I have a relative in Canada who hates their health care. He had to wait months recently just to get an MRI. He says the wait in cities is long but admits it is less in the rural areas. So "if you hear someone say they like it, they likely reside in a rural area". Overall he thinks it's a "miserable failure".

I have an aunt and cousin who live in Canada and I personally asked them about their healthcare and they love it and do not know why Americans don't have it. I also have a friend's friend from France who absolutely loves their universal healthcare. So don't listen to the lies spewed about how you have to wait months to see a doctor or how you don't get great care. Obviously, the people from these other countries are not complaining.

dustyd - that's because this is a healthcare article. Why doesn't the gazette run a Benghazi article?

dustyd - that's because this is a healthcare article. Why doesn't the gazette run a Benghazi article?

Why is everyone so preoccupied with people's health care here in Wisconsin?
Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!

The democrats need to re-group (at the clocktower).

3.) In other words, my plan for Medicare is first a question to our private health care system – Why are you so much more inefficient with worse results than other government health care sponsored systems around the world? And second the deal – you as a private sector system prove to me that you are able to deliver the best and lowest cost health care or quit trying to use that as a reason to block government run health care and using your exorbitant profits to block our government from reducing medical costs. It is as simple as that.

Now - your top five points please.

2.) The second premise is that everyone should have access to good quality, affordable health care and should contribute toward that access. Not taking care of ones self and engaging in reckless conduct is not considered contributing and penalties should be in place to address this – but not take it out on people’s children. We need to address the ridiculous cost of our health care delivery system that directly drives up the cost of Medicare and Medicaid. If the private sector will not do that through competition (they have not done that to date and we have many that are still uninsured while some health care executives skim off millions and tens of millions of dollars annually while adding nothing to the value or quality of health care) we then move to a model of more intervention to “assist” them through benchmarks in wanting to me more proactive. We address these problems along with the delivery mechanism. There again, in the oldest and largest medical system centered in Janesville, WI, we have a CEO (and his staff) that profits greatly from other persons' misfortune while adding very little, if anything, to the value of health care. We go after fixing these problems using methodologies used in other medical systems such as Cleveland Clinic and Mayo Clinic to become more efficient. IF THE PRIVATE SECTOR CANNOT become as efficient as other major countries around the world, then we turn to a government plan such as Medicare for everyone who wants it. The wealthy can continue to pay the exorbitant costs for private care if they so wish but they still subsidize the government plan and may use it as everyone else does – we live in a society that we all contribute to but you are free to use your money as you wish, you just don’t get a free ride on the backs of others just because you have more money. Assuming that the private sector can compete with any and all government ran health care system (we can use an average of every other industrialized nation for a bench mark for cost, quality and results), we should see a sharp reduction in the cost of health care along with a sharp reduction in the cost of Medicare and an sharp improvement in our overall health care.

1.) Well, yes I actually do have a plan. The two basic premises are:

That Social Security is a separate, self funding program through payroll deductions and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the cause of our deficit (that is caused for the most part by lower tax revenues even though reducing taxes was supposed to increase revenues, the Iraq war that was never funded, the Afghanistan war that was never funded, Medicare part D that was never funded and the downturn in the economy that was a due in large part of reduced government regulations of Wall Street). Social Security is solvent into the 2030s and even then will pay 75% if we do not do anything to fix the shortfall for the baby boomers which will be out of the system shortly after that time. We may fix the shortfall in any one of a number of ways that will either add to the income or reduce the outflow. I can listen to many solutions but will not accept the privatization of Social Security – this will only amount to legalized theft by the wealthy from the poor and needy. The simple solution is to raise or lift the earnings cap that we pay Social Security on. If we choose to reduce Social Security benefits for future generations, we need to hit the current retirees also in the same amount (this includes you and me as we are in this together, right?). If we collectively want future generations to suffer, we should be willing to suffer also to the same extent. There are other ideas also.

This "do it yourself or the feds will come in and do it for you" situation comes up frequently in environmental law, and when it does, the states who choose to do it themselves almost always have an advantage. Although it's easier, it's never to your advantage to willingly give up control of a program to the federal government.

fordfan..just admit it, you have no plan to save social security or Medicare. Typical!

donnaw - another non-answer. Admit that you have no plan. You only want to whine - the neo-com tea party way.

fordfan...you'll get the five points for healthcare when you lefties itemize your five points for saving Medicare and social security, which your beloved Obama et al have avoided for four years. Also, a budget would be nice for a change.

Now that Oblameocareless has to be paid for, you'll notice how all those who voted for Oblameo are starting to panic. Unfortunately, running away to Rockford again will not solve this failure.

still waiting on the top five bullet points of the right-wing health care plan. Seems to be a new set of righties out here today so maybe someone will answer. wislady and Midnight don't seem to have any ideas - only whinning as usual.

who provides healthcare in China? The government? Business? Individuals? They don't "need" healthcare in China?

Motor weren't you one of those people complaing about jobs moving to china? Where do you think the iphone you blame your spelling on was made. Just more if the same from the do as I say not as I do crowd.

wood chuck..."bend it" to fit our needs? Did you even read patriotsal's post? How much "bending" do you think the Feds would allow our state to do? Au contraire! They have no intention of that. They only want the lackey states to administer and will demand states help pay for the increasing costs this bamboozle is going to cost us.

That's a new one...blaming stupidity on a smartphone!:)

Chadvader.......I get a laugh out of anyone using "social security" and "benefit" in the same sentence:) As if it's a benefit to have our government force us to "invest" our earnings because it considers us to irresponsible to do so. Then we have our government, an irresponsible and completely corrupt power structure in itself, spend our entire investment, only to have to borrow money to repay to us only a fraction of that initial investment......yep--great benefit!

38 mil isn't free. Maybe now we can have the same health care the federal employees have. Yeh, right!

hey old vet, you ever benefit from any federal programs (like social security, medicare, etc?).

Nothing worse than a socialist calling others a socialist!

:)

For somebody with distrust and animosity toward the federal government like Walker, it's foolish to voluntarily relinquish control of a program like this to the feds. If you kept it yourself you could at least bend it and shape it to your own preferences a little. Now it's completely out of his control.

Ths is EXACTLY how Walker should have handled this situation. Let the costs of implementing and maintaining the exchange fall squarely on the back of the Federal government. It is their program, the cost will then be spread across all 50 states rather than be absorbed by just ours. Of course the Federal government will be more effective in implementing the exchange--It's THEIR program that the exchange is tied to! This is common sense people. With so many unknowns and the Federal government making up and changing rules as they go(the latest one being the revised cut off date) it just makes sense to do it this way. As well as the fact that when this whole program implodes, the Federal government will be responsible for the mess that it creates. Easy peasy!
Great decision Governor Walker--Keep up the great work!:)
Let's hope he gets to work on entitlement reform involving the state programs when the Republican run legislature comes into session......

With comments such as "You lost lost BIG" and "take you cheaper medicine", leads one to wonder exactly how exceptional our educational system pre-Walker. If this is what came out of it, maybe some restructuring is necessary.....

Good decision Governor Walker. The socialists created this monstrosity, let them handle it.

Good decision Governor Walker. The socialists created this monstrosity, let them handle it.

The 15 reasons I posted are from the citizens' council for health freedom

11. Redistribution of Wealth to Health Plans. Fully 98% of the new spending
under the federal health reform law goes directly to health plans approved by the
government to offer health insurance on the Exchanges. Approximately $1 trillion
will be transferred from taxpayers to health plans through federal premium
subsidies offered on the Exchanges and through the expansion of Medicaid
through the Exchanges. (Bloomberg.com http://bit.ly/NRxw7P and http://bit.ly/TCoVt9)

12. The “Clawback.” Individuals signing up for insurance on an Exchange must
estimate annual income for the coming year. If it’s between 100% and 400% of
the federal poverty level (FPL), federal premium subsidies are available to help
cover the cost. However, if the income is greater or family status has changed, the
IRS can ask for all or part of the subsidy to be repaid. Thus, “If you received a
subsidy based on a prediction that your income was 350% FPL and it later turns
out your income is $1 above 400% FPL—you have to pay 100% of the premium
subsidy back,” according to Inside Health Insurance Exchanges (Aug 2011).

13. Risk Scoring of Individuals. Under the Obamacare Exchange “risk adjustment”
regulation, states are required to analyze data and calculate individual risk scores
on all persons: “Individual risk score means a relative measure of predicted health
care costs for a particular enrollee that is the result of a risk adjustment model.”

14. Gaming the System. Health plans with the sickest enrollees receive more health
care dollars. According to an expert cited in LDI Health Economist, “If an insurer
is able to work [the risk adjustment system] in combination with subsidies, which
are also complex, then that carrier may be able to enroll a lot of people who kind
of ‘look’ sick and are subsidized and also get bonus risk-adjustment payment on
top of that. An insurer may be able to make a killing by working both sides.
”
15. Sicker Patients on Paper. “Risk adjustment” dollars will travel on state-based
“risk corridors” from Exchange health plans with low risk enrollees to Exchange
health plans with high risk enrollees. Experts quoted in LDI Health Economist
report, “the entire country is going to get a lot sicker on paper” and “an insurer
will have an incentive to give people the absolutely most thorough physical of
their lives when they join because if there is even a trace of conditions like cancer
or diabetes…the insurer may be able to get more risk adjustment money.”

Lawmakers can stop the federal takeover. State legislatures and governors must refuse
to create or accept any Exchange and return Exchange funds to the federal government.
Congress must not fund a Federal Exchange, must defund Exchanges and repeal the law

9. The Exchanges will expand Medicaid and build middle-class dependency. All
persons and families up to 400% of federal poverty levels (FPL) will be enrolled
into Medicaid (up to 138% FPL) or be able to receive a taxpayer-funded premium
FMI: StopHealthInsuranceExchange.org
CCHF • 161 St. Anthony Ave., Ste. 923 • St. Paul, MN 55103 • cchfreedom.org • 651-646-8935 • info@cchfreedom.org
subsidy to buy health insurance. In 2012, 400% FPL is $44,680 for an individual
and $92,200 for a family of four.

10. “Federally-facilitated exchanges” are a facade meant to deceive. The FFE will
have a state name (i.e. Iowa Exchange) but operations will be conducted by the
federal government—leaving the public in the dark about the federal takeover

7. The Exchange will create an unprecedented tracking system. Whether they
pay taxes to the Federal government or not, everyone must annually register with
the IRS either on their own through the Exchange or through their employer. State
governments are already considering how to “pre-populate” the exchange using
other databases such as state taxpayers, voting registration, and vital statistics.

8. The Exchange will enable Obamacare fines. Employers face significant fines if
even one of their employees buys health insurance on a state-based Exchange.

15 REASONS: Oppose Obamaʼs Health Insurance Exchanges
1. Exchanges are Federal Takeover Centers, not marketplaces. The federal
government controls the health plans and the benefits—and oversees patient care.
Exchanges will also become single-seller bureaucracies where only governmentapproved
health plans are sold and no real “market” exists. It is expected that all
people in the future will be required to buy insurance from the Exchange. (see #5)
2. States will lose. State-run exchanges will hide the federal takeover; enable federal
access to state-held data on citizens, patients and providers; and shift the annual
$10 million - $100 million cost of operating the exchange to State taxpayers.
3. State-run Exchanges are not required. That would be commandeering of the
state by the federal government. Obama’s health care law acknowledges this fact
by having a fallback plan for creation of a Federal Exchange—but no money to do
it. They’ve asked for ~$750 million, but Congress has thus far refused.
4. All Exchanges are Federal Exchanges. State-run Exchanges must follow the
federal law and all federal rules. They are required to report annually to the U.S.
Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) and are under control of HHS.
5. State-run Exchanges are part of a National Exchange. State exchanges are 50
state-named website portals of a national system. They are extensions of the
federal government into each state through the “Federal Data Services Hub,”
which will receive and share private data. Data entered online to buy insurance is
sent for verification through the Federal Data Services Hub (“Hub”) to at least
five federal agencies, and compared with myriad state databases and data systems
made accessible to the Hub by state government.
6. The Exchange is a national registration and enforcement tool. The National
Exchange (with 50 website portals) will register the insurance status of every
citizen and allow the IRS to enforce the penalty-tax for refusing to buy health
insurance. The purpose is universal coverage — national health care. Registration
takes place through purchase of insurance or online registration of an exemption. Rest of 15 reasons in my next comments

The new law, obamacare, did nothing to prevent future cost growth. As many involved in the law and those pushing for the law stated their goal was single payer, this just being a stepping stone to get them to that goal.

All ideas put forth to build competiveness into the cost of medicine and treatment was left out of the law. The law only mandated all have insurance and created structures to set that up. None of that addresses the cost of medicine.

Simple concepts like those used in dental and vision care have worked for decades to keep costs lower. Those concepts drive competition and make patients aware of all the costs, so they shop for care with their dollars. None of this is involved in medical care. When was the last time you saw prices before care in the doctors office or hospital? Ask your lawmakers why they left out cost savings proposals in the healthcare overhaul that only worried about insurance.

