H.R.3200 - America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 view all titles (5)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Official: To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 as reported to house.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1801-1830 of 2046 total comments.

  • Comm_reply
    bkrueg 10/01/2009 8:51am

    Re: **Obama’s Science Czar – Dr. John Holden
    Sep 7, 2009 3:56 PM
    co-author of Ecoscience – Population Resoures Environment
    Page 837: Compulsory abortions would be legal :

    Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.—John Holden

  • Comm_reply
    Cobaltblu 10/01/2009 9:06am

    Ok I get the point that you don’t like Obama or the health care bill but your multiple posts are getting very silly.

    Just because one person might decide to get an abortion which isn’t medically necessary doesn’t mean you can prohibit people from getting them who need them. Michael Jackson got so much plastic surgery he looked like a clown but that doesn’t mean you should ban reconstructive plastic surgery for people who need it to stay alive.

    Do you think Americans really want to prohibit a medically necessary procedure from occurring when someone needs it?

    Even if a majority of Americans want to prohibit a medically necessary procedure, majority rule decisions have no place when someone’s life is at stake.

    You should be ashamed for even suggesting that Obama is going to somehow support compulsory abortions, give me a break! No one reading this message board (except perhaps you) believes that the health care bill will turn into forced abortions.

  • Comm_reply
    bkrueg 10/01/2009 9:34am

    Nearly 75% of the American people do not want their tax dollars going to fund abortions, even including many of those who support abortions.

  • Comm_reply
    Cobaltblu 10/01/2009 10:28am

    You can get polls and surveys to say anything based on how you word the questions and sample the populace.

    70% of Americans do not want to prohibit a woman from getting a medically necessary procedure which could save her life…especially if you ask them the REAL non-sanitized question which is “Do you want to prohibit funding for medically necessary procedures which are needed to save lives?”

    Doctors provide services based on the accepted standard of care and any procedure which is within that accepted standard of care should be covered under health insurance and that includes medically necessary abortions.

    I am not a woman but I assume you aren’t either because I bet you would have a whole different opinion if your doctor told you, you might die if your pregnancy wasn’t terminated. Would you then stick to your principles and risk dieing to avoid the abortion?

  • Comm_reply
    bkrueg 10/01/2009 9:48am

    The only way Obama can get the un-constitutional HR-3200 past the Supreme Court is to lie to the American people and tell them it is an insurance or health care reform bill while telling the Supreme Court it is a new tax for an American benefit. After all, that is what FDR had to do with the Social Security bill and look how well that is working. OBAMA LIES, this is a new tax on the American People with no accounting just like Social Security. Any one see a LOCK BOX.

  • Comm_reply
    Cobaltblu 10/01/2009 1:43pm

    I call your bluff.

    Please specifically explain how the health care bill is unconstitutional.

    Quote the constitution and quote the health care bill and prove your accusations.

    We need a factual debate on this website and not random inflammatory quotes and incredibly unsupported claims.

    You can say it is unconstitutional as many times as you want but that doesn’t mean it is any more true.

  • Comm_reply
    bkrueg 10/01/2009 2:35pm

    WSJ-Posted September 19th, 2009 by betty “The federal government is a government of limited, enumerated powers, with the states retaining broad regulatory authority. Congress, in other words, cannot regulate simply because it sees a problem to be fixed. Federal law must be grounded in one of the specific grants of authority found in the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, which among other things gives Congress the power to tax, borrow and spend money, raise and support armies, declare war, establish post offices and regulate commerce. Health-care backers understand this and have framed the mandate as a “tax” rather than a regulation. Federal legislation requiring that every American have health insurance is part of all the major health-care reform plans now being considered in Washington. Such a mandate, however, would expand the federal government’s authority over individual Americans to an unprecedented degree. It is also profoundly unconstitutional. “

  • Comm_reply
    bkrueg 10/01/2009 2:45pm

    If a concerned citizen asks a proponent of nationalized healthcare to point to the constitutional authority for such a law, he may hear that the “General Welfare” clause, the “Necessary and Proper” clause, or the “Interstate Commerce” clause enables Congress to create national public health insurance to act. None of these clauses—or any others found in the Constitution—gives Congress the power to create a government healthcare system. The “General Welfare” clause gives Congress the power “To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.” This clause is not a grant of power to Congress (as constitutional law professor Gary Lawson has shown). It is a limit to a power given to Congress. It limits the purpose for which Congress can lay and collect taxes.

  • Comm_reply
    Cobaltblu 10/01/2009 3:08pm

    I read your comments and reviewed it with a relative who is a lawyer and you are indeed correct that the bill is unconstitutional.

    I don’t support the bill at all because it requires everyone to buy insurance merely because they are alive (not because of any economic activity or participating in any right or privilege). I didn’t necessarily think that was unconstitutional by itself but upon further review I suspect it is.

  • Comm_reply
    bkrueg 10/02/2009 7:13am

    The only way Obama can get the un-constitutional HR-3200 past the Supreme Court is to lie to the American people and tell them it is an insurance or health care reform bill while telling the Supreme Court it is a new tax for an American benefit. After all, that is what FDR had to do with the Social Security (SS) bill and look how well that is working. OBAMA LIES, this is a new tax on the American People with no accounting just like Social Security. Any one see a LOCK BOX. The money will go into the general fund and then to the Pork Barrel Projects just as bankrupt SS. IT IS A POWER GRAB.

  • Comm_reply
    ecce_ego 10/16/2009 2:45am

    My grammaw gets her social security check every month and thanks God that there is such a program that she could pay into when she was younger and working for a little INSURANCE that she would be helped out when she could no longer help herself. Shame on you for implying there is anything wrong with one of the most successful social programs our country has ever implemented.

  • Comm_reply
    bkrueg 10/01/2009 2:51pm

    Judge Andrew Napolitano. “the constitution’s Commerce Clause doesn’t afford Congress the power to regulate health care.”

  • belogical 09/29/2009 1:46pm

    People,
    Those nuts in Washington did have enough common sense not to deregulate our financial system, do you really believe their smart enough to solve this mess. Not in our lifetime. I realize people are scared and many our suffering, but we will all be that way if we sell control of our lives over to those jackel’s

  • louisabernethyy 09/30/2009 4:57am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Just fix the things that a broken, allow competition amoung the current companies, make insurance stay with the person not the company and do away with pre existing conditions. This is still a country of free choice, leave it that way. Not sure this bill is legal anyway.

  • iliveinct 09/30/2009 5:29am

    DEAR SENATE,

    NO PUBIC OPTION?! CONSIDER YOURSELF UNEMPLOYED IF YOU VOTED IT DOWN!!!

    GOOD LUCK MORONS!!!!

  • mywhitehouse 10/01/2009 8:17am

    We just need to fix the outrageous insurance prices. Opening the insurance companies to sell in all states would be an easy way of doing that. It would have also saved the time of writing this bill. We have spent to much in time alone on this bill.

    If you think you deserve health insurance just because you are American, you have lost all sight of what America is about. Land of the free doesn’t mean you get everything for free. It means you are free to build a business, or you can choose to sit on the couch and do nothing.

  • Comm_reply
    ecce_ego 10/16/2009 3:30am

    Um, not really. Yes, you are free to start a business. Yes you are free to sit on the couch. You are free to beat your wife, shoot a gun and chew tobbacky all at the same time, and you are free to deal with the consequences of anything you do. You are also free to vote. And we voted for a president and a congress that is liberal and will reform health care. And you are free to vote for what you want. If you are successful: God bless America! The system works. And if you are not successful: God bless America! The system works.

    I support a public health option because I believe that the costs to me will ultimately be less if I pitch in and help take care of those less fortunate than I. The fact that you think that anyone who supports social services is just some lazy and/or poor person who wants something for free, I think says much about the kind of person you are.

  • bkrueg 10/02/2009 7:19am

    Calling the ObamaCare Police
    Smokers, Overweight People to Face Fine Under Health Bill
    By Dan Weil NewsMax.com The Senate Finance Committee approved an amendment to the healthcare bill Wednesday that would allow employers to charge workers with unhealthy lifestyles more for their insurance coverage.
    The amendment would permits employers to adjust premiums as much as 50 percent according to the level of workers’ health habits, up from 20 percent now.

  • Comm_reply
    ecce_ego 10/16/2009 3:33am

    Good. I’m tired of waiting to see my doctor because the fatass in front of me is having his third triple bypass because he can’t stop stuffing his fat craw.

  • bkrueg 10/02/2009 7:22am

    WAR ON OLD GRANDMA.
    Department of Health and Human Services- Humana had published a letter, stating: “[I]f the proposed funding cut levels [in the current health care legislation] become law, millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable.” According to the New York Post; Baucus’ ObamaCare 6.0 plan does indeed call for funds to be cut “from Medicare Advantage – a program that offers more choice than traditional Medicare – to help pay for the overall ObamaCare tab.” And former-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren ; “that Medicare Advantage senior citizens would lose over 50 percent of their added value on Medicare under the Baucus plan.”
    THIS A NEW TAX NOT HEALTHCARE.

  • Comm_reply
    Papulee 10/02/2009 3:57pm

    I believe you are correct! Furthermore, I am disappointed that President Obama does not know the difference between “Medicare Advantage Plans”, and straight Medicare. Granted, he is very intelligent, and I’m glad he is president. But, he is sadly mistaken on this one. He thinks seniors in Medicare Advantage Plans, will not be affected at all, when they revert back to straight Medicare. That is so far from the truth, it’s pathetic! Someone should explain it to President Obama.

  • mywhitehouse 10/02/2009 7:24am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    All of these clowns are corrupt, please sign our petition. The right is only mad because the left now has the control of the corruption.

    http://mywhitehouse.org/dont-tread-on-me/

  • Comm_reply
    oderintdummetuant 10/02/2009 3:29pm

    How’s this going for you?

  • bkrueg 10/02/2009 9:20am

    JUST-SAY-NO TO HR-3200
    Sen. Thomas Carper (D.-Del.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, told CNSNews.com that he does not “expect” to read the actual legislative language of the committee’s health care bill because it is “confusing” and that anyone who claims they are going to read it and understand it is fooling people.

    “I don’t expect to actually read the legislative language because reading the legislative language is among the more confusing things I’ve ever read in my life,” Carper told CNSNews.com.

  • bkrueg 10/02/2009 9:54am

    A poll was conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corp. from September 29 to September 30 for FOX News among 900 registered voters. The poll has a 3-point error margin.
    Americans’ beliefs about what would happen if health care reform legislation were to pass sheds light on why opposition may be growing. Majorities agree the plans being considered cost too much money (62 percent), give too much power to Washington (60 percent) and take decision-making away from them and their doctor (54 percent).
    This last number is particularly important. The failure of President Clinton’s attempt at health care reform is often attributed to the public’s belief that it would lead to a loss of personal control over health care decisions.

  • bkrueg 10/02/2009 12:22pm

    By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer -The government-run plan doesn’t appear to have the votes to clear the Senate. In the House, a bill that doesn’t include a government plan to compete with private insurers won’t get off the floor, Democratic leaders say. That’s not the only fault line. The House plan taxes the wealthy to pay for subsidies needed to make health coverage affordable for millions who are now uninsured. The Senate instead taxes the health care haves — those with expensive insurance plans. They’ll face contentious issues including how to deal with coverage for abortions and how to keep benefits from going to illegal immigrants.“A lot of people have a lot of non-starters, and they are different non-starters,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "If you add up all the non-starters, it makes it very difficult to pass a bill. When we get an agreement in the House, it will contain things some people will prefer weren’t in there.

  • kerrilake1 10/02/2009 2:47pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    PUBLIC OPTION OR BUST!!!!!! Why should only the richest 2% (or whatever the % is) be allowed health insurance…that’s simply ridiculous! I may not happen to fall into the uninsured category, but I have a few times in the past and I’m quite certain that it may happen again during my lifetime and I don’t want to be left without insurance!

    VOTE YES on this bill Senetors, Congressman/Congresswoman, Representatives and all…VOTE YES FOR AMERICA!

  • Comm_reply
    oderintdummetuant 10/02/2009 3:28pm

    Yeah, good luck with that. By the way its more like 85% of America has or can afford insurance and like 15% doesn’t or can’t…but I like your passion.

  • arzuagm 10/03/2009 6:43am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    this is just a stupid bill. stop shoving this bill down everyones throats. stop kissing the bosses butt and, start thinking about the people that voted you in.
    I shouldn’t have to pay more taxes for someone who does not have insurance.
    maybe the ones that should have to pay for this absurd plan are those that do not have insurance and leave the ones that do have insurance alone.
    I see the future and the future looks dim for those politicians that pass this bill. maybe they should start sending out their resumes for their next career move. maybe they can get jobs at GM

  • LucasFoxx 10/04/2009 12:16am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    “I shouldn’t have to pay more taxes for someone who does not have insurance.”

    Your taxes are already paying for that every time someone without insurance and can’t afford it goes to the emergency room. Paying for a doctor to give you some advice about diet and exercise once or twice a year is a lot cheaper than the expensive stuff we pay for when preventable emergencies happen. And we won’t be paying for it, the insurance companies will. I’ve never being able to afford COBRA (essentially, my payment plus my former employer’s), I’m anxious to have affordable health insurance options. If you have never had to go without insurance, you are either fortunate enough to be wealthy or lucky. What about the rest of us? I suppose we should just die and leave you alone? But then, how would we support your fat paycheck by doing the hard work that pays less. Fortunately, there are more of us.


Vote on This Bill

22% Users Support Bill

2320 in favor / 8051 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments