Health care is a CIVIL right - and thats why its a mandate

[yodoobo]

Health care is unique is that it is a civil right AND its an obligation.

Everyone is entitled to health care as civil right. Its a right that has only recently been recognized here, but has been recognized for a very long time in other countries.

But its also an obligation that WE ALL have to everyone else. Hence the mandate.

Here's the real deal.

When you REFUSE to buy health insurance, you reduce the funding pool for health care, hence YOU ARE DENY SOMEONE ELSE their civil right. It's as simple as that.

For those of you who say that you will REFUSE to buy health insurance..well you are no better than the tax dodgers who whine about taxes. You are denying other people their civil right to be cared for. And that is wrong.

Its a RIGHT. AND an obligation.

Thank you Congress. Thank you Mr. President.

[villager]

1. We certainly don't want to deny insurance companies their "right" to a vast profit!

How undemocratic of us!

[yodoobo]

12. I support taking the profit out of the system

The bill didn't do that and its certainly an area for improvement.

Nonethless. The only way we can have healthcare is if we ALL chip in.

Doctors won't work for free.

[Vincardog]

17. OK why don't we all chip into a UNIVERSAL SINGLE PAYER PLAN?

[aquamarina]

30. +1,000,000

[phantom power]

34. Your logic makes the puppy sad.

[RaleighNCDUer]

52. +++++++++++++++

[kenny blankenship]

60. That way ALL of the money would go to health care, and not to Gulfstream jets and caviar

and seventh vacation homes.

Let me think about this. Hmmm. Your plan sounds unAmerican. Where, for example, is the opportunity to put poor people in jail???

[Union Label]

156. Ok your post made me think of taxing the fuck out of the oxycontin pedofile

limpballs.:evilgrin:

[knixphan]

136. !

:toast:

[Bryn]

154. Excellent Idea!

I'd be more than happy to chip into a Universal Single Payer Plan. OP is wrong. This kind of bill feeds Insurance companies. They're nasty and are only interested in money.

[liberalhistorian]

40. "Certainly an area for improvement"

YA THINK???

As far as doctors go-don't get me started. They're more concerned with protecting their profits and protection from accountability for the consequences of their negligence than they are the welfare of their nation's citizens and patients. I lost my nearly lifelong best friend last winter to a horrible act of inexcusable medical negligence, and she suffered for months before finally succumbing.

[yodoobo]

62. Well we can have a bill that needs improvement.

or we can have nothing at all...and try again in 30 years.

[derby378]

92. Some of us don't have the luxury of waiting 30 years for a solution

This bill is practically equivalent to "nothing at all," and your original premise that it is both my right and duty to make the CEOs at Blue Cross, Humana, and UnitedHealthcare richer is looking thinner by the second.

[yodoobo]

95. If 5 CEO's earn a little more, but millions get healthcare

Thats a worthy tradeoff.

I'm not going to deny millions the care they need in order deny 5 people an extra boat.

[newspeak]

118. oh, you forgot the shareholders

gotta make wall street happy, too!!!! After all, it's the American way!!!!

[derby378]

119. Not to mention...

...the money those Big Insurance executives spend on those fancy boats will be withheld from the millions of Americans who need health care.

"It takes a village" is not in the Constitution. It is a proverb that probably originated in Kijita and a sentiment often used by Hillary Clinton, but it is not justification for robbing from the poor and giving to the rich.

[kestrel91316]

85. Yep. And I am 100% behind the complete removal of middlemen

aka "medical insurance companies" from the process. They are robbing the healthcare providers AND the healthcare recipients.

[uppityperson]

120. "Doctors won't work for free." Indeed. however, insurance co's are making the millions, NOT the docs

Make the money go to the providers and I'm happy. This doesn't happen though.

[emulatorloo]

25. House Health Bill Removes Insurer Anti-Trust Exemption, Taxes Health Industry

just for background information:


House Health Bill Removes Insurer Anti-Trust Exemption, Taxes Health Industry
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/10/29/details-house/

[Jamastiene]

2. Do you think with that mind? n/t

[derby378]

3. Just like the Second Amendment MANDATES that you own a gun

Or, for that matter, like the First Amendment demands that you be imprisoned if you don't vote.

[yodoobo]

9. Thats why its unique.

Where do you think the money is going to come from for healthcare?

Its going to come from you or I.

[emulatorloo]

23. "The bill is paid for surtax on the wealthy, changes to Medicare and Medicaid, and taxes on

the Insurance Industry"

House Health Bill Removes Insurer Anti-Trust Exemption, Taxes Health Industry
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/10/29/details-house/

[liberalhistorian]

43. I don't mind that at all.

What I mind is HOW it's done. Single-payer or medicare for all would be just fine, thank you.

[Donnachaidh]

4. CARE is FAR DIFFERENT than INSURANCE

And forcing people to buy insurance with NO price controls from private FOR PROFIT companies is NOT constitutional. And it does NOT fall under the label of a Civil Right. Corporate WELFARE yes, forcing the poorest of the country into slavery.

[Jamastiene]

22. "Corporate WELFARE yes, forcing the poorest of the country into slavery."

Absolutely. Forcing many of the poorest into homelessness and hunger too, possibly. What good does being forced to buy expensive health insurance do if it puts a person in the streets?

[aquamarina]

33. +100,000,000

[anigbrowl]

98. Agreed. Taxes for care I am fine with, a mandate for buying insurance I am not.

Current proposals basically amount to a forced subsidy for private industry. I don't think this is a workable model.

[phantom power]

5. That is an argument for HR676.

It's not an argument for mandating private insurance.

In my opinion.

We didn't build SS on top of private investment firms. And we didn't build Medicare on top of private insurance companies. But now the rest of us are going to receive our "right" by having to pay either our money or taxpayer money to private companies?

:shrug:

[kenny blankenship]

14. Well said.

[yodoobo]

18. I agree, but I respect our Presidents judgement on this

We aren't going to get a public option with the current Congress.

We can either take this and improve on it.

Or we can have nothing and take another shot in 20 or 30 years.

[AllentownJake]

21. I respect his judgement as a Primary candidate on this as well

When he said mandating insurance to solve health care is akin to mandating the homeless to buy a house to solve homelessness.

Some reason, I agreed with him more in 2008, than I do in 2009.

[phantom power]

27. I wonder if he (or Congress) understands how very dangerous this thing is...

Because if anybody in the future manages to tweak this system by weakening the consumer protections, it really does turn into a full-on private industry extortion racket, both funded and endorsed by the federal govt. And I think the last 30 years provide overwhelming examples of how easy it is for industry lobbies to weaken consumer protections. Congressmen are easy to buy.

Proceeding on the assumption that consumer services will get stronger, and protections stronger, flies in the face of my experience. It seems overly optimistic in the dangerous kind of way.

[AllentownJake]

41. Yes judging by the past 30 years of things moving in the opposite direction

the hopes that this will get fixed seem to me a little sunshine and rainbows thinking. In fact looking at recent legislation like HIPAA or SOX the move has been to take out the biggest consumer protection provisions at the behest of big business after passed.

[liberalhistorian]

45. Then there's a simple solution if that happens. We can

all simply refuse to comply with the ridiculous mandate.

[yodoobo]

72. The bill has sufficient safeguards that most everyone will comply

Just like we pay our taxes and obey speed limits.

yes there are few loud mouths now who say they won't chip in.

but they will.

[RaleighNCDUer]

54. If we get this we will STILL have to take another shot in 20 or 30 years -

because the overall system is NOT changed, it mandates profits to private insurers which are designed to profit by NOT giving good service.

What we will have is everyone being required to buy private insurance, while the insurance companies use those profits to pay expensive lawyers to find every little loophole in the legislation to keep them from doing what we are paying them to do.

fuck it. The world ends in 2012, so it's a moot point anyway.

[AllentownJake]

6. What a crock of shit

When you refuse to buy a product from private vampire insurance companies you are violating others civil rights? This is the silliest defense I've read yet.

[yodoobo]

24. When you refuse to PAY YOUR SHARE

yes you are denying care to someone else.

When you refuse to pay into the healthcare system, you are denying care to someone else.

Where do you think the money comes from to pay the Doctors and Nurses when they take care of your neighbor?

YOU and I.

[AllentownJake]

31. Pay my share to Blue Cross and Aetna

Tell me when did I get the power to vote on their behavior.

[liberalhistorian]

48. I have no problem at all paying my fair share into

a single payer or medicare-for-all system, none whatsoever. I already don't mind paying into medicare and having my tax dollars used for medicaid. Once again, it's HOW it's done that I mind.

[RaleighNCDUer]

58. The difference is, this is not paying into a healthcare system - it is

paying into a private health insurance system. I wouldn't mind paying to pay a bureaucrat's salary in a government health plan - i.e., medicare for all - but I'll be damned if I want to pay for some asshole to get his daughter a Lexus for her sweet 16 celebration. Where do you think 30% of ALL private insurance money goes?

[yodoobo]

68. No you'll pay

There are sufficient safeguards in the bill to prevent people who getting out of their duty.

I agree though, the profit needs to be taken out of the system.

We now have a building block on which to build AND which provides care for almost everyone in the meantime.

[RaleighNCDUer]

78. And how does a bill specificly designed to protect private profits move

us toward taking profits OUT of the system?

[yodoobo]

97. It doesn't

But it provides healthcare for most everyone.

Its FAR FAR more important to provide care for everyone, than it is to punish people who make profits.

Once this bill is signed by President, then we can begin to remove the profit from the system and build on our success.

It was either that, or million go without for a few more decades.

[Echo In Light]

73. Wha-what-whaaat?! Ya mean there's a *difference?*

:sarcasm:

[Donnachaidh]

134. when there is NO price controls, who decides what amount is FAIR?

The insurance companies.

