Which is exactly where I was going with that. If the Federal Government exacted pressure on the States to force them to enable them to pass Health Care reform, then we’d be in a far better position. The problem is, just as you’ve said, no one has put that on the table. I would argue that no one has put that on the table because the ones who drafted the legislation would rather have federal control over this monstrosity than delegate it out to the states.

The way we get this done is simple. The Federal Government only has to threaten to withold federal dollars to Medicade/ Medicare to the states if they do not enact sufficent legislation to properly reform the health care system. If Federal dollars for Medicade/Medicare get stripped there will be an uproar by those who use the systems. Most states will not risk that kind of loss in faith from their constituents.

Isn’t that cutting off your nose to spite your face? Tort reform is much bigger than just the health care industry. If your Democrats don’t stop fillibustering, you will get nothing. Imagine what the landscape is going to look like in just a few months, when the mid-term elections get rolling, and you haven’t accomplished anything on this.

The problem is that the states haven’t done it. Federal pressure on the states instead of federal regulation is a great idea. In the 70’s the federal government withheld highway funds to pressure the states to lower the speed limits to 55. I’d like to see that as well. But there are other ways to skin this cat and give it health care. I would prefer to see reforms in the direction you propose, but I don’t see them on the table. What is on the table is better than the status quo.

I would define that as exceptional progress! If you know of a bill on the table that gets there, I’d be interested in seeing it.

The Postal Service reported a net loss of $3.8 billion for the 2009 fiscal year, about $1 billion more than the previous year. WHY WOULD ANYONE GIVE THE GOVERNMENT HEALTH CARE? THE GOVERNMENT CAN NOT EVEN DELIVER THE MAIL. JUST-SAY-NO TO OBAMA/PELOSI CARE.

(CBS)
President Obama says rising costs are driving huge federal budget deficits that imperil our future, and that there is enough waste and fraud in the system to pay for health care reform if it was eliminated.

At the center of both issues is Medicare, the government insurance program that provides health care to 46 million elderly and disabled Americans. But it also provides a rich and steady income stream for criminals who are constantly finding new ways to steal a sizable chunk of the half trillion dollars that are paid out each year in Medicare benefits.

In fact, Medicare fraud – estimated now to total about $60 billion a year – has become one of, if not the most profitable, crimes in America.
If the government knows about this why haven’t they cleaned it up before? I DO NOT WANT TO GIVE THE GOVERNMENT MORE HEALTH CARE. DO YOU? JUST-SAY-NO TO OBAMA/POLESI CARE.

Plain and simple..It does not have any provisions for TORT reform. Which entirley means this bill is a contrived power and money grab. Get it right or throw it away. we are not foolish. 2010 Democrats who voted for this bill will not see the 2010 Christmas lights in Washington, unless you are there on your own nickel.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) The Senate now must approve its own version, after which lawmakers would iron out the differences between the two bills. The House and Senate each then would have to pass the compromise legislation before sending it to Obama to sign.
“We know it’s been in Harry Reid’s office for six weeks and the other 99 senators have not seen it,” McConnell said of the Senate healthcare bill, referring to the Senate majority leader. “I think we ought to at least have as much time for the other 99 senators and all of the American people to take a look at this bill as Majority Leader Reid has had.”
“The only way to guarantee that for sure would be to delay the process to allow everyone to fully understand what’s in the bill,” McConnell said.

Lieberman opposes a public option because he’s concerned the expansion of government would increase U.S. debt, projected to grow to $21 trillion in 10 years from $12 trillion today, he said in a Nov. 8 televised interview with “Fox News Sunday.”
“I have no other choice,” Lieberman said in an interview with Bloomberg News. “I have to use the right I have as a senator to stop something I think will be terrible.
JUST-SAY-NO TO OBAMA/PELOSI CARE.

The key is that all of this can be done with out trampling on state rights and trampling on civil liberties. Wouldnt you agree that pushing the states to address these issues would be better than having the Federal Government regulate all of this?

The definition of the term “progress” is debatable when it comes to this bill.

I think the Independent minded voters (the fastest growing number of voters in the US) might disagree with your definition of “progress”.

In my mind, as an Independent and a Constitutionalist, I define progress as:

1) Instituting the least amount of Federal Control as possible but still achieving the goals of health coverage for all.
2) Leaving the power of regualting healt insurance issues to the states by only stipulating guiding principles as a “blueprint” for what each of the states should do Instead of having all of this mandated at the federal level. This would also include a measure where as no medical institute, public or private, can deny treatment to anyone as well as a measure regulating medical costs such as routine exams, tests, procedures and check-ups to prevent overcharging.
3) Change focus of Insurance company’s to “not for profit” organizations to prevent price gouging.

The more the government gets involved in the private sector, in this instance, health care, the more the overall quality declines. In nearly every example we have of a socialized health care system in other countries, health care is horrible, waiting for services is worse, and abuse of the system is worst of all. If you don’t think quality will go down when doctors and hospitals are being paid less, then you don’t understand how capitalism works.

Since that is the best you can do, we have something we can agree on. Good day.

I’ll see your people, and raise you the voters that put these people in office to get something done. Next year, those who are standing in the way of progress and not contributing constructively will get the same thing they had coming to them in 2008 and 2006. See you at the polls.

What book did you read that crazy version of history from? I’m glad you didn’t get it from public schools.

Sorry, I misspoke — Helvering actually addresses title VIII which is similar to title IX. I’m all over the place today.

Sorry, one of those sentences wasn’t exactly clear. It should have read “It does NOT grant the power to appropriate for this purpose and the decision does not support your claim…”

Certainly, but I persist that the decision itself does not support your ‘general welfare’ assertions.

Your ability to cherry pick and ignore context is amazing. Do I have to quote every paragraph in the decision perhaps? With the 1000 character limit that would take awhile…

The quotation is perfectly relevant to the decision. You do know what the decision was, don’t you? I somewhat apologize for my mocking tone, but I believe it is necessary here. If you’re going to continue to be extremely obtuse on the subject, there’s really no point in arguing further. I can see this devolving into an endless series of “Yes it is! No it isn’t! Yes it is! No it isn’t!” I’m taking my ball and going home; good day, sir.

Baffling — how exactly did I “mix up” the titles again?

How many times do I have to say that Steward is not relevant to your argument and does not support your conclusion? Unappropriated taxes are constitutional because the general welfare clause specifically grants the power to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” for the general welfare. It does NOT grant the power to appropriate for this purpose and it does not support your claim that the Congress may do so because THAT ISSUE IS NOT UNDER CONSIDERATION IN THIS CASE. Helvering refers to it only because Helvering also addresses title IX; the travesty is their ruling on title II.

Of course you are correct to bring up the number of tax returns, since every person in the United States obviously would not be paying, but lets use the correct number of decimal places for those calculations as well. In 2008 according to you, 155 million tax returns were filed, so, $400 * 10^9 / 155 * 10^6 = $2580 per person. Or you could look at it like this $400,000,000,000 / 155,000,000 = $2580.

I’m not making the claim that this is inexpensive or not. I just wanted the calculations shown above corrected.

You added too many zeros bkrueq, ebin was correct. $400 billion is indeed $400,000 million (as you stated above) = $400 * 10^9 = $400,000,000,000. Divided by 305 million (305 *10^6 or 305,000,000) = $1311. (Check google if you don’t believe me, http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=400+billion+%2F+305+million&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=) Think about it, how could each person have to pay an astounding $1,311,476, as you stated above? Thats more than a million dollars per person, thats not realistic numerically. Or you could multiply it out, $1 million (per person, approximately) * 305 million (people) = $305 trillion; $305 trillion is not $400 billion.

I am sorry that our educationsystem fail you. Maybe you could take some night classes on history

Those who agree will work to keep them in office. Rest assured we are watching too and if they work for the good of the American people they will win the next election. I don’t care which party they are from those in office must put working people first and not those who look to seek only power.

Let’s talk about Social Security and the claim that it is going bankrupt? Below were claims made by those who wanted to privatize the program .
1. Claim: The crisis starts when the first dollar is needed from the trust fund (in 2018). But, private accounts require dipping into the trust from day one — they see no problem with that.
2. Claim: The trust fund is just paper and of no use. But they plan to spend all of it — ~$2 trillion
3. Claim: Once the trust is gone Social Security is “bankrupt.” But, if they get their private accounts, no problem, they say. Just borrow trillions.
4. When Bush talked to those over 55, he said there’s no crisis for them.
5. The privatizers told us in 1983 they would need a crisis to push this through. They’re tired of waiting, so now they pretend there’s a crisis.
The government programs you blast have worked well and served the American people. These programs do not cheat people out of what they have put in unlike Worldcom, Enron, and Madoff.

You are confused with your use of the word socialists and socialized medicine. Obviously you know nothing of how the private insurance companies have worked for the past 60 plus years when dealing with health care. Your comments bring nothing but fear mongering to the debate. To leave the system as is does nothing to guarantee competition. Your assumption about the private sector not being able to compete is ridicules. As it sits now the overhead of private insurance companies is about 17%, with some restructuring and working with what has been purposed they could bring that overhead down to 5% and then include a 3% profit they would easily compete. This model is proven to work but the insurance industry said they could not do it unless everyone was required to have insurance. So Republicans wanted this included to help their buddies in the Insurance business. If all you want is kill reform you care nothing for even the 10 to 14 million Americans that you talk about.

To all members of Congress who support this government run healthcare bill, we will work to get you out of office your next elecions. We do not want the government to run our healthcare system. Rest assured, we are watching and you will lose your next election.

I AGGREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

You can take Medicare for starters was suppose to be a good program when it was written in to law. Look at Social Security what has happened to it. The government started dipping into the money for every reason you can think of until it is bankrupt. Washington has let fraud and spending bankrupt every program it has ever started. They can’t even pass a simple bill without all the pork they dump on a bill before it gets passed. They can’t even fix or try to fix Medicare and now they want to put the whole country on a Medicare like healthcare that will be bankrupt before it goes into effect. Then they will be throwing money at it like they do Medicare and Medicaid until it is totally useless. They will be raising taxes every year trying to bail it out just like they do Medicare now. Besides no one in Washington can balance a check book and pay their income taxes.

I think Washington has gotten to big for it’s pants. If you look back in history at the real cause of the Civil War between the states. It was mainly over the taxes on the southern states.They were taxing the people till they were going broke and losing everything.It got bad enough the states started pulling out of the union. They wanted the states back in for the tax money that Lincoln decided to fight to free the slaves was the excuse he used to force the states back into the union.By the way you will not find the truth in a public school library but it is in the public city library to get the true history. History does repeat it’s self. The ones running Washington right now don’t care how many laws and taxes they dump on us. It is a little over the line to put someone in prison for not having healthcare. It might take another civil war to end this.