81 replies to this topic

[NittanyLion]

WASHINGTON – Summoned to success by President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled Congress approved historic legislation Sunday night extending health care to tens of millions of uninsured Americans and cracking down on insurance company abuses, a climactic chapter in the century-long quest for near universal coverage.

Widely viewed as dead two months ago, the Senate-passed bill cleared the House on a 219-212 vote. Republicans were unanimous in opposition, joined by 34 dissident Democrats.

Obama watched the vote in the White House's Roosevelt Room with Vice President Joe Biden and about 40 staff aides. When the long sought 216th vote came in — the magic number needed for passage — the room burst into applause and hugs. An exultant president exchanged a high-five with his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.

A second, smaller measure — making changes in the first — was lined up for passage later in the evening. It would then go to the Senate, where Democratic leaders said they had the votes to pass it.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the legislation awaiting the president's approval would extend coverage to 32 million Americans who lack it, ban insurers from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions and cut deficits by an estimated $138 billion over a decade. If realized, the expansion of coverage would include 95 percent of all eligible individuals under age 65.

For the first time, most Americans would be required to purchase insurance, and face penalties if they refused. Much of the money in the bill would be devoted to subsidies to help families at incomes of up to $88,000 a year pay their premiums.

Far beyond the political ramifications — a concern the president repeatedly insisted he paid no mind — were the sweeping changes the bill held in store for millions of individuals, the insurance companies that would come under tougher control and the health care providers, many of whom would face higher taxes.

Crowds of protesters outside the Capitol shouted "just vote no" in a futile attempt to stop the inevitable taking place inside a House packed with lawmakers and ringed with spectators in the galleries above.

Across hours of debate, House Democrats predicted the larger of the two bills, costing $940 billion over a decade, would rank with other great social legislation of recent decades.

"We will be joining those who established Social Security, Medicare and now, tonight, health care for all Americans, said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, partner to Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., in the grueling campaign to pass the legislation.

"This is the civil rights act of the 21st century," added Rep. Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, the top-ranking black member of the House.

Republicans readily agreed the bill would affect everyone in America, but warned repeatedly of the burden imposed by more than $900 billion in tax increases and Medicare cuts combined.

"We have failed to listen to America," said Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, leader of a party that has vowed to carry the fight into the fall's midterm elections for control of Congress.

The final obstacle to the bill's passage was cleared at mid-afternoon when Obama and Democratic leaders reached a compromise with anti-abortion lawmakers whose rebellion had left the outcome in doubt. The White House announced he would issue an executive order pledging that no federal funds would be used for elective abortion, satisfying Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan and a handful of like-minded lawmakers.

A spokesman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops expressed skepticism that the presidential order would satisfy the church's objections.

Republican abortion foes also said Obama's proposed order was insufficient, and when Stupak sought to counter them, a shout of "baby killer" could be heard coming from the Republican side of the chamber.

The measure would also usher in a significant expansion of Medicaid, the federal-state health care program for the poor. Coverage would be required for incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, $29,327 a year for a family of four. Childless adults would be covered for the first time, starting in 2014.

The insurance industry, which spent millions on advertising trying to block the bill, would come under new federal regulation. They would be forbidden from placing lifetime dollar limits on policies, from denying coverage to children because of pre-existing conditions and from canceling policies when a policyholder becomes ill.

Parents would be able to keep children up to age 26 on their family insurance plans, three years longer than is now the case.

A new high-risk pool would offer coverage to uninsured people with medical problems until 2014, when the coverage expansion would go into high gear.

For the president, the events capped an 18-day stretch in which he traveled to four states and lobbied more than 60 wavering lawmakers in person or by phone to secure passage of his signature domestic issue. According to some who met with him, he warned that the bill's demise could cripple his still-young presidency.

After more than a year of political combat, Democrats piled superlative upon superlative across several hours of House debate.

Rep. Louise Slaughter of New York read a message President Franklin Roosevelt sent Congress in 1939 urging lawmakers to address the needs of those without health care, and said Democrat Harry Truman and Republican Richard Nixon had also sought to broaden insurance coverage.

Republicans attacked the bill without let-up, warning it would harm the economy while mandating a government takeover of the health care system.

"The American people know you can't reduce health care costs by spending $1 trillion or raising taxes by more than one-half trillion dollars. The American people know that you cannot cut Medicare by over one-half trillion dollars without hurting seniors," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich.

"And, the American people know that you can't create an entirely new government entitlement program without exploding spending and the deficit."

Obama has said often that presidents of both parties have tried without success to achieve national health insurance, beginning with Theodore Roosevelt early in the 20th century.

The 44th president's quest to succeed where others have failed seemed at a dead end two months ago, when Republicans won a special election for a Massachusetts Senate seat, and with it, the votes to prevent a final vote.

But the White House, Pelosi and Reid soon came up with a rescue plan that required the House to approve the Senate-passed measure despite opposition to many of its provisions, then have both houses pass a fix-it measure incorporating numerous changes.

To pay for the changes, the legislation includes more than $400 billion in higher taxes over a decade, roughly half of it from a new Medicare payroll tax on individuals with incomes over $200,000 and couples over $250,000. A new excise tax on high-cost insurance policies was significantly scaled back in deference to complaints from organized labor.

In addition, the bills cut more than $500 billion from planned payments to hospitals, nursing homes, hospices and other providers that treat Medicare patients. An estimated $200 billion would reduce planned subsidies to insurance companies that offer a private alternative to traditional Medicare.

The insurance industry warned that seniors would face sharply higher premiums as a result, and the Congressional Budget Office said many would return to traditional Medicare as a result.

The subsidies are higher than those for seniors on traditional Medicare, a difference that critics complain is wasteful, but insurance industry officials argue goes into expanded benefits.

____

Associated Press writers Jim Kuhnhenn and Erica Werner contributed to this report.

[LongIslandCoastalWx]

There was a motion which was drawn up by the Republicans to have the bill recommited again. That was being debated in the House but that was voted down a little while ago.

[vascudave]

so i pay $ 1400/ month
anyone know what my new payment will be?

[isobar65]

This Bill will do NOTHING but increase costs and entitlements ... and result in more unemployment (despite the massive increase in IRS employees) ... increase malpractice costs as well drive up hospital costs.

Do you think that the majority of those who do not pay for ER visits will change their behavior because now it is free to go to a clinic (where they have to get an appointment?)

It is a sad day for the taxpayers of the US.

[devilsfan0405]

I'm naturally skeptical of most things done by the government, but I just hope this helps more people than it hurts. I'm crossing my fingers.

[Ehop]

Next time someone tells you how the USA is a free country remind yourself of all the rules and regualtions and this one takes the prize.

This time the federal government is requiring the people to purchase a product that they set the rules on. Not at anytime during our history has that been the case.

Please read the tenth amendment.

Our individual liberties are being taken away step by step and people continue to fall for it with the concept they know what is best for us.

This is a sad day in American history for people who believe we should be free to live our lives as we see fit.

[devilsfan0405]

Ehop, on Mar 22 2010, 09:53 AM, said:

Next time someone tells you how the USA is a free country remind yourself of all the rules and regualtions and this one takes the prize.

This time the federal government is requiring the people to purchase a product that they set the rules on. Not at anytime during our history has that been the case.

Please read the tenth amendment.

Our individual liberties are being taken away step by step and people continue to fall for it with the concept they know what is best for us.

This is a sad day in American history for people who believe we should be free to live our lives as we see fit.

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but most states require you to purchase auto insurance. Yes, that requirement usually only pertains to liability coverage that would protect other people from damage you cause but it's similar in some respect. Then again, that's not a federal mandate, but a state-by-state one and the rules vary. I also hear people saying that the federal government has no right to get involved because health insurance is not portable across state lines, therefore it is not interstate commerce. It's a tough situation and I can understand both sides of the argument feeling the way they do.

[vascudave]

devilsfan0405, on Mar 22 2010, 10:46 AM, said:

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but most states require you to purchase auto insurance. Yes, that requirement usually only pertains to liability coverage that would protect other people from damage you cause but it's similar in some respect. Then again, that's not a federal mandate, but a state-by-state one and the rules vary. I also hear people saying that the federal government has no right to get involved because health insurance is not portable across state lines, therefore it is not interstate commerce. It's a tough situation and I can understand both sides of the argument feeling the way they do.

well not for nothing, if it cost me $1300 for the entire year to cover my health insurance, then i'm on board.

[devilsfan0405]

vascudave, on Mar 22 2010, 11:05 AM, said:

well not for nothing, if it cost me $1300 for the entire year to cover my health insurance, then i'm on board.

You're right, it's very different. And we don't use our auto insurance for every little thing we have done to our cars. Oil changes, basic maintenance, new tires, etc. No claims for those things.

[icehater]

Nearly 61% of this poll (at the time of this post) are angry about this bill. Personally when a President is actually led by the Speaker of the House and has to go to the ends of the earth, literally bribing swing voters you know it's a bad piece of legislation. Pelosi actually led this thing in the end. Even Obama was ready to settle for much less reform and frankly the latter was the much better way to go.

http://politics.newsvine.com/_question/201...xcited-or-angry

Interesting picture here. I couldn't find it on NY Times.com so I scanned it. Who looks like the President to you in this photo. Pelosi looks like this in so many photos. This woman's ego is beyond anyone's imagination.

[FreezingDrizzle]

The Cost of Doing Business Has Just Gone Up
By Eric Bolling
- FOXNews.com

Small businesses will be hit hardest of all by Obamacare and the consequences won't be pretty.
Here are my thoughts on the just passed health care bill.

Caterpillar Inc., a company with 94,000 employees, recently suggested that in the “first year alone” the new health plan would cost them $100 million.

McDonalds, IBM, United Parcel Service have around 500,000 employees and Walmart with 1,900,000 employees will be hit extremely hard.

But those who will be hit hardest of all by Obamacare will be small businesses. Many small businesses have been reluctant to add workers to their payrolls because the legislation was unclear. Now they know some of the massive new costs coming at them will be borne by them when they hire new people.

Small businesses employ nearly 70% of America’s labor force; nearly 100 million people work for and/or own small businesses in America.

In the past, a “fully employed” America has traditionally meant an unemployment rate of five percent.

Expect that number (the fully employed unemployment rate) to be at 8% going forward because the cost to insure new employees will prohibit hiring.

The difference between 5% unemployment and the new 8% rate translates to an additional 4,600,000 Americans out of work. These same Americans will also STAY unemployed for much longer periods, too.

Possibly the most infuriating aspect of the new health care plan is the method of enforcement. It appears that the IRS will be hiring an additional 16,500 auditors to administer compliance and assessing fees/taxes/penalties

Here are a few more things to keep in mind going forward:

The Senate version of the bill (what the House voted on) contains:

Mandates: (For Individuals)
*Individuals must purchase insurance or pay a penalty that would be the greater of $750 or 2% of income by 2016.
Mandates (For Employers):
*The Senate bill requires companies with 50 or more employees to help defray the cost. Note: there is no exception for Part time versus full time employees.
How It Is Paid For:
*The reform plan would be financed through billions (suggested $500b) in Medicare cuts….. and new taxes, including a tax on insurance plans that are worth more than $23,000 for a family. Couples making more than $250,000 would pay additional Medicare payroll taxes.
* Fees, penalties and new Social Security taxes may be assessed as soon as enforcement agency (see below) is ready. Also, the benefits don’t really kick in, kin 2014. So for the first decade after passage of the health care bill, there will be ten years of paying into the system and six years of benefit withdrawals.
Exchanges-
*50 different exchanges to be set up, administered by the states, where people without employer-based coverage will buy insurance.

Medicaid

*Medicaid would be expanded to cover everyone earning under 133 percent of the federal poverty level ($29,327 for a family of four).

Medicare Drug Program

*The Medicare drug benefit would expand to partly close the “doughnut hole” in coverage for retirees.

Abortion ** Subject to Stupak promise of Executive Order (President Obama will the clarify abortion language after passage of Senate version through House.)
*The new insurance exchanges can offer plans that cover abortion, but people who choose those plans must pay for their coverage with separate checks — one for abortion coverage, one for the rest of their health care services.

Eric Bolling is a Fox Business Network anchor.

[icehater]

FreezingDrizzle, on Mar 22 2010, 11:35 AM, said:

[size=3][b]The Cost of Doing Business Has Just Gone Up
By Eric Bolling
- FOXNews.com

