The President gave a pretty good speech last night outlining his goals for health care reform. He addressed the many misconceptions about his proposals as well.
The only part of his plan I'm not sure I'm comfortable with is the idea that everyone would be forced to have insurance. I didn't really like this when Hillary Clinton was pushing it during the election, but apparently it is a popular demand among some conservatives and/or Republicans?
I know that uninsured people inadvertently drive up the price of insurance and health care for everyone else when they go to the emergency room and don't have to pay for their services. I guess we demand auto insurance.
Did anyone else watch the speech last night? What were your thoughts? And what do you guys think about mandating health insurance be purchased by everyone?
I thought it was just so disrespectful the remarks shouted out by several GOP senators. I mean please...you can disagree with the man but its rather immature to interrupt the President when he's making an address like that.
I find it pretty ironic that the GOP heckled Obama on Health Care, but cheered Bush for making war. To me that says quite a bit about the mindset of some Republicans.
Sorry again...P.P.S...I saw this on a friends e-mail and it describes how a lot how I feel: ------ "We did not come here to fear the future, we came to shape it." B. Obama---last nights speech
We need to fix our healthcare system because it is a disgrace to let 46 million Americans live in fear that if they get sick, they can't afford to be treated. We need to fix this broken system because it's unforgivable that more than 60% of personal bankrupcies in the US arise from a medical emergency - and that many of these are from people who did have insurance. We need to fix our crazy system because with lifetime caps on payouts it's possible for a 10 year old child with Leukemia to use up her lifetime quota of insurance claimes before she even enters her teens.
We need to fix our system... because we can. Because it's bizarre to pretend that America has no choice but to be the most expensive health care market in the world at the sime time we are falling behind on life expectancy, infant mortality and rates of chronic diseases.
We have to fix our health care system because, frankly, it's downright unpatriotic to deprive Americans of the benefits enjoyed by citizens all over the world as a basic right.
----
Change needs to happen and I support Obama in what he's trying to do. I also think though that talks won't end once the bill passes....talks on quality/cost effectiveness will go on for a long time.
Call/Write your representatives and tell them to pass health care and stop wasting so much time with politics!
I watched the US Open, and I Tevo'd "So You Think You Can Dance."
I'm tired of the hypocrisy and double-talk. Why is it "bickering" if it comes from the other party, and justifiable civil dissent if it comes from your own? Why is it ok to spend when it is your policy, but not when it is someone elses?
Roger makes a good point. And I think Christine's memory is a little short. This is not the first time that someone has heckled the President during a speech before the Congress. Just about six years ago, President Bush was heckled by Democrats. I find it ironic that the pot is now calling the kettle black.
Remember when Code Pink was all over the news protesting the war? Nancy Pelosi, when confronted by them, told them she respected their right to dissent. Now Americans on the right are demonized as Nazi's and "astroturf" because they choose to return the favor. I don't care whether you agree with President Obama's health care proposal or oppose it, or agreed with the war or opposed it, the freedom of speech without recrimination by the government should apply to all.
I find it further disingenuous that the party with control of both houses of Congress and the White House are now discussing whether or not to censure the congressman (was it Wilson?). This is worse than 1984. We're facing the debate of the century about what is perhaps the most important legislation to be passed in fifty years, and the party in control of all the levers of government, all the immense power of the federal bureaucracy, is discussing an official censure of representative of the people. They want to silence their critics not by persuasion of argument by with official action. Scoffing and mocking your critics may be lowbrow, but at least it is not abuse of power. I do not think that Wilson (it was Wilson, right?) acted with the decorum the occasion required, but official actions to squash his right to dissent, echoing the scoffing by the majority leader that town hall protesters were "un-American," is the very epitome of what prevents us from reaching an accord on this issue that is of such great importance to our country.
There has GOT to be something in between what he is proposing and what is currently out there. Just b/c I don't support his plan doesn't mean I like the current state of things. We need things to change, but there needs to be a compromise. There are other ideas out there. They just need to be seriously considered. Why can't people just get along and listen to each other? Some politicians are so ignorant b/c they refuse to accept that the other side might have a good idea so they don't listen! That goes for both sides.
Auto insurance is required - if you choose to own an automobile. Driver's insurance is required - if you choose to drive. Requiring health insurance though? I mean we all have bodies that need care - should we be REQUIRED to have health insurance? I don't know. I mean if you can't afford to feed yourself every month, how can you be expected to have health insurance (unless they make it completely free and only require you to sign up?)? I think the plan to make a much more affordable option for people is wonderful - and greatly needed - but can they realistically require it? And what happens if people don't? Will they have to pay a fine, putting them more into debt? I realize I'm only posing more questions here - just curious to hear more thoughts.
What if the debate was not about health care, but just health? Wouldn't the need for health care diminish? Eat better, lose weight, stop smoking....fewer cases of diabetes, cancer, and obescity with all the health problems that come with it.
I don't have a problem with dissent but I think there's a time and a place for it no matter what party you belong to.
I think the GOP would be coming across a bit better right now if their arguments were actually based on fact not lies/fear. They seem to be doing a lot of McCarthyist type name calling without providing realistic answers to the problem. They think it will somehow save the party if they just squash the legislation + not come up with solutions. But that's just my opinion. The GOP say the same thing about the Dems don't they? TO be fair I do think the Dems need to get some guts and stop wasting so much time!!
I agree with you on the health issue...too much of this argument is on treating the sick when it should be focused on preventative care too.
First of all, I am so sick and tired of being labeled a poor person hater or being told that I am not compassionate (on previous posts) simply because I am not in favor of "Obamacare." People who can't afford to feed themselves, qualify for healthcare NOW under the current plan. That won't change. I am not choosing to leave the poor on the streets without healthcare by choosing not to follow Obama.
Second, I completely agree with Daniel B.'s comment about the pot calling the kettle black. Oh how that drives me up the wall!! As far as Wilson, at least someone had the guts to say something!! Good for him!
Lastly, Jenny, I do think it should be required for all people to have healthcare. I feel that it would do a few really great things for the healthcare system. 1) Normally healthy adults, who normally don't get health insurance, will start paying into the system and it will offset the cost. 2) Fewer people will go to the Emergency Room because they will have regular doctors to go see. 3) We will be able to do away with pre-existing conditions because people will always have health insurance.
In addition, instead of seeing my tax dollars going to anyone and everyone who wants health care, I would rather see it go to the lower middle class families who are trying their best to get off of welfare but can not afford to get a raise because then they no longer qualify for any help at all. From what I understand, our current system does not really help wean people off welfare. I feel that it should be a more gradual process. Once you make a certain amount, you go from having free healthcare and hundreds of dollars for groceries and free cash to help pay bills, to having to do this all on your own. These are the people I feel sorry for-- the ones who just barely don't qualify anymore but can't quite make it. I feel that they should change the current system so that it begins with you paying for a small percentage of your health care costs, which gradually increases until you pay it all-- thus becoming self-sufficient. Just an example, if you make $0 a year, you pay $0 for healthcare. If you make $20,000 a year, you pay ?% of your costs. When you get up to $40,000 a year, you pay more- ??%, and so on. I feel that people should be doing all that they can and having to be somewhat responsible for their actions. For example, why not call an ambulance everytime you get sick, if you don't have to pay a cent of it??
Another idea would be for people to have the tax deductible option to create "health scholarships" for families who have excessive bills due to worst case scenarios like the Dad has a brain tumor and can not work or something. Those who are suffering from these types of things and can not pay their expenses, can apply for these health scholarships. It would be so much nicer to give my money to a cause like this then to be forced to give my money so that anyone who chooses can have free healthcare.
I am not claiming to "know-it-all" or to say that these are the perfect solution; just to say that there are other ideas out there besides this slip-sliding, foot in the door, next step to becoming universal health care.
I like what Washington Mama has to say. I also admire Joe Wilson for having the passion and belief of his convictions to speak up. We need more of this on both side of the isle.
Hello Gen Noriega. If Sen. Wilson can make some cash yelling at the president, good on him...it works for rock stars and political talk show hosts too.
Washington Mama, I think your ideas are great. My only question is what's the main difference between your ideas and those being put out by Congress?
Like your idea about paying a percentage of health costs based on your wages. Aren't tax payers still going to bear that burden to make up the difference? It sounded to me like you were against that. The President, in his speech, was proposing a plan that would ultimately pay for itself.
Your idea for health scholarships is an interesting one too, and could probably help a lot of people. But what's the difference between that and the "death panels" that a lot of critics are yelling about? Who gets to sit and decide who gets a scholarship and who doesn't?
I think you've got great ideas. I just don't see them as being that different from many of the ideas already out there.
Ultimately, I would just like to see some plan passed that changes the system.
"The President, in his speech, was proposing a plan that would ultimately pay for itself." Is the money going to magically appear? Nothing pays for itself. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, each employer will have to pay $500 per employee. That is going to send a lot of businesses over the edge and cause lost jobs.
The key difference between the current plan and my ideas is that it will remain with a limited slice of the population and it will be people that truly need help, not just anyone could get it. Like the guy who makes $100,000 and just doesn't want to pay for his own healthcare.
About the healthcare scholarships, they aren't paying for the surgery or whatever up front, they would be helping a family get out of debt. That is not a "death panel." They aren't deciding whether or not to pay for the surgery/pay to save the life or not pay and let them die. I feel that there is a huge difference between the two. Yes, it couldn't help everyone and it would be hard to choose but it could help.
14 comments:
The President gave a pretty good speech last night outlining his goals for health care reform. He addressed the many misconceptions about his proposals as well.
The only part of his plan I'm not sure I'm comfortable with is the idea that everyone would be forced to have insurance. I didn't really like this when Hillary Clinton was pushing it during the election, but apparently it is a popular demand among some conservatives and/or Republicans?
I know that uninsured people inadvertently drive up the price of insurance and health care for everyone else when they go to the emergency room and don't have to pay for their services. I guess we demand auto insurance.
Did anyone else watch the speech last night? What were your thoughts? And what do you guys think about mandating health insurance be purchased by everyone?
I thought it was just so disrespectful the remarks shouted out by several GOP senators. I mean please...you can disagree with the man but its rather immature to interrupt the President when he's making an address like that.
P.S.
I find it pretty ironic that the GOP heckled Obama on Health Care, but cheered Bush for making war. To me that says quite a bit about the mindset of some Republicans.
Sorry again...P.P.S...I saw this on a friends e-mail and it describes how a lot how I feel:
------
"We did not come here
to fear the future, we came to shape it." B. Obama---last nights speech
We need to fix our healthcare system because it is a disgrace to let 46 million Americans live in fear that if they get sick, they can't afford to be treated. We need to fix this broken system because it's unforgivable that more than 60% of personal bankrupcies in the US arise from a medical emergency - and that many of these are from people who did have insurance. We need to fix our crazy system because with lifetime caps on payouts it's possible for a 10 year old child with Leukemia to use up her lifetime quota of insurance claimes before
she even enters her teens.
We need to fix our system... because we can. Because it's bizarre to pretend that America has no choice but to be the most expensive health
care market in the world at the sime time we are falling behind on
life expectancy, infant mortality and rates of chronic diseases.
We have to fix our health care system because, frankly, it's downright unpatriotic to deprive Americans of the benefits enjoyed by citizens all over the world as a basic right.
----
Change needs to happen and I support Obama in what he's trying to do. I also think though that talks won't end once the bill passes....talks on quality/cost effectiveness will go on for a long time.
Call/Write your representatives and tell them to pass health care and stop wasting so much time with politics!
I watched the US Open, and I Tevo'd "So You Think You Can Dance."
I'm tired of the hypocrisy and double-talk. Why is it "bickering" if it comes from the other party, and justifiable civil dissent if it comes from your own? Why is it ok to spend when it is your policy, but not when it is someone elses?
Roger makes a good point. And I think Christine's memory is a little short. This is not the first time that someone has heckled the President during a speech before the Congress. Just about six years ago, President Bush was heckled by Democrats. I find it ironic that the pot is now calling the kettle black.
Remember when Code Pink was all over the news protesting the war? Nancy Pelosi, when confronted by them, told them she respected their right to dissent. Now Americans on the right are demonized as Nazi's and "astroturf" because they choose to return the favor. I don't care whether you agree with President Obama's health care proposal or oppose it, or agreed with the war or opposed it, the freedom of speech without recrimination by the government should apply to all.
I find it further disingenuous that the party with control of both houses of Congress and the White House are now discussing whether or not to censure the congressman (was it Wilson?). This is worse than 1984. We're facing the debate of the century about what is perhaps the most important legislation to be passed in fifty years, and the party in control of all the levers of government, all the immense power of the federal bureaucracy, is discussing an official censure of representative of the people. They want to silence their critics not by persuasion of argument by with official action. Scoffing and mocking your critics may be lowbrow, but at least it is not abuse of power. I do not think that Wilson (it was Wilson, right?) acted with the decorum the occasion required, but official actions to squash his right to dissent, echoing the scoffing by the majority leader that town hall protesters were "un-American," is the very epitome of what prevents us from reaching an accord on this issue that is of such great importance to our country.
There has GOT to be something in between what he is proposing and what is currently out there. Just b/c I don't support his plan doesn't mean I like the current state of things. We need things to change, but there needs to be a compromise. There are other ideas out there. They just need to be seriously considered.
Why can't people just get along and listen to each other? Some politicians are so ignorant b/c they refuse to accept that the other side might have a good idea so they don't listen! That goes for both sides.
Auto insurance is required - if you choose to own an automobile. Driver's insurance is required - if you choose to drive. Requiring health insurance though? I mean we all have bodies that need care - should we be REQUIRED to have health insurance?
I don't know. I mean if you can't afford to feed yourself every month, how can you be expected to have health insurance (unless they make it completely free and only require you to sign up?)? I think the plan to make a much more affordable option for people is wonderful - and greatly needed - but can they realistically require it? And what happens if people don't? Will they have to pay a fine, putting them more into debt?
I realize I'm only posing more questions here - just curious to hear more thoughts.
What if the debate was not about health care, but just health? Wouldn't the need for health care diminish? Eat better, lose weight, stop smoking....fewer cases of diabetes, cancer, and obescity with all the health problems that come with it.
I don't have a problem with dissent but I think there's a time and a place for it no matter what party you belong to.
I think the GOP would be coming across a bit better right now if their arguments were actually based on fact not lies/fear. They seem to be doing a lot of McCarthyist type name calling without providing realistic answers to the problem. They think it will somehow save the party if they just squash the legislation + not come up with solutions. But that's just my opinion. The GOP say the same thing about the Dems don't they? TO be fair I do think the Dems need to get some guts and stop wasting so much time!!
I agree with you on the health issue...too much of this argument is on treating the sick when it should be focused on preventative care too.
First of all, I am so sick and tired of being labeled a poor person hater or being told that I am not compassionate (on previous posts) simply because I am not in favor of "Obamacare." People who can't afford to feed themselves, qualify for healthcare NOW under the current plan. That won't change. I am not choosing to leave the poor on the streets without healthcare by choosing not to follow Obama.
Second, I completely agree with Daniel B.'s comment about the pot calling the kettle black. Oh how that drives me up the wall!! As far as Wilson, at least someone had the guts to say something!! Good for him!
Lastly, Jenny, I do think it should be required for all people to have healthcare. I feel that it would do a few really great things for the healthcare system. 1) Normally healthy adults, who normally don't get health insurance, will start paying into the system and it will offset the cost. 2) Fewer people will go to the Emergency Room because they will have regular doctors to go see. 3) We will be able to do away with pre-existing conditions because people will always have health insurance.
In addition, instead of seeing my tax dollars going to anyone and everyone who wants health care, I would rather see it go to the lower middle class families who are trying their best to get off of welfare but can not afford to get a raise because then they no longer qualify for any help at all. From what I understand, our current system does not really help wean people off welfare. I feel that it should be a more gradual process. Once you make a certain amount, you go from having free healthcare and hundreds of dollars for groceries and free cash to help pay bills, to having to do this all on your own. These are the people I feel sorry for-- the ones who just barely don't qualify anymore but can't quite make it. I feel that they should change the current system so that it begins with you paying for a small percentage of your health care costs, which gradually increases until you pay it all-- thus becoming self-sufficient. Just an example, if you make $0 a year, you pay $0 for healthcare. If you make $20,000 a year, you pay ?% of your costs. When you get up to $40,000 a year, you pay more- ??%, and so on. I feel that people should be doing all that they can and having to be somewhat responsible for their actions. For example, why not call an ambulance everytime you get sick, if you don't have to pay a cent of it??
Another idea would be for people to have the tax deductible option to create "health scholarships" for families who have excessive bills due to worst case scenarios like the Dad has a brain tumor and can not work or something. Those who are suffering from these types of things and can not pay their expenses, can apply for these health scholarships. It would be so much nicer to give my money to a cause like this then to be forced to give my money so that anyone who chooses can have free healthcare.
I am not claiming to "know-it-all" or to say that these are the perfect solution; just to say that there are other ideas out there besides this slip-sliding, foot in the door, next step to becoming universal health care.
Hello Fascist Pig,
I like what Washington Mama has to say. I also admire Joe Wilson for having the passion and belief of his convictions to speak up. We need more of this on both side of the isle.
VIVA Manuel!
Hello Gen Noriega. If Sen. Wilson can make some cash yelling at the president, good on him...it works for rock stars and political talk show hosts too.
Washington Mama, I think your ideas are great. My only question is what's the main difference between your ideas and those being put out by Congress?
Like your idea about paying a percentage of health costs based on your wages. Aren't tax payers still going to bear that burden to make up the difference? It sounded to me like you were against that. The President, in his speech, was proposing a plan that would ultimately pay for itself.
Your idea for health scholarships is an interesting one too, and could probably help a lot of people. But what's the difference between that and the "death panels" that a lot of critics are yelling about? Who gets to sit and decide who gets a scholarship and who doesn't?
I think you've got great ideas. I just don't see them as being that different from many of the ideas already out there.
Ultimately, I would just like to see some plan passed that changes the system.
"The President, in his speech, was proposing a plan that would ultimately pay for itself." Is the money going to magically appear? Nothing pays for itself. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, each employer will have to pay $500 per employee. That is going to send a lot of businesses over the edge and cause lost jobs.
The key difference between the current plan and my ideas is that it will remain with a limited slice of the population and it will be people that truly need help, not just anyone could get it. Like the guy who makes $100,000 and just doesn't want to pay for his own healthcare.
About the healthcare scholarships, they aren't paying for the surgery or whatever up front, they would be helping a family get out of debt. That is not a "death panel." They aren't deciding whether or not to pay for the surgery/pay to save the life or not pay and let them die. I feel that there is a huge difference between the two. Yes, it couldn't help everyone and it would be hard to choose but it could help.
Post a Comment