• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Here's the health bill...

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
...not that you'll be able to understand a doggone thing.

What a piece of trash legislation.

http://bit.ly/3HL23Z

-or-

http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

Doing a scan of "end-of-life" finds more of the same doublethink,doubletalk as the older shorter version. The closing section of end-of-life says it all:

3) No premption of state Law - Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt or otherwise have any effect on State laws regarding advance care planning, palliative care, or end-of-life decision-making
In other words, Washington and Oregon and any other State who wishes to legalize “assisted suicide” or the sanitized version of “death with dignity” (IMO a euphamism for euthanasia) just keep on doing what you have been doing or enact State legislation to allow for self-murder or euthanasia.

This version has introduced "abortion" via public funding, same double talk:

It isn't allowed but on the other hand it is allowed:

7 (e) ABORTION COVERAGE PROHIBITED AS PART OF MINIMUM BENEFITS PACKAGE.— On page 109.

8 (4) ABORTION SERVICES.—

9 (A) ABORTIONS FOR WHICH PUBLIC FUNDING IS PROHIBITED.—The services described in this subparagraph are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is not permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the beginning of the plan year involved.


17 (B) ABORTIONS FOR WHICH PUBLIC FUNDING IS ALLOWED.—
The services described in this subparagraph are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the beginning of the plan year involved.


So at some time in the future our tax dollars will be used for "allowed" abortions.


HankD
VerDate Nov
 

rbell

Active Member
To tell you how terribly bad this bill is...

The Wall St. Journal calls it the "worst bill ever." SOURCE

That trillion-dollar healthcare bill will only cover 2% of Americans with its hideous "public option." http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/2009/11/all-of-this-for-2.html

Annual Medicare fraud: $60 Billion. Annual profits for top ten insurance companies: $8 billion. http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/10/post_145.asp


I'll be real clear: This bill is unAmerican, dangerous, and wrong. And anyone who supports it is ridiculously mistaken, or ignorant, or doesn't care about the future of this country.
 

Gold Dragon

Well-Known Member
Thanks for posting this. As a medical student considering practicing in the US, I am very interested in the contents and outcome of this bill.

The Committee on Energy and Commerce has some good summary pages and I browsed the "Section by Section" document which summarizes each section of the bill to get a feel for the main issues being tackled by the bill. I'll summarize my understanding of the bill.


Division A: Health Care Choices is the meat of the plan which is to create 1) a Health Insurance Exchange with the goal of making it easier for consumers to compare and find the right plan for them 2) a public health insurance plan option to compete with private insurance plans. It also includes regulation to prevent potential abuses by insurance companies as well as taxing individuals and employers who do not purchase adequate health insurance for themselves or their employees.

Division B is about changes to existing Medicare/Medicaid services including cost reduction strategies and improving existing services
Division C is about improving training opportunities for health workers.
Division D is about improving health services for American Indians.


There are a lot of very specific apparently actionable changes that make sense to implement but most of them seem fairly minor. The major issues are the creation of the Health Insurance Exchange and the public health insurance option. I'm planning to research a little more into the implementation of those two entities to see what the potential for success is in both cases.

There are several statements like the ones HankD quoted that essentially say that this bill does not affect legislation related to ...... (abortion, end-of-life, etc) basically to calm down certain groups who get concerned that it will affect those hot-button issues and tell them that this legislation has nothing to do with those issues.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

rbell

Active Member
From Neal Boortz:

The White House doesn't seem to have a problem with that. Robert Gibbs was asked just yesterday whether White House lawyers had reviewed the Constitutionality of Obamacare. Robert Gibbs' response was that the White House is not seriously concerned about this.

There you go. The Obama administration isn't concerned about the Constitution.

I think you have all the information you need.

Barack Obama, and his administration: They oppose freedom, liberty, and the foundations of this great Republic. These guys are evil.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
From Neal Boortz:



There you go. The Obama administration isn't concerned about the Constitution.

I think you have all the information you need.

Barack Obama, and his administration: They oppose freedom, liberty, and the foundations of this great Republic. These guys are evil.


Pure evil........
 
Top