President Barack Obama walking through the Colonnade of the White House to the Rose Garden to comment on a long-awaited health-care vote today. (Photo by Mandel Ngan / AFP / Getty Images.)
by James Oliphant and updated at 5:15 pm EDT
Legislation that would transform the nation's healthcare system cleared a significant hurdle today, as the Senate Finance Committee voted 14-9 for a sweeping overhaul.
Just one Republican, Sen. Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, voted for the bill. But that represented a victory for the White House, which had heavily courted Snowe, and it allowed overhaul advocates to claim that there was a vestige of GOP support for the measure.
"Is this bill all that I would want? Far from it," Snowe said in announcing her vote. "But when history calls, history calls."
The bill would require Americans to have health insurance, provide federal subsidies to help low-income workers buy insurance, establish new insurance marketplaces, regulate health insurer practices, and expand Medicaid. The plan as drafted is estimated to cost $829 billion over the next 10 years.
Some cast the vote in landmark terms.
"This is our opportunity to make history," said Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.). "Now is the time to get this done."
The long-anticipated committee vote sets the legislation up for debate on the Senate floor. But first its terms must be reconciled with those of a bill passed by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee this summer.
"This bill is not perfect, and we have significant work ahead of us,'' President Barack Obama said in a statement delivered in the Rose Garden of the White House this evening. "But I do believe the work of the Senate Finance Committee has brought us significantly closer to achieving the core objectives I laid out in September.''
The bill will cover more of the uninsured and improve coverage for those who have it, he said, "and it will not add a penny to the deficit.''
Obama also made a point of praising Snowe in particular for her political "courage'' and seriousness of purpose.
"We are now closer than ever before to passing health-care reform,'' the president said. "But we are not there yet. Now is not the time to pat ourselves on the back.... Now is the time to dig in even harder and get the work done.''
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), will work behind the scenes with help from the White House to craft a compromise in the coming days. Because the Finance bill explicitly sets forth how the bill would pay for the cost of covering uninsured Americans as well as set penalties for the failure to have insurance, its terms are expected to comprise the bulk of the bill that ultimately is debated on the floor.
Floor debate could begin before the end of the month.
Despite the committee' s approval, key provisions of the legislation remain to be resolved, including whether the bill ultimately will include some form of a government-run health insurer, the so-called "public option." Some senators favor a provision that would allow states to exempt themselves from providing a government option to consumers--a bid to sway moderates who otherwise might oppose a mandatory plan.
It's unclear whether Reid will include any sort of a public option in the bill during the merger process or instead invite an amendment during the Senate floor debate.
Also, there remains some significant disagreement about whether to pay for the expansion of healthcare coverage to millions of uninsured Americans with an excise tax on high-end insurance plans--as well as the threshold at which that tax would take effect.
Furthermore, the insurance industry has objected strenuously to the Finance Committee's loosening of the requirement in the bill that all Americans to purchase health insurance. The committee approved an amendment that weakened the penalties for failing to buy a plan.
Still, the Finance Committee's endorsement was undeniably a signature moment in a healthcare debate that has consumed Capitol Hill for much of the year. The vote was the culmination of months of work by Baucus and members of the committee. Prior to the vote, the committee met for eight contentious days and considered 135 amendments to the bill.
Up until the vote, the support of some Democrats such as Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) remained in doubt. All eyes, however, were on Snowe, whose imprimatur was deemed critical for Baucus and the White House to claim that there was some vestige of bipartisan support for the effort and to help create a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate to ward off a potential Republican filibuster.
The Maine moderate remained cagey about her vote until today's meeting, as many believed she would withhold her approval to ensure she would maintain a role as the final bill is written. In remarks prior to the vote, she made clear that her support going forward hinges on maintaining the bill's $829 billion price tag.
"My vote today is my vote today," Snowe said. "It doesn't forecast what my vote will be tomorrow."
Congressional Democrats have strived to keep the cost of the bill beneath $900 billion. The Finance bill does that, and the Congressional Budget Office has estimated it would shave the federal deficit by $81 billion over the next decade, as well.
Before a packed committee room this morning, senators on the committee alternately praised and criticized the bill prior to the vote, with Republicans arguing that the bill would result in higher premiums for Americans and higher taxes for businesses.
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa.), the senior Republican on the committee, complained that Democratic leaders in the Senate scuttled a series of bipartisan talks between the so-called Gang of Six that occurred over the summer. He charged the bill had "moved leftward" as a result.
"Today, we see the fears that we had were legitimate and justified," Grassley said. "I still hold out hope the doorway to bi-partisanship will be opened once again."
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), too, slammed the process, saying that the ultimate bill would be written by Reid without GOP input. "It almost seems like hundreds of hours of debate were all for naught," Hatch said. "The real bill is currently being written behind closed doors."
Many Democrats addressed a report released Monday by an insurance industry trade group, that claimed that the bill would cause premiums for many Americans to skyrocket. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) attempted to debunk the report and suggested that the report would fuel momentum for a public option as a means to make the insurance market more competitive. "It's a powerful argument, frankly, of why we should have a public plan," Kerry said.
As it stands, the bill would result in 94 percent of Americans having insurance, Baucus said, with 23 million taking advantage of new insurance exchanges that would be created by the bill and 14 million added to Medicaid rolls. The bill would subsidize the cost of insurance for Americans who earn incomes just above the federal poverty level. It would also prohibit insurance companies from denying or rating coverage based on preexisting medical conditions.
Some Democrats have expressed reservations about the bill, even as they voted for it. Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), a moderate up for reelection next year, said her support for the bill today did not mean she would vote for it on the Senate floor. She said her constituents remained concerned about the legislation.
"Americans out there are frightened," Lincoln said. "They're alarmed about big bills that are difficult to understand."
Wyden continued to insist the bill did too little to ensure that middle-class Americans would be able to afford health insurance. He predicted that in its current form, many working families would choose to be exempted from the mandatory insurance requirement because they will not be able to afford a suitable plan.
"People want coverage. People want coverage to be affordable," Wyden said. "We've got a lot more work to do with respect to affordability."
Comments
"set penalties for the failure to have insurance" The government will be forcing Americans to do something, rather than give us a choice.
Posted by: D. Stevens | October 13, 2009 3:05 PM
Snowe job.
Repubs can sit out the state of the union address in January. Since they aren't part of the "Change" wrought by Obama's Democrats.
Posted by: Anne | October 13, 2009 3:10 PM
Any plan without any meaningful tort reform will do little if anything to retard the growth in health care costs. They will continue to skyrocket with the costs subsidized by the Federal government further leading us towards bankruptcy. A problem Obama and the Democrats appear not to worry about as they continue to add trillions to the national debt. So much for being fiscally responsible.
Posted by: Dave | October 13, 2009 3:15 PM
"set penalties for the failure to have insurance" The government will be forcing Americans to do something, rather than give us a choice.
Posted by: D. Stevens | October 13, 2009 3:05 PM
*********************************
.
Teresa, if you think that's going to be in the final bill then I've got a bridge to no where that Sarah Palin would like to sell you.
Try again....
Posted by: Bobbie Mobbie | October 13, 2009 3:16 PM
D. Stevens, is that choice not to have insurance so that those of us with insurance have to support the irresponsible?
Posted by: Ryn8tor | October 13, 2009 3:21 PM
Well, the dems got their token republican. She hasn't been a republican in quite some time though.
Posted by: jfr | October 13, 2009 3:22 PM
Mid-season trade: Max Bacchus and a blue-dog to be named later for Olympia Snowe. It's already de facto. Might as well make it de jure.
Posted by: JON WINDY | October 13, 2009 3:23 PM
So there really is such a thing as this "moderate Republican" species that I've been told about. Very interesting...
Posted by: Kathy | October 13, 2009 3:26 PM
So D. Stevens, what do you suggest? We all wind up paying MORE for you and goodness knows countless others when you will, no doubt, have to go to the emergency room for one reason or another? There will simply be no excuse for not having health insurance after a form of this bill passes, hopefully with a public option! You and people like you who would rather pay a penalty for not having coverage than a premium to have coverage, are basically just dumb. Why would you cost everyone else so much money? Makes no sense, which is actually typical for right-wing conservatives.
Posted by: Sharon | October 13, 2009 3:28 PM
Finally. Why do these Republicans, especially the great antediluvian Charles Grassley, not get it that we have to fix this to survive fiscally? Are Republicans that much in service to the big money special interest groups that got us into this recession in the first place? Do Republicans EVER put country ahead of special interests? Kudos to Olympia Snowe for being a REAL American who gets it. A pox on Republicans! And no health care for them!
As to D. Stevens "no choice for Americans": what, are you mental? You think we lead unregulated lives now? Do you honestly think most Americans would choose not to be covered by health care? I am here to tell you that they would - especially those who either have no coverage or who have been forced off by greedy companies who only see the bottom line. Wise up.
Posted by: George Watson | October 13, 2009 3:28 PM
The Repugs are shooting themselves in the foot....again. And that might also force Snowe to go Democratic ala Specter.
No mattter what happens, the GOP will utterly lose the Pacific Northwest, and a lot of remaining moderates and independents still clinging to the hope of a sane GOP will leave them too.
Posted by: HK Votto | October 13, 2009 3:31 PM
That is part of why Republican numbers keep going down in Congress. They have for years been forcing moderates to minor committees without chairmanships and with no perks if they are even pro-choice. They will punish Snowe, they already have been for years. There are already dozens and dozens of Republican legislators who have quit rather than be subjected to this radical moronic behavior. She either quits or she gets re-elected. She decides. Nothing we can do. If this gets it to the floor, so be it. She is right, this is only a beginning, the end is much more difficult.
Posted by: Gillian M | October 13, 2009 3:35 PM
Much as I feel like the health insurance companies rape the public in general to maintain their Wall Street profitability, there should be at least several different grades (Say A to F) depending on health conditions. A 300 pound diabetic who smokes and has heart disease SHOULD pay more than a healthy 21 year old for insurance. There should be REAL penalties for not having health insurance just like there are if you drive without insurance.
As for Republican complaints that they don't have a good enough seat at the table...that's what elections are for and you guys rightfully lost. Sorry.
Posted by: andy | October 13, 2009 3:41 PM
"set penalties for the failure to have insurance" The government will be forcing Americans to do something, rather than give us a choice.
Posted by: D. Stevens | October 13, 2009 3:05 PM
Ok D. Stevens, are you really that stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God I am so sick of explaining to you people how this works. First of all you WILL have all the choices you have now plus the government option!! What part of this dont you understand and translates to you that you dont have a choice??? What this prevents is you from chosing NOT to have ANY health insurance so I DONT have to pay for YOU! GET IT??????
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | October 13, 2009 3:46 PM
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) attempted to debunk the report and suggested that the report would fuel momentum for a public option as a means to make the insurance market more competitive. "It's a powerful argument, frankly, of why we should have a public plan," Kerry said.
Frankly John, you can't "debunk" the report and claim it is a powerful argument. You and your cronies forced companies to accept pre-existing conditions and at the same time removed penalties for waiting until one is sick to get coverage. I know you believe capitalism is the root of all evil, better to marry into money, but until you can provide an alternative that works, just stick to denouncing baby killing Vietnam vets.
Posted by: Hans | October 13, 2009 3:48 PM
This bill will bankrupt this country. Its cost is vastly underestimated and will be run by the same folks that gave us Amtrak, Freddie and Fannie, the Post Office and the Internal Revenue Service.
Posted by: Den C | October 13, 2009 3:56 PM
Senator Snowe demonstrates that in order to support ObamaCare, it helps to hear mysterious voices in your head.
"Is this bill all that I want? Far from it. Is it all that it can be? Far from it. But when history calls, history calls."
Seantor Snowe, next time history calls, just take a message.
Posted by: Bruce | October 13, 2009 3:57 PM
Glad to see progress is being made. The Government is only requiring that people have health insurance -- not whom to have it with. The choice is still there. Besides, all state governments require every driver to have car insurance or face penalties. Likewise, they don't tell you whom to have it with. It's basically the same premise. The individual's right to choose is still there.
Posted by: K. Clark | October 13, 2009 3:57 PM
This is NOT to be celebrated. Yes, it's out of the committee. But we have zero reason to trust Snowe and she could have cut so many backroom deals on this vote. Who knows.
If Snowe really cared, maybe she wouldn't ally herself with a Repug Party that uses racism as a de facto part of their platform and hangs out with birthers and deathers.
Snowe voted "no" on the good amendments.
If she were so brave, she'd have voted yes to those and not this watered down piece of crap.
Posted by: Kendra Kline | October 13, 2009 3:59 PM
The more Democrats cater to Snowe or any other Republican, the more likely it is that the final bill actually WILL be a screw job on those Americans already hardest hit by the health care crisis.
