New health-care agenda is outrageous

  • Follow Letters

So, the federal government now wants more control over our pocketbooks and even our health? They are forcing all Americans to adopt their socialist style of health care with a promise to manage these costs.

Really? That is like asking an alcoholic to manage a liquor store. New York Times columnist Douglas H. Eakin estimates this legislation will not only not deliver the promised $138 billion in deficit reductions, but instead will cost an estimated $562 billion more.

Our government already "manages" our retirement funds (Social Security), retirement health care (Medicare), our indigent health care (Medicaid) and our state and federal unemployment funds -- and all of these funds are financially a wreck.

Social Security already is paying out more money than it has taken in, Medicare and Medicaid are predicted to be completely bankrupt by 2014, and the state and federal unemployment coffers are all in deficit positions.

Would you ask them to manage your piggy bank?

It is still hard for me to believe that our country has endorsed socialism to this degree. Very sad. Where is our nationwide, patriotic revolt?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said our health-care system would now be on equal footing with Europe. Seriously? Europeans who can afford it come to the U.S. for health care.

If you have said nothing and done nothing so far to protest this law, it is never too late. Laws can change and they can change quickly if enough people speak in a united voice.

If you would like to call, write or e-mail your senators and representatives, go to these Web sites:

www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm; and https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml.

Comments (63) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
veggie-d
0
Points
veggie-d 04/12/10 - 12:12 pm
0
0
you people still cryin about

you people still cryin about this issue? seems like with all the "facts" & "knowledge" dispersed throughout these comments that you all woulda been able to elect the RIGHT people to get the job done in the FIRST place...oh yeah...that's what DID happen...

jack
11
Points
jack 04/12/10 - 12:13 pm
0
0
Gouse, tht article was

Gouse, tht article was written BEFORE the HC monstrosity was passed. Current professional analysis counters not only the CBO numbers claiming that the HC monstrosity will reduce the deficit. Neither does the article take into consideration the $halfT dollars being stolen from Medicare.

jack
11
Points
jack 04/12/10 - 12:16 pm
0
0
"The sad part is that not

"The sad part is that not many of the people who can change things care enough about others to even consider it"

I believe you aren't looking at the prospects of November elections and the tea party movement.

Rhetor
1160
Points
Rhetor 04/12/10 - 12:18 pm
0
0
PS: the health reform law

PS: the health reform law does not cover illegal immigrants, a fact known to anyone who looks at any news source except Fox. In fact, illegal immigrants cannot even use their own mondy to buy insurance under the new law. Illegal immigrants still get free ER care at government expense thanks to President Reagan....

Rhetor
1160
Points
Rhetor 04/12/10 - 12:22 pm
0
0
I take it back. Even Fox has

I take it back. Even Fox has reported (in a very brief, well-buried news item) that the health care law doesn't cover illegal immigrants.

LindaB
0
Points
LindaB 04/12/10 - 12:26 pm
0
0
I have read every page of the

I have read every page of the new law. And you clearly have not. There are several factual errors in this letter. Medicare is not destined to go broke in 2014. Social Security is safe until 2025. That does not mean these programs don't need changes. They do. Where were the Republicans in the 8 years they had the power to make changes? Spending like drunken sailors is what they were doing - mostly on the Iraq war. Come on folks. What we need to do to save Medicare is to start paying for medical care that works, not just paying for MORE care. Start paying doctors and hospitals for the results they get, not just for doing more of the same. As for the rest of us? If you are on Medicare and reading this, you have to ask yourself -- how many times have I asked my doctor for some test or treatment just to reassure myself? How well am I taking care of my own health so I don't become a burden on the system? This has nothing to do with socialism or a government take over. Enough already with the government takeover. The new health care law keeps the present system of private insurance and private doctors and hospitals. It does allow the government to keep an eye on fraud and waste -- and to be sure insurance companies aren't gouging us. To me, that is what government ought to be doing!

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 12:38 pm
0
0
I have read every page of the

I have read every page of the new law. And you clearly have not. There are several factual errors in this letter.
________________________________

Nothing after that statement relies upon the law you claim to have read. You cite not any sectional references, quote not any basis, therefore the remnant is opinion. Therefore, your claim is adjudged grossen bullschiezen.

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 04/12/10 - 12:42 pm
0
0
LindaB,are you sure you

LindaB,are you sure you didn't miss anything or overlook something or misinterpreted something?

LindaB
0
Points
LindaB 04/12/10 - 01:03 pm
0
0
What references do you want?

What references do you want? The info on when Medicare or SS go broke is available via a variety of sources, such as the Congressional Budget Office, but going broke in 2014 is NOT one of the reliable estimates. The information about quality monitoring and payment changes in Medicare are available in a variety of places in the law, too numerous to outline here. If you have a specific question, ask me.

LindaB
0
Points
LindaB 04/12/10 - 01:06 pm
0
0
And to wizzardx1, of course

And to wizzardx1, of course there are different interpretations. But I try to stick to what is in the law, not what "might" happen. For example, there has been a lot of wild-eyed speculation that the IRS will put people in jail if they don't sign up for insurance and don't pay their fines for not doing so. Actually, on page 131 of PL 111-148 (or HR 3590), it says the following:

‘‘(A) WAIVER OF CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.
‘‘(B) LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES.—The Secretary shall not—
‘‘(i) file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section, or
‘‘(ii) levy on any such property with respect to such failure.’’.

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 01:33 pm
0
0
Hmmm, you can't throw me in

Hmmm, you can't throw me in jail, you can't attach my property or my tax refund... why exactly should I buy health insurance again? Can't I just wait till I need it?

    my compliments on your citations. thank you.

butler123
1
Points
butler123 04/12/10 - 01:34 pm
0
0
To all tax payers who think

To all tax payers who think this healthcare thing is so great and that everyone except a few misguided die hard repubs want it: People buy health insurance and God forbid that something happens where they need it. Where does the money come from? It comes from everyone that pays into it and doesn't need to use it (hence the name insurance, kind of just in case). If this thing is so wonderful, then why doesn't the government just start it's own insurance co. and just those that want in pay the premiums. And since so many of you think you should take care of your fellow man, then you can pay a little (or a lot) extra for those who want it, but can't afford it. You know I might have joined that myself. At least it would have been my choice. Sounds more like a true public option to me.

butler123
1
Points
butler123 04/12/10 - 01:35 pm
0
0
What did you say? You all

What did you say? You all want it, but none of you can afford it? Hmm...

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 02:06 pm
0
0
version 3.1 THE HEALTH

    version 3.1

THE HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGES
The Senate‐passed bill as improved through reconciliation will create state-based health insurance Exchanges, for states that choose to operate their own exchanges, and a multi-state Exchange for the others. The Exchanges will make health insurance more affordable and accessible for small businesses and individuals.

EXCHANGES
Create Exchanges where individuals and small businesses can compare and purchase health insurance online - among other places - at competitive prices.
For states that choose not to operate their own Exchange, there will be a multi-state Exchange run by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Sure sounds like a government run insurance company to me.
State insurance commissioners will continue to provide oversight regarding consumer protections, rate review, and solvency.
Protects the financial integrity of the Exchanges through annual audits and financial reporting overseen by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and establishes procedures and protections to guard against fraud and abuse.
Mice guarding the cheese.

ONE-STOP SHOPPING THAT PROMOTES CHOICE AND COMPETITION
Health coverage options available in a zip code will be listed on state-based web portals and elsewhere.
Using the Internet and other means to present consumers with available plans will make purchasing health insurance easier and more understandable.
And those who get ripped off on the internet will find millions of phish sites that are just one letter off…
Individuals will be able to choose coverage among several benefit packages all including an essential set of benefits that provide comprehensive health care services with different levels of cost sharing. cost sharing?LMAO
To ensure competition, state Exchanges will have a national plan supervised by Office of Personnel and Management and may include state-based non-profit co-ops and multi-state insurance plans.
Non profit? Co-ops run by the state? But you can keep what you have now… hahahahahalol.

PROVIDE INFORMATION AND PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY
Requires standardized format, definitions, enrollment applications, consumer satisfaction, and marketing requirements to allow easy comparison of the prices, benefits, and performance of health plans.
Great idea. Hope it’s 3rd grade level.
Establishes a toll‐free telephone hotline to respond to consumer requests for assistance.
Aye is laughing too hard to comment on this.
Creates online eligibility determinations with regard to health care premium tax credits or public programs, and consumers without access to the Internet will be able to enroll through the mail or in person in a variety of locations.
You can be denied online and appeal at a location nearest you!
Health coverage Navigators in states will conduct public education activities, distribute information about enrollment and premium credits, and provide enrollment assistance.
Wooohoooo, Government Navigators!” This is so simple, we pay someone to help you screw it up!”
Awards grants to states to establish, expand, or support health insurance consumer assistance.
I hope you all see how much money this law gives to the states to pay their welfare bills. Its an outrage.

ENSURE AFFORDABLE COVERAGE
Provides premium tax credits to limit the amount individuals and families up to 400% poverty spend on health insurance premiums.
Only if you bought the insurance through the exchange.
Provides cost‐sharing credits for individuals and families up to 250% of poverty to help ensure affordable coverage.
Cost sharing again… why subsidize people up to 250% of poverty??
Sliding scale tax credits are available to small employers with fewer than 25 employees and average annual wages of less than $50,000 that purchase health insurance for employees.
There will be many small employers who currently employ 50-75 people who will become employers of less than 25 as a direct result of this Health Insurance Rape Law.

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 02:18 pm
0
0
Tax credits for health

Tax credits for health insurance premiums are only eligible for those who purchase the insurance from the "Exchange".

Your employer pays a $2000 "fine" to good ol Uncle Sam for each employee which is not offered insurance. Yeah, we can keep our insurance... what company would rather pay 2-3x and offer it when they can pay a flat fee annually and let someone else deal with it? So your employer decides to pay the fine and notifies you... guess what? You must purchase your new health insurance through the "Exchange".

Bottom line: what used to be a private transaction, optional, requiring a bit of forethought and decision making, has now become a Government Bureaucracy. What used to be as simple as filling out a job application has become a Government Intervention? All because some people had the audacity to choose to be uninsured. TOYOTA

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 02:30 pm
0
0
AT&T Inc. will book $1

AT&T Inc. will book $1 billion in first-quarter costs related to the health-care law signed this week by President Barack Obama, the most of any U.S. company so far.

A change in the tax treatment of Medicare subsidies triggered the non-cash expense, and the company will consider changes to the benefits it offers current and retired workers, Dallas-based AT&T said March 26 in a regulatory filing.

AT&T, the biggest U.S. phone company, joins Caterpillar Inc., AK Steel Holding Corp. and 3M Co. in recording non-cash expenses against earnings as a result of the law. Health-care costs may shave as much as $14 billion from U.S. corporate profits, according to an estimate by benefits consulting firm Towers Watson. AT&T employed about 281,000 people as of the end of January.

“Companies like AT&T, that have large employee bases, are going to have higher health-care costs and, therefore, lower earnings unless they can negotiate something or offer less to their employees,” said Chris Larsen, an analyst at Piper Jaffray & Co. in New York, who rates AT&T shares “overweight” and doesn’t own any himself. "But you can keep your current insurance if you want to. LIES

AT&T previously received a tax-free benefit from the government to subsidize health-care costs for retirees, who would otherwise be on a Medicare Part D plan. Under the new bill, AT&T will no longer be able to deduct that subsidy.

“As a result of this legislation, including the additional tax burden, AT&T will be evaluating prospective changes to the active and retiree health-care benefits offered by the company,” the carrier said in the filing.

Aye is still laughing at the prospect of one of the dumb masses calling the Gov't Helpline and hearing "Hello, I am calling myself Mark, and I am being very happy to be hearing you today! Welcome to Government Helpline."

KSL
164923
Points
KSL 04/12/10 - 02:43 pm
0
0
Or "I'm from the Government

Or "I'm from the Government and I'm here(hear) to help you."

disssman
6
Points
disssman 04/12/10 - 02:50 pm
0
0
Southernguy. A poll of Faux

Southernguy. A poll of Faux news isn't really a valid poll for the entire country. I believe the president won by a fat margin and that is who he is responding to.
I do like the CONS version of healthcare.
1. Don't get sick.
2. If you are seriously sick please have the deacency to die quickly.
3. Send all pregnant girls overseas so the neignbors won't know they are having an abortion. Claim a tax write off for schooling.
4. And make sure all pre exhisting conditions are denied coverage.
And make sure the bill is one page long so there won't be any questions. Although that is a lot for some southern folks to digest in one sitting.

disssman
6
Points
disssman 04/12/10 - 02:53 pm
0
0
Wizzardx1 please don't tell

Wizzardx1 please don't tell me - grandma has to die? Is that back in there?

disssman
6
Points
disssman 04/12/10 - 02:54 pm
0
0
WizzardX1 please don't tell

WizzardX1 please don't tell me they have included funding of abortions.

disssman
6
Points
disssman 04/12/10 - 02:56 pm
0
0
Wizzardx1 please explain to

Wizzardx1 please explain to everyone about congress getting their own hospitals and doctors and nurses for their private use. Absolutely disgusting what they are doing in this area. Are their secretarys and gardeners getting the samr treatment?

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 03:08 pm
0
0
If Aye was in Congress, and

If Aye was in Congress, and did NOT exempt himself from this law, Aye'd be a fool.

    Aye has many faults, foolishness isn't one of them

InChristLove
22486
Points
InChristLove 04/12/10 - 03:35 pm
0
0
LindaB, I think you need to

LindaB, I think you need to go back and read this carefully. "In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure." Notice the words "failure by a taxpayer to TIMELY pay any penalty". This wording is tricky, it doesn't say failure by a taxpayer to pay, it says timely pay, so in my observation that means you have to pay, just not timely. You still have to pay the penalty for be prosecuted. This is what you call fine print.

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 03:41 pm
0
0
ICL: I disagree. I think

ICL: I disagree. I think LindaB's citation was excellent, your point is semantics at best. If you pay on time, why would they prosecute? If you don't pay on time, you'll not be prosecuted is the only logical interpretation of this accurate citation. She is right, those that say the IRS will imprison you for not paying the fine are wrong.
LindaB1- ICL-0

InChristLove
22486
Points
InChristLove 04/12/10 - 03:51 pm
0
0
I disagree. It say if you

I disagree. It say if you don't pay timely, which means you still have to pay just not in a timely manner. Which leaves the alternative, if you don't pay at all, you could be imprisioned. What is the insentive to pay at all, if they aren't going to do anything if you pay untimely or don't pay at all. Everyone will decide not to pay because there is no ramification not to. If nothing is going to be done whether you pay or don't pay, why even have this statement in the bill at all. Makes no sense.

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 03:59 pm
0
0
Because a law which clearly

Because a law which clearly says "pay this fine or go to jail" would have never made it past Congress.
Toothless law. I suggest at least 230 million Americans test it and let us find out.

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 04:01 pm
0
0
In the submitted material to

In the submitted material to the CBO, the Health Insurance Rape Law proposed to offset cost with fine receipts. The excellent material offered by LindaB shows there will be no penalties for non-compliance. So what is Government relying upon to collect? Gullible sheep who are afraid of the IRS. For many, that will be sufficient.

Ayetidiosi
2
Points
Ayetidiosi 04/12/10 - 06:34 pm
0
0
No death panels... the Gov't

No death panels... the Gov't knows best... trust the Health Insurance Rape Law...

Diana Smith has gone through six months of radiation and chemotherapy -- one week out of every month. She is in remission and had a donor for a transplant; being in remission is prerequisite for the transplant.

But her hopes of receiving the transplant were dashed in March, when she says, the Social Security Administration contacted her –without her soliciting it -- and told her that her three year-old son was entitled to receive Social Security disability payments. Even though she didn't ask for it, she signed the form and received her son's first check.

In April, Medicaid canceled her universal health care policy because her income level had risen with her son's payments – making her ineligible for the insurance program.

There's much to this Aye is leaving out, but the point is the same:
You people want the Government to handle anything concerning your health?

corgimom
45260
Points
corgimom 04/12/10 - 08:30 pm
0
0
"They did this AFTER they

"They did this AFTER they exempted themselves from it."

If you're going to complain about the new bill, at least tell the truth. There's plenty to object to, but don't waste your time with lies. Ronald Reagan signed into law in 1984 that Congress would be covered under the Federal health benefits program. They didn't exempt themselves from this, Ronald Reagan did, 26 years ago.

LindaB
0
Points
LindaB 04/12/10 - 08:33 pm
0
0
If any of you really want to

If any of you really want to know what is in the law, check out this website by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation (no relation to the Health plan)... http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/finalhcr.pdf -- one of the comments here mentioned the nonprofit Office of Personnel Management that administers all the benefits for federal employees, including members of Congress and their staff. It is not true that federal employees or Congress members have their own doctors and hospitals. However, they do have an "exchange" like the one states will set up. It is just a marketplace of different plans that federal employees can choose from depending on where they live and how much they want to spend. The OPM does a great job of administering these plans at quite a low overhead. We should all be so lucky to have that opportunity to actually choose among different plans -- and we will, come 2014.

Back to Top
loading...
Top headlines

$1 million settlement reached in North Augusta police shooting

A $1 million settlement has been reached with the North Augusta police and officials in Edgefield County in the case of a 68-year-old black man shot to death by a police officer after a slow-speed ...
Search Augusta jobs