OBAMACARE'S FUTURE: Rationing Comes to Massachusetts!

[clarise]

WHEREAS:

79% of the insured in Massachusetts under socialized medicine are on public programs;

and health care costs will consume 54% of the 2012 state budget, up from 24% in 2001;

and health care spending since 2001 has jumped by 59%;

while education has dropped by 15%, and police/fire by 11%, and roads/bridges by 23% (despite the Big Dig);

and Massachuetts spends more per capita on health care than any other state and more than in the rest of the industrialized world;

and costs are 27% higher than the U.S. average, and 15% higher than average after adjusting for higher incomes,

THEREFORE,

Governor Deval "Mini-Me" Patrick is about to sign into law the Health Care Cost Containment Bill, which will legislate the following:

All Massachusetts doctors and hospitals will have to register with a new bureaucracy for permission to practice.

All health providers, from hospitals down to practitioners, will have to track and report on financial performance, price, cost trends, complianced with state-sanctioned quality measures, and market share.

A new 11-member board known as the Health Policy Commission will set and enforce rules to ensure that both public and private health care provision grow no more than the projected state GPD through 2017 (0.5% or lower), regardless of changes in population or any other dynamic.

No provider of health care will be allowed to make changes to its operations without permission.

The Commission can rewrite the terms of provider contracts with insurers if payments to the providers "are deemed excessive."

The Commission can decide to supervise the behavior of any provider that exceeds benchmarks yet to be specified, in terms of the level of health care provided or the cost of that service.

The Commission can regulate the rate of readmissions. (Efforts to curb Medicare costs already show that the "good hospitals" that curb admissions tend to be the hospitals in which more patients per capita DIE, because dead people can't be readmitted; while the "bad" hospitals tend to readmit more people, and thus keep them alive.)

The socialist left of Massachusetts are unhappy with the provisions of the new bill, because delinquent providers can only be fined for an amount up to $500,000, for providing health care service that exceeds the levels approved by the Commission.

So. Sarah Palin was nuts, huh?

Rationing is officially coming to the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts: one of the most affluent states in the country, and the one that is most able to shoulder the costs of socialized medicine.

Just wait until it comes to Arkansas, Wyoming and Montana.

[Distant Lover]

And the problem is...?

What matters is that everyone in Massachusetts, thanks to Romneycare, has medical care. Before that was not true.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

And the problem is...?

What matters is that everyone in Massachusetts, thanks to Romneycare, has medical care. Before that was not true.

lol. It is hard to fault you for consistency.

[darthel0101]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

And the problem is...?

What matters is that everyone in Massachusetts, thanks to Romneycare, has medical care. Before that was not true.

I wonder how they will contain the growth of spending in medical care to GDP growth?
Possibly by prohibiting certain procedures for those who are on socialized care? I wonder where they will start and where they will stop.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by darthel0101

I wonder how they will contain the growth of spending in medical care to GDP growth?
Possibly by prohibiting certain procedures for those who are on socialized care? I wonder where they will start and where they will stop.

That is precisely what socialized medicine was originally promised to do in Massachusetts.

Rationing will only make things worse.

BTW, DL is flat-out wrong that Massachusetts finally has coverage for everyone. No one who needed healthcare in Massachusetts was ever denied it. The goal was not coverage, because that was never an issue. The goal of socialized medicine was to reduce the volume of ER walk-ins by people who had no intention of paying. Yet the opposite has occurred, because health insurance in Massachusetts is so expensive that only the top 5% of wage earners can afford it. Twenty-or-so percent of others get subsidized plans from employers. The rest, 79% of the state's population, now get it on the dole, or they have no coverage whatsoever and have elected to pay the fine for non-compliance.

The Massachusetts plan was touted, at the time of its passage, as fiscally sound and cost-effective.

Obamacare is not fiscally sound. Most of the legislation that will be needed to pay for its new layers of bureaucracy have not even been written yet, and most of the states are declining to participate in the creation of the federally mandated "exchanges."

If Massachusetts is rationing after just a decade down this road, Obamacare will not last half that long.

