Oh my that is such a thourough shredding of the democratic party i may get converts! ha ha ha can't deny history! Damn i'm good!

Fair enough. I got my education using Federally guaranteed student loans. I did work between 30-40 hrs week while doing so, and I wouldn't recommend it. All that caffeine took its toll.





For what its worth, I don't see you as being with the loonies. As Warren Buffett puts it, it looks to me like you have 'skin in the game'-- this affects you directly, not unlike some the so-called loonies who sit on the sidelines with their TriCare or corporate Cadillac plans and hurl stinkbombs onto the field.

But, it directly affects me to an even greater extent, and I have a ton of experience regarding it. I just get fed up with people who vandalize the debate just to get their jollies.





Well, you yourself said that the government can do things that the private sector can't. If done correctly, I think there is precedent for the government acting as the 500 lb gorilla who keeps the private sector honest by its presence.

I'm not opposed to tort reform-- I just don't think it's going to make enough of difference to matter. A lot of my thinking on the subject comes from reading "Better: A Surgeon's Notes on Performance" by Atul Gawande. He advances the argument that medicine is a fantastically complicated enterprise with so many variables and pressures that even the best doctor is going to make some mistakes because she is only human. Rather than doing away with malpractice suits, he suggests a very good middle ground strategy that admits faults as a given and sets up a mechanism for handling them succinctly and fairly. Did you know that every time certain vaccines are dispensed, there is a small surcharge that goes to a fund to protect people who have bad reactions to them through no fault of their own or their doctors.

As another For-what-its-worth, I never trusted John Edwards' phony populism. He was too close to the trial lawyers' lobby and I think they bear some responsibility, too. As it turns out, that distrust was not displaced (If you'll lie to wife, you'll lie to me ala Ross Perot). Again, in the book "Better", you'll read about a malpractice attorney who was himself once a doctor-- you might be surprised by his perspective on the system.

In closing, what good does do to vanquish all the Islamofascist djinns hiding beneath our beds if it means we have to become like Luddites who die of curable diseases because of our stubborn adoration of ideology?


-Kerry O.

Ah, until recently (like two weeks ago recently) I was doing 50 hours a week minimum and 12-16 units a quarter including summer session. It was really taking a toll on my body, especially since I drive 45 miles to school four days (next quarter five and occasionally six) days a week.


I believe that our ideals and beliefs are what defines us. We are all individuals of different backgrounds, shapes, sizes, and colors that are all out of our control. Our beliefs and ideals are what we control that define us. I believe the way I do because it is fair. Nobody has the decision of the conditions they are born into and they should not be forced into helping everyone else for something out of their control. Sometimes the draw is pocket aces, sometimes it's an off-suit deuce-three. You have to play with what you have. The thing is, life is just like playing hold'em. your deal is your background, where you are born into; the cards on the table are life. pocket aces by all means gives you a great start, but does not mean that the draw on the table won't be a couple more deuces and a three and you get beat by the guy at the bottom.


The free market works if the people demand it to. Society today has become too reliant on the government with all the welfare and social programs that they demand they help them, not the system. If people were more aware of their purchasing and the media did their real job exposing corruption, we would not need government regulation.

It all comes down to personal responsibility. I want to ween ourselves from the government by forcing people to be responsible for themselves.


However, on the lines of the healthcare debate... I understand it needs drastic measures, but ironically, it is regulation that is keeping competition down. I recall an article about how they limit the number of new doctors. Tort reform is a start to reduce malpractice insurance, but I know it will only be a small percentage in the scheme of things. The big one to me is competition across state lines. That one I know will bring down costs as the larger companies like Blue Cross and Kaiser may then combine into one main location, reducing overhead.

You see, that is the primary reason that a private insurance company has higher costs than medicare - medicare only operates out of a few locations, blue cross has to have a full corporate organization in almost every state. If that could be combined into one, yeah, you'd lose a lot of jobs, but it would be real free market activity and the costs would dramatically decrease.

I know that I preach no regulation, because truthfully, in an ideal world, you would not need it. However, I just attempt to neutrailze the situation to a middle ground where it works best in reality between myself and those that want full government control.


So I guess what I'm saying with all this is that in the end, you have yourself. I think that is made up of your ideals and your honor (through your actions). If I give up what I believe, I feel like I lose a part of myself.

Fanta, I don't know what you're reading but most Americans are against...Obamacare...read it and weep...

The Senate worked through the weekend on its version of the national health care bill, with President Obama stopping by for a rare Sunday visit, but for the second week in a row, only 41% of U.S. voters favor the health care plan proposed by the president and congressional Democrats.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% oppose the plan. And as has been the case for months, the emotion’s on the sign of the naysayers: 40% Strongly Oppose the plan, while just 23% Strongly favor it.

Support for the president’s health care plan fell to 38%, its lowest ever, just before Thanksgiving. Followed by two weeks at 41%, this marks the lowest extended period of support for the plan yet. With the exception of a few days following nationally televised presidential appeals for the legislation, the number of voters opposed to the plan has always exceeded the number who favor it.

“This suggests that public opinion about the health care plan is hardening,” says Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports. “Despite the fact that most American believe our health care system needs major changes, most are opposed to what Congress is currently doing about it.”

Rasmussen Reports is continuing to track public opinion on the health care plan on a weekly basis, with updated findings released each Monday morning.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The Senate is expected to take up the abortion issue as part of its health care debate this week. Earlier polling shows that 48% nationwide want abortion coverave banned in the health care bill, while just 13% want such coverage mandated in the legislation.

Both the Senate and the House have Democratic majorities, which explains why both keep pushing on health care despite consistent public opposition. Seventy-two percent (72%) of Democrats favor the plan, while 83% of Republicans and 62% of voters not affiliated with either major party are opposed to it.

Democrats consistently have rated health care reform as the most important of the priorities listed by the president early in his term. Republicans and unaffiliated voters say cutting the federal deficit in half by the end of his first term is the president's highest priority.

Fifty-two percent (52%) of all voters now say it is at least somewhat likely that the health care plan will become law this year, while 37% believe that is unlikely to happen. Seventeen percent (17%) think passage is Very Likely, but nine percent (9%) say it’s Not At All Likely.

That’s one reason why 71% of voters nationwide say they’re at least somewhat angry about the current policies of the federal government. That’s up five points from September. The overall figure includes 46% who are Very Angry.

While one of the chief stated goals of the plan proposed by the president and congressional Democrats is to lower the cost of health care, 57% say costs will go up if the plan is passed. Twenty-one percent (21%) say costs will go down, and 17% believe they will stay about the same.

Similarly, only 23% think the quality of health care will get better if the plan is passed, while 54% predict that it will get worse. Sixteen percent (16%) expect quality to stay about the same.

Other polling shows that 47% trust the private sector more than government to keep health care costs down and the quality of care up. Two-thirds (66%) say an increase in free market competition will do more than government regulation to reduce health care costs.

Sixty percent (60%) of voters nationwide believe passage of the health care plan will increase the deficit. Seventy-five percent (75%) also think it is at least somewhat likely that middle class taxes will have to be raised to cover the cost of the plan. Fifty-nine percent (59%) say such a tax increase is Very Likely.

Only 27% favor a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone.

Althoough most Americans oppose the health care legislation working its way through Congress, 42% of voters say the federal government should be addressing health care reform. Twenty-three percent (23%) prefer to see reforms at the state government level, while 17% want both the state and federal government to get into the act.

Healthcare reform now!!!!!


I made my daughter an appointment the other day and was told that I will be charged if I cancel...how preposterous...

out of 12 doctors I've talked in the last couple weeks not one single doctor favors the plan

they all believe it gonna lead to rationing of health care

hey quiet,, are you ok? why so many doctors, if I may ask?

and the debate rages on... HC/no hc...

Yet everyone seems to be missing the scary part.

The senate, if it continues closed door sessions... On a bill that will alter the tax structure... Without the representatives of large parts of the voting/taxpaying public in the room.

would be violating a basic tenet of the united states...

Taxation without proper representation
If they continue on this course of action... This bill would be unconstitutional...

and givin the number of 'closed' sessions, secret wh meetings and other things I have noticed over the last few months I will go out on a limb and say.

The United States has been the victim of a coup...

Complete... with a shadow government installed over the true one.

Of course not. Any health care reform limits their abilities to overcharge and order unnecessary procedures just for extra profits.

Did you really think the AMA would support health care reform if they weren't the primary author?
That's like expecting the Insurance companies to support a Gov option.
It ain't going to happen.
If they did then I'd worry.

The health care bill is so wonderful that all the members of congress and the senate can't wait to sign themselves up for it.

It's such a wonderful plan that they have to ram it through before anyone has a chance to really read it.

Taxation without proper representation?

Representation, according to the Constitution, is achieved by voting!
All our representatives and Senators are elected officials.
Elected to represent their constituents interest.
Elected by their constituents.

The Healthcare business of Thomson Reuters is the leading provider of decision support solutions that help organizations across the healthcare industry improve clinical and business performance. It is built on the strength of leading healthcare brands including Medstat, MercuryMD, Micromedex, PDR, and Solucient. Through these offerings, Thomson Reuters provides the solutions, information, insight, and analysis its healthcare customers need to manage healthcare cost, quality, market positioning, and enterprise growth.

Our solutions are comprised of comprehensive healthcare databases, analytics, professional services, and research services to help professionals make better decisions faster. Thomson Reuters offers healthcare business solutions for clinicians, hospitals and healthcare providers, employers, health plans, government agencies, pharmaceutical companies and researchers.

Organizations across the healthcare industry rely on Thomson Reuters to diagnose and treat patients anywhere at anytime; improve clinical, financial, and operational performance; and develop sound growth plans and effective marketing strategies. Thomson Reuters also assists its healthcare customers in designing effective benefits plans, targeting and evaluating preventative medicine programs, structuring disease management programs, improving access to care, and stewarding government dollars.

Through its legacy brands, the Healthcare business of Thomson Reuters has been a trusted partner to healthcare decision makers, delivering reliable and innovative solutions since 1944 - longer than any other company in the industry. Professionals and stakeholders from every facet of healthcare use Thomson Reuters solutions to understand markets, access medical and drug information, manage costs, and improve the quality of healthcare.

thomsonreuters.com/healthcare

Maybe you could find another poll in which the pollsters aren't so heavily involved in the healthcare industry.

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/103928/The_death_of_the_public_option

Yep as soon as the government takes over you won't have to worry about appointments anymore! You'll just have to wait in a line that stretches around the block and they won't charge you anything for that!

Poppycock!

more like rationing their paycheck.

No, the care. If they make less, there is less incentive to become a doctor and take on the couple hundred thousand in loans required to become one. They also will retire earlier.

You cut supply while increasing demand. If anything, the one cost they have not included in the bill is to subsidize the doctors they're going to need to keep up with the demand they're creating. Sure, they can all go the the ER so the problem won't be there so much, but if you think the preventative care side isn't going to suffer you're fooling yourself.

Aye... all that you said is so.

Yet in excluding even ONE Senator from the procedings you have denied that senator's CONSTITUENTS their voice...

I.E they are at that point NOT REPRESENTED...

As I said Taxation Without Representation...

I stand by that...