Active Users:1183 Time:23/11/2024 06:24:32 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Senate Finance Committee Votes Against Government-Run Health Insurance Plan trzaska2000 Send a noteboard - 29/09/2009 09:08:40 PM
Big-time ass kicking:

In a decisive vote that could forecast the demise of a proposed government health insurance plan, the Senate Finance Committee voted Tuesday against creating a "public option" that would compete with private companies.

The 15-to-8 vote, which followed several hours of debate, was a defeat for liberal Democrats who view government-sponsored insurance for the middle class as a key component of President Obama's health care overhaul.

Five Democrats, including Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., joined all 10 committee Republicans to defeat a measure proposed by Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia.

The vote followed warnings by the Finance Committee's top Republicans that creating a government-run health insurance program would crush private companies.

Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, sparred with Democrats on the Senate floor over the necessity of a public plan -- with Grassley saying lawmakers shouldn't take advantage of the shortcomings in the health care system to "denigrate" American health care.
*MySmiley*
Reply to message
Senate Finance Committee Votes Against Government-Run Health Insurance Plan trzaska2000 - 29/09/2009 09:08:40 PM 766 Views
I just hope this doesn't squash all health-care reform attempts LadyLorraine - 29/09/2009 09:12:15 PM 489 Views
It definitely needs work, but not scrapped..... trzaska2000 - 29/09/2009 09:16:32 PM 492 Views
Opinion polls with health care have huge swings depending on how it's phrased Jragghen - 29/09/2009 09:28:28 PM 563 Views
Polls are horrid evidence in my mind LadyLorraine - 29/09/2009 09:32:58 PM 490 Views
Re: Polls are horrid evidence in my mind Isaac - 29/09/2009 10:12:26 PM 657 Views
From a government employee: Nice post *NM* scalius - 29/09/2009 10:17:48 PM 205 Views
Not that I totally disagree with you, but that being said LadyLorraine - 29/09/2009 10:29:13 PM 444 Views
Re: Not that I totally disagree with you, but that being said Isaac - 29/09/2009 11:21:21 PM 543 Views
Re: Not that I totally disagree with you, but that being said Jragghen - 29/09/2009 11:40:42 PM 551 Views
his statements on health care are precisely my point, but much more well stated. *NM* LadyLorraine - 29/09/2009 11:54:29 PM 205 Views
the difference is the focus of the organizations moondog - 29/09/2009 11:44:56 PM 523 Views
Re: the difference is the focus of the organizations Isaac - 30/09/2009 12:40:38 AM 551 Views
Difference is that the law is subject to more checks and balances than the whims of a CEO LadyLorraine - 29/09/2009 11:44:58 PM 541 Views
Re: Difference is that the law is subject to more checks and balances than the whims of a CEO Isaac - 30/09/2009 12:28:36 AM 522 Views
that the private sector has a long history of abusing both customer and employee *NM* LadyLorraine - 30/09/2009 03:46:03 AM 199 Views
That's indisbutable Isaac - 30/09/2009 05:55:45 PM 512 Views
And that's all I'm saying LadyLorraine - 30/09/2009 07:08:04 PM 469 Views
Re: And that's all I'm saying Isaac - 01/10/2009 03:10:02 AM 504 Views
It doesn't work at all Brian - 30/09/2009 04:27:44 AM 551 Views
i have yet to see any evidence of malpractice insurance being a driving cost of health care moondog - 30/09/2009 05:27:34 AM 559 Views
When the malpractice insurance can cost well over $100k a year of course it effects the costs. Brian - 30/09/2009 06:21:29 AM 537 Views
it's not THAT they pay malpractice LadyLorraine - 30/09/2009 02:00:04 PM 421 Views
but doctors are *required* to buy malpractice insurance moondog - 30/09/2009 04:13:08 PM 470 Views
that's completely moot to the situation malpractice insurance causes. LadyLorraine - 30/09/2009 04:21:42 PM 439 Views
hooray, we're going to continue in mediocrity when it comes to our health moondog - 29/09/2009 10:15:00 PM 550 Views
Yes, it's comforting to see that we are only rated 37th... Danu - 29/09/2009 11:14:33 PM 462 Views
That is a decade old and horribly discredited citation Isaac - 29/09/2009 11:46:51 PM 631 Views
regardless, we still spend a lot more on health care while having too many uncovered people moondog - 29/09/2009 11:56:24 PM 461 Views
My objection, in this context, is strictly about references Isaac - 30/09/2009 12:13:40 AM 469 Views
i understand your point about the reference moondog - 30/09/2009 12:54:25 AM 512 Views
Re: i understand your point about the reference Isaac - 30/09/2009 01:15:30 AM 569 Views
Re: i understand your point about the reference NaClH2O - 30/09/2009 12:24:45 PM 556 Views
Re: i understand your point about the reference Isaac - 30/09/2009 06:29:09 PM 545 Views
Re: i understand your point about the reference NaClH2O - 30/09/2009 10:57:36 PM 526 Views
Interesting... Isaac - 01/10/2009 12:09:35 AM 461 Views
So basically you are saying? NaClH2O - 01/10/2009 01:10:22 AM 427 Views
Basically... Isaac - 01/10/2009 02:52:51 AM 469 Views
Hooray! The government isn't going to get directly involved and make HC even worse! *NM* trzaska2000 - 30/09/2009 01:03:50 AM 200 Views
yes, heaven forbid we take care of our own *NM* moondog - 30/09/2009 04:13:50 PM 204 Views
looks l;ike they found some bipartisan spirit after all random thoughts - 29/09/2009 10:35:55 PM 472 Views
Definitely wouldn't want to "denigrate" Health Care... Dannymac - 30/09/2009 02:46:19 PM 432 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes