E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Washington Post's E.J. Dionne and MSNBC political analyst Charlie Cook debate the role of health care in the presidential race.
Most social media users approve of the Supreme Court's health care ruling last week but believe it will help Republicans in the November election, according to msnbc.com's computer-assisted analysis of tens of thousands of posts on Twitter and Facebook.
The court upheld nearly all of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on a 5-4 vote Thursday. The consensus in news reports and among political pundits was that the ruling was a major victory for President Barack Obama.
But among people who use social networking sites, 56 percent of those who stated a clear opinion on the decision's political impact said they thought it was more likely to energize Republican voters in November. Forty-four percent said it was likely to be more helpful for Democrats.
(Msnbc.com analyzed 175,000 Twitter and Facebook posts mentioning the ruling from midday Thursday through midday Monday. The analysis uses a tool called ForSight, a data platform developed by Crimson Hexagon Inc., which is used by many media and research organizations to gauge public opinion in new media. Crimson Hexagon reports a 3-percentage-point margin of sampling error for this type of online sentiment analysis.)
More social media analysis from NBCPolitics.com
Overall, 60 percent of online commenters approved of the decision, with many of them telling stories about how it would have an immediate impact on their families.
Supreme Court upholds health care law
Health care ruling could leave poorest Americans at greatest risk
Writing on Facebook, Cathy Weller of Cocoa Beach, Fla., described herself as "a fiscal conservative, libertarian leaning, social progressive." She wrote of losing her health insurance when she lost her job and the difficulty she had insuring herself because of her pre-existing condition — cancer:
All of a sudden I found myself researching health insurance options. Imagine my surprise to find there were none. None. Not a few expensive ones, but none. It didn't matter if I was willing to pay $10,000 a month for health insurance, it was just not available to me, anywhere for any amount of money. This was the first time I personally came up against the issue of health insurance availability having worked constantly up to that point and always having employer offered insurance.
Of opponents of the act, Weller wrote: "I wonder at their sense of security. Do they really imagine themselves to be invulnerable to what so many fellow citizens are going through?"
Nearly a quarter of those supporting the decision stressed its impact on ending what they see as a bias against women in the current health care system.
Among them was Lisa Kitinoja of Eugene, Ore., who administers a nonprofit organization:
Twitter.com
Many opponents complained that the act would make health care more expensive, including Darren Perkins of Kansas City, Mo.:
Twitter.com
Others saw it as unconstitutionally giving the federal government too much control over people's lives, like Andrew Hastings, an engineer in San Diego:
Facebook.com
The 60 percent-to-40 percent split among social media users in favor of the ruling runs counter to public opinion surveys, which generally indicate that a slight majority opposes the health care act. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Sunday put support at 48 percent.
The social media results, however, could be a reflection of rising support since the Supreme Court ruling. The Reuters/Ipsos poll, for example, found that before Thursday, support was only 43 percent before rising to 48 percent. (Support in msnbc.com's analysis also showed support trending up since the ruling, hitting 62 percent Monday.)
They also may be explained by the demographics of the social media audience. The Pew Internet & American Life Project, which uses ForSight in its statistical analysis of social media, reported in March that people who identify themselves as liberal are more likely to use social networking sites than are people who self identify as conservatives.
Even so, commenters concluded that Republicans would benefit from the ruling politically more than Democrats, by 56 percent to 44 percent.
Mike Wasylik, a lawyer in Tampa, Fla., wrote:
Twitter.com
Chris Twining, a computer consultant in Wildomar, Calif., explained on Facebook:
Facebook.com
And Michael Gorka of Newport News, Va., said:
Facebook.com
Real-world evidence may support that analysis — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's campaign reported that Friday was its biggest fundraising day from individual donors so far.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
Daren's tweet said it all!
Single Payer for all Americans NOW!
filbert,
The biggest problem with Darren's tweet is that NOT having the ACA would cost far more, and repealing it will cost even more - according to the CBO.
It turns out that medical expenses do go up - kind of like the cost of automobiles, college tuition and even brocolli. The ACA can only slow down the ultimate rise of those expenses.
Disagreement with me does not constitute economic illiteracy as Darren portentiously claims for those who disagree with him. Any arguement that can be supported by facts is quite legitiment.
"Nearly a quarter of those supporting the decision stressed its impact on ending what they see as a bias against women in the current health care system."
Is it 'bias' to charge women more for health insurance because their health care costs more?
If so, then it's 'bias' in the life insurance industry to charge more for men because they are more likely to die sooner.
Rates are based on actuarial costs, so if we 'equalize' health care costs for women and men, then we should do the same for life insurance.
Green Timer
Before the ACA, health insurance was increasing between 12 & 14% per year. After the first mandates hit, Insurance increased between 20 & 44%. The second round of additions (only a couple) the rates increased between 20 & 30%. This year's rounds have begun, I'm hearing 20 - 28% this year and expect 30 - 50% in 2014 when the most costly items are all added.
This is when employers will drop Health insurance for employees and employees will be forced to go the exchanges and purchase health insurance at the full price instead of the employee share. Employers won't give much toward the employees to help them because of the fine the employer must pay.
How do you think that What Obama has done is affordable or Better?
The implimentation cost is said to have gone from $1 Trillion to $1.8 Trillion. That does not include the costs for the states will have to shoulder (and appears to be the bigger share). States are struggling to make budget without these new costs.
Undoing and replacing with reasonable measures will cost everyone a whole lot less. People who say differently are blowing a lot of smoke.
If obamacare = romenycare then all you fools on here that keep spouting everyone will have to pay for insurance now better google Romenycare and see how the freeloaders keep increasing every year in MA since the bill was past. If you make less that 200% of the proverty level you get free healthcare. Please tell me how a family of two making 46K should get free healthcare? IT's free here in MA and if you make less than 300% of the proverty level you paid a cheap montly fee forhealthcare. So who pays for all this - MA has been getting federal money to help pay for our healthcare system and of course those who do have private healthcare insurance have seen their perimums go up every year. We have a short of primary doctors and ob/gyn. The ERs here are still use by illegals and other using them as their primary care. Nothing has improve except we have more freeloaders on another government program. So please go sell your liberal talking points about everyone now having to pay for healthcare that's total bs. The poor will get it for free, the increase cost will not effect the rich and as usual the middle class will be screwed.
DB et all. I have Blue Cross Health insurance. Two years ago my premiums went up modestly and this year they actually went down by 2.38 a month. I am not disputing your statement, although you provide no proof of your data. I only have my experience to go by. Your numbers are a fabrication according to my real results.
Your boy Mitt claims he will replace the AHA with all it benefits without the individual mandate. He can't explain how he will accomplish that feat, perhaps you can. This is where the blowing smoke is. If calling it a tax upsets you, then consider this.
If you are poor, your will have insurance and not have to pay the tax.
If you have insurance, then you are in compliance and will not have to pay the tax.
If you are one of the deadbeats expecting me to fund the health care system just in case you need it, then sorry, you will have to pay the tax. I hope I never have to hear anything about taking personal responsibility out of you again.
I do believe people should be able to opt out of the AHA by singing a waiver that says if they show up at a ER without proof of being able to pay the bill, the hospital has to turn them away. This will aid in the process of natural selection.
DB Akron,
If your numbers are accurate, you make an excellent point. I understand these forums are not meant to be documented research papers, but if you get a chance, I'd like to see where those numbers come from. Meantime, I'll start looking for those numbers myself.
Thanks for your reasonable reply and discourse.
Health care cost is rising, not because of the ACA, but because people do not have enough jobs and are going to emergency rooms more often when they need care. This has nothing to do with the new health care law, because most of that law hasn't kicked in yet.
On the other hand, "social media" has been flooded with about a billion dollars of Republican donations: paid writers who appear to be "average" people.
I think this law is a disaster in the making, and that it will end up hurting the ones it was meant to help the most in the end.
1) Remember when they came out with all those new cancer screening guidelines? They stretched the recommended time in between tests waaaaay out. Why?!? Maybe to avoid discussions about "death panels" and rationing care? Just keep in mind, THEY AREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING TO TREAT A TUMOR THEY HAVEN'T FOUND YET, right?
2) Sheer numbers on the rolls mean longer waits for care. Waiting 2 months to see a primary, 2 months for a scan, and then another 2 months to see an oncologist could mean the difference between life and death to someone with an aggressive form of cancer. There are not enough doctors out there to keep up. I fully expect overwhelmed, under-reimbursed doctors to either quit/retire or transform their practices into cash pay only. If you think the rich benefit more now, wait until they are the only ones who can afford to pay for office visits!
3) They can (and will) be charged higher premiums. What good is guaranteed issuance and a promise that you can't be dropped if you can't afford to keep paying the monthly premium? Yep, the sickest among us will go to the ER, get admitted, and we will see hospitals filled to capacity with people who have serious health conditions that are expensive to treat. They may have paid the penalty/tax (that's a whole other discussion), but they will not have paid for insurance. When they sign up while standing on death's door, the finite resources of the premium pool will dry up VERY quickly.
Do we need changes to healthcare? Absolutely! But why in the world couldn't we try things that won't cost us a dime, like allowing people to buy insurance across state lines? Start there, give it a year to see what happens. If it doesn't work, tackle tort reform. Give it a year, see if it works in addition to buying across state lines, and if not, add something else to the list. This monstrosity won't fully take effect until 2014 anyway, so we are waiting that long to see the results either way! Only difference is: we could be off the hook for a whole bunch of money if we tried the free solutions first.
Never believe ANY statistics on here without a link to the source, GreenTimer. DB Akron is known to either deliberately post propaganda or else he may actually believe the stuff he just makes-up himself (or reads in some unreliable right-wing blog).
