H.R.3590 - Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes. view all titles (46)

All Bill Titles

  • Popular: Health care reform bill as .
  • Official: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Popular: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as introduced.
  • Popular: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Legislative Vehicle) as introduced.
  • Short: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as passed senate.
  • Official: An act entitled The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. as amended by senate.
  • Short: Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: Catalyst to Better Diabetes Care Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: CLASS Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Congenital Heart Futures Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Cures Acceleration Network Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: EARLY Act as passed senate.
  • Short: Elder Justice Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: ENHANCED Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: Establishing a Network of Health-Advancing National Centers of Excellence for Depression Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Short: Young Women's Breast Health Education and Awareness Requires Learning Young Act of 2009 as passed senate.
  • Official: An act entitled The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. as introduced.
  • Popular: Health care reform bill.
  • Popular: Patient protection and affordable care bill.
  • Short: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as passed house.
  • Short: Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Catalyst to Better Diabetes Care Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: CLASS Act as passed house.
  • Short: Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act as passed house.
  • Short: Congenital Heart Futures Act as passed house.
  • Short: Cures Acceleration Network Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: EARLY Act as passed house.
  • Short: Elder Justice Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: ENHANCED Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Establishing a Network of Health-Advancing National Centers of Excellence for Depression Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Young Women's Breast Health Education and Awareness Requires Learning Young Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Young Women's Breast Health Education and Awareness Requires Learning Young Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as enacted.
  • Short: Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: Catalyst to Better Diabetes Care Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: CLASS Act as enacted.
  • Short: Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act as enacted.
  • Short: Congenital Heart Futures Act as enacted.
  • Short: Cures Acceleration Network Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: EARLY Act as enacted.
  • Short: Elder Justice Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: ENHANCED Act of 2009 as enacted.
  • Short: Establishing a Network of Health-Advancing National Centers of Excellence for Depression Act of 2009 as enacted.

Comments Feed

Displaying 31-60 of 211 total comments.

mouseissue 05/23/2010 8:46am
in reply to mastermeerkat May 15, 2010 9:43am

Almost nothing the gov’t does is good!

Mediocre is the best they can do (And even that is rare).

mouseissue 05/23/2010 8:44am
in reply to moongirl61 Mar 30, 2010 4:18am

THESE ARE NOT RIGHTS!!!
We pay sales and property taxes (among others) for these services.

BTW, we are “endowed” with our rights.
The gov’t can only regulate or take them from us.

And, the gov’t has no money it has not taken from us!
So if you think their being generous, you are a fool!

Time to get back to earth and educated moongirl61!

mastermeerkat 05/15/2010 9:43am

This bill was suppose to be good

Without the public option this law only makes it worse.

jabariabramson 05/01/2010 10:07am

Do we need an amendment to separate corporation and state? Good Lord, they need to just hit the kids with healthier lifestyles, exercise and preventative care and implement medicinal marijuana to help cut those damn prescription pill costs down and the government could take in some revenue.

kbthiede 04/22/2010 4:36pm
Link Reply
+ -1

haha bill is law, and you losers are whining even though it seems to help the guys you jerk off to every night: the wealthy corporate elite

d3hartm2 04/09/2010 8:29am
in reply to zombiexl Mar 26, 2010 11:29am

“The “working poor” (with kids) get back far more than they paid in federal tax."

So do most of the “red” states. I’m tired of Mississippi and Alaska taking my money.

jsprong 04/07/2010 5:59am
Link Reply
+ -1

I totally disagree with the methods these people are using to display their disagreement with this bill. They made it much harder for the rest of us to be able to disagree with this bill in a way that we are actually heard, in a way which may be more useful for making progress. And, as long as the and debated,se idiots continue acting like this, and using violence, the threat of violence, or other foul talk to respond to things that they don’t like, people are going to continue to equate them to everyone else who disagrees with what Obama and the rest of the government is doing.
While the summary of H.R.3962 looks fantastic, the real meat of the bill is nothing but a bunch of lining for rich people and politicians, people who wanted their fingers in it to get something for themselves. Obama did nothing to stop this, as he had promised to do during campaigning.
I guess for now the government will stay behind them, and keep getting away with nibbling away at our constitutional rights.

moongirl61 03/30/2010 4:18am
in reply to Bostondan Mar 25, 2010 11:38am

Well, Bostondan, I guess you’ll be forfeiting your right to use community services then, since you don’t think the government should do anything to help you. When your home is burning, or a family member has a heart attack, I don’t want to hear you calling 911 for help :)

ComputerGranny 03/29/2010 2:43pm
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to LookingtoMakeaDifference Dec 28, 2009 4:19am

I’m not sure what you mean. It’s not a requirement to have insurance to get treatment. You just have to pay cash. The problem with the current system is people with insurance get the “contract” price. Anyone without it pays double or more for the same service. The price should be the same for all. Then, if you want insurance or can afford it, fine. If not, pay for the service when you get it. Save the money you don’t pay for premiums to pay for your care when you need it.

Torry 03/29/2010 9:43am
in reply to honestgrunt Jan 25, 2010 3:27pm

The TSA had nothing to do with the Xmas bomber. He came in from a foreign country, and through their security, not ours.

PChalks 03/29/2010 8:38am

I would like to know why you left out Sec. 1513 from your summary of this bill. That is not in any indicative of “Open” anything, Congress or otherwise. That is perhaps the most invasive, calamitous aspect of this bill, and one that has gotten no attention whatsoever from the media. Virtually no one knows it exists; therefore, nobody knows the harm it will cause to our economy.

octavian61 03/28/2010 1:23pm
Link Reply
+ -2
in reply to saknama Mar 11, 2010 11:23am

Mr.saknama, the law struck down by the Supreme court does not infringe on liberties…Explain to me how Obama was able to raise more than 780 million dollars for his campaign, and the writer of the bill John McCain raised more than 350 million dollars for his campaign,with the bill in place for about 6 years…..That totals a whopping 1 billion dollars for a job that pays around 500,000 a year…The billion dollar president…The law did not stop them from making money….

kvarnlov 03/28/2010 12:03pm
in reply to LeMat Nov 29, 2009 11:14am

This is a genuine question, so I hope you see it as this. I keep hearing people say that this bill is unconstitutional, however I do not plainly see the unconstitutionality of it. Can you please explain the details of the bill that make it unconstitutional? Thank you. I look forward to your answer.

Dmdclossin 03/27/2010 9:02am

LMAO I just think that, Yes you should defy the Governmentwhen they do something that is unethical and flat out wrong but please just don’t be the person who complains and B****s when your employer sticks you with the cheapest plan they can find and quite possibly may just be as usless as not having Insurance at all. Please do not be the people that complain becasue you are getting collection calls because your kid broke their leg and get stuck with a $6k bill for just a MRI. Don’t be mad when your plan drops your butt when you get cancer and your plan tells you “sorry we’re only going to give you $100,000 for a lifetime benefit” when your Chemo run at $15k a treatment. As for the president himself, lets face it like him or hate him he promised this would be done and in just over a year it’s done unlike the other presidents who tried and failed over the past 40 years.

zombiexl 03/26/2010 11:29am
Link Reply
+ -2
in reply to suzieqs Dec 31, 2009 3:35am

The “working poor” (with kids) get back far more than they paid in federal tax. Add to that all the other assistance they (reduced or free childcare, WIC, food stamps, the list goes on and on). This may not represent 100% of the “working poor”, as you call them but it does represent a large portion.

I have many friends that are “working poor” and I love tax time when they complain to me about how little they got back. Then I usually ask ‘how much did you pay?’. The answer usually comes out around 1/3 or less than they received back. I have no problem if they get back 100% of their federal income tax, but to give back more than they paid is a hand out. Social Security is not refundable, so that tax shouldn’t enter the argument.

caj51fish 03/26/2010 5:29am
in reply to jnjnelson Dec 22, 2009 10:13am

It was the only way to start the reform process without creating another entitlement.

LucasFoxx 03/25/2010 3:03pm
in reply to Bostondan Mar 25, 2010 11:38am

When the choice comes down to greed or saving lives, I will always back life.

jonhoye 03/25/2010 12:10pm
in reply to Bostondan Mar 25, 2010 11:38am

According to gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/hist.html table 6.1 you can thank our victory in WWII as a manufacturer supplying the allies for a large amount of your purchasing parity. This is the period where the US economy grew the most since its inception. The delayed entry to war was a government decision, fully supported by our extremely unhawkish fathers and grandfathers.

According to Dr. C. J. Tassava, our mobilization for war thanks in a large part to Roosevelt’s “the Arsenal of Democracy” in the year before we were attacked in Pearl Harbor gave us the preparedness advantage needed to win outright economically and militarily.

So don’t be too quick to dismiss Goverment’s role in your quality of life. As for market competition… There exists no market competition under yesterdays system, when employees don’t have the opportunity to choose their provider you have a different form of governance, the kind that involves a company store.

Bostondan 03/25/2010 11:38am
in reply to LucasFoxx Mar 24, 2010 9:53pm

Let’s see what HAS the free market given me? An incredibly high standard of living perhaps. More selection of goods an services than can be imagined in a centrally controlled economy? Competition is what is is all about. Government run industries have none and do take everything from you for crappy goods and services. This bill effectively will put private insurers out of busienss, forcing a government option as a response to an “emergency”. Or, government control of the companies. In either case, no competition and eventually very expensive very mediocre health care. Unless you are in Congress of course.
But, this always boils down to this: Do you want to be self reliant or do you rely on and trust your government to fix your problems and make you happy? If you do want the government to take care of you, getting you to look at the history and impacts of big government is like teaching a pig to sing. It only annoys the pig and frustrates the teacher.

Dmdclossin 03/25/2010 8:14am
in reply to OKStateBrad Mar 24, 2010 5:06am

You state that Insurance is part of you benefits compensation such as your paycheck. So by that logic you think that those who are unable to owrk or work for a company who can not afford insurance coverage that they not be allowed to have help with getting coverage. IF this is the case then isn’t the same thing as those who receive SS checks, Medicaid, Medicare, Food stamps… aren’t those forms of compensation for those who can’t be compensated and why is so radical to think that the same government that gives these compensations also be able to give insurance benefit as well.

LucasFoxx 03/25/2010 6:49am
in reply to jonhoye Mar 24, 2010 11:16pm

Charlie Rose is a treasure, and an aberration.

jonhoye 03/24/2010 11:16pm
in reply to LucasFoxx Mar 24, 2010 9:50pm

Check out Charlie Rose’s coverage of the issue. He’s been able to have straight, informative interviews with people involved in every aspect of this thing. Not sure how he does it, but when people appear on his show they don’t simply regurgitate party talking points. Until now I just followed him on mid-east related issues, such as when Petraeus was on, but these days I watch almost every show. Recent stuff is on hulu, with back logs available from his site.

LucasFoxx 03/24/2010 9:53pm
in reply to Bostondan Mar 24, 2010 12:45pm

Yes: “HUGE ineffeciencies and waste”; and yet still: “the best on the planet.”

What has the free market done for you without taking everything it can from you?

LucasFoxx 03/24/2010 9:50pm
in reply to LucasFoxx Mar 24, 2010 9:44pm

My point was supposed to be that people should know certian things, but since the issue is not simple and public media has failed to keep the public informed, we end up wasting a lot of time on rhetoric when matters of fact could be stated more simply. I got a little side tracked. It’s late.

LucasFoxx 03/24/2010 9:44pm
in reply to jonhoye Mar 24, 2010 12:32pm

That’s really the problem with the whole issue. Since our “news” outlets are no longer in the information business (they are in the entertainment business), and outrageous fights over fictional matters get more ratings than reasoned argument over matters of fact, we’ve ended up with an uninformed public that is rabid about things that don’t exist in this bill because their “news” (commentary) networks are.

LucasFoxx 03/24/2010 9:22pm
in reply to geekmom Mar 24, 2010 12:15pm

Hmmmm… I’ll only say that I voted for the Democratic take back of congress, and the current President, partly because I had, and might still have, the same sentiments toward the Republican party that you are expressing. The current majority, my local reps, and the President are currently trying to solve the problems we voted them into office to solve. You’re statistic doesn’t really mean much to me in that light.

jonhoye 03/24/2010 5:55pm

I may try to reply to the Howard Rich essay here, since it’s the bottom of the thread. This guy sure quotes a lot of figures without offering any source for where he gets them. It’s also frustrating that he uses such obvious exaggeration. He’s a very wealthy man, maybe he has some access to privy information, but he’s the first guy to question the CBO report in everything I’ve read. Not exactly an unbiased investigative journalist there, I’ll be surprised if he gets much traction.

Until very recently I very much supported most libertarians, voting for them whenever I got to the polls, but these guys are off the rocker lately. What’s an independent party that wants to reduce the deficit and reach fiscal responsibility, not simply by avoiding interaction with government, but by actually working within it.

jonhoye 03/24/2010 3:36pm
in reply to Bostondan Mar 24, 2010 2:48pm

If you refer to the 1982 anti-trust lawsuit the United States vs AT&T, then lets do it, you have my vote. If health insurance reform is on the same road then I can’t wait for the day. As for the Howard Rich essay, if you have his kind of money, then I understand why you wouldn’t support this thing. Poor guy is about to get an extra 1/2 % income tax on his billion dollar investment portfolio windfalls when the house amendments go through. But I generally don’t trust what he says because he speaks in hyperbole.

I simply fail to see the same thing you do in this bill, I don’t see a public option, or a new government run plan. It looks like regulation when I read it, and fiscally responsible, timely legislation at that. I do complain that it’s cumbersome, but at least it phases in so we can see some effects and have time to anticipate the rest.

Bostondan 03/24/2010 3:03pm
Link Reply
+ -1

Check this out, it says it all: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/content/view/full/27899

Bostondan 03/24/2010 2:48pm
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to jonhoye Mar 24, 2010 1:20pm

Ah Grasshopper, you are young and have much to learn. Giant corporations cannot match the mischief giant goverments achieve on a regular basis.
Example: Once the biggest corporation in the world, in less than 20 years it disappeared. It was protected by the government for 100 years, given monopoly status based on reasons that had disappeared decades before. It was stripped of it’s protection and, due to miserable customer service, huge bureaucracy, and inflated pay scales, went the way of the dinosaurs. I refer to AT&T. It survives in name only, which was purchased by one of it’s offspring. The market worked, once the goverment got out of the way. So, regulate, but don’t run should be the goverment’s role. Insure free market entrace and egress, enforce the anti-trust laws, and get out of the way.


Vote on This Bill

29% Users Support Bill

1086 in favor / 2695 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments