Health Care Ruling:

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Health Care Ruling:
79
Sat, 08-13-2011 - 4:11pm

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Sun, 08-14-2011 - 6:18am

Too bad private insurance companies are in the health care mix IMO.

>"One of the heartening aspects of Friday’s ruling, as with the 6th Circuit decision, was the ideologically mixed nature of the majority and dissent. In Friday’s majority were a George H.W. Bush appointee, Joel Dubina, and a Clinton appointee, Frank Hull; the dissenter, Judge Marcus, was elevated to the appeals court by Bill Clinton but originally named to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan. Likewise, joining the 6th Circuit majority to uphold the mandate was Jeffrey Sutton, a George W. Bush appointee and a former law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia, a prominent advocate of state’s rights. The notion that a judge’s political pedigree predetermines his or her conclusion on the individual mandate is disturbing. To the extent that these cases disprove that idea, they are a welcome development, whatever the final outcome"<

Segment from....... Health care and the Constitution

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/health-care-and-the-constitution/2011/08/12/gIQAat8mBJ_story.html

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Sun, 08-14-2011 - 8:28am

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Sun, 08-14-2011 - 4:31pm
Personally, I feel anyone who has children should be required to provide health insurance for the kids up to age 18 (or longer if they wish). If the adults don't want it, then they should also be required to pay their medical bills - no free rides (not referring to those who truly cannot afford to purchase insurance).

 nwtreehugger  

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Tue, 08-16-2011 - 8:49am

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-12-2011
Tue, 08-16-2011 - 1:16pm

If you objectively look at what works best you wouldn't be supporting Obamacare.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-12-2011
Tue, 08-16-2011 - 1:19pm

How do you determine who can and cannot afford health insurance?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Tue, 08-16-2011 - 4:13pm

I am no fan of the Affordable Health Care Act but make no mistake, "rationing" already exists in private insurance. There are limits on coverage for just about everybody. The line about rationing is nothing more than fearmongering.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Tue, 08-16-2011 - 4:24pm

Really? Got a link to the part of the bill which states that "some government goon come in and say 'you're spending too much on food'...'or you don't really need that car, take a bus'..."sell that TV, health insurance is more of a priority"?

At the time of debate over health care reform, there was a massive amount of disinformation and lying, most of which was intended to scare the bejiggers out of people who could not or would not bother to ascertain facts from the bill itself. Loads of alarmist spin about "death books" (go ahead, make my day by asking about that claim because a WSJ op-ed rant turned out to be pure jealousy) and "death panels", blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Is this any different?

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Wed, 08-17-2011 - 10:14am

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Wed, 08-17-2011 - 10:34am

Your right Tom, those stats do not prove that universal health care would change anything. We looked at this in a class I took last semester, the fact is those stats are developed with a heavy leaning on a bias for universal health care. The other fact is that countries do not report infant mortality in a consistent manner. The US has the most comprehensive reporting and reports more deaths than other countries. The fact that the US has a violence problem that contributes to the life expectancy rate is also ignored, as well as other factors. Obesity is also a factor.

Pages