Senate bill fines people refusing health coverage

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR   Thursday, July 2, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT
 

— Americans who refuse to buy affordable medical coverage could be hit with fines of more than $1,000 under a health care overhaul bill unveiled Thursday by key Senate Democrats looking to fulfill President Barack Obama's top domestic priority.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated the fines will raise around $36 billion over 10 years. Senate aides said the penalties would be modeled on the approach taken by Massachusetts, which now imposes a fine of about $1,000 a year on individuals who refuse to get coverage. Under the federal legislation, families would pay higher penalties than individuals.

In a revamped health care system envisioned by lawmakers, people would be required to carry health insurance just like motorists must get auto coverage now. The government would provide subsidies for the poor and many middle-class families, but those who still refuse to sign up would face penalties.

Called "shared responsibility payments," the fines would be set at least at half the cost of basic medical coverage, according to the legislation. The goal is to nudge people to sign up for coverage when they are healthy, not wait until they get sick.

In 2008, employer-provided coverage averaged $12,680 a year for a family plan, and $4,704 for individual coverage, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation's annual survey. Senate aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said the cost of the federal plan would be lower but declined to provide specifics.

The legislation would exempt certain hardship cases from fines. The fines would be collected through the income tax system.

The new proposals were released as Congress neared the end of a weeklong July 4 break, with lawmakers expected to quickly take up health care legislation when they return to Washington. With deepening divisions along partisan and ideological lines, the complex legislation faces an uncertain future.

Obama wants a bill this year that would provide coverage to the nearly 50 million Americans who lack it and reduce medical costs.

In a statement, Obama welcomed the legislation, saying it "reflects many of the principles I've laid out, such as reforms that will prohibit insurance companies from refusing coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and the concept of insurance exchanges where individuals can find affordable coverage if they lose their jobs, move or get sick."

The Senate Health Education, Labor and Pensions bill also calls for a government-run insurance option to compete with private plans as well as a $750-per-worker annual fee on larger companies that do not offer coverage to employees.

Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said in a letter to colleagues that their revised plan would cost dramatically less than an earlier, incomplete proposal, and help show the way toward coverage for 97 percent of all Americans.

In a conference call with reporters, Dodd said the revised bill had brought "historic reform of health care" closer. He said the bill's public option will bring coverage and benefit decisions driven "not by what generates the biggest profits, but by what works best for American families."

The Congressional Budget Office, in an analysis released Thursday evening, put the net cost of the proposal at $597 billion over 10 years, down from $1 trillion two weeks ago. Coverage expansions worth $645 billion would be partly offset by savings of $48 billion, the estimate said.

However, the total cost of legislation will rise considerably once provisions are added to subsidize health insurance for the poor through Medicaid. Those additions, needed to ensure coverage for nearly all U.S. residents, are being handled by a separate panel, the Senate Finance Committee. Bipartisan talks on the Finance panel aim to hold the overall price tag to $1 trillion.

The Health Committee could complete its portion of the bill as soon as next week, and the presence of a government health insurance option virtually assures a party-line vote.

In the Senate, the Finance Committee version of the bill is unlikely to include a government-run insurance option. Bipartisan negotiations are centered on a proposal for a nonprofit insurance cooperative as a competitor to private companies.

Three committees are collaborating in the House on legislation expected to come to a vote by the end of July. That measure is certain to include a government-run insurance option.

At their heart, all the bills would require insurance companies to sell coverage to any applicant, without charging higher premiums for pre-existing medical conditions. The poor and some middle-class families would qualify for government subsidies to help with the cost of coverage. The government's costs would be covered by a combination of higher taxes and cuts in projected Medicare and Medicaid spending.







reader COMMENTS (94)
moterman
Sep 24, 2009 at 5:23 a.m.
Suggest removal

are we being represented ? would our founding
fathers put up with sutch garbage ? dident the British overburden the americans with taxes and surcharges they were hard pressed to pay ? what happend then?

Mikki
Jul 7, 2009 at 4:53 p.m.
Suggest removal

hankill, you are sorely mistaken. There were not '6' people in Rock County getting "welfare" checks. Guess what? There is no more welfare!!
There is W2, and from the information, there were more than 6 people on the program.
Also, the government has always issued 'affordable healthcare' as a court order for non-custodial parents to keep on their children. This is nothing new. What the government is trying to do is cut down on the people trying to get the free healthcare (Badgercare) when they have healthcare at a nominal cost through their employers. Like at $20 or so a week, or if the employers pay 80% of the premium. That is Wisconsin's rule.

sjraleigh210
Jul 6, 2009 at 10:40 p.m.
Suggest removal

hannakill social workers have told unmarried women to go out and get pregant so that they can recevie the benefits. this has been going on since the 70s. What happen to our morals? Russia said that they would take over our country, not by war but from within! This country of ours has seen the morals detoriate to the point that we are destroying us. Are we any better off then Russia when the goverment tells us what we can or cannot do? I for one am sick and tired of the beuarcay bull that is beinghanded down from the goverment!!!

momof5
Jul 6, 2009 at 7:35 p.m.
Suggest removal

If they are going to fine us citizens who do not have health insurance, does that equate to automatic deportation if you're an illegal??

melstew47
Jul 6, 2009 at 1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal

im sorry mr. hil when i said i didnt have any insurance i meant my employer doesnt offer affordable insurance,i buy it myself.sorry bout the mix up.

melstew47
Jul 6, 2009 at 1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal

HANK HILL;no im not a business owner,and i pay for my insurance as one should if they are able to.but one should not be fined if they do not have insurance,this will stop people from going to the doctor if they need to.i never go to the emergency room, and i dont go to my own physician unless its necessary or for a check up.the ERs are over crowded with people who dont need to be there just running up bills for badgercare because they have a cold or their back hurts or they have some rash,its absolutely ridiculous why some peole go to the ER.people,children,and elderly should never have their health care compromised.my idea about the monthly premium is that alot of this would stop if they knew they had to pay something.

kinsohn
Jul 6, 2009 at 8:29 a.m.
Suggest removal

Is it politically incorrect to ask what article of the Constitution allows the federal government to fine and imprison people for not buying health insurance?

RetiredAirForce
Jul 6, 2009 at 7:03 a.m.
Suggest removal

hankhill...You say you work for the state and also say "The feds ought to be fineing the mega employers for not providing Full time equivilent jobs, and reasonable insurance."
-
I don't want to assume too much here so please correct me. How can the Fed fine a company for not breaking a law? I would hope someone who works for the state should know this?

melstew47
Jul 5, 2009 at 10:46 p.m.
Suggest removal

ive been thinking again, and that scary,lol why dont these working families who get badgercare have to pay a premium each month?if they can afford all the luxuries they have, why cant they afford a small insurance premium each month?im still wondering how all these people i see lately are getting food stamps an badgercare,they all but told us to drop dead. i see more and more people coming into my store with food stamp cards,they should make some of these people work for the city or county to pay for this.grown men waving around a food stamp card to pay for his groceries ,like hes proud of it,what a shame.an i know some of these people could be working i mean doing something.the state should considering making people pay a co payment on the badgercare instead of fining them,it would make more sense.

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 10:27 p.m.
Suggest removal

At $1600. I'm a bargain.LOL

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 10:06 p.m.
Suggest removal

Retired 43 years.That's the best you could do ?? roflmao@u

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 9:23 p.m.
Suggest removal

getintotherealworld.. Thank You ! hankhill would really dislike me if he knew I'm a GM'er !!LOL After all he thinks we all have that self entitlement better than everyone else attitude.

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 9:13 p.m.
Suggest removal

hankhill.. She doesn't get that BIG tax refund. Why you ask.. because we still claim her on our taxes along with the grandchild.In a perfect world babies would be born after marriage.It didn't happen here so we are all doing the best we can.At the end of the day every child is a blessing..... not a mistake !!

getintotherealworld
Jul 5, 2009 at 9:05 p.m.
Suggest removal

ihavealife i commend you for not giving up and living off the system. I agree with you whole heartedly. I wish all the luck to your daughter and her child.