Posted by: ThanksButNoThanks | October 13, 2009 4:04 PM
Yes, history calls! Let the distortions begin anew. "The government will be taking away your choice." -- As if most people really have any.
Posted by: dmc | October 13, 2009 4:04 PM
******************************
Frankly John, you can't "debunk" the report and claim it is a powerful argument. You and your cronies forced companies to accept pre-existing conditions and at the same time removed penalties for waiting until one is sick to get coverage. I know you believe capitalism is the root of all evil, better to marry into money, but until you can provide an alternative that works, just stick to denouncing baby killing Vietnam vets.
Posted by: Hans | October 13, 2009 3:48 PM
**********************************
.
No, actually he can, you moron.
That report was put out by the insurance industry THEMSELVES and it does nothing but make the case FOR a public option. Ruh-roh!
.
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/10/health-care-experts-release-statement-on-misleading-ahip-report.php
.
Posted by: Bobbie Mobbie | October 13, 2009 4:14 PM
The above article quotes 6 ObamaCare supporters a total of 112 words, but only 2 ObamaCare opponents a total of 51 words.
6 to 2. 112 to 51.
No wonder it is widely believed The Swamp is an arm of the White House.
Posted by: Bruce | October 13, 2009 4:15 PM
Repubs can sit out the state of the union address in January. Since they aren't part of the "Change" wrought by Obama's Democrats.
Posted by: Anne | October 13, 2009 3:10 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.
Yes, and 3/4's of America and the rest of the World would be grateful if they did.
Posted by: K | October 13, 2009 4:17 PM
Fantastic! Just learned that people earning less than $200K will be responsible for 87% of the revenue for "heath care reform". What happened (Obama) to your rhetoric that only the earners making $250K or more would be taxed? The 250K and up will be paying less than the 100K and below. You LIE!
Posted by: JAC | October 13, 2009 4:18 PM
My wife is an organ doner recipient thanks to the wonderful advancements in medical technology. To think that she could die because we cannot afford the anti-rejection drugs or the premiums charged by our "insurance provider" is an ironic commentary on American public health care and the profit driven health insurance system. Anyone want to start a not-for-much profit insurance company?
Posted by: Kevin Rice | October 13, 2009 4:18 PM
The Government is only requiring that people have health insurance -- not whom to have it with. The choice is still there.
OK, so why not just make that a requirement now, without all the other hoopla? If someone does not have money for insurance today, how are they going to have the money for it tomorrow? If they opt not to buy the coverage they can't afford, they are penalized. They would have to pay for 'government coverage', for which they supposedly don't have the funds.
Great plan. Then again, idiots abound who think this is a good thing.
Posted by: Don | October 13, 2009 4:19 PM
the bill will require all americans to have health insurance. What about the illegal immigrants? Who will pay the cost. Will it be like the auto insurance, where they usually end up driving without any.
Posted by: GP | October 13, 2009 4:19 PM
This bill will bankrupt this country. Its cost is vastly underestimated and will be run by the same folks that gave us Amtrak, Freddie and Fannie, the Post Office and the Internal Revenue Service.
Posted by: Den C | October 13, 2009 3:56 PM
*******************************
.
Yes, because as every good little Repug minion knows - the only way to run government is to start wars and give tax cuts to rich people.....NOT!
Posted by: Lana | October 13, 2009 4:20 PM
"Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), a moderate up for reelection next year, said ....her constituents remained concerned about the legislation.
"Americans out there are frightened," Lincoln said. "They're alarmed about big bills that are difficult to understand."
Was she referring to the hospital bills? or current insurance premiums and/or denials of payment? Time to educate your constituents, Senator.
Posted by: DaveK | October 13, 2009 4:32 PM
im confused, maybe someone can help me out. the senate finance committee that voted on this got it approved? wheres the senate? im not trying to start an argument, im just actually confused.
Posted by: kev | October 13, 2009 4:34 PM
That's OK, this will get repealed by 2013 or 2017 at the latest. No more unfunded mandates, the root cause of any economic difficulty.
Posted by: Reality | October 13, 2009 4:38 PM
The above article quotes 6 ObamaCare supporters a total of 112 words, but only 2 ObamaCare opponents a total of 51 words.6 to 2. 112 to 51.No wonder it is widely believed The Swamp is an arm of th
Posted by: Bruce | October 13, 2009 4:15 PM
**************
.
RNC Brucey,
Is there a quota as to how many times a day that you cry about how doughy Repug white guys like yourself are supposedly being wronged in some way?
Posted by: Gus | October 13, 2009 4:39 PM
Good Lord. Reason has become so debased in this country over the course of the George W. Bush years that whatever any Republican, conservative, neo-con or simple-minded miscreant like Rush Limbaugh thinks becomes real. According to "Den C.," "this bill will bankrupt the country." No, "Den. C.," not doing anything will bankrupt the country. Letting insurance companies continue to have their merry ways will not harm people who actually need care, it will bankrupt the country. Letting the greedy whose only interest is making money and reducing people to actuarial numbers is what will destroy the country. Just because you and your emotions contrive something doesn't make it real. Seek the facts and avoid emotions. (BTW a mantra repeated time and time again by the conservative joey clown Savage.)
Posted by: George Watson | October 13, 2009 4:42 PM
Democrats promised to stimulate the Economy and create Jobs. How else do you provide Healthcare with the Economy and Jobs on the same plate? You mandate that everyone buy private insurance or pay a fee. Be a good Democrat. Can you not see they are giving you a choice? They're being nice about it too. Why would you rather pay the fee when you can get services for your fee? See, all better now. Don't worry your pretty little head about whether or not you want to be forced to pay. We're all on page two, the fee or the other fee. Don't you get it? This is about life and death. Health reform is intrinsic to prolonging your life. Today we will insure your life with health reform, and tomorrow we will insure your death with life insurance reform. You don't want to leave your loved ones empty handed. The government and every Uncle CEO is counting on you.
Posted by: Teresa | October 13, 2009 4:48 PM
What a joke! The elected officials pay absolutely NO attention to what the people they represent say. They have been telling them all summer the do NOT want changes in health care. The best area to change is torte reform but that would hurt them, so they ignore it. Snowe is really a Democrat that was elected as a Republican.
Posted by: nancy | October 13, 2009 4:48 PM
I already pay extra in my car insurance for "uninsured drivers." Guess my Medicare and Medicare supplemental insurances will go up to help pay for "uninsured sick people."
