The great debate about healthcare reform is begining to heat up as Congress heads home for summer vacation. Town hall meetings are planned to discuss the pending healthcare reform legislation.

*yawn*

If you eyes dont glaze over when you hear the about this complicated and important issue, I would be interested to know you thoughts and feelings about healthcare in America. Pros, cons, personal stories, generic philosophizing; all is welcome.


Allow me to say a few things about the subject and provide my own perspective.

(1) I dont know much about the house and senate bills and the various versions. The bills are way to long, subtle, and complicated and require a lawyer to properly characterize. Plus, that is why we elect people who get paid to write and read this stuff. Only sometimes the "reading" part is forgotten.

http://www.wellsphere.com/down-syndr...slation/746300

Steney Hoyer (D-MD, my home state) actaully laughed at the idea that the entire bill should be read,

"I'm laughing because a) I don't know how long this bill is going to be, but it's going to be a very long bill"

"If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn't read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes,"

So members of Congress are admitting that they do not know what they vote for. This hardly seems like the type of government that Obama promised on the campaign trail. But thats another thread.

(2) I also am worried about the intentions of Congress. Especially when powerful congressman Barney Frank admits to a reporter that the GOAL OF HEALTHCARE REFORM IS SINGLE PAYER. He said that single payer is the ideal system and that a public option is the Trojan horse that will get us there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3BS4C9el98

Single Payer is social healthcare. Take from each according to their means, and provide to each according to their needs. That sounds very Un-American to my ears. It also undermines Obamas stance that "if your happy with your healthcare, you can keep it." Single payer will affect everones plan. Obama can support his claim with any of the legislation that is being considered.

The debate is degrading into bully tactics and shouting matches. Both sides share blame here. But the real cause, in my eyes, is the arbitrary deadline that was created by Congress.

http://clearly-political.blogspot.co...ng-august.html

Harry Reid blamed the media for creating the deadline after Obama himself defended the deadline. Huh? A sign of a desperation and weakness.

(3) Finally, the town halls have arrived and people are mad Often yelling at their representatives and unleashing their frustration.

There are videos all over the internet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5IInBP9D_s

Pelosi came out over the weekend and wrote an opinion piece with Hoyer, calling the Town Hall protestors "UnAmerican." Basically saying the same thing she did about the Tea Parties.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/...e-debate-.html

Saying that the protestors were either orchestrated by the GOP or they are an unruly mob. The democrats are systematically marginalizing all opposition of any policy.

In fact, the democrats have been doing there own "organizing," the type that would seem very bizarre to Obama . SEIU Union members are showing up all across the country to intimidate and bully any opposition to Obamacare. SEIU is an arm of ACORN and very strong supporters of the democratic tickets, filtering millions of dollars (some tax payer money) into liberal pockets. Are these union thugs "UnAmerican." Have you even heard about them? Does Pelosi care to be honest about what is going on?

So the the American people are being called UnAmerican. Meanwhile, Pelosi tries to entitle illegal immigrants with free healthcare. Obama described critics of the Canadian system as "demonizing canadians", meanwhile he makes backroom deals with the pharm companies, and laughs at his campaign promises of transparency and televised discussion.

I think the problem is that there is too little debate, too much politics, and very little compromise.

Here's and idea for Congress. They promise they can cut costs by x-amount. Then pass legislation to cut costs.

Wow, so simple and effective. I would love to hear Obama say that they can save $x by doing a,b, and c. Do a,b, and c, and see how much you save. If he is being honest, then support for expanding coverage will swell.

Instead, he wants to rework 1/8 of the US economy in the same time it takes him to choose a dog for his children, to satisfy the 20% who are not happy by ignoring the 80% who are happy.

/rant

Just did some reading about Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel. He is Ramn Emanual's brother and a key healthcare advisor for the President.

He is certaintly a very intelligent person. But intelligence does not make a man. He developed something called the 'complete lives system' that is used to categorically value a persons life.

http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/PIIS0140673609601379.pdf

He presented this curve in his work,



I feel sorry for a man who sees children in such a light.

But that pales in comparison to this quote by Science Czar, John Holdren,

"The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being. Where any of these essential elements is lacking, the resultant individual will be deficient in some respect."

Maybe this is me overanalyzing things, or he mispoke, or it was a subconscious slip, but John Holdren said that babies under a year old are not human beings.

It actually makes sense that he would believe this, in some twisted way, considering his enthusiasm for the funding and promotion of abortions.


If that quote doesnt percolate the responses then I dont know what will.

And if you dont reply, remember that we're still all gonna die

Thats a yes.

Frankly I'm pretty sick of this issue. Both sides are taking things out of context and using it to try to prove their point. Pelosi is a dried up old c*** that should crawl under a rock and complete the withering process. Congress should focus on putting in reforms that fix the corruption and unfair practices in play today, not try to redo the entire system. Most people, myself included, are happy with their current care. If illegals don't have insurance, let them go home and try their luck. These graphs and studies that try to put a value on life are pretty disturbing; I heard one recently that put the value at about $150K. What would you say your child is worth? Would you spend $151K to save them? I guess they need a number in order to make judgment calls, but those calls are about the bottom line, not about taking care of people.

Well, if Congress passes the public option, and if there is a line in the bill to force all members of the House and Senate to use the public option (drink their own kool aid), and if they play by the rules, and if the monetary crisis (nat'l debt) continues to rise and the gov't keeps printing money, and if they then need to ration healthcare to only the young, healthy, etc.... then Nancy Pelosi might be forced to crawl under the rock and become fertilizer.

They should focus on strictly reforming and maybe adding regulations to the healthcare industry. Any social healthcare system should not be run at anything higher that the STATE level. That way anyone wanting a handout social plan can go move to Blue State that offers it. Anyone sick of paying higher taxes for others free health care can move to a Red State that doesn't tax for it, or something along those lines... Let the STATES decide, it's not a national issue. Why should Alaska residents pay a federal healthcare tax that benefits California residents?

Anyway, the bottom line in one sentence is:
Public option healthcare is a one-way ticket to single payer, 100% gov't run (socialized, not privatized) healthcare with worse coverage and higher taxes at best.

The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money.

I am thankful that the people are usuing their brains about this situation and not mindlessly agreeing with our dictator president.

You have "official" speeches of Obama talking about the fact that universal healthcare will not affect anyone who wants to keep private plans. You have many other speeches he has given saying the exact opposite. His supporters then claim that those speeches cannot be considered because of the time and nature they were given. As far as i am concerned anything that man says needs to be considered. We rely too much on the media which is like hiring a 4th grader to go to your college physics classes and take notes for you.

When it comes to our president we should be so frekin picky it makes everyone sick. This person is in control of everything we do. We just let issues roll off our backs because we dont think we will ever be affected by the decisions of who we pick to lead us. People are starting to see the truth though.

One HUUUUUGE reason why this situation is a terrible idea is the fact that if we go to a single payer program, the GOVT will setup direct withdrawl components on everyone's bank accounts. Sounds like a great idea huh!

In his heart, I believe that Obama wants universal single-payer style healthcare, similar to Canada. In fact he has said so himself.

This is an interesting vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk

Obama, "a single payer universal healthcare option is what I liked to see."

Obama, "I dont think were going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediatley, there is going to be a transition period."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7wTDK-LwqE

Obama, "if i was starting from scratch, I would setup a single payer system."

Just yesterday, Obama declared that he is not promoting a single payer plan. Why? Because the transition from the current system to single payer would be too disruptive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_j2QYz6-vk

So I conclude from what Obama has siad, that he thinks that single payer is the best system, but it cannot be implemented in this country right away, but perhaps over time it can be phased in. He wants single payer but he doesnt want to be too disruptive. He wants things to happen gradually without people realizing the true intentions.

But the truth is that Obama will say whatever he thinks people want to hear. And he shows little effort to control the other democratic leaders who want socialized medicine. That makes me uneasy.

So I understand people frustration and anger. This administration is not being honest with the people. It doesnt care what we think because they are so smart that they know what is best for us.

Its funny how town halls are being setup to persuade people to support the current version of healthcare reform. Town halls should be about listening to the people and representing their will.


The media also plays its part in this debate. Just like with the tea parties, they find the most radical protestors and crtisize them as a way to demonize the opposition. The critics of the healthcare plan have been called "Unamercan", an angry mob, *****, terrorists, stupid, etc. Of course they would never stand in the way of criticism when it was directed at Bush.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...-bush-protest/

and what did Bush think about protestors...when asked about Cindy Sheehan (the woman who camped outside of Bush's ranch and called him a murderer after her son was killed in Iraq), Bush said that what makes this country great is the ability to disagree and to be heard.

So without question, it is safe to say that Bush has shown much thicker skin than Obama. Obama does not like to be critisized and he does not handle it well.


The funny thing is that when I made a thread called, "How Obama Got Elected," there were swarms of Obama supporters enthusiastically defending him. But now that he is in office, most of my criticism of Obama goes largely unchallenged. Many people did not know what exactly they were voting for. They just knew that they didnt like Bush and they didnt want the GOP to be in charge.

Here's a pretty good article from an Obama supporter, Camille Paglia. It only takes a few minutes to read.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/...12/town_halls/

She begins by saying that she does not have buyers remorse because despite Obama's domestic failures, his ability to apologize overseas makes up for it (whatever?). Thats just denial in my mind.

But more to the point. She has some sharp criticism for our leaders in DC.

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down."

and she is worried by the misguided liberalism

"But somehow liberals have drifted into a strange servility toward big government, which they revere as a godlike foster father-mother who can dispense all bounty and magically heal all ills. The ethical collapse of the left was nowhere more evident than in the near total silence of liberal media and Web sites at the Obama administration's outrageous solicitation to private citizens to report unacceptable "casual conversations" to the White House. "

Just thought I provide a little balance to the debate since most liberals dont think that Fox is a real news source.

One question I'd ask immediately to zerO is if not everyone will qualify for the public option health care, why offer it at all? If by not everyone, he means illegal immigrants, people working getting paid under the table, drug dealers, and other leaches on society who do not pay federal taxes, then o.k. What I think he may mean, is if you work hard and earn too much money (XX thousand dollars per year) and pay taxes, then you don't qualify, because you theoretically could afford private insurance.
The bill in the House now states, according to the cable news this afternoon, that if you aren't in a private or company funded healthcare program by 2013, you must enroll in the public option, and are not able to return to private/company offered plans. Does that mean if you lose your job, or change jobs in 2013 or later, and the new company you work for has a healthcare plan for employees, but you must now take the public option instead? Sounds like a bad deal with less choice to me.

There is a very good chance that everyone will be forced to have life insurance, just like you need liability insurance to drive a car. But at this point the bills have not be finalized and they will change a lot before they are voted on.

As far as forcing people out of private insurance. The most legitimte concern is that the govnt plan will be cheaper for businesses. So they will choose to drop coverage to stay competitive and their employees will be forced into the public option. Once you already are on the public plan it may be difficult to move back into private covergae.

The best way to broaden the options, i think, would be to allow insurance to be purchased across state lines. This will automatically increase competition and lower costs. Many of the cheapest car insurance plans are from out of state companies.