The Tyranny of the Republican Party and Blue Dog Dems
70America is my native land and I would like to make it better. How about you?
Tyranny of the Blue Dog Dems
The Republicans and some Democrats, in the Congress and Senate, have decided that the middle class and poor, don't really matter. Their idea of “for profit” health care is exclusionary, which simply means, if you cannot afford to pay their price for coverage, then you are just out of luck, and on your own. So, if you develop a chronic illness, or terminal cancer, that's just too bad, deal with it.
These people want you to believe and accept the premise, that it is your fault that you cannot afford health insurance, and that you should not have the right or even the desire to change or improve this diabolical system. The wealthy, fat, greedy, bloated, Republicans seemingly have no shame. They don't want us, the people to understand that they are actually operating completely, against our interests.
Evidently, they think that they can snub their noses at us, while continuing to serve their rich masters. They have convinced the unlearned and unfortunate poor, that capitalism is king and that only, the rich and powerful matter in our society. The problem with this idea, is that it not only conflicts with the U.S. Constitution, but it is also contrary to Christ's teachings.*
The fundamental purpose of our Constitution is contained in the preamble, which begins with: “we the people.” So then we can extrapolate from its stated purpose, “the preamble,” and every thing that follows, after that point, is and must be provided, for the sole benefit of the we, the American People.
The Revolutionary War was fought to escape the tyrannical rule of King George. Life under his reign was great, if you were a royal and a property owner. However, If you were among the less privileged and poor classes, then your life path was pretty much unchangeable and without hope. The colonials or the revolutionaries, who were the intellectuals of their day, and critical thinkers, surmised that their lives would be so much better, if they escaped the tyranny of the king and formed their own country and government.
Life was very hard and unrewarding for the common people, during this time. If you did not belong to the ruling classes, you were just out of luck, much as today. If you don't have a good paying job or some other substantial means of income, then you are looking at potential bankruptcy, homelessness and living on the street with your wife and children. So, considering that the founding fathers despised tyranny and actually took up arms against a much stronger adversary, the King of England and his mighty armed forces, why then would they want to create the same conditions here that they found intolerable there? The obvious answer is that they wouldn't. They were absolutely and completely dedicated to the idea of change, of turning the page on tyranny forever.
The preamble of the Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” **
How do we insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare or secure the blessings of liberty, if there is no health care, no jobs, no education, and taxation without representation? Many of our elected representatives practice “Darwinian economics,” which basically means that only the strong survive, i.e., the rich and powerful. Consistent with their greedy philosophy, they are not bothered by your inability to afford health care or for that matter, your ability to get a job or an education.
It is well known that more than 70 % of the American People want single payer, government managed, health care. The fact that the people have been and continue to be ignored, by their representatives, takes us back to the days of taxation without representation.
It is clear to me and should be clear to you, that “for profit corporations” should NOT be involved in health care. Health care belongs to “the commons,” just as police, fire, roads, sewers, water lines, public transportation, etc.. When we collectively purchase these necessary services and make the government responsible for their safe and efficient operations, we then retain our rights and authority over our government and employees.
This provides assurances that the services are delivered at the most reasonable cost to the people. We all pay for government services out of taxes and fees, which are spread across the tax base. So then we are all better served. We are not insignificant nor are we expendable. We are the American People and we are somebody! Indeed, we are the sole reason and purpose for which this blessed document, the United States Constitution was written.
We must push for and support the public financing of all elections. We must rid our government of U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives, who do not represent our best interests, both in times of war and in times of peace. The acceptance of Lobbyist money and gifts, is the same as, bribery and is just wrong and criminal in my opinion!
Finally, Mr. President, we are counting on you to lead this effort in turning the page, from years and years of tyranny, to a new and brighter future, filled with hope, freedom, and an America that will be a light to all nations of the world. And let it be known that we support the President of the United States, and that we expect the U.S. Senators and Congressmen to work closely with our President, so as to help him to achive the goals of the common people.
*New Testament Matthew chapter five
**National Archives Experience
CommentsLoading...
Maybe we can get those Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats to take another look at the U.S. Constitution. Good work, eaglefeather.
You really believe that the US Constitution grants you health coverage by the Government? You have taken that sacred document and reduced it to health coverage? That Document set forth the founding of this Country and to enable every citizen freedom from an oppressive government, it does not say one word about providing anyone health coverage. General welfare, you have the right to walk into any emergency room in this country and be treated and cannot be turned away based on your inability to pay! That is law! There is your General welfare!
And where do you get off blaming Republicans? They cannot stop the Democrats from passing any legislation they want to pass. They have no power! They control nothing! And the latest polls say that 54% of Americans do not want them passing any legislation concerning health care, these blue dog democrats are acting exactly the way they are supposed to in a Representative Republic! They are acting on behalf of their constituents, that must drive you crazy to see the politicians listening for a change!
No my friend you have no right to health care other than the rights you enjoy now, I pay for my health coverage every month and I am by no stretch of the imagination rich. If I can do it and not whine then you should be able to do it too!
Government already provides health care consistent with the Constitution's "promote the general welfare" provision. It's called Medicare which could easily be extended incrementally to the rest of the population. However, single-payer health insurance doesn't automatically solve the problem of skyrocketing costs. It would make slowing costs easier but additional measures would be required.
Medicare is nothing to brag about, it is what it is and I do not think anyone wants to see it destroyed. But adding more people to its rolls isn't going to make it cheaper! Have you read this health care bill? If not then you are not alone as I doubt the people who proposed it have either!
Providing Health care for everyone is an expensive proposition and there are many charitable organizations who are better suited to help those who need it!
I do not believe the constitution meant health care when it speaks of "Promote the general welfare" but rather the safety of the populace from outside forces, I ain't talking about disease!
This is nothing but a power grab by a political party to ensure its continued existence by buying votes!
Well here we go again those rich republicains.Lets look at the top 10 out of the top 40 richiest in the Congress Millionaire Club 1, John Kerry (d) 164mil 2, Herb Kohl (d) 111mil 3,Rockerfeller (d) 81mil 4John Curzine (d)71mil 5Dianne Feinstein (d) 26mil 6Peter Fitzgerald (r) 26mil (here are those evil rich rep) 7 Frank Lautenberg (d) 17mil 8 Ed Kennedy (d) 9mil 9 Jeff Bingaman (d) 7mil 10Bob Graham (d)7 mil. These are stright from the right wing CNN Inside Politics. Know this story started out saying those rich fat republicains should read the Constituion May be you should find out more about your beloved Dems that you want to bless you with healty care. Oh those ones that will not take part in that same health care that includes Mr Obama himself. Do you not see some kind of problem with that. Oh he is worth 8.5mil Thats is nice he is a common man just like those top 10 millionaires. Wake up and take you rose glasses off so you can see who you blindly fAllow.
And the usual blame the Republicans, why? How is it the Republicans fault? just because they are against it. Typical Democrat crap, baseless accusations and hope one of the Kool aide drinkers believe it! Unfortunately they all do because they are told to!
And they say conservatives are narrow minded not wanting change, but we just are not mind num robots that do what we are told,or say what we are told to. Well there is still a chance that we can slow down this train before it go's of the cliff.
So Ralph and Eaglefeather you have not said any thing about the rich dems up in Congress. Does this mean you are looking into those facts? I hope so. Ralph like I said a couple of days ago on you blog we are Americans first not dems and reps, we need to do whats right for this country not the parties. So i challenge you on this subject to think outside your party line.
Goodnigt Underwater Man
You think that millionaire's are un-American? Obama is trying his best to do what's right for the country. And he's tried with little success to have a civil dialog with Republicans in Congress. They seem to prefer the role of wreckers.
Ralph, You seem to be no more than a hate all Republicans kind of guy. If Obama was truly doing what was best for America he would not try and pass a bill most Americans don't want. Your Democrat leaders are nothing more than pretend tough guys trying to bully Republicans into getting behind a crappy bill so when it gets bad they can blame them. The tactic is old and Republicans will not budge. I can get all my health care through the VA and not pay a dime, but I want to be able to walk out of a hospital that I enter standing up. I want real health care and that is the kind I pay for!
I wish to acknowledge the comment of both Texan and underwater man, and to give my reasons in disagreement. I would like you both to understand that words do have meaning, or else why use them?
Have you ever seen a house without a foundation? Well, the foundation of the U.S. Constitution is the preamble. The preamble establishes, the reason and purpose, for the production of such a document, the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, whatever, is added to the document, after the foundation, or the “Preamble,” is an explanation or clarification, of the intent of the founding father's, or their express will in more specific details. As the foundation is to an house, so the “preamble,” is to the constitution.
From this we can see that the founders intended a new government, that is solely based on the good and the benefit of the common people, and not the king, or the royals, or the so-called upper classes. But that ”the common people” should be the sovereigns, in America and not the wealthy few or privileged few.
They bestowed on us, the common people, the blessing of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They establishes , what had never been done before, anywhere on earth. Thus, “the great experiment” appeared. They sought to protect it “the Constitution” by providing checks and balances, i.e., the Congress, the Senate, the Executive and the Court. They intended to create a government which would enrich the lives of all the people and not the wealthy few.
They were oppressed by the kings tyranny and by the wealthy, so-called upper classes, and fought against the mighty King of England, in a Revolutionary War to end their oppression and to begin a brand new life and a brand new government where the people could be free and prosperous.
I am very sorry that you seem to not understand what seems so clear to me. May God give you understanding that leads you and those like you to repentance.
This is for Mr.Deeds and Mr.Torpey. I am very hopeful that this article and others like it will help bring the people together and united as intended by the formers of that great document "the Constitution of the United States of America. Thank you.
Thanks for the History lesson as flawed as it is! You have not addressed the questions I asked and my guess is you never will, your entire rant and revisionist history is a testament to the understanding of the indoctrinated victims liberals and democrats seek to create!
Government was not created to enrich lives! The pursuit of happiness is guaranteed but actual happiness is not!
"May God give you understanding that leads you and those like you to repentance." Those like me? I suppose I will go to hell because I will not consent to my money being redistributed to others, you sir are a blasphemer and a hypocrite!
Sir I fisrt resent the statement that I need to repent, For I have repented and I do serve my Lord and Savior Jesus first.
Now Sir the preamble as it is writen.We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union,establish Justice ,Insure domestic Tranquility provide for the common defence, promote the General welfare,and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Postenty, do ordain and establish this Constitution for yhe United States of America.
There is no mintion of the health care for all.It says to provide for the common defence and promote the general welfare. And this is all so going to breack this country. We are already having problems. I've asked my liberal friend and my brother in-law how do we pay for this?Please tell me with out more taxs. Here is a nother uestion when will you Dem's ever get ridd of a tax? Did you know that we are still paying a tax that was issued to pay for the Spanish American war. This tax is on phones do you know why it was on phones? Answer it was a luxury tax because only the rich had phones back then, Does that sound like today lets tax the rich becuase they have it.Oh they also creat all of the jobs, Oh not any more its the Government. Question on that matter when was the last time a poor person gave you a job?
Texan, some of my best friends are Republicans!
Thats like saying some of my best friends are black. The Government has never shown the ability to run anything successfully. This is nothing more than another power grab by corrupt politicians, I'm sure in your mind its a good thing but we cannot afford it on top of all this other unsustainable debt we have.
No it's not. You accused me of being "no more than a hate all Republicans kind of guy." That's not true. I have good friends who are Republicans, and I admire several Republican senators, current ones and former ones. I am not an admirer of Bush and Cheney or very many of the current hard right GOP Congressmen and Senators.
Ok Ralph I believe you, but you have not answered any of the Questions I have asked, why are you siding with this guy and seeming to agree that this is somehow the fault of Republicans?
I've said this many times. George Bush put the country in a deep hole. Two unnecessary and costly wars. Tax cuts for the richest Americans and a huge increase in the national debt. Regulatory failure culminating in the biggest recession since the 1930s. Obama has, we hope, brought us back from a bottomless world economic abyss or at least he's doing his best to do so.
Texan and underwater, I believe that you two are nearly brain dead, as you have completely missed the point of my article. Apparently, you share a world of you own. I would call it the land of the "we refuse to learn."
Unfortunately, your comments are filled with nonsequiturs. It seems a waste of time to attempt to reason with you. How can you even claim to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and pursue your greedy and selfish lifestyle? How?
Did you read Matthew, Chapter 5? Oh and yes, I believe that everyone like you needs to repent and change their ways! If possible, please give it some serious thought.
Is anyone going to answer the question? You and Ralph blame Republicans for your lack of health care, but you do not say how the party that CONTROLS NOTHING is at fault! Rhetoric is all either one of you give, broken record about Bush, no answers, just like your incompetent leader.
I sugggest that you read my other articles, “The Constitution and the People,” and “Still frustrated and want to vent!” Perhap, then things will become more clear for you.