The white hot anger of conservatives in Wisconsin that carried Scott Walker to victory will now spread nation wide. Enjoy your moment in the sun liberals, your time is short. With that said, conservatives need to put together a replacement for Obamacare that actually will deliver better coverage and controls/reduces costs over time. This is done by empowering the patient which would force health care providers to COMPETE for the privilege of providing a service to the patient. Then the tough part, making the pitch to the American voter in order to sell the proposal, and finally, following through with swift action to repeal the ACA and passage of their proposal.
Read the numbers people -- even Fox has Obama winning. The only poll showing his behind is Rasmussen and they're consistently wrong.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html
Charlie...., Ummm the election is in 4 months. However if you want to use polls to reinforce your feeling about who will win in November, perhaps look at the trend over the past 6 months. Well on second though maybe not. Just keep telling yourself Obama is the greatest president ever, thats sure to keep your spirits up.
Judicial activism, which Pres. Obama claimed the court would engage in by invalidating the law under the Commerce Clause, didn't occur. Judicial activism by liberals that created a penalty, then a tax as needed to make their decision fit proved it's existence. Yes the conservative base is fired up as it's so obvious to all. Not a debate about the health law but a debate over the logic which is clearly judicial activism. Seems the President, as usual, only has an issue with ethical lapses when it works against him.
I don't like government interference into my life and having them tell me what I can/cannot have.
This ACA is a fiscal montrosity that the government cannot afford. In addition it will add more taxes and the
middle class will have to cover most of it. It should be repealed and made more streamline with transparent bi-partisan congressional committees.
greatpretnder,
How do you support your claim of the ACA costing more - in light of the Congressional Budget Office determining that it actually will reduce the debt?
I hope your reply is not to claim more knowledge for yourself than for the CBO with out any evidence of that knowledge.
I've heard all kind of silly comments regarding the CBO scoring of the ACA, including "Obama tells them what to say".
The fact is, most of the posts against the ACA that were used in this article failed to articulate any semblance of fact. Most are scare tactics that pull figures out of the air.
The bottom line is, if you can afford health insurance and don't buy it, you will pay a tax/penalty/fee. The free ride is over...
Greentimer - MA residents were told 10 years ago the our insurance cost would go down with Romenycare. Still waiting for that decrease in cost. Please name one government program that has ever come in under cost. You live in a fanastyland.
greatpretender,
The main interference that the ACA has against you, or anyone else, is to prohibit one from waiting until illness or accident strikes before going to the expensive emergency room to stabilize you at the expense of those who had the personal responsibility to have health insurance.
The law provides the government to run interference for citizens and companies against other unexpected setbacks. Bankruptcy laws allows the discharge of unpafyable debts, for a clean start.
The laws of the land are established by freely elected representatives of the American people to provide services for citizens that are needed to conduct a functioning economy - services which they cannot provide for themselves: civil protection, military defense, commerce, etc. That's how a bunch of people manage to live next door to each other without having to do violence to one another.
and..
nowhere does the constitution say that the government will provide healthcare for the citizenry.
It should be left to the states to draft their own healthcare laws and government can assist by
providing vouchers for the needy. The left are criticizing Romney's failed healthcare law, but they fail to
mention that the ACA is a copy of it. We have a mirror to look into to see where this is taking us.
The middle class needs relief, not new taxes!
Whether the states provide it or the feds, it's still government. You can't bitch and moan about government interference and then say it's okay as long as it follows your protocol. You still want federal taxes to pay for state medical care, so what, pray tell, is the difference?
And
You're freaking kidding, right? Please crawl out from under your rock.
finallyproud..
you are an idiot!
"Barack Obama's health care bill is nothing new. Mitt Romney signed one just like it four years before."
Howard Dean, Friday, November 12th, 2010.
Ruling: Mostly True | Details
The Senate-passed health care bill "is identical to the Massachusetts health care plan -- the same thing."
Paul Krugman, Sunday, January 31st, 2010.
There is a big difference between the feds and the states. It's like comparing an oil tanker
to a sportsfisher.
greatpretender,
... and nowhere does the Constitution provide for bankruptcy protection, national parks or Interstate highways, the first two of which were issues that could have been addressed in 1776.
FinallyProud has nicely covered my thoughts on the rest of your posting.
The middle class needs jobs, and private industry is sitting on more than $2 trillion of cash that could be spent on jobs if only there were demand for their products. Private industry creates wealth, not jobs. That's the whole meaning of capitalism. Demand creates jobs, and that demand comes from wage earners with money to spend on goods and services.
gideb, Tell me the price of anything that has gone down in the last ten years, except, of course, for these little electronic gadgets that you and I use to post crazy ideas onto internet sites like Newsvine. That does not mean that prices for some things may have not gone up more slowly under actual conditions than they might have under other conditions.
greatpretender, you said
Then in a later post, you call another poster a idiot for disagreeing (in bold face letters) with your comment.
