Wow. Do as the master says...

Coming to you soon...
and it's not the Movie it's Reality.

We all Knew this would be a part of the “package”. Keep it up liberals. You’ll start to see what REAL criminals look like.

So, let’s see: An illegal alien doesn’t join a program and shows up at the emergency room. Will anything change under the new bill (aside from other initiatives which will make him a citizen and give him the money to join a program as part of his welfare)?

Do as the master says...

You will and you'll like it.

I think I’ll move to Arizona and refuse to participate in the Government medical plan.

Americans who refuse to buy affordable medical coverage could be hit with fines of more than $1,000 . . .

Such a law is clearly unconstitutional. Better budget for it.

Who decides what “affordable medical coverage” is?

You don’t want to ask. I’m sure their answer is “amnesty.”

This is unbelievable! Our rights are fast deminishing. Unfathomable that such a thing would be done! Car liability insurance and health insurance are two separate things. That is really comparing apples to oranges! Very interesting piece of information. This really needs to be on CNN, CBS, NBC, and the other media outlets....what you bet it is “lost” in the reporting.

If I didn't know that the constitution has been rendered obsolete and defunct by the left, I would ask where the constitutional authority for this nonsense is derived.

Things being as they are, I'll just say: 'never mind'.

Romney is an idiot!

Romney is the enemy within.

“Who decides what “affordable medical coverage” is?”

Likely the states will, just like they do for medicaid.

Every state has a different standard for poverty level.

Like medicare part D, the cost varies in every state.

Once again Republicans are handed a killer issue on a silver platter. Anyone running ads? My God. It practically writes itself.

Everything not prohibited is compulsory.

Dem Dem’s aren’t going to like this. Dey wants free sh*t.

Does this manifesto have a number and is it online?

Democrat fines are identical to Romneycare fines!

worth noting

Evidently, it’s not in Massachusetts. And car insurance is mandatory in most states. I guess they figure this is the same thing.

"Will anything change under the new bill"

Sure well all be much poorer (well most of us anyway, not the newly minted citizens).

naw...he (or she) will do exactly what they do now (that has bankrupted so many socal hospitals and reduced access to care for everyone) - change their name as soon as they leave the hospital - fluid id = no way to find them.

I love the "hardship" exemption. Just who in the hell can pay a $1,000 fine without a second thought?

If people could afford health insurance, most would have it now.

How do you fine people who can't afford to pay?

What happens if you refuse to pay the fine?

Do you end up in jail while your neighbor is exempt and need not pay a thing because he or she has a great sob story?

I also assume they figure it is the same thing, but of course it isn't.

It will actually be a transfer payment dressed up like insurance. Like a drag queen with an obvious big Adam's Apple, it ain't what it appears.

Scotus found the social security and progressive income taxes to be constitutional about 70 years ago. There is no hope they will find against Obamacare in any form.

Nothing short of a tax on being alive.

I can’t afford health insurance, have spent all my money on ammo.

ok, so the cost for an individual is 4700 give or take. But what age group? Kaiser sent me a signup quote that said $119 for 18-29 - that’s about $1,200/year. Blue Cross was a few dollars more. That’s with a 500/deductable. The govt plan will be a little less. We don’t know what the deductable is yet. The fine is 1000. I think a lot of people who normally don’t want to carry insurance (those 10feettall and bulletproof yutes) will be paying the fine - it’s cheaper. And obviously the gubment is expecting people to pay the fines, since they are talking about how much they will raise in fine revenue. And special interests will get fine waivers. And if you pay a fine does that mean your medical treatment is then free? for how long? how many times can you be fined in one year? does your deductable count towards the fine? How does this fine plan guarantee coverage for “97 percent of Americans” ? Will this plan be 1200 pages too? Will anyone get to actually read the plan?

I really do hope the House version of the Socialized Medicine bill has this provision in it. The more loony ideas it has, the less likely the Senate will enact any version of the puppy.

Because the Democrats will do the real dirty work in the joint House-Senate conference committee to iron out the differences in their two versions. There can't be a Senate filibuster of the final version which comes out of that committee. A filibuster can only stop the Senate from passing its own version. This makes it vital to keep the Senate from passing any version of the thing.

In 2008, employer-provided coverage averaged $12,680 a year for a family plan ... Senate aides.. said the cost of the federal plan would be lower but declined to provide specifics.

Oh sure. When govt does stuff it always costs less!

Here's one specific for ya: our govt blue cross is about 13K a year.

How totally ignorant of these pukes. We've got about 16 million unemployed folks and they don't have incomes to pay for the plans.

Yet, they could be subject to ruinous fines, and absent an income to pay the fines, one must suppose the pukes in the Senate intend to jail them.

