A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

why are people so opposed to the new healthcare reform?

Posted: Oct 3, 2010

I keep hearing commercials from people running for office, saying that they will put a stop to "Obama-care" or being so proud that they voted against it.

I just don't get it. Everything I have heard, like being covered even if you have a preexisting condition, not being dropped when you get sick, covering kids until the age of 26, no lifetime caps, etc. all sounds great and consumer friendly.

Why are candidates appealing to the public to vote for them and they will fight it?

Why don't people want it?

I'm sure we've been over this, but I need to see it again in simple terms.

;

The list can go on and on - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
First and foremost for me is that I am an American in the land of the free, a democracy. That to me is the government stepping too far into my business. It gives them a certain control over me that I do not particularly care for. Our government is here to protect and not provide.

Other reasons, the cost. We are a very doctor friendly nation. We see them often. There are a lot of health problems in the US. We work in the medical field. We complain about what we make, etc. Okay, so, that is the government also taking control of that. The hospitals and docs are paid by the ins companies and patient's, and it is then trickled to us. So, there is more control that I do not like. They can just up and decide, "Hey, we only going to pay $500 for that $5000 procedure now". Eventually, those types of things trickle to us. Oh, and we a lot of our health issues are because of the way we live. Then you have we need to get health costs down, so we are going to make alcohol, tobacco, fats, sugars all illegal because they are causing the healthcare costs to sky rocket. I'm just one of those people that likes to make my own decisions and have as little government involvement.

I worked at a doctor's office that basically had to shut down because they were in a rural area with mainly state-funded and Medicare insurances. The choice was either to see way more patients that there was not time to see or move to another area. Of course, they had to move. You can only see so many patient's a day without risking care.

Most states already have some form of Medicaid to help those in need such as the ones that can't afford or due to medical problems or for children to 18 or 21. I'm sorry, but well before 26 the kids need to be getting their own insurance, and if their parents want to pay it for them, more power to them.

Here's my main problem with it.... - Zville MT

[ In Reply To ..]
I don't think it's right for Congress to mandate buying anything, let alone health care. I know they have used and abused the interstate commerce clause, but that was originally set up so that one state could not deny business to another state or prevent that state from doing business elsewhere (say Ohio wanted to sell corn to North Carolina and Kentucky said Ohio farmes couldn't go through Kentucky to get thier corn to North Carolina - that's were the interstate commerce clause comes in.)

My family and I can't afford health insurance and actually, we've found that health care has been relatively cheaper since not having insurance. Most of the doctor's offices we go to have a discounted rate if you're paying cash. Kroger's and Wal-Mart both have discount drug programs where the majority of generic drugs are extremely cheap - my last round of antibiotics for a sinus infection cost me $0 - Kroger's said there are some drugs on thier list they just give for free!

I agree with some of the things in the health care bill and agree that we need to fix the system, but I think where the bill should have started is where everyone agrees - children should not be turned down for preexisting conditions, insurance companies should not be able to drop you when you get sick. After that, what really needs to be fixed is the cost of medical procedures, not the insurance. There's no reason a mammogram should cost $500! There should also be tort reform so doctors don't feel the need to order tons of tests just to cover their butts. There should be reform, but not like what this bill offers. I think if you would read the bill in it's entirety, you would agree.

Why opposed? - Anon

[ In Reply To ..]
I'm with you. I don't understand why people get so up in arms against it either. Hopefully, it will be something people change their minds about when it starts really taking effect and is better understood. It probably was the same reaction when Medicare and Social Security first started.

health care reform is a good thing - think about it

[ In Reply To ..]
I think you will find the people against health care have been watching too much Fox, because you are right, the only way to get people mad about things like no preexisting conditions is to plant the idea it is un American somehow, which of course it is not. The right wing have a vested interest in keeping the system the way it is now. I have actually asked my employer to NOT offer health insurance. If you look on http://www.healthcare.gov/ you can figure out what kind of policy you can get if your employer does not offer it. No wonder the insurers are worried. No deductible, no out of pocket, $800 month in premiums for a family. Right now I pay $300 every two weeks, $3000 deductible, $8000 out of pocket. Ridiculous. Do you think itâ��s fair that people making $100,000 plus have the gold plated health care, i.e. they probably get immediate access, no deductibles, no out of pockets, and guess what, they can afford it! I know weâ��ve been told that we are supposed to aspire to higher things, but why does aspiring to success and wealth mean we have to step on those poorer than us? I lived in another country for awhile. Free health care. Very good care. Higher taxes, but better salaries. No people living on the streets, everyone looked after. Sure, a hip replacement or cataract might mean a 2 year wait, but if you had a heart attack or another grave illness, you are not hit with a bill that causes you to go bankrupt. Do you not see that itâ��s better having the govt involved than insurance companies? The govt would be fair. I canâ��t believe the insurance companies are, not with those premiums and their profits, and how would we know, anyway?

