Do you think health care reform will pass?

[Baculus]

And that's where the poor leadership part came in.

Voters wanted health care reform. They don't want this piece of ****.

....

When Americans are polled on individual parts of the bill, they want it. You know what they fear? "A government takeover that will ration health care and enact death panels."

Gee, what does that sound like?

I am a bit tired of people speaking for the millions of Americans who want reform. The GOP, the minority party, do not speak for the rest of us.

[Baculus]

As a small business owner I would welcome a plan that allowed other small business owners to band together and give us the buying power of large corporations.

That is part of the objective of the Democratic reform platform.

[Baculus]

But I'm sure you fully support the Democrats insistance on "obfuscating the issue and using untruthful representation" for the objective of passing this health care bill?

Oh and yes I think they'll pass it.

Please show me examples of this, especially those on the level of "the Democratic socialistic takeover of health care will enact rationing death panels in an unprecedented power grab."

Nothing the Democrats have said match the hyperbole of the right-wing.

[zoony]

When Americans are polled on individual parts of the bill, they want it. You know what they fear? "A government takeover that will ration health care and enact death panels."

Gee, what does that sound like?

Ineffective leadership from the President.

I am a bit tired of people speaking for the millions of Americans who want reform. The GOP, the minority party, do not speak for the rest of us.

More evidence. You're making the case quite strongly.

[Baculus]

The author of reconciliation, Robert C Byrd has even said reconciliation was never intended for a bill like healthcare.

That is a distortion of what he said. Byrd said reconciliation should not be used BEFORE it has gone through the House and the Senate in the proper channels. Which these bills have done.

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/byrd-defends-use-of-reconciliation/

[Baculus]

Ineffective leadership from the President.

The President was hoping Congress would get the job done by themselves.

More evidence. You're making the case quite strongly.

Come again?

[zoony]

The President was hoping Congress would get the job done by themselves.

You're saying it better than I ever could

Come again?

http://extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=7362854&postcount=54

[Baculus]

And Baculus- please let the profanity filters do their jobs. Thank you.

Aha. Sorry. I should know better. I will adhere to the rules in the future. My bad.

[LaxBuddy21]

When Americans are polled on individual parts of the bill, they want it. You know what they fear? "A government takeover that will ration health care and enact death panels."

Gee, what does that sound like?

I am a bit tired of people speaking for the millions of Americans who want reform. The GOP, the minority party, do not speak for the rest of us.

Yet if you put it to a public vote, it sounds like they speak for the majority of people who think this bill is a bad idea. Instead of trying to tear down the Republicans and force people to agree with you, why dont you try breaking down the points of the bill and the merits of the bill? Let the bill speak for itself and ignore what others are saying about it. That is the best way to get the truth and to get people to agree with you. If everyone was talking about what the bill actually says and does rather than what one party is saying or the other party is saying, we might actually get something accomplished!

[TD_washingtonredskins]

When Americans are polled on individual parts of the bill, they want it. You know what they fear? "A government takeover that will ration health care and enact death panels."

Gee, what does that sound like?

I am a bit tired of people speaking for the millions of Americans who want reform. The GOP, the minority party, do not speak for the rest of us.

Can you thumbnail those individual parts of the bill? I really would like a clear understanding of what is being proposed...

[Baculus]

You're saying it better than I ever could

http://extremeskins.com/showpost.php?p=7362854&postcount=54

Gotcha.

Well, with all of the issues facing this country, the President could only assume so much of a leadership role in this issue, I figure. Congress is the legislative branch, after all -- if they want reform, they need to get their act together.

Of course, some may argue that the process is working in the manner it is supposed to work, with diverse opinions being argued. Of course, the GOP will simply insist the bill is being "jammed" through Congress.

[aREDSKIN]

If trying to pass the bill above board and that means with full input and disclosure this bill has no chance of passing . Now the Dems will do ANYTHING, including unconstitutional maneuvers, obfuscation,, bribery and WHATEVER it takes to try and ram this through. Just watch and see what they try and get away with. It will be just horrible for the nation. The dems will what they think they can get away with the PUBLIC be damned.

[Baculus]

In reply to LaxBuddy21 and TD_washingtonredskins, here is a Kaiser Family Foundation form which generate some specific information on the House, Senate, and Presidential plans:

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm

Here is a summary of the House bill (HR 3200):

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=2&ved=0CA4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fenergycommerce.house.gov%2FPress_111%2F20090714%2Fhr3200_summary.pdf&ei=PjOZS4e-JcH98AbTjv3ICg&usg=AFQjCNEH7CBkSobSKnRLHhmLbhuh2XaBkg&sig2=DSOBQDBiUPr2O3L5yMOZoQ

Information on the Senate bill (The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act):

http://dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc-sen_health_care_bill.cfm

And the healthreform.gov site with more information:

http://www.healthreform.gov/

I hope this helps.

[LaxBuddy21]

In reply to LaxBuddy21 and TD_washingtonredskins, here is a Kaiser Family Foundation form which generate some specific information on the House, Senate, and Presidential plans:

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/sidebyside.cfm

Here is a summary of the House bill (HR 3200):

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=2&ved=0CA4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fenergycommerce.house.gov%2FPress_111%2F20090714%2Fhr3200_summary.pdf&ei=PjOZS4e-JcH98AbTjv3ICg&usg=AFQjCNEH7CBkSobSKnRLHhmLbhuh2XaBkg&sig2=DSOBQDBiUPr2O3L5yMOZoQ

Information on the Senate bill (The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act):

http://dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc-sen_health_care_bill.cfm

And the healthreform.gov site with more information:

http://www.healthreform.gov/

I hope this helps.

These are the issues that should be discussed not what one side is doing or who is to blame for this or anything. Talk about the bill. Talk about whats in the bill. Is it good or bad? The words Republican and Democrat should never come up in the discussion because we should be analyzing the bill!

Thanks for posting!

[Baculus]

If trying to pass the bill above board and that means with full input and disclosure this bill has no chance of passing .

Sorry -- can you clarify what you mean by this?

Now the Dems will do ANYTHING, including unconstitutional maneuvers, obfuscation,, bribery and WHATEVER it takes to try and ram this through.

What is this, the third or fourth time we have heard the GOP talking point, "ram this through." on this thread?

The propaganda is really working: We can all see who watches Fox News. You guys are so predictable.

A few points:

1. Demonstrate where the Democrats have used " unconstitutional maneuvers."

2. Demonstrate where they have obfuscated.

3. Demonstrate where they have used bribery. (I am sure the "Kansas kickback" will make an appearance.)

Compare this to the GOP, whose every talking point, including the one you just spouted, is an obsfucation. I would guess, aREDSKIN, you cannot talk intelligently about the Democratic bills without leaning on GOP propaganda.

Otherwise, prove me wrong.

Just watch and see what they try and get away with. It will be just horrible for the nation. The dems will what they think they can get away with the PUBLIC be damned.

"Get away with it"? Since when is using Congressional voting processes "getting away with it"?

What a strange thing to say. As if, once in the majority, Democrats aren't allowed to govern.

Public be damned -- yeah, as if the GOP have ANY interest in serving the public. Their mantra should be "Party Before Country" because they have NO interest in serving the American public. Otherwise they would be concerned with the 45,000 Americans who die due to a lack of health care, or the millions of Americans who cannot afford insurance. Or the rising costs of health care premiums, which have doubled in a decade (and tripled since 1994, the last time the Democrats tried to pass reform).

If anyone is trying to jam anything down the public's throat, it is the GOP. The Republicans want to defeat reform, even though the MAJORITY of Americans want it.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Thanks Baculus.

[Baculus]

These are the issues that should be discussed not what one side is doing or who is to blame for this or anything. Talk about the bill. Talk about whats in the bill. Is it good or bad? The words Republican and Democrat should never come up in the discussion because we should be analyzing the bill!

Thanks for posting!

Any time. :-)

We can never get to the details of health care reform because the opposition, by and large, are not interested in minutia. After all, thus far, what is the main point they have brought into this thread?

"The Democrats want to jam this bill down America's throat!"

It has been like this for the past year since we've been debating this topic. It's been all "death panels," and "government takeover," and "jamming down our throats."

[Baculus]

Thanks Baculus.

I hope it's informative.

[twa]

Any time. :-)

We can never get to the details of health care reform because the opposition, by and large, are not interested in minutia. After all, thus far, what is the main point they have brought into this thread?

"The Democrats want to jam this bill down America's throat!"

It has been like this for the past year since we've been debating this topic. It's been all "death panels," and "government takeover," and "jamming down our throats."

How about you can keep your present policy?....false

How about your rates will go down?....maybe,but many will go up

How about the budgeting gimmicks to make it appear deficit neutral?

Start with that minutia,then we can move on.

[Baculus]

How about you can keep your present policy?....false

Beep. Wrong. Otherwise, prove your point.

There is no mechanism in either bill which would "take away" someone's insurance.

How about your rates will go down?....maybe,but many will go up

The CBO has stated that health care costs for most citizens will go down under the Democratic plans:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009

/12/to_repeat_the_cbo_found_that_p.html

Of course, you appear to be ignoring the reality that health care rates will certainly rise without reform. Case, in point, Anthem Blue Cross attempting to raise rates in CA by 39%. I am rather confused to why opponents of reform always ignore this reality -- that rates have doubled over this last decade while they claim rates will increase under the Democrat's reform efforts.

It reminds me of the GOP complaining about health care rationing, while ignoring the rationing in the current privatized system. Or talking about "patient choice" when most markets are served by a limited amount of insurers.

It's befuddling.

How about the budgeting gimmicks to make it appear deficit neutral?

Please provide examples.

Start with that minutia,then we can move on.

Please provide some minutia -- otherwise this is more spin.

[aREDSKIN]

Sorry -- can you clarify what you mean by this?

What is this, the third or fourth time we have heard the GOP talking point, "ram this through." on this thread?

The propaganda is really working: We can all see who watches Fox News. You guys are so predictable.

A few points:

1. Demonstrate where the Democrats have used " unconstitutional maneuvers."

2. Demonstrate where they have obfuscated.

3. Demonstrate where they have used bribery. (I am sure the "Kansas kickback" will make an appearance.)

Compare this to the GOP, whose every talking point, including the one you just spouted, is an obsfucation. I would guess, aREDSKIN, you cannot talk intelligently about the Democratic bills without leaning on GOP propaganda.

Otherwise, prove me wrong.

"Get away with it"? Since when is using Congressional voting processes "getting away with it"?

What a strange thing to say. As if, once in the majority, Democrats aren't allowed to govern.

Public be damned -- yeah, as if the GOP have ANY interest in serving the public. Their mantra should be "Party Before Country" because they have NO interest in serving the American public. Otherwise they would be concerned with the 45,000 Americans who die due to a lack of health care, or the millions of Americans who cannot afford insurance. Or the rising costs of health care premiums, which have doubled in a decade (and tripled since 1994, the last time the Democrats tried to pass reform).

If anyone is trying to jam anything down the public's throat, it is the GOP. The Republicans want to defeat reform, even though the MAJORITY of Americans want it.

1) "Will use" and "have used" are quite different. Give it time and we shall see.

2) Ibid

3) Already have been shown to be a fact. Most reasonable people view it this way but many dems and people who benefited from the bribes don't.

Show me a current poll that in any way supports your assertion "even though the MAJORITY of Americans want it."

And for the 1000th time I do not watch Fox NEWS. I watch more MSNBC than anything else.

This entire process is going to get messier & messier it will not be as smooth as many purport. Of course it is my conjecture but time will tell here real soon.

[LaxBuddy21]

Any time. :-)

We can never get to the details of health care reform because the opposition, by and large, are not interested in minutia. After all, thus far, what is the main point they have brought into this thread?

"The Democrats want to jam this bill down America's throat!"

It has been like this for the past year since we've been debating this topic. It's been all "death panels," and "government takeover," and "jamming down our throats."

We can get to the details of health care at any time. Use those as your argument responding to anything someone says. Its not hard. And they mean jam it down Americas throat since they are trying to pass the bill in the face of overwhelming American opposition. I agree that we need to reform healthcare. I do not agree this is the way to do it. The problem with healthcare is rising cost and lack of coverage. I do not think this addresses either of these problems adequately in my opinion. I am in favor of reform but I think this bill should be scrapped and they should start over.

Honestly, I would be in favor of percentage caps on markups. Something costs you x $ to produce, you can only make say a 20% profit on it. I also think we should modify the timeline on patents for drug development. Drugs are so expensive because by the time they get out of clinical trials, companies only have a few years to make back all the money they spent developing the drugs. Give them a cap on profit and a longer period of time where they have exclusive rights to the drug and you will lower the cost. Put more money into health education programs. Make them affordable options for people. I could have been a doctor easily but I could not afford to go to medical school. You need more healthcare professionals to sustain more people having access to health care. There are just much better ways to handle this than whats being done. Not to mention they need to get rid of all the little add ons that people throw in there to get votes. This needs to happen in all bills not just this one.

[Baculus]

1) "Will use" and "have used" are quite different. Give it time and we shall see.

Are you referring to reconciliation? Are you now saying that process is unconstitutional? Well, considering the Republicans have used it 17 out of 22 times in their efforts, this smacks of hypocrisy.

2) Ibid

Can you explain what you mean by this?

3) Already have been shown to be a fact. Most reasonable people view it this way but many dems and people who benefited from the bribes don't.

Please expound on this thought.

Show me a current poll that in any way supports your assertion "even though the MAJORITY of Americans want it."

Let me find a recent poll.

And for the 1000th time I do not watch Fox NEWS. I watch more MSNBC than anything else.

Than why do you repeat GOP talking points, down to their verbiage, i.e., "ram it through"? I mean, seriously, this is the most cliched, robotic talking point in recent memory. Especially since it is not true: The House and Senate bills were passed with a majority vote.

I am glad, though, no one has mentioned the bogus "nuclear option" bit of propaganda.

This entire process is going to get messier & messier it will not be as smooth as many purport. Of course it is my conjecture but time will tell here real soon.

We are near the end of this debate since the Democrats will vote on reconciliation over the next week or so. So we'll see!

[alexey]

Please provide examples.

One accusation that appears to have some legs (maybe short legs, but nonetheless) is about double-counting of medicare savings as being used for both new spending and for future Medicare benefits.

I don't fully understand the issue, but there appears some valid concern there:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/policy/29health.html

“To describe the full amount of hospital insurance trust fund savings as both improving the government’s ability to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would essentially double-count a large share of those savings, and thus overstate the improvement in the government’s fiscal position,” the budget office said.

Richard S. Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, agrees with the Congressional Budget Office. He traces the confusion to different accounting rules used for the federal budget and for the Medicare trust fund.

After issuing its clarification, the budget office reaffirmed its earlier estimate that the Senate bill would reduce the deficit by $132 billion in the next 10 years, compared with the deficits expected under current law.

[Thiebear]

Now they are trying to vote for the bill without showing WHO voted for it?

that's all i need to know about how good it is.