House Democratic official: 'We've got the votes' on health care

Status
Not open for further replies.
Royale said:
Oh shoot
Click to expand...

Yep....3 more states and we have enough to call for a convention....Nobody has mentioned that yet.
 
TXgolfer said:
Yeah i think he confused the election year and the year most of this bill goes into effect
Click to expand...

yes and I make mistake when I realize election is 2012 and bill probably could kill in 2014, if there is Republican president... or whatever it is.
 
jillio said:
You can thank the Repubs for that one. They are the ones that refused the public option.:cool2:

If you can't afford to purchase private insurance, you will be covered by Medicaid. This has been stated over and over again.:roll:
Click to expand...

wow some people are happy to have a messed up bill just to have something pass than none at all. Oh well, I just they are just waiting for evolution to happen and then they got their socialized healthcare.
 
For those that prefer Cliff Notes to actually accessing and reading the PDF document:

Washington (CNN) -- Democratic congressional leaders unveiled their long-awaited $940 billion compromise health care plan Thursday, setting the stage for a vote Sunday.

Here are highlights:

• New health insurance subsidies would be provided to families of four making up to $88,000 annually, or 400 percent of the federal poverty level.

• Health insurance exchanges would be created to make it easier for small businesses, the self-employed and the unemployed to pool resources and purchase less expensive coverage.

• Total out-of-pocket expenses would be limited, and insurance companies would be prevented from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. Insurers would be barred from canceling coverage for sick people, as well as charging higher premiums based on a person's gender or medical history.

• Insurers would be required to provide coverage for non-dependent children up to age 26.

• The Medicare prescription drug "doughnut hole" would be closed by 2020. Under current law, Medicare stops covering drug costs after a plan and beneficiary have spent more than $2,830 on prescription drugs. It starts paying again after an individual's out-of-pocket expenses exceed $4,550.

• A 40 percent tax would be imposed on insurance companies providing "Cadillac" health plans valued at more than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families. The tax would kick in starting in 2018.


• The Medicare tax would be imposed on investment income for individuals making over $200,000 and couples making over $250,000.

• The federal government would assist states by picking up 100 percent of the costs of expanded Medicaid coverage between 2014 and 2016, and 90 percent starting in 2020.

• Individuals would be required to purchase coverage or face a fine of up to $695 or 2.5 percent of income, whichever is greater, starting in 2016. The plan includes a hardship exemption for poorer Americans.

• Companies with more than 50 employees would be required to pay a fee of $2,000 per worker if the company does not provide coverage and any of that company's workers receives federal health care subsidies. The first 30 workers would be subtracted from the payment calculation.

• States could choose whether to ban abortion coverage in plans offered in the health insurance exchanges. Individuals purchasing plans through the exchanges would have to pay for abortion coverage from their own funds. Some socially conservative Democrats have complained that the plan does not do enough to ensure that taxpayer money is not used to fund abortions.

• Illegal immigrants would not be allowed to buy health insurance in the health insurance exchanges.


Highlights of health care compromise bill - CNN.com
 
And for those that believe that polls are the end all and be all of information and prognostication:


TIME Health-Care Poll: Americans Back Reform, Worry Over Details

Read more: Health-Care Poll: Americans Support Obama's Reform Goals - TIME

And for those that want to compare the Sept. 2009 bill with the Feb 2010 bill:


TIME Health-Care Poll: Americans Back Reform, Worry Over Details

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1913426,00.html?cnn=yes#ixzz0ivhZSOJt


(I have already posted a link allowing access to the 2010 bill)
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjx1ROUz-jc]YouTube - KO Countdown : Comment 091216 : Health Bill Unsupportable : 1/2[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOVUyA5jaME]YouTube - KO Countdown : Comment 091216 : Health Bill Unsupportable : 2/2[/ame]

Trying to read his lips, but from what I gather, this well known commentator, a Liberal, is imploring Obama to get rid of this one provision that will fine and jail those that cannot or will not pay for health insurance.

Someone transcript this please?

Thanks

Yiz
 
I really like the immediate changes that will take effect in the first year if this bill passed.

Health care reform: What can you expect right away? - CNN.com
Eliminating caps: If you buy a policy, a health care company will not be able to place a lifetime -- or annual -- cap on how much they will cover. This is will be especially important for those diagnosed with serious illnesses, such as cancer, who face steep medical bills.

Pre-existing conditions: The Senate bill includes $5 billion in immediate support to provide temporary coverage to uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions. The money would help you until the new health care exchanges in the Senate bill are put into effect in 2014.

Children and pre-existing conditions: Another thing that's going to be very important, CNN Senior Political Analyst Gloria Borger said, is that there will be no exclusion of children with pre-existing conditions.

Dependent children: Your children will be covered until the age of 26.

"Children who are over 21 and may not have a job that pays their health insurance can still be on your policy," Borger said. "That's very important to a lot of families."

Small business tax credits: Those tax credits are aimed at helping small businesses buy health insurance for their employees. Tax credits of up to 50 percent of premiums will be available to firms that offer coverage, according to the Senate's plan.

Preventive care: All new insurance plans, Obama said, will be required to offer free preventive care in order to "catch preventable illnesses and diseases on the front end."

Appeals process: A new independent appeals process will be set up for those who feel that they were unfairly denied a claim by their insurance company.

Help for seniors: If you fall into the Medicare Part D Drug Benefit coverage gap, dubbed the "donut hole," you will receive $250 to help pay for prescriptions.
Click to expand...

my mom and brother can benefit from this but the one that will take effect in 2014? NO THANK YOU :nono:
 
Jiro said:
I really like the immediate changes that will take effect in the first year if this bill passed.

Health care reform: What can you expect right away? - CNN.com


my mom and brother can benefit from this but the one that will take effect in 2014? NO THANK YOU :nono:
Click to expand...

Well see with pre existing conditions.......you could still get coverage before. Just not for those conditions. Makes sense to me Forcing an insurance company to cover a pre existing condition is no different than forcing a car insurance company to cover a previous accident. :shrug:

The small business tax credit is only for 50%.....The remaining 50% is still a big expense for most small businesses. And in 2008 for example that credit would have been moot to many small businesses because they would have lost money.

Some parts are good of course.....even a broken clock is right twice a day. But it is still a matter of cost. We will have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good to me.
 
i thought i'd show everyone an interesting article relating to the GOP and health care reform:

GOP proposed reform of health system in 1993

Why did Republican Senators change their mind on health care reform? Turns out that many provisions they oppose today they advocated 17 years ago.

It can be embarrassing to look at history. National Public Radio carried a story recently about a bill proposed in 1993 by Senate Republicans that was in opposition to Bill Clinton's health plan.

The Republican bill was introduced by 20 Republican Senators. Four of them still serve in the Senate: Orrin Hatch of Utah, Charles Grassley of Iowa, Robert Bennett of Utah and Christopher Bond of Missouri. It proposed a market-based national health care system designed largely by Mark Pauly, a conservative health economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School.

One of the things the plan called for was an "individual mandate" — the requirement that everyone has to buy health insurance for themselves. Here is what Senator Hatch has to say about the individual mandate in the current bill:

"Congress has never crossed the line between regulating what people choose to do and ordering them to do it," he said. "The difference between regulating and requiring is liberty."

Seventeen years ago, Senator Hatch proposed an individual mandate. Today he says it would take away our liberty?

What has changed from the time when conservatives thought it was the best way to make sure that no one could take unfair advantage of the system? As Pauly put it: "We called this responsible national health insurance. There was a kind of an ethical and moral support for the notion that people shouldn't be allowed to free-ride on the charity of fellow citizens."

This idea did not go away. Many years later, Republican governor Mitt Romney picked it up and put it into the current Massachusetts health plan. Why have the Republican Senators turned on it now?

There are other elements of the current bill that are similar to those in the Republican bill of 1993. Both the old Republican plan and the current bill call for purchasing pools and standardized insurance plans. Both call for a ban on insurers denying coverage, or raising premiums because a person has been sick in the past. Both even call for increased federal research into the effectiveness of medical treatments.

The many similarities between the bills make me wonder why Republicans are having so much trouble with the Democratic bill now in Congress. They talk about "death panels," big government, mandates, and "killing granny."

Republican Congressional leader John Boehner put it this way recently: "Look, our goal is to kill this monstrosity."

Len Nichols of the New America Foundation, says: "I think it's a sad testament to the state of relations among the parties that they've gotten to this point."
Click to expand...

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100321/OPINION/3210345/-1/NEWSMAP
 
TXgolfer said:
Well see with pre existing conditions.......you could still get coverage before. Just not for those conditions. Makes sense to me Forcing an insurance company to cover a pre existing condition is no different than forcing a car insurance company to cover a previous accident. :shrug:

The small business tax credit is only for 50%.....The remaining 50% is still a big expense for most small businesses. And in 2008 for example that credit would have been moot to many small businesses because they would have lost money.

Some parts are good of course.....even a broken clock is right twice a day. But it is still a matter of cost. We will have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good to me.
Click to expand...

Ahhh...so you agree that Dometic Violence should be used as a pre-existing condition to deny any ER visits for an injury. Or that a diabetic patient is denied treatment for a unrinary tract infection because they have diabetes?

That 50% is on top of other breaks and incentives. It is not singular.
 
jillio said:
There is a reason that the widespread changes are not effected immediately.
Click to expand...

yes.... time for employees to start looking for other jobs and also time for small business owners to shutter up and work for somebody...
 
Jiro said:
yes.... time for employees to start looking for other jobs and also time for small business owners to shutter up and work for somebody...
Click to expand...

*whistling*

I'm waiting to hear from my mom to see the status of the business we have..
 
TXgolfer said:
Well see with pre existing conditions.......you could still get coverage before. Just not for those conditions. Makes sense to me Forcing an insurance company to cover a pre existing condition is no different than forcing a car insurance company to cover a previous accident. :shrug:

The small business tax credit is only for 50%.....The remaining 50% is still a big expense for most small businesses. And in 2008 for example that credit would have been moot to many small businesses because they would have lost money.

Some parts are good of course.....even a broken clock is right twice a day. But it is still a matter of cost. We will have to wait and see, but it doesn't look good to me.
Click to expand...

ah yes I forgot to mention that the part about small business in my post. It's TERRIBLE. Now because of this and the dooming requirements for 2014.... I suppose we all can forget about opening up small businesses... now we'll be at pitiful mercy of mega-corporations with "profit first, customer last" attitude...

the facebook would not exist or be like this if the founder came up with this idea in a few years with this health bills in place. I fear that it undoubtedly will put some potholes and speed bumps to our relatively healthy & rapid innovation.
 
Jiro said:
yes.... time for employees to start looking for other jobs and also time for small business owners to shutter up and work for somebody...
Click to expand...

Ummm...not necessarily. You are not figuring in the changes in the environment and economy that will occur with the changes that are instituted immediately. That will make the later changes more effective.

There is a reason that the changes are set to occur incrementally.
 
Jiro said:
ah yes I forgot to mention that the part about small business in my post. It's TERRIBLE. Now because of this and the dooming requirements for 2014.... I suppose we all can forget about opening up small businesses... now we'll be at pitiful mercy of mega-corporations with "profit first, customer last" attitude...

the facebook would not exist or be like this if the founder came up with this idea in a few years with this health bills in place. I fear that it undoubtedly will put some potholes and speed bumps to our relatively healthy & rapid innovation.
Click to expand...

That was my point in a thread this weekend when I said this bill hurts innovation. It will also encourage people to work less in order to qualify for a larger subsidy. America....less innovative and less productive. Exactly what we need in a down economy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top