Blue Cross Blue Shield Lobbyists Quietly Helping Extreme Effort To Declare Health Reform Unconstitutional
Blue Cross Blue Shield Lobbyists Quietly Helping Extreme Effort To Declare Health Reform Unconstitutional
ThinkProgess has documented how the private health insurance industry is waging a duplicitous, “two-faced” campaign to kill health reform. Because the industry understands that the public views it in a largely negative light, the industry presents itself as proactively working hand-in-hand with legislators to produce reform. However, behind the scenes, the industry is coordinating a massive effort to kill all reform — employing attacks from front groups, allied politicians, think tanks, lobbyists, and right-wing media.
The Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, which is a lobbying group representing 39 independent Blue Cross and Blue Shield Plans, is also engaged in this two-faced campaign. Like most of industry, the BCBS Association says it fully supports the concept of health reform, but continually demands drastic changes to the bills in Congress. Some have begun to question the BCBS Association’s claim of support given its new study attacking reform legislation in the Senate. The criticism of BCBS is bolstered by a new revelation that BCBS Association lobbyists are helping to orchestrate a right-wing movement to invalidate all of health reform.
Yesterday, the BCBS Association released yet another industry-sponsored study to distort health reform and falsely claim that premiums will skyrocket because of the legislation. However, the nonpartisan CBO reported earlier this week that under the Senate health reform bill, “most Americans would pay the same or less in premiums.” A New York Times editorial yesterday criticized BCBS Association’s study, and noted correctly that it is yet another example of the private insurance industry doing whatever it can to frighten Americans.
But while the study certainly damages BCBS’ credibility, BCBS is involved in another anti-health reform ploy that they do not bother to promote on the BCBS website. The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), founded in 1973 by conservative activist Paul Weyrich, is a DC-based front group which helps state lawmakers craft corporate-friendly legislation. As the Atlantic has noted, ALEC developed template health care “states’ rights,” legislation to declare aspects of health reform unconstitutional. ALEC has promoted this “tenther” legislation using its network of mostly far right Republican state lawmakers. The bills, which have been adopted in some form in 24 states so far, aim to invalidate federal regulations of health insurance, the public option and the individual mandate using the Tenther Amendment.
According to the ALEC website, the resolution was developed by a three member task force of industry representatives. One of the of the members is Joan Gardner, who is executive director of state services with the BCBS Association’s Office of Policy and Representation. In an interview with ThinkProgress, Christie Herrera, the director of ALEC’s health task force, confirmed that Gardner played a pivotal role in crafting this anti-health reform states’ rights initiative. Herrera told us that Gardner’s unique position at the BCBS Association brought “great knowledge” to the issue, and that Gardner voted to press forward with the campaign.
Part of the reason the BCBS Association has claimed that it opposes the reform bill in its current form is because of what it perceives as a weak individual mandate. However, the BCBS Association-supported ALEC campaign depicts the very notion of an individual mandate as “anti-freedom.” So either way the Senate acts, BCBS will be able to trash the bill and try to kill reform.
Private insurers have already been caught using a stealth lobbying firm to send employees to rowdy town halls (and radical tea party events), sharing lobbyists with slash-and-burn anti-health reform attack groups, and paying a number of conservative pundits who regularly appear in major media outlets to slam health reform. Now that it is clear that BCBS helped write the script for the radical tenther movement, any claim that the industry supports reform must be viewed with heightened skepticism.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Wonder how much of that %23 per year increase in premiums is going to lobbying?
December 5th, 2009 at 12:31 pmWhat unconstitutional is how these companies can monoplize. What a bunch of parasites.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:34 pmJust another example of how illogical it is to have health care provision dominated by for-profit corporations. They have no choice but to do anything possible to whore after the stockholders, who could care less about the ultimate product, even though they often are personally affected by it…
December 5th, 2009 at 12:39 pmThis nation is sick, sick, sick.
No health insurance policy can cure this possibly terminal illness in our nation.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:39 pmThe middle class and poor of this country are fcuked. The corporations own the politicians. Without the abolition of lobbying and the current method of campaign financing, the only changes will be for the worse.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:39 pmCorrect me if I am wrong, but doesn’t Congress have the ability to regulate commerce?
December 5th, 2009 at 12:42 pmBenji, you’re right. Congress has the ability to regulate Commerce, and to pass legislation that does their Corporate Masters the most good.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:51 pmThe sad part is that even with a public option, you won’t qualify for it if you make any money.
Then we will still have to deal with companies like this who want to delcare health care reform unconstitutional.
There is something very wrong with that.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:52 pmHi VoteDownBaby. How’s your morning going?
December 5th, 2009 at 12:54 pmBlueCross/BullSh– does support health care reforms.
They wholeheartedly supports any reform that prevents their victims from sueing them.
They fully support any reform that totally deregulates the health insurance industry.
They fully support any reform that cuts taxes on their profits.
They also support reform that requires everyone to buy health insurance at whatever rates they want to charge.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pmbenji85 says:
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t Congress have the ability to regulate commerce?
Yes, Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. This clause in the Constitution is broadly interpreted and you will be hard pressed to find any recent court decisions that have struck down a federal law based on the clause. The tenther argument is specious at best. Any state laws that challenge the health care act based on the amendment will fail. Federal law will preempt any state law on the issue and those laws will be held to be unconstitutional based on the Supremacy clause. The states are pissing in the wind.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pmThe corporations own the politicians. Without the abolition of lobbying and the current method of campaign financing, the only changes will be for the worse.
Fully Agree with you there!
December 5th, 2009 at 12:56 pmThis is the only solution to the basic probem:
1. Public funding for all federal elections.
2. No single-client lobbying allowed in congress, period.
3. Networks must provide public service time to allow candidates for federal office to debate and present their ideas.
4. Limits on television political advertising.
In the absence of these changes, we have to hope Democrats will pass some form of meaningful health care reform, but people shouldn’t kid themselves. This is a huge American corporate industry trying to protect hundreds of millions in profits. They’ll do anything. People get killed in the street every day for hundreds of dollars or less. The insurance industry will do anything to protect that business.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:58 pmExit Stage Left @ 5,
I remember a quote from “Lil Abner”, Sunday Funnies years ago.
“What’s good for General Bullmoose” is good for the USA.
In that day, General Bullmoose was General Motors, these days it’s health care.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:59 pmThings don’t change much. You have good politicians and then you have the whores.
I am afraid Washington is one large brothel, and it always has been. The Republicans have a reputation of refining the business. Thanks G W Bush for your good work. Another facet of your legacy.
If congress was doing its job of representing the people (as opposed to corporations), these greedy Insurance Companies would have been pushed to the sidelines years ago.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:00 pmFor the first hundred years of our republic, it was a criminal offense in most states for any corporation to give any money to any election. Up until the late 19th century, corporations had to be dissolved after 40 years!
Some of our country’s founders believed corporations were just a crafty new way to set up a landed aristocracy similar to the monarchy-based system entrenched in Europe. Of course, they were correct. Today, a large percentage of large corporations are run, at least in part, by the children of those who founded the corporations. And, the majority of American wealth today is inherited, not earned.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:02 pmAnalysis like this does serve one useful purpose for cynics like me.
Whenever I reach the point where I am absolutely convinced the health reform efforts are largely a sham mapped out behind closed doors between crony capitalists on Wall Street and in Congress, stuff like this makes me think there actually might be real reform here. Elst why would the insurance industry wage this sort of battle?
Don’t get me wrong. Max Baucus Inc. and all that he stands for in the effort to “reform” health care in America is still unequivocally The Bottom Line.
But it’s nice to know there is still something worth preserving underneath it.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:02 pmThat is precisely why they want to eliminate the Estate Tax.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:05 pmAnd the chief of staff to the incoming sack-of-shit in NJ was counsel to Horizon Blue Cross/Blue Shield of New Jersey. If Congress passes the opt-in, I, and several million others, go without affordable healthcare.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:07 pmBriseadh na Faire: “That is precisely why they want to eliminate the Estate Tax.”
Too late! The Dems are re-instituting the tax at 45% for everything above $3.5 million for individuals and $7 million for couples. The tax will affect less than one percent of all American inheritances, but it will bring in billions.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:10 pmMy wife’s Blue Cross rates are going up, Up, UP. We are raising her deductible to the highest they offer just to keep the cost where it was. They spend our hard earned money hiring lying lobbyists and paying fat executive salaries. I feel like an indentured servant to these phuckers.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:10 pmGeorge, it doesn’t look to me like Baucus is calling any shots anymore. The Senate bill includes a decent public option and the majority wants it to stay there.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:11 pmWho will have access to the public option?
December 5th, 2009 at 1:12 pmWho will have access to the public option?
Last I heard it was everyone, for 2.5% of your pay. So if you make $50,000 you get it for around $100 a month. Difference being the choice is gone. Suppose your wife covers you both for $48 per 2 weeks for $98 a month, she is better off staying with that (Provided you make nothing). If the two of you make 100K, then it’s around $200 that you must spend OR stay with a plan that is existing from work.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:20 pmcorrection $96 a month
December 5th, 2009 at 1:20 pmAppropriate you put a question mark there, Fuzzy.
You likely are guessing that undocumented immigrants will have access to the public option.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:21 pmfuzzy – you didn’t stick around last night to confirm my suspicion that you are in fact Exley.
your post to Z gave you away.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:23 pmWe pay over $600 per month just for her and she has a pre-existing condition. Our income varies as we are self employed…35 to 50 thousand per year. Sounds like it could free up some of our income.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pmNinerFan says:
This is the only solution to the basic probem:
1. Public funding for all federal elections.
2. No single-client lobbying allowed in congress, period.
3. Networks must provide public service time to allow candidates for federal office to debate and present their ideas.
4. Limits on television political advertising.
There are serious legal questions with all of these ideas. The easiest election reforms that can be enacted would be:
1. A draconian ban on all government employees and their families accepting any money, gifts, services or item of value from lobbyists.
2. All campaign contributions would be restricted to a hard limit of money which includes contributions to PACs. The contributions should be limited to any person that has the right to vote. Corporations will be limited to making contributions to PAC’s with a hard limit. A hard limit means a specific dollar amount. For example, a voter could give $5000.00 and that limit applies to all candidates. The corporations would also be limited to a one time contribution to PAC’s and no more per year. These limits are intended to stop multiple donations so the individual or corporation has to divide the $5k among various candidates and PAC’s. All PAC’s must be legally affiliated with a candidate. Once the person has made that contribution, they would be barred from donating any further money, gifts and services.
The hard limits would remove a lot of cash from the election process. It would be uneconomical for corporations and interest groups to keep forming new entities to get around that $5k limit because there is a lot of paperwork to incorporate and obtain federal tax id numbers. The IRS would have a registration fee of $1000.00 with such paperwork.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:26 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
WTF? Why do the trolls ALWAYS target immigrants? There is wording in the bill that stipulates that illegal immigrants won’t benefit in this Bill. Jesus! These guys are morons!
December 5th, 2009 at 1:26 pmI had Blue Cross when it was a non-profit. I’ll never forget the asswipe CEO who decided to go for-profit.
My premiums TRIPLED in one month. Apparently being a Wall Street honcho is incredibly easy.
This ‘unconstitutional’ argument will go the way of the Tenthers. Nowhere. Ah gah-ron-TEE it.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:26 pmWho has insurance like that? What could it possibly cover?
Use realisic numbers and you get a different picture.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:26 pmFuzzy logic is no help…
December 5th, 2009 at 1:27 pmTundra, Thanks for the information.
Fuzzy Slippers: “Undocumented immigrants?”
The public option is not really a national single-payer plan. It’s an insurance plan run by the government in which one must sign up and pay premiums. And undocumented immigrant would be unable to sign up for the program.
And anyone who told you otherwise was lying to you, fuzzy! Maybe you should reevaluate your “source”.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:28 pmHow very un-American of them.
Blood-sucking %$#@#@!!! (I can’t think of a word bad enough, alas.)
December 5th, 2009 at 1:28 pmI’d venture that over 90% of immigrants are better members of our society than 90% of the teabagger trash that are so vocal against immigrants.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:30 pmI currently pay $400/month for my post-divorce COBRA. I have 22 months of eligibility left (ends on 10-31-11)which leaves me a few years short of the implementation of any public option. Since I’m self-employed with pre-existing conditions, it looks like I’ll be unable to get health insurance, at any price, for a few years. I’ll be relegated to the Republican plan of: don’t get sick, but if I do…die quickly.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:30 pmfuzzy slippers link in his name links to a trojan. Do not click on it.
Report from Norton:
Norton Safe Web has analyzed deco-01.slide.com for safety and security problems. Below is a sample of the threats that were found.
Threats found: 1
Here is a complete list:
Threat Name: Downloader
Type: Trojan Horse
Systems Affected: Windows 2000, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows Me, Windows NT, Windows XP
Downloader connects to the Internet and downloads other Trojan horses or components.
Note: Virus definitions dated June 1, 2006 or earlier may detect this threat as Download.Trojan.
Flag him for abuse and don’t click on his link.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:30 pmWho has insurance like that? What could it possibly cover?
Use realisic numbers and you get a different picture.
Gee Fred, that’s my case as my employer pays a majority of it currently. I actually pay $28 every two weeks, would be $48 if I had family coverage.
Sorry if my numbers didn’t fit into your “realistic” number scenerio. Guess I am the only guy running around who works for a company that actually pays large amounts of his health insurance. I’m sure they will refigure out all the calculations when the hard numbers are in though.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:30 pmpags2: “There are serious legal questions with all of these ideas.”
Not if someone revisits Santa Clara v Southern Pacific. There is still no real reason, no prevailing original opinion, that gives corporations the rights of individuals under the 14th Amendment. The idea that they get these rights as a result of this case is a mistake and a myth that must be revisited by someone soon.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:31 pmTundra, congrats on your nice company plan. I hope you like your job, because under the current system you’re stuck.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:33 pmI’m thinking that maybe you are.
It is definately not what most Americans are facing.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:35 pmOK, putting a link on this board with a virus should get anyone banned for life. I hope the people running this site have the ability to see where “Fuzzy Slippers” is coming from and make it impossible for him to come here again.
These people are just such low-down dirty rats, it boggles my mind.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:35 pmTundra, congrats on your nice company plan. I hope you like your job, because under the current system you’re stuck.
Hey, I’ve been thinking of starting my own business, if universal health care goes through and a public option it’s just another push in that direction.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:36 pmExley says:
Why not?
December 5th, 2009 at 1:39 pmI’m questionin ya fool.
Your link says this:
gee, I wonder what that could mean?
December 5th, 2009 at 1:39 pmFizzy Sluppers ain’t no Exley, although he probably wishes he could be.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:40 pmArizona would be better served if the illegals there received no healthcare, and ended up infecting half the state with hep-C,
right Exley?
oops – i’m sorry – i questioned you.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:41 pmAre we surprised?
The profit-driven companies soak their clients with premium increases, deny them coverage on their claims, and throw them off the rolls if they end up paying a couple of dollars on their clients’ behalf.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:41 pmThat they employ lobbyists (spending millions) to sway lawmakers on their behalf, that they secretly finance operations to thwart reform, that they pay their CEOs millions each year in bonuses and salaries to concoct these schemes is testimony that we need to get health care out from under the profiteers.
Don’t ever question me.
Ok Cheney.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:42 pmi think it is Z.
pretty sure i specifically recall the exchange with you he referred to last night.
doesn’t quite sound the same as he used to – but that was then – before the exquisite beating of the 06 and 08 elections.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:42 pmfuzzy slippers + living in AZ = sweatty, stinky feet.
try flip-flops instead.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:44 pmBCBS Association = U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Both of these membership organizations exist for one purpose only — protect the status quo and guard the interests of their members without regard to the public good.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:45 pm56 – but when ordinary people organize to assert their own self-interest, it’s branded socialism and portrayed as evil.
neat double-standard, huh?
December 5th, 2009 at 1:47 pmFizzy Sluppers,
List some of your prior monikers.
I won’t put it in the form of a question, because I certainly wouldn’t want to
December 5th, 2009 at 1:47 pmunhingeupset you.How did policy-holder owned health insurance companies (like Blue Cross Blue Sheild) become for-profit with no benefit to the policy holders? Was this legal?
How did hospitals, built by local communities and local donations, move from non-profit to for-profit? Was this legal?
How does this happen in a so-called “Christian” nation? Is this fair?
How does this hatred and profit happen?
December 5th, 2009 at 1:48 pmdixie – in my State, they tried to go private, but the state insurance commission wouldn’t allow it because it went directly against their original charter to operate in the state.
i’d guess in the states where they’ve privatized, they just greased the right R’s and had their charter conveniently overlooked.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:50 pmsee Z – i pulled his mask off and he ran away.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:50 pmtombaker,
Exley never ran away, especially if he was wrong, and he’s not in Arizona.
Of course, all trolls lie.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:53 pmI’ll question you as much as I want.
Nice that you use a state system to “prove” that a federal system would have the same pattern. Anyone ever state that the AHCCCS would be the exact same system as the Obama health care proposal?
Okay, Exley?
Oh, that’s a question mark. My bad.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:55 pmthat’s not exley… guessing…
what name did the rude azzhole from AZ use, the one who drove his own schwans-like delivery truck?
it could be that one… who has gotten even more rude and angry…
i’ve been around since day 1, and used to keep track…
December 5th, 2009 at 1:55 pmmaybe i can find that list…
The Fizzy Sipper adds nothing to the discussion.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:55 pmNinerFan says:
pags2: “There are serious legal questions with all of these ideas.”
Not if someone revisits Santa Clara v Southern Pacific. There is still no real reason, no prevailing original opinion, that gives corporations the rights of individuals under the 14th Amendment. The idea that they get these rights as a result of this case is a mistake and a myth that must be revisited by someone soon.
I agree but you cannot realistically believe that the SCOTUS is going to overturn that case. The corporations have freedom of speech, but they do not have an unqualified right to dole out money for political campaigns and PAC’s. It is easier to regulate the campaign contributions than to overturn case law. These restrictions do not interfere with their freedom of speech because they are still free to say what they want, but they cannot use proxies to get around the campaign limits. It would force corporations and campaign donors out into the open.
There PACs that are not affiliated with a candidate such as the health care ones today. There are multiple political PACs for various issues. The hard limits would apply to these PAC’s so that corporations would have to decide how to divide the $5k on health care, cap and trade, etc. One of the major election campaign problems is the proliferation of PAC’s as a means to get around the limits. The fees for IRS registration and the hard limits would make it difficult to get around. People and companies can set up multiple PAC’s but if you restrict the ability to collect contributions from the sources, individuals and companies, the lobbyists such as Freedom Works would find it difficult to raise money from the same sources.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:55 pmthat’s the ptsd for ya.
having been proven so comprehensively wrong over the long run has really shaken him to his core.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:55 pmUnfortunately, my carrier is BCBS and I just received notice of a 10% increase for 2010.
It’s so nice to know that my hard-earned money is supporting the rich vulchers and their paid shyster lobbyists.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:56 pm‘Don’t ever question me’. Excuse me, but who the Hell are you? What an ego!
December 5th, 2009 at 1:56 pmPD,
Fizzy Sluppers is such an inadequate chickenshit piss-soaked troll that he thinks online threats scare us.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:03 pmkaty says:
“what name did the rude azzhole from AZ use, the one who drove his own schwans-like delivery truck?”
That was O Bigfoot, and he’s from northwestern New Mexico.
He bragged at length about his business, and his place in the backcountry, and about his scavenging of “cultural resources, ie: artifacts.
All in my general neighborhood, which I informed him of.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:08 pmI happened to casually mention his activities to personages of a law enforcement nature to whom that kind of activity would be of interest…
Maybe he got scared and wised up.
And shut up.
Regardless of state charters…how did they change under IRS regulations from a 501(c)3 organization to a for profit organization without public notice or pay outs to the previous fund raisers?
How did we get robbed?
December 5th, 2009 at 2:11 pmO i remember the Bigfoot too. quite the piece of work – i think of him every time i see an old fat white guy with a bunch of righty bumperstickers and a ballcap driving around in a shitty beat-up old car.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:11 pm72 – sympathetic administrations in D.C. i’d suppose, but i really don’t know.
we’ll never know half of the illegitimate and shady ways the insiders collude to screw another buck out of everyone.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:13 pmO. Bigfoot, i do believe…
you should see this list… all time favorite hits…
ugh.
.
hey zooey – i found a zinger of yours, from 12/8/07:
G eorge
December 5th, 2009 at 2:16 pmO rwell’s
P rediction
I think of O Bigfoot every time I see a doughy white guy driving a beat up pickup with Sportsmen For Bush bumper stickers and a couple of old freezers full of meat in ziploc bags.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:16 pmThey like to park wherever they can run an extension cord to an outlet.
i made some very random notes…
did you know that corn syrup depletes vitamin B?
now you do…
December 5th, 2009 at 2:18 pmI’ve had BCBS of Florida for years. Costs me $6,000 a year in premiums and bound to go up. Deductibles are killer too. I don’t mind the new guidelines on mammograms because I can only afford a $250 mammogram once every two years! Yes, that is what I have had to pay for each of my last two mammograms because BCBS won’t cover all the costs. I don’t dare get the colonoscopy recommended by my physician. I had one of those 6 years ago with some questionable results. I was suppose to have a colonoscopy every 5 years after that one, but no way. I asked BCBS if a colonoscopy would be covered; one person said yes and the other one said no, so I don’t dare chance it.
Talk about rationing of health care. I’m sure Blanche Lincoln doesn’t have to worry about whose paying for her mammograms.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:21 pmahhh… noseeum got it… and correctly… new mexico…
ok then… how about:
FrankM/FrankJ
muckdog?
actually, one would think only chicks would go for fuzzy slippers…
oh well……
December 5th, 2009 at 2:23 pmkaty says:
“…actually, one would think only chicks would go for fuzzy slippers…”
Really? What color?
December 5th, 2009 at 2:25 pm;)
$250 mammogram once every two years!
Why does a mammogram cost well over $250.00? Seeing as they paid some I would assume it’s more than that. Is it possible to justify that price?
December 5th, 2009 at 2:25 pmkaty, are you stalking me? :-D
I’d forgotten about that one!
December 5th, 2009 at 2:27 pm.
Q U E S T I O N:
When will influencing Legislation by Corporate dollars be outlawed?
We, The People…
… NOT they, the Corporate.
.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:27 pmTundra says:
“Why does a mammogram cost well over $250.00?”
For profit health care.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:28 pm@47 – quoting chapter and verse from policy documents in an extremely patronizing tone were always exley calling cards.
i’m sticking to my hypothesis until there’s more evidence to go on.
not that it matters – a troll is a troll is a troll.
i just wish they weren’t all as utterly lame as those who visit here lately.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:28 pmwell, MY fuzzy slippers are beige… don’t need laundered as often… heh…
no, zooey, not stalking… found an old notebook i used to keep…
December 5th, 2009 at 2:29 pmFor profit health care.
Which is not reflective of Health Insurance at this point. Because that sum sounds high and they have a limit on what they will pay for one. You are saying there are other places where costs are outragous and way out of control?
December 5th, 2009 at 2:31 pmYeah! Thanks Fred!
I can paste that info into the Report Abuse box.
There’s bugs in your slippers, Fuzzy.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:32 pmI don’t think you are experiencing what most Americans are experiencing with their insurance companies.
Are you very young?
December 5th, 2009 at 2:32 pmBefore I quit working to go to school, my Blue Shield of Idaho insurance was over $550 per month, with a $2K deductible. No matter how healthy I was, my insurance went up at least $75 per month — the last year, it went up $150 a month!
December 5th, 2009 at 2:33 pmWell, there used to be, but most countries with good educational systems and responsible governments fixed that problem decades ago.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:34 pmwow junior… i really wish you could find a way to get that colonoscopy… i know, it’s crazy expensive…
i have to do it every 3 years due to previous findings and family history…
my sister just had one and she stayed awake for it – but she’s an RN and like that… but, next time i’m going to try to skip the general anesthesia and save about half the cost…
my insurance “covers” mammograms… bless their hearts…
costs me “nothing” to have my boobs squished to tears…
lady MD’s – PLEASE invent the machine that allows us to LAY DOWN, leave ‘em hangin’, for that procedure… PLEASE!
December 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pmi hear sonograms are coming…
Tundra says:
“You are saying there are other places where costs are outragous and way out of control?”
Absolutely.
Lab work, administrative costs for referrals to “specialists”, the specialists themselves; who milk what they can and then refer you on to another specialist…
I had a recent experience where a local clinic was contracted to provide physicals to a government agency.
