Well, what did you think? I think the speech was well-delivered, eloquent, and hit on the very topics that the opposition have been trying to nail Obama on. In particular I like how he addressed the falsehoods such as "death panels" which I took as a direct attack against Palin, who started much of that nonsense.

I did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful. Just an honest question though, has anyone done this in recent years while a President was speaking to both the senate and house, or is this a new development? Personally, I hope that our politics don't start to look like Parliament.

UAL

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): I did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful.

  

I tend to be fairly conservative and don't necessarily feel the President is on the right track here, however I felt this outburst was incredibly disrespectful. You keep your mouth shut while the President of the United States is speaking.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): Well, what did you think?

Watching the speech would have interrupted the Yankee game I was watching, and Derek Jeter is on the verge of surpassing Lou Gehrig as the all-time hit leader for the Yankees. Far more exciting and more important.      

*I'm sure someone is going to rip on me for this. I can't wait.  

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): Personally, I hope that our politics don't start to look like Parliament.

We could always go the Korean route of parliamentary negotiation:  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJdZ0TocTlo

Rattled on and on like Castro

Did not change any perceptions that I had nor add any information that is not out there. Obama only insulted the people who pay for their insurance, people who work for insurance companies, pharmaceutical and medical professions or take responsibility for their own well being physically or financially.

Okie

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 3): We could always go the Korean route of parliamentary negotiation:

Actually I could picture folks like McCain and Pelosi engaging in such fights, would make watching C-SPAN that much more entertaining!

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): Well, what did you think?

I didn't get a chance to watch it but the early comments that I have read on the net are mostly positive. To be honest I'm simply amazed that such a much needed and comprehensive health care reform has had to wait this long to materialize. Sometimes I wonder if we have our priorities right in this country.

Cheers!

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 2): *I'm sure someone is going to rip on me for this. I can't wait.

Not me (except for the fact that the Yankees suck).

I'm busy watching the US Open.

I honestly can't take more than a minute or two of a politician's speech. Any more than that and it just bores me to tears, pisses me off, or confuses the hell out of me. Frequently all three.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): I did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful.

I have that part DVR'd. It was the most intolerant, disrespectful thing I've ever seen.

The speech was amazing. When he speaks is when his intelligence shines the most. He delivers a broad vocabulary.

I feel he really hit the key points of the health-care debate. And despite what the right would try to argue, he DID try to reach out to the Republicans.

Quoting Charles79 (Reply 5): Sometimes I wonder if we have our priorities right in this country.

Amen Brother.

It's becoming "every man for himself" because anything other than that is distorted as communism/socialism/fascism/Hitleresque. Though, I seriously cannot find any correlations that even make sense between Obama and Hitler. That analogy doesn't make sense in any way to me, even if I stretch my mind as far as it can go.

BTW Mr. President, please please please call people out! That would be a lot of fun.  

UAL

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 8): BTW Mr. President, please please please call people out! That would be a lot of fun. Smile

The part where he called out "death panels" I SO wish he had just said the name we were all thinking about at that moment, Sarah Palin.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful.

Agreed. That was ugly. I think he said a few whoppers, particularly in the early part. But you don't do that in that setting.

I was happy to see Obama open the door to Tort Reform. I hope he's serious, and is not just dangling a false carrot.

He made the excellent point that the insurance market in certain states is severely restricted to a handful of companies, which stifle competition and increase prices. But I think he took the entirely wrong lesson from that. The solution is not a Public Option, but rather the federal government should invoke one of the enumerated powers given to it in the Constitution - the power to "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". They can use this power to override the States' insurance licensing process and allow a Colorado insurance Company to offer services in Ohio, for instance. Some bonding issues can be resolved, and for once, FOR ONCE, the federal government would actually be acting in the way the Founders hoped it would, promoting interstate trade and knocking down inter-state barriers.

Quoting AustinAirport (Reply 9): The part where he called out "death panels" I SO wish he had just said the name we were all thinking about at that moment, Sarah Palin.

LOL, right when that happened my facebook status was changed to, "Barack Obama Bitch Slaps Sarah Palin." I knew exactly who he was talking about.

UAL

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): I did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful.

Ha... there's already a page up on ActBlue collecting donations for Rep. Wilson's Democratic opponent in the next election. And since he only won his seat 54/46 in the last election, it's entirely possible that his stupidity will cost him his seat the next time around. Way to go, Rep. Wilson!

"Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse." -From Pres. O's speech tonight

Bravo   

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): I did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful.

This man is shameful and of no honor to do this in the joint session during a Presidential address.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 1): I tend to be fairly conservative and don't necessarily feel the President is on the right track here, however I felt this outburst was incredibly disrespectful. You keep your mouth shut while the President of the United States is speaking.

Well it's getting to the point we can't listen to the lies anymore. The president had a chance to do the right thing tonight. Instead he has shown us he will go down in flames just to keep Pelosi happy. Sad.

I listened to the speech and it was the same as all his others. He tells us how he inherited a mess. How the GOP is evil and how things need to change. Yet he never tells us how he is going to do it and who is going to pay for it and when someone exposes the truth he calls them names. The DNC needs to change course on this quick because it's leaking major oil and is headed for disaster.

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 11): LOL, right when that happened my facebook status was changed to, "Barack Obama Bitch Slaps Sarah Palin." I knew exactly who he was talking about.

Laugh all you want but the fact remains we can't pay for this, don't have enough doctors to handle the load and care would have to be rationed. People would be waiting months for surgery just like in Canada. It is these FACTS that the Dems can't even get their own people to vote for this. Which is why they deflect attention away from that by attacking us.

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 2): *I'm sure someone is going to rip on me for this. I can't wait.

Wouldn't think of it. Sadly I feel baseball is too slow and therefore frequently as boring as trying to understand the Republican's health care proposals.

Quoting Charles79 (Reply 5): Actually I could picture folks like McCain and Pelosi engaging in such fights,

First McCain can't fight as his shoulders were screwed up when he was a POW.

And Pelosi won't do it because she might break a nail.

So, at the most, what you end up with are two pols flipping each other off.

Quoting Charles79 (Reply 5): Sometimes I wonder if we have our priorities right in this country.

Well, we put profits above people.

And greed over country.

And the last thing we want to do is ask ourselves "what is the character of our country".

Quoting AustinAirport (Reply 9): I SO wish he had just said the name we were all thinking about at that moment, Sarah Palin.

She wasn't the only one saying it, but she was probably the only one who believed it.

As for the dick head who shouted out during the speech, he's already issued an apology. Must have had a lot of people chewing his ass out for that dumb move.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14): People would be waiting months for surgery just like in Canada.

LOL this canard again? I waited 36 hours for an MRI and CT scan in a country with national health and 4x the population of Canada. Get your facts straight, Jack.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14): don't have enough doctors to handle the load

That's a legitimate beef that the AMA has raised with the White House on the issue. Until federal limitations on funding for doctors' training are modified, it will continue to be difficult for med school graduates to get the positions and opportunities they need to advance their skills. We're approaching shortages in many specializations too.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 10): the federal government should invoke one of the enumerated powers given to it in the Constitution - the power to "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". They can use this power to override the States' insurance licensing process and allow a Colorado insurance Company to offer services in Ohio, for instance.

Hear, hear...an excellent point. There's *some* hope on tort reform as well - the mighty David Axelrod said tonight on CNN that trial lawyers may not like the direction they're going in, but that doesn't stand above the White House's concern for a system that doesn't work well.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14): He tells us how he inherited a mess.

He did. 8 years worth. Yet the right wingers want President Obama to change things over night.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14): How the GOP is evil and how things need to change.

I have never heard him say the GOP is evil. Source please.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14): Well it's getting to the point we can't listen to the lies anymore

Could you clarify, in your opinion, whether or not the congressman shouting "You Lie" is acceptable ?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 15): As for the dick head who shouted out during the speech......

Hear hear!

A good speech, particularly the section at the end about "the character of America".

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): I did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful.

Definitely a no-class move. However, he did do the right thing and apologized right away, so I'm not going to hound him over it.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 14): Yet he never tells us how he is going to do it and who is going to pay for it

He did, actually, in the speech. You may not agree with it (there are some numbers I'm not sure add up), but you can't deny that he did put his plan out there.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 10): He made the excellent point that the insurance market in certain states is severely restricted to a handful of companies, which stifle competition and increase prices. But I think he took the entirely wrong lesson from that. The solution is not a Public Option, but rather the federal government should invoke one of the enumerated powers given to it in the Constitution - the power to "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". They can use this power to override the States' insurance licensing process and allow a Colorado insurance Company to offer services in Ohio, for instance.

