Health Care Reform

  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #46
Are you kidding me? You provided the link yesterday! :lol: Remember....draft bill here

Let me make it a little more obvious:
IT IS IN THE
BILL STARTING ON PAGE 93 HOW GOVERNMENT MANDATES INSURANCE
You posted a link to my post. Page 93 of that draft bill says nothing about anything you are talking about.

Here is what is on page 93 of that document:

‘‘(e) STATE DETERMINATIONS.—As a condition of its
13 State plan under title XIX of the Social Security Act, and
14 the receipt of any Federal financial assistance under sec
15 tion 1903(a) of such Act, a State shall assist in making
16 eligibility determinations under this title in accordance
17 with this section.
18 ‘‘(f) EXCLUSION FROM INCOME.—Amounts received
19 by an individual under this section shall not be considered
20 income for purposes of making eligibility determinations
21 based on income or assets with respect to any other Fed
22 eral program.

Now, go back and find the section in any of the bills that say this:

QUOTE (Freedom4all @ Aug 23 2009, 10:19 AM) *
Obamas whole healthcare insurance reform debate mandates the government to basically run it, dictate terms etc
 
You posted a link to my post. Page 93 of that draft bill says nothing about anything you are talking about.

Here is what is on page 93 of that document:



Now, go back and find the section in any of the bills that say this:
Starting on page 93, keep reading, it dictates how insurance coverage is to be structured. Plain and simple.
 
What happen to this (broken) promise on hope and change?

President Obama, Where Are Those C-SPAN Cameras?

Flash-back to the 2008 campaign trail: Then-candidate Barack Obama promised a new level of transparency in government -- particularly concerning the sausage-making that would produce any health care reform legislation. "We'll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN," he said, "so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies."

Instead they attempted to shove it thru without any public review. And they wonder why people are peeved? :blink:
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #51
Haha, :lol: nice try when painted into a corner again, exposed your lies once again.
Just post anything to support your claim.

What is funny is that first you said "it is on page 93". Then you said :Starting on page 93, keep reading, it dictates how insurance coverage is to be structured. Plain and simple." Of course, that has nothing to do with your original claim:

QUOTE (Freedom4all @ Aug 23 2009, 10:19 AM) *
Obamas whole healthcare insurance reform debate mandates the government to basically run it, dictate terms etc

But the first passage on page 94 is this:

94
1 ‘‘(h) NO FEDERAL FUNDING.—Nothing in this Act
2 shall allow Federal payments for individuals who are not
3 lawfully present in the United States.

See page 94 in the draft bill.
 
Just post anything to support your claim.

What is funny is that first you said "it is on page 93". Then you said :Starting on page 93, keep reading, it dictates how insurance coverage is to be structured. Plain and simple." Of course, that has nothing to do with your original claim:



But the first passage on page 94 is this:



See page 94 in the draft bill.
Keep reading techie...keep reading :lol:
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #53
Keep reading techie...keep reading :lol:
I have read all of the proposed bills from all of the committees.

It is obvious that you have not, since you continue to make false claims as to what is actually in them. And when confronted with it, as most of the just say no crowd, you cannot produce any evidence to support your claims.

Keep trying though. You make it easy since the truth is easy to prove... :rolleyes:
 
I have read all of the proposed bills from all of the committees.

It is obvious that you have not, since you continue to make false claims as to what is actually in them. And when confronted with it, as most of the just say no crowd, you cannot produce any evidence to support your claims.

Keep trying though. You make it easy since the truth is easy to prove... :rolleyes:
Too funny, maybe you should try to persuade your democratic compatriots with the same vigor you use with me. Its them who are imploding this healthcare issue. :lol:
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #55
As the nation ponders government run health care it's not necessary to look at Canada. All one need do is to walk through a VA Hospital and you can view your Health Care future in real time and it ain't always pretty folks.

My dad passed in a VA hospital when he was 39. Imagine being a 13 year old boy who lost his Dad picking up the mail at the post office and finding 6 get well cards with the following.

"Return, EXPIRED in ICU" emblazoned upon the envelope.

Or the time I was helping this older gentleman make copies who fought in the Phillipines and was a survivor of the Bataan Death March copying his file to appeal his denial of benefit by the VA saying the bone spurs in his back were not a result of his military service. He showed me the scars on his back from the Japaneese whips which the VA said had nothing to do with his illness.

My Dad may have "Expired in ICU" but the birth of my Libertarian views began that day at the Post Office in 1968.

Beware VA quality health Care may be in your future so be careful what you wish for.
Sorry to hear about your experience with your Father. I hope that your story it is out of the ordinary.

My Father-in-Law died from liver/heart failure. He was exposed to agent orange in Vietnam and was also a printer/pressman by trade after Vietnam. The VA gave him the benefit of the doubt and called his liver failure agent orange based (they did not know for sure it was that or the exposure to the printing chemicals). He received VA treatment for almost 40 years.

I used to take him to the VA for his treatments in Atlanta. He was always treated well. The center was old, but the people were always very friendly and he was always able to get in when he needed. He never had any problems getting Rx's or appointments. He died a few years ago.

My Dad now has Tri-Care from his military service (Retired Navy Captain). He is happy with that, coupled with his (and Mom's) medicare.

That said, the health reform proposals have only offered a public option for those who do not have care through an employer. If their is a public option, nobody at this point even knows what form that may take. It may be contracting out to current health care providers. Nowhere is it proposed that the government is going to force anyone to take government run health care of course their is still Medicare). If they do end up in the health care business, I am quite sure nobody will drag you into a government run office and force you to get better...
 
I'm curious here.............you argue over Senate versions of which have to meld to one final product and be voted on and passed or rejected by Senate.
The only final ready to vote version I know of is from the House which if passed or rejected will go to Senate for a combining/rejecting session between both houses after Senate has completed their final draft.....so all this hair splitting is moot unless one wants to argue over House. :blink:

At least that's how I see it.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #57
I'm curious here.............you argue over Senate versions of which have to meld to one final product and be voted on and passed or rejected by Senate.
The only final ready to vote version I know of is from the House which if passed or rejected will go to Senate for a combining/rejecting session between both houses after Senate has completed their final draft.....so all this hair splitting is moot unless one wants to argue over House. :blink:

At least that's how I see it.
The key to all of this is going to be the conference committee. They will be the ones to battle it out over what is reconciled in the final package sent to the President.
 
The key to all of this is going to be the conference committee. They will be the ones to battle it out over what is reconciled in the final package sent to the President.


So why spike the BP here on mundane issues?

I can see argument on finals from both houses as what needs to be added/removed or modified.....but all this discourse over ??
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #59
.....but all this discourse over ??
I will not let false statements go unchecked.

There is far too much of that in this debate.

You will be called to prove them.

You cannot shout me down here. The truth is the truth, and is very easy to prove.

False statements catch up with you in the end and lessen credibility.
 
I will not let false statements go unchecked.

There is far too much of that in this debate.

You will be called to prove them.

You cannot shout me down here. The truth is the truth, and is very easy to prove.

False statements catch up with you in the end and lessen credibility.

You will be called to prove them as well, oh but wait...you cant, and dont. :lol:
 
Back
Top