But Sarah Palin was nuts when she warned about rationing. Yessiree. What a dumb little cunt she was, huh? (giggles)

[RandyKnight]

Just wait until it comes to Arkansas, Wyoming and Montana.

Arkansas will do just find half of them are already on some sort of health care welfare...

The rich stupid yankees seems to be the ones having problems...

Hell here in Texas we provide health care to 1/3 or northern Mexico already anyway...

Most used male name for new born here last year was Jose'...

[richief]

Was this scheme not started by Romney when he was governor of the commonwealth and not Obama?

[RandyKnight]

Originally Posted by richief

Was this scheme not started by Romney when he was governor of the commonwealth and not Obama?

That is what everyone says but I am not sure Romney claims it any longer...

[richief]

Originally Posted by RandyKnight

That is what everyone says but I am not sure Romney claims it any longer...

So he starts something and then walks away from it if it goes wrong, just the guy you need as a president.

[RandyKnight]

Originally Posted by richief

So he starts something and then walks away from it if it goes wrong, just the guy you need as a president.

They say the Obama National plan was modeled after the Romney State Plan but Romney claims he will have it vote out when he becomes President.

Who knows with all these Nuts....

[DS1980]

I've sold my place. I've been done with MA for a while.

[Pandorius999]

Socialism? In medicine? Best if luck guys it failed in India but I'm sure you'll fare better.

PS I meant the almost free healthcare part.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by richief

Was this scheme not started by Romney when he was governor of the commonwealth and not Obama?

It was started by Romney, in league with a couple MIT economists and the CEOs of the local teaching hospitals, principally Harvard Med, Mass General and Beth Israel Deaconess.

That is why it is called Romneycare.

It is the ten thousand pound albatross around Romney's neck.

It is why Romney is in an even heat against Obama going into August, despite the worst performance of any U.S. president in modern times.

Obama could very well win. Thanks to Romneycare.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by RandyKnight

That is what everyone says but I am not sure Romney claims it any longer...

He struggles to distance himself from it, but he can't. Romney's official position, last I heard? "No regrets."

I pay full boat for health insurance in Massachusetts, because I am a business owner. I pay nearly $20,000 per year, despite diluting my coverage by raising deductibles and reducing services each year for the past eight years.

But it hasn't helped. Rationing, here we come.

That's why I won't vote for him.

[ace's n 8's]

Originally Posted by Distant Lover

And the problem is...?

What matters is that everyone in Massachusetts, thanks to Romneycare, has medical care. Before that was not true.

In the future years, who will have FREE healthcare in the state of Massachusetts, when the state is BANKRUPT??

[spjames]

Originally Posted by clarise

He struggles to distance himself from it, but he can't. Romney's official position, last I heard? "No regrets."

I pay full boat for health insurance in Massachusetts, because I am a business owner. I pay nearly $20,000 per year, despite diluting my coverage by raising deductibles and reducing services each year for the past eight years.

But it hasn't helped. Rationing, here we come.

That's why I won't vote for him.

$20,000 pays for how many Employee's per year?

[thikdik]

Soon will be going to Cuba and Venezuela to get good care.

[tommyturtle]

Originally Posted by spjames

$20,000 pays for how many Employee's per year?

I'm guessing zero.

[darthel0101]

Originally Posted by tommyturtle

I'm guessing zero.

I'm guessing the range of 100-200 employees.

[tommyturtle]

Several years ago when I was working for a company that provided health insurance they were paying $5,000 a year just to cover me.

Too many people don't understand what health insurance really costs. It ain't free like some union members believe.

[ridgerunner]

!

[darthel0101]

Originally Posted by tommyturtle

Several years ago when I was working for a company that provided health insurance they were paying $5,000 a year just to cover me.

Too many people don't understand what health insurance really costs. It ain't free like some union members believe.

It really does get cheaper with packages.

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by tommyturtle

Several years ago when I was working for a company that provided health insurance they were paying $5,000 a year just to cover me.

Too many people don't understand what health insurance really costs. It ain't free like some union members believe.

But you just named the reason the US has so much trouble competiting with other nations in the world economy. Its because nearly everyone of those other countries have universal health care which means employers don't have to spend that $5,000 per year per employee.

[stumbler]

You know what medical boards to watch over hospitals and doctors isn't such a bad idea compared to the alternative.

Hospital Chain Inquiry Cited Unnecessary Cardiac Work

In the summer of 2010, a troubling letter reached the chief ethics officer of the hospital giant HCA, written by a former nurse at one of the company’s hospitals in Florida.

In a follow-up interview, the nurse said a doctor at the Lawnwood Regional Medical Center, in the small coastal city of Fort Pierce, had been performing heart procedures on patients who did not need them, putting their lives at risk.



“It bothered me,” the nurse, C. T. Tomlinson, said in a telephone interview. “I’m a registered nurse. I care about my patients.”
In less than two months, an internal investigation by HCA concluded the nurse was right.



“The allegations related to unnecessary procedures being performed in the cath lab are substantiated,” according to a confidential memo written by a company ethics officer, Stephen Johnson, and reviewed by The New York Times.



Mr. Tomlinson’s contract was not renewed, a move that Mr. Johnson said in the memo was in retaliation for his complaints.
But the nurse’s complaint was far from the only evidence that unnecessary — even dangerous — procedures were taking place at some HCA hospitals, driving up costs and increasing profits.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/07/bu...work.html?_r=1

[sjwilson3821]

I love Obamacare its helped me get through college healthy.

[darthel0101]

Originally Posted by stumbler

You know what medical boards to watch over hospitals and doctors isn't such a bad idea compared to the alternative.

Hospital Chain Inquiry Cited Unnecessary Cardiac Work




http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/07/bu...work.html?_r=1

yeah, MEDICAL boards would be good but how many MEDICAL personnel would be included in a GOVERNMENTAL board? Also, who pays the salaries for those boards? If the salaries are paid by the people, then that can be positive but when the salaries are paid by the entities being monitored, then watch out for bloat and coverup.

One of the reasons for Medicare's bloat is unnecessary procedures and who is monitoring that?

People who NEED assistance are unable to get it because the approval for that assistance is given by a pencil pusher instead of a medical practitioner.

Drugs which have multiple uses are denied when one of their effects overlaps the effect of another drug even when the DESIRED effect can only be maintained with the drug prescribed.

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by sjwilson3821

I love Obamacare its helped me get through college healthy.

I'd have really been screwed if the ACA had not been upheld. I need shoulder surgery on my right shoulder to repair a torn tendon and rotator cuff and shoulder replacement surgery on my left shoulder.

But had the ACA been struck down my health insurance would have counted both my shoulders as pre existing conditions they would not pay for.

Originally Posted by darthel0101

yeah, MEDICAL boards would be good but how many MEDICAL personnel would be included in a GOVERNMENTAL board? Also, who pays the salaries for those boards? If the salaries are paid by the people, then that can be positive but when the salaries are paid by the entities being monitored, then watch out for bloat and coverup.

Membership and term of office

IPAB is composed of fifteen members appointed by the President, subject to Senate confirmation. The Secretary of HHS, the Administrator of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the Administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration serve ex officio as nonvoting members.[15] In making the appointments, the President consults with the Majority Leader of the Senate concerning the appointment of three members; the Speaker of the House of Representatives concerning the appointment of three members, the Minority Leader of the Senate concerning the appointment of three members, and the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives concerning the appointment of three members.[16]


The first members appointed to the Board will be divided into three staggered classes in order to ensure that their terms do not expire simultaneously. Five will be appointed for a term of one year, five will be appointed for a term of three years, and five will be appointed for a term of six years. All subsequent appointments will be made for six years. A member may not serve more than two full consecutive terms.[17] Individuals who are directly involved in providing or managing the delivery of Medicare items and services may not constitute a majority of IPAB’s membership.


The President of the United States must establish a system for public disclosure by IPAB members of any financial and other potential conflicts of interest. As it currently stands, no IPAB member may be engaged in any other business, vocation or employment.[1]
Members will be paid at a rate described in Level III of the Executive Schedule that determines pay for senior executive branch officials. As of 2010 this is $165,300 per year.[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indepen...Advisory_Board

Originally Posted by darthel0101

One of the reasons for Medicare's bloat is unnecessary procedures and who is monitoring that?