Now either you did not read what you wrote ("the left fails to mention the ACA is a copy of it"), OR you are misquoting two unquestionable lefties, Krugman and Dean, as saying that the ACA is "the same thing" as Romney's MA plan.
Maybe you are just in a hurry here, but you cannot have it both ways. You cannot prove liberals don't mention the similarity of the ACA with the MA plan by quoting liberals mentioning the similarity of the ACA with the MA plan.
lotta empty confusing words greentimer..
take your meds?
greatpretender, I see how valid your arguments are by the way you resort to calling names, infering insanity on your fellow blogger.
Nice going showing us all what the other side has, nothing.
Obama/Biden 2012, vote like America's future depends on it.
I'd like to emphasize what IMHO has just said. Exactly right IMHO, greatpretender's post reveals the emptiness of the GOP arguments.
greatpretender,
Do liberals mention that the ACA copies the Romney MA plan?
I just cant see our govt running this efficiently or keeping cost down, there are simply too many moving parts..red tape and bureaucracy will go through the roof...expect to see this costing us double of what projected amounts will be and is this something we can afford right now..i will not get into the issue about big govt telling us what to buy, already not happy about that..guess we will wither see how this all plays out post election day.
just wish they read the whole damn thing before they passed it instead of the other way around....
Even the government could keep our health care system running more efficiently and more cost effectively than the insurance companies. The new bill requires that insurance companies spend 80% of revenue from premiums on providing health care. Administrative costs, CEO pay, marketing, office supplies, and profits are limited to a total of 20% of the pie.
The sad thing is that most of this bill comes from two sources: Senator Chafee's (R-RI) 1993 healthcare reform plan and the conservative Heritage Foundation's proposals. This bill is not a liberal monstrosity in any way, shape, or form. This bill comes from the mind of the now-reviled moderate wing of the GOP.
Thomas Sowell
composer - Unlike Liberals I can think for myself and I don't agree with everything put out by heritage foundation. Your post is ridiculous the heritage foundation say so; so you republicans and conservative have no right to disagree with this program. It's call independent thinking you should tired it some time. I live in MA and I've seen how well Romenycare works for the middle class taxpayers so I'm not for Obamacare. The poor and wealthy will be fine with Obamacare as usual the middle class will pay for another government hand out for Democratic voters.
It is right and fair to have government step in and regulate health care BECAUSE the government's JOB is to protect it's citizenry. It has a MORAL quality that corporations do NOT possess. A business's reason to exist is profit. That is not the reason for the US government to exist. Even if you consider free enterprise, the DOD has worked on many great projects that we benefit from because the military shared it with corporations. One example would be GPS devices that many people use. This FOXwellian mantra people spout "government is bad" leaves this black hole of "so... corporations are good" crap. When I was young and poor and buying insurance Prudential dropped me right when I needed them. My husband looked into it and they staffed lawyers to GET THEM OUT OF PAYING CLAIMS. For God's sake! Why wouldn't anyone want the hand of government over those jerks to make them do what they are supposed to do??? Prudential owns utilities now, their office landscapes are always decorated with fountains, etc., etc. Because they have NO shame. And just how great has it been since utilities were deregulated??? Notice how they shed their line infrastructure and split off into just generation? Because they SUCK all the money to the top and don't keep them maintained!-to whit the current and horrid outages that are going on now. Myself, I think energy is a little to important to everyone to have it privatized as well. It sure did not make the price go down as they PROMISED, and people are left with brown-outs and old transformers because maintenance costs them money! Don't even start me on the military, who are trying to go green ASAP because climate change is a HUGH national security risk. The US Navy has a Climate Change Station in the Arctic and the USAF considers climate change one of the biggest threats we face as a nation. What do the fossil fuel corporations do to help the military? They use propaganda via "FOX news etc., to deny it! It is treasonous what is going on and one day these deniers will be as popular as Holocaust deniers as well they should be. We have problems from Wall Street like no other! I wish Washington would throw them off the cliff- because only they have the power to do so. Except we have a Supreme Court that is heavily invested in corporations and they are making it harder for each of us to be heard. They should have to wear the logos of the corporations they are invested in on their black robes so we would know what the hell they are thinking! Big government...well the Multi-national corporations that originated in the USA are no patriots. They are users. Profiteers. Sharks. Like wall-street. There are psychopaths that kill people with no remorse. Then there are corporate CEO's that just destroy people --with no remorse. I am refering to a recent best-seller about the polish some psychos possess as they go about functioning prettily in the world.Heck-even the MOB has more rules of behavior than some of these businesses.....
The government will keep costs down by running national health care as well as they run health care in prisons, at the VA, and on Indian reservations. Fasten your seat belts, sick people, it's gonna be a bumpy ride.
Hey--Prisons are mostly privatized and one of the biggest lobbys out there. Just go hand your pay check to a private insurance company and see how much you get back.
km -
And just what do you think Obamacare mandates the average citizen to do?
Obamacare mandates that we hand our paycheck over to a private insurance company or be fined.
Just how do you think that's going to work out?
Tammy, as Harlan Ellison once said, "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."
So, please, find me even one credible source that says the average working person (who, by the way would already be covered by insurance in most cases) must hand over a paycheck to anyone? If you are so poor that you can't afford it, health care will be subsidized. If you're just a self-absorbed, unemployed jackass who can afford, but refuses to pay for, insurance, you get to pay a yearly tax so the rest of us don't have to foot the bill for your egoism when you get sick or hurt. Get it? Probably not...
Finally Proud,
That's it? America is made up of three kinds of people, poor people who have government insurance, middle class who have insurance in most cases, and self-absorbed, unemployed jackasses who can afford, but refuse to pay for insurance?
What about those who can afford their own healthcare and have no need for insurance? You're ok with that group of people being taxed for NOT buying a product for which they have no use? What else are we going to be taxed for not buying? Vitamins? Sugar substitutes? Gym memberships? When have we ever collected a tax and turned the money over to private companies?
The average working person who is already covered by insurance may not be so comfortable with their situation when you realize that the tax their employer would have to pay for not providing insurance benefits is much less than the amount they now pay for that insurance. How long will it be before those companies decide to drop that benefit? How are those people now going to find affordable insurance? They are the ones who are going to be handing their paychecks over to an insurance company.
VH NAVY - The Medicaid that is operated and monitored by the government has a 3% Overhead Costs
Private Insurances Companies operate at a "no limit" Overhead Costs
This Affordable Health Care Act - limits their Overhead Costs at 15% giving 85% costs for actual care and if they exceed that they must write checks to their subscribers which will be refunded in August - 2012
Why do you think they spent $250 Million to try and defeat this bill? DUH!
And when the nay sayers see the check in the mail
what do you think they will say - no I won't cash it because I hate money or OBAMACARE?
Now Navy - you have access to the VA Hospitals - what do you think their Overhead is? Comparable to Medicaid
Yes there are complaints and there are raves - my husband has been treated at American Lake at Fort Lewis - raves
Activist judges, Goverment over-reach, bureaucracy gone wild, telling us what to do, blah blah blah.
The bill was read guys, it was when you were screaming and lying about it. When it was time to negotiate you and the T-baggers, AFP, Koch brothers were out smearing it. Death panels, pull the plug on grandma, Socialist takover of the feds.
Now it passed and got affirmed by the supreme court.
Too late to add your crostructive criticism, we had to do it without the R's.
Problem was the President promised all sorts of things that it wasn't . We can't handle the truth? 35% of the people approve of it. It's not a tax he said, and continues to say? Really? Keep my plan? Costs will go down? Better to talk about what has worked. what? Minority gains, majority loses and government gets huge new powers. Just wait until conservatives take over, as politics ebbs and flows, and your new standard of politics is deployed against you. Unlike liberals I can take it but since you're dishing it out be prepared when it comes back. Something liberals never seem able to handle.
Hey Kal Albert - you have a nominee by the name of Willard Milton Romney who is promising all kinds of things which you and I know he could never deliver
Because why? The House of Representatives write the bills - the Senate approves or disapproves and the President can accept or veto
So what is the differrence you tell me? - and if what you call conservatives they are nothing but a paid for group of Corporate Shills
Awesome!
Every right-leaning, libertarianesque crank with a social media account is now part of the political punditry, and their opinions matter, by golly.
Don't suppose there are any other reasons why the right all hate this right wing think tank-created "socialist" insurance mandate, are there? Nah.
BTW, good luck with the "tax" label on the mandate - or should I say "Willard's tax".
This is insane. I agree with the tweet mentioning getting "taxed" *cough* *cough* for not driving an American car. The federal government does not have the right to force citizens to purchase a retail product. The Supreme Court got this one wrong, and those who voted in support of this policy which goes against the Constitution should be removed from the bench immediately.
So what's next, we all have to buy new cards and Ipads? Would fix the economy...
Oh, and Obama would be smart to not run for re-election, he's going to be quite embarrassed by the landslide defeat he will be handed.
The federal government already has the power to impose taxes for not driving an American car. They are called tariffs, and are taxes on imported products imposed on the importer, which are then passed on to the consumer in the price of the product.
"No I don't want that pack of gum"
"Ok the tax to not buy it is $2.35"
You know, there seems to be an aspect of this that nobody seems to talk about. If the SCOTUS had ruled that individual mandates were unconstitutional, then it seems that would open the door (from a legal stand point, eventhough I am not an atty.) for people to start having state individual mandates struck down as well (think motorcycle helmet laws, child seat sfety laws, car insurance laws, seatbelt laws, etc.).
If you need an example of this kind of thing happening, you have to look no further than Montana's campaign finance laws, which the SCOTUS overturned, because it goes against their Citizen's United ruling. Remember, all it would take was for one person to file the suit.
Either way, healthcare should be revisited so a single payer system can be brought into place, like all the rest of the industrialized countries have. If money is what you are worried about, look at the fact that we pay more than any other country for medical care and don't even get the best results. Then look at the fact that we spend 17% of our GDP on healthcare costs (as opposed to other nations only spending around 5 or 6%) , and to add to that, over 60% of all bankruptcies in the US are from healthcare issues. Something had to be done. The ACA was a small step in the correct direction, but more still needs to be done on that front.
To gtouch: Oh yes, the tired argument about the government "forcing" you to buy a product. The old "broccoli" debate. Unlike food (which theoretically) we should all be able to provide ourselves (ever heard of a garden, chickens, livestock), health care is a profession and will be universally used at some time in everyone's life. Birth, death, illness, accidents happen - we all will suffer these at some point and be forced into the health care market. Unlike food (again, that we all can theoretically provide for ourselves) very few of us can perform our own emergency surgery, write prescriptions, replace a knee or hip or treat our own cancers, etc.
That's an excellent point, red-gemini! Thank you for elevating the conversation.
Buff Daddy - YOU THINK? Then the American public is doomed to become an oligarchy and you and your ilk made it so - no not you entirely you - Murdoch Reigns - and Koch Bros - and Corporate America
ALL HEIL!
Barbara, your argument makes no sense. Oligarchy? Do you know the definition of that word? I'm doing the opposite here. The majority don't want this bill and the majority knows it is unconstitutional, and I fully agree with them. For reference, the definition of "oligarchy" is: "a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people". I do not want Obama breaking the law and breaking the constitution against the people's wishes. Please either stop using words you don't understand or learn them and use them correctly. Thank you.
There was a much easier and better solution to the problem, but no one was paying any attention. This solution also would not have created ANY new penalty/tax, but hard to do when one has the insurance companies lining one's pockets. The inexplicably easy fix?
LAWS REGULATING INSURANCE COMPANIES AND WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO UNDER THESE LAWS
Normally referred to as regulating an industry just as was once done to the airlines way back when legislators and US citizens were sane.
Chief Justice John Roberts knew what he was doing and has successfully handed the election to Mitt Romney. I'm still laughing at the liberals who think this decision is a win for them. In reality it is a death sentence...one and done, thank goodness.
#1 - I am forced to buy medical insurance by my employer. The only way I can opt out is by proving I have obtained health insurance by other means. Not much changes here; no tax on me. Those who have health insurance will still have health insurance. Those who have gambled (and sometimes lost) by not having health insurance, will have to buy it now, the penalty is for them.
#2 - Thanks to the SCOTUS ruling, I can now plan to retire before Medicare age, and buy my own health insurance without being denied or penalized for any pre-existing condition, or be dropped for any illness I may acquire. It is a win-win situation, because when I do retire, someone younger who needs the job can move into my position.
These Experts on this show are really dumb, The American People are not that Dumb. Our President will win in this Election. America.
I applaud the decision of the Supreme Court -- it appears Chief Justice Roberts provided cover to his side of the bench but also gave the heads-up to his decision to Romney in order for him to be prepared to have that ridiculous press conference at some bldg w/backdrop view of the Capitol w/a banner posting "repeal and replace" -- the exact same health care reform he himself initiated in Mass. But then the media coops his message that what he introduced in Mass was something different. I think the media is after Romney rhetoric. Hooray for health care reform! Let the conversation begin and let reform begin and finally can we move forward to improve and improve and improve on what we have and stop the bickering from the ridiculous right!
Interesting. What I see here is a split along gender lines with women seeing a need for public healthcare and men not. I can't help but wonder if any of these loudmouths spouting off against it are over 30 with children. Bet not. Bet they are the same 20-somethings who think they can tie a rocket to their lawn chair and ride to Europe.
mj - I'm a female with three children and I don't want this program so please kept your narrow minded viewpoint to yourself. Unlike you I don't need the government to provide for my children or myself. I live in MA and l"ve seen how Romenycare works and all you middle class taxpayers who think this is the answer to our health care problems are in for a rude awakening. But from the bitching your doing mj I'll assume you and your children already live off the government tit so it will be another freebie for you.
gibeb114 If you are really from MA you would already have insurance, seeked a waiver or have a plan through the health connector or been paying a fee.
And some of them are just trolls who are waiting to drop the BS! LOL
The ACA GUARENTEES that health insurance will be provided by private insurance companies. That is as far from a government takeover as it gets.
The law prohibits the insurance companies from standing between patient and doctor. The Ins Cos. can no longer decide after the fact whether a condition is or is not covered. The law protects the patient/doctor relationship from interference by the insurance companies, who are rightfully trying to make a profit, not provide health care.
Health insurance coverage will now be protected by the laws of freely elected representatives of the American people, not by the companies seeking (rightfully) to protect investors.
Is this bill going after the free riders, slow riders, or Mustang Sally? This bill is going to create a bureaucratic nightmare and help very few people. Most people who don't have insurance right now, don't want it and they are not going to buy it now. However, the people that get it free are going to storm the system. You know the people I am talking about! The people that ate their dime bag of meth because they thought there was a raid, the people that inhaled large amounts of Lysol to catch a buzz, and of course the people who ate one to many litter box treats
Kirk - you are so right when Romenycare was impletment the state had 7% that weren't insured. The number of individuals getting free healthcare has increased every year since Romenycare was past.
Obama and the Supreme Court can kiss my ass. If they were suffering for life with an illness that would not kill them and I had a cure ,they would suffer. If they had an illness that caused death they would die!!!!!!!!!!!! Obama and the Supreme Court Justices voting to uphold the health care plan can and will burn in HELL FOR ETERNITY!!!!! Send Obama and his family back to Africa in shackles and put them in the jungle!!!!!
Have you sought help for that psychosis you have?
Thanks, Pam....always nice to hear from the teagagging right wing whackjobs.
Keep up the good hatred....it looks good on you!
Wow Pam. It amazes me when people who know nothing but hatred, anger and bigotry come on here and "think" that they are actually posting something at least semi intelligent, when in reality it just shows their ignorance and the clear fact that whatever they say should be ignored. You did nothing to help your side or your opinions. In fact, I'd guess that some people who were on the fence read your post and now side with Obamacare.
It just scares me to death that adults really think that they will receive FREE health care!!! Are you kidding me? Have you ever heard the saying: "nothing in life is free?" Indeed, you may be able to receive "free" health care, but believe you me, somebody is paying for your doctor services, tests, medication, etc. And if others have to pay for this, this means that they will not be able to pay or invest in other things. This makes as much sense as a pension. It is just a matter of time before it implodes. Shame on you people for being so naive and gullible!!!! Indeed our health care system needs to be tweeked, but this is so not the answer. Mark my words, we are going to pay dearly for this and I don't just mean the 1%.
I don't think it matters. Both sides don't have any solutions to our problems. The one job Romney has been trying to secure for years-the presidency is for himself. If deregulating business and fighting two wars and lowering taxes at the same time was the right prescription we wouldn't be in trouble now. We had a surplus under Clinton (which I understant republicans take credit for and I don't blame them). Our problem is rooted in the fact that real wages have not gone up in this country for about 25 to 30 years. There are several reasons for that -none of them can be delt with politically. Governments pass laws and regulations to protect the population-some don't have the desired effect. However, many of the people I work with complain about government interference but have nothing to do with government except paying their taxes. If that is going to be the debate there are a lot of different programs I don't want my money going for and my congressman is a conservative republican who doesn't give a damn what I think except every two years. Our health care system is broken and several presidents have tried to fix it. It is true we have exceptional health care if you are wealthy but then that is true all over about almost anything. It would help if conservatives came up with some realistic alternatives rather than calling liberals morons and Obama a muslim. They have a vote, are citizens and pay taxes which means their opinion is just as relevant as any conservative opinion. I don't like that any better than I like hearing Romney's religion is a cult. It is unfair and hardly to the point. This idea that 50% of the population is stupid, greedy and moronic has got to stop or we will never solve anything. I read terrible comments here about Obama and I feel sure democrats felt the same way about Bush. It is childish.
you folks are lost. When people figure out that their is nothing to replace it with, than they will vote for obama. Also, romney? He is a liberal like McCain. Comprehensive immigration? How about here is frkn b us ticket. . Running to the left in the general election. You gonna vote for that? Romney is cut from the same liberal though. It was all an inside long con. Now, a few people get angry ..make a few bucks given in the fall and business as ususal. No one lost in this health care debate except the poor taxpayer ---ie 30-50 k folks who have to shell out 10k a year to support the albrotross and the big con. Do you think any republican gives one hoot about this? They just passed another 100 billion or so to repaint the roads. I mean, no one is going to stop anything.
Jolly joker - if obamacare is romenycare families making 30 - 50K a year will now get free healthcare. Romenycare is free healthcare for anyone who lives 200% under the proverty level.
Romney is a liberal and so is obama. No one, and I repeat no one is interested in bringing down cost. I mean, how about graduate x7 the number of doctors or nurses? Or for that matter importing drugs from canada or other countries? What about 1 policy that is nation wide that can be sold across state lines. Thoughts so! No, the only ideas are to throw money at it and let people be slaves to high premiums. You force somene to spend 10k a year on 30k in income or tax the cr ap out of them? Those jobs go away or people opt of the workforce and live on cash. THats the end result of all o fthis. The federal poverty level is around 11,000. So, I make 12,000 and buy and 4000 dollar policy or get fined. Get real.
I disagree with this article' the new health insurance ruling has strengthened Obamas voter base. When Republicans said We dont want everyone to have health insurance,they lost the election for sure.The Republicans arent telling the truth about it being only a tax on people that dont buy health insurance and the facts will haunt them before the election.
