Protests (Topic Closed)

No, but, fortunately, Move On has raised lots and lots of money, I think over a million so far, and has many, many organized supporters who will work against anyone who votes against it.

A Legitimate group. Some consider that to be the Republicans. The rest of us would like health care.

Amen!

Actually, I believe this neighbor was asking for a group that is ready to organize against any congressman who voted FOR the healthcare bill. And, to this neighbor I would question why you are against healthcare reform unless you earn over $500,000 a year as an individual or $1 million as a couple. If you have insurance, healthcare reform will reduce the cost of healhcare premiums for you or you employer (an expense, which can now be used for salary increases), if you don't, you will now have coverage. If you or family members or friends have been denied coverage, you or they will get the coverage you deserve. If you are a senior, you will no longer have to worry about the "donut hole," when you require pharmaceuticals that exceed $2500 a year. To this neighbor I would question why you would want insurance companies to be making decisions about your health rather than your doctor.

We compassionate Republicans believe that care should be earned, not paid for by others.

I am sorry but belieiving one should "earn" care does not sound compassionate to me. What about people like myself who lost their jobs due to them being outsourced and have COBRA payments that are hundreds of dollars each month. Because I lost my job though no fault of my own, does this then mean I did not "earn" health care? Or a person who has a pre-existing position so cannot get affordable healthcare has not "earned" care? It's one thing for Republicans to have different opinions than Democrats, Progressives, Independents and others, but one cannot call this a "compassionalte" view in any way.

Arnold, I was rejected for insurance coverage because I had two doctor visits last year - for minor health matters.

How would you suggest I earn my health care coverage?

So those of you that believe healthcare shouldn't be earned. Do you feel the same way about food, clothing, housing and just about everything else on the planet? I mean if a person chooses to feel they "deserve" healthcare can the state or gov. mandate a healthier lifestyle? For those that choose not to work at a job beneath them which seems to be common in this area should they be given food and housing which both can effect health to a large degree. I believe healthcare should be easier to obtain but it shouldn't be free. Most free things are abused or unappreciated.

I have the choice to move to a less expensive home and buy less expensive food and clothing but I don't have the choice to purchase less expensive health insurance on my own. I'm not asking for anything for free.

How about my 20 year old son who is attending college part time and working part time, total 38 hours per week. He does not work at a place which offers health care and he does not take enough credits to go on mine. He has had asthsma since birth. I guess you'd rather pay his health care in county taxes when he goes to the general hospital because he has no choice when he is having an attack. I am also working on outsourcing my job to China and Taiwan, by next September I will be out of a job and then I will have to go on Cobra, there aren't many manufacturing jobs in the area any more. Yes, I think the goverment needs to step in. I had a heart attack and live in fear that I will not qualify for any health care if someone doesn't step in on my behalf after I lose my current job. It has nothing to do with what I earn.

So the govt will be determining who and what health services are available. Mandating lifestyles for those partaking of the services should be a part of controlling costs. Smokers, the obese, drug abusers, alcoholiocs and extreme athletes should be subject to review. Similiar to any private insurer that tries to reduce it's exposure to loss. Or is the common thought people can expose themselves to unhealthy and unsafe behavior at the expense of everyone else? For those thinking I don't understand what it is to pay for private insurance have been doing so for at least the past 5 years. Cobra cost me about $3000 a month until I found something else. I think there needs to be reform of some sort. I also know very little the Govt is involved in works efficiently or within budget

Your response suggests that you are not reading these responses with an open mind. I look forward to the day my doctor can make decisions about my care and not my insurance company. Millions of Americans have been victimized by insurance companies denying care because of "pre-existing conditions" or because previously promised coverage is refused when physicians recommend life-saving procedures that are deemed too expensive for companies to make a profit. The Government is not going to dictate your coverage. You may continue to make that decision yourself. The difference will be that your insurance premium will be less, and you will not be denied care if something should develop for you or a loved one. Hospital expenses also will be less, because they will not need to factor in the losses they currently incur providing care for the uninsured - many of whom are uninsured, because they are now unemployed. Healthcare in the United States is currently twice that of other countries, and 64 million people continue to be uninsured. It's important for us to get past the playbook that there would be no problem with healthcare if it weren't for the obese and smokers.

You are dreaming if you think the same type of service will be available at a lesser cost if the Govt has their hand in the deal. You list only 2 of the examples I noted I can assume those are the 2 that effect you. I don't mean that as a jab but the other reasons going unmentioned usually means they are of no concern to you. The Govt will only be another layer of people that do not deliver service but will increase the cost of the services delivered.

Are you saying Daleladi is an obese smoker but she's not a drug abuser, alcoholic, or extreme athlete? Your responses sound as though you are jumping to conclusions not only about the proposed health care reform but about the people who are discussing it. That's called an ad hominem attack and is unacceptable in any civil discussion.

If you're satisfied with your health care, keep it. Let others who cannot get coverage take advantage of this care that you think will be so terrible.

"Compassionate conservative" is an oxymoron.

Just turned on the news and heard that hundreds of pro-health reform people gathered today in a church, while the antis were out on the streets yelling. Interesting.

See you look at this from a perspective "I need it so I should have it" . I look at it from the perspective work harder do better, live within your means, save for your needs and those of your family. The govt has safety nets for people that can't work. Medi Care, Medi Cal just to name a few. Last time I read the proposals from the Gov, the gov itself was exempt from accepting the health plan being proposed for everyone else. No one sees the Irony in this? Sure it is good enough for the masses but not our elected officials? If you want to make me the bad guy fine. Reform would be nice govt control has never been good and from the past 9 months no signs of change anytime soon

Elected officials would not be allowed to buy into the public option because they don't need it, they already have good insurance. You wouldn't be eligible either if you already have insurance. The safety nets have huge holes in them, especially in California.

I don't need the public option either; I have good insurance. I want this health care reform because it is shameful that in a country as rich as this one, people are being diagnosed with cancer when it has spread because they can't afford to go to the doctor. I just saw a woman on TV who was diagnosed because San Francisco has its own "public option." Her cancer was Stage I and treatable. If she hadn't had access to that public insurance she wouldn't have been diagnosed until much later. Are you willing to let her die because she didn't "earn" health insurance? I'm not.

Well, Bob I mentioned them, because obesity and smoking are most commonly mentioned in the insurance company playbook. The problem with healthcare is not lifestyle; it's the American public being cheated by insurance companies. Insurance companies and oil companies are the only industries making profits - huge profits - these days. In what value system is it okay for an industry that is (I would think) in business for the public good, making such profits? I am not obese, nor a smoker, drug addict, alcoholic, nor extreme athlete. It is not lifestyle choices creating this problem. I have talked with many people who originally had the same point of view you espouse - until a health problem developed for them or a family member that their insurance company refused to cover.

Bob, you're lucky you didn't have a "pre-existing condition" when you were shopping for insurance. You would have been out of luck.

If you have insurance that costs $3,000/month, you may have to pay additional taxes. You must have worked really hard to "earn" that kind of coverage, or worked in the financial industry where people get multimillion dollar bonuses along with their $36,000/year insurance. Do they really work harder than people who don't make millions and don't have any insurance?

See unless the proposed health care legislation was changed since earlier in the week keeping your insurance from job to job was not an option. The profits of the health care should be searched looked at closer instead of repeating what you heard. The assumptions as to what my profession was are about as wrong as can be but if that makes you feel better have at it. Lastly if a person can not afford insurance how is it possible $7 a pack cigarettes are something they can afford? I am done with this. Our children will be servicing this debt and voting on the legislation in the future determining if and how the elderly will be cared for.

I did not assume anything about your profession, just wondering who has insurance that costs $36,000/yr. That's in the range that would be taxed because it is so exorbitant.

When the voters are determining if and how the elderly will be cared for, you'd better hope they think like me, not like you!

I agree with Bob that we've pretty much exhausted this topic. I just wanted to note that as long as we continue the practice of employer-based health insurance, employees will not be taking their insurance from job to job. That's a single payer idea, which is something I wholeheartedly agree with you about. Lastly, healthcare reform will be a savings for our children, because those of us with insurance are currently paying $1100 a year for the uninsured.

Thanks, Deladi, for your input.