Nelson and Reid Reach a Deal: Game Over

[Rowan]

"There are multiple reports that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has reached a deal with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) on language concerning abortion in the health care reform bill.

The manager's amendment which includes these and other last minute fixes is being read in its entirety due to the insistence of Senate Republicans."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/12/19/deal_reached_on_health_care_bill.html

[Franzl]

[Sam Spade]

And now the real fun can begin...

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Good.

[cinyc]

Yay!  More taxation, regulation and limits on personal freedom!

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.   The majority of Americans oppose this crap bill.  May the Democrats reap what they sow in 2010.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

On the plus side, I've seen 6 coat hangers for a dollar.

[Franzl]

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.
 

But a very happy day for the millions of uninsured people that will now have access to healthcare.

[cinyc]

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.
 

But a very happy day for the millions of uninsured people that will now have access to healthcare.

Nonsense.  Most of those millions of uninsured people ALREADY have access to health care.  Paying cash works.  Insurance isn't necessary to get health care in this country.

And even after this crap bill passes, maybe some will have "access" to health care.  In 2014.  After the taxes have already been put into effect.  Or maybe they'll end up in JAIL because they can't afford to buy an expensive, mandatory, government-approved insurance policy that covers things they don't want or need. 

Bringing back debtors' prisons - it's the Democrat way!

[MaxQue]

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.
 

But a very happy day for the millions of uninsured people that will now have access to healthcare.

Nonsense.  Most of those millions of uninsured people ALREADY have access to health care.  Paying cash works.  Insurance isn't necessary to get health care in this country.

And even after this crap bill passes, maybe some will have "access" to health care.  In 2014.  After the taxes have already been put into effect.  Or maybe they'll end up in JAIL because they can't afford to buy an expensive, mandatory, government-approved insurance policy that covers things they don't want or need. 

Bringing back debtors' prisons - it's the Democrat way!

Some are very good to understand the Republican talk points, but less to understand reality.

[Rowan]

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.
 

But a very happy day for the millions of uninsured people that will now have access to healthcare.

Yeah because they will be FORCED to buy the insurance.

[MaxQue]

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.
 

But a very happy day for the millions of uninsured people that will now have access to healthcare.

Yeah because they will be FORCED to buy the insurance.

Well, that is the reality in all the occidental world expect the US and they have no problems with that. And don't say than Canada is against liberty, dead0man posted something months ago who was saying than Canada was much more libertarian than US.

[Vepres]

Good luck combining this with the house bill, it is game over, for the Democrats

[Sam Spade]

Obviously, when the bill actually comes out, I'll read it and give commentary.  But assuming that most provisions are similar to past bills, there are a few points to be made.

1) Any of the actual health care benefits as they pertain to the bill do not go into effect into 2013.  Remember that.

2) The number of uninsureds should decrease because they will be forced to buy health insurance on the open market as individuals (if they don't have work) or companies will have to provide said health insurance (I'll have to read the exact language).  This is the bribe being given to the health insurance companies and is a giant tax on individuals and small businesses that goes into effect now (remember because none of the government handouts to protect individuals/small businesses go into effect until 2013).  Illegals, of course, I think get out of this tax, but I'd need to read the new language to make sure.

3) A good chunk of savings are being done by massive cuts in Medicare benefits to doctors and by largely changing the system of Medicare as we know it (the former will be the same, the latter is how it in the House bill - I don't know whether the Senate changes this).  Historically, any cuts in Medicare payments to doctors have been reversed via omnibus spending changes later on.  So there's a two-way street here, either the cuts occur and the spending on this bill will increase by a ton or I suspect most doctors will stop taking Medicare.

4) There are a number of other individual taxes in previous bills that I'm not going to go into now - basically, Republican or Democrat, you're going to get ass-raped over the next 3 years.

[Zarn]

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.
 

But a very happy day for the millions of uninsured people that will now have access to healthcare.

I'm not insured right now, although I am taking care of it by getting through my job in a month or two. My career will also help me out there.

Since I don't have insurance for my eyes, I just paid for my own contact lenses, glasses, and exams. How inhumane...  how can I ever afford food now? /end sarcasm

[Torie]

If a significant number of docs stop taking medicare patients, I would think the end game is to increase the payments but ration, since the money just isn't there to increase the payments and not ration, no matter how much one might want to do that.

If marginal employers have to provide health insurance, they will cut wages or hire fewer people, which means really that the employees are paying the premiums, which is as it should be. No one thought that subsidizing the premiums of the uninsured poors and the sick with pre-existing conditions would be free, but  maybe over time there will be some offsetting savings derived from less use of the emergency rooms, and less cost associated with delayed health care (with the attendant exacerbating the medical condition to be treated).

So, my initial impression, Sam Spade, is that if your bullet points are the "worst" that is in the Bill, it may well have merit.

[MaxQue]

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.
 

But a very happy day for the millions of uninsured people that will now have access to healthcare.

I'm not insured right now, although I am taking care of it by getting through my job in a month or two. My career will also help me out there.

Since I don't have insurance for my eyes, I just paid for my own contact lenses, glasses, and exams. How inhumane...  how can I ever afford food now? /end sarcasm

Well, I hope than eye care is not included in the bill. Most countries doesn't include eye and dental care in the universal coverage and in the public insurance system. In Canada, we can buy supplemental insurance for teeth and eyes.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Yay!  More taxation, regulation and limits on personal freedom!

Personal freedom to die due to lack of insurance, yay!

[Sam Spade]

If a significant number of docs stop taking medicare patients, I would think the end game is to increase the payments but ration, since the money just isn't there to increase the payments and not ration, no matter how much one might want to do that.

If marginal employers have to provide health insurance, they will cut wages or hire fewer people, which means really that the employees are paying the premiums, which is as it should be. No one thought that subsidizing the premiums of the uninsured poors and the sick with pre-existing conditions would be free, but  maybe over time there will be some offsetting savings derived from less use of the emergency rooms, and less cost associated with delayed health care (with the attendant exacerbating the medical condition to be treated).

So, my initial impression, Sam Spade, is that if your bullet points are the "worst" that is in the Bill, it may well have merit.

Heh.  Let me read the actual bill first.

Few points:
1) If an increasing number of docs stop taking Medicare, you will essentially ration the care given to the elderly based on income (or at least set up a two-tier structure).  Increase in Medicare payments will never happen, though I can see the rationing coming into play (and who decides this, btw).  The question with Medicare payments is simply whether the cuts are real or will be rescinded under pressure later on as they always have been.  That will effect what else occurs.  The elimination of Medicare Advantage is specifically to benefit AARP, as I am sure you are well aware of.

2) The premiums for individuals will, of course, be much higher than those obtained to through employers - that's the reason why I referred to it as a stealth tax.  I disagree that emergency rooms will see less action - go see what happened in Massachusetts under Romney's plan.

3) I am sure you are well aware of what this really is - a revenue-raising method through increased taxation to offset the massive drop in government revenues that is still ongoing today.  The health care changes are lasting, but secondary, because the general thought is that by 2013, the economy will be better and revenues will be up so that we can implement what we really want.  Fits along with everything else the government is presently doing, actually.  Extend and pretend.

[Vepres]

Yay!  More taxation, regulation and limits on personal freedom!

It's a very sad day for individual rights, limited government and freedom.   The majority of Americans oppose this crap bill.  May the Democrats reap what they sow in 2010.

[Torie]

Sam Spade, premiums for individuals at the moment are substantially less than the premiums in a group plan (in my case about half as much), if the individual got individual coverage while healthy. Will that change?

[Sbane]

So the subsidies won't start till 2013 but people would be forced to buy it before then? I don't think congressional dems are that retarded. I think you may be talking about the public option starting in 2013, which doesn't even exist anymore afaik. This bill isn't perfect but I don't see what would be the better way to cover everyone. And if we have to cover everyone we gotta pay for it somehow. Hey at least the democrats are trying to pay for their spending, which is a pleasant divergence from the republican strategy of borrowing from China and screaming "omgz fiscal conservatism" loud enough so that nobody realizes what they are doing.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     So this bill makes it a crime to not have health insurance? Can't say I like that idea much, though I guess it makes practical sense.

[Sbane]

     So this bill makes it a crime to not have health insurance? Can't say I like that idea much, though I guess it makes practical sense.

Yeah but I don't think anyone is getting put in jail for this. They will just be taxed more and if they don't pay that they will face the same consequences you face anyways today for not paying taxes. And I must say this is one of the bills I really approve of. I am much more apprehensive about mandates on small businesses.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     So this bill makes it a crime to not have health insurance? Can't say I like that idea much, though I guess it makes practical sense.

Yeah but I don't think anyone is getting put in jail for this. They will just be taxed more and if they don't pay that they will face the same consequences you face anyways today for not paying taxes. And I must say this is one of the bills I really approve of. I am much more apprehensive about mandates on small businesses.

     Even if they are merely taxed at a higher rate (nevermind the tax load already suffered by the lowest earners) rather than prison time, isn't that still just punishing someone for a victimless crime?

[Ronnie]

Depressing