Healthcare taxes, hidden and otherwise
So, House Democrats plan today to scold South Carolina Republican Joe Wilson for shouting “You lie!” when President Barack Obama declared before Congress last week that illegals could not qualify for healh care coverage. Wilson apologized later, but House Democrats bringing forth a resolution of disapproval want a formal apology from the House floor.
The conflicting interpretations about whether illegals could gain coverage and about whether federal funds would be spent to cover abortions (the Senate, incidentally, is attempting to revise proposed health care legislation to make Obama’s words true), are examples of why news organizations and supposedly non-partisan public interest groups should avoid the temptation to declare political assetions to be “fact or fiction.”
The problem for such “authorities” is that they either lack sufficient knowledge of proposed legislation in the context of existing law or they have a bias that is contrary to that of those who make the assertion. On illegals, for example, if a workable mechanism does not exist to verify whether illegals are being allowed to enroll, it’s fair to assume on the basis of past experience that they will be allowed to access coverage. One of the truth-squad organizations, reading just the the proposed law without knowing context, may authoritatively, but wrongly, declare that assertion to be “myth.”
The same is true federal funding for abortions. Unless specific language is included prohibiting the practice, the law will be interpreted to allow it.
The point here is that news and public-interest organizations walk across minefields when they profess to speak authoritatively after an in-house analysis of complex proposed legislation. Too, when the assumption is made that opponents are rabble-rousers, kooks or die-hard partisans spinning wild conspiracy theories, truth squads are tempted to debunk their claims without giving them proper weight.
As Congress continues work on health care legislation — commonly called health care reform though it’s a matter of opinion whether it’s “reform” — more specifics are coming out about how Congressional leaders intend to pay for it. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus’ plan would levy hidden taxes, called annual fees, of $6 billion on insurers, $4 billion on makers of medical devices, and $750 million on clinical laboratories. Latest projections are that the cost will be $880 billion over the first 10 years.
Business organizations will readily conceded to new taxes levied as hidden fees if they know that they’ll be allowed to pass them along to consumers — or in this case taxpayers. This is part of the shell game that is health care entitlement financing.
Americans are highly skeptical of elements of this proposed legisaltion and they have a right to be. It still boils down to the simple common-sense fact that there are three honest ways that have surfaced to finance expanded coverage. One is to raise taxes, hidden and otherwise, on all taxpayers. The second is to force the young and healthy to buy insurance to help pay for those who aren’t young and healthy. And the third is to limit care provided to some who are receiving it now.
There’s no Easter bunny.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2009 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
55 comments Add your comment
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
September 15th, 2009
8:00 am
Well, I don’t want no taxes on my healthcare. Just let the insurance cos. raise the price till it’s out of sight, but don’t tax it. That would be guvmint getting in the way of Private Innerprize. Sure, a few thousand people might could die because they can’t afford healthcare, but that’s no reason to tax people to get it for people.
And I don’t know what this world is coming to when a rep. can’t come right out and call this illegal President a liar right on national TV. What ever happened to our Right to Free Speech? Ain’t calling somebody a liar Free Speech? So what if it ain’t never happened before in Congress? There’s always a first time for everything. People might as well act in Congress like they do in honky-tonks all over the country.
Have a good day everybody.
jconservative
September 15th, 2009
8:57 am
It appears “health care reform” is just around the corner. The Republican response to Obama’s speech last week listed areas of agreement with Democrats:
“Here are four important areas where we can agree, right now:
One, all individuals should have access to coverage, regardless of preexisting conditions.
Two, individuals, small businesses and other groups should be able to join together to get health insurance at lower prices
Three, we can provide assistance to those who still cannot access a doctor.
And, four, insurers should be able to offer incentives for wellness care and prevention – “ Rep. Charles Boustany (R) LA
And the news reports to which Jim refers:
Sept. 15 (Bloomberg) — Senate negotiators seeking bipartisan health-care legislation say they have pared its cost to less than $880 billion, and are writing provisions on abortions, undocumented immigrants and medical malpractice in a bid to attract Republican support.
If I were a betting man I would put my money on a bill being signed by Obama in 2009.
The “over/under” on 60 votes – 2.
Sorry Jim, this looks like one we lose.