As the parent of a child with a genetic disorder, I *know* we're going to be screwed by the companies that have REFUSED to cover us in the past.

Now if YOU want to subsidize my child's extra expenses - that's fine. But I'll be damned if I'm going to be forced to purchase some crappy insurance that probably won't give us good coverage, while forcing us to live at a poverty level.

Insurance is NOT *CARE*. And if you think this is a FAIR bill, you need to pull your ears out of your anus, and take a deep breath.... :eyes:

[John Q. Citizen]

7. I have to make Tom Daschle a millionaire? Ha ha ha you are funny.

[yodoobo]

15. Knock your own strawman down

I support taking the profit out of the system.

[RaleighNCDUer]

61. How do you take the profit out of the system when the system is designed

to support PRIVATE insurance companies?

[ipaint]

81. Mrs. Daschle just loves Reid.

Lobbyists including Tony Podesta of the Podesta Group, Paul DiNino of DiNino Associations, Linda Daschle, wife of ex-Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), and the political action committee for law firm DLA Piper raised a total of $100,100 for Reid, according to FEC reports.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/64655-healthcare-lobbyist-bundles-contributions-for-senate-dems



Linda Daschle, a former acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, mainly lobbies for aerospace and airline industry clients, but has worked for some health care-related firms in the past, Senate lobbying disclosure reports show.

She was one of a few Baker Donelson lobbyists on accounts for the pharmaceutical company Amgen Inc. and cigarette makers Lorillard Tobacco and Philip Morris Cos. in 1999.

Daschle has some health care related connections of his own: He serves on the boards of Prime BioSolutions and the Mayo Clinic, among others, and his law firm lobbies for a number of industry clients, including CVS Caremark, the National Association for Home Care and Hospice, Abbott Laboratories and HealthSouth. Daschle does not lobby himself, but his law firm has a lobbying arm.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/11/daschles_lobbyist_wife_might_c.html

Daschle, Obama's first pick to head up HHS.
Follow the money.

[joeybee12]

8. If there was a strong public optin, yes, include the mandate...

..but this is justa windfall for the insurance companies...you will be forced to buy expensive insurance, no guarantee of coverage...it's gaming the system in the ins co's favor.

[SammyWinstonJack]

20. Why is this SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND for some?

:shrug:

[joeybee12]

50. Beats me...the whole concept is very simple...n/t

[akwapez]

10. Your argument supports universal health care, not being forced to make a PURCHASE nt

[yodoobo]

29. of course you have to purchase it.

Did people REALLY believe that Congress was going to be the healthcare fairy and give it everyone for free?

Where would they money come from? Print it?

The only way we can have healthcare, is if everyone chips in.

Its no different than our roads and fire departments.

[Garbo 2004]

59. Typically fire departments & depts of transportation are public entities, not private corps.

That's the significant difference.

People aren't stupid and they know nothing is for free. Our taxes support public services such as fire departments.

But it's another matter to be required to pay a private profit motivated middleman corporation rather than paying to support a publicly run service. Which is why many people wanted and preferred a strong public option as an alternative to further enriching the same corporations that have been the obstacles to universal health care.

[yodoobo]

74. public would have been better

But it would have been impossible to pass.

It was either fail and try again in 30 years.

Or pass this and work on improving it next year.

[RaleighNCDUer]

65. Roads and fire departments are paid for by TAXES, and are not for-profit

institutions. I don't send money to the fire department on a monthly basis to ensure that they will come to my place if it catches fire, with the knowledge that if I don't send them money they aren't going to come. THAT would be the accurate analogy.

Your argument is an argument for SINGLE PAYER. Which this legislation is NOT.

[akwapez]

66. It is different. Those are paid for with taxes and not to support private business

[derby378]

11. In addition, I realize that you're still new here...

...but you've come to the right place. Here you'll get a better view of the big picture.

[walldude]

13. Yes we know Cigna's take on all this why do you need to repeat it?

[yodoobo]

19. This is my take on it.

Congress isn't going to hand out ponys to everyone.

If we want universal healthcare, we have to pay for it. ALL OF US.

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. Where is the universal healthcare option? Oh that's right, it's off the table.

[walldude]

105. I didn't ask for a fucking pony... And your "take" is the same as

any insurance company. I asked not to be fucked over by corporate shills. Oops too bad. I and my family mean nothing to these people. So I'm telling them to fuck off same as they are telling me. So take your "DU pony" talking point and shove it up your ass.

[yodoobo]

108. If you don't want to be part of the process that's fine

[walldude]

109. LMAO.. I am the fucking process.

My family hasn't had insurance in 9 years. I am exactly the person this bill is supposed to help. By the time it gets beaten down by the senate there will be nothing but "pre-existing conditions" coverage and mandates to purchase health care. Which would be fine if I didn't have to buy my mandated coverage from a company that has no real regulation and can charge whatever they want and raise my rates 25% per year.

Are you going to still tell me how great the new bill is once the Senate guts it?

Democrats have no fucking idea how to bargin or debate. You don't fucking compromise your position before you even start, you start with the position you want then work back from there. This bill should have started with single payer then got rammed through with a decent public option. Instead we have a half assed sort of public option that will get destroyed before the bill passes.

[yodoobo]

110. We'll see what happens in the Senate

I agree they could have done better. But this is a good start.

[Romulox]

16. Private profits are not a civil right. nt

[Ozymanithrax]

28. Are you relating that right back to Ammendment IX

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

I have yet to see that right written into law or as part of a SCOTUS decision.

[yodoobo]

35. Are you seriously going to argue its NOT a civil right?

Common sense tells us that it is.

[Ozymanithrax]

42. No, I am merely asking from where in the Constitution do we derive that right.

It is not an enumerated right. Health Care is not mentioned in the Constitution.

We are able to enjoy and protect those rights granted us in some way from the constitution. Abortion, for instance, is based on a constitutional right to privacy emanating from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, also known as substantive due process.

From what part of the Constitution do we derive a right to Health Care. In order to defend that conclusion under law, we must be able to state the source of that right.

[liberalhistorian]

91. Health CARE is a civil right. Mandating profits to

private companies with no guarantee that they will provide the necessary services, and with NO penalties for said private companies but plenty of penalties for US even if we don't get the services we're paying for, most certainly is NOT a civil right. And it is not the way to go.

[slackmaster]

36. The right to health care exists. I don't believe anyone is questioning that.

The issue is about the scope and extent of an entitlement to receive it at public expense.

[Ozymanithrax]

47. How do we defend the right to Health Care in a court.

The rigths we have must all stem from the Constitution. It is not an enumerated right, therefore where do we gain that right in our system.

I am not saying that Health Care Should not be a right. I just wan to know where people derive that right so it could be defended in a court of law.

[slackmaster]

57. All rights, whether enumerated or not, pre-date the Constitution

The Ninth Amendment makes that clear. Any right that is being denied by something other than due process is being infringed.

[yodoobo]

70. I'll leave that to the lawyers.

But for our purposes its a civil right.

[MattNC]

32. If you're going to cover pre-existing condtions

you need a mandate. Otherwise, people will only buy insurance when they're sick and then drop it again.

[yodoobo]

55. exactly. then the whole system collapses

And NOBODY gets any healthcare.

Then, only the fabulously wealthy will get healthcare.

[ipaint]

86. Baloney.

The insurance industry didn't always operate like this. THEY changed the rules not americans. THEY abused the system not americans. When they provided a fair service for a reasonable price no one gamed the system.

The insurance companies decided to get greedy, not americans.

Quit with the toxic corp speak.

[Lex]

37. Health "Care" is not Health "Insurance." nt

[liberalhistorian]

38. What a crock of horseshit. Yes, I agree that health care

is a civil right for all and most assuredly not a privilege. And I fully agree that it is the responsibility of all of us to ensure that we're all given access to quality health care when we need it, without worry of financial ruin and without regard to economic status. Etc., etc., etc.

HOWEVER. For-profit health insurance companies ARE THE FUCKING PROBLEM with health care in this country. They are the PROBLEM and not the SOLUTION. Health INSURANCE is not health CARE. They are two entirely separate things. Having coverage does NOT guarantee care, not by a long shot. They can still deny or delay coverage and they can still pay so little of a claim as to make it meaningless. They can still have such high deductibles that you never actually get to make a claim. They can still charge horrendous premiums if you have or have had any major conditions, and the government, not you, decides how much of a premium you can afford. In short, you're still punished for being sick or injured. You still have to deal with the possibility of financial ruin and losing everything due to an illness or injury.

And, most important, it does little to nothing to hold insurance companies responsible for THEIR egregious actions, but only punishes people who may not be able to afford the damned "required" premiums in the first place. This is nothing more than a huge giveaway to the for-profit insurance companies and goes in the totally opposite direction from where reform needed to go. It's like attempting to solve the homeless problem by requiring the homeless to buy a house. Ridiculous.

Fuck this mandate and the Congress it rode in on.

[Shagbark Hickory]

39. I always though this was a lame argument and I don't agree with it.

I'm for nationalized state-run healthcare. No more "insurance."
I'll just put that out there.

But I don't believe healthcare is a right and saying it's a right is like kicking an anthill full of republican, libertardian, and independent swing voting ants. And it's not persuasive.

I think it would be more effective to explain why health services currently aren't equally accessible.

As it is, 80% of high school seniors don't know about who pays for health expenses and they don't know about insurance or what it costs.

They don't teach you in high school that you need to work for medium to large corporation with a group plan with low deductible payments or else you go broke. They don't teach you in high school that these plans cost employers over $500 per employee, per month.

In fact most older adults have no clue what their employers pay for their health plan and they don't consider that they may one day find themselves without a job due to an illness that is no fault of their own.

[Generic Other]

44. Same as we buy insurance to drive from private companies

I also would like mandatory payments out of the hands of the private corps, but I also want coverage. I am willing to compromise to get some of my urgent needs met. I need to know that if I hurt someone in an accident that someone else will help me cover the costs.

Same with health care insurance. I too want the government to spring for the costs, but I also want the security of not being denied for pre-existing conditions, of having an affordable plan, of seeing 95% coverage. If compromise with bloodsucking vultures is the only way I can get it, I will compromise rather than lose it all for another twenty years. Pyrric victories aren't worth the price. We all get burnt.

[AllentownJake]

49. That really is a false argument from a legal point of view.

The state licenses the privelage to drive cars. You have to take a test for that privelage and you have to meet minimum requirements to keep that privelage.

Are we licensing births in this country now?

[RaleighNCDUer]

75. False analogy. At any given time you can choose to not drive.

I've never heard of anyone who, having an attack of appendicitis, CHOSE to not have appendicitis.

That means that auto insurance companies are faced with having to compete with one another for clients. Health insurance companies, knowing they have mandated purchase which no one can opt out of, can price fix all they want.

Without a strong public option that holds premiums down, it is nothing but a giveaway to the insurance companies with NO guarantee that they will honor their end of it when you need to cash in.

[The2ndWheel]

46. It's a mandate because if you let people freely choose whether or not

they want to be part of a given system, they may not choose to be part of it.

[Desertrose]

51. Bullshit. I am not going to be guilted into buying insurance.

We can afford bombs, planes and WMD. We can afford to bailout f'ing WALLSTREET but we cannot afford to take care of the people in this country by providing HEALTH CARE. Not health insurance but health CARE?

And you have the guts to call people who either choose not to or cannot afford to buy private insurance- that is only about profit and NOT really about CARE, whiners and tax dodgers? Holy shit.


Something very wrong with this picture.

(Good job tho Corporate America)

[Libertas1776]

53. +1000

[yodoobo]

56. nothing to do with guilt. Its OBLIGATION

You have an obligation to take care of your neighbor.

"Its takes a village" is more than just a cool slogan.

[Hannah Bell]

100. but not to take care of aetna (founded by jp morgan's grandpa).

1/3 of healthcare $ go into private pockets.

if they want to mandate purchase they can damn well put a ceiling on profits like they do in france.

bullshit on the pretense that this represents some brothers-keeper scheme. it's a rentier arrangement funneling guaranteed income to financial corps.

[optimator]

63. I refuse to buy private insurance

and I disagree with your premise of any obligation.
I'll gladly pay more in taxes for pooling of resources for health CARE, not private insurance.
You can send me to prison, thats fine.
I won't ever accept tyranny of corporations.

[yodoobo]

79. No I'm sure that you'll chip in

The bill has plenty of safeguards to prevent people from doing their fairshare.

When it comes down to it, 99.9% of the people will go ahead and pay into it and support their neighbor, rather than deal with the IRS. The other .1% will be a curiosity in some of the papers occasionally.

[derby378]

93. So when your argument fails, you turn to veiled threats instead?

You're not helping yourself one bit...

[yodoobo]

94. No more so than if you said you won't pay your taxes

There are those among us who refuse to pay taxes.

And we read about them in the paper occasionally and its rarely a happy story.

I have no sympathy for those who avoid their obligations though.

[Sinti]

64. Health care may be a requirement for life

but so is food and heat in the winter time, you don't have a right to those.

This is the United States, those are not the sort of rights given to you in the Constitution. At this moment in history, if no one sees fit to give you a job for long enough you might have the right to die in the street. More often they'll force you to move on, or wash you away with high pressure hoses.

[yodoobo]

84. That's not the America that I live in.

[Sinti]

89. You must be very young

very naive, very sheltered and/or extremely wealthy not to be aware of this fact.

[yodoobo]

103. food,heat and shelter are ALL civil rights

that are frequently violated.

[Sinti]

106. I can get behind that.

We've got a big boulder to push up hill before we can get everyone else behind it. :)

[ZombieHorde]

67. Then why are we putting our civil rights into the hands of private corporations?

Why is abortion excluded if HC is a civil right?

[yodoobo]

76. abortions are performed by private company's today everyday

Yet only the right wing complains.


To answer your question though. Abortion was excluded because it was politically expedite.

It would have been impossible to pass without the exclusion.

Shitty deal, but thats what it was.

[Xenotime]

69. Healthcare is already a right given by the constitution.

[yodoobo]

71. exactly. And now this bill provides a method of providing it

It seems that many many people thought that Congress was going to pass the "healthcare fairy act" and make a law that requires a healthcare fairy to come around to everyone and give them magically free healthcare.

No. This bill simply passes the requirement that we all chip in and take care of each other.

"It takes a village" is more than just a feel good slogan.

[RaleighNCDUer]

77. What this bill requires is that we chip in to help the health insurance industry.

GIVE ME A FUCKING PUBLIC OPTION. THAT I will not object to paying for.

[yodoobo]

82. Its does and I want to see that changed

In the meantime, this is a HUGE step forward.

Look, I can deal with a few people making a few extra dollars, if it means that most everyone gets healthcare.

I'm not going to sentence millions to death, just to smite a handful of insurance executives.

[ipaint]

88. Well your going to need a team of fairies for that fantasy.

I believe wall street is counting on billions of "extra dollars" that's out of your pocket and mine.

How do people get so naive.

[kdmorris]

80. Health CARE may be a CIVIL right

But health insurance is not. nor is it an obligation.

Until Health Insurance is not-for-profit, it's not right to force everyone in the country to buy into an already corrupt and bloated system.

[yodoobo]

87. Then upon WHO is it an obligation if not YOU?

The "other guy" right?

[kdmorris]

90. Your response doesn't make any damned sense

It may be my obligation to pay taxes to provide HEALTH CARE. It is NOT my obligation to pay a health insurance company to MAYBE provide health care to my fellow Americans.

Or maybe NOT. Depends on if it interferes with the health INSURANCE profit margins. They sure as shit don't care if you live or die. Only if they make money. It is not "the other guy" who has an obligation to make health INSURANCE companies rich, either, in my opinion.

You are saying that it's our duty as Americans to continue to make health INSURANCE companies rich because that's what Congress said we should do. And I strongly disagree with you.

[yodoobo]

96. You don't have to understand. But I'll give you answer

its your responsibility and your obligation.

I don't understand why everyone thought we were all getting a free healthcare pony.

[derby378]

116. "You don't have to understand" - WTF?

War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength?

You can smugly talk about ponies all you want, but we're Americans here - we're tired of secrecy and obfuscation, especially after the Bush years. We want health insurance reform that works, and the House plan does not. I understand that plainly enough.

[kdmorris]

146. You know, you can keep saying everyone thought we were getting a pony

or a health fairy bill. But that's really just your attempt to keep talking when you don't know what you are talking about.

In a civilized country, it is everyone's responsibility and obligation, in my opinion, to provide for each other and help others along. This bill and it's mandate does not do that.

Have you ever even been in the position of needing to choose between buying insurance and feeding your children?

How the hell can you sit there and act like you care when you are basically adding one more level of pain to the existence of the working poor. I was once in this situation. I had three young daughters, an ex-husband who refused to pay child support and a job for $25,000 a year. And my health insurance (for me only) was $240 every two weeks out of my $700 pay check. I couldn't afford to pay for that insurance and still feed my children and pay my rent, so I did without.

There is nothing in this bill that helps people who are still in that situation. There's all kinds of "mandate this" in there, but the company I worked for at the time would have been completely in compliance with this bill (they offered insurance, after all). The only person hurt in that situation are people who cannot afford to pay for health insurance.

NO one is looking for a pony or a fairy (and it's pretty damned insulting for you to keep saying that). What we wanted was TRUE reform. Reform that helped everyone, including people like that single mother trying to feed her kids.

I'm not hurt by this bill. I have relatively decent health insurance right now and I've used that to translate into good health CARE. And I make enough money now to pay for it all.

I still contend that it is YOUR responsibility and YOUR obligation to actually fight for equality for everyone, for health CARE for everyone, not sit here and insult us all with this nonsense about how every one has health care now. They don't. And it sucks for those people who are going to be hurt by this. It's going to create an entire "underclass" of people who will no longer get health CARE because they will be fined for not having health INSURANCE.

[yodoobo]

153. This is reform

But we have further to go.

Too many seem to think this is the last healthcare bill that will ever be considered.

its not. its a building block.

we can scrap this building block and wait another 20 years and try again.

Or we can pass this HUGE step forward and add another building block next year.


One thing is for sure.

We are NOT going to sacrifice healthcare for millions, because we are afraid a few people in the industry might earn a few extra dollars.

I'm really shocked at the how people here are behaving.

But I am thankful that Obama is behind this bill and will be signing it once it leaves the Senate.

I stand with Obama and the Democratic party on this. Where are you?

[librechik]

83. In the same way we provide a lawyer to those accused who can't afford one

we should also supply healthcare to those who can't afford it.

IUt's the same sort of thing Americans have done for generations without real controversy (altho of course the right wing thinks it's a waste of taxpayer money, I'm sure.)

Healthcare, like education, clean water and air, and access (of all sorts) Must be seen as a legal right, not a privilege, and soon. Our society is sick and needs to heal.

[HamdenRice]

99. Health care is NOT a right. It's not in the Constitution and no SCOTUS decision has ever so held

Please show the provision in the Constitution that says health care is a right.

(You can't.)

That doesn't mean universal health care is a bad idea -- only that it is a legislative policy preference, not a right.

It may be a right under some state constitutions, like New York's, which are more expansive with economic and welfare rights, but I'm not even sure that's true.

Comparative law distinguishes between negative rights and positive rights. Our constitution consists almost entirely of negative rights (the govt can't do X to you). Positive rights are "the govt must do X for you," and generally, our legal system doesn't hand out many positive rights.

Other countries do, like South Africa. But even there, the Courts have held that positive rights can only be enforced to the extent that the Court requires their "progressive realization," not immediate implementation.

[yodoobo]

102. take that argument somewhere else

nobody buys that one.

Its a civil right and that is that.

[HamdenRice]

104. Because you say so? I could say 1 pink cadillac per person is a right and that is that

It would be nice if it were, and it is in some countries, but it is not a right in this country.

Do you have any credible source to support your claim?

[yodoobo]

107. No.Because it is.

We're not here to argue this fact, nor am I a constitutional attorney.

If it becomes necessary, the lawyers will argue it in court.

In the meantime, we continue with the prevailing Democratic view.

[HamdenRice]

112. Well, I went to law school. I also practiced international human rights.

There are countries where it's a right and there are countries where it isn't.

We're in the latter category.

[RaleighNCDUer]

101. If I may ask, what is the 'raison d'etre' (sp?) of a health insurance company? nt

[kenny blankenship]

111. To pay out less to docs and hospitals than it collects from the marks?

And, preferably, to make sure the suckers can't get to the docs and hospitals without paying them for access.

Like any would be monopoly, there's nothing that could aid them more in this scheme than the hairy arm of the law. They're so close now. Guaranteed profits forever! They have what racketeers have always wanted and needed, real partnership with a friendly government.

[RaleighNCDUer]

113. You got it. Some naive posters seem to believe that the insurance companies

are actually there to help patients, when they are really only there to help themselves. They have no interest in health, other than in the health of their stockholders' investments.

[yodoobo]

114. all for profit companies are there to make a profit

we use road building companies all the time to build our roads.

Just because they make a buck doesn't mean that can be directed to do a public good.

[RaleighNCDUer]

117. That's just the point. Road building companies BUILD ROADS.

That's how they make a profit.

Health insurance companies DENY HEALTH COVERAGE. That's how THEY make a profit.

Did the director of Medicare make $400 million last year?

[yodoobo]

121. No. they make money by getting $tate and Federal contract$

And then building the road as cheaply as possibly and pocketing the difference.

I don't think we disagree that private companies are only out to make a buck.

I'm just saying that if we all get healthcare, I don't care if a somebody makes a buck - for now.

Its certainly far better than waiting another generation with nothing.

[kenny blankenship]

123. And these construction companies contribute SOMETHING OF VALUE to the system

The insurance companies contribute NOTHING of value to the health care system. They don't invent new drugs or procedures. They don't perform surgeries. They don't set broken bones or hand out lollies. They don't empty bedpans. Their role is TICKET-TAKER. GATEKEEPER. They control access to the system and contribute NOTHING to it. We don't need them for anything.

The fact that someone is taking up space and "has always been there" does not signify that they are performing useful work or fulfilling a useful function. Orderlies who empty bedpans or custodians who push vacuum cleaners down hospital corridors are performing a useful function. They may be doing "menial" tasks, and they aren't paid well, but they are more essential to the health care system than insurers.

The 30% that insurers siphon off from the health care system is PURE WASTE. Using the govt. as enforcer to collect that profit for them is a crime. Money taken by force from citizens and stuffed into the pockets of insurers is money that is NOT spent on health, it is money that gets TAKEN AWAY from preventing death, treating illness, researching new drugs and procedures, and doing preventive care.

[tkmorris]

147. Beautifully summed up

Yours is an argument for which there is no refutation possible. Insurance companies are an obstacle to health care, not a facilitator of it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

125. BUT WE WON'T ALL GET HEALTHCARE!

How the fuck do you not get that? We get private health insurance, which means that we pay out the ass to buy a fucking CEO's private jet while his company finds every possible reason to DENY any claim against the insurance. You know, for some companies it is SOP to DENY ALL CLAIMS when first presented, in the hope that the claimant will not pursue it. And with mandated insurance, the person does not get to pick and choose - he can ONLY get the options offed by his employer. There are NO controls that bring costs down.

It IS worse than nothing.

You are aware, aren't you, that 80% of medical bankruptcies are of people who have insurance? If they are unemployed, uninsured, they are covered by the government for the most part. It is the insured who are getting fucked, and this allows MORE insured to get fucked.

Health insurance is not healthcare. Health insurance is, often as not, an impediment to healthcare. And people on BOTH ends of the equation - health insurance providers, and those fucked by the health insurance providers - KNOW it. The only people confused on the issue are people who haven't had it happen to them.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

115. Oh, I thought it was mandated because Big Insurance threatened to kill a kitten for each $ they lost

It's not a civil right in this country. To say that it is shows you've no real understanding of what a civil right actually is.

I'll give you a clue, Social Security is not a civil right, but freedom of speech is. I'll give you another clue since I'm feeling generous today, housing is not a civil right, but freedom of religion is.

[yodoobo]

122. It's a civil right EVERYWHERE

But some countries don't completely recognize it yet.

Ours just made a big step forward in recognizing this universal truth.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

126. No, it's not.

You're argument confuses social responsibility and civil rights. The two are not the same.

If it were a civil right then SCOTUS would be the entity presiding over this matter and not Congress. In the United States there is no provision in the constitution regarding health care. For it to become an enforceable civil right would require a constitutional amendment. That's not what this legislation at any point was attempting to do.

[yodoobo]

130. I'm shocked that so many on DU are advocating against this being a civil right

Its no wonder healthcare has been such a struggle when the right is totally against it, and many of the left are as well.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

132. Yet I'm not surprised to see you attempting a dramatic twist to frame your argument

If health care in the United States is a civil right then explain why this is not being presided over by the SCOTUS?

Again, you keep confusing a Constitutional right with social responsibility. Which makes the rest of your OP baseless.

[yodoobo]

133. scotus presides on what is brought to them.

and then further on what they pick and choose.


Look at how many years the gun issue was discussed in consitutional terms before the court presided over the Heller case.

How many years was abortion a hot topic before ROE V Wade?

I would hardly argue that scotus won't get involved in this.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

137. Alright, then point out where in The Constitution of the United States

It says citizens of the United States have a right to health care. Remember, this is your assertion, not mine.

I'll be waiting.

[yodoobo]

143. Alright, then point out where in The Constitution of the United States

It says citizens of the United States have a right to an abortion.


Hint: its the exact same place!

Not everything is spelled out in black and white.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

145. Show me where in Roe v Wade it says that?

It doesn't. The decision was based on the Fourteenth Amendment and a constitutional right to privacy.

I'm still waiting.

[yodoobo]

151. It was a combination of 9th and 14th

In any event, the constitution evolves.

[earth mom]

124. Do you pay for your other civil rights? HELL NO!!! This OP is a total fucking joke!!!

Your logic is so fucking ridiculous it's hard to believe that you even posted it!!! :wtf:

[yodoobo]

128. What quality of care do you expect if doctors and nurses are not paid?

Unless you want candy strippers performing your colonoscopy, I support paying medical professionals.

[earth mom]

131. Now you've gone off the deep end completely! Who the fuck ever said doctors won't get paid?

:wtf:

Put down the Hope & Change Kool Aid and THINK about what you are saying.

And FYI-even Doctors are against this shit "reform".

[yodoobo]

135. Your the one that is troubled by paying for healthcare

Look at your own post!

yes some doctors are against it. Some are for it. Doctors are not a borg mind.

[derby378]

139. She's troubled by being forced to pay for INSURANCE, not HEALTHCARE

She has a big moral problem with rewarding private corporations for bad behavior.

WAKE UP.

[earth mom]

140. Thank you! That's it-plus I object to the middle class being burdened with yet another ball & chain

that will be ever more expensive with each passing year.

It's like we've all been served a prison sentence and some people are fine with it because it selfishly serves their own agenda or purpose.

[earth mom]

141. That doctors are against it should give you a clue. Watch the movie Sicko & then get back to me. nt

[newspeak]

127. actually if FDR had his second bill of rights for the people

what you say would have been true. However, he died, so that dream wasn't realized. Of course, if that had happened, I'm sure he wouldn't have sold us out to a rapacious insurance industry.

[yodoobo]

129. Rights are not dependent on the paper they are written on

They exist.

The paper just indicates whether we as a society have risen to recognize those rights.

[derby378]

138. Let me clue you in on the nature of "rights"

In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson spoke about "inalienable rights," among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

You do not have to pay anyone to breathe air, drink water, or pick an apple off of a tree and eat it. Your right to life does not come with a price tag.

You do not have to buy the ability to travel or speak freely - you're born with a mouth, arms, and legs. You have the right to liberty, no surcharge necessary.

And if I wish to pursue happiness by finding a hill, stretching myself on the green grass, and letting the sun warm my face as I watch the clouds drift by, there's no fee for that, either.

These rights exist. BUT...

What you're trying to tell us, apparently, is that Big Insurance has a right to pick the pockets of working-class Americans to fatten the wallets of CEOs while women's health care is curtailed and the rest of us are given nebulous promises that our health insurance will improve "someday." This "right" does not exist, and no amount of smug henhouse bitchiness will bring such a "right" into existence.

[JVS]

150. +1

:yourock:

[Geek_Girl]

142. I think your partly right. But using a mandate to prop up a corrupt industry is immoral!

nt

[yodoobo]

144. IMO, the next step is to nationalize that industry

But we need to take things one step at a time.

[Hepburn]

148. And a FUCK YOU to Barf Stupak ... n/t

[anonymous171]

149. Health care is a right. Health Care insurance is not.

Forcing people to buy from private companies is fascism.

[mmonk]

152. Rights do not entail payment at risk of punitive action.

They are given or granted.

[Political Heretic]

155. All your talk would be fine if we had a single payer system. Ordering people to fund Big Insurance

That's something entirely different.