Healthcare "special deals"

[chutem 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100313/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_overhaul_special_deals

Should some states get special consideration in the healthcare legislation?

James

[rushmc 23]

Quote

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100313/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_overhaul_special_deals

Should some states get special consideration in the healthcare legislation?

James

What ever it takes to buy a vote....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100313/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_overhaul_special_deals

Should some states get special consideration in the healthcare legislation?

James

What ever it takes to buy a vote....

That's the Chicago way!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[chutem 0]

Do you guys give Obama credit for speaking out against the special deals or is it all just part of "the game"?

James

[rushmc 23]

Yes, and OH!

There is more

From AP found on NewsMax

http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/US-Health-Overhaul-Special/2010/03/13/id/352553

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Do you guys give Obama credit for speaking out against the special deals or is it all just part of "the game"?

James

Read the link just posted

He is still spawning behind the door deals

It is his way

Oh, and why do you think he "speaks out" against them now? Cause the public got pissed maybe?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Also from AP found on FOX

Quote

AP

Obama's proposal to eliminate state-specific items in the health care bill comes with polls finding heightened public opposition to backroom political deals.

Hmmmm...

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Do you guys give Obama credit for speaking out against the special deals or is it all just part of "the game"?

James

I'd count Obama offering a judgeship to the brother of a Dem that voted against the healthcare bill as 'part of the game'.

What would YOU call it?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[chutem 0]

We're going to do what we have to do to get a bill out of the House and Senate," said James Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. As for Obama's wish list of deletions: "We'll certainly keep it in mind as we pull together a final bill."

Gotta love the sound of this.

I must admit that I like hearing the president speak out against these special deals although I don't doubt it's political gamesmanship.

James

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Yes, and OH!

There is more

From AP found on NewsMax

http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/US-Health-Overhaul-Special/2010/03/13/id/352553

You guys can't help yourself, can you? I just ignored a Heritage Foundation post yesterday. Hillarious, some of you guys think wikipedia is BS.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Yes, and OH!

There is more

From AP found on NewsMax

http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/US-Health-Overhaul-Special/2010/03/13/id/352553

You guys can't help yourself, can you? I just ignored a Heritage Foundation post yesterday. Hillarious, some of you guys think wikipedia is BS.

Heritage is respected in Washington at least at some level

but again you generalize and ignore issues when you have to,.

Oh,and the article was AP lucky my boy

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I just ignored a Heritage Foundation post yesterday

For which we were all INCREDIBLY thankful.

Quote

Hillarious, some of you guys think wikipedia is BS.

Hilarious, coming from the guy that thinks the Onion is non-satire.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 23]

From Heritage and a good read. But I suppose anyone can ignore it and chose to stay un-informed

Quote

A Principled Path to Rational Health Care Reform
Published on May 15, 2009 by Nina Owcharenko

Congress will soon unveil legislation to reform the health care system. The policies outlined by President Obama during his campaign and those being discussed in Congress would centralize control over the health care system in Washington.

The chief danger of this approach is that it would directly interfere in the personal health care decisions of Americans. There is a much better alternative: a system that recognizes diversity across the states and differences in individual health care needs and preferences.

A Consensus on the Problems

There is little disagreement that the current health care system needs an overhaul. Today, health care costs continue to rise while people have fewer choices and are less secure that the coverage they have today will be there tomorrow. The U.S. spends over $2.4 trillion on health care (almost 17 percent of GDP), and the government accounts for almost one-half of all health care spending.[1]

Premiums continue to rise in the private sector. Employer-based family coverage has increased from an average of $6,438 in 2000 to $12,680 in 2008.[2] The government health programs are not faring much better. According to recent CMS Actuary calculations, Medicare and Medicaid spent $818 billion in 2008 and are projected to reach $1.7 trillion by 2018.[3]

Americans are also facing fewer choices. Today, 85 percent of all employers offer only one health plan for their employees.[4] Similar restrictions on personal choice face enrollees in government programs. In Medicaid, 23 percent are not accepting new Medicaid patients, and 18 percent are accepting only some.[5] In Medicare, serious legislative efforts are underway that will likely chip away at seniors' access to the private plans they want in Medicare.[6]

Finally, Americans feel less secure about the future of their health care coverage. With the economic recession, Americans recognize they are one paycheck away from losing their health care coverage. Fifteen percent of Americans are without coverage. The uninsured are not a homogeneous group, but they tend to be disproportionately young, a member of a minority group, and working for small firms.

Most important, while the percentage of those without coverage remains constant, the individuals are not the same. As a matter of fact, 45 percent of uninsured are uninsured for less than four months; only 16 percent are uninsured for more than 18 months.[7] This churning in the health insurance markets, and the lack of portability, is almost entirely the result of outdated government policies.

Two Competing Health Care Visions

There is also general agreement on the outcomes Americans are looking for in any health care reform proposal: affordability, accessibility, portability, and quality. But there is less agreement on policy path for reform.

On one side, there are those who believe that centralizing power in Washington is the best approach to achieve serious and long-lasting health care reform. Their policy prescriptions call for federalizing and heavily regulating health insurance. Proposals for a new public health plan and a federal health insurance exchange, as well as an individual mandate to purchase a government-approved package of benefits, clarify their intent: Washington control over health care financing and delivery.

The result, regardless of stated intentions to the contrary, is that the Congress would ultimately be in charge of health care decisions. It would result in a massive one-size-fits-all government system, and it would depend on flawed financing schemes, new mandates, and higher taxes to pay for it.

On the other side, there are those who believe that individuals and families should be the key decision-makers in health care and that they should control the flow of health care dollars in a reformed system. They are concerned that a centralized system of federal decision-making would:

* Diminish individuals' control over their personal health care decisions;
* Directly undermine state autonomy and authority in health policy, undercutting both innovation and experimentation to expand coverage and deliver quality care, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable of our citizens;
* Generate and perpetuate unsustainable federal spending; and
* Ultimately, in the face of serious budget crises, lead to government rationing of care and services.

Key Elements for a Workable Solution

Members of Congress serious about improving the health care system must find a way to bridge the gap between these two competing visions. There are three critical elements that could bring about a workable solution for lasting health care reform.

1. Tax Equity. The cornerstone of any serious health care reform proposal must address the tax treatment of health insurance. Today, individuals who purchase coverage through their place of work receive an unlimited tax break on the value of their health care benefits. However, those who purchase coverage on their own receive no comparable tax break.

There is broad bipartisan agreement, especially among health care economists and experts, that the current tax treatment of employer-based coverage is inequitable and regressive. Ideally, Congress should replace the current tax exclusion with a system of universal tax credits. Moreover, as a general principle, Congress should provide tax relief for those who purchase coverage on their own and redirect other health care spending to help low-income individuals and families purchase private health insurance coverage.

2. State-Based Reform. The health care challenges vary greatly across the country. Some states face high health care costs, while others face high rates of uninsurance. And, rural states face different challenges than urban states.

Instead of depending on a federal one-size-fits-all solution, Congress should embrace a federal-state partnership that would preserve diversity in the states. The states' role would be to devise the best ways to achieve common national goals--for example, to establish a mechanism for portability. This is in sharp contrast to other state-based approaches where the federal government sets explicit requirements and imposes on the states the onerous task of administering its federal reform. These types of partnerships are little more than a backdoor way to a one-size-fits-all federal plan.

3. Sound Financing. The U.S. spends over $2.4 trillion on health care. Instead of spending an additional $1.6 trillion on a plan financed by tax increases and unproven savings from Medicare and Medicaid that may never materialize, Congress should restructure and redirect existing health care spending to make it more effective. To address long-term health care costs, Congress must focus on fundamental reform of the tax treatment of health insurance and entitlements. At the very least, Congress should require that savings be realized before appropriating them to any expansions.

Creating a Lasting Health Care Reform

Members of Congress have a choice: Either they can support efforts that expand Washington's control of the health care system, or they can allow the states to develop solutions that will transfer direct control of health care dollars and personal health care decisions back to individuals and families. The choice should not be that hard.

There are supporting links on the page if you so wish to continue your education

http://www.heritage.org/Home/Research/Reports/2009/05/A%20Principled%20Path%20to%20Rational%20Health%20Care%20Reform

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[chutem 0]

With all the Presidential push to get something done on this I was surprised to see him saying things that don't seem to help push it through. If it is all just game playing I'll just go back to dissapointed.

James

[pirana 0]

The fact that each state's leaders are most focused on why each of them are so special is a strong indicator of what a patchwork piece of provincialized shit this thing is going to be.

Kudos to Obama for publicly denouncing it, but that is probably more of him responding to opinion and needing to look good than anything. But if it works, cool.

However, since there is very little chance of cutting the pork and actually creating a level playing field this time around - I'd say the best we can hope for is extension of the current system, the pain of which might make enough people see the light in time for the next round of "reform."

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Yes, and OH!

There is more

From AP found on NewsMax

http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/US-Health-Overhaul-Special/2010/03/13/id/352553

You guys can't help yourself, can you? I just ignored a Heritage Foundation post yesterday. Hillarious, some of you guys think wikipedia is BS.

Heritage is respected in Washington at least at some level

but again you generalize and ignore issues when you have to,.

Oh,and the article was AP lucky my boy

Then post the AP article. Most likely the AP writeup was extraploated and bastardized to their liking.

Respected at some level? Yea, a real low level in a partisan sense. Anyone with a couple braincells knows they are a highly partisan rag, Hannity and Limbaugh refernce them all of the time. Nice try though, keep trying to legitimate them.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

I just ignored a Heritage Foundation post yesterday

For which we were all INCREDIBLY thankful.

Quote

Hillarious, some of you guys think wikipedia is BS.

Hilarious, coming from the guy that thinks the Onion is non-satire.

No, I thought it was a RW rag with a satirical, "we're just joking" spin on the homophobia present in most current Repubs.

Sad thing is, you actually think the Heritage Foundation is legitimate and non-partisan .

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

There are supporting links on the page if you so wish to continue your education

http://www.heritage.org/...alth%20Care%20Reform

Lucky: Posts gov data

Mike, Rush, etc: Posts Heritage Fondation

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Too funny ...

Lucky whines about partisan news organizations and how they are not credible in all sorts of threads today, but then has a URL to the "Huffington Post" in their signature line.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Too funny ...

Lucky whines about partisan news organizations and how they are not credible in all sorts of threads today, but then has a URL to the "Huffington Post" in their signature line.

That's just the type of stuff that Lucky thinks is legit.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Yes, and OH!

There is more

From AP found on NewsMax

http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/US-Health-Overhaul-Special/2010/03/13/id/352553

You guys can't help yourself, can you? I just ignored a Heritage Foundation post yesterday. Hillarious, some of you guys think wikipedia is BS.

Heritage is respected in Washington at least at some level

but again you generalize and ignore issues when you have to,.

Oh,and the article was AP lucky my boy

Then post the AP article. Most likely the AP writeup was extraploated and bastardized to their liking.

Respected at some level? Yea, a real low level in a partisan sense. Anyone with a couple braincells knows they are a highly partisan rag, Hannity and Limbaugh refernce them all of the time. Nice try though, keep trying to legitimate them.

You sure do drool and fall all over your tongue when your "facts" get thrown back in your face don't you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

There are supporting links on the page if you so wish to continue your education

http://www.heritage.org/...alth%20Care%20Reform

Lucky: Posts gov data

Mike, Rush, etc: Posts Heritage Fondation

Heritage USES gov data

YOU SPIN gov data

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Too funny ...

