What Sen McConnell is realy saying......
Republicans want to let insurance companys go back to denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions,Let them go back to charging women twice as much as men for the same coverage,and let them push millions of seniors back into the medicare doughnut hole.

You republicans must be so proud, you have put everything in reverse
we are all headed backward again.
I remember now way back before the election hardly anyone wanted medical insurance, because (you said) you would rather do without,
I feel so benieth all you millionares,perhaps you guys should be on a Rolls Royce forum.
I have never in my life seen working men and women voting for republicans ,talk about fu+king brainwashed,jesus christ unbelievable.

Mick and WM -

I said it all along that all that was needed to solve over 90% of the issues with health care was to outlaw pre-existing condition exceptions.  Premiums will rise a bit, but so what - that's the price you pay to include nearly everyone.  As in all things, there never is a perfect, 100% solution, for absolutely everyone.

What we got is analagous to hunting rabbits with quad .50 caliber machine guns mounted on a truck.

There was a small problem that needed a limited solution.  But, as they typically do, Dems saw an opportunity to greatly expand government's role, and seized upon it.  We now have a monster.

One of the basic tenets of insurance is to try to match premium to the risk being insured.  That's why a Ferrari costs more to insure than a Ford Focus.

For instance, smokers have paid more for health and life insurance for the last few decades, as they should - they are at higher risk for health claims, and they live shorter lives, by and large, as their heirs collect on their life insurance sooner.

The same for women - even routine, natural childbirths cost money, and as far as I now, women are the only ones who birth children.  If a woman with 3 kids is as healthy as they come, she'll still have more health insurance claims than will a man in equally good health - hence, her premium should be higher.

But, Mick, you have to admit that you had life saving surgery under the old program of a combination of very basic coverage from Medicare, combined with the private, supplemental policy that you decided to buy to protect yourself - wise, my Friend.  What did you really pay, out of pocket, for a surgery and long hospital stay that saved your life?

Just pointing to the costs & showing they rose dramatically doesnt make the MEDical system bad. While I wont say its fair & reasonable, I WILL point to the change in the value of the dollar & inf;ation in other [places.
Gold in january in 2000 was under 300 bux. Look at it now. IOW, part of the price increase is simple inflation.

Serowbot -

There numbers are ridiculous - I have no idea who was surveyed.  More importantly, what is the age group for which te premiums are supposedly valid?  Health insurance premiums vary widely by completelness of the plan, smoking history, and most importantly, AGE.  We OFs have more claims, and as we age, the claims sky rocket.

My monthly premium for Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield family coverage under a VERY complete plan is $1800 monthly.  And it's only that high because of my age, 63, and my wife's age, 62, and my history of heart stents and past smoking.

My 40 year partner's premium for the exact same plan, and including his 2 children still in his household is $1100 a month.  His wife is a few years younger than he, so she's still of child bearing age, and in fact, is expecting another child next month.  So that's currently 4 people insured for $1100 a month - pretty fair premium.

your premium Jerry is a little less than alot of people earn per month. $400 a week thats alot of scratch.
who in the heck can afford that every week ?  Speak up people who can afford that premium ? Come on all you dyed in the wool repubs,speak up.

The 8 year Bush/Republican record is doubling cost, and increasing the uninsured...
If you don't like "Obamacare",... maybe you should have accepted "Hillarycare" when it was offered...
... but the Bush plan of non-action put you in this position... any Republican plan, should have happened when the Republicans were in charge...  
They did nothing...
Truth is,... they don't want to fix anything... just to continue lining the pockets of the HMO's and big Pharma... and their own coffers...

Repub's harp on a "takeover" of one sixth of the US economy.... the point is,... it shouldn't be one sixth of the economy...
The whole, convoluted system, needs to be 86'd and reborn...
... this will not fix with a couple of pieces of band-aid legislation...

Guys -

Mick and I had "agreed" earlier this week not to re-hash the whole health care debate that we posted to death for over a year.

Is there anything really new to say that hasn't been said before?

I started this thread just to blow my own horn a lttle bit.

Now to go on to something else:

Our town had a proposal on the ballot on Tuesday to double our city income tax.  Thanks in no small part to the efforts of one city councilman, my daughter, it went down in flames with almost 80% of the voters rejecting it.

So, where does our town of 15,000 people come up with the $2.2 million that this tax incresae would have generated?  Here are a few of her ideas:

1.  Our building department did 8700 building inspections in 2006, the last year of the building boom.  So far this year, they've done 1600.  But, do you think the city has laid off any inspectors?  Not on your life.  At least 3 of them need to be shown their walking papers, and one of the secretaries in the dept. can be let go.  Several phone lines can be discontinued, one copier lease can be terminated, etc., etc.

2.  The city police force can be disbanded, and the city can contract with the county sheriff, who has already said that he can provide dedicated deputies and dedicated cruisers to stay in our town, and provide exactly the same number of officers, cruisers, and man hours of coverage that the city police dept. provides and at a savings of $1.4 million per year.  The sheriff would hire the current city cops as deputies, and hire the current police chief as a chief deputy - no one loses a job, the citizens get the same protection, and we save a ton of money.  He would even take over our cruisers, re-paint them in sheriff colors, and use them.

3.  We stop providing all of the needlessly fancy recreational srevices like more city parks than you can imagine, walking and bike paths, etc. until revenues pick back up as the economy improves.  Just close and mothball them until we can afford to re-open them.  Take your walk on the sidewalk - what a novel idea, huh?

4.  Five years ago the city manager and the mayor did all of the city's financial stuff.  During the boom years, the city went nuts and hired a 6 figure per year finance director, and a $60,000 assistant finance director.  They both need to go, and make the city manager and mayor actually work again.

5.  Fire the 6 figure public information director.  I don't need him to tell me where the soon to be mothballed city parks are, or when the swimming pool opens next spring.  I can call and find out for myself.

This is just an example of how some creative thinking on the part of one councilman can avoid a tax increase and still provide necessary services, like police protection, while eliminating some idle emplyees and unneeded crap.

If your town is crying the blues over its financial condition, think it thru - maybe some of these ideas can serve your town too.