Posted by: Pooch | October 13, 2009 5:02 PM
Republican Congressman who oppose universal health insurance should immediately relinquish their federal health insurance. After all, these members of Congress have long enjoyed taxpayer-subsidized health insurance, a privilege that they apparently believe tens of millions of working, uninsured Americans and their families don't deserve.
If Republicans don't think being uninsured is a big deal, then they should go right ahead and try it out. And if they really believe a public plan is such a bad option, maybe they can persuade their parents to give up Medicare too.
Posted by: Republicans hate blue collar workers | October 13, 2009 5:04 PM
101,000 Americans die UNNECESSARILY each year because of lack of access to basic medical care that they would get in most other industrialized nations.
.
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2008/Jan/Measuring-the-Health-of-Nations--Updating-an-Earlier-Analysis.aspx
I keep asking my "Canada bashing" kool-aid drinking Wingnut friends to find me just ONE comprehensive poll in Canada showing that Canadians would swap their health care system, warts and all, for ours...Haven't seen any yet.
And believe me, if there were any polls favorable to the Republican cause of denying healthcare to everyone, the Republican minions would be linking to them all day long. Instead, all they have is a handfull of anecdotes that they get from Druggy Rush and that clown Glenn Beck etc.
Posted by: J. Carlson | October 13, 2009 5:06 PM
Just another clash of the clunkers. These morons are a bunch of morons
Posted by: morton mike | October 13, 2009 5:09 PM
I agree with the republican plan for healthcare......let insurers go across state lines to screw patients in all the states they can. Make bandaids cheaper along with free asprin.
Posted by: bill r. | October 13, 2009 5:09 PM
Hey Scot S. Blakeley - you have no clue what the hell you spew out of your mouth. I have been laid off from my job I make 1400 per month on un-employment. My mortgage is 1000.00 per month. you do the friggn math knuckle head. where is the money going to come from? If our stupd govt was smart I would be allowed to make upto 70% of my income including unemployment so I could afford the heath insurance too.
Posted by: James | October 13, 2009 5:17 PM
The senate bill is a farce.
It relies heavily on new taxes to finance the plans, and there's no accounting for shortfalls if the new revenue doesn't materialize.
What if $201 billion in new levies on health insurance companies with high-end health insurance plans doesn't materialize when the companies eliminate those plans to avoid the tax?
What if $180 billion in new taxes on medical devices and drugs stops because these companies stop R&D to avoid the tax?
What if $25 billion in new taxes on employers doesn't materialize as employers restructure to avoid the tax?
The only people who won't be able to avoid the taxes when these companies avoid doing the things to pay it, are the taxpayers! You and I are going to be screwed! That $83 billion in new income taxes on individuals, is only going to go up!
So much for the BO promise not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250K.....
Read the Senate Bill and start the revolt!
Posted by: joe | October 13, 2009 5:20 PM
I and many others on Medicare are going to get screwed by this new program. They are going to take away the arrangement we have the AARP/United HeathCare. If they were doing this and working on alternatives or saying we have to charge more for it then I might support the new heath care. The federal government setup the arrangement and now they are reworking it to reduce costs. What makes you think they will not do the same thing later?
Posted by: BigbadSouthsideJim | October 13, 2009 5:22 PM
I hope that the healthcare bill will help a lot of people in our country that need it.
Posted by: Amy | October 13, 2009 5:22 PM
Ok D. Stevens, are you really that stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God I am so sick of explaining to you people how this works. First of all you WILL have all the choices you have now plus the government option!! What part of this dont you understand and translates to you that you dont have a choice??? What this prevents is you from chosing NOT to have ANY health insurance so I DONT have to pay for YOU! GET IT??????
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley
Ok then you are the one who doesn't get it because you ARE GOING TO PAY for everyone get it??? In the form of increased taxes, in the form of getting taxed before paying for insurance. I think it's you who does not get what this bill and paying for insurance "for those who currently do not have" Where do you think the money is coming from???? It doesn't grow on trees. GET IT?
Posted by: Susan | October 13, 2009 5:27 PM
There are still many steps before this sham of a bill could be passed.
Unions will oppose Baucus bill unless it's changed
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9BADD080&show_article=1
And who really gets to pay for this mess??!?!?!?
Obamacare Tax Frays Middle-Class Vow
http://www.aei.org/article/101152
This bill does more harm than good . . .
Posted by: Bobbie Mobbie | October 13, 2009 5:30 PM
Americans Can't Trust Republicans With Medicare
You want a simple message to counter dishonest Republican fear mongering on healthcare? How's this, Republicans want to do away with Medicare. They've always wanted to take it away, and if they get half a chance in the future they'll get rid of it then. It's not hard to find examples of them saying so in their own words since Medicare started.
Saint Ronny Raygun in the 60s: "if you don’t [stop Medicare] ... you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free."
Republican Bob Dole openly bragged in 1996 that he was one of 12 House members who voted against creating Medicare. "I was there, fighting the fight, voting against Medicare ..."
.
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/29/medicare-44/
GOPer nutjob/ "guru" Newt Gingrich said of Medicare, "We don't get rid of it in round one because we don't think that's politically smart, we don't think that's the right way to go through a transition, but we believe it's going to wither on the vine." He then went on to propose cutting Medicare by 14% and forcing millions of senior citizens to seek out private HMOs or go without, all to help make sure Medicare would 'wither on the vine.' And it continues right into present day.
.
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/09/16/us/gop-s-plan-to-cut-medicare-faces-a-veto-clinton-promises.html?sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=all
Roy Blunt: "You could certainly argue that government should have never have gotten in the health care business, and that might have been the best argument of all, to figure out how people could have had more access to a competitive marketplace."
.
http://www.firedupmissouri.com/content/radical-roy-blunt-it-would-have-been-best-if-medicare-and-medicaid-never-existed
Former Republican House Majority Leader the Dick Armey reaffirmed this week on MtP that he thinks Medicare is "tryanny" and if that's not worrisome enough, he wants to "phase out" social security too.
Republicans want to do away with Medicare because they're against government healthcare, always have been, always will be. That's a core plank in GOP ideology, they hold it as dear and precious as some holy theology. Just yesterday, when asked about government healthcare, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa said the "government is a predator, not a competitor" and went on to note he wouldn't vote for any healthcare reform bill as a matter of conservative principle, even if it has everything he wants in it. So when a Republican talks about "reform," says we must "get the government out of healthcare," pitches convoluted tax schemes and private accounts for the affluent, or spits out terms like "socialized medicine," like a dog whistle they all mean the same thing: getting rid of Medicare.