There's also the problem of huge disparities in costs that don't happen with private insurance.

McAllen And El Paso Revisited:
Medicare Variations
Not Always Reflected In The
Under-Sixty-Five Population

ABSTRACT Medicare spending for the elderly is much higher in McAllen,
Texas, than in El Paso, Texas, as reported in a 2009 New Yorker article by Atul Gawande. To investigate whether this disparity was present in the non-Medicare populations of those two cities, we obtained medical use and expense data for patients privately insured by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas. In contrast to the Medicare population, the use of and spending per capita for medical services by privately insured populations in McAllen and El Paso was much less divergent, with some exceptions. For example, although spending per Medicare member per year was 86 percent higher in McAllen than in El Paso, total spending per member per year in McAllen was 7 percent lower than in El Paso for the population insured by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas. We consider possible explanations but conclude that health care providers respond quite differently to incentives in Medicare compared to those in private insurance programs.[/quote]

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/d...nandElPaso.pdf

STUDY HIGHLIGHTS DISPARITIES IN AID TO TRAIN DOCTORS

New Government data show huge disparities in what Medicare pays to train doctors in different parts of the country, with some teaching hospitals in New York getting three or four times as much for each trainee as those in Los Angeles or Cleveland, and seven times as much as those in Houston.

Federal health officials have known for some time that Medicare payments for such training varied from hospital to hospital. But a study published this week in The New England Journal of Medicine highlights the disparities and provides more detail than had ever been publicly available.


The disclosures come as hospitals across the country say they have been severely hurt by Federal budget cuts, and Congress is considering substantial changes in the financing of graduate medical education, including proposals to sever the link between Medicare and the Federal support for teaching hospitals.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/25/us...ted=all&src=pm

Originally Posted by darthel0101

People who NEED assistance are unable to get it because the approval for that assistance is given by a pencil pusher instead of a medical practitioner.

Actually that's the way it is now with private health care insurance. Doctors don't get to decide what the patient needs. Its some pencil pusher at the insurance company.

And the ACA is supposed to remedy that.

Originally Posted by darthel0101

Drugs which have multiple uses are denied when one of their effects overlaps the effect of another drug even when the DESIRED effect can only be maintained with the drug prescribed.

Once again it was my insurance company that tried to dictate to my doctor what pain medications I was allowed and in what strengths. They even tried to assign one of THEIR NURSES to monitor my pain management.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by spjames

$20,000 pays for how many Employee's per year?

That is my family's coverage! (Not quite $20,000, to be honest... more like $19,500-and-change.)

That is the cost in Massachusetts to insure a family of 2-and-change. (And that is the most I will tell you about my personal life, James )

My cost to cover employees? That's none of your business, either. But they have no idea what their coverage really costs.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by tommyturtle

Several years ago when I was working for a company that provided health insurance they were paying $5,000 a year just to cover me.

Too many people don't understand what health insurance really costs. It ain't free like some union members believe.

+1

People do not have a clue.

New hires in Massachusetts resent being nickel-and-dimed on starting salary negotiations. They don't understand that compulsory benefits in Massachusetts cost a fortune and are driving jobs out of the state.

[spjames]

Originally Posted by clarise

That is my family's coverage! (Not quite $20,000, to be honest... more like $19,500-and-change.)

That is the cost in Massachusetts to insure a family of 2-and-change. (And that is the most I will tell you about my personal life, James )

My cost to cover employees? That's none of your business, either. But they have no idea what their coverage really costs.

Well guess what. I do. Before I lost my insurance (everyone in the business did including the owners) it was $500 per month and that was after the insurance company raised it from $366 per month per employee with 10 people on the policy. That was in 2009. It wasn't a bad policy either. $1250 deductible and relatively small prescription drug, doctor offfice and emergency room co-pay. I would guess that now being 3 years later it would be 20 percent higher yet.

Sound about right?

[clarise]

Originally Posted by spjames

Well guess what. I do. Before I lost my insurance (everyone in the business did including the owners) it was $500 per month and that was after the insurance company raised it from $366 per month per employee with 10 people on the policy. That was in 2009. It wasn't a bad policy either. $1250 deductible and relatively small prescription drug, doctor offfice and emergency room co-pay. I would guess that now being 3 years later it would be 20 percent higher yet.

Sound about right?

Don't know. Could sound right, in some states, but not enough information. Is that the cost of the policy, or just your own monthly contribution? How much of the total policy cost did your employer pay?

If you're saying $500 per month was the total cost of the policy, that would be $6000 per year, for an individual... Sounds low, even three years ago, in most states.

I am talking about the outright purchase cost. Forget your employer. What would it cost you to walk into an insurance broker in your state and buy health insurance outright, as though you were buying car insurance?

Not many people know what that costs. But they are about to find out.

[CS natureboy]

Papa John's Pizza To Raise Prices Because Of Obamacare, CEO John Schnatter Says
The Huffington Post | By Harry Bradford Posted: 08/07/2012 2:51 pm Updated: 08/08/2012 12:00 am


#news_entries #ad_sharebox_260x60 img {padding:0px;margin:0px}






John Schnatter, CEO of the restaurant chain Papa John's Pizza, says the president's health care reform law will cost his business, and that cost will be passed on to consumers in the form of price increases.



After President Obama's health care law takes full effect, the slogan for national pizza chain Papa John's may need an update. Instead of, “Better ingredients. Better Pizza,” may we suggest, “Better health care. Pricier pizza."
Papa John's CEO John Schnatter says that Obamacare will result in a $0.11 to $0.14 price increase per pizza, or $0.15 to $0.20 cents per order, Pizza Marketplace, a trade publication, reports. (Hat tip: @dkberman via Twitter.)
Under Obamacare, the company, which is the third-largest pizza takeout and delivery chain in the United States, will have to offer health care coverage to more of its 16,500 total employees or pay a penalty to the government.
The National Restaurant Association pointed out following the health care law's Supreme Court approval that it may adversely affect restaurants’ ability to maintain already slim profit margins because it requires companies of more than 50 employees to provide affordable health insurance.
One Papa John's franchise owner in Texas, Judy Nichols, says the law could interfere with her ability to open more restaurants.
“I have two options, I can stop offering coverage and pay the $2,000 fine, or I could keep my number of staff under 50 so the mandate doesn't apply,” she told Legal Newsline. Nichols added that the law may cost her between $20,000 to $30,000 extra in taxes. “Obamacare is making me think about cutting jobs instead," she said.
But with strong sales last quarter and more than 1,500 new retail locations planned in the near future, Schnatter doesn't seem all that bothered -- perhaps because he intends to pass those health care costs on to customers.

“We're not supportive of Obamacare, like most businesses in our industry,” Schnatter was quoted as saying in Politico. “But our business model and unit economics are about as ideal as you can get for a food company to absorb Obamacare."

McDonald’s also expects Obamacare to cost each of its 14,000 franchises between $10,000 and $30,000 annually, according to Businessweek. But, like Schnatter, the company remains optimistic it is well placed to handle the extra costs.
Representatives from other restaurant chains may be less hopeful, however, including Burger King, Quiznos and Dunkin’ Donuts, all which have expressed concern the law may hurt business, according to the Wall Street Journal.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...6pLid%3D189665

[ridgerunner]

ok you can stop using the term obamacare since it was based on the system romney instituted in mas.
is that why mitt wants it gone so badly?

mitt replaced hillarycare with romneycare..........and the state is going broke

[tommyturtle]

Obama took a flawed Romneycare, made it national and claimed it for himself. Thus the term Obamacare. It's a valid term and will fail just as badly.

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by tommyturtle

Obama took a flawed Romneycare, made it national and claimed it for himself. Thus the term Obamacare. It's a valid term and will fail just as badly.

Not according to Romney's Campaign.

Team Romney Scares Conservatives By Touting ‘Romneycare’

Mitt Romney’s campaign is giving conservatives quite a scare this week by touting Romney’s Massachusetts health care overhaul — a subject Romney has gone to great lengths to avoid.



Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul brought up the law in response to a Priorities USA ad in which a steelworker, who lost his job after Bain Capital closed the GST Steel mill where he worked, connects his unemployment — and resulting lack of health insurance — to the death of his wife.



