AUGUSTA, Maine — Opponents of President Obama’s health care overhaul rallied Tuesday in the capitol as the U.S. Supreme Court entered a second day of arguments over the landmark law.
Organized by conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity, the “Hands Off My Health Care” event was held in conjunction with a rally at the U.S. Capitol.
About two dozen people gathered at the Kennebec County Superior Courthouse to protest what they called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s intrusion into the lives of Americans.
“It is a 2,700-page reminder that there are forces today who want to institutionalize government control over the lives of every single American, from cradle to grave,” Carol Weston, state director of Americans for Prosperity and a former Republican lawmaker from Montville, said in prepared remarks.
Americans for Prosperity is a national organization based in Arlington, Va., financed by the industrialist Koch brothers.
In a second day of oral arguments on the law’s constitutionality, the Supreme Court on Tuesday took up the central question of whether Congress can require nearly all Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty.
Maine and attorneys general from 25 other states are challenging the so-called “individual mandate.”
Joel Allumbaugh, president of the Maine Association of Health Underwriters, said also troubling are the two-year-old law’s requirements for minimum health coverage.
Each state will choose an existing health plan as a benchmark for providing basic benefits, locking high-cost states like Maine into expensive plans, he said.
Layered on top are requirements that insurance companies spend 80 cents of each premium dollar on care, he said.
“Many people in Maine, both small businesses and individuals, are going to need to turn in their current coverage and buy more expensive coverage to meet those base requirements, and that’s very troubling,” Allumbaugh, also the health care policy director for the conservative Maine Heritage Policy Center, said after the rally.
Several small businesses in Maine spoke out Tuesday in favor of the law, challenging the National Federation of Independent Business’ opposition to the reforms.
“For the first time, small businesses in Maine have seen payment reforms, credits and protections from the federal government that have made it easier to cover our workers and keep our businesses profitable,” David White, owner of MDI Imported Car Service in Bar Harbor and a board member of the Maine Small Business Coalition, said in a press release. “When NFIB argues against the law today, remember this: they don’t speak for me and they don’t speak for most businesses in Maine.”
Bob Sullivan traveled to the rally from Arundel to protest the health care law, which he viewed as a threat to Americans’ individual rights.
“What’s the government going to tell us to do next?” he said, carrying a sign that read “Repeal Obamacare.”
Just what is it that people think the Affordable Health Care Act is going to do to their insurance? I know what the right wing pundits say, all lies BTW. You can check that at any of the websites that cover those things.
But “Hands off my health care”? Really? If you already have insurance it doesn’t even affect you; other than preventing your company from dropping you for no reason. Or capping your coverage while you are in the middle of your cancer treatment. Or denying your treatment all together.
What is wrong with people?
What is wrong with people?
They are Pawns for Americans for Prosperity.
Its funny how he will blindly do what Americans for Prosperity tell them but not the government.
Well, everyone knows that it is intended to kill your (plural version) grandmother and then inject Obama serum into you so that you become a socialist. This manufactured outrage is a joke and should be taken as such.
There are always feeble minded people in any society. Here they watch Fox or listen to Rush and parrot what they hear. They think it is all true. As schools teach to the test, real thinking skills that can help decipher lies and distortion are not developing. Simple critical reasoning is enough to render much of their hyperbole nonsensical. Still, few actually question what they hear.
They are being told precisely the opposite of what is happening. We are nearing the precipice. Keep your wits. I am convinced this group of lemmings is dangerous and capable of nearly anything. If they really believe that the president is a terrorist, what would prevent them from acting on that notion?
Propaganda is a dangerous poison. One never can say for sure how people will react once they imbibe enough of it. Remember, most Germans didn’t see themselves losing it either. They were being roused with nationalistic propaganda that over time led them to atrocity. I am sure we have some ugliness ahead. The rhetoric is growing more hateful and less tolerant every day. The only missing ingredients are a fanatical leader with delusions of grandeur and focusing on an enemy of the people. The rest just happens…..
You’re drinking too much kool aid while watching MSNBC.
I don’t watch MSNBC or any TV news except the local for the weather. I read my news from international and reputable national sources.
The international perspective is generally free of partisan slant. That has proven very valuable in understanding the insanity that is our political scene.
You read your news from the Chellie “I am the 1%” Pingree owned media.
Its this type of elitism that wedges people. Believe it or not, people can educate themselves and come up with their own suspicions and conclusions without listening to fox or limbaugh.
Are your opinions handed to you by Olbermann, Chris Mathews? You speak of propaganda while dispensing it.
People are capable of informing themselves and coming to their own opinions, and by dismissing them because you do not share them, you only add fuel to fire.
Brainwashed
Obama care will help make healthchare m0re affordable, efficient and less costly. The air is a little thin from where I am typing this from…
Must also smell of cannibis.
hehehe
50 million people today can’t afford a doctor and 45,000 people die a year from lack of health insurance. The typical household is paying $1000 a year to provide medical help to those without insurance.
For the love of God, will Republicans please stop kissing the toes of Big Insurance and let this country do what every other democratic civilized country in the world has done.
Ever been to Europe spruce?
I have. They pay a bit higher taxes and send everyone to college and provide healthcare for every citizen, regardless of cost of treatment, age, or financial situation. They also have good public transportation and four day work weeks and a higher level of self-esteem.
I have also, and that is not always the case. They DO determine health factors and you wait accordingly. Wishing that wasnt true does not make it false. Not to mention the fact that you want to put health into the hands of a political system ripe with corruption on BOTH sides. Yeah, I am sure it will turn out well.
Remember not long ago, a famous baseball player, very old, alcoholic, got stranglely moved to the top of a liver donation list? I am sure it had nothing to do with his money and fame, I am equally sure nothing like that would happen on a government run healthcare program. For god sake look at the FDA, probably the only thing more corrupt than the IRS.
I know I am wasting time, but I have seen it, and I am not sold
The baseball player got moved up the list while the current system is in place. Dick Cheney got moved up the heart transplant list with the current system in place. You are arguing against yourself a little bit here.
Did you know that the Speaker’s staff is exempt form any of this?
Pelosi thought for sure she still would be in charge.
No, I am not actually, I agree the system we have no does not work, but I also know that gvt cannot force anyone to buy anything. I am not claiming to have the answers, I dont. I just know that gvt on every level needs to stay out of it. The more involved they are, the more problems they create.
The baseball player got it because he had money and fame, if you think that will change under Obamacare, you are wrong. NONE of the people in our gvt care about poor people, if you believe they do….well, hope you arent poor. You will be pretty disapointed
Its not, Bush, or Obamas, or Pelosi, or anyones elses place to tell me what I have to buy. If you truely think it will stop at insurance, you are wrong. Peoples trust in the government, be it R or D, is truely frightening
I dont understand that at all. Nobody in the world gets better, more affordable medical care than those on Medicare, which is all government run. And to say that D’s dont care about poor people when they are the only ones fighting for affordable schooling, Medicade, Food Stamps etc (and yes some of those programs are abused). Making across board statements like that is way over the top. I was poor when I was a child, I am not now, in no small part because of the programs that I mentioned and that (many) Democrats have been fighting for for the last 75+ years.
And as far as forcing people to buy insurance, its been working well in Mass (97% now have health insurance and prices are dropping because of that) Thanks Mitt Romney!
Ds dont care, anymore than the Rs do. Ill let you in on a secret. Do you know who cares about poor people? Poor people, and none of them, d or r, are poor. You mistake making people dependent, for caring. Its not the same by any means.
Its not been working well in Mass actually. The number one complaint of people in mass? Taxes. One of only two states that consistantly lose population every year. (that may have changed by now).
I respect your opinion, I honestly do, but ask yourself if you are bias for what you want, vs what may or may not be the rigt thing to do.
As for your comment on best healthcare in the world is gvt run healthcare. If it was run so well, it wouldnt need the reform almost everyone agrees it needs because its bankrupt
How do you know Dick Cheney got moved up?
Granted there may not be proof of it, but of course he got moved up. Because its a corrupt system, just like everything else gvt touches
How do you know the Vice President got moved up on the list?
Because overweight people over 65 who have had 4 heart attacks don’t are not typically the priority for heart transplants. People under 55 are consitered priority. 70+% of people who need heart transplants dont get them, including the under 55 set.
Its interesting that you admit there is corruption, but then want those same people in charge of more of our healthcare
Or was it only corrupt under the bush admin? Sorry if you believe that
When did I say anything about Bush? People on this site love to make things up to argue against. And again, the government would not be in charge of more of our healthcare, the private insurance market would still be providing coverage. This is not complicated. Also, you pay for people who dont have health insurance every time they go to the emergency room and you dont get a choice. Interesting concept of freedom. And the government is not forcing anyone to do anything. Its not “or else” its “get insurance or pay a fine so that others don’t have to pay for the care for you.”
Wait, let me see if I got this right. Its not pay or else, but its pay or you get a fine?
Im sure that makes sense to someone. Cause to me, the or pay a fine part would qualify as “or else”
“or else” on its own sounds like a physical threat or something. Just clarifying that its just asking people to pay for themselves instead of others paying for them. Why dont you answer what else I wrote there. Like you paying for other peoples health care and having no recourse is your concept of freedom.
Fair enough. The buy or else is only part of the bill, the goal is universal health care, and no, I do not want to pay for people who have no interest in working. As I stated before, I lose 33% of my pay to pay for other people. It irritates me. No, I dont care for the poor, I care for me and my son, and thats about where my concerns end. Does that make me a bad person? Probably, but it doesnt make me any different than any of the politicians trying to force this on us. The only difference is, I can admit it because my only concern in life isnt rather or not I get re-elected.
There are just to many other factors that need to be, and are not considered, for this to be viable. My concept of freedom is pretty simple. I go to work, and I take care of the child I created, not everyone elses. I pay my mortgage, my bills etc etc. I will never agree that paying other peoples bills is my responsibility.
My original point stands, I see people compare our system to the european system and claim it works, without looking into any of the other factors that need to be looked at.
Also, you have skipped over plenty things yourself, so dont ask me to answer things when you pick and choose yourself.
Oh, I agree. We can’t let ourselves fall into those pitfalls. But seeing what works and what doesn’t in other systems can help us build something even greater. Afterall, isn’t that how America came to be in the first place? We saw a system that we liked, but that was corrupted and imperfect – so we forged a new one for ourselves that kept the good and discharged the bad. We liked the Magnacarte, but realized that a King and unrepresented taxation were bad, so we kept the good parts about a written law which could be amended and got rid of the monarch and the non-representation.
I don’t think anyone is wanting to rush into any kind of new system without thinking it through. I know I, for one, love hearing concerns such as yours. It helps keep us aware of where we’re going and how to get there the right way. It also helps us make sure everyone gets what they want, or need without sacrificing our moral integrity to push forward just for the sake of progress itself.
I personally see this healthcare reform as a good step. Note: STEP. It’s not the end-all, be-all of systems, but it’s moving us in the right direction. Along the way, we’re going to realize truths and find new ways to ensure that our citizens are taken care of in the best way. It might take us fifty years, but we’ll get there. But we can only reach that place if we work together. Having an open discourse on these kinds of subjects, as well as the personal fortitude to compromise to reach an equal goal will help us reach everyone’s goals quicker.
Im not sure how I feel about it honestly. I have to admit, that my faith in goverments ability to do anything, is not just shaken, its gone.
Its not even just about the corruption. Congress couldnt even manage its own cafeteria without it going bankrupt.
Its interesting that you talk of how our country formed itself. Unfair taxes. I pay alot, about 33% of every check I get goes to taxes, and I have to ask myself what I see for it. I see methadone clinics, I see people on welfare, dumping out water bottles they purchased with EBT, to get cash and buy booze, and CONTINUE to get EBT benefits. Meanwhile I know a mother of 2, that makes $20 a year too much to qualify. I see the same people in and out of jail every 3 days or so.
I could go on and on, but the point is, they cant run anything without f***ing it up. I have no reason to believe this will be any different.
Thats the point though. Under the Affordable Care Act, the Government won’t be running anything. The mandate is for people to purchase private insurance.
