Who will read the Health Care Bill ??

[cobra de capell]

Dear Senator/Congressman _________,

President Obama has often cited the (dubious) number of 46 million Americans without health INSURANCE as his justification for completely revamping America’s healthcare system. Of that 46 million figure cited, approximately half are believed to be people who voluntarily choose not to BUY health insurance. When I was younger, I also voluntarily opted NOT to BUY health INSURANCE!!

So, my question to you is this: In a country of over 300 million Americans, why does the Congress feel the need to completely disrupt the health care system as it currently exists, because an estimated 46 million people cannot or will not BUY health insurance? Why is the president and the Congress discussing an overpriced, “one-size-fits-all” plan that affects ALL Americans in order to accommodate a handful of Americans??

I look forward to your reply.

[4RE KLR]

CDC

Of all the post you have made (that I actually read )
I think that one makes the most sense.

[Bill Bess]

Perhaps the bill should be put on a tape "books on tape" so those Congress Folks could just listen to it while their sitting on the john. They then might realize that they're pushing a very bad thing and acting "Stupidly".

I'm have to admit, I'm enjoying seeing these libs. looking so dishonest, stupid and making all these gaffs. The thing that worries me is when will they get real.

Hell, what do I know....I'm getting older and soon my medical benefits will be phased out due to cost cutting measures by the socialists.


Bill

[cobra de capell]

Originally Posted by Roscoe

The questioner's mother needed a pacemaker. But she was 100 years old. And though her doctor said she needed a pacemaker to go on, an arrhythmia specialist declined to do it because of her age and, like a government bureaucrat would, by reading her file rather than seeing her. When the arrhythmia specialist actually saw her in person - at her doctor's insistence - he changed his mind about the level of risk and went ahead. As the questioner put it, he did so when he saw "her joy of life."

Her question is essentially about care for the elderly, the removal of personal care and the weight of impending additional impersonal bureaucracy under Obama's government health care takeover plan. His answer is a plate of spaghetti. With a side of painkillers.

Question: "Outside the medical criteria for prolonging the life of someone who is elderly, is there any consideration that can be given for a certain spirit, a certain joy of living, or quality of life; or is it just a medical cut off at a certain age?"

President Obama: "Yeah, we're not gonna solve every difficult problem in terms of end of life care. A lot of that is going to have to be we as a culture and a society making better decisions within our own families and for ourselves. But what we can do is make sure that at least some of the waste that exists in the system that is not making anybody's mom better that is loading up on additional tests or additional drugs that the evidence shows is not going to improve care, that at least we can let doctors know and your mom know that, you know what, maybe this isn't gonna help. Maybe you're better off not taking the surgery, but taking the painkiller."

This exchange was on Hannity last night, comes from an Obama Townhall meeting.

The interesting thing is that if doctors/hospitals withhold treatment or tests at any level of sickness - what will happen when the attorney's get involved? Without tort reform the implementation of this bill will be a disaster.

One thing is for sure, Obama's health care talking points and the truth are purely accidental. The talking points that Obama endlessly yammers are poll-tested attributions of a plan that the public would support. They do not subsist in any Democratic plan being written in Congress or that will be supported by Obama.

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by Bill Bess

Perhaps the bill should be put on a tape "books on tape" so those Congress Folks could just listen to it while their sitting on the john. They then might realize that they're pushing a very bad thing and acting "Stupidly".

I'm have to admit, I'm enjoying seeing these libs. looking so dishonest, stupid and making all these gaffs. The thing that worries me is when will they get real.

Hell, what do I know....I'm getting older and soon my medical benefits will be phased out due to cost cutting measures by the socialists.


Bill

They just need to look in the john after they've done their "business" and they will see exactly what the bill looks like!

[HI Cobra]

The bill is not about health - it is about government control.

[4RE KLR]

Originally Posted by HI Cobra

The bill is not about health - it is about government control.

Exactly.....

[427sharpe]

Here is a good snapshot from the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB2000...720472842.html

I wonder if the obliging masses will open their eyes before it's too late?

[4RE KLR]

Man that is some scary reading.

I think small business will become a thing of the past.

[cobra de capell]

Originally Posted by 4RE KLR

Man that is some scary reading.

I think small business will become a thing of the past.

Back to your original question......

Conyers Sees No Point in Members Reading 1,000-Page Health Care Bill--Unless They Have 2 Lawyers to Interpret It for Them Monday, July 27, 2009 By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter

(CNSNews.com) - During his speech at a National Press Club luncheon, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Democratic Congressman John Conyers (D-Mich.), questioned the point of lawmakers reading the health care bill.

“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,’” said Conyers.

“What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”


http://www.cnsnews.com/public/conten...x?RsrcID=51610

It's hard to believe that Conyers said this, but he did.

It is malfeasance and a breach of fiduciary duty to not read the bill.

Cuff ‘em, and run ‘em outta the building. Tar and feather ‘em and THROW THE BUMS OUT. The arses think they can spend our trillions - GRRRRRR - and yet they don't have to read and interpret the bills they're passing. That is the height of arrogance and malfeasance. No other profession or industry could stand up to such insanity. Arthur Andersen had it's Enron. Lehman Brothers had its subprime mortgage toxic derivative assets. Napoleon had his Waterloo...

The dim bulbs and bammy, have theirs coming too...arrogance and conceit have their limits.

On the other hand, Geez are we screwed for now.

[bomelia]

I am writing my representative and INSISTING he read the entire bill and report back with major section synopsis.

I hope you will all do the same.

Mike

My email: Congressman Griffith, I am deeply concerned about the "health care reform" bill. Its too expensive. And I do not support (or want) government run health care. I agree there are problems. But socialism is NOT the answer. Before you vote on this bill, I must insist that you read all 2000+ pages of the bill and report back to your constituents what is in the bill and that you KNOW what you are voting on. Every last section of the bill. My guess is you will toe the Obama line and vote for this terrible bill. But I am hoping that real common sense will prevail and that you will do the right thing and vote no. Perhaps your "yes" vote is not needed, like in the "cap & trade" bill. Maybe this will be a bill you can vote no on and look good in your district. But I doubt it. I suspect you will be forced to vote for it. Please send a comprehensive report detailing your reading of the entire bill to us in your district. Mike

[bomelia]

I answered the survey on Parker Griffiths website. 24% want health care reform and 76% do not want it. Wanna guess which way he will vote?

If he can vote no to look good, he will. He got elected in a special election and faces a real run for office next year. But if the vote is close, he will toe the Obama line. Regardless of what his district wants.

Mike

[4RE KLR]

Thanks Mike

I wish everyone in America would send the same letter to their representatives.

Yes, we do need to reform health care. It is a total wreck.
But does anyone want a government worker dictating your medical treatment. I sure as hell don't.

I wish there was a way we could FORCE them to read it "twice" before they signed it.
If they did, they would need medical assistance themselves.





.

[cobra de capell]

Yes, we do need to reform health care. It is a total wreck.

It really isn't a total wreck. It simply needs tweaking - a difficult task, yes but doable as long as those that are doing it don't have their own agenda, one that doesn't serve all Americans.

[cobra bill]

As long as we have to pay for all those that don't have insurance, and using emergency room healthcare, we will have double digit inflation on what we pay, and without a government run option they will always be un-insured, and you will always pay too much of your insurance dollars toward covering them.

[Ron61]

Bill,

without a government run option they will always be un-insured,

I don't entirely agree with that. I have no insurance and I don't want to be forced to pay for what I don't want. You nor anyone else pays for my medical bills. I pay them out of my savings. I don't want the Govt. to start telling me I have to buy this or that and dictating what I can or can't do. I see this whole mess as nothing more than another power grab by the Messiah.

Ron

[cobra de capell]

To solve anything we need to put aside all of the political rhetoric and begin with a real assessment and problem statement.
1) We do not have a health-care problem, we have the best health-care in the world.

2)We do not have an access or availability problem, no one is denied health-care in the US.

3) We have a financial issue with respect to the financial consequences of catastrophic health incidents. This can easily be solved by establishing a catastrophic insurance requirement and letting the private sector compete for the policies much like auto insurance.

[4RE KLR]

OK,
Lets keep this on track.

It seems that everyone agrees our legislators will not read the bill before signing it. At least that seems to be the general consensus.

How can we entice (or harass) them into reading it before they sign it?

I think Mike has a good idea of everyone sending letters (e-mails) to their legislators daily to let them know we want them to read it first.

[Ron61]

Ray,

You are correct, but what I object to is the forcing people to buy any medical insurance. This, catastrophic insurance requirement, would be much like the Bad Risk Automobile Insurance and cost so much that only millionaires could afford it, therefore it should be a persons option to either pay for insurance or not have it. The more the Govt. forces people to buy or do anything the more freedom we lose. This isn't like automobile Insurance where I can chose to not register my car and park it. I guess I am just opposed to the Govt. telling me I have to buy this or that and I have no choice or they will fine me. Just my opinion and I am sure that I am in the minority here, but what about those that really can't afford to pay. If they fine them, then they will be even worse off. And since Obama claims most of the expenses are ran up by Seniors, why not just tweak a few things. Most of them can't afford to pay for anything, let alone what insurance would cost. I am only speaking for myself, but I prefer by far the set up I have and I have a No extraordinary means to revive me and no hooking me to a machine Power Of Attorney that lets a friend of mine have complete power over my medical if I become incapacitated.

Ron

[cobra de capell]

I can see your point, e.g. forcing people to do anything seems like freedom lost.

On the other hand, those that do not have insurance at all are basically gambling with our money - we pay if they lose, we don't pay if they win - seems like a strange bet from our point of view and a good bet from their point of view. Let's face it, it's just like gambling - the odds must be in favor of the house or no gambling would take place - therefore, the house (government) needs to be paid over time - in some way - to offset "patient" bad bets - a simple way to do this with no additional expense would be to increase the payroll deduction relating to Medicare if the potential patient is not covered by insurance, possibly in addition to having patients maintain catastrophic coverage at a minimum.

There are lots of ideas out there, some good and some bad – ObamaCare is full of nothing but bad stuff.

Unfortunately, people have generally become fat and stupid within the last 20 years – electing Obama is clear evidence, but also – obesity has become the norm, diabetes is practically a pandemic in America, millions of Americans can’t even get it up (if you know what I mean – the entire nation is stressed out and millions of baby-boomers are starting to retire bringing to Medicare all kinds of medical issues and problems.

The bottomline is the fat and stupid people need to pay up. There is no free lunch.