What the Supreme Court's Ruling Means for Consumers: HealthCare

[GoVegan]

The dems had the white house, senate, and congress when this bill was written and passed...it is of their design

Health care reform got screwed up because conservatives, to include some blue dog democrats and an overwhelmingly majority of Republicans, refused to support reform until it became watered down and written in a way to support insurance companies. Obama and the American public should have had the balls to insist on a better plan even if that meant delaying reform for a few more years.

[sgreger1]

The dems had the white house, senate, and congress when this bill was written and passed...it is of their design

Yah, I think it should be noted that Obama worked very closely with the insurance companies who practically wrote this bill themselves. This simply can not be blamed on republicans. True, republicans did not want socialized healthcare, but the dems decided early on that they were going to drop any talk of single payer or even a public option. It was a political decision, they figured it was too controversial so they had to tone it down if they wanted this to get passed.

[sgreger1]

The Republicans and several "Blue Dog" Dems muddied up the reform bill. Public option was discussed and pursued, but the blue dog dems kept it from progressing into the final bill.

Correct, it was the democrats who screwed the pooch. The republicans knew they were going to vote against this thing as a block. Dems need to learn to work together, even with a majority they can't manage to get things their way because half of them can't agree on what they want. This is why the republicans can so easily bully the dems, because the dems are weak as a group and do not move as a unit.

[sgreger1]

Health care reform got screwed up because conservatives, to include some blue dog democrats and an overwhelmingly majority of Republicans, refused to support reform until it became watered down and written in a way to support insurance companies. Obama and the American public should have had the balls to insist on a better plan even if that meant delaying reform for a few more years.

Now that we are a few years away, do you really think that your statement still stands? That it would have been better to wait. I think he passed it when it had a chance, and did what had to be done to pass SOMETHING that even remotely looked like reform before the time became too late. I think he chose the right time. If he tried today, there would be no HCRA being discussed.

[sgreger1]

Too bad the Republiarcans messed this one up from the beginning by forcing us to accommodate to the insurance companies. The insurance companies helped to create this mess. Makes you wonder how much they had to pay to buy Congress.

In all honesty, Obama is the one who worked so closely with insurance companies to write this bill. Obama knew he had to bring them on board. That part wasn't really due to republicans. It was Obama who made concessions with the insurance companies.

[Crow]

Dems need to learn to work together, even with a majority they can't manage to get things their way because half of them can't agree on what they want. This is why the republicans can so easily bully the dems, because the dems are weak as a group and do not move as a unit.

We're a diverse party. A couple of examples: we have Socialists (such as Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont [not a Democrat 'formally', but caucuses with our party]), and we have "Third Way" Dems (such as President Bill Clinton).

There's no room for diversity (or compromise) in today's Republican party. You're either with the agenda or you're against it. President Obama has tried the "third way" approach throughout his first term, but we're not dealing with the old Republican party anymore. They simply refuse to compromise (it's "our" way, or no way).

But, it appears that the Democratic party is slowly embracing a more progressive platform, which is promising. I think the party needs to drop the "third way" approach, since it's clearly not working (not until the Republicans change their ways; which is not likely in this day and age).

[sgreger1]

We're a diverse party. A couple of examples: we have Socialists (such as Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont [not a Democrat 'formally', but caucuses with our party]), and we have "Third Way" Dems (such as President Bill Clinton).

There's no room for diversity (or compromise) in today's Republican party. You're either with the agenda or you're against it. President Obama has tried the "third way" approach throughout his first term, but we're not dealing with the old Republican party anymore. They simply refuse to compromise (it's "our" way, or no way).

But, it appears that the Democratic party is slowly embracing a more progressive platform, which is promising. I think the party needs to drop the "third way" approach, since it's clearly not working (not until the Republicans change their ways; which is not likely in this day and age).

But that's what I mean, it's all fine that they are more diverse or whatever else their reasoning is, the point is that it means they lose every time. Even with a majority in congress they can't get what they want. They are ineffective, they do not understand their enemy, they have no strategy, and are generally unorganized. The republicans have differences but are united on a single front and vote as a block, they can be in the minority and still dictate policy, even with a dem in the white house and a dem majority in the house and senate. When you are dealing with an organized foe like that, you can't sit around reveling in your "diversity", otherwise you end up losing every time.

[CoderGuy]

I think the issue that I hear the most is not that they don't want the poor not to have coverage, it's that we will have to pay for their coverage. To use an analogy that we all can relate to; let say we are all paying 5 bucks a can for snus. Now 1000 new poor people join the forum that cannot afford to buy snus, but instead of saying, "Sorry, you're really missing out" we say, "No problem, have whatever you want, we'll take care of you" and now we have to pay 10 bucks a can so they can have snus.

I know that's really generalizing the issue, but that is the comments I hear from my GOP co-workers that are so against it. One of the issues anyway. They don't think kids should be covered to 26, they don't think people with pre-existing conditions should be covered for the same price as someone that is healthy, they don't think coverage should be the same if you get sick. Of course, I am sure if ANY of these conditions affected them, they would reverse their opinions naturally. Notice I said co-workers, and not friends.

Personally, I am independent, and stay pretty center on issues. My own thoughts, I agree that a sick person should pay a little more than a healthy person, but they SHOULD at least have coverage (not be forced to spend 10x normal for a special plan just because they are sick). The opponents try and use the car insurance analogy, "if you were a safe driver, you wouldn't want to pay the same as a person that gets DUIs every day". Well, true, but the DUI person chose to do that, a sick person didn't (generally).

The simple fact is, our health care system is f**cked up, and it's largely due to the insurance and big pharma companies. Something definitely NEEDS to be done. For years everyone has talked about it, but Obama was the first to actually DO anything about it, and of course, because it's Obama, naturally, a lot of people are against it. Had Bush done exactly the same thing, it would be the Dems fighting against it.

[Bigblue1]

I think the issue that I hear the most is not that they don't want the poor not to have coverage, it's that we will have to pay for their coverage. To use an analogy that we all can relate to; let say we are all paying 5 bucks a can for snus. Now 1000 new poor people join the forum that cannot afford to buy snus, but instead of saying, "Sorry, you're really missing out" we say, "No problem, have whatever you want, we'll take care of you" and now we have to pay 10 bucks a can so they can have snus.

I know that's really generalizing the issue, but that is the comments I hear from my GOP co-workers that are so against it. One of the issues anyway. They don't think kids should be covered to 26, they don't think people with pre-existing conditions should be covered for the same price as someone that is healthy, they don't think coverage should be the same if you get sick. Of course, I am sure if ANY of these conditions affected them, they would reverse their opinions naturally. Notice I said co-workers, and not friends.

Personally, I am independent, and stay pretty center on issues. My own thoughts, I agree that a sick person should pay a little more than a healthy person, but they SHOULD at least have coverage (not be forced to spend 10x normal for a special plan just because they are sick). The opponents try and use the car insurance analogy, "if you were a safe driver, you wouldn't want to pay the same as a person that gets DUIs every day". Well, true, but the DUI person chose to do that, a sick person didn't (generally).

The simple fact is, our health care system is f**cked up, and it's largely due to the insurance and big pharma companies. Something definitely NEEDS to be done. For years everyone has talked about it, but Obama was the first to actually DO anything about it, and of course, because it's Obama, naturally, a lot of people are against it. Had Bush done exactly the same thing, it would be the Dems fighting against it.

Most people are confusing this bill with a single payer system. Which I am a proponent of. The fact of the matter is it is not. It is making everyone buy into the system and charging some and others not. It isn't even fully conceived. see here http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...284229362.html This thing will change so many times before fully implemented that it will make your heads spin. It's not a good thing to make people buy into a private industry . I'm not even sure how it could be called health care for everyone. There are people who live ultra healthy lifestyles who are gonna be grouped in with major fat asses and have to cary the same weight. (pun intended). This is just going to become another corporate takeover; this time by the insurance industry. How can you have a competitive market when everybody has to choose from a or b. Then again I guess peeps are used to it because they do it at least every 2 yrs during elections. And what is up with the IRS taking care of the collections? I'm sorry friends but this may be the death Knell of the Republic......... Or one of many.....

[sgreger1]

Most people are confusing this bill with a single payer system. Which I am a proponent of. The fact of the matter is it is not. It is making everyone buy into the system and charging some and others not.

This about sums it up for me. I also liked coderguy's analogy that for car insurance you don't want to pay the same rate as someone who gets a bunch of DUI's if you are a good driver.

[Darwin]

2700 page bill. Average of three unintended consequences per page. Sounds like fun.

[Crow]

But that's what I mean, it's all fine that they are more diverse or whatever else their reasoning is, the point is that it means they lose every time. Even with a majority in congress they can't get what they want.

You're right. The Democratic party needs to drop the centrism and turn left. It's the only way we're going to make any real progress.

[truthwolf1]

Let me get this straight . . .We’re going to be “gifted” with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don’t! Which purportedly covers at least ten million more people without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it, passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a Dumbo President who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes, for which we’ll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese , and financed by a country that’s broke!!!!!‘What the hell could possibly go wrong?’

TRUMP

[Ainkor]

Let me get this straight . . .We’re going to be “gifted” with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don’t! Which purportedly covers at least ten million more people without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn’t understand it, passed by a Congress that didn’t read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a Dumbo President who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes, for which we’ll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese , and financed by a country that’s broke!!!!!‘What the hell could possibly go wrong?’

TRUMP

I'm always suspect of anything that guy says. Check politifact (www.politifact/personalities/donald-trump)

70% of the time he's either full of shit or an out and out liar.

[truthwolf1]

I'm always suspect of anything that guy says. Check politifact (www.politifact/personalities/donald-trump)

70% of the time he's either full of shit or an out and out liar.

I think there is some truth in the Rant and totally agree with his lack of enthusiasm on the subject.