Team Romney’s response: He should have lived in Massachusetts.
On two Fox News appearances Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, Saul countered that if the steelworker, Joe Soptic, and his wife had lived in Massachusetts, they would have kept their insurance under Romney’s health care reform law.


“To that point, if people had been in Massachusetts, under Gov. Romney’s health care plan, they would have had health care,” Saul said Tuesday.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...re.php?ref=fpa

[ace's n 8's]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

ok you can stop using the term obamacare since it was based on the system romney instituted in mas.
is that why mitt wants it gone so badly?

mitt replaced hillarycare with romneycare..........and the state is going broke

Ok you leftists can begin understanding the differences between states rights, and the federal government overstepping.

States have the right to fund anything that the residents of that state are willing to fund,,the federal government DOES NOT have that right. The state of Massachusetts has the right to provide state wide ''FREE'' healthcare for the residents of that state.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by stumbler

Not according to Romney's Campaign.

Team Romney Scares Conservatives By Touting ‘Romneycare’




http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...re.php?ref=fpa

Romney's campaign has no choice, do they? Romneycare could lose the election for Romney, but they have no alternative: they have to try to thread that needle.

I think he is going to lose. I don't see how he can win. I don't care who goes up as running mate. I don't see how anyone can win this one for Romney. He'll probably pick Marco, to try to lock Florida, but it won't be enough.

I still want Condee Rice, but I am an atheist and fiscal (not social) conservative, so I know damned well I am in dream land. She can't win it for him, either. The far right despise her, and if she were the running mate, they would stay home.

Romney blew it with Romneycare. I don't think he has much of a chance.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

Ok you leftists can begin understanding the differences between states rights, and the federal government overstepping.

States have the right to fund anything that the residents of that state are willing to fund,,the federal government DOES NOT have that right. The state of Massachusetts has the right to provide state wide ''FREE'' healthcare for the residents of that state.

Hi, Aces. Speaking of states' rights, have you heard the latest from Lizzy "Granny" Warren and how she is being tooled by Hollywood and Wall St. to win Teddy "Chivas Regal's" seat back?

Naw, sheesh. Not here. I'm going out to page 5, to resurrect my SQAW thread!!!! Back in a few.

[ace's n 8's]

Originally Posted by clarise

Hi, Aces. Speaking of states' rights, have you heard the latest from Lizzy "Granny" Warren and how she is being tooled by Hollywood and Wall St. to win Teddy "Chivas Regal's" seat back?

Naw, sheesh. Not here. I'm going out to page 5, to resurrect my SQAW thread!!!! Back in a few.

Anyone that ''I swallow'' Barney endorses has got to be a fruit loop, while Scotty Brown wants to be a 'nice guy',,how well will that bullshit work??

[ridgerunner]

aces it seems to me that you failed to adress that "obamacare" is actualy "romneycare"
and since romney wants to kill the "obamacare" bill that must mean that he knew that his own system was trash from day 1 and that would show through to the people

and then add the gop attempting to stop people from voting

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

aces it seems to me that you failed to adress that "obamacare" is actualy "romneycare"
and since romney wants to kill the "obamacare" bill that must mean that he knew that his own system was trash from day 1 and that would show through to the people

and then add the gop attempting to stop people from voting

[ace's n 8's]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

aces it seems to me that you failed to adress that "obamacare" is actualy "romneycare"
and since romney wants to kill the "obamacare" bill that must mean that he knew that his own system was trash from day 1 and that would show through to the people

]Fucking kids,,I tell ya.........

You will find that I have addressed the issue, about 2 years ago on this forum, Romney was visiting the White House, assisting in the drafting of Obamacare.

You will also find that I publicly stated that Romney is actually a center/leftists during most of his Governorship,,during Romney's Governorship in the state of Mass,,he had 85% leftists in the state office regulating and sucking the people of Massachusetts dry of their money.

Romney is essentially running his campaign on 'his business experience', not his Governorship of the great State of Massachusetts...

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

and then add the gop attempting to stop people from voting

The GOP is doing nothing of the sort, voting rights are voting rights, if a person needs a state photo I.D., to sell scrap at a scrap yard,,then it is only correct to provide a legal state I.D. to cast a vote.

[ridgerunner]

the id issue i agree with it stops illegals from voting
and if one is illegaly here they deserve no say(thats how rick perry wins)

and the last post was designed to get this response

[BigTrobbing]

It is already being reported that Dr's are no longer going to be accepting new medicaid patents and many Dr's are going to be leaving private practice.

I called mc caskill and asked what about the illegals that jump the fence to drop out kids, I was told we would be picking up that tab. I responded with what happened to everyone pulling their fair share (as obumnuts and the demoTwits have been saying) and was told we would be paying for them anyway. So what was the point of the socialized medicine obumnuts care for???

Once again we the people have been SCREWED. Just wait until people find out just how much this free care will cost.

[darthel0101]

Originally Posted by BigTrobbing

Just wait until people find out just how much this free care will cost.

Do we have any Britons who can advise on what taxes are like in that great social medicine state? IIRC, taxes on the LOWER portion of society run near 50%

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

Anyone that ''I swallow'' Barney endorses has got to be a fruit loop, while Scotty Brown wants to be a 'nice guy',,how well will that bullshit work??

Actually Clarise was just trying to spread a little right wing noise machine false propaganda. Which I'm sure you would just love to believe.

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

aces it seems to me that you failed to adress that "obamacare" is actualy "romneycare"
and since romney wants to kill the "obamacare" bill that must mean that he knew that his own system was trash from day 1 and that would show through to the people

and then add the gop attempting to stop people from voting

No actually a spokeswoman for the Romney Campaign was just bragging about Romney Care a day or two ago pointing out that if the laid off steel worker who's wife died of cancer after Bain Capitol laid him off and he lost his insurance would have had insurance under RomneyCare if they had lived in Massachusetts.

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

]Fucking kids,,I tell ya.........

You will find that I have addressed the issue, about 2 years ago on this forum, Romney was visiting the White House, assisting in the drafting of Obamacare.

You will also find that I publicly stated that Romney is actually a center/leftists during most of his Governorship,,during Romney's Governorship in the state of Mass,,he had 85% leftists in the state office regulating and sucking the people of Massachusetts dry of their money.

Romney is essentially running his campaign on 'his business experience', not his Governorship of the great State of Massachusetts...



The GOP is doing nothing of the sort, voting rights are voting rights, if a person needs a state photo I.D., to sell scrap at a scrap yard,,then it is only correct to provide a legal state I.D. to cast a vote.

Now that is a big dumb lie there Ace.

Fla. Republican: We wanted to suppress black votes

Florida's disgraced former GOP chairman says the party had meetings about "keeping blacks from voting"

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/27/fla_...d_black_votes/

Pennsylvania Republican: Voter ID Laws Are ‘Gonna Allow Governor Romney To Win’

This weekend, Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai (R-PA) finally admitted what so many have speculated: Voter identification efforts are meant to suppress Democratic votes in this year’s election.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/20...romney-to-win/

[stumbler]

Actually its pretty obvious healthcare costs in Massachusetts are increasing at a slower rate than the US average and at least they are trying to cut costs even more.

Background

Health expenditures in the United States neared $2.6 trillion in 2010, over ten times the $256 billion spent in 1980. [1] The rate of growth in recent years has slowed relative to the late 1990s and early 2000s, but is still expected to grow faster than national income over the foreseeable future.[2] Addressing this growing burden continues to be a major policy priority. Furthermore, the United States has been in a recession for much of the past decade, resulting in higher unemployment and lower incomes for many Americans. These conditions have put even more attention on health spending and affordability. [1]


Since 2001, employer-sponsored health coverage for family premiums have increased by 113%, placing increasing cost burdens on employers and workers. [3] In the public sector, Medicare covers the elderly and people with disabilities, and Medicaid provides coverage to low-income families. Enrollment has grown in Medicare with the aging of the baby boomers and in Medicaid due to the recession.[1], [4] This means that total government spending has increased considerably, straining federal and state budgets. In total, health spending accounted for 17.9% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2010. [5]

http://www.kaiseredu.org/issue-modul...und-brief.aspx


Has Massachusetts Finally 'Cracked the Code' On Health Care Costs?

This week, Massachusetts Governor, Devall Patrick, signed into existence a sweeping law designed to gain control over the spiraling costs of healthcare in Massachusetts—the home of the universal healthcare program now known as “Romneycare.”


The new law aims to save Massachusetts $200 billion over the next fifteen years by tying the growth of healthcare spending to the growth of the state’s economy.


It works like this—staring in 2013 and continuing through 2017, medical costs in Massachusetts will be permitted to rise at just one-half the rate of the state’s economic growth. For the five years that follow, spending will be further limited by an additional one half of a percentage point.


Massachusetts medical spending has seen an increase of about 7 percent each year over the past few years while the state’s economy has grown at a rate of approximately 3.7 percent. Using these rates of growth, health care spending would now be required to be cut by about ½ of the current rate of annual increase, greatly lowering the costs of care in the state.


To make this happen, the law has taken dramatic steps to change the way hospitals and physicians are paid—moving away from the fee per service model to one where providers are paid based on the overall care of a patient rather than how many tests are done, procedures performed, etc.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickunga...th-care-costs/

[ace's n 8's]

Originally Posted by stumbler

Actually Clarise was just trying to spread a little right wing noise machine false propaganda. Which I'm sure you would just love to believe.

Sounds like it is something that is actually factual,,or you leftists would be ignoring it,,but your not.

Originally Posted by stumbler

Now that is a big dumb lie there Ace.

Fla. Republican: We wanted to suppress black votes

Florida's disgraced former GOP chairman says the party had meetings about "keeping blacks from voting"

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/27/fla_...d_black_votes/

For christ's sake,, old issues,, lets talk about how many leftist politicians were convicted/charged with suppressing/gaining votes illegally,,shall we??

Originally Posted by stumbler

Pennsylvania Republican: Voter ID Laws Are ‘Gonna Allow Governor Romney To Win’



http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/06/25/505953/pennsylvania-republican-voter-id-laws-are-gonna-allow-governor-romney-to-win

Sounds about right to me,,,,but you leftists are to brainwashed from the White House talking points, to be able to comprehend exactly what Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai was even talking about,,,'those without ID's will typically vote for the democrat, actually that is how the leftist politicians have it designed.

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

Sounds like it is something that is actually factual,,or you leftists would be ignoring it,,but your not.

Ace the facts are that this was a settlement for federal violations of the motor voter act as it was called.

Let me help you out there.

The 1993 National Voter Registration Act — better known as the Motor Voter bill –requires that citizens be offered the opportunity to register to vote when they get a driver’s license or apply for social services.

Are you with me there so far? You can read those words and numbers can't you?

OK so:

Voting rights groups — including Demos — filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was not in compliance, after a 35-year-old woman was not offered the chance to register to vote when she filed paperwork with the state’s welfare office last June.

Still with me. The state of Massachusetts was not following that law so voting rights groups filed suit. Just like they are all over the US to stop the unconstitutional attempts by the American Legislative Exchange Council and the conservative/Republican/Tea Party to try and keep people who might vote Democratic from voting at all.

I have not seen anything more chickenshit since the 1960's and the old south.

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

For christ's sake,, old issues,,

Old issues? These are current as in just this past week or so.

Don't give me that bullshit dodge. They are admitting it NOW.

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

lets talk about how many leftist politicians were convicted/charged with suppressing/gaining votes illegally,,shall we??

Absolutely. Put some up and lets take a look at them.

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

Sounds about right to me,,,,but you leftists are to brainwashed from the White House talking points, to be able to comprehend exactly what Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai was even talking about,,,'those without ID's will typically vote for the democrat, actually that is how the leftist politicians have it designed.

OK then Ace if voter fraud is that big of a problem you won't have any trouble showing me some examples will you? Why don't you do that and prove me wrong?

[stumbler]

Did you guys see this? Its from former congressman Alan Grayson who is running for congress again. I think you better get ready for a whole different kind of voter list.

http://www.namesofthedead.com/