Obama Takes Center Stage in Healthcare Debate

Reader Comments
Back to article

vote it down don,t neet it

j mc donald of MD 8:59PM December 25, 2009

The reprentative who called Mr .Obama a liar should be applauded for the guts it took to tell the Truth.What congress is struggling to approve has government funded abortion in it.A public option no matter what you call it it is government controlled heath care with a provision making it illegal for anyone not to take part along with a $9600 dollor fine.A provision allowing planned parenthood(abortion mill) to set up offices in our high schools.Plus our fine representatives do not even care whats in it .Mr Kerry and Polosy they just want to approve this crap without even reading it.How far from a free society is this!
Some people have read and kept up with congress to tell the American people the truth
I referrence aclj.org

paul falone of IN 12:22PM September 30, 2009

The word "welfare" means not only that an individual "fares well," but that an entire population "fares well." The word "relief" means relieving suffering and deprivation not only of one person, but letting general populations have lives worth living. "Public Health" is an all-encompassing word." Melissa described very well a situation that existed since the Industrial Revolution when capitalism meant "speed-ups" at work & union organizers often had to fear for their lives. I was study partner for my husband when he did a course in "Time and motion study" at UCBerkeley. It was for "Efficiency Experts" who could be at work stations, timing what workers did. Many generations of workers have endured & are enduring painful health problems. By being unable to work, they lose health insurance. We all grow older every minute & the MOST IMPORTANT THING IN LIFE IS GOOD HEALTH. We need tax-paid health care not involved in any with with employers. We have socialized medicine for the military & for Congress. Because it's tax-funded, it's called "socialized.' We spent 2 billion dollars a week at the start of the Bush war in Iraq. Surely, by ending wars, we can use taxes to help us all have health care.

auradawn veirs of CA 1:39AM September 20, 2009

I agree that a healthcare system for everyone is needed; However, my vision of the plan was very different. I had hoped that the nationalization of doctors and medical facilities would be the task at hand and the individuals using the facilities would simply provide (example) their social security number which would allow the doctor/facility to bill for services. This would regulate the costs for treatment as well as drugs and would keep the treatment at the physician level.
Current insurance carriers can exist but must also adhere to the medical costs/payouts as perscribed for services to the physicians and medical facilities.
We presently have a medicare tax burden now, and adding a GMT(govermental medical tax)would not be an outrageous issue when applied in the same manor.
If private and public insurance is required to submit to one database, it should be easier to track fraud and eliminate some of the existing issues. Using the SS# would then allow tracking for each individual as we do for taxes. A yearly audit verified by the individual for services rendered may also help with control.
Putting the responsibility on the providers should also allow for substancial costs reductions to run the system, decreasing notices, publications etc.
We do need healthcare for all....and we do need to contain costs. Not an easy task. I sincerly hope that some form of

Katie Mann of NY 10:15AM August 18, 2009

I believe that everyone misses the point in this entire issue concerning government health care. Everyone talks about their money that the government is spending on OUR own citizens but no one has negated that fact that our country spends more money on other countries than here at home. How can you help other countries when your own people are suffering?
Remember Bell telephone? Of course you do not. This company was a monopoly that threatened the security of our nation's supply and demand yet everyone complained about the expensive telephone service. Our nation stepped in and "reformed" the service where others could compete with Bell and the rest is history. How dare you so called Americans put down other Americans because of their age or socio-economic status. There but for the grace of God, goes YOU!
This reform is design mainly for the blue collar worker and others that work who have a glitch of some sort in their current insurance plan. Like the gentleman that said that he worked hard and earned his money but when he becomes ill, no one in the hospital will know that and he will be treated like everyone else (no coverage for certain items means you worked in vain).

Our People First of GA 3:07PM August 17, 2009

I am really tired of hearing about how the only people thqt are without health insurance are lazy and dont work. I have worked 50-60 hours a week since age 16 but usually for small companies that did not offer insurance. My husband worked 34 years for a manufacturer where the temperature was over 100 degree and the work entailed heavy lifting then he had an accident and is no longer able to work. We lost our coverage since we couldnt afford the premiums as he cant be left alone and it creates a situation where it would cost more than I make to pay a caregiver while i work. I now run an adult family home and take care of 3 people with special needs and am still without health insurance mainly because I cannot find an individual plan that will even begin to cover what my husbands old employer's plan did for a reasonable rate. I cannot afford to pay $500 a month for a plan that has a $5000 deductible and doesnt cover prescriptions and many other things.
Healthcare reform is not only for the lazy, it is for the small entrepuer and the middle income people that have few choices concerning healthcare. It will open the door to healthcare for many that it was closed to before and will create a situation of competition amongst insurers that will benefit all.

Melissa of WI 5:08PM August 16, 2009

bare with me as i explain the point of view from a middle class, hard working person. i come from a blue collar family that has worked hard to get through college so i can live and provide a better life for myelf and my family. i was tought to put my time in, work hard, and do the right thing. now as i get older, i see more and more of my "hard earned" money going towards programs that do not directly effect me or my family (minus taxes for schools, roads, etc). i pay a lot of money for my health care, but i do so knowing that if me or one of my loved ones were sick, they would be taken care of. i do not collect unemployement while working off the books, like many people do these days.
you can see where i am going with this: the system that is in place has flaws and citizens can take advatage of the system and hard working americans have to foot the bill for this. i would like to see the government become less involved and enable the hard working american to get ahead by taking care of thier own family, not the lazy and complacent american. health care is a necessity and a responsible person will go out and find a good job that offers health care - so their family is taken care of.
i want nothing for free, but at the same time i do not want to pay for someone else to sit and take advantage of my hard work. i have said a lot without really saying anything or providing a resolution. All i know is that every person shouldnt recieve a trophy for just showing up. the people who work the hardest and do the right things should be the ones benefiting from their hard work...

Rickie of NY 9:55AM August 16, 2009

First off, had you gone to college you would have learned in Economics, (if you took the class) about two very important concepts. Supply and Demand, and Limited Resources.
The government, contrary to what democrates believe, is limited. It's resources are limited. When supplies (resources are scarce and limited) how is the government going to meet overwhelming demand?
Someone is going to have to make the tough call. That someone is the government since they are the ones paying for it.
Let's put it this way in a purely hypothetical example. Let's say it would cost the government $10 billion to provide every American's health care need. But the government only has $6 billion available. What are the solutions? The current flavor has been to push the cost onto future generations. But that's not a viable option anymore since our great grandchildren yet to be born have already been mortgaged.
So the only available option is to ration. You're an elderly woman 5 years from the grave, you're live value is gone. No soup for you . . . to borrow a Seinfeld quote. You have a child born with an expensive and life threatening, long term ailment. The government is going to ration and say, "money down the drain. No soup for you." You were in a horrific accident and you'll never walk or work again and the forecasted medical cost for your treatment could never be returned in taxes. "Sorry, no soup for you". You are 55 and discover you have a curable, but expensive cancer. "No soup for you." Who get's the soup, the 17 year old through 45 year old I'd guess.
I get your point, though, about the insurance industry. Here's a novel concept. Why not regulate the insurance providers? Obama has a Czar for everything under the sun. Why not an Insurance Czar? Or, if that doesn't work, let's make it easier to sue Insurance providers.
Here's another reason this is a bad idea. Since the begining of time people have gotten sick and die. In fact, there are a few things you can be certain about in life. Taxes and death are two of them.
So, let's get over the believe that everyone deserves to live forever. If someone believes that heaven and earth should be moved to keep their carcass among the living then it's their choice and their responsibility to figure out how to make that happen--Not the government's and certainly not mine our yours.

david of ID 4:44AM August 16, 2009

As a former insurance agent licensed to sell Life, Health and Accident insurance I can tell you I had to leave the profession after I saw how corrupt it was being a man of morals. We are all being taken to the bank by these companies and they need to be investigated.
And calling this recent attempt to change the old ways Socialism (Just like people called medicare and medicaid socialism in the 60's) is over the top. The government can do what private insurance does for 30% of the money, which I learned in college, and "If" 2/3 of the money proposed to be used for the reform comes from programs that will be terminated due to wasteful spending I am for it. Besides, each has room for improvement like everything but I am pretty happy with our postal service, schools, Firemen, and police all of which could be called socialist with the way that word is being abused now day's.
One last thing. Why are so many Americans giving our president such a hard time when he has eight years of mistakes to fix. The former president's lack of leadership on this issue and others helped get us where we are today.

Chris of OH 11:08PM August 15, 2009

I would like to point out that contrary to Barara Lynch's comment, the US is no longer an industrialized nation. I think we should be discussing and correcting this minor issue first because I just cannot figure out how any of nobama's programs are being financed...of course except by the middle class tax support as he gives us the middle finger salute - classy fraud that he is.

Max Doral of FL 10:52AM August 15, 2009