You say everybody needs health insurance. Really? Everybody??? Does Bill Gates need health insurance? He can afford to pay his healthcare expenses out of pocket. So can a lot of other people. They don't NEED health insurance.

Frankly, neither does the guy who is healthy all his life, then gets hit by a bus and dies at the tender age of 28.

The comparison to food is right on. Everybody needs food. Everybody. Rich or poor. Healthy or sick. Sure, food stamps feed the poor. But if the government only reimbursed the grocery stores for 60% of the cost of the food, then food prices for the rest of us would go through the roof in a hurry. This is what Medicare and Medicaid have done to the cost of healthcare.

Medicare and Medicaid should start paying the FULL price for services. This would bring the costs down for everyone.

The government should help those people truly in NEED. Leave the rest of us alone.

Folks, that 856 billion is over 10 years. thats about $2300 per uninsured person per year.

As Obama said in his speech, that is about the cost of the Iraq war. What he has also said is that the Iraq war hurt us economically.

So... its okay for healthcare reform to hurt us economically, but not a war? And if we fund healthcare, that pretty much eliminates our ability to fight future wars, and puts our national security at risk.

Frankly, neither this healthcare bill nor the Iraq war are/were worth destruction of our economy. I suppose the shiites and the kurds are (temporarily) pretty happy for what happened in Iraq, but the whole thing is just about fall apart and we will have wasted a trillion dollars and thousands of lives for nothing.

But, back on the subject, not having the option to wage war because we are bogged down paying for healthcare will destroy both our economy and our national security.

If everyone who can, is paying their own premiums, then they shouldn't cost the Federal Government (taxpayers) anything right? So the $856 billion is to cover the currently uninsured of 30million? That is $28,533 each! How is this a good idea?

If this is going to save americans money, why, oh why, are we going to have to spend 856 billion dollars on it? That is like telling me to buy a car that costs 50 grand and being told I am saving 6 thousand, but after I sign up and check my savings account, the 6 thousand didn't get deposited. I don't get it. I feel cheated, but the car payments keep coming, and to top it off, the car degrades from the Lexus I paid for, to a rebult Yugo and I get a notice that my interest rate has doubled. I want out, but no way, I signed a contract. There I am with the $30,000 refried Yugo and payments on a Lexus that keep going up and I realize that if I don't make the payments, the guys with guns are going to come and put me in jail. Where the health care will probably be better.

Or no Democrats to either
by the way, the 3 Republicans on the Gangbang of 6 are really Rhinos

Obama overwhelmingly elected? What was it, by a margin of what 5% or so?

cover illegal aliens, ration Medicare,
Yes, if you had read house bill 3200 it would have

Joyce -- Let's briefly review recent history.

1. Obama and all other Democratic candidates come out strong for universal health care during the election.

2. Obama and the Democrats are overwhelmingly elected.

3. Obama instructs Congress to have a bill for him over the summer.

4. Even though most Democrats support a single-payer plan, Obama and the Democratic leadership take that off the table on the ground that it won't make it past a Republican filibuster.

5. Four of five Committees produce health care bills, all with public options.

6. Republicans, Fox News and talk radio all go balistic, claiming that the bills provide for "death panels," cover illegal aliens, ration Medicare,
and are "trojan horses" for the government takeover of health care. All proven to be lies.

7. Even thought the Dems have a overwhelming majority in the Senate, Max Baucus appoints a gang-of-six -- three Republicans and three conservative Democrats -- to try and produce a bill in the Senate Finance Committee that can have bi-partisan support.

8. The Senate Finance Committee delays and delays. Does not produce a bill by the August recess. Repeatedly claims that it just needs "a little more time" for their "bipartisan bill."

9. Finally, Baucus releases his bill. No public option. No reduction in Medicare. Explictly bars illegal aliens. Bans reimbursement for end-of-life counseling.

10. No Republicans support Baucus's plan.

Again, what's the point with even trying to be bipartisan. Republicans will oppose anything proposed by a Democrat. End of story.

Of any healthcare reform passed this year so we need to pay attention to it as it gets Committe mark up and than is presumably voted out of Committee.

Max Baucus is about as slick as it gets.
Be very afraid if you hear any leftist say that conservatives need not worry about some sort of healthcare deal that Max Baucus has crafted.
Max Baucus has buddies on both sides of the aisle that owe him many favors that he can call in any time he wants.

Immediately upon release, Harry Reid says: "During this time of economic crisis, our state cannot afford to shoulder the second highest increase in Medicaid funding."

Here's the the logical inconsistency of that kind of statement (Olympia Snow said the same thing about Maine): If your state can't fund Medicaid for your people (i.e. you can't tax your state's population enough to fund health coverage in your state), what makes you think that the Federal government can?

EVERY state that has admitted that they can't afford health coverage for their own people (Mass, Maine, Hawaii, California, Nevada, and the list goes on) somehow thinks that the Federal government.... which is taxing the EXACT SAME population base... can raise those taxes instead? Or do they think that it is more palatable for the Federal government to tax other things (businesses) and other demographic groups (the rich) instead of directly taxing their own people and businesses?

Harry doesn't seem to understand that ALL money from the federal and state governments comes from the same group of people. He believes that since the State government of Nevada won't tax Nevada's population enough to cover medical care then the Federal government should tax Nevada's population to cover medical care. Since they are taxing the SAME population to cover healthcare, why is it so much better for the Federal government to do it than the State government?

Nothing comes for free. Whether the money comes from my State taxes or my Federal taxes, it is still coming from my taxes.

Mandatory healthcare insurance is not a new concept in the various healthcare reform bills. HR 3200, the primary House bill, already requires it -- AND REQUIRES IT FOR MOST ILLEGAL ALIENS. Think you'll hear that on the evening news?

My source is the Congressional Research Service, the official congressional body for analyzing and reporting on legislation to Members of Congress and Committees. It's not the media; it's not a partisan think tank. It's like the Congressional Budget Office, except it's staffed with professionals who do nothing but read and report on legislation FOR CONGRESS for a living.

On August 25, 2009, the CRS issued a report, titled "Treatment of Noncitizens in H.R. 3200", to all members of Congress. The report is only eleven pages long and is available at Treatment of Noncitizens in H.R. 3200.. Or Google it.

According to the Report, all "resident aliens" must purchase health insurance. "Resident alien" sounds like an immigration term, but it's not. It's income tax term and includes any illegal alien who meets a "substantial presence" test -- that is, the illegal alien has been in the U.S. for at least 31 days this year and at least 183 days total over the last three years. Try pg 2, para 2 & 3, pg 7, para 1 & 2.

Why isn't La Raza protesting the requirement that low income illegals buy health insurance without receiving credits from the gov't? Think maybe there's an understanding with the Obama administration?

TRUTHSNEEKER...............you are a dumbass.....and dats da truff.......

So we have heath Assurance ... why would we need insurance ... except to protect ourselves from bankruptcy / debt and to protect those with insurance from higher costs due to non-payment of other's medical bills.

Now if I just bought tumor insurance, I'll bet I could buy a 60 year policy for less than I pay now for "Sniffles" insurance.

Insurance always costs more when you add it all up .... even for non-profit insurance. It simply has to. So there is no way you reduce costs using insurance. It might reduce the cost for one individual, but never the collective.

And besides ... isn't giving something of value to someone in need charity ... and isn't charity legal?

Or should we continue your line of thinking and add "Food Insurance", "Water Insurance", "Transportation Insurance" ... to the list of mandatory insurances?

Might want to hold off on comments till we've all had a chance to look at this.

But I will remind everyone, that there is no constitutional right of the Federal Government to require any one to purchase anything.

Federal Mandates are un-constitutional.

Refuse to surrender my money to rationed medical care ... Hmmmm ... a felony or misdemeanor?
When I am sent to prison, my medical care is free.
Sounds like a plan to me.
C.Y.A.
... getting better by the minute ... !

Hold on a second republicans before you go to the ER, since I care about Americans, I will aid you. 1st, dont worry about it too much, nobody knows who this guy is and nobody will again in a couple weeks. 2nd, this wont pass, people on both parties do not support it at all. So sit back and relax, and dont start throwing your pitchforks at the tv yet

to challenge the constitutionality of a federal mandate to spend money you may or may not have on something you may or may not need?

So now we all HAVE to get health insurance. No more personal choice to have it or not. If that does not scream total control over your life, I don't know what does.