Re the new health-care bill. Let's give it a chance to work. The bill can always be modified for improvement. Laws/bills/policies/programs, etc. have always been tweaked/changed as they evolve. Social Security is not the same as it was when it was enacted. Corporations and the government have always changed programs/benefit/policies to fit the time and the circumstances.

Something should have been done with Health-care a long time ago. We (Yes WE) finally have a president with a spine who had the guts to to do something about it and people are all in fits when they know full well that nothing in life EVER REMAINS THE SAME.

Typical liberal thinking.

Do something even if it is known to not work.

Let some one else pay for it

so what would you do, big shot?

Anthony asked, "so what would you do, big shot?" I will take a shot at answering that if I may.

I would make medical insurance illegal. Health care should be like anything else in our society. If you use it you should pay for it. Insurance is a type of socialization. It transfers the cost from the recipient to a broader poputlation. Doing so is bad for the country. The best way to control medical costs is to make recipients of medical servicies pay for them. That would solve almost all the problems with health care in America. People would buy less if they had to absorb the full cost. Lawsuits would go down because doctors could provide a list of tests and their costs, explain why each test may be of benefit and then leave the decision on which tests or procedures to purchase to the patient. Since the pacient is making the choice it would be hard to win a law suit if the patient chose not to have a test that could have helped him or her.

Illiminating medical insurance does not prevent the government from helping with medicial costs thereby providing a safety net. I would implement a medical loan program similar to the college loan program. The loans are granted based on financial need. Once given the loan does not go away until it is paid off or the person dies. Bankrupcy would not remove it.

In addition, I would recommend that the government give $4,000 per year to every US citizen. This money could pay for health care but it could be spent on anything the recipient wanted. Unless the person has a medical loan out. The annual payment would go to the medical loan until it was paid off.

Health care in America, SOLVED!

This article can't be accurate. The healthcare bill was supposed to fix all of these cost problems...save us money. Let me break out the Obama-TI-2010 Calculator....carry the zero...multiply by 4...subtract 2...collect taxes for the 1st ten years...pay benefits for 6 the last six of those 10 years...sweep years 11-20 under the rug b/c everyone is too dumb to recognize that trick....AHHH HA!! We are saving approximately $180+ billion over 10 years. Folks...the Obama TI2010 calculator indicates that we should receive approximately $600 for every man, woman and child in America after 10 years of "savings". This article must be wrong and my Obama-math just proved it.

whynot,..lives in a dilusional world,where money comes from trees.

It amazes me that you think healthcare is so simple. So, a child born with serious disabilities should start incurring debt from birth and pay until death, even though that child may never grow into a functioning adult who could afford to house and feed themselves, let alone pay off hundreds of thousands or even millions $ of debt.

How about elderly people? As we age, we fall apart, piece by piece. Who is going to pay their debt? If they fall and break a hip, should they just ask to be taken to the crematorium?

It sounds to me that you are actually suggesting that if you can't afford the cost of of hospitalization, you should just die. Can you afford a $200,000 or more tab if you get cancer?

This is about healthcare in retirement, folks ..... covered by Medicare, supplemental insurance and out of pocket costs --- exactly as it was before the recent legislation. The new health care bill has very little to do with Medicare, but so many of you are so eager to bash President Obama you don't bother with rational thinking, research or even careful reading. "Obamacare" was all about covering people who did not have health care coverage.

WTF??!!! It doesn't grow on trees? Unless of course you mean "people that go out an earn it" when you say "it grows on trees". In that case, it all makes sense. LOL!!

Just what Nancy P said "let's pass this bill and figure out what it does later". Well, IO'm beginning to find out what it means to me and it isn't good. I'm on a Medicare PPFS plan that is being dropped next year. Yes, I will be able to choose another from the same insurance company, but it will now cost me more. Not only that, I will have to use a doctor in their network (my current plan allows me to use any doctor willing to bill the insurance company and understanding that the fees are based on what Medicare allows). My concern is knowing the doctors and specialists who will NOT accept Medicare patients. You know they still have that option. My wife uses a specialist like that and we just pay her full fee. Luckily we can still do that although for fhow long is uncertain.

All you people who think this is a good thing think it is free. There is nothing free. Someone will have to pay for ObamaPelosiReid care, and it apparently is going to be retirees and taxpayers. Bah humbug to you.

The best way to control medical costs is the way other First-World countries do it -- essentially universal health coverage. The best example is Germany, where the government sets the standards for both worker contributions and what is provided, over a thousand non-profits or co-ops handle the administration, and the rich can opt out of at least most of it if they have a more expensive plan. The worst outside the US may be Canada, which essentially banned private practice altogether and apparently is totally centrally administered. Every other country in the world (except Monaco, as I recall) spends a lot less than the US, and those with the best plans usually have better outcomes.

WHYNOT,

Outlaw health insurance? Why stop there? Outlaw ALL insurance. NO auto insurance, no property insurance, no business insurance, no life insurance, no liability insurance, no mortgage insurance, no Credit Default Swaps (another form of insurance).

Health insurance is a form of gambling. Insurees are betting that they MAY get sick or injured (a perverse way of winning). Insurers are betting that most people will not get sick or injured and will be better able to make money from the premiums collected than they have to spend paying claims. They "fix" the game by negotiating better costs from providers, excluding risks, and limiting payouts. Further, many of them back their bets by buying interests in drug companies, hospitals and clinics, Effectively, they pay themselves on the back-side.

Unless you either NATIONALIZE all healthcare providers, your scheme will only dirve higher costs and limit access as individual patients will have NO leverage (negotiating) pressure on providers.

Further, your suggestion that the Federal goverment just give every citizen $4000 a year smacks of the very same distribution of wealth that you decry. The student loan plan that you would extend to health care is under attack by all the same folks who complain about "Obamacare". Further, it will only drive us all in to even greater debt.

Finally, please remember that only the fringes of "Obamacare" have taken effect. People are yelling and screaming about changes that will not take effect until 2014 or later. Why the wait? Part of the reason is organic, it takes times to change or create rules, programs and/or organizations to support a program. The second reason is pure politics. This had to be a continuing issue for the parties (primarily Republican) to campaign on in 2012. The Republicans believe that this will be the "Obama-killer". They have made no secret whatsoever that their ONLY issue for the next two years is defeating Barack Obama. And to hell with the rest of us, or with the country.

I agree with Whynot. Insurance is a big reason health-care costs so much. People who have insurance can go to the doctor for every little sniffle and don't have to worry about taking care of themselves as the consequences of their actions will not be paid for by them, but by the rest of us.

So StormerF...money does not grow on trees but for those who have insurance, they sure act like it does. Everyone else pays for those who make bad health choices. Why should I have to pay for those who stuff their faces and then develop diabetes and heart problems because they can't show any self-control? Why should I pay for the children who choose to keep an elderly parent alive on life-support long after their minds are gone and bodies have given up because they can't face death? Why should I choose to pay the exorbitant medical bills for a teenager whose parents didn't monitor his poor driving habits and then who rams his car into a tree while drinking and driving fast? Insurance allows people to not be accountable for their choices. You can call me heartless, but like it or not, we all die at some point. Forcing everyone else to pay higher and higher fees so you can avoid the inevitable is stupidity.

The expectation is that the new health car law will lessen these costs. For those who have trouble with points of the bill, this doesn't seem to be one of the troublesome points.

To "Whynot": my partner's mother got a bad infection, lost kidney function, and has been in the hospital for months. I'm sure the hospital bill is much more than her assets. Under your scheme, she would have been kicked out of the hospital after a month or two and died. If that's the way you want the country to operate, then your position is self-consistent. Otherwise, I think you may not be clear on what insurance is for.

I agree...lets make health insurance illegal, and all insurance....it's "Socialism"....and while we are at it......let's get rid of all law enforcement...after all, why should I be made to pay to protect your mother or grandmother because she is too stupid or old to have a gun! And let's eliminate all fire departments.....why should I be forced to pay because you're too stupid to prevent a fire in your house....and just because it catches your neighbor's house on fire should I be forced to pay for that? Oh MY GOD!! I sound like a member of the TEA-liban!

Hey guys. The concept of insurance is fine but the execution of health insurance in the US is not. The idea behind insurance is to enable you to handle expensive situations that are unlikely to occur. Insurance should not cover routine events such as a visit to a doctor because you have a sore throat. It should cover unusual events like 4 days in the hospital to repair a compound fracture. Dental insurance is absurd -- it covers routine visits 100%, serious procedures at 50% or so. Exactly wrong! Sheesh! Regards....

good. let the tea baggers find out for themselves how wonderful insurance companies really are when they smack them in the face with a lifetime cap.

The concept of banning health insurance is interesting. Insurance companies are posting quarterly profits in the hundreds of million dollar range. Everyone wants universal health care and maybe a study should be done on facts and figures of taking monies currently paid (by individuals and companies) to Insurance companies by everyone and determine the possibility of creating a program and fund specifically for paying claims. A law such as a 20 year jail term for anyone trying to use this money for anything else but claims.

I do realize there will be huge obstacles to overcome such as ensuring competant people to run this program and details to curb fraudulent and excessive claims. Also some type of formula to determine affordable out of pocket expenses based on income.

Preference should be given to the most qualified industry claim handlers, managers etc. who will be needed to make such a program function.

Most of these negative posting are from insurance company executives or by people being paid by them.

I think that everyone should save money for health care regardless of their age and retirement. Saving money for health care is a must because you would never know what would happen later on in the future and don't wanna be hit with a large bill that you can't afford. careers in healthcare

That would be $100,000 each. So, your $195,000 puts you just below the average of $200,000 for husband & wife. Stay well!

This is an interesting issue!

What many seem to have forgotten, or just don't know, is that the GOP, about 12 yrs ago, presented a "health care bill" that went even further than Obamas, and in a very positive direction. Clearly, at that point in time, the Democrats shot it down...... as did the GOP, on this current go-around. No party whats the other to take credit, so even though the issue might be good for the voters, they will put a stop to it. Politics is more about "staying in power", rather than doing what's best for the voters. After all, the politicians don't have to use whatever health care they pass....but we do.

For the record, I'm a Democrat [most of the time! lol!!]. I really do wish there was a Moderate Party that took the best of both current parties. Wish we could get back to bi-partisen politics again... UGH!!

Gene where have you been the Dimocrats passed the Obamacare with out any Republican imput.Stop saying the Republicans had anything to do with it,your lying if you keep saying it.

They had a lot to do with the watered down version we got. The Dems tried to accommodate the Repubs and gave in to a lot of their demands.

And the new healthcare reform bill has nothing to do with this article. Medicare has always had to be supplemented and it costs money. As people age, they have a lot of healthcare problems.

Jezz, that's rubbish. The Democratss did NOTHING to accommodate Republican ideas, in particular tort reform. The current tort rules only benefit lawyers. Any idea of the proportion of lawyers in Congress??

Edwardcj: You do realize of course that malpractice lawsuits add 1% to health care insurance costs, - but then I imagine that makes no difference to you - you will shill for the wealthy corporations no matter what. Throwing mud at lawyers makes no sense, who do you think is going to be around to try and help compensate the malpractice victim? Are you willing as a tax payer to take care of the victims wife, son, daughter? I think not. And just who do you think is standing up for the corporation? A LAWYER! So what YOU would like to see is absolutely no oversight - let the incompetent doctors amputate the wrong foot, or remove the good kidney, and then? If you really wanted to do something constructive, rather than just blather as if you are on the far right talking points maybe you should pressure the AMA to take the license of the doctor found to be at fault. At the very least DEMAND that the AMA list any actions for malpractice decided against all doctors - then you could play the free market game - buyer beware.

I don't think the 1% includes all the costs for unnecessary testing which would raise the percentage much higher. Also insurance companies profits are also 1% and Obama wanted to blame the whole problem on them.

Gene where have you been the Dimocrats passed the Obamacare with out any Republican imput.Stop saying the Republicans had anything to do with it,your lying if you keep saying it.

Stormer you are an idiot if you think they had nothing to do with it. They plugged in at least half of the bill through the committees. Just becasue they were too scared to vote for it does not mean it wasn't written in part by them. The re-puke-licans have a lot of nerve to tell anyone they had no part of it and yet they just stand up there and lie lie lie about it. They wrote it, lots of it. As did doctors, hospitals, drug companies, not just the democrats. It was supposed to be bipartisan but they are cry- babies because they couldn't let someone else get some credit for it. The Medicare benefit from the plan could be that Medicare payments to doctors, which are way out of line in some states, will be equalized to a new normal, and those states that handled Medicare well in the past will get some more, those that allowed doctors to overbill and defraud the system will get less.

Where are Sarah's death panels?

They will be here shortly.....................

THe death panels are already here, but they have nothing to do with Obamacare. The rising costs of healthcare especially in retirement will dictate who will live and who won't. The bean counters are the death panels, doling out care based on the ability to pay. If you get sick and have saved enough to pay for care, you live. If ytou don't have enough, you die.

Who are the people who never contribute? If you have never contributed to Medicare, you don't get it without paying a lot for it.

I am serious. Who are the imaginary people who don't contribute?

Jezz: I believe social security benefits are based on your earnings. So, if you never worked or worked for minimum wage all your life, your benefits will be lower. But there is a max monthly amount. Now, I do not believe the Medicare premium that is withheld from that s.s. amount is on the same sliding scale as the monthly benefit. It is the same for everyone. So those who get less are in effect paying more for Medicare.

If you never worked at all i.e. "stay at home mom" all your life, you would be eligible for your husband's s.s. but because you never made any actual money, you never contributed to the system and would have no benefits that were actually yours. Those are your imaginary people.....

OK - I may be wrong and please feel free to correct my assumptions

Sunday, medicare premiums ARE based on a sliding scale. So, if you saved your money for your golden years and taking into account Social Security benefits, and pensions, you are likely to be paying more for medicare A&B than you lower wage earner. Not only that, but the IRS also taxes your Social Security benefits to which you contribute after tax dollars (in other words, you already paid taxes on the amount you contributed). Byzantine. Ponzi scheme.

Sarah' s death panels ae alive and well in Texas. George Bush and the conservatives here passed a bill in 1999 creating them follow this link.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0322-03.htm

Yankee:

After almost two years of negotiating away anything that would be significantly in the best interest of the middle class, I fear you're right. As HCR is written, the health insurers stand to gain the most from HCR. No price controls, and subsidies from the government for the mandate just funnels enormous profits to insurers. It resembles money-laudering...but we're not supposed to notice.

As our elected officials discuss eliminating our entitlement programs away to "lower the deficit" at the same time they anticipate approving tax cuts for the wealthy, is such an oxymoron that it makes you wonder how stupid they think we are. However if we say nothing, do nothing, but watch our president fail to face the opposition and overcome it, you really have to wonder whose side he's on.

He is not a stupid man. His speeches are strong and vibrant. But actions speak louder than words. I believe he's using the "opposition" as a scapegoat to do exactly what is demanded of him by the corporate bosses who contribute to his election campaigns.

I read the Citizens United ruling last night. Nothing before has ever assurred the end of democracy in this country more than that ruling. To hope that the very people who stand to gain the most (congress) from it will do anything to change that ruling is like trying to convince screaming children that walking out of the candy store is a good idea.

As long as the ruling stands, our elected officials including the non-elected SCOTUS will serve their employers. Unfortunately, since we can't meet the salaries offered by the corporate elite, we no longer are their employers and they will not work in the best interest of the people. The pay is just not good enough...

bluwtrdia- ah be we far outnumber them and in reality we are in charge. we need to stop being baited by the 24 hour news cycle clowns and realize that neither party functions in our best interest. of the people, for the people, by the people - WE THE PEOPLE

Do the deadbeat pols have the same problem?????? NO! Let these bums go on the same plans that the rest of us who have contributed to that the growth and stability of the country are on. ALL politicians from the bottom to the top have no concerns, nor do they care about our concerns.

I would like to see published who in the DC political scene have ever served in the military. Is 3% too high? My own feeling, and those of others, is that anyone holding a top political office should have served in the military.

I wouldn't mind it so much if they gave me a "death date" put my in some kind of care-center when I'm like 70, gave me all the drugs I want and then the ability to over-dose on them. I'll bet many people (by that time) who are my generation wouldn't mind that option. I don't think people are as frightened of death anymore. I'm an atheist, so I'm not worried. Blink...you're gone, so what? You DO have to make room for the younger people coming up. That's one thing the older people, the boomers, forget because they're mostly so self centered.

mj

Numbers mean little because the system is corrupt. The problem is that while we have numbers, they have cash. The top 5% of the population controls 90% of the wealth. The people we elect, all of them serve the top 5%. Sometimes we get a thrown a bone to keep us quiet.

Yankee................Obama? This is about the Medicare system as it has been for years. My parents have been on it for 30 years and they have paid out more than $200,000 for Medicare supplements and over $300,000 for assisted living. It has nothing to do with Obama. Medicare does not pay 100% - it never has.

And if you are referring to paying doctors to have the discussion about do not resuscitate orders as the Palin death panels, then you are ill informed.

Republicans are the ones who wants the old to die faster. I would suggest that insurance is nothing more than a pyramid scheme. It is a medical savings account until you have to use it and then insurance companies find a way to not pay. I would suggest that all those who think they could always pay 100% of all medical care, do so for themselves and their family. You don't need anyone's permission. I just hope you never need any critical procedures (mainly for the children who's stupid parent make irrational decisions).

Here's an option. In bulk, everyone move to the one insurance company willing to lower cost by say 20%. They would make billions and force the others to do the same or go out of business. Competition? Now that's supply and demand.

old paul, i agree. everyone seems to think that the answer to the healthcare issue is for everyone to have insurance. the insurance isn't going to help when our hospitals and drs. know how much insurance will cover, and treat patients accordingly. my father had a stroke in jan., when he received a bill for 1100 for his portion not paid for by medicare, i requested an itemized bill from the hospital. medicare was billed for 5 ct scans. the stroke didn't show up on the first ct, so why do 4 more. when i called and questioned it i was told i shouldn't worry about it, medicare was paying for it anyway.

I'm a conservative! that said, the only way health care reform had any chance of working, is the public option. what we have now is for the benefit of the insurance companies, not the public. Without the public option there is no incentive for the insurance companies to lower their rates, and any body that tells you different is lying to you. But what really bothers me is when an illegal can walk into any emergency room in this country and get free medical treatment at the expense of the tax payer. I don't mind people coming into this country legally. You want to solve some of these problems? pPut the Marines down on the border and I'll bet they can solve the problems with the drug cartels, and the illegals that in itself will solve some of the medical cost this country faces.

Dear Old Paul,

This isn't "socialized." The government would not be making a tremendous profit on "socialized" medicine, but the insurance companies are. Yesterday, my doctor told me I need an MRI of my spine, but that Medicare would probably insist I have a "useless" x-ray first. He gave me lab orders for both. I don't understand why I should have to have the useless x-ray, absorb the radiation, and wait for the MRI while Medicare then pays for both. As Adam Smith said, it is the Invisible Hand of Greed. We have become nothing but Cash Cows for the politicians. But even cows get necessary medical care at no expense!

Paul,

The big problemis that insurance is a game of odds, and insurers are casino bosses. Health care providers know that they will have a greater earning capacity if they tap pools of the insured. Additionally, if health care providers cannot earn what they "need" to they choose another line of work. ZThis causes a shortage in health care provider, thus raising cost beyond the means of most people. Health insurers operating in a completely free market will work to load the dice in their favor by cancelling people that are sick and not offering coverage to those that need it. This is why the industry has become so regulated. .

The situation is very complcated. The reason we have such good healthcare in this country is because there was always a lot of money available in the system. This attracted the best talent and funded a tremndous amout of research. This type of care has become expensive to sustain because those in healthcare expect high pay and continue job growth. The need for regulation has also increased costs not to mention the cost of litigation.

Old Paul you are exactly right. Medical insurance is socialization and it is bad. It is socialization because medical costs are spread over a large population so the actual costs of service are grossly distorted. That makes for bad decisions. Having to pay for the services you receive would have a huge effect on the cost of medicine in the U.S. Better decisions would be made. Overinflated prices would be forced out of the system because people would not pay them. Now price of a service is pretty much irrelevant because the patient has to pay only a tiny portion of the cost.

so lets see here a person making minimum wage and gets his or here leg cut open in a accident walking dow the street should dye cause they cant afford to have stiches and a perscription for a antibiotic.

whynot,

It doesn't work that way in healthcare because most people will pay anything for medical services that will save their life or the life of a loved one. As costs go down, so will the level of care. A good analogy is the dental industry. Good care costs more than most can afford, and that's just for teeth, imagine the effect when the issues are life threatening.

People miss an important issue with healthcare. The fewer people that are able to seek medical attention, the greater the likelihood that diseases will spread, which can threaten the whole population. There are certain issues that just don't completely lend themselves to the invisible hand and free market economics. These include the country's food supply, defense and healthcare..

tief: To answer your question, it is because our elected officials no longer work for the American people.

The insurance corporations make it more profitable for our lawmakers to create legislation that is in the corporate best interest.

With the recent Citizens United ruling from the SCOTUS, it can only get worse. That ruling will end democracy as we know it. And, the chances of the legislative or executive branch of our government doing anything about it are nil...since they all feed at the same trough.

If you want insurance and retirement for life.

Start your own company and give it to yourself and all your employees.

See real easy to do, So get to work......

And why should companies be responsible for your health care?

I would rather be offered a plan like my company offers and keep it or look for better without my company telling me what they want to do about it. Have the company give me the money they pay - and I will then pay the premiums - with whatever provider earns my business. The company gets out of the health care business - and I become responsible for my choices.

The scam is that ObamaCare does nothing to improve health care - it merely adjusts the money holding process of insurance and government - with Obama plan seeking to drive all that money into hands of government programs.

The scam is that small companies really have no incentive today - and their employees are unable to seek coverage at reasonable rates. If insurance companies were truly competitive - they would offer equivalent of group rates with appropriate age qualifiers to any and all and have standard policy schemes (just like auto insurance).

So switch from company based to individual offerings (at competitive group rates) and people are not bound to companies for continuing coverage. It also puts companies on more of an equal footing (as they offer fewer and fewer benefits) and pay can be better compared.

tief-has-had -enough asked why can't companies pay for health care like they did for our parents. That answer is that we are living decades longer than our parents. Society has changes. We need to adapt.

Company sponsored health care plan began as a perk in the 50s and 60s to ebtice high end employees. As time went on, employes were button holed into providing plans for employees. Many unions demanded these benefits, and eventually labor regulations started demanding that employers offer the same benefits to all employees. I alway felt that healthcare should not have become a responsibility of an employer, though it is a convenient vehicle to provide health care coverage. Insurers were happy as Pigs in slop with this because they could grab up premiums from pools of healthy people that perhaps would not have bothered having health insurance. Now the chickens have come home and insurers and healthcare providers have become used to high profitability.

In any case, as an employer I provide healthplans tomy employees because most are highly specialized and valuable to operations. The costs have become staggering though, not only for the plans, but also to manage the whole mess.

Retirement plans are a thing of the past, unless of course you are in a union. Many companies that offered pensions raided the pension accounts and left employees high and dry. Then came the 401K, which was one of the greatest financial boondoggles and money grab in history. Many 401k plans became huge financial siphons, getting people to pump money into the financial markets, under the guiess of reaping some sort of tax benefit. The system itself was flawed in that money invested was not that secure. Many failed to realize the any tax saving was temporary at best. Eventually you were going to ay tax on the money in the account. in fact, for many their tax burden may wind up being higher once they reach retirement age. Younger families generally have more write offs lowering tax rate, while older people lose many of the write offs they had. When retirement distributions are coupled with social security benefits, tax burdens can get pretty substantial.

because self responsibity is the foundation for freedom. No company is responsible for an employee after they retire. I am not responsible for my children after they turn 18. Our health problems are the result of bad and unhealthy lifestyles. 90% of disease is caused by the patient themselves.

Wow pained how far up your rectum did you have to go to dig out that crap? Actually I do believe that personal responsibility is an important foundation for a successful life. As far as a companies responsibilities, perhaps there should not be any legal responsibility for an employee after retirement, but the thought is that the employee has contributed to the success of the firm and the company may have some moral responsibility, or at least demonstrate some sort of gratitude for the services provided. As I mentioned before, pensions and retirement benefits started as perks to keep good employees.

Your statement about the cause of disease is just plain ignorant. Some people don't care for themselves and wind up with medical issues due to dietary choices, but the figures your spouting are purely imaginary. You are very fortunate to live in a country where the healthcare system has so effectively managed the vast array of communicable diseases that so often killed so many in previous generations. Simple flues used to kill thousands each year, not to mention diseases like polio, typhoid, TB, cholera and many others that had little to do with how people cared for themselves.

Nancy...You do realize that ordering prescription medicine outside the U.S. is against the law...don't you? Our government made sure we don't have that option, without penalties.

Although the Veterans' Administration is exempt, and most, if not all prescription meds are puchased outside the U.S., the government claims making it illegal for U.S. citizens is in our best interest. The law is intended to protect us...I guess they figure citizens' well-being is more important that our veteran's.

In reality, it assures profitability for pharma... Just don't be surprised if one of your prescription packages is confiscated at the border...it does happen.

I just don't know what it's going to take for Americans to recognize who our politicians serve.

Certainly the results of the last election indicates we are lost in wishful thinking... Having the republican party claim they received a mandate from the people, to return to Bush era economics isn't surprising. As fiscal conservatives, while they increase the deficit for no good reason it's exactly what Bush was doing...with unfunded wars, unfunded tax cuts, unfunded medicare programs..leading to economic collapse...sure...that's what the electorate just said we want more of! They got that message...loud and clear.

They conveniently ignore the fact that our vote is our only voice and that vote, from our point of view, voiced disatisfaction with increasing the deficit. It certainly was not electorate approval for deficit increases caused by unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy.

If this nation survives the next two years without going bankrupt, we can only hope that they will reap what the sew.

if you truly believe that, go online and read the healthcare bill. better yet, read the first draft, which not only limited care to seniors and required all citizens to partake of the one plan, they required your checking acct. number, so the govt. could debit your premium payment from your acct.

perhaps it's only certain seniors, which by the way, in the first draft, the govt. was allowed to dictate who received treatment, not our personal drs.

don't forget "Once again the GOP plan, make up crap, insist it is true, and then run on total BS and lies and then win control.

The average American is going to be in for a rough time in the next two years while the Republicans run their agenda on us again. If you thought it was bad in 2007-08 wait till they get their way from 2011-2012. If you need help, forget about it. I hope the ones that will suffer the most are the ones who voted them back into power. You deserve it. Next time think before you buy their slogans and talking points.

If you thought it was bad in 2007-08 wait till they get their way from 2011-2012. If you need help, forget about it. I hope the ones that will suffer the most are the ones who voted them back into power.

Yeah because 2009-2010 have been great. The democrats sure did a lot to help people out.

I totally agree with you!!

We should all be so lucky. Your just 50 my friend? you've got a long way to go. You will get sick you will die and getting thereI hope you eat all your veggies, if they aren't tainted by the time you expire. Although eating healthy is great it can be very expensive for a family to do on moderate to low income. I don't know your income but I just went to the store and it cost 1.69 for a pound of Minni carrots. Now that's just carrots try adding in some green leaf veggies and various other vegetables and it can get quite expensive. Veggies don't fill up a child's stomach like cheap macaroni and cheese. Plus, I suppose you don't have little ones, try to get children to eat a vegan life and you're likely to get undernourished children. The crap they put in food is making all of us obese, unless your a workout nut, then your just thinking of yourself. Health care shouldn't be a privilege but a human right and anybody that's against that is a, bad word, Nazi. I went to a health food store and couldn't even afford a peanut. This government doesn't care for the real Americans just that they get their way at our expense. We need a new party in this country one that will listen to the American people. One that's interested in making our country great again, by investing in American labor not foreign labor for profit. If the government wants a revolution they sure are pushing the working peoples tempers. We need jobs f!@#$#@ now. Not later now!!!!! We need to get the hell out of China,India, and any other third world country that exploits their people. Fine any large company that takes jobs overseas and benefits from screwing us out of our future. We are the world, we are the country that takes the most care of the world. We help when there is oppression, starvation, dictators who eat their own, but we, the American people, need assistance NOW! Wake up Republicans, Democrats, Obama, get your heads out of your ass and smell the prevailing winds, your headed for a revolt in this country like never before. Stop the wars and come home and protect us!

Because those 40 million people who can't afford insurance still need health care. And in order to fulfill their health needs end up going to the Emergency Room (where the law requires that they be seen) or racking up health bills that are sent to collection agencies. Who ends up paying their health care bills in the end? The taxpayers. Even a small contribution towards minimal insurance would alleviate this financial drain on the system.

Because those 40 million people still have health care needs. Now, they fulfill those needs by going to the Emergency Room (where the law requires that they are seen) or racking up expensive health care bills that end up getting set to collection agengies anyways. Who pays for that? Taxpayers. Even a minimal contribution towards health insurance would alleviate the financial drain on the system.

Suzen, anything that's on the table that serves to increase corporate profit will be approved by the majority in the House of Representatives for the next 2 years. Whether it gets through the senate and passes remains to be seen.

Since the president fails to confront the opposition and overcome it, he will continue to appease the other side in the name of bipartisanship... Convenient as it is, the republicans just gave him the best scapegoat he could've asked for.

Only what benefits corporate America, enabling our elected officials to continue to receive the monetary benefits of working for corporate America, rather than U.S. citizens, will be approved. The recent SCOTUS "Citizens United" ruling gave the green light for full-speed ahead corporate takeover, right after our Supreme Court justices attended republican campaign fund raisers sponsored by Koch Corporation...Hmmm...timing is everything...

Although HCR represents some benefits for the middle class, with no price controls, and government subsidies to meet the mandate, all of it goes into the pockets of the insurers...So who is the ultimate winner from HCR?

The president gets to claim he passed HCR...hooray! More profit for the insurance companies...hooray! Yet he stands there innocently wondering why the American people don't "recognize" his accomplishment...

Maybe we're smarter than he thinks we are.

You are right on Suz, at least for the more reasonable people. I think that there are also a significant number of voters that just listen to the alarmist spouting misinformation as well. As for myself, I was very distressed that Obama and company forced the healthcare bill through with little regard to what was in it or public opinion. I think it's a dangerous precedence. I don't believe anyone deserves to be given health insurance, but do think that if this is a benefit that the citizens wish to have available, then it can be voted on.

I think that we need to hand back some of these responsibilities to the states. Education should be the States responsibility.

"The Framers were concerned with a few things over all. They wanted to create a national government that was effective and powerful, but which did not infringe upon the rights of the individual, nor upon the powers of the states.

Nobody mentioned Michelle

That was then. Now if you leave something up to the states it becomes a race to the bottom. One state decides they can corner the market by giving advantages to companies who want to do business there. They allow those companies to take liberties that make it hard for companies in other states to compete. So the only companies that can stay afloat are the ones who move to that state and provide the same level of bad service.

Some states have lax health regulations, then expect to receive Federal help for their poor and unhealthy people. It doesn't work. There can't be too much regulation as far as I'm concerned. Companies and states don't do the right thing for everyone. They do the right thing for themselves.