However court rules, Price ready with alternative to Obamacare
When the Supreme Court last week heard arguments in the 26-state legal challenge to Obamacare, Georgia was well-represented. There was Sam Olens, who as our attorney general is one of the plaintiffs. And there was Tom Price, a leader in the effort to repeal and/or replace the law, however the justices rule.
“It was really uplifting, actually,” Price, a fourth-term congressman from Roswell and the fifth-ranking Republican in the House, said in a phone interview. “I think [the justices] were giving it the serious consideration that it warrants.”
Price, who previously practiced medicine, not law, stopped just short of predicting the outcome: “My suspicion is this will be ruled unconstitutional, but I’m not a court watcher so that may be more hope than fact.” Either way, he’s ready.
As he did months before Obamacare was passed, Price has introduced the Empowering Patients First Act. It’s a more market-oriented approach to fixing what ails American health care.
Price’s updated bill begins by repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, in case the Supreme Court leaves all or part of it intact. Then it moves on to correct the inequity in the way tax law treats health insurance. Individuals who buy their own insurance would get the same tax deduction as employer-sponsored plans.
Low-income Americans could receive the tax benefit as a credit both refundable — meaning they’d get it even if they didn’t pay income tax — and advanceable — meaning it could be paid directly to the insurer, rather than the insured person fronting the money. It would also allow people to opt out of government programs such as Medicaid and Medicare and receive a tax credit toward a private plan.
Missing is a legal requirement to buy health insurance, just incentives that mean “you’d be foolish to not get covered,” Price said.
Next, the bill tackles two other problems: portability and pre-existing conditions. Regarding the former, Price said his bill “makes it so that everybody owns their health coverage regardless of who’s paying for it — your employer, the government, or you. If you change or lose your job, you just take it with you. Losing your health insurance when you change your job, when the employer is using your money out of your paycheck, just doesn’t make sense.”
For pre-existing conditions, the bill again mimics the advantages now given only to big employers. It allows states, small businesses and other entities (e.g., churches or trade associations) to form risk pools large enough that people with chronic health problems won’t be turned away.
“The vast majority of high-risk pools at the state level don’t work, because you take all the sickest people and throw them in a pool and — surprise, surprise — their costs are greater,” he said. “We believe any individual ought to be able to access a pool of millions of people.”
In doing so, the bill “would create a market for a new product that doesn’t exist now because it’s against the law to do what we propose to do.”
Another key element of the bill is a tort reform authored by Phil Gingrey, another Georgia doctor-turned-congressman.
Price said defensive medicine — procedures doctors order to avoid being sued — accounts for a quarter of U.S. health costs, or some $600 billion a year. To reduce that figure, the bill proposes administrative health courts in which experts and specialized judges handle malpractice claims. It also creates a “safe harbor” for doctors who follow industry-standard guidelines for treating a particular ailment.
To allay concerns tort reform is up to the states, not Washington, the bill limits the safe harbor provision to patients with a “nexus with the federal government.” That means they are covered by a federal program (Medicare, the military’s Tricare, etc.) or a big employer whose plan is governed by the federal ERISA law.
“That gets you about 85 percent of the population or even more,” Price said. “So we believe that in and of itself would change the dynamic, and make it such that states could adopt fill-in measures.”
Democrats often claim GOP opponents of Obamacare offer no alternative. Price’s bill dispels that notion. He has little confidence Democrats will now entertain his 32-month-old bill. But …
“That’s not to say, if the Supreme Court throws it out, there couldn’t be a change of heart,” Price allowed, “and I would welcome that with open arms.”
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
210 comments Add your comment
Joel Edge
April 5th, 2012
6:31 am
“He has little confidence Democrats will now entertain his 32-month-old bill.”
Smart man.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
April 5th, 2012
6:32 am
However court rules, Price ready with alternative to Obamacare
5:09 am April 5, 2012, by Kyle Wingfield
———————–
The alternative to Obozocare is freedom.
ragnar danneskjold
April 5th, 2012
6:43 am
That sounds like a pretty good set of reforms – why did the democrats not do something so rational?
mountain man
April 5th, 2012
6:48 am
So what if a person decides not to buy insurance even though “you’d be foolish to not get covered,”?
It probably is still cheaper to go without insurance than use the tax credit, especially if you make more than $50,000 per year (a good portion of “free riders” make more than that).
Are you still going to allow them to go to the hospital and make the rest of us pay for their care through our higher insurance bills?
Let’s hear the answer, Tom Price.
GDRLA
April 5th, 2012
6:51 am
WHY were these proposals done BEFORE the health care act was passed? If they are so great why did it take most of my lifetime to get something like the HCA into effect? As someone with a pre-existing condition & uninsurable most of my life I take a dim view of these AFTER THE FACT fixes. If they are so valid and necessary to the ‘free market’ they should have been in place long ago.
Having read a great deal of the HCA it has problems but it can be repaired, adjusted, fixed, etc., just as many of our laws undergo adjustments after their passages. SCOTUS may or may not overturn all or part of the act but if they overturn it it will be a conservative Republican example of Judicial Activism.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
April 5th, 2012
7:00 am
mountain man: Let’s hear the answer, Tom Price.
——————————-
Caring liberals will form a charity to provide health care for the “less fortunate”.
How much did you donate to the cause of health care for all last year?
Didn’t think so.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
April 5th, 2012
7:01 am
GDRLA: As someone with a pre-existing condition & uninsurable most of my life
——————–
Who should be paying for your health care?
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
7:06 am
“That gets you about 85 percent of the population or even more,”
Hmm… 310 million people at last count. 15% of that is… 46 million people. Isn’t that how many were not covered by health care insurance before the debate started?
Ronnie Raygun
April 5th, 2012
7:10 am
“He has little confidence Democrats will now entertain his 32-month-old bill.”
Give me a break. If the Democrats ever do support it, the Republicans will deride it as freedom hating socialism, just like they are doing with all of the Republican ideas that make up 90% the Affordable Care Act.
Don't Tread
April 5th, 2012
7:24 am
Don’t you know Obama will be upset when the Court rules Obamacare unconstitutional. After all, he DID tell them that they had no business doing so. Blah, blah, blah.
That being said, a personal tax deduction for buying health insurance IS constitutional. However, Democrats don’t like it because a) they can’t gain control of 1/7 of the economy that way, and b) they want to control other people’s money, and tax deductions don’t help with that. (The “health care” issue is really all about *control* and not health care).
These power hungry people need to be kicked out of office, quickly. I personally don’t care to repeat German history (1932 – 1939) in this country.
Wade Hampton
April 5th, 2012
7:34 am
Sounds like some good ideas but…………………………….
Tom Price and Phil Gingrey BOTH signed the NDAA 2012.
.
NEVER trust a Traitor.
Just try them.
xdog
April 5th, 2012
7:35 am
“the bill proposes administrative health courts”
Death courts!
I’m surprised at you Kyle.
Fed Up With Republicans
April 5th, 2012
7:35 am
Mr. Price – how much did your health care cost you last year. Just another repugnant idea to screw over the needy and the Seniors. You, old man, are getting to be a pain just like the rest of your repugnant buddies. Contrary to what you and your buddy Fran Millar may think, we are satisfied with Hank Johnson and don’t want you representing us. Repugnants – two kinds – millionaires and suckers – to which category do you belong? Both of them. Pay for your insurance coverage before you start running your mouth.
Jeffw
April 5th, 2012
7:35 am
Lil Barry Bailout(oh btw the Wall St Bailout was BUSH’s BAILOUT): if you read what Tom Price said, he thinks TAXPAYERS(aka HARD WORKING SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS) should pay for the pre-existing conditions by way of taxpayer sponsored, government backed(conservative speak for government run) risk pools. Under ObamaCare, FOR-PROFIT HEALTH insurance corporations, who tell us 24×7x365 that they are better than the government wouild pay for it. That’s who I want to pay for the costs of pre-existing conditions: for-profit health insurers shareholders&employees who don’t sell anything to growing emerging markets. They don’t grow the pie. They only take from it. I want to help HEROIC small business owners who DO grow the pie by selling to overseas emerging markets. That’s how we grow our economy.
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
7:43 am
He has little confidence Democrats will now entertain his 32-month-old bill. But …
I have little confidence the Republican majority in the House will entertain it either, considering they haven’t put the bill out for a full vote yet, have they? Or are they still in the minority and can’t bring bills to the floor for a vote in the House?
curious
April 5th, 2012
7:46 am
Don’t Tread
What happened in Germany 1932-1939? I know Hitler was in power from 1933-1945. Maybe I need to read my history book some more.
Johns creek
April 5th, 2012
7:47 am
why is having health insurance believed to be such a good thing? health insurance companies are ripoff artists, and for the great majority of people it is not cost effective. Most of us will see little benefit from health insurance, and pay way too much for it. Put the money in a Roth Ira, which you can use to cover medical costs should you need to, and you will be far better off.
The ripoff that needs to be fixed is doctors and hospitals charging different people different amounts for medical care. That is discriminatory. Medical providers should be required to charge everyone the same amount, with no exceptions!
bull sitting
April 5th, 2012
7:48 am
Again, another plan that allows people to avoid taking PERSONEL RESPONSIBILITY for their medical care, how long will republications foster this nanny-state idea Romney care must stand!
jconservative
April 5th, 2012
7:54 am
“Low-income Americans could receive the tax benefit as a credit both refundable — meaning they’d get it even if they didn’t pay income tax — and advanceable — meaning it could be paid directly to the insurer, rather than the insured person fronting the money.”
If the government is going to hand out money, this plan becomes just another government entitlement.
There is nothing wrong with the health care system we have/had before the passage of the Health Care Act. Everyone who wants to receive medical care was/is able to get medical care from any hospital in the country.
Since the passage, and the signing into law by President Reagan, of the The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986 hospitals are required to provide care to anyone needing emergency health care regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions.
This plan has worked successfully for 26 years. Why change?
curious
April 5th, 2012
8:01 am
Next time you need a hip replacement to enable you to work, go to your local ER and see what you get.
Ayn Rant
April 5th, 2012
8:10 am
Price has some good ideas, but not a firm grasp of the problem. Affordable health care insurance won’t work unless the insurance pool is very large, as large as everyone in the USA, the healthy and the sick. Insurance providers cannot offer coverage for pre-existing conditions if freeloaders can enroll only when they need medical care. And the cost of health care insurance cannot be contained so long as freeloaders get free medical care at emergency clinics. The “mandate” is necessary and indispensible.
Lawyers and health care insurers are unnecessary financial burdens onUS health care. Neither provides any medical care or eases the suffering of patients. Price does offer “tort control” to limit the lawyers, but he keeps private insurers as middlemen between patients and medical care providers.
Price does not address the outrageous cost of prescription drugs under patent. He fails to give the government health care programs like Medicare the right to negotiate drug prices. He fails to ban consumer advertising of patented prescription drugs, which are not competitively traded or available for direct consumer purchase.
Price’s plan will be opposed by his Republican colleagues because it provides some financial assistance to working people. It should be opposed by the Democrats because it caters to the health care insurance racket and the pharmaceutical drug lobby.
Overall, the Romney/Obama plan is better. Substituting a “public option” for insurance exchanges, and “binding arbitration” for lawyers, would make the Romney/Obama approach as perfect as an American health care plan can ever be.
AU Liberal in ATL
April 5th, 2012
8:15 am
Freedom. How can so few fail to understand the meaning of the word? The kind of freedom those tea party nuts are espousing leaves everyone on their own. No taxes equal no police, no streets or interstate roads, no clean water, no fire department, etc, etc, etc…..Let those morons take over our government and we cease to exist.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
8:23 am
“WHY were these proposals done BEFORE the health care act was passed?”
They were proposed during the health care debate, GDRLA, but the Democrat-controlled House and their Democrat-controlled committees wouldn’t let any GOP proposals even get a hearing at the committee level.
jconservative
April 5th, 2012
8:24 am
curious 8:01 am
“Next time you need a hip replacement to enable you to work, go to your local ER and see what you get.”
curious, your opinion of doctors is pretty low.
I know someone who actually had that done, complete hip replacement. They fell, broke the hip, and went to the emergency room. No insurance but no that was no problem. They had the hip replacement surgery done by the most experienced local orthopedic surgeon. They spent three months in physical therapy after the surgery. All “pro bono” as the lawyers say.
A year later they are doing fine. They are not back to “normal”; after complete hip replacement nothing will ever be normal again.
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986, a product of a Democratic House, a Republican Senate and a Republican president.
carlosgvv
April 5th, 2012
8:26 am
“more market-oriented approach”
Translation – It continues to protect the obsene profits of the medical industry at the expense of the American people.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
8:27 am
“just like they are doing with all of the Republican ideas that make up 90% the Affordable Care Act.”
DNC talking points aside, just because one (or even a handful) of Republicans call for a particular program to be implemented, doesn’t make it a “Republican” idea.
Political deflection is what you are engaging in, Ronnie.
RAMZAD
April 5th, 2012
8:32 am
Kyle, you have become a good little water bucket for Repugnant propaganda. Somebody has to do it and the bills have to be paid. I totally understand.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
8:34 am
“No taxes equal no police, no streets or interstate roads, no clean water, no fire department, etc, etc, etc”
What was it Romney said about the current Disaster-in-Chief’s speech the other day? Something on the order of “He railed against proposals no one has made . . . .”
AU Liberal needs to UNDERSTAND what some Republicans and Tea Party members ACTUALLY CALL FOR, not what his mind-numbing liberal masters tell him.
curious
April 5th, 2012
8:39 am
J conservative
The Doctor should be commended.
I suppose the hospital, support staff, medical appliance provider, and physical therapy folks also provided that pro-bono service. If they did, I would wager they just jacked up their bill to the paying customers to make up the difference.
Thank you for paying (I did, too).
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
8:48 am
I say we get universal gov’t run healthcare…. like in the UK:
83-Year-Old Woman Denied Health Care Over “Carbon Footprint”
“If you want to get a glimpse of what life will be like under Obamacare, just look to the UK, where government-run health care continues to produce ludicrous stories like this – a pensioner who had visited the same doctor’s practice for 30 years was told to find a new GP because of concerns over the “carbon footprint” of her 2 mile round trip.
After 83-year-old Avril Mulcahy complained about a doctor, she was told that the practice had a problem over her “green traveling issues” and ordered her to re-register at another practice.”
Finn McCool (Class Warfare = Stopping Rich People from TAKING MORE of OUR MONEY)
April 5th, 2012
8:48 am
people with chronic health problems won’t be turned away.
I prefer “can’t” to “won’t”. Price’s plan is just wishful thinking.
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
8:49 am
“In the UK, patients cannot seek private health care without first being referred by a National Health Service GP. This can often take weeks because it is like a lottery attempting to get an NHS appointment. Government-run health care in the United Kingdom is notoriously poor and horror stories about wrong legs being amputated and other medical nightmares are routinely in the news.”
carlosgvv
April 5th, 2012
8:51 am
curious – 8:39
Thank you for pointing out what the cons obviously don’t want to hear.
Cutty
April 5th, 2012
8:52 am
Republicans had complete control of Washington from 2002-2006, if this was so important why wasn’t a bill by Price introduced then? Risk pools, administrative health courts, portability, pre-existing conditions. Sounds a lot like what we have now in ‘Obamacare’ with another name slapped on it.
But hey, ‘you’d be foolish not to get covered.’
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
8:57 am
“if this was so important why wasn’t a bill by Price introduced then?”
It wasn’t important then.
You don’t really know politics, do you, Cutty?
WOW
April 5th, 2012
8:58 am
A lot of these ideas are good (some are in the ACA), but where in this proposal is there any effort to control cost? Without the mandate there is no cost control, meaning the tax incentives will continue to increase the overall cost of the bill. Everyone knows this, this is why Gingrich, Romney and teh Heritage Foundation were all originally for the mandate. Also there will be those who choose not to get covered and they will continue to use the ER as their primary health care provider, again increasing the amount of government spending on Health Care.
This proposal will be more expensive than Obamacare!
jconservative
April 5th, 2012
9:01 am
curious at 8:39 – ” I would wager they just jacked up their bill to the paying customers to make up the difference.”
I would think you would win the wager.
We can call it the “charity” that Lil’ Barry was talking about earlier.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
9:07 am
WOW, tort reform will control the costs. Doctors are already on record as saying the run more defensive medicine tests to avoid malpractice suits to the tune of 30% of the cost of healthcare today.
And while Gingrich and the Heritage Foundation may have at one time supported a mandate, Romney has not. At least not at any Federal level. Get off the Santorum / media talking points.
Finn McCool (Class Warfare = Stopping Rich People from TAKING MORE of OUR MONEY)
April 5th, 2012
9:09 am
AU Liberal needs to UNDERSTAND what some Republicans and Tea Party members ACTUALLY CALL FOR
That’s right, Republicans aren’t really for smaller government, they just want to shift government around so it only benefits people like them. Proof? Eight years of W. Government didn’t get smaller – and Republicans controlled both houses during 6 of those years.
Finn McCool (Class Warfare = Stopping Rich People from TAKING MORE of OUR MONEY)
April 5th, 2012
9:12 am
tort reform? If the doctor amputates your leg by removing the wrong one are you just going to take it on the chin? Give him a pass? Let him off with an “Oh, my bad!”
??
Mistakes have consequences. You remove the consequences, you remove the desire and need to limit mistakes.
Richard
April 5th, 2012
9:12 am
I have another idea (since I’m a solutions guy). Get rid of the fixed dollar amount for copays and make it percentage based.
See, the Obama administration is correct in that health care markets operate differently than others. They just got it wrong as to how. They behave differently because most people don’t pay for the product they’re buying, so they don’t care about price. In turn, doctors/hospitals are free to raise prices as much as they want without any backlash from customers.
Let’s say your copay is $20. Do you care if the doctor charges $100, $200 or $500? Do you even know? If the copay was 10%, you’d be looking at $10, $20, or $50 for the same doctors. Maybe you’d care a bit more. Maybe the doctors would find ways to lower their prices.
The way insurance is structured, doctors have no incentive to compete on price. It is the opposite of a free market system.
Bobby
April 5th, 2012
9:13 am
While not a Price fan, if he could actually get his fellow GOP legislators to go along with his bill, I would not oppose it replacing Obamacare.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
9:17 am
“That’s right, Republicans aren’t really for smaller government, they just want to shift government around so it only benefits people like them.”
Hyperbole.
“Proof? Eight years of W. Government didn’t get smaller – and Republicans controlled both houses during 6 of those years.”
And they paid for it, Finn, by being ousted from control. Just as Democrats did by overreaching when they got into power.
The difference is that it appears for now that Republicans learned from their mistakes. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid clearly have not.
Joe the Prophet
April 5th, 2012
9:22 am
Tom Price..”I have a solution if Romneycare is ruled unconstitutional…”
Barack Obama…”I endorse Tom Price’s solution to Obamacare….”
Republicans…..”The plan sucks…It’s socialist….It’s Muslim….!!!”
Beware America You Will PAY The Price
April 5th, 2012
9:22 am
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
April 5th, 2012
6:32 am
However court rules, Price ready with alternative to Obamacare
5:09 am April 5, 2012, by Kyle Wingfield
———————–
The alternative to Obozocare is freedom.
********************************************************************
The Price ain’t RIGHT and NEITHER are you.
Joe the Prophet
April 5th, 2012
9:24 am
Tom Price….”I have a solution to Romneycare/Obamacare…”
Barack Obama….”I endorse Tom Price’s solution…”
Republicans….”That solution sucks…!!! It’s Muslim…!!! It’s Socialist….!!!! Keep your Socialist hands off my Medicare…!!!!”…..
Joe the Prophet
April 5th, 2012
9:27 am
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
9:17 am
“That’s right, Republicans aren’t really for smaller government, they just want to shift government around so it only benefits people like them.”
Hyperbole.
“Proof? Eight years of W. Government didn’t get smaller – and Republicans controlled both houses during 6 of those years.”
And they paid for it, Finn, by being ousted from control. Just as Democrats did by overreaching when they got into power.
The difference is that it appears for now that Republicans learned from their mistakes. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid clearly have not
========================================
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are not the one’s trying to renegotiate the scheduled sequester budget cuts…….The Ryan budget plan also raises the deficit……..
Evidently getting out in public with Tbags on your head and yellow flags with snakes on them is not the same thing as actually lowering the deficit……
Beware America You Will PAY The Price
April 5th, 2012
9:28 am
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
April 5th, 2012
7:01 am
GDRLA: As someone with a pre-existing condition & uninsurable most of my life
——————–
Who should be paying for your health care?
************************************************************************
Who should be paying for your mental health care when the day will come and you will GO NUTS hating OBAMA?
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
9:33 am
“The Ryan budget plan also raises the deficit……..”
Hey, Joe! How long did it take to get to $1.5 trillion in deficits each year?
Answer: DECADES!
How long will it take to get to eliminating the deficit and paying down our debt?
Answer: DECADES!
The difference is that the Ryan plan actually reduces the size of the deficit. The current Disaster-in-Chief has NO PLAN which accomplishes the same thing..
Hillbilly D
April 5th, 2012
9:33 am
Whether you have Obamacare or Price’s proposal, the real winners are the insurance industry. Same ol’, same ol’.
clyde
April 5th, 2012
9:34 am
When The Supremes decide then I’ll decide.
Trump: President Obama’s comments on Supreme Court’s pending decision on … – Fox News | Financial News
April 5th, 2012
9:37 am
[...] Warning High Court on Health LawBusinessWeekObama, judge rebuked for health care commentsUSA TODAYHowever court rules, Price ready with alternative to ObamacareAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Washington Post -Reutersall 1,798 news [...]
Jefferson
April 5th, 2012
9:44 am
Until the excess profits are removed, the cost will not decrease.
JF McNamara
April 5th, 2012
9:46 am
I remember the healthcare debate. Rather than bring up proposals and negotiate, Republicans were in lock step against it. The tone of the debate was horrific, and they just wanted to defeat Obama at all costs. I wonder if that plays into why Price’s bill was completely ignored by Democrats.
St Simons- island off the coast of New Somalia
April 5th, 2012
9:48 am
“control costs? This proposal will be more expensive than Obamacare!”
ding ding we have a winner.
And the clause about “religious objection” is grrrreat.
I’m an employer, and
Since I don’t believe in cancer, we won’t cover that.
Since I don’t believe in medicine, you should just prayyy it away
Oh man this plan’s gonna be cheap.
If my employees get sick, we’ll just put em in the “let em eat cake” pool
and “Dr” Price sure does want that malpractice limit heheh
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
9:48 am
“Until the excess profits are removed, the cost will not decrease.”
Yeah, ’cause we want minimum wage people working for the government providing our health care across the board, don’t we, Jefferson?
Jefferson
April 5th, 2012
9:54 am
Just yours, T – I’ll pay my tax and go private on the side.
Jefferson
April 5th, 2012
9:59 am
Funny thing, the German and British health care workers don’t work for min wage.
When the insurance profits are smaller, there’s plenty of money to pay those doing the health care.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
10:00 am
“I remember the healthcare debate. Rather than bring up proposals and negotiate, Republicans were in lock step against it.”
Then you really don’t remember the healthcare debate at all, JF McNamara. Because they had a minimum of 7 separate proposals that the Democrats never allowed past committee, and many of them didn’t even get a hearing at the committee level. No amendments were allowed from the floor by Pelosi rules.
Facts are such troublesome things to you, aren’t they?
td
April 5th, 2012
10:01 am
LIBERALS please listen up: Obamacare is going to be ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS. Government run HC is not an option. Medicaid and Medicare is bankrupting the country.
These are facts so instead of whining then get on board the ideas train and try to figure out solutions.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
10:02 am
“Funny thing, the German and British health care workers don’t work for min wage. ”
Nor are they paid according to their ability, Jefferson.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:07 am
ByteMe @ 7:06: He was talking about 85 percent of the population falling under the safe-harbor provision.
Sam
April 5th, 2012
10:07 am
The last time, the Democrats abandoned their own plan (single payer option) and went for a Republican’s plan (Romneycare). Then, all the Republicans who previously supported it suddenly did an about face and opposed it. Wonder what will happen this time.
Just saying..
April 5th, 2012
10:07 am
Kyle, would you address Republican responses to Price’s plan, so far?
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:08 am
xdog @ 7:35: Try reading the rest of the sentence. Context is your friend.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:10 am
jconservative @ 7:54: It’s no different from what people who work for large companies covered by ERISA get now, except that the tax credit would go through them rather than their employer.
Now, if we want to debate whether the feds should be using the tax code to subsidize health insurance at all, let’s have at it.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:11 am
Ayn Rant @ 8:10: It won’t work unless the pool is as large as the entire U.S. population? That’s just silly. The risk pools of companies that employ a few thousand or more people work just fine.
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
10:12 am
“Funny thing, the German and British health care workers don’t work for min wage”
No, but they’re basically told how much they can make based on their specialty, etc…. which has led to somewhat of a doctor shortage (at least in the UK and to some extent Canada). That’s why a good majority of the doctors are from other countries. Nothing like having 5 year long waiting lists for GP’s and dentists….
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:13 am
carlosgvv @ 8:26: And you think Obamacare is any different? Why do you think the insurers and pharmaceutical companies were lobbying FOR it?
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
10:13 am
“The last time, the Democrats abandoned their own plan (single payer option) and went for a Republican’s plan (Romneycare).”
And yet they didn’t, because Obamacare isn’t Romneycare, despite what you don’t know about it.
Trump: President Obama’s comments on Supreme Court’s pending decision on … – Fox News | Personal Finance
April 5th, 2012
10:14 am
[...] Warning High Court on Health LawBusinessWeekObama, judge rebuked for health care commentsUSA TODAYHowever court rules, Price ready with alternative to ObamacareAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Washington Post -Reutersall 1,798 news [...]
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:15 am
WOW @ 8:58: Tiberius gets part of it at 9:07. But, as a cushion, the bill also provides for a 1 percent cut in all non-defense discretionary spending (about $6 billion in FY 2012, which is why it’s just a cushion rather than the main “pay-for”).
Btw, CBO has not yet scored the bill.
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
10:15 am
Kyle, you are correct, I read it too fast (and obviously too early
).
So why haven’t they passed this bill in the House in the past 18 months?
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
10:16 am
CBO has not yet scored the bill.
Wait… let me get this straight… he’s complaining that Democrats haven’t voted on it in 32 months, but he’s yet to submit it to the CBO for scoring??
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
10:16 am
Yet ANOTHER failure by the Obama administration. Good job fools.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
10:19 am
CBO scoring is a waste of time and money.
They only score based on what you give them, and if you don’t give them the whole story (as in Obamacare), they give you a puppy dogs and skittles report (which is what you wanted in the first place).
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:21 am
JF @ 9:46: When they did bring up proposals, such as Price’s bill, which was introduced in July 2009, they were ignored. They were ignored because the Dems knew they had the 60 Senate votes to kill a filibuster and pass whatever they wanted — a fact on the ground that didn’t change until Ted Kennedy died and Scott Brown was elected to replace him. Then they used legislative sleight of hand to get what they wanted anyway.
So the crocodile tears about Republican obtuseness don’t get very far with me.
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
10:22 am
They only score based on what you give them
Exactly. And if you can’t even give them a good story, then they don’t give you a good score.
Ever wonder why you were so concerned about CBO saying that Obamacare will cost more than expected and now you’re not concerned about it in this case? We don’t wonder at all.
Mr. Holmes
April 5th, 2012
10:24 am
There are admittedly some points worth debating on that bill, particularly if the Roberts court continues its trend of voting its politics. But let me get this straight: Price’s bill allows low-income earners to get a tax credit for the cost of their insurance premiums–even if their income is so low that that don’t pay any tax. In essence, they get a tax credit each year to *supplement* their income tax-free income?
Can you possibly imagine the reaction had Barack Obama proposed something like this?
md
April 5th, 2012
10:25 am
Amazing………a person that would fix the spokes vs re-invent the entire wheel.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
10:26 am
ByteMe: CBO scores bills as they move through the legislative process. This one isn’t close enough to a vote to get a score. Why hasn’t the House passed it yet? Good question. I suspect it’s because, knowing it would go nowhere in the Senate and certainly would be vetoed, they prefer to keep it and other potential replacements on the sidelines. They’ve seen where they get by passing their own budget, for instance: Nowhere.
Pizzaman
April 5th, 2012
10:32 am
Look’s to me like Obamacare with tort reform.
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
10:33 am
CBO scores bills as they move through the legislative process.
Not true. CBO will score a bill when you give it to them to score it. Often a bill will get retooled after CBO scoring but before it ever comes up for a vote.
Why hasn’t the House passed it yet? Good question. I suspect it’s because, knowing it would go nowhere in the Senate
But they were happy to not only submit the Ryan plan to a vote, knowing it would go nowhere (since it had gone nowhere the year before). They also submitted it for a CBO score before it was voted on (and were all too happy to ignore that CBO said it would worsen the deficit).
So why is he complaining that Democrats haven’t wanted to vote on it when he won’t submit it for a score and his own party won’t bring it up for a vote? And why are you leaving it to me to call him on that?
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
10:39 am
“Ever wonder why you were so concerned about CBO saying that Obamacare will cost more than expected and now you’re not concerned about it in this case?”
Is English your primary language, ByteMe?
“Cause I just said that CBO scoring is a waste of time due to the very reason you repeated back to me.
So how, exactly, do you come to the conclusion that I am not concerned about the CBO score in this case?
Reading and comprehension, ByteMe. Try it sometime.
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
10:40 am
Look’s to me like Obamacare with tort reform.
Some aspects of it are definitely similar (medical standards — aka death panels — and eliminating certain policy limits). “Tort reform” is a minsomer: it’s tort award limits, something that the Constitution says needs to be left to the states, since these cases take place in state courts, regardless of which insurance plan covers them. If the insurance plan screws up and it’s a federal plan, then the case is a federal case, but that’s not what we’re tlaking about. We’re talking about a doctor screwing up and the patient trying to get compensated for their loss. The medical insurance company has no standing in this type of case.
Health care courts are a great idea.
And to address someone else’s point: doctors are ALWAYS going to practice defensive medicine even if there’s a limit on tort awards, just because they don’t want the publicity of being in court all the time for screwing up. And they don’t want their insurance to drop them for screwing up so many times.
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
10:40 am
Waiting for Obama to show up on TV with a hoodie and a bag of Skittles in an attempt to manipulate votes.
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
10:42 am
Cause I just said that CBO scoring is a waste of time due to the very reason you repeated back to me.
No, you didn’t say anything like what I said. Perhaps your reading comprehension is the issue here.
See, I just pulled a Romney on ya!!
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
10:43 am
“So why is he complaining that Democrats haven’t wanted to vote on it when he won’t submit it for a score and his own party won’t bring it up for a vote?”
Because you have an existing law in place which is in flux until the SCOTUS rules on it, and you have a Senate who will obstruct it anyway. In addition, the Ryan Plan is a BUDGET, something the Congress is Constitutionally-bound to provide, therefore it is incumbent upon the House to actually do their duty. A health care reform bill does not fall under such a mandate, ByteMe.
Thulsa Doom
April 5th, 2012
10:46 am
“Democrats often claim GOP opponents of Obamacare offer no alternative. Price’s bill dispels that notion. He has little confidence Democrats will now entertain his 32-month-old bill. But …”
In other words the Democrats just lie and lie and lie about the Republicans not offering an alternative. Why am I not surprised?
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
10:48 am
Because you have an existing law in place which is in flux until the SCOTUS rules on it
Wasn’t that the whole point of the 2010 battle cry of “repeal and replace”? If he can get enough people to sign up for his bill, he can do fulfill that promise. And the House took a vote already to repeal. This is supposed to be to replace it, right? But they’re too chicken to bring it up. But maybe he knows he can’t get anyone to vote for it, especially after the CBO scores it as being more costly to the Federal budget than ACA. Hard to know when he complains about the other party instead of doing his own homework.
Thulsa Doom
April 5th, 2012
10:49 am
“Waiting for Obama to show up on TV with a hoodie and a bag of Skittles in an attempt to manipulate votes.”
Well if O doesn’t do it he will have Eric Holder over at the dept. of payback do it for him.
yuzeyurbrane
April 5th, 2012
10:52 am
Kyle, I am surprised that you did no research before you simply repeated Dr. Price’s “plan”. His plan, which he produced only after intense put up or shut up pressure, was analyzed by the AARP which was provided Dr. Price. Kyle, I suggest you ask the AARP for a copy of that analysis. While it is a small step in the right direction, it would only provide health insurance to only about 3 million of the approximately 50 million Americans who now have none. So for most uninsured Americans, including the 2 million uninsured Georgians (highest % in country), his proposal is meaningless. Nor does it propose anything that would meaningfully control the the extremely high increases in the costs of medical care. Indeed, the only thing Dr. Price has done actively is to support increases in Medicare doctor reimbursements. In that, I think it is fair to say that he does a good job of looking after his own.
Thulsa Doom
April 5th, 2012
10:52 am
“Because you have an existing law in place which is in flux until the SCOTUS rules on it, and you have a Senate who will obstruct it anyway”
Tiberius,
There ya go again. Trying to talk common sense to the loony left.
Common sense, rationality, logical thought; they elude the liberals always.
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
10:53 am
The rumor is that Romney is going to pick Paul Ryan as VP. That is a very very strong ticket.
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
10:55 am
UGA…is a racist COWARD!!!! Step up and say what you spend so much time hinting around……
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
10:55 am
“it would only provide health insurance to only about 3 million of the approximately 50 million Americans who now have none.”
More talking points I see. Might want to research that 50 million number some. You’ll be amazed what you’ll find.
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
10:56 am
“How much did you donate to the cause of health care for all last year?”
L’il BB – I donated around $1000 – it was included in my health insurance premiums to pay for people who go to the hospital and don’t pay – the “free riders”. I was not given the choice whether to pay for it or not – it was included as payment for a Federal law – EMTALA – an unfunded mandate passed during the administration of Ronald Reagan. The federal government forcing me to pay for something I did not choose – just like Obamacare – except that with Obamacare, the people who are forced to pay for their own insurance ACTUALLY GET SOMETHING for the dollars they have to pay.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
10:58 am
So we now have ByteMe on record as saying that he/she WANTS the House to waste their time passing meaningless bills since the Senate won’t even address them.
Got it.
Anybody care to bet whether ByteMe would be COMPLAINING about that very practice if they did?
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
10:58 am
Romney / Ryan would end up just like McCain & Palin… TTheir message of hate and division would fall flat and gt turned away…
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
11:00 am
Inside Out….You are the coward that through the “R” word out. Tell me what did I say that was racist? HAHA
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:00 am
“House to waste their time passing meaningless bills since the Senate won’t even address them.”
That was the case with the Ryan budget, but they sure did not have a problem doing it then……What is the difference?
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
11:00 am
Inside Out….”hate and division” you mean like Obama’s class warfare?
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
11:02 am
Anybody care to bet whether ByteMe would be COMPLAINING about that very practice if they did?
I’ve yet to do it. Unlike others, I think that people can handle more than one task at a time, so they can vote for ridiculous resolutions to celebrate Candy Day at the same time as doing the heavy lifting of real work.
I think it’s very telling that they voted for the doomed Ryan budget instead of creating one that had a hope of passing both chambers. I think it’s telling when they don’t do something as well.
Nice attempt at creating a strawman argument, though. Got any other nonsense you want to throw at the wall to see if it sticks instead of addressing the core of the topic?
Obama’s Supreme Court comments become political football as Justice preps … – Fox News | International Financials
April 5th, 2012
11:03 am
[...] TODAYConstitution Check: Is the "Roberts Court" Driven by Politics?Huffington PostAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Washington Postall 2,016 news [...]
Dirty Dawg
April 5th, 2012
11:04 am
Given that the ‘mandate’ thing in ‘ObamaCare’ only impacts, potentially, about 5% of the population…and given that every other part of (aka) Affordable Health Care, like not denying coverage due to pre-existing condition, coverage of dependents up to age 26, filling the ‘donut hole, etc., are all well-liked, I guess the thing that ‘you guys’ really don’t like is the ‘Obama’ part.
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
11:04 am
I am on the side of personal responsibility here, something the Republicans supposedly support. I believe that people who use health care should pay for their health care. For most people that means having health insurance (unless they have a couple of million in spare change that they can deposit into an escrow account in case they are hit by a major medical incident). EVERYONE is at risk for this, so unless you want to change the system so that people who can’t pay are thrown out into the street to die, the EVERYONE needs to purchase health insurance.
Atlanta 1
April 5th, 2012
11:06 am
All you have to do is read the post after the article to see how polarized our society is. The left trashes the ideas, the right likes them.
I do not believe anyone should be forced into a National Healthcare Program, which is exactly what you get, if you really pay attention to what is going on.
I did see some flaws in the proposal, the biggest one being that while taking your insurance with you sounds good; keep in mind that most employers contribute to the cost of your insurance and it is usually a pretty good amount. Who pays for that? You?
Obama’s Supreme Court comments become political football as Justice preps … – Fox News | Breaking News Board - Daily News Magazine
April 5th, 2012
11:06 am
[...] Check: Is the "Roberts Court" Driven by Politics?Huffington PostAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Washington Postall 2,015 news [...]
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
11:07 am
“Their message of hate and division would fall flat and gt turned away…”
Please provide any specific examples of what you believe is a “message of hate and division” that Mitt Romney has spoken and cite your source please, Inside Out.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
11:10 am
Atlanta1: Your employer doesn’t contribute anything to the cost of your insurance. Your employer diverts part of your compensation toward your insurance premium because there are tax advantages for doing so. But that money is still your earnings.
md
April 5th, 2012
11:11 am
Romney/Ryan?
I’d vote for that………shoot, I’d vote for Ryan in a heartbeat. The guy actually gets in the weeds and digs out the numbers…….the dems hate him because he has facts, and the biggest fact he deals with is the effect of 16 trillion and counting on our future. A future the dems seem very unconcerned about. Their idea of reform seems to be to get as many toys as they can to put in the life boat when the ship goes down.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
11:11 am
“That was the case with the Ryan budget, but they sure did not have a problem doing it then……What is the difference?”
Reading comprehension isn’t your friend, is it, Inside Out?
I suggest you go back and read what I posted earlier about Congress having a Constitutional duty to pass a budget, where health care laws do not have the same mandate.
md
April 5th, 2012
11:15 am
“Given that the ‘mandate’ thing in ‘ObamaCare’ only impacts, potentially, about 5% of the population…and given that every other part of (aka) Affordable Health Care, like not denying coverage due to pre-existing condition, coverage of dependents up to age 26, filling the ‘donut hole, etc., are all well-liked, I guess the thing that ‘you guys’ really don’t like is the ‘Obama’ part.”
Typical……leaves out the part about subsidies for folks making up to 88k and the administrative costs to the States that will create a burden they can not bear………..
Jack
April 5th, 2012
11:16 am
I pay my share of taxes to provide health care for those that pay no income tax or social security/hospital insurance. But when the “needy” get sick because of poor hygiene and reckless life styles, I resent their call for “fairness”.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
11:16 am
“I think it’s very telling that they voted for the doomed Ryan budget instead of creating one that had a hope of passing both chambers. I think it’s telling when they don’t do something as well.”
And yet you do exactly what I predicted you’d do. Complain that they passed something they knew wouldn’t pass the Senate. You’re a cheap read, ByteMe. And tell me; what kind of budget would pass both chambers? Obama’s last budget submitted to the Senate failed 0-97.
“Nice attempt at creating a strawman argument, though. Got any other nonsense you want to throw at the wall to see if it sticks instead of addressing the core of the topic?”
Actually, I have addressed the topic at hand. You probably missed that trying to create your own strawman and deflection.
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:17 am
Tibby…..I comprehend quite well….Your comment was
“the House to waste their time passing meaningless bills since the Senate won’t even address them.”
The Ryan budget was passed without a chance that the Senate would address it…Nothing in that comment speaks to a Constitutional duty….. YOU can’t throw it out then try to get me to fall for the old Banana in the tail pipe trick….
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
11:20 am
I suggest you go back and read what I posted earlier about Congress having a Constitutional duty to pass a budget, where health care laws do not have the same mandate.
So are you suggesting that only those bills that have a constitutional mandate should be brought up for a vote? Of course not. What about all the doomed anti-abortion bills they’ve brought up that have died… should they have not done those bills as well? Of course not. It’s told us much about their priorities — and about this bill — that they chose to bring up those bills while NOT bringing up this one. But yet they complain about Democrats.
There’s a general rule for the House leadership (both parties): if it can’t pass your own party, don’t bring it up for a vote unless you’re trying to make a political point. So, either it can’t pass their own party OR they don’t want to make a political point of bringing up a doomed healthcare bill for a vote. Which is it and why?
Sour Mash
April 5th, 2012
11:20 am
Don’t let doctors Price and Gingrey fool you. They went to Congress to represent their own interests and those of fellow physicians just as when they were in the state legislature. So called “defensive medicine” due to concerns over medical malpractice suits does not account for ever increasing health care costs. Doctors owe loyalty to hospitals where they practice and they order unnecessary tests to increase the bottom line for themselves, their colleagues and the hospitals employing them. Research the issues, doctors and hospitals kill and maim more people than any other single cause in this country. Yes, these two want medical malpractice claims to go away but not by reducing the medical errors leading to them but by limiting recovery of awards to a pittance which will leave the taxpayers to pick up the tab on their future care. Trust them, they really have the interest of the public at heart.
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
11:20 am
Complain that they passed something they knew wouldn’t pass the Senate.
I didn’t complain at all. Where do you see that?
Oh… I see… you pulled a Romney this time! Good one!!
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
11:22 am
Inside Out…..But Obama’s budget failed without a single vote in support from the Dems or the Repubs! Explain that one!
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
11:22 am
UGA is stuck on “but… but… but… Obama!!!” Sad.
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:23 am
UGLY 1999…since when did pointing out the income disparity in this country become class warfare??? Check out the atttached link…Then you can spin it however you like….
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph
md
April 5th, 2012
11:24 am
“But when the “needy” get sick because of poor hygiene and reckless life styles, I resent their call for “fairness”.”
According to the dems, choices don’t enter into the equation……the poor, poor, pitiful, poor are a group of people dealt a bad hand, and “we” have an obligation to help them.
The can’t see the difference between a can’t and a won’t, and also don’t understand that enabling is a disease, not a cure.
get out much?
April 5th, 2012
11:27 am
32 months old? How about adding the 168 months (give or take) it took the Republicans to offer their alternative to HillaryCare.
md
April 5th, 2012
11:27 am
“since when did pointing out the income disparity in this country become class warfare???”
Since folks pointed to one group as the cause of the others position. And using charts that represent a snapshot of wealth as if it is finite.
Neither is likely true, but the dems like those talking points and their followers eat it up like candy.
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:29 am
Ok…md…tell me which if the charts is incorrect???? Tell which which are slightly off and which ones are a bold face lie…..
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
11:30 am
Inside Out. Good job name calling. I wouldnt expect more from your kind. Even Obama admits that the income disparity has gotten worse under his leadership and party conflicts have worsened. What has he done right. Oh let me guess Bin Laden? Good job Seals!
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:31 am
And yes, when CEO pay has gone up 200+ % and average worker pay has stayed flat in in some cases declined, there is a direct line between the two!!!
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
11:31 am
“So are you suggesting that only those bills that have a constitutional mandate should be brought up for a vote?”
No, and you do not have liberty to speak for me. I do that very well on my own, thank you.
And your own words I quoted proves you complained, ByteMe. Try English 101 the next time you’re at the community college.
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:32 am
UGGIE…you probably think that Bush kept us safe after 9-11 too …..
Justice Department faces deadline from Texas judges – CNN | Rss News Desk | Daily News Magazine
April 5th, 2012
11:33 am
[...] care commentsUSA TODAYObama Risks Voter Backlash by Warning High Court on Health LawBusinessWeekAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Washington Postall 2,652 news [...]
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
11:33 am
“The Ryan budget was passed without a chance that the Senate would address it…Nothing in that comment speaks to a Constitutional duty….. ”
Once again, Inside Out, I suggest you read my earlier comment which speaks very specifically to the Constitutional duty of passing a budget.
Most people when caught in an error would admit to it, but I understand that liberals have a tough time owning up to their mistakes.
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
11:34 am
Inside….He did! Clinton could have taken out Bin Laden and he did not.
md
April 5th, 2012
11:39 am
“Ok…md…tell me which if the charts is incorrect???? Tell which which are slightly off and which ones are a bold face lie…..”
It’s not the chart…..it’s the interpretation of the chart. All the chart shows is who has what in this country at any given point in time……..that’s all.
Not why folks have what they have……not how much goes to China or India……not how much comes from China or India……etc, etc, etc.
There is no one “pie” that is divvied up between the haves and have nots……..the money is there for all who want to go get it…………….
But it’s easier for some to believe they don’t have it because the rich guy down the street took it…….because that is what they are told.
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:39 am
Bush sworn in on Jan. 20th 2011……9 months later we were hit by Bin Laden….That happend on his watch EVEN ON THE REPUBLICAN CALENDAR…… Stop playing the blame game!!!! His watch, his problem!!!! Clinton left him a surplus, had he been focused on taking care of the country intead ofspending 800 days on vacation, we might not have had to deal with that!!!!
ByteMe
April 5th, 2012
11:39 am
And your own words I quoted proves you complained, ByteMe. Try English 101 the next time you’re at the community college.
That’s the best you got? You got nothing STILL. You still can’t explain why they won’t bring it up for a vote. Is it fear or do they not have the votes?
If it’s such a great bill, let the CBO score it and bring it to the floor. Until then.. it’s just whining by the republican party leadership. More whining, I should say, since they do it so often.
Justice Department faces deadline from Texas judges – CNN | Best News Feed - Daily News Magazine
April 5th, 2012
11:44 am
[...] care commentsUSA TODAYObama Risks Voter Backlash by Warning High Court on Health LawBusinessWeekAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -Washington Postall 2,652 news [...]
Jefferson
April 5th, 2012
11:47 am
The city of Atlanta should raise the water prices until revenue falls, is this the world you folks want to live in.
GDRLA
April 5th, 2012
11:51 am
Lil’Barry – I should pay for my own healthcare – however I have NEVER been allowed to do so since the private insurance industry would not insure me – even @ higher rates – I am not asking to be subsidized – just to play on the same level field as others do – let me have insurance – I have asked HC providers during my lifetime to write me for conditions OTHER than my pre-existent item & was still unable to get a policy written for me. So paid for most of it out of my pocket (which was then subsidized by others since I then qualified for the medical deduction on my personal taxes). Paid for my own broken bones, appendectomy, etc.
So I do support the HCA since I can now get this insurance even if it is still not a totally level playing field. I never asked anyone to pay for me, just that I could pay for myself according to the same subsidy rules as others.
mountain man
April 5th, 2012
11:57 am
” Your employer doesn’t contribute anything to the cost of your insurance. Your employer diverts part of your compensation toward your insurance premium because there are tax advantages for doing so. But that money is still your earnings.”
So, Kyle, you believe that if employers were told not to supply insurance to their employees, that the employer would immediately give the employee a raise amounting to the cost they were putting into insurance? You are a naive little thing, aren’t you?
That Black guy
April 5th, 2012
12:00 pm
Does anyone have a source for the 30/40/50 million uninsured Americans number that is being tossed about?
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
12:01 pm
md…lets be serious….Robert Nardelli took over Home Depot and the stock stayed flat. During his tenure, his compensation rose double digit percentage every year….. The pay of the average worker stayed flat… The stock value stayed flat and he walked away with a 210 million dollar package….If you are going to tell me that kind of disparity does not need to be addressed, the you really are blind…..
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
12:01 pm
Inside….Care to look at the attacks since Obama has been in office. Hoodies and Skittles will riddle Obama’s tenure! NICE!
mountain man
April 5th, 2012
12:02 pm
Why don’t we take a look at the Republican ideas for fixing the Health Care system proposed while Bush was in office…oh, wait.
md
April 5th, 2012
12:05 pm
“md…lets be serious….Robert Nardelli took over Home Depot and the stock stayed flat. During his tenure, his compensation rose double digit percentage every year….. The pay of the average worker stayed flat… The stock value stayed flat and he walked away with a 210 million dollar package….If you are going to tell me that kind of disparity does not need to be addressed, the you really are blind…..”
That’s different than total wealth distribution……..you are referencing exceptions, not the norm. Sure, there are some ceo’s that get paid too much, but that doesn’t equate to all ceo’s………..
Jefferson
April 5th, 2012
12:07 pm
Truth is there is no alturnative, nor will there be if left up to those who care only for themselves and not others.
robert
April 5th, 2012
12:13 pm
Yeah, Mountain Man asks the right question. Frankly most of the people I know will just continue to use the ER for their health care. And so Price’s suggestions really will mean even higher costs than Obamacare. Sorry I am a traditional conservative, which means this: at some junctions we have to mandate personal responsibility. New conservatives seem like 60’s liberals–they want us all to do our own thing–no one is the boss of me! Seems like the attitude of affluent people with a sense of entitlement to me, sorry.
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
12:14 pm
“Does anyone have a source for the 30/40/50 million uninsured Americans number that is being tossed about?”
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/20/the-myth-of-the-46-million
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/real-number-uninsured_525775.html
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
12:14 pm
md….when overall wealth distribution is being shifted in this manner, it has to be a part of the discussion…. to ignore the issue or to try to play it off as some made up boogey man is intellectually dishonest at best…
Dirty Dawg
April 5th, 2012
12:15 pm
md…you really are a piece of it…the ‘old block’ that is. Galbraith was right, the definition of conservative is indeed the search for a better excuse for selfishness – as if you guys actually needed one. Your ‘comeback’ was that ‘ObamaCare’ also included Federal subsidies to individuals and the states…guess what every state, including the RomneyCare one, relies on Fed dollars to cover their health care programs. But since it’s got Obama’s name associated with it, that automatically makes this one evil or something.
td
April 5th, 2012
12:17 pm
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:31 am
And yes, when CEO pay has gone up 200+ % and average worker pay has stayed flat
And this should tell you that instead of being on this blog you should be out improving you education and skill set so that you two could have a 200% increase in pay.
That Black guy
April 5th, 2012
12:19 pm
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
11:39 am
Bush sworn in on Jan. 20th 2011……9 months later we were hit by Bin Laden….That happend on his watch EVEN ON THE REPUBLICAN CALENDAR…… Stop playing the blame game!!!! His watch, his problem!!!! Clinton left him a surplus, had he been focused on taking care of the country intead ofspending 800 days on vacation, we might not have had to deal with that!!!!
_______________________________________________________________________________
What the eff does any of that have to do with ACA or Price’s plan?
And people wonder why we can’t get any of the problems fixed in this country.
Too busy calling each other “poopyheads”.
md
April 5th, 2012
12:20 pm
“md….when overall wealth distribution is being shifted in this manner, it has to be a part of the discussion…. to ignore the issue or to try to play it off as some made up boogey man is intellectually dishonest at best…”
No, intellectual dishonesty is not displaying the entire picture or attributing a cause to a false pretense.
We live in a global economy…….how much wealth have we shipped to China? India? Vietnam?
Who’s wealth was it?
We have a 500 billion yearly trade imbalance, who’s money is that??
Answer those questions and you may find your answer as to why it is “class warfare”…..
Justice Department faces deadline from Texas judges – CNN | Just Top News – Daily News Magazine
April 5th, 2012
12:23 pm
[...] Risks Voter Backlash by Warning High Court on Health LawBusinessWeekHuffington Post -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)all 2,033 news [...]
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
12:23 pm
Ah yes, the class warfare pimps have arrived. As if taxing the top 1% or whatever would actually benefit them (except make them feel better maybe?).
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
12:24 pm
“The US economy is not a zero-sum game. If somebody earns a dollar, it does not mean somebody’s lost a dollar. If somebody loses a job, it doesn’t mean somebody was hired. If somebody was hired it doesn’t mean somebody was fired. It is a dynamic, expanding economy, and it’s made for the fit. It’s made for the competitive.”
md
April 5th, 2012
12:25 pm
“Galbraith was right, the definition of conservative is indeed the search for a better excuse for selfishness – ”
Selfish is a two pronged fork……….so are you saying the 1/3 of kids that drop out of school (itself a taxpayer funded assistance program) and end up on the hard road of life aren’t selfish???
Do your homework, those folks cost society about 300 billion a year……look it up. Sounds selfish to me.
As for hc…….you need to do a bit more homework too on the administrative costs to the States……many have balanced budget requirements……..and folks are already bitching about cuts to education………you think??? This goes through, and they’ll really have something to bitch about after the next wave of cuts goes through………….
Dirty Dawg
April 5th, 2012
12:26 pm
Oh yeah, mountain man, you’re right, if employers dump health care coverage, and even though they won’t be able to ‘write it off’ as part of compensation any longer, they won’t automatically raise salaries to make up the difference. Unless, of course, an individual or, perhaps, through a collective-bargaining agreement, employees negotiate for it…you know damn-well top management will have it in their contracts…the rest of us will just have to ’shame ‘em into it’.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
12:30 pm
Dirty Dawg @ 12:15: Right, because paying more taxes — or demanding that others do so — is the only way to show one cares about others.
Galbraith died a few months too early to be able to read this.
That Black guy
April 5th, 2012
12:32 pm
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
12:14 pm
“Does anyone have a source for the 30/40/50 million uninsured Americans number that is being tossed about?”
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/20/the-myth-of-the-46-million
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/real-number-uninsured_525775.html
________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you SB.
I knew the number was bogus, but that provides good info.
But the “50 Million uninsured” bumpersticker talking point will STILL be used even thought it is incorrect.
UGA 1999
April 5th, 2012
12:33 pm
Typical democrat word….”Wealth distribution”!
Inside Out
April 5th, 2012
12:35 pm
Black Guy…Read before you comment…. The statement was in response to UGA’s 11:34…..
Billings, i never said this was a zero sum game…But to dismis any of the factors that are in play is to undercut the issue that is being debated… I have never been one to lay blame at teh feet of the wealthy, but I also do not have a problem speaking to what is right before my eyes….
td… My education level is just fine…. Advance degree…. six figure income, prior military service, proud american……. I just happen to be willing to put all sides of an issue on the table and speak to them…….Without taking my ques for Sean and Rush….. or Keith and Ed…..
That Black guy
April 5th, 2012
12:35 pm
Stephenson Billings
April 5th, 2012
12:24 pm
“The US economy is not a zero-sum game. If somebody earns a dollar, it does not mean somebody’s lost a dollar. If somebody loses a job, it doesn’t mean somebody was hired. If somebody was hired it doesn’t mean somebody was fired. It is a dynamic, expanding economy, and it’s made for the fit. It’s made for the competitive.”
____________________________________________________________________________
STOP!!!!!
You’re gonna make some heads go essplody!
md
April 5th, 2012
12:35 pm
Now be easy Kyle…….they can’t help it if their definition of giving means to give others money……they want to do what they can for others just like them.
Choices do matter……..we choose everything we do.
Justice Department faces deadline from Texas judges – CNN | News Report Now | Daily News Magazine
April 5th, 2012
12:36 pm
[...] Risks Voter Backlash by Warning High Court on Health LawBusinessWeekHuffington Post -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)all 2,032 news [...]
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
April 5th, 2012
12:41 pm
“If it’s such a great bill, let the CBO score it and bring it to the floor.”
What part of “CBO scoring of any bill is useless” do you NOT understand, ByteMe?
What part of “there is a current bill in flux at SCOTUS” do you NOT understand, ByteMe?
What part of “the Senate won’t even bring it up for a vote” do you NOT understand, ByteMe?
Darwin
April 5th, 2012
1:02 pm
“Individuals who buy their own insurance would get the same tax deduction as employer-sponsored plans.” That’s not the same as a tax credit. So, if your plan costs $10,000, you deduct your tax bracket percentage. Like 25%. So you pay 75% – or $7,500. What a plan.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
1:05 pm
Try again, Darwin.
Mark
April 5th, 2012
1:23 pm
9 million people were denied access to health care insurance over the last three years due to pre-existing conditions (many of those being minor, basically excuses for not covering the elderly). So how does creation of more insurance pools ASSURE those 9M they WILL get access to insurance under Price’s plan? And, will it be affordable; can they charge more to those with pre-existing conditions? How much more for those over 50 years of age? Lots to learn about “Plan B”.
getalife
April 5th, 2012
1:56 pm
Long live ObamaCare.
Obama/Biden.
Four more years!
getalife
April 5th, 2012
2:00 pm
Get ready cons.
Money trumps ideology.
The sc will rule 5-4 in favor of ObamaCare.
Deal with it cons.
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
2:12 pm
The part about coverage for all who have pre-existing conditions at a reasonable price (which everyone loves) is inextricably tied to the individual mandate that everyone buy insurance (which is the thing lots of people say they hate, even if they already have insurance through their employer). If you take away the individual mandate, all the young people will just wait until they get sick, then go out and buy insurance. Sorry, that is not how insurance works. You spread the risk of catastrophic bills over a large number of people, most well and a few sick. You cannot limit the sharing to only those that are really sick.
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
2:18 pm
If conservatives want to do something constructive, lay off the individual mandate (which they were for before they were against) and try to get Tom Price’s idea about medical tort reform passed. That is an idea I agree with him about. It is also something the majority of the people in the US would probably back.
Beware America You Will PAY The Price
April 5th, 2012
2:29 pm
This is an EXAMPLE of why the Republicans ARE AGAINST OBAMACARE.
hmmmmmmm
Newt Gingrich’s former health care think tank has filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, a move that would liquidate its assets, and a stunning turnaround for a group that reportedly collected tens of millions of dollars from major health care interests and others while the Republican presidential candidate was at the helm.
NEWT COLLECTED MILLIONS from major health care INTERESTS.
Typical REPUBLICAN HYPOCRITE
Oblama
April 5th, 2012
2:59 pm
Redistribution of wealth…. is that Socialist philosophy or communist economics?
Oblama
April 5th, 2012
3:17 pm
Sure to get results. Freeze Congress’s salary now. Reduce Congress’s salary by 20% each year they fail to balance the budget. Give Congress a 20% bonus (of their salary) each year the national debt is reduced from the previous year. Either they will reduce the debt, quit or get voted out of office. Of course we would have to get a national mandate to take away the power that Congress currently has to raise their own salaries and perks but who among us actually thinks that employees should have this power to start with?
Oblama
April 5th, 2012
3:21 pm
Is redistribution of wealth a socialist philosophy or communist economics”
rd
April 5th, 2012
3:23 pm
“To reduce that figure, the bill proposes administrative health courts in which experts and specialized judges handle malpractice claims.”
Sounds like BIGGER GOVERNMENT to me. Why aren’t conservatives and tea party up in arms? Oh, its a Republican sponsored bill…..
MrLiberty
April 5th, 2012
3:24 pm
Not surprising that Mr. Price would not endorse true medical freedom. Nowhere is he eliminating the FDA, DEA, or other agencies that work to destroy medical freedom. Nowhere is there the proper use of the interstate commerce clause to allow interstate sale of medical insurance. Nowhere is there an end to the war on drugs so that sound, thousand-year-old medicines can be legal again. And all along there is still the federal government deciding what medical treatments are “approved” – as if that is also not part of the rising costs of care.
What a clown. Plenty of votes for the destruction of civil liberties (multiple Patriot Act renewals, NDAA, etc.) but no support for medical freedom.
I am newly in his district and although Hank Johnson is a typical idiot liberal when it comes to economic issues, at least he cares about my freedom and has voted in favor of civil liberties every time there has been a vote.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
3:26 pm
rd: It’s “BIGGER GOVERNMENT” only if you think there aren’t courts dealing with these things already. Price’s bill lets states decide how to set them up, and a proposal in Georgia calls for funding the courts with fees paid by insurers. So, maybe that’s why folks aren’t up in arms.
BW
April 5th, 2012
3:28 pm
Outside of tort reform, portability and the individual mandate, how is this different from the Affordable Care Act? There is still the pooling of individuals to lower rates, in theory at all. The private insurance industry is still empowered. There are still no futures outlook of future medical cost, which is the big issue with voucherizing Medicare. Will the voucher keep up with the cost of insurance? At day’s end, both plans seek to cover the most people with no real guarantee of cost containment.
Kyle
Do you really believe this plan is better than the current half-assed one?
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
3:38 pm
BW: “Outside of tort reform, portability and the individual mandate…”
Gee, and here I was thinking that constituted quite a bit!
BW
April 5th, 2012
3:48 pm
Kyle
Putting the obviousness of what I expressed….in terms of coverage only as both sides agree that people should have insurance (at least Price does), both these bills essentially make you have insurance. What are we really arguing about? That your state vs the feds make you do so?
BW
April 5th, 2012
3:49 pm
should say “putting aside”
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
3:50 pm
BW: I don’t see how Price’s bill forces anyone to have insurance. It enables people, incentives people, to have insurance, but doesn’t coerce anyone to do so.
BW
April 5th, 2012
3:56 pm
It incentivizes behavior with the endgame of controlling costs by making sure the highest amount of people are covered in order to distribute risk. Maybe I’m not relying this the best but both sides seem to agree in this basic prinicple. It is the only way to hope to contain medical spending in this country given the current state of the systems. Yes the means of this are contentious I agree but the ends are the same. Why can’t we honestly discuss this as a country in a civil manner? That is my frustation with this entire debate….we recognize an issue but dismiss solutions out of hand because of the political party it came from.
Kyle Wingfield
April 5th, 2012
4:01 pm
BW: The thing is, no one ever disagreed about the ends.
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
4:04 pm
“It enables people, incentives people, to have insurance, but doesn’t coerce anyone to do so.”
So my question remains, Kyle, what do you do with those people who still refuse to buy insurance, but then show up at the emergency room to be treated when they get sick?
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
4:06 pm
And about pre-existing conditions, why should I not just wait to buy insurance until I get a diagnosis of cancer , then join one of those insurance pools?
BW
April 5th, 2012
4:08 pm
LOL…that certainly is not the way it’s framed on any political show nowadays. The left is about “giveaways”, the right is about leaving “one the ravages of the market”. Do you believe that Medicare and Social Security will ever get privatized? I can’t see that happening in my lifetime and I’m 32. The core of this argument is the cost of medicine which no one is seriously addressing and that to me is the saddest part of all this….we’re arguing about coverage and not containing costs. I believe that government will have a part to play on that side of this argument.
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
4:11 pm
I have an idea – when a person enters into a hospital, they do a check – if they have no insurance and no way of paying their expected bill, and if they make more than a certain amount per year, say $50,000, then they are thrown out of the hospital for being too greedy with their money, choosing to spend it on other things when they could easily afford insurance. Let them die! It would be the only way to “incentivize” some people to make sure they bought insurance.
Mountain Man
April 5th, 2012
4:14 pm
“The core of this argument is the cost of medicine which no one is seriously addressing and that to me is the saddest part of all this….we’re arguing about coverage and not containing costs.”
That is because if someone wants to have a serious discussion about containing costs, one party is crying “Death Panels” and the other one is accusing someone of pushing grandma over the cliff in a wheelchair.
OBIWAN
April 5th, 2012
4:19 pm
AU Liberal in ATL;
It is stupid lying comments like yours that are so incorrect, but loser libs will keep repeating them. I don’t care how many times you tell a lie it is still a lie, unless you are a loser liberal…
Dusty
April 5th, 2012
5:25 pm
At last, a heathcare bill composed by a healthcare professional! A doctor! Finest people in the world.
Don’t complain about the costs. When you are sick, you want the BEST in healthcare. If the doctor goes with the very best, he will order all tests and examinations that might aid in a correct diagnosis. Then he will order the best treatment no matter the cost. There is no way to get the BEST cheap.
If you want “screening” which is what doctors do to cut costs, they do the best they can with the results they have. Socialized medicine relies on short screening, semi-professional workers and doctors from foreign medical schools which may or may not have the highest standards. Doctors are scheduled with minimal time with each patient to insure that the greatest number of patents are seen.
Hospitals are releasing patients from surgery often the same day. Registered nurses are the supervisiors and other “nurses” and aides usualy have less or little training. Cost cutting is being tried in this essential field already.
But if you want to go overboard about pre-existing conditions, many of whom are still able to support themselves, let us go for something impossible since many do not care for the reasonable.
Set up pre-exist pools of about a hunded patients in each pool . A pool will be assigned to any person who has an income or assets over four million. The pool “leader” will pay the bills for the preexisting patients which will have close supervision. So there! Help the poorly ones and take away from the rich! A double duty plan!!
Molly Marine
April 5th, 2012
5:59 pm
Emergency room does not mean free, it is thousands more than going to a primary care doctor and is paid by Medicaid for those without insurance. Medicaid is paid for by your taxes so you are paying for people to not have insurance.
Martin Williams
April 5th, 2012
6:12 pm
Kyle, cut the nonsense out as you very well know that this country will NEVER have a universal health care under the GOP banner. Some of us with employee’s health care pays for the rest without. Kyle if you watch CNN few weeks ago, Swiszaland has almost the same health care we in America trying to implement for the past 20 years. It is not perfect by any standard but better than nothing. As you all call it ‘ Socialize Medicine’ it is not perfect. For the past fourty years no GOP president has talked about universal health care for this great country. What is the GOP going to do if the court fails to uphold this thing, NOTHING and you know that. My guess, another nail in the coffin for any economic growth.
independent thinker
April 5th, 2012
6:51 pm
Good start – does the author of Romneycare support it? What will it do to EMTALA? Will socialized medicine continue to allow anyone to go to an emergency room for any ailment and get free care? Or will Price advocate the program of Michelle Obama at University of Chicago to get around EMTALA? (do your research) Will it continue to allow the unfunded Medicare drug program with no restrictions or discounts from drug companies? Will the elderly and overweight all get free scooters from Medicare if they are too lazy to walk?
Will states be allowed to opt out of Medicaid and EMTALA if they provide alternatives for medical care for the poor?
Dusty
April 5th, 2012
6:57 pm
Matin Williams,
Did you know there was a time in America when people considered taking care of themselves and being self reliant was the eipitome of independence and good character? You seem to think it is the perogative of the government to care for your personal needs and those of everybody else..
Is there anything you can think of that you don’t want government to run for you? Do you want a total nation of dependents instead of our valued independence? People like you seem to ask for a caregiver government instead of a democratic republic. What happened?
Michael H. Smith
April 5th, 2012
6:59 pm
For pre-existing conditions, the bill again mimics the advantages now given only to big employers. It allows states, small businesses and other entities (e.g., churches or trade associations) to form risk pools large enough that people with chronic health problems won’t be turned away.
“The vast majority of high-risk pools at the state level don’t work, because you take all the sickest people and throw them in a pool and — surprise, surprise — their costs are greater,” he said. “We believe any individual ought to be able to access a pool of millions of people.”
>
Okay, now you’ve got something I can go forward on, Rep. Price. However, let’s get things in line with the Constitution. Federal guidelines, State implementations with “individual ownership and control” - not government, especially not the “federal government”.
Michael H. Smith
April 5th, 2012
7:03 pm
Is there anything you can think of that you don’t want government to run for you?
Yeah, the federal government can only run exactly what the Constitution says it can run, which means only about 10% of our government should be supplied at the federal level during times of peace. The other 90% ran by the State and ourselves – Et al the federalist paper number 45 and the tenth amendment.
Michael H. Smith
April 5th, 2012
7:16 pm
I know Federalism is something that sounds strange to most people in this day and time, particularly to the so-called Progressives a.k.a. “Marxist Socialist Liberal Democrats” but your wonderful centralized Federal government was created for the benefit of the States – to serve them. The States were never meant to exist for nor were they created for, the benefit of the Federal Government – to serve it.
mountain man
April 5th, 2012
8:14 pm
so. Michael H, Smith, we should be 50 seperate countries, each with our own laws, only loosely confederated for mutual defense? Maybe Georgia should have its own language (maybe we do). We could go to war with Tennessee over the water from the Tennesssee River.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
April 5th, 2012
10:18 pm
GDRLA: I am not asking to be subsidized…I do support the HCA since I can now get this insurance
————————–
You ARE asked to be subsidized. You aren’t paying the full cost of your health insurance and are demanding that your neighbors pay your bills for you.
We need a real fix to this type of free rider problem.
Obozocare is simply welfare.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
April 5th, 2012
10:22 pm
Jeffw: FOR-PROFIT HEALTH insurance corporations, who tell us 24×7×365 that they are better than the government
————–
If you think health insurance is a ripoff, don’t buy it. Oops, under fascist Obozocare, that’s not an option.
Funny how Democrats thinks health insurance is a ripoff, and they’re desperate to have it. As long as their neighbors are covering the cost for them.
Democrats: Parasites.
ALS
April 5th, 2012
10:59 pm
All you need to do to determine whether Tom Price is on the side of consumers or on the side of those who receive payments from consumers is to look at his publicly available campaign contributors. They are overwhelmingly composed of the latter–not unsurprisingly health insurance companies and doctors are his main donor (just Google “Tom Price Campaign Contributors). That may be because his proposals will cost much much than Obamacare so that his donors can continue to make their very high profits while reducing what patients receive, and still not solving the problem of who pays for the uninsured who show up bleeding at emergency rooms. And then Price’s bill also contains subsidies for health insurers. (It also relieves doctors of responsibility for the damage done by their malpractice.)
It doesn’t matter what you think of Obamacare or the current system–Price’s proposal is a lot worse than either for consumers and taxpayers. If you support it without knowing who’s behind it, or anything that is in it other than what a columnist is told by the politician who wrote it, then you’ll only have yourself to blame if you don’t like the results.
Ga Small Claims Court : Court – Small Claims
April 6th, 2012
3:42 am
[...] Information associated to Ga Small Claims Court: Even so courtroom principles, Price tag prepared with option to Obamacare When the Supreme Court previous week heard arguments in the 26-state authorized challenge to Obamacare, Georgia was effectively-represented. There was Sam Olens, who as our lawyer basic is one of the plaintiffs. And there was Tom Value, a leader in the effort to … Go through a lot more on Atlanta Journal Structure (blog site) [...]
mountain man
April 6th, 2012
6:44 am
“If you think health insurance is a ripoff, don’t buy it”
Unfortunately, that is what is happening now. There is a class of people, mostly young and “healthy”, who think they are invincible and don’t need insurance, so they don’t buy it. Then when they get beseiged with a major medical bill, they walk away and leave you and I to pay for it. I am not talking just about “poor” people who feel they cannot afford it; I was amazed to learn how many people who make good salaries do not have health insurance! They are “free riders” and they know they have a “publicly funded (by EMTALA) safety net”, so they take advantage of you and I to the tune of $1000 per year in free services. (By the way L’il BB, I noticed you never commented on my reply about donated money – I love it when my comments result in total silence on the other end)
mountain man
April 6th, 2012
6:46 am
The only “true” market-based system would be to let those who have insurance or have the means to pay receive care and the rest set out on the curb to die. Is that what we want in this country?
davetv
April 8th, 2012
11:27 pm
Why do the lefties always say that people who go the emergency room get their treatment for free and the rest of us end up paying for it? If you go to the ER and you don’t have insurance, then you get the bill. It’s only free if you choose not to pay the bill. What $50k/per year person is going to choose the chance of bankruptcy/bad credit when they have a viable way of paying for health insurance?
Another Georgia congressman proposes possible Obamacare replacement | Kyle Wingfield
April 10th, 2012
5:05 am
[...] week, I looked at U.S. Rep. Tom Price’s bill to repeal and replace Obamacare. His bill includes a section on [...]