That is baloney. Majority want it repealed, and they - are not all Fox watchers!.

[ In Reply To ..]
My premiums just went up, and I am not rich, not even close. Reason given to me was this was in preparation for the new laws in the healthcare reform. I was already paying for insurance, and now I must pay even more for something I hardly use. .. oh, and "sure, a hip replacement or cataract might mean a 2-year wait"... oh great. So, that is BETTER than what we deal with now? LOL. "The Govt would be fair".. OMG. Wrong. The Govt has no clue what they are doing regarding healthcare, and they have no business in MY healthcare.

It is a joke - not the government's job

[ In Reply To ..]
First of all they passed a bill that no one had time to read the 1,000's of pages it contained. We don't sign (if we have any sense)a contract that we don't understand. But they signed a healthcare reform without ever reading all of what was in it. Have you ever tried to read an actual insurance policy? I can guarantee you 7/8 of the people that voted for this reform did not have a clue as to what they were voting on. If it is such a great thing, why is it our government leaders are not mandated to be covered under this healthcare, no they still get to have different healthcare than we (the citizens of this country) have. The problem is no one knows exactly what it covers, what the cost is going to be, how it is going to be paid for.

I personally have friends in Canada who have waited 2 years for a colonoscopy, when they had abdominal pain. Several months for a breast ultrasound when their mammo was abnormal. 6 months for an MRI when they blew their knee out snowboarding. Over 2 months for cardioversion. They still have to pay for that care, it isn't free but it is lousy. If they want good medical care they come across the border (if they have the money) and pay for their medical care here. That is Socialized Medicine.

Medicare premiums are going up, supplemental (part B) health plans for medicare are going up. Insurance premiums across the board are starting to be raised. The reason given, new healthcare reform. Think about it...they have passed a reform that no one knows all of what it entails because no one had the time to read it before they voted to pass it. This is Socalized Medicine and we don't need it in the U.S.

read it? - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
What people don't understand is that we already are paying for the people not covered. Why DO you think a mammogram costs $500 if you pay cash? What about an ambulance ride $700-1400 anyone? That's because so many poor people just don't pay, so we who do have to pay more. I do agree the care here is excellent, but it seems that again the middle class is paying the bill and are the last ones getting that care. If you are dirt poor you just don't pay if you have an emergency health situation, if you are rich your insurance covers everything and you can afford what it doesn't. The middle class just gets stuck with a huge bill in the form of deductibles, out of pocket and whatever the insurer thinks they can get away with after the fact. I don't think stalling doing anything about this until everyone can read the bill will help anything. I am amazed at the level of concern with the deficit, another red herring in my opinion, where was all the concern under the previous administration?

Majority want it to go further! - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
What the govt is doing in healthcare is not really being in healthcare. They are just telling the insurers they need to be fairer, and the insurers are having huge hissy fits and trying to find ways out. The defense of this is inexplicable. You know what, in that country where really poor or really cheap people wait 2 years for a hip replacement or cataract, those willing to pay for the operation can get it right away. Cost $2000. Guess what, since you're not paying $6000 a years in premiums for really nothing at all, you can afford it!

It is not that simple... and what you said regarding cataract, - hip replacement is sickening.

[ In Reply To ..]
Really, it shows that like the Govt, you dont have a clue on the subject.

Why is that sickening? - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
What do you think poor people in this country do if they need cataracts or a hip replacement, check into the clinic? No, my guess is they just suffer in silence and also very long, as applying for Medicaid might be something they cannot comprehend. Waiting two years for an operation is hard, but at least you can get it, and if not you pay for it, and as I said, because you don't have the huge premiums, maybe you can actually afford it.

A poor person currently on Medicaid can get the - hip replacement!! ...now, with the changes

[ In Reply To ..]
yeah, they might get it in "two years"??? Oh, okay.. My grandma needed a hip replacement and was in pain. Sure, lets have her wait a couple years. You make no sense! I work in a medical office. If you need Medicaid, you can get all kind of assistance in obtaining it. You need to look a little deeper than you currently do. Right now, people can get the hip replacement in the USA. Once rationing starts, they may wait and wait and wait.

hip replacement - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
Okay, I agree with you there. In fact, when I lived in that country, I thought it was pretty terrible. I am glad to hear people get assistance to get Medicaid. Why do you think there would be rationing here, though? The country I lived in had a govt run health system and some things were rationed. Here it will always be through insurance, even Medicaid is insurance, right?

Millions more people are going to be put on Medicaid. - You watch, it will happen. One thing I know

[ In Reply To ..]
about Medicaid, there is also a LOT of abuse with it. They use it for everything. "I have a headache, better call a squad".. I have a bad cold, better run to the ER". There are few limits once you qualify, and too many people abuse it.(hurting the whole system when its meant to help the truly needy). When the millions are added, there basically will be a ton more people running to the doctor for everything, causing lines, causing rationing. My aunt is an ER nurse. The stories she tells me would make you fume. We are basically going to end up with less doctors, yet many more appointments from patients... trying to weed out the nonemergents. Again, MEDICAID is run by the Govt, is on the verge of bankrupting many states. So, why do YOU think the Govt interfering even more is going to help this mess?? Sorry, but I have no confidence in them at all.

44% is not the majority. The majority of Americans do NOT want it - anon

[ In Reply To ..]
53% oppose it. I don't know about your math but the last time I looked 44 was less than 53. They are not the majority. It used to be higher than 44% (it used to be 46% but that still is not the majority).

Just because you want it doesn't mean the majority wants it.

There are many of us out there who understand what this will mean and how our health care will deteriorate under such a system. Luckily more people are aware than not. That's why the majority does NOT want it.

And you really know it's especially bad when the people who are trying to enslave us in such a system refuse to join it themselves.

As the saying goes.... "It doesn't pass the stink test".

You are right. They were mixed up. Its the 44pct who - want it to go further, NOT the majority.nm

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

and you believe the insurance company? - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
The insurers claim they cannot compete with "govt health care". Well they could TRY, instead of paying for scare tactic ads and upping everyone's premiums. I do not understand why people believe insurance companies are trustworthy. They have made our healthcare system into a huge for profit system. They do not want the profits questioned or threatened, of course not. Socialized medicine, yes, for them. We are paying for THEIR profits with our premiums and deductibles. The way it got there is lack of regulation. How is it going to get better without regulation?

If you look at history "regulation" many times causes - more problem than it cures!.

[ In Reply To ..]
Also, insurance companies rate of profit is so much lower than MANY companies receive, so this constant demonization of insurance companies is another thing Obama spews, and of course, you buy everything he spews. I am not saying there are not problems, but he is blowing this way out of proportion. His main accomplishment here will to be putting millions more on Medicaid, which will cause individual states to go broke. You think that wont happen? ...and Medicare and Soc. Security are predicted to be bankrupt in the future, so you think having Govt take over healthcare is a GOOD thing? This is NOT reality.

Govt is NOT taking over health care - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
It is merely trying to regulate it. I don't follow anyone blindly, and I have never seen Obama "spew" anything. Fox News, on the other hand, spews a lot. The worst thing to me is that having health insurance tied into your job makes this country not competitive internationally. Why do you think jobs go overseas? The US companies claim they can't afford the cost of a US worker. When I lived in the South Pacific, I was earning more per line than I am here in the USA, typing for a contractor of a hospital not far from where I live now. Sending jobs overseas is not only happening because they can pay pennies, it's because they don't want to pay insurance and other costs. Guess what, in a country with govt health care, the company doesn't have those costs, so hence they beat us. This is happening with manufacturing as well. I think these companies are against health care being separate to jobs because they want an excuse to keep sending the jobs overseas. It's cheaper and easier.

Sorry, but I also think you see things blindly.nm - TX

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

LOL. When has Govt ever done a good job regulating? - NEVER

[ In Reply To ..]
Companies are already threating to drop health insurance for the hundreds or thousands they employ. Thanks Obama... and thanks for helping to raise my premiums.. He is a disaster.

I think that is a good thing - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
When they drop the high deductible, high out of pocket insurance for their employees, those employees will have access to other insurers and be able to get better insurance where you pay a monthly premium and everything is covered. Also, if you leave that job your insurance won't end. Thanks, Obama. I think that's a good thing.

Yes, if you are a MT you will really be thanking him - NOT

[ In Reply To ..]
Not sure if you are aware of the difference in reimbursements between private insurance and government insurance, but they are HUGE. Worked billing for years. So, you are ultimately paid by insurance money, and you want the insurance payments to the hospitals and doctors you work for to go down? It's funny, I go from one board talking about they cannot believe how low MT pay is to another one with MTs wanting a low-paying government ran insurance that eventually is our source of income. So, I'm sure this is going to really help us.

Oh, dream on. Wish I lived in your fairytale land.nm - Realist

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

You don't really believe that do you? - anon

[ In Reply To ..]
I may have been born at night, but I wasn't born last night. They are never going to drop the high deductibles or out of pocket insurance for the employees. Our rates will continue to remain high and of course not everything will be covered.

You really believe our insurance rates are going to drop and we'll have access to other insurers and bet better insurance and everything we need will be covered? Really? Really? I have to ask again...really? It's really hard to believe that anyone can believe such a fairy tale and not grasp truth from fantasy.

Here in the real world I have learned to do research, listen to an issue, sit back and put common sense into play.

Maybe in your world of sugar and spice, candy kisses and lollipop dreams that's what you believe, but unfortunately here in the real world it will not work like that. We will continue to pay the high deductibles (it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out), get the same horrible plans (procedures medicines not covered), keep fighting to have the "obamacare company" pay for procedures and medicines we desperately need. Still be refused (per their own words). The care will deteriorate as more docs are planning to leave the health care industry (per their own words. That is why it is widely known as "crapcare". And don't forget their own words and read up on "The complete lives system".

http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2009/08/ezekiel-emanuel-complete-lives-system.html

â��When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and the oldest get chances that are attenuated.â��

http://www.conservativepup.com/dr-ezekial-emanuel-putting-seniors-and-infants-last/.html

Rationed care. If you think that's a good thing you must not be past the age of 40 or have a grandparent or young infant with a disability. - No it's not a good thing and the majority of American's know this and don't want it - and more so strongly when congress refuses to join it.

I kind of don't get all the imagery - get real

[ In Reply To ..]
Candy kisses and lollipops, really? I notice the links you provide also have a similar theme, i.e. no doubt recommended by Drudge and Fox. Why don't you pretend you lost your job or your company stopped providing healthcare insurance(and you were not eligible for any other employer sponsored one) and to the steps on www.healthcare.gov and see what you get. Saying that congress refuses to join it is meaningless. Everyone already covered is unable to join it, but when I look at what I am eligible for should I not have other coverage, I wish I could join it. If again all this is so horrible, where is the alternative plan? Again, we need "time to read the bill", not "rush into anything," etc. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that something needs to be done, so what's your solution? Buzz words like tort reform and across state lines often come up, but I still have yet to see any actual plan based on these or any other conservative principles.

Because.... - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
1. Millions Will Lose Their Current Insurance. Period. End of Story: President Obama wants Americans to believe they can keep their insurance if they like, but research from the government, private research firms, and think tanks show this is not the case. Proposed economic incentives, plus a government-run health plan like the one proposed in the House bill, would cause 88.1 million people to see their current employer-sponsored health plan disappear.

2. Your Health Care Coverage Will Probably Change Anyway: Even if you kept your private insurance, eventually most remaining plansâ��whether employer plans or individual plansâ��would have to conform to new federal benefit standards. Moreover, the necessary plan â��upgradesâ�� will undoubtedly cost you more in premiums.

3. The Umpire Is Also the First Baseman: The main argument for a â��public optionâ�� is that it would increase competition. However, if the federal government creates a health care plan that it controls and also sets the rules for the private plans, there is little doubt that Washington would put its private sector â��competitorsâ�� out of business sooner or later.

4. The Fed Picks Your Treatment: President Obama said: â��Theyâ��re going to have to give up paying for things that donâ��t make them healthier. â�¦ If thereâ��s a blue pill and a red pill, and the blue pill is half the price of the red pill and works just as well, why not pay half for the thing thatâ��s going to make you well.â�� Does that sound like a government that will stay out of your health care decisions

5. Individual Mandate Means Less Liberty and More Taxes: Although he once opposed the idea, President Obama is now open to the imposition of an individual mandate that would require all Americans to have federally approved health insurance. This unprecedented federal directive not only takes away your individual freedom but could cost you as well. Lawmakers are considering a penalty or tax for those who donâ��t buy government-approved health plans.

6. Higher Taxes Than Europe Hurt Small Businesses: A proposed surtax on the wealthy will actually hit hundreds of thousands of small business owners who are dealing with a recession. If it is enacted, Americaâ��s top earners and job creators will carry a larger overall tax burden than France, Italy, Germany, Japan, etc., with a total average tax rate greater than 52%. Is that the right recipe for jobs and wage growth?

7. Who Makes Medical Decisions? What is the right medical treatment and should bureaucrats determine what Americans can or cannot have? While the House and Senate language is vague, amendments offered in House and Senate committees to block government rationing of care were routinely defeated. Cost or a federal health board could be the deciding factors. President Obama himself admitted this when he said, â��Maybe youâ��re better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller,â�� when asked about an elderly woman who needed a pacemaker.

8. Taxpayer-Funded Abortions? Nineteen Democrats recently asked the President to not sign any bill that doesnâ��t explicitly exclude â��abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance planâ�� or any bill that allows a federal health board to â��recommend abortion services be included under covered benefits or as part of a benefits package.â�� Currently, these exclusions do not exist.

9. Itâ��s Not Paid For: The CBO says the current House plan would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. And that number will likely continue to rise over the long term. Similar entitlement bills in the past, including Medicare, have scored much lower than their actual eventual cost.

10. Rushing It, Not Reading It: Weâ��ve been down this road beforeâ��with the failed stimulus package. Back then, we also heard that we were in a crisis and that we needed to pass a 1,000-plus-page bill in a few hoursâ��without reading itâ��or we would have 8% unemployment. Well, we know what happened. Now, one Congressman has even said itâ��s pointless to read one of the reform bills without two days and two lawyers to make sense of it. Deception is the only reason to rush through a bill nobody truly understands.

Thank you, Heritage Foundation - really?

[ In Reply To ..]
Come on. Copying off The Heritage Foudnation, word for word? Could you not at least sum it up in your own words? I think if people wanted the Heritage Foundation's view, they could look up the Heritage Foundation's view.

Similar Messages:

Mar 19, 2010
because I think it is MUCH better to spend HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars raping a foreign country like Iraq and then REBUILDING THAT COUNTRY than to spend hundreds of billions of dollars helping the CITIZENS OF THIS NATION better afford basic health care coverage. Surely you all agree? Because from the GOP's point of view we CAN afford endless war but we CAN'T afford heath care reform. Geniuses, ain't they? ...

Mar 22, 2010
Does anybody know how this might positively or negatively affect our jobs as transcriptionists. I haven't really been following the particulars of the bill that closely. ...

Dec 04, 2012
A Hospital War Reflects a Bind for Doctors in the U.S. By JULIE CRESWELL and REED ABELSON For decades, doctors in picturesque Boise, Idaho, were part of a tight-knit community, freely referring patients to the specialists or hospitals of their choice and exchanging information about the latest medical treatments. But that began to change a few years ago, when the city’s largest hospital, St. Luke’s Health System, began rapidly buying physician practices all over t ...

Mar 04, 2016
This sounds like an excellent plan to me. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform ...

Mar 25, 2010
nm ...

Jan 13, 2017
healthiest half of the population consumes only 3% of health care costs. The only alternative would appear to be taxpayer subsidies. It is next to impossible, politically, to take away freebees once in place. Income redistribution continues to increase. The 2010 health law, also known as Obamacare, forced insurers to sell coverage to anyone, at the same price, regardless of their risk of incurring big claims. That provision was popular. Not so were rules requiring nearly everyone to have ins ...

Jun 26, 2016
An Arizona Democratic lawmaker who once voted against welfare fraud protections in her state has been indicted on felony charges of defrauding the food stamp program. According to the indictment unsealed earlier this week, state Rep. Cecilia Velasquez was charged with three felony counts: unlawful use of food stamps, fraudulent schemes and practices, and theft. The Arizona Department of Economic Security began investigating Velasquez in 2014. According to the Arizona DES, Velasquez fraud ...

May 06, 2011
I just thought I would start a contraversial topic before I take off for the day. I'll be back later to see the ruckus. LOL. ...

Dec 11, 2009
Thoughts on the bill passed in the House today? Too little, too much? I think it's a good step but there are no guarantees Big Business won't find loopholes. In fact, I'm quite sure they will try. In the meantime, however, it sends a good message that we will be watching. I'm also sure the senate will take months with this. Will that lead to a watered-down version? I guess it depends on how hard the constituents press their elected officials. NJ ...

Mar 15, 2010
LIE: "There is no federal funding for abortions in the bill." Obama and Pelosi have insisted that there is no federal funding of abortions in the bill: http://www.healthcarebs.com/2010/03/08/video-pelosi-obama-lie-about-abortion-funding-in-senate-reform-bill/ But Rep. Stupak says otherwise: "Stupak notes that his negotiations with House Democratic leaders in recent days have been revealing. “I really believe that the Democratic leadership is simply unwillin ...

Apr 24, 2010
Click on O's pic and you can play the video. BTW, I applaud AZ for taking matters into their own hands since the government has been so lax in protecting its citizens from crimes committed by illegals. I think this has come to a head since the death of the farmer killed a few weeks ago. It is also a way to force the government to start paying attention. Illegal is ILLEGAL. While others have come here legally, others have followed illegally. It must be stopped but as an af ...

Jul 18, 2010
I have been reading articles on what is, and what is not, included in this new law. Not a single article agrees this is real reform. It still gives Wall Street (SEC) and big banks the freedom to do what they want. This is not good. It's what I've been saying all along. The idea of financial reform was supposed to stop the abuse, but it may give the above more free rein in what they do. I'm posting one article from MSNBC. Please be sure to read the ful ...

Apr 30, 2010
I especially love the line about not doing something just for the sake of politics - who is he kidding? The whole reason it's not on the agenda anymore is because of politics! And you can blame the republicans or the democrats - they're both just as guilty of doing what's right for themselves instead of what's right for the country! A politician doesn't do anything that isn't for the sake of politics! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100430/ ...

Oct 17, 2011
Two url links: http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=b17560ae-fbd9-4447-8564-f73a8f254637 This is interview of Warren Buffet regarding the deficit and, in particular, a constitutional amendment that would not allow sitting members of congress to run for reelection if the GDP was more than 3%. And, http://www.petition2congress.com/3944/ which is regarding Congressional Reform Act 2011. ...

Nov 12, 2014
"We have all heard it said many times that America is a land of immigrants, some voluntary and some involuntary, but immigrants nevertheless. We have plenty of space in our country, but insufficient resources to support everyone who wants to come here. When we see innocent children used as political pawns, it still tugs at our heartstrings, which is the desired intent. The real question is, What are we going to do about it? Immigration reform has been a very tough issue, as well as a p ...

Feb 22, 2010
Eileen Aj Connelly, AP Personal Finance Writer, On Sunday February 21, 2010, 2:29 pm EST NEW YORK (AP) -- Your next credit card statement is going to contain an ugly truth: how much that card really costs to use. Now, thanks to a long-awaited law that goes into effect Monday, you'll know that if you pay the minimum on a $3,000 balance with a 14 percent interest rate, it could take you 10 years to pay off. "Jaws will drop," said David Robertson, publisher of The Nilson Report, a newslet ...

Jul 02, 2010
While I agree with some things said, I totally disagree with giving all illegals a "pathway to citizenship." http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/york-mayor-bloomberg-immigration-jobs-lebron-james-11071170 But, as I delve into more and more of this information, I found this problem with the current system with those applying legally to come to this country. Read the article and please click on some of the underlined words, especially about the English couple who owned a restaurant in Main ...

May 12, 2011
President Barack Obama renewed his push for comprehensive immigration reform Tuesday, citing America's legacy as a nation of immigrants and saying that finding a solution for millions of undocumented workers is critical to the country's common future. "We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants -- a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America's precepts," Obama said during a visit to El Paso, Texas. "It doesn't matter where you come from. What matters is that y ...

Mar 22, 2010
According to what I have been reading today, NO. The government cannot force us to buy health insurance: "But the individual mandate extends the commerce clause's power beyond economic activity, to economic inactivity. That is unprecedented. While Congress has used its taxing power to fund Social Security and Medicare, never before has it used its commerce power to mandate that an individual person engage in an economic transaction with a private company. Regulating the auto industry or pa ...

Jun 21, 2010
http://pol.moveon.org/sfd/slate/index.html?id=21231-5238824-oyQ97mx&t=5 ...

Jun 24, 2010
Dylan Ratigan is freaking out of the changes Chris Dodd and Barney Frank are trying to make to this financial reform bill: The long-awaited showdown between banks and Sen. Blanche Lincoln over her derivatives reform section of the Wall Street bill begins Thursday. The conference committee will consider an offer made by the House to amend Senate legislation that forces banks to spin off their swaps desk and separately capitalize that operation, while also bringing the business out into the open, ...

Apr 27, 2013
ICE Officer and President of the National ICE Council testified at a hearing on the immigration bill that the Gang of Eight are trying to push through Congress - again, without anyone being able to read it. Sound familiar? Will they have to pass it to find out what's in it? I am so disgusted with these Senators, a couple that I had high respect for...and now this. There are so many loopholes that it will be another fiasco. Back when the amnesty was passed, we only had how many illegals in ...

Jun 27, 2013
Don't think it will pass the House. Border security is NOT first in this bill and Janet Napolitano is the one who will make the decision on whether the border is secure or not...and we all know she thinks it is secure...that's why they never finished the fence. Yet the border agents are saying it's not secure and....well, if it WAS secure, how did 11 Million illegal immigrants cross it? This bill also sets limits on ag workers, lower than what it is now. BTW, vote was 68-3 ...

Nov 16, 2014
I have not copied the whole articles since it would take up too much room. I HAVE POSTED THE LINKS AFTER THE ARTICLE. It's up to everyone to go to those links to read the whole article.The last time Congress enacted sweeping immigration reform was back in 1986. That bill, signed by Ronald Reagan, looked a lot like the proposals being put forward today. There was a path to citizenship for existing illegal immigrants, coupled with tighter border enforcement. What did the 1986 ...

Nov 05, 2009
Looks like heath care reform is on its way! ...

Feb 19, 2010
My husband owns a small business and in the last 6-9 months, we have been hounded more than ever by insurance company representatives and brokers looking for our business. Are they looking for sheer numbers if this reform goes through, or is there something else I'm missing? In any case, it certainly doesn't seem that the insurance companies are worried about health care reform hurting them. Maybe they're just trying to lock us in so then they can raise ...

May 15, 2011
I'll admit that I really have never understood what the Health Reform Bill is supposed to do, but I thought this summary was interesting. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/22/health-reform-bill-summary_n_508315.html#s75147&title=An_End_To An End to Pre-Existing Conditions---which certainly would benefit me. Small Business Tax Credits for business with fewer than 50 employees will cover up to 50% of employee premiums---my family business will benefit from that one. No Lifetime Ca ...

May 21, 2010
Hopefully, when the Senate and House blend the bills, it will truly be good for the country. Only time will tell. I noted that 3/4 of the amendments were not introduced or voted on in the Senate. WASHINGTON - Prodded by national anger at Wall Street, the Senate on Thursday passed the most far-reaching restraints on big banks since the Great Depression. In its broad sweep, the massive bill would touch Wall Street CEOs and first-time homebuyers, high-flying traders and small town lenders. T ...

Sep 19, 2012
work requirement, number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubles. How can you Liberals possibly say he is not creating a nanny state? I mean, really? What world do you come from? It's just a common sense issue. What is your problem? I know, lots of questions. I know you can't answer them all. Just read this. ...

Nov 16, 2012
Not sure of this has a chance, but certainly is quite an aggressive "here I am" by Warren. I have feeling that many of her colleagues on the right side of the aisle are now wishing she'd been appointed to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, her brainchild, which they opposed at the time. She will be exciting to watch for sure. ...