• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Obamacare originally a Republican Idea

Help Support Ranchers.net:

A

Anonymous

Guest
Lose to Win?


Yesterday the Supreme Court took up the case of whether all or part of the Affordable Care Act passed by Congress 2 years ago is constitutional. Twenty six states, all with Republican Attorneys General or governors, have filed suit claiming it is unconstitutional. The great irony of these suits is that the whole idea was not invented by President Obama (ObamaCare) or even Mitt Romney (RomneyCare). It's origin goes back to President Richard Nixon, who saw that many people did not have adequate health care and wanted a solution, albeit a Republican solution. His plan had an employer mandate, forcing every business to buy health care for its employees, not unlike ObamaCare, that forces individuals to do the same. Later, the very conservative Heritage Foundation modified Nixon's plan and proposed that individuals, rather than businesses, be forced to buy insurance from private companies. For decades, this was the Republican response to Democratic attempts to expand Medicare to cover everyone. Only after Obama pushed it through did the Republicans begin objecting to what was, in reality, their own plan.


On the face of it, the health industry constitutes about 18% of GDP and operates in all states, so there is little doubt that Congress can regulate the industry under the clause of the constitution giving Congress the power to regulate commerce among the states. What is contested, however, is whether Congress has the power to force individuals to buy a product (health insurance) from a private company or face a fine. Although Nixon never got the plan passed, he certainly never doubted its constitutionality, but times have changed, as has the Republican Party.


There are precedents all over the map concerning this. First, RomneyCare forces residents of Massachusetts to buy health insurance or pay a fine and this law has never been successfully challenged. However, some people argue that while the states can force people to buy insurance or wear seat belts or eat broccoli, the federal government cannot. Other people argue that since caring for uninsured people costs the country about $116 billion a year in medical costs, and these costs are foisted indirectly on everyone, both through taxes that pick up some of the bills and higher insurance premiums that pick up the rest, then the federal government's attempt to push the costs back to the people generating them surely falls under the heading regulating interstate commerce. Nevertheless, many people strongly object to the federal government's ordering them to do anything, hence the lawsuits.

A precedent that may weigh heavily on some justices is Gonzales v. Raich (2005). In this case, the Supreme Court decided that the constitution's commerce clause gives Congress the power to prohibit people from growing medicinal marijuana for their own personal use, even in states (e.g., California) where such production is legal. Many legal experts have said that if growing a product that is not part of any commerce, (i.e., is not for sale anywhere), is interstate commerce, then surely regulating 18% of the economy is within Congress' power to regulate commerce as well.

The Court could punt on making a decision at all now by declaring the penalty for not being insured to be a tax and then using an 1867 law saying that no one can bring suit about a tax until they have actually paid it, something that no one will be required to do until April 15, 2015. However, initial questioning from the justices yesterday seems to indicate that they do not consider the penalty to be a tax and do not consider the 1867 law applicable here. Their reasoning seems to be that the primary goal of a tax is to raise revenue and that is surely not the case here.

Ultimately, the justices could do any of several things. They could strike down the entire law and tell Congress to go do its homework better or they could strike down just the individual mandate and leave the rest intact. In the latter case, if the provision prohibiting insurance companies from refusing to insure people with preexisting conditions is maintained, large numbers of people will undoubtedly refrain from buying insurance until they are seriously ill, in which case the pool of people paying premiums will contain disproportionately many sick people and premiums will skyrocket. In fact, under these conditions, many insurance companies may just decide to get out of the health insurance business altogether, leading to a complete meltdown of the system.

If the entire health insurance system collapses, Congress will come under enormous pressure to do something. With an individual mandate impossible, its options will be limited. One choice would be to do nothing and continue to take the heat. A second (but unlikely) choice is full socialized medicine, which the U.S. already has in the form of the Veterans Administration, where the government owns and runs the hospitals and the doctors are government employees. Congress could simply pass a law allowing everyone to get free care at a (hugely expanded) V.A. hospital system and then raise taxes to pay for it.

Another option would be socialized insurance (like Canada has) by allowing everyone to buy into Medicare, but keeping the hospitals and doctors private. Only the insurance companies would be eliminated.

