from the dems that goes along the lines of, "Only a few healthy people need to pay a little more to insure millions who don't have insurance."

Kinda like, "the rich need to pay their fair share (i.e. over the %70 of tax brought in that they are paying now)."

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Of course Bob! The main socialist goal....wealth redistribution.

 

[tom pritchett]

Mr. fletcher, I am not interested in helping anyone that is here illegally, but if they are a major cost to our healthcare system as those Doug pointed out as people going to the ER and getting free services, how do we get them to pay in this new system? My point is we can't and won't. We, the tax payer will be paying for our own increases in healthcare and still have to pay for illegals.

I have a solution to this whole problem. Eliminate healthcare all together, everyone pays the doctors or hospitals directly, limit the amount a doctor can be sued eliminating the attorney ambulance chasing so fees directly to the doctors will be substantially less.

It'll never happen of course. Too much power to relinquish.

 

[Larry L.]

^ There are any number of doctors who are now establishing "boutique" practices wherein their basic operating philosophy is what you suggest. They refuse to participate in Obamacare.

'Wonder how long it'll be before Obama/Holder have them thrown into jail.

 

[Jack]

Not soon enough I'm afraid. There would be a BIG list that would go down with them too.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Here's a whole boatload of liars!

SEN. HARRY REID (D-Nev.): “In fact, one of our core principles is that if you like the health care you have, you can keep it.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.8642, 8/3/09)

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: “We believe — and we stand by this — if you like your current health insurance plan, you will be able to keep it, plain and simple, straightforward.” (Sen. Durbin, Congressional Record, S.6401, 6/10/09)

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “If you like your insurance, you keep it.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Bill Mark-Up, 9/29/09)

SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-Wash.): “Again, if you like what you have, you will be able to keep it. Let me say this again: If you like what you have, when our legislation is passed and signed by the President, you will be able to keep it.” (Sen. Murray, Congressional Record, S.6400, 6/10/09)

SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-Mont.): “That is why one of the central promises of health care reform has been and is: If you like what you have, you can keep it. That is critically important. If a person has a plan, and he or she likes it, he or she can keep it.” (Sen. Baucus, Congressional Record, S.7676, 9/29/10)

SEN. TOM HARKIN (D-Iowa): “One of the things we put in the health care bill when we designed it was the protection for consumers to keep the plan they have if they like it; thus, the term ‘grandfathered plans.’ If you have a plan you like — existing policies — you can keep them. … we said, if you like a plan, you get to keep it, and you can grandfather it in.” (Sen. Harkin, Congressional Record, S.7675-6, 9/29/10)

THEN-REP. TAMMY BALDWIN (D-Wis.): “Under the bill, if you like the insurance you have now, you may keep it and it will improve.” (Rep. Baldwin, Press Release, 3/18/10)

SEN. MARK BEGICH (D-Alaska): “If you got a doctor now, you got a medical professional you want, you get to keep that. If you have an insurance program or a health care policy you want of ideas, make sure you keep it. That you can keep who you want.” (Sen. Begich, Townhall Event, 7/27/09)

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-Colo.): “We should begin with a basic principle: if you have coverage and you like it, you can keep it. If you have your doctor, and you like him or her, you should be able to keep them as well. We will not take that choice away from you.” (Sen. Bennet, Press Release, 6/11/09)

SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D-Calif.): “So we want people to be able to keep the health care they have. And the answer to that is choice of plans. And in the exchange, we’re going to have lots of different plans, and people will be able to keep the health care coverage they need and they want.” (Sen. Boxer, Press Release, 2/8/11)

SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D-Ohio): “Our bill says if you have health insurance and you like it, you can keep it…”(Sen. Brown, Congressional Record, S.12612, 12/7/09)

SEN. BEN CARDIN (D-Md.): “For the people of Maryland, this bill will provide a rational way in which they can maintain their existing coverage…” (Sen. Cardin, Congressional Record, S.13798, 12/23/09)

SEN. BOB CASEY (D-Pa.): “I also believe this legislation and the bill we are going to send to President Obama this fall will also have secure choices. If you like what you have, you like the plan you have, you can keep it. It is not going to change.” (Sen. Casey, Congressional Record, S.8070, 7/24/09)

SEN. KAY HAGAN (D-N.C.): ‘People who have insurance they’re happy with can keep it’ “We need to support the private insurance industry so that people who have insurance they’re happy with can keep it while also providing a backstop option for people without access to affordable coverage.” (“Republicans Vent As Other Compromise Plans Get Aired,” National Journal’s Congress Daily, 6/18/09)

SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-La.): “If you like the insurance that you have, you’ll be able to keep it.” (MSNBC’s Hardball, 12/16/09)

SEN. PAT LEAHY (D-Vt.): “f you like the insurance you now have, keep the insurance you have.” (CNN’s “Newsroom,” 10/22/09)

SEN. BOB MENENDEZ (D-N.J.): “If you like what you have, you get to keep it” “Menendez is a member of the Senate Finance Committee, which is expected to release a bill later this week. He stressed that consumers who are satisfied with their plans won’t have to change. ‘If you like what you have, you get to keep it,’ he said.” (“Health Care Plan Would Help N.J., Menendez Says,” The Record, 6/19/09)

SEN. JEFF MERKLEY (D-Oreg.): “[E]nsuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it” “The HELP Committee bill sets forward a historic plan that will, for the first time in American history, give every American access to affordable health coverage, reduce costs, and increase choice, while ensuring that those who like their insurance get to keep it.” (Sen. Merkley, Press Release, 7/15/09)

SEN. BARBARA MIKULSKI (D-Md.): “It means that if you like the insurance you have now, you can keep it.” (Sen. Mikulski, Press Release, 12/24/09)

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-W.Va.): “I want people to know, the President’s promise that if you like the coverage you have today you can keep it is a pledge we intend to keep.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Hearing, 9/23/09)

SEN. JACK REED (D-R.I.): “If you like the insurance you have, you can choose to keep it.” (Sen. Reed, Town Hall Event, 6/25/09)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-Vt.): “‘If you have coverage you like, you can keep it,’ says Sen. Sanders.” (“Sick And Wrong,” Rolling Stone, 4/5/10)

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN (D-N.H.): ‘if you have health coverage that you like, you get to keep it’ “My understanding … is that … if you have health coverage that you like you can keep it. As I said, you may have missed my remarks at the beginning of the call, but one of the things I that I said as a requirement that I have for supporting a bill is that if you have health coverage that you like you should be able to keep that. …under every scenario that I’ve seen, if you have health coverage that you like, you get to keep it.” (Sen. Shaheen, “Health Care Questions From Across New Hampshire,” Accessed 11/13/13)

SEN. DEBBIE STABENOW (D-Mich.): “As someone who has a large number of large employers in my state, one of the things I appreciate about the chairman’s mark is — is the grandfathering provisions, the fact that the people in my state, 60 percent of whom have insurance, are going to be able to keep it. And Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that. That’s a strong commitment. It’s clear in the bill … I appreciate the strong commitment on your part and the president to make sure that if you have your insurance you can keep it. That’s the bottom line for me.” (U.S. Senate, Finance Committee, Bill Mark-Up, 9/24/09)

SEN. JON TESTER (D-Mont.): “‘If you like your coverage, you’ll be able to keep it,’ Tester said, adding that if Medicare changes, it will only become stronger”. (“Tester In Baker To Discuss Health Care,” The Fallon County Times, 11/20/09)

SEN. TOM UDALL (D-N.Mex.): “Some worried reform would alter their current coverage. It won’t. If you like your current plan, you can keep it.” (“What I Learned: About Health Care Reform This Summer, By Your Lawmakers In Congress,” Albuquerque Journal, 9/8/09)

SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D-R.I.): “…it honors President Obama’s programs and the promise of all of the Presidential candidates that if you like the plan you have, you get to keep it. You are not forced out of anything.”(Sen. Whitehouse, Congressional Record, S.8668, 8/3/09)

And of course BO said it a minimum of 26 times. How could you possibly sponsor a bill with your name on it a say you didn't know what was in it?

 

[Larry L.]

The list is actually longer than that...but, some will still defend every one of those people. At the very WORST (these supporters will tell you), they "simply misspoke"...over, and over, and OVER AGAIN.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Is misspeaking kind of an OK lie?

 

[Jack]

Only in the PC world Al!

 

[Doug S.]

I'm still not understanding something. How exactly does obamacare insure the millions that are here illegally?

Well, Tom...that depends.

Depends on what? Well, for starters, it depends on how those undocumented immigrants earn what $$ they do...if they work for a business or employer who witholds income taxes, as do the vast majority of them, then the government could (somehow, I'm not going there) identify those who do NOT have health insurance and somehow force the employer to withold enough more from their pay to cover the penalty fee. I think it has to be done that way because another thing I see as I watch the undocumented immigrants is that they routinely don't file income taxes. You and I would think that the IRS would be after them, but they are usually low-wage earners and the IRS has much more success recovering monies from those of us who earn respectable incomes. So, we can't get the penalty $$ on the back end, their income tax return where the penalty can be added to their taxes, we have to get it BEFORE the undocumented immigrants get their hands on it.

For those who work as day-laborers, and there are huge numbers of them on many of the street corners just waiting for a construction company to pull up and pick them to climb in the back of the pickup for a day's labor at less than minimum wages...in cash...I'm at a loss. Perhaps we ought to enact yet another law (YEAH....that'll be a popular proposal) that those who want to take advantage of "free" care might have to bring in a copy of their income tax returns to prove that they paid the penalty, or perhaps there can be a data-base that the medical organizations can access on the internet with identifying information for those who have paid the penalty.

The bottom line is that the penalty $$ really needs to go toward paying the cost of medical treatment for those who WON'T get their own insurance...if they can't pay their own costs at the point and time of treatment. Perhaps a system like is used in TX prisons where offenders are charged $100/year for medical care...with some exceptions, such as chronic care and mental health care. The $100/year is deducted from their inmate trust fund...but, the bottom line is that it's cruel and unusual punishment to deny them medical treatment if they are indigent so if they don't have the $$ in their account they get the treatment anyway.

As for the doctors and other medical practitioners who don't want to accept the amount the ACA sets for a procedure....waaaah, waaaaaah, waaaaaaahhhhh! Sure, you paid a huge sum to get your medical certification/license, but you charge sums that amount to about $1,000 per hour, so you make an obscene amount of $$. I do know a dentist who quit accepting all insurance plans, was tired of the negotiated reductions that went along with HMO and PPO plans and now treats only those who pay out of pocket. They pay his prices...and he seems to have a thriving business, although I had to switch dentists because I could not afford his fees.

There are much smarter people out there who could figure out a way...there must be a way. However, if we do like many of our states have done with the income from lotteries, which was dedicated to education funds but routinely gets raided and assigned to the general fund, we'll see the $$ go for bridges and roads and you name it....the penalties MUST go for medical care for the program to be of any benefit to us, otherwise we will continue to have to pay for the unpaid medical care of those who won't do the responsible thing and get their own insurance if they can't (or WON'T) pay out of pocket.

Despite all the yaahhh-yaaaahhh here, I'm not convinced that the sky is falling...not convinced that it can't be made to work. So far all I hear is a bunch of Republicans/Conservatives who are pissed that they lost the last presidential election and that the Republicans...who really do represent the conservative agenda much better than the Dems even though there are conservative Dems, too...will lose what little power their party has in the next election.

I've been wrong before, and eaten crow here on the forum when I was, so I don't mind predicting that the future of the Republican/Conservative agenda rides on their ability to reign in the TEA Partiers, that very vocal and manipulative minority that is now holding the Republican party hostage to their unreasonable demands. If they can eliminate or at least control those TEA Party radicals, they might stand a chance of holding on to what they have now...but (IMHO) probably not. If they can't (or WON'T) try to rid themselves of the offending little back-stabbers, I think the Dems stand a good chance of holding the White House and the Senate and regaining control of the House of Representatives. I must admit, I can't imagine that happening to a nicer (????) guy than John Boehner!!!!

Back to the issue at hand...throwing barbs at a POTUS who honored a promise he made during his campaign and made the HUGE mistake of hiring a VERY inept IT company to develop the website to inplement the program. Who else believes Chicken Little is right????? :laugh:

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Jack]

Could it be true then that the Canadian based IT company that developed the ACA website
is run by a college buddy of the Wookie? purported cost of $600,000,000.

 

[Doug S.]

Could it be true then that the Canadian based IT company that developed the ACA website
is run by a college buddy of the Wookie? purported cost of $600,000,000.

Maybe....probably....doesn't mean that wookie shouldn't (or, couldn't) hold their feet to the fire and make them correct the inadequacies in the program.

I must admit that the $600,000,000 figure is a bit shocking!

I'm constantly amazed at the way people are so incensed that B-O might have sent some business the way of his comrades. To me the implication is that he's guilty of an infraction that hasn't been committed before. How quickly we forget the dedication of such a huge amount of the nation's TARP Program monies that went to comrades of the then POTUS, George "Gee-Dub" Bush...and with NO PLAN to even get the $$ back from the already obscenely rich banking industry, not even a request for repayment. At least the developers of the ACA website delivered SOMETHING for the $$...the only thing the banking industry did for Gee-Dub's money was hold out their hands when Gee-Dub threw the huge sums at them....oh, yeah, and line their own pockets with the money rather than stimulating the economy by lending it out, as was the plan.

Jack....it's politics as usual....neither party is better than the other. I can't figure out how to fix the issue unless we just get rid of the political parties altogether. I've proposed quite a few times that we eliminate the legislative branch of the government and replace it with an "organization" that determines the issues that the majority of the public wants to decide and then puts those issues up for a nationwide popular vote...not an electoral college vote where a sitting governor can alter the results of the election by manipulating the determination by clouding the issue with "hanging chads" and decide an election against the popular vote, but one vote per person with a winner declared on the number of votes. We have the technology and we already decide "propositions" and "ammendments" by popular vote in the state where I live...why not nationwide and really get rid of the problem...which is the politicians.

How quickly we forget.....:thumbsdown:

Cheers?

Doug

 

[Jack]

Can't disagree with flushing the whole bunch Doug. The "Wookie" referred to is
Mrs. O'Bummer.

 

[Doug S.]

LMAO, Jack....honest!!!!

Cheers....best laugh I've had in a long time!

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

The list is actually longer than that...but, some will still defend every one of those people. At the very WORST (these supporters will tell you), they "simply misspoke"...over, and over, and OVER AGAIN.

Larry, I often say this when someone thinks I am wrong:

"I thought I was wrong once, but upon further reflection I realized that I was simply mistaken!"

Works for me!

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Ian Anderson]

Here it's all summed up

The Allergists voted to scratch it, but the

Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.

The Gastroenterologists had a sort of a gut feeling about it, but the

Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve.

The Obstetricians felt they were all labouring under a misconception.

Ophthalmologists considered the idea short-sighted.

Pathologists yelled, "Over my dead body!" while the

Paediatricians said, "Oh, Grow up!"

The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the

Radiologists could see right through it.

The Surgeons were fed up with the cuts and decided to wash their hands of the whole thing.

The ENT specialists didn't swallow it, and just wouldn’t hear of it.

The Pharmacists thought it was a bitter pill to swallow, and the

Plastic Surgeons said, "This puts a whole new face on the matter...."

The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the

Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea.

The Anaesthetists thought the whole idea was a gas, but the

Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no.


Actuall it was written for the NHS!

 

[Doug S.]

Masterful, Ian, just MASTERFUL!!!

Cheers!

...and more CHEERS!!!!!

Doug