Scan Medical Insurance

Affordable Health Insurance, Cheap Online Health Insurance ...? represent all major medical insurance carriers, From individual health insurance, self employed health insurance, family health insurance, small business ... http://businessandfinance.cn/health-insurance.html

Individual Health Insurance Plans - Medical history not perfect? anyone know of any affordable insurance plans out there...health insurance, preferably with a deductable only on ER and Hospitalization costs.... and initial "co-pay only" on visits and such...Rx.... my medical history isn't the best, but no major health issues...just some past med. history that could make it difficult for me to be insurred.

What are the pros and cons to having a medical flexible spending account (FSA) ? I'm filling out the forms for my employee benefits, and wondering if I should sign up for a medical flexible spending account. I'm young (25) and don't have any major medical issues, though I would be going to the doctor more often than I used to, now that I will have insurance w/ affordable copays. I've never had an flex spending account before. What are the pros and cons.... why should or shouldn't I sign up for it?

What is a good affordable health plan to get? I am a single 25 year old healthy male. Are there any truly affordable health plans out there for me? And don't say that $300 a month is affordable, because its not. I don't need any major medical coverage. I haven't had insurance for 6 years and haven't been to the doctor in those six years. However, my eyesight isn't great, so vision coverage would be good. I also want dental coverage as well. Any suggestions? I forgot to mention that I live in Oregon.

Is international health insurance worth it? I'm from the US and will be travelling to SE Asia and wondering if I should buy international health insurance and what company is best. I have no current health insurance and am in great health. Thailand has very affordable medical care which might be affordable paying out of pocket even if something major happened there, but if I had to be flown back to the US for something medical related, I'd surely go bankrupt. Does anyone have any recommendations for international coverage or not?

Separate But Equal Health Insurance Will Not Work? President Obama lists his health care reform plans on the White House website. The major points of this plan follow: Make Health Insurance Work for People and Businesses -- Not Just Insurance and Drug Companies. •Require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions so all Americans regardless of their health status or history can get comprehensive benefits at fair and stable premiums. •Create a new Small Business Health Tax Credit to help small businesses provide affordable health insurance to their employees. •Lower costs for businesses by covering a portion of the catastrophic health costs they pay in return for lower premiums for employees. •Prevent insurers from overcharging doctors for their malpractice insurance and invest in proven strategies to reduce preventable medical errors. •Make employer contributions more fair by requiring large employers that do not offer coverage or make a meaningful contribution to the cost of quality health coverage for their employees to contribute a percentage of payroll toward the costs of their employees' health care. •Establish a National Health Insurance Exchange with a range of private insurance options as well as a new public plan based on benefits available to members of Congress that will allow individuals and small businesses to buy affordable health coverage. The last item - "Establish a National Health Insurance Exchange with a range of private insurance options as well as a new public plan based on benefits available to members of Congress that will allow individuals and small businesses to buy affordable health coverage." Should cause all of us some concern. Although I agree with Obama's overall plan - creating a public plan "based on benefits available to members of congress" is setting up a separate but equal health insurance system. If a person chooses to participate in the public plan - that person should have access to the VERY SAME plan as members of congress and all federal employees have. "Separate but equal" public plans, one for federal employees and one for the rest of America will mean trouble down the road. As congress changes and enhances their own plan - the other public plan (for the rest of us) will be left behind. I strongly feel that any new - optional - public plan should be the exact SAME plan our congress uses. American citizens should be able to buy into the existing Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program website states that federal employees have "“the widest selection of health plans in the country”. If American citizens decide to participate in the new public plan - they should be able to buy from the same pool of plans that federal employees buy from. This would ensure that as the congress changes and negotiates better benefits for itself - the rest of America will benefit as well.

Major sinus problem, what do I do? Sudafed’s one of the few products that actually worked effectively to treat my congestion due to sinus problems and allergies. Then they changed the formula (because people were using it to make home-made illegal drugs), and it just never worked the same. But when I found the Sudafed nasal spray, I knew I had to try it out. I’ve suffered from consistent allergies for years. My Dad and his mother have it worse as well. Though the severity of the allergies and congestion is lessened a bit, it’s still a daily problem, especially in the early morning hours, sometimes during class or work and at night, at night being the worst of all. Sometimes, the nighttime congestion is so bad that my sleeping is interrupted, or my family’s sleeping is interrupted, because I sneeze, blow my nose, sniffling all night that I stay up prancing up and down the hall waiting for my nasal stops draining and then fall asleep around 4 in the morning. I’ve tried all kinds of prescription and over-the-counter medications, but none of them have been super effective, or they make me too drowsy to function and even drainages get worse. Sudafed cold tablets with pseudoephedrine works fine for me –no drowsy and I do sign up for it, hated doing this. With Sudafed nasal spray (no pseudoephedrine!), I figured drowsiness was the least of my worries. It’s an affordable spray, too, at just about $7 a bottle, and it seems to go a long way. I was excited to try a new Sudafed product that continues to work! The first thing that appealed to me about this spray was that it was a twelve hour spray. All too often, I see these sprays that require use every two hours or, at best, every four hours. My prescription spray was a twelve hour spray, but I was lucky if it worked for three hours, so figured it couldn’t hurt to try this out, and it was certainly cheaper, even with my medical insurance. Though I like how fast-acting nasal sprays are, there’s always that uncomfortable medicated burning in the nasal cavity that turns me away from those products. But this Sudafed spray didn’t have any uncomfortable side-effects like that, and it DID work immediately. The minute I used the spray, the congestion was lessened, and within another five minutes or so, the congestion was gone almost completely. Unfortunately, and like so many other products, it doesn’t last the amount of time it says its’ supposed to… more like five or six hours, but that’s still a much better time frame than anything else I’ve found, even using a tablet and spray together. So, because of that alone, I was highly pleased with the product. I tend to use it mostly when the congestion is at its worst, which is the early morning, during class or work and late night hours, and I find that it really helps me get moving for the day ahead and helps me relax enough to get some uninterrupted sleep at night. No more noise at night that keeps my family awake till all hours. I’ll definitely be using this product again. Was glad to see Sudafed put something new out that works, unfortunately Walgreen has just removed this Sudafed OM Sinus Congested nasal spray from the counter. Why?! What do I do? My dad regularly sees his allergy doctor but he’s still sneezing and draining. I don’t have insurance coverage for this type of allergy doctor. I’ve seen a few and none of their meds work. What do I do? I’ve tried other products and they do not work.

Is my mother one of those Lazy Dirty handout seekers the Conservative complain about? I am wondering if that is what my mother is. You see she works 40 hours a week in a low paying job. Then Saturday and Sunday she works cleaning business in the afternoons. So she works 7 days a week. She is in need of Health Insurance. She was born with a leaking heart valve, and had ovarian cancer over 30 years ago. Because of this she can not find affordable health insurance. She pays close to $800.0 a month for major medical coverage. It does not pay for any thing until she has over $10,000 in bills for that year Because of this I have to help her with her other living expense. She does not smoke, she does not drink, and she has never done a drug in her life. She does not get any kind of assistance. She lives well with in her means. Universal health care would be a wonderful thing to help her out. But I guess she is one of those dirty lazy people that should not be helped. Look at the compassionate conservatives now!!! I hope none of you ever have problems beyond your control. Because your compassion will be rewarded. So why is it that if Canada health care is so bad that live longer then us Americans SM Smith... I work 60 hour a week, and have 3 business 5 employees and pay roughly 33% of my income in taxes. How much do you contribute to our country? Bruer you are correct about the fact that I am not a friend of the Conservative views. I am not a lier. This is my mothers place in life. She is not old enough for medicare, We live rural so there is not nonprofit hospitals. My point is not to bash Conservatives "I will save that for my answers to their questions." My point is to show that there is hard working people that thew no fault of their own have a hard time making enough to pay for Insurance and this all or nothing system that we have is not and does not work. To the person who said that she never made a donation in her life... % wise I am will to say she donates more then 75% of Americans including myself.