.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/2009/08/sen-grassley-on-health-care-the-government-is-a-predator.php?ref=fpblg
Forget about grandma being unplugged, grandma won't be able to afford being seen, much less be able to pay for hospital admission. Grandma is on her own. All so that conservative zillionaires and their Republican congressional lackeys can save an extra 0.0145 of their gross, bloated paycheck, the same flat rate we all invest to keep millions of senior citizens alive and healthy today.
Posted by: Darksyde | October 13, 2009 5:32 PM
You can drop the universal from universal healthcare. The only one who will see health in old age will be the executives. The only one who will die of work related exhaustion to pay all for your bills is ----------- YOU.
Posted by: Democrats hate the middle class | October 13, 2009 5:37 PM
Nancy, actually the majority of Americans DO want health care reform. Health care reform is far more than health insurance reform. How we pay for it is only a piece of the whole pie.
Posted by: JustSteve | October 13, 2009 5:44 PM
"set penalties for the failure to have insurance" The government will be forcing Americans to do something, rather than give us a choice.
Posted by: D. Stevens | October 13, 2009 3:05 PM
Yeah, those bastards! Just like they do with car insurance. Why don't they just let me drive without car insurance. And if I ram into the back of your daughter's car, you can sue me. And if I can't pay, oh, well, let your insurance and others pay for your daughter's health bill. And if they want to sue me, they can.
But as the ol' sayin' goes, "You can't get blood from turnip."
Of course the government limits our choice when it comes to insurance. So does the private market. When was the last time you bought a house without insurance?
Posted by: Tell the Truth | October 13, 2009 5:53 PM
You can drop the universal from universal healthcare. The only one who will see health in old age will be the executives. The only one who will die of work related exhaustion to pay all for your bills is ----------- YOU.
Posted by: Democrats hate the middle class | October 13, 2009 5:37 PM
*******************************************
.
Yes, because us Republicans know that we shouldn't pay for health care when we can happily burn up our money on wars and tax cuts for muliti billionaires....Brilliant!
Posted by: Repugs are idiots | October 13, 2009 6:03 PM
Rather than re-hash what's already been brought up in support of or complaining about the proposal--which is going to change, anyway--my question is whether the Republican charge that bipartisanship has been a sham has merit. Have they been allowed a meaningful degree of input? If not, here we go again: Party-line politics, with the attendent bitternessand diviseveness voters say they decry. What's that old saying, "The more things change, the more they stay the same"?
Posted by: Richard Palzer | October 13, 2009 6:05 PM
The lobbyists win again. And the citizens lose....again.
Anyone keeping score? I estimated it is 1,000 to zero.
If this were in the sports page, the American Citizen would be in last place, behind the Detroit Lions and the Washington Generals
Posted by: Twill59 | October 13, 2009 6:10 PM
Yes, because us Republicans know that we shouldn't pay for health care when we can happily burn up our money on wars and tax cuts for muliti billionaires....Brilliant!
Posted by: Repugs are idiots | October 13, 2009 6:03 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Personally, I'd say WHO CARES ABOUT THE REPUBLICANS, buuuuuuuuuuuut since Obama and his Congresshens are so keen on getting their approval I think it means that the Republicans "know" something. Genius!!!!!
Posted by: Democrats hate the middle class | October 13, 2009 6:15 PM
Have they been allowed a meaningful degree of input? Posted by: Richard Palzer | October 13, 2009 6:05 PM
The Republicans have chosen not to give any meaningful input. The Republican leadership has chosen to make this a completely partisan battle. They've stated openly that they want this to be Obama's "Waterloo". They haven't been shut out, they've refused to participate.
Posted by: Victor | October 13, 2009 6:17 PM
Our health care system is disintegrating. Today, 46 million people have no health insurance and even more are underinsured with high deductibles and co-payments. At a time when 60 million people, including many with insurance, do not have access to a medical home, more than 18,000 Americans die every year from preventable illnesses because they do not get to the doctor when they should. This is six times the number who died at the tragedy of 9/11 - but this occurs every year.
In the midst of this horrendous lack of coverage, the U.S. spends far more per capita on health care than any other nation - and health care costs continue to soar. At $2.4 trillion dollars, and 18 percent of our GDP, the skyrocketing cost of health care in this country is unsustainable both from a personal and macro-economic perspective.
It always makes me laugh when I hear people say they want to preserve "insurance choice" in this country. What choice do you have when you work and are nominally "insured," but your insurance coverage doesn't pay for anything you need? Are you then going to have the ability to run out and purchase extra coverage on the wages you make? Well, I guess you have the "choice" to rob a bank or maybe win the lottery to pay for it, but that's about it.
Republicans and their rich oligarchy supporters (Healthcare CEO's and Lobbyists) will do anything to kill a good healthcare bill because they know people will like it and when that happens their electoral goose will be cooked for generations - if it's not already.
Posted by: Trig | October 13, 2009 6:18 PM
It seems that the big argument is that EVERY American should have health insurance and the Dems are loving the passage of this bill through committee. Well, the way it stands, we will only cover 94% of Americans. Why wouldn't you consider this unacceptable? Don't you care about the other 6% or is being close to the target good enough?
Posted by: drez | October 13, 2009 6:21 PM
Democrats care more about the wealth and health of the one percent deadenders who run this country and who will patriotically volunteer your kids off to look for those weapons of mass destruction they keep talking about from a left to right to left again presidency than-------------------- YOU.
Posted by: Democrats are Donkeys for a reason. | October 13, 2009 6:23 PM
This is the bill the health insurance companies never even dreamed of. This is not healthcare reform. This is opening the U.S. Treasury so they can have an open account.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ssgbm3IN88
Posted by: BobM of Westmont | October 13, 2009 6:30 PM
Now we get to pay for illegal immigrants, families of 4 will pay $4800 more a year. Where do you think this money is going to come from? This is not a gift tot hose of us that work for what we have its a gift for illegal immigrants and people who live off the government.
Posted by: annjilly | October 13, 2009 6:32 PM
We will make history in the US by bringing our health care system on the same level as other systems, like the German, Australian, Canadian, Spanish and many others.
Don't let republicans misrepresent!!
We need reform and we need it NOW!
Posted by: jf | October 13, 2009 6:40 PM
Just with a show of hands, how many people support this bill? I would imagine, very few - so who is this for anyways? Care to tell us our so called elected leaders?
What a bunch of farce. We need gridlock in D.C. plain and simple.
Posted by: Peter | October 13, 2009 7:03 PM
Socialized medicine is just one step closer. Hello Mexi/Obama care!
Posted by: Greg | October 13, 2009 7:13 PM
NO ONE ever mentions those who are constantly rejected by the insurance companies due to "pre-existing conditions". These people are included in the count of uninsured - and I'm sure they will still be uninsured even after health care "reform".
Posted by: Fed Up | October 13, 2009 7:14 PM
Sad day in America. I hope whoever voted for this totalitarian regime is happy
Posted by: david martenson | October 13, 2009 7:15 PM
Stop using the car insurance analogies, they don't work. You don't have to drive a car, so you don't need to purchase insurance. Plenty of people don't drive, ergo, no need to pay for insurance.
And the reason everyone needs car insurance is for litigation purposes. You get sued from a little fender bender. Perhaps it's all the lawyers that cause the problem? They increase the cost of health insurance because of the insurance doctors must pay to practice, same with the car industry. Oh wait, use the analogy, what we need is tort reform. I bet you would see costs go down, if the lawyers weren't so busy.
Posted by: Erin | October 13, 2009 7:27 PM
I already pay extra in my car insurance for "uninsured drivers." Guess my Medicare and Medicare supplemental insurances will go up to help pay for "uninsured sick people."
Posted by: Pooch | October 13, 2009 5:02 PM
----------------------------------------------------
You don't have to pay for uninsured motorists. Tell your agent to remove it from your coverage. When you get hit by an uninsured motorist, don't come whining to us.
But you say you do have Government health insurance - Medicare. I guess Government run health insurance is good enough for you, but not anyone else, hypocrite.
Posted by: I heart Schadenfreude | October 13, 2009 7:36 PM
THE PROCESS IS NOW JUST BEGINNING.
Now that this bill is out of the senate finance committe, the fight truly begins. I sense that a public alternative to the greedy private insurers may survive. Once it becomes clear to all what that means, there should be a growing amount of support for a non-profit source of medical insurance.
There are a lot of ways to make a fortune, but at the expense of the health and welfare of our brothers and sisters should not be one one of them. The private health insurers have joined the ranks of drug trafficers, arms dealers and war profiteers. They need to change their ways or go away.
Posted by: Gus | October 13, 2009 7:38 PM
This is hilarious!
Jon Stewart destroys Crazy Glenn Beck's anti health care rants.
.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-13-2009/glenn-beck-s-operation
.
Posted by: Willow | October 13, 2009 8:00 PM
* * * * *
Posted by: Tell the Truth | October 13, 2009 5:53 PM
.
Of course, you have to realize that your argument is BS and/or that you are being totally disingenuous about your analogy to auto insurance. (Either that, or you’re just plain stupid.) If I don’t want to carry auto insurance, I have a choice: I can stop driving. I can then walk, take public transportation, or have friends or relatives drive me around. Under the terms of the proposed health care plan(s), there is no similar choice. No one can avoid being forced to buy insurance unless they elect to stop breathing (which I think you may have already done), or moving to another country and renouncing U.S. citizenship.
.
Furthermore, auto insurance is also required because driving around in a few tons of steel in public is a dangerous activity. Many people are killed and injured yearly by the negligent operation of motor vehicles. On the other hand, the negligent operation of a human being, in the absence of a deadly instrumentality, has almost no chance of killing or injuring others. Thus, the analogy to car insurance fails again.
.
Finally, the ‘blood-from-a-turnip’ argument fails because we will all still end up paying for those who can’t afford health insurance - just like we do now for the indigent who show up to emergency rooms for medical help. We’ll pay for their subsidized health care plans either in the form of increased taxes or larger insurance premiums. This may not be worse than the current system, but I’m still trying to figure out why you think it’s much of an improvement.
Posted by: John W. | October 13, 2009 8:03 PM
Democrats care more about the wealth and health of the one percent deadenders who run this country and who will patriotically volunteer your kids off to look for those weapons of mass destruction they keep talking about from a left to right to left again presidency than-------------------- YOU.
Posted by: Democrats are Donkeys for a reason. |
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.
Waaaaah!
We lost and we're going to cry like the petulant children that we are!
Waaaaaaaah! Save us Rush! Save us!
.
http://patterico.com/images/jed_eddy_fake_republican.jpg
.
Posted by: Republican response | October 13, 2009 8:07 PM
This is why no one cares what the Republican party thinks about anything (health care etc) anymore.
It was Republicans who contributed to our spending deficit more than anyone else.
.
http://conservationreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/history-of-budget-surplus-deficit.gif
Nearly every facet of the main causes of the public's repudiation of Bush and the Republican party had to do with their adherence to the principles of movement conservatism, both in its governance:
.
Foreign-policy debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A government that invades nations under false pretenses.
A nation less secure and at greater risk of terrorist attacks than ever.
They tanked our economy.
An expanding gap between rich and poor.
Utter inaction on global warming.
$5-a-gallon gasoline.
An unresolved immigration problem.
An incapacity to deal with natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina.
A debacle in public-school education testing and funding.
Declining food and consumer-product safety standards.
A government that spies on its own citizens.
A government that tortures prisoners held in their detention facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------
AND THEIR POLITICS:
.
The absurd impeachment of Bill Clinton in spite of the public's broad disapproval.
The caricaturization of a future Nobel Peace Prize winner, Al Gore, in the course of foisting a Bush presidency upon an unsuspecting public.
The relentless campaign to portray anyone dissenting from Bush's post-9/11 war plans as insufficiently patriotic and "soft on terrorism."
The tireless recourse to a string of "Friedman units" in excusing the interminable extension of the Iraq war.
The swift-boating of John Kerry.
The Terri Schiavo fiasco.
The Graham Frost fiasco.
The ritual and ongoing demonization of Latinos as criminals, welfare bums, America-hating, job-stealing foreigners.
The crude dog-whistle campaign run against Obama, depicting him as a terrorist-loving, America-hating, secret Muslim brown man.
The deeply disturbing way that conservatives acted on this rhetoric: spewing hate, racism, and threatening violence.
In nearly every single one of these instances, movement conservatives pronounced their avid support because they reflected "conservative values" -- and indeed, in a number of them (such as the opposition to gay rights, or inaction on global warming, or the Schiavo matter) they were directly at the behest of movement conservatives, particularly the religious right.
It does no good to point this out to Right wing ideologues on here, at some point it only makes sense to let them wander off into the political wilderness for a few years. They have it coming.
Posted by: Planet Wingnuttia | October 13, 2009 8:19 PM
I never thought that somebody would take my saber rattling weapons of mass destruction seriously to start an unnecessary war in the middle of a scorpion den. I was just hoping someone dumb enough would come along, who I could enable by looking away, to take the initiative. You got an army, you should use it. Someone should remind me to get a place in China, they love my business, and Americans love Chinese healthcare. The nonexistent one I will form into being on the backs of hard working Americans paying the Chinese off.
Posted by: Donkey Democrat | October 13, 2009 8:32 PM
'Democrats??
(silence)
Dems?
what?
Oh Dems??
what?
Democrates!?
sorry.....'
That's about all that can be said about this weak, broken as designed, made to fail bill.
This is simply nibbling around the edges of a failed system.
What is needed, of course, is a single payer national health system.
Short of that we need a robust, accessible, affordable public option.
This is the only option that will reign in the privateer health insurance syndicates.
The Dems. in the Senate have now spent the entire summer and half the fall writing a bill suitable to ONE Republican senator from Maine who represents what?, less than one percent of America?
She's not a bad senator, likable and smart, but also a Republican, and a member of the losing party.
Crafting a bill that pleases the Republicans and the health insurance industry was a huge mistake. The industry just stabbed them all in the back with claims that the cost of health care will go up under this new plan.
That may be true, but we know it will go up at an exponential rate if we stick with the current system. That's right, we will all go bust under the current system. It just won't happen all at once, so no one will notice. (sigh,,,, Americans)
Reforming the current system is an exercise in futility. Nibbling around the edges, compromising with the people that have been killing us, trying to please one Repub. senator will prove to be the undoing of any kind of meaningful reform.
Simply put, the Senate bill is overly compromised and does not deserve support.
And yes, everyone should be covered.
(Thanks, Kristen Wiig)
Posted by: C.Morris | October 13, 2009 8:36 PM
I can take comfort from the fact that this is far from over.
This bill is a disaster from start to finish. It means less care, at higher cost, for everyone. Remember rationing? Well, it will happen. Remember higher costs? There's a reason why the insurance company said yesterday that the bill would increase costs to families to the tune of about $4,000.
Hopefully this will be killed later on.
Posted by: beth | October 13, 2009 8:51 PM
the Baucus bill is weak. It'll get stronger now that its out of committee.
The Trib talks about "sweeping" but this bill does more to line the pockets of big insurance then anything else.
Posted by: alex | October 13, 2009 8:56 PM
The Democrats were "present" for the entire eight Republican years. Sleeping.
Posted by: Democratic Universe | October 13, 2009 8:59 PM
to david martenson. You obviously don't understand what a totalitarian regime is.
Stating we have one obviously doesn't make it true. One problem I think that lives with the modern day American right, it doesn't have the intellect it once did. Seems that after the religious right took over, smart Republican governance took a 28 year sabbatical. And it doesn't seem that anything is changing for them.
Posted by: alex | October 13, 2009 9:04 PM
GOP vote gained? Are you kidding me? Is openly lying in headlines okay, now? One RINO, who has strongly she won't vote for the bill on the floor, does not, in any way, make up the "GOP vote," or even one real republican vote. It's one squishy moderate. That's it. This is a farce, not bipartisanship.
Posted by: Jeff | October 13, 2009 9:13 PM
No public option?
No reform, folks.
Posted by: JazzBo | October 13, 2009 10:16 PM
Where do you think the money is coming from???? It doesn't grow on trees. GET IT?
Posted by: Susan | October 13, 2009 5:27 PM
Susan, I dont give a rats a++ if my taxes go up to save lives! What i do care is that I never had a choice where my WAR tax dollars went either! Get it? Obviously you have no moral issues with funding wars that kill and maime millions of foreign people but when it comes to saving your own citizens you have a problem with that?? You're right I DONT GET IT!!!
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | October 13, 2009 10:56 PM
The bottom line reason for healthcare premiums being so high to those who actually pay them are these:
1. Insurance companies expect and get large profits.
2. Immigrants who enter this country illegally are treated with respect and dignity, as each any every human being deserves. They just don't pay for it, we do.
3. Many poor people (not all), have expected and received entitlements. I am a nurse who works in a poverty section of Chicago. When I ask a mother who has no insurance why she at least does not have medicaid, I have received this answer: "It takes too much time. I'm not sittin in no medicaid office for hours just to get a medicaid card, it makes no difference to me."
4. The insurance companies are greedy - oops, did I just say that twice?
The bottom line problem is the insurance companies. The secondary problem is illegal immigration. The third problem is entitlement. The fourth problem lies within our own people. We have social problems - gangs who shoot themselves up and the ER's who are expected to fix them and absorb the burden of the cost.
I have to pass a drug test to maintain my job, to pay my taxes. Let's start with drug tests for all those who receive government entitlements. I think this might be a good start.
Posted by: Eileen | October 13, 2009 11:01 PM
One more thought . . . just how is the government going to FORCE people to sign up for Medicaid, when they cannot even do it now?
How will the government get illegals to pay for their healthcare when they cannot even get them out of the country when they commit crimes?
Are we kidding ourselves or are we listening to more campaign rhetoric??
Posted by: Eileen | October 13, 2009 11:08 PM
If this is the Democrats idea of bipartisan then I truly believe they are delusional. They would not know the meaning of bipartisan if it bit them in the ass.
Posted by: Paul | October 13, 2009 11:13 PM
Hey folks, keep in mind, this isn't even a bill. There is no legislative language.
The finance committee passed a concept, and in a month or so Harry Reid will turn it into what ever bill he wants when he brings it to the Senate floor.
Posted by: Bob | October 13, 2009 11:32 PM
Wow. That photo of the President must be making Paulo, Django and Bruce grind their teeth in their sleep.
Wait until the bill signing ceremony.
They'll need dentures.
Posted by: ornery | October 13, 2009 11:32 PM
This is not the reform we have been waiting for! This is the "reform" the insurance companies have been waiting for! We demand a public option!
Posted by: megan | October 13, 2009 11:41 PM
The bill has not been wrote. We need to see the real bill. But, I did feel this will just be other nail for the democrats come 2010.
Posted by: Crooks_In_DC | October 14, 2009 12:35 AM
ALL I KNOW IS THAT I'M 60, IN GOOD HEALTH, (THANK GOD) AND PAY ONE THIRD OF MY FIXED INCOME TO HEALTH CARE MONTHLY...WHICH GOES UP, UP, UP, ANNUALLY! IF THIS INSURANCE REFORM IS PASSED (AND I SAY THAT LOOSELY) SHOULD I GIVE UP FOOD AND SHELTER SO I WON'T PAY A PENALTY FOR NO INSURANCE?????? MAYBE THESE POLITICIANS SHOULD GIVE UP THEIR RAISES THAT THEY SNEAK THRU AND LIVE LIKE THE REST OF US MORTALS!! ALL KIDDING ASIDE...THIS INSURANCE THING IS VERY SCARY FOR THOSE OF US ON FIXED INCOMES WHO ARE OLDER AND LOOKING FOR A PART-TIME JOB TO HELP WITH HEALTH CARE PREMIUMS AND CAN'T GET HIRED BECAUSE OF OUR AGE!!!!! GOVERNMENT..YOU'RE KILLING US!!
Posted by: pamela christine | October 14, 2009 2:04 AM
To all the wingnut poster (s). You need to refill your valium prescription before the medicare cuts go into effect.
This isn't about healthcare. It IS about the government securing more money and more power. We don't have a healthcare crisis, but the government is going to "fix" it. It's kinda like a "fix" in a horserace where the mob, ie the big government, holds all the cards and doesn't tell anybody else what is really going on. We will all pay more for either healthcare or taxes or both and receive less. Congrats!
Posted by: Gary | October 14, 2009 5:31 AM
I think true bipartisanship would have crafted a good bill.
That is, compromise between the Baucus Caucus/Snowe and the liberal Dems. on the panel may have produced a real reform bill with at least a couple teeth in it.
As it is, the Dems. have compromised with people that in the end won't vote for any reform at all.
It's been pointed out by cons. many times, usually in self-righteous anger, that the USA is not a democracy, but a republic.
The Electoral College and the organization of the Senate are the two main reasons we are not a democracy.
Posted by: C.Morris | October 14, 2009 7:56 AM
"101,000 Americans die UNNECESSARILY each year because of lack of access to basic medical care that they would get in most other industrialized nations."
To start with, this number is more than double any other I've seen, regardless, one should point out the following:
2006 deaths: 2,426,264
Subtract accidents: 121,599
Subtract the above mentioned deaths: 101,000
That means 2,203,665 die WITH health insurance. It is clear that health insurance is the leading cause of death.
Posted by: FLZapped | October 14, 2009 8:40 AM
Thank God! He has heard the cry of the poor. God blessed the most wonderful President, since Kennedy, Carter and Clinton!
Posted by: Annette Weaver | October 14, 2009 9:44 AM
Wow. That photo of the President must be making Paulo, Django and Bruce grind their teeth in their sleep.
Wait until the bill signing ceremony.
They'll need dentures.
Posted by: ornery | October 14, 2009 10:16 AM
Yes Jeff, I think everyone agrees that Snowe and any Moderate have no place in the modern Republican party. Keep shrinking the tent, tossing out anyone who doesn't toe the extreme right wing line. Make it absolutely clear that the only things the Republican Party stands for are War, Tax cuts for the wealthy, and the defense of the privledges of the straight, white, christian, male. That surely is the long term recipe for succes for the Republican Party.
Posted by: A helpful message from the DNC | October 14, 2009 10:19 AM
Why should we trust the Government with all our health care when it has consistently reneged on its existing obligations under other laws, leaving our health institutions holding the bag?
“The provisions in the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act that require nearly all American emergency rooms to accept and stabilize any patient regardless of the patient's ability to pay, but do not provide adequate reimbursement for indigent patients.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfunded_mandate
Posted by: Walter LeCroy | October 14, 2009 11:17 AM
Susan, I dont give a rats a++ if my taxes go up to save lives!
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | October 13, 2009 10:56 PM
Unless you have been walking around with a sack of your own money looking for people in need of health care - you are being completely dishonest with this comment.
Of course - this health care debate has never been about honesty or doing the right thing has it Scot?? It is about ramming through, (while DEMs enjoy a large congressional majority), an ideology based, economically suicidal plan to uproot and radically change a system that works for 80-90% of the US population.
Congress may just vote for this- despite the fact that most people don;t want it or need it... that alone should make anyone that is being intellectually honest worry about what is happening to our rights and freedoms...
Posted by: heartburn | October 14, 2009 11:19 AM
Posted by: John W. | October 13, 2009 8:03 PM
;
Yes John W,
Walking around with infectious viruses and bacteria, contaminating the workplace is not a threat to ANYONE elses life.
Posted by: sensible | October 14, 2009 12:08 PM
Walking around with infectious viruses and bacteria, contaminating the workplace is not a threat to ANYONE elses life.
Posted by: sensible | October 14, 2009 12:08 PM
And how will Obamacare prevent this?
Posted by: heartburn | October 14, 2009 12:37 PM
Posted by: sensible | October 14, 2009 12:08 PM
Stay home, wash you hands, clean up you work space, take your boss up on the sanitary conditions maintained by the cleaning crew, or just get the government to fix it all for you. Besides, the Democratic calendar calls for work to keep up with the whims of the government. Dead cash cows are no good cash cows. Better yet, get a flu shot. Get the Swine flu shot, the Asian flu shot, the Nile Virus shot, and the vaccine shot for the vaccine flu. Better still make it law for every American from child on up to get vaccinated for everything under the sun because viruses mutate, and aren't treatable by standard medicine, usually your immune system works out to them instead. This way you can stay healthy, and the pharmaceutical companies can have access to lump numbers of ready made study groups in a shorter time frame.
Posted by: crazy | October 14, 2009 12:55 PM
* * * * *
Posted by: sensible | October 14, 2009 12:08 PM
.
Poor little brain dead, illiterate lefty. I wrote, “…the negligent operation of a human being, IN THE ABSENCE OF A DEADLY INSTRUMENTALITY, has almost no chance of killing or injuring others.” Gee, d’ya think that someone walking around with “infectious viruses and bacteria, contaminating the workplace” might qualify as having a deadly or dangerous instrumentality? Who’da thunk it?
.
And, as heartburn aptly asked, how is being forced to acquire health care insurance going to solve this? The last I looked, it takes a sensible person to stay home from work if he or she is sick. When did doctors and health officials start enforcing that little bit of common sense?
Posted by: John W. | October 14, 2009 2:10 PM
Im glad a republican see's some good in the health plan. Way to go who ever the hell you are...
Posted by: chris brown | October 14, 2009 3:38 PM