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 8:17 p.m.
Suggest removal

hankhill.... I was the single parent that got NO help.My child had NO medical coverage until she was 8 years old.I never got $$, food stamps,medical or help paying my rent etc.When my daughter needed her shots I took her to the health department and paid $3.00 each. When I did ask for help ,I was told I made too much money....$75.00 a week(1979).In her next breath to me ..Quit your job and go on full welfare..I not so nicely told her what she should kiss and walked out and never looked back.I know what it's like to have to say no we can't afford it and see the disappointment on your childs face,or just hope that crappy little knock off barbie will do just fine from santa.In my lean years I had NO cable, phone,new clothes or at times $$ to put gas in my car to get to work.I made do and made sure my daughter had everything she needed first.I for one am very glad I didn't quit that job(stayed 5 years)and fall victim to the welfare system like alot of people did/do.When I left that job after 5 years I made $16,000. that year(1984)
Now I will also tell you about my dealings with Badger Care... My daughter who is going to school full time and working25-30 hrs a week and is still on our insurance had a baby last year. When the intake worker found out who we had for insurance my daughter was told to put the unborn baby on ours.She called and asked if she could and I told her no it wasn't allowed to cover grandchildren anymore.The intake worker told her it was and ended her appointment.So when the grandchild was born there was NO insurance for him.He was born with a kidney issuse and at two weeks old was refused to see his doctor.So down we go to the billing office and they tell us that they are going to add him to our insurance.I told her if she did I would see to it they were charged with insurance fraud.So I paid $88.00 that day so he could see the doctor.It took 3 months for him to get covered by Badger Care.And by the way my daughter gets NO FREE $$ for going to school.Her schooling has been paid for by us and student loans.No free rides in my house !!! So to answer your question..do children deserve to have medical coverage.. YES if the parents do all they can to help themselves and not relay on taxpayers to foot the entire bill to raise their children.

chainsawchuckie
Jul 5, 2009 at 7:26 p.m.
Suggest removal

getintotherealworld: I would like you to thank your husband who is serving our country for me and to also thank you for sharing your thoughts in this thread. we all get so caught up in everyday life that we don't remember those who serve. once again THANK YOU!! to all other in this thread I'm sorry I have gone off subject. we now return you to the Gazette thread.......on how to get a $1000 fine.

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 6:31 p.m.
Suggest removal

hankhill.You work for the state ??? Believe me I'm no spelling police...but if you work for the state no wonder we are in the mess we are in ...JMO
You didn't answer my question on the # of people in a family that makes $40,000.My guess would be 6-7 in household ??

andre_linoge
Jul 5, 2009 at 5:10 p.m.
Suggest removal

"No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session."
+
I don't know who gets credit for this intuitive inflection, it has been attributed to several authors, but the advice is stellar in accuracy.

dub190
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:26 p.m.
Suggest removal

Does ANYONE here know someone who was refused medical care? Does anyone here know someone who left the US for a procedure because our care was sub standard? Why do people flock from all over the world to learn medicine in our country, and to have procedures and treatment in our country? BECAUSE UP UNTIL NOW WE HAD THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE WORLD! Say goodbye to those days. I hope you all like the taste of crow...

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal

getintotherealworld....JMO...hankhill is a very unhappy person.I'm sure my comment about him knowing the system isn't too far off.Thank You,your husband and children for all that you are doing for others:)

dub190
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:14 p.m.
Suggest removal

To compare this to auto insurance is just ridiculous. This in total b.s. and just ANOTHER FREEDOM BEING TAKEN AWAY! And you all said the seatbelt laws weren't a slippery slope.

getintotherealworld
Jul 5, 2009 at 3:09 p.m.
Suggest removal

hank you sound like you are a bleeding heart liberal that thinks everyone deserves everything without having to work for it. People need to support themselves not make the government pay for there needs. People need to be responsible for themselves, not the government. The extras should come after they have the necessities.

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 1:59 p.m.
Suggest removal

hankhill...Sounds like you may know the system ?? A family of how many can get Badger Care making $40,000.That would mean working a 40 hr week job that person makes $20.00 hr??.If that family is able to buy medical coverage at their employment...they are suppose to.Same with Badger Care Plus..if a person hasn't had coverage in the last 12 months and meets the income reguirement.After being laid off from a job people are entitled to pay out of pocket for 18 months CORBA insurance. Their ex-employer is to pay 65% of the premium.How many do you think will really do the right thing ???

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 1:13 p.m.
Suggest removal

How do you feel sorry for anyone that whines because they can't afford something ? When income goes down why is it so hard to give up the cell phones,going out to eat,having your nails done,tanning, movies etc. etc.Until people put their priorities over wants and must have,this is never going to change.It really isn't fun for anyone of us not to have $$ to pay for needs,but some people are not willing to even try to help themselves.Do I really think this ridiculous $1000. fine is going to work....Hell no!!!! The ones that will not buy medical coverage themselves already know how to work the system.After all they are entitled because they had a horrible childhood.

melstew47
Jul 5, 2009 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal

i believe one of the logos on some of the t-shirts i seen of alot of the younger generation wear was a time for change or something in that effect. Well heres your change.lol affordable health coverage hmm some people only make minimum or a little above it,now they will have to make a choice between rent electric food and health insurance,hmm what will the choice be?and for all of you who voted this nut in, are you happy about it now?now you have to get pre approval for services. let me see,if you plan on having a heart attack or a anuerism,you probably need to notify them first. lol(no emergencies allowed)ha ha. what a bunch of idiots.ill be glad when his term is over,you bet this is a mark in history,this is the first time people will be forced to get insurance they cant afford or to be fined.they already got the money from the fines spent.ill bet all you will think twice next election who you vote for.oh heres another idea,if they dont pay for the insurance instead of fining them, why dont we lock them in stockade camps,because it sounds like thats what its turining into.

ihavealife
Jul 5, 2009 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal

WOW!!! Americans who refuse to buy affordable medical coverage will be fined $1000.00...But ONLY in Wisconsin those that refuse to have auto insurance will be fined $10.00.What's wrong with this picture ????
I agree something has to be done to those that abuse the system and feel it's owned to them for free.

DrTalk
Jul 5, 2009 at 10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal

There is no problem helping those that need help, but it is not the job of the government to help those people. It's the job of us as individuals to help those in need.

usaret
Jul 5, 2009 at 9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal

There is no problem helping those that NEED HELP but it is tiresome that there are those who abuse the system and deny proper funding for those who really need help.

getintotherealworld
Jul 5, 2009 at 8:32 a.m.
Suggest removal

hank you want to hear about the real world, having a husband thousands of miles away in Iraq, dealing with a 14yr who sometimes has a hard time dealing with that, a daughter who doesn't want to leave the house just incase her dad might call or be on the internet, wives/girlfriends calling anytime of the day asking "I over spent this month is there any help out there so I can pay my electric bill, I don't have a babysitter, how do I get a hold of my husband/boyfriend, or any other question or problem they may have, plus working all day. I am not complaining I love my life and would not change a thing but don't tell me I don't live or know about the real world, I know more about it than alot of people! (Sorry to all the other bloggers for changing the subject)

getintotherealworld
Jul 5, 2009 at 7:30 a.m.
Suggest removal

Old and handicapped are a different story I don't mind my money going toward what they need, its the lazy people who don't want to work or try to help themselves is who I am tired of paying for. Its not just my husbands money it is also my money that pays for all these lazy people. Beleive me I live in the real world. I just belive that everyone should carry their own weight, thats one of the problems with democrats they believe in more government. I'm not a dem or rep I just believe people should be responsible for themselves. My attitude sucks because I have to pay for lazy people.

keithrg13
Jul 5, 2009 at 6:04 a.m.
Suggest removal

Should the punitive aspect of this legislation come to fruition, let us take the opportunity collectively to incrementally implement the “citizen cooperation construct.” There must be a monitoring rubric. The U.S. Constitution (nuisance that it is) can be circumvented by making the argument that people must have health care compliance due to disease control – it is surely a national security issue. We can not protect the nation if citizens are sick and diseased.
There should be random “citizen compliance” check points. At these sites citizens will be require to present a national compliance card. On its information chip will be data about your insurance compliance status. If you have somehow defaulted on your insurance obligation, your insurance provider will report you to the citizen compliance data base.
Punitive measures can be constructed to transcend with your income and property tax obligations. Ultimate penalties for noncompliance could result in property confiscation. Further noncompliance should result in incarceration of some type.
You should be required to swipe your compliance card at the grocery store (data can be collected on calorie intake etc.), liquor store, cigarette shop, and tavern etc., to collect data about any “bad citizen” risky behavior. The card must also be inserted into your car in order for the vehicle to function. Data about your speed and seat belt compliance, as well as auto insurance compliance will also be stored in the chip. A matrix can be configured to your chip card to measure your work output at any employment you may have. If your labor contribution falls below set standards, progressive citizen attitude consultations will be mandatory. Further penalties for any aforementioned transgressions can be added to one’s “compliance debt.”
Remember citizens, “Obedience is Freedom.”
posted by Bob Keith - "good citizen"