Why are Republicans pushing Tax Credits for Health Insurance? First off I work at a job that does not offer insurance....AT ALL. Why do they not understand that if someone is having to pay $300-$500 a month for decent coverage. doesn't have it because they can't afford it to begin with. How does a tax credit help that??? If I am not able to pay the monthly price right now that covers me nearly 100%, then what is the point of the tax credit because I would not be able to use it because I would not have been able to pay the plan each month. Are they just that out of touch with the working American people(People who work at jobs where insurances are not offered or just don't make enough to afford insurance and make too much to be qualified for medicaid)? My kids use services through Medicaid and SCHIP and when they go to the doctor, we are in and out, no paperwork and it is all taken care of, simple and sweet, no real big costs out of pocket, except $5 for SCHIP doctor visits. When I used to have insurance through a prior company, I had to fill out paperwork to show that I was serviced, stuff wasn't covered 100%, I had high deductibles, basically I didn't want a problem to happen or it could end up costing me hundreds of dollars....that is not right as it can cause a major problem for someone NOT rich. People are bankrupting medical bills because they just can't afford them. I still have collection companies trying to get money for services that were not covered by my prior insurance. I'm not trying to make this political, I just want insurance that is affordable and covers nearly 100% for services needed with little or no deductible. Don't give answers, like find a different job because that is not possible. This is according to their NEW recent plan they submitted that can be viewed here: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/17/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5093897.shtml Ok it is apparent nobody gets my question because they keep saying that the tax credit can be used to pay for the insurance..... I would have to have been paying on the insurance a month to be able to get that so that WOULD NOT work for people like me. Please think this through....the tax credit would not be enough to pay for my insurance. Why can't we just expand medicaid to cover more as that works perfectly fine? Again....these latest answers are not what I am asking. Let me reiterate, I am unable to to get another job because the market and the area I am in. My job does not offer insurance and I am not an illegal alien, I am a regular American trying to be able to afford health care like millions of other Americans. I think most the people answering have insurance or make more than $100K a yr because your answer don't make sense if you were someone like me. As far as free clinics, great the closest one is about 100 miles or so away, so that really is not convenient for me or my family. You guys are missing my point and my question which really leads me to believe you are all in favor of no health care and just want to keep at the same pace we are at with comments like "who cares, it is not affecting me....blah blah blah" Seriously, is there any body with a truly good answer to this as we are the ONLY country in the western world without some sort of universal health care for all.

So no Health plan - how do we handle the 30% premium increase? The cost of health care and medical insurance has continued to climb and has more than doubled in the last 10 years. One of the major concerns with the Health Care plan was to provide all of us with affordable health care and insurance by keeping costs of both medical care and insurance in check. The two parts, health care and insurance companies, continue to point fingers at each other saying the other is too blame for the increasing costs; it makes no difference who is too blame - the consumer, you and I, are the ones having to pay it and they are the ones getting rich with it. Now - one of the insurance companies has announced they are going to have to raise their premium costs 30% to cover the increased costs of health care. Now that the HC bill is all but dead we can see the insurance companies pushing their costs up. Any ideas on how we are going to handle these increases? I am not working, I have used up almost all my savings, have cut back on everything I can cut back on, keep my furnace at 62 degrees through the day and 52 at night and now only eat two light meals a day. I am probably better off than a lot of people but we need to do something to stop these continual price increases - not only health care and insurance but groceries and everything else that seems to be going out of site - WHAT CAN WE DO?

Do you agree with Dr. Ron Paul on health care? http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul339.html As a medical doctor, I’ve seen first-hand how bureaucratic red tape interferes with the doctor-patient relationship and drives costs higher. The current system of third-party payers takes decision-making away from doctors, leaving patients feeling rushed and worsening the quality of care. Yet health insurance premiums and drug costs keep rising. Clearly a new approach is needed. Congress needs to craft innovative legislation that makes health care more affordable without raising taxes or increasing the deficit. It also needs to repeal bad laws that keep health care costs higher than necessary. We should remember that HMOs did not arise because of free-market demand, but rather because of government mandates. The HMO Act of 1973 requires all but the smallest employers to offer their employees HMO coverage, and the tax code allows businesses – but not individuals – to deduct the cost of health insurance premiums. The result is the illogical coupling of employment and health insurance, which often leaves the unemployed without needed catastrophic coverage. While many in Congress are happy to criticize HMOs today, the public never hears how the present system was imposed upon the American people by federal law. As usual, government intervention in the private market failed to deliver the promised benefits and caused unintended consequences, but Congress never blames itself for the problems created by bad laws. Instead, we are told more government – in the form of “universal coverage” – is the answer. But government already is involved in roughly two-thirds of all health care spending, through Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs. For decades, the U.S. healthcare system was the envy of the entire world. Not coincidentally, there was far less government involvement in medicine during this time. America had the finest doctors and hospitals, patients enjoyed high-quality, affordable medical care, and thousands of private charities provided health services for the poor. Doctors focused on treating patients, without the red tape and threat of lawsuits that plague the profession today. Most Americans paid cash for basic services, and had insurance only for major illnesses and accidents. This meant both doctors and patients had an incentive to keep costs down, as the patient was directly responsible for payment, rather than an HMO or government program. The lesson is clear: when government and other third parties get involved, health care costs spiral. The answer is not a system of outright socialized medicine, but rather a system that encourages everyone – doctors, hospitals, patients, and drug companies – to keep costs down. As long as “somebody else” is paying the bill, the bill will be too high. Erich M, the solution is to get the government out of healthcare. It was fine before congress forced medicare, medicaid, and HMOs down our throats.

Is Ron Paul the only politician in Washington willing to blame Congress/Gov for most of our problems (long)? The D's blame the R's. The R's blame the D's. They blame Wall Street, Insurance companies, banks, etc...........Everyone and everything is evil and to blame for all of our problems, except them. Ron Paul...... We should remember that HMOs did not arise because of free-market demand, but rather because of government mandates. The HMO Act of 1973 requires all but the smallest employers to offer their employees HMO coverage, and the tax code allows businesses – but not individuals – to deduct the cost of health insurance premiums. The result is the illogical coupling of employment and health insurance, which often leaves the unemployed without needed catastrophic coverage. While many in Congress are happy to criticize HMOs today, the public never hears how the present system was imposed upon the American people by federal law. As usual, government intervention in the private market failed to deliver the promised benefits and caused unintended consequences, but Congress never blames itself for the problems created by bad laws. Instead, we are told more government is the answer. But government already is involved in roughly two-thirds of all health care spending, through Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs. For decades, the U.S. healthcare system was the envy of the entire world. Not coincidentally, there was far less government involvement in medicine during this time. America had the finest doctors and hospitals, patients enjoyed high-quality, affordable medical care, and thousands of private charities provided health services for the poor. Doctors focused on treating patients, without the red tape and threat of lawsuits that plague the profession today. Most Americans paid cash for basic services, and had insurance only for major illnesses and accidents. This meant both doctors and patients had an incentive to keep costs down, as the patient was directly responsible for payment, rather than an HMO or government program. The lesson is clear: when government and other third parties get involved, health care costs spiral. The answer is a system that encourages everyone – doctors, hospitals, patients, and drug companies – to keep costs down. As long as “somebody else” is paying the bill, the bill will be too high. On the economic crisis........ Last week the federal government's Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission held hearings as part of their continuing investigation into the causes of the acute economic meltdown which occurred in late summer 2008. This bipartisan commission, partly inspired by the Pecora Commission -- which investigated the causes of the Great Depression -- is expected to report back to Congress before the end of the year. Things don't seem to be going well. The individuals questioned by the commission mostly seem to be diverting blame for the whole fiasco to someone else. Nobody is offering any tangible insights into the causes of the financial crisis. Predictably, the commission will avoid calling any witnesses who might unequivocally indict the federal government for its role in the crisis, or suggest solutions which take away government power. Government commissions have a remarkable tendency to recommend granting even more power to the same useless government agencies that so utterly fail to prevent crises in the first place. We saw this with the Pecora Commission, we saw it after 9-11, and we’re seeing it again today with regard to financial regulations. For example, this latest commission almost certainly will suggest granting more power to the SEC, when in fact the SEC should be abolished as an embarrassing farce. Rest assured that this recommendation will be made without apology or sense of irony. http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=770

If any one has read the entire House Bill on the affordable health care choices please voice oppinion? Someone did read the entire House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009 but is this what you belive too? Please read this and let me know if this is the truth? From Michael Connelly - Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Instructor, Carrollton , Texas Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U..S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care. This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the "Health Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of law." So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out of the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;" The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation" to support the For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us. Michael Connelly Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Instructor Carrollton , Texas

Will we keep going forward on improving health care and not go backwards with the appeal voted on in congress? People think that we have a good health care system, but we don't. Insurance companies raising cost paying out less and putting a cap on what we can use in a lifetime. I had insurance back in the 70's that major medical payed 100% with no out of pocket money except paying for premiums which was affordable. Not anymore, need the changes that are within reason. If not there will be more people uninsured than there is now, because we won't be able to afford it.

Is this a reasonable solution to the healthcare problem? I would favor the establishment of a publicly owned, non-profit insurance company which provides a lower tier, basic healthcare insurance. Private insurance companies could continue to sell policies for upper tier coverage that fill in gaps from the basic plan. Every American would be required to purchase this basic, affordable coverage. The cost of the policy should have an upper end cap and progress downward based on income level to the point of free for poverty level incomes. This would put all Americans in a single group fund, which will create economy of service. It would be vitally important that the funds generated in this entity not be mingled with the general treasury funds, as done with the social security funds. There would be years that this insurance group would have a surplus and years with a deficit. In surplus years, the cost of the policies should be lowered. In deficit years it should be increased. If the funds go into the general treasury, the cost of these policies would never go down. They would only increase when deficit years roll around. One deficit years would create an increase, which might be followed by 4 or 5 surplus years. The government would enjoy the surplus, then increase the cost again in year 6 because of another deficit. This is one of the major problems with the social security system. The government uses the social security system as a revenue source. There is a major danger of the same thing happening if a national healthcare system is established. Americans would find the cost of healthcare continuously going up if it becomes a general treasury item. Eliminating the profit from a basic health plan could lower the cost of insurance 20% or more. With a group that includes every American, we could see a 40% drop in insurance cost. Keeping upper tier insurance available thru private health plans would keep the medical industry vibrant.

Why so republicans hate the Affordable Healthcare Act? when my Think Tank was one of the architects of it? A think tank founded by GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich collected at least $37 million over the past eight years from major health-care companies and industry groups, offering special access to the former House speaker and other perks, according to records and interviews. The Center for Health Transformation, which opened in 2003, brought in dues of as much as $200,000 per year from insurers and other health-care firms, offering some of them “access to Newt Gingrich” and “direct Newt interaction,” according to promotional materials. The biggest funders, including firms such as AstraZeneca, Blue Cross Blue Shield and Novo Nordisk, were also eligible to receive discounts on “products and workshops” from other Gingrich groups. The health center advocated, among other things, requiring that “anyone who earns more than $50,000 a year must purchase health insurance or post a bond,” a type of insurance mandate that has since become anathema to conservatives. The group also pushed proposals to build centralized electronic medical records and use such data to research treatment effectiveness, both central features of President Obama’s health-care reforms. Gingrich has clashed with other Republican presidential candidates over his evolving positions on health-care issues. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, whose own state health-care reform plan was a model for Obama’s national approach, attacked Gingrich at one debate: “We got the idea of an individual mandate from you!” The Gingrich health center’s support for such a mandate was part of an “Insure All Americans” plan that appears to have disappeared from the center’s Web site Thursday. Read the question, its asking why hate an act when I helped create it http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2206590 SO GINGRICH GETS A FREE PASS FOR CREATING THE THING?????????????? READ against Hillarycare and Obamacare? He came up with a plan back then that was the exact same as the current Obamacare. I read and you didn't. And his think tank pretty much came up with Obamacare. Stop being so ignorant, no wonder why you guys got blown out this electio and will again.

Who do you trust more when it comes to Health Care, Doctors or Insurance companies? http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/american-medical-association-endorses-house-health-care-bill.php American Medical Association Endorses House Health Care Bill By Brian Beutler - July 16, 2009, 1:50PM Just a couple weeks ago, the AMA was trying to have it both ways with the public option. The group had long opposed the provision, but in an appearance on CNN, its President J. James Rohack was unable to come right out and say so. Now it seems as if they've gotten over, or at least managed to suppress, their concerns. "On behalf of the Board of Trustees of the American Medical Association, I am writing to express our appreciation and support for H.R. 3200, the 'America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009,'" wrote AMA Vice President Michael Maves in a letter to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel. This legislation includes a broad range of provisions that are key to effective, comprehensive health system reform. We urge members of the House Education and Labor, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means Committees to favorably report H.R. 3200 for consideration by the full House. You can read the full letter here. Note, this caveat. "The AMA looks forward to further constructive dialogue during the committee mark-up process. We pledge to work with the House committees and leadership to build support for passage of health reform legislation to expand access to high quality, affordable health care for all Americans." 'Building support' would likely entail weakening the bill in some ways, and it seems likely that with respect to certain provisions, the AMA would be just fine with that. But this is nonetheless a pretty major development.

Will the other provisions of Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act be repealed? There is a major possibility that this could be repealed as part of the Republican's plan to cut spending in the welfare sector. The health-care has been rejected by several states but has been upheld three out of four times in the federal courts. A few innovations in health-care has happened (Effective as of Sept. 23, 2010) : - Individuals affected by Medicare Part D coverage gap received $250 in rebate. The coverage gap is an instance where the beneficiary exceeded his/her coverage limit and has pay out of their pocket. - Insurers cannot drop insurance from their policyholders when they get sick - Medicare was extended to rural areas - Companies that provided benefits for people between 55-64 could join in a temporary coverage plan that cut down premium costs The other parts of the legislation haven't been effective yet: (Effective 2013): - Individuals making in excess of $200,000 will pay a 0.9% tax (Effective 2014): - Insurers are prohibited from discriminating against or charging higher rates for any individuals based on pre-existing medical conditions Several seats are at stake for the 2012 congressional elections. This is why I'm asking this question (hopefully in a non-partisan way).

what would you do in this situation - kids, job, fiance? have been unemployed since july 08... i have been desperately looking for a job ever since.. while unemployed, i have been receiving an unemployment check of $135 per week.. i also was approved for medicaid due to a major pre existing condition i have that prevents me from getting affordable health insurance... medicaid covers all my doctors visits and prescriptions which would be very costly, insurance or not... before i got the medicaid, i applied for a part time job that would give me only 28 hours a week at $12 per hour... at the time though, it was fine, because they offered insurance and seeing as i had none, this was great.. i was turned down for the job... a few weeks later, i was approved for the medicaid. since then i have put out several more apps and resumes, and got interviews on a couple, and they seem really promising. now, i get a call back from the part time job i applied at 2 months ago saying they want to hire me, for really awful hours and no hope for advancement. all shifts that open up in the department are given based on senority.. they did post a new job that is full time, and day shift, which would be perfect, but since they want to hire me for this crappy position, i have to decline the job in hopes that they will call me on the other full time one, but no guarantees. if i accept, company policy prevents me from applying for another position in a different department for at least 6 months. now, if i go to work for these people, i will only be making about $280 per week, roughly, which yes, is more then my unemployment check, but i will now have to pay my insurance, co pays, and scripts, which can get extremely expensive. i think it will actually be counterproductive to accept this job, because i think that, along with crappy hours, no family time because of it, i will be making just enough extra to pay all that medical stuff... i dont know if i will get any of the other jobs i have applied for, but im hopeful... what would you do? with all this, i have 2 young step daughters who need me, and i will be losing 90% of my time with them, due to the hours of this job!

what would you do in this situation? have been unemployed since july 08... i have been desperately looking for a job ever since.. while unemployed, i have been receiving an unemployment check of $135 per week.. i also was approved for medicaid due to a major pre existing condition i have that prevents me from getting affordable health insurance... medicaid covers all my doctors visits and prescriptions which would be very costly, insurance or not... before i got the medicaid, i applied for a part time job that would give me only 28 hours a week at $12 per hour... at the time though, it was fine, because they offered insurance and seeing as i had none, this was great.. i was turned down for the job... a few weeks later, i was approved for the medicaid. since then i have put out several more apps and resumes, and got interviews on a couple, and they seem really promising. now, i get a call back from the part time job i applied at 2 months ago saying they want to hire me, for really awful hours and no hope for advancement. all shifts that open up in the department are given based on senority.. they did post a new job that is full time, and day shift, which would be perfect, but since they want to hire me for this crappy position, i have to decline the job in hopes that they will call me on the other full time one, but no guarantees. if i accept, company policy prevents me from applying for another position in a different department for at least 6 months. now, if i go to work for these people, i will only be making about $280 per week, roughly, which yes, is more then my unemployment check, but i will now have to pay my insurance, co pays, and scripts, which can get extremely expensive. i think it will actually be counterproductive to accept this job, because i think that, along with crappy hours, no family time because of it, i will be making just enough extra to pay all that medical stuff... i dont know if i will get any of the other jobs i have applied for, but im hopeful... what would you do? with all this, i have 2 young step daughters who need me, and i will be losing 90% of my time with them, due to the hours of this job!

what would you do - job, kids, fiance? have been unemployed since july 08... i have been desperately looking for a job ever since.. while unemployed, i have been receiving an unemployment check of $135 per week.. i also was approved for medicaid due to a major pre existing condition i have that prevents me from getting affordable health insurance... medicaid covers all my doctors visits and prescriptions which would be very costly, insurance or not... before i got the medicaid, i applied for a part time job that would give me only 28 hours a week at $12 per hour... at the time though, it was fine, because they offered insurance and seeing as i had none, this was great.. i was turned down for the job... a few weeks later, i was approved for the medicaid. since then i have put out several more apps and resumes, and got interviews on a couple, and they seem really promising. now, i get a call back from the part time job i applied at 2 months ago saying they want to hire me, for really awful hours and no hope for advancement. all shifts that open up in the department are given based on senority.. they did post a new job that is full time, and day shift, which would be perfect, but since they want to hire me for this crappy position, i have to decline the job in hopes that they will call me on the other full time one, but no guarantees. if i accept, company policy prevents me from applying for another position in a different department for at least 6 months. now, if i go to work for these people, i will only be making about $280 per week, roughly, which yes, is more then my unemployment check, but i will now have to pay my insurance, co pays, and scripts, which can get extremely expensive. i think it will actually be counterproductive to accept this job, because i think that, along with crappy hours, no family time because of it, i will be making just enough extra to pay all that medical stuff... i dont know if i will get any of the other jobs i have applied for, but im hopeful... what would you do? with all this, i have 2 young step daughters who need me, and i will be losing 90% of my time with them, due to the hours of this job!

what would you do.................? i have been unemployed since july 08... i have been desperately looking for a job ever since.. while unemployed, i have been receiving an unemployment check of $135 per week.. i also was approved for medicaid due to a major pre existing condition i have that prevents me from getting affordable health insurance... medicaid covers all my doctors visits and prescriptions which would be very costly, insurance or not... before i got the medicaid, i applied for a part time job that would give me only 28 hours a week at $12 per hour... at the time though, it was fine, because they offered insurance and seeing as i had none, this was great.. i was turned down for the job... a few weeks later, i was approved for the medicaid. since then i have put out several more apps and resumes, and got interviews on a couple, and they seem really promising. now, i get a call back from the part time job i applied at 2 months ago saying they want to hire me, for really awful hours and no hope for advancement. all shifts that open up in the department are given based on senority.. they did post a new job that is full time, and day shift, which would be perfect, but since they want to hire me for this crappy position, i have to decline the job in hopes that they will call me on the other full time one, but no guarantees. if i accept, company policy prevents me from applying for another position in a different department for at least 6 months. now, if i go to work for these people, i will only be making about $280 per week, roughly, which yes, is more then my unemployment check, but i will now have to pay my insurance, co pays, and scripts, which can get extremely expensive. i think it will actually be counterproductive to accept this job, because i think that, along with crappy hours, no family time because of it, i will be making just enough extra to pay all that medical stuff... i dont know if i will get any of the other jobs i have applied for, but im hopeful... what would you do? with all this, i have 2 young step daughters who need me, and i will be losing 90% of my time with them, due to the hours of this job!

what would you do about this situation? i have been unemployed since july 08... i have been desperately looking for a job ever since.. while unemployed, i have been receiving an unemployment check of $135 per week.. i also was approved for medicaid due to a major pre existing condition i have that prevents me from getting affordable health insurance... medicaid covers all my doctors visits and prescriptions which would be very costly, insurance or not... before i got the medicaid, i applied for a part time job that would give me only 28 hours a week at $12 per hour... at the time though, it was fine, because they offered insurance and seeing as i had none, this was great.. i was turned down for the job... a few weeks later, i was approved for the medicaid. since then i have put out several more apps and resumes, and got interviews on a couple, and they seem really promising. now, i get a call back from the part time job i applied at 2 months ago saying they want to hire me, for really awful hours and no hope for advancement. all shifts that open up in the department are given based on senority.. they did post a new job that is full time, and day shift, which would be perfect, but since they want to hire me for this crappy position, i have to decline the job in hopes that they will call me on the other full time one, but no guarantees. if i accept, company policy prevents me from applying for another position in a different department for at least 6 months. now, if i go to work for these people, i will only be making about $280 per week, roughly, which yes, is more then my unemployment check, but i will now have to pay my insurance, co pays, and scripts, which can get extremely expensive. i think it will actually be counterproductive to accept this job, because i think that, along with crappy hours, no family time because of it, i will be making just enough extra to pay all that medical stuff... i dont know if i will get any of the other jobs i have applied for, but im hopeful... what would you do?

Healthcare..is there another option that most don't think of? okay, so here is the deal, with all this healthcare talk all over the place it got me thinking. My husband and I own our own business, and therefore to buy personal health insurance for our family, the amount is outrageous! for a family of 4 for a decent plan, it cost us 650 dollars a month, plus a 25 dollar copay each time we go, and if anything major happens, we have to meet a 5000 deductible first. Prescriptions however only cost us 10 dollars, no matter what it is. However, we are a fairly healthy family. My children only go for their yearly checkups, and if they get an infection that just will not go away on its own. I only go once a year to the girly doctor. My husband goes once a year for a checkup. So, about 6 years ago, we dropped our insurance, we have not had insurance for 6 years! and this is why. for one year, we stuck our 650 a month into a savings..and when it came time for us to need something medical, we took it out of that savings and paid out of pocket. We called around to all the doctors in our area and within a 20 mile radius, and found one who understood we were paying cash from our own pockets and therefore, he gives us a discounted price for your normal basic run of the mill things..checkups, call in prescrips, etc. As for dental, it was way to expensive to begin with, we in turn also called around to dentists for our children at first only, so they could have a yearly check up. Why did we do this? because we never ever went to the doctors! our 650 was being wasted because we never barely used it! we were astonished to see that after a year we had saved up roughly 7800 dollars, and only used 1000 of it, which meant a savings of 6800 dollars...now after 6 years? we have about 30,000 saved...and we have not had to use it for any major health problems. With dropping our insurance we knew we had to insure our health, and that of our childrens..so we began to eat healthier, and we made sure our children as well as ourselves took very very good care of our teeth. We buckled down on our excercising and eating right, dropping all bad habits, smoking, drinking, sugary sweets (we still have the occasional sweets) and that also saved us money..at the time cigs were only 2 dollars a pack..but it does add up! so here is my question..what if everyone did this? what if everyone in america...dropped their healthcare? and only paid the doctors who worked for decent prices out of pocket in cash? and if we began eating healthier and diminished bad things? what would happen then? what would the health insurance agencies do? what would the other medical doctors who charge and arm and a leg do? Just something to think about is all I'm saying. Right now..my husband and I are only 29 and 33...if we continue as we are, we stand to save 204,000 dollars by the time he's 63 and I'm 59..add the interest rate to it that our bank gives us, and we have decent amount of money. We have talked about if something big pops up, like broken bones, and such, or illness, but our doctor has assured us that he can guide us in those situations, what to do, where to go if need be. My point is ...if a good percentage of people did this, especially those who are well off? and could afford to do it this way? would the prices not come down? to make it more affordable for everyone? I can tell you in six years, we have not had a huge problem. We had the birth of our 2 year old, I went to a midwife, the whole thing cost us 10k, alot yes...but we had it saved already, midwife is not the most common pick today..but I can tell you my experience was equal to that of the birth of my 8 year old in the hospital, in fact it was a bit better, more comforting really. Not for everyone..but again..what if a large enough percentage of people followed along? rrm....what coverage is that? and how does it work? I haven't seen something like that, but then again, we haven't gone searching for any in the time being. Any info you could give me on would be appreciated. Like, what does it cover? and are their deductibles, only certain hospitals to go to? etc. Thanks for the info! michel, not to mean honey, at all...but that is kind of one of my points on the buckling down issue, we do have to be more vigilant about ourselves, more aware of our surroundings, it causes us to be that way when we have no coverage..which would mean...I would never ever, under any circumstances, pour hot oil into any container..doesn't mean I'll never have an accident, it just means I am much much more vigilant about me and my children.

If Obamacare is so good then why do economists urge its repeal? Think about it? In the run up to Wednesday’s vote in the U.S. House of Representatives to abolish “Obamacare,” a group of prominent economists—including several former members of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers and two former directors of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office—have written the congressional leadership urging its repeal. In their letter, the nearly 200 economists from all over the United States—from the business world, from the academy, and from the think tank community—say that the repeal of the new nationalized healthcare law would “promote job growth and help restore the government to fiscal balance.” Obamacare, they write, “contains expensive mandates and penalties that create major barriers to stronger job growth. The mandates will compete for the scarce business resources used for hiring and firm expansion. The law also levies roughly $500 billion in new taxes that will enter the supply chain for medical services, raising the cost of medical services. At the same time that businesses juggle the potential for higher interest rates or higher taxes, these medical costs will translate to higher insurance premiums, further increasing the cost of operating a business in the United States.” Furthermore, they say, the new law “is fiscally dangerous at a moment when the United States is already facing a sea of red ink. It creates a massive new entitlement at a time when the budget is already buckling under the weight of existing entitlements. At a minimum, it will add $1 trillion to government spending over the next decade. Assertions that these costs are paid for are based on omitted costs, budgetary gimmicks, shifted premiums from other entitlements, and unsustainable spending cuts and revenue increases. A more comprehensive and realistic projection suggests that the Affordable Care Act [Obamacare] could potentially raise the federal budget deficit by more than $500 billion during the first ten years and by nearly $1.5 trillion in the following decade.” Forgot the link, http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/01/18/prominent-economists-urge-obamacare-repeal Now instead of 1 million illegals coming to America per year. There will be 10 million illegals pouring in.

Could it be possible that the democrats/socialists are incapable of understanding the law of the land? and crafting laws consistent with these rules? C&P: Someone did read the entire House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009 From Michael Connelly - Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Instructor, Carrollton , Texas Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with Particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law.. I was Frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed Might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard Or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its Implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are Saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly Where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free Health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably Forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of Business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about Personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and Most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, Payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will Be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In Fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of Providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover For the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of Government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law Or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power Between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government.. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration Authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American People and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't Have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I Defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any Authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care. This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama Administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your Personal financial information, and the information of your employer, Physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific Provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against Unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to Privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what The 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private Insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the "Health Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is Called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application Of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that Allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely Depriving someone of property without the "due process of law. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so Much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively Nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that Provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall Not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;" The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by The Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece Of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to Have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to Control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get The idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and Limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both Houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation" to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for This legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that Sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope t

Do you believe this Health Care Bill is about Health care? The following comment is from a retired attorney and constitutional law instructor who states he has read the entire health care bill and has some comments, not about the bill, but about the impact upon our Constitution. It's a broader picture than just health care reform. Looks like something to sit up and pay attention to; once this sort of thing happens, it will be irreversible. THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HEALTHCARE BILLS ? Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care. This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of law. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; " The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the quier k : I deleted his name for obvious reasons but I left the site that all of this can be verified. Liberals you can ignore this all you want as expected. But it is not a interpretation it is all factual. I know you hate the truth because it makes Obama look bad . This administration is the most corrupt ever in USA history!

When his mouth is moving he is lying. Do you think that about 0bama? LAWYER TO LAWYER (Must read, if you want the truth) Is Obama Telling the Truth? Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:44 AM Read this, then decide if you think Obama is telling the truth in all his speeches. Bryant Sewall wsewall@Verizon.net THIS IS SOME SERIOUS READING!! The following comment is from Michael Connelly of Carrollton , Texas , a retired attorney and constitutional law instructor who states he has read the entire health care bill and has some comments, not about the bill, but about the impact upon our Constitution. It's a broader picture than just health care reform. Looks like something to sit up and pay attention to; once this sort of thing happens, it will be irreversible. THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HEALTHCARE BILLS Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed Bill that were being discussed, might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the Bill and its implications are in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The Bill does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of Government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this Bill or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration, authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care. This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed "acceptable" to the Choices Administrator" appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a "tax" instead of a fine, because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the "due process of law. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten, in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; "The 10th Amendment states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but

Did you find anything suspicious about Obama's speech on healthcare the other night? I just recieved this in my e-mail. It is pretty interesting. The Truth About the Health Care Bills - Michael Connelly, Ret. Constitutional Attorney 08.24.09 Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participa tion in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t20have any authority to legislate in20most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care. This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “ due process of law. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable. For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us. Mi http://michaelconnelly.viviti.com/

Would you like to be educated in the new Healthcare Bill? THIS EXPLAINS THE DETAILS OF THE HEALTH BILL This man is a retired Attorney and Constitutional Law Instructor! His name is Michael Connelly. He has read the complete Healthcare Bill and shares the following information; "Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government. However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people, and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn't have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with! I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.. This legislation also provides for access, by the appointees of the Obama administration, to all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation to protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. A direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance, or if you have private insurance that is not deemed acceptable to the Health Choices Administrator appointed by Obama, there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a tax instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment.. However, that doesn't work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the due process of law. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much, out of the original ten in the Bill of Rights, that are effectively nullified by this law It doesn't stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; The 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to "be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution." If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway, I would hope the American people would hold me accountable. For t

Obama as a proponent of Cloward-Piven and Alinksy wants to radically change the Constitution.Do you want this? Obama said he wants to change the constitution, from proscriptive to prescriptive. He said ACORN would drive his agenda. ACORN's agenda (seen in the way they helped defraud taxpayers in NYC and WA DC with the pimp/ho) is to Cloward-Piven (overburden obligations til breaking point) the system to impose crisis and radical change. Obama studied the Cloward-Piven and Alinsky methodologies, and lectured on them himself. He spoke about them with regards to race, economy, banking, business, utilities, etc. and he is implementing his own tactics (which we see in bailouts and takeovers). The next step is further diminishment of individual and states' rights in the Constitution. The analysis below by a Constitutional professor shows how the Obamacare plan is really about reducing the constitution to a meaningless document while consolidating power into the executive. The Truth About the Health Care Bills – Professor Michael Connelly, Ret., Constitutional Attorney 08.24.09 Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected. To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care. This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the st Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable. For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/ex hibits/charters/constituti on_transcript.html And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/ex hibits/charters/bill_of_ri ghts_transcript.html There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us. Michael Connelly Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Profesor Carrollton , Texas

Did you know Obamacare transfers most gov't power to the president&destroys 4th,5th,5th,6th,9th,10thamendments? amendments? The following is an analysis by a retired constitutional law professor: To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession. The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled. However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed. The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care. This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide. If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law. So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control. Michael Connelly Retired attorney, Constitutional Law Professor, Ret. Carrollton , Texas

What are the lies in this?Some one said it was all Republican Lies so I would like to know what ones...? Reid’s Senate version : + Hiding the $1.8 Trillion price tag by not accounting for actual costs. + Major reductions in Medicare benefits to seniors. + Major Tax Increases on every American to pay for it all. + Reid called for increasing the Medicare payroll tax. THE AAPS SURVEYS SHOWS THAT 70% OF DOCTORS WOULD REFUSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PUBLIC PLAN IN THIS BILL (Courtesy: www.PatientsFirst.com) 1) Harry Reid has had his bill for 6 weeks – shouldn’t the American people have the same time period to review it and know what the bill contains? After all, 2,074 pages isn’t exactly light reading. 2) Some treatments could be deemed unnecessary – A government task force recently declared that mammograms for women younger than 50 were not recommended. The Health and Human Services Secretary quickly backed away from her task force’s declaration, but under these bills unaccountable bureaucracies would have vast new powers to coerce doctors to follow their recommendations. 3) Young people would be required to pay higher premiums – A study by actuarial firm Oliver Wyman found the restrictive new insurance regulations in both the House and Senate bills would increase premiums for young people by 69 percent. 4) Everyone would be forced to purchase costly plans – Requiring everyone to purchase expensive health care plans with high premiums – and not allowing people to choose affordable options that meet their budgets and needs – would mean lower-cost high-deductible plans would no longer be available. 5) Loads of new taxes – Nonpartisan experts at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) have concluded that new excise taxes on medical devices would be passed on to patients, increasing insurance premiums and increasing prices on everything from wheelchairs to pacemakers. The tax increases in the Senate bill add up to almost $500 billion. 6) Expands Medicaid and shifts costs – The Senate bill would force 15 million Americans into the flawed Medicaid program, which 4 in 10 doctors won’t accept because the program underpays providers. Studies show that expanding the program directly increases costs for everyone else, since doctors and hospitals must make up for their losses under Medicaid by shifting costs to other patients. 7) Taxes “Cadillac” and union plans – The new 40 percent tax on high-end “Cadillac” health insurance plans (any plan over $8,500 for an individual or $23,000 for a family) would force companies to shift costs to employees or to reduce the value of the health benefits they provide. 8) Government-forced health care mandates on employers would require employers to pay up to 8% higher payroll taxes in the House bill and $750 per employee in the Senate bill. This will result in lower pay and job losses, especially for low-income workers. 9) Medicare benefits would be slashed by over $400 billion, reducing benefits for seniors and jeopardizing access to care for millions of others. If these cuts do not materialize, then the bills will dramatically increase deficits. 10) Millions will still be uninsured. Even though the whole health care system will be turned upside-down, the CBO says at the end of 10 years there will still be 24 million uninsured Americans under the Senate bill. SENATE DEMOCRATS BILL “BY THE NUMBERS” From Sen. Tom Coburn, MD (OK) 0 — provisions guaranteeing taxpayers do not finance abortion 0 — provisions prohibiting the rationing of health care 0 — number of senators required to enroll in the new government-run plan 8 — number of new taxes created in the bill, according to JCT analysis 13 — pages in the bill’s table of contents 20.8 – pounds the bill weighs printed out 36 — pages in the CBO estimate of the price tag 70 — government programs authorized by the bill 1,697 — times the Secy. of HHS is given authority to create, determine, or define things in the bill 2,074 — pages in the bill 3,607 — uses of the word "shall" in the bill $6.8 million — cost to taxpayers per word 24 million — people left without health insurance $1.2 billion — cost to taxpayers per page $5-$10 billion — additional funding needed for the IRS to implement the bill $8 billion —taxes levied on uninsured individuals $25 billion —additional Medicaid mandates placed on states $28 billion —new taxes on employers not providing government approved plans $100 billion — estimated annual fraud in Medicare and Medicaid $118 billion —cuts to Medicare Advantage $465 billion — total cuts to Medicare $494 billion — revenue from new taxes/fees levied on American families and businesses $2.5 trillion — cost for full implementation of the legislation $12 trillion — total U.S. national debt As a Democrat I am ashamed of this bill....And I am not even close to being the only one..... ungodly --- LOL OHH your so scary...just answer the question and leave your goth crap in the bedroom ...

Can you give me any ideas about this writing, please? Is it fine? Health care is a very major issue that deals with the future of the U.S and its citizens. President Obama wants to make the insurance more available to all people and change the American’s health care system so that it is cheaper. He also wants the change so that the insurance companies find it harder to get out of paying for treatment. There are many pros of enforcing health care such as it will come to the aid of people who do not have Medicare or Medicaid. Many people have went to hospitals for serious conditions and have either been sent back out of the hospital or tended to last because they cannot afford to pay the bill. If this is enforced, the costs of the health bills will be reduced and more affordable. People will not have to pay a large amount of money just because of natural causes. On the other hand, patients receiving medical coverage also receive additional help in the event of a serious injury or illness. It would also assist people who have a very low income but yet work hard acquire the help they require. For instance, perhaps right now they are stress out about not being able to afford prescription drugs or frustrated that they cannot afford to pay a dentist or to operate on their teeth. It would provide relief to families fighting to make ends meet. People would also be protected in the event of an accident. Additional pro is that there will be increased competition in the insurance market. It might be from a public option. It might also be from some kind of non-profit, state-specific, co-operative. This might push the health care companies to lower costs and provide better services. Health care enforcement not only has pros but it also has some cons. There will be fewer doctors in medicine because of a drastic pay cut. Patients may be subjected to wait extremely long for treatment. If health care does happen to get enforced, hospitals will be packed with patients that need to be treated. Another con of health care enforcement is that people will be controlled more by the government. If health care does get enforced then it is more than likely that the government is going to take charge and make huge changes. He may pass additional restrictions to keep us away from certain things or increase taxes on things such as smoking, fast-food, etc. Doing these things could actually stop many Americans from having the freedom that they already have. All of our health records and personal information will be in the hands of the government and all of that information will no longer be confidential. Moreover, government-controlled health care could lead to a decrease in patient flexibility. The doctors cannot get to all of the patients at one time and they have to figure out which people will have to be treated first. These decisions could lead to people with serious problems waiting for many months just to get treatment at the hospitals. Should Congress pass a health care reform bill? I think it is important that they do everything within their power to get the middle class back to full employment before they try to overhaul the health care system. No matter what reforms are made, it is going to add a huge burden to government budgets. The U.S cannot maintain the current rate of spending, much less increase it, without a solid middle class tax base because we can be certain that the rich and business are not going to pay for it.

Obamacare obliterates half the Bill of Rights and is rationed death. How do we get rid of this monstrosity? OBAMACARE -NOT ABOUT HEALTHCARE; IT'S ABOUT POWER SEIZURE & LIMITING RIGHTS --obamacare does provide rationing health care for senior citizens, persons not worth saving --free health care for illegal immigrants, free and at times forced abortion services --forces private insurance companies out of business, everyone put in a government system --all decisions about personal health care will be made by feds most without any healthcare knowledge --hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations medical devices strictly controlled by the government WORST OF ALL THOUGH... --obamacare really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices --obamacare is cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government ever --obamacare will destroy major portions of the us constitution --destroyed: balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government, congress transfers bulk of power to executive over private citizens --constitution has no authority to regulate health care --obama administration can pry into all of your personal healthcare records and all citizen, employer, physician and hospital financial information, in violation of 3rd and 4th amendments and protected against unreasonable searches and seizures and against all rights to privacy --tax imposed if you decide not to have have government healthcare or use private insurance (exemption for muslims, american indians, amish) called a tax instead of fine to avoid application of due process clause of 5th Amendment --however, doesn't work since there is nothing in law that allows contest or appeal of imposition of tax, thus depriving property without the due process of law. --nullified by obamacare: 9th Amendment The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; --nullified by obamacare: 10th Amendment The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under obamacare neither the people nor the states will have any rights or powers at allin many areas that once were theirs to control. FOLKS, NOTICE HOW NEITHER JOE OR DAVE CAN DISPUTE ANY POINT I MADE?

Obamacare is rationed death and kills the Constitution too. Are you for getting rid of this monster? OBAMACARE IS NOT ABOUT HEALTHCARE; it is about seizing power and limiting rights --obamacare does provide rationing health care for senior citizens, persons not worth saving --free health care for illegal immigrants, free and at times forced abortion services --forces private insurance companies out of business, everyone put in a government system --all decisions about personal health care will be made by feds most without any healthcare knowledge --hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations medical devices strictly controlled by the government WORST OF ALL THOUGH... --obamacare really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices --obamacare is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government ever --obamacare will destroy major portions of the us constitution --destroyed: balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government, congress transfers bulk of power to executive over private citizens --constitution has no authority to regulate health care --obama administration can pry into all of your personal healthcare records and all citizen, employer, physician and hospital financial information, in violation of 3rd and 4th amendments and protected against unreasonable searches and seizures and against all rights to privacy --tax imposed if you decide not to have have government healthcare or use private insurance (exemption for muslims, american indians, amish) called a tax instead of fine to avoid application of due process clause of 5th Amendment --however, that doesn't work because ince there is nothing in law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, thus depriving someone of property without the due process of law. --nullified by obamacare: 9th Amendment The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; --nullified by obamacare: 10th Amendment The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Under obamacare neither the people nor the states will have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

How Do I Protect My Family From ObamaCare? Now that health care will soon be crammed down my throat, I need to consider what to do next to protect my family. This law has the potential to cause a major crisis for my family and will likely turn everything upside-down for some time. Perhaps all of you that have seen my many rants will soon understand why I am why I am when you read below. If you have any ideas how I will transition and live with this monster, I'll appreciate it. Years ago, I purchased a wonderful high-deductible health policy for CHEAP, long before I married, even before "provider networks" were invented. I got married and converted it to a family plan that covers an UNLIMITED amount of natural/adopted kids. Medical conditions didn't matter at birth/adoption. It is fully divisible to individual plans as the kids grow up and has already divided several times. I had managed to assure every kid I had their very own, very high-quality, affordable high-deductible health plan. It cannot be canceled on anyone unless premiums are not paid, or UnitedHealthCare leaves the whole state. I bought my policy before it was UHC. All these kids are/were set for life. We just have to make those stiff premiums and deductibles. I have a lot of GREAT kids. One kid is a pre-teen with cerebral palsy. She gets great physical therapy and has costly surgeries (9 so far). She'll needs physical therapy and some equipment for life. Brilliant kid! Cries if she gets a B. Another fantastic kid is a young college ADULT. She's type 1 diabetic sporting the latest cutting-edge pump/sensor system. Properly managed type 1 costs a LOT of money per month and always will, for life. These kids both un-insurable, but thanks to me, they're set for life. Or were they? I have some questions about life under ObamaCare. 1. When will all insurance companies be forced to take un-insurable my minor child? 2. When will all insurance companies be forced to take my un-insurable young adult child? 3. What is "acceptable coverage" to the government? If my deductibles are too high for my income under my wonderful plan, will I be forced to pay a fine to keep the coverage I have? 4. When my premiums go through the roof, will I get assistance? I've never received any assistance for anything, How will that work? I'm hoping someone can give me the real scoop on what will happen to me and my family. If you can answer anything above, I'll appreciate it. My reality will change radically tonight, if this thing passes.

Hey, why didn't the dems pass an annual budget bill in the last 2 years? 1. why do some businesses need exemptions from the obviously superior Obamacare? 2. why did Pelosi talk about the Deem and Pass strategy if it was superior? 3. why did the senate vote on it on December 24th? 4. why did AARP get exemptions from oversight on future rate increases 5. why are these other kickbacks in the bill? Cornhusker Kickback:In order to secure the vote of Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), the legislation states that Nebraska would be the only state to have the full amount of its increased Medicaid costs paid for by the federal government. The Louisiana Purchase:In order to secure the vote of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) the Senate bill provides $300 million in extra Medicaid funding for any state in which every county has been declared a disaster area.Every county in Louisiana was declared a Federal Disaster area following Hurricane Katrina. Gator Aid:At the request of Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fl), the Senate bill includes a formula for protecting certain Medicare Advantage enrollees from billions in cuts.The formula would only apply to five states, but 800,000 of Florida’s one million Medicare Advantage users would be exempt from cuts. Water for Votes: In a surprising coincidence of timing, on March 17, 2010, the Department of Interior (DOI) announced that they were allowing new water supplies to flow through the Central Valley Project in California.The news was not scheduled to be released for at least two weeks, but the DOI explained that they decided to release the news early at the behest of Congressmen Costa and Cordoza. The Department of Interior stated: “Typically, Reclamation would release the March allocation update around March 22nd, but moved up the announcement at the urging of Senators Feinstein and Boxer, and Congressmen Costa and Cardoza.” New England Handouts:According to CBO, the Senate bill now contains about $600 million in extra Medicaid cash to Vermont, and about $500 million in additional money for Medicaid to Massachusetts, making these three states the only to receive such funding. The Dodd Clinic:Section 10502(a) of the bill provides $100 million for construction at an unnamed “health care facility” affiliated with an academic health center at a public research university in a state with only one public academic medical and dental school.Connecticut is the only state that fits this description.Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) later sent a press release saying that:”These provisions will bring millions of dollars to the state so that Connecticut’s residents can receive quality, affordable health care.” Medicare Expansion:A provision slipped into the Senate bill by Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-MT), Section 1881A(b)(2), specifically expands Medicare coverage for individuals who reside “in or around the geographic area subject to an emergency declaration made as of June 17, 2009.”This description can only refer to Libby, Montana which was has suffered from a major asbestos contamination. Tax Exemptions for “Profiteering” Insurers:The Senate bill exempts Michigan Blue Cross and Blue Shield from the new taxes levied on health insurers. Billions in Payouts to Insurance Companies:The CBO stated Section 1412(c) provides $436 billion in federal subsidies to insurance companies to provide health care in the exchange. _________________________________________________________________________________ "The tactic — known as a "self-executing rule" or a "deem and pass" — has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure."

Wow is this true about health care? The Democratic Senators and Congressmen can well choose to ignore polls. Polls go up. Polls go down. They may figure that the public will have moved on by the time they run for re-election, particularly those Senators who are not up in 2010. With four or six years to go in their terms, they can afford a relaxed view of polling data. But the Democratic Party as a whole cannot afford to ignore a massive defection in the ranks of the elderly, one of its key building blocks. Ever since the New Deal coalition was cobbled together by FDR, the elderly have been a major component. Worried about Republican designs on their Social Security, they vote overwhelmingly Democratic. But the Obama proposals, which many see correctly as a major cut in Medicare, might be seminal in driving them en masse away from the Democrats. The Democratic Party is built on six pillars -- blacks, Latinos, single women, young people, union members, and the elderly. If legislation threatens one of those pillars, it threatens the stability of the entire partisan structure. And Obama's health care reform seems to do just that. With 40% of the savings in medical spending coming from Medicare, the senior citizens of America are coming to see the Obama proposals as an assault on their health care system. Since their needs are fully met by Medicare, they see no need for monkeying with the system and are highly suspicious of any changes. When they watch as their fellow seniors attend town meetings to protest to their Congressmen about these cuts and are labeled "un-American" for their pains, their alienation from the Democrats just grows. The fissure Obama is driving between his party and the elderly will not soon heal. When the elderly change their voting habits, they tend to do so for a very, very long time. Even Senators who are up in 2012 or 2014 should worry that their votes for the Obama plan could doom their ability to attract elderly support. As to the young people who back the plan, once they learn that they will have to pay steep premiums for health care coverage, whether they want to or not, their support is likely to cool. Under the bill, for example, those making $30,000 a year would have to pay up to 7% of their income in health insurance premiums before they could get a government subsidy. A $2,100 bill for such a young person might seem affordable to Obama, but perhaps not to them. Thus, the legislation may well come to be seen as a tax on the young, another of the key constituencies of the Democratic Party. The cost of Obama's health care changes just keeps growing -- financially and politically.

How do you think America's health care system should be changed? I have just finished watching a film called "Sicko" and almost cried aftrer being reminded of how insane Americ'a health care system is. Anyone who is saying America should keep the current system should watch this film and realize how much it is devastating millions of working class Americans. I am not a big fan of universal health care either, but it certainly works better for all the people who can't afford high medical bills. One thing that totally surprised me was, there have been a lot of lies and myths about universal health care. It doesn't really require long wait times and it doesn't take that long to get treated. The film producer interviewed people in the waiting room in a major city in Canada, and it points out Americans have been fooled by all the wealthy and heartless republicans and insurance company CEOs. But I still stand my ground on my belief that UHC is not a perfect system, although it is much better than America's system. What are the pros and cons of universal health care system? How should America change its most expensive health care system in the world? It already seems if Barack Obama is backing away from his promise to provide affordable health care to everyone due to other issues (What is more important than life-threatening issues?) If you were the president of America, how would you improve the health care system? I will look foward to hearing your answers with great policy suggestions.

How do I get affordable major med/surgical in Dallas Tx? I have to quit my job and will loose my health insurance. I need just major medical and surgical It would have to be really affordable

Should I get medical insurance or a prescription drug card? I currently take 3 generic prescriptions monthly, and two of which are Schedule II substances (adderall xr and ir) that require a dr visit every other month. Since these prescriptions are my main concern (as opposed to major medical emergencies), I'm wondering if it would be more economical to get a prescription drug plan. I'm not really sure how rx plans work, as I've had difficulty finding neutral information on the internet. I'm looking at spending around $300/month with a medical insurance policy (premium and copays included), and am hoping that I can find an option that is more affordable/suitable to my needs. What do you think?

US Mock Election Questions, whats YOUR answer? Name (first only- optional) Male or Female? Are you registered to vote? Age (you can give me a aproximation. example im 16 so i put 15-20) Of these issues, which do you feel is most important? A. the economy B. energy crisis C. health care quality and costs D. war in Iraq and Afganistan Which of the above is second most important to you? WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS REFLECTS YOUR OPINION ON THE ECONOMIC POLOCIES? A) international trade agreements like NAFTA have benifited our partner countries at the cost of American jobs and should be terminated or renegotiated to include better terms and protection for US workers and Consumer Goods B) the president should take measures to significantly reduce the federal budget deficit, which is projected to be $410 billion. Doing so would lower our trade imbalances, raise savings while lowering our need for foriegn debt, and improve our long term economic growth. C)the president should make improvements to our aging infrastructure. replacing bridges, investing in modern rail networks, and upgrading our outdated electricity grid would create more jobs and promote efficiencies that would benefit our economy. D) with oil prices high and jobs creation slow, taxes should be lowered to create more income to meet the rising bills. this would put money back into the economy and create jobs. E) uncertain WHICH STATEMENT REFLECTS YOUR BELIEFS ABOUT THE ENERGY CRISIS? A) the goverment should subsidize the reasearch and developement of alternative energy to reduce our demand for oil, as its harmful to the inviorment and increasingly expensive. B) as oil companies collect record profit with the increasing price of gas, the government should impose windfall profit taxes on the companies if they fail to increase investment in greater oil production or new energy alternatives. C) with the price of gas stretching the american pocket book, the goverment should suspend the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents a gallon to lessen the burden of drivers at the pump. D) the rise of oil prices is mainly due to an increase of demand, without a corresponding expansion of supply. to increase supply, the goverment should remove the ban on off-shore drilling so that oil companies can remove more oil from the ground. E) uncertain WHICH STATEMENT REFLECTS YOUR BELIEFS ON AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT IN THE IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN WARS? A) the US should stay in Iraq and Afghanistan until our military and political goals are achieved, no matter how long it takes. Our security and intrests are paramount. as the only world superpower we can do things alone without concern for world public opinion. B) the wars are still to be won and there goals achieved. when the military and political situations improve , our troops should slowly and gradually withdrawal. C) the war has not been successful in achieving the goals of making our nation safer. our in ternational reputation has been harmed. american casualties have been much greater than expected. all american troops should return home when the political status of Iraq and Afghanistan improves. D) the wars have damaged the reputation and power of the US. it is the best intrest of our country that our armed forces imediatly leave Iraq and Afghanistan in an orderly manner. let the people of both countries resolve thier own problems, and we will provide economic help when needed. E) uncertain WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT REFLECTS YOUR BELIEFS ABOUT HEALTH CARE POLICY AND COSTS? A) the federal goverment has no responsibility for health care of private citizens. it should be the responsibility of the individual to gain health care coverage through insurance companies. self reliance and free market system should be used for all services in the US. B) the federal goverment should largly stay out of providing health care to americans. that should be done mainly through private sector. only the most needy citizens should be given basic level of medical assistance. C) the federal goverment should play a major role in assuring that affordable, quality healthcare is available to all americans. fedeal healthcare should be provided to all citizens who cannot get private coverage. D) a national healthcare insurance program is needed. all americans should be provided quality healthcare through a federal program, funded by tax revenues. health care is too important to be left to private enterprise. E) uncertain WHICH LEADERSHIP QUALITY IS MOST IMPORTANT IN A PRESIDENT? A) High Ethical Standards: honest, trusted, knows right from wrong B) Strong Decision Making Skills C) Patriotic: always puts country first D) Organized and a Team Leader E) Exellent public Comunicater: People person, crowd talker WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING WOULD YOU CHOOSE TO LEAD THE COUNTRY IF IT WAS AT ALL POSSIBLE? A) Abraham Lincoln B) Franklin D Roosevelt C) John F Kennedy D) Ronald Reagan E) Bill Clinton WHO WOULD/WILL YOU VOTE FOR IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION?? THE UPCOMING ELECTION??? thank you all and it is okay if you only put the letters to the answers, i understand these views may not be exactly of your own. this a poll i am taking for my school and because there is no correct answer, i will let the votes decide the best answer. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. i dearly appreciate it.

I find it appalling that anyone could say things of this kind about my "president" 0bama. How about you? Now's the Time to Stop the Abomination of Obamacare Janice Shaw Crouse Wednesday, October 28, 2009 http://townhall.com/columnists/JaniceShawCrouse/2009/10/28/nows_the_time_to_stop_the_abomination_of_obamacare We’re down to the wire with ObamaCare. The big-government-loving left is determined to push through a bill before the end of the year that contains who knows what — with the only certainty being that members of Congress won’t be subject to its limits on care. After promising bipartisanship and sunshine in the deliberations, Democrats are shaping the bill behind closed doors. In the face of an overwhelming lack of public support and dire budget-deficit ramifications, the left, like the snake oil peddlers of old, is selling ObamaCare with quackery and the President’s oft-repeated and patently false claim that “if you’ve got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan.” The media campaigns of today’s slick-talking politicians harken back to the entertaining road shows where deceiving people and leaving before the deception became obvious was an effective way to fleece the public. Today’s radical politicians are determined to promote and pass their disastrous health care reform before the public learns the details and then delay implementation until some time after the 2012 election when Obama, at least, will be politically safe from the public’s wrath. Oh, the deception! Let me count the ways! For starters: the reality of mandates, rationing, taxpayer funded abortion, opposition from physicians, the prohibitive cost, the lack of competition between private and public insurance … the list could go on and on. It’s easy to get the facts at websites like ours — www.cwfa.org. But it’s not easy to get it from the nightly news or the morning papers. Nor can you get the truth from those promoting ObamaCare — but I repeat myself. Congressional GOP members describe the plans that are on the table as socialized medicine. They point out that government-run health care would drive private insurers out of business. Even Democratic members privately admit that their plans don’t offer enough choices and will hurt Americans who already have insurance through their employers. The estimates of additional costs to individual American families run into the thousands of dollars. In fact, in spite of repeated denials by those pushing legislation through Congress right now, government-run insurance policies would provide the type of shortage-plagued service now available in Canada and England — not exactly what Americans want. Remember the major selling point for ObamaCare? It was supposed to provide insurance for those who don’t currently have insurance. However, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) shot down that deception; CBO’s estimate was that when fully implemented, the proposed plan — counting both the number who would gain insurance less the number who would lose coverage through their employer — would only increase the number of insured by about 16 million (only about 35 percent of the 46 million uninsured in 2009) at a cost of an additional $1 trillion in the deficit over the 2010-2019 period. Now is the time for dissenting, well-informed voices to be heard. If the current ideas become law, it will irrevocably change our health care system as we know it. It will lead to higher costs, rationing of health care, the funding of elective abortions, and will drive pro-life doctors out of the profession. Was this the change that people voted for in 2008? People from around the world come to the United States for the best health care, and that top-quality health care, now available to the vast majority of Americans, is endangered. It is reprehensible that politicians are working behind closed doors to devise schemes to push ObamaCare through quickly without public approval. They are willing to totally ignore the millions of Americans who are concerned that it will trample our beliefs and values. Congress needs to hear our voices; we must speak out now. With public disapproval getting more open, and the outcry against ObamaCare spreading so rapidly, Congress is getting pretty desperate; and the backroom tactics are getting more bare-knuckled. The Christian Medical Association (CMA, www.cmda.org) revealed this week that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) reportedly offered money to physicians who would drop their opposition to ObamaCare. He reportedly promised national medical groups that the Senate would stop medical cuts to doctor payments for 10 years in return for physicians’ support for ObamaCare. Remember presidential candidate Barack Obama’s talk about “affordable” health care coverage? More and more people are learning the reality about the hefty price tag of Obama’s health care bill. A report from Price Waterhouse Coopers confirms that health care reform measures will be prohibitively expensive —

Do you know what Obama HAS accomplished in 6 months? Signed executive orders to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, within a year, ban torture and end the CIA’s secret overseas prisons and define treatment of Detainees. Reversed restrictions on stem cell research. Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Reducing discrimination based on gender, age, religion, or race. Signed an executive order reversing the ban that prohibits funding to international family planning groups that provide abortions. Gag rule revoked (Mexico City policy). Creates the White House Council on Women and Girls "to provide a coordinated federal response to the challenges confronted by women and girls and to ensure that all Cabinet and Cabinet-level agencies consider how their policies and programs impact women and families." Signed a Presidental Memorandum extending federal benefits to same-sex partners of federal workers and announced support for the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009. Reverses U.S. position on LGBT Issues at the UN: At the "Durban Review Conference," U.S. supports language condemning “all forms of discrimination and all other human rights violations based on sexual orientation.” Signed executive order requiring federal contractors to offer jobs to current workers when contracts change. Reversed a Bush order requiring federal contractors to post notice that workers can limit financial support of unions serving as their exclusive bargaining representatives. Signed executive order preventing federal contractors from being reimbursed for expenses meant to influence workers deciding whether to form a union and engage in collective bargaining. Created a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners. Expanded eligibility for the refinancing portion of the Making Home Affordable plan to help Americans struggling with distressed mortgages refinance at lower interest rates, even if they owe up to 25 percent more than their homes are now worth. Established a credit card "bill of rights". Expanded loan programs for small businesses. Extended and index the 2007 Alternative Minimum Tax patch. Expanded eligibility for State Children's Health Insurance Fund (SCHIP). Expanded funding to train primary care providers and public health practitioners. Created a new White House task force on the problems of middle-class Americans, and installed Vice President Joe Biden as its chairman. Appoints Vice President Joe Biden to Oversee Stimulus Plan Payouts. Granted a reprieve to Liberian immigrants facing imminent expulsion. Directed military leaders to end war in Iraq. Allowing Caskets to be photographed when the return from Iraq with family approval. Released nine previously secret internal Justice Department memos and opinions defining the legal limits of government power in combating terrorism. On Arab TV Network, Obama Urges Dialogue. Gave a speech in Cairo engaging the Muslim and Arab world. Bars independent contractors from conducting interrogations of terror suspects. Granted Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send money to Cuba. Ordered the release of nearly a quarter of a million pages of records from the Reagan White House that were kept from the public during a lengthy review by President George W. Bush. Restored funding for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne/JAG) program. Released presidential records. Required new hires to sign a form affirming their hiring was not due to political affiliation or contributions. Pushed for enactment of Matthew Shepard Act, which expands hate crime law to include sexual orientation and other factors. Invites gay families to the Easter Egg Roll as part of the Obama administration's outreach to diverse communities. Created a White House Office on Urban Policy. Increased funding for the NEA. Appointed an assistant to the president for science and technology policy. Funded a major expansion of AmeriCorps. Banned lobbyist gifts to executive employees. Investment in all types of alternative energy. Enacted tax credit for consumers for plug-in hybrid cars. Support for high-speed rail. Provided grants to encourage energy-efficient building codes. Extended unemployment insurance benefits and temporarily suspend taxes on these benefits. Created the White House Council on Automotive Communities and Workers to help auto industry workers transition to new manufacturing opportunities, including jobs in alternative energy. Stopped raids on medical marijuana dispensers. Nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States. If confirmed, Sotomayor would be the first Hispanic to ever serve on the Supreme Court. Appointed more than 60 openly LGBT persons to positions in the executive branch. Issues Presidential Proclamation for Pride, proclaiming June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. Signed a mercury reduction pact with 14

Does anyone in Y/A Politics know that it was Senator Kennedy who helped create HMO's? From their beginnings, HMOs were designed--by Democrats and Republicans--to eliminate individual health insurance. The result is a vast network of health care collectives (HMOs, PPOs, Point-of-Service plans) created by government that are destined to do harm to individuals. The individual was first discouraged from buying insurance in 1942 when employee health premiums were made tax deductible to employers--not to individuals. Congress created Medicare in 1965, making individual insurance for those over 65 obsolete. Subsidized, unrestricted health care for seniors lead to an unprecedented frenzy of spending by patients and doctors. Costs went up, introducing an economic obstacle to individual health insurance. As costs rose, those on the New Left, including then freshman Sen. Ted Kennedy, argued that government ought to pay for everyone health care and promoted the idea of a health maintenance organization, a term coined by a left-wing college professor. President Nixon appeased the left and proposed the HMO Act, which Congress passed in 1973. The law created new, supposedly cheaper health coverage with millions of dollars to HMOs, which, until then, constituted a small portion of the market. Kaiser Permanent was the only major HMO in the country by 1969 and most of its members were compelled to join through unions. Combined with Medicare, the HMO Act eventually eliminated the market for affordable individual health insurance. The new managed care plans mushroomed with federal subsidies. Employers perceived managed care as less expensive than individual insurance and stopped offering a choice of plans, making insurance more expensive for the individual. The government had effectively instituted HMOs, at the insistence of the left and the capitulation of conservatives and pragmatic businessmen. Nixon's HMO Act was passed 25 years ago. Since then, the individual has become a prisoner of the tax code. Covered by an employer and herded into managed care, the individual patient is powerless. Under managed care, if the patient gets sick, he or she may wander the maze of managed bureaucracy, be treated, or, languish in pain awaiting treatment. The patient may also be refused treatment and die. Premiums under managed care do not pay for an insured contract for medical care decided between the patient and the physician--premiums pay for the management of care, i.e., health maintenance, by a third party. Unrestricted free choice in medicine--health insurance chosen, provided and paid for by the individual--has practically vanished. A few indispensable provisions of the House GOP's recent health care proposal, crafted by prospective House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, (R, IL), offer renewed hope. Hastert's proposal offers every patient a choice to purchase health insurance as an individual--neither through an employer nor through government--by legalizing Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) for all Americans, (MSAs are currently restricted to a small group of self employed, uninsured, small business people and 390,000 Medicare recipients.) The GOP proposes to make every patient eligible for MSAs, lift restrictions, and grant full tax detectability to the self-employed for health insurance premiums. MSA opponents, including Hillary Clinton and Kennedy, believe MSAs will attract young and healthy patients and, therefore, raise premiums for the remaining population. According to the IRS and private health plans, the opposite is true: fully one third of thousands of MSA enrolls were previously lacking any health insurance and the median age for an MSA health insurance policyholder is over 40. The distinct lack of a free market in individual health insurance, not a lack of regulations, lead to the domination of managed care. The next Congress, possibly under Hastert's leadership, should grant 100 percent individual tax detectability and fully expand MSAs and it should do so immediately. Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, an MSA proponent, ought to take the lead in proclaiming the provisions as a step toward what America's health care system needs most: health insurance which preserves the right to choose--and pay for--ones own health care.