PDF of HC bill-1502 pages? - Page 2

Anarcho-Technocrat · #11 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by siddhartha

"Why are you against healthcare reform."

"Derrrr, cuz it's big."

thank you for your insights.

Translate all 1502 pages of this healthcare reform in simplification and give a detailed analysis of exactly what will happen.

10,000 pages later...

The sheer size and complexity of this bill is logical evidence of what there real intentions are.

HB Surfer · #12 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by camp_steveo

Page 264 starting on line #2. It exempts states with seasonally adjusted unemployment of greater than %12 from funding Medicaid enrollee’s. So it shifts the bruden for new Medicaid enrollee’s from states like Nevada, New York, and Florida to states like Texas, Utah, Colorado etc.

2 Federal medical assistance percentage
3 determined for each fiscal year quarter oc
4 ocurring during that period with respect to
5 amounts expended for medical assistance for
6 newly eligible individuals described in subclause
7 (VIII) of section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i), shall be
8 equal to 100 percent. For purposes of the pre
9 ceding sentence, the term ‘high-need State’
10 means a State that is one of the 50 States or
11 the District of Columbia, on the date of the
12 enactment of the America’s Healthy Future Act
13 of 2009, has a total Medicaid enrollment under
14 the State plan under this title and under any
15 waiver of the plan that is below the national
16 average for Medicaid enrollment as a percentage
17 of State population, and for August 2009, has
18 a seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate that is
19 at least 12 percent, as determined by the
20 Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of
21 Labor.

Holy crap... your assertion better not be right. If it is... they have targeted the states that are achieving and punished them for it. Let me guess the most liberal states have enormously high unemployment rates?

Redistribution of wealth anyone?

Anarcho-Technocrat · #13 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HB Surfer

Holy crap... your assertion better not be right. If it is... they have targeted the states that are achieving and punished them for it. Let me guess the most liberal states have enormously high unemployment rates?

Redistribution of wealth anyone?

Thats completely unconstitutional. That is a state function not a federal function...

HB Surfer · #14 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by siddhartha

"Why are you against healthcare reform."

"Derrrr, cuz it's big."

thank you for your insights.

I am against the DEMOCRAT PROPOSED Health Care reform. I am not, nor is nearly any conservative I speak with against Health Care reform.

Why are we not doing the simple and effective things first?

1. HSA's
2. Competition Across State Lines
3. Quit Paying for Mexico's Health Care
4. Tort Reform (Loser Pays - Limits)
5. Medicare Audit Teams (Waste and Fraud Units)

These items will save BILLIONS. Let's start there before we make this a Statist Power Grab of nearly 20% of the economy.

siddhartha · #15 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 02:25 PM

1. HSA's - already have them - for a long time - they don't do anything to improve the situation

2. Competition Across State Lines

Quote:

The reason we have restrictions on interstate sales of health insurance is that a number of states regulate insurers. In particular, some states have a form of community rating, which basically says that insurers can’t deny you coverage or charge extremely high premiums if you have a preexisting condition. And community rating will be unsustainable if individuals can buy insurance from out of state; insurance companies in states that don’t have community rating will cherry-pick the healthy, good risk people, leaving the community rating states with only the highest-cost people.

Now, you might say that’s fine: if you’re a bad risk, you don’t get insurance. But politicians never say that in public, because most voters feel that their fellow citizens shouldn’t be denied health care. So the way this is always presented is that effective competition will make insurance so cheap that everyone can afford it.

But we already know better. California — which has more people than many countries — has a non-community-rating insurance system:

Insurers have wide latitude to choose among applicants for individual coverage and set premiums based on medical conditions. Insurers say medical underwriting, as the selection process is known, is key to keeping premiums under control.

And what are the results of competition there? The answer is that insurers compete by doing their best to deny coverage to anyone who might actually need medical care.

What kinds of things are enough to cause denial of coverage?

Insurers declined to disclose the underwriting guidelines that lead to rejection or higher premiums. But a review of public records, as well as rejection letters sent to individuals, shows that California carriers turn people away or charge them higher premiums for conditions that range from the catastrophic to the common. Cancer, epilepsy and AIDS make the list, along with breast implants, ear infections, varicose veins and sleep apnea.

Jeffrey Miles, a vice president of the California Assn. of Health Underwriters, a trade group for independent insurance agents, said one of his clients — a 27-year-old woman “in perfect health with absolutely nothing wrong” — was rejected because she had seen a psychologist for three months after breaking up with a boyfriend.

…

Consumer advocates say out-of-date, ambiguous and even erroneous medical information can render people uninsurable. Sometimes the reasons can seem absurd. In a letter to an otherwise healthy recent college graduate, for instance, Blue Cross listed among the reasons it denied coverage a past bout of jock itch, “successfully treated with cream.”

So when you hear people like DeMint — or conservative economists — preach the wonders of a market-based health care system, bear in mind that this is what it would look like: an America in which nobody who has ever had a major health problem, or had a minor health problem that for some reason bothers the insurance company, can get coverage. Believing that it would turn out otherwise is the triumph of ideology over experience.

3. Quit Paying for Mexico's Health Care

Immigration reform will come after HC reform.

4. Tort Reform (Loser Pays - Limits)

Quote:

OK. Never let it be said the cost of malpractice is an “unspoken cost”. Everyone knows it’s a big issue. I think so, the AMA thinks so, and I bet even the administration thinks so. My center has done work on this issue and we have a study specifically focusing on negligent claims that we hope to publish soon.

That said, good estimates – MANY studies – have been done to look at the costs of defensive medicine. Estimates range from the tens of billions of dollars to about $200 billion. For the sake of argument, let’s say $100 billion is a good estimate. We can lose sight of the fact that $100 billion is a LOT of money. That’s an enormous sum. It’s just dwarfed by the more than $2 trillion we’re spending on health care every year.

And here’s the more important thing. Malpractice reform will not contain health care costs. Even if I’m low-balling it, and it costs$200 billion, that’s less than 10% of spending if we got rid of it entirely. Health care costs would still go up at an insane rate, people would still be uninsured, more would be underinsured, and nothing would change for the future.

We need to fix the malpractice system. We do. Even President Obama said so to the AMA. And we should pursue it. But it’s not the same issue as health care reform, and we shouldn’t confuse the two, or neither will get the focus it deserves.

http://mdcarroll.com/2009/09/13/read...s-tort-reform/

5. Medicare Audit Teams (Waste and Fraud Units)

National Association of Medicaid Fraud Control Units been around since 1978

May 8, 2009 — 12:29pm ET | By Anne Zieger

The White House has announced that it plans roll out a tough new fraud and abuse control program for Medicare and Medicaid, one it estimates could return $2.7 billion to the government over the next five years.

Right now, the White House plans to spend $1.7 billion over the next 10 years to help detect dollars lost due to fraudulent or improper billing. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that the program should save $1.55 for every $1 that officials spend.

The new program follows on the efforts of the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program, which has returned more than $11 billion to Medicare and Medicaid trust funds from 1997 to 2007.

Johnny Destroyer · #16 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 02:40 PM

^oh yeah^

Government run Fraud Waste and Abuse....oh hey...WAIT A MINUTE, we've had that since the 50's. Doesn't work very well.

Sure the government may bilk out a few bucks cracking down on waste but there "projections" are ridiculous. "you see, we crack down on waste, give medicares funding to the program, and bam, little timmy gets a new leg brace."

Gimme a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing break.

Nobody is against healthcare REFORM, and Obama knows this so he's latched onto the term in the vain hopes it detracts from his long time wish of a single payer government ran system. I bet it helps the polling our tax money pays for so he can say people support him.

Consmike · #17 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by siddhartha

"Why are you against healthcare reform."

"Derrrr, cuz it's big."

thank you for your insights.

who said we are against hc reform?

jackdog · #18 (**permalink**) 10-21-2009, 03:58 PM

this is only the tip of the iceberg, they still have to vote on this thing then the House and the Senate bills have to be merged into one then sent back for a second vote in both the House and Senate

Truth-Bringer · #19 (**permalink**) 10-22-2009, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HB Surfer

Why are we not doing the simple and effective things first?

1. HSA's
2. Competition Across State Lines
3. Quit Paying for Mexico's Health Care
4. Tort Reform (Loser Pays - Limits)
5. Medicare Audit Teams (Waste and Fraud Units)

Because those things don't expand government power and the influence of arrogant politicians.

Think for myself · #20 (**permalink**) 10-22-2009, 06:04 AM

I see nothing wrong with the length of the bill other than it confuses people who refuse to read it.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Excerpts from the first 500 pages of Obama's health bill.	Lasher	Health Care	63	08-10-2009 12:41 PM
And now for a little fun - Alter web pages on your computer	danarhea	Humor & Satire	3	07-08-2008 04:10 PM
Hacking ISP Error Pages	SchneierBlog	Political Blogs	0	04-24-2008 05:11 AM
3000 pages of documents released	JP5	United States	31	03-22-2007 05:59 PM
veto any bill more than 100 pages long?	Nathan	Political Opinions & Beliefs	8	04-01-2005 01:23 PM