Questionable Healthcare Lines

[DebS]

We have a great State Representative that went out of his way to outline some of the more interesting lines from the Healthcare Bill (HR 3200) that he discovered going through it line by line. I thought you might be interested in seeing them.

Representative Curtis Blackwood

NEWSLETTER
July 30, 2009

Folks, while going over some emails in the office, I came some interesting information on the Democrats’ big health care bill, H.R. 3200, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. While this is federal legislation and not state, the topic is of enough significance that I thought many of you would be interested in reading it. Please find below page references and direct quotes from the proposed bill.



Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the gov option!
Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." (Yes, it really says that.)
Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."
Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.
Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individual s.
Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.


The N.C. budget appears to be in its final stages; will have more state and budget news for you in the next newsletter.

Representative Curtis Blackwood is serving his fourth term in the N.C. House.

[spb]

Some of those are questionable indeed. It's worth going to this site to check out the claims.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...decide-your-h/.

If the long word-wrapped link doesn't work then just go to the home page. The article is obvious. In fact, it's well worth scanning over some of the other articles they have.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

SB

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by spb

Some of those are questionable indeed. It's worth going to this site to check out the claims.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...decide-your-h/.

If the long word-wrapped link doesn't work then just go to the home page. The article is obvious. In fact, it's well worth scanning over some of the other articles they have.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

SB

If you read througgh the .PDF provided by the federal gov't located here http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h111-3200 you see that the page numbers listed on that email match up to the page numbers of the .pdf. Now if you read it, you will find that this email is remarkably accurate. This health care "reform" is nothing but a smokescreen for a blatant powergrab by the gov't in the form of meddling in and controlling our daily lives. Just say NO. This bill will enable gov't mandated "end of life" actions for those that can't contribute taxes anymore. The Nazis would have loved this bill.

And that site you posted seems very left leaning to me. In fact, it looks to me like they contridict themselves on the matter of Obama's "birth certificate." See here where say that Obama's birth certificate is real and, like the rest of the "fair and impartial" media, call the ones who doubt "birthers" and make them out to be nutjobs.

Kinsolving: "No, no, no — the long form listing his hospital and physician."

Gibbs: "Lester ... This question in many ways continues to astound me. The state of Hawaii provided a copy, with a seal, of the president's birth. I know there are apparently at least 400,000 people that continue to doubt the existence of and the certification by the state of Hawaii of the president's birth there, but it's on the Internet because we put it on the Internet for each of those 400,000 to download. I certainly hope by the fourth year of our administration that we'll have dealt with this burgeoning birth controversy."

Gibbs says that the "birth certificate" Obama's people posted has a seal. Ok. Look here...http://www.politifact.com/media/img/...hCertObama.jpg
Where's the seal? A notorized document will still show the imprint of the seal. This "birth certificate" has none. They also mention that factcheck.org helped them "prove" it's real. Factcheck.org is another notoriously left-leaning pro-Obama website.

I know this has nothing to do with the healthcare bill, but it destroys the credibility of the website decring this email.

EDIT - upon further reading on that website I see they list the promises that Obama has kept. They say he kept a promise to suspend taxes on unemployment benefits. I'm currently on unemployment and I'm still paying federal income taxes on it. Looks like they're wrong about him keeping that promise. That further undermines the site's credibility. They also say he kept a promise to make DoD find an end to the war in Iraq and they say he kept it. Wrong again. He promised many times during the campaign that he would pull all troops out of Iraq with 16 months. Within his first week in office, he publically said he was extending that deadline to 19 months. So they lose more credibility.

Read the bill yourself instead of taking others' word for it. That's what I did. I actually read through the .pdf provided by the feds.

[spb]

OK, Let's take a look at a few. I doubt I'll have time to get through very many of these as I do have real work to do.

Originally Posted by DebS

[I]
Page 16: States that if you have insurance at the time of the bill becoming law and change, you will be required to take a similar plan. If that is not available, you will be required to take the gov option!

This is defining grandfathered insurance programs. I'm not clear on section 102-a-1-A. It may or may not mean what you say.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!

False, and Politifact is correct. It says (from p.21) "The Commissioner, ... shall conduct a study of the large group insured and self-insured employer health care markets." That is not an individual company audit.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!

Continued from p.26, defining the benefits package. To me it reads as a limit on cost sharing, common to health insurance packages.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process/

"The Advisory Committee [will] recommend covered benefits" [for the government plans, for those who use them because they don't have private insurance.]. Just like private health insurance. And I'd love to see you get a private plan cover procedures outside their published benefits! Politifact is correct.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

Politifact is again correct, this is "PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE. ... services covered by this act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics...." i.e. Race, gender, hair color, etc. Doesn't say that non-US citizens will be covered.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.

