The name calling, I think, is really out of line. How is it decided what's funny and what's rude? Apparently anything said about people at tea parties is considered funny. I, personally, just don't understand the need for it.
Printable View
The name calling, I think, is really out of line. How is it decided what's funny and what's rude? Apparently anything said about people at tea parties is considered funny. I, personally, just don't understand the need for it.
http://gopleader.gov/News/DocumentSi...umentID=145859
gopleader.gov
Boehner
Contact:
Reality Check: Text of Dem Health Care Bill, President’s Senior Advisors Refute His ‘No Tax Increase’ Claim
Bill Text Calls Individual Mandates a “Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage;” Presidential Candidate Obama Called Them a “Very Harsh Penalty”
Washington, Sep 21 -
Once again, President Obama’s health care rhetoric doesn’t match the reality of congressional Democrats’ costly government takeover of health care. On ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos yesterday the President repeatedly insisted that requiring Americans to buy government-approved health care does not constitute a tax increase, yet that is exactly what it says in the 1,018-page House bill. What’s more, the idea that an individual mandate is a tax on working families has been confirmed in earlier writings by senior Obama Administration officials. All told, H.R. 3200 contains roughly $820 billion in tax increases, according to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) called on President Obama to “be straight with the American people” and admit that his health care plan requires significant tax increases:
“Once again, the President’s health care rhetoric doesn’t match reality. The massive tax increases working families will see under the Democrats’ costly government takeover of health care aren’t hidden in the fine print. The President should be straight with the American people and admit that his health care plan requires significant tax hikes in the middle of a deep recession. The President’s inability to meet his own standard of not repeating ‘bogus claims’ about health care reform is yet another indication it’s time to hit the reset button and start working together on a bipartisan plan the American people can support and afford.”
As the following shows, both the text of the House Democrats’ health care bill and President Obama’s own advisors have refuted his “no tax increase” claim:
RHETORIC
REALITY
President Obama: “For us to say you have to take responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.” (ABC’s This Week, 9/20/09)
“STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?
OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.” (ABC’s This Week, 9/20/09)
From p. 169 of H.R. 3200, as amended:
“SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE. (a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of — (1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, or (2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.”
President Obama: “Nobody considers that a tax increase." (ABC’s This Week, 9/20/09)
Sherry Glied, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services: “The individual mandate offers new options, but it also introduces risks. The mandate is in many respects analogous to a tax. …[T]he mandate will act as a very regressive tax, penalizing uninsured people who genuinely cannot afford to buy coverage.” (New England Journal of Medicine, 4/10/08)
Larry Summers, Director of the National Economic Council: “Economists have generally devoted little attention to mandated benefits – regarding them as simply disguised tax and expenditure measures.” (American Economic Review, May 1989)
Then-Sen. Barack Obama: “In order for you to force people to get health insurance, you’ve got to have a very harsh penalty.” (Democratic presidential debate, 2/21/08)
House Republicans have proposed fiscally responsible solutions to make quality health care more affordable and accessible for every American. As Leader Boehner said on NBC’s Meet the Press yesterday, “We’ve outlined a number of ideas to make the current system better. Why not allow small employers to group together through national associations so they can buy health insurance for their employees like big companies and unions can today? Why not allow the American people to buy health care plans across state lines? Why not get serious about medical malpractice reform and more importantly the defensive medicine that doctors practice because we haven’t reformed our tort system?”
I believe that when people can't come up with a legitimate argument thats when the insults start. Its just a diversion tactic and a silly one at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlebuggy
Hollywood & MoveOn.org’s insurance industry-bashing video
By Michelle Malkin • September 22, 2009 11:54 AM
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/22...bashing-video/
Make a note of the Hollywood celebrities featured in this health insurance industry-bashing joint production from MoveOn.org and Will Ferrell, Jon Hamm, Olivia Wilde, et al.
No word yet on whether they’ll be making a protest video about the fund-raiser for Nancy Pelosi in Washington, D.C. being hosted by UnitedHealth care lobbyist Steve Elmendorf http://www.openleft.com/diary/15066/...-public-option — or targeting the Washington, D.C. law and lobbying offices of Alston & Bird, where Obama health care advisor Tom Daschle consults for UnitedHealth http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/he...e.html?_r=3&hp ....
http://www.funnyordie.com/topic/youtube
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091005/psa_video
http://seriouslypolitics.com/2009/09...-option-video/
Like I always say:
Corporate Shills for Hope and Change get a pass.
Related: MoveOn’s Maryland chapter is holding a mock “funeral” targeting UnitedHealth:
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0909/661485.html
No word on whether the procession will head to Pelosi and Daschle’s offices…Quote:
In Maryland, they plan to drive a hearse through downtown Rockville and place a casket at the door of the office of United Health care Insurance Company. They say United is a member of a national organization representing health insurance companies that has spent millions opposing healthcare reform.
Feds Use Intimidation To Silence Critics On Health Care Reform
McConnell's remarks just in from the Hill. They'll eventually be posted here. http://mcconnell.senate.gov/ More background from the WSJ. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...839672342.html
Do these people even know the country they are supposed to be governing in? You can't just shut down speech because it disagrees with you. And when the government does it it's as danerous as can be. What an appalling abuse of power and intrusion of control into the private sector yet once again.
U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Tuesday regarding free speech in the health care debate:
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carniv...re-reform.htmlQuote:
“I rise to call my colleagues’ attention to a disturbing development in the health care debate. “A colleague of ours has called for an investigation into a major health care company because this company informed its customers of its concerns about health care legislation that this colleague of ours introduced.
“As a result, the federal government has now told all companies that provide Medicare Advantage to seniors to stop communicating with their clients about the effects of that legislation — even telling them what they can and cannot post on their websites. This gag order, enforced through an agency of the federal government at the request of a Senator, is wrong.
“It started when a company based in my hometown of Louisville — Humana — had the temerity, in the eyes of some of our colleagues, to explain to its customers that if Medicare Advantage is cut, as the chairman’s mark requires, it may have to reduce benefits, which, of course, is a common sense conclusion.
“Mr. President, this is America: Citizens, either as individuals or grouped together in companies, have a fundamental right to talk about legislation they favor or oppose. That is the core of the First Amendment’s protections on speech. Unfortunately, this is part of a troubling trend of efforts to dismiss the concerns raised by the American people over the past few months.
“Over the summer, we saw American citizens who raised concerns about the health care proposals before Congress dismissed as ‘un-American’ by leaders in Congress. That’s bad enough, but using the full weight of the federal government’s enforcement powers to stifle free speech should trouble all Americans — and all of us — even more.
“We cannot allow government officials to target individuals or companies because they do not like what they have to say.
“This latest effort to squelch free speech raises several serious questions:
“Is this what we have come to as a country — that an individual or company can no longer factually advocate their position on an incredibly important public policy issue?
“Shouldn’t customers have a right to know the potential impact of a Congressional action?
[i]“Is this what we believe as a Senate — that this body should debate a trillion-dollar health care bill that affects every American while using the powerful arm of government to shut down speech?
“Is this how citizens and companies can expect to be treated if health reform passes? That any health provider that disagrees with a powerful Senator will be subject to an investigation and a gag order?[i/]
“How is this any different than what the Washington Post and New York Times have done in lobbying for a reporter shield law? Would we stand by if the Judiciary Committee asked the FBI to investigate the media for taking positions on pending legislation we don’t agree with? Of course not.
“Humana is headquartered in my hometown of Louisville, and yes, I care deeply about its 8,000 employees in Kentucky. But this gag order now applies to all Medicare Advantage providers.
“I would remind my colleagues that I have spent my career defending the First Amendment rights of people to criticize their elected officials, including me. I would make the same argument if this were a company based in San Francisco or Helena or Chicago.
“The right to free speech is at the core of our democracy. Free citizens have a First Amendment right to petition their government for a redress of grievances. This gag order on companies like Humana and those in all our states, in my view, is a clear violation of that right. It’s wrong.
“Employers that warn their customers about the effects of legislation aren’t the ones who should be getting warnings here. Senators who threaten Americans’ First Amendment rights are.”
http://gopleader.gov/News/DocumentSi...umentID=145989
Boehner: Stop the Obama Administration’s “Gag Order;” Seniors Deserve Truth About the Democrats’ Medicare Cuts
GOP Leader: “It is outrageous that the Obama Administration is trying to keep seniors in the dark about the consequences of congressional Democrats’ costly government-run health care bills”
Washington, Sep 22 - House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement today criticizing actions by the Obama Administration to impose a gag order on critics of the $500 billion in Medicare cuts proposed by the congressional Democrats:
“It is outrageous that the Obama Administration is trying to keep seniors in the dark about the consequences of congressional Democrats’ costly government-run health care bills. Would the Administration impose this sort of gag order if seniors were being given information promoting the Obama health care plan? I don’t think so. Seniors have a right to know about the cost and consequences of the Democrats’ health care bills, and Republicans will continue to tell the American people the facts about the nearly $500 billion in Medicare cuts that Democrats are proposing.”
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/09/22...es-aarp-gettin
AmSpecBlog
GOP Report Charges AARP Getting "Kickbacks" In Dem Health Care Bills
By Philip Klein on 9.22.09 @ 4:15PM
One of the subplots to the health care debate I've been following is the cozy relationship between AARP and the Obama administration, as the group has thrown its full-throated support behind the Democrats' health care push even though their membership comes from the age group most opposed to Democratic health care proposals. Today, House Republicans have issued a report providing evidence that AARP is in a position to recieve tens of millions of dollars in "kickbacks" if Democratic health care legislation becomes law.
President Obama and Democrats have proposed saving money to pay for health care legislation, in part, by cutting $162 billion in payments to Medicare Advantage, which allows Medicare recipients to choose privately-administered coverage. If these changes go through, millions of seniors who have chosen Medicare Advantage would lose their current coverage, forcing them into government-administered plans with less generous benefits. As a result, many of them would have to purchase policies to supplement traditional Medicare. Enter AARP.
In 2008, AARP generated $652.7 million in revenue by selling products like Medigap supplemental Medicare insurance, accounting for over 60 percent of the group's revenue, according to an analysis of its financial statements cited in the report released by the House Republican Conference.
If the House Democrats health care bill becomes law, the report argues, it would be a boon to AARP, because while Medicare Advantage plans will be required to pay out 85 percent of the money collected in premiums to claims made by policy holders, the requirement would only be 65 percent for the kind of Medigap policies sold by AARP.
"In other words, under the Democrat bill, seniors could pay as much as 20 cents more out of every premium dollar to fund 'kickbacks' to AARP-sponsored Medigap plans than Medicare Advantage plans," the GOP report charges.
But this isn't the only way that AARP is getting special favors, according to the report.
Earlier this month insurer Humana Inc. sent customers who enrolled in the company's Medicare Advantage plan a letter warning them that their benefits would be in danger if the Democratic health care legislation passed. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus complained to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which not only ordered Humana to stop sending the letters to its customers, but prohibited any other private insurers from doing the same. Except, that is, AARP -- which sponsors a Medicare Advantage program in addition to the Medigap policies it offers, but was exempt from the Obama administration's gag order.
I have a call into AARP, and will update the post once I get a response
Wow, talk about forcing this bill down our throats! If they have to outlaw anyone that objects that is tyranny and comunistic! This is against the law yet they do it and get away with it because the president and our so-called elected officials want this to happen? We are becoming like germany was around the time of WWII!! Who will they go after when they are done with the elderly?, the disabled, the weak? Who is next?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SurferGirl
AARP members who are still wondering why their leaders in Washington want to sell them out on Obamacare, pay attention.
The GOP has uncovered one very lucrative possibility: Kickbacks. Here's the deal :
A Hill source summed it up for me this way: “AARP has endorsed a huge reduction in funding of Medicare Advantage, which touches over 10 million middle-lower income seniors. If Medicare Advantage funding is reduced, and seniors are forced out of the program, they become potential buyers of the heavily-promoted and very profitable Medicare Supplement program sponsored by AARP (MediGap is 70% of AARP’s annual income). Medicare Supplement is a huge source of revenue to AARP. At a minimum, AARP should be required to disclose this every time they discuss Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage plans are making important contributions to the Medicare program. These plans focus on prevention and offer disease management programs for beneficiaries with chronic diseases. This focus on chronic diseases is not seen anywhere in MediGap. New research demonstrates that Medicare Advantage plans have reduced unnecessary hospitalizations and readmission rates for beneficiaries with diabetes and heart disease. By reducing the need for hospitalization and emergency room care, private plans are not only improving the health and well-being of Medicare beneficiaries – but also achieving greater efficiencies and cost savings. The House proposal (supported by AARP) would disproportionately affect beneficiaries in rural counties and areas where fee-for-service expenditures are relatively low. The current provisions in the bill would result in reductions in Medicare Advantage funding by more than 20 percent in many of these areas and likely limit seniors access to coordinated care through the Medicare Advantage program. The areas that are impacted the most by the bill are the same geographic areas where Congress has acted twice since 1997 to establish payment floors for private plan options in recognition of the inadequacy of existing FFS rates as the basis for Medicare Advantage payments.”Quote:
This week the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced it was investigating Humana for providing “misleading” information regarding the Administration’s proposed cuts to Medicare Advantage policies-and prohibited other Medicare Advantage plans from providing similar information on how Democrat health “reform” could take away their current coverage.
Yet the Administration’s edict prohibiting plans from communicating with their beneficiaries failed to include AARP, which sponsors a Medicare Advantage plan but has been a prime advocate of Democrats’ government takeover of health care-quite possibly because AARP has been supporting a health care overhaul from which it stands to gain overall handsomely. Even as AARP advocates for cutting Medicare Advantage plans by more than $150 billion, an analysis of the organization’s operations reveals that it stands to receive tens of millions of dollars at the expense of seniors’ medical care-with Democrats’ full approval:
* The Congressional Budget Office has previously estimated that the cuts to Medicare Advantage plans proposed in Democrats’ government takeover of health care (H.R. 3200) would cause millions of seniors to lose their current plan and enroll in government-run Medicare.
* Because the government-run Medicare benefit is less generous than most private health plans, the independent Medicare Payment Advisory Commission found in June that more than nine in ten seniors not in nursing home settings utilize some form of Medicare supplemental insurance. While many of these individuals currently rely on Medicare Advantage plans for the extra benefits they provide to seniors, many would be forced to purchase supplemental Medigap policies should their existing Medicare Advantage plans be taken away from them due to Democrats’ government takeover of health care.
* A review of its financial statements finds that in 2008, AARP received more than half a billion dollars in revenue from selling products like Medigap supplemental insurance policies-$652.7 million in direct “royalties and fees,” and an increase of more than 31 percent from the $497.6 million in similar revenue AARP generated in 2007.
* Royalty revenues now comprise more than half-60.3 percent-of all AARP revenues; a Bloomberg news analysis published in December found that in 1999, royalties comprised only 11 percent of the organization’s total revenues.
* The Bloomberg article-which highlighted what one observer called AARP’s “dirty little secret”-profiled seniors who felt betrayed after paying hundreds of dollars above market price for AARP-branded coverage. One noted that “AARP has great buying power, and people should be able to get the best deal….This is unconscionable, what AARP has allowed to happen.”
Another disillusioned senior wrote to the organization’s leadership asking whether AARP had a “‘special relationship’ with [insurance carriers] by which it receives commissions, incentives, rebates, or dare I say ‘kickbacks?’”-and when he arrived at AARP headquarters for a tour, was promptly escorted out of the marble-covered atrium.
* While H.R. 3200 would place strict price controls on Medicare Advantage plans-requiring them to pay out 85 percent of premium revenues in medical claims-Medigap policies face a far less strict 65 percent requirement. In other words, under the Democrat bill, seniors could pay as much as 20 cents more out of every premium dollar to fund “kickbacks” to AARP-sponsored Medigap plans than Medicare Advantage plans.
The higher prices charged by AARP plans, and the organization’s increasing dependence upon revenue from “royalties,” provide tangible evidence why AARP would support cuts to Medicare Advantage that would likely increase their “kickbacks” from Medigap plans.
Philip Klein at the American Spectator asked the AARP for comment — and received an evasive statement decrying “scare tractics” in response.
Card-carrying members might want to ask AARP headquarters about this: Toll-Free Nationwide: 1-888-OUR-AARP (1-888-687-2277)
And the question one AARP member asked his AARP representative arises again: “Do you work for us or do we work for you?”
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/22...care/#comments
Thats disheartening. I thought AARP was about helping senior citizens. It doesn't sound like it is.
what about dental? I would love to be able to go to the dentist..
Open wide: A dental exam on health reform
Andy Miller
Sep 22nd 2009
When the 5-year-old boy opened wide for dentist Lindsey Robinson in April, she found cavities in the back corners of his mouth. But his parents, who had no insurance, didn't bring him back for fillings.
The boy returned in September with a toothache. Untreated, one cavity ''got into the nerve and developed an abscess,'' says Robinson, who practices in Grass Valley, Calif. She had to remove the tooth. "The parents felt horrible putting it off,'' she says.
This recession has led many adults to postpone trips to the dentist, both for themselves and their children. "In tough economic times, you're concerned about your job and your expenses,'' says Bill Prentice, director of the American Dental Association's Washington office. "People are putting off dental care. Patients aren't coming back for checkups as they should.''
During the ferocious debate on health reform, meanwhile, dental care has largely been shunted to the sidelines. It's treated as separate -- and unequal-- to general medical care, says Oral Health America, an advocacy and education organization that has called for dental coverage for all Americans.
The American Dental Association has also pushed for inclusion of dental care in reform legislation. In addition, the group seeks better pay for dentists who treat patients covered by Medicaid, the government insurance program for the poor and disabled. Currently, many state Medicaid programs don't cover dentists' costs of seeing these patients.
California, mired in a budget crisis, has even removed dental coverage for adults on Medicaid, Robinson notes.
Dental care represents about 5% of overall health care spending. But the out-of-pocket expenses can add up, especially for the more than 100 million Americans who have no dental coverage -- more than twice the number who lack health insurance. Kids without dental insurance are much more likely to have no regular dental care than those with coverage. And untreated tooth decay in children can cause pain, difficulty concentrating on learning, loss of school days, and difficulty in eating and sleeping. Tooth decay is the most common chronic disease of children, says the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Untreated tooth problems afflict millions of adults as well. Adult dental procedures typically are much less expensive than those in general medical care, but some still can run into the thousands of dollars, which leads many to forgo treatment. In 2005, 25 million adults did not receive dental care because they couldn't afford it, according to a report by Delta Dental Plans Association.
Families who have private dental insurance generally get at least some coverage for cleanings, fillings and X-rays, as well as twice-a-year checkups.
People without coverage can get short-term relief with lower-cost care at a community health center, a county health department, or a clinic at a dental school.General dentists in private practice averaged $206,000 in income in 2007, according to the American Dental Association, though the group says the economic downturn has squeezed that pay.
Robinson, a pediatric dentist, works in a rural area in Northern California where the recession has struck hard. Like other dentists, Robinson says she's flexible on payments if a family can't immediately pay the entire cost of a visit. "I'm certainly willing to work with people,'' Robinson says.
About 20% of her pediatric patients have no coverage at all, she says.
"There are so many kids with giant holes in their mouth,'' she says. ''They have advanced disease. Many need a great deal of treatment.''
Robinson sees the reform debate in Washington as vitally important as millions more Americans may gain health insurance. Preventive dental care and treatment should be covered for those newly insured people, she says.
Like other oral health advocates, she wants to put teeth in health care reform. "It's important that dentistry has a seat at the table,'' Robinson says.
http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/0...health-reform/