A final--and draconian--option would be to let people choose to buy or not buy insurance, as they prefer, but repeal the law saying that hospitals must provide emergency care to anyone who shows up. In this scenario, when an uninsured person showed up at an emergency room, the first question following the one about insurance would be: "Visa or MasterCard?" People who didn't have insurance and couldn't pay would simply be turned away as a consequence of their own decision not to be insured. It probably wouldn't take too many news stories about uninsured people dying inside or just outside hospitals before most people got the word that having insurance was a good idea. A variant of this version would be for hospitals to treat uninsured children but not adults. Still another variant would be to let people who opted out of insurance to later announce they wanted back in, but make them wait several years before getting it, forcing them to cover their own bills in the interim.

If the Court says the law is constitutional except for the penalty, Congress could (but won't) restructure it as an incentive by adding two lines near the end of form 1040.

44a. Add your tax from line 44 to $700 (health tax) and write it here.
44b. If you have health insurance, subtract your $700 health insurance credit from line 44a and write it here.
So by making everyone pay the tax and then offering an equal credit for people who have insurance, it no longer becomes a mandate to get insurance, but you get a credit for it if you have it. The tax code is riddled with optional credits, including lines 47 through 53 on form 1040 and dozens of others on different forms. There is no doubt that Congress can offer deductions or credits for anything it deems worthy. In fact, taking the tax credit route might have been better from the start but it would have involved a tax increase for everyone, which probably would have made it harder to swallow.

Putting aside for the moment the health consequences of the Supreme Court's decision, let us look at the political aspects. It is well known that the justices read newspapers and watch television. They know this issue is very partisan. Chief Justice John Roberts, in particular, is known to be concerned about having the public respect the Court. A 5-4 decision striking down all or part of the ACA, with all the Republican appointees voting as a bloc to kill the law and all the Democratic appointees voting as a bloc to sustain it, would make the Court look extremely partisan, and not at all like an umpire, just calling balls and strikes as he has put it before. Respect for the Court would undoubtedly hit an all-time low, and Roberts has to factor this consideration into his vote.

Another issue that everyone is aware of is how the decision, probably to be handed down in June, will affect the 2012 elections. Ironically, this is where the loser will probably win. If the Court strikes down the mandate or the whole law, Democrats will be incensed at judicial activism and redouble their efforts to make sure Obama is reelected so he gets to fill any Supreme Court vacancies that come up in the next four years. Considering Justice Ginsburg's age and health, her possible retirement (or death) in the next 4 years has to be taken into account. Furthermore, Republicans will relax, since they will no longer have to elect Romney to sign a law repealing the ACA: it will be already gone. Thus a clear decision to kill the law will help the Democrats.

The reverse is also true. If the Court says Congress was within its authority to pass the law, the only way for the Republicans to get rid of it is to take control of the White House, the House, and 60 seats in the senate. The Republican base will move heaven and earth to achieve these goals.

Finally, as usual, be careful what you wish for. You might get it. Many of the same people who hate the individual mandate also hate Social Security. They want to replace it with a law forcing (i.e., mandating) people to buy a pension or investments from a private insurance company, bank, or broker instead. If the Supreme Court says the government can't force people to buy health insurance from a private company, it is not likely to say the government can force people to buy a pension plan from a private company, thus derailing a major goal of the conservative movement.

Again, none of this is a secret to the justices. The four Democratic appointees are very likely to vote for the law's constitutionality. Clarence Thomas (and probably Samuel Alito) are likely to vote to strike it down. The other three, John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy are surely going to think hard to find a way to out of this mess. Roberts cares about the Court's reputation and probably does not want a 5-4 decision along partisan lines if he can avoid it. Scalia and Kennedy voted with the majority in Gonzales v. Raich, so if they vote against the ACA, they are going to be pilloried for saying that growing marijuana for personal medical use is interstate commerce but something that affects 18% of the economy is not.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
I didn't read your article Oldtimer but I have two questions for you. If the affordable care act was a Republican idea way back in the days of Nixon why was it not passed by them while they were in power? Could it be as they knew it would be struck down as UNCONSTITUTIONAL if they trying to force everyone to BUY something just because they are born?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
So if Nixon's plan was the same as obama's, would Kennedy have said the same thing about obama's plan as he did Nixon's?


Senator Edward “Teddy” Kennedy of Massachusetts, attacked Nixon on the grounds that he was offering a deal that would see the insurance companies benefit.

Read more at Suite101: The Nixon-Kennedy Health Care Plan: How Richard Nixon and Edward Kennedy Worked For American Health Care | Suite101.com http://mcroberts-robert.suite101.com/the-nixonkennedy-healthcare-plan-a143121#ixzz1qNqdPTZO
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
OT gets biatch-slapped again. Looks as though he'd get tired of it one day? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Again, none of this is a secret to the justices. The four Democratic appointees are very likely to vote for the law's constitutionality. Clarence Thomas (and probably Samuel Alito) are likely to vote to strike it down. The other three, John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy are surely going to think hard to find a way to out of this mess. Roberts cares about the Court's reputation and probably does not want a 5-4 decision along partisan lines if he can avoid it. Scalia and Kennedy voted with the majority in Gonzales v. Raich, so if they vote against the ACA, they are going to be pilloried for saying that growing marijuana for personal medical use is interstate commerce but something that affects 18% of the economy is not.

was there any part of that decision that forced/mandated every American to grow marijuana?
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
4,364
Reaction score
0
Location
Heart of Texas
History of health care reform in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_health_care_reform_in_the_United_States
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
3,173
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
That makes sense to me.

When was the last time a democrat came up with an idea?

I made a mistake and bought that 6.0 ford diesel. That was a bad decision. I have had a few other bad ideas that I did not follow through with. Maybe I should take better care on expressing my thoughts. Who knows what democrat might implement the bad choices?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
cartoon---03-28-12_small.jpg


The Republican Party of years past much better represented the populace of the whole nation- as well as identifying and working to abate the top costs to the voters and nation as a whole....
They long ago recognized that continued rising of health care costs and health care insurance to the GDP would eventually bankrupt this country...And most agreed- that "doing nothing was not an option"...

Even GW saw it- and ran with it as his #1 campaign issue- and one of the main reasons I voted for him was I thought with a Repub controlled Congress he would get it done------- but sadly he decided after being elected that nationbuilding- and spending money like a drunken sailor in camelflea invested sandpits was more fun..... :(

But in the partisan world of today- where getting re-elected to a high paying/high perks/high pocket lobbyiest $'s job is more important than doing anything for the betterment of the nation- they would rather sell out the country and see it go tits up...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
cartoon---03-28-12_small.jpg


The Republican Party of years past much better represented the populace of the whole nation- as well as identifying and working to abate the top costs to the voters and nation as a whole....
They long ago recognized that continued rising of health care costs and health care insurance to the GDP would eventually bankrupt this country...And most agreed- that "doing nothing was not an option"...

Even GW saw it- and ran with it as his #1 campaign issue- and one of the main reasons I voted for him was I thought with a Repub controlled Congress he would get it done------- but sadly he decided after being elected that nationbuilding- and spending money like a drunken sailor in camelflea invested sandpits was more fun..... :(

But in the partisan world of today- where getting re-elected to a high paying/high perks/high pocket lobbyiest $'s job is more important than doing anything for the betterment of the nation- they would rather sell out the country and see it go tits up...


obama refused to workk with the Republicans and even take a look at their plan.


House GOP Solutions Group Outlines Health Care Plan
to Increase Affordability, Accessibility, Availability
Commonsense Health Care Reform to Lower Costs and Increase
Access and Quality at a Price Our Country Can Afford
Republicans believe there are a number of potential areas for common ground to work
with President Obama to improve health care for all Americans. Republicans are
promoting commonsense reforms that make health care more affordable, reduce the
number of uninsured Americans, and increase quality at a price our country can afford---
while making sure that Americans who like their health care coverage can keep it.
The House Republican Health Care Solutions Group has been working for months on a
plan, listening to the American people, talking to doctors and patients, collecting input,
and studying and debating ideas. This process has resulted in the broad outline of a health
care reform plan that the solutions group hopes will receive bipartisan support.
The health care reforms outlined are designed to:
1. Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American,
regardless of pre-existing health conditions.
2. Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run health care plan
that would: a) eliminate the health care coverage that more than 100 million
Americans currently receive through their job; b) limit your choice of doctors and
medical treatment options; and c) result in the federal government taking control
of your health care.
3. Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans
the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs.
4. Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not
government bureaucrats.
5. Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease
management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for lifethreatening
diseases.
Making Health Care More Affordable for All Americans:
More Americans will gain access to quality health care once its costs are brought under
control. The first step in lowering health care costs is to eliminate the unnecessary overspending
in our current system.
Doctors order unnecessary tests to avoid being sued and every insurance company has its
own codes and forms patients and doctors need to fill out. The Chief Counsel to the
Health and Human Services Inspector General even went so far as to say that “building a
Medicare fraud scam is far safer than dealing in crack or dealing in stolen cars, and it’s
far more lucrative.”
To lower the costs of health care, the Republican plan:
• Brings greater fairness to the tax code by extending tax savings to those who
currently do not have employer-provided insurance but purchase health insurance on
their own. This provision would provide an “above the line” deduction that is equal
to the cost of an individual’s or family’s insurance premiums.
• Provides immediate substantial financial assistance, through new refundable and
advanceable tax credits, to low- and modest-income Americans.
• Recognizes that many Americans who have not yet hit retirement age but may be
changing jobs or have lost a job often face higher health care costs. To help those
aged 55 to 64, the plan increases support for pre- and early-retirees with low- and
modest-incomes.
• Recognizes that one of the largest obstacles for many small businesses when it comes to
retaining current employees or creating new jobs is the cost of health insurance. The
plan allows states, small businesses, associations, and other organizations to band
together and offer health insurance at lower costs.
• Implements comprehensive medical liability reform that will reduce costly,
unnecessary defensive medicine practiced by doctors trying to protect themselves
from overzealous trial lawyers.
• Provides Medicare and Medicaid with additional authority and resources to stop
waste, fraud, and abuse that costs taxpayers billions of dollars every year.
• Creates incentives to save now for future and long-term health care needs by
improving health savings accounts and flexible spending arrangements as well as
creating new tax benefits to offset the cost of long-term care premiums.
• Gives financial help to caregivers who provide in-home care for a loved one.
Making Health Care More Available & Accessible for All Americans:
The Republican plan reduces the number of uninsured Americans by wisely targeting this
population and helping Americans keep health care coverage regardless of a change in or
loss of a job.
To expand availability and accessibility of health care coverage, the Republican
plan:
• Makes it easier for Americans to keep health care coverage regardless of a change in
or loss of a job.
• Encourages states to create a Universal Access Program by establishing and/or
reforming existing programs to guarantee all Americans, regardless of pre-existing
conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable coverage.
• Strengthens employer-provided health coverage by helping the 10 million uninsured
Americans who are eligible, but not enrolled in, an employer-sponsored plan get
health care coverage. The plan does this by encouraging employers to move to optout,
rather than opt-in rules.
• Helps employers offer health care coverage to their workers by reducing their
administrative costs through a new small business tax credit.
• Recognizes that not all high school and college graduates are able to find a job that
offers health care coverage after graduation. By allowing dependents to remain on
their parents’ health policies up to the age of 25, the number of uninsured Americans
could be reduced by up to 7 million.
• Provides flexibility to Medicaid and SCHIP beneficiaries by allowing them to apply
the value of their benefit to a health plan that better meets their needs than the onesize-
fits-all government program.
Promoting Healthy Living and Quality Care for All Americans Now and
Tomorrow:
Innovations in treatment and access to quality health care information are critical to
ensuring Americans receive the best possible care. It’s no secret that patients in other
countries are often denied care or die waiting to get access to the top treatments.
To promote prevention and wellness while ensuring every American has access to
high quality health care, the Republican plan:
• Promotes prevention and wellness by giving employers and insurers greater flexibility
to financially reward employees who seek to achieve or maintain a healthy weight,
quit smoking, and manage chronic illnesses like diabetes.
• Rewards high-quality care, instead of encouraging health care providers to order more
and unnecessary services.
• Uses new and innovative treatment programs to better coordinate care between health
care providers, ensuring that those with chronic disease receive the care they need and
do not continue to fall through the cracks.
• Encourages the creation of health plan finders to provide patients with the tools to
easily find the right health plan that best meets their needs.
• Gives patients access to health care information so that they can identify and select
health care providers who deliver high-quality care at a lower cost.
• Makes health care more convenient by eliminating bureaucratic red tape to expand
access to Community Health Centers that are so critical to underserved areas, both in
large cities and in rural America.
• Encourages home care and independence for patients rather than forcing individuals
into institutionalized settings.
• Promotes seniors' access to the doctors they need by modernizing Medicare
reimbursements.
• Provides incentives to physicians who enter the field of primary care, helping to
ensure all Americans have access to the doctors they need.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/GOPHealthPlan_061709.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
cartoon---03-28-12_small.jpg


The Republican Party of years past much better represented the populace of the whole nation- as well as identifying and working to abate the top costs to the voters and nation as a whole....
They long ago recognized that continued rising of health care costs and health care insurance to the GDP would eventually bankrupt this country...And most agreed- that "doing nothing was not an option"...

Even GW saw it- and ran with it as his #1 campaign issue- and one of the main reasons I voted for him was I thought with a Repub controlled Congress he would get it done------- but sadly he decided after being elected that nationbuilding- and spending money like a drunken sailor in camelflea invested sandpits was more fun..... :(

But in the partisan world of today- where getting re-elected to a high paying/high perks/high pocket lobbyiest $'s job is more important than doing anything for the betterment of the nation- they would rather sell out the country and see it go tits up...


obama refused to workk with the Republicans and even take a look at their plan.


House GOP Solutions Group Outlines Health Care Plan
to Increase Affordability, Accessibility, Availability
Commonsense Health Care Reform to Lower Costs and Increase
Access and Quality at a Price Our Country Can Afford
Republicans believe there are a number of potential areas for common ground to work
with President Obama to improve health care for all Americans. Republicans are
promoting commonsense reforms that make health care more affordable, reduce the
number of uninsured Americans, and increase quality at a price our country can afford---
while making sure that Americans who like their health care coverage can keep it.
The House Republican Health Care Solutions Group has been working for months on a
plan, listening to the American people, talking to doctors and patients, collecting input,
and studying and debating ideas. This process has resulted in the broad outline of a health
care reform plan that the solutions group hopes will receive bipartisan support.
The health care reforms outlined are designed to:
1. Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American,
regardless of pre-existing health conditions.
2. Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run health care plan
that would: a) eliminate the health care coverage that more than 100 million
Americans currently receive through their job; b) limit your choice of doctors and
medical treatment options; and c) result in the federal government taking control
of your health care.
3. Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans
the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs.
4. Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not
government bureaucrats.
5. Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease
management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for lifethreatening
diseases.
Making Health Care More Affordable for All Americans:
More Americans will gain access to quality health care once its costs are brought under
control. The first step in lowering health care costs is to eliminate the unnecessary overspending
in our current system.
Doctors order unnecessary tests to avoid being sued and every insurance company has its
own codes and forms patients and doctors need to fill out. The Chief Counsel to the
Health and Human Services Inspector General even went so far as to say that “building a
Medicare fraud scam is far safer than dealing in crack or dealing in stolen cars, and it’s
far more lucrative.”
To lower the costs of health care, the Republican plan:
• Brings greater fairness to the tax code by extending tax savings to those who
currently do not have employer-provided insurance but purchase health insurance on
their own. This provision would provide an “above the line” deduction that is equal
to the cost of an individual’s or family’s insurance premiums.
• Provides immediate substantial financial assistance, through new refundable and
advanceable tax credits, to low- and modest-income Americans.
• Recognizes that many Americans who have not yet hit retirement age but may be
changing jobs or have lost a job often face higher health care costs. To help those
aged 55 to 64, the plan increases support for pre- and early-retirees with low- and
modest-incomes.
• Recognizes that one of the largest obstacles for many small businesses when it comes to
retaining current employees or creating new jobs is the cost of health insurance. The
plan allows states, small businesses, associations, and other organizations to band
together and offer health insurance at lower costs.
• Implements comprehensive medical liability reform that will reduce costly,
unnecessary defensive medicine practiced by doctors trying to protect themselves
from overzealous trial lawyers.
• Provides Medicare and Medicaid with additional authority and resources to stop
waste, fraud, and abuse that costs taxpayers billions of dollars every year.
• Creates incentives to save now for future and long-term health care needs by
improving health savings accounts and flexible spending arrangements as well as
creating new tax benefits to offset the cost of long-term care premiums.
• Gives financial help to caregivers who provide in-home care for a loved one.
Making Health Care More Available & Accessible for All Americans:
The Republican plan reduces the number of uninsured Americans by wisely targeting this
population and helping Americans keep health care coverage regardless of a change in or
loss of a job.
To expand availability and accessibility of health care coverage, the Republican
plan:
• Makes it easier for Americans to keep health care coverage regardless of a change in
or loss of a job.
• Encourages states to create a Universal Access Program by establishing and/or
reforming existing programs to guarantee all Americans, regardless of pre-existing
conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable coverage.
• Strengthens employer-provided health coverage by helping the 10 million uninsured
Americans who are eligible, but not enrolled in, an employer-sponsored plan get
health care coverage. The plan does this by encouraging employers to move to optout,
rather than opt-in rules.
• Helps employers offer health care coverage to their workers by reducing their
administrative costs through a new small business tax credit.
• Recognizes that not all high school and college graduates are able to find a job that
offers health care coverage after graduation. By allowing dependents to remain on
their parents’ health policies up to the age of 25, the number of uninsured Americans
could be reduced by up to 7 million.
• Provides flexibility to Medicaid and SCHIP beneficiaries by allowing them to apply
the value of their benefit to a health plan that better meets their needs than the onesize-
fits-all government program.
Promoting Healthy Living and Quality Care for All Americans Now and
Tomorrow:
Innovations in treatment and access to quality health care information are critical to
ensuring Americans receive the best possible care. It’s no secret that patients in other
countries are often denied care or die waiting to get access to the top treatments.
To promote prevention and wellness while ensuring every American has access to
high quality health care, the Republican plan:
• Promotes prevention and wellness by giving employers and insurers greater flexibility
to financially reward employees who seek to achieve or maintain a healthy weight,
quit smoking, and manage chronic illnesses like diabetes.
• Rewards high-quality care, instead of encouraging health care providers to order more
and unnecessary services.
• Uses new and innovative treatment programs to better coordinate care between health
care providers, ensuring that those with chronic disease receive the care they need and
do not continue to fall through the cracks.
• Encourages the creation of health plan finders to provide patients with the tools to
easily find the right health plan that best meets their needs.
• Gives patients access to health care information so that they can identify and select
health care providers who deliver high-quality care at a lower cost.
• Makes health care more convenient by eliminating bureaucratic red tape to expand
access to Community Health Centers that are so critical to underserved areas, both in
large cities and in rural America.
• Encourages home care and independence for patients rather than forcing individuals
into institutionalized settings.
• Promotes seniors' access to the doctors they need by modernizing Medicare
reimbursements.
• Provides incentives to physicians who enter the field of primary care, helping to
ensure all Americans have access to the doctors they need.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/GOPHealthPlan_061709.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody

If you had watched the hearings- over 150+amendments and platform ideas introduced by Republicans were included in the current Health Care-- including Senator Coburn (an MD's) amendment to have senior citizens be advised on living wills and give credence to living wills for the Doctors to follow (which could save healthcare providers $Millions)-- which was immediately identified by Palin and the rightwingernuts in their bias as " Throw Gramma in the Coffin" ...

Why did GW- with his Republican controlled Congress not write their own Healthcare/Health Insurance law when they were in control :???: All those same Congressmen kept saying "doing nothing was not an option"...But they did nothing under GW- even tho prior to GW bringing on the Iraq War- and the Bush Bust-health care and health care insurance costs were the #1 concern of the voters...

But I guess in ways GW succeeded- because after bringing on the Bush Bust- just keeping a roof over your head- and food on the table took precedence over healthcare for the majority of the country... :p :wink: :lol:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
If you had watched the hearings- over 150+amendments and platform ideas introduced by Republicans were included in the current Health Care-- including Senator Coburn (an MD's) amendment to have senior citizens be advised on living wills and give credence to living wills for the Doctors to follow (which could save healthcare providers $Millions)-- which was immediately identified by Palin and the rightwingernuts in their bias as " Throw Gramma in the Coffin" ...

Why did GW- with his Republican controlled Congress not write their own Healthcare/Health Insurance law when they were in control :???: All those same Congressmen kept saying "doing nothing was not an option"...But they did nothing under GW...


So Repubs. did care, when offering the amendments, or they didn't, which is it?
 

jingo2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
907
Reaction score
0
Mike said:
OT gets biatch-slapped again. Looks as though he'd get tired of it one day? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


You just called Tam a biatch!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
Are you saying Tam is oldtimer :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: You are more confused than ever kolo=jingo=lulu=allie
 

Latest posts

Top