HR 3200, read it for yourself

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
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.

Actually, the bills have to be combined from the House and Senate. So whatever makes it to Obama's desk...Obama is attempting to tout the House contribution right now...you know that spesky figment of his imagination commonly referred to as ObamaCare and HR 3200.

Obama said he wants to phase out Private Insurance and today he denied that? Why would I believe what he said in Montana today?

That's the problem...statements about Obama doing a "great job" or talking about his "good speech" or referring to his "likability" or "popularity" is a bunch of useless garbage. I could care less if Obama performed well...I can't trust him with my healthcare.
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,639
Media
62
Likes
5,013
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
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?

You mean we don't all get a snuggly kitten?

Seriously there has to be balance. No welfare provision at all just isn't right. It isn't Christian, and it isn't moral. Too much state support is also problematic and ultimately doesn't work. But there are basics that the welfare state should provide in any country, and your post implicitly hints at these:
1) Universal free health care. We have this in Britain.
2) Universal entitlement to food (or usually the money to buy food and clothing). We have this in Britain.
3) Universal entitlement to shelter. We have this in Britain.

The UK health system isn't perfect, and I gather you have plenty of media coverage in the US pointing out its (many) problems. But the universal availability is an enormously important issue. The US needs to get behind the concept of universal availability of health. And while the US is about it, sort out the problems of hunger and homelessness is the US. It is beyond defence that the world's richest country should not be providing decent (free) food and shelter to all who need it.
 

Bodaddio

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Posts
85
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
91
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
We have universal availability to health, food, and shelter in the US.
Again when does the welfare state stop? Just exist without having to provide for yourself? The government will do it all. That is not what this country was founded on.

Cheers
 

lucky8

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Posts
3,623
Media
0
Likes
193
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.


So is this saying that after the plan is implemented, private insurers cannot enroll any new customers? Or am I comprehending it incorrectly? I would really like for someone to help me understand this...


This is how it reads if you replace the word "such" with the term it is referring to:

Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering individual health insurance coverage does not enroll any individual in individual health insurance coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

...sounds like a ban on new enrollment to me...
 
Last edited:

Cowboy_Jake

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Posts
200
Media
0
Likes
90
Points
113
Location
Southwest
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
I don't mind helping people who help themselves, but I'll be damn if I want to help all the lazy bums on the dole. I've seen too many take advantage of the system. By the way, do you know the proposed bill would give free health care to the illegals here?
 

lucky8

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Posts
3,623
Media
0
Likes
193
Points
193
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Yes, thanks for the link.... but... isn't that what we elect our officials for???!!! To actually read these bills?! Call me kooky, but they have the plushest gigs, phat staffs and so forth... and ... nevermind.

Ya...sad that a 23 year old student is willing to read it but they aren't...is it just me or is this the most immature group of officials we've ever had? I honestly feel like I'm watching a soap opera everytime I see them on tv...it's redic, they all need replacing in my opinion. There's one thing I can say with confidence with no regret: I am more intelligent than Nancy Pelosi (and her collagen)...sad indeed
 

VeeP

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Posts
1,752
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
268
Gender
Male
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...
I'd say you're understanding it just fine -- it's a massive power grab cloaked in the guise of "reform". A stepping stone to a single-payer system, if you will. Obama and his cronies are on record saying that's what they ultimately want -- it's no secret, really.

So is this saying that after the plan is implemented, private insurers cannot enroll any new customers? Or am I comprehending it incorrectly? I would really like for someone to help me understand this..
That's how I read it as well. And make no mistake -- it's purposefully ambiguous, too. If passed as is this P.O.S. would then go to the various agencies which will prepare the regulations and implement as they see fit -- which, we may note is why the C4C program took until 23 July to get rolling when it was signed on 1 July. Also precisely why GOP attempts to clarify/restrict some areas of H.R. 3200 have been blocked.

By the way, do you know the proposed bill would give free health care to the illegals here?
Ah, but of course it will -- they're a significant percentage (10 million by most estimates) of the "47 million uninsured".

There's one thing I can say with confidence with no regret: I am more intelligent than Nancy Pelosi (and her collagen)...sad indeed
Vile, despicable woman. I mean seriously, how can someone who polls lower than Dick Cheney remain Speaker?
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
I'd say you're understanding it just fine -- it's a massive power grab cloaked in the guise of "reform". A stepping stone to a single-payer system, if you will. Obama and his cronies are on record saying that's what they ultimately want -- it's no secret, really.

That's how I read it as well. And make no mistake -- it's purposefully ambiguous, too. If passed as is this P.O.S. would then go to the various agencies which will prepare the regulations and implement as they see fit -- which, we may note is why the C4C program took until 23 July to get rolling when it was signed on 1 July. Also precisely why GOP attempts to clarify/restrict some areas of H.R. 3200 have been blocked.

This article is very enlightening:
Obamascare: Does anyone take HR 3200 seriously?

by Kurt Schulzke on July 21, 2009
Targets of Section 401 include individuals who, for whatever reason, choose to self-insure and those who would if they could choose a plan that deviates somehow from what Big Brother thinks best. But, as others have already pointed out, “free market” deviants will quickly be crushed by the Obamacare juggernaut.

Should government ever be empowered to tell Americans what kind of insurance they are allowed to buy? Shouldn’t we all react with revulsion at such bold intrusion into these two most personal arenas of individual and family life, health care and religion?

And specifically on the discussion of sec.102/Does HR shut down private insurance?...the following is a question and answer blog on govtrack.
LOL, it's hilarious. People arguing back and forth on what the bill actually states. The point being that the bill is so confusing that people can't even agree on what it states it will do.

But it's saying exactly what they think its saying:

Jul 17, 2009 9:05 Am I understand that on page 16 is a provision to deny private insurance. Is this true? - Show 10 Answers

A1: Yes. It is in Section 102 of the house bill where if private insurance providers cannot open new policies and your private insurance coverage will be denied if the insurance company changes your rate or any other available coverage in your plan. [Answer submitted on Jul 22, 2009 9:32 PM]

A2: No, that is untrue. Pages 16 and 17 define "Grandfathered" insurance plans (plans that currently exist and are not subject to new restrictions) and part of the restriction is that the plan can not accept new enrollments.

The restrictions in question are for consumer protection. For example, preventing insurance companies from dropping individuals from coverage due to medical conditions.

It makes sense because if any plan that exists now could avoid the law and continue to enroll people, the restrictions wouldn't have much of a reason to exist.
[Answer submitted on Jul 23, 2009 9:14 PM]

A3: Actually, A2's answer is WRONG. Section 102 says you can keep your covered plan so long as that company does not enroll any new individuals after the government plan goes into effect. This means that your current plan will soon go out of business because it cannot sell any new policies. [Answer submitted on Jul 25, 2009 9:24 AM]

A4: Undoubtedly, that depends on who you are, how much you make and what your political affiliation is. [Answer submitted on Jul 28, 2009 9:38 AM]

A5: To add to A3's last sentence:
And as the membership in a group dwindles due to attrition, the rates will go up because the remaining members are getting older, using more services, and no new members to help spread the cost. [Answer submitted on Aug 4, 2009 8:56 AM]

A6: Actually and factually, A1 and A2 are wrong.

Section 102 says the PLAN (not company) can not enroll new people into the Grandfathered PLAN (not company) in order for it to keep GRANDFATHERED status and be immune to the bill's regulations.

They also cannot raise the rates sharply or make other alterations to the plan. It becomes a static plan. The Company's NEW plans will have to conform to the bill's regulations.

More info at: Bill does NOT make Private Health Insurance Illegal! | NowPublic News Coverage
and THOMAS (Library of Congress) (search for bill number H.R. 3200)
[Answer submitted on Aug 5, 2009 9:28 PM]

A7: A2 is correct and A3 is way off. The rule is that they can't purge people with existing conditions leaving people without, or far less coverage while they are signing up other "more desirable" low use customers.

The wonderful caveat of the plan is that "all people have to be covered". This is pure genius and will lower cost for all of us, and open up more availability. [Answer submitted on Jul 28, 2009 7:15 PM]

A8: As I understand it, private insurers (i.e. carriers) who will likely have grandfathered plans, will ALSO be able to offer plans through the new Health Exchange as long as the new offerings conform to the mandated basic coverages and premium factors as set by the Exchange. They won't necessarily go out of business, unless of course the Public Option ends up having an unfair cost advantage over the private plans offered through the Exchange. [Answer submitted on Aug 6, 2009 1:38 PM]

A9: It does not deny private insurance plans. Private plans are allowed to remain in effect after this bill so long as A) they do not enroll new individuals, B) they do not change the terms or conditions of the plan in effect, C)there are restrictions on increasing premium costs and D)they have 5 years to to change their plans to meet the same requirements as the "essential benefit package" offered by the new "national health care exchange program". So, in a nutshell, all private plans will eventually have to change to be the same as the government exchange plans, at the same cost and with the same regulations. [Answer submitted on Aug 3, 2009 2:28 PM]

A10: How long does moderation take, please?

[From the moderator: Vacation called. Things should be back up to speed in a few days.] [Answer submitted on Aug 5, 2009 8:45 PM]
 

VeeP

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Posts
1,752
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
268
Gender
Male

Just a little excerpt:


SEC. 2402 ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HEALTH INFORMATION. . .

`(b) Responsibilities- The Assistant Secretary shall–
`(1) ensure the collection, collation, reporting, and publishing of information (including full and complete statistics) on key health indicators regarding the Nation’s health and the performance of the Nation’s health care;
`(2) facilitate and coordinate the collection, collation, reporting, and publishing of information regarding the Nation’s health and the performance of the Nation’s health care (other than information described in paragraph (1));
`(3)(A) develop standards for the collection of data regarding the Nation’s health and the performance of the Nation’s health care; and . . .
`(i) ensure appropriate specificity and standardization for data collection at the national, regional, State, and local levels;
`(ii) include standards, as appropriate, for the collection of accurate data on health and health care by race, ethnicity, primary language, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, socioeconomic status, rural, urban, or other geographic setting, and any other population or subpopulation determined appropriate by the Secretary;. . .


Where's the ACLU on this stuff?

Anyone who fails to see the power grab in this has rocks in their head.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
So is this saying that after the plan is implemented, private insurers cannot enroll any new customers? Or am I comprehending it incorrectly? I would really like for someone to help me understand this...


This is how it reads if you replace the word "such" with the term it is referring to:

Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering individual health insurance coverage does not enroll any individual in individual health insurance coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

...sounds like a ban on new enrollment to me...

How about we let the President answer this one for you....:eek:

brace yourself:

Obama "Not Familiar" With Key Provision In Health Care Bill

Heritage Foundation: During the call, a blogger from Maine said he kept running into an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance. He asked: "Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?" President Obama replied: "You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about."
RealclearPolitics.com
:eek::eek::eek:
 
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Posts
16
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
88
Yikes! The loonies are everywhere! Not that reason will have an impact, but always worth a try: 1) If you'd read a piece of legislation in the past, you'd know that such is the lingo. 2) A system that is single-payer, public option has never been the plan; even just today, the administration says that the option for a public option as part of the plan is negotiable. 3) The Heritage Foundation as a reliable, objective source??? Good grief.
 

D_Tintagel_Demondong

Sexy Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Posts
3,928
Media
0
Likes
74
Points
193
How about we let the President answer this one for you....:eek:

brace yourself:

Obama "Not Familiar" With Key Provision In Health Care Bill

:eek::eek::eek:

If you expect him to memorize the entire 1000-page bill then you're crazy. Besides, he only legally needs to read the bill when he signs it. If he's unfamiliar with any bill that's not in the Conference Committee then that's quite normal for a President. He doesn't have to do these town halls or cheap radio shows, but he want's health care reform--as does 82% of Americans.

Maybe he should just do what Dubya did for the first 200 days of his term and hunt armadillos ("armadilly") and drink until he passes out and chokes on pretzels while watching the ball game. Instead, Obama is out "there" (hint: the real world) promoting health care reform.

You'll jump at any opportunity to attack your President, even if he's unfamilar with a single clause in a 1000-page document. He's a Senator. He's probably read hundreds of bills. He gets the "gist" of them, which is all that's needed.

Medicare and Medicaid are failing. Keep rooting for failure, Trinity! It becomes you.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
Yikes! The loonies are everywhere! Not that reason will have an impact, but always worth a try: 1) If you'd read a piece of legislation in the past, you'd know that such is the lingo. 2) A system that is single-payer, public option has never been the plan; even just today, the administration says that the option for a public option as part of the plan is negotiable. 3) The Heritage Foundation as a reliable, objective source??? Good grief.

The President is presented in his own words.:rolleyes:

If you expect him to memorize the entire 1000-page bill then you're crazy. Besides, he only legally needs to read the bill when he signs it. If he's unfamiliar with any bill that's not in the Conference Committee then that's quite normal for a President. He doesn't have to do these town halls or cheap radio shows, but he want's health care reform--as does 82% of Americans.

Obama is answering questions on healthcare reform that is a figment of his imagination and making promises based on that figment. The American people need to know the truth about what is going to happen to their healthcare, they don't need to be given empty promises about provisions of the Democrat's plan Obama isn't completely familiar with.:rolleyes:

Maybe he should just do what Dubya did for the first 200 days of his term and hunt armadillos ("armadilly") and drink until he passes out and chokes on pretzels while watching the ball game. Instead, Obama is out "there" (hint: the real world) promoting health care reform.
As you pointed out, a majority of Americans support reform. We don't need Obama promoting health care reform. What the American people need are real concrete answers on how Obama and the Democrats are reforming healthcare. Obama is supposed to be the leader, if we the People know enough about the bills to ask the questions Obama and his advisors should understand the reform they are pushing.

Over 80% of Americans are happy with the healthcare they have. Obama not understanding that key provision and yet making promises explains why American voters don't support the public option and why Obama had to drop it.

You'll jump at any opportunity to attack your President, even if he's unfamilar with a single clause in a 1000-page document. He's a Senator. He's probably read hundreds of bills. He gets the "gist" of them, which is all that's needed.
We need more than the gist if the government thinks it can run healthcare.:rolleyes:

Medicare and Medicaid are failing. Keep rooting for failure, Trinity! It becomes you.
A majority of Americans... Democrats, Independents and Republicans have said much the same as me. Obama and the Democrat's promotion of their figment of imagination has failed...the figment costs too much, will add to the deficit and will negatively impact healthcare rather than improve it.
 

D_Doewell Dadong

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Posts
639
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
103
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?

Welfare state should extend to free healthcare for all (if you want to go private, then fair enough, but the provision for free healthcare for all should be budgeted for), free education for all up to university standard (subject to qualifying grades) and social housing should be available.

The fluffy kitten is an optional extra
 

Bodaddio

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Posts
85
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
91
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I think the big problem with this bill is one: no one knows what it says! Hell you can't even get the party members to agree on what is in it. Write something that says what it means and everyone can understand what it says.
2: Over a 1000 pages?!?! Please, all of our founding documents aren't that long. Who can read all that? That is crazy!
3: Who wrote the thing? No one in congress can say they read it, that means none of them wrote it. Who wrote it?

Give us something that makes sense! Can be read in a reasonable amount of time and doesn't take a law degree to know what it says.
I am all for fixing what is wrong, we need health care that we can all afford, but damn people give me a break.

Cheers
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
178
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Welfare state should extend to free healthcare for all (if you want to go private, then fair enough, but the provision for free healthcare for all should be budgeted for), free education for all up to university standard (subject to qualifying grades) and social housing should be available.

The fluffy kitten is an optional extra

Oldham_Tightly:


Can I trade the fluffy kitten for a puppy? If so, I'm all for it!
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,254
Media
213
Likes
32,173
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I couldn't be more proud of Barney Frank being a Congress person from my home state! He held a townhall forum on healthcare and gave the most AMAZING answer to an uninformed constituent. It's short but very sweet:

YouTube - Barney Frank Confronts Woman At Townhall Comparing Obama To Hitler

This video brought a smile to my face. Thanks!!! :biggrin1:
I wish more of the intelligent people in our Government would get this brazen and call out people for being uninformed.
 

MovingForward

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Posts
842
Media
0
Likes
123
Points
173
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Not to mention the video at a town hall, where a woman yells Hail Hitler at a jewish guy.

Ok so maybe I am wrong, but I thought that if you had your own insurance you could keep it. I also thought that not everyone would qualify for the public option or it might be something they are working on. I think if you make a certain amount of money you would not be eligible for the public option.

Nothing is set in stone, why can't we try something and see if it works, rather than not try it at all. We do not know if it will work or not, but we won't know until we give it a shot.

Let's look at it this way. I have surgery on my shoulder to remove a pin. My doctor said back in the day he would do this surgery in his office with general anesthesia. Just takes 5 minutes. Why then when I am having surgery today, they are actually going to put me under general anesthesia and knock me out to perform this same simple procedure? To make more money. Why is it that everytime I go to a doctor regarding an issue, they have to have their own set of x rays or their own MRI, as if the ones you have are not good enough. Granted not all doctors are like that, but I think everyone agrees, some type of health care reform needs to happen
 

Bodaddio

Just Browsing
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Posts
85
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
91
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Movingforward, also to make sure they don't get sued. When you take your own x-ray, you know who is taking it, how it is done, in other words you control it. There are many procedures done by doctors not really to make more money, but to make sure they don't get sued.

Cheers