sprout
Jul 5, 2009 at 2:13 a.m.
Suggest removal

I would guess that most of the 40 million people without health insurance are the working poor as the Welfare collectors already have the best insurance their is, Medicaid, people on Medicaid have 100% coverage, they pay zero of their health care. If you are tired of paying for other peoples insurance you should be screaming about the people on Welfare that could be working. Those 40 million uninsured people have accidents etc and already see doctors and ER rooms, so I don't think there will be a big need for more doctors and nurses because of them coming into the insured system. Yes, the first year there may be an increase of doctor visits for them only because they will want to get a much needed check up. Since most of the potential newly insured are probably working they will be paying for their own premiums or most it now that government will make them affordable. By adding the uninsured to the system it will actually decrease what hospitals charge for a procedure because the hospital will now get paid for sure. Last I knew, the same hospital procedure had a different charge for each different insurance company that was based on what the hospital and insurance company negotiated, the uninsured patient got charged the highest of any for the same procedure. Millions illegal immigrants are currently given free Medicaid, that isn't right that they get free insurance and legal citizens go without.

getintotherealworld
Jul 4, 2009 at 11:55 p.m.
Suggest removal

Well I am tired of my tax dollars going to people who don't want to work or pay their own way. I am not responsible for other peoples insurance, let them pay for their own!!!!

Ilovehockey
Jul 4, 2009 at 11:25 p.m.
Suggest removal

There are state and federal laws that every insurance company doing business in this state have to follow. If you feel that your insurance company has not paid a claim appropriately, then you need to contact the Office of the Insurance Commissioner. If people would take the time to actually read their insurance policies, they would probably understand them better. Instead, they just slide along until something doesn't go right, and then it is always the insurance companies fault. READ YOUR POLICY!

I'm tired of rates going up to pay for all the uninsured people that keep going to the ER.

The other thing to look at is what type of coverages are we paying our city and county employees. In alot of cases, especially the teachers, we are paying their insurance premium for rich benefits, no deductibles, no copays, very little out of pocket. When the contracts come up again, I urge those involved to take the fat out of their benefits. If I have a $20 office visit copay with a deductible, then so should they. We need to stop the "entitled" mentality. We need to be more realistic in what those benefits should be.

greatidea
Jul 4, 2009 at 11:10 p.m.
Suggest removal

Dylan said it " It's a slow train comin' " It is about time too!

andre_linoge
Jul 4, 2009 at 10:59 p.m.
Suggest removal

Three and a half more years of this foolishness to go! How is that hope and change working out?

getintotherealworld
Jul 4, 2009 at 10:35 p.m.
Suggest removal

I had cancer surgery up at UW Madison 14yrs ago not one bill showed up at our house the insurance paid the full thing it was over 75,000.00 and we are still covered under the same insurance policy.

garyprimer
Jul 4, 2009 at 10:33 p.m.
Suggest removal

You will never really know how good your health insurance is until you or someone in your family has a serious illness that generates a large bill. If the company decides to find a way to bail out on you, you are out of luck. Many people who thought that they were well covered have been left out in the cold. You can read your policy as many times as you want, but unless you are a lawyer in the field, you will probably miss or misinterpret some of it.

getintotherealworld
Jul 4, 2009 at 10 p.m.
Suggest removal

hankhill I don't lie and I am not mistaken. Believe what you want but I know what we pay for insurance. Sorry that my husband has a good job with good benefits. There still are some employers that care about their employees.

getintotherealworld
Jul 4, 2009 at 9:43 p.m.
Suggest removal

Well we pay less than 600.00 a month we pay 100.00 every two weeks. Yes the company pays the rest. It use to be 50.00 dollars every month. They belong to a coop which insures themselves no insurance company or agents. Believe what you want, but this is fact!

usaret
Jul 4, 2009 at 7:27 p.m.
Suggest removal

I wonder when the government will come up with a way to charge everybody a fee (tax) based on age? Heck, you might have to pay $1.00 for every year you live. Forty years old=$40.00. Your married: Husband 40yrs, Wife 39yrs, two children ages 8 and 10, total fee cost $97.00. Couple ages 65 and 70, why they would pay $135.00. There would be many ways to collect this fee and I'm sure the government would be able to come up with a way. Of course, this doesn't replace any other methods that raise money for health care. But it could be used to offset the health care costs. Nobody would be exempt from this with the exception of those that die during the year. People on unemployement would pay just the same as those that are working. That is only fair. Just an idea. Remember, you read it first here.

Placebo
Jul 4, 2009 at 4:37 p.m.
Suggest removal

I am always gun shy when I hear phrases like, "The government's costs would be covered by a combination of higher taxes and cuts in projected Medicare and Medicaid spending". Taxpayers are going to pay for this hell or high water, so vague terms like "higher taxes" and "projected cuts" are not reassuring. Once we start down this path, there is no going back. I look at Social Security from inception to present and have that eerie history repeating feeling coming over me.

garyprimer
Jul 4, 2009 at 3:28 p.m.
Suggest removal

If you know of a company that will provide good coverage for less than $600/month, please share the information with the rest of us. You don't have to give the whole name, just leave a couple of letters out.

getintotherealworld
Jul 4, 2009 at 2:22 p.m.
Suggest removal

Hank we pay less than that for a family policy and it is very good insurance. And it is not a union shop my husband works at. It is a local company. Not all insurances are expensive to get. 20.00 co-pay and everything else is paid for. No deductable. Good prescription coverage also. So don't assume all insurance is unaffordable.

DrTalk
Jul 4, 2009 at 2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal

Mandatory insurance will only increase the cost of health care. Lasik eye surgery is not covered by insurance companies and look what's happened to the cost over the years - it's gone DOWN. Lasik eye surgery would not have gone down if it was covered by insurance companies. Vote out the Senators that were in favor of this bill.

sjraleigh210
Jul 4, 2009 at 12:42 p.m.
Suggest removal

I had Blue Cross after suffering a heart attack the repesentive of the insurance company approve me going to the hospital. Few months after i get a bill for over 10 000. I called the insurance company there response was , that they dropped me cause i didnt get prior approveal to go, which i did. Yes the insurance company are out for the almighty dollar. So it does happen where they will drop you for any reason. I dont beleive that we should be fined for not carry insurance!!!

gpawcat
Jul 4, 2009 at 11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal

Ah Sara good question! Because I am responsible for my health care. Why send insurance people 10,000 a year (1997) and give them the power over my life when I have to make the Dr. bill good. When people pay me they call the shots, when I pay some one I make the rules. If you get sick the insurance co will do everything in their power to kick you off the policy. Just when you need them the most, they run out on you.

mytake4u
Jul 4, 2009 at 1:17 a.m.
Suggest removal

panamared....more people entering the system means many more doctors and nurses will be needed. what's the options? lower the standards to become doctors and nurses or bring more graduates from the university of ISLAMBAD or other 3rd world universities?

SarahB1
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:24 p.m.
Suggest removal

gpawcat: Why not just write off the insurance payments?

officerfriendly1
Jul 3, 2009 at 8:20 p.m.
Suggest removal

Less government = More freedom. Libertarian Party: The Party of Principal. http://www.lp.org/

gpawcat
Jul 3, 2009 at 6:40 p.m.
Suggest removal

After our insurance went up to $800.00 per month with a $1000 deductible and 80/20 in 1997, I told the insurance co to take a hike. Why send a insurance company money when we can send cash to the Dr. and write it off. I think we paid a few hundred in income taxes the last 5 years. Why would any one throw away a tax deduction by not paying the medical bill? People don't throw away home mortgage interest. If we don't have medical bills I would have to send more money to DC. I'm down to my last $25,000 in medical bills then I'll have to find another deduction to take it's place when that is gone, cause Grandma just got on medicare.

Russ68
Jul 3, 2009 at 5:38 p.m.
Suggest removal

"Bipartisan talks on the Finance panel aim to hold the overall price tag to $1 trillion."
.
ONE TRILLION?!?! Are they (and those who think this is a good idea...) out of your ______ minds? This, on top of bailout after bailout - a few BILLION here a few TRILLION there... we are BROKE. My kids grandkids children are BROKE. Generations who have yet to be born are broke.
.
All this printing of money is not going to end well - see Germany in the late 1930's and Zimbabwe to discover what awaits us with hyper-inflation. If you think it's bad out there now... you haven't seen anything yet.
.
If you have an adjustable rate loan on anything, you will be in for a very, very rude awakening very shortly.
.
Good luck out there...

RetiredAirForce
Jul 3, 2009 at 4:38 p.m.
Suggest removal

"It's really very simple, the more people in the system, the less cost to all participants."
-
Assuming numbers as stated by the pundits are true; ~50 million without coverage (no reason to get into those that don't want/can't afford/pay their own). Of the total US population that is ~16%. You say it will be cheaper if these 16% are paying; yet the whole point of the expansion is to add coverage to those who can't afford it. How does adding 50 million to the roles who did not/could not pay before to the system reduce costs?

If they couldn't pay before how are they going to pay now?

getintotherealworld
Jul 3, 2009 at 4:29 p.m.
Suggest removal

My husband and myself work hard to pay for our health insurance and everything else we have why should we have to pay for someone else's insurance just because they either don't want to work or they don't want to work enough hours to afford insurance. I have known plenty of people that will quit work so they don't have to pay for insurance (get badger care at our expense) or cut their hours so they aren't eligible.

PanamaRed
Jul 3, 2009 at 3:41 p.m.
Suggest removal

You are exactly right NVgrf, who DOES PAY for those who don't have insurance now. You can bet most of those posting here don't have insurance since most think someone else should pay. Talk about entitlement. Family policies BEGIN at $600 per month. That's akin to a mortgage payment. Reform is needed and so is participation. It's really very simple, the more people in the system, the less cost to all participants. Businesses that provide insurance to their employees pass that expense on to the consumers of their product or service. HEALTH CARE COSTS MONEY. That's all there is to it. Maybe they could open clinics and staff it with the students who flunked out of medical school to treat those who don't want to pay for health care.

gpawcat
Jul 3, 2009 at 3:20 p.m.
Suggest removal

I'll sit my fine out in the rock county jail.

momof5
Jul 3, 2009 at 3:08 p.m.
Suggest removal

I believe I have now heard it all..... OMG!

darwin1
Jul 3, 2009 at 1:43 p.m.
Suggest removal

Hospitals are not allowed to let you die if you are in an accident. Simply put, spreading out risk doesn't work if those with little risk don't pay into the system. Evidently some people don't understand how insurance works. Personally, we should just place a federal sales tax of foods that contain certain percentages of sugar and fat.

usaret
Jul 3, 2009 at 12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal

Eliminate waste and fraud first.
Eliminate the medical exemption for Congress and let them receive the same treatment the rest of us get and have to pay out of pocket.
Not to sound crass or anything but who paid for Senator Byrds and Kennedy's medical bills?

whoanellie
Jul 3, 2009 at 11:02 a.m.
Suggest removal

AMEN rexhammer!!

cfox310
Jul 3, 2009 at 11:02 a.m.
Suggest removal

Come out to the Tea Party in Janesville tomorrow. 9-12 post office parking lot. For more information go to: http://www.teapartyday.com/

rexkramer
Jul 3, 2009 at 11:01 a.m.
Suggest removal

Ahh yes, "Change we can believe in". Anybody want to take their vote back yet? I would, but, oh, I forgot, I actually saw this guy for the radical lying crook that he is before the election.

Minan
Jul 3, 2009 at 10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal

If you can't afford health insurance, what makes them think you can afford a $ 1000.00 fine?

jviers77
Jul 3, 2009 at 10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal

I definitely don't agree with "fining" those who choose not to have health coverage, but affordable health care needs to be available to all. I know too many people who don't have insurance and would be completely wiped out for the rest of their lives if they had a medical emergency. I had an emergency appendectomy 2 years ago, and luckily I had insurance. The surgery and aftercare bill was over $30k. You can't recover from that.
*
I can understand the thought behind the "fines", though, because if someone refuses coverage and then has a medical emergency, the hospital with the unpaid bill is going to have to increase their fees, in turn causing the insurance companies to raise premiums. I don't agree with the "fines", but they may be a necessary evil to keep the # of unpaid hospital bills down. I would like to see a bipartisan compromise on this, but that will never happen because the GOP simply argues against the Dem plan without offering up any other plans. Both parties need to work together to get something in place that works for every citizen.

chainsawchuckie
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal

this cartoon says it all.................

http://www.gazettextra.com/photos/2009/j...

SarahB1
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal

Personally, I like this idea ... I'm tired of people (some with plenty of money) skipping out on their bills.

Placebo
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:51 a.m.
Suggest removal

What a tribute to our country for its birthday. "Do this or else". I've heard of the carrot and the stick, but not the stick and the bigger stick. If the government wants to offer a plan, fine, but health coverage is not car insurance. You carry minimum car insurance, which is liability, you are protecting the other people in which you may harm. No one gives a crap if you die in an accident, but you cannot negatively effect the civil liberties of the other drivers. This is not an apples to apples comparison. For a government to depend on money from non-compliance for a source of funding is not promising. I am not going to start screaming communism like some, but if it looks like socialism and feels like socialism....Socialism is not the end of the world, but please don't pretend to be defenders of democracy and a free market when almost all of your actions are contradictory.

Your best bet in this country is to give up. It is constantly rewarded by government at all levels and has the highest effort/reward level of any other way of life. I suggest everyone sit back, live in free public housing, go shopping for free at a food pantry, make sure you have lots of kids so you can still receive your tax credits even though you don't contribute to society, free zero deductible health care, and enough monthly government money to have Direct T.V., a smart phone with unlimited minutes, the latest styles in fashion, and sleep in until 10:00 a.m. because your kids are in a government provided day care. Why would anyone in America even want to try?

chainsawchuckie
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:32 a.m.
Suggest removal

what a crock of crap.......I have said it before and I'll say it again.......hang onto your wallets.........it doesn't matter who is in charge.....dems or reps.....we are heading down a road that is not on the map.......

NVgrf
Jul 3, 2009 at 9:19 a.m.
Suggest removal

Gee, I wonder who picks up the tab for folks who are treated now without health care?

usaret
Jul 3, 2009 at 8:37 a.m.
Suggest removal

Are you denied health care if you don't pay the fine?
Is it $1000.00 per year? What happens if you don't pay? Wages garneshed? Automatic deductions by your employer upon notification your not paying for health insurance? Jail? How does this effect ones credit?
If the government is requesting funding for 50 million uninsured, and that figure includes those who can afford but do not purchase health insurance, then how can they be penalized?
What level of income is the determining factor as to whether or not you have to buy health insurance?
Will the rich have to buy insurance or are they exempt since they can afford more then what the insurance pays for?
If employers have to pay a fine will they stop hiring people? Will they raise the price of the Merchanidise to offset the extra cost?
How do you collect money from the illegals?
How do you collect money from a turnip?
Won't this prevent people who are sick from seeking medical help because they may just be on the boarder of earning too much and would have to purchase insurance?
The bill may have good intentions but the outcome will cripple the working class.

oldtimer
Jul 3, 2009 at 7:40 a.m.
Suggest removal

I dont get it. This is not America anymore. I feel sorry for you and your children,

sjraleigh210
Jul 3, 2009 at 7:03 a.m.
Suggest removal

OBAMA in his campaign promises that he made,one was that we would not be fined for not having health care. Just another promise that he lied to us!!!! I dont care what party you belong to all of the politacns are nothing but crooks. Yes health care has gotten out of hand, when you can go to a drotors office and have no tests done just a simple conversation with the dr and get bill over 300,that is ludricous.

miyata312
Jul 3, 2009 at 12:31 a.m.
Suggest removal

Nice. Now people who are having trouble making ends meet as it is are gonna have to figure out how to pay for this now. Its $55/week for single and $85/week for family where I work and is expected to go higher next month from what I've been hearing. 2 yrs ago it was $40/single and $65 family. Dont wanna think what its gonna be come next month. We havent got a raise either. Already talk at work with a number of employees who are going to have to drop insurance because they just cant afford it as it is.

goarmy
Jul 3, 2009 at 12:03 a.m.
Suggest removal

I am going to get fined if I don't have medical coverage.

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT