*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Yes indeed that was a truly dumb statement. However, one person's dumb statement does not make socialism good.
Oh I agree. I was not saying it was. You should know better.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Yes indeed that was a truly dumb statement. However, one person's dumb statement does not make socialism good.
Oh I agree. I was not saying it was. You should know better.
ooooh sorry, I know that! I was merely agreeing with you and taking it one step further my friend!
I am seeing the lefties trying to use Ms. Palin's foolish statements as a basis from which to argue. just headin' 'em off at the pass, as it were
Here's some footage of a journalist getting mobbed at one of these town hall meetings in Texas. My condolences to his family.
LoL !
We must set up a support group for this man and his family. The abuse he took here was out of line and these townhall meetings must be stopped.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. Samuel Adams
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
:P or atleast from here on the sidelines it would appear as such.
You mean evil wins (assuming taking from people by force without their consent is evil). Sorry, there is no reason behind socialism at all. Just the desire to loot from one's neighbor, and the desire to control the lives of one's neighbor, all in the name of a political theory.
Originally posted by Sabiancym Reading the bill is important.
I've read quite a chunk of it - hence why I disagree with Palin's ridiculous remark. However, your quote from Obama is exactly what is frightening.
I have a little something called keratoconus.
Let's say my blue pill is riboflavin drops with UV treatment (currently not approved in the US - going under FDA approval) and my red pill is corneal transplants.
The blue pill in this case will work to an extent. My corneal degeneration may slow progression and may even slightly heal giving me somewhat better vision (without my glasses right now, my vision is 20/400 - with my glasses I can see fair). However, my red pill, a bit more costly, will give me roughly 90% better vision than I have now whereas the blue pill may give me approximately 30-45% better vision.
Which do you think I will be approved for under a government plan? The blue.
And, don't just copy and paste chunks of the bill. How about adding the ridiculous requirements for private carriers that will be impossible to meet unless they operate at a loss. Or those who are grand-fathered in under a private plan, if their company changes one little item on their current coverage how they must meet the guidelines as the public option. Or how Obama is allowing unions to be exempt from public coverage. Or the requirement for abortion coverage.
There is quite a bit of nastiness in that bill.
And, just a humorous side note, I find it quite interesting Obama is using the blue pill as good and the red as bad. He's trying to put a subliminal message in there.
You totally ignored that inefficient part she wrote didn't you. And you conveniently ignored the by force part too.
Now, how is someone coming and taking our money by force to put it into an inefficient system helping our community again? How is it that you contend it is the best method?
Nothing twisted, you read it wrong.
I address what I like as you do in posts. Sometimes I prefer to type less and don't address things which don't need addressing.
No one is "coming and taking your money by force". You've been paying taxes every year I assume and not working under the table. This just puts where the tax money goes in a different place from where it was before. The politicians all claim they aren't going to vote for it unless its fully funded and not deficited. You aren't getting "robbed", lol. You money is and always was there in Washington, so I'm not sure what you don't understand about that.
I explained it already in my other post how it helps "your" community. Cheaper drugs for taxpayers, instead of them having to break the law and smuggle them in now and OTHER countries getting the money from that sale, not the U.S. If a citizen buys an inhaler from Mexico, guess who's government gets that money? Right, NOT the U.S. lol. The government can buy in bulk but it can't do it now, because there's no healthcare.
Local and state hospitals don't have to send bills to insurance companies for UNINSURED people who need ACLs or cancer treatment. The insurance companies then don't raise the rates on policy holders to make up the difference, like they do right now, lol. Hospitals stay solvent because the government guarantees payment and doctors don't have to worry about huge malpractice suits.
Your local citizenry is now healthier instead of spreading Swine Flu to you at the diner because they are sick, but can't afford that doctor visit for "just a flu". Or whatever else super illness comes along. Now they just go to the doctor and get treated.
This allows you to now only help people in your small town, but in every small town in the U.S. through buying power.
WHAT?
The government doesn't come and take my money by force? Then how do they take it? If I don't feel like paying anymore, then what the hell do you think they're going to do?
Let's say I decided that my church would use the money I would normally have taken in taxes in a better and more efficient way, so I gave that money to my church instead. Do you think the government is going to understand my point of view and not demand that money? And if I tell them I already gave at the church leave me alone, then what do you think is going to happen?
The people who want to take away the freedom of others for some socalist dream are the callous ones. If you believe peole should be helped, get to work. You have no right to impose your will on others. The force of the government is not the answer, love is.
You're back to that soapbox nonsense again, and not debating the issue. Back on BLOCK you go.
That's a soapbox more people need to get on. So I'll listen to him anytime.
You're not on my BLOCK Fishermage, keep up the good work!
I don't agree with everything Fishermage says, but are you seriously going to argue that the government doesn't use force to do what it wants? Did you know that paying taxes is voluntary? It's only voluntary until the IRS sends in it's armed enforcement team.. well technically it's still voluntary even then, but good luck choosing that route.
aero, taxes are NOT voluntary. It's the law that everyone has to pay them. It's in the tax code.
It's not technically at all. Roads have to be built, schools have to be built, police have to be paid for and so does the military.
If it were left up to people to "volunteer" taxes in a CAPITALISTIC counrty, China would have been in Montana yesterday.
Please don't go off on this tangent. You know taxes must be paid.
Actually that's a fallacious argument. Our country survived quite well for a long time without taxes. It survived and thrived. It grew out of control and prospered like never before.
there are plenty of ways to raise revenue other than taxation. And there are plenty of programs that could be cut to lower the cost of our government to function.
You should expand your mind sometime. Here is an excellent organization that you might find intriguing.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
WHAT? The government doesn't come and take my money by force? Then how do they take it? If I don't feel like paying anymore, then what the hell do you think they're going to do?
Let's say I decided that my church would use the money I would normally have taken in taxes in a better and more efficient way, so I gave that money to my church instead. Do you think the government is going to understand my point of view and not demand that money? And if I tell them I already gave at the church leave me alone, then what do you think is going to happen?
Do you remember this year after your boss sent you those things in the mail called W-2s? You probably sent them off to an accountant and then after the government determined if you paid your fair share of taxes, they sent you a refund. Or if you claimed no deductions and your boss did his job right, then you owed nothing and received nothing. There was no force involved at all.
You can pay your fair share of taxes and with the rest of your money, you can still tithe to your church like millions of other Americans. There is nothing stopping you from doing that.
In fact, if you DO choose to do that you get a tax write off for the donation, so you actually pay LESS in taxes. That is a stellar idea, porg. But it is not ultimately up to you to decide WHERE the tax money goes. That's for the politicians you elect when you participate in the voting process. Everyone knows that.
If you say "you already gave at the church, leave me alone", you'll end up like Wesley Snipes and rightfully so for tax evasion because it's the law. Citizens are not allowed to "pick and choose" which laws they will adhere to.
If this sounds like bad news, I'm sure you can go to any other country of your choice and never have to pay one dime in taxes like they do in.. ummm... errr.. hmmm. I guess every civilized country in the world has it's citizens pay taxes. Looks like your stuck as well.
If Blade has to pay taxes on the millions he's made, you certainly have to pay taxes on what your boss paid you.
Originally posted by porgie Originally posted by popinjay
Originally posted by aeroplane22
I don't agree with everything Fishermage says, but are you seriously going to argue that the government doesn't use force to do what it wants? Did you know that paying taxes is voluntary? It's only voluntary until the IRS sends in it's armed enforcement team.. well technically it's still voluntary even then, but good luck choosing that route.
aero, taxes are NOT voluntary. It's the law that everyone has to pay them. It's in the tax code.
It's not technically at all. Roads have to be built, schools have to be built, police have to be paid for and so does the military.
If it were left up to people to "volunteer" taxes in a CAPITALISTIC counrty, China would have been in Montana yesterday.
Please don't go off on this tangent. You know taxes must be paid.
Actually that's a fallacious argument. Our country survived quite well for a long time without taxes. It survived and thrived. It grew out of control and prospered like never before. there are plenty of ways to raise revenue other than taxation. And there are plenty of programs that could be cut to lower the cost of our government to function. You should expand your mind sometime. Here is an excellent organization that you might find intriguing. CATO. ORG
Not really. This is not "a long time". This is the 21st century and things cost real money, not Monopoly money.
I don't think if the government allowed porgie and his gentleman friends to voluntarily pay taxes that they would. He's already been QQing in the other thread about paying taxes. The military is a huge fiscal nut that's financed through citizen taxes. I'm sorry that's a new discovery but it's true.
There's no magical "Army Fairie" that comes down and makes all the tanks for free. There's no "Airplane Trees" that farmers grow. Bombs aren't made in a kitchen (unless you are a townyeller or tyranny nut supremacist or something) Someone in the real world has to pay for those weapons. I don't think the corporations who evade taxes illegal are going to voluntarily pay, and General Dynamics doesn't usually give away stealth bombers for free or run "Buy one JDAM, get one JDAM FREE!" offers. It's their job in life to rip the government OFF of money in contract extortion, not to voluntarily give them some.
Taxpayers pay that. That's me. That's you. Freedom ISN'T free as your hero says in these forums.
I think it was time you learned what that actually meant. Sorry to shock you but China and Russia would have long taken over the U.S. with your attitude and tightwad pursestrings. Hell, I'd hate to see what a porgie solution to Al Qaeda would have been for our troops against IEDs.
:P or atleast from here on the sidelines it would appear as such.
You mean evil wins (assuming taking from people by force without their consent is evil). Sorry, there is no reason behind socialism at all. Just the desire to loot from one's neighbor, and the desire to control the lives of one's neighbor, all in the name of a political theory.
Oh yea, cause that's even worth arguing with... lol
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
So being forced to pay taxes is immoral to you? You'd rather have no taxes at every level? We'll see how long that works.
Or is it only immoral when the tax money doesn't go to where you want it to?
Originally posted by popinjay In fact, if you DO choose to do that you get a tax write off for the donation, so you actually pay LESS in taxes.
If you say "you already gave at the church, leave me alone", you'll end up like Wesley Snipes and rightfully so for tax evasion because it's the law.
Now, imagine this little scenario (yes, unrealistic scenario).
Everyone claims high enough exemptions where there is essentially little or no taxes taken out of their paycheck. This would mean at the end of the year everyone would owe a very large chunk of taxes.
However, throughout the year, instead of saving this tax money, every individual donates these funds to charity essentially reducing their tax liability to zero. The government gets no tax revenues. What then?
Also, you have never, ever responded to what your problem is with the Fair Tax. You say it is unfair. How?
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
So being forced to pay taxes is immoral to you? You'd rather have no taxes at every level? We'll see how long that works.
Or is it only immoral when the tax money doesn't go to where you want it to?
Government by its very nature, is always at least a little bit evil, since it begins and ends with force. This is why our Founders regarded it at best as a Necessary evil. They felt that if you are going to have a government, since it is in essence evil, it should be used as little as possible, and should only be used to protect people from other people who would use force on them.
I agree with that sentiment. I know, you do not, and would hand us over for a free loaf of bread.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
So being forced to pay taxes is immoral to you? You'd rather have no taxes at every level? We'll see how long that works.
Or is it only immoral when the tax money doesn't go to where you want it to?
Government by its very nature, is always at least a little bit evil, since it begins and ends with force. This is why our Founders regarded it at best as a Necessary evil. They felt that if you are going to have a government, since it is in essence evil, it should be used as little as possible, and should only be used to protect people from other people who would use force on them.
I agree with that sentiment. I know, you do not, and would hand us over for a free loaf of bread.
So explain how that answers my question. You said being forced to pay taxes for health care is immoral and then you backed it up as government being necessary only to protect people from other people.
So are you suggesting that the taxes you pay for road construction and various other infrastructure are immoral and you would rather not have to pay them?
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
We are "just doing it". Your logic makes zero sense when it comes to the whole evil and immoral thing, and attempting to draw lines with what should be publicly funded and what shouldn't.
I doubt you police the streets or purchase your neighbors guns. You'd find me quite erroneous if I were to call you evil or immoral for forcing my tax dollars to pay for police when I rather arm crips and bloods with pawn shop weapons, but boy, that'd be so Godly, moral, free and liberty-like.
Anyway, that's why you can't be taken seriously. The whole liberty agenda sounds good until lines start to be drawn by the semantics obsessed completely devoid of any other logic. For those that consider health care a perfectly reasonable and basic human right that should be protected under that whole "life" clause often associated with liberty and purposes of our government, doing anything but is evil and immoral.
I believe our government should protect the lives of its citizens where it should and can. It's unfortunate that you believe different. Liberty will triumph over the evil you unfortunately desire.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
I do care for people. I care for the people who will benefit from my share of the total taxes going the programs they fund. That's why I'm speaking out against YOUR immorality. And for someone you claims to a man of God, you have a sense of morality that I think God himself would find very peculiar. That's why I pay my taxes without complaining about it. I know that my taxes are going to services that help my fellow countrymen. I consider it my civic DUTY to pay my taxes. As Justice Oliver Wendell Homles, jr. said, "Taxes Are What We Pay for a Civilized Society" And I will perform my duty without complaint to keep our society civilized.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
I do care for people. I care for the people who will benefit from my share of the total taxes going the programs they fund. That's why I'm speaking out against YOUR immorality. And for someone you claims to a man of God, you have a sense of morality that I think God himself would find very peculiar. That's why I pay my taxes without complaining about it. I know that my taxes are going to services that help my fellow countrymen. I consider it my civic DUTY to pay my taxes. As Justice Oliver Wendell Homles, jr. said, "Taxes Are What We Pay for a Civilized Society" And I will perform my duty without complaint to keep our society civilized.
Yes taxes are what we pay for a civilized society. It is uncivilized t use the force of government to rib from one group of people and give it to another group of people. It is called stealing, also known as armed robbery, and is uncivilized behavior. Just because a government does it does not make it civilized.
Please, show me where in the BIble does it say that anyone has the right to take anyone else's money by force and give it to another person.
God tells us to go out and care for the people OURSELVES -- and Christian, Jews, and Muslims (others too) have been doing so all along.
He does not say we may elect people to force other people do do such thngs for us. If you believe in helping others, do so, That is no reason to use the gun of the state to force others to do so as well.
*If you say death panels, prepare to be proven wrong.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
We are "just doing it". Your logic makes zero sense when it comes to the whole evil and immoral thing, and attempting to draw lines with what should be publicly funded and what shouldn't.
I doubt you police the streets or purchase your neighbors guns. You'd find me quite erroneous if I were to call you evil or immoral for forcing my tax dollars to pay for police when I rather arm crips and bloods with pawn shop weapons, but boy, that'd be so Godly, moral, free and liberty-like.
Anyway, that's why you can't be taken seriously. The whole liberty agenda sounds good until lines start to be drawn by the semantics obsessed completely devoid of any other logic. For those that consider health care a perfectly reasonable and basic human right that should be protected under that whole "life" clause often associated with liberty and purposes of our government, doing anything but is evil and immoral.
I believe our government should protect the lives of its citizens where it should and can. It's unfortunate that you believe different. Liberty will triumph over the evil you unfortunately desire.
Nothing you say justifies armed robbery and the transfer of wealth enforced by the state. We are not protecting the lives of the citizens when we force people to pay for one another's care. We are committing armed robbery in the name of a social theory.
My human rights are things that MUST be defended by force, and involved orevnting people from hurting one another. Your notion of rights requires using force to take from one another. That invalidated the whole notion of rights. It is a self-refuting principle.
Comments
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Yes indeed that was a truly dumb statement. However, one person's dumb statement does not make socialism good.
Oh I agree. I was not saying it was. You should know better.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Yes indeed that was a truly dumb statement. However, one person's dumb statement does not make socialism good.
Oh I agree. I was not saying it was. You should know better.
ooooh sorry, I know that! I was merely agreeing with you and taking it one step further my friend!
I am seeing the lefties trying to use Ms. Palin's foolish statements as a basis from which to argue. just headin' 'em off at the pass, as it were
fishermage.blogspot.com
LoL !
LoL !
We must set up a support group for this man and his family. The abuse he took here was out of line and these townhall meetings must be stopped.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
The Official God FAQ
Point, set, match.
Logic wins. Victory Sabiancym...
:P or atleast from here on the sidelines it would appear as such.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Point, set, match.
Logic wins. Victory Sabiancym...
:P or atleast from here on the sidelines it would appear as such.
You mean evil wins (assuming taking from people by force without their consent is evil). Sorry, there is no reason behind socialism at all. Just the desire to loot from one's neighbor, and the desire to control the lives of one's neighbor, all in the name of a political theory.
fishermage.blogspot.com
I've read quite a chunk of it - hence why I disagree with Palin's ridiculous remark. However, your quote from Obama is exactly what is frightening.
I have a little something called keratoconus.
Let's say my blue pill is riboflavin drops with UV treatment (currently not approved in the US - going under FDA approval) and my red pill is corneal transplants.
The blue pill in this case will work to an extent. My corneal degeneration may slow progression and may even slightly heal giving me somewhat better vision (without my glasses right now, my vision is 20/400 - with my glasses I can see fair). However, my red pill, a bit more costly, will give me roughly 90% better vision than I have now whereas the blue pill may give me approximately 30-45% better vision.
Which do you think I will be approved for under a government plan? The blue.
And, don't just copy and paste chunks of the bill. How about adding the ridiculous requirements for private carriers that will be impossible to meet unless they operate at a loss. Or those who are grand-fathered in under a private plan, if their company changes one little item on their current coverage how they must meet the guidelines as the public option. Or how Obama is allowing unions to be exempt from public coverage. Or the requirement for abortion coverage.
There is quite a bit of nastiness in that bill.
And, just a humorous side note, I find it quite interesting Obama is using the blue pill as good and the red as bad. He's trying to put a subliminal message in there.
Nothing twisted, you read it wrong.
I address what I like as you do in posts. Sometimes I prefer to type less and don't address things which don't need addressing.
No one is "coming and taking your money by force". You've been paying taxes every year I assume and not working under the table. This just puts where the tax money goes in a different place from where it was before. The politicians all claim they aren't going to vote for it unless its fully funded and not deficited. You aren't getting "robbed", lol. You money is and always was there in Washington, so I'm not sure what you don't understand about that.
I explained it already in my other post how it helps "your" community. Cheaper drugs for taxpayers, instead of them having to break the law and smuggle them in now and OTHER countries getting the money from that sale, not the U.S. If a citizen buys an inhaler from Mexico, guess who's government gets that money? Right, NOT the U.S. lol. The government can buy in bulk but it can't do it now, because there's no healthcare.
Local and state hospitals don't have to send bills to insurance companies for UNINSURED people who need ACLs or cancer treatment. The insurance companies then don't raise the rates on policy holders to make up the difference, like they do right now, lol. Hospitals stay solvent because the government guarantees payment and doctors don't have to worry about huge malpractice suits.
Your local citizenry is now healthier instead of spreading Swine Flu to you at the diner because they are sick, but can't afford that doctor visit for "just a flu". Or whatever else super illness comes along. Now they just go to the doctor and get treated.
This allows you to now only help people in your small town, but in every small town in the U.S. through buying power.
WHAT?
The government doesn't come and take my money by force? Then how do they take it? If I don't feel like paying anymore, then what the hell do you think they're going to do?
Let's say I decided that my church would use the money I would normally have taken in taxes in a better and more efficient way, so I gave that money to my church instead. Do you think the government is going to understand my point of view and not demand that money? And if I tell them I already gave at the church leave me alone, then what do you think is going to happen?
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
You're back to that soapbox nonsense again, and not debating the issue. Back on BLOCK you go.
That's a soapbox more people need to get on. So I'll listen to him anytime.
You're not on my BLOCK Fishermage, keep up the good work!
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
aero, taxes are NOT voluntary. It's the law that everyone has to pay them. It's in the tax code.
It's not technically at all. Roads have to be built, schools have to be built, police have to be paid for and so does the military.
If it were left up to people to "volunteer" taxes in a CAPITALISTIC counrty, China would have been in Montana yesterday.
Please don't go off on this tangent. You know taxes must be paid.
Actually that's a fallacious argument. Our country survived quite well for a long time without taxes. It survived and thrived. It grew out of control and prospered like never before.
there are plenty of ways to raise revenue other than taxation. And there are plenty of programs that could be cut to lower the cost of our government to function.
You should expand your mind sometime. Here is an excellent organization that you might find intriguing.
CATO. ORG
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
Do you remember this year after your boss sent you those things in the mail called W-2s? You probably sent them off to an accountant and then after the government determined if you paid your fair share of taxes, they sent you a refund. Or if you claimed no deductions and your boss did his job right, then you owed nothing and received nothing. There was no force involved at all.
You can pay your fair share of taxes and with the rest of your money, you can still tithe to your church like millions of other Americans. There is nothing stopping you from doing that.
In fact, if you DO choose to do that you get a tax write off for the donation, so you actually pay LESS in taxes. That is a stellar idea, porg. But it is not ultimately up to you to decide WHERE the tax money goes. That's for the politicians you elect when you participate in the voting process. Everyone knows that.
If you say "you already gave at the church, leave me alone", you'll end up like Wesley Snipes and rightfully so for tax evasion because it's the law. Citizens are not allowed to "pick and choose" which laws they will adhere to.
If this sounds like bad news, I'm sure you can go to any other country of your choice and never have to pay one dime in taxes like they do in.. ummm... errr.. hmmm. I guess every civilized country in the world has it's citizens pay taxes. Looks like your stuck as well.
If Blade has to pay taxes on the millions he's made, you certainly have to pay taxes on what your boss paid you.
"TO MICHAEL!"
aero, taxes are NOT voluntary. It's the law that everyone has to pay them. It's in the tax code.
It's not technically at all. Roads have to be built, schools have to be built, police have to be paid for and so does the military.
If it were left up to people to "volunteer" taxes in a CAPITALISTIC counrty, China would have been in Montana yesterday.
Please don't go off on this tangent. You know taxes must be paid.
Actually that's a fallacious argument. Our country survived quite well for a long time without taxes. It survived and thrived. It grew out of control and prospered like never before.
there are plenty of ways to raise revenue other than taxation. And there are plenty of programs that could be cut to lower the cost of our government to function.
You should expand your mind sometime. Here is an excellent organization that you might find intriguing.
CATO. ORG
Not really. This is not "a long time". This is the 21st century and things cost real money, not Monopoly money.
I don't think if the government allowed porgie and his gentleman friends to voluntarily pay taxes that they would. He's already been QQing in the other thread about paying taxes. The military is a huge fiscal nut that's financed through citizen taxes. I'm sorry that's a new discovery but it's true.
There's no magical "Army Fairie" that comes down and makes all the tanks for free. There's no "Airplane Trees" that farmers grow. Bombs aren't made in a kitchen (unless you are a townyeller or tyranny nut supremacist or something) Someone in the real world has to pay for those weapons. I don't think the corporations who evade taxes illegal are going to voluntarily pay, and General Dynamics doesn't usually give away stealth bombers for free or run "Buy one JDAM, get one JDAM FREE!" offers. It's their job in life to rip the government OFF of money in contract extortion, not to voluntarily give them some.
Taxpayers pay that. That's me. That's you. Freedom ISN'T free as your hero says in these forums.
I think it was time you learned what that actually meant. Sorry to shock you but China and Russia would have long taken over the U.S. with your attitude and tightwad pursestrings. Hell, I'd hate to see what a porgie solution to Al Qaeda would have been for our troops against IEDs.
Probably paper clips and rubber bands.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Point, set, match.
Logic wins. Victory Sabiancym...
:P or atleast from here on the sidelines it would appear as such.
You mean evil wins (assuming taking from people by force without their consent is evil). Sorry, there is no reason behind socialism at all. Just the desire to loot from one's neighbor, and the desire to control the lives of one's neighbor, all in the name of a political theory.
Oh yea, cause that's even worth arguing with... lol
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
fishermage.blogspot.com
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
So being forced to pay taxes is immoral to you? You'd rather have no taxes at every level? We'll see how long that works.
Or is it only immoral when the tax money doesn't go to where you want it to?
The Official God FAQ
Now, imagine this little scenario (yes, unrealistic scenario).
Everyone claims high enough exemptions where there is essentially little or no taxes taken out of their paycheck. This would mean at the end of the year everyone would owe a very large chunk of taxes.
However, throughout the year, instead of saving this tax money, every individual donates these funds to charity essentially reducing their tax liability to zero. The government gets no tax revenues. What then?
Also, you have never, ever responded to what your problem is with the Fair Tax. You say it is unfair. How?
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
So being forced to pay taxes is immoral to you? You'd rather have no taxes at every level? We'll see how long that works.
Or is it only immoral when the tax money doesn't go to where you want it to?
Government by its very nature, is always at least a little bit evil, since it begins and ends with force. This is why our Founders regarded it at best as a Necessary evil. They felt that if you are going to have a government, since it is in essence evil, it should be used as little as possible, and should only be used to protect people from other people who would use force on them.
I agree with that sentiment. I know, you do not, and would hand us over for a free loaf of bread.
fishermage.blogspot.com
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
So being forced to pay taxes is immoral to you? You'd rather have no taxes at every level? We'll see how long that works.
Or is it only immoral when the tax money doesn't go to where you want it to?
Government by its very nature, is always at least a little bit evil, since it begins and ends with force. This is why our Founders regarded it at best as a Necessary evil. They felt that if you are going to have a government, since it is in essence evil, it should be used as little as possible, and should only be used to protect people from other people who would use force on them.
I agree with that sentiment. I know, you do not, and would hand us over for a free loaf of bread.
So explain how that answers my question. You said being forced to pay taxes for health care is immoral and then you backed it up as government being necessary only to protect people from other people.
So are you suggesting that the taxes you pay for road construction and various other infrastructure are immoral and you would rather not have to pay them?
The Official God FAQ
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
We are "just doing it". Your logic makes zero sense when it comes to the whole evil and immoral thing, and attempting to draw lines with what should be publicly funded and what shouldn't.
I doubt you police the streets or purchase your neighbors guns. You'd find me quite erroneous if I were to call you evil or immoral for forcing my tax dollars to pay for police when I rather arm crips and bloods with pawn shop weapons, but boy, that'd be so Godly, moral, free and liberty-like.
Anyway, that's why you can't be taken seriously. The whole liberty agenda sounds good until lines start to be drawn by the semantics obsessed completely devoid of any other logic. For those that consider health care a perfectly reasonable and basic human right that should be protected under that whole "life" clause often associated with liberty and purposes of our government, doing anything but is evil and immoral.
I believe our government should protect the lives of its citizens where it should and can. It's unfortunate that you believe different. Liberty will triumph over the evil you unfortunately desire.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
I do care for people. I care for the people who will benefit from my share of the total taxes going the programs they fund. That's why I'm speaking out against YOUR immorality. And for someone you claims to a man of God, you have a sense of morality that I think God himself would find very peculiar. That's why I pay my taxes without complaining about it. I know that my taxes are going to services that help my fellow countrymen. I consider it my civic DUTY to pay my taxes. As Justice Oliver Wendell Homles, jr. said, "Taxes Are What We Pay for a Civilized Society" And I will perform my duty without complaint to keep our society civilized.
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
I do care for people. I care for the people who will benefit from my share of the total taxes going the programs they fund. That's why I'm speaking out against YOUR immorality. And for someone you claims to a man of God, you have a sense of morality that I think God himself would find very peculiar. That's why I pay my taxes without complaining about it. I know that my taxes are going to services that help my fellow countrymen. I consider it my civic DUTY to pay my taxes. As Justice Oliver Wendell Homles, jr. said, "Taxes Are What We Pay for a Civilized Society" And I will perform my duty without complaint to keep our society civilized.
Yes taxes are what we pay for a civilized society. It is uncivilized t use the force of government to rib from one group of people and give it to another group of people. It is called stealing, also known as armed robbery, and is uncivilized behavior. Just because a government does it does not make it civilized.
Please, show me where in the BIble does it say that anyone has the right to take anyone else's money by force and give it to another person.
God tells us to go out and care for the people OURSELVES -- and Christian, Jews, and Muslims (others too) have been doing so all along.
He does not say we may elect people to force other people do do such thngs for us. If you believe in helping others, do so, That is no reason to use the gun of the state to force others to do so as well.
fishermage.blogspot.com
There are no death panels and Palin's idiotic comment screwed the pooch on that issue.
There is, however, the formation of a medical advisory panel which determines if certain treatments are cost effective or not - yes, that is in the bill.
I fear for that personally because I will need corneal transplants within 10 years and my private insurance does cover such a procedure; however, if the advisory panel deems that it is not cost effective for me to receive that treatment, then I will be rejected for the transplant.
And no, it will not be a choice to keep my private insurance. Many companies will go out of business because they will be forced to operate at a loss.
Edit: And I would like to squash the whole right to medical care argument. There is no where in the Constitution that guarantees, or even hints at, the right to medical care.
The president used this example
"If there'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 that's going to make you well"
That's what they are talking about when they say cost effectiveness. They aren't going to deny you a surgery when it's the better way to fix something.
It's on page 30 of the bill. Direct lines from the bill will be in red
IN GENERAL.—There is established a private-public advisory committee which shall be apanel of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced, and premium plans.
Exactly as you said. It goes on to say who's on the committee. Surgeon general, appointed officials, etc.
PARTICIPATION.—The membership of the Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least reflect providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in healthcare financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with disabilities, representatives of relevant governmental agencies. and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system so that no single sector unduly influences the recommendations of such Committee.
People from every walk of life.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND13
ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and Human Services benefit standards), and periodic updates to such standards. In developing such recommendations, the Committee shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce health disparities.
Hmm nothing about cost in there. Only innovations and reducing health disparities.
(3PUBLIC INPUT.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall allow for public input as a part of developing recommendations under this subsection.
Public has a say in the recommendations.
And what are the standard benefits that this committee will look over?
SEC. 122. ESSENTIAL BENEFITS PACKAGE DEFINED.
22 (a) IN GENERAL.—In this division, the term ‘‘essential benefits package’’ means health benefits coverage,consistent with standards adopted under section 124 to ensure the provision of quality health care and financial security, that—provides payment for the items and services described in subsection (b) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical or other appropriate clinical or professional practice;
(2) limits cost-sharing for such covered health
care items and services in accordance with such ben
efit standards, consistent with subsection (c);
(3) does not impose any annual or lifetime limit on the coverage of covered health care items and services;
(4) complies with section 115(a) (relating to network adequacy); and
(5) is equivalent, as certified by Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, to the average prevailing employer-sponsored coverage.
(b) MINIMUM SERVICES TO BE COVERED.—The
20 items and services described in this subsection are the fol21
lowing:
(1) Hospitalization.
(2) Outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, including emergency department services.
(3) Professional services of physicians and otherhealth professionals.
(4) Such services, equipment, and supplies incident to the services of a physician’s or a health professional’s delivery of care in institutional settings,physician offices, patients’ homes or place of residence, or other settings, as appropriate.
(5) Prescription drugs.
(6) Rehabilitative and habilitative services.
(7) Mental health and substance use disorderservices.
(8) Preventive services, including those services recommended with a grade of A or B by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and those vaccines recommended for use by the Director of theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.
(9) Maternity care.
(10) Well baby and well child care and oral health, vision, and hearing services, equipment, andsupplies at least for children under 21 years of age.
Blue is important. Everything under the sun. No limits, and is at least equivalent to private health care provided by employers now.
Reading the bill is important.
It's a pain in the ass to copy and paste though.
However, since it is all taken from people by force, it is immoral.
What a cop out! Immoral is not having healthcare for all citizens of the US. Especially those who can't afford private insurance. It's an abosute SIN that the richest and most powerful nation on the planet will not.....not can not but WILL NOT provide health care for all it's citizens. THAT is the very definition of immoral!
If you really cared about people, you would simply pay for it yourself. No, you want to force others to do it. That is immoral. If you really care, just DO IT.
We are "just doing it". Your logic makes zero sense when it comes to the whole evil and immoral thing, and attempting to draw lines with what should be publicly funded and what shouldn't.
I doubt you police the streets or purchase your neighbors guns. You'd find me quite erroneous if I were to call you evil or immoral for forcing my tax dollars to pay for police when I rather arm crips and bloods with pawn shop weapons, but boy, that'd be so Godly, moral, free and liberty-like.
Anyway, that's why you can't be taken seriously. The whole liberty agenda sounds good until lines start to be drawn by the semantics obsessed completely devoid of any other logic. For those that consider health care a perfectly reasonable and basic human right that should be protected under that whole "life" clause often associated with liberty and purposes of our government, doing anything but is evil and immoral.
I believe our government should protect the lives of its citizens where it should and can. It's unfortunate that you believe different. Liberty will triumph over the evil you unfortunately desire.
Nothing you say justifies armed robbery and the transfer of wealth enforced by the state. We are not protecting the lives of the citizens when we force people to pay for one another's care. We are committing armed robbery in the name of a social theory.
My human rights are things that MUST be defended by force, and involved orevnting people from hurting one another. Your notion of rights requires using force to take from one another. That invalidated the whole notion of rights. It is a self-refuting principle.
fishermage.blogspot.com