The clinic employed poorly trained, if at all, health care workers, grossly inflated the cost of the physicals, and botched many of them due to incompetence and substandard equipment and procedures.
All for an easy profit.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pmkaty says:
my insurance “covers” mammograms… bless their hearts…
costs me “nothing” to have my boobs squished to tears…
December 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
As soon as the “testicogram” is invented, someone will figure out a breakthrough for something more comfortable. :D
December 5th, 2009 at 2:39 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it a hundred times more:
I don’t understand why our health care system is in the hands of an industry that was founded on pricing risk for merchant ships of the middle ages against storms and pirates.
OK, well the pirate part, mayhaps.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:42 pmunlikely, cg
i’m sorry.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:42 pmLooking for a testicosquashingram coming to a clinic near me soon….Not.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:43 pmbut thanks for the dash of bitters – just right for my Old Fashioned. delicious!
December 5th, 2009 at 2:44 pmThe government health care bill needs to die a slow dealth.
—
December 5th, 2009 at 2:44 pmWhy? Can you offer a bulleted list of your ideas so that we can all discuss them like adults? Thanks you so much for offering to facillitate the discussion
zooey, all – i had a recent GOOD experience with my insurer…
the OFFERED to let me re-apply to get into a different rating pool…
i was assured that i would not be dropped – the worst would be that i’d stay in the same pool…
i tried it and it worked… my premiums are back to 07ish rates…
Health Alliance, in illinois, btw…
December 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pmbut you might ask yours about the possibility…
I don’t think you are experiencing what most Americans are experiencing with their insurance companies.
Most likely not. Not sure where you get “Most Americans” though.
Are you very young?
I’m 35, see my doctor about once a year for a checkup. I eat well, exercise. Avoid fast food like the plague.
I was simply stating that the cost to hook a woman up to a machine for a 15 minute prodedure seemed excessive to me. The statement was that junior paid $250 with insurance.
I looked here
http://www.imaginis.com/breasthealth/faq-mammo2.asp#question11
And they stated it’s around $100.00 that most insurance plans cover. I’m curious on how someone with insurance can have to pay 2.5 times as much for the same thing. I was just trying to get clarifications on where that money goes.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pmcg don’t know why, he just don’t like it cause dems are for it.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pmyou know cg can’t go beyond a few words per post without risking going on a rant that would last a week.
give him a couple of points for having the self-awareness and discipline to spare us that.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:46 pmconservative guy, others may not notice that you’re using more words these days and misspelling fewer than you used to. They may not see it but I do. I see your growth as a troll, and it makes me a little emotional sometimes.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:47 pmAnd a great day to you too, Mr. Stall Man.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pmthat money takes specialists and insurance execs on caribbean golf junkets!
they love golf junkets.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pmHi Richard Stallman
December 5th, 2009 at 2:48 pmJust what exactly is your deal. I mean we all see that it is attention driven and not issues driven but still in a metacognitive way why do you feel you do that you this weird thing you do?
hyperbole much?
(couldn’t resist trying out that clever form of retort)
December 5th, 2009 at 2:49 pmIt’s no wonder the American people hate you
December 5th, 2009 at 2:50 pm—
This is the part that made me giggle the most…
All for an easy profit.
I’ll concur. I’d like to see them address the other areas as hard as they are addressing the insurance one. Different bill or whatever, would just like to see it all addressed. Otherwise it feels like they are taking from everyone to still fill someone elses corporate profits.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:50 pmhyperbole much?
(couldn’t resist trying out that clever form of retort)
—
December 5th, 2009 at 2:50 pmNo Proof? Shocker!
Poor Dick StalledMan. Just hates. Great compassion should be had for those so intellectually inept.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:51 pmGee Fred, that’s my case as my employer pays a majority of it currently.
Which is why I’m surprised businesses are by far and large against health care reform. The taxes thus far proposed to pay for health care reform are far less than employer contributions to for-profit health insurance. I understand the cost of health insurance exceeds the cost of raw materials in each new car produced in the United States.
If we take health care out of the cost of doing business, business will see an immediate boost to their bottom line. Except, of course, for health insurance compaines.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:52 pmMr. Stall Man, I think your diatribe might have a little more punch if you used more pejoratives when you’re haranguing us.
Might I suggest adding “marxist”, “imperialist” or “authoritarian”? Sure the last two apply more comfortably to you own political ideology, but that kind of accuracy doesn’t seem to concern you much.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:53 pmBnF, most businesses here in the great state of WA know and understand that with health care off their backs, they’d be more competitive and would have a healthier workforce.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:54 pmbut Bris, what about the golf junkets!?
how can there be freedom if there are no all-expenses golf junkets???
December 5th, 2009 at 2:54 pmPrice it as a 58 year old with pre-existing conditions and get back with me.
Not through your employer, which is the way most of us now live.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:55 pmVote ‘em down, vote ‘em down.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:55 pmMuch like the 45,000 Americans each year who die due to lack of health care….?
To protect the profits of corporations, you would see more Americans die each month than were killed on September 11, 2001. When did you sell your soul, and how much did you get for it?
December 5th, 2009 at 2:55 pmZooey@96, I have a good friend who is quite large uptop.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:56 pmShe tells me that they squash them as flat as a manhole cover.
No man could survive having his nads squashed like that.
I give you women tons of credit. How do you handle it?
BnF, you assume too much. cg was born into that soulless vaccum called neoconservatism.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:58 pmWhich is why I’m surprised businesses are by far and large against health care reform.
I would think they are against it because they lose the control over the cost. Benefits are a huge draw for employers, it allows them more flexibility in who they hire. If people have the option of going to something else at a competitive price, some may go. If enough go they no longer have their bargening power with the insurance companies. So they either have to drop coverage and push everyone to the government plan. or pay more for the plans they offer. Currently the “big wigs” of my company have the same plan offerings I have. Their out of pocket is the same. If the lower priced people figure out that they can get insurance for 2.5% all of those jump ship. Leaving less there to demand the prices they get for the big wigs (their 2.5% is a whole lot more than mine)
December 5th, 2009 at 2:59 pmBy whom?
you?
tee hee, little hateful man.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:00 pmMr. Stall Man, I was just going to suggest using right-wing boogeymen as a way to add pizzaz to your comments, but I still think you need more pejoratives.
Try it. I think you’ll be surprised at how much more angry you will sound.
That IS what you’re going for, isn’t it?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:01 pmbut Bris, what about the golf junkets!?
how can there be freedom if there are no all-expenses golf junkets???
Damn! I forgot about all-expenses paid golf junkets for CEOs making over $10,000,000 per year!
How about this for a compromise: They keep their golf junkets, and we get to use their golf courses as cemetaries for the 45,000 dead Americans each year who die at their hands.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:01 pm124:
December 5th, 2009 at 3:02 pmI have a female friend who is the person who executes the test. Basically she squashes boobs all day. She tells me that sometimes the patients are sort of hostile toward here regarding this whole crushing thing. Seems there ought to be a better way… Ladies please go to the windows and press your naked breasts against them so we can try that satellite imagining thing again!!!!
sscncturn64 says:
December 5th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Not only do they squash ‘em flat as pancakes, they have a knob on the side so they can hand crank it down even tighter. Ouch!
On the other hand, with three generations of women with breast cancer having gone before me, I grin and bear it.
They give me a flower on the way out the door — not the whole bouquet, which I think would be a nice gesture.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:03 pmWTF?
“they lose control over the cost”? What does that even mean?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:03 pmAll you socialists are guilty of treason and will be punished appropriately.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:03 pm—-
Do tell! How will the punishment be administered?
with a supply of bitters like this, we can all enjoy sippng Old Fashioneds all day!!!
muddling pestles at the ready, everyone. i’ll grab the big bottle of bourbon on my run to the store.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:03 pmSo Tundra thinks that businesses have control over their health care costs now?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:04 pmWhat does that even mean?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:04 pm—
It doesn’t mean anything. It is just something a guy says.
Sort of like when a hick adds “F uck 2″ or “damn straight”
f uckin’ A….
December 5th, 2009 at 3:05 pmPrice it as a 58 year old with pre-existing conditions and get back with me.
Why? I’m not 58 and don’t have preexisting conditions. Why don’t you price it as me and then go ahead and get back to me.
Not sure why you are giving me crap. I havent said a negative word about government run healthcare, Haven’t advocated it failing at all. I simply answered some questions and asked some of my own. If anything I have advocated doing more to control costs than just insurance (at a different time as not to slow this down).
Not through your employer, which is the way most of us now live.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:05 pmcould you go ahead and provide links to that fact.
Richard Stallman says:
All you socialists are guilty of treason and will be punished appropriately.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
What punishment would you consider appropriate for us?
Please use as much detail as possible.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:05 pmWhat punishment would you consider appropriate for us?
Please use as much detail as possible.
—
December 5th, 2009 at 3:07 pmWhat you haven’t seen the boob locks being installed on the town common?
everyone knows that most everyone who has health insurance has it through their employer – didn’t you just say that’s where yours comes from?
does your employer tell the insurance companies how much they will pay for it?
it’s really just the opposite, isn’t it?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:07 pmTundra,
Do you seriously think businesses (especially small business) has any bargaining power with insurance companies, or control over the costs of the policies they buy?
Seriously?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:08 pmRalph,
So Tundra thinks that businesses have control over their health care costs now?
This may be hard for you to gather and understand but try and keep up.
Currently:
Company has X employees, they pay X dollars for coverage. Static and easy to track.
If passes:
Some unknown number of employees go to government run health plans. That unknown number is paid by an unknown number of tax on their unknown payroll per employee.
If enough leave then they have to pay more per employee that stays on employer based health plans, because they don’t have enough for the higher brackets. It make forcasting what the bottom line will be a whole lot more difficult.
Not advocating it, just answering the question on “Why” some businesses may be against it.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:10 pmThere’s that righty attitude that I knew was lying just below the surface. Way to try to understand the problem dufus.
Me Me Me
December 5th, 2009 at 3:11 pmDearest Zooey,
I said it was a static number based on number of covered employees. It si a solid number they know and can use.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:13 pmMe Me Me
HAHAHAHAHA! You are the one that wanted me to be more like you and I’m the mememe one?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:14 pmIGMSFU is the only principle many people ever want to adhere to consistently.
Tundra, if I recall correctly, follows the Libertarian flag.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:14 pmZooey says:
Richard Stallman says:
All you socialists are guilty of treason and will be punished appropriately.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
What punishment would you consider appropriate for us?
The comfy chair (Monty Python)?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pmGo fu(k yourself, Tundra. Try making sense for a change.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pmum Rich,
when you say “nazi leftists” it tips everyone off to how very much you don’t know.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pmMy lord,
Nevermind. Sorry I tried to answer a question on “the possible why, bunsineses are against it even though they will likely save money”.
There is no reason, they are simply BUSH followers and it’s Cheneys fault!!
There, I wasn’t justifying their position or supporting it, just throwing out a possible reason. However I guess there isn’t one, it’s the inherent nature of evil business owners….grrrrrrr.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pmZooey @132, I only know you through TP, but im glad that you do go and get your mammograms.Ive been reading your comments for about a year now,and I visit your blog. I think you are a beautiful woman. I look forward to reading your comments for years. Stay healthy.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:18 pmi heard ya tundra – there is a point in what you said, but you should remember that, if those employees are able to move off the employer plan, it will force insurance companies to take their thumbs off the scales and offer better values to those employers.
competition, and free market, and all that – you know.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:19 pmTundra says:
December 5th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Shitcan the patronizing attitude, Tundra.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:20 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
There is no greater evil than you socialists. You socialists and the taliban are almost the exact same.
—
December 5th, 2009 at 3:21 pmCan we talk about this or are you just a dumper of weirdness that never looks back after the dumping?
hooray for you Dookie!!!
you of all people should know that
paying more and getting less = freedom
but if you have some complaints about it, i recommend you contact the Dick Army.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:22 pmRichard Stallman says:
There is no greater evil than you socialists. You socialists and the taliban are almost the exact same.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Define “evil.” Are we worse than the Taliban, or better? Are we nazi leftists or socialists?
You know, I’m beginning to think you don’t know what the fcuk you’re talking about.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:23 pmOnce again, Tundra, go fu(k yourself.
“This may be hard for you to gather and understand but try and keep up.”
The question that you folks never seem willing to answer is why should businesses be burdened with the responsibility for health care in the first place.
It’s the status quo, that’s all. That’s why the Right defends it. Can you imagine the shitstorm the Right would throw up if the status quo were currently a single-payer program and someone suggested shifting that burden on to businesses?
Businesses that provide health care for their employees currently have little if any control of costs. That’s part of the problem — businesses faced with skyrocketing costs “control” them by offering fewer benefits and requiring greater contributions from the employees themselves.
That’s some cost control right there. Yeah,. let’s preserve THAT system.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:24 pmsscncturn64 says:
December 5th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Thanks, sscncturn64. *blush*
December 5th, 2009 at 3:25 pmWow. I’m a terrorist.
Say, Ricky. That’s a pretty big accusation.
You looking to take Glenn Beck’s job from him?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:26 pmmaybe you all missed this, from waaay back @103… fyi – could help…
zooey, all – i had a recent GOOD experience with my insurer…
the OFFERED to let me re-apply to get into a different rating pool…
i was assured that i would not be dropped – the worst would be that i’d stay in the same pool…
i tried it and it worked… my premiums are back to 07ish rates…
Health Alliance, in illinois, btw…
but you might ask yours about the possibility…
if there are no major changes to health issues…
off to run some errands… see yaz…
December 5th, 2009 at 3:26 pmi heard ya tundra – there is a point in what you said, but you should remember that, if those employees are able to move off the employer plan, it will force insurance companies to take their thumbs off the scales and offer better values to those employers.
I fully agree, it will cause the insurance companies to get competitive (especially if they address other healthcare areas as well at some point). I was just trying to point out that there is a money related reason they aren’t all pro universal healthcare.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:27 pmpags2 says:
The comfy chair (Monty Python)?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
No!! Anything but that!
December 5th, 2009 at 3:27 pmRichard Stallman @ 147
——————————————————————————–
Nazi leftists will be gleeful when there is no private health care and the government can dictate what we eat, how much we can weigh, who lives and who dies.
There is no greater evil than you socialists. You socialists and the taliban are almost the exact same.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Richard, May I ask you who coined the phrase
December 5th, 2009 at 3:27 pm“New World Order”?
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Yeah, Mr. Dupe. A proposed reform bill that will not take effect for a couple of years even if passed in its current form has forced your insurer to raise your rates.
No insurance company had raised its rates over the past ten years, so this increase must be traced to the president and his proposals to reform the system.
Nice brain you got there.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:29 pmT – that’s why reform is so urgently needed. the status quo market features only choices between companies that have their thumbs on the scales (bigtime). that real public option is the only way to get them to relent.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:29 pmkaty says:
December 5th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I had missed that, katy. Congrats! Seems an unusual thing these days.
I have student health through school, and it suits my needs for now — as long as nothing really disastrous happens.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:29 pm168 – who raised your rates?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:30 pmRalph,
That’s some cost control right there. Yeah,. let’s preserve THAT system.
As I stated earlier, if I didn;t have to get my insurance through my employeer I may start my own business as it is one less hurdle to overcome. I don’t advocate the system the way it is now. Trying to give any explanation to you that isn’t “inherent evil” causes you to go off laughing and cursing at me.
I agreed that businesses may very well save money going this way, well there has to be a reason they aren’t for it. So I tried offering one. I suppose you have a better reason on why businesses are against it even thouugh they would save money? Hey I am all for listening to any thoughts.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:31 pmAnd failing to do so.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:31 pmYa know, when trolls put their comments in bold AND italics it really doesn’t make any difference.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:32 pmNo you weren’t.
“Universal health care” would completely relieve businesses of their burden, thus eliminating any anxiety they would have about their “control of costs”.
You were pointing out that there is a money-related reason why they would oppose the kind of reform that is being debated in Congress. That’s different than “universal health care”.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:32 pmMr.Duke says:
Because they can’t make it in this world without having someone else take care of them.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
In order to keep your pride in being SO self sufficient, you better drop your health insurance coverage ASAP.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:34 pmWhy is it that they don’t get it that our very natural history requires us to share to survive? The all want to be Aldo. Yet what was Aldo’s end?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:36 pmWrong. What caused me to go off laughing and cursing of you was your condescension. Your assumption that it was trying to give any explanation to (me) that isn’t “inherent evil” that caused my caustic response was just one more of the convenient mistakes that seem to flavor your contributions here.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:37 pmNo you’re not. I tried to show you that not everyone is in the enviable position that you profess to be in as far as insurance and you basically responded with “I got mine so f uck you”.
Just because you say you are open or reasonable doesn’t make it a fact. Your actions speak for you.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:38 pmRoosevelt wanted Universal Coverage way back when, and the righties wouldn’t let him get it done.
Since so few of the individual citizens alive at the time could foot the bill themselves, they organized (thank Unions again(especially on Saturdays)), and forced employers to pony up (reasonable, since employees were, and do now, sell their lives to employers in exchange for the means to survive)
That’s how it became the defective and expensive system we now enjoy. Very much imperfect, but certainly better than the alternative – no health insurance for anyone less-than-rich.
It’s funny that Dookie should complain about billionaires screwing him, when his entire view of the Nation rests on the false idea that this country was founded to serve as an incubator and guaranteed safehaven for billionaires.
December 5th, 2009 at 3:55 pmfurthermore Dookie – it’s ironic you’re complaining to a blaming the very people who would like to make it cost less for you.
why do you lobby and vote against your own best interests?
December 5th, 2009 at 3:58 pmtombaker,
I’m gonna take an easy guess and say Dooky is just plain stoopit.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:10 pmI said it was a static number based on number of covered employees. It si a solid number they know and can use.
So is Zero: The number of employees Business owners would have to provide health insurance for if we went to Universal Health Care.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:14 pmMr. Duke must be the only person in the whole country that never saw a health insurance rate increase until this year.
But a deeper analysis of his gripe is warranted. His health insurance company knows it would have less profits should a public option become law, so it is jacking up rates like crazy to get as much money as it can, as fast as it can. And Duke is complaining that the rest of us want to keep his costs down!
December 5th, 2009 at 4:18 pmOK Ladies,
I had a routine mammogram (haven’t had one in more than 2 years) in October. The full charge was $346.00. It was reduced by the insurance to $231.00, leaving a balance of $114.00. So, the “negotiated” price saved over $100.
If I had no insurance, it would have been the full $346.00.
I carry insurance with a huge deductible in an effort to reduce the monthly premium, and give me the “negotiated” pricing, and cover me for a catastrophic circumstance (before I would be dropped).
December 5th, 2009 at 4:46 pmAnd I have no health issues — if I did, I’d be sunk.
Helluva system isn’t it?
FYI,
December 5th, 2009 at 4:50 pmI worked for years in the medical field.
Professionals need to maintain CME credits which are often fulfilled by having meetings at posh resorts subsidized by big pharma. I have no reason to think the situation has gotten any better.
Richard Stallman…..take a valium and go directly to see a psychaitrist……you need it.
December 5th, 2009 at 4:52 pmExcellent report TP! Please keep exposing these greedy people’s schemes to the light of day. The more people know about these robber barons the less they fear the changes necessary to make affordable healthcare available to all.
December 5th, 2009 at 5:19 pmSenator Reid blasted Aetna on the Senate floor yesterday.
Part of the transcript:
December 5th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Marie says:
OK Ladies,
I had a routine mammogram (haven’t had one in more than 2 years)
then you are up with the “new recommendations”!
i think the clinic i visit told me i could wait 2 years – i can’t remember…
they will send me a card… close to my february birthday…
[...]
If I had no insurance, it would have been the full $346.00.
i wonder… i have heard that there are different rates for patients with no insurance… i’ve had no personal experience, except at the eye doctor years ago – she changed the verbal quote when she realized i had no eye coverage…
i guessed it was some kind of “pay cash” discount and thought little of it then… in hindsight though…
and, gosh, did i just open another can of worms…?
but that just points to the graft of some providers, doesn’t it?
are they “stickin’ it” to the insurance company?
that 60 minutes report about medicare fraud was sickening…
i don’t know why that didn’t make a much bigger ruckus…
…oh, sure i do…
December 5th, 2009 at 6:00 pmIs anyone actually suyists harprised by this?? I mean really. The lobbve the law makers paid off (bought and paid for) so is it any wonder why nothing ever happends to actually help the SHeeple (thats us).
RT
December 6th, 2009 at 9:59 amBe Invisible Online
And my mom is wondering why her premiums on the BCBS insurance she gets through our public school system here(she’s a teacher) are increasing this year, which means she has less take home pay. She actually thinks it’s because her employer isn’t covering it’s share of the cost like it used to (which is probably part of the reason), but she hasnt quite connected her premium increase with lobbying expenses that BCBS is using to make sure it’s allowed to keep doing this!
December 6th, 2009 at 10:28 amRepublicans obviously don’t understand a lot of things and they’re happy with that. Just don’t ever let one be elected for anything ever again. It’s so important for everyone to go and vote them out.
December 6th, 2009 at 4:55 pmRichardSTALLman
FOAD you ignorant pile of dogshit. Just go kill yourself. You are so stupid there is no other service you can perform for mankind
December 7th, 2009 at 5:17 amRSTALLman
There is no such thing as a Nazi leftist. My GOD you are stupid. You are such a moron that you think if you keep regurgitating the same stupidity it will eventually become true. The thing is the whole Nazis are leftist idiocy was dreamed up just for brainwashed morons like YOU. People so stupid they will just repeat ANYTHING, no matter how stupid, that they were programmed with. You DEFINE pathetic
December 7th, 2009 at 5:20 amMr Duke
I want to thank YOU for reminding us just how stunningly stupid you are. Please continue to spew the stupid talking points you have been brainwashed with. I just love to laugh at morons as stupid as you.
December 7th, 2009 at 5:22 amThe one thing that should be perfectly clear when witnessing a battle like health reform is that big corporations and the GOP are not two separate entities; The GOP IS corporate America. The two major political parties in this country are Democratic and Corporatism.
December 7th, 2009 at 10:27 am@66:
Maybe somebody already posted this, but it does not appear the Santa Clara case actually ruled on the equal protection of corporations under the law. That note was added by the court reporter, and did not come from the court. Thus, the question would be one of first impression for the SCOTUS.
December 7th, 2009 at 10:47 amTundra says:
Suppose your wife covers you both for $48 per 2 weeks for $98 a month
Who has insurance like that? What could it possibly cover?
Use realisic numbers and you get a different picture.
I have insurance like that!!!! The problem for you is that you have to move to Canada!!!!
We pay about 4% of our wages. If we are out of work…no problem…you don’t pay because corporations pick up the slack.
Canada – People come first
US- Money hungry whores who would sell out there mothers for profit….oh wait, they already did that with Medicare part D….OH WELL.
December 7th, 2009 at 12:48 pmThanks for letting me know where my 10% premium increase goes!!!
i make a career out of living healthy and always learning how to improve on it, earning the lowest risk/lowest cost health and life ins premiums. (self-bosser w/individual highest deductible ins.)
Didn’t carry any health ins. for many years…then decided to get catastrophic beginning Aug 2008 from BCBS of TX. (Also didn’t realize they’re no longer non-profit!! What?????)
Aug 2009, they raised it 10% telling me it was because of my birthday. My b’day is in January! So when i called to ask for the real reason, they said it was because everyone else is costing them more and they need to spread out their expenses. (So i’m penalized for costing them absolutely *zero*??) But i accepted it as sort of fair…but really stupid…
To pay for secret Lobbyists…to undermine the effort to reform our system so broken and corrupt thanks to corporations??? At least it’s more believable…so thanks for shedding the light!!
Thanks also for the *name* of the case Santa Clara v. S. Pacific…i knew of the case and have known for some time that this is central to many of our troubles. I think our newest SC Justice has at least raised the issue publicly…more than anyone else has done. It DOES need to be revisited if we are to survive.
Not sure whether to pay this month’s premium or just cancel and put it in our savings acct i just drained for something else…(not health-related). i’m not kidding…really tempted.
Thanks for shedding the light…pretty pathetic.
December 7th, 2009 at 3:18 pmor…maybe i’ll deposit 90% into savings…10% here:
http://www.pcrmlf.org/
December 7th, 2009 at 3:26 pmI worked for years in the medical field.sony laptop battery
December 11th, 2009 at 10:54 pmProfessionals need to maintain CME credits which are often fulfilled by having meetings at posh resorts subsidized by big pharma. I have no reason to think the situation has gotten any better.