Senate panel rejects Obama health reform plan

  • Thread starter Thread starter mrhealthguy
  • Start date Start date
  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
M

mrhealthguy

Guest
what you guys think of In what is the first setback for US President Barack Obama in a centerpiece policy issue, the Senate Finance Committee overwhelmingly voted to throw out the government-run health insurance plan, dubbed the “public option.”

The proponents of the plan lost twice, first by 15 to 8 and next by 13 to 10, attempts at adopting the “public option” on September 29.

Three Democratic Party senators - Chairman Max Baucus of Montana, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas - voted against both proposals.

Under the proposed plan, the government can agree on rates with physicians, hospitals, and other health providers as an alternative to another proposal which would have linked the plan's rates to those paid by Medicare for two years.

Medicare is a US government social insurance program for providing medical care, especially to the aged and the disabled.

Despite the disappointment, the White House tried to put on a brave face on the defeat in the Senate. A White House spokesman, Reid Cherlin, said that while the president still believes in making a public option available to those without health insurance, Obama is “open to other constructive ideas of increasing choice and competition.”

The Democrats hold a majority in the Senate, with 60 out of the 100 seats.
 
I really don't understand america's reluctance to have health insurance for everyone.

Medicare is cool, seriously. I've got so much free medical treatment, and so many days off work, because of medicare.

You americans should try it, its fun.
 
We don't want it.

And people that want us to continue to produce advanced medical technology shouldn't want it for us, either.
 
I was hoping Rockefeller's amendment would pass. I want massive health care reform to happen, but I'm becoming less and less hopeful that that will happen. I would be all for a single payer system.
 
The main concern I have about socialized health care is that people from all over the world come to America to get the medicine and medical procedures that they need to survive, because their government put them on a waiting list not caring if they lived or died while waiting to recieve the treatments that they need...I'm sure that there are benefits to this type of health care, but I dont want our country to be like that. I like knowing that if I get cancer I wont have to sit around for a year or more waiting on the government to tell me its okay for me to be treated.
 
Well I gather it's for many, a choice between waiting around for a year to have treatment, and not having treatment at all because you can't afford it?
 
Most people can afford some type of treatment, and even if you cant, if your illness is life threatning, you'll get treatment wether you can afford it or not. Granted, you may have alot of bill to pay later, but at least your alive. What good is it to be able to afford treatment, but have to wait to get it.

In a perfect world, everyone would be able to afford the treatment they need, and get it when they need it. Unfortunatley I dont think that is the goal our government is trying to accomplish. Their goal is to save money not lives.
 
taylor_11 said:
Granted, you may have alot of bill to pay later, but at least your alive. What good is it to be able to afford treatment, but have to wait to get it.
Click to expand...

1.) I don't have insurance, and if I were faced with a big procedure, I wouldn't get it done, even if it were necessary to keep me alive, because I cannot go tens of thousands of dollars into debt. This is also one of the reasons we need affordable health care for everyone: people without insurance don't get preventative treatments because they do not go to the doctor when they have early symptoms.

2.) Under any system in the world you can get treatment if you have the money to afford it.
 
mrhealthguy said:
what you guys think of In what is the first setback for US President Barack Obama in a centerpiece policy issue, the Senate Finance Committee overwhelmingly voted to throw out the government-run health insurance plan, dubbed the “public option.”

The proponents of the plan lost twice, first by 15 to 8 and next by 13 to 10, attempts at adopting the “public option” on September 29.

Three Democratic Party senators - Chairman Max Baucus of Montana, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas - voted against both proposals.

Under the proposed plan, the government can agree on rates with physicians, hospitals, and other health providers as an alternative to another proposal which would have linked the plan's rates to those paid by Medicare for two years.

Medicare is a US government social insurance program for providing medical care, especially to the aged and the disabled.

Despite the disappointment, the White House tried to put on a brave face on the defeat in the Senate. A White House spokesman, Reid Cherlin, said that while the president still believes in making a public option available to those without health insurance, Obama is “open to other constructive ideas of increasing choice and competition.”

The Democrats hold a majority in the Senate, with 60 out of the 100 seats.
Click to expand...

We have it in Canada and those who need it have to wait a long long long time to get it even if they can pay for it. It is not always that effective depending on the situation. Also, people abuse the system a lot and that's why the queues and wait times are enormous.
 
Bad, Bad, Bad,

All it will amount to they will tell you what treatment and IF you can have treatment it will cost lots of money if you pay for health insurance and if you have so-called free health insurance it will still cost you. Nothing is ever free. and when enouph people drain the system no one will have anything. (ecept those who the government says is worthy.) More control.

It would be better if they did nothing then many people would suffer but the health care industry would have no choice but to lower there prices if no one paid for there service and at least we would get what WE pay for. and we would keep more of our freedom rather than be forced to pay both ways.

It's all about control not greed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back