Anthony Weiner rips GOP on Health Care

[NickCole]

Jack, I don't think you're being honest with us.

I believe that you, as a Republican, don't want Health Care reform. 'Fess up.

If that's true then Obama winning in 2008 gave Jack the result he wanted.

Ain't that a kick in the head.

 

[hotatlboi]

You've also conveniently proved another of the chief arguments against the democrat's bill; it does ZERO to lower costs. What the hell is the point of a bill like this that is supposed to 'help' the healthcare system when all its going to do is make all of the problems we have now worse.

The bill does incorporate major cost reductions in medicare, which is the part of our health care system most unsustainable at this point.

 

[JB3]

The bill does incorporate major cost reductions in medicare, which is the part of our health care system most unsustainable at this point.

That's a red herring and a nice attempt at deflection. That has absolutely NOTHING to do with reducing the cost of healthcare. In fact, all that is is the Obama admin's taking of money from medicare to pay for their healthcare bill, which they would otherwise be unable to pay for.

The fact still remains that the bills at hand do NOTHING to fix the healthcare system except raise costs even further.

 

[hotatlboi]

The fact still remains that the bills at hand do NOTHING to fix the healthcare system

Just completely false.

Not as good as it could be, but it's an improvement.

 

[NW007]

And what percentage of Weiner's support comes from the Insurance Industry. Please find out and give me the exact percentage. I heard just a passing comment on the news tonight that he gets a fair amount of support from the industry himself.

And I find it interesting that he is complaining about the Inusrance industry when it is his own party that is cramming this legislation down the throats of the nation anyway that will force the public to buy policies from the very companies he is complaining about. And then the Democrats turn arround and complain about premiums going up because of all the increased costs of covering more people who either can't pay or don't want to pay until they are forced to.

Perhaps he should save his public grand standing rants for his own party.

 

[JB3]

Just completely false.

Not as good as it could be, but it's an improvement.

It won't be. We'll be paying more, but this time american taxpayers will be footing part of the bill.

 

[hotatlboi]

yes and that is why the FUD about reconciliation killing the Dems chances in the election coming from the Republicans is just that.

The Dems know that doing nothing after making health care the #1 issue for the last year will look even worse.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

The trouble, Jasun, is that the current bill 1) doesn't include a public option and 2) is mandatory for all.

That makes it a direct giveaway to the insurance companies. As a fellow Leftie, I'm appalled to the core.

I'll take a closer look at it before I say much... I'm a big supporter of a public option. I mean.. I'm Canadian..

 

[hotatlboi]

The trouble, Jasun, is that the current bill 1) doesn't include a public option and 2) is mandatory for all.

That makes it a direct giveaway to the insurance companies. As a fellow Leftie, I'm appalled to the core.

While a public option would be better, again it's important to remember that not only will the insurance companies revenues be going up, their costs will be going up by a lot as well since they will be required to cover many more sick people under the new rules.

Right now, they just deny or drop many people that don't fit into their profit calculations. That kind of thing will become much harder to do.

 

[NickCole]

It takes 60 senators to break a filibuster, which is inevitable in the Senate. Democrats have 59. Close but no cigar.

For a year Democrats had a filibuster proof majority. No health care reform.

Then Scott Brown was elected.

But you're not up to speed. Now ObamaNation has discovered what some of us pointed out all last year: the option of passing it through reconciliation.

The last thing the Republican Party wants or needs is for the Democrats to go to election day with a stack of good legislation under their belts.

And Democrats are doing a damn fine job of failing to deliver good legislation, much less a stack of it.

That is what the game is all about on Capitol Hill now. See how badly you can fuck over the other party and it doesn't matter how badly the American people get screwed.

Democrats are in power. By a large margin. Obama is President and leader of the Democratic Party. Obama Democrats are in power, they're at the controls, they're making the rules. Just like Bush & Co did during the eight years we rightly blamed them.

If you don't like the way the game is being played, Obama Democrats and those who defend them are to blame.

 

[hotatlboi]

For a year Democrats had a filibuster proof majority.

No they didn't. They only had that for around 6 months. Franken was not seated until July.

 

[NickCole]

ObamaNation: excuses for failing when you're in charge.

What a tragedy this comes when we're teetering at the edge of a cliff and need genuine results more than ever.

 

[JB3]

No they didn't. They only had that for around 6 months. Franken was not seated until July.

And when, exactly did the senate pass their version?

 

[Kulindahr]

The bill does incorporate major cost reductions in medicare, which is the part of our health care system most unsustainable at this point.

Oh, wow -- that's how my mom's boss used to "balance" the books, by moving expenses from one place to another one to hide what was going on.

Democrats are in power. By a large margin. Obama is President and leader of the Democratic Party. Obama Democrats are in power, they're at the controls, they're making the rules. Just like Bush & Co did during the eight years we rightly blamed them.

If you don't like the way the game is being played, Obama Democrats and those who defend them are to blame.

Point: why was it, when Bush had less of a majority in Congress to work with, did he get more things through?

Insurance coverage is going to be mandatory, which means that a lot of young, healthy people, previously uncovered, will have to have it. Ostensibly, this spreads the risk and thus lowers costs.

The problem is that there still won't be any real competition because there won't be a public option.

That's why, if we insist on playing this game, any good bill will provide huge incentives for people to form fraternal health outfits, through churches, lodges, associations, etc. Fraternal insurance is not-for-profit, and it would have to cover everyone in the organization, whether a union, a dairy farmers' association, a certain brand of churches, or whatever.

 

[hotatlboi]

Insurance coverage is going to be mandatory, which means that a lot of young, healthy people, previously uncovered, will have to have it. Ostensibly, this spreads the risk and thus lowers costs.

Yes and there will be a lot of sick people with serious conditions who previously uncovered, will now have insurance.

Ex. My mom has struggled with cancer and recently lost her coverage when my dad lost his job. COBRA was not an option since the company dissolved and the policies were cancelled. It's a bit difficult to get coverage currently with cancer as a preexisting condition.

Just one seriously ill person can rack up costs it will take many healthy people's premiums to pay.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yes and there will be a lot of sick people with serious conditions who previously uncovered, will now have insurance.

Ex. My mom has struggled with cancer and recently lost her coverage when my dad lost his job. COBRA was not an option since the company dissolved and the policies were cancelled. It's a bit difficult to get coverage currently with cancer as a preexisting condition.

Just one seriously ill person can rack up costs it will take many healthy people's premiums to pay.

Just one more bill for college students, too -- add $16k+ more for a college education.