Comments on: Rep. Stupak faces pressure from White House, leadership

By: perplexed

perplexed — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:01:01 +0000

KC, its hard to tell the hype from reality in this situation, the fact that insurance companies couldn’t become more cost effective and competitive is a big farce. If you look at the banking industry and then the car manufacturing loans and in short time both of these bailouts have seemed to work and stabilize the economy. Imagine the opposition for insurance reform is coming from the people who benefit the most as the system is today. Its hard to see a nest egg your saving for your kids go to a profit margin for a big insurance company. Its gone from what a consumer can afford, to a projection in a board room to rate and limit policies and services to increase profits. If health insurance is fixed, you’ll see the economy boom, not the profits margins from certain share holders or CEOs.

By: KC

KC — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 20:49:04 +0000

Should those individuals who do not want the proposed health care have a constitutional venue?

By: José

José — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 02:54:12 +0000

He may be right, and that’s a shame. There are several proposals that carefully partition funds so that taxpayer dollars cannot used for abortion services, yet the anti-abortion bloc (including that powerful lobby, American Catholic Bishops) won’t allow any plan to include abortion insurance even when the additional premiums are entirely paid by the individual instead of the government. This restriction theoretically applies just to the public option, subsidized plans, and the so-called insurance exchange, but it would effectively discourage insurance companies from including abortion coverage in many private plans. In other words the real goal is not to keep tax monies from paying for abortions, but to prevent ANYONE from buying ANY insurance policy that covers a legal medical procedure. So much for freedom and individual rights.