Jenkins talks health care in Topeka
U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Topeka, took time Wednesday to listen to concerns from area residents about health care issues. The Topeka stop was the first in Jenkins' listening tour. Enlarge video
Jenkins discusses health care
U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Topeka, conducted a forum at the Holiday Day Inn Holidome in Topeka where she discussed health care reform. Enlarge video
U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Topeka, listens to Paul Degener of Topeka at a meeting on health care Wednesday at the Holiday Inn-Holidome. Degener was saying the federal government should not be involved in health care. More than 200 people attended the meeting. Jenkins' district includes west Lawrence.
Jerry Aller of Hiawatha makes a statement Wednesday at U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins’ town hall meeting on health care Wednesday in Topeka.
Topeka — More than 200 people on Wednesday packed into a town hall meeting on health care, with most of them having none of Democratic congressional plans aimed at expanding coverage and reducing costs.
U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Topeka, conducted the forum at the Holiday Day Inn Holidome, saying Democratic proposals would destroy the best health care system in the world.
“The bottom line is simple: A plan that drastically expands government will even further bankrupt our country and saddle our kids and grandkids with more and more debt,” she said.
She said the proposal would result in 114 million Americans losing the insurance they currently receive through their employers. President Barack Obama has denied this allegation and said he wants a plan to extend coverage to 47 million Americans who have no insurance and reins in the skyrocketing cost of health care.
Jenkins also said she was concerned that Democratic proposals would reduce care to the elderly and provide federal funding of abortions — allegations that supporters of various plans in Congress say are falsehoods.
Jenkins invited to speak representatives of doctors and hospitals, who criticized Obama’s initiatives, and said health care reform should include provisions to make it tougher for patients to sue doctors and hospitals.
Only Dennis George, chief executive officer of Coffey County Hospital, urged cooperation.
He said that when Jenkins returns to Washington, D.C., she should try to reach out to a Democrat and try to forge a compromise.
But many of the people asking questions were vehemently opposed to the Democratic Party and the health care initiatives, saying they amounted to a government intrusion into their private lives.
Jerry Aller of Hiawatha said Obama’s proposal to have a government public option insurance plan to compete with private insurance was like “the umpire being the pitcher.”
Paul Degener of Topeka waved a booklet copy of the U.S. Constitution and said the Constitution said nothing about guaranteeing health care.
But Richard Mason of Topeka, who identified himself as a Democrat, said government is needed to build roads and schools and defend the nation.
“There are times when we do need the government in our lives,” Mason said. He said people feel “pretty small” when insurance companies refuse to pay for care and force people into bankruptcy.
There were no shout downs as has occurred in other town hall meetings across the nation.
Jenkins said Kansans are more respectful.
“Some folks have just let their passion boil over on occasion, but I understand that this is an emotional issue,” she said.
When asked if so-called “death panels” were in the bill before the House, she said, “Not that I’m aware of but I’ve not been invited to the speaker’s office yet to talk about the bill.”
Some Republicans, most notably ex-Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, have claimed the bill will set up panels that will decide whether the elderly should receive care. Democrats deny this allegation and say the bill includes an option that will pay for people to plan end-of-life matters.
Jenkins also said she hasn’t read the entire bill -- H.R. 3200 -- but that her staff has.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
sunny (anonymous) says…
You go girl! Thanks for fighting for us!
jimmyjms (anonymous) says…
Tom Shewmon, where are you?
bd (anonymous) says…
Our whole political system is a joke!
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
I am glad the crowd was polite. We need to have a good 'fight' over this issue, but should talk about the realities, not the fantasies dreamed up by the extreme left and right wings of the parties.
Boston_Corbett (anonymous) says…
Sounds like the Americans For Prosperity bus got there in time.
KansasVoter (anonymous) says…
Lynn is a coward and no good for Kansas. She should have scheduled at least half of these forums after work hours or on the weekend. She knew that if she scheduled all of them during the workday she would only have fellow right wingnuts at them all.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Why in the hell is the health care industry buying and why are legislators selling out?
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/...
Opposition thinkers and the insurance industry are taking americans for fools!
Go to : http://www.healthcare-now.org/hr-676/
Senate Report Finds Insurers Wrongfully Charged Consumers Billions
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
Paying More Getting Less
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
Here are 10 great reasons to support HR 676, the U.S. National Health Insurance Act: http://guaranteedhealthcare4all.org/s...
HR 676 can save $350,000,000
http://www.healthcare-now.org/campaig...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-v...
5 common fears about health reform
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/ma...
Leading Cause Of Bankruptcy
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04...
Opposition thinkers and the insurance industry are taking americans for fools!
Former Lawmakers and Congressional Staffers Hired to Lobby. The hirings are part of a record-breaking influence campaign by the health-care industry, which is spending more than $1.4 million a day on anti insurance reform lobbying.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
http://www.commoncause.org/site/apps/...
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/...
“In front of me I have a document from my employer that shows their cost for insurance.
Medical, Dental and Vision for the year 2010 my employer will pay $15,450. I will pay another $2,860 out of my pay check. $18,310 a year for insurance is ludicrous, and we wonder why so many companies are having massive layoffs. It is a real travesty that nothing is going to happen in the near future on health care.”
Go to : http://www.healthcare-now.org/hr-676/
sunny (anonymous) says…
No thanks merrill I dont read your left wing nutty stuff.
kansasvoter, how is she a coward and no good for kansas.
Most republican/conservatives like her!
merrill (anonymous) says…
What I consider a crime and unamerican is that the health insurance/healthcare industry
is spending these dollars without seeking the permission of their clients and stockholders.
Consumers/clients and stockholders are losing and will be billed in 2010 for the cost of this misinformation campaign by way of increased premiums and co-pays and or less coverage. Supporting this campaign is simply not very smart.
Health care Insurance activity against reform has a budget of at least $100,000,000(million) health care dollars according to mainstream news. The money would be funneled/laundered through a primary coordinator known as the Chamber of Commerce.
The Chamber of Commerce is supporting no reform thus increasing the cost to consumers and increasing the cost of doing business.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/0...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathie-...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
merrill (anonymous) says…
The insurance/health care industry is spending $1.4 million health care dollars a day on a misinformation campaign.
That same $1.4 million health care dollars a day would purchase full coverage 24/7 New Medicare Insurance for 519 families each day of this campaign.
So what would the new Medicare For ALL Insurance offer to THE USA?
*365 days a year
*24/7
*employed or not
*moving on to a new job or not
*single mom or not
*struck down with cancer or not
A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 in payroll tax for all health care costs. About $225 per month. Today the below insurance coverage actually costs about $1,100 per month.
* long term care such that cancer would require
* prescription drugs
* hospital
* surgical
* outpatient services
* primary and preventive care
* emergency services
* dental
* mental health
* home health
* physical therapy
* rehabilitation (including for substance abuse)
* vision care
* hearing services including hearing aids
* chiropractic
* durable medical equipment
* palliative care
HR 676 ends deductibles and co-payments. If a deductible and/or co-pay policy is in effect this usually indicates under-insured.
HR 676 would save hundreds of billions annually by eliminating the high overhead of the private health insurance industry and HMOs. The privatized medical insurance industry is anything but efficient.
HR 676 contains costs and saves about $350,000,000,000 annually. But special interest politicians don't want to talk about HR 676. So they present bills that will increase the cost. Why? Special interest campaign funding(the industry) is writing those bills.... foxes in the chicken coop!
Changing nothing certainly will save nothing ever!
Senate Report Finds Insurers Wrongfully Charged Consumers Billions = big time corruption
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
(BTW where are the refunds?)
Godot (anonymous) says…
Merrill lies again.
"Long term care such as cancer requires" is not part of health insurance, long term care insurance is a totally separate insurance policy.
So are dental and vision care.
And HR3200 does not propose to cover "long term care" or dental or vision.
In Kansas, rehabilitation for substance abuse and mental health care benefits are restricted by statute. Your government decided how much you should be able to recieve for these treatments.
The ignorance being spouted by the Merrills of the world is mind numbing.
puddleglum (anonymous) says…
the health care bill being proposed is generalized coverage-not "Your government decided how much you should be able to recieve for these treatments. "
I appreciate merrill's post and links
I also appreciate godot's point of view,
but I do not agree with it often.
So what is Lynn gonna do? just sit on her hands and yell "my hands hurt" and vote against the bill, or is she willing to make some attempt to interject her own philosophy on how to fix our broken health care system...
my guess is the former.
it sounds like there are actually some people out there that enjoy paying for health insurance, and (obviously) haven't had to make a claim yet...
I guess their perspective will change eventually.
BigDog (anonymous) says…
I guess the previous headline wasn't getting Scott the results and attention he desired.
Republicans aren't disagreeing with Democrats .... they are disagreeing with the policies/proposals being pushed by some Democrats.
Just for the record Scott ,,,, there are Democrats who don't support the health reform legislation that the President and his minions are pushing.
Jimo (anonymous) says…
Let me just say upfront that I don't agree with any of the versions of the bill because they go too far to involve government in the business of insurance and because they fail to make any material limitation on the out-of-control increase in medical costs. Still, passage of these bills wouldn't come close to the nightmare of (yet more) 'socialized' medicine in this country (let along the reign of the Antichrist!).
That said, Jenkins' claim that our health care system is the 'best in the world' is objectively false, indeed, such a giant self-congratulating fib that it is outrageous that LJW would print this claim without a correcting comment. By NO measure is our system the best. Add on the additional whoppers being put forward and I am only left to wonder why some people seem to believe that they become credible sources of information by telling over the top (easily disprovable) falsehoods.
Jenkins needs to introduce her own legislation to address matters. Until then, she offers nothing more than "no, no, no, no!" Kansans have a right to expect construction efforts from their representatives. Lead, follow, or get out of the way, Lynn.
mitchell09 (anonymous) says…
"Jenkins also said she hasn’t read the entire bill -- H.R. 3200 -- but that her staff has." Super. Way to do your job.
srj (anonymous) says…
We had the Republican Party dead and buried until the health card debate.
And Mitchell09, nobody reads all the bills.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
The linkbot has woken. Fear his mad copy/paste skillz!
puddleglum (anonymous) says…
snapbot is awake!
good contribution.
I would never throw out heckling one-liners like you....
well
maybe
i
would.
tolawdjk (anonymous) says…
Yep, nobody reads all the bills.
However, I would like to think that a bill as sweeping as this would invoke somekind of primal "I better wake up and do my job" response and result in the bill getting read. You don't have to run from every lion, just the ones chasing you.
While it is my personal opinion that this bill isn't the answer, I have still yet to see a proposal from the otherside of the aisle. It is obvious to everyone that a change from the status quo is needed...too many people are falling through the cracks, falling out of coverage through no fault other than that they finally -need- the coverage.
Health insurance right now isn't insurance, its snake oil.
Months ago, it was stated that the republican party was the party of no. Frankly, there is no time like the present to prove to the populous otherwise. The most the leadership can seem to put forth is "Defeat the Socialists" without any kind of plan of what comes next.
That's not leadership, that's cheerleading. If it is your belief that America's health care is the best in the world, does that mean you need to stop there? If you are the top of the class with a C average, why bother to shoot for an A?
Or has America turned into the land of the Good Enough For Me?
KansasVoter (anonymous) says…
sunny (Anonymous) says…
"kansasvoter, how is she a coward and no good for kansas."
She is a coward because she scheduled all of her health care forums during the workday when only retirees and the unemployed could attend. She is no good for Kansas because she hasn't done anything since she was elected to Congress. Kansas would be much better off if Nancy Boyda was still the 2nd District Congressman.
mitchell09 (anonymous) says…
Maybe if people our leaders read the bills (aka being informed and doing their job) then there might not be as much misinformation out there. I just know if I told my boss that I hadn't done my homework, but gee, one of my friends had, it wouldn't fly.
KansasVoter (anonymous) says…
Also,
"There were no shout downs as has occurred in other town hall meetings across the nation.
Jenkins said Kansans are more respectful."
Yeah, except for the Kansans who issued death threats to Congressman Dennis Moore. Those death threats caused him to cancel his planned town hall meetings on health care.
texburgh (anonymous) says…
Of course, Lynn is covered by a premium government subsidized (ie socialized medicine) health care plan. The Republicans, believing the rest of us are not worthy of this health care system, are working hard to block it from becoming a reality for us while preserving it for themselves.
Lynn, having sold her soul and principles to the extreme right wing of her party, is no better than Jim Ryun. Once upon a time I voted for her believing her to be a thoughtful, moderate Republican. Never again.
The Kansas Republican Party and congressional Republican "leadership" have turned me into a yellow dog Democrat.
blakec (anonymous) says…
An insurance company is a business that must generate greater profits each year to satisfy stockholders. In the early 90s, about 95 cents of every dollar given to insurance companies was used to pay claims. Last year it was about 80 cents per dollar. This 'medical loss ratio' is the leading indicator to investors on how an insurance company is doing and is unique to the insurance industry. Shrink the ratio (through cost cutting or denying claims) and investors are happy; if not they sell in masses and the company hurts. To me, insurance isn't something that should be profit-driven at the detriment of peoples' lives. The model now seems to be shifting to the attitude of dollar>life. I think this is a concern in the back of a lot of minds. But hey, it's big business as usual.
Bladerunner (anonymous) says…
Why does the headline read anti-democrat and not anti-health care reform? Im not anti-democrat...Ive slept with lots of em....but I AM "anti push through congress the fastest health care bill we can come up with without thinking first" like the stimulus package Obama wouldnt let anyone read before voting on. Thats the crap I'm against. Anti-stupidity!
deathpenaltyliberal (anonymous) says…
barrypenders (Anonymous) says…
"My, My how civil the progressive nature has evolved. The progressive civilness has evolved to the point of calling those tax paying citizens discourse not in agreement with Herr Obama, NAZI like."
You are spectacularly misinformed. No progressives ever said that. Maybe they were talking about the rightwingnuts with the Obama/Hitler posters who were shouting down other Americans at town halls?
Why do you call the POTUS Herr Obama? That is an insult to the hundreds of thousands of Americans who died in Europe fighting REAL fascism.
walkingonwater (anonymous) says…
Lynn has signed a pledge saying she will not vote for health care legislation she has not read. She has not read 3200, therefore she will not vote in favor. It is a stupid, misleading pledge. Read everything and do the work you were elected to do.
ontheotherhand (anonymous) says…
walkingonwater, Jenkins IS doing what the majority voted for her to do. She is appealing to the least common denominator: people who listen to "spins" and fear tactics and never read documentation. Perhaps we should get her to lead all those people into signing pledges that say they will never accept Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, or any other service funded by the gov.
fallingwhilereading (anonymous) says…
A kansas liberal is still a good conservative in the rest of the countries eyes.
fallingwhilereading (anonymous) says…
Actually Lynn is a very nice person. I can't say anything bad about her. Even though we do disagree on a lot of things. She is at least willing to listen to my points when I do not agree with her ideas on certain things.
fallingwhilereading (anonymous) says…
Have you met her? Sat down with her for any amount of time?
If not your really just talking out the other side of your ----- Beobachtler.
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
"In Kansas, rehabilitation for substance abuse and mental health care benefits are restricted by statute. Your government decided how much you should be able to recieve for these treatments."
Gee, I wonder how those statutes came to be passed. Do you think the insurance companies had anything to do with passing laws that restrict the coverage and payout they must provide. I suspect MY government did not make that decision. No, that decision was made by the legislators bought and paid for by the health care industry.
Machiavelli_mania (anonymous) says…
The Religious Rite and their murderous Christian mafia, issued forth from C street, is more unpopular than the dems, no doubt about it.
Stain (anonymous) says…
Jenkins does her best to taint every discussion and every "survey" her office puts out with partisan propaganda. She cannot even present a straightforward survey question that is not loaded, and all the multiple choice answers loaded, with subjective opinion. Try choosing from a through e - you cannot! Her fake surveys and polls are push polls, nothing more.
I hope she reads this. I cannot wait until an opponent surfaces so that I can work to throw her out. She is a poster child for what is wrong with politics in America - dishonesty and partisanship that trumps the truth. She does not want to represent anyone; she wants to brainwash them.
Her sudden concern for spending is rich. Where was she when Bush threw the country into the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression and not because he spent money helping people? Trillions went missing to Halliburton and Cheney's other friends and is unaccounted for. $2 billion a week goes to needless war - enough to get health insurance for all the uninsured children in the country.
Stain (anonymous) says…
I hope I will be in town for her next "town hall" meeting stacked with partisan stooges.
I will be there and I will not be afraid of the violent crazies.
LiberalDude (anonymous) says…
"When asked if so-called “death panels” were in the bill before the House, she said, “Not that I’m aware of but I’ve not been invited to the speaker’s office yet to talk about the bill.”
Wait, what, not that your aware of??? You're supposed to be representing us and you don't know the answer to this. I do, the answer is NO. Read the bill, Lynn! You shouldn't need to talk to anyone about it to know basic aspects of the bill. Jenkins is a joke.
Stain (anonymous) says…
LiberalDude:
She's like the Liz Cheneys and all the Republicans in Congress in that respect. She knows the crazies are crazy but she does not want to discourage them, so she feigns ignorance. (Notice all the contenders for the GOP 2012 nomination are hiding since the crazies came out. They do not want to be asked about this.)
That right there is a reason to throw her out of office in the next election. The most important piece of legislation in a generation is before her and she has not read it!
RalphReed (Ralph Reed) says…
Well, it seems our regional Rush/O'Reilly/Coulter/Beck melange has finally come out to play.
Jenkins conducted a congenial meeting because she was speaking to the choir. Plain and simple. The crowd wouldn't dare go up against her.
The "buffons" are being shouted down before many of them even have a chance to speak. Alinsky's *Rules for Radicals" are being used as a playbook to make every attempt to close down the town hall meetings. I didn't like it when "leftist" (can I say that here without censure) radicals used those tactics in the 60's and early 70's, and I don't like it when conservative radicals use the same tactics. It's a case of, "I've made up my mind already and refuse to let any one say anything that might upset the delicately balanced apple cart rolling around the inside of my skull."
The conservative radicals have in fact published their own version of it; here's a link to an article.
http://washingtonindependent.com/5455...
A quote by the author seems to indicate the rules are intended to alienate anyone not of the judeo-christian pursuasion. “I’m suggesting that we take the successful Alinsky rules, we update them and apply them to new social networking technology, and we execute them in the Judeo-Christian tradition.” (That might take this thread in a different way.)
People like that are afraid to listen and will do everything they can to keep others from saying anything they don't want to hear. Why are the conservative radicals afraid to listen at the town hall meetings? Are they scared they might hear something different? Are they simple sheeples?
Godot (anonymous) says…
In HR3200, there is no mention of "death panels." What is there is the creation of a panel of individuals who are not elected, not confirmed by congress, but are appointed by the President, reporting only to the President, who will determine our health benefit and our health rights and who will have unlimited access to our records, both health and financial, and who can determine whether we shall or shall not receive treatment that our doctors recommend. It is there, it is in the bill, it is without question.
The "death panel," can be imagined from the provisions of the bill.
The bill provides that all Medicare recipients must receive "end of life" counseling from their physicians, at a minimum of once every 5 years. If one succumbs to a chronic or fatal disease, counselling must be provided at the time even if it has not been 5 years since the last counsel. The physician, or an employee, will require that the medicare recipient sign off on a "health care directive," that governs the treatment the Medicare Recipient shall receive if he or she experiences a cardiac or apneic event, and that the directive be communicated, electronically, to all health care providers.
This requires seniors to sign a document, witnessed by the doctor/nurse, that directs future actions by medical providers in regard to providing (or withholding) life support, intubation, feeding, and even antibiotics.
Under current practice, if one has not signed a "health care directive," medical professionals will do all they can to preserve your life.
If you have signed, in advance, a medical directive that directs medical professionals to withhold care, they will honor the directive.
If you go to your doctor, and he tells you you are fat, and you have high blood pressure, and you might get diabetes in the near future, and then he tells you that you are likely to have a heart attack or a stroke and become a vegetable, and then he tells you you have to make decisions about the treatment you want if you present at an emergency room or are near death, and your decision is to ask for care that will keep you alive for a few weeks or months, or to just get it over with and save everyone the trouble, and says, "do you really want to put your family through this?" and you are weak and vulnerable, what will you do?
This bill requires physicians to confront their patients with this decision every five years, at a minimum, and requires them to up the pressure when one is diagnosed with a chronic or terminal illness.
The bill also lists the multiple number of government agencies that will be notified, in advance, of your advance directive (ER, EMT, hospice, nursing home, social worker, etc.) There is no mention, not a single one, of notifiying, or consulting, your family members about your end of life decisions.
LloydDobbler (anonymous) says…
She didn't catch any heat because the lion's share of member in her opposition party, the Democratic Party, have enough class and respect the process enough not shout her down.
Katara (anonymous) says…
Godot, the bill mandates that an "end of life" discussion with your doctor is paid for as an actual medical visit. It is not mandatory to have one. It simply states that you cannot have one paid for more than once every 5 years.
It is voluntary. Physicians are not required to bring it up to you.
Currently, if I go to my doctor and say "Doc, if I have (insert medical condition here) and (insert catastrophic event here) happens, what are all my options? The doctor then can provide me with those options and the pros & cons of each. I can then use that info for my advance health care directive (living will) and also use it to designate my POA for Health Care Decisions who will then carry out my wishes. But under the current system, that visit is completely out of my pocket and insurance will not cover it.
Under the bill, this visit is covered by insurance.
And why would a government health care bill require you to discuss any issue with your family? I don't think cost is an issue if you want to discuss your medical directives with them.
Where are you getting this stuff? It is chock full of misinformation.
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
"President Barack Obama has denied this allegation and said he wants a plan to extend coverage to 47 million Americans who have no insurance and reins in the skyrocketing cost of health care."
If he denies it he's lying. Businesses will be forced to offer the 'public option' along with the private carrier they have which will skyrocket premiums for the latter if the company drops below a specific percentage of employees. And numerous companies will be required to switch to the public option.
And there's the lie again: 47 million is bs. 10 to 20 million of that number are illegals. Another ten make more than enough to afford coverage, they just roll the dice.
And why will it cost more than 2 trillion if all they're doing is getting a very small percentage of our country coverage? So I can keep my private coverage, but I get to pay boatloads for other's coverage too? Tax tax tax tax tax tax tax. Swell.
.
Too much, too fast.
Centerville (anonymous) says…
Scott conveniently forgot to mention that Jenkins laid out the Republican alternative - you know, the one that would actually introduce competition into the system. There was one liberal blogger there with a said little sign - but he forgot to bring a violin accompaniest so no one noticed.
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
Centerville:
I wasn't there and the article makes no mention of any plan from Jenkins. Perhaps you could detail the conservative/pay or die industry plan.
MeAndFannieLou (anonymous) says…
The headline should read "anti-democratic feelings evident" - and I don't mean the democratic party!
exhawktown (anonymous) says…
Kansas Voter, at least Lynn is having town halls. Is Dennis Moore? Didn't think so. . . . . .
exhawktown (anonymous) says…
To be fair, I know why. But it seems many assumptions are being made about the person(s) who made the threat to his office: "right-wing," right? Can we think about this for a minute? Dennis is a blue dog, and has been trying to slow this whole thing down. Anyone could have made that threat, including, (say it aint so) a Democrat.
RalphReed (Ralph Reed) says…
@Katara: Good post at 0036.
*******
@exhawktown: (re: your 0815). Lessee. Dennis Moore received death threats at his office and declined to tempt fate for himself and more importantly his staff. I didn't hear of Jenkins receiving any death threats. Did you?
exhawktown (anonymous) says…
Ralph, I hear you, see last post.
MeAndFannieLou (anonymous) says…
exhawktown, no, that doesn't sound plausible at all.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
Shouldn't the headline read "Anti-Socialist...."?
jimmyjms (anonymous) says…
"My, My how civil the progressive nature has evolved. The progressive civilness has evolved to the point of calling those tax paying citizens discourse not in agreement with Herr Obama, NAZI like."
Barrypenders with the spin. It's your side that's painting swaztikas, invoking Hitler, and carrying loaded guns to town hall events.
Moron.
"Sarah Palin is afraid Obamacare will put a price on human life. But we already do."
http://www.slate.com/id/2224790?obref...
hail2oldku (anonymous) says…
I am willing to become part of a nationalized health care program as long as our "leaders" are willing to be participants in the same program. Under the current proposal the legislative, judicial and executive branches all get to keep their current health care coverage. How about it President Obama & Vice-President Biden? Congressman Moore and Jenkins?
If it's good enough for the people it should be good enough for you.
gphawk89 (anonymous) says…
"Democratic congressional plans aimed at expanding coverage and reducing costs"
Shouldn't that read "Democratic congressional plans aimed at shrinking coverage and increasing costs"?
rshrink (anonymous) says…
With all of the publicity about "death panels," is it possible that she would not know about it? So, she uses the now old and tired trick of saying, ".. not that I know of." Republicans have nothing to offer this country but soundbites and ad campaigns, unless you are very wealthy. Then they can help you stay that way, at least until the demise of the country due to extreme incompetence. Most certainly, in a global economy, old republican ways are now a dinosaur and on the way out. Why did Kansans vote for this person? What were they hoping for? Next will be C street Brownback, who has been hanging out with the so called Family Values group in Washington D C, that appears to sanction extramarital affairs and extreme "Christian" ideas about taking over the world. How is it possible that all of these nut cases get into politics and then get votes? How can it not all be just about money?
overthemoon (anonymous) says…
I'm sure Lynn Jenkins presented a fair and unbiased explanation of the bill and is fully conversant on all sides of the issue.
HA!!!
jayhawks911 (anonymous) says…
The members of our government already have nationalized health care. Most seniors have nationalized health care. The rest of us pay through the nose for what we have. Employers who cover their employees are disadvantage in competing in the world market place. What is it that is so hard to understand that we need health care for all of our people. Lynn Jenkins has government insurance why shouldn't all of us
hail2oldku (anonymous) says…
jayhawks911 (Anonymous) says…
The members of our government already have nationalized health care. Most seniors have nationalized health care. Lynn Jenkins has government insurance why shouldn't all of us
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The nationalized healthcare my senior mother has is a joke. I don't want anything to do with anything like that or what our military men and women receive.
We can't afford to provide everyone the coverage that our governing bodies receive.
That 's why I would only be a proponent of them putting together something that THEY would be willing (and required) to move to instead of the cushy coverage they currently receive.
Phogfan86 (anonymous) says…
Does one have to be an AARP member to attend these town hall meetings? Because that's who's showing up.
I should go. Wait -- I have an 8-5 job, so Lynn's not interested in hearing from me.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Here's the deal. Why are the media, blue dogs, repubs and their loud mouth rebel rousers coming out against medical insurance reform?
Are they truly concerned about wait times? No way we've been making medical appointments for 70 years or more. We have been waiting at least 50 years for fiscally responsible,fiscally conservative,practical and comprehensive medical insurance. So the wait thing is nothing but crap.
Are they truly concerned about cost? Hell no! The USA has been plagued with high cost for at least 30 years so that obviously is not their concern.
Are they concerned about government take over? The government has been involved for at least 70 years. The med insurance industry is receiving at least $1.2 trillion medical insurance tax dollars as we speak. Nope that is not a real concern just more crap.
What the hell are they concerned about?
*Shareholders only give a damn about dividends that which includes many legislators which prevents legislators
from remaining objective.
*Legislators against reform and on all sides of the aisle are concerned about corrupt special interest campaign money pure and simple.
*Repubs only concern is having enough corrupt money to win upcoming elections so they can come back and wreck our economy further.
*The media would just hate to lose all of those healthcare advertising dollars and they are just loving all of the money spent because of the insurance reform campaign.
In a nutshell it is all about money money money which is to say consumers and taxpayers are being taken for fools.
Machiavelli_mania (anonymous) says…
I want to know if guns were allowed at these town-hall meetings the GOP are holding.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Politicians,medical insurance industry,the media and others opposed to practical,fiscally responsible,fiscally conservative and the most comprehensive medical insurance ever presented to consumers are playing the USA public for fools.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/...
What increases the cost of medical insurance?
* high dollar medical insurance spending on what 2,000 health insurers add to the actual cost of providing care:
• its bureaucracy
• profits
• high corporate salaries
• advertising
* over charges
• sales commissions
• Shareholders ! are the primary clients of for-profit insurance companies, not patients
• Special interest campaign dollars
* Golden parachutes
* Politicians as shareholders:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
What will HR 676 and only hr 676 Eliminate?
* Eliminates high dollar medical insurance spending on what 2,000 health insurers add to the actual cost of providing care:
• its bureaucracy
• profits
• high corporate salaries
• advertising
* over charges
• sales commissions
• Shareholders ! are the primary clients of for-profit insurance companies, not patients
• Special interest campaign dollars
* Golden parachutes
* Eliminates Politicians as shareholders:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
* Eliminates Insurers Wrongfully Charging Consumers Billions = big time corruption
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
*Eliminates Paying More Getting Less
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
*Eliminates Leading Cause Of Bankruptcy
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04...
*Eliminates:
“In front of me I have a document from my employer that shows their cost for insurance.
Medical, Dental and Vision for the year 2010 my employer will pay $15,450. I will pay another $2,860 out of my pay check. $18,310 a year for insurance is ludicrous, and we wonder why so many companies are having massive layoffs. It is a real travesty that nothing is going to happen in the near future on health care.”
tbaker (anonymous) says…
Its pretty clear many of you who have posted comments are more interested in political demagoguery than you are really doing something about fixing health care. You should argue the merits of real ideas and not waste your time impugning political philosophy.
Hows this?
When Obama says "46 million Americans are uninsured" be sure to remember he is including (at least) 10 million people who are not Americans. They are illegal aliens. The census bureau just released a report that says so. Before we start any debate about what to do to fix health care, we need to start with honest numbers.
Then ask yourself how many of those 36 million don't have any health insurance out of personal choice - they can afford it, they just chose not to have it. There are lots of numbers out there.
Once you have the number of people (15-20 million) who cannot afford to have health insurance, ask yourself whats the best way to provide it for them?
I say give them a government health care debit card. You don't need to create some new, massive, expensive federal bureaucracy to do this. This would be quick and easy and accomplish the end-state of providing for everybody who can't afford health care. Sure it would cost a lot of money we don't have, but it would be a tiny fraction of what they are talking about spending.
If we want to go beyond just helping people without the ability to pay for health care, and actually "reform" the system to reduce the incredible cost of it, we need to do three things:
1) Tort reform. End "casino" lawsuits that make malpractice insurance more expensive in the US than anywhere in the world. The trial lawyer lobby is stopping this reform.
2) Nationalize the sale of health insurance across state lines. Presently, the law limits you to buying health insurance from within your state only which prevents competition and forms monopolies. The insurance lobby is stopping this reform.
3) End the tax deduction given to employers for the cost of the health care they provide employees. Give the deduction to the employee instead. Let people buy their own health insurance and take a full deduction (perhaps even a tax credit) for 100% of their health care expenses. Big government advocates hate this idea because it empowers individual American people - which in their mind is never a good thing when you are trying to make Americans dependent on big government.
Issue debit cards and then fix the 3 things.
Machiavelli_mania (anonymous) says…
Former Executive: Insurers Fomenting Town Hall Chaos
Wednesday 12 August 2009
by: Mike Soraghan | Visit article original @ The Hill
http://www.truthout.org/081309I
A former health insurance executive claims that the health care industry is behind the disruptions at health care town hall meetings. (Photo: Chris Zuppa / Times)
commuter (anonymous) says…
"texburgh (Anonymous) says…
Of course, Lynn is covered by a premium government subsidized (ie socialized medicine) health care plan. The Republicans, believing the rest of us are not worthy of this health care system, are working hard to block it from becoming a reality for us while preserving it for themselves. "
Textburg- If the Republicans are the only ones who want to keep their premium plan, why haven't the Democrats included Congress in the bill?
Democrats are just as bad a the republicans.
I can't support this bill until it includes all of the government to be group in the bill (Congress, Executive, etc) and Some type of Tort Reform.
mommie2boogie (anonymous) says…
there are no death panels in the hr3200, what they are referring to is basically end of life care, like a DNR. It was an amendment even drawn up by a fellow republican Isakson, I believe he is in GA? Anyhow, as far as the abortion, that is void as well, there is the Capps Amendment that forbids gov't money to go towards any abortions, however, in the amendment it always states that it does not forbid private insurance companies participating in the gov't health care program that the individual will have to pay for.
and regarding abortion, many of you who are against that, 87% of private health insurance through providers either privately or through your employer already cover abortions. your hard earned dollar is already going towards an insurance company who supports the abortion right for women.
logicsound09 (anonymous) says…
tbaker,
I really enjoyed your post. A lot of good ideas, and most importantly, really the first ideas on health care reform I've heard besides
A) single-payer, (which I favor, but am open to other solutions)
B) the Democrats pseudo-single payer idea, or
C) Aaaaaaahh!! Socialism!!!!!!!! EVIL!!!!
I only have a couple of comments, mostly in regards to the numbers you provided about the uninsured.
Though 10 million of the 46 million aren't U.S. citizens, they are a part of the rising cost of healthcare, due to the fact that they get most of their treatment at the Emergency Room, which we all pay for in the long run. And unless we were to move to a single-payer system (Which doesn't seem to have a lot of traction right now from what I can tell) those illegal immigrants would still have to pay in to be able to even get the public option. Unless I'm misunderstanding the proposal.
Of the the uninsured by choice, one of the reasons I tentatively support a single-payer system is because it would force (via taxes) those who are the healthiest (and therefore the least likely to have insurance) to pay into the national insurance plan. One of the cost savings intended by single-payer is to have healthier people pay into the system to offset the sicker people, because at the end of the day, a sick or old person is going to draw more money *out* of the system and a healthier person is going to put more money *in*.
So part of the beauty of it is that you bring those who are gaming the system in to help pay down those who are a drag on the system, and in the process make it less likely that major health problems will be discovered early, when can be treated at less cost. Or better yet, administer basic, preventative care that reduces the likelihood of major problems occurring in the first place.
But again, I appreciate the sentiment to be sure.
kathyw105 (anonymous) says…
AP Article - Fact Check: No 'death panel' in health care bill: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090811/a...
Seriously, for those who really believe Sarah Palin on the "death panel" thing, research on your own and use your brains.
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
tbaker,
Liked what you had to say. One problem I see though is on your second point. State lines dictate premium costs quite often, ask anyone who pays for a policy in Mo. vs. Ks.; they're usually at least $100-150 higher per month per individual. Also, each insurer has their specific 'networks' which they've pre-settled pricing with. While a company like BC/BS is nationwide ftmp, your network is dependent on your permanent residence. I find that to be an incredible crock btw, but I suspect it has to do with taxes and col adjustments.
kathyw105 (anonymous) says…
Ok, ardoardoardo, show us proof of that please. And it can't be from Fox or any of those other right-wing groups. I'd like to see proof from some independent entity.
kathyw105 (anonymous) says…
ardoardoardo: I researched it myself, and see a story about a woman was refused $4000/per month meds, but could have gotten a $50 death drug per se. This is coming from the Drudge Report (http://www.drudge.com/news/123953/dea...) and other right-wing, so I obviously can't say if it's completely true. But lets say that it is fact:
Unless you are living under a rock, ALL insurance companies make decisions on a daily basis on what drugs they will and will not cover. I know this from personal experience, from a friend who died of cancer. She had private health insurance, and they refused to pay for "alternative drugs" as they say during her last months. That happens all of the time, and you've got to admit that.
So if you have a big problem with that, take it up with the private sector as well. They are one of the biggest parts of the problem with driving up costs of health care.
Here's the Oregon Plan: http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/healthplan/. Research it yourself.
mommie2boogie (anonymous) says…
well said kathy!!! people freak out with more of the "fear mongering" saying its going to ration care...
ummm.. hello.... its already rationed!!! Why are we being penalized for getting sick... like we woke up one morning and said, "okay, i feel like getting cancer, sounds like fun!"
we need reform, and we need it NOW.
tbaker (anonymous) says…
OK everyone - pay attention. jaywalker and logicsound 09 both demonstrated how to have a civil, meaningfull, and intellectually honest dialog on this blog. While I don't necessarily agree with everything they said in their responses, they nonetheless put forth thoughtful, well-read, fallacy-free ideas that stimulate more honest debate. This is a splendid example of how intelligent people can disagree without being disagreeable. My hats off to both of them.
rshrink (anonymous) says…
The only reason Social Security is losing out is because the government has borrowed from it and not paid back what it borrowed and then there was this recent president by the name of Bush who cut taxes for the wealthy and sent jobs out of the country, causing massive layoffs and reduced income for taxing. Nice work repubs.
rshrink (anonymous) says…
Not supporting the current system, but overhauling it to make it effective. Keep repubs out of washington and it can stay that way. No more dinosaurs.
rshrink (anonymous) says…
ardo, how about voting for more compassionate people to run the insurance companies, oh wait ...., you can't.
Godot (anonymous) says…
The words "death panel," "rationing," "euthanasia," do not appear anywhere in HR3200. However, the authorization for the steps that lead up to this do. So does violation of privacy and government control over personal finances.
The phrase "a woman's right to an abortion" do not appear in the constitution, either, but, in 1973, the Supreme Court determined that it existed. And their decision stands as accepted law.
I wish our elected officials would always think about the worst thing that could happen in the worst of situations as a result of their legislation before they enact it, particularly in the case of Obama's rush to create health care reform. I wish they thought about the long term consequence of legislating rights that do not exist in the constitution or the bill of rights, and of giving unchecked power to an unknown person or persons in a manner that the constitution prohibits.
Once the Obama/Reid/Pelosi health care progromme is put into law, it will only get bigger, not smaller, and the stakes over who controls it will get higher and higher, and those of us who are way low on food chain will pay for it many times over.
Godot (anonymous) says…
I have this uncanny feeling that I am being cyber-stalked by an Obamanista.
Godot (anonymous) says…
beobachter, are you employed by, or a volunteer for, any group that is supported by or affiliated with any of the following: the Obama campaign, the DNC, Organizing for America, ACORN, Move-on.org, or any of the organizations that receive financial and/or logistical support from any of the above mentioned groups?
Godot (anonymous) says…
And, beobachter, add to the list, The Whitehouse. Are you a volunteer for, or employed by, anyone on the staff of the administration of Barack H. Obama, either directly or indirectly?
Katara (anonymous) says…
What does beobachter belonging to any type of group (no matter the affiliation) have to do with whether or not you have read the full bill, Godot?
Have you? It is a simple yes or no question.
If you are bashful about it, I'll start. I've read parts of the bill that have been brought up in discussions but I have not read the bill from the very beginning to the very end.
See? It is easy.
rshrink (anonymous) says…
Godot, none of the progressive organizations you mention made wild accusations without evidence, nor did they try to incite people into violent acts. Bush did not let dissenters into his meetings. His meetings always carefully selected people and he operated off of scripts. The meetings on Healthcare have been open and people would have been free to discuss, but that hasn't happened because the only approach to these meetings from conservatives have been to ask scripted questions created by healthcare corporations and then instead of allowing answers or listening, they have shouted down any kind of response or discussion. That sounds like people who are into manipulation and deception for their own gain rather than people who are interested in participating in democracy and negotiating out a plan. Some people are being used and others are the ringleaders of this sham. Which of these are you?
Godot (anonymous) says…
beobachter is a troll. Are trolls the only ones who are alllowed to demand answers?
rshrink (anonymous) says…
The repubs have created a new concept. It is the Nazi Socialist. Who knew? Well, for all of those who hate cut and paste, here is some more. Get over it:
"Leading conservative economist Bruce Bartlett writes that the Obama-hating town-hall mobs have it wrong—the person they should be angry with left the White House seven months ago.
Where is the evidence that everything would be better if Republicans were in charge? Does anyone believe the economy would be growing faster or that unemployment would be lower today if John McCain had won the election? I know of no economist who holds that view. The economy is like an ocean liner that turns only very slowly. The gross domestic product and the level of employment would be pretty much the same today under any conceivable set of policies enacted since Barack Obama’s inauguration.
Until conservatives once again hold Republicans to the same standard they hold Democrats, they will have no credibility and deserve no respect."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-an...
Katara (anonymous) says…
Godot (Anonymous) says…
beobachter is a troll. Are trolls the only ones who are alllowed to demand answers?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I really don't care what beobachter is or isn't. He asked a legitimate question. You have been posting about how important it is for everyone to read the whole bill but you won't answer whether you did or not do so yourself.
Your reluctance to answer leads me to believe that you have not read the bill yourself.
chicklet (anonymous) says…
personally i think the elderly should be set adrift on an iceberg.
Left_handed (anonymous) says…
"The ignorance being spouted by the Godots and Rushs of the world is mind numbing."
It pales, however, in comparison to the ignorance spouted by the Beobachters of the world.