To ProudFighter11: donnaw must be a "white male" WRONG!! I am a 68 year old grandma!! And can't wait til the next election to vote these bumbleheads out for the mess they have created!! But what do you expect from someone who never held a real job before or since!! I am not a Sarah Pallin supporter but when they complain about her lack of experience I have to laugh and say isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black!! She at least was governor of a state.

"If unsafe drugs were distributed, especially today, word would get out and the drug would be pulled, doctors would not prescribe, etc.."

So, you basically want people to be the "guinee pigs"? Nice. You would allow drug makers to claim their drug could cure any disease, without actual proof, and with no concern for long term side effects? These are just a few of the things drug companies have done, and would do, without regulations.

I won't even comment on the rest of your post, it's so ridiculous, and without basis in fact.

Don Diego --

1. Makes sure my food is safe.
Not really - People do that, when they properly cook the food, clean the equipment. What does the govenrmnet do? Nothing. They state the obvious.

2. Makes sure my drugs are safe.
Not really. If unsafe drugs were distributed, especially today, word would get out and the drug would be pulled, doctors would not prescribe, etc..

3. Provides roads unlike any other country in the world. Maybe, the potholes are so bad in many areas, that you really can't stand behind this.

4. Keeps me safe.
How -- Maybe, we could say the military protects our boaders, kills terrorists.

5. Provides my children with an OPPORTUNITY to the best education in the world.
Some of the best schools in America, are charter schools and private universities. The worst are public schools.

6. Provides vaccines to the extent that we have eradicated illnesses that use to kill millions.
Need I say more than H1N1?

7. Provides access to utilities and makes sure that they can't raise prices without civilian approval.
The free market would do much more. As rates rise, alternative energy would become more cost effective and each user could install there own solar and wind energy solution, taking control of their own energy consumption.

8. Makes sure that companies don't make and market products that are unsafe.
Not really. exploading gas tanks, three mile island etc,,, government didnt provide that protection, private citizens taking action did.

9. Makes sure that when a woman is pregnant she can't be fired.
This one I can agree with. Will give you this one. But I have still heard of instances where workforce reuctions were required, and of course, the person not producing would be 1st to go.

10. Removes snow from the street so I can get to work.
Maybe -- In some areas outside your little world, the cost of the equipment is prohibitive.

We forget that personal responsibility is what we really need.

"I have no health care right now, but that is my choice. I do not expect someone to be paying for it nor do I want to pay for anyone else."

You are the problem. Everybody gets sick or injured in their life. EVERYBODY. If you require a major medical procedure, costing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, and you end up filing bankruptcy because you can't possibly pay the bill, who do you think pays for that? Everyone else who buys insurance or pays for medical care out of their pockets.

The purpose of health care reform is to provide AFFORDABLE health insurance to as many people as possible, so people can pay something into the system, not FREE health insurance. As RAF pointed out, everyone has ACCESS to health care. Access isn't the problem, cost is.

Any health care bill should assure that eveyone have equal access to the same level of health care at the same cost. If that means that Politicians, UAW workers, teachers, etc. see either reduced services or increased costs as a result so be it. Fair is what its all about right?

I agree with RAF 100%. I have no health care right now, but that is my choice. I do not expect someone to be paying for it nor do I want to pay for anyone else. I pay for enough of their crap right now as it is. If these people on welfare want to receive a check they should be painting fire hydrants and cleaning the freeways, afterall thats the direction we're heading in right "communism.

Emergency health care is an expensive last resort, not the kind of care that is conducive to keeping healthy.No preventative, diagnostic, life style care before an emergency arises, and it might be too late for the patient. You are already paying for other peoples health care under the present system, and according to CBO people like you who buy their own insurance will see a reduction in premiums under the Senate bill. Talk to Reagan about raiding Social security, hopefully we have learned something. Bush campaigned in 2000 on a promise of not doing it, but by 2007 he had taken over $1 trillion from the fund, a broken promise. Medicare Advantage is overpaying by 14-17%, changing that results in immediate savings, and that is proposed. The people on that plan get much better benefits than other Medicare covered people.

"National health care first came up in the Teddy Roosevelt administration, do we have to wait another 100 years?"
-
100 years for what? Do you not have health care? Everyone in this country has a right, protected by law, with access to life saving health care. The problem is some people wanting someone else to pay for it.

"All the time some of you are saying "cut the spending", well, what do you cut?"
-
Even the weakest strategy of not increasing spending every year is a better approach to what is in place now.

If your paycheck/income goes down do you maintain the same level of spending?

"Medicare/Medicaid cuts to help finance this plan"
-
If these same politicians thought there was money to save from these plans why wait till now to do it?

"I know, I know, SS is going broke"...yet you use it as an example.

When Social Security was passed in 1935, benefits were not scheduled to begin until 1942. The monetary base of the system must be set before payments can start. I know, I know, SS is going broke, but only because our politicians raided the trust fund. If the money had been left alone, there would be no problem. So, you are going to say the same thing will happen to the health care fund. Maybe, maybe not. We should learn from the past. People are saying there will be Medicare/Medicaid cuts to help finance this plan, that is true, waste ,fraud, and abuse should be addressed, even if this doesn`t pass. All the time some of you are saying "cut the spending", well, what do you cut? SS, Medicare/Medicaid, defense, interest on the debt, if you don`t touch those that leaves discretionary spending. Money to run the government, education, payments to states, foreign aid(2%), etc. There are things in that group I don`t like paying for, and others you don`t like, but if we would have cut ALL discretionary spending in 2008, we still would have had a deficit. Some of those other payments, including SS, Med./Medi., will have to be looked at for cuts. National health care first came up in the Teddy Roosevelt administration, do we have to wait another 100 years?

The second ten years the plan cuts the deficit an additional $600 billion. Let`s see what they "concoct" to pay for Afghanistan, or will it be a tax cut? Maybe pass another Medicare bill like 2003, with no "concocting" on how to pay for it. I ,for one, am glad somebody is finally "concocting" a way to pay for something, and a good fiscal conservative should be too.

Krauthammer is really going off the deep end. Comparing oranges to health care is ridiculous. Oranges are a commodity; health insurance is not.

Each state currently determines their own minimum requirements to sell insurance there. If insurance companies are allowed to sell across state lines, they will all simply sell their plans from the state with the least amount of regulation and consumer protections. Selling oranges, or any other food, across state lines works because every seller must satisfy uniform FDA regulations. Damn that pesky government.

Zoom, where is the CBO wrong? I never said their numbers were wrong; they based their 10 year study on the plan put forth by the senate leadership...concocted to get a good score. Any program that collects fees and taxes for 3+ years before spending anything looks good on paper.

Now, try to debate the facts.

I knew RAF would drop his unwavering support for the CBO whenever their analysis didn't agree with his worldview.

Donnaw must be a "white male"

Just what we need, 118 new bureaucracies in Washington--new salaries, benefits (gov health insurance-not the one they are forcing down our throats) pensions, etc. And if 58% of Americans are against and only a third of Americans are for this plan, why are they doing it!! Because they think the govt is always the answer. I would rather let the states handle it. I feel I have more influence over what happens in our state than our federal govt, which seems like one big sesspool. Everytime we send money to Washington everybody has their hand out on the way there and the way back. How inefficient!
The mainstream press has been asleep at the wheel on this one--not much fact reporting, just trumpeting the need for the plan. Hope we vote these idiots out of office!

greatplain if you think it is such a great deal give it a try.

RetiredAirForce- You received funding for your insurance in the service supplied by taxpayers, right?
How was it?

And the second decade the deficits go down over $600 billion. Was CBO right about the tax cuts causing huge deficits? Yes! In Ryan`s plan he touted the savings from Medicare reform, did you believe him because it was a Republican saying it? They sure have a track record of deficit/debt reduction don`t they? Is Medicare/Medicaid socialism? Let`s see if you can get rid of them.

Typical reaction declaring belief in the CBO now vs then. Deal with the facts.

If this bill was scored when benefits start it is a budget buster. The current scoring from the CBO expects a complete ~+400 billion reduction in Medicare and counts money collected for +3 years before paying anything out.

If the bill was really deficit neutral why employ budget tricks? I hear Harry Reid has ocean front property for sale in Nevada if you want it too.

It's hard to see how anyone can be against a health reform plan that becomes insolvent, by design, less than 7 years after benfits kick in. It's the only way we can get ourselves out of the current deficits we are already running.

they do all that for us with the help of PRIVATE BUSINESSES. without them, it wouldn't work. just like what will happen when the government wipes out all the insurance companies. i.e. single payer.

"Only a lawywer would be against tort reform," I am not a lawyer, and not against tort reform, but it does not do the job of reducing costs. The people in states that have done it have seen no lowering of their health insurance premiums. The only way health care will work if it can be sold across state lines is if the government sets minimum standards for policies, otherwise all the work states have done to protect consumers could be for nothing.

#10 only works here in Janesville for the first snowfall and only if they get out with the plows before 2 am. other wise the budget is broke and so are we the tax payers

What does the government do well (not perfectly):
1. makes sure my food is safe.
2. makes sure my drugs are safe.
3. provides roads unlike any other country in the world.
4. keeps me safe.
5. provides my children with an OPPORTUNITY to the best education in the world.
6. provides vaccines to the extent that we have eradicated illnesses that use to kill millions.
7. provides access to utilities and makes sure that they can't raise prices without civilian approval.
8. makes sure that companies don't make and market products that are unsafe.
9. makes sure that when a woman is pregnant she can't be fired.
10. removes snow from the street so I can get to work.
We often forget the successes of the government because we get focused on the failures. Look around and be grateful for what our government has done for us.

name one thing the government has a monopoly on, and does right.

its time for single payer health care...

There are ways we can reduce health care costs to a point but we have to realize we get what we pay for (or in obama's plan we get what other people and our grandkids pay for.) There is always going to be a significant cost for a significant benefit such as with the best health care in the world.

only a lawyer would be against tort reform. the government can't run welfare, medicade, or medicare. how are they going to fix health care? anyone who can stand by such a stupid decision is a sheep for sure. looking to the government for everything has been the beginning of the end for many many countries. it breeds lazy expectant non productive generations to come. why work for a living if the rich people are going to pay all my bills!

CBO numbers are great when they are in your favor, and not to be believed when they are not. Right? We should have listened when they said the Bush tax cuts would balloon the deficit $!,5 trillion,. and the Medicare bill of 2003, and the wars were not paid for. This bill is paid for.

Yes, passing a terrible bill that will put this nation further in debt is a better choice...

In the ranking by OpenSecrets.org of campaign contributions by the top 100 special interests during the past 20 years, the American Association for Justice (AAJ) – formerly the Association of Trial Lawyers of America – ranks sixth overall. The AAJ is the trial lawyers’ Washington lobbying group, and 90 percent of its $30.7 million in contributions since 1989 went to Democrats. At the other end of this pay-to-play process in the nation’s capitol, AAJ has spent nearly $14 million lobbying Congress just since Democrats won control of both chambers, including $2.3 million thus far this year.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinio...

And by the way, John Kerry was also under that desk.

Hey, I heard a rumor somebody told me once so I don't know if it's true or not, but didn't the Republicans actually control both houses of Congress and the White House earlier this decade? I didn't see any tort reform then. Oh, that's right, they were busy checking under Bush's desk for nonexistent nuclear weapons. Well, priorities, I guess.
.
This is something they only bring up to jab Democrats. If they actually cared about it they would have done it when they had power.

Why wait till now to come out with these "novel" ideas? Where were the conservatives on the health care issue in the past? When ten Senators, five from each party, sent Bush a letter early in 2007 offering to work with him to reform health care because of it`s problems, his answer was......? Krauthhammers low estimate on tort reform savings, is somehow over 400% higher than CBO`s. Besides, over 30 states have enacted tort reform, and the savings are what? I`m not against it, but it is not the "magic potion" that will reform health care. There is a form of interstate insurance sales offered in the House bill, I don`t know about the Senate one yet. But then the strict Constitutionalists will lose whatever reason they try to bring forth that national health care is unconstitutional because you would have interstate commerce. By the way, is Medicare/Medicaid unconstitutional? It`s a national health program, let`s see the uproar if we try to get rid of those programs. When people like McConnell say that they will fight health reform, no matter what amendments or changes(161 Republican amendments in the Senate Finance bill), is he doing what he was elected to do, or just obstructing?