Wahoo_35..couldn't have said it better myself...THANK YOU.

RAF....Are you really trying to say that adding $109 Billion dollars to the deficit is acceptable because the estimates don't go further out than 10 years??? I can't imagine there are any economists who would venture any further than that due to unknown changes over a period of 10 years. We do know that the IF status quo of health care continues IT WILL bankrupt individuals as well as the nation, but that's ok as long as the insurance companies get even richer.

Short blurb on doc fix costs

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/daily-re...

oneday, perhaps you are not aware of how the CBO derived the numbers, not deliberately saying you’re ignorant but perhaps you are unaware.

The CBO is provided with a situation, they don't create them. They are tasked to evaluate the cost based on current fiscal constraints, over time. The current situation is collecting revenues for 2-3 years before paying out anything for the program. The evaluation did not include full spending for a ten year period as a real cost comparison would use. They directly reported the cost to the govt books for ten years, this included collected funds for 25% of the decade before expending funds. Also exempted from this was any monies needed to correct the doc-fix problem or the money moved from the medicare pile to the obamacare pile.

Still waiting for you to provide an answer to my previous question.

motor I anxiously await your links to support your claim....can't wait to read the actuarial tables for this one.

Greed is the problem? Is that the same greed people have that want to live longer using the more costly system designed to enable people live longer by treating things like cancer?

from RAF "the CBO based its numbers on a specific situation. First taxes were collected for 2-3 number of years before anything was paid out. This slanting of the books only works for the first ten years."
From the CBO
"However, CBO and JCT, in consultation with outside experts, have devoted a great deal of care and effort to the analysis of health care legislation in the past few years, and the agencies have strived to develop estimates that are in the middle of the distribution of possible outcomes."

Do you really believe the CBO is "slanting the books"? I bet you agree with Jack Welch that the BLS was manipulating the Oct. jobs reports. Anytime the math doesn't = what you wing nuts want it to, there is a conspiracy. I might be going out on a limb here but I'm going with an evaluation from the CBO rather than your opinion.

Health care should not be in the open market. It needs to be regulated. There is no reason that a person should occur a large debt because on an illness. Our current health care system is based on corporate greed from the drug companies to the doctors that push these drugs on people. And it is because of this greed is why Replicans are against a national health care system.

onedayatatime the CBO based its numbers on a specific situation. First taxes were collected for 2-3 number of years before anything was paid out. This slanting of the books only works for the first ten years.

If you really think these numbers are real please provide the name of any other large government program that EVER cost exactly (or less) than original projections.

wislady,midnight,bowlgal etc etc..do you people never tire of making yourselves look like complete idiots. Again and again you are provided with information and links to the actual AHCA, Kiser Institute, CBO and numerous independent analysis of the healthcare act and all you do is come back with ignorant comments such as "Obama Scare" and AARP is a left wing mouth piece. You make completely ridiculous comments again and again, that are proven to be outright lies and misinformation again and again, and yet you continue to repeat the same old tired a$$ rhetoric. I would think you would be bored with yourselves. I know you certainly make my butt tired.
One more piece of information that you probably won’t read because it again proves you have absolutely no critical thinking skills or an iota of reading comprehension skills AND IT INVOLVES MATH. It does answer many of the funding questions that you have asked. You always go on about the deficit but yet you want to repeal the AHCA which would REDUCE REVENUES BY $1 TRILLION & add $109 BILLION TO THE DEFICIT. http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43471
Stop parroting Rush and Hannity and GET A CLUE!!!!

Saw this on Sen. Cullen's FB page:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/0...

wislady, I have to assume that there it not a single point that is in ObamaStillCares as you have only whined about it. Being the open minded person that I am, I am asking you what the top five bullet points are for your preferred medical program for the US. Or if you think the current (pre-ObamaReallyCaresAboutEveryone) is the best solution, just say that. BTW - are you on TRICARE?

Obama Scare is over 2500 pages, now you want to condense it to 5 "bullet points".

Go read the law, it's what you voted for.

wislady - the five major points of what healthcare reform should look like in your mind....please.

fordfan
your linked article is irrelevant, wait until the real costs kick in....2014, if we all last that long.

Obama Scare is NOT healthcare reform.

walker wont play if he cant be the leader

In my opinion you want to fix health care one get rid of Obama care then get rid of the insurance companies. You do that my hope would be lower health care cost for the American people.

wislady said, "the "state run" was in name only, all guidelines were already set up by Feds."

wislady, that is not correct. This, just one of the flexible options states have if they manage their own exchange, from Kaiser: "States have flexibility in determining the role of the exchange with respect to contracting with health plans. All exchanges are required to contract only with health plans the meet minimum federal requirements for qualified health plans. States can choose to have the exchange contract with all qualified health plans (clearinghouse) or states can choose to have the exchange contract with selected health plans and/or negotiate premium prices with health plans (active purchaser)." [ http://statehealthfacts.kff.org/comparem... ]

If you want to hear it from the government directly, and learn of other flexibilities the states have, check out: [ http://www.healthcare.gov/law/resources/... ]

Or, better yet, read the Affordable Care Act itself: [ http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr... ]

Oh...so occasionally I see a few righties complaining about the cost of their health care since ObamaCares (vs. RepublicansDon'tReallyCare) has started implementation. I know this is probably viewed as a radical left wing site that happens to endorse Republicans up until it stopped endorsements, but for what it is worth (from 11/14/2012):

“Cost of providing health benefits rises 4.1%, lowest in 15 years”
http://www.jsonline.com/business/cost-of...

wislady - the five top bullet points from your plan to improve our healthcare please (assuming you did not have ObamaCares to deal with). If you have nothing better, maybe you should capitulate.

Silly wingnuts.
The first federal "socialized" medicine happened in the late 1700s iirc. You know, the whole forefathers schtick. Do a search on "sailor's homes" or somesuch. Sailors refused to crew ships due to health problems, so the feds mandated ship owners pay for the sailor's health care.
Obamacare was based on a GOP idea, from the GOP backed Heritage Institute.
Obamacare passed in Congress, signed by Obama, and confirmed by the Supreme court. All three branches of government.
Get over it. Women voting, slavery, and lots of other stuff has changed the country. The only countries without universal health insurance are in 3rd world countries in Africa.
Try moving there if you don't like our laws. Let us know how it works out.

thatwaseasy - I forgot to mention this from your Canadian doctor/author of your article (your article was from 2007 so that is why there are references from the 2000s):

"There’s no question that American health care, a mixture of private insurance and public programs, is a mess. Over the last five years, health-insurance premiums have more than doubled, leaving firms like General Motors on the brink of bankruptcy. Expensive health care has also hit workers in the pocketbook: it’s one of the reasons that median family income fell between 2000 and 2005 (despite a rise in overall labor costs). Health spending has surged past 16 percent of GDP. The number of uninsured Americans has risen, and even the insured seem dissatisfied."

poobah
You are wrong, the "state run" was in name only, all guidelines were already set up by Feds.

fordfan, thanks for the links. An interesting phenomenon that those against healthcare reforms typically cite is the number of Canadians (and other foreigners) that come to America for healthcare. In fact, there are approximately 10 Americans that travel to foreign countries (including Canada) for healthcare for every foreigner that comes to America for healthcare. Ten to one!

"A McKinsey and Co. report from 2008 found that between 60,000 to 85,000 medical tourists were traveling to the United States for the purpose of receiving in-patient medical care. The same McKinsey study estimated that 750,000 American medical tourists traveled from the United States to other countries in 2007 (up from 500,000 in 2006). The availability of advanced medical technology and sophisticated training of physicians are cited as driving motivators for growth in foreigners traveling to the U.S. for medical care, whereas the low costs for hospital stays and major/complex procedures at Western-accredited medical facilities abroad are cited as major motivators for American travelers."
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tou... ]

[ http://www.forbes.com/2008/05/25/health-... ]

[ http://www.ipa.org.au/publications/960/a... ]

On a side note..........

Congratulations to Governor Walker for being named Vice Chairman of the Republican Governors Association!

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal was elected Chairman.

wislady said, "All the feds wanted, was for states to fund it, but it would have been run by the Feds anyway."

What a ridiculous, and inaccurate, argument. The state had an opportunity to run their own exchange. Walker declined. And you mention funding as though there is some difference between where state tax dollars and federal tax dollars come from -- the taxpayers. States don't fund anything and neither does the federal government. Taxpayers fund the exchanges regardless if they're run by the state or the federal government, Wisconsin taxpayers will end up paying for the exchange. Given that, Walker apparently felt the federal government was much better equipped to run the exchange than his own administration, and he was right about that.

A little reading on the Canadian Health System which is not on the table anyway. If, however I had to choose between no insurance and the Canadian model - Canada easily wins.

http://www.canadian-healthcare.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_...
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0...
http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_125...

sorry - The name was in your second link.

thatwaseasy - I didn't see a name as a reference in this article and the hot link does not open to a valid page. Please post the doctor's name that said this stuff about Canadian health care. Most foreigners that I know really don't understand our medical coverage mess.

poobah

You missed the reason why Wisconsin is letting the Feds take charge....if the States set up their own, it would be "state run" in name only. All the feds wanted, was for states to fund it, but it would have been run by the Feds anyway.
Obama owns it all now, enough with blaming Bush.

carlitosway

And how will the Obamacare be funded????

Congress, and the Congressional Budget Committee, which is chaired by Paul Ryan.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_3_ca...

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/07/2...

Canadian Doctor Describes the Nightmare of Canada's Health Care System

donnaw - so what is incorrect with what they said. Please be specific on where they are wrong. I will even take a Faux News link if it is specific rather than opinions. Waiting.....

fordfan....AARP is a left wing mouthpiece for the Dems.

wislady you never quit Your little boy is mo longer a part of the Election OF PRESIDENT OBAMA AND WILL NEVER BE * HE LOST THAT JOB INTERVIEW as dishonesty was not accepted,,,,, Just picture this..........Obama and the Feds asking Ryan and the Budget Committee for funding. Not going to happen!! *Picture this, wislady finally sees reality*. http://www.healthcare.gov/law/full/index...

for others who think that ObamaCares (vs. Republicans don't care)is so bad:

http://www.aarp.org/health/health-insura...

for Midnight-Ride:

http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/gov...

usaret - may I ask, "does anyone profess to know the full cost of TRICARE? Does it matter who pays, the State or the Fed Gov? I mean afterall, the money comes out of our pockets either way."

Anyone arguing that there isn't anything wrong with our healthcare system now, could you please tell me what HMO or plan you are on, because I want to join! I, like many people, are in constant battles over health care costs with insurance companies. The World Health Organization ranks the US at 37th....thats right 37th! We are doing a poor job with health care now and changes need to be made. Is the ACA the answer? no way, but it's a start.

Ah, those Gazette Gremlins! My apologies for the double post. It certainly wasn't so profound that it merited being posted twice!

Sorry, lovemycountry, but an online poll by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is not a statistically accurate poll. It's a clever ploy used by the MJS to get readers more likely to read and click. More readers and more clickers means more revenue from advertising. It has nothing to do with accurate polling of a population. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's not reliable.

Sorry, lovemy country, but an online poll by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is not a statistically accurate poll. It's a clever ploy used by the MJS to get readers more likely to read and click. More readers and more clickers means more revenue from advertising. It has nothing to do with accurate polling of a population.

Olderandornerier (great ID, BTW) said, "Healthcare is a product for sale, not some right that should be provided for all for free." CONSIDER: The cost of healthcare skyrocketed in the 60s and 70s and put it out of reach of middle and lower income people. Large employers who could afford to and who could get deep discounts began to provide it to get and retain workers. So, now only those who work for a large company or are wealthy can afford comprehensive healthcare. In your world, everybody else should suffer. And I personally know plenty of people who are SUFFERING with chronic pain and other ailments because they cannot buy insurance at any price (locked out by pre-existing conditions or kicked out when they got sick) and cannot afford the exorbitant prices charged to those without insurance. Up until Obamacare, they had ZERO options. With Obamacare, they will be able to buy insurance and will not need to worry about losing it. They will not be getting FREE healthcare, they will be getting reasonably-priced healthcare. More needs to be done to reform the health insurance industry and the healthcare system, but until Obamacare NOTHING was being done. And while we argued about the details and our precious RIGHTS, many many people were dragging themselves through another day of pain, and wishing they could somehow afford to see the doctor, or pay for their medicine, or maybe even die to get away from their misery. I am not exaggerating. I know people in this situation. It is heartbreaking.

A large majority of Wisconsinites believe our Governor made the right call. 63% to 37%.
http://www.jsonline.com/polls/179683981....

Bowlgal said, "Medicare is not the same and the elder's treatment is gone such as cervical cancer screening. "no longer available for your age""

That is just not true and you should know it from our last exchange that went like this:

Bowlgal said, "My 65 year mother was just told due to Obamacare she is no longer covered for cervical cancer screening."

Your mother apparently elected to not carry Medicare Part B, which fully covers cervical cancer screenung. If she did that because she can't afford the $99 per month Part B premium, she should contact the state to see if she qualifies for Part B payment assistance. [ http://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-co... ]

Pap tests/pelvic exams (screening)

How often is it covered?

Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance) covers pap tests/pelvic exams:

- Once every 24 months for all women

- Once every 12 months if you’re at high risk for cervical or vaginal cancer, or if you’re of childbearing age and have had an abnormal Pap test in the past 36 months

Who's eligible?

All women with Medicare are covered.

Your costs in Original Medicare

You pay nothing for the lab Pap test, nothing for the Pap test specimen collection and nothing for the pelvic exam, if the doctor accepts assignment." [ http://www.medicare.gov/coverage/pap-tes.... ]

Zoom - don't cry fire in a crowded room. If you think someone is telling lies tell us why.

I happen to agree because I've see it. Medicare is not the same and the elder's treatment is gone such as cervical cancer screening. "no longer available for your age"

Private rooms even for the less fortunate is a luxury with our greatest healthcare will also be eliminated. But of course there is a lot of "new normal" under Obama that traditional Americans won't probably see again.

Glad to hear Walker had just enough common sense to acknowledge that that Obama administration could do this job much more efficiently and effectively than Walker's own administration.

will someone on the neo-con right please list out your top 5 points to address the health care problems in this country? wislady and Midnight jumped ship on me from the last string where I asked (true to form).

You want healthcare, pay for it. Problem solved. That was easy. Healthcare is a product for sale, not some right that should be provided for all for free.

@midnight- Your statement, " In Canada you wait on a long list for treatment."- have you tried to get an appointment with a physician in the US lately- long wait here too but expensive long wait.

Does anyone on the Left profess to know the full cost of the Medical Exchanges? Does it matter who pays, the State or the Fed Gov? I mean afterall, the money comes out of our pockets either way.

I guess walker thinks the Feds can do a better job that he can at the state level?

One more thing. Obamacare is not "socialized medicine", unfortunately, any more than auto insurance is socialized risk. The government doesn't, and won't, employ the caregivers, or own the hospitals, except in the case of the VA.

Midnight - I asked first and you are basically not being honest with the points that you gave. I have to leave for the day but will be back later so maybe you will have a rational response then.

-"Why do so many people from socialism medicine countries come to American for care?"

Only the rich do so, because they can afford our first class, but expensive care, and private rooms.

-"A women giving birth to a child in England must share her room with 10 other women or more."

10 women giving birth at once, in the same room? More lies.

-"In Canada you wait on a long list for treatment."

Only for elective procedures.

-"Obamacare has gutted care for older Americans and treatment as they once had is no longer."

More lies. Medicare hasn't changed.

"Walker just saved Wisconsin. Now Obama has the burden."

What a ridiculous leap of logic. Taxpayers will pay for establishment of the exchange, no matter who sets it up, not Walker or Obama. Walker simply gave up control of that process. I guess states rights is a situational ethic for the GOP.

I'm looking forward to buying my insurance via the Federal Exchange.

Fordfan
Please list 5 things that is wrong with our healthcare system as it is today.

Why do so many people from socialism medicine countries come to American for care?

A women giving birth to a child in England must share her room with 10 other women or more. In Canada you wait on a long list for treatment.

In America we don't have that problem. YET

Obamacare has gutted care for older Americans and treatment as they once had is no longer. That is now law.

Summary:

The cost of Obamacare just in the administrative cost alone could just hand everyone in America insurance that don't have it now.

The cost to police us with regulators, IRS agents, decision panels and paper shufflers could be replaced with cash directly to the uninsured to freely go where the want when they want.

No, this is about power, anti-rights and control. It has nothing to do with care

Also those "47%" you so parade in front of us already get insurance by the government. We are talking about a complete change in our economy and our freedoms for about 10% of Americans that ...again... could be insured with the the money going in to police us with authoritarian powers.

What part of this can I explain further for you on the left?
You seem to have a mental block regarding this 2700 pg bill that was passed before it was read.

When you call names like a child, why bother when you mind is closed.

As of right now, there is no healthcare problem. The Problem with healthcare will come after Obamanocare is fully installed.

The uninsured is what you mean I'm sure and that could simply be addressed like most other big government programs. Pay for the sick when they get sick if they are not insured. Why do you need billions of dollars worth of administrators, Irs agents and death panels???

Your turn. you tell me why

tttt. And we all know you'll be the first in line!

will someone on the neo-con right please list out your top 5 points to address the health care problems in this country? wislady and Midnight jumped ship on me from the last string where I asked (true to form).

miltonlib - Obama doesn't get the money either. Now he has to ask Ryan for it....HA

I little mis-step they didn't expect in their partisan game of chess.

