BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Or "I don't believe in nation building".
MANDATORY health insurance, part 2
- Thread starter Diemen
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Or "I don't believe in nation building".
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Big deal, it was just a campaign promise.
Like "If you like your current insurance you can keep it."
And "If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime."
No biggie.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
When did these two change?
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Let me guess, 58% of Americans are stupid, racist or both.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
I disapprove, but I support what he wants to achieve...
You always forget that demographic.
You always forget that demographic.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Christian Science Monitor
Three ways healthcare reform could pass even if Coakley loses
By Peter Grier Mon Jan 18, 12:25 pm ET
Washington – It’s an extraordinary political situation: The fate of healthcare reform now may be determined by the outcome of Tuesday’s Senate election in Massachusetts.
If Republican Scott Brown beats Democrat Martha Coakley in the special ballot to fill the late Sen. Edward Kennedy’s seat, as now seems possible, the GOP would have 41 Senate votes. That would be enough to block final passage of the House-Senate compromise on healthcare legislation that Democratic lawmakers are now negotiating under President Obama’s oversight.
If this happens, Democrats basically have three options:
1. TALK FASTER. House and Senate Democratic leaders could cobble together a final package at a more rapid pace and push it through both legislative chambers before the new Senator Brown is seated.
Pros: This would enable Democrats to settle their differences in the manner they had originally planned. Liberal House members would get their chance to move the final legislation leftward from the Senate’s more conservative version.
Cons: This method could also make Mr. Obama and other Democratic party leaders look as if they are thwarting the will of the people – specifically, the will of the people of Massachusetts – by acting before the new senator is sworn in. And Republicans might sue. Conservative commentator Fred Barnes, editor of the magazine the Weekly Standard, opined over the weekend that the current placeholder in the Massachusetts Senate seat, Democrat Paul Kirk, will legally lose his ability to vote the moment election returns are final.
2. BYPASS THE SENATE. House-Senate conferees could also simply agree to adopt the Senate’s version of healthcare legislation. The House would have to vote to approve this move, but the Senate would not, since the House would be considering the exact version of a bill Senators have already passed.
Pros: By bypassing another Senate vote, Democrats would avoid a scenario in which a new Senator Brown helps filibuster healthcare reform into oblivion. Plus, the White House prefers the Senate version of the legislation, anyway.
Cons: This could be described as another thwarting-the-people move – and one that looks a bit trickier than the “Talk Faster” option. Also, House members would be very unhappy about having to swallow the Senate bill, and could even vote the whole thing down.
3. RECONCILIATION. Obama and Democratic leaders could also junk months of work and start over with a stripped-down version of healthcare reform. Using "reconciliation" – a Senate maneuver designed for passing crucial budget items without a filibuster – a narrow, more budget-focused approach might need only 50 votes to get through the Senate.
Pros: Democratic leaders might look like they were heeding the will of the people. Lots of nervous moderate Democrats would prefer a less-ambitious healthcare bill, anyway.
Cons: The “reconciliation” approach is extremely controversial and complicated. It involves breaking the healthcare bill into many pieces and proving that each would trim the deficit. Using reconciliation on non-budget bills has been called the "nuclear option" because of the ill-will and partisanship it generates in the Senate. It would be subject to GOP attack at every turn. Moreover, President Obama would find it difficult to sell the result as the sort of healthcare reform worthy of being the defining domestic achievement of his first years in office.
None of these options are particularly good ones, notes one veteran Washington political expert.
“They’re too artificial,” says Stephen Hess, a political analyst at the Brookings Institution in Washington.
Democratic leaders should not manipulate the legislative process to get healthcare reform through, according to Mr. Hess. He suggests another option: if the Massachusetts seat does go to the Republicans, the Obama administration should redouble efforts to try and get Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) of Maine to vote for the finished healthcare effort.
Three ways healthcare reform could pass even if Coakley loses
By Peter Grier Mon Jan 18, 12:25 pm ET
Washington – It’s an extraordinary political situation: The fate of healthcare reform now may be determined by the outcome of Tuesday’s Senate election in Massachusetts.
If Republican Scott Brown beats Democrat Martha Coakley in the special ballot to fill the late Sen. Edward Kennedy’s seat, as now seems possible, the GOP would have 41 Senate votes. That would be enough to block final passage of the House-Senate compromise on healthcare legislation that Democratic lawmakers are now negotiating under President Obama’s oversight.
If this happens, Democrats basically have three options:
1. TALK FASTER. House and Senate Democratic leaders could cobble together a final package at a more rapid pace and push it through both legislative chambers before the new Senator Brown is seated.
Pros: This would enable Democrats to settle their differences in the manner they had originally planned. Liberal House members would get their chance to move the final legislation leftward from the Senate’s more conservative version.
Cons: This method could also make Mr. Obama and other Democratic party leaders look as if they are thwarting the will of the people – specifically, the will of the people of Massachusetts – by acting before the new senator is sworn in. And Republicans might sue. Conservative commentator Fred Barnes, editor of the magazine the Weekly Standard, opined over the weekend that the current placeholder in the Massachusetts Senate seat, Democrat Paul Kirk, will legally lose his ability to vote the moment election returns are final.
2. BYPASS THE SENATE. House-Senate conferees could also simply agree to adopt the Senate’s version of healthcare legislation. The House would have to vote to approve this move, but the Senate would not, since the House would be considering the exact version of a bill Senators have already passed.
Pros: By bypassing another Senate vote, Democrats would avoid a scenario in which a new Senator Brown helps filibuster healthcare reform into oblivion. Plus, the White House prefers the Senate version of the legislation, anyway.
Cons: This could be described as another thwarting-the-people move – and one that looks a bit trickier than the “Talk Faster” option. Also, House members would be very unhappy about having to swallow the Senate bill, and could even vote the whole thing down.
3. RECONCILIATION. Obama and Democratic leaders could also junk months of work and start over with a stripped-down version of healthcare reform. Using "reconciliation" – a Senate maneuver designed for passing crucial budget items without a filibuster – a narrow, more budget-focused approach might need only 50 votes to get through the Senate.
Pros: Democratic leaders might look like they were heeding the will of the people. Lots of nervous moderate Democrats would prefer a less-ambitious healthcare bill, anyway.
Cons: The “reconciliation” approach is extremely controversial and complicated. It involves breaking the healthcare bill into many pieces and proving that each would trim the deficit. Using reconciliation on non-budget bills has been called the "nuclear option" because of the ill-will and partisanship it generates in the Senate. It would be subject to GOP attack at every turn. Moreover, President Obama would find it difficult to sell the result as the sort of healthcare reform worthy of being the defining domestic achievement of his first years in office.
None of these options are particularly good ones, notes one veteran Washington political expert.
“They’re too artificial,” says Stephen Hess, a political analyst at the Brookings Institution in Washington.
Democratic leaders should not manipulate the legislative process to get healthcare reform through, according to Mr. Hess. He suggests another option: if the Massachusetts seat does go to the Republicans, the Obama administration should redouble efforts to try and get Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) of Maine to vote for the finished healthcare effort.
indra
ONE love, blood, life
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 12,689
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Very similar stories, could have been prevented if certain idiots hadn't gotten in the way and lives would have been saved if the disaster were avoided.
Very insightful.
Very insightful.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is asking the largest for-profit health insurer in California to "provide a detailed justification" for expected rate increases that could hike its consumers' premiums as much as 39 percent.
In a letter to Leslie Margolin, president of Anthem Blue Cross, Sebelius struck a harsh tone about the expected rate hike, which was reported this past weekend by the California press. Calling the expected 39-percent rate increases "extraordinary" and noting that they were "up to 15 times faster than inflation," the HHS Secretary asked for a detailed synopsis of how much of that money would go to medical care versus administrative costs.
"Your company's strong financial position makes these rate increases even more difficult to understand. As you know, your parent company, WellPoint Incorporated, has seen its profits soar, earning $2.7 billion in the last quarter of 2009 alone," Sebelius wrote.
"I believe Anthem Blue Cross has a responsibility to provide a detailed justification for these rate increases to the public," she added. "Policy holders in the individual market deserve to know if their premium increases would be invested in better medical care or insurance company overhead costs like salaries, profits, and advertising."
An official with HHS said that, as of early Monday afternoon, no response has yet been received. Sebelius did mention the reported rate hike during a speech before the Health Affair's National Health Policy Conference on Monday.
On Friday, the Los Angeles Times reported that many of Anthem's "approximately 800,000 customers who buy individual coverage" could see the price of their plans go up starting on March 1 -- some by as much as 39 percent. People with group coverage aren't affected.
February 8, 2010
Leslie Margolin
President, Anthem Blue Cross
Delivered Via Fax
Dear Ms. Margolin,
One of the biggest pressures facing families, businesses and governments at every level are skyrocketing health insurance costs. With so many families already affected by rising costs, I was very disturbed to learn through media accounts that Anthem Blue Cross plans to raise premiums for its California customers by as much as 39 percent. These extraordinary increases are up to 15 times faster than inflation and threaten to make health care unaffordable for hundreds of thousands of Californians, many of whom are already struggling to make ends meet in a difficult economy.
Your company's strong financial position makes these rate increases even more difficult to understand. As you know, your parent company, WellPoint Incorporated, has seen its profits soar, earning $2.7 billion in the last quarter of 2009 alone.
I believe Anthem Blue Cross has a responsibility to provide a detailed justification for these rate increases to the public. Additionally, you should make public information on the percent of your individual market premiums that is used for medical care versus the percent that is used for administrative costs. Policy holders in the individual market deserve to know if their premium increases would be invested in better medical care or insurance company overhead costs like salaries, profits, and advertising. I am aware that the State of California is investigating this matter, and urge Anthem Blue Cross to cooperate fully. In the meantime, I will be closely monitoring the situation.
At a time when health care costs are a critical threat to families as well as the nation's economy, I hope you appreciate the urgent nature of this request. I look forward to your prompt reply.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Sebelius
Secretary of Health and Human Services
In a letter to Leslie Margolin, president of Anthem Blue Cross, Sebelius struck a harsh tone about the expected rate hike, which was reported this past weekend by the California press. Calling the expected 39-percent rate increases "extraordinary" and noting that they were "up to 15 times faster than inflation," the HHS Secretary asked for a detailed synopsis of how much of that money would go to medical care versus administrative costs.
"Your company's strong financial position makes these rate increases even more difficult to understand. As you know, your parent company, WellPoint Incorporated, has seen its profits soar, earning $2.7 billion in the last quarter of 2009 alone," Sebelius wrote.
"I believe Anthem Blue Cross has a responsibility to provide a detailed justification for these rate increases to the public," she added. "Policy holders in the individual market deserve to know if their premium increases would be invested in better medical care or insurance company overhead costs like salaries, profits, and advertising."
An official with HHS said that, as of early Monday afternoon, no response has yet been received. Sebelius did mention the reported rate hike during a speech before the Health Affair's National Health Policy Conference on Monday.
On Friday, the Los Angeles Times reported that many of Anthem's "approximately 800,000 customers who buy individual coverage" could see the price of their plans go up starting on March 1 -- some by as much as 39 percent. People with group coverage aren't affected.
February 8, 2010
Leslie Margolin
President, Anthem Blue Cross
Delivered Via Fax
Dear Ms. Margolin,
One of the biggest pressures facing families, businesses and governments at every level are skyrocketing health insurance costs. With so many families already affected by rising costs, I was very disturbed to learn through media accounts that Anthem Blue Cross plans to raise premiums for its California customers by as much as 39 percent. These extraordinary increases are up to 15 times faster than inflation and threaten to make health care unaffordable for hundreds of thousands of Californians, many of whom are already struggling to make ends meet in a difficult economy.
Your company's strong financial position makes these rate increases even more difficult to understand. As you know, your parent company, WellPoint Incorporated, has seen its profits soar, earning $2.7 billion in the last quarter of 2009 alone.
I believe Anthem Blue Cross has a responsibility to provide a detailed justification for these rate increases to the public. Additionally, you should make public information on the percent of your individual market premiums that is used for medical care versus the percent that is used for administrative costs. Policy holders in the individual market deserve to know if their premium increases would be invested in better medical care or insurance company overhead costs like salaries, profits, and advertising. I am aware that the State of California is investigating this matter, and urge Anthem Blue Cross to cooperate fully. In the meantime, I will be closely monitoring the situation.
At a time when health care costs are a critical threat to families as well as the nation's economy, I hope you appreciate the urgent nature of this request. I look forward to your prompt reply.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Sebelius
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
good for her. though this should've started being done ages ago. and really should be done for lots of things. hell, how many years have gas companies reported insane profits yet had to insanely raise the price of gas? but that's neither here nor there.
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
That 45,000 actually comes from the Left-wing group Physicians for a National Health Program. Strong advocates for single-payer health care. It's phoney. How could one really measure such a metric?
