Way to step up Massachusetts

[senorchipotle]

No offense, but you live in Texas. I lived in Texas too, and their fire departments probably shouldn't carry sharp objects. Texas is a very conservative state, and the hospitals, schools, fire departments, and police forces in Texas are woefully underfunded. When I first arrived in Texas, my schoomates refused to believe I was from Florida because "it was only beaches, look at the map, it's too thin for anyone to live there." This was 5th grade. The school system in Texas was so bad that a teacher had told my class that Lake Okechobee was a hole in the middle of Florida that went to France. I am, I repeat, NOT, making this up. I honestly wish I was.

funny, i was in florida on vacation in key largo one summer during h.s. a local girl i met asked with a straight face, ''where do you keep your horses at school?" perplexed, i asked why anyone would ride a horse to school, to which she replied, ''well, isn't that how everybody gets around out there?''

moral of story: there are idiots everywhere.

[B Keller]

moral of story: there are idiots everywhere.

Yep. I hate to hear Shanks' story but I can believe it. Especially if it was a small town like I live in.

I worked in Connecticut at a camp for a summer. People didn't believe I was from Texas because I didn't sound like a redneck. I was also asked by a dead serious kid if I rode a horse to school. I also had people marvel at my truck because I had Texas tags....I didn't get the fascination, but whatever.

[Lefty-Golfer]

Steers and queers come from Texas....kidding i swear just kidding.

[B Keller]

Steers and queers come from Texas....kidding i swear just kidding.

That's from a movie, right? R. Lee Ermey said it?

[Lefty-Golfer]

That's from a movie, right? R. Lee Ermey said it?

I honestly don't know...just know the line. In a past life (pre wife and kids) I made several trips to College station....from what I saw of the girls there...Texas is fine by me!! Plus it is a Republican state!!

[Fatphil]

eh so what do you think about the public option for health care?

[Lefty-Golfer]

eh so what do you think about the public option for health care?

LOL com what do you think i feel...of course it is a terrible idea. of all the terrible ideas this current president / congress has, and there to many to count or list, pulic option on health care and government health care at all is the worse. It is so bad they can't even get their own super majority to agree to it...without bribes of course. and that takes us back to the title of this thread!! LOL Mass voted for a Rebuplician and there is still some kind of debate!!

[Shanks A Million]

LOL com what do you think i feel...of course it is a terrible idea. of all the terrible ideas this current president / congress has, and there to many to count or list, pulic option on health care and government health care at all is the worse. It is so bad they can't even get their own super majority to agree to it...without bribes of course. and that takes us back to the title of this thread!! LOL Mass voted for a Rebuplician and there is still some kind of debate!!

So, to get it straight, you favor not having an option as opposed to having an option?

Of course it's a terrible idea, we're only the most unhealthy country in the G20 with the highest infant mortality, shortest life expectancy, and highest costs, plus we have 50 million uninsured people. What could be wrong with a system like that! I can't see how anyone would disagree with an option for those who want it to get government healthcare. Meanwhile, I'll go on with no healthcare due to a pre-existing condition.

[B Keller]

So, to get it straight, you favor not having an option as opposed to having an option?

I am in agreement that our current system is broken and some change has to be made. But I do not agree that what is being offered is the right solution.

Something to prevent insurance companies from denying on pre-existing conditions? I am for that, depending on how it is written. Allowing people to buy insurance across state lines? Same as above. I know one state (Minnesota?) has a non-profit system. I think that should be seriously investigated. I just have a problem with a government program that will force you to have insurance with the threat of a large fine or jail time if you don't. I am against having to pay for a citizen to pay for their own/families insurance and have to pay for someone who doesn't want to work for their own. I do have sympathy for those who want it, work hard, and can't afford it. But I don't think they are the government's responsibility. That is the job of private organizations who would be able to do that if we weren't taxed like we are. My dad, under the current legislation, has a Cadillac Plan. Why? Because of a pre-existing condition that forces him to have less coverage than me at 3 times the cost. So he will continue to have that and have to pay a tax for having that plan? This is fair? We agree something has to be done, but the wrong thing will make it worse. That is what I believe this plan is.

[Lefty-Golfer]

So, to get it straight, you favor not having an option as opposed to having an option?

I am in favor of the government staying out of the health care industry. They are already in deeper then I would care to see them and they will never come out…our government isn’t very good of getting out of things.

I am totally open to reform. I am willing to discuss new ways to force competition. Pre existing condition is a very tough…I don’t know enough about the insurance business to say how that should or should not be handled. Have you never had health insurance? You do need to keep in mind, through my company, I pay health insurance (actually 90 percent of it) for 105 people and their families. I totally understand the cost of insurance….better then 99 percent of the people in this country. I actually SIGN the checks and PAY for the insurance that costs so much money….I have complete confidence that if Washington was to get involved it would end up costing MORE….because that is how our government does things.

[Leftygolfer]

Health care cost are driven up by government. Ask some people from countries with socialized medicine how quickly they get treated. I had knee surgury within 3 weeks from my first appointment. It is horrid how long you have to wait. The government can do nothing well.

[wannabe]

has anyone perused the U.S. Constitution lately to see if there's any authorization for the U.S. Federal Government to get involved in healthcare or 90+% of the other things it's currently doing?

There's a process to remedy this of course called the constitutional amendment process; hmm, wonder why that's not being followed?

[jamo]

has anyone perused the U.S. Constitution lately to see if there's any authorization for the U.S. Federal Government to get involved in healthcare or 90+% of the other things it's currently doing?

See: necessary and proper clause, they can do anything they deem "necessary and proper." It's the job of the judicial branch to tell them they can't and the job of the people to tell them they don't wan them too.

There's a process to remedy this of course called the constitutional amendment process; hmm, wonder why that's not being followed?

Amendment for what? It's a bill, not a proposed amendment. As the legislative branch, Congress is allowed to make laws...

[B Keller]

See: necessary and proper clause, they can do anything they deem "necessary and proper." It's the job of the judicial branch to tell them they can't and the

This is a fair point, and frankly one I had not thought of. But I think you will have a hard time proving this bill is necessary and proper when it limits liberty that is guaranteed by the constitution and the lack of health insurance does not prevent life.

The people have done that and yet they still press on. Again: Something needs to be done, but this idea is a bad idea according to most of America. I will also say that I love the fact that we can discuss something like this without it degenerating into name calling and rudeness. Props to everyone involved.

[jamo]

This is a fair point, and frankly one I had not thought of. But I think you will have a hard time proving this bill is necessary and proper when it limits liberty that is guaranteed by the constitution and the lack of health insurance does not prevent life.

The problem with this is that the US government works in the way that everything is constitutional until proven otherwise, namely by the Court system.

The people have done that and yet they still press on.

You sort of missed my point. By the people telling then they don't want them to i mean voting the majority party out of power. But, we give senators 2 years and presidents 4 years for a reason.

Again: Something needs to be done, but this idea is a bad idea according to most of America.

I've heard this a lot. I'm in support of the bill, but mostly because i'm not as mush of a cynic (not an insult) as some of the people who are against it. Even if it was the republicans pushing for it (hypothetical) i would want to see what happens. Maybe it will be good, maybe not, the thing is, no one knows yet, thats why i'm not so down on the government. On a similar note, i'm not so down on Obama. I have a feeling the stimulus bill would have passed even if GW Bush (again, hypothetical) was president. It is Congress, after all, is who passes laws. I think that government run programs aren't as bad as anyone thinks, and i hate the use of Socialist as a buzz word. We have socialist fire and police service, they work fine. I just think that a public option will create a little more healthy competition, and it will help pay off the gigantic deficit (and don't tell me the deficit is all Obama's fault either, Reagan invented the deficit, Clinton left with a surplus (and yes, i know the congress was republican, you have to pick one, Congress or the president)).

Yes, a republican won in Massachusetts, but there were far more reasons than people wanted change. Just remember, 1 year ago 60% of America approved of Obama. Just give him a chance. I mean, come one, we put up with 8 years of George W. I live in MA, and i am of the belief that Coakley (i hope i spelled that right) lost the election. She was up 30 points in december. Then she began attack adds, and claimed Brown hated rape victims, and spelled Massachusetts wrong in her add (it's not Massachusettes). I don't think Brown will last long, if only because this is Taxachusetts, people will come to their senses eventually.

I will also say that I love the fact that we can discuss something like this without it degenerating into name calling and rudeness. Props to everyone involved.

Still no insults.

[iammpspeer]

this is a fair point, and frankly one i had not thought of. But i think you will have a hard time proving this bill is necessary and proper when it limits liberty that is guaranteed by the constitution and the lack of health insurance does not prevent life.

wtf are you talking about you !#@$ :-p

[Shanks A Million]

This is a fair point, and frankly one I had not thought of. But I think you will have a hard time proving this bill is necessary and proper when it limits liberty that is guaranteed by the constitution and the lack of health insurance does not prevent life.

55% of Americans favor a public option. So, according to that reasoning, we should pass a public option. Seems simple.

You're never going to win this argument, most countries have social healthcare, and they are in better health, live longer, and are satisfied with their healthcare in much greater numbers than we are. The numbers overwhelmingly show that socialized medicine, with the option to have private insurance, works better. To those of you who say that public healthcare is useless, when you get robbed, who do you call, the police, or a private investigator?

[wannabe]

See: necessary and proper clause, they can do anything they deem "necessary and proper." It's the job of the judicial branch to tell them they can't and the job of the people to tell them they don't wan them too.

The necessary and proper clause only refers to legislation necessary and proper to administering the enumerated powers of Congress as listed in Article 1, Section 8. Administering a national healthcare system is not one of Congress' enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8.

In order for Congress to exercise additional power, the US Constitution would have to be amended to grant this additional power. Otherwise, as stated in the 10th Amendment, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." I understand these points are the ones, along with the commerce & general welfare clauses of the US Constitution, are the most fundamentally used clauses to aid in the continued expansion, reach, and power of the federal government, but it doesn't make it right according to the basic reading and interpretation of the texts. As for the Supreme Court, it's role is one thing, it's effectiveness in performing that duty, different topic.