Unless we change the fee-for-service system, costs will remain hard to control because providers are paid more for doing more. Obama might have attempted that by proposing health-care vouchers (limited amounts to be spent on insurance), which would force a restructuring of delivery systems to compete on quality and cost. Doctors, hospitals and drug companies would have to reorganize care. Obama refrained from that fight and instead cast insurance companies as the villains.

He's telling people what they want to hear, not what they need to know. Whatever their sins, insurers are mainly intermediaries; they pass along the costs of the delivery system. In 2009, the largest 14 insurers had profits of roughly $9 billion; that approached 0.4 percent of total health spending of $2.472 trillion. This hardly explains high health costs. What people need to know is that Obama's plan evades health care's major problems and would worsen the budget outlook. It's a big new spending program when government hasn't paid for the spending programs it already has.

"If not now, when? If not us, who?" Obama asks. The answer is: It's not now, and it's not "us." Pass or not, Obama's proposal is the illusion of "reform," not the real thing.

If they pass this pos bill--it will be champagne time when the lawsuit is filed for it's unconstitutionality.

So the costs are going to kill us--along with the taxes and the mandates and the employers will pay the fine rather than pay for the employee's insurance.

Great job there Obama.

And everywhere the ER rooms the bodies will increase--because it's free!!

Saw Brokaw fill in on meet the press sunday. Axelrod stated all of the savings of healthcare and Brokaw didn't feel the need to challenge him at all.

There are no savings--they double count--steal from Medicare and Social Security--gimmicks like 10 years of taxes and only 6 years of benefits.

And in reality --none of this affects costs--they mandate employers--who will drop insurance for employees.

Heck why not--pay the fine--it's cheaper.

Dumping them into the gov't run program.

And now they are saying they won't even give an up or down vote.

It's a PRETEND VOTE!!

Check out Article 1 Section 7--

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

YEAS AND NAYS!!!!

You know a vote with yes or no as the answer.

obama - a liar's liar.

Murphy,

Have you read the bill yourself?

What specifically do you object to?

When you take in other peoples children to raise, you have a right to demand they live by your rules. You people who want to be raised by the nanny state will fall victim to this. Your just being used to drag the productive children into the family. I think you'll find that your new masters may be a little more strict when there's not enough food for the whole family. You'll be the first out pushed out into the cold.

Dragnlady, have you read the entire bill yourself? Do you like everything in it?

The Democrat party and their democrat process is an oxymoron.

For those of you who watched the US loose to Canada in overtime, the winning goal was scored by Sydney Crosby, who plays for the Pitsburg Penguins.

Why doesn't he play for a Candian team? Because the cost of living is too high. What is the largest expenditure by the Candian Government? Health Care.

Every Stanley Cup finals Candians ask why are there no Candian teams in the finals? Because they gave up exceptionalisim for average (socialism), the taxes to pay for health care drove out the hockey players.

England used to be the worlds sea power, and the Brits are always asking what happened. They gave up exceptionalisim for average (socialism), They cut the Navy budget, by 75% to pay for health care.

Once we go down this path a paying or subsidizing health care for 300 million (Canada does for 7 million), America will go from #1 to # what ever, and future Americans will do the same; asking what happened.

If you think companies outsource now wait till all the taxes go up to pay for this monster.

Dragnlady, have you read the entire bill yourself? Do you like everything in it?

#9 | Posted by andyuhenet

I've read a lot of the bill, and what I've seen so far I like.

Immediate gains for uninsured/uninsurable people. Restrictions to insurance companies regarding cancellation of policies. Establishes a minimum basic coverage, with provisions for more coverage at a decent price. Specific wording that the coverage will not be used for illegal immigrants.

Like I told Foshaffer, I'm bewildered why so many people are against this bill.

Like I told Foshaffer, I'm bewildered why so many people are against this bill.

#12 | Posted by Dragnlady

Maybe because they know who will actually get the bill in the end.

If you think companies outsource now wait till all the taxes go up to pay for this monster.

#11 | Posted by 90c2cab

If you think that the reason corporations have outsourced is because of taxes, you might want to look again.

They outsource because of employee pay rates. They outsource because of ecological restrictions. It's not all about taxes, that's a myth.

Like I told Foshaffer, I'm bewildered why so many people are against this bill.

There are few if any rational reasons to be against this bill.

That noted there are tons of irrational ones.

FOX news and RW radio spew pernicious propaganda out into the ether where it is seized upon by people too stupid to do the math for themselves.

The DR provides ample evidence of this assertion.

See: Babbler, nonLucid, Whitepolicy, Rightiswrong et al.

Morning Dragnlady! ^_^

/Is still morning where Spud is.

Be Well.

*waves to Spud

It's morning here still. And it's a good day, the pain isn't so bad and I can sit an type for a bit.

#14 | Posted by Dragnlady

If you think that the reason corporations have outsourced is because of taxes, you might want to look again.

They outsource because of employee pay rates. They outsource because of ecological restrictions. It's not all about taxes, that's a myth.
--------------
My post was missleading, I never inteded to say that the current outsourcing is because of taxes, but when taxes go up, and they will, that you will see more outsourcing.

Maybe because they know who will actually get the bill in the end.

#13 | Posted by STIRSUMUP

You mean like how the insurance company tells you you're covered for something then reneges and makes you pay for it out of your pocket.

Corporations will continue to outsource until it is not profitable to do so.

*waves to Spud*

*waves back*

It's morning here still.

The West coast is the best coast!

And it's a good day, the pain isn't so bad and I can sit an type for a bit.

Spud is really glad to hear yer having a relatively pain free day today.

Spud was having a pain free day but after bashing my head into me desk over and over after reading some of the tripe posted here today Spud's now gots a migraine thingy going on.

Take care of yerself, Dragnlady.

Make hay while the sun shines.

Carpe diem.

Be Well.

The only cost control Commrade Obama knows is when he takes it from the Private Sector.

#12 | Posted by Dragnlady
Immediate gains for uninsured/uninsurable people. Restrictions to insurance companies regarding cancellation of policies. Establishes a minimum basic coverage, with provisions for more coverage at a decent price. Specific wording that the coverage will not be used for illegal immigrants.

Like I told Foshaffer, I'm bewildered why so many people are against this bill.
---------------
All thoese things look nice, but they are not free. When the bill comes due it's going to be huge, and thats why people are against it.

Guranted outcomes cost money (that is what this bill does), Texas has very few, California has many. The Texas safety net is not as good as the one in California, but Texas has fewer recessions, more job growth, and a lower cost of living.

Liberals don't like Texas, and Conservatives don't like California, and that is because they want different results.

This health care debate is just that all about what both sides want for results, and their different.

Of course there won't be any savings. Only a liberal could possibly believe that you could cover an additional 30 million people--most of whom will be getting coverage for free--AND deliver higher quality care AND cut costs. It's impossible.

Libbies are utopians. And they're too stupid to realize that they're voting for caps, more wait times, and fewer choices, not more.

I hope PelosiReidObama is worth that to you. Check out what's happening in Massachusetts, dummies.

For those who believe in obama's savings, yes I do have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell to you :)