Well I do agree with you on one point, I am very happy the Supreme Court did not overturn the Affordable Health Care Act. I believe a majority of people in this country have figured out this is a terrible law that may very well lead to the destruction of the United States of America as we have known it for the past 235+ years.

Nancy Pelosi said in her now famous statement, "We have to pass this law to find out what is in it". Well now we know much more about what is in it and I believe a majority of the population do not like what they have found. Yes, there are many good elements of the law and they could have been enacted without imposing an enormous additional tax on the people and creating a massive costly health care expansion that we can not afford.

This bill was supposed to reduce our health care costs and we now know it will do the exact opposite. Health care costs are rising steadily since it has been enacted in preparation for its implementation. In addition it will add an additional burden to the entitlement spending that is already bankrupting the country and putting us into such a dangerous debt position that we were downgraded for the first time ever in the history of our country.

The projections by the CBO, the independent nonpartisan accounting arm of government, is that the Affordable Health Care Act will add well over a TRILLION dollars of additional debt to our already out of control entitlement spending.

This law will cost more than we can afford to pay, reduce the quality of health care by adding additional patients to the health care rolls while decreasing the number of doctors to provide care to us as a nation. You will not find more people willing to become doctors to treat a larger population when they can only expect more government intervention for a lower salary. This law will reduce our quality of health care, impose strict restrictions limiting what is available and in general reduce the quality of health in our country.

But the worst part of the bill is what I have already said. It will add a burden of debt that will most likely cause a financial meltdown in the country, the likes of which will make the depression seem like the boom years.

Since I believe there is a majority of people who now realize this bill needs to be repealed if we are to survive as a country, it has become a rallying cry for a change to the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal Government. You can see that already in the amount of money that has been sent to the Romney campaign in the few days since the Supreme Court issued its decision. Most of the money that came in droves was in small amounts from a large section of the population at large. Normally, Romney got his money from big donors with an agenda for their donation. This was not the case this time. The money came from regular folks who want to see this bill repealed.

Do not think I am against changes to our current health care system. As I said there are many things that can be done to make it better that will not be expensive to implement and will not cost a lot of money nor add a new tax to the American Public. But that is a different discussion.

I think if the bill were overturned by the Supreme Court it would have created a rallying cry for Obama to implement a new bill that would be constitutional in his next administration. Now that it has been upheld, it is a rallying cry for Romney to repeal this oppressive and expensive bill with something different.

Obama did not tell the truth to the American Public when he was trying to sell us the bill. He told us it was not a new tax. Now, just three years later he told the Supreme Court that it is a tax because otherwise it would have been repealed. He told us it would reduce the costs of health care and now we have found out it will do the exact opposite. He has told the American Public what they wanted to hear in order to get the bill passed and now he has told the Supreme Court what he needed to say for them to uphold the law. It is clear this man wants to change the country to be what was not intended by the founding fathers nor what has worked for us for the past 235+ years.

But despite Obama saying numerous times during the creation of this law that it did not impose a new tax on the country, when it came time to defend the bill before the Supreme Court, he had his lawyers present the case that the law did indeed impose a tax. It is constitutional for Congress to enact a tax on the people so the Chief Justice ruled in favor of that argument without regard to the merits of the law.

Furthermore, I am happy it was Roberts and not Kennedy who cast the deciding vote. It upholds the integrity of the Supreme Court and specifically that of the Chief Justice. Even though he is a conservative, nominated by President George Bush, he voted strictly according to the constitution regardless of the merits or politics of the bill. He made it very clear in his ruling if the people do not believe it is a good law for the country, it is up to them to vote in representatives that will change the law to what they want.

This ruling is a win for the Constitution and the three separate branches of government upon which our country is based. Each branch did its job as they saw fit. It is now up to US the PEOPLE to act as we see fit. I hope and pray enough are paying attention and make the right decisions in November.

Well said Skinny; I wonder why the truth and hard facts are never used by those off in La La land when they write a post.

Franken says it is all "free". It isn’t. We will all pay as Skinny says. But some people are all for "Obama money" but that money is your money! Vote this socialist out.

I find Skinny’s argument right on the money. This health-care thing is a tax. We can vote the Obama/Pelosi gang out and put in those who understand that trillions in debt is not a good thing. Yes, we will need to figure out how to take care of the 40 million without insurance but it sure is not to tax the hell out of the rest of us.

I too have been awaiting a good debate on this board regarding the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

"Skinny" wrote: This bill was supposed to reduce our health care costs and we now know it will do the exact opposite.

I found a couple of posting that disagree with that issue. "In a rebuke to Republican leaders who call health care reform a budget-busting trillion dollar spending program , the Congressional Budget Office said Thursday that the law saves money and its repeal, H.R. 2 Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act, which is scheduled for a vote on the House floor next week, will raise the deficit by $230 billion over the decade starting in 2012." This article can be found in The Fiscal Times http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/01/06/Despite-GOP-Slam-CBO-Confirms-Health-Care-Savings.aspx#page1 which is back-up by an article in Politicohttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47141.html. In fact, Ezra Klein wrote an article titled "CBO: Health reform to cut deficit by $50 billion more than we thought" http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/cbo-health-reform-to-cut-deficit-by-50-billion-more-than-we-thought/2011/08/25/gIQAXgPSES_blog.html. Skinny also mentions

that it reduce the quality of health care by adding additional patients to the health care rolls while decreasing the number of doctors to provide care to us as a nation.

I just don’t understand that argument because of the "supply and demand". I think that the ACA will require more medical technicians, nurses and doctors = jobs. Like most businesses when you find you have more customers you hire more workers to support your business. Now initially there may be some bottle necking, but in the long run we will see a decline.

But the worst part of the bill is …it will add a burden of debt that will most likely cause a financial meltdown in the country.

I’m not sure which countries you are talking about but let me mention two that have more inclusive health care plans than the ACA – Great Britain and Canada.

Britain’s citizens have a longer life expectancy and lower infant mortality, and the country has more acute-care hospital beds per capita and fewer deaths related to surgical or medical mishaps. Britain achieves these results while spending proportionally less on health care than the U.S. — about $2,500 per person in Britain, compared with $6,000 in the U.S.

Read more:http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1916570,00.html Britain has a single payer system as well as private health care plans similar to ours.

I hate car insurance, but I am glad that the individual that damages my vehicle or me has it – which is required by most states. To me the ACA is just like car insurance without it I’m left holding the bag. That’s what is happening with health care, those with it are paying for the care of those that don’t have it. Just like the state requires you to get car insurance the ACA is requiring health care insurance.

Whether Obama was lying or truly didn’t believe it was a tax I just don’t know. Only he knows what the truth is. He may have believed it wasn’t a tax that is was a commerence issue. It was the Federal Government lawyers that presented the ACA as a tax rather than a commerence issue – not Obama (although I am sure it agreed to that defense).

I’m not so sure I agree with Skinny’s comment about Roberts versus Kennedy. I think Kennedy would have received less hate mail and comments than Roberts. I do agree that this judgement appears to temporarily make the SCOTUS seems as if it isn’t right leaning, however, we can’t overlook most of the their most recent rulings were right leaning. It’s just that with this ruling Roberts decided to protect the history of his court by finding the ACA constitutional. Let’s not forget, he did throw the right a bone – the ACA is now viewed as a Constitutionally protected TAX – and you know the right is already off and running with that bone.

I do agree with Skinny regarding the upholding of the law – we Americans can change it – thank God! It’s not perfect and we can make it better. I believe that as more people really find out how it benefits them they won’t want to get rid of it just like senior citizen don’t won’t to go back to an America without Medicare (see President’s video addressing these points http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8TlGrRZ5AE) . Here are just a few benefits of the ACA.

1. I can keep my children on my health care plans until they are 26 years old (requires an increase in premium however).

2. If you are unhappy with your job but wouldn’t leave it for fear of losing your family health care that is no longer an issue under the ACA.

3. If you or your child has a pre-exisiting condition you can no longer be turned down for insurance. If you have every had cancer you would know what a relief this is. Now you family doesn’t have to go into bankruptcy just to keep you alive.

4. If you can afford healthcare, but don’t purchase it, yet end up in the emergency for care and don’t pay your bill. You can no longer leave me to pay your bill. Someone had to pay the hospital bills so the hospitals passed on the cost to health care companies who then passed it on to you and I by increasing our insurance policies. NO MORE FREELOADING patiences.

5. The insurance companies have been raising their insurance policies in recent years by as much as 30%. They claim to cover the increases brought on by the ACA. Not true. The reason their is a mandatory fee is because the health care companies requested it be put in the act so that it can get 33 million new insurers and include healthy bodies to offset the increase of those that have pre-existing health issues. But now the insurance companies must provide a reason for the increase cost – they can’t raise it just cause they want more money.

6. The ACA requires that 80% of the premiums the Health Care companies take in MUST be used on health care. Only 20% can pay those exorborinate CEO paychecks. This means that those that have health care should be getting back some money paid into their premiums.

7. If you already have health insurance you get to keep it. Don’t believe the hype being put out by the Republicans. The government isn’t going to make you give up your insurance plans. What may happen however, is that many companies will find it more beneficial to change their health care providers in light of savings they will receive which could change your provider. However, you are already being told by the health care companies which doctors you can see and can’t see so the logic being put out about coming between you and your doctor doesn’t hold water.

8. Insurance companies can no longer place lifetime limits on your health care cost. This provision may save millions of Americans from filing bankruptcy because of their excessive health care bills.

9. They can no longer drop your coverage if you get sick.

10. They are required to provide preventive care such as check-ups and mammagrams.

11. Seniors receive discount of their prescription medicine.

12. If states can cover their citizens cheaper than the ACA then they are encouraged to do so without penalty.

All I can say is that we do live in interesting times and everyday I thank God that I live in America. Whenever I lived overseas or traveled to another country, I’ve always felt like Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz "there is no place like home!"

"Devilique" wrote: I hate car insurance, but I am glad that the individual that damages my vehicle or me has it – which is required by most states. To me the ACA is just like car insurance without it I’m left holding the bag. That’s what is happening with health care, those with it are paying for the care of those that don’t have it. Just like the state requires you to get car insurance the ACA is requiring health care insurance."

This is a Red Herring argument if there ever was one. Most everyone will agree that Auto Insurance is not their favorite thing to buy. And yes "IF" you own a car and intend to drive it on public streets most, if not all, States Mandate you to purchase Automobile Insurance. But they stop short of requiring that those who obtain drivers Lic’s get it. To match this law they would have to require that all adults get it regardless of whether you own a car or not. Auto Insurance is not a universal requirement it’s a choice. With this health care debacle you have no choice.

And your still going to pay for those who don’t have it, but now it’s going to cost you even more.

My Mother-in-laws Cancer Doc just opened his practice to "Private" Pay or Insurance their own way patients because he can’t break even on costs when billing Medicare/Medicaid. He no longer accepts anyone with these Government run insurances and has sent the existing patients to other Doc’s, who may or may not be as good. How’s that lead to more and better Doc’s. And that’s what this law is giving us.

Go to Merry Ole England if you want to see what’s in-store for us. Or Canada where those that can afford it used to come down here to aviod the long waits to get most any procedure.

Jesus your blind.

And yes "IF" you own a car and intend to drive it on public streets most, if not all, States Mandate you to purchase Automobile Insurance. But they stop short of requiring that those who obtain drivers Lic’s get it. To match this law they would have to require that all adults get it regardless of whether you own a car or not. Auto Insurance is not a universal requirement it’s a choice. With this health care debacle you have no choice. And your still going to pay for those who don’t have it, but now it’s going to cost you even more.

Interesting concept, you right you have no choice because everyone uses health care starting at birth! I’m curious as to where you found a creditable report that states we are still going to be paying for those that can afford healthcare yet won’t purchase it? Also which report states that the ACA will require you to pay more for the freeloaders?

I have to agree with Stephen C that the car insurance analogy is bogus. IF you have a car you MUST have insurance. No car, no problem. Just because I will need medical care at some point in my life is not a valid enough reason to compel me to purchase insurance today. What if I have the means to just pay cash for my healthcare needs? I’m not out to stiff the system, I’m just making a business decision that I believe it will cost less to pay as I go rather than buy an insurance policy. I can do the same thing with car insurance, put up a surety bond instead of paying monthly for a policy I don’t think I’m going to use.

If I’m a terrible driver, too many tickets & accidents, my insurance costs go up or the company drops me. Remember insurance companies are for profit businesses. If I cost more in claims then they get in premiums, my rates will change. If I’m a lower risk, then I pay less.

Now if Stephen C is a health nut, eats right, excerises regularly, and doesn’t engage in high risk behaviors, he would pay the same as me who smokes 2 packs a day, drinks a fifth of Jack Daniels, never gets off the couch, lives off of McD’s, and is carrying an extra 75 lbs. My life style CHOICES almost gaurantee that I will use more resources, but companies are forbidden to cap my benefits or exclude pre-existing conditions. How long will they stay in business with those kind of restrictions? Unless someone (government) is going to come in and run my life, tell me what I behaviors I can and cannot engage in, I will bankrupt an insurance company with all the extra services I will require.

Healthcare is a business. Some may bristle at the notion, but let’s not kid ourselves. If a business can’t increase it’s revenue, but must provide services to more customers for the same cost, the only choice left is to limit the quantity (ration) services. It’s the old business axiom of good, fast, or cheap. Pick which 2 are important. This bill would have use believe we can have all 3. Obama even thinks so himself. His comment about how insurance companies will provide birth control ‘at no additional cost’. Someone is picking up the bill.

I don’t understand why people think healthcare is different from any other service we must pay for. I don’t think the life and death aspect of healthcare is a valid arguement. Bottom line is that we are all going to lose this game eventually (the ulitmate 7-out) even if you have the best doctors money can buy, but the idea that someone with more means has better options available to them seem unfair to some people.

If Canada or Britian’s (or anywhere else in the world) systems are so great, how come when some rich or important person needs great care in a timely fashion, they come to the good ole US of A for their care? Because if you have the money, you can get the service you need today, that why. Sure beat being put on a waiting list hoping you live long to get your turn.

"fscobe" wrote: I find Skinny’s argument right on the money. This health-care thing is a tax. We can vote the Obama/Pelosi gang out and put in those who understand that trillions in debt is not a good thing. Yes, we will need to figure out how to take care of the 40 million without insurance but it sure is not to tax the hell out of the rest of us.

But Frank, you are already paying for their health care except you are currently paying it through your high health care plans. The hospitals have to treat them when they show-up in the emergency room. The hospitals and doctors can’t afford to stay open or continuing treating people without getting paid. They pass the cost on to your insurance company. The insurance company isn’t going to eat the cost so they are passing on to you in the cost of your health care plan.

I don’t have a problem with Congress coming up with another solution to getting everyone we can insured, except the country has been trying to do this for almost a 100 years and no one has been able to do it until now. The ACA is a far cry from perfect, however, we should now all work together to find a way to fix it so that it works for everyone. Governor Romney and Republican politicians keep saying we will repeal it however, they haven’t said how they will fix the problem. If it was so easy to fix then why haven’t they done before the ACA was passed? The answer is it is easier said then done – politics get in the way. If we try to repeal it we will go back to what we had before and health care insurance companies can drop your coverage whenever they want, they can cancel your policy when you get sick, they can increase your insurance policy cost whenever they want without justification, etc. Let’s stop fighting and find a solution individual mandate or not. Let’s put politics aside and find a solution for our nation that works!

Just in case you think I am arguing for the ACA because I need it I want to let you know I have health care and I want Congress to keep their hands off my health care because I love it! It has a single payer and I wouldn’t trade it in for anything. Congress members have Government health care plan and they have no intentions of giving them up. I say they should be forced to go without health care like their 33 million constituents that don’t have health until they find a solution that works for our nation.

When all is said and done this "ACA" as you call it is the largest TAX on the American public ever. I need no confirmation from anyone to know that this crap (no offense meant toward our game) is going to cost me more directly in premiums. We are not going to see a single cent in savings regardless of how you try to spin it.

Real Estate sales in 20012 on sales profit over 250K are subject to a 3.8% Federal sales tax. Indirect earnings, the stuff most Retired middle class folks use to help with their "Golden years" will be subject to more taxation. Usually now they pay 15% on long term holdings and dividends that figure is going up to just shy of 45%. Half of their supplemental income to pay for your boondoggle.

2000 plus pages with a 17 page table of contents, really. And the court jester Pelosi admonishing everyone that we had to pass it so we could really see what was in it. What a joke. What a Christmas present to the country. Another trust fund for the gang in Washington to pillage. And another reason to enslave more of the public in their Government "Freebies". but it’s not really free is it. The 53% of the american people, the earners, will pay for the 47%, the freeloaders. We pay and they play all the time demanding more.

Sorry Devilique I wouldn’t vote for Barry as Dog catcher. At this point if someone dug up and dusted off Adolf I’d vote for him. That’s how angry I am over what I see as the theft of our prosperity and the futures of our children and our country. I don’t want this country going the way of Europe and we’re not far away from that cliff. Barry is dragging us there full tilt Czars and executive orders.

And then there’s the 10,000 + new IRS agents to police it. Why do we need 10,000 more cops if this is going to be good for us.

StephenC I’m not asking you to vote for Obama you have made it quite clear that you are not open to a reasonable discussion about the topic I respect your opinion, but please don’t dig up Hitler, let him rest in Hell. I just want to know what suggestions you have for insuring those hard working Americans and their children that currently can’t afford to carry health care as it is now? Do you think we should even worry about it? Believe me I like my money too – really I like it better in my pocket rather than the government. I don’t have all the answers and I don’t claim to, I just want to figure out a way to raise the America’s life expectancy rate for 50th place in the world where we are currently. I want to see our nation education system fix and I to ensure our security (physically and financially). I’m willing to listen to anyone (Republican, Democrat or Independent) that have any ideas on those issues.

You can’t insure everybody without making it criminal to not have insurance. Some people will refuse even under penalty of law. But if you want to make access easier, more affordable to those that want insurance I have some suggestions.

1. Stop with the "we must treat you in the emergency room" fiasco. Broken bones, excessive bleeding, chest pains, or other potentially live threatening situations, the ER is the place you need to go. Sniffles, just because I know they can’t refuse me, not the place to go. Direct them to the local clinic. Also if you are here illegally, we will treat your live threatening injuries, but also contact INS since we know where you will be.

2. Allow competition across state lines for insurance. As it is now only a handful of companies are allowed to sell policies in each state. If I don’t like the options offered to me in Washington, why can’t I purchase a policy from Idaho?

3. Stop mandating that certain procedures need to be included. I don’t need a PAP smear, my wife doesn’t need a prostate exam. Allow me to tailor a policy to my needs.

4. Stop think of health insurance as pre-paid medical care. This is the biggest problem we have. It is insurance to protect against catastrophic medical costs. Not to pay for every little office visit.

5. Tort reform. Why do doctors order so many tests? Because if they make one tiny mistake, or miss one tiny detail, they can get sued. Stop forcing doctors to practice defensive medicine. I’m not saying to give doctors a free pass, but realize they are only human. Is it reasonable to expect them to catch a 1 in a million diagnosis 100% of the time. Of course not. If a doctor is found negligent or incompetent, by all means take away his livelihood. But make sure he cannot just move to another state to set up shop. But if a doctor make a prudent judgement call that turns out to be incorrect, he should have to suffer because of it.

Some good suggestions Sevenout. I’d like to address each of your 5 ideas.

1. I agree we we should stop emergency room treatment for sniffles. I also agree with you thoughts about illegal aliens – save their lives then send them home.

2. Sorry, I don’t know enough about interstate insurance competition to discuss it intelligently so I’ll have to pass until a later date.

3. I like where you are going here, however, I don’t know if insurance al la carte would be a savings or not.

4. As long as an office visit isn’t too expensive (say $80-$125) then I hopefully people won’t complain too much (although some people will complain regardless).

5. Ahhhh Tort Reform – this is an important topic that I believe was left out of the ACA. I agree it needs to be addressed. Doctors are human and therefore can make mistakes. Some of jurors do award plaintiffs too large much money for pain in suffering for minor health issues. I do believe if someone requires round-the-clock care for the rest of their life, then their needs to be some way to calculate what that cost maybe as well as some money for pain and suffering, however, 100 of millions of dollars is excessive.

If a doctor is found negligent or incompetent, by all means take away his livelihood.

I’m not sure I agree with this statement in it’s entirety. Incompetent yes, negligent maybe not. On a case-by-case basis and depending upon the damage done to a patient maybe probation is appropriate before taking away a persons livelihood. I concur their should be a database that list a doctor’s license #, SSN or some other method of identifying a doctor regardless of which state he/she sets up shop.

I would like to add one more idea I have if you don’t mind.

I would like to see the federal government award a number of scholarships to students wanting to practice medicine. The scholarships should be tied to a number of years of service to the federal government at a certain salary. The winners of the scholarships will payback the government by treating low-income patients that the government is currently insuring. The government should cover the doctor’s malpractice insurance and require low-income patients to sign contract that states their rights and limitation for filing complaints and lawsuits against these doctors or the federal government. I don’t know how many years the students would be required to serve, however at the end of their service they walk away with a college education, experience and no student fees. To me this is a win-win problem-solution.

Let us shop for policies across state lines. I could find a cheaper policy that would fit our needs cheaper maybe in Wyoming or New York. Why do I and my wife still have to carry Maternity coverage, or addiction, or mental health or any of the 52 other mandated riders here in Colorado for that matter. Most if not all we will never use.

But getting back the the unfortunate Withouts ….

In 2007 the Census Bureau reported that more than 14 million people without health insurance earned annual incomes of at least $50,000, with 7.2 million of them making over $75,000.

In December 2007, the Association of Health Insurance Plans issued a report showing that nationwide annual premiums for private health insurance policies averaged from $2,613 for individuals to $5,799 for families.

A 2003 Blue Cross/Blue Shield Association study concluded that, "More than 14 million uninsured Americans are already eligible for health insurance through Medicaid and State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)." These people could automatically be signed up for these programs by seeking care at a hospital. In addition, a Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute study shows that 7 out of 10 uninsured children could be covered if their parents chose to sign up for existing government programs.

A 2003 Blue Cross/Blue Shield Association study concluded that, "More than 14 million uninsured Americans are already eligible for health insurance through Medicaid and State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)." These people could automatically be signed up for these programs by seeking care at a hospital. In addition, a Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute study shows that 7 out of 10 uninsured children could be covered if their parents chose to sign up for existing government programs.

A 2009 article in PoliticFact quotes the Census Bureau stating there were 9.7 million (I love this) "Non-citizens" in the room with the other "Withouts". Of course the Bureau also qualified that number as low due to the "Non-citizens reluctance to come forward and be counted. Lets call a Spade a Spade here folks they’re Illegals, Interlopers, Invaders for you folks from any other country of the world.

I see no need to smash my health care and limit my choice, no actually eliminate it for less that 5 percent of the population.

but of course you already made it clear that my choices are secondary to yours or the Withouts. Ruin mine for them but leave yours alone. So magnamimous with ours as long as you skate.

No StephensC your wrong – I want you to keep your health care plan if you are happy with it. I agree with you and Sevenout the illegals aliens should not be clogging up our health care system and costing Americans to pay their health care bills.

In addition, a Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute study shows that 7 out of 10 uninsured children could be covered if their parents chose to sign up for existing government programs.

Sounds like the Federal Government has dropped the ball by not getting out the message. Maybe the parents do know about the service, but just haven’t taken advantage – all I can say is shame on them. Maybe they are illegal aliens that are afraid of being caught, in that case they should have thought about that before having children and either stayed in their home country or do like Romney say and decide to "self-deport" themselves.

In 2007 the Census Bureau reported that more than 14 million people without health insurance earned annual incomes of at least $50,000, with 7.2 million of them making over $75,000.

These are the people that Governor Romney and President Obama agree should be paying for health care policies or either paying their own bills. I personally don’t care if they don’t pay for a health care plan as long as they don’t pass on their bills to me when they do decide to end up in the emergency room and run out on their bill. I don’t agree with some who say they should suffer the consequences if they don’t purchase health care – it could be my adult child. I would rather the government mandate they get insurance like the states mandate I wear a seat belt. Again, I’m not crazy about seat belts (because of my chest my seatbelt rides against my neck), the state government is looking out for insurance companies and me as well. I know StephenC believes I am mixing apples and oranges, but to me it makes sense.

Now please don’t jump on me StephenC and I don’t know if you can answer this question, but why is there only 14 million people listed in the Blue Cross/Blue Shield 2003 study instead of the 33 million we keep hearing about? I don’t think I’m blind. I just like to think for myself without repeating Democratic/Republican talking points that are just made up with no study/report or research to back them up. If politicians are successful and repeal the ACA then I wish they would be truthful and say they don’t have any idea on how to fix the problem instead of saying they will look at each issue separately (what they really are saying is that once your back is turn they will drop the issue). Both parties have been doing that for years and they refused to work together to come up with a reasonable solution to sell to both parties. Politicians should just tell the American people that what they come up with won’t make everyone happy on both sides but that it is the best solution they could come up with. We can’t insure everyone for everything – the poor, elderly and a few others are not going to get everything they need but they will have some of the health care the American people can afford. I would like to cut the spin both parties are putting out.

The number of Uninsured seems to be a moving target. Recently I’ve seen figures from the 33 you mention to as high as 56. Its what ever sounds best to make the point at the time.

Socialisim has not ever worked. I admit that it sounds good and makes for a good "Once opon a time…lived happy ever after" type of story with a lot of cute talking animals in it. But add the human eliment and it will always fail. ……….always!

As far as being biased because President Obama is black?????? He is half black and half white. It could just as well be the white half that is the socialist.

Socialism fails white or black.