The problem I have with that is that it would basically be a way for insurance companies to skirt state laws, since they could just relocate to the state with the most favorable laws for insurance companies, and then be free to ignore the laws of other states where they do business. So in essence you'd be federalizing the insurance laws anyway, only that it would be at the lowest common denominator instead of at the levels appropriate for one state vs. another.

-Mir

An elequent, inspiring speech, the best I have watched. The screaming joker, just re-enforced the image that I have of the hysterical "Right" stopping any rational discussion on this matter. I had to laugh at the Republican side sitting on their hands and looking like they were sucking on lemons. It reminded me of sulking school children. Sarah deserved what she got in the speech. I thought the President did very well tonight. Although no Kennedy lover, the point about him having two children with cancer and maybe not being able to afford health care was right on the money. Think about it.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 20): I had to laugh at the Republican side sitting on their hands and looking like they were sucking on lemons.

It was tough for them, knowing they had to sit there looking a bit out to lunch when Obama hit some very good lines.

But then there was Boner - the top Republican - looking like he still uses his tanning lamp. His "tan" left him a complexion like Obama's.  

Quoting Mir (Reply 19): The problem I have with that is that it would basically be a way for insurance companies to skirt state laws, since they could just relocate to the state with the most favorable laws for insurance companies, and then be free to ignore the laws of other states where they do business. So in essence you'd be federalizing the insurance laws anyway, only that it would be at the lowest common denominator instead of at the levels appropriate for one state vs. another.

Not necessarily, You just had the government federalize California's ultra-strict vehicle emission laws in favor of all the others.

I'm in the telecom business, which is similarly regulated by the states and the federal government. The state regulatory requirements are a royal pain in the ass, and have little to do with protecting the consumer, but rather designed to keep competitors away from the local incumbents. We'd be nationwide tomorrow if we could, but as it is we are restricted to only 15 states - that's all the paperwork our infrastructure can deal with without hiring a bunch of new worthless paperpushers.

Believe me, the state laws are not designed to help the consumers. I've dealt with these regulatory buttwipes long enough to know. They even admit it.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 16): I waited 36 hours for an MRI and CT scan in a country with national health and 4x the population of Canada. Get your facts straight, Jack.

I waited about the same time for an MRI & results in a country with the same population as Canada, the following week they had me in for surgery...what the poster is referring to is elective surgery which is not considered urgent, if its a life threatening emergency then I suspect Canada would be the same as Australia, UK and other nations with socialised health care.

if it weren't for Medicare down here, I'd be 6 feet under by now.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 22): Not necessarily, You just had the government federalize California's ultra-strict vehicle emission laws in favor of all the others.

I have no problem with a federal health insurance standard. What I don't want to see happen is for the barriers to be removed so that one state's standard can be used for another state with more stringent standards.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 22): Believe me, the state laws are not designed to help the consumers. I've dealt with these regulatory buttwipes long enough to know. They even admit it.

Which is exactly we shouldn't let insurance companies pick the easiest (i.e. most anti-consumer) laws out there to operate under.

-Mir

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter): I did find that the Representative from SC, I believe, who said, "That's a lie" while the President was speaking was disrespectful

Agreed , not the place for it and it appeared very juvenile .

Although he was lying ... government can not increase competition and that is not what the Dems want. The competition argument is a outlandish bait and bat situation done so to perk conservatives but not based in reality. The competition thing is simply a word ...nothing more.

And I love the part about .. not raising taxes and not increasing the deficit . Funding it by the savings that his plan will reap ? ..... savings ? Every federal program is as least 30 % in deficit .... everyone ... so now tell me again how you are going to pay for it ? The guy wants this so bad ... he knows it is a stepping stone to the real prize..single payer.

I need a coach Jim Mora picture ... Savings ? ! SAVINGS?! Your talking about Savings ?!   

Quoting Mir (Reply 24): I have no problem with a federal health insurance standard. What I don't want to see happen is for the barriers to be removed so that one state's standard can be used for another state with more stringent standards.

A proper federal standard would make state standards redundant. That's the whole point. You wouldn't happen to work for a well-entrenched insurance company, would you?

Quoting Mir (Reply 24): Which is exactly we shouldn't let insurance companies pick the easiest (i.e. most anti-consumer) laws out there to operate under.

Once again - one federally mandated standard. Cut the state regulations, cut administrative costs, and increase competition which has been artificially restricted by excessive state regulation.

Quoting Okie (Reply 4): Did not change any perceptions that I had nor add any information that is not out there. Obama only insulted the people who pay for their insurance, people who work for insurance companies, pharmaceutical and medical professions or take responsibility for their own well being physically or financially.

I sincerely hope that you never get the hospital bill I just got. And I'm insured. Yes, $400 for a doctor's visit because the insurance company reimburses an embarassingly small amount for the service provided.

Quoting Charles79 (Reply 5): Sometimes I wonder if we have our priorities right in this country.

We don't. And that is why I predict complete collapse of the United States within 100 years.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 25): Although he was lying ... government can not increase competition and that is not what the Dems want. The competition argument is a outlandish bait and bat situation done so to perk conservatives but not based in reality. The competition thing is simply a word ...nothing more.

Please explain yourself here. The public option is just that, an option--another choice for the American consumer. How is that not an increase in competition?

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 28): Please explain yourself here. The public option is just that, an option--another choice for the American consumer. How is that not an increase in competition?

With the funding the latest bills demand (2% to 8%, depending), there is no way in hell that the Public Option will be able to meet the expenses of the program, and will thus have to depend on subsidies from the federal budget. In addition to impacting the budget, selling the service at a loss would be considered dumping, no different than what happened when certain memory chip manufacturers sold memory below cost, driving some of their competitors out of business some years ago.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27): I sincerely hope that you never get the hospital bill I just got. And I'm insured. Yes, $400 for a doctor's visit because the insurance company reimburses an embarassingly small amount for the service provided.

I sincerely hope that you have returned to good health. However, I do not see anywhere the Obamacare plan is going to yield you any better results on deductibles and payments to Doctors. So far what is being indicated is that the payments to the healthcare providers is considered exorbant and will be less.

Okie

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 29): With the funding the latest bills demand (2% to 8%, depending), there is no way in hell that the Public Option will be able to meet the expenses of the program, and will thus have to depend on subsidies from the federal budget.

From Obama's speech:

Quote: Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea. They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government. And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won’t be. I have insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects.

And anyway, what's to keep the public option from charging sufficient premiums to cover its expenses?

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 28): How is that not an increase in competition?

As a business owner , payroll taxes increase by 8% if I my employees choose the public option . That is less than what I pay for their health insurance. It will be a migration too the public option by employers looking to cut costs. Eventually millions and millions will be forced on the public option . The costs will increase too the public , taxes will go up .... on and on.

Elections 20 years from now we will have Chelsea Clinton , Pelosi's daughter , and some Kennedy grandkid telling us how they are going to fix public care ...and the republicans have bankrupted it... its another political plank for the democrats.

Sorry Doc , the solution is to scare the insurance companies to death .. by opening up the market and driving costs down by more competition.

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 31): From Obama's speech: Quote: Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea. They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government. And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won’t be. I have insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects.

That was an example of a) Obama not having a clue what he's talking about, or b) he's lying through his teeth about the draconian rationing required to meet the budget.

I'm betting on b) because he did mention the posibility of cost-cutting measures if revenues were not up to par.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 33): That was an example of a) Obama not having a clue what he's talking about, or b) he's lying through his teeth about the draconian rationing required to meet the budget.

Can't he be both?

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 1): I tend to be fairly conservative and don't necessarily feel the President is on the right track here, however I felt this outburst was incredibly disrespectful. You keep your mouth shut while the President of the United States is speaking.

To be honest there were several outbursts from both sides of the aisle, his was just the loudest but essentially you are correct.

Quoting AustinAirport (Reply 9): The part where he called out "death panels" I SO wish he had just said the name we were all thinking about at that moment, Sarah Palin.

Two things, if he is going to be true to that, then one section of HR 3200 has to go away. Secondly, since he had to actually address the issue, she won the debate.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 10): But I think he took the entirely wrong lesson from that. The solution is not a Public Option, but rather the federal government should invoke one of the enumerated powers given to it in the Constitution - the power to "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". They can use this power to override the States' insurance licensing process and allow a Colorado insurance Company to offer services in Ohio, for instance. Some bonding issues can be resolved, and for once, FOR ONCE, the federal government would actually be acting in the way the Founders hoped it would, promoting interstate trade and knocking down inter-state barriers.

Hear hear.

I just finished watching a replay of the speech. A few of the things he spoke about.

"You will be able to keep the insurance and doctor you have."

That may be true on day one, but every day after that it grows less and less likely that that will be true if HR 3200 is the base bill he is working off of.

"No one should go broke because they get sick"

If you get very sick, unless you have catastrophic insurance or disability insurance there is every chance you will go broke no matter how cheap your health insurance is. Credit card, auto loans, home mortgages, unless you buy insurance to protect yourself, will not just let you off the hook. Yet not a word about catastrophic insurance, similar to flood insurance, to be offered by the government.


"Preventive care."

It has already been shown that preventive care as he envisions it, mamograms and other such tests, will actually raise the cost of health care because you are testing people that ordinarily would not be at risk.


"Required insurance."

So your freedom of choice is once again taken away by the government. As to the cost of someone not insured, someone who pays no tax and is on the governmetn insurance costs us just as much.

"No death panels."

As stated above, then a whole section of Congresses working bill HR 3200 goes out the window whether he wants to admit it or not.

"Abortion spending."

Another section of HR 3200 goes out the window then.

"Choice and competition and a government plan."

Does not address the fact that the government carries the force of law and has a printing press and tax policy to beat the insurance companies over the head with.


"Public colleges and private universities"

Flies in the face of his pre-existing conditions section of the speech since private universities cherry pick students every single year. For that matter a lot of public universities cherry pick as well.

"To my Republican friends we should work together."

Yet a few months ago he told them he was not interested in what they had to say.

"I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to the deficit now and in the future"

Then he can throw out the plans that have passed out of committee since the CBO has said that all of them will increase the deficit.

"I will cut spending to pay for it."

So either taxes go up of spending goes down. If spending goes down (when was the last time government really cut spending?) guess what, that means less service for someone.

He coudn't resist going back to the well to blame President Bush again. For spending on the Iraq war which he says wasn't paid for. I have one question, how is he paying for the battle in Afghanistan?

"Finding savings in the existing health care system already there in medicare and medicaid."

Then he needs to get with the CBO and fiqure out where the disconnect is since they say that all the savings he is talking about will not be enough to make a difference and that his health care plan will add to the deficit.

Tort reform. The President said he thinks that it maybe be contributing to costs. Maybe? and he did not promise to add into the bill. Only that he would issue instructions to his HHS Secretary to start pilot programs. I bet a year from now they will still be langushing on some bureaucrats desk since he is too indebted to the trial lawyers as is his party.

He is still blaming tax cuts despite the rise in tax reciepts that followed those cuts.

Calling persons out. Yet when he is called out he claims that scare tactics are being used or that the people doing the calling are just trying to quash reform. He had a chance to start over tonite and work on a bill that offers real reform and again he dropped the ball. The citizens voices of August were evidently lost on him.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 33): That was an example of a) Obama not having a clue what he's talking about, or b) he's lying through his teeth about the draconian rationing required to meet the budget.

I don't see how you can declare that the public option won't be self-supporting when you don't know what it will charge in the way of premiums - that would be like making predictions about McDonald's cost structure when you don't know what they charge for a hamburger. If you're talking about the portion of the health care bill that would subsidize those who can't afford health insurance - yes, it's possible that Obama has underestimated the cost of that program. But that's quite independent from the public option. One could easily imagine a system where the government pays subsidies to private insurers to cover those who can't afford it.

The current bill may require (I'm not sure that it does) those receiving subsidized care to choose the public option, but that's because the premiums it charges will be lower - it doesn't have to pay for advertising, investor's profits, etc. If the government is going to be subsidizing people's insurance, I'd rather not have any of the subsidy going to things like that that aren't related to health care.

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 36): when you don't know what it will charge in the way of premiums

I don't think congress ought to know what the premiums are before inflicting them on the public.

Seems like a vital need to know piece of information to me.

Quoting DXing (Reply 35): So your freedom of choice is once again taken away by the government. As to the cost of someone not insured, someone who pays no tax and is on the governmetn insurance costs us just as much.

Preventative healthcare saves a lot of money. But if people can't afford their meds, then they get sick, and then they have costly trips to the ER instead of cheap trips to their GP. Over and over and over.

You have plenty of freedom of choice. You can choose not to go to the doctor. But if you do go, you are insured.

Quoting DXing (Reply 35): "You will be able to keep the insurance and doctor you have." That may be true on day one, but every day after that it grows less and less likely that that will be true if HR 3200 is the base bill he is working off of.

Please explain what you think is going to happen on day thousand that will at that time prevent you from keeping the insurance and doctor that you have.

Quoting DXing (Reply 35): "To my Republican friends we should work together." Yet a few months ago he told them he was not interested in what they had to say.

Was this something he said or implied with respect to the GOP position on health care? A citation would help.

Quoting DXing (Reply 35): Tort reform. The President said he thinks that it maybe be contributing to costs. Maybe?

The CBO, in a 2004 analysis (cf: Limiting Tort Liability for Medical Malpractice ), indicated that the likely effect of tort reforms "would lower health care costs by only about 0.4 percent to 0.5 percent and the likely effect on health insurance premiums would be comparably small" and concluded "the evidence available to date does not make a strong case that restricting malpractice liability would have a significant effect, either positive or negative, on economic efficiency". Does it not seem reasonable to focus on other avenues that may contribute savings of greater than 0.5% instead of on tort reform?

Thanks

(Edited to add quote from CBO conclusion about tort reform)

[Edited 2009-09-10 00:09:24]

Quoting L-188 (Reply 37): I don't think congress ought to know what the premiums are before inflicting them on the public. Seems like a vital need to know piece of information to me.

Har har. Anyway, there's no good reason to specify the premiums in the law--insurance companies don't declare their premiums right at their formation, do they? The public option will do the same thing as the private insurers: hire some analysts to crunch the numbers and adjust their premiums to match their expenditures.

I'm watching it now and support the president on this. Where is young people on this issue, his main base?

This crap of standing ovations every 5 minutes is the only thing that annoys me when any president speaks lol

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 8): It's becoming "every man for himself"

When WASN'T it that way, though? Being self-made, self-sufficient, standing on ones own two feet - aren't these the ideals this country was founded upon?

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 16): I waited 36 hours for an MRI and CT scan in a country with national health and 4x the population of Canada.

That's great, however the problem is that in many cases waiting 36 hours might be the difference between life and death. Perhaps Doc Lightning can speak to this point - how often do "precautionary" MRI or CT scans reveal something that - left untreated for 36 hours - may have been fatal?

I'd like to have the option available to pay a little more and get what I need on-demand if I want.

OMG Pelosi gave that man when he shouted at Obama the look of DEATH!! That woman has a long memory. Ask any GOP member from the Clinton years lol.....She is not going to let that slide.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 42): That's great, however the problem is that in many cases waiting 36 hours might be the difference between life and death. Perhaps Doc Lightning can speak to this point - how often do "precautionary" MRI or CT scans reveal something that - left untreated for 36 hours - may have been fatal?

I am not a doctor, but I have an opinion. People keep repeating this yarn about how people have to wait for care in "socialized medicine" countries with the implication that that could lead to death etc.

I have fairly good private medical insurance coverage. Earlier this year, an MRI was ordered for me for a non-emergency diagnostic. I had to wait for about a week for an appointment for the MRI because there are only certain labs that are covered by my insurance. I thought nothing of it - it was not an emergency. So for me, here, in our very own US of A, with good private insurance coverage, I had to wait a week - and it did not bother me at all.

Compared to my one week wait, Aaron747 waited a day and a half.

If I went in to the ER for some genuine emergency and this emergency needed an MRI, then that would have been done right away.There is a 24-hour emergency imaging facility that is associated with the ER at the nearby hospital.

But get this. Even if I was in one of those dastardly socialized medicine countries like Japan, Canada or the UK - and I needed an MRI in an emergency, it would have been done for me with no waiting. No medical professional in Japan, Canada, or UK would let you wait for 36 hours for imaging if he judged you needed it right away - ie if it was a life/death matter.

People somehow don't get this. Or perhaps they just do not want to.

Quoting Charles79 (Reply 5): To be honest I'm simply amazed that such a much needed and comprehensive health care reform has had to wait this long to materialize. Sometimes I wonder if we have our priorities right in this country.

A large part of the world is just simply shaking their collective heads in bemusement. I find myself torn between sympathy for those who suffer from a woeful system and "serves you damned well right" for those who oppose these sorts of change and then find themselves in a medical trap.

Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 17): the right wingers want President Obama to change things over night.

Are you sure there should not be an "h" after the "w" in wingers Itsjustme??

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 20): It reminded me of sulking school children.

Not a bad analogy, mixed a bit with Marie Antoinette having a blend of let them eat cake and I am born to rule.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 38): You have plenty of freedom of choice. You can choose not to go to the doctor.

Professional question Doc hopefully not one that breaches the H Oath. When you get opponents of change in the privacy of the consultancy rooms, are they as robust defenders of the status quo as we have seen on other threads, or is the consultancy room a bit like a shell hole during war, very few atheists?

In general the "near sacred" nature of POTII* leaves furriners a bit amazed, but compared with our local bear pit, you would do well to preserve sacred POTII. And with the current POTUS, you do get good quality policy speeches that are well delivered as a side benefit too. I was listening to an ex Bush speech writer (he contributed to the Axis of Evil speech) in a discussion about US health reform, and he was unconvincing on the need for the health status quo (TOO!!). Must be a lesson there????

* If more than one Airbus is a group of Airbii, then more than one Pres must be a group of POTII????

After seeing this speech 'live', hearing some comments on it last night and this morning and thinking about it, I am disappointed. Yes, it was a well delivered speech, but the policy presented still has serious flaws.
I believe we need a 'Public Option' to be available, with premiums based on income and sufficient regulation so that it does not become a dumping place taking the highest risk persons.
We have to face reality of paying for any wider access. Reducing 'waste and fraud' will never be enough. It will take a substantual raise in taxes on personal income or a National sales tax. Of course, that politically cannot happen.
It does not go after the huge expenses and executive salaries of private insurance companies as well as ending their bad practices.
Sadly, I suspect we will end up with some minor tweaking of our health care insurance system but not the massive change we need. Millions of Americans cannot wait and will die long before they should if we don't do substantal changes.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 16): LOL this canard again? I waited 36 hours for an MRI and CT scan in a country with national health and 4x the population of Canada. Get your facts straight, Jack.

You live in Canada or ever been there? I know 3 people and two of them have waited 6 weeks and 2 and a half months. I got facts buddy. So do the Dems who won't vote for it.

Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 17): Yet the right wingers want President Obama to change things over night.

No that is what he is trying to do, we don't want a rush and Bush didn't create the health care mess. We want a good solution, not a rush job that is only designed to show Pelosi can do whatever she wants.

Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 17): Source please

Oh please.

Quoting WestWing (Reply 18): Could you clarify, in your opinion, whether or not the congressman shouting "You Lie" is acceptable ?

I actually found his actions unacceptable but it does show how people are becoming upset with how the Dems are handling this mess and trying to sell a lemon to the American people. They will shout just as loud next November.

Quoting Mir (Reply 19): He did, actually, in the speech. You may not agree with it (there are some numbers I'm not sure add up), but you can't deny that he did put his plan out there.

They don't even come close to adding up and they make no sense. So once again we got a fluff speech designed to villify the right and sell this lemon. When the truth is he doesn't even have the support of his own base except the far left.

Quoting Tsaord (Reply 41): This crap of standing ovations every 5 minutes is the only thing that annoys me when any president speaks lol

This was a ploy by the Dems to overdo it since they knew the speech would be weak and offer nothing new. Kind of a take your eye off the ball kind of thing. It didn't work and this morning we are back to the fact that the Dems have nothing and are trying to ram it down our throats. I feel so bad since Obama had the chance to kick Pelosi to the curb and work with us and show he is not like her and instead he just took another dive in the polls.

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 2): Yankees. Far more exciting and more important.

I agree. Especially when it comes to Obama speaking.

Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 6): watching the US Open

Now that is by far more important than Obama speaking.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 15): And Pelosi won't do it because she might break a nail.

King Obama and Princess Pelosi at their best.

Quoting Carlisle (Reply 48): Now that is by far more important than Obama speaking.

I thought it would be but Melanie stunk up the place pretty bad and then pouted about it after every bad shot she hit. Quite a let down. If it wasn't for that beautiful Scandinavian girl it would have been a total loss.