"Are there no prisons. Are there no workhouses" "The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?"

I think our most Liberal members of the Senate need go no further than "A Christmas Carol" or maybe some other work by Dickens, to find language to support their attitude toward those who have no money, and the poor, and the sick.

Gad!

coverage worth 12,000 in exchange for a 1,000 fine? Where do I pay my fine?

If this is ever taken to court SCOTUS will put a stamp of approval on it even though it is clearly illegal for the feds to essentially tax people for being alive.

The “lower” cost estimate is because they will drop the “government alternative” plan. That was just put there to create drama and get people to accept this fascist style health care plan.

We will see 5 to 10 RINOs in the Senate vote for this bill.

And on a slightly different note I will NOT vote for Romney. If that means BHO is reelected in 2012 so be it.

What about Christian Scientists or others who have a religious belief against medicine?

so if somebody is well enough off to SELF INSURE, they can be fined for not paying for govt care???

Lets see them enforce it.

It's unconstitutional.

they can shove it up their bleep

I agree re: Romney.

They can kiss my ass!! Friggin traitors!!

I can avoid car insurance by not owning a car. Can I do the same with health insurance?

I can avoid car insurance by not owning a car. Can I do the same with health insurance?

Yes, by asking for the euthanasia benefit up front.

As is 99.7% of what this administration does. But don’t expect anything from the GOP.

An illegal alien doesn’t join a program and shows up at the emergency room. Will anything change under the new bill

Not really. The feds bill state that the illegal alien or anyone without coverage should be fined. But how would the feds know. So perhaps the hospital "reports" the illegal alien - maybe. Even if they did - then what? nothing is my guess.

If this were to become law then any pretense of America still being a free country is out the window. When you have to pay taxes for being alive, you are not free. I never thought I’d live to see the day that being a US citizen is tantamount to being a slave.

We currently have the best medical care in the world. The Socialist Obama and his Socialist Congress are determined to destroy it.

Where in the Constitution are the president and congress allowed to dictate to us which doctors we will see, how long we have to wait to get treatment, which hospitals we will use, and how much they are allowed to charge? Obama would create a statist, socialist medical care system which denies us the right to hire a non-government doctor or hospital. Canadians already “enjoy” this situation, so they come to the United States for treatment.

We have too much government involvement in medical care already. What we need is more free enterprise, which always results in more choices, better quality, easy access, and lower prices. Obama thinks the government can do it better. So did the other Socialists and the communists in history, and they all failed.

The National Socialists (Nazis) rose to power in Germany largely because of hyperinflation, and that’s exactly what we will have here in the U.S. as the value of the dollar declines due to trillions upon trillions in new national debt. We are already in serious trouble, and cannot afford still more debt to pay for socialized medicine.

The best thing Congress could do right now is absolutely nothing, except insofar as the federal government’s role in medical care can be reduced and the role of private enterprise increased. The last thing we need is another idiotic plan, such as the $787 billion (and counting) non-Stimulus package (aka Welfare Enhancement Act of 2009) which was rushed through Congress.

cars are optional.
Their health insurance is not

how could that possibly be the same.

FREEDOM!!

Don’t worry. There will be a new rider to the bill providing “Healthcare Fine Income Tax Credit” for those who make less than 200% of the Poverty Level. Your fine will be paid for by other taxpaying schlubs.

In a revamped health care system envisioned by lawmakers...

And that's why I dislike lawmakers. Who made them expert health care providers? NOBODY! That's who!

Mitt Romney demonstrates his “pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior),
and his need for admiration”as the carpetbagger-socialist-dictator installs ROMNEYCARE-1.

"Massachusetts Universal Healthcare System Breaking Down Already
When Governor Mitt Romney instituted a universal healthcare plan for Massachusetts in 2006 he proclaimed it a conservative idea.
But has it worked? Has it been successful?
For a time, many thought it might but cracks in the system are already being seen.
These cracks are instructive as a lesson on how Obamacare will crash and burn just like Romneycare is now in the process of doing.

One of the early claims that helped push Romneycare through to law was the insistence by its supporters that Emergency Room visits would fall as more and more citizens became covered under healthcare insurance.
Since ER care is far more expensive than a doctor's care, it was thought that more people with insurance would ease the overcrowding of ERs as well as lower the overall costs of healthcare.
However, a flaw in this logic has been seen throughout the state. As more people became insured, more people demanded the care of doctors. These doctors became overloaded with patients and waiting lists for doctors got longer and longer.
As a result, ERs in Massachusetts have not seen a downturn in visits. On the contrary, it seems that ER visits are actually on the upswing in the Bay State. In fact, in 2007 they were higher than the national average by 20 percent...