I hope all you peeps keep that same 'states rights' mojo when the legal marijuana fight gets to this level, because it's coming.

All of you tea party folks should settle down. Only a little more than a month before the end of the world! I guess you really can't root for that though because you all want the ACA to destroy the world. But really, wouldn't it have been wise for Rat - especially after the Supreme Court decision - to work on a plan to submit for Wisconsin...considering how absolutely horrible he and all of you think the Federal government is? It doesn't change anything except Wisconsin doesn't get the money to implement the exchange. Horray Obama, Baldwin, Healthcare and Bobby Jindahl! Finally a prominent Republican, Jindahl, has said how stupid the Republicans have been. Have a good weekend everyone! Talk to you in 2013 sometime.

True we are not exempt from a lot of it's taxes. Afterall Obamacare is just one huge tax bill, but he and 20 other states and counting have provided somewhat of a safe haven.

Obama must now include the financing through a budget which we all know the Democrats have not passed in over 3 years.

38 million was a "bribe" to start the state exchange.

Walker just saved Wisconsin. Now Obama has the burden.

Motorman - Duh.. because we'd still be broke +38million.

yada
Nov 16, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.
You are as funny as a bowl on the head haircut --

Is this really how adults act?

Yadamousezi, are you laughing at the 10th amendment because you practice nazism or do you not understand it's wording?

Article 1, section 8

Isn't that nice, Obama has extended the deadline for drinking Obamacare Koolaid to December 14th. Belly up to the bar, boys and girls, and drink a toast to the self-destruction of state's rights.

Thanks, Governor Walker, for sticking to eggnog for the holidays.

I voted for Walker twice. He just secured my vote in the next election.

10th AMMENDMENT - OMG & LOL --- You are as funny as a bowl on the head haircut --

Good move Governor - Thank You! I bet the final deciding factor was the inappropriate letter from democrats begging that Wisconsin sets up it's own exchange - that's when Governor Scott Walker knew he shouldn't.

But WISLADY - If we ask Ryan --> He probably will not give a True answer anyway, maybe the FEDS should you for help. Although it is quite possible that you will join the Re-FIB-lican Lawmakers - AKA -"Breakers"that want to have the FEDS arrested for implementing the policies. It will be fun & quite educational watching all of your in your cute little jumpsuits heading off to Federal Prison.

"WI GOP Backs Bill to ARREST FEDS IMPLEMENTING OBAMACARE"

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/11/1...

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepoliti...

*The party that gives a new meaning to stupidity.*

If only Paul could give us an answer...

--FiBs....
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/...

Thank you Walker. I'd rather have anyone but Walker set up the exchange. Besides, he'll have free health coverage in prison.

Good one wislady, let us hope this is a domino effect on other heavy taxes and burdens it puts upon us that aren't up to states.

Always remember the 10th Amendment.

I voted for Walker twice. He just lost my vote in the next election.

On the contrary thekai. Governor Walker just saved us a whole lot of money and of course freedom. 20 states just became an island for religious freedom as well as other Obamacare mandates.

To think in over 2500 pages of unread law when passed, no one on the left ever considered they would have to scramble under the weight of their own monster.

Ironic.

Just picture this..........Obama and the Feds asking Ryan and the Budget Committee for funding.

Interesting how fiscal conservatives seems to advocate an approach that they actually -hope- will be more expensive.

The even better news for Wisconsin is Illinois -who is broke buy the way -say yes to more taxing businesses and residents with state exchange. People on the left, it's just a short move south if you love big Government.
By the way, look to Michigan, and Illinois and California....they are liberal broke.

Good luck to the Feds on figuring out how to pay for this. Doesn't Congress Budget Committee authorize the funding?

Good job Governor, protecting employers and employees from ObamaNOcare mandates.
Let them figure it out, it's their law.

STATES RIGHTS!

Here's the Governor's letter to the HHS Secretary. http://www.walker.wi.gov/Documents/11.16...

He had little choice.
He is up for reelection
in two years.

Yup, this is the liberal disaster to screw up now as mostly all federal program do. Then we can create more government to amend the problems with the first laws.

"The bottom line here: the state-run exchanges would be "state-run" in name only."

Governor Walker

Walker is not alone. Several governors have said no their state heading up this slow motion train wreck called Obamacare. It's the smart fiscal decision, if nothing else. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/201...