Impeding changes to our Health Care system

[Happy Monkey]

Alan Grayson is awesome.

Congressman Alan Grayson, D-Fla., today introduced a bill (H.R. 4789) which would give the option to buy into Medicare to every citizen of the United States. The “Public Option Act,” also known as the “Medicare You Can Buy Into Act,” would open up the Medicare network to anyone who can pay for it.
...
The bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish enrollment periods, coverage guidelines, and premiums for the program. Because premiums would be equal to cost, the program would pay for itself.

[classicman]

In keeping with the “Grayson style,” the bill is clear and concise.
It is only four pages. You can read the bill here.

Shoulda had him write the whole damn thing!

[Happy Monkey]

It's easy to keep a bill short if you're just extending something which already has its thousands of pages written.

[TheMercenary]

A dizzying array of options to pass health care

It's a hard time find a House Democrat who wants to vote for the Senate's health care bill. But they may not have to -- at least directly.

Party leaders have discussed the possibility of using the House Rules Committee to avoid an actual vote on the Senate's bill, according to leadership aides. They would do this by writing what's called a "self-executing rule," meaning the Senate bill would be attached to a package of fixes being negotiated between the two chambers -- without an actual vote on the Senate's legislation.

Under this scenario, the Senate bill would be automatically attached to the reconciliation package, if the House passes reconciliation. In other words, Bill A would just become part of Bill B if the House passes Bill B, and the Senate could then vote on a reconciliation package before sending it to the president. This allows House members to approve the broader measure without actually voting on it.

The same aides who confirmed this process was under discussion quickly noted that party leaders have not yet arrived at a final decision, so it's far from a done deal -- a point House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) made repeatedly Tuesday during his weekly exchange with reporters.

This would allow them to deal with the Senate bill without forcing their members to go on record in support of unpopular items, like the now-infamous Cornhusker Kickback or the so-called Louisiana Purchase, that could be used against them on the campaign trail in the fall.

According to industry lobbyists, the House may take the additional step of further amending the rule to guard against another nightmare scenario -- the Senate's failure to enact a package of fixes through the now-familiar reconciliation process. House leaders could add a caveat to the rule that the Senate bill can only be signed into law if the Senate also passes the fixes.

Confused? You're not alone. These hypotheticals have been the topic of much discussion on Capitol Hill as congressional Democrats look for ways to massage chamber rules in the House and Senate pass a health care bill without any Republican support. And before they can do that, they might need to walk their members through some of the finer points of parliamentary maneuvering.

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/03...e.html?showall

[TheMercenary]

Senate Health Care Bill Dead on Arrival, Pro-Life House Democrats Say

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...use-democrats/

Well it should be interesting to see how they get around those in their own party who would bury this thing...

[Pooka]

Have we not spoken... why does he not get it .... people to Obama regarding Healthcare Reform "DO NOT WANT"

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Pooka

Have we not spoken... why does he not get it .... people to Obama regarding Healthcare Reform "DO NOT WANT"

I don't think that's true. The polls say that the majority don't want the distorted plan that the repubicans have described, but when individual parts of the plan are offered, the majority do want.

[Pooka]

Then they are idiots.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Pooka

Then they are idiots.

Why?

[classicman]

Again - this is my cat channeling . . .

I have heard both sides of this too many times.
I can only say that some may want individual parts, but not the sum total.
We need reform, I think the vast majority agree upon that. Defining what exactly "reform" is, is another story.

I still wonder why, if this bill is so good, that there are so many problems passing it with the majorities they have in both houses. Apparently Obama has been reduced to threatening D's. There has got to be a better way.
meow.

[Pooka]

First of all... why would you want the government to have such a hand in your health care. Think about it.

If the reason is to make it more available and more affordable for everyone... well... there is Medicaid, there is Medicare, and hospitals cannot deny you care if you go to an emergency room. If you pay as little as $5 a month they cannot send you to collections. If you make too much to qualify for assistance… then let me ask you… do you buy cigarettes, sodas, alcohol… learn to budget. If you can't find $5 in your monthly budget it may be time for a second job.

I can tell you it won’t make it more accessible. We can look to California and Canada as examples of “why not”. You will wait longer for access. Your taxes will be higher. The government will have trouble paying facilities... if facilities aren't paid the employees have to wait for pay.
Obama doesn't like that Insurance companies increase premiums every year... well... the population ages and is increasingly becoming sicker (they raise the premiums to cover the risk… they actually run on a fairly small profit margin)... do you really think the government won't increase the taxes to cover the cost of the healthcare year after year just as the Health Insurance companies have done. Health care will become more expensive for everyone, it will suffer in quality, and people will find it much harder to get the care they need. Don’t believe me? Talk to friends in CA or in Canada… they have been living it… and by the way look at the finances of California… it is a glimpse of the future if Obama has his way. This is NOT a good thing any way you slice it.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Pooka

First of all... why would you want the government to have such a hand in your health care. Think about it.

First of all ... we disagree. That doesn't mean that either of us are idiots.

I want the government to have a larger hand in healthcare because I don't trust big, profit-motivated business (health insurance, pharma, providers).

Originally Posted by Pooka

If the reason is to make it more available and more affordable for everyone... well... there is Medicaid

The problem is that many people make too much to qualify for Medicaid, but too little to afford private health insurance. If they get ill or injured, their are screwed.

Originally Posted by Pooka

, there is Medicare

Only if you're old

Originally Posted by Pooka

, and hospitals cannot deny you care if you go to an emergency room.

The most expensive and wasteful care that you can get

Originally Posted by Pooka

do you buy cigarettes, sodas, alcohol…

Don't mess with my alcohol...

Originally Posted by Pooka

I can tell you it won’t make it more accessible. We can look to California and Canada as examples of “why not”.

Most countries with nationalized healthcare are very happy with it.

Originally Posted by Pooka

You will wait longer for access.

I work in an ophthalmology office. There is a 5-6 month waiting list for cataract surgery.

Originally Posted by Pooka

Your taxes will be higher.

As high as your health insurance premiums + co-pays + medications? Probably not, considering that it would be spread over a larger, healthier base.

Originally Posted by Pooka

Obama doesn't like that Insurance companies increase premiums every year

Neither do I.

Originally Posted by Pooka

... well... the population ages and is increasingly becoming sicker (they raise the premiums to cover the risk… they actually run on a fairly small profit margin)...

I think insurance companies are very profitable.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

First of all ... we disagree. That doesn't mean that either of us are idiots.

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

I don't trust big, profit-motivated business (health insurance, pharma, providers).

You missed the biggest offender of them all...

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by classicman

You missed the biggest offender of them all...

Philadelphia Eagles management?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Philadelphia Eagles management?

Andy Reid refuses to practice socialism. Andy Reid refuses to let Obama save the Eagles. Clearly Limbaugh is right. The world is coming to an end!

Or maybe Andy Reid should learn how to adjust his play calls to adjust to changing conditions. Heavens forbid, says Pat Robertson. That is god's call whether the team lives or dies. Only god's will can determine Eagle's health. Thank god Republicans are there to filibuster those would subvert god's will. Only god should provide Eagles with necessary health care.

Only god can save the Eagles - an obvious conclusion.