"Hospital patients 'left in agony'"
"Patients were allegedly left screaming in pain and drinking from flower vases on a nightmare hospital ward.
Between 400 and 1,200 more people died than would have been expected at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust over three years, a damning Healthcare Commission report said.
The watchdog's investigation found inadequately trained staff who were too few in number, junior doctors left alone in charge at night and patients left without food, drink or medication as their operations were repeatedly cancelled.
Patients were left in pain or forced to sit in soiled bedding for hours at a time and were not given their regular medication, the Commission heard.
Receptionists with no medical training were expected to assess patients coming in to A&E, some of whom needed urgent care.
Sir Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS, said there had been a "gross and terrible breach" of patients' trust and a "complete failure of leadership".
The Healthcare Commission's chairman Sir Ian Kennedy said the investigation followed concerns about a higher than normal death rate at the Trust, which senior managers could not explain.
He said: "The resulting report is a shocking story. Our report tells a story of appalling standards of care and chaotic systems for looking after patients. These are words I have not previously used in any report.
"There were inadequacies in almost every stage of caring for patients. There was no doubt that patients will have suffered and some of them will have died as a result."
Julie Bailey, 47, was so concerned about the care being given to her 86-year-old mother Bella at Stafford Hospital that she and her relatives slept in a chair at her bedside for eight weeks.
She said: "We saw patients drinking out of..."

"Paramedics told: 'Let accident victims die if they want to' in new row over patient rights (UK)"
Health Service paramedics have been told not to resuscitate terminally-ill patients who register on a controversial new database to say they want to die.
It has been set up by the ambulance service in London for hundreds of people who have only a few months to live so that they may register their 'death wishes' in advance.
It is believed to be the first in the country, but other trusts around the country are expected to follow suit to comply with Government guidelines which state that patients' wishes should be taken into account, even at the point of death.
Patients' groups and doctors have welcomed the scheme, but it has met opposition from pro-life groups who say it violates the sanctity of life.
The system would come into play if a cancer patient, for example, was in serious pain and rang 999 for help to alleviate the suffering.
But if the paramedics arrived and the patient was close to death, he or she would not be resuscitated if such a request was registered on the database.
This would also be the case if a patient on the database was being transferred between hospitals, and had a heart attack.
Dominica Roberts from the Pro-Life Alliance said: 'This is very sad and very dangerous. It's another step along the slippery slope, at the bottom of which is euthanasia as we see in Holland. 'Paramedics should be there to save lives. They should not be there to let patients die. The medical profession should not agree with someone's belief that their life is worthless.'"

"National Health Preview - The Massachusetts debacle, coming soon to your neighborhood."
"Three years ago, the former Massachusetts Governor had the inadvertent good sense to create the "universal" health-care program that the White House and Congress now want to inflict on the entire country.
It is proving to be instructive, as Mr. Romney's foresight previews what President Obama, Max Baucus, Ted Kennedy and Pete Stark are cooking up for everyone else.
In Massachusetts's latest crisis, Governor Deval Patrick and his Democratic colleagues are starting to move down the path that government health plans always follow when spending collides with reality -- i.e., price controls.
As costs continue to rise, the inevitable results are coverage restrictions and waiting periods. It was only a matter of time.

They're trying to manage the huge costs of the subsidized middle-class insurance program that is gradually swallowing the state budget.
The program provides low- or no-cost coverage to about 165,000 residents, or three-fifths of the newly insured, and is budgeted at $880 million for 2010, a 7.3% single-year increase that is likely to be optimistic.
The state's overall costs on health programs have increased by 42% (!) since 2006.

What really whipped along RomneyCare were claims that health care would be less expensive if everyone were covered.
But reducing costs while increasing access are irreconcilable issues.
Mr. Romney should have known better before signing on to this not-so-grand experiment, especially since the state's "free market" reforms that he boasts about have proven to be irrelevant when not fictional.
Only 21,000 people have used the "connector" that was supposed to link individuals to private insurers."

A Very Sick Health Plan; Bay State’s ‘Grand Experiment’ Fails [RomneyCare]
"The Daily News Record, Harrisonburg, Va. - 2009-03-31 "
"For folks increasingly leery of President Obama’s plan to radically overhaul America’s health-care system,
or 17 percent of the nation’s economy, all this could hardly have come at a better time —
that is, fiscal troubles aplenty within Repubican Mitt Romney’s brainchild, Massachusetts’ “grand experiment” in “universal” health care."

"Initiated on Mr. Romney’s gubernatorial watch in 2006, this “experiment” has fallen on hard times, and predictably so.
Even though the Bay State commenced its program with a far smaller percentage of uninsured residents than exists nationwide,
“RomneyCare” is threatening to bankrupt the state. Budgeted for Fiscal Year 2010 at $880 million,
or 7.3 percent more than a year ago, this plan, aimed at providing low- or no-cost health coverage to roughly 165,000 residents,
has caused Massachusetts’ overall expenditures on all health-related programs to jump an astounding 42 percent since 2006.

So what does Mr. Romney’s successor, Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick, propose as a remedy for these skyrocketing costs?
Well, whaddya think? The standard litany of prescriptions (no pun intended) — price controls and spending caps, for a start, and then, again predictably, waiting periods and limitations on coverage.
As in Europe and Canada, so too in Massachusetts. And, we feel certain, everyone from Mr. Romney to Mr. Patrick said, “It would never happen here.”
But then, such things are inevitable when best-laid plans, with all their monstrous costs, run smack-dab into fiscal reality.

"Dem Congresswoman Admits Obama Health Care Plan Will Destroy Private Health Insurance Industry"

Thousands of patients with terminal cancer were dealt a blow last night after a decision was made to deny them life prolonging drugs.
The Government's rationing body said two drugs for advanced breast cancer and a rare form of stomach cancer were too expensive for the NHS.
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence is expected to confirm guidance in the next few weeks that will effectively ban their use.
The move comes despite a pledge by Nice to be more flexible in giving life-extending drugs
to terminally-ill cancer patients after a public outcry last year over 'death sentence' decisions."

"Patients Forced To Wait Hours In Ambulances Parked Outside A&E Departments
"An investigation by The Sunday Telegraph has found that thousands of 999 patients are being left to wait in ambulances in car parks and holding bays, or in hospital corridors – in some cases for more than five hours – before they can even join the queue for urgent treatment.

Experts warn that hospitals are deliberately delaying when they accept patients – or are diverting them to different sites –
in order to meet Government targets to treat people within fours hours of admitting them."

"Cancer survivor confronts the health secretary on 62-day wait (UK Socialized Medicine)
WAITING times for cancer treatment need to be cut, the Scottish Government was told yesterday.
..Cancer experts later said that patients elsewhere in Europe would be "outraged" by having to wait two months to start treatment, with most being seen within two weeks.

The current target of 62 days from urgent referral by a doctor to starting treatment has still not been met in Scotland, despite that originally being the target figure for 2005."

"Hospital patient so shocked at dirty ward she climbed out of bed to clean it herself
After 12 years cleaning care homes and private houses, no one is better qualified than Tereza Tosbell to say whether a room is spotless.
So hospital bosses should take heed of her opinion after she spent four days on a 'filthy' ward.
The mother-of-one said during her stay there was a single, brief visit from a cleaner who left dusty curtains, dirty bedframes and a messy floor.
Disgusted at the conditions, she grabbed the antibacterial fluid dispenser at the end of her bed and some hand towels from the bathroom.
She then set about cleaning her four-bed ward, at one point dropping to her hands and knees to sanitise the floor as she dragged her drip trolley behind her.
'It was shameful to see how sloppy the cleaners were while I was there. I was not prepared to put up with such conditions,'
said Miss Tosbell, a 48-year-old divorcee who was admitted to Colchester General Hospital in Essex with an abscess in her neck.."

"Kidney cancer patients denied life-saving drugs by NHS rationing body NICE (UK Socialized Medicine)
Thousands of kidney cancer patients are likely to lose out on life-prolonging drugs.
The NHS rationing body, NICE, has confirmed a ban on three out of four new treatments.
.. 'Families will be denied time together and doctors will be unable to give patients the best treatment.'."

"Girl, 3, has heart operation cancelled three times because of bed shortage (UK Socialized Medicine)
A three-year-old girl awaiting heart surgery has had her operation cancelled three times this month because of a shortage of beds.

... A hospital spokesman said that procedures would be reviewed, but the case highlights a growing problem of cancelled operations in the NHS.
More than 57,000 surgeries were postponed for non-clinical reasons, including a lack of beds, last year – 10 per cent more than the previous year."

I would support this if you could get out of it by signing a waiver that would prohibit you from taking a dime of taxpayer money if you got sick and couldn’t pay for your own treatment.

After all, that is the real problem they are trying to solve — our inability to let people die on the sidewalk in front of a hospital.

If you can come up with a way to make it acceptable for people without insurance to die in the streets because they can’t pay for their care, then we don’t have to worry about taxing them for the possibility of coverage later.

Otherwise, we are just giving them free health insurance through the government with other taxpayers paying for it while they get a free ride.

If you don’t want public health insurance, and you don’t want to mandate private coverage, you have to cut people off from free health care provided by the government.

Unfortunately, there isn’t even majority support in this forum for that sort of drastic action, nor would you ever get it through a congress elected by the people.