Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CA: LEGISLATIVE ALERT: SB840 -- socialized Medicine

Posted on 05/17/2005 11:21:34 PM PDT by HKMk23

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 last
To: stinkerpot65

Hmm... thyroid, hypertension, or heart issues. Sheila doesn't look all that healthy. Granted, I've accounted for the natural aging process...


41 posted on 05/19/2005 4:29:37 AM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp
Okay.. the old saw. Ahnold versus Tom.

Tom would have fixed the problems in CA. Ergo, he never would have gotten voted in. What did and do the Dems have in mind? Bringing CA to its knees and demanding the "feds" pay for everything -- to bail out, CA. This bailing out would have been paid from EVERY SINGLE STATE IN THE USA.

Enter, Arnold. Incrementally cleaning up the mess left by Dems while continuing to keep, however hidious, the economic environment at least "moving" in CA. Since Liberals are obsessed with "social" matters, fine, give them the go-ahead; and then blast their proposal budget when it arrives.

42 posted on 05/19/2005 4:33:13 AM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: BelegStrongbow
As I wrote in another post: I can understand, on one hand, Repubs staying mum on this matter a bit: Dems are determined to make the Feds (read: all the other states) bail out CA. 11 hospitals in SoCal are "bankrupt". Feds have said -- it's a state issue: clean it up yourself. Enter this proposal. It won't pass as written, IMHO. BUT! I'd let it go forward, and simply as a bargaining tool on other budget items. My two cents.

Sometimes, just sometimes, Beleg... I get the strongest perception that many in CA have utterly, absolutely, unequivocably NO concept of how economically "dire" are the straits CA has been put into by the Dems.

Anyone who has ever been in "credit hell" knows firsthand the jingly,dancing game one plays to survive while getting out of debt.

43 posted on 05/19/2005 4:37:36 AM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: tame
Morning tame!

Click here: :)

44 posted on 05/19/2005 6:32:20 AM PDT by JesseJane (Close the Borders. No Amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: JesseJane

Good morning :o)


45 posted on 05/19/2005 8:26:27 AM PDT by tame (Are you willing to do for the truth what leftists are willing to do for a lie?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: HKMk23


Reasons to support SB 840:
1. Contrary to what another poster posted SB 840 will not encourage companies to move out of California. Providing health insurance for employees is one of the biggest costs that companies face today. SB 840 will actually save them money by providing employees health insurance at a lower cost, and it will eliminate the middle man, the insurance companies. Support the businesses and citizens of California by supporting this bill.

2. SB 840 provides for universal coverage and comprehensive benefits while making very significant state savings in health care spending. In the short run, it adds no new spending, and in the long run it controls the growth in health care spending.

3. SB 840 provides for reliable coverage and security for every California resident. Eligibility is based on residency, not employment or income. No one will ever lose coverage because of unaffordable insurance premiums, changing or losing a job, going to or graduating from college, or pre-existing conditions.

4. SB 840 provides for affordable health care. Health benefits will be paid for by federal, state and county monies currently being spent on the health care system and affordable insurance premiums that replace all premiums, deductibles, out-of pocket payments, and co-payments now paid by employers and consumers.

5. System savings resulting from use of the state's purchasing power to buy pharmaceuticals and medical equipment at discounted rates, administrative simplification, and making primary care and preventive care available for everyone will dramatically increase the funds that can be spent on providing universal coverage. According to the Lewin Group study, even after care is made available to California's uninsured and underinsured, the net state savings will be about $8 billion in the first year.

6. SB 840 provides for efficient delivery of health care. Waste will be eliminated by consolidating the functions of many insurance companies into one comprehensive insurance plan saving the state and consumers billions of dollars each year. A recent Boston University study shows half of every dollar spent on health care is squandered on clinical and administrative waste, insurance company profits and over-priced pharmaceuticals. The Lewin Group report estimates that California will save more than $20 billion in reduced administrative costs in the first year alone.

7. SB 840 provides for high quality health care. Consumers will have total freedom to choose their personal primary care provider. Health care providers and facilities will receive fair reimbursement for all covered services they provide.

8. SB 840 provides for generous health care benefits based on all care prescribed by a health care provider that meets accepted standards of care and practice. The benefit package is broader than that of many current health plans and includes hospital, medical, surgical, and mental health; dental and vision care; prescription drugs and medical equipment; diagnostic testing; emergency care; health education and translation services; hospice care; and more.

9. SB 840 will stabilize the growth in health care spending by linking spending increases to growth in state gross domestic product and population, employment rates, and other relevant demographic indicators. It includes cost controls and an emphasis on preventative and primary care.


46 posted on 01/11/2006 8:28:16 PM PST by care4all
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: care4all; Darksheare; Dead Corpse; King Prout

That's some wicked lookin' Kool-Aid, you're drinkin'.

Hope it goes well with the fragrance of OZONE.

IB4TZ


47 posted on 01/13/2006 9:42:24 AM PST by HKMk23 (Why do you expect better treatment from this lousy world than Jesus got; are you holier? - Ravenhill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: care4all

Sure!
Socialized medicine works really well!
Just look at the 6 month to a year waiting list in Canada..


48 posted on 01/13/2006 11:42:37 AM PST by Darksheare (Beware the waddling Penguin Invaders from Ursa Minor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Eventually, we are all going to have to pay for our own health insurance, since businesses are finding ways to get out of providing coverage, and who can blame them with sky rocketing costs. Are you willing to pay $600 a month for an individual policy, and thousands a month for a family? And that is just this years insurance premiums, which have been going up double digit for the last several years. That is if you are lucky enough to be healthy. Once you get sick and have a pre-existing condition you are out. The insurance companies root you out fast, and then you have no insurance at all. What everyone calls insurance, is not insurance at all. The insurance companies are there to make money. At least with a state runned program you have a fighting chance. Even my doctors agree. They are sick of fighting with the insurance companies to get approval for the necessary care of their patients.


49 posted on 01/13/2006 11:05:53 PM PST by care4all
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: care4all

You are advocating socilized medicine in your previous post.
It does not jive with having to pay for your own coverage.
Troll.


50 posted on 01/14/2006 8:34:43 AM PST by Darksheare (Tagline subverted for nefarious plans of nefariousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: HKMk23
Giving working class people the right to medical care is not a bad thing. Me any my family work hard everyday like most Americans. Should I or my family not get adequate health care because I chose a profession that does not pay as much as others. Should my kids go with out dental care because I do construction and am not some kind of lawyer? Whats wrong with sharing the burden of health care so all Californians can be well. It is money well spent. A healthy society is a more productive society. i am sure that will some how "drip down" to all the fat cat millionaires that oppose universal health care in the first place.
51 posted on 05/17/2006 6:02:56 PM PDT by Dannyskins20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: HKMk23

>>1. Call your State Senator in Sacramento now and ask them to "Please vote No on SB 840."<<

Heck, for this I'd vote from Georgia if it would do any good - good luck to y'all in Cali.


52 posted on 05/17/2006 6:04:45 PM PDT by gondramB (He who angers you, in part, controls you. But he may not enjoy what the rest of you does about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dannyskins20; care4all; Darksheare; Jim Robinson
Giving working class people the right to medical care is not a bad thing.

There is NO SUCH THING as a "right to healthcare", and giving healthcare to people who can't afford it is an entirely different thing than giving medical insurance coverage to people that can't afford it. Providing healthcare to the poor is humanitarian work undertaken by numerous PRIVATE-SECTOR organizations throughout the world as a voluntary, donation-supported ministry of compassion. How many of these organizations do YOU give money to?

Medical insurance, on the other hand, is a retail product, like cable television, or a gym membership. In the world of grown-ups, retail products you can't afford to buy don't come home with you. If you can't handle the payments on that Escalade, you aren't going to be driving it home. If you can't pay first, last, and deposit on that apartment, you aren't moving in anytime soon.

"But," you say, "we work hard." Big deal! We all work hard. That isn't the standard by which eligibility for insurance gets judged. The standard is, "Can YOU pay for it?" If the answer's "No", it's not the government's responsibility to cut you a check to take up the slack.

Should I or my family not get adequate health care because I chose a profession that does not pay as much as others?

Yes. You and your family should NOT get adequate medical insurance until YOU choose to do something different, or something more, so that you then have the money needed to PAY for it. Until then, you'll do without.

Should my kids go with out dental care because I do construction and am not some kind of lawyer?

No. They should go without dental insurance because YOU -- perhaps selfishly, but maybe not -- choose to work in a profession that doesn't pay you enough to buy it for them.

Whats wrong with sharing the burden of health care so all Californians can be well?

What's wrong with sharing the burden of car payments so that everyone can drive a new 325i? What's wrong with THAT? What's wrong with "sharing the burden" of house payments so everyone can live in a 3 bedroom, 2 bath tract home? The same thing that's wrong with that is what's wrong with "sharing the burden" of medical insurance premiums.

Look, I'm sorry you've sold off your self-respect somewhere along the line; that's a real shame, but you can't legitimately get something for nothing by asking government to rip me off so they can buy it for you. That's what you're advocating, here, whether you've thought it through that far or not. THAT'S what it comes down to: government-sanctioned robbery. They take a whole wad of everyone's money, spread it in a thin layer over several thousand bureaucrats who buy new SLK430's with it, then they compensate medical staff for the mediocre care that they can barely afford to provide with what's left. At that point, the care you'd be getting almost isn't worth having.

So, let me get at least ONE thing straight here: this isn't Burger King; you CAN'T have it YOUR way. AND furthermore, even at Burger King, you can't have it YOUR way unless you've got the money in your pocket to pay for it. No money; no burger. Boo-frickin'-hoo.

If you didn't do enough studying in school to get the kind of job that pays enough for you to be able to afford medical insurance for your family -- sorry, you don't get any. Shop alternatives to standard insurance; co-op plans are far less and there are many. I ran with no insurance for a few years because I worked out of a job shop that didn't provide any benefits. Then I got bare-bones "catastrophic" insurance for awhile; low monthly premiums and a big deductible. I did what I could afford, but I never, never, never, never, never sold my self-respect downriver by implying -- much less EXPECTING -- that anyone else ought to be carrying my water for me.

If I couldn't afford it, I didn't get it.

But it isn't a legitimate function of government to take up my slack, or yours, or anyone else's and pay to get stuff for folks who can't pay for it themselves. That's an inexcusable abuse of money entrusted to the governement by the taxpayers for legitimate government functions.

A healthy society is a more productive society.

A society of individuals that pay less in taxes to their government can AFFORD BETTER HEALTHCARE on their own, AND that society's productivity b!+chsmacks the crap out of your hashish-induced dreamworld.

i am sure that will some how "drip down" to all the fat cat millionaires that oppose universal health care in the first place.

LOL!! Yeah, right. Fresh in from the planet Zarquon, eh? Wake up and smell the burning coffee! All but a paltry busload of your mythical "fat cat millionaires" are, in REALITY, everyday working-class stiffs trying as hard as you are to keep as much after-too-much-taxation income in their pockets as they can SO THEY CAN MAYBE PAY THEIR INSURANCE PREMIUMS. They're your neighbors; people you work with; the people you stand in line with at the grocery store; the guy driving next to you on the freeway in commute traffic. Who opposes universal healthcare? "We, The People," oppose it. THAT'S WHO!

Now, don't ask anymore stupid questions; I'm gettin' cantankerous.

53 posted on 05/17/2006 8:13:04 PM PDT by HKMk23 (We keep you alive to serve this ship. Row well, and live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: HKMk23; Dannyskins20; care4all

Used a little Whack-A-Trolle on them.


54 posted on 05/17/2006 9:17:37 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

RE: "Whack-A-Troll"

Reminds me of an old song...

If I had a hammer,
I'd hammer in the mornin'
Hammer in the evenin'
All over this land...


55 posted on 05/18/2006 8:05:52 AM PDT by HKMk23 (We keep you alive to serve this ship. Row well, and live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

Just more government control over your private life. As I have no interest in living in California, I say let em have it. Then watch the state disintegrate. We do need a test state, ya know.


56 posted on 05/18/2006 8:09:32 AM PDT by griswold3 (Ken Blackwell, Ohio Governor in 2006- No!! You cannot have my governor in 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson