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 1-30 of 211 total comments.

mouseissue 03/31/2012 4:50pm

This bill creates far more problems than it solves PLUS causing costs to rise even more!
It should be scrapped and start over.

The first two goals should be; (1) to make healthcare more affordable for EVERYONE!
and (2) make it more accessible to low wage earners.

Healthcare will NEVER be free!… No matter how much you want it to be.
And expensive care must paid for by “someone”.

For the liberals, that “someone” is just about anybody else who makes a more $$$ than they do!
Problem is, sooner or later, you run out of other people’s money.
This is the core flaw of Socialism.

PGJK 02/01/2012 6:22pm

“To amend …certain other Federal employees [I’m fine up until this point, except in cases of those “noshow” FEDs to which division heads be held accountable for support. AND AS FOR “…and for other purposes”. No way!!! ..Just like monies from the lottery that was supposed to go toward education. We should have by now, qualified teachers using topend learning materials in the U.S. system by now, instead Ed. system is laying off & not hiring due to lack of funds. Imagine millions & millions of unallocated monies slated toward educational system being spent elsewhere (I’ll keep my 1 pothole for just 1 more qualified teacher). No wonder foreign countries are killing us in our school syatem, infrastructure seems more important than a child’s education. And forget about funding for continued education where most students are just about forced to pay their own way unless they’ve received some scholarship monies or are a minority.

“…and for other purposes” ..definitely no way!!!

Spam Comment

esthersgirl1 09/02/2011 7:57pm
in reply to BelovedEmpress Dec 21, 2009 9:59am

Let’s for a moment forget about the taxpayer, one of which I am. Don’t you realize that this bill, along with H.R 756, protects YOU, IF YOU DO BECOME ILL. I was a 6 figure employee when I became ill with a vast array of diseases,including, Lyme, Cancer, Fibromyalga, spinal steosis and degenerative disc disease. I had to retire and give up my 6 figure job. I am now handicapped. This bill and others pay for research and development, along with paying for extended education of the medical community, medicare and third party payers, and believe me, THEY NEED TO BE EDUCATED! Most of the doctors I have met do not know how to treat the sick. I am now handicapped and my surgeon was paid more than he was worth. Thank goodness for medicare.

magicalpig 12/30/2010 7:54am
in reply to BenjaWiz Nov 21, 2010 11:55pm

huh
What new tax?

magicalpig 12/30/2010 7:49am
in reply to applemanmatt Mar 23, 2010 11:17am

“So to solve the problem create a nationwide private health insurance market with nationwide policies of what a package can include…and ban companies from rejecting people from pre-existing conditions. That will fix our health care system.”

And isn’t that what this bill aims to do?

BenjaWiz 12/10/2010 3:42pm

THIS BILL NEEDS TO BE DEFUNDED RIGHT AWAY………

nwipling 11/29/2010 12:16am
in reply to Hearmenow Jun 04, 2010 6:38am

You get to pay an extra tax if you are deemed to have a ‘rich’ benefit plan provided by your employer…unless you are in law enforcement or a high-morbidity risk field.

nwipling 11/29/2010 12:11am

The language of this law was carefully crafted so that one can claim it is only ‘regulation’ of the health insurance industry. But there is a large lack of limitations specifying how far that regulation will be allowed in practice. So yes, the talk of death panels is bunk – there are none, but there is no definitive verbiage in it that would prevent restrictions from reimbursing for treatments that were deemed ineffective. That is why this issue is so highly polarized – its interpretation hinges on whether you have a more apprehensive or altruistic view of government or big business.

nwipling 11/29/2010 12:04am
in reply to Corivee Mar 22, 2010 12:39pm

And this intrusive, over-extending form of government is what those logically consistent ‘tea baggers’ are protesting against.

nwipling 11/29/2010 12:00am
in reply to Analyst1 Aug 19, 2010 2:03am

@Analyst1
The difference is that public roads are a public good, financed by the public. Health insurance companies, are not.

Government jurisdiction should be religated to institutions and assets that are public goods.

BenjaWiz 11/21/2010 11:55pm

BAD BILL SEND IT BACK NO NEW TAXES.

jacckfrost 11/16/2010 11:07am

I support this bill as it allows for innovation to take place in the industry and it will create jobs. I work in the hightech/Software industry and I can see may ways plenty of companies can get involved in making this happen.

Leopardskinpillboxhat 11/15/2010 6:24pm
in reply to grant3719 Dec 24, 2009 7:25am

Finally, someone writes an informed and insightful post. I couldn’t agree more!

Leopardskinpillboxhat 11/15/2010 6:04pm
in reply to jnjnelson Dec 30, 2009 5:22am

So then all taxes…ever. That’s ridiculous.

PatriotFather 11/13/2010 3:47pm
in reply to Americafirst Mar 17, 2010 4:36pm

false

hanawaykp 11/11/2010 6:51am
in reply to b58 Dec 14, 2009 3:56am

There are a seeming majority of people who, according to the latest surveys, do not support this bill. However, approximately a third of those who don’t support the bill do so because they wanted the bill to go further. The bottom line is that this bill more supported than not. It simple logic but it will be spinned until there is nothing logical about it.

For Republicans the votes and their wins speak volumes. But, much like the healthcare bill I would not be quick to draw any final conclusions.

carlt 10/23/2010 9:29am

test comment

kir 10/07/2010 4:06am

I was just told that according to a new law if you have health insurance, you can not go to another doctor and pay cash, you must use a doctor that takes your insurance plan. Any idea if this is true and if so is it in this bill or another?

umrph95 10/01/2010 9:30am

Last year our federal income tax, alone, was within 3 or 4 thousand dollars of my husband’s entire gross income! We have 4 children and both work full time, plus I have 4 prn positions to keep us afloat. As a health care professional I am livid when I see the amount of my hard-earned $ that our government wastes. When a customer/patient drives up to our drive-thru in a Lincoln Navigator, wearing designer clothes, and talking on a Blackberry then hands me a medicaid card to pay for their medication it is difficult to maintain a professional composure. I resent giving half of my income to these kinds of people. Waste is rampant!!! If our government wants to save $ on healthcare, lets limit access to these programs to only the elderly, TRULY disabled, or critically ill (those with a CRITICAL illness that prevents them from working). I stood on my feet working 10 – 12 hr shifts for the past 2 years with a hemoglobin of 7 (they give transfusions at 5). If I can do it, so can a lot of others

Analyst1 08/19/2010 2:03am
in reply to saknama Mar 11, 2010 11:43am

“It’s not the gov’s role to tell us what we can do and what we can’t do. It’s their role to ensure that our rights are not taken from us.”

So the government is obligated to ensure our rights are not taken from us, however in order to do that the government must at some point impede on the rights of those that would take those rights away from us.

In order to have some rights, other rights must be taken away. If someone has a car, in a state of anarchy they would be able to drive at 100+ mph without any issue from an overarching authority. However, our nation values safety, so in the U.S. a car must operate within accepted speed limits so as to protect the safety of the group. The right to go 100mph is taken in exchange for the right to pass through our road systems with relative safety. In that sense, the government is very much telling us what we can and can’t do, because such a deed is necessary to preserve our rights.

Analyst1 08/19/2010 1:51am
in reply to honestgrunt Jan 25, 2010 3:23pm

“have you ever heard of the ‘Free Market’. the part that makes it work is the FREE part.”
A splendid joke chap! Well met!
Oh wait, your serious.
The problem with your statement is that in the U.S. there isn’t and hasn’t been a “Free Market” for some time. In a Free Market there are no restrictions on what can be done in the private sector aside basic property laws. Evidently this isn’t what you want though, considering that you go on to say:
“i aint saying there shouldnt be rule and regs …”
What you have described here isn’t a free market at all, it’s what is called a mixed market, and it just so happens to be the type of market the U.S. has had for decades. A mixed market is simply a market that allows for private control of assets with government regulation.
You then making assertions that no one seems to be suggesting. No one has said private industry should in anyway be overturned. No one has stated that people shouldn’t be allowed to try and sell superior products to the public.

JonasGreywolf 07/28/2010 12:25pm
in reply to LeMat Nov 29, 2009 11:14am

You say this is unconstitutional, but you do nothing to support your claim. Try using facts instead of slogans & jargons. It might help your case.

JobyOne 07/13/2010 1:21pm
in reply to suzieqs Mar 01, 2010 12:20am

I certainly have. I love the idea of this website, but I wish it were a better sampling of the people at large. There seems to be a pretty hard bend to the right here.

That’s why most of the time I use it just to keep track of the progress of bills, and try to pretend the comments don’t exist (except just now obviously).

nivekeleets21 06/24/2010 1:09pm
in reply to elmichle May 25, 2010 7:19pm

he voted yes for the bill.

Hearmenow 06/04/2010 6:38am

Please forgive my ignorance but before I say I like or do not like this bill can someone please explain the following?
Title IX: Revenue Provisions – Subtitle A: Revenue Offset Provisions – (Sec. 9001, as modified by section 10901) Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose an excise tax of 40% of the excess benefit from certain high cost employer-sponsored health coverage. Deems any amount which exceeds payment of $8,500 for an employee self-only coverage plan and $23,000 for employees with other than self-only coverage (family plans) as an excess benefit. Increases such amounts for certain retirees and employees who are engaged in high-risk professions (e.g., law enforcement officers, emergency medical first responders, or longshore workers). Imposes a penalty on employers and coverage providers for failure to calculate the proper amount of an excess benefit.
Sec. 9002) Requires employers to include in the W-2 form of each employee the aggregate cost of applicable employer ,etc

vote4whoandwhy 05/26/2010 4:44am

OK, this may sound wacked out,BUT what if each state took the funds out of its lottery commission to fund its individual state’s unemployment extension?? Everyone KNOWS how much money is made by the lottery commission!!! Just a thought. Horray for the great work force recovery bill. Let’s hope it works…(rolls eyes) BUT PLEASE CONGRESS, PASS AN AMENDMENT to the existing tier AT LEAST to get us through to eat, pay for gas to get to our interviews, and to pay for clothing and shoes for an interview!!

elmichle 05/25/2010 7:19pm

I already voted out specter for turning his back on us. Who’s next?

elmichle 05/25/2010 7:17pm

I am a long term unemployed individual. I had spent 28 years working and paying taxes in the State of Pennsylvania. I was last employed, for 10 years, as a technician in the lab of a textile processing facility. I have an associates degree in the arts and I am now in my junior year of the B.A. program at Kutztown University. I have lots of experience and education. I have been looking for a job for a long time and I have not found one. Bad (employed) people are saying that I/we are lazy and not looking for work. I was filing mail claims for quite some time, to receive my benefits. Any one of our elected officials should know this much, or they should not even be broaching the subject. The truth is you can’t be a long term unemployed individual and not have been looking for work, because, at one point, you must document your searches. If my congressmen don’t help me, I do not know who I will vote for – none of them deserves to draw a paycheck from the taxes I will pay.

elmichle 05/25/2010 7:03pm

Last month our elected officials fed myself and many others to the sharks, when they did not add a tier 5 in Pennsylvania. Since then I have searched the websites of Arlen Specter and Bob Casey, to see if they were addressing this issue. What I have found is that they all just seem to be ignoring it. They are not mentioning unemployment at all. The are all shouting and throwing their hands up in praise of some workforce recovery act. I received a response to an email that I sent to Casey, about my need for a tier 5, and he responded by telling me about this great work force recovery bill they passed. He did not even mention the word unemployment in it, not once. These politicians want to tell us they have created jobs – why don’t they offer us one then? Now they are going to give an extension to others and not to us. If they give an extension to any they should give one to all. I have been looking for work, for so long, and now I don’t have any money at all to look for work.


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