The states have no budgets to do this. I read somewhere that it would cost $4bln a year for California to process this data. California is almost broke as it is. So state taxes are going to rise. The problem with the math on this bill is it doesn't take into account the domino cost effect on all adjacent spaces. There's a lot of uncounted friendly fire here and some of it is very damaging. But this bill is not the one you will get. Reconciliation will make major changes and reconciliation takes into account increased deficits which this bill will certainly cause. I'm really amazed at all this. This is the ultimate example of getting an elephant to step on and kill an ant. What was needed was minor corrections. What we got was a total overhaul that most people wanted no part of. Obama and Pelosi are counting on momentum getting this thru as is and I doubt it happens. Also the fact that the bill literally forces folks to buy insurance is absurd and s/b unconstitutional. Many folks that d'ont buy insurance (and are counted in the 32mln) simply feel it's cheaper to pay a doctor rather than enroll in a plan. I have a cousin that does this and is up in arms about the bill and feels misrepresented as being included in the 32 mln. This is a make or buy decision that many are being forced out of. A lot of folks in that 32 mln are young folks who choose to pass on health insurance and only want catastrophic coverage. I remember reading that the real math on folks that can't get insurabce is about 8mln, the rest choose against it. So we did this bill for less than 5% of the population. We couldn't help and protect that small percentage in a better way than this??

[icehater]

devilsfan0405, on Mar 22 2010, 10:46 AM, said:

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but most states require you to purchase auto insurance. Yes, that requirement usually only pertains to liability coverage that would protect other people from damage you cause but it's similar in some respect. Then again, that's not a federal mandate, but a state-by-state one and the rules vary. I also hear people saying that the federal government has no right to get involved because health insurance is not portable across state lines, therefore it is not interstate commerce. It's a tough situation and I can understand both sides of the argument feeling the way they do.

That's different. That involves protection and rights of others and is set up that way so that drivers are more cautious. Otherwise the courts could never deal with the lawsuits. Health insurance and what you want out of it is personal and limited to you and your family.

[Mike_The_Golfer]

So in 2014, if you don't get insurance you'll be fined $95? So you pay the fine and then what...does the federal gov't pick up the tab if you go to the hospital? Why would anyone actually get insurance then? It'll be infinitely chaeper to just pay the fine as opposed to the premiums (let a lone a trip to the ER)...even after it goes up in subsequent years.

[devilsfan0405]

icehater, on Mar 22 2010, 12:07 PM, said:

That's different. That involves protection and rights of others and is set up that way so that drivers are more cautious. Otherwise the courts could never deal with the lawsuits. Health insurance and what you want out of it is personal and limited to you and your family.

Exactly. It really isn't a good comparison because the protection afforded is for 3rd parties, not for yourself.

[devilsfan0405]

Mike_The_Golfer, on Mar 22 2010, 01:24 PM, said:

So in 2014, if you don't get insurance you'll be fined $95? So you pay the fine and then what...does the federal gov't pick up the tab if you go to the hospital? Why would anyone actually get insurance then? It'll be infinitely chaeper to just pay the fine as opposed to the premiums (let a lone a trip to the ER)...even after it goes up in subsequent years.

Good point. What makes people think that someone (especially young people) will pay several thousand dollars annually for a policy over a miniscule (by comparison) fine? You still won't be turned away at the ER, as you stated.

[vascudave]

Mike_The_Golfer, on Mar 22 2010, 01:24 PM, said:

So in 2014, if you don't get insurance you'll be fined $95? So you pay the fine and then what...does the federal gov't pick up the tab if you go to the hospital? Why would anyone actually get insurance then? It'll be infinitely chaeper to just pay the fine as opposed to the premiums (let a lone a trip to the ER)...even after it goes up in subsequent years.

thats for poverty level i think it goes up to bout 700 bucks, or 2% of income?(not sure) but ur right, i'll pay a fine of $1000 bucks, then the rest is free? yep doesn't make sense, why buy insurance?

[vascudave]

over 60% on msnbc don't like..now if that don't tell you public opinion...

http://politics.polls.newsvine.com/_questi...angry?GT1=43001

[icehater]

vascudave, on Mar 22 2010, 02:07 PM, said:

over 60% on msnbc don't like..now if that don't tell you public opinion...

http://politics.polls.newsvine.com/_questi...angry?GT1=43001

That's getting worse and worse. I first saw it at 50% last night than 60.8% when I posted it. Now it's over 65%.

[devilsfan0405]

icehater, on Mar 22 2010, 02:37 PM, said:

That's getting worse and worse. I first saw it at 50% last night than 60.8% when I posted it. Now it's over 65%.

Wow. And that's MSNBC saying that, a left-leaning network to say the least. It could be a bloodbath for Democrats come November. A lot of guys went over the cliff for Obama and Pelosi. He better have a lot of jobs lined up for these guys so they have something to do next year.