House passes health care reform

While it’s certainly not time to celebrate yet, health care reform legislation did take a big step forward yesterday, passing the House by a vote of 220-215. However, despite passing the House, Senate Republicans were quick to announce the bipartisan health care reform legislation as being dead on arrival, while Democrats had a different opinion of the legislation’s chances:

“The House bill is dead on arrival in the Senate,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Sunday. “It was a bill written by liberals for liberals.” A Democratic colleague, Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, predicted an overhaul would pass the Senate because “it’s essential” to the country’s economic success and people’s quality of life. “It will take time,” he added.

Clearly the battle for meaningful health care reform isn’t over, but yesterday’s vote in the House was a big step in the right direction.


Related Articles

16 thoughts on “House passes health care reform

  1. You just pull the string coming out of their back and off they run.

    Hey Alex? You mean 45,000 dead per year for lack of health insurance is cause for hope?

  2. “45000 dead per year because of a lack of insurance” …Wow, talk about pulling something out of “your back”.
    Are you sure you’re refering to America and not some third world country?
    Yes, I’m sure there are bound to be some sad healthcare stories out here, but going from the best care IN THE WORLD like we have now, to rationed care will only turn your emaginary “dead er year” number to a reality, even if they change the cause of deaths from “lack of proper care” and “preventable” to “old age”.
    Enjoy you’re brave new world – SUCKA’S !!!

    1. Alexander, you seem to be under the impression we don’t already have rationed care, and I hate to break to you, but our current health care system is all about rationed care.

      1. Technicaly you would be right, I guess it comes down to just how bad one wants that “rationing” to get. I believe that under a gov. run system rationing can’t help but get out of hand. Murderous

        1. Alexander, rationing is already out of hand. Insurance companies are already finding ways to avoid covering folks who have insurance simply so they can pad their bottom lines. I’ve got some personal experience with rationing, and it’s not pretty.

  3. Alex-
    Since you have just identified yourself as an ignorant troll, I will address you this one last time.

    Do yourself a favor and google “Harvard Healthcare study” and read. Or look up the study that places the United States near the bottom of industrialized nations in health care. Or the decline of our average life expectancy, also amongst the worst in the developed world. We might as well be a third world nation. If you’re happy in 10 years to pay more for health insurance than you do for taxes, then fine. I, for one, would prefer to see the money I earned but don’t get to keep to be used for the public good, not to pad corporate earnings.

    The evidence, Alex, is not anecdotal. Now that you’ve been confronted with facts, I dare you to come up with facts that support your thesis. Show me rationed healthcare. Please. Because even rationed healthcare is better than no healthcare at all.

    Have a nice day.

  4. Oooh, so bitter.
    Well, you’ve got me on the one sided studies count. I have to go off of what I see and hear in the real world, and it still all points to the good ol U S of A being out on top. But keep your hope up, with your marxist buddy in the white house I’m ure America will be on its knees in no time.
    …”ignorant troll”. I’m begining to see why the “right” allways says the “left” usually resort to name calling. …nice.

  5. (sigh…) Okay, “marxist” qualifies as “name calling”, sorry zach, I’ll leave that for my posts.

  6. I can’t see rationing in a system set for profit being worse than rationing in a system set up to pay for everybody. In order for for a system to be able to pay for everybodies care thet are going to have to cut “high end care”, “unessasary” (as in end of life, nonlife essential, theripies, ect).
    I say todays “messed up” system beats gov. care hands down.

    1. Alexander, nothing changes just because everyone is forced to buy health insurance. “The system” is not changing. The Kennedy Plan forces everyone to buy insurance unless you cannot afford it. And when you cannot afford it, the government issues you a government insurance plan.
      No changes to hospitals, doctors,or treatments. True, the government plan will come with a limited number of possible treatments but if you work for a company that pays your health insurance, nothing changes.
      What does change? Wellness availability and a health insurance exchange is created so you can shop and compare plans.
      What else changes? Insurance plans must have specific components in them. No more ‘pre-existing condition’ excuses for insurance companies. Nationwide record retention and medical information sharing is a by-product.
      There is a hope that costs will go down as a result but this is pie-in-the-sky thinking. Nobody knows what will happen except that the fraud doctors who bill the government twice for every ailment and take three tests when only one is needed will have to deal with insurance companies now.
      This healthcare plan is like saying you can fill your tank with any gas you want from any service station you want but you can only use Visa. MasterCard, American Express, and cash are no longer accepted.Visa will only pay for your gas if your gas gauge says 1/4 full and you get the right amount of gasoline at the right octane level for the car you own. And, oh by the way, if you don’t have a Visa card, you will be assessed a special tax. When everyone uses Visa, the administrative costs of Visa will go down which will result in lower pump prices for gasoline. The gas station will be reimbursed 100% for all the gas you take regardless whether it is a gallon, a barrel, or a supertanker fill-up as long as they charge you a reasonable fee.
      That is the plan. Everything else you read and hear about is malarkey IMO.

  7. One of the best explanations yet. left or right. I have some issues nontheless.
    -can’t get over the whole forced puchace thing, feels unconstitutional..
    -a single “purchase card” eliminates competition, killing innovation.
    -what happens when an older model car pulls in for gas? today, if one card wont cover the bill, another may.
    -this bill not only promises gas, but all fluids, new wipers, and preventive tune ups. in order to pay for all this, many presently offered survices would have to be cut, more road taxes/fees would have to be raised/created.
    -I would not be congtroling the card, the card would be controling me.
    -…and does anyone remember the lines at the gas stations in the carter years? I think they would be considered short compared to what this all controling visa card would create. How many cars will have to “run out of gas” waiting in line before the outry started? I’d rather no wait, I’ll start the outcry now.

  8. I applaud your willingness to actually discuss the issues instead of dismissing them out of hand. Major points.

    Here’s the thing. Hospitals are required to provide essential services to anybody who walks in the door regardless of their ability to pay. For those without insurance, the hospital emergency room becomes the only option, even for non-emergency conditions. ER visits also happen to be (next to ICU), the most expensive type of provided health care. When the patient can’t pay, guess who does? We all do, indirectly. On the other hand, a person with health insurance has access to the family or general practitioner outside the hospital where costs are far lower. (Which also improves the chance of preventative medicine, but that’s another thread.) When all eligible citizens participate in some kind of managed health plan (private or public) then the cost of treating the uninsured (theoretically) disappears. We all win in that scenario. And that’s just one example.

    The republicans don’t have a problem with mandatory participation. But they want to keep it entirely private within the health insurance companies. And that’s a non-starter, since there would never be any assurance that it would ever be affordable. There’s no checks or balances in a monopoly or even a duopoly.

    Make no mistake, health insurance companies will continue to thrive and make lots of profits for their shareholders AS LONG AS they are willing to find better and more efficient ways to provide their services. But that will require big changes to business models for these behemoth companies. The steadfast refusal of these companies to even contemplate such change has angered me more than anything in this whole debate. Instead of coming to the table with workable alternatives, these utterly lazy companies have simply thrown tens of millions of dollars (yes that’s our money, too) at our legislators (who were elected to SERVE THE PEOPLE) to preserve the failed status quo. It has been the actions (or lack therein) of these health insurance companies that have brought us to the point where we are now.

    What a public option does (and I’m no big fan of single payer, which btw should not be confused with public option) is open the playing field of competitiveness. Insurance companies will have decisions to make. Do they go after the population that opts for the public option? Do they innovate to stay ahead of the trends? Those that do adapt will continue to provide returns to their investors.

    This country rose to greatness through innovation and adaptation, not by adhering to the status quo. I guess I’ll leave it there for now.

  9. Clearly the battle for meaningful health care reform isn’t over, but yesterday’s vote in the House was a big step in the right direction.

    The battle for meaningful health care reform NEVER BEGAN. And I’m guessing it won’t begin until the Democrats plan is put into practice and fails miserably like it inevitably will.

    Washington is incapable of solving this problem and is only going to make it worse, exploding the deficit along the way. All this bickering is going on while unemployment hits double digits (despite a “stimulus” packaged that will add almost $800 billion to the budget deficit).

    We’ve had partisan hackery all over the place, rhetoric and dogma, incredibly biased “studies” and data and absolutely no real honest debate and discussion about the problems and how to best fix them. Well at least by the politicians.

    At this point, I really don’t care. The Democrats have the votes to do whatever they want. They have no interest in debate, or bipartisan support – and they don’t need it, so just get it over with already.

Comments are closed.