View Full Version : How can you,,,,,,,,,
"....be a United States senator and be afraid to be debate health care reform?"
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“Last year 750,000 Americans filed bankruptcy,” Mr. Reid said in a speech opening the debate. “<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Over half of those bankruptcies were because of medical expenses. Over half of the people who filed bankruptcy because of medical expenses had health insurance.</span> Don’t we need to do something on health insurance reform? Of course we do.”
Mr. Reid derisively accused Republicans who oppose the legislation of “living in a different world” and said, “The health insurance industry has an insatiable appetite for more profit.”
He also accused the Republicans of cowering from the debate and the difficult votes that would still lie ahead, in which he might have to sway one or more Republicans to his side to offset any defections.
<span style='font-size: 17pt'>“How can you be a United States senator and be afraid to be debate health care reform?” he asked.</span>
In closing, Mr. Reid said: “This legislation that we are going to vote on a motion to proceed to, saves lives, it saves money and it saves Medicare. Pretty good deal I would think.” </div></div>
Its not the best bill but its better than nothing.
Check this out. link (http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/countdown-goes-free-clinic-held-new-o?highlight=free+healthcare)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">After watching for hours as the patients moved through the clinic, it was hard to believe that I was in America.
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Eighty-three percent of the patients they see are employed,</span> they are not accepting other government help on a large scale, not "welfare queens" as some would like to have us believe. They are tax-paying, good, upstanding citizens who are trying to make it and give their kids a better life just like you and me.
Ninety percent of the patients who came through Saturday's clinic had two or more diagnoses.
Eighty-two percent had a life-threatening condition such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or hypertension. They are victims of a system built with corporate profits at its center, which long ago forgot the moral imperative that should drive us to show compassion to our fellow men and women. </div></div>
Gayle in MD
11-21-2009, 01:19 PM
As far as I'm concerned, both the insurance industry, and the Republicans, are pigs! It's all about money for them, and likewise for those few Democratics who are holding up Health Care Reform, and Leibermanm, the so called independent, turn coat, who is a real POS for sure.
11-21-2009, 06:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
As far as I'm concerned, both the insurance industry, and the Republicans, are pigs!
I'm sure some would saY the same thing about you.
11-21-2009, 08:12 PM
Debating with those who have no concept of truth is a futile endeavor.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its not the best bill but its better than nothing.
</div></div>I disagree completely. The bill is going to cost a couple trillion dollars over the next 10 years, and that is not something you want to just flop down and say, "it isn't good but it is better than nothing." I sure hope our senators smarten up and are not as flippant with our money as some fool overseas is.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "Its not the best bill but its better than nothing.
I disagree completely. The bill is going to cost a couple trillion dollars over the next 10 years</div></div>
You might be right about the Bill. It seems there is a good chance that it will be so watered down it will become exactly what the HC industry wants.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The bill is going to cost a couple trillion dollars over the next 10 years</div></div>
Apart from the FACT that the CBO has said the Bill will SAVE money, how much does the Govt spend on HC now?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Health care costs have been rising for several years. Expenditures in the United States on health care surpassed $2.2 trillion in 2007, more than three times the $714 billion spent in 1990, and over eight times the $253 billion spent in 1980.</span> Stemming this growth has become a major policy priority, as the government, employers, and consumers increasingly struggle to keep up with health care costs. 
In 2007, U.S. health care spending was about $7,421 per resident and accounted for <span style='font-size: 17pt'>16.2% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product </span>(GDP); this is among the highest of all industrialized countries. Total health care expenditures grew at an annual rate of 6.1 percent in 2007, a slower rate than recent years, yet still outpacing inflation and the growth in national income. Absent reform, there is general agreement that health costs are likely to continue to rise in the foreseeable future. Many analysts have cited controlling health care costs as a key tenet for broader economic stability and growth, and President Obama has made cost control a focus of health reform efforts under way.
Although Americans benefit from many of the investments in health care, the recent rapid cost growth, coupled with an overall economic slowdown and rising federal deficit, is placing great strains on the systems used to finance health care, including private employer-sponsored health insurance coverage and public insurance programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Since 1999, employer-sponsored health coverage premiums have increased by 119 percent, placing increasing cost burdens on employers and workers.  With workers’ wages growing at a much slower pace than health care costs, many face difficulty in affording out-of-pocket spending.
Government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, account for a significant share of health care spending. Public health expenditures made up about 46% of the health care dollar in 2007, with the remainder split between private and out-of-pocket spending (42% and 12%, respectively). Medicare spending has grown at a slightly lower rate, on average, than private health insurance spending, at about 9.0 vs. 10.1% annually respectively between 1970 and 2003.  Medicaid expenditures, similarly, have grown at slower rate than private spending, though the current economic recession is likely to increase the number of enrollees in Medicaid and therefore increase Medicaid spending. </div></div> link (http://www.kaiseredu.org/topics_im.asp?imID=1&parentID=61&id=358)
This is what you have now.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <u><span style='font-size: 14pt'>One of the most common right-wing memes used by opponents of health care reform is that progressive solutions to America’s health care problems place “Washington bureaucrats firmly between you and your doctor.”</span> Again and again, conservatives have deployed this meme to demagogue the health care debate.
