Use your head. The legal requirement that drivers observe speed limits does not guarantee that they will. Duh! Your information is anecdotal. If not, cite your sources that substantiate your claims. And what in the world is a "sub-satisfactory physician"?

You're making an 'argument from authority' and your logic is formally the same as an ad hominem fallacy:

B (Lawmaker) claim Y1 (accuracy and diligence of the law 42 USC 1395dd et seq)
B is an expert in field Y (Consitutional law)
Therefore Y1

It is your logic that is flawed. And I don't think I'm relating anecdotes when I note that there are people in this country and all across the world who have been dying for generations due to INFINITELY rising costs in health care. It's a fact of life, tho maybe not in your own personal shangri la.

"I have read the law extensively, and you know that a hospital's legal requirement to treat the sick can in no way guarantee that they will do so in a timely and appropriate fashion. One might get into see a sub-satisfactory physician after they've been 'cleared' but only after valuable time in the healing process has passed without treatment."

"... there are people in this country and all across the world who have been dying for generations due to INFINITELY rising costs in health care."

Make up your mind. Are you arguing cost or availability? You still did not cite your sources nor define "sub-satisfactoty physician."

I don't think I have to distinguish between a good doctor who adequately serves the Hippocratic oath and those who don't--doctors who flippantly or glibly diagnose our loved ones for the purpose of not bettering the patient's health but of serving the insurance companies and HMO's.

And are you arguing that such health services are adequately available and distributed in this country? If so, then why the need for an overhaul? Which is it?

That the system is broken is a given, you wouldn't be arguing for reform if it weren't. That the daunting financial task of establishing nationalized health care for 100% of the American populus is comparable to that of paving the roads in Afghanistan or putting a man on Mars has been noted extensively, and I don't have to track down a source on such a standardly acknowledged claim.

Nor is it necessary to substantiate (our) claim that the system is broken, that poor people go without pills, chemotherapy, wheelchairs, just the same as I don't have to cite sources to prove someone's house is burning down - where there's smoke, there is fire. No amount of fallacious appeals to authority can discount that.

Question is: what are we going to do about it, and is it too late for anything to be done? Mr. Obama seems to have backed off his initial proposal so what's next?

Whats next???? HE PASSED HEALTH CARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not a perfect bill, but a damn good start. Once everyone sees the heavens don't fall because this has passed, he's a two termer.

Whatever else you can say, he managed to accomplish what other presidents have attempted for almost a century.

As for being a two-termer, let's see the economy even out a bit first. People are still too frightened.

Yeah, I agree. If the economy doesn't pick up and we're still at war in two years, he's no shoe-in for a second term. Sorry, Don T, you get too excited. But it's understandable, given your age .

But let President Obama have his moment today. He got it done. And kudos to Reid and Pelosi. I still don't like either one of them, but they really improved their "do nothing" reputations with this bill.

Hold on. There's still a ways to go before health care reform becomes a reality. The Senate will have to pass it and there are any number of amendments to it that can be offered by Senators that will have to be considered.

I wonder how many of those shitheads in congress will not be re-elecrted come November?

How many small businesses will have to close now? How many more people will lose their jobs?

Why was it more important for Obamacare than it was for job creation?

Mig, Why do you think that small businesses will have to close? And if these elected officials risked re-election by voting with their conscience, isn't that to be admired? Isn't that what we always complain about, that the politicians are so concerned with staying in office that they won't vote for something that would help people?

In part Babe, the answer to your question is that, unlike myself and maybe a few other Board members, who has read the Bill that passed the House last night or the one that passed the Senate last December? Who has even read a summary of those bills? If they had, they would know that most of the provisions of the bill don't become effective until 2014 and that employers with less than 50 (and in some cases 100)employees are exempt from any provisions regarding health insurance coverage. Ignorance can be bliss, but in more cases than not, it is damaging.

This already failed in the Michigan Senate , which does have a Republican majority. So I don't think it's going anywhere.

Anti-health reform drive begins in Michigan

KIM KOZLOWSKI
The Detroit News

Republicans and Michigan Tea Party leaders are launching a petition drive today to put an initiative on the November ballot that would ask voters if citizens could opt out of the federal health care reform.

The move follows landmark passage of legislation late Sunday that aims to overhaul the nation's health care system by expanding it to an estimated 32 million uninsured Americans. Among the package's provisions is a requirement that all citizens have health insurance or face sanctions if they do not purchase it.

But opponents want to allow citizens to opt out.

"We feel what happened last night, under the cover of darkness, was the taking of our freedoms," said state Rep. Tom McMillin, R-Rochester Hills.

The group announced it has scheduled a press conference for 1 p.m. outside William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, which prompted hospital officials to declare that it does not support the effort.

"Beaumont is not affiliated with the anti-health reform press conference in Royal Oak today," officials said on its Twitter page. "We support health reform."

To get the initiative on the ballot, supporters will have to collect 381,000 valid signatures by July 5. Already, 300 people have volunteered to collect signatures after McMillin put up a request on his Facebook page on Sunday, he said, adding that organizers will be submitting language to the board of canvassers this week.

The language is patterned after legislative and ballot initiative efforts in 37 other states, such as Arizona, where citizens rejected the initiative in 2008.

Whether a state constitutional amendment can trump federal legislation is unclear. Numerous experts say state efforts can't override federal law.

But the Goldwater Institute -- a public police/think tank/litigation center based in Phoenix -- says it can.

"This is one of the most important decisions people can make for themselves, but it's not the government's decision to make for us," said Starlee Rhoades, vice president of external affairs for the Goldwater Institute, which hopes the issue reaches the U.S. Supreme Court.

"We want to have a legal battle on whether the federal government can force people to buy products they may or may not want."

In case you hadn't actually watched the news or read a newspaper, the president signed a $38 billion jobs bill last week.

Unclear? I'd like to read that legal brief!

This issue has to be seen in two different contexts: Technocratical and political.

(1) Olivant is right, plus that this bill is pretty similar to the one Nixon proposed in the early 1970s. Yes Nixon is a socialist now. It's rather conservative, not as apocalyptical liberal as talk radio this morning made it out to be.

A similar (if not exact clone) we can see in execution is the derided "RomneyCare" over in Massachussetts, the state healthcare system signed into law by Mitt Romney, the supposed front-runner for the 2012 GOP Nomination. Notice how he wrote an angry pissy response about how Obama created tyranny because he passed a national variation of RomneyCare.

The premiums are highest in the nation, in the late 30s, maybe over 40 but I can't remember exactly. Because the demand overloaded the supply, alot of folks got kicked out in order to pay the insurance.

(2) But politically, unless I'm mistaken, you don't see the Massachusetts GOP actively trying to repeal and shut down RomneyCare. Not even that Scott Brown fellow who won Ted Kennedy's seat.* In fact many in that seat fear that ObamaCare will cut into their RomneyCare. They want to more "reform" or fix up that leaky boat.

Consider how the GOP talked of how problematic the healthcare systems in Canada and UK are. And they do have a point. To a degree. But notice neither nation is in a hurry to go back to a US-style healthcare apparatus. Shit even the Tories in UK would really batshit nuts if someone tried to do that with their healthcare system.

The HCR passed last night has problems and alot of bullshit. But it's a start, and I'm almost certain the Democrats will get schlacked this fall. But the HCR stays, and like Social Security and Medicare, it'll become a political liability to seriously consider dismantling or shutting it down. Optimistic I am, but in years to come as party majority comes and goes, that ship will be fixed up, loopholes filled,

Also you think some of those states those populations will get pissed they won't get healthcare denied by their capitals? I wonder that will backfire like the Stimulus "turn down" by several GOP governors, who then got bucked by their own assemblies. Some which were fellow party members.

*=I don't want to be a dick, and couldn't care less about Brown. But just the idea of Teddy rolling in his grave, maybe it was worth it.

Yeah that argument a state can deny federal supremacy has been around since Jefferson/Madison drafted those Annulments to the Adams Presidency arresting people for criticizing the government and banning foreigners from entering the country, etc. But once Jefferson became President, that shit hit the dirt. Hell he even betrayed his own political philosophy in his method of getting the Louisiana Purchase.

Then Calhoun tried that same card at federal tariffs, his South Carolina even openly rumbling about succession. Andrew Jackson threatened to personally march the American Army down there and lynch Calhoun himself, that issue died down again.

Then that whole Civil War thing, directly and indirectly about that whole slavery thing...yeah.

Then when the federal government was actually serious about protecting civil rights of blacks again in the 1950s/60s, you had southern states try to play that fucking card again. Got George Wallace nationally famous, led in someways to the mainstream resurgence of the Conservative political movement. But in substance? Why nothing.

Nobody ever believes in the principle of statte's rights, it's a situational cause.

You know, Ronnie, if you didn't go out of your way to be a dick most of the time, I'd have to admit that you're one of the most intelligent posters on this board .

It's a compliment, so don't get your panties in a bunch .

Gotta love that Andy Jackson!

Lets see what the actual jobs are before you get all excited.

How do you know that our elected officials voted with their concience? How do you know that Reid & Pelosi didn't bribe them to get their vote.

Can I add that whether your political opinions....one can't help but admire what Pelosi pulled off?

I admit, I've called Madame Speaker a ton of names. Skeletor, Useless, Gomez, Frankenstein, etc. But with Healthcare once again dead as a doornail just more than a month ago, she was determined to get the sucker passed, boom or bust. And she got it passed at the House.

And one must realize this: I believe Obama, Pelosi, and Reid knew the party was likely (unless the economy improves over the summer) to get their asses kicked in November. So they figure if that is the case, well let's go out with a bang and at least have something passed that they could be proud of having accomplished.

That is a reminder to everybody: Elections matter. Generally, especially last decade, we've had this unofficial Congressional maxim that everything was about the next election cycle, that do what was political expedient, damn the promises to that base who worked their asses (and donated much) to get them elected to the Hill. The base will mindlessly continue pumping money and volunteers, don't worry.

Whether Democrat or Republican, we want people up there to do what we want done. Cutting taxes, Healthcare, whatever. Well, many Democrats wanted Healthcare. And they got it passed even over the majority of their own conservative wing. Some things are worth losing an election over. Goldwater's supporters in 1964 realized that. The GOP in 2010 have forgotten that.

Healthcare has been bandied about for over a century after Mr. Badass himself Teddy Roosevelt proposed it. Then Democratic Presidents from FDR to Truman to JFK to LBJ to Carter to Clinton have talked talked talked and hoped it could happen. It finally happened under that black guy with the foreign name who picked the wrong college to win the Final Four*

Whether he was the ideological muscle or not**, after a year of shit progress the President decided to quit letting Congress those clueless jackoffs run this debate and gambled to finally put his team on one bill and become the face of it. The ball was fumbled, he picked it up, could have gotten fucking buried this side of Lawrence Taylor on Joe Theisman's leg. Instead Obama somehow, by luck and persistence and politicking, ran for the touchdown.

Or to put it another way, he can finally tell Bill Clinton to go suck his dick. Clinton with the best economy in American history with no major foreign policy problems couldn't get it done. Obama with maybe the worst economy since the Great Depression, inheriting two never-ending wars in Asia, will sign the bill.

*=Though to be fair, I think almost 90% everybody else figured Kansas would win too.
**=I think it was Pelosi, but Obama definately is easier an easier face to sell than hers. YEECH!

Heck that's easy to answer Mig. It's because Obama's whole freaking presidency was based on this one single issue.



[quote=SC

Time to take some sleepy time tea from the tea party and rest yourself.
[/quote]


Actually SC Mig is not to far off. Senator Ben Nelson from Nebraska(whom I'm ashamed to say that I voted for, although come 2012 I plan to rectify that oversight) was against the senate version passed last December for a long time, then just hours before it passes he all of a sudden supports it after winning concessions for his home state, a state whose citizens wanted nothing to do with this whole health care reform in the first place. His vote was basically bought and paid for!!!

Iceman - How shocking. What's next, rappers curse? The sky is blue? The local preacher is a womanizing son of a gun?

btw, "Rectify"? Will you whine in '12 if Nelson gets re-elected in spite of your e-rectification?

You asked why "Obamacare" was more important than job creation, and when I pointed out that a $38 billion jobs bill was actually signed by the President BEFORE the healthcare bill, that's your response? That I shouldn't get excited?? At least he's TRYING things, not sitting around with his thumb up his ass, obsessed with sending out our young men and women to look for weapons of mass destruction that don't exist. Oh, by the way, the trillions spent on that obsession is what put us in this desperate need for jobs creation.

And they were bribed? All 219 of them? And there was no chance that the insurance lobbyists were spreading the wealth for any "no" votes from the Republicans?? Puh-leeze!

...

The real problem here is: Where the hell is the money really coming from?

Keep sending money out there!

At Rotary last week, those at our table (all Business owners)said, they cannot take any more overhead on. Not a Tax, not a Fee, not another Increase, not another Form. They have cut back as much as they can and if they are called upon to provide more for this crap, then they will downsize and let people GO! The small business owner is on a tightrope just hanging on in some cases.

LESS JOBS!

Or the outcome is to raise prices which they feel will cut sales because of higher prices and cause inflation.

Then less sales lead to less sales taxes being taken in so then there is a need to find other ways to make up the gap.

So what is the real costs here?

FS, you have a point about the business community. However, and please forgive me if I'm wrong, isn't your business located in NY?? It's NY State government that's royally screwing the small businesses more than anything. Between levying that ridiculous MTA Payroll Tax on people that aren't serviced by MTA, cutting school aid so that local property taxes are increased, and now they want to add tolls on the East River Bridges. The NYS Legislature has increased spending by 70% in the last 10 years. That may have more to do with why businesses are being strangled rather than federal government, although they're not getting a pass either.

Many businesses are also using the economy as an excuse. Even those that are making money are cutting jobs in order to raise profits. To the workers that are left to pick up the slack, they can tell them to go elsewhere if they don't like it. Where are you going to go??

Is anybody watching the historic Bill Signing as we speak?



TIS

I'm watching it. One thing really confuses me. Some of the same people that voted Obama into office, are now very upset for him doing exactly what he said he was going to do during his campaign. Healthcare reform was the #1 thing on his agenda. I guess a good portion of America just voted him in because they hated 8 years of Bush, and never thought he'd be able to deliver on healthcare reform.

Lou,

I think a lot of his base were (and still are) disappointed that there is no public option.


TIS