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 121-150 of 719 total comments.

bravo6lima 11/24/2009 11:50am
Link Reply
+ -2

Good thing I’m not a literary professor.Or a spell checker.

bravo6lima 11/24/2009 11:48am

And why ARE the congress and senate exempt from this plan?Because it SUCKS ASS and they know it.

bravo6lima 11/24/2009 11:46am

Anyone who thinks that being threatened with punishment for failure to purchase a service is a good idea needs to have thier head examined.And don’t bring up the “car” insurance thing,cause that dog don’t hunt.More than taxes and cost,this is about the principle of being forced into a plan.Thats what’s going to happen eventualy,as employers drop the coverage they help provide and force all on the govt plan.When that happens,govt will have access to parts of our lives that it never had before,including taking a part in the decisions that will determine your care.Don’t tell me it wont happen,cause it will.Yes,more people will get healthcare,and thats a GOOD thing.But what will the end result be?You need to test the water before you dive in.We are not doing that and we’re going to hit our head on a rockif this bill ( and cap-n-tax) passes.

bravo6lima 11/24/2009 11:32am
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to justamick Nov 23, 2009 5:51am

The difference is that under the current situation,I’m not forced to take part under threat of jail.

b58 11/24/2009 4:55am

Looks like Reid wants to take a chance and push this bill through with the people saying no to the whole thing. People out of jobs and moving into the streets and they ignore that and push health care is way out of line. They even want to put people in prison for not buying health care. What part of broke do you not understand and require someone to buy something without money. We can’t raise money like the government does when they run out and raise taxes like that. The government has already cost us our jobs now they want to put another bill on us we can’t pay. I think we have a bunch of idiots running Washington.

justamick 11/24/2009 3:01am
in reply to justamick Nov 24, 2009 2:56am

In the same way, affording the government the opportunity to provide reasonable assurances for the health of it’s citizens is both unattainable and ridiculous. If you think that this Health Insurance Reform bill will do that, then your just as delusional as the President and members of Congress who envisioned this.

justamick 11/24/2009 2:56am
in reply to jasonledtke Nov 08, 2009 5:13am

The Declaration of Independence is not a legal document in this country. It is just that, a declaration of our independence. It holds no legal precedent and therefore no legal standing.

Might I also add, that no where in the Constitution does it grant the right of the government to empower it’s self. This is not how the founders of this country intended our country to be.

I would also like to highlight a simple phrase “pursuit of happiness”. Do you wonder why the Declaration of Independence doesnt say “guaranteed happiness”? Simply put, the Government cannot in any sense guarantee your happiness. Simply affording you the constitutionally guaranteed rights is the only thing that the government can do to enable your pursuit of happiness. No person or entity can guarantee happiness.

RWBerg413 11/23/2009 7:51am
in reply to calebhood Oct 29, 2009 8:29am

Excellent point CH. Has anyone here read the bill in it’s entirety? 2,000 plus pages of double speak and hinted tax hikes? Great. We already have a government run healthcare system called Medicare; and it’s bankrupt. What makes any of you think this will be any different? How about we switch things up a bit and elect the guy we’ve never heard of into office; from state to federal levels, to see if we can affect true change in our government? Old dogs doing old tricks stealing our hard earned money need to be thrown out of office-can anyone argue that point? The two party system we use now has been broken for decades, so all the people arguing about what administration messed things up the most are wasting their time and intellect. They’re both guilty;hands down. Our beloved country needs to be rescued from the crooks and liars who decieve us every day. Health Care Reform needs to happen, just not like this-and not by the people who support it.

justamick 11/23/2009 7:37am
in reply to bkrueg Nov 23, 2009 5:31am

Its amazing that this country hasnt gone bankrupt yet… $1.4T deficit and over $12T in debt… One might ask how can we afford this bill? Hmmm…

bkrueg 11/23/2009 6:46am
in reply to bkrueg Nov 23, 2009 5:58am

Real health-care reform: market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven. As the Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon and others have argued, such policies include giving all individuals the same tax benefits received by those who get coverage through their employers; providing Medicare recipients with vouchers; reforming tort laws; and changing costly state regulations to allow people to buy insurance across state lines. Rather than another top-down government plan, let’s give Americans control over their own health care.
You’ll start paying higher taxes to fund this scheme in 2010 even though it doesn’t start up until 2014. Among the provisions in this bill will be a $2500 cap on Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs). The IRS allows families with special needs children to use FSAs to cover educational expenses. This new $2500 cap will hit these families especially hard and cost them hundreds of dollars in new taxes every year. – Sarah Palin

bkrueg 11/23/2009 6:27am
in reply to brking Nov 22, 2009 3:06am

The reason Pelosi never answered the question about the constitutional foundation for the legislation, is because quite simply, there is none. There is no legitimate basis in the Constitution for the government to control decisions regarding what health care a person receives, what medical services and medications are appropriate for a patient, who is to pay for those services and products and how much they are to cost. At a recent Commerce Committee hearing, during which concerns were raised about the constitutionality of such legislation, and about the principle of “federalism,” Rockefeller proudly proclaimed his constitutional disinterest thus — “I don’t really give a hoot about states’ rights or federal rights on this one. I care about results.” by Bob Barr

bkrueg 11/23/2009 5:58am
in reply to brking Nov 22, 2009 2:34am

ROFL, another one, “Dogpiling on Palin”
Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff
Monday, November 23, 2009

Nov 23 2009, 11:31 am by Chris Good
The Palin Crowds
Sarah Palin has been drawing massive crowds to her book signing events—averaging over 1,000 people per stop on the “Going Rogue” tour, with fans camping out, overnight and in the cold, for the chance to meet her.

This morning, over 1,000 people were reportedly waiting for Palin an hour before her scheduled appearance at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. It’s the fourth consecutive stop that has drawn over 1,000 people, according to news reports.

In fact, all but one of her stops have drawn over 1,000, according to local news reports, even with local bookstores distributing wristbands to limit entrants, often capping Palin’s signings at 1,000.

justamick 11/23/2009 5:51am
in reply to nermin Nov 22, 2009 6:55pm

First of all, you’re example is to the fear-mongering extreme.

Secondly, most states require public hospitals provide treatment of patients despite whether or not they have health insurance. If people cannot foot the bill, that burden then placed on the taxpayers to take care of.

So… with that said; what is the difference between that and a “public option”? Either way, taxpayer dollars are going towards treatments for people who cant afford good quality health coverage.

bkrueg 11/23/2009 5:35am
in reply to brking Nov 22, 2009 1:51am

President Barack Obama took office promising to lead from the center and solve big problems. He has exerted enormous political energy attempting to reform the nation’s health-care system. But the biggest economic problem facing the nation is not health care. It’s the deficit. Recently, the White House signaled that it will get serious about reducing the deficit next year—after it locks into place massive new health-care entitlements. This is a recipe for disaster, as it will create a new appetite for increased spending and yet another powerful interest group to oppose deficit-reduction measures.

bkrueg 11/23/2009 5:31am
in reply to bkrueg Nov 23, 2009 5:06am

Correction: $12 TRILLION DEPT. The federal government ran a 2009 deficit of $1.4 trillion—the highest since World War II—as spending reached nearly 25% of GDP and total revenues fell below 15% of GDP. Shortfalls like these have not been seen in more than 50 years.
There is no relief in sight, as spending far outpaces revenues and the federal budget is projected to be in enormous deficit every year

bkrueg 11/23/2009 5:06am
in reply to nermin Nov 22, 2009 6:55pm

The news is now $200,000.00 per year will pay for your medical. That is just one more broken promise by the Obama Administration. Soon it will by your turn to pay because Obama is spending America into bankruptcy on purpose.

Obama team makes it official: Budget deficit hits record. $12.026 TRILLION 11/23/2009. ($2.84 BILLION PER DAY)
A year ago, as the financial crisis hit and the Bush administration prepared massive bailout plans, the deficit was $455 billion.
Republicans cited record deficits as another reason to oppose Obama’s health care plan and other big projects. “No more spending money we don’t have,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

nermin 11/22/2009 6:55pm
Link Reply
+ -1
in reply to nobama1 Nov 22, 2009 4:34pm

I respect your opinion but just one thought. How are you going to loose everything if the people who make over $250K a year are paying a little bit more in taxes? Additionally, how are you not afraid that you are going to loose your house and everything you own should you get really sick (with something serious like cancer)?

Do you understand that your insurance company won’t cover many things and that they may even drop you completely if you get really sick? What do you do then? Look for another insurance company? Well, good luck with that — no insurance company will want you because you have a “pre-existing condition”.

What do you do then? Sell everything you own to save your life?

nobama1 11/22/2009 4:34pm

Affordable Health Care for America?? How about get off your rear and get a job. I mean this for the people that are sucking the system dry. Im tired of people that have been on it for years!!! I have worked hard for many years and paid my taxes, and now OBAMA is going to take away everything I’ve worked for all my life by taxing me to DEATH!!!! NO TO AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE!!! I’VE WORKED HARD FOR WHAT I HAVE FOR MANY YEARS!!!!!

brking 11/22/2009 3:06am
in reply to nmeagent Nov 14, 2009 8:12am

although it will be up to the supreme court to interpret it. Article I, section 8 [very bottom] "Congress shall have the power to… make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

This is know as the elastic clause which was intended to help the government adjust to unforeseen events or changes. still it is up to the supreme court if this is “necessary and proper”. which is still mostly conservative. so it might be declared unconstitutional. still i getting the feel you can almost justify any law as “necessary and proper” but i really know nothing about it’s legal interpretation, other than what i just said.

brking 11/22/2009 2:34am
in reply to bkrueg Nov 18, 2009 12:55pm

up here in Alaska you might get the feeling she was popular, which see was during the prez election campaign. I know we as American need someone to stand up for smaller government and the little guy. Palin gave away 500 Million dollars to transCanada Corp. to fund a natural gas pipeline that won’t really benefit Alaskan as much as Canada which the pipeline will go through, i mean for starters we Alaskan have to pay them if we don’t meet a quota. anyways this unfolding of event is so unpopular that other republican like Bill Walker are run for governor on the platform of an all Alaskan pipeline. my point is that Palin is just as guilt of doing the will of special interest as any other politician. in short she F**k us over i don’t want to see what she would do in Washington. she has disgraced Alaskans and Alaska, which might have factor into one of the reason she resigned. I just thought the rest of the nation should know this, before it may be too late

brking 11/22/2009 2:12am
in reply to bmwtriton Nov 19, 2009 7:08pm

it’s not bribery because it goes to help that state in some way, even if it is a pet project. last time i look 99% of congressmen and woman this year have placed earmarks in laws. as you know earmarks are know for there pork-n-barrel quality.—→ http://www.opensecrets.org/bigpicture/earmarks.php <—- anyways they accept these extra funds becomes they want to get reelected, and they want funding for PAC’s to fund their campaign.
Appropriated funds are accounts represent funds made available to the Departments a result of an act of Congress that permits the Department to incur obligations and to make payments out of the Department of Treasury for
specified purposes. In other words congress gives them the a budget and they are obligated to some extent by a time limit to spend it. don’t worry if enough people are worried about not getting tarp funds congress also has the power to form special oversight committees to make sure the fund are being spend in the manner they legislated.

brking 11/22/2009 1:51am
in reply to juskeepswimmin Nov 15, 2009 6:25am

You 2500 a year per person is wrong. the top 10 percent of earner in this nation pay 85% of all taxes. I haven’t read the fine print, so i don’t know exactly what type of tax it is but I have a feeling it will be a progress tax. besides in 2010 the bush tax cut which mainly helped the rich cutting off about 3% from each tax bracket will be gone. meaning that 1.2 trillion tax cut bush implement after the 2001 recession will be gone and all are taxes will go up anyways.

jcdm 11/21/2009 6:20am
in reply to bkrueg Nov 19, 2009 4:59am

Of course they are not going to part of that system. There are plenty of examples of what awaits them if they jump into this system that they are creating. If you look at any nationalized health care system – whether you’re looking at England or the Tricare system put in place to cover our troops and their families – the number one problem is access to care. They are not willing to wait in any lines for care. The common folk can be placed in waiting lines for their bypass surgery and their Viagra, but the elected elite are not willing to be burdened by those kinds of hardships. They will be too busy thinking for those of us who cannot think for ourselves to worry about whether they’ll be able to get an appointment before their condition becomes irreversible.

steveocray 11/20/2009 4:22pm

Socialisum works great until you run out of other peoples money.

nmeagent 11/20/2009 2:27pm
in reply to bkrueg Nov 19, 2009 4:59am

Of course he doesn’t want it — it’s only meant for us slaves.

nmeagent 11/20/2009 2:21pm
in reply to LucasFoxx Nov 12, 2009 5:52pm

Anarchy is the wrong term; try minarchy. I would also not label Jefferson or Madison’s interpretations of the constitution as the result of ‘extreme parsing’. If anything, the supreme court precedents you rely on are the result of dubious parsing or outright omission of various parts of that document.

Of course, I could be suffering from short-term memory loss and/or latent racism, which of course must invalidate my entire argument. Seriously?

bkrueg 11/20/2009 7:26am

November 20, 2009
President Obama’s job approval numbers will dip below 50% for the first time today in Gallup’s daily tracking poll, according to a Gallup official.

“Gallup Daily tracking results just in. Obama will be below 50% for the first time when we update our numbers at 1:00 p.m.,” wrote Gallup.com managing news editor Lymari Morales on Twitter.

justamick 11/20/2009 2:02am
in reply to bmwtriton Nov 19, 2009 7:08pm


bmwtriton 11/19/2009 7:08pm

“The Obama administration, as inexperienced as they are, are also holding back some of the TARP funds (which aren’t doing any good anyway) so that they can use some of the money to get the “Blue Dogs” on board with this healthcare bill and buy their votes with pork barrel project money to their districts and state(s)."

If that is the case, then it’s bribery, and bribery is an impeachable offense and a felony. Also, according to Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, only Congress can appropriate funds, not the president, and any funds previously appropriated may not be reappropriated without an act of Congress. Any official involved in this bribery should be immediately removed from office, prosecuted for bribery, and, if convicted, sentenced appropriately.

bkrueg 11/19/2009 12:12pm

ABC News’ Jonathan Karl reports:
On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster.”
I am told the section applies to exactly one state: Louisiana, the home of moderate Democrat Mary Landrieu, who has been playing hard to get on the health care bill.
Senator Harry Reid, who drafted the bill, cannot pass it without the support of Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu.
How much does it cost? According to the Congressional Budget Office: $100 million.

Vote on This Bill

23% Users Support Bill

981 in favor / 3297 opposed

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments