H.R.3962 - Affordable Health Care for America Act

To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes. view all titles (10)

All Bill Titles

  • 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: Affordable Health Care for America Act as introduced.
  • Short: Affordable Health Care for America Act as introduced.
  • Short: Indian Health Care Improvement Act Amendments of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Affordable Health Care for America Act as passed house.
  • Short: Indian Health Care Improvement Act Amendments of 2009 as passed house.
  • Official: An act to provide a physician payment update, to provide pension funding relief, and for other purposes. as amended by senate.
  • Short: Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010 as passed senate.
  • Short: Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010 as passed house.
  • Short: Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010 as enacted.

Comments Feed

Displaying 661-690 of 721 total comments.

Lmmspeasley 11/02/2009 12:44pm

The arrogance in Washington is just unbelieveable! There is not one word directed to one of the main causes of Healthcare abuse…hence payback to the trail lawyers for getting this bafoon in office. Does healthcare need fixing, hell yes. Rushing the 1,990 pages of a language no one but the trail lawyers understands, trying to vote on it quickly should be raising some really red flags for all of us. I personally feel like Congress is acting like a shady car salesman and selling us a bunch of garbage desguised in a pretty little red bow…you know, like the stimulus was shoved down our throats…transparency my rear end! Stop lying to the American People. We are your bosses! Slow it down, ask the people who work in the system that aren’t bad lawyers for advice and let’s put forth a piece of legislation that will make sense and not take from our Senior Citizens who worked their entire lives for what the thugs in Washington are trying to steal from them.

bkrueg 11/02/2009 10:28am
in reply to sonni43 Nov 01, 2009 4:21am

I’ve read your words and at the end the question that stands out in my mind is, “When did you sonni43 ever read the Holy Bible?” It is in my thoughts that liberals like you use the Bible the same as they do the United States Constitution and that is it’s a growing, living document that changes with society and the feelings of the day. HR 3962 is an unpopular and a costly power grab by the Democrat President and the Congress. The facts are HR 3962 will be found un-constitutional by the high court. Just look what your OBAMA government has done for the Native Americans who turn to government for their health care. It is the worst health care in the USA. They run out of money in June. DO NOT TRUST THE GOVERNMENT WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE. JUST-SAY-NO TO HR-3962

bkrueg 11/02/2009 8:58am
in reply to LucasFoxx Oct 30, 2009 5:30pm

lucasfoxx- When liberals have no facts they attack the messenger and try to change the facts and then topic. The topic is still HR 3962. The facts are that HR 3962 is unpopular and a costly power grab by the Democrat President and the Congress. The facts are HR 3962 will be found un-constitutional by the high court. I can help you in your effort to find the facts if you can stay on topic. Your personal attacks are meaningless to the debate. DO NOT TRUST THE GOVERNMENT WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE. JUST-SAY-NO TO HR-3962

desolation_anonymous 11/02/2009 8:56am
in reply to kevinmcc Nov 02, 2009 8:45am

Good. Hopefully if they do overstep and this monstrosity actually passes, we can get the whole thing thrown out in court.

I thought the main issue was, it is not in the Federal Government authority to force the American People to buy anything? Or am I wrong about that?

I’d love to see that. Get the whole thing overturned because it is unconstitutional. I’m not a lawyer, but last I checked the Constitution is STILL the highest legal authority as law in this land.

kevinmcc 11/02/2009 8:45am

Question: Where does Congress get the authority to create a public option?

Answer: They do not have that power. A public option is unconstitutional and beyond their regulatory powers.

desolation_anonymous 11/02/2009 7:28am
in reply to TSpringer59 Oct 31, 2009 11:07am

No disagreement with you here.

desolation_anonymous 11/02/2009 7:27am

News sources read (I have yet to read the actual portion of the bill) that this also caps Flexible Medical accounts at $2,500 a year? That is an outrage… I know many people who are only making it financially because of their Flexible Spending accounts…

I have yet to read the bill, but I got to say… I do not support government control of our healthcare insurance system, with our without a ‘public option’, it is still controlling and regulating our health insurance. I have yet to see the government regulate anything in a way that makes it better.

Why not pass a few small laws at a time, to slowly improve… such as allowing insurance to be bought across state lines? If things don’t get better in 5 years, add another small option….

This kind of massive regulation and overhaul cannot lead to anything good. I challenge anyone to name one government system that is run efficiently and without a lot of interference and red tape.

bkrueg 11/02/2009 7:17am
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to LucasFoxx Oct 30, 2009 5:24pm

The Senate Health Bill: Yet Another Budget Gimmick
In the desperate attempt to portray their massive new spending bill as “budget neutral,” Congress and the Obama Administration are relying on more desperate measures to hide the true cost of the legislation. The Senate Finance Committee bill includes Section 1209, aka the “Fail-Safe Mechanism to Prevent Increase in Federal Budget Deficit.” But it is more than just a budget gimmick, it is an unprecedented change in the balance of power from Congress to the President that ought to unite liberals and conservatives in opposition to it. This is either a dangerous or cynical game.

desolation_anonymous 11/02/2009 7:15am
in reply to desolation_anonymous Nov 02, 2009 7:11am

Also, natural news is NOT a news source. I’m not arguing that vaccines could, sometimes have bad side effects, but most of the time they are effective in preventing disease.

Vaccines are effective in most that have them, IF the shot is a good match. Seasonal flu prevents it 70-90% of the time when there is a good match. http://www.cdc.gov/Flu/about/qa/flushot.htm

Why, do you think, do we not have Smallpox anymore? It didn’t just peter out on it’s own… Do you think it would have been better to let 1/3 of people who get a disease die, or be scarred for life (like smallpox did…)?

desolation_anonymous 11/02/2009 7:11am
in reply to TSpringer59 Oct 31, 2009 11:20am

You are the one who doesn’t have the facts, H1N1 is MUCH worse than seasonal flu. Try going to actual sources and statistics, say from the National Library of Medicine or the CDC… natural news is not an actual news source…

1) H1N1 infects deep in the lungs which seasonal flu does NOT http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090910083915.htm
2) H1N1 has already killed over 90 children. Seasonal flu kills at max 88. 74 have died since they just ‘reset’ the clock in August, 19 http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm#MS
3) Seasonal flu usually only kills elderly and immune compromised. This flu is killing young people, and middle-aged people, many previously healthy
4) When it comes down to it, H1N1 will end up claiming many more lives than seasonal flu. It is foolish to compare a year of a disease course with a disease that just emerged a few months ago. I’ll be happy if you were right, but sadly I fear you’ll be eating your words by next April.

bkrueg 11/02/2009 7:08am
in reply to LucasFoxx Oct 30, 2009 5:30pm

Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) health care plan presumes that about 8-to-14-million American workers will pay fines rather than buy health insurance. Unless they do, there’s a $167-billion hole in her financing plan and everything falls apart.

Like the rest of us, this group would face higher-than-ever insurance prices under Pelosi’s proposed bill.

Speaker Pelosi, President Obama and others claim they will make coverage cheaper, yet the official projection relies upon millions who would prefer to pay fines rather than join their system. In some cases the individuals would pay the penalty; in others their employers would pay; and sometimes both.

The estimate of 8-to-14 million who would be fined is based on the official projections made by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

bkrueg 11/02/2009 7:00am

Budgetary Gimmicks

Unpaid-For Doctor Fix: While the Democrats claim their bill is now deficit-neutral, the majority also introduced a separate piece of stand-alone legislation (H.R. 3961). The more than $200 billion cost of this legislation is not paid for, thus adding hundreds of billions of dollars in deficit spending and interest costs to the federal debt. Many may also note that the Congressional Budget Office recently analyzed similar legislation (S. 1776) as raising Medicare premiums by $70 billion.

bkrueg 11/02/2009 6:43am

The new House health care bill, H.R. 3962 includes the same problematic provisions found in the Capps Amendment added to H.R. 3200. The new bill:

Allows private health insurance plans that cover elective abortion to receive government subsidies (Section 222(e)(2)) (The bill also includes the Capps provision that purports to segregate the “federal dollars” from “private dollars” that are used to pay for abortions (Sections 303(e)(2); 341©(3)) – but nothing alters the fact that this provision allows government dollars to go to private plans that cover abortion);
Permits the public option to include abortion coverage (Section 222(e)(3));
Ensures that one plan in every coverage area covers abortion (Section 303(e)(1)(A)).
H.R. 3962 also states that funds provided for school-based clinics cannot be used for abortions (Sec. 399Z-1©(2))) and that school-based clinics are defined as not providing abortions (Sec. 399Z-1(l)(3)(E)). However, it does not prohibit abortion referrals.

bkrueg 11/02/2009 6:18am

WSJ reports, “What we do is we try to make the current system work better,” Boehner, of Ohio, said on CNN’s “State of the Nation.” The GOP plan would likely be less costly to taxpayers and involve less government intrusion into the private sector. Boehner said the bill would take “a step-by-step approach” to expanding coverage.

It would, among other things, propose new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits and make it easier for individuals and small businesses to pool resources to purchase insurance.

Boehner said the Republican bill would also propose grants for states that use “innovative” solutions to expand coverage. He pointed to states that have created special “high-risk pools” to provide insurance to individuals with pre-existing conditions.

He said the bill wouldn’t raise taxes, nor mandate that individuals and businesses purchase insurance, as the Democratic legislation does.

cwhiteside 11/01/2009 3:52pm
Link Reply
+ -1

If insurance companies could sell across state lines — wouldn’t that lead to larger companies being dominant? Maybe getting “too big to fail”? Also insurance regulation is set up at the state level. If companies go national, the federal government would have to be the regulator — isn’t that more “big government”?

Filtered Comment [ show ]

steve4608 11/01/2009 2:27am

if every individual would have to shop for their own insurance instead of employers – the market would become client driven – instead of today’s market were people at the corporate and government level get wined and dined and lobbied and the incentive to create a cost effective health care system is mismanaged. The government has proven that it can not perform tasks of this magnitude. The health care bill should be that of privatizing the monolithic money black holes it now has responsibility of managing. It could be called the health care stewardship bill.

Filtered Comment [ show ]

TSpringer59 10/31/2009 11:20am
in reply to bkrueg Oct 30, 2009 1:05pm

You are helping to propogate the H1N1 “urgency”. Have you not read all the actual research on the fact that vaccines no not work anyway? It is a ploy to instill fear in the public in order that they can take more control over our lives! See this (http://www.naturalnews.com/027364_internet_pandemic_traffic.html) If we all beleive that they will take care of us, then we will allow them to do it. More than 36,000 people die every year from the seansonal flu. Why the call for a “National Emergency” for this particular strand? The second leading cause of death in America today is perscription drugs! Do more research and wake up.

TSpringer59 10/31/2009 11:09am
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to Betonavette Oct 31, 2009 6:47am

Unfortunately it is not a smokescreen. It is part of the plan!

TSpringer59 10/31/2009 11:07am

Regardless of the “contents” of this, or any other proposed legislation, is there no thought given to WHY IS THIS SO URGENT? Any legislation that is this important, and this highly debated, should not be rushed (remember the last few times there was and “urgent” need?). No plan is a noble plan if it cannot stand the test of thoughtful reflection without urgency! In fact, the actions of the elected are the opposite of noble. The elected continue to demonstrate they are not using an ounce of integrity with respect to the process or the fiscal accountability for their actions. I will answer this recklessness in the upcoming elections. I hope you all will too. Because, regardless of what the bill is supposed to accomplish, it will be forever tainted by the process that was used to pass it.

Filtered Comment [ show ]

Betonavette 10/31/2009 6:47am

It is my belief that this Healthcare bill is a somke screen used by the Obama administration to bring socialism to this country. Period!

lindatemp 10/31/2009 2:38am
in reply to nomadwolf Oct 30, 2009 12:35am

How can you compare the cost of healthcare for sick babies with the cost of an abortion? How are the two related? 99% of babies aborted are perfectly healthy. They’re NOT aborted because of birth defects (except in very rare cases). They are aborted for the most part because their existence is inconvenient for someone else. We all know from common sense that an unborn baby is just that – a baby. It‘s exactly what each of us has been at some point. We were all unborn babies –then infants – then children -then adolescents -then adults. Fortunately for you, you were given the right to stay alive (to live long enough to take away that right from another ).

You have a legal right to an abortion, pay for it yourself. (A moral and ethical right is a different issue). You have to answer for what you do in your life. As for me, I don’t want to participate in any way, shape or form in the taking of an innocent life.

You don’t have the right to make me participate.

Moderated Comment

LucasFoxx 10/30/2009 5:24pm
in reply to bkrueg Oct 30, 2009 8:11am

That’s a savings of $260,000 per word.

LucasFoxx 10/30/2009 5:22pm
in reply to Betonavette Oct 30, 2009 2:59pm

That idea didn’t work out with the credit lenders.

Betonavette 10/30/2009 2:59pm
in reply to Abatts1 Oct 29, 2009 11:12am

Sounds like there is a simple solution for your problem that the Republicans could get you and it is called Insurance access across state lines. BCBS has a monopoly within each state. With competitve pricing your insurance and the rates that go with competition would have been there for you!

evought 10/30/2009 1:55pm
in reply to bkrueg Oct 30, 2009 7:06am

Funding to fight waste and fraud is simply more waste and more “oversight” jobs these folks can give to relatives and favorites.

If there was that much money wasted in Medicare which could be readily recovered, then recover it and reduce the deficit. They don’t do that for two reasons: 1) there is not that much waste which can be recovered [without spending a lot of money to “recover” it] and 2) they cannot then use the illusion of easily recovered waste to fund yet another wasteful boondoggle. And, in fact, even if the waste were there, recovering it does not “fund” anything but merely reduces the amount it puts us further in debt.

Look at all the protection the wonderful “oversight” in TARP has provided us! We still have no clue where the money has gone and what our bill will be a decade from now. This is no different.

bkrueg 10/30/2009 1:05pm

Obama’s failure to act on a Clear and Present Danger.
Deadliest week so far for children and swine flu in USA
ATLANTA – Swine flu has caused at least 19 more children’s deaths — the largest one-week increase since the pandemic started in April, health officials said Friday.
At least 114 children have died from swine flu complications since the spring, up from 95 reported a week earlier, according to the CDC.
Millions have been sickened since April. Swine flu is more widespread now than it’s ever been, with 48 states now reporting widespread flu activity. The only states without widespread flu are Hawaii and South Carolina
Also expect more, a second wave of swine flu leaves 24 in London fighting for life.
There are 751 people in hospital across Britain with the virus, of which 157 – or 20 per cent – are in intensive care. It will take up to three weeks before all 1,700 GP practices can start vaccinating.

Vote on This Bill

23% Users Support Bill

983 in favor / 3296 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments