bytor2112 Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill Obama signed into law Tuesday.What a putz. Read on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talisyn Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Gap in health care law's protection for children - Yahoo! Newshere's another article, without the witty commentary Late Tuesday, the administration said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius would try to resolve the situation by issuing new regulations. The Obama administration interprets the law to mean that kids can't be denied coverage, as the president has said repeatedly.....Parents whose kids are turned down by an insurer would still have a fallback under the law, even without Sebelius' fix. They could seek coverage through state high-risk insurance pools slated for a major infusion of federal funds.The high-risk pools are intended to serve as a backstop until 2014, when insurers no longer would be able to deny coverage to those in frail healthAccording to this article, Pres. Obama thinks the bill passed doesn't allow insurance companies to deny children. An insurance industry group says the language in the law that pertains to consumer protections for kids is difficult to parse."We're taking a closer look at it to see what exactly the requirement will be," said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, the main industry lobby.The insurance industry might not agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalShadow Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 What a putz. Read on.Shouldn't you be happy about this? I thought that was on your list of 20 reasons our freedom is being taken away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Shouldn't you be happy about this? I thought that was on your list of 20 reasons our freedom is being taken away.Why would I be happy???? Listen my liberal digital friend :)....I am ALL for health care reform. I am just very disgusted by the process and the end result. All Americans should be and we should demand better from our elected representatives....regardless of party affiliation or ideological leanings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalShadow Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Why would I be happy???? Listen my liberal digital friend :)....I am ALL for health care reform. I am just very disgusted by the process and the end result. All Americans should be and we should demand better from our elected representatives....regardless of party affiliation or ideological leanings.I don't particularly agree with the process or result either, but I believe that many people (particularly conservative) are overstating the implications of all this just a bit. I am all for demanding more of our elected representatives regardless of party affiliation or ideological leanings, but forgive my suspicion when it seems mostly conservatives are making this demand and it happens coincidentally when liberals come in to power. If it were conservatives in power that were blundering toward a conservative goal (yes, I admit liberals are blundering right now), I can guarantee you would be much more understanding and much less outraged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 I don't particularly agree with the process or result either, but I believe that many people (particularly conservative) are overstating the implications of all this just a bit. I am all for demanding more of our elected representatives regardless of party affiliation or ideological leanings, but forgive my suspicion when it seems mostly conservatives are making this demand and it happens coincidentally when liberals come in to power. If it were conservatives in power that were blundering toward a conservative goal (yes, I admit liberals are blundering right now), I can guarantee you would be much more understanding and much less outraged.Overstating....how so? And yes, obviously more conservatives than liberals are upset over this.....BUT, the majority of Americans are self described conservatives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalShadow Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Overstating....how so? And yes, obviously more conservatives than liberals are upset over this.....BUT, the majority of Americans are self described conservatives.Overstating by saying things like "20 Ways Obama Care will take away your freedom." I'm not sure what "take away your freedom" means to you, but to me it has more serious implications than simply extra taxes and some regulations on health insurance companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Overstating by saying things like "20 Ways Obama Care will take away your freedom." I'm not sure what "take away your freedom" means to you, but to me it has more serious implications than simply extra taxes and some regulations on health insurance companies.Well, I didn't write the article and only posted it and the title. I agree, "freedom" is a bit over the top. BUt, wouldn't you agree that trusting 219 Congress people with the future of our health care and a large portion of the economic pie is madness? Given the fact that this 2700 page monstrosity hasn't been read by the members, much less the President. Aren't you just the slightest bit miffed at the back room deals and the buy it or else we'll fine you language? Is this the best they could do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalShadow Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 (edited) Well, I didn't write the article and only posted it and the title. I agree, "freedom" is a bit over the top.But the person writing the article didn't think it was over the top and I've experienced much of the same sentiment from my co-workers.BUt, wouldn't you agree that trusting 219 Congress people with the future of our health care and a large portion of the economic pie is madness?Isn't the very purpose of congress to make these kind of decisions though? If we can't trust these representatives elected by the people to make large scale decisions regarding our future, then our entire system of government is fundamentally broken and the founding fathers were wrong. You could make the argument that the current crop are for the most part corrupt and undeserving of their position, but do you really think it would be much different if we threw them all out today and held another election?Given the fact that this 2700 page monstrosity hasn't been read by the members, much less the President. Aren't you just the slightest bit miffed at the back room deals and the buy it or else we'll fine you language? Is this the best they could do?I'm really not sure what to think since as a result of their ideology many people have a vested interest in proving it is either pure evil or the greatest thing ever, it is difficult to get a grasp on the overall impact and cut through the propaganda on both sides. Edited March 25, 2010 by DigitalShadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Isn't the very purpose of congress to make these kind of decisions though? If we can't trust these representatives elected by the people to make large scale decisions regarding our future, then our entire system of government is fundamentally broken and the founding fathers were wrong. You could make the argument that the current crop are for the most part corrupt and undeserving of their position, but do you really think it would be much different if we threw them all out today and held another election?No DS...the very purpose of Congress is to represent the WILL of the people and the Founding Fathers certainly did not want the governmental power to become so centralized and intrusive or so nanny state like. No, I think there is something about the water in DC that changes politicians......but, I do believe that they richly deserve to be tossed out on their a%$'s . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 I'm really not sure what to think since as a result of their ideology many people have a vested interest in proving it is either pure evil or the greatest thing ever, it is difficult to get a grasp on the overall impact and cut through the propaganda on both sides.Might this be the fault of those in charge? Couldn't they have done a better job in selling the plan to the American people? I suspect many Americans in support of reform (like me) thought and hoped for a Canadian or UK type of model. Instead we got something that legislates mandates to purchase health care or pay a fine. It may be cynical to say, but, one could easily see this as a big "tax"..... If it's cheaper to pay a fine than purchase health insurance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 But the person writing the article didn't think it was over the top and I've experience much of the same sentiment from my co-workers.The person writing the article needs to attract readers and as for your co-workers, I can only imagine it's the cumulative effect of high un-employment and weak economy and no real measurable progress there, while hyper focus on yet another spending bill for "health care". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just_A_Guy Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 (edited) Another "oops!" moment:The bill's tanning-salon tax allegedly discriminates against white, middle-class young women. Edited March 25, 2010 by Just_A_Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalShadow Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 No DS...the very purpose of Congress is to represent the WILL of the people and the Founding Fathers certainly did not want the governmental power to become so centralized and intrusive or so nanny state like. No, I think there is something about the water in DC that changes politicians......but, I do believe that they richly deserve to be tossed out on their a%$'s .I believe the point of Congress is more than simply executing the unadulterated will of the people, otherwise why not just replace the whole system with direct voting for issues?Might this be the fault of those in charge? Couldn't they have done a better job in selling the plan to the American people? I suspect many Americans in support of reform (like me) thought and hoped for a Canadian or UK type of model. Instead we got something that legislates mandates to purchase health care or pay a fine. It may be cynical to say, but, one could easily see this as a big "tax"..... If it's cheaper to pay a fine than purchase health insurance.Actually I think it's more a result of the severe ideological polarization in this country. As for the plan itself, I don't like what I've heard, but I also don't have time to read the whole thing.I'm also surprised you were hoping for a Canadian or UK type model of health care. I was under the impression most conservatives consider those "nanny state like." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwen Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 Another "oops!" moment:The bill's tanning-salon tax allegedly discriminates against white, middle-class young women.in the comments on this link someone comments "...the tampon tax. Arguably, this is a tax against only a select number of American citizens." ..... i missed something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADoyle90815 Posted March 25, 2010 Share Posted March 25, 2010 · Hidden Hidden If you're happy with your health insurance, you WILL be able to stay with it. Link to comment
Just_A_Guy Posted March 25, 2010 Report Share Posted March 25, 2010 in the comments on this link someone comments "...the tampon tax. Arguably, this is a tax against only a select number of American citizens." ..... i missed something?See this (partisan) source. It's dated, and I'm not sure whether it refers to the same version of the bill that ultimately passed; but the FDA apparently considers tampons as a Class II medical device. As such, under the bill under consideration in September of 2009, they would be subject to additional taxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 26, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2010 I believe the point of Congress is more than simply executing the unadulterated will of the people, otherwise why not just replace the whole system with direct voting for issues?Umm...House of REPRESENTATIVES...we have a Representative Republic...they are there to represent the will of the people. They are there by the consent of the people.Just to clarify...I am for reform, but not necessarily the Canadian or UK model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talisyn Posted March 26, 2010 Report Share Posted March 26, 2010 Reps are doing the will of the people. Sure, the country leans conservative but not all conservatives are in a big enough block to be the voice of the people, and let's say a 54% conservative lean still makes for a sizable 46% liberal block. Here in Idaho Walt Minnick voted against the bill despite being a dem not because he didn't like health insurance reform but because it was the will of his constituents. I think this bill is flawed, I wish that the 'public option' had been stuck in there somehow. But it's a start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 26, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2010 Reps are doing the will of the people. Sure, the country leans conservative but not all conservatives are in a big enough block to be the voice of the people, and let's say a 54% conservative lean still makes for a sizable 46% liberal block. Here in Idaho Walt Minnick voted against the bill despite being a dem not because he didn't like health insurance reform but because it was the will of his constituents. I think this bill is flawed, I wish that the 'public option' had been stuck in there somehow. But it's a start.Your numbers are make believe..... and a CBS poll shows that 61% of American disapprove of the bill and want the GOP to challenge it....41% Democrats. Your right the bill is flawed...... and likely unconstitutional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.