"may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card." Note MAY. Or maybe they can use the SSN every citizen already has!

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.

the text is "to... enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (example: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)

Inflammatory and misleading. The text: ".. establish a temporary reinsurance program ... to provide reimbursement to assist participating employment-based plans with the cost of providing health benefits to retirees" In other words, bring uninsured retirees back under the employer insurance, with temporary govt. assistance if necessary.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.

YEP, as on p.16. And in agreement with PolitiFact.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)

. I don't see that anywhere on p.84.

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens

. Faulty translation, unless there is some requirement I'm unaware of that US citizens be fluent in English. Sure it's advisable, but do you want to strip citizenship from people born and raised here?

Originally Posted by DebS

Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.

Inflammatory again. The text: Commissioner shall con-
duct outreach activities ... including through use of appropriate entities as to inform and educate individuals and employers about the Health Insurance Exchange and Exchange-participating health benefits plan options." And they can place ads in the Wall Street Journal.

This covers a few of them. I have to get back to work. In what I've read, Politifact is correct whereas the quoted email is often incorrect or misrepresenting the bill to generate heat, but no light.

To go offtopic with you,

See here where say that Obama's birth certificate is real and, like the rest of the "fair and impartial" media, call the ones who doubt "birthers" and make them out to be nutjobs.

Gibbs: "Lester ... I know there are apparently at least 400,000 people that continue to doubt the existence of and the certification by the state of Hawaii of the president's birth there ...

Politifact is quoting the press secretary here! Anyway, if you will not believe the Hawaiian DoH director, the Republican Governor, the Registrar of Vital Statistics, and microfiche copies of the newspapers (which got their info from the state), then there is nothing I can do to convince you. Pointing out that an embossed seal would not show up on a scan would be wasting my breath. As would this from PolitiFacts earlier article:

The Hawaii Department of Health receives about a dozen e-mail inquiries a day about Obama's birth certificate, spokesman Okubo said.

"I guess the big issue that's being raised is the lack of an embossed seal and a signature," Okubo said, pointing out that in Hawaii, both those things are on the back of the document. "Because they scanned the front … you wouldn't see those things."

If I have time later perhaps I'll address some of the other points.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by spb

To go offtopic with you, Politifact is quoting the press secretary here! Anyway, if you will not believe the Hawaiian DoH director, the Republican Governor, the Registrar of Vital Statistics, and microfiche copies of the newspapers (which got their info from the state), then there is nothing I can do to convince you. Pointing out that an embossed seal would not show up on a scan would be wasting my breath. As would this from PolitiFacts earlier article:


If I have time later perhaps I'll address some of the other points.

Don't bother, you're clearly another Obamite here to spout the same leftist talking points with no regard to facts.

As for the seal, my birth certificate has a seal imprinted on it, like ALL certified legal documents, the seal is raised which WILL show up if the document is scanned.

That website is left-leaning and pro-Obama. So is factcheck.org, whom they mention as being in league with them. Sorry, this healthcare bill is a BAD idea. READ the .pdf version that was released by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT and you'll see what this is really all about. But you won't do that because then you'd see that this whole "reform" for what it really is.

[spb]

Originally Posted by bcj1755

EDIT - upon further reading on that website I see they list the promises that Obama has kept. They say he kept a promise to suspend taxes on unemployment benefits. I'm currently on unemployment and I'm still paying federal income taxes on it. Looks like they're wrong about him keeping that promise. That further undermines the site's credibility. They also say he kept a promise to make DoD find an end to the war in Iraq and they say he kept it. Wrong again. He promised many times during the campaign that he would pull all troops out of Iraq with 16 months. Within his first week in office, he publically said he was extending that deadline to 19 months. So they lose more credibility.

Did you read the article? Their judgement is "Obama pledged to extend unemployment benefits and temporarily suspend taxes on the benefits. He definitely achieved the first part, and taxes are suspended on some of those benefits. So we are rating this one Promise Kept."
The tax suspension is on the first $2400 of unemployment benefit. I'm sorry that you have had to exceed that amount. Perhaps be thankful the bill extended the benefits.

From Politifact #126:

The timetable for withdrawal was a major campaign issue — the McCain campaign accused Obama of flip-flopping, a claim we said was False — but as Obama noted in his Camp Lejeune speech, he often talked of a 16-month timeline. Obama's current plan goes two months beyond that. There will be some who will say even a day longer than 16 months should constitute a broken promise. We're not ready to make that call because many things can change between now and August 2010, so for now, we're rating it In the Works.

We can revisit this in a year, but first off, they judge it "In The Works", not "Promise Kept", and arguing over a couple months out of 16 is rather petty.

So I think the politifact site is indeed credible. Facts are not left- (or right-) leaning.

SB

[bcj1755]

Here's another post about this.
http://www.thefirearmsforum.com/show...217#post484217
And before you start, I actually took the time to google Dr. Dave Janda. These remarks are apparently true.

This bill is about controlling people and letting those that disagree with Obama slowly and quietly die from lack of healthcare. The elderly will be allowed to die because they'll be a drain on the system. Ever wonder how Obama can save all those billions of dollars from Medicare? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by spb

Did you read the article? Their judgement is "Obama pledged to extend unemployment benefits and temporarily suspend taxes on the benefits. He definitely achieved the first part, and taxes are suspended on some of those benefits. So we are rating this one Promise Kept."
The tax suspension is on the first $2400 of unemployment benefit. I'm sorry that you have had to exceed that amount. Perhaps be thankful the bill extended the benefits.

See, maybe you should try to get some facts before you open your mouth. I've been paying taxes on my unenployment from DAY ONE. You beloved website plainly says that Obama promised to suspend taxes on unemployment benefits, well I guess North Carolina and the IRS missed the memo. I am getting that extra $25 a week and guess what, they're taking TAXES out of it. AND, I thought the "stimulus" bill was supposed to create jobs and hold unemployment under 8%. We're now over 9% (higher if you count the people that have exhausted their UI benefits because they are no longer counted in the official numbers) and still losing jobs. Sorry, try again.

From Politifact #126: We can revisit this in a year, but first off, they judge it "In The Works", not "Promise Kept", and arguing over a couple months out of 16 is rather petty.

So I think the politifact site is indeed credible. Facts are not left- (or right-) leaning. And I think it's not

Facts are facts and the left has a serious lack of them. Many times during the campaign Obama plainly promised to pull ALL troops out of Iraq within 16 months. Less than a month after he takes office, he goes on the news and says it'll be at least 19 months. And how about his promise to close Gitmo? Right away he signs an order to close it within a year. Now he's been saying that he may not be able to. Reason? He blames Bush.

SB

Face it, your Dear Leader has been lying through his teeth.

[spb]

Originally Posted by bcj1755

Don't bother, you're clearly another Obamite here to spout the same leftist talking points with no regard to facts.

OK, that will save me a lot of time. I'll just add this for posterity:

Originally Posted by bcj1755

As for the seal, my birth certificate has a seal imprinted on it, like ALL certified legal documents, the seal is raised which WILL show up if the document is scanned.

Did you read where the Hawaii official that said the seal is on the back side? If you were to continue reading the article the official mentions that traces of it can be seen.

That website is left-leaning and pro-Obama. So is factcheck.org, whom they mention as being in league with them. Sorry, this healthcare bill is a BAD idea. READ the .pdf version that was released by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT and you'll see what this is really all about. But you won't do that because then you'd see that this whole "reform" for what it really is.

Yeah, anyone that disagrees with you is in league with the Obamites. You may have noticed from the quotations that I do in fact have a copy of the bill, straight from the government (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h111-3200.) I don't agree with all the provisions, but I really dislike lies and exaggeration as is present in the originally-quoted email. It's the basest form of politics, inflaming passions and stirring up a mob mentality instead of honestly discussing what is good and not good about the subject, and agreeing to disagree when compromise is not possible.

Cheers,
SB

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by spb

OK, that will save me a lot of time. I'll just add this for posterity:

Hey, I call 'em like I see 'em. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, it's not a chicken. It's amazing to me how liberals get offended at being called "liberals," "Obamites," or "socialists."

Did you read where the Hawaii official that said the seal is on the back side? If you were to continue reading the article the official mentions that traces of it can be seen.

You do realise that the required RAISED seal WILL show up on a scanned document, even if it is stamped from the backside. And let's say for ther sake of argument that you're right, why won't they release the BACK side? Add to that that EVERY single certified legal document I have EVER seen has a RAISED seal. My long form birth certificate from 1978. My mother's long form birth certificate from 1957. My sister's long form birth certificate from 1985. My NC Concealed Handgun Permit. Hell, in North Carolina you can even the Clerk of Courts to give you a certified receipt. You know what entails, they notarize it with a RAISED seal. Also here, if you get a background check from the courthouse (some employers here require you to go to the Clerk of Courts and get a certified background check) it has a RAISED seal. You go to the DMV here and present a "birth certificate" like the one Obama posted, you will be denied. It MUST be a LONG FORM with a RAISED SEAL. That "birth certificate" is a fake.

