Club Cobra - Comparison of House & Senate Health Bills

Club Cobra (http://www.clubcobra.com/forums/)

- Lounge (http://www.clubcobra.com/forums/lounge/)

- - Comparison of House & Senate Health Bills (http://www.clubcobra.com/forums/lounge/101700-comparison-house-senate-health-bills.html)

Anthony,

You need to go back and read HR676, section 211.

Medicaid is free to people under 18 or 21, depends on state, people over 65, pregnant women (65% on medicaid are women), blind, disabled and you have less than $2000 in assets for 5 years.

These people have little money and pay almost no taxes.

We support them because we are a compassionate and great country.

HR676 is paid for by (A) existing medical funding sources, (B) increased tax on top 5% income earners (C) payroll tax of about 7% for all workers (D) small tax on stocks and bonds.

Medicaid is free. HR676 is insurance paid for by people that use it. The two are in no way alike.

The bills in Congress are a scam to protect the insurance companies who give tons of money to senators and congresspeople. That money comes out of our insurance payments.

Sunman

I wouldn't call it a scam by the Gov to protect the insurance guys, perhaps just the opposite! It's a double edged sword at best. The insurance companies potentially stand to reap a big windfall of profits by signing up millions of people who before this did not have insurance. So the number of clients will go up dramatically. In that sense you could say the Government is doing them a favor. In the short term. Now long term these "newbies" are going to require care who's costs may exceed the income from premiums. On that front the insurance companies are shaking in their boots, there is plenty of "doom and gloom" talk about which insurance companies will survive and which will go under.

While I see a possible downside for the insurance guys, I don't see ANY downside for the drug companies, not yet anyway. THEY are going to make a killing of this plan if it passes as currently written.

Excaliber,

The insurance companies wrote the bills. The people sitting behind Max Baucus,
his #1 aide, come from and go back to Wellpoint and other insurance companies.
Like I said they give him campaign money for protection from real reform.That money comes from our insurance payments. Thats money we could use for medical treatment. With real reform they won't get any money.
I know a scam when I see it.

Sunman

Ok, so it's a scam. I see it like the "scam" where we send millions to Pakistan to fight Al Queda (or Yemen or Afghan, pick a country, any country). Now you KNOW these guys are siphoning off a ton of US money that never makes it to the military or any part of the fight against Al Queda. That just really pisse's me off, but we have few options, we gotta do it and were running out of time.

Like Health Reform, it's ugly, far from perfect, but we gotta do it. We been trying to do it for decades, still hasn't happened. It's time, mount up, were going in. :)

Excaliber,

Don't get me started about the military :D. Thats our #1 problem. Start the draft and send 1 million plus men, occupy and dominate or get out. Enough on that. I do agree something is better than nothing on health care. Its a start.
I think from reading what I could in the bills (confusing as h***)), they get rid of pre-existing conditions and prescription caps go up.

Hoping and praying for the best

Sunman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Excaliber (Post 1014686)

Anthony, it just wouldn't be BIG enough. What we need here is something REALLY BIG, a couple of thousand pages to get started, build on that. If were gonna get the job done we will need to massively increase the size of Government.

Now my main man, Obama, is going for it. It's gonna be glorious when he's done! :)

Our present workforce is well less than 50% of our population, if all were working. Right now, with high unemployment, its less than 40% of the total population. Even in the best of times, the workforce is down to about 45% of the total actual legal population of the US. AND it is shrinking. Do you really believe that 45 workers can support 55 non-working, non-taxpaying, citizens, in a manner better than the workers themselves enjoy? And when the workforce is down to 40 supporting 60? You actually believe that is possible and sustainable?

Democrats are lying to the public and shoving legislation down their throats that the majority do not want. Thus shootinhg themselves in the foot for the future election.
Republicans, leaderless, are shooting themselves in the foot in a wide variety of ways.

The winner of the 2010 elections may well be the party that runs out of ammo first!:eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunman (Post 1014711)

Here is what you referred to.

SEC. 211. OVERVIEW: FUNDING THE USNHC PROGRAM.

(a) In General- The USNHC Program is to be funded as provided in subsection (c)(1).

(b) USNHC Trust Fund- There shall be established a USNHC Trust Fund in which funds provided under this section are deposited and from which expenditures under this Act are made.

(c) Funding-

(1) IN GENERAL- There are appropriated to the USNHC Trust Fund amounts sufficient to carry out this Act from the following sources:

(A) Existing sources of Federal Government revenues for health care.

(B) Increasing personal income taxes on the top 5 percent income earners.

(C) Instituting a modest and progressive excise tax on payroll and self-employment income.

(D) Instituting a small tax on stock and bond transactions.

(2) SYSTEM SAVINGS AS A SOURCE OF FINANCING- Funding otherwise required for the Program is reduced as a result of--

(A) vastly reducing paperwork;

(B) requiring a rational bulk procurement of medications under section 205(a); and

(C) improved access to preventive health care.

(3) ADDITIONAL ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS TO USNHC PROGRAM- Additional sums are authorized to be appropriated annually as needed to maintain maximum quality, efficiency, and access under the Program.

I don't know, but from my understanding of the English language, it appears that the funding of HR676 is from the taxation of the working class, the same way money is presently generated for Medicaid. Whether a worker pays premiums to a private insurance company, or pays higher taxes for HR676, he is still paying for his own insurance and others, the same way it is now, with Medicaid. Although the money is paid to different funds, the bottom line is that the worker is still paying money. Medicare is different, in that all enrollees are required to pay a partial premium ( about 25%) deducted from their SS income. Also, Medicare only pays for 80% of the allowed amount, unlike Mediaid and HR676, which cover 100%. So Medicaid is "free" to their current enrollees (although some have a spend down and must pay a minimum per month to qualify fo Medicaid ), and HR676 benefits would be "free" to all working class as well. Am I missing something here ?

Quote:

The winner of the 2010 elections may well be the party that runs out of ammo first!

Yup, that pretty well sum's it up.

... I see Anthony found another clip, lock and load. :)

Anthony,

You said HR676 "WAS LIKE MEDICAID".

People on Medicaid are so poor they pay almost NO TAXES.

I'm retired Air Force, I'm good to go but my brother pays 16% of his gross income, plus 25% copay with no out of pocket limit and a low prescription cap for his Blue Cross/ Blue Shield. Thats a Carpenters Local 327 union plan.

He would rather pay the 7% in HR676. He has had to use his insurance and with his copay is now one of the working poor, savings wiped out, on the verge of bankruptcy, to sick to work but has to work for insurance.

HR676 is not "FREE TO ALL WORKING CLASS AS WELL" as your partial quote states. It would be a deduction from your pay.

These are people I know, facts, figures, union names, insurance company names, and a bill you can read, understand and post on this site, HR 676.

I repeat, PEOPLE ON MEDICAID ARE POOR AND PAY ALMOST NO TAXES.

And thats all I got to say about that. No reply needed. I'm going out to the shop to work on the Cobra.

I'm preping it to jump the new Devon Building, the tallest building west of the Mississippi.:cool:

Sunman

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunman (Post 1014750)

I'm retired Air Force, I'm good to go but my brother pays 16% of his gross income, plus 25% copay with no out of pocket limit and a low prescription cap for his Blue Cross/ Blue Shield. Thats a Carpenters Local 327 union plan.

He would rather pay the 7% in HR676. He has had to use his insurance and with his copay is now one of the working poor, savings wiped out, on the verge of bankruptcy, to sick to work but has to work for insurance.

HR676 is not "FREE TO ALL WORKING CLASS AS WELL" as your partial quote states. It would be a deduction from your pay.

7% is not going to be enough. At the current government spending, expect between $250-350 dollars per month per person for insurance, as that is what the gov currently spends on the Medicaid program (250/month/person), and Medicare pays about 20% more than Medicaid rates. $1000 per month for a family of four. 7% aint going to cover it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunman (Post 1014750)

Anthony,

I repeat, PEOPLE ON MEDICAID ARE POOR AND PAY ALMOST NO TAXES.

Why are these people poor ? Do you have any personal experience with people on Medicaid? Are alot of your relatives on Medicaid?

If your on Medicaid it's a given your "poor" as determined by Federal guidelines. I knew plenty poor folks in Hawaii, on Medicaid, SSI and various Government programs. I never asked them WHY they were poor. In some cases it was obvious, mental health, handicapp, that sort of thing. In other cases it was more difficult to tell, but as I got to know them it became more clear. Sometimes, it was just a head scratcher as to why, maybe they were frauds. I can't imagine walking up to someone and asking them, "Why are you poor?"

I recall two folks in particular, both Vets. One of them worked for me for awhile, did what he could, I paid him for what he was worth. He was just not able to hold a job, anger issues mostly, very sensitive to questions like, "Why are you poor?" That would have set him off! :) The other fellow recently had a liver transplant in Portland. Sharp guy, used to own a restaurant, got sick, lost everything, dang near lost his life.

C-SPAN Challenges Congress to Open Health Care Talks to TV Coverage

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...s-tv-coverage/

Kind of contradictory don't you think.

And efforts to open these meetings up to the public have been rebuffed.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded to a C-SPAN
request to televise the reconciliation process by saying,
"There has never been a more open process for any
legislation," and hinted that keeping the public at bay
is the best way to push the legislation through.

"We will do whatever is necessary to pass the bill,"
Pelosi concluded.

Ron