Lucky whines about partisan news organizations and how they are not credible in all sorts of threads today, but then has a URL to the "Huffington Post" in their signature line.

The link is a satirical SNL skit that demonstrates how guys like you work with your political thinking. I'm not referencing them as a legit site, just a fun ref. In case you read my posts, I try to stick with or very close to gov data, but I won;t confuse you with the facts.

[rushmc 23]

Interesting new topic angle within the Dem talking points

Quote

March 13, 2010 | 12:20 PM ET
House Democrat Takes On Party Leaders

In a surprising and fascinating look at the behind-the-scenes negotiations of proposed health care legislation on Capitol Hill, a prominent Democrat says the actions of his party's leaders in recent days represents a "pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party."



If House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is holding out hope that Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) will replicate his "yes" vote on health care reform she can probably forget it. In a wide-ranging swipe at his party's leaders, Stupak told an interviewer that he is a definite "no" vote on a health care bill that is expected to reach the House floor next week.



A single vote could make the difference in the fate of the legislation but Stupak says other pro-life Democrats who had been part of his coalition fighting for specific language on abortion funding have given up the fight. "It's almost like some right-to-life members don't want to be bothered. They just want this over," Stupak told National Review's Robert Costa in an article published on-line Friday. If that's the case, Democratic leaders may be able to prevail without Stupak's support.



The Michigan Democrat's vitriol for House leaders shines a bright light on the normally secret negotiations. "They're ignoring me," Stupak asserts while concluding that the final bill will not have the stronger abortion-related language that he's long supported and was able to force in the first bill the House passed late last year.



"[E]ven if they don't have the votes, it's been made clear to us that they won't insert our language on the abortion issue," Stupak says. "I really believe that the Democratic leadership is simply unwilling to change its stance. Their position says that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered."



Stupak offers an interesting take on why party leaders don't want his effort to succeed. "If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That's one of the arguments I've been hearing," Stupak says. "Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue - come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we're talking about."



Stupak believes that if a final health care bill passes without strong language on abortion funding, it will effectively freeze out pro-life Democrats in the future. He says he will remain a Democrat but predicts that any effort to change the abortion language would have to wait "until the Republicans take back the majority to fix this." You read that right, a Democrat looking forward to a Republican take-over of Congress!



Stupak's prominence and apparent resolve on this issue has increased the political heat on the nine-term Democrat. "This has really reached an unhealthy stage," Stupak says. "People are threatening ethics complaints on me. On the left, they're really stepping it up. Every day, from Rachel Maddow to the Daily Kos, it keeps coming. Does it bother me? Sure. Does it change my position? No."



A Friday posting on Daily Kos has this headline: "Women ROAR BACK against Stupak/Pitts!" It targets Stupak and Congressman Joe Pitts (R-PA) and is a fundraising appeal for Stupak's primary challenger. "If you were pissed when Joe Wilson shouted YOU LIE at President Obama I want you to channel that same sort of anger and aim it in support of Connie Saltonstall..."

Earlier this week, MSNBC's Maddow took direct aim at Stupak saying his efforts were designed to do nothing more than get him on television. "Abortion rights only for rich ladies. That's Bart Stupak's principled crusade," Maddow said.

Stupak does not name names in his attack on party leaders but in a radio interview Thursday, Stupak recounted a conversation he had with House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA), a central figure in the health care debate. Stupak said Waxman told him that Democratic leaders "want to pay for abortions." In a statement to Fox News, Waxman said “My position has been clear and consistent. I do not believe health reform should be used to change current law, which prohibits federal funds from paying for abortion.”

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Too funny ...

Lucky whines about partisan news organizations and how they are not credible in all sorts of threads today, but then has a URL to the "Huffington Post" in their signature line.

That's just the type of stuff that Lucky thinks is legit.

I don't think it's legit, it's just a satirical demonstration of how Repubs work. It doesn't detail an issue, it just illustartes a modus operendi.