...And Romney wants to repeal these benefits in the ACA law, going to all Americans:
HEALTH REFORM BILL SUMMARY: THE TOP 18 IMMEDIATE EFFECTS
No More Denials For Pre-Existing Conditions
Health insurers cannot deny children insurance because of pre-existing conditions. A ban
on the same discrimination against adults will take effect in 2014.
Small Business Tax Credits
Businesses with fewer than 50 employees will receive tax credits covering up to 50
percent of employee premiums, thus allowing small businesses to operate less financially
hampered by higher medical insurance costs for themselves and their employees.
Seniors' 'Donut Hole' Rebate
Seniors will receive a rebate check in the mail to fill the "donut hole" in Medicare drug
coverage, which severely limits prescription medication coverage of expenditures over
$2,700. As of next year, 50 percent of the donut hole will be filled.
More Young Adults Covered On Parents' Plans
The cut-off age for young adults to continue to be covered by their parents' health
insurance rises to age 27.
No Lifetime Caps
Lifetime caps on the amount of insurance payout an individual can receive will be banned.
Annual caps will be limited, and banned in 2014.
Adults With Pre-Existing Conditions Covered
A temporary high-risk pool will be set up to cover adults with pre-existing conditions.
Health care exchanges will eliminate the program in 2014. These non-profit, public
exchanges set up in each state will come into direct cost competition and quality-of-
service competition with private sector, for-profit, health care plans and programs.
New Insurance Plans Must Include Preventative Care
New plans must cover checkups and other preventative care without co-pays. All plans
will be affected by 2018.
The End Of 'Recissions'
Insurance companies can no longer drop someone when he or she gets sick.
Transparency In Insurance Companies
Insurers must now reveal how much money is spent on overhead.
Customer Appeals Process
Any new plan must now implement an appeals process for coverage determinations and
claims.
Indoor Tanning Services Tax
A 10 percent tax is imposed on indoor tanning services. This tax, which replaced the
proposed tax on cosmetic surgery, is effective for services on or after July 1, 2010.
Enhanced Fraud Abuse Checks
New screening procedures will be implemented to help identify and eliminate health insurance fraud and waste.
Medicare Expansion To Rural Areas
Medicare payment protections will be extended to small rural hospitals and other health
care facilities that have a small number of Medicare patients. Rural Americans will finally receive access to full coverage.
Deductions For Blue Cross / Blue Shield
Nonprofit Blue Cross organizations will be required to maintain a medical loss ratio –
money spent on procedures over money incoming -- of 85 percent or higher to take
advantage of IRS tax benefits.
Nutrient Content Disclosure
Chain restaurants will be required to provide a "nutrient content disclosure statement" alongside their items. Calories should be listed on both in-store and drive-through menus of fast-food restaurants.
Better Coverage For Early Retirees
The law establishes a temporary program for companies that provide early retiree health
benefits for those ages 55‐64 in order to help reduce the often-expensive cost of that
coverage.
Better Consumer Information On The Web
The Department of Health and Human Services will set up a new website to make it easy
for Americans in any state to seek out affordable health insurance options The site will
also include helpful information for small businesses.
Encouraging Investment In New Therapies
A two‐year temporary credit up to a maximum of $1 billion is in the law to encourage investment in new therapies for the prevention and treatment of diseases.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/22/health-reform-bill-summary_n_508315.html#s75147&title=No_More_Denials
The only way you could get the truth out of Republicans would be to listen to them off CAMERA.
No presidet could bring down the deficit with Republicans GRIDLOCKING every bill that has come up to create jobs along with everything else. The deficit was created by Republicans and their still in denial.
What is needed is term limits instead of letting people sit up in Washington, for 20, 30, 40 years.
We crack down on lobbyist for all the ins. companies and everyone else standing up there handing out the cash to the people that make the decisions. Do away with pork barrel spending....both sides of the isle. Do away with programs that pay millionaires not to plant (5 Billion last yr). But no the people like Paul Ryan want to take away from the poor and the elderly, you can bet they haven't missed any meals recently.
People in Congress get their healthcare free, make them start paying for theirs and their dependents you will see a different tune
Term limits of one term. Once elected to an office, there is no reason to raise any money for the next election and no reason to sell one's vote to the highest bidder.
Office holders could vote their conscience without fear of retribution at the next election, 'cause there would be no next election.
I don't like people showing up at emergency rooms for basic care because they can't afford coverage or are unwilling to pay for it costing we the taxpayers Gizzillions, I don't like insurance companies kicking people off their coverage or raising their rates once they get ill and they have paid for coverage for ever, I don't like the fact that certain Republicans have forgotten the phrase "Ask Not What Your Country Can Do For You, Ask What You Can Do For Your Country" and turned anything that helps people including themselves as a handout!!
Truth is we as a nation are finaly going to provide very, very neccessary health coverage for ALL citizens of the U S A! A true Christian would expect nothing less!
Over time the health CARE system will self correct, the insurance scam will self correct and the cost of the essential heath CARE will subside making the cost justifiable with the service delivered, best of all we will become the nation that we aspire to be, one nation under God!