And as with all government programs, we tend to ignore what works and focus on what we don’t like. A large chunk of your taxes goes to national defense or to government agencys like the NIH or CDC that have literally saved or prolonged millions of lives.
And how many lives does the FDA cost? Cure for cancer? Nope, might kill you. Cure for male patern baldness, well it might kill you, but thats ok. None of these people care about anything other than $.
This comment made no sense. Should the FDA not regulate drugs for safety? Before the FDA doctors used to give people morphine for upset stomachs and cocaine for lethargy. Sounds like your beef is with pharmaceutical companies, if you think $$$ is the problem. An FDA regulator makes the same salary if a drug is rejected or approved.
Ugh, this is frustrating. DO they regulate for safety? Sure, to an extent. The question is do they also regulate for profit? OF COURSE THEY DO!!
As I stated before, many cancer treatments have been denied by the FDA due to potential harmful side affects….but they have no problem with passing stupid pills for everything from hair loss to erectile disfunction even though the effects may be worse.
In what way does this not make sense? Turn on the tv right now and you will see a commercial for a lawyer proposing lawsuits based on deaths from stupid pills that strangely passed the FDA. How can you not see this?
“An FDA regulator makes the same salary if a drug is rejected or approved.”
Good god. Do you even know what corruption means? IF you honestly believe drug companies arent slipping $$ to FDA regulators, well, then I applaud your blind faith in anything goverment related
Choose to believe me or not, but I work for a company that interacts with the FDA on a daily basis. Its not blind faith, it’s the direct knowledge that comes with experience. Yes there is a revolving door between public and private entities that can lead to corruption, but if you know of any direct bribery, you should report it ASAP, because that would be a huge deal.
The drug development pipeline from NIH funded basic research, to transitional research to the privately funded development of the drug itself is expensive, incredibly complicated and involves hundreds of people, none of them infallible. Sometime stuff slips through because people are imperfect, but it is not a total snake pit. Seeing evil and corruption everywhere is sometimes more comforting than the truth, which is that most people care and want to do their job well and are not trying to screw you over, but sometimes that is not good enough. Sorry if me not seeing the boogieman around every corner is frusturating to you.
It is blind faith, sorry to say. If we had proof of every corrupt system out there, we wouldnt have gvt at all. You really believe all these millionairs care about poor people. You really believe that? Let me guess, the IRS isnt corrupt either?
I dont know what to say to you honestly. Blind faith that millionairs will do the right thing on behalf of the poor is well, naive. Millionairs everywhere care about one thing, the next million, and if they can make it off the backs of every poor person out there they will.
Since mass seems to be a shining example, how come billionair john kerry doesnt donate millions to charity? Hes all about raising taxes, but opts not to pay more himself. Is that because of his undying concern for the poor people?
The fact is, gvt, d and r alike, mess up everything they touch. Time willl prove this to be no different.
Your not even reading what I am writing are you? For one thing, most people who work for the federal government (like the FDA) are not millionares. And I already rebutted your blind faith claim. And the “Hey, if this rich guy cares about poor people, why dosent he give all his money away.” is a silly argument. “Hey, want to fight a war in Iraq, go ahead and fight it yourself.” It makes no sense and solves nothing. When government (run by democrats at the time) created a number of programs to fight poverty in the 1960’s the poverty rate was cut in half in 5 years and has stayed there ever since. It was a great thing. I encourage you to read a history book and learn about what life in America was like for most people when the government just stayed out of the way.
Yes I am reading you. My example of Kerry, did not say anything about giving away everything he has. My example was for people like him to not expect me to do it, when he isnt doing anything extra himself. Its similar to al gore preaching global warming from his private jets and caravans of SUVS
Lead by example so to speak.
I think you mistake the intent of social programs. They are not there to create reliance on government, but thats exactly what they do. The intent was to help, not support. As with anything, abuse is going to happen, and I am for, to an extent, helping people who geniunly need it, however I am not interested in helping those that have no intention in helping themselves.
In my opinion, the latter is the more common of the two.
Allow me if you will to make another comparison.
Do you believe that insurance companies are NOT behind those that create seatbelt laws? I ride a motorcycle, the reason my insurance is cheaper for my bike is because if I get in a crash, I am likely to be killed and thus paying out is not a concern. Strange there isnt a helmet law here.
Maybe proof of insurance companies backing lawmakers isnt always there, but its a safe bet that it happens.
First off, thank you for the back and forth.
I think that the number of people who have died due to car wrecks (on a per capita basis) has dropped by 2/3rds since seat belt laws were put into effect. The book that cause the uproar over how unsafe cars were “Unsafe At Any Speed” and lead to the enactment of seatbelt laws and crash tests was written by Ralph Nader, who dispite his faults has never been consitered a friend of insurance companies. The opposite really. So no, I dont believe that. Those rules have saved millions of lives. I consiter that a good thing.
The government already has mandated “children” to the age of 26, birth control for women , can’t be denied due health reasons, no caps on policies, but their not running anything. Their still writing regulations as we type. Wake up bradygirl2 the government and the politicization has just begun.
ITS NOT THE GOVERNMENTS PLACE TO MANDATE I BUY ANYTHING AT ALL!!!! Thats the problem
Interesting points, for sure. I feel the same way. I don’t like seeing people squander the money that I pay into society for services. But on the same token, I know those services are vital to many families out there that may have just been dealt a bad hand in life, or who may have never had a chance to recover from an accident, a lost job, or the loss of income a deceased family member could’ve helped provide.
Services such as welfare, unemployement, social security, and the new healthcare system are all essential to making sure that our fellow citizens have the safety net to catch them when the chips are down.
I consider myself a highly progressive liberal. I see the benefit in many social programs and am a steadfast believer in education. But, at the same time, I’m a firm believer that people don’t always play nice. There are many folks out there who use the system, or play the system for their own gain, regardless of whether or not they need it.
For that reason, I know we need to reform those programs. We need more accountability for benefits. We need to make sure the money is going to people who actually need it – and not just those that can use it to buy alcohol or pay off gambling debts.
I gather, from what you’re saying, that you are against these programs because you feel that they are corrupt and useless. I would argue that they are muddied, but essential. We need to reform them, we need to streamline them.
We don’t need to throw them away just because they dont’ work very well right now. If we were to use a car as an anology – The government, and it’s many essential safetnet programs just need a good clean up, a tune up, and maybe a new set of tires. But we still need it to make sure we get where we are going, and can continue doing things we need to do.
Too often I see people make the argument that just because the system isn’t working, that it has to be dismantled altogether. It saddens me when I hear that, because if we were to do that with every car that needed a new set of tires…. we’d all be much worse off than we are today. Reform the programs, streamline them to help those that really need it.
Do you think that’s something you could get behind, dsnoww? By the way, I’ve enjoyed this discussion. It’s very nice to speak to someone from the other side that isn’t screaming for my liberal head.
:)
I only scream for liberal heads when facts are ignored. You are not doing that, and Im actually, to a certain extent, socially liberal, however I am fiscally conservative, which is impossible to accomplish.
I started this because many people compare the European system to ours, without knowing alot about the European System. This is true for both conservatives and liberals alike.
Take some of the scandinavian countries for example, Norway especially, they have the worlds highest taxes, which helps pay for such things, but its not just taxes that make it possible. With everything else we have on our plates, we couldnt afford to pay their rate of taxes because of several factors. One, they dont have nearly the population, 2, they generally speaking, live healthy lifestyles. 3, they handle their own oil, and take care of their own before throwing money at other countries. These are all things we cant say about america. Also add that they have excedingly low crime, the entire country has only one prison. Immigration is next to impossible because they take care of their own first. Thus unemplyment is very low.
The point being, with such high taxes, and very few of the problems we have, they can easily afford it.
Making people purchase something they dont want to purchase will not go over well. Its going to lead to fines or taxes people cant afford.
{ Not to mention the fact that you want to put health into the hands of a political system ripe with corruption on BOTH sides }
The source of the coruption is still money and the capitalistic private sector.
It is better to put up with the Devils Advocates than the Devil Himself.
And they all thank the Germans for accepting being part of the EU and the Euro. Of course most of the countries are bankrupt and they can’t meet the retirement promises they made to employees just a few years ago. Monocultures fail. Big monocultures fail in big ways.
What health care? Most of the people I know don’t have it because they can’t afford it.
I’d also like to know how many “anti Obamacare” people without health insurance have had their medical tabs picked up by the State? I personally know a few.
Yea! Keep Government out of my Medicare! Socialism and Blah Blah Blah!
Those protesting must be the ones who don’t carry health insurance !! They are “just fine” with the current system because we are paying for their free healthcare through our higher premiums and taxes.
For decades the democrats and republicans have been giving lip service to the need to address the health care crisis in this country ( which side of their lips has largely been dependent on which party is in power at the time ). Finally came the passing of the Affordable Health Care Act.
No doubt this is far from a perfect document. However it is a start. We do not need to repeal it as much as we need to adjust and amend. We now have a frame work to begin the path to affordable health care for all of the citizens in this country. As the old saying goes “Let ‘s not throw out the baby with the bath water” .
Both parties know this is not a perfect solution and both parties need to work together ( here comes that word compromise ) and build us a program that addresses our health care crisis.
The health care crisis is a nation wide problem for which our elected officals owe us a nation wide solution. Some of them by passing the Affordable Health Care Act have attempted to provide us with a beginning and some ( partly do politics ) want to go backwards. Many of those seeking repeal do not even offer an alternative.
We the citizens need to have this problem addressed — no more lip service — let go of the politics — let’s move ahead.
The better slogan would be..”Governemnt, don’t force me to buy something I may not want to buy.” This is not a tax, it is a forced purchased with a penalty of a fine. You may not live in the USA unless you purchase health insurance or be subject to a fine? Find me comparable laws and don’t use car insurance, no one is forced to drive a car.
You may not choose to have health insurance…however, if you are in a health care crisis…for example you appendix and burst. You do NOT have time to go shopping for health care insurance to cover this expense. Healthcare is unique in that you obtain the service and figure out how to pay after…more often than not…you do not pay. Hence, my insurance costs more money in order to pay for you who do not have health insurance.
Rich people invest heavily in the insurance companies and pharmaceuticals etc. They don’t want a system where unhealthy people actually get health care because that cuts into their dividends. If you have cadillac insurance from your employer but get disabled, you will find your coverage stops very quickly.
Either enact a fair health care plan for All Americans or repeal all of it, including medicare and medicaid. Health care for all or for none.
Far be it that the us government steps in to regulate those insurance companies that are bleeding us dry financially.. This reform is not so much to deliver us better care but to insure that we do get care and not over financially burdened when we require care unexpectedly.. Also it mandates that we all get care and insures that we not be dropped due to preexisting conditions.. I am all for it.. The issues i have have now rendered me immobile i just got fitted for my wheel chair.. This could of been avoided if i wasn’t waiting for health care here in the U.S.A. Been waiting for far too long.
Medicare is not “free”. It is taken out of one’s
social security payment each and every month.
It also does not cover everything or pay for everything.
In order to pick up the costs of things you need to have
a supplimental coverage and even then you still may pay
a good amount. The thing with medicare, most people have
already been paying into the system for many years and still need
some other coverage. But at least they can still do what they want
without the govt telling them what they have to do. Doesn’t anyone
recall the President touting how the older lady may not be given
permission for an operation and putting her on pills will have
to suffice? You want that….have at it. I don’t.
Here’s the real story behind your half-remembered notion that President Obama would deny surgery to an old woman. You have it backwards.
“His grandmother, who already had a diagnosis of terminal cancer, fell and broke her hip, possibly because of a mild stroke. The question became whether to replace her hip even though she was dying. As Mr. Obama recounted the story, his grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, decided to have the surgery, but then, two weeks after the operation, everything went downhill. Ultimately, Ms. Dunham, who helped raise Mr. Obama, died in Hawaii two days before her grandson was elected president.
“I don’t know how much that hip replacement cost,” Mr. Obama said in the interview with David Leonhardt of The Times. “I would have paid out of pocket for that hip replacement, just because she’s my grandmother. Whether, sort of in the aggregate, society making those decisions to give my grandmother, or everybody else’s aging grandparents or parents, a hip replacement when they’re terminally ill is a sustainable model is a very difficult question.”
He went on to say: “If somebody told me that my grandmother couldn’t have a hip replacement and she had to lie there in misery in the waning days of her life, that would be pretty upsetting.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/01/us/politics/30web-baker.html
And Obama was most recently heard saying ” Wait until after my election , I’ll have more flexability “. I wonder why this statement didn’t make front page news ?
I certainly hope he does have more flexibility after his re-election. I hope he’ll be able to prevail over Republican obstructionists.
Agreed, if bush had said it, it would be front page for years, especially on BDN. Obamas as corrupt as the last and the next will be as corrupt as Obama
Maybe you should look up the “real story”. My reference
had nothing to do with HIS grandmother. It had to do with
a person asking a question about THEIR grandmother. So maybe
it is YOU who have it backwards and it had nothing to do with
a hip replacement. And the elderly woman wasn’t dying, just elderly.
For someone who’s so excited about a “real story,” it’s interesting that you can’t provide any details except that it had to do with an elderly woman, pills, and surgery. Details, please?
OK, I was actually able to track your story down. A woman named Jane Sturm told President Obama that her 99-year-old mother’s doctors had resisted giving her surgery for a pacemaker, which would have cost $30,000. Ms. Sturm said getting the pacemaker permitted her mother to get out of the hospital for lengthy “alternative” therapies, which in turn, she said, saved taxpayer money.
The president was interested, and said, “If we’ve got experts who are looking at this and they are advising doctors across the board that the pacemakers are saving money…” [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7922187&page=1&singlePage=true]
Such studies are called “comparative effectiveness studies,” and they accomplish exactly what Ms. Sturm favored for her mother–they can tell us when treatment that initially seem quite expensive do turn out to be very helpful and save money in the long run.
Interestingly, key Republicans such as Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma have worked against a reform proposal considered in the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee–they hope to ban comparative effectiveness research.
It is probably unconstitutional to force someone to buy something from a private company
and
this will hopefully lead to a single payer platform.
but,
the reality is that ‘Obamacare’ is the GOP Health Care Plan from the Clinton era.
You think this will lead to a single payer system? Have you not seen the polls? The Electorate is awake, no way you are going to sneak that by or trick them /us into it.
Well just how did this pass anyway ?
Deceit, exaggerations and out right lies .
Plus bribes to members of congress for their vote.
Four types of people protesting there.
The first three are the puppets of the Koch lobbying organization, those ignorant of the provisions of the Act and the partisan cheerleaders for failure whose goal is simply to bring down the President.
I believe the fourth and most pathetic group are the freeloaders who can afford insurance but gleefully show up at the ER and receive free medical care that the rest of us pay for while hiding behind their silly rantings about “their rights” and “socialism.”
I might be in favor of exemptions to the personal mandate if the freeloaders that choose to not purchase insurance would simply agree to die on the side of the road rather accept care that they refuse to pay for. That way the rights of the leeches to not pay their way and our rights to not have them leech off us are both preserved.
I have no problem helping those who can’t afford insurance, but those that can afford it owe it to the rest of us to buy it rather than freeload off the rest if us. The Act is a strong defense of our rights over the freeloaders.
It’s fascinating to see people stand up for their rights–
The right to be denied health insurance due to a pre-existing condition .
The right to go bankrupt over medical bills.
The right to have your insurance company dump you when you get sick.
The right to have coverage for your cancer treatment suddenly STOP when you reach the company’s limit.
The right to have your child, born with disastrous medical problems, meet his or her lifetime cap on treatment by the age of 8 or 10.
Apparently anyone who states that this Obamacare does not impact their insurance do not have their own insurance or are not informed. Fact one. Flexible spending accounts were reduced by 50% this year becasue of Obummercare. Sound familar? Then you know what I am talking about. If not, then stfu about this communist manifesto not affecting working people. Who is going to pay for insurance for the unemployed when they are forced to either one, pay the rent, 2, pay for food, 3 pay the insurance premium. The liberals and backers of this fiasco are totally lost and I could care less what the republicans think too, the politicians have their own healthcare plan.