I work with indigent patients everyday. I know there's a problem, but using the logic of this ad, since 2,410,000 people in the United States WITH health insurance die every year.... You are 54 times MORE LIKELY to die WITH health insurance than without. Aren't statistics fun?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Then why don't you want reform?
I've seen you defend our current system...
Advocate saving accounts...
And then talk around everything else...
None of which would solve or even come close to helping that problem you now claim you know of...
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Bluer White
New Yorker
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Meanwhile so many Americans are still without health insurance.
There doesn't appear to be any love lost between the two candidates who faced off for the presidency in 2008.
Taking his turn to speak at this morning's historic bipartisan summit on health care reform, Sen. John McCain launched into a spirited attack on President Obama and the Democrats in Congress. He cited "unsavory" deals made by Democratic leadership in the Senate, argued that Obama had broken his promise to have previous health care negotiations live on C-Span and called on President Obama to "start over."
President Obama didn't take kindly to McCain's attack, saying bluntly to McCain "We're not campaigning anymore. The election is over."
Chuckling, McCain responded "I'm reminded of that every day."
There doesn't appear to be any love lost between the two candidates who faced off for the presidency in 2008.
Taking his turn to speak at this morning's historic bipartisan summit on health care reform, Sen. John McCain launched into a spirited attack on President Obama and the Democrats in Congress. He cited "unsavory" deals made by Democratic leadership in the Senate, argued that Obama had broken his promise to have previous health care negotiations live on C-Span and called on President Obama to "start over."
President Obama didn't take kindly to McCain's attack, saying bluntly to McCain "We're not campaigning anymore. The election is over."
Chuckling, McCain responded "I'm reminded of that every day."
solemole
War Child
Actually, what you've done [...] is bring the right together with the far right. And I don't think Americans are tired of partisan politics; I think they're tired of hearing career politicians diss partisan politics to get a gig. I've tried it before. They ain't buying it. That's okay, though; that's okay, though, 'cause partisan politics is good. Partisan politics is what the Founders had in mind. It guarantees that the minority opinion is heard, and as a lifelong possessor of minority opinions, I appreciate it.
~Pres. Bartlett
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
apparently, you care about the 30-40m people who don't have health insurance, or you don't.
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Yes, because the Republicans don't want ANY health care reform of any kind.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Do they? I haven't found one that does... Can you show me?
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Im pretty sure were all aware the Republicans have shown the Democrats proposals of their own, all of which Obama has pretty much rejected...
Personally, I believe the biggest issue to health care reform is barring health care providers from being able to raise costs or deny someone health insurance because of preexisting conditions. I do not know if the Republicans proposals address this, but thats how I feel.
Personally, I believe the biggest issue to health care reform is barring health care providers from being able to raise costs or deny someone health insurance because of preexisting conditions. I do not know if the Republicans proposals address this, but thats how I feel.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
And did you read their proposals? They were weak attempts that didn't reform anything, they suggested across state insurance but that doesn't work without federal mandates which they don't want, they talk about tort reform which doesn't need to be part of healthcare it needs to be a seperate issue, etc... Their "reforms" were nothing but... They were jokes. Political grandstanding just so they don't look like the party of no.
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Haha I just read that on some article. That actually may be true, but a lot of the current bill goes against Conservative Republican values which Obama doesn't want to take out, so of course they're not going to vote for the bill if they don't want to sound like hypocrites...most of the bill could work with Republicans, was it Eric Cantor that said Republicans agree on about 80% of the democrats bill?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
"Conservative Republican Values"? What does that even mean, and what part of providing health care for all does that clash with?
If it's true that they agree with 80% then something should be happening soon, but I somehow doubt it.
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Basically the government stays out of the private sector as much as it can. I won't go so far to say that this bill is a government takeover of health care like all the conservative pundits do, but it is more government intrusion than I feel comfortable with. HOWEVER, if the democrats would be more willing to compromise with the Republicans on the key issues the two sides have with each other, I would be willing to compromise some of my values for the greater good. Unfortunately, I'm not a senator
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Do you believe life and health should be left up to the "private sector"? In otherwords do you believe your mother's future should be determined by profits?
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Thats generally how capitalism works.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
So you believe capitalism should rule every aspect of your life? I want you to really think about that...
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Thats a pretty sweeping observation you made..I already said that I am open to some of the ideas of the Democrats that the Republicans are opposing. Although I don't really know much about the health bill at all, nor does pretty much anyone here. All anyone hears about are the 30 second sound bites on the news.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
