HR 3200, read it for yourself

faceking

Cherished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Posts
7,426
Media
6
Likes
279
Points
208
Location
Mavs, NOR * CAL
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Free health care for everyone is the right way forward. I think a lot of people high up are opposed because they won't make as much money privately out of it.

So is free food and free shelter and a job and a snuggly kitten in every bed... when and where does the welfare state stop?
 

faceking

Cherished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Posts
7,426
Media
6
Likes
279
Points
208
Location
Mavs, NOR * CAL
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male

HippyHollowAustin

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Posts
150
Media
2
Likes
282
Points
393
Location
San Marcos (Texas, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
...and Trinity cites to the National Review, if you want to scream bias. Rejecting information because of the source, without further investigation is pretty goddam juvenile. About as juvenile as accepting it unblinkingly because it comes from your "side".
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,243
Media
213
Likes
31,790
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Wrong. Every independent estimate does not say the public option will save us money. But we aren't just talking about he public option but Obama's and the Dems whole plan in HR3200.

The press release from the Gavel supposedly citing CBO numbers is countered below. Review the links and you will find that the CBO numbers do not support that:
Now that we have that cleared up and we know that the ObamaCare HR 3200 will increase the deficit, we can get back to the real cake throwers.

Obama and the Democrats actually said that they want to phase out and end Private Insurance which over 80% of Americans don't want to happen. To add insult to injury, Obama and the Dems claim people are spreading misinformation. How can anyone trust Obama and the Democrats with their healthcare?
There is no Obamacare bill. Obama doesn't have a bill in Congress, or even a bill in Congress he said he supports, so if you oppose "the Obamacare bill", you oppose a figment of your imagination.
 

faceking

Cherished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Posts
7,426
Media
6
Likes
279
Points
208
Location
Mavs, NOR * CAL
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
...and Trinity cites to the National Review, if you want to scream bias. Rejecting information because of the source, without further investigation is pretty goddam juvenile. About as juvenile as accepting it unblinkingly because it comes from your "side".


goose:gander

reminds me of Frozen Face herself saying protesting was un-American... fuck me, and this was only two years ago: Breitbart.tv ‘06 Flashback: Pelosi Tells Anti-War Protesters ‘I’m a Fan of Disruptors’

pick a fucking lane Danica....
 

lucky8

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Posts
3,623
Media
0
Likes
188
Points
193
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
...and Trinity cites to the National Review, if you want to scream bias. Rejecting information because of the source, without further investigation is pretty goddam juvenile. About as juvenile as accepting it unblinkingly because it comes from your "side".

If you read the bill, or at least read up to section 206, you'll see that this plan DOES eliminate private health insurance by not allowing private insurers to enroll new customers after year one of implementation. This plan also forces all businesses to adopt a basic "qualified" health benefits plan, but it doesn't allow businesses with over 20 employess to adopt the exchange program that will be offered by the government...wtf? 20 employees is considered "large business?" I've only read about 1/8 of the (2200 section long) bill so far, and it sucks...terribly...

We don't need to get rid of private health insurance. All we need is a public OPTION, which is what they're saying they're giving us, but this bill reads as a MANDATE. Private health insurance, at least the plan I'm on, as well as my parents and sister, has never screwed us over. Ya, it's expensive, but it saved my mother's life on more than one occasion. Everything from a brain cist to breast cancer was paid for by our private insurers. Yes, private insurers do screw tons and tons of people over, but we shouldn't get rid of it all together as it does have its benefits.

People are so confused over this bill because it's the exact opposite of what dems and Obama are telling us it is. Where's the option part here? This isn't healthcare reform...this is an insurance take over. You're not going to decrease the cost of healthcare by taking over insurance...I'm just not seeing an "option" anywhere in this bill so far...and so far I'm not buying it...
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,243
Media
213
Likes
31,790
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
If you read the bill, or at least read up to section 206, you'll see that this plan DOES eliminate private health insurance by not allowing private insurers to enroll new customers after year one of implementation. This plan also forces all businesses to adopt a basic "qualified" health benefits plan, but it doesn't allow businesses with over 20 employess to adopt the exchange program that will be offered by the government...wtf? 20 employees is considered "large business?" I've only read about 1/8 of the (2200 section long) bill so far, and it sucks...terribly...

We don't need to get rid of private health insurance. All we need is a public OPTION, which is what they're saying they're giving us, but this bill reads as a MANDATE. Private health insurance, at least the plan I'm on, as well as my parents and sister, has never screwed us over. Ya, it's expensive, but it saved my mother's life on more than one occasion. Everything from a brain cist to breast cancer was paid for by our private insurers. Yes, private insurers do screw tons and tons of people over, but we shouldn't get rid of it all together as it does have its benefits.

People are so confused over this bill because it's the exact opposite of what dems and Obama are telling us it is. Where's the option part here? This isn't healthcare reform...this is an insurance take over. You're not going to decrease the cost of healthcare by taking over insurance...I'm just not seeing an "option" anywhere in this bill so far...and so far I'm not buying it...
How about a little cut and paste or directions to where in the BILL this is stated.
 

lucky8

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Posts
3,623
Media
0
Likes
188
Points
193
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.


  • (a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
    • (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-
      • (A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.
 

lucky8

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Posts
3,623
Media
0
Likes
188
Points
193
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
SEC. 202. EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS AND EMPLOYERS.


  • (a) Access to Coverage- In accordance with this section, all individuals are eligible to obtain coverage through enrollment in an Exchange-participating health benefits plan offered through the Health Insurance Exchange unless such individuals are enrolled in another qualified health benefits plan or other acceptable coverage.
  • (b) Definitions- In this division:
    • (1) EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL- The term `Exchange-eligible individual' means an individual who is eligible under this section to be enrolled through the Health Insurance Exchange in an Exchange-participating health benefits plan and, with respect to family coverage, includes dependents of such individual.
    • (2) EXCHANGE-ELIGIBLE EMPLOYER- The term `Exchange-eligible employer' means an employer that is eligible under this section to enroll through the Health Insurance Exchange employees of the employer (and their dependents) in Exchange-eligible health benefits plans.
    • (3) EMPLOYMENT-RELATED DEFINITIONS- The terms `employer', `employee', `full-time employee', and `part-time employee' have the meanings given such terms by the Commissioner for purposes of this division.
  • (c) Transition- Individuals and employers shall only be eligible to enroll or participate in the Health Insurance Exchange in accordance with the following transition schedule:
    • (1) FIRST YEAR- In Y1 (as defined in section 100(c))--
      • (A) individuals described in subsection (d)(1), including individuals described in paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (d); and
      • (B) smallest employers described in subsection (e)(1).
    • (2) SECOND YEAR- In Y2--
      • (A) individuals and employers described in paragraph (1); and
      • (B) smaller employers described in subsection (e)(2).
    • (3) THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS- In Y3 and subsequent years--
      • (A) individuals and employers described in paragraph (2); and
      • (B) larger employers as permitted by the Commissioner under subsection (e)(3).
  • (d) Individuals-
    • (1) INDIVIDUAL DESCRIBED- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this subsection, an individual described in this paragraph is an individual who--
      • (A) is not enrolled in coverage described in subparagraphs (C) through (F) of paragraph (2); and
      • (B) is not enrolled in coverage as a full-time employee (or as a dependent of such an employee) under a group health plan if the coverage and an employer contribution under the plan meet the requirements of section 312.
    • For purposes of subparagraph (B), in the case of an individual who is self-employed, who has at least 1 employee, and who meets the requirements of section 312, such individual shall be deemed a full-time employee described in such subparagraph.
    • (2) ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE- For purposes of this division, the term `acceptable coverage' means any of the following:
      • (A) QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN COVERAGE- Coverage under a qualified health benefits plan.
      • (B) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE; COVERAGE UNDER CURRENT GROUP HEALTH PLAN- Coverage under a grandfathered health insurance coverage (as defined in subsection (a) of section 102) or under a current group health plan (described in subsection (b) of such section).
      • (C) MEDICARE- Coverage under part A of title XVIII of the Social Security Act.
      • (D) MEDICAID- Coverage for medical assistance under title XIX of the Social Security Act, excluding such coverage that is only available because of the application of subsection (u), (z), or (aa) of section 1902 of such Act.
      • (E) MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPENDENTS (INCLUDING TRICARE)- Coverage under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, including similar coverage furnished under section 1781 of title 38 of such Code.
      • (F) VA- Coverage under the veteran's health care program under chapter 17 of title 38, United States Code, but only if the coverage for the individual involved is determined by the Commissioner in coordination with the Secretary of Treasury to be not less than a level specified by the Commissioner and Secretary of Veteran's Affairs, in coordination with the Secretary of Treasury, based on the individual's priority for services as provided under section 1705(a) of such title.
      • (G) OTHER COVERAGE- Such other health benefits coverage, such as a State health benefits risk pool, as the Commissioner, in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, recognizes for purposes of this paragraph.
    • The Commissioner shall make determinations under this paragraph in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury.
    • (3) TREATMENT OF CERTAIN NON-TRADITIONAL MEDICAID ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS- An individual who is a non-traditional Medicaid eligible individual (as defined in section 205(e)(4)(C)) in a State may be an Exchange-eligible individual if the individual was enrolled in a qualified health benefits plan, grandfathered health insurance coverage, or current group health plan during the 6 months before the individual became a non-traditional Medicaid eligible individual. During the period in which such an individual has chosen to enroll in an Exchange-participating health benefits plan, the individual is not also eligible for medical assistance under Medicaid.
    • (4) CONTINUING ELIGIBILITY PERMITTED-
      • (A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in subparagraph (B), once an individual qualifies as an Exchange-eligible individual under this subsection (including as an employee or dependent of an employee of an Exchange-eligible employer) and enrolls under an Exchange-participating health benefits plan through the Health Insurance Exchange, the individual shall continue to be treated as an Exchange-eligible individual until the individual is no longer enrolled with an Exchange-participating health benefits plan.
      • (B) EXCEPTIONS-
        • (i) IN GENERAL- Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to an individual once the individual becomes eligible for coverage--
          • (I) under part A of the Medicare program;
          • (II) under the Medicaid program as a Medicaid eligible individual, except as permitted under paragraph (3) or clause (ii); or
          • (III) in such other circumstances as the Commissioner may provide.
        • (ii) TRANSITION PERIOD- In the case described in clause (i)(II), the Commissioner shall permit the individual to continue treatment under subparagraph (A) until such limited time as the Commissioner determines it is administratively feasible, consistent with minimizing disruption in the individual's access to health care.
  • (e) Employers-
    • (1) SMALLEST EMPLOYER- Subject to paragraph (4), smallest employers described in this paragraph are employers with 10 or fewer employees.
    • (2) SMALLER EMPLOYERS- Subject to paragraph (4), smaller employers described in this paragraph are employers that are not smallest employers described in paragraph (1) and have 20 or fewer employees.
    • (3) LARGER EMPLOYERS-
      • (A) IN GENERAL- Beginning with Y3, the Commissioner may permit employers not described in paragraph (1) or (2) to be Exchange-eligible employers.
      • (B) PHASE-IN- In applying subparagraph (A), the Commissioner may phase-in the application of such subparagraph based on the number of full-time employees of an employer and such other considerations as the Commissioner deems appropriate.
    • (4) CONTINUING ELIGIBILITY- Once an employer is permitted to be an Exchange-eligible employer under this subsection and enrolls employees through the Health Insurance Exchange, the employer shall continue to be treated as an Exchange-eligible employer for each subsequent plan year regardless of the number of employees involved unless and until the employer meets the requirement of section 311(a) through paragraph (1) of such section by offering a group health plan and not through offering Exchange-participating health benefits plan.
 
Last edited:

Bodaddio

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Posts
85
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
91
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
According to the CBO in 10 years we will still have 36 million people uninsured.

The nonpartisan CBO found that Kennedy's plan would cover an additional 16 million people by 2019, leaving 36 million uninsured.

So what is the point of the health care bill?

Who wrote this bill? Why no tort reform? Really who is on the hook to pay for it?

Cheers
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
...and Trinity cites to the National Review, if you want to scream bias. Rejecting information because of the source, without further investigation is pretty goddam juvenile. About as juvenile as accepting it unblinkingly because it comes from your "side".

The National Review provides the actual report from the CBO to Rangel in the paragraph I quoted. Here are the actual numbers from the CBO that clearly show HR3200 increases the deficit and does not cover all of the uninsured.

There is no Obamacare bill. Obama doesn't have a bill in Congress, or even a bill in Congress he said he supports, so if you oppose "the Obamacare bill", you oppose a figment of your imagination.

Obama is pushing some figment of his imagination in Montana right now. :rolleyes:
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
175
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
I better not get banned for posting that...

Lucky8: Banned! I doubt it. But I'm pleased to see that you're working your way through that 1000 page proposal and seeing for yourself what's currently in it. You engender a great deal more respect with me than the He/She/and Holy It that just spouts what He/She/and Holy It has "heard" or gleaned from one-sided sources.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,243
Media
213
Likes
31,790
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Obama's healthcare reform...also commonly referred to as ObamaCare and HR 3200. Obama just today attempted to tout his healthcare reform in Montana.
Actually the ONLY bill that will make it to the president's desk for his signature will be the bill reported out of the Senate Finance Committee. You can take that to the bank. And I thought he did a reat job today in Montana.