Yeah, anyone that disagrees with you is in league with the Obamites. You may have noticed from the quotations that I do in fact have a copy of the bill, straight from the government (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h111-3200.) I notice you posted quotes from the text of the bill AFTER I posted a link to it I don't agree with all the provisions, but I really dislike lies and exaggeration as is present in the originally-quoted email. It's the basest form of politics, inflaming passions and stirring up a mob mentality instead of honestly discussing what is good and not good about the subject, and agreeing to disagree when compromise is not possible. Isn't that what liberals do? Inflame passions and stir a mob mentality?

Cheers,
SB

I'm sorry, but that website has ZERO credibility with me, and niether do you quite frankly. I was trying to be respectful in my initial post to you, and you immediately went on the defensive. Another sign of a typical Obamite.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by spb

Pointing out that an embossed seal would not show up on a scan would be wasting my breath.

You're right, it would be wasting your breath and I'll show you why. This first picture is the raised seal from my long form birth certificate, scan taken from the front (I cropped out the nonpertinent parts, such as my personal info). Also notice that there is s signature from the State Registrar (of Louisiana, in this case), something that is noticibly absent from Obama's "birth certificate."

The second picture is the same seal, but from the backside. (Again, nonpertinent info, in this case a blank page, has been omitted.)

Third, is the raised seal on my NC CHP, scanned from the backside. The permit is laminated adn the seal shows on a scan quite clearly. (Again, extranious info has been omitted.)

As you can plainly see, a raised seal will indeed show up on a scanned document, even if the seal was stamped from the back. Now, before you go off on "they did things differently back then," I should point out that my mother was born in 1957 and her birth certificate has a raised seal on it. AND the fact that Obama's "birth certificate" is printed on the Nov. 2001 edition of the form, as is plainly shown on the posted "birth certificate."

All this should plainly show that politifact.com, in claiming that the "birth certificate" is real, has no credibility as a source of truth and fact.

[DebS]

Originally Posted by bcj1755

Face it, your Dear Leader has been lying through his teeth.

spb, how many times does history have to repeat itself before you catch on that Obama is trying to install a healthcare method that has been proven over and over NOT TO WORK? Let's see if Dodd goes to Canada or maybe the UK to get superior healthcare for his newly diagnosed cancer.

More and more American's are waking up to this liar what his real agenda is for America and we aren't buying it.

Posting your left leaning propaganda here isn't going to get you anywhere. What you Democrats aren't getting is that this is no longer a 'party issue'. We saw what Bush did during his tenure, we didn't like the Patriot Act and have the balls to say the Republican's started us down this road to ruin. Now, we're just running instead of walking.

[Trouble 45-70]

The 4th and 5th amendment protects our property and personal effects and papers from unreasonable searches and seizures. This bill sifts through all of our personal information and finances and ties it together. Probably ties in firearms sales, CC info. too and God only knows what else will go into this data dump. Perhaps under financial would be purchases made on credit cards. This Bill provides a framework for a whole lot of mischief, the Constitution be damned. I think there are in govt. many people who would have been quite at home as a bureaucrat in Nazi Germany but have been so far, constrained by our laws and culture. This bill might be the key to unleash them on the public. Starting with us useless eaters. We do live in interesting times and if it passes, we shall see.

[DebS]

Well, looky here at the group having trouble keeping their story straight.

Sometimes the mask cracks a little and you can see underneath.

Interesting times, indeed.

[spb]

DebS - What would you think if you were trying to educate somebody about the 2nd amendment and were told "Posting your right-wing propaganda here isn't going to get you anywhere"?

I believe we have more in common than you might think including, if I read you right, your opinion of the Patriot Act and enjoyment of shooting sports. I also share bcj1755's dislike of a national ID card. To be honest, I'm right-wing on some issues, left-wing on others, and dislike misinformation coming from either wing. In this case I believe the email contains falsehoods for the purpose of generating a visceral emotional response. If you will point out where in my line-by-line reply I was incorrect I will gladly take it back.
Since I see little value in posting "me too" replies I end up being thought of as a "right-wing fundamentalist gun nut" on left-wing forums, and as an "Obamite" on this forum. Everybody hates me!

About the youtube video: My mother-in-law used to forward me emails with subject lines like "Amazing Photos!". I would have fun dissecting them to see how they had been Photoshopped. Some were pretty obvious (like shadows going the wrong direction), some had subtle clues, and some I couldn't find anything amiss. Of the latter group, perhaps a few were actually genuine! Curiously, she doesn't seem to be forwarding those emails to me anymore. The point being, you can no longer expect any photo to reflect reality unless you were present when it was taken, and videos are beginning to warrant the same skepticism.

I was able to find a transcript of one of the key interviews in the clip. Fair warning - the interview sponsors are a "progressive" organization. The bit extracted by the video is in bold.
http://www.americanprogressaction.or...ranscript.html

As I indicated before, I think that we're going to have to have some system where people can buy into a larger pool. Right now their pool typically is the employer, but there are other ways of doing it. I would like to -- I would hope that we could set up a system that allows those who can go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort. But I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There's going to be potentially some transition process. I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out where we've got a much more portable system. Employers still have the option of providing coverage, but many people may find that they get better coverage, or at least coverage that gives them more for health care dollars than they spend outside of their employer. And I think we've got to facilitate that and let individuals make that choice to transition out of employer coverage

I don't think the text before or after the quote is unimportant, particularly when it cuts off in mid-sentence. The phrase "eliminate employer coverage immediately" is a red flag, but the omitted part seems to say employer coverage will remain an option for those who want it. It your employer is too small to affordably offer coverage there would be a federal or state insurance pool to sign up with. Your interpretation may vary

If your interested in the white house response, it's here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0XCl...layer_embedded

Now the old chestnut "How do you know when a politician is lying? When his lips move." may be true but if he in fact is making two opposed claims then you have only your own preconceptions and biases to lean on when choosing which to believe.

Cheers,
SPB

[DebS]

spb, if you're getting heat from both sides, then you must be doin' something right.

I generally never post emails that I receive and hate getting forwarded emails, however this one was from Mr. Blackwood and when I checked it out, I found it all to be valid. I also wanted to make it clear that I am in perfect aqreement with those that feel our healthcare system is broken; however not irretrievably.

The discrepency in page numbers you are finding may be due to the fact that currently, there are three healthcare bills in House committee's and one in a Senate committee. So, we have four bills floating around.

I have received and reviewed information from both parties and there has been nothing provided IMO that would indicate that the Government is capable or even should be in control of 7% of our GNP.

Regarding the youtube video, there have in fact been youtube vid's that have been changed or modified (heck, that talking baby that calls his golfer friend a Shank-o-potamus is proof that anything can be done!). On this issue though, both President Obama and the Demo leadership have stated multiple times that this is the way to get to single payer 'socialized medicine' system.

Even though we may not have to worry about socialized medicine for 20 years if passed now, now is still the time to stop the movement to a single payer system. Healthcare DOES need to be fixed, I agree. I do NOT agree that the Government should be involved in making decisions regarding my healthcare or lack thereof, in any way.

Currently, many insurance companies offer health insurance to individuals at group rates. Why isn't THAT the option being pushed, offering a decent pool plan for people working for company's that don't offer decent health insurance?

Although I didn't vote for Obama, I didn't necessarily have any preconceptions of what to expect other than what he was promising during his campaign. Government performing oversight of healthcare is needed: to make sure the insurance companies are not screwing you. A mighty fine group of trustworthy folks are they.

Government providing healthcare is just unacceptable. They have repeatedly proven they cannot do it: all you have to do is look at Medicare (cost overuns and abuse), VA (the atrocious treatment and inability to get needed healthcare) and the military (the quality of care is poor, the availability of care for most current military people is horrible, unless you are an officer). Members of my family are currently experiencing these examples right now, oddly.

I did want to point out that this healthcare issue is not happening in a bubble, as it were. Just as you wouldn't assess and buy a car reviewing the condition of tires alone, you would look at the picture as a whole.

The other things the administration is doing like: huge gov't expansion with an increasing astronomical debt, the takeover of the auto industry, takeover of the banking industry, and the attempt to take over personal energy consumption, have to be considered when reviewing the healthcare bill. We also have to consider that when he appointed several communist, radical and downright crazy czar's to report directly to him avoiding checks and balances of congress, all of his agendas become suspect.

The Government works for us and should oversee and not take over, as our founding father's outlined.

Gotta run, gotta run by the DMV, then over get a new Social Security card, then rush home to get my CCW license promised to me in 90 days, then trade other mail with my neighbors that made it into the wrong box.

No offense intended in my previous post to you, sorry it appeared harsh.

Take care,

Deb