Disgusted
September 15th, 2009
9:17 am
And, four, insurers should be able to offer incentives for wellness care and prevention
Get ready for universal drug testing, tobacco use testing, and weigh-ins at work. Oh, and learn to read code words. These conservative Republicans don’t mind intruding on your privacy if it will save their campaign contributions from the insurance companies.
clyde
September 15th, 2009
9:18 am
With any health care reform taxes have to be higher for everyone.It has to be paid for.The user,and that’s everyone, has to pay for it.There will be those whose use will be sparing and those that will use it for every ache,pain, or sniffle.Just like now.
booger
September 15th, 2009
9:42 am
This is a very good article. Also, I agree with jconservative that there will ultimately be a bill signed, and my money is on it including a public option. The problem in the end , however, is still the same…we cannot afford any of this. If congress could shore up Medicare and go ahead and take out the hundreds of million dollars which supposedly are lost to waste and fraud, it would help build trust that they could run the proposed program, but I have seen no move to do this.
Another problem with the bill as written now, is even though Obama says everyone can keep the coverage they have, it does not say at what cost. If they tax the insurance companies, and require them to cover people who have expensive pre-existing conditions, cost will go up, and users will pay.
The final and largest issue is that I believe without imposing some wording to compel companies to continue offering health insurance, they will over time quit offering this benefit. An penalty of 8% of payroll is not a deterrant, when many large companies are paying 12% to 15% of payroll for health insurance now. Companies would gladly pay an 8% fixed rate to get rid of a cost which is higher, and which can increase wildly year to year. I think many would keep their plans for a while but as soon as a few large companies dropped coverage, the floodgates would be opened. This happened with pensions not too long ago. IBM dropping their conventional pension plan was the sign to the rest of corporate America that this could be done without a hugh consequence.
In the end, any public option will morph into a single payer plan. I know this, and the democrats know this.
Cliff
September 15th, 2009
9:48 am
If you don’t believe illegals will get coverage, look at Grady right now. They are closing the dialysis unit. Two thirds of the patients are illegal aliens. The clinic loses 2 to 4 million dollars per year. Why in the hell are we allowing this? I certainly don’t want my dollars going to support this. I have no issue with it supporting indigents, but absolutely NOT illegals. We can’t afford this. Grady can’t afford this.
Health care is not and never has been a right. Where does it stop? Will we be required to pay for air conditioning and gym memberships for folks who “can’t afford it?” Those increase health too, so why not?
This is socialism plain and simple. It doesn’t work. Ask anyone from one of the “enlightened” countries that has this system about waiting months to get in to see a specialist.
zeke
September 15th, 2009
9:51 am
Idiots all! Remove all illegals from the country, including their ILLEGAL children in 6 months! Install the FAIR TAX MODEL and constitutionally remove the income and payroll taxes! Ban all universal service charges and fees! It is not my responsibility to pay more so someone living a hundred miles from nowhere can pay the same as I do, living in a metropolitan area, for phone service or internet service! If they want service, let them pay for it! IT IS NOT A CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHT! We must remove all other wealth transfer programs put in place by the demogogs over the last 80+ years! Install the FAIR TAX model, then EVERYONE will pay their “fair share” as demanded by the demogog party! If Joe makes 25 thousand a year and his tax rate is 15% max, and, Nancy makes 150 thousand per year, THEN HER FAIR SHARE SHOULD ALSO BE 15% max! Ther is nothing progressive about the dems agenda or our tax system! IT IS REGRESSIVE!
Chris Broe
September 15th, 2009
10:30 am
Easter Bunny?
Elephant Whip
September 15th, 2009
10:32 am
Scenario for those “conservatives” claiming health care is not a right: a stay-at-home mom raising three young kids begins discovering health problems and is treated through her husband’s employer health insurance. These problems indicate more serious complications, say ovarian cancer. For unrelated reasons, stay-at-home mom’s husband files for divorce. Where is she going to get health coverage? And, if you are ‘christian conservative’, would denial of coverage be a sin?
Chris Salzmann
September 15th, 2009
10:36 am
Cliff
September 15th, 2009
9:48 am
If you don’t believe illegals will get coverage, look at Grady right now. They are closing the dialysis unit. Two thirds of the patients are illegal aliens. The clinic loses 2 to 4 million dollars per year. Why in the hell are we allowing this? I certainly don’t want my dollars going to support this. I have no issue with it supporting indigents, but absolutely NOT illegals. We can’t afford this. Grady can’t afford this.
CHRIS SAYS: Actually, Congressman Joe Wilson, who is so concerned that illegals will benefit from Health Care Insurance Reform, voted in 2003, to allow funding for hospitals to continue treatment of illegals.
Also something I long suspected, the Tea Party crowd are basically a bunch of birthers by another name. Here’s an interview of the “Tea Party” leader, Mark Williams. Judge for yourselves:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/15/tea-party-leader-melts-do_n_286933.html
And these guys are mad that the sane segment of the population doesn’t take them seriously??? Heck, these crazies have taken over the conservative movement, scarring away independents, intelligent Republicans and conservative democrats. These folks take their marching orders from clowns like Glenn Beck and they aren’t ashamed to admit it. This talk of less government and lower taxes is just cover for the nutjobs. No wonder Republican strategists are really worried about what going on in their party.
Cutty
September 15th, 2009
10:40 am
You lie Wooten!!!! Ever heard of the Hyde Amendment??? A law is already on the books banning federal funds to be used for abortions.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
September 15th, 2009
10:45 am
I wonder if there is room in this society for a health insurer to sell a private policy that excludes coverage for lifestyle-related illnesses, such as AIDs and its ancillary diseases. Since those diseases are often horrifically expensive to treat, and since there are certain demographics that have no measurable risk from the diseases, seemingly health insurance policies would be much cheaper for those who elected to purchase those.
reservoirDAWG
September 15th, 2009
10:55 am
Ragnar, interesting concept. Unfortunetly the PC police would not allow that.
booger
September 15th, 2009
10:58 am
Elephant,
Where is she going to get health coverage…..
If her husband has a decent job the courts will award alamony, and child support. Often this will include health coverage.
If this is not the case she would probably qualify for medicaid, and her children for sure would be eligible under Peach care. If she is disabled, she could get social security, and possibly medicare. This does not even include the various charities and agency’s with available help. She can call the American Cancer society for a list of these.
truth
September 15th, 2009
10:59 am
Health care is neither a God-given right or a right under our Constitution. I have no right to be supported by other people against their will. If I am in need people should help me, but person to person, not through the government.
Quote from Thomas Jefferson:
“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who are not”
Jeff
September 15th, 2009
11:05 am
For the first time I actually agree with a Wooten column. At a MINIMUM, insurance must be made available to all who want it. I was self employed, making over 150k, but because of a pre-existing condition I could not get insurance at ANY price. Finally had to abandon my business and go back to being a cubicle slave just to qualify. THAT AIN’T RIGHT!!
Jeff
September 15th, 2009
11:07 am
Well, if you have no right to be supported against their will, then when you get sick just go out to the pavement and die. Under the swame logic, I have no kids in school – why should I be forced to pay to educate yours?? I have no boat – why should my taxes be used to support the Coast Guard to help boaters in trouble?? I don’t hike – why should my taxes be used to support Forest Rangers who rescue stupid or unfortunate hikers?? WHY – because it’s what a civilized society does for the benefit of all.
Ray Pugh
September 15th, 2009
11:14 am
Mr. Wooten,
Would your insuror consider looking like Orvil Redenbacher to be a pre-existing condition?
Naomi
September 15th, 2009
11:15 am
You go , Zeke. The fair tax would put more money in every citizen’s pockets( assuming they work) and less for the government to squander on earmarks. Because the Fair Tax takes power to buy votes from the powers that be, it will not pass until the grass roots rise up and demand it. Note:Unless you have read the Fair Tax book or visited Fairtax.org you are not sufficiently informed to respond to this comment.
neo-Carlinist
September 15th, 2009
11:17 am
Truth, you’re close (Jefferson quote), but given our particular brand of American Capitalism; and the nature of the current Medical-Insurance Complex, have we every enjoyed “Democracy”? Welcome to the working class (which now includes those earning $250,000 per year). For every deadbeat welfare recipient on the bottom, there are 10 paper-shuffling, derivative-pedaling, no-work executive/corporate board members who “take” from workers (and if you follow the stock market – individual investors). These are interesting times. Capitalism has failed and Socialism has failed. We need a new mousetrap.
Peadawg
September 15th, 2009
11:23 am
“Install the FAIR TAX model, then EVERYONE will pay their “fair share” as demanded by the demogog party! If Joe makes 25 thousand a year and his tax rate is 15% max, and, Nancy makes 150 thousand per year, THEN HER FAIR SHARE SHOULD ALSO BE 15% max!”
So tell me why I should pay the same % as Bill Gates when I make $30k/year?
Naomi
September 15th, 2009
11:32 am
Actually, Peadawg, you would only pay tax on what you buy. None of the income tax nor payroll taxes would be taken from your paycheck. The price of goods would be the same because the imbedded tax in the price of goods now would disappear. You would choose how much tax you pay by how much you spend. You would also get a rebate on taxes on essentials. Bill Gates is treated the same way. He gets to keep more because he made his own job and earns more. Keep in mind that he has made millions of jobs for other people. Don’t get caught up in “wealth envy.”
Elephant Whip
September 15th, 2009
11:35 am
booger:
I doubt a court could order the husband’s employer’s insurer to continue to pay for a now non-family member’s insurance after the divorce, regardless of the alimony. Now she’s hunting insurance with a preexising condition.
And you suggest that she go to the government for healthcare? Under your political outlook, what’s the difference between medicare/medicaid, social security, peachcare, and the current proposals for healthcare reform? Aren’t all of those inappropriate entitlements? And if all of those worked, why are there so many without health insurance?
Donna P.
September 15th, 2009
11:38 am
I’m so sick of this health care debate. Who are the 45 million anyway? Some are young people who can get insurance but don’t what to pay for it; some are illegals; some are people who have pre-existing conditions and no insurance company wants to insure them; and some are under-insured. We spend $289.34 for my husband’s employer-based health care a month plus $93.90 for AFLAC which offers us additional insurance for accidents, cancer, and heart ailments. Others can do the same if they give up alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes.
People think this government-run Obama care will be FREE but it won’t be; you will still pay premiums and co-pays like the rest of us with insurance do. I don’t find fault with insurance companies, hospitals, or doctors; they are business people and want to make a profit (there is nothing wrong with that). Obama and the Democrats should be worried about the economy and terrorists instead of health care. Health care isn’t evil and isn’t killing people every day like Obama claims. He needs to grow up and leave health care alone.
Shaneneeee Faneneeeeeee
September 15th, 2009
11:38 am
ABC is covering up most of Obamas bad press so I am surprised they let the comment of him calling Kanye a jackass out there.
Chris Salzmann
September 15th, 2009
11:38 am
Peadawg September 15th, 2009 11:23 am SAID: “Install the FAIR TAX model, then EVERYONE will pay their “fair share” as demanded by the demogog party! If Joe makes 25 thousand a year and his tax rate is 15% max, and, Nancy makes 150 thousand per year, THEN HER FAIR SHARE SHOULD ALSO BE 15% max!”
So tell me why I should pay the same % as Bill Gates when I make $30k/year?
CHRIS SAYS: Interesting point. Under the “fair” tax, which by the way, is anything but, you are penalized for earning less. The rich are rewarded and the poor are punished. And the key word here is proportionality. That is what a progressive tax system tries to avoid. Although you get taxed more as you earn more, your disposable income still far outstrips someone making 1/2 what you make, even though you pay a higher tax rate.
I want to get the opinion of the conservatives/libertarians on this board about this:
In Finland, a capitalist country, speeding fines are based on income from your previous tax return. So therefore, someone like Bill Gates would get the same proportionate fine of someone say, earning $30K a year. Would that be considered fair? Under our system where everyone pays the same fixed fine fine for a given ticket, aren’t you unfairly punishing someone who earns less and letting people who earn more, get off with a proportionally lesser burden? Now here the KEY argument AGAINST our current system: Shouldn’t a fine be, as its defined, a detriment, to make the person think twice about repeating bad behavior (in this case speeding)??? BTW, the Finland story is interesting because several years ago, a senior Nokia executive was caught speeding about 25mph over the speed limit in Finland. Based on his income, his fine came to about $200,000. I’m sure he’ll be more careful next time, eh?
Chris Salzmann
September 15th, 2009
11:49 am
Donna P. September 15th, 2009 11:38 am SAYS: I’m so sick of this health care debate. Who are the 45 million anyway? Some are young people who can get insurance but don’t what to pay for it; some are illegals; some are people who have pre-existing conditions and no insurance company wants to insure them; and some are under-insured. We spend $289.34 for my husband’s employer-based health care a month plus $93.90 for AFLAC which offers us additional insurance for accidents, cancer, and heart ailments. Others can do the same if they give up alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes.
CHRIS SAYS: Oh yeah? What about those who are self-employed and have pre-existing conditions? What about those who work for small businesses and have pre-existing conditions? Same question about the families of these folks. What about those who get laid off and are running out of COBRA? Especially those in the COBRA scenario who are receiving treatments for debilitating illnesses for themselves or their family with their COBRA running out? Any answers for those scenarios? Perhaps you need to get out of your cocoon and think about what other folks may be going through. Come back and tell us about it when your husband loses his job and his COBRA starts running out.
Donna P. September 15th, 2009 11:38 am SAYS: People think this government-run Obama care will be FREE but it won’t be; you will still pay premiums and co-pays like the rest of us with insurance do. I don’t find fault with insurance companies, hospitals, or doctors; they are business people and want to make a profit (there is nothing wrong with that). Obama and the Democrats should be worried about the economy and terrorists instead of health care. Health care isn’t evil and isn’t killing people every day like Obama claims. He needs to grow up and leave health care alone.
CHRIS SAYS: Health Care isn’t evil and no one claims it is. The current health care insurance system is evil and disproportionate. About 20,000 Americans die every year because of the lack of health insurance. Over HALF of all personal bankruptcies in this country are related to medical expenses. Who do you think ends up paying for that? And you think everything’s hunky dory???
Manny
September 15th, 2009
11:56 am
Here’s the bottom line for me: Health insurance is too high, period…especially for the self-employed. And small business is getting killed as a result of it; along with the entrepreneurial spirit.
I don’t care if it’s with the single-payer program, Co-ops, increased competition or whatever else- all I want is to get affordable healthcare with low or no deductible. Right now, in order to get affordable healthcare for someone self-employed, you have to agree to deductibles so high, you might as well just not even take out your card during an emergency.
Donna P.
September 15th, 2009
12:00 pm
Chris, could you back up your “20,000″ American die a year claim with that data and where I can go see this data? Thanks. Also, go to http://www.ehealthinsurance.com; there you will find insurance companies that cater to small businesses and individuals. We have used them before in-between insurance coverage. You can get policies with major insurance companies like AEtna and Blue Cross, Blue Shield. I know it is hard for people to search the internet to find insurance companies in their states that will insure them.
truth
September 15th, 2009
12:02 pm
When did the idea become popular that insurance should cover pre-existing conditions? It makes no sense that you should expect an insurance company to pay for something pre-existing. What is the difference in that and expecting auto insurance to pay to fix your car that was damaged before you took out coverage. Or, a person being able to buy life insurance for you after you are dead and expect payment. People…look up the definition of insurance and insure. It is to protect against future loss…not what you have already lost…health or otherwise.
Tray
September 15th, 2009
12:23 pm
HOW ABOUT THIS…? Healthcare is a PRIVILEDGE and not a right. You have no right to healthcare. You have the right to life, but if you make unhealthy decisions, too bad for you, your life will be taken by your poor, unhealthy decisions.
DLink
September 15th, 2009
12:35 pm
Current cost of company supported health plan: $1200/mo. For 62yr old man and wife. Just saying, that not all company plans are remotely affordable for their employees.
Eli Jones
September 15th, 2009
1:04 pm
Joe Wilson was right, Obama does lie and so does his corrupt allies. We American’s must breath down the necks of the Obama Rubber Stampers to make sure they do us right. We cannot let our guard down for one second and depend on them to put what they promise in any healthcare plan. I just want these government morons to leave me and my insurance company alone. I am happy with paying my own way. Throw the bums out in 2010!
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/3/impeach-obama
neo-Carlinist
September 15th, 2009
1:19 pm
I hope our Commander-In-Chief was not watching the MTV Video Awards, but re: Kanye West, I think Obama nailed it, and I applaud his candid (if off the record) remark. I suspect West will concur. I futher suspect West is an OK guy, but in this instance “jackass” is a compliment.
Jake
September 15th, 2009
1:48 pm
This is just about taking from Medicare recipients, elderly people most of whom worked all their lives, the young and the working people and giving to the scum, slackers, dregs, dopers, smokers, drunks and fatties so they’ll vote for Obama in 2012.