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>However, the reality is there already is someone standing between you and your doctor: health insurance companies.</span></u> Single mother Ellen Hayden knows this from experience. After losing her mother at the age of 7 from breast cancer, Hayden has done everything she can to get regular mammograms. Following an abnormal mammogram, her doctor recommended that she have an MRI. After the scan, her insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield, refused to pay for the procedure and is also refusing to pay for a follow-up second MRI her doctor has suggested.
Ned Helms, a former health insurance industry executive who now works at the University of New Hampshire, told Sea Coast Online that this is Hayden’s case is an example of “insurance people” getting between patients and their doctors:</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Insurer Denies Woman’s Claim: She Should Have Known That Her Bleeding Breast Was Not An ‘Emergency’</span>
One of the worst abuses of private insurance companies is the practice of using spurious reasons to deny claims. In April, Rosalinda Miran-Ramirez awoke and found her shirt soaked in blood. Realizing that her “her left breast [was] bleeding from the nipple,” she rushed to the emergency room.
Today, CBS-5 reports that this San Francisco Department of Public Health employee has had her claim denied because her insurance company, Blue Shield of California, didn’t consider her situation to be an “emergency.” Even though her doctor told her it was likely a tumor, Blue Shield said that Miran-Ramirez should have known it wasn’t: </div></div> link (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/25/blue-shield-denies/)
I don't know about you but I think any woman would freak out waking up to a blood soaked bed.
How low can they go?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Six-Year-Old Girl ‘On Verge Of Never Hearing Again’ Due To Insurance Company Denial</span>
cigna_logoOne of the worst abuses of the private health insurance industry is its practice of denying claims to pay for necessary care for patients. This practice has become so rampant in the industry that a recent study by the California Nurses Association found that a whopping 21 percent of all insurance claims filed in the first half of 2009 in the state of California were denied by insurers.
As the story of six-year-old Madison Leuchtmann of Franklin County, MO, demonstrates, even children are victims of this insurance company abuse. Madison was born with bilateral atresia, which means she lacks ear canals in both ears. In order to hear, she wears a special device on a headband that allows her to make out sounds. Despite her disability, Madison is at the top of her kindergarten class and is slowly learning to read.
Yet Madison, due to her growth, will soon require a new hearing implant to be able to recognize sounds. Her hearing and speech therapist warns that “if she doesn’t get her implants by age seven, she’s not going to be able to blend her words. … She won’t be able to hear herself [talk].” Madison’s pediatrician, Dr. Randall Clary, also insists that without the implant, the girl may never be able to hear again.
Unfortunately, the Leuchtmann’s family insurer, Cigna, has issued “one denial after another,” flatly refusing to cover the $20,000 bill for the implant. In a written statement to the local news station Fox 2, Cigna explained, “It is not unusual for commercial benefit plans to exclude hearing assisted devices,” prompting Dr. Clary to angrily respond, “This is obviously medically necessary. You have a child that has no ear canals!” Dr. Clary also told Fox 2 that he sees these sort of denials “on a weekly basis.” Watch Fox 2’s report </div></div>
Just last week a kid was refused an artificial limb because he had used up his 'quota'........?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Benjamin French was born with his right arm missing below the elbow. In his 12 years, he has been fitted with seven prostheses. His most recent replacement will cost nearly $30,000 and his doctor says he will soon grow out of it.
But, according to his insurance company, the boy is ineligible for further coverage of prosthetic devices <span style='font-size: 20pt'>because he has already spent his lifetime maximum benefit.</span> </div></div>
ie, "Sorry kid, you are TOO EXPENSIVE."
There are 1,00s of these stories.
When 100 Mil is paid into the proposed Govt run Public option, 97 Mil will be used to pay for HC.
When a 100 Mil is paid into a private- for profit- insurer, 70 Mil will be used for HC.
People, who are insured, are being refused treatment to protect profits, that's a fact.
Its pay or die, and if you can't pay then you are expendable. Collateral damage.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Apart from the FACT that the CBO has said the Bill will SAVE money, how much does the Govt spend on HC now?
</div></div>I don't know, but spending MORE is certainly not the answer.
eg8r <---laughed a bit when qtip threw his "facts" out there again.
11-24-2009, 03:07 PM
The cost estimates have one main flaw. The bill is set up to collect money for the first 4 years, but not begin spending until after that. If you look at the actual costs from the year 2013 through 2022, which is the first ten years they will be paying for it, the cost estimates approach 2 trillion dollars. And I challenge anyone to find any government program in our history that did not drastically exceed the cost estimates.
11-24-2009, 06:05 PM
And let us not forget the good ol' disclaimer:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">a. Does not include effects on spending subject to future appropriations. </div></div>
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.