Obama Care

[saden1]

Originally Posted by budw38

Good morning Saden . I like you hope for better HC. You don't think our members of the House and Senate should read the bill , but we the people should ? If as you say , if " we " do not read a bill , we have no right to complain ... thats crazy ... I doubt that 2 % of Americans have ever read any bills , so 98 % of all Americans cannot complain accord to Sadens Law ? We have the right to complain/protest if we so choose ... unless Democrats are in the white house ... Sedition Act of 1918 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Japanese American internment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Waco Siege - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good morning. It's not asking much, if you're going to criticize at least have your T corssed and I dotted. You simply cannot complain without having facts on your side and the best way to do that is to read the bill. I spent all day Saturday watching the house debate and sifted through the bill...it's pathetic but first hand info be best hand info.

As for members of congress it is as 12thMan said. They got their staff reading it and raising red flags for them. There is no problem with this process. There is a problem however if you proclaim something is in the bill and do not verify or whine about how many pages it is. Supreme Court Justices have their clerks, members of congress have their staff.

[budw38]

Originally Posted by saden1

Good morning. It's not asking much, if you're going to criticize at least have your T corssed and I dotted. You simply cannot complain without having facts on your side and the best way to do that is to read the bill. I spent all day Saturday watching the house debate and sifted through the bill...it's pathetic but first hand info be best hand info.

As for members of congress it is as 12thMan said. They got their staff reading it and raising red flags for them. There is no problem with this process. There is a problem however if you proclaim something is in the bill and do not verify or whine about how many pages it is. Supreme Court Justices have their clerks, members of congress have their staff.

I do not mean to complain , I'am just stating a concern for a bill that could < I stress could > , lower the quality for some < those who have paid their fair share in taxes/HC-Ins > . 2 could lead to higher debt < yes the Rep's have as bad a record as Dem's , maybe worse > . As I have stated many times , I hope congress passes a bill that will not lower care for the millions that have worked and paid taxes/Ins . for 30 -40 years . I'am not saying that the White House or Dem's in congress are wrong in this matter , the truth is our elected officials do not have a track record IMO for me to just trust the " bill " will benefit us all .... I hope that is does . Only time will tell .

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by budw38

I do not mean to complain , I'am just stating a concern for a bill that could < I stress could > , lower the quality for some < those who have paid their fair share in taxes/HC-Ins > . 2 could lead to higher debt < yes the Rep's have as bad a record as Dem's , maybe worse > . As I have stated many times , I hope congress passes a bill that will not lower care for the millions that have worked and paid taxes/Ins . for 30 -40 years . I'am not saying that the White House or Dem's in congress are wrong in this matter , the truth is our elected officials do not have a track record IMO for me to just trust the " bill " will benefit us all .... I hope that is does . Only time will tell .

This bill is very flawed, there's no doubt that. And I imagine once it comes out of conference the public option will be watered down a little more, but probably more budget friendly in terms of cost. I think Harry Reid is requesting two sets of scores from CBO and the Senate will more than likely move towards the one that has the more favorable score. That's just my speculation.

At this point, unfortunately, I think it's becoming more and more about winning, getting Obama a legislative victory, and less about health care. I think it's solid first step though. But they will have to address the cost containment portion again down the road I suspect, as well as the number of uninsured that will ultimately go into the exchange option.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

This bill is very flawed, there's no doubt that. And I imagine once it comes out of conference the public option will be watered down a little more, but probably more budget friendly in terms of cost. I think Harry Reid is requesting two sets of scores from CBO and the Senate will more than likely move towards the one that has the more favorable score. That's just my speculation.

At this point, unfortunately, I think it's becoming more and more about winning, getting Obama a legislative victory, and less about health care. I think it's solid first step though. But they will have to address the cost containment portion again down the road I suspect, as well as the number of uninsured that will ultimately go into the exchange option.

I think that happened sometime over the summer when Obama essentially guarranteed the passage of a health care bill with the public option. He has consistently talked about cost containment and, initially, I was encouraged by his assertion that sustainability was important. My initial hope was snuffed when he touted the empty pledge from HC actors that they would cut costs as a real step towards sustainability. Quite frankly, other than "tax the wealthy, everybody must buy insurance", I have not seen any real steps towards cost containment from Obama or anyone else.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I think that happened sometime over the summer when Obama essentially guarranteed the passage of a health care bill with the public option. He has consistently talked about cost containment and, initially, I was encouraged by his assertion that sustainability was important. My initial hope was snuffed when he touted the empty pledge from HC actors that they would cut costs as a real step towards sustainability. Quite frankly, other than "tax the wealthy, everybody must buy insurance", I have not seen any real steps towards cost containment from Obama or anyone else.

I think they're "betting" on cost containment happening as opposed to actually producing hardcore numbers to prove it. I mean numbers have been produced, obviously, but from what I've seen certain variables have to fall into place almost perfectly over a period of time for costs to be driven down. In fact, premiums are still likely to rise either way.

A robust public option or a single payer system, which is simply too expensive and cumbersome to implement, in my opinion, was the best shot. Pros and cons to both, but it looks like they are getting further and further away from either as this drags out.

More than likely, if this bill passes, the cost issue will be revisted down the road. Maybe under Obama's presidency, maybe not.