Read them, and since you are intellectually dishonest I will not continue to waste my time seeking answers to accusations you have made. Good luck rewriting the Constitution to suit your views.
So when you are given numbers that yo don't like you show how low class you can be. Have ethier myself or Texan called you anything other than lib or liberal? You call us brain dead I call you sir. As I was brought up to respect my elders.
The wealth of our congressmen, Democrats or Republicans, is not at all germane to this discussion. Also, I don't know where you get your polling information, but most Americans want government to provide health care. Medicare and the Veterans Administration provide excellent care for millions of Americans -- and they don't push up premiums every year, nor do they drop you from their rolls willy nilly the way private insurers do. Government also does a pretty decent job of providing education for millions of Americans. Republicans are the biggest stumbling block to progress because they invariably oppose every effort to offer needed services to the American people while endorsing every proposal to promote big business and the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are deservedly criticized for their "public be damned" attitudes, but all Republicans are fair game for the critics because they have consistently endorsed the Bush Administration's efforts to give tax cuts to the rich, drastically cut Social Security benefits for the elderly, for putting their personal ambitions ahead of the safety and well being of all Americans by blindly taking us into unnecessary wars and doing severe damage to our international relations -- even with our friends.
You have no clue what you are saying about the VA,and the wars. and what is up with you libs and Bush.? are you locked in the loop and can't get out. And what about Bosnia.Samalia did you know that we still aresending troops to Bosnia? No. Have you been to Iraq and met the people? have you formed your opinon on your own? On health care have you been in a nationalized health care system? when you go to those countrys and talk to them in person and they tell you like I've been told don't let your country do this to you. You will regret it.
I'm so tired of the line about those rich republicians and how they are standing in the way. You should learn to count you have the numbers in both houses to pass every thing you libs want. So stop crying that the republicians are standing in the way. Is it that maybe there are some Dems that are not liking what they see? Maybe some of them read the bill and are not wanting it.
And the comment that uor International relations are dameged you again are reading from you news channels go to the countrys. Why is it that the young Irans who want change wish that Bush was still presdent because they know that he would not stand by while they are being killed. You libs make me sick while you sit here out of danger able to talk down you leader for 8 years and still walk the streets. Why don't you come join us who defend this country and care about what you libs are doing. Open up your history book and see what good this country has done even while weak kneed libs sit at home and protest.
I would go to Iraq to ask how they like Bush's war, but the ones I'd like to talk to are among the tens of thousands of casualties -- or they've picked up an left the country for the safety of themselves and their families. My history book is full of war and pestilence, depression and starvation. I hope you've found a better book.
Well that explains the point of view. What about Bills war or did you feel that going into that country was ok? So ther is nothing good in our history? And where are all those people who got and left the country were they the ones who had purple ink on thier fingers and smiles on thier faces because the got the vote for the first time in thier live's, or are you talikng about the ones whoe left this planet becuase they were gased by thier leader. are those the ones you talk about? You are one screwed up lib. Look around infrount of your face and see what you have. Have you ever been out of you liberal nieborhood to another country? have you seen kid selling gum on the corner of one of these places you like so much. Have you seen the shacks that they live in or the water they drink.You and all of the libs like you sit here and preach that we do so much bad and Bush this and that what have you done to change one of thier lives for the good? Shut up and do somthing instead of talk out of you butt. I'vebeen there and i've helped build houses for them and drill wells for them to drink clean water from' I've seen people die for your right to sit here and spite out your hatered for this country and our former President,What have you done? What good?
Anyone who truly cares about the great American middle class and the poor would not try to deny health care to the millions who live without it. Nor would they deny minimum wages to the hard working poor or favor the usurers who operate our insurance and financial corporations. Those who throw a dime in a beggar's tin cup and believe they've done their share for the poor are simply rationalizing their behavior.
As far as I know, there is no final version of the health bill that one can read. There are, it seems, several porposals, so to say that it contains this or will do that seems a bit premature to claim. Once the Congress is back, there will be things added and/or taken out. The end bill, I am certain, will look very different fromthe ideas being floated out there right now.
The Republicans are not all to blame for anything, and neither are the Democrats. We, the People, are supposed to be in control, but We the People are greatly divided. Half of us want this one thing, a little less than half of us want the opposite thing. we cannot have both. But we can have some of each, and if done well, the compromise can be best for everyone.
As Lincoln said, a house divided against itself can not stand. Although the times we live in have different problems to solve, the lesson is simply this. America needs to be a land of compromise, not extremists, neither Left nor Right.
The Constitution may not have much to say about health care, but the Constitution has been altered to meet the needs of the times. In the original Constitution slavery was allowed. There was a great debate, a war and a lot of other things that changed that. Women were not allowed to vote, and once neither were people who had no property. those things all changed as American society changed.
These issues were not answered in the original writing of the Constitution, but were left to later generations to solve.
A Texan and Underwater man, I have not yet had the pleasure of meeting you in the hubs, while I have had that pleasure with the others commenting above, while you make some interesting points, you are taking the view that anyone who has an opposing view must be somehow wrong. Maybe they are, but it takes a lot more than anger to make your points clear.
As for your question, if I read it correctly, how can I or anyone answer it if a final bill has neither been completed nor sent out of committee?
There are some aspects of the ideas being proposed that I would not be in favor of, but I do want to see health insurance reform. All the arguments about who should control our insurance come down, for me at least, to which of these two entities would you rather have making decisions for you?: The government or the insurance companies? Frankly, I don't want either of them.
Some hae said the status quo in unexceptable, and I agree. but the plan for how to amend the problems also needs time, input and careful deliberation.
Hello, Chef Jeff:
as stated in my article above; "The fundamental purpose of our Constitution is contained in the preamble, which begins with: “we the people.” So then we can extrapolate from its stated purpose, “the preamble,” and every thing that follows, after that point, is and must be provided, for the sole benefit of the we, the American People."
In other words, the U.S. Constitution was written to give the common people a new life and a new government that would act solely in the interests of the common people, and not the rich and powerful. It is our government and its sole purpose is to make our lives better and better. This has not happened, because a significant majority of the people do not understand their sovereignty, and are therefore unable to rise to the challenge of U.S. Citizenship. It is important to understand the meaning of words, as they communicate ideas and thought which then inspire an appropriate response. In the case of citizenship, responsibility and action.
Also, it was not Lincoln that said, "a house divided against itself cannot stand.", but it was the Lord Jesus Christ, who first said it. St.Mark Chapter 3 verse 25.
I hope that you will go back and read my article more carefully, so that you may take responsibility for your citizenship, and invision a brighter future for yourself and for the people of the USA.
To: cdggt:
You are the devil. Your purpose is to create confusion and to divide and oppress the common people and to keep them in a state of eternal suffering and poverty. Therefore, I decline to allow your comments.
Also... sorry, I just can't help it... you are calling me a tyrant because I don't feel obligated to provide you with health insurance. You are suggesting that the U. S. Treasury Department, at the point of a gun, take the product of my labor and give it to you. This legalized robbery is without regard to whether you smoke, are fat, drink, eat fast food, etc.
I exercise, eat right, don't smoke and I have worked seventy to eighty hour weeks for over twenty years so that I can better provide for myself and my family. I have just now broken the six figure mark on my yearly salary and nobody has helped me do it. I started extremely poor (my parents combined income was in the $25k range).
I have no problems with helping children or the elderly with health care. They simply don't have the capacity to do so for themselves. You have the option of providing for yourself. I don't have any sympathy for a healthy adult that can't figure out a way to buy their own health insurance in this country.
There is no reason that a person in the U. S. can't earn enough to buy their own health insurance. I images, 9 times out of 10, that the same healthy adults complaining about not having the resources to buy their own health insurance have cable and eat out at least two to three times a month. That alone would pay for most policies.
Reforms are great. Robbery by taxation is not.
What is it with people not wanting to pay taxes? Do you live alone in the forest? I highly doubt it. If you live in a society you have to "pay-to-play". I have "said" this in other posts of mine: without taxes how do paramedics, police officers, politicians (and they "need" a lot we all know that) and the like get paid? How will the infrastructure of cities be supported? Do not be foolish taxes are needed to maintain and improve our societies.
To: cdggt: I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, obviously, you do not. You are selfish and uncaring. You make excuses and lie even to yourself. Health care should rightfully be included in the "commons," as are roads and bridges, police and fire, sewer and water, the armed forces, the VA, post office etc. The private for profit Health Insurance Corporations are parasites feeding on the sick and dying.
The Lord spoke very highly of the "Good Samaritan." The good samaritan was given as an example to believers in Christ. If you were of God, then you would understand, the mercy, compassion and generousity shown by the good samaritan. "thou shalt love thy neighbor as thy self" that is God's commandment to the believers!
I'm happy to support medicare, social security, roads, bridges, etc (although they need proper reforms). You are a grown man and completely capable of providing for yourself. Why should I support you? As far as being a "Good Samaritan," That's a silly argument. You don't need my support. How bout the old "give a man a fish" argument. By the way I am a Christian.
Is voting money out of my pocket even though you could earn it honestly the Christian thing to do? I have no problems with taxation as long as it is for a good cause.
I simply don't understand why people feel that a government run health care plan is the right thing to do. The government is full of corruption and waste. The private sector is simply more efficient.
The fact that you deleted my prior comments shows that you can't support your argument with facts. The foundation of your argument is based on a falsehood.
To: Mr Happy:
Thank you for your enlighten comments. I truly appreciate your logic.
God bless you!
To: cdggt: I have allowed your comments for the benefit of others, who might read them and understand your selfish and un-Christian views. Sir you are the devil and therefore you will not repent. Your comments are not logical. I usually do not respond to non-sense. You hypocrites bore me!
To A Texan: You called me a liar and asked me produce the polling data to support my contention that the American People favor government managed health care by over 70%
Here is my source, please click the link below:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health/policy/21
You should be man enough to admit that I am right, but I doubt that you will.
I think maybe you need to click it, it goes nowhere! Page gone! Again I say where is your proof! Post it or start telling the truth!
To: A Texan: I am not a liar. Here is the article.
Welcome to TimesPeople
Get Started TimesPeople Lets You Share and Discover the Best of NYTimes.com 9:46 am
The latest activity in your network... Latest ActivityRecommend
Skip to article Get Home Delivery Log In Register Now
TimesPeople
Home Page Today's Paper Video Most Popular Times Topics
Search All NYTimes.com
Money & Policy
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Autos Research Fitness & Nutrition Money & Policy Views Health Guide Advertise on NYTimes.comSearch Health3,000+ Topics
In Poll, Wide Support for Government-Run Health
Sign in to Recommend
comments (148)
Sign In to E-Mail
Reprints
ShareClose
LinkedinDiggFacebookMixxMySpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalinkBy KEVIN SACK and MARJORIE CONNELLY
Published: June 20, 2009
Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Graphic
Support for a Public Health Plan
Interactive
Document Reader: Complete Poll Results
Related
How the Poll Was Conducted (June 21, 2009)
Mandatory Health Insurance
Is requiring every American to have medical insurance the best way to begin health care reform?
Join the Discussion »Readers' Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (148) »
The poll found that most Americans would be willing to pay higher taxes so everyone could have health insurance and that they said the government could do a better job of holding down health-care costs than the private sector.
Yet the survey also revealed considerable unease about the impact of heightened government involvement, on both the economy and the quality of the respondents’ own medical care. While 85 percent of respondents said the health care system needed to be fundamentally changed or completely rebuilt, 77 percent said they were very or somewhat satisfied with the quality of their own care.
That paradox was skillfully exploited by opponents of the last failed attempt at overhauling the health system, during former President Bill Clinton’s first term. Sixteen years later, it underscores the tricky task facing lawmakers and President Obama as they try to address the health system’s substantial problems without igniting fears that people could lose what they like.
Across a number of questions, the poll detected substantial support for a greater government role in health care, a position generally identified with the Democratic Party. When asked which party was more likely to improve health care, only 18 percent of respondents said the Republicans, compared with 57 percent who picked the Democrats. Even one of four Republicans said the Democrats would do better.
The national telephone survey, which was conducted from June 12 to 16, found that 72 percent of those questioned supported a government-administered insurance plan — something like Medicare for those under 65 — that would compete for customers with private insurers. Twenty percent said they were opposed.
Republicans in Congress have fiercely criticized the proposal as an unneeded expansion of government that might evolve into a system of nationalized health coverage and lead to the rationing of care.
But in the poll, the proposal received broad bipartisan backing, with half of those who call themselves Republicans saying they would support a public plan, along with nearly three-fourths of independents and almost nine in 10 Democrats.
The poll, of 895 adults, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
Mr. Obama and many Democrats have argued that a public plan would be essential, in the president’s words, to “keep insurance companies honest.” But Mr. Obama has also signaled a willingness to compromise for Republican support, perhaps by establishing member-owned insurance cooperatives instead.
It is not clear how fully the public understands the complexities of the government plan proposal, and the poll results indicate that those who said they were following the debate were somewhat less supportive.
But they clearly indicate growing confidence in the government’s ability to manage health care. Half of those questioned said they thought government would be better at providing medical coverage than private insurers, up from 30 percent in polls conducted in 2007. Nearly 60 percent said Washington would have more success in holding down costs, up from 47 percent.
Sixty-four percent said they thought the federal government should guarantee coverage, a figure that has stayed steady all decade. Nearly 6 in 10 said they would be willing to pay higher taxes to make sure that all were insured, with 4 in 10 willing to pay as much as $500 more a year.
And a plurality, 48 percent, said they supported a requirement that all Americans have health insurance so long as public subsidies were offered to those who could not afford it. Thirty-eight percent said they were opposed.
In a follow-up interview, Matt Flurkey, 56, a public plan supporter from Plymouth, Minn., said he could accept that the quality of his care might diminish if coverage was universal. “Even though it might not be quite as good as what we get now,” he said, “I think the government should run health care. Far too many people are being denied now, and costs would be lower.”
While the survey results depict a nation desperate for change, it also reveals a deep wariness of the possible consequences. Half to two-thirds of respondents said they worried that if the government guaranteed health coverage, they would see declines in the quality of their own care and in their ability to choose doctors and get needed treatment.
“It is the responsibility of the government to guarantee insurance for all,” said Juanita Lomaz, a 65-year-old office worker from Bakersfield, Calif. “But my care will get worse because they’ll have to limit care in order to cover everyone.”
When asked their opinion of specific changes being considered in Washington, three-fourths of those surveyed said they favored requiring health insurers to cover anyone, regardless of pre-existing medical conditions. Only a fifth supported taxing employer-provided health benefits to help pay the cost of coverage for the uninsured. And there was deep uncertainty about whether employers should be required to either help insure their workers or pay into a fund for covering the uninsured.
Three of four people questioned said unnecessary medical tests and treatments had become a serious problem, suggesting that they would support calls by health researchers for a payment system that would better reward appropriate care. But an even higher number, 87 percent, said the inability of people to have the needed tests and treatments was a serious problem. One in four said that in the last 12 months they or someone in their household had cut back on medications because of the expense, and one in five said someone had skipped a recommended test or treatment.
The poll found that Americans were far less satisfied with the cost of health care than with the quality of it. Mr. Obama, who has emphasized the need to reduce costs, has found an audience for his argument that health care legislation is vital to economic recovery. Eighty-six percent of those polled said rising costs posed a serious economic threat.
Yet only a fifth of those with insurance said the cost of their own medical care posed a hardship. And only a fourth said that keeping health costs down was a more urgent need than providing coverage for the country’s nearly 50 million uninsured. That was a notable change from a Times/CBS poll taken in early April, when 40 percent said that controlling costs was more pressing.
Marina Stefan and Dalia Sussman contributed reporting.
Sign in to RecommendMore Articles in Health » A version of this arti
This is your proof that 70% want a single payer system???? Have you read any CREDIBLE polls LATELY? NY TIMES is not a credible source AT ANY TIME!!! Real question is what was the polls wording? At no time going as far back as April has a 70% majority of Americans wanted a single payer system! I read CREDIBLE POLLS! This link will take you to credible polls http://hubpages.com/hub/In-defense-of-the-truth it will also expose what you are!!!
"The national telephone survey, which was conducted from June 12 to 16, found that 72 percent of those questioned supported a government-administered insurance plan — something like Medicare for those under 65 — that would compete for customers with private insurers."
To A Texan: I don't know why the link did not work, but you can go the the NY TIMES and bring it up yourself as I had to do. A liar I am NOT! I posted the entire article above as I too had problems with the link. I will post the link again:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health/policy/21
I understand that you want to discredit me as you have done to the President of the United States. However with just a little self effort I am sure you can retrieve it from the NY TIMES yourself.
You have been discredited the second you put up a New York Lies poll as proof of anything! Obama discredits himself by lying EVERYDAY!
I will say this, according to your flawed evidence you are indeed of the belief that 70% of Americans want a government run insurance or at least the NYT wants you to think they did on 6/16/09, that is not the same as a single payer system! I will retract my Liar charge and ask that you seek credible sources in the future and choose your words more carefully!
To A Texan:
Sir you are an idiot. In your delusional little world, black is white, true is false and the moon is made of green cheese.
I allowed your silly comments to remain, so that the whole world
could witness your pyschosis.
To A Texan:
Sir, If you weren't so pathically unbelievable, I might just laugh, but people like you have infected the minds of some poor ignorant, unlearned, misguided people and have convinced them to vote against their own interest.
If I were you, I would repent and get right with the Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Savior.
Who would those people be eaglefeather, the poor? Blacks? Hispanics? All of these groups vote for Democrats and none are doing any better because of it! If you are such a Christian how come you feel the need to degrade people, that seems unchristian like! I know you will just delete any comment that shows what a pathetic loser you are! But alas I will write Hub after Hub devoted to you!
To A Texan:
Sir, why would post the same link that I posted previously and pretend that it was somehow different? You did not read the article, before first rejecting it right?
This is why I declined to allow your last comment.
You are desparately averse to the truth. As a believer in Christ, I have a duty to the truth and to expose unabashed liars. Get help please.
Why would you put up that as evidence that 70%want a single payer system, it doesn't say that! Forget that June poll, what do the polls say today? Do they support your claim? No and they didn't then!
To A Texan:
Sir, the polls may have indeed changed, since the published date of my article and that can be attributed to the campaign of lies, conducted by the corporations and the paid for U.S. Congressmen, Senators and the Republican Party.
It seems that you liars will stop at nothing to maintain a system of poverty and death that is the status quo.
What will you say to God in the Day of Judgment? Hmmm...
May have changed? They HAVE changed but you did not dispute your numbers yesterday when you were challenged and today provide proof from a source notorious for lying! Now you simply say they "may" have changed, you are as dumb as a bag of hammers! I doubt you have the BALLS to let this comment and REAL poll stand!
Here is a CREDIBLE poll from the same time!!!!!
To A Texan:
We the People are not deceived by the campaign of lies and misdirection, which is the signature of the Private for Profit, rich and powerful, who seemingly, have no mercy or compassion for less fortunate Americans.
I have two words for you and for those like you and those words are "repent quickly." God is watching from above and he will judge the wicked and avenge the poor and needy.
God does not care if you get things for free or not! Psycho!
eaglefeather. the poll you cite does not have anything to do with a single payer system. It asks about a government insurance plan that competes with private plans. There is a huge difference between the two.
Your argument is still built on falsehoods. That's not very Christian of you. Details are posted on my hub.
To cdggt:
Tomato or tomato?
Isn't it kind of stupid to reinvent the wheel? France, Germany and Canada already have proven experience with universal health care and it's outstanding and their people love their health care systems.
Why reinvent the wheel? Why? (The question is rhetorical.)
You tell me that I'm intentionally distorting the facts which I've proven is false. I've proven in my last post which, will probably be deleted shortly, that you are the one who is distorting the facts.
You say that I am not a Christian. The term Christian means "Christ like," correct? Since you are the one distorting the fact I would say you are the one who is not acting Christ like. Are you the devil? I would say no because I believe the devil would make a more convincing argument. I just think that you are wrong.
Actually a recent Standford University study says that 70% of Canadian and British citizens do not like their systems! And besides we are not Canada or Britain, if you like their health care then become a citizen of their countries, if you hate America as much as you sound I would expect you to do just that!
Tomato or tomato? What?
There is a giant difference between the two. All I'm asking is that you base your argument on fact.
I have no problem with a government managed health insurance program as long is it plays by the same rules as private companies and doesn't have the ability to deficit spend (usury). A non-profit health care plan would be fine.
As far as a single payer system, I'm absolutely opposed. Our government is a rumbling, corruption filled, wasteful organization.
Visions of congressmen with their freezers filled with $50k and Governors flying to Argentina on taxpayer money to cheat on their wives comes to mind. I simply don't trust any politician (Repub or Dem) with my health.
I am in agreement cdggt, but I doubt eaglefeather is!
The problem with eaglefeather is he see's government as a Mother to take care of him, the rest of us want to be self sufficient!
With a government managed non-profit health insurance plan the power of capitalism will go to work.
Private insurers would be forced to innovate to compete with the government and the government would be forced to stay lean and efficient to stay viable.
Healthy adults should not be provided for by others. To qualify they should have to contribute. People that simply cannot provide for themselves have the Medicare system. Medicare is a tax burden on the productive. But, that's a reasonable price to pay for compassion. Although, it does need serious reform to eliminate the waste.
To A Texan and cdggt:
I have graciously allowed your comments, because the public needs to understand your twisted, cruel, unmerciful, selfish, un-American, delusional views.
Again with you two, white is black, true is false and the moon is made of green cheese.
The word of God says: "There is none so blind, as he that will not see." Is there any point in this back and forth, seeing that the two of you are stuck in a world of untruth and unreality?
So, you can't back up your statements with fact? Just attacks on the character of others.
If you don't support the socialization of the health insurance industry you're an evil monster?
Eaglefeather, while I appreciate the fact the you are now allowing dissenting comments on your hub, you haven't made a single point that supports your thesis.
Calling people names and assaulting their character is not an argument.
Tsk Tsk Eaglefeather, you have lost and are not man enough to accept it, as long as you post lies I will respond if you do not allow my comments I will write a hub devoted to your lies! Either way you will be exposed for the liar you are!
BTW, I'm pretty sure God doesn't need you to tell us how we are going to suffer at his hand, you are one sanctimonious screwball, aintcha?
To A Texas and cdggt:
I have already supported my views, however, it is not my fault that you two seem unable to comprehend the logical approach that I employed, in order, to make my points and clearly.
I guess the corporate profiteers and lobbyists are paying you two very well, seeing that you are able to post lies and misdirection endlessly.
Obviously, you don't have time to perform a regular job.
Here's the exact question that was asked in the poll you cite:
"Would you favor or oppose the government's offering everyone a government administered health insurance plan like Medicare that would compete with private health insurance plans?"
Compete being the key word
Again, no mention of a single payer system.
I took a screenshot of it for those that don't want to register with the NY Times.
To cdggt: Sir,
Just for your information, there is no constitutional guaranty to protect wealthy people or corporations by some imagined special right or priveledge. It does not exist.
The U.S. Constitution rather guarantees all rights to the common people. There are no rights above that of the people!
The idea that private health insurance companies have some special rights is a misinterpretation of the Constitution.
Therefore, your entire point is moot. You seek to guaranty to corporations rights above that of the People.
We the People of the United States are the owners of this lland and country. The government of the United States is our servant, not our master.
If you can understand this point, then you have a chance to become an effective profitable owner and citizen.
The people deserve a government that defends their interests.
We are one nation.
Our neighbor is connected to the circle of life that links us together.
We are stronger, when we are in union, as one. We would be smart to drop racism, because it divides us.
Can you point out specifically where I was racist? No, because I wasn't. Health insurance reform has absolutely nothing to do with the color of anybody's skin. Try to be at least a little bit intellectually honest.
I was absolutely fair. Your charges are misleading and false. When a person actually applies the facts to your post, the conclusion is the opposite of your claims.
As far as the constitution being a collectivist document as you describe it, we can get into that if you like, but it'll end the same way our discussion of the single payer system ended.
Please try to remember that the constitution protects all Americans. It doesn't discriminate based on wealth, education, race, sex, religion, social status or any other group that some attempt to classify us by.
You've already been completely discredited. My recommendation is, when you find yourself in a hole... stop digging.
To cdggt:
Sir, I will try to respond to the issues that you have raised, point by point:
1. Can you point out specifically where I was racist?
Answer: When did I say that you were a racist?
2. Health insurance reform has absolutely nothing to do with the color of anybody's skin.
Answer: when did I say or imply that race had anything to do with health care?
3. Try to be at least a little bit intellectually honest.
Answer: I am intellectually honest, it is just that you seem not to understand words or context. Not my fault.
4. I was absolutely fair. Your charges are misleading and false. When a person actually applies the facts to your post, the conclusion is the opposite of your claims.
Answer: Whether you have been fair or not depends on how you are viewed by others in light of known facts.
2. Your charges are misleading and false.
Answer: Which charges? Can you be more specific?
3. When a person actually applies the facts to your post, the conclusion is the opposite of your claims.
Answer: I think that it might be due to your apparent inability to read, understand context, and draw from context clear meaning. Again, It is not my fault that your reading comprehension is poor.
5. As far as the constitution being a collectivist document as you describe it, we can get into that if you like, but it'll end the same way our discussion of the single payer system ended.
Answer: Again, sir, Read more carefully the preamble of the United States Constitution, which begins with "We the People," believe it or not, that is a collectivist declaration. Sorry that you just don't get it!
2. we can get into that if you like, but it'll end the same way our discussion of the single payer system ended.
Answer: In this part of your comment, I tend to agree with you, as your level of understanding seems impaired, when it comes to your interpretation of my articles.
6. Please try to remember that the constitution protects all Americans. It doesn't discriminate based on wealth, education, race, sex, religion, social status or any other group that some attempt to classify us by.
Answer: I absolutely agree that the constitution does not create a special class based on wealth, status, religion or race. It simply includes ALL THE PEOPLE.
However, the rich and powerful have been able over time to manipulate our elected representatives, through lobbyist and large political donations, into a shift away from protecting the people that elected them to office.
Consequently, we have private health insurance companies engaged in the discussions, as though they have some right that is equal to or above the right of the people.
They absolutely have no such right. There is no corporation, company, elected official or any entity that has a right above that of the people.
It is all about the "We the People of the United States."
7. You've already been completely discredited. My recommendation is, when you find yourself in a hole... stop digging.
Answer: I have not been at all discredited, but from my point of view, you certainly have. And so, perhaps you should stop digging!
Cheers Mr. Eaglefeather for putting up with all the nonsense that is thrown your way. May Wakan Tanka guide your path!
I agree with almost every thing you said, with one major exception... 70% of Americans wanting government controlled healthcare is not accurate. I could believe that 70% of Americans want some kind of healthcare reform and that they have a problem with for profit corporations running the healthcare system, but not that they want the government more present in their lives. The tea parties are a testament to just that. The whole problem with the healthcare system as it is now started because of government involvement. And, blaming the for profit corporations for high healthcare costs is also a farce. Why would a company designed to create a profit try to find a way for it to cost more money to them for healthcare when they have the power to negotiate lower costs? Healthcare reform is a necessity. It is just going in the wrong direction. And when alternatives to President Obama's plan are ignored or ridiculed, can anyone really say that the best interest of all the people are at heart?
I have just read some of the comments and back and forth between you and some of your other naysayers. While I do agree with you wholeheartedly that the government should be representing We The People, I can not believe that this will happen with a government run healthcare system. My reasoning is simply that the corruption in Washington is so deep that the politicians will continue to listen to the lobbyists who support the drug companies and medical industry. This will keep them from being able to reduce the cost of medical coverage, thus making the potential Obamacare plan run into bankruptcy as has Medicare/Medicaid. There are only 2 ways that this problem could be obsolved. One is to increase taxes to cover the cost. This is the most likely solution, but it sucks. The second, and this one is my favorite, is to outlaw lobbyists from approaching congressmen and women, thus allowing them to actually focus on the benefits of their constituents.
To Mr.Happy:
I appreciate your supportive comments, as you appear to have been enlightened and understand that these right wing Republican nut bags, are supporting a campain of dangerous lies.
Our President is being targeted by these people, but in a manner, that they believe protects them from culpability, in the event, that an act of violence, is perpetrated against our President.
This is a serious matter that should concerns every loyal American citizen. We must find a legal way to stop these conspiracies.
Thank you for your comments.
To wagnerzx2:
Thank you for your comments. You have connected some of the dots, but not all.
Please continue reading my articles, as they will expose the truth behind the smear campaigns, launched against our President.
They have admitted that they want him to fail and it appears that they want it by any means.
These people are very dangerous and must be taken much more seriously than is the case.
It is about power and money.
Thank you for jumping in wagnerzx2. I agree with pretty much everything you said.
I didn't dig too deep into Eaglefeather's analysis of our founding documents. I think that I made a strong enough case against his argument that it wasn't necessary. Also, I've come to the realization that no argument I make, no matter the facts, will force him off of his position. It seems to me that he is making the case that they are in effect collectivist documents that mandate the socialization of the health insurance industry (and most any other industry for that matter).
Do you agree with his assessment there? Or do you believe as I do that the basis of our founding documents were to insure individual freedom? Which, by the way, would include economic freedom.
to cdggt.
I do not believe that the Constitution was written as collectivist document to insure socialism. It was indeed written to protect the rights of the individual over anyone. Read my article on tobacco law to understand my viewpoint. I also wrote an article about Obamacare which was inspired by this very article. And reading 3 words of a document, We the People, can not give a full concept of idea, or a translation of the whole document thereof. That would be like translating the bible based off "In the beginning". It just does not work.
The word " PREAMBLE" means purpose. So then, by extention, the purpose of the constitution or reason is stated in the preable.
I hope that is not too complexed for you to grasp. Imagine, how much better our lives had been, if they had not departed from the foundation of the document, which is the preamble.
I understand that our educational system is broken, however, that does not relieve you or anyone else from searching out the true meaning of important documents for yourselves.
Don't let others tell you what to think, that's what a lazy mind does.
I don't let others tell me what to think. But you calling me an idiot (reading between the line, I am not) shows that you have no argument. The Preamble is not the whole of the document, it is the beginning of the document. Yes, our lives would be far better had the Constitution never been ignored. But your whole article proposes that a government plan to take over the healthcare system, which is not Constitutional, is a good idea. You contradict your own self while arguing a point that sounds good only in theory. But ask yourself this, has anything the government gotten its hands into ever turned out for the better of this country? Look at federal income taxes, the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank, the Vietnam War. How did those turn out for We The People?
To wagnerzx2:
I will respond to your comments point by point , as follows:
1. I don't let others tell me what to think. But you calling me an idiot (reading between the line, I am not) shows that you have no argument.
Response:
I did not say that you were an idiot. However, how do you explain your apparent inability to understand simple concepts?
2.The Preamble is not the whole of the document, it is the beginning of the document.
Response:
The preamble sets forth the reasons and purpose for the document, which is the Constitution. The preamble is the foundation of the constitution, and it establishes the scope, parameters and framework envisioned by the founders for a new nation. A new nation, of the people, by the people and for the people.
3.Yes, our lives would be far better had the Constitution never been ignored.
Response:
I agree.
4. But your whole article proposes that a government plan to take over the health care system, which is not Constitutional, is a good idea.
Response:
Private for profit corporations have no constitutional right equal to or above the right of the people of the United States. This also applies to for profit health care corporations. The fact that these corporations have inserted themselves into the health care debate is pure arrogance, on their part.
Many public officials have allowed these rascals, to usurp rights that were never granted them, by Constitution of the United States.
Any right asserted by corporations are imaginary and do not exist in the constitution.
There is NO RIGHT ABOVE THAT OF THE PEOPLE!
5.You contradict your own self while arguing a point that sounds good only in theory. But ask yourself this, has anything the government gotten its hands into ever turned out for the better of this country?
Response:
The fact that you believe that I have contradicted myself, suggests that your level of understanding is very poor.
The other part of your comment, is an empty, silly Republican talking point, that does not deserve a response, it's so trite!
I am going to put this as my final note to you. This is the whole Preamble of the Constitution:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
You will note that the preamble just says, in laymens terms, "hey we like these ideas, so we are creating this law so we can keep these ideas true for future generations". It does not say, "hey, here are our ideas. We're putting them in this document, feel free to ignore them". The problem as a whole is that this document has been ignored for WAY TO LONG by ALL of Congress, Senate, President, Supreme Court, etc... There have been too many laws put in place to "protect the people" when the people didn't really need protecting in the first place.
As for my last comment being, "an empty, silly Republican talking point, that does not deserve a response, it's so trite!"... your inability to respond to how bad things have gone when the government gets involved goes a long way to your inability to admit that there might just be a problem with your own argument. As for me, I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I am a free thinking, God fearing, liberty loving Constitution defending citizen of this greatest country in the world. And it tears me apart to see our elected officials (notice the lack of the use of the work leader) ignoring the oath of office to defend the document that protects our freedom in the first place.
Response:
Sir, you like many others, have been mis-educated and lead by the nose, away from the truth, into a delusional world, that has brought us, full circle, back to the times of the ruling elite and to those thought of as royals. The special people that are above the rest of us.
This is exactly what the founding father were trying to prevent, and so, the constitution was written to give to the people rights, that in the past, had never existed.
They wanted something very different. They wanted a new government,a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
Just ask yourself, why would the founding fathers revolt against such a system, only to reintroduce it under another name?
Why are you not understanding this?
If you do not understand that I am giving you the actual truth, then stop asking me. Ask someone else. I am finished answering foolish questions!
wagnerzx2:
I had to delete your comment, because it is just more
ignorance, nonsense and garbage! It's so very, very trite!
You repeat the same old talking points over and over, again
and again! I am feed up.
I have some general comments to make. First, I found this hub well written, well argued and as I agree that all people should be entitled to basic health care, had no argument with Eaglefeather's views.
Then I started reading the comments. Oh, people! This is so sad -- not to mention boring, trite, closed-minded....I mean what's the point?
To lmmartin:
Thank you for the comment.
To Patman66:
Sir:
Just more Republican nonsense. I will not debate nonsense, ignorance, foolishness or stupidity. I have heard it all. You have no valid points!
Therefore, I decline to allow your comment.
It seems to too many people are alienating themselves from "The government" The people or their representitives are the government.It's just a question of legality and morality or the majority,two thirds one way or the other as to what will be done.
The A.M.A.is partly responsable for the cost of healthcare due to it's control over how many doctors there are in the marketplace.They have conspired to limit the number of doctors that there can be simply by limiting the number of schools available.
Medicare and medicaid are always being overcharged by doctors and hospitals,some of it is to try to cover the cost of people being treated who are not eligible for government healthcare who go to hospital emergency rooms and the rest is outright fraud on the part of some doctors in private practice.
The big corporations that sell medications are another reason for such high costs.profit-which is thought of as a personal investment for the purpose of making money should not be the sole purpose of those who invest in such corporations. (Profit was intended to be used to improve a businesses product or service in some way,not to be used to pay dividends to stockholders.The whole purpose is to improve life for everyone ,not just the stockholders.)
Last, but not least the governments lack of control over what is put into the food we buy at the supermarkets or elsewhere.Then they also seem to want us to have to go to a doctor to be able to buy food suppliments that could improve our health if we so choose.The cost of suppliments is already high enough without the government making it more exspensive.Does it make sense healthwise to put artificial colors or flavors,and added ingredients to preserve foods or use as fillers if it is proven to be harmful to our health? Corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup are in almost every processed food you can think of.More and more children are getting unhealthy foods to eat than ever before.How does this connect to healthcare?
You can't be serious about healthcare if you allow such things to go on.
To Hxprof:
Apparently you are another Republican with a learning disability. As I have said before, I will not suffer fools.
Your comment was declined as it is completely stupid. You don't understand words.
To someonewhoknows:
Thank you for your comment.
um....the health care was designed by the democratic party, and backed by the president. The opposition was high throughout the US. It will result in terminating research and development that we now lead the world with. What of the new policies now passed? If you don’t make enough money you get it for free, if you make over a certain amount but can’t afford it you will be charged a penalty for not having it...who’s brilliance came up with that scenario?
To: must65gt
The simple answer points to the greed and to the inhumanity of the very rich and powerful and to their minions, i.e., the Republican Party, the Blue Dog Democrates, the easily guided simple minded Tea Baggers and racists, who are sworn to defeat President Obama and at any cost.
Read between the lines and connect the dots. Profits over people.
I am an ignorant foreigner and if I ever read the US constitution it was a long, long time ago; so I can't comment on whether or not it implies that citizens should be provided with health care. It may also be that we in Europe have a completely false impression of life in the USA.
What I can say is that I have never met anyone in Britain (or indeed the EU) who would be happy to live in a country with an American-style healthcare system. I have never met anyone here who is not grateful to have our National Health Service and willing to pay taxes to support it.
Of course everyone complains about the NHS - but everyone complains about the railways, the buses, the schools, the government generally, the electricity supply companies, the weather ...... We are a nation of moaners, but no party would dare to fight an election with a manifesto that included cutting the NHS budget or asking patients to pay a portion of their treatment.
State-provided free healthcare, of course, creates all sorts of moral and political dilemmas. It is not in practice possible to provided every conceivable treatment for every real and imagined illness to everyone. How do you decide whether someone should be given an expensive treatment which may perhaps prolong their life by a few weeks or months, but for which their is little evidence of efficacy for their condition? Is in vitro fertilisation medical treatment or a life-style choice? Should patients be denied treatment if they refuse to make life style changes to reduce their risks of further disease (e.g. heart by-pass patients who refuse to give up smoking)?......
These are all difficult issues and exercise the minds of many NHS managers and clinicians as well as politicians; but I would rather have this sort of dilemma to deal with than to live in a country where I know that even one citizen is too poor to be able to afford proven medical treatment for genuine health needs.
I bet we could get down to a list that we really agree on.
What do we agree on right now?
Thank you for your unbiased opinion. Very intelligent remarks.
Thank you for your kind n considerate remarks.
Ralph Deeds Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago
Well said!