Elephant Whip
September 15th, 2009
1:52 pm
Tray:
Thanks for the foundation for the argument for universal healthcare. You, a conservative I assume, state that we have a right to life (a God-given right, I assume). Illness of any sort (arising by chance or poor health habits) jeopardizes this right to life. So, we should protect this right to life against the threat of illness, which could deprive us of our right to life. Therefore, no one should hinder any entity’s efforts to protect everyone’s right to life.
All this “right to life” phraseology reminds me of conservatives’ other right to life: unborn children. If conservatives are so interested, under religious and moral conviction, in protecting life from conception to natural death, then why can’t you help people who are already alive remain alive and healthy…even the least of these?
Hillbilly Deluxe
September 15th, 2009
3:05 pm
You have the right to life, but if you make unhealthy decisions, too bad for you, your life will be taken by your poor, unhealthy decisions.
Too bad I guess, that some people choose to get cancer or suffer serious accidents?
clyde
September 15th, 2009
3:22 pm
I don’t know how many thosands of dollars my employer and I have paid out in health insurance during my working career but I know that not one cent of it has ever been paid out because of a claim by me.Now that I’m of an age where I will more than likely need some type of health care the rules are going to change and not in my favor.What I have paid for all of my life is going to be gone or replaced with something I can start paying for again.The unfairness of life continues to follow me as I age.We have a tax bill coming that is going to astound us all.
booger
September 15th, 2009
3:22 pm
elephant,
In a divorce, the children are still considered dependents of the father. Therefore a court can order the father to continue dependent health care benefits for the children. In fact, the court doesn’t have to be involved. The father can just keep them as dependents.
As for medicare, medicaid and peachcare. These are all programs aimed at a specific segment of our population. They are not considered “reforms” and in no way impact peoples current plans. Health care reform is aimed at the entire health care system and will impact everyone.
And if you were not aware, all the programs you mentioned are in dire financial straits.
Elephant Whip
September 15th, 2009
3:35 pm
booger:
Nice diversionary attempt with the kids; but what’s the wife going to do about her preexisting condition?
And, I was not the one using medicare, -caid, and peachcare as alternatives, you were. And now it sounds like you are suggesting reform to these existing entities. You couldn’t possibly be suggesting dismantlement, because you suggested them as an alternative to universal healthcare in your first argument.
EVIL REPUBLICANS TIME IS UP
September 15th, 2009
3:44 pm
ITS SIMPLE PEOPLE,THE REPUBLICANS LIKE TO USE TAXPAYER MONEY ON WAR,I MEAN UNLIMITED AMOUNTS OF MONEY ON WAR AND DEATH! THE DEMOCRAPS LIKE TO TAKE TAXPAYER MONEY AND HELP THE POOR AND THE ELDERLY,SO IF YOU HAVE COMMON SENSE,YOU WOULD REALIZE THAT HELPING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS BETTER THAN KILLING AND BOMBING EVERYBODY!
Jake
September 15th, 2009
4:35 pm
E Whip – The wife will have to pay for her treatment as long as she can and then Medicaid will pay for it. There is a huge difference between not having health insurance and not getting health care. This is a case of having to go broke to pay for health care, not a case of not having health care. Uninsured people often forego care because they don’t want to pay for it or don’t realize they can get it without paying if they are poor enough, but care is generally available for everyone, even those scumbag illegals who should have to go back to their country of origin for treatment.
booger
September 15th, 2009
5:36 pm
elephant,
No diversion, just answering your questions.
As for my suggesting dismantling anything, I have no idea where you read that.
Peter
September 15th, 2009
8:35 pm
Don’t worry folks it will come down to us getting health care, then the little chip that says you are the number.
Because in the big picture that is all the 100s millions of American’s are……pawn’s in the big machine run by a few !
Peter
September 15th, 2009
9:05 pm
Come on now………EVIL REPUBLICANS TIME IS UP……..War is a way of making money, controlling the population.
That is why we have WAR !
Chris Salzmann
September 15th, 2009
10:24 pm
Donna, I sent you several responses but keep getting the message below:
“Chris Salzmann Your comment is awaiting moderation.September 15th, 2009 10:21 pm”
So I don’t know what’s up with Jim Wooten. I provided my sources which include the Institute of Medicine which is a branch of the National Academy of Sciences. This non-partisan group advises Congress.
