Archive for Friday, October 30, 2009
Kansans in U.S. House cool to health plan
Republicans outright critical; Democrat Dennis Moore reserves judgment
October 30, 2009
Advertisement
Kansas Republicans in the U.S. House on Thursday blasted health care reform legislation that the Democratic leadership unveiled.
“After weeks of meetings behind closed doors, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats emerged from their one-sided meetings today to unveil their nearly 2,000-page plan for a government takeover of health care,” said Rep. Lynn Jenkins, a Topeka Republican who represents western Lawrence.
The state’s lone Democrat in Congress, Rep. Dennis Moore, of Lenexa, whose district includes eastern Lawrence, said he and his staff needed to look into the complex bill.
“I have to start reviewing and come up with my decision and how I want to vote on this,” Moore said in a telephone interview.
During a Thursday morning ceremony in Washington, Pelosi touted the measure, H.R. 3962, saying it “covers 96 percent of all Americans, and it puts affordable coverage in reach of millions of uninsured and underinsured families.”
But Republicans on Capitol Hill decried that the bill used the word “shall” 3,425 times and claimed Pelosi shut Republicans out of the process.
“Instead of a fresh proposal, we got an additional 1,000 pages of government intrusion,” said Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard.
The bill includes a version backed by moderates of a public health insurance option that allows doctors, hospitals and providers to negotiate rates with the government under the option.
Moore has said previously he would support a public option under the right circumstances, as a way to create competition.
The full House is expected to vote on the bill next week, and with an overwhelming Democratic majority in the House, the GOP would need to convince at least 39 Democrats not to support it.
Rep. Jerry Moran, R-Hays, said although the health care system needs reform, the bill was not a good starting point.
“This bill seeks to expand insurance coverage by levying taxes on businesses, cutting Medicare benefits, eliminating jobs with an employer mandate, and enabling bureaucrats to define what forms of health coverage are acceptable for Americans,” Moran said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Top ads RSS
- SIGN ON BONUS! Full time! $400 - $500 per week. ...
- Summer Instructors Harvest of Hope Leadership Academy at KU is ...
- Cleaning Technician Sun. - Thurs. Evenings 2-3 hrs. per eve. ...
- Douglas County Senior Services, Inc. Part Time Receptionist Needed For ...
- SENIOR SUPERVISORS (2 Openings) Both openings performs daily food service ...
Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment · Bars · Theatres · Restaurants · Coffeehouses · Libraries · Antiques · Services
- Kansas Legislature considers poverty waivers for those looking to get married, but unable to pay fees February 9, 2010 · 17 comments
- ‘Tea party’ is Palin’s people February 7, 2010 · 207 comments
- Rep. John Murtha, Iraq war critic, dies at 77 February 9, 2010 · 89 comments
- Proposed constitutional amendment to block federal health care reform considered February 9, 2010 · 27 comments
- Bill would allow big-cat hunting February 9, 2010 · 71 comments
- KU employee suspected of charging personal items on university credit card February 9, 2010 · 15 comments
- Tehran moves closer to warhead capacity February 9, 2010 · 38 comments
- Blog: Marion - Disappeareded 1-23-2010 January 23, 2010 · 806 comments
- Blog: Anna Undercover Mini-Blog: More Drugs February 8, 2010 · 40 comments
- The only choice February 9, 2010 · 51 comments
- Bill would allow big-cat hunting February 9, 2010
- Chancellor Gray-Little supports schools February 9, 2010
- Aldrich’s father gets to ‘live a dream’ — in Lawrence February 9, 2010
- Under her wing: Parent writes book on developmental disabilities February 8, 2010
- Eudora man hospitalized after head-on crash into tree February 9, 2010
- Jayhawks knock off Longhorns to get first win in Austin under Bill Self February 9, 2010
- Henry gets physical for KU February 9, 2010
- HealthGrades releases list of hospitals with lower mortality, complication rates February 9, 2010
- KU employee suspected of charging personal items on university credit card February 9, 2010
- Climber prepares to peak in Argentina February 8, 2010
30 October 2009
at 7:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…
“After weeks of meetings behind closed doors, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats emerged from their one-sided meetings today to unveil their nearly 2,000-page plan for a government takeover of health care,” said Rep. Lynn Jenkins––––––––––––––––-
The bill that eventually gets passed will unfortunately be written to primarily protect the profits of corporate healthcare providers, Big Pharma and the insurance companies, with improvement of healthcare delivery as an afterthought. But does anyone think that Lynn Jenkins would have it any other way?
30 October 2009
at 8:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Orwell (Anonymous) says…
After Jenkins cast one of her first votes against children's health care coverage we should hardly be surprised by this latest knee-jerk “takeover” lie.
Also, someone should explain to Moran the difference between cutting Medicare costs and cutting Medicare benefits. This plan leaves benefits intact, and instead reduces windfall payments (of OUR money) to private insurers. And I'd rather have someone answerable to the public deciding what services we the public will pay for, when the alternative is to leave that decision to entities (for-profit service providers and insurers) who have financial self-interests in the decision.
No point worrying about Tiahrt's comments – he can't see past his extreme ideology to address the real merits of the debate. If it can't fit on a bumper sticker, he doesn't want to know about it.
By contrast, it appears Moore wants to know what he's talking about before he decides what he'll do. What a concept!
30 October 2009
at 9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Wallythewalrus (Anonymous) says…
“….and it puts affordable coverage in reach of millions of uninsured and underinsured families.” ––––––––—
I am sure it puts affordable coverage just within reach of their finger tips.
30 October 2009
at 9:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
beobachter (Anonymous) says…
We knew the party of NO would oppose. At least Moore is willing to look closely at it first.
30 October 2009
at 9:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
merrill (Anonymous) says…
All legislators protecting the most expensive medical insurance in the world are increasing your cost of living.
Changing nothing definitely increases the cost of the most expensive medical insurance on the planet as usual. $18,310 for 2010 is an increase of 25% over 2009 costs.
How will HR 676 and ONLY HR 676 reduce the cost of medical insurance by billions?
• Eliminates high dollar medical insurance spending on what 2,000 health insurers add to the actual cost .
Plus HR 676 eliminates:
• its bureaucracy which increases YOUR cost
• eliminates profits that increase YOUR cost
• Eliminates high corporate salaries that increase YOUR cost
• Eliminates advertising that increases YOUR cost
* Eliminates over charges that increase YOUR cost
• Eliminates sales commissions that increase YOUR cost
• Eliminates Shareholders which are the primary clients of for-profit insurance companies that which increase YOUR cost
• Eliminates Special interest campaign dollars that increase YOUR cost
• Eliminates Golden parachutes that increase YOUR cost
* Eliminates Politicians as shareholders:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/…
* Eliminates Insurers Wrongfully Charging Consumers Billions
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/…
Go To: http://www.healthcare-now.org/hr-676/
30 October 2009
at 10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
whatthehell (Anonymous) says…
This is my first comment on any LJW forum. I have voted republican many times because it was how I was raised…. “big govt is bad… US as world police is good”. I am done, done, DONE!! Republicans in Washington have had MONTHS to get ready for this and meet head on with a rational counter proposal but all they can do is say no, no, and NO to anything this administration wants to do.
30 October 2009
at 10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
whatthehell (Anonymous) says…
Furthermore… Everyone should look very closely at the history of Health care as a not-for-profit. I believe it was under Reagan that Health Care was privatized and costs across the board have sky-rocketed since. In all the coverage I have seen, this is never discussed. Wonder Why?
30 October 2009
at 11:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BigDog (Anonymous) says…
whatthehell …. are you talking about?
Reagan privatizing health care???? ….. health care has been privatized for many years, it wasn't just privatized in the 80's.
By the way Republicans have had health care ideas and proposals ….. they have not been allowed to inroduce them. The House bill was written totally by House Democratic leadership and the White House behind closed doors. Republicans have not been invited to even be a part of the meetings. Since it was done behind closed doors not even Democrats know what is in the bill for sure.
30 October 2009
at 1:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
whatthehell (Anonymous) says…
Instead of privatized, I should have said, turned into a gigantic for profit business, which I don't believe it was previously. You are like my ex-wife…refusing to address the primary point re. the history of non-profit entities re healthcare vs FOR Profit.
And by the way, recent Republican ideas have shown no inclination to do anything meaningful except to protect the bottom lines of major medical. They do not do a credible job of addressing the major issues.
30 October 2009
at 2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…
whatthehell (Anonymous) says…
“refusing to address the primary point re. the history of non-profit entities re healthcare vs FOR Profit.”
Yes, BigDog should have to argue against your completely unsubstantiated, random thought that you aren't even sure is accurate yourself.
30 October 2009
at 2:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BigDog (Anonymous) says…
And by the way, recent Republican ideas have shown no inclination to do anything meaningful except to protect the bottom lines of major medical. They do not do a credible job of addressing the major issues.
––––––––––––––––
What might these ideas be that you are speaking of that you say are just protecting the bottom line? Anyone can throw out the claims ….. now back it up
30 October 2009
at 3:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…
The Democrats are hearing the Ghost of Mid-term Elections Yet to Come rattling his chains.
30 October 2009
at 3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
JHOK32 (Anonymous) says…
Republicans don't want healthcare for millions of our fellow Americans in need. Millions of people have lost their jobs in the greatest recession since the depression, and lost their health insurance benefits along with their lost income…………and Republicans do not want to support it? Why don't we taxpayers, as their employers, take away their incomes and take away their healthcare benefits and then let's see what they have to say about it then!
Of course if this was a bill that would give huge taxbreaks for Wall Street Millionaires they would support it 100%!
30 October 2009
at 3:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
whatthehell (Anonymous) says…
Well said JHOK32.
I started my comments by stating clearly I have always voted repub. Today I am at work trying to sell more than ever to maintain lower middle class status for my family… forget about getting to the next level (even though my wife and I are both college educated). Every year our costs are skyrocketing in many areas. I do not have time to go back and post links to substantiate every thing I said earlier, however I do know for a FACT that in the '80s, Reaganomics slashed govt controls on all big businesses, including for-profit health care. The republicans are clearly, again, trying to protect their lobby dollars and big business friends with a litany of no, no, NO.
Come on. It makes no sense to ask, or expect a large company, beholden to it's shareholders to look out for any one single American person. Any one of us who EVER costs them money is at risk, as evidence, check the #'s…rising cost, rising uninsured and on and on and on.
30 October 2009
at 4:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BigDog (Anonymous) says…
Interesting you talk about receipt of campaign from dollars for big insurance given the bank bailouts and many of those companies being the top contributors to the Obama campaign and Democratic campaigns.
His top donor group being lawyers …… tort reform in health care???? Not a chance
30 October 2009
at 4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
BigDog (Anonymous) says…
Sorry forgot the links:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/con…
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/ind…
30 October 2009
at 4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
gphawk89 (Anonymous) says…
“I believe it was under Reagan that Health Care was privatized and costs across the board have sky-rocketed since. In all the coverage I have seen, this is never discussed. Wonder Why?”
Because it's not a cause-effect relationship.
I'm not all that old, but I sure don't remember government-sponsored healthcare working very well in the 60's and 70's. If fact, I don't remember government-sponsored healthcare at all…
30 October 2009
at 4:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
whatthehell (Anonymous) says…
Sure it is a cost-effective relationship. Again, I misspoke when I said “privatized”. I believe, what I read was that health care companies (many of them) were “turned loose” as for profit (with little or no regulation) under Reagan. Costs went up / coverages went down…straight line pretty much.
I never said Government Sponsored. It never was that, however there are some cases where govt is VERY involved…look into the health care for anyone related to the coal industry.
30 October 2009
at 4:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
QuiviraTrail (Anonymous) says…
Moore supports Public Option. He'll vote for some final bill.
Since the insurance companies will take their cut and are very inefficient (high administrative costs), It won't be as good as Medicare for All which would be a single payer system.
30 October 2009
at 5:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
puddleglum (Anonymous) says…
where's the ghost of the great white hope at anyway?
oh yeah, thanks for the laugh, snap…
you keep grasping onto your charles dickens….it is really working out well for you and the g.o.p.
the nobel 'dying party' prize might be wrapped up at this point.
tea baggers, birthers, sarah palins, death panels, astroturfers, childish congressmen, nobel-naysayers, great white hopes, opossum-eaters who are totally NOT racist….who/what is next?
I love it!
30 October 2009
at 5:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
rbwaa (Anonymous) says…
@whatthehell
i think you may be referencing health *insurance* companies becoming for-profit entities. blue cross-blue shield of kansas used to be non-profit years ago…
30 October 2009
at 7:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…
whatthehell (Anonymous) says…
“I do know for a FACT that in the '80s, Reaganomics slashed govt controls on all big businesses,”
Deregulation, if that's what you are talking about, actually began under Carter. The airlines, railroads, trucking, and various utility and energy industries were deregulated to a certain extent. In THOSE industries prices went down. Health care and insurance were not among those that were deregulated. Thus your hypothesis that lack of government controls leads to rising prices is not only false, but completely backwards. Lack of government controls leads to *falling* prices in the industries that are deregulated. The same thing would happen in health care and insurance.