Chris Salzmann
September 15th, 2009
10:30 pm
Donna,
Do you realize that when trying to buy health insurance, these insurers do not cover pre-existing conditions? These are common conditions such as diabetes, Lupus, high blood pressure, etc. So, if someone or their family are unlucky enough to have pre-existing conditions, and they have no option but to purchase private health insurance, what option do they have for treatment?
Also, another thing to remember, a major business lobby weighed in Tuesday, saying that if current trends continue, annual health-care costs for employers will rise 166 percent over the next decade — to $28,530 per employee.“Maintaining the status quo is simply not an option,” said Antonio M. Perez, chief executive of Eastman Kodak and a leader of the Business Roundtable. “These costs are unsustainable and would put millions of workers at risk”.
The current system is not sustainable.
Silent Majority
September 16th, 2009
8:45 am
Oh, please don’t remind me that I voted for Jimmy Carter way back then. How naive I was.
Chris Broe
September 16th, 2009
10:44 am
CNN just reported that Vice President Joe Biden’s arrival in Iraq’s Green Zone was met by a barrage of shoes thrown by the recently-released Sunni Bathist Insurgent Scumbag known as “Shoeless Muntadhar Al Zeidis”. Biden barely escaped being scuffed, laced, and socked as he weathered the rain of leather. Most of the shoes were duds. The majority of the unexploded shoes were goat-skinned Jimmy Choo knockoffs that were obviously supplied by the Iranians.
Editorial on the AJC’s level of sophistication and relevance: “There is a danger that for the want of a shoe, the war on terror could be lost. Somebody has to do something. Why doesn’t somebody do something? Is there a cobbler cell the CIA doesn’t know about?”
Steven Daedalus
September 16th, 2009
10:59 am
If Wilson’s not a racists, there ain’t a cow in Texas.
JD
September 16th, 2009
11:46 am
Steven Doofusdalus,
To make such a charge at a Member of Congress from a 2 word comment just makes you look as ignorant and partisan as Jimmy Carter. At least Carter has senility as an excuse, or his lack of relevance, or his failed Presidency but what is your excuse, Steven?
JD
September 16th, 2009
11:50 am
Steven,
As a postscript, truth is always best defense and Joe Wilson’s comment, while unseemly and inappropriate, is none the less – accurate.
Obama has either lied about, or squashed the truth about, most every part of his life beginng with birth and continuing through his education. If there is nothing to hide then why spend millions of dollars to keep the documents a secret?
Jackie
September 16th, 2009
12:50 pm
One of the arguments concerning the proposed health care reform uses the point “…we can not afford the proposed reforms.”
Question to those who use this mantra as a major point in their argument is, can we afford NOT to have health care reform?
Liberal Idiocracy
September 16th, 2009
1:19 pm
That senile Jimmy Carter is at it again running his mouth like an ignorant old jackass:
“I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he’s African-American,” Carter told NBC Nightly News.
What an old fool, liberal or otherwise. First of all, it was a given that the mindless left wingnuts were going to claim “racism” on those against Obama’s policies and proposals. Never mind that nobody on the Right spoke out against former Sec. of State Condi Rice and most recently, Michael Steele as head of the GOP – or former Congressman Watts from Oklahoma.
No, the mindless, thoughtless, emotion-driven bedwetting children of the left can’t stand anyone speaking out against their idiotic policies. So if it’s a white male left wingnut politician spoken against, said Right winger is a “nazi.” If it’s a white female, said Right winger is a “sexist.” If it’s a Hispanic or Asian politician being spoken against, its “Xenophobic.” And of course, if its a gay politician like Barney Frank, it’s being “homophobic.” You get the idea. The mindless children of the left – and that’s all their mentality is – can’t honestly debate anything and like children, don’t like being told NO!
Well get used to more of this kind of idiocy from the wingnut left as America continues to reject their policies like Obamacare. Oh, and for the mindless out there who say Republicans have offered no alternatives, yes they have. They got shot down. Look it up, stupid sheep. But back to Carter, as each year goes by, the Chavez and Castro lover, who oversaw 21% interest rates, 12% unemployment, and 444 days of American hostages in Iran and doing nothing, you have to have pity on such a former president. In any event, it does offer for some laughable reading.
smoochie
September 18th, 2009
7:00 am
Jimmy Carter is dumb as a can of beans.