What is actually on the Health Care Reform Bill

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

oaklandguy

Dismembered
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
3,619
Reaction score
6
There aren't any copies of the 1,000 page Bill out there on the internet yet; however, many of us do not know the things that have been added on that have very little if nothing to do with healthcare. And for the record, I am very moderate when it comes to politics however my faith always leads me a little to the right on social issues.

#1 Subsidized abortions are on the bill. Which basically means the tax-payer will be paying for people to get abortions (whether you are pro-life or pro-choice) you will be paying for it.

#2 Counseling regarding how to die for elder people. Basically the bill will pay for an aging baby-boomer to learn how to euthanize themselves. Funny how Kavorkian goes to jail for this same thing, but when our President wants it, it's okay.

Anyways, those are just a couple things for now that I personally believe do not belong in the healthcare bill. As far as how surgeries are going to be handled and other procedures as well as the payment options and how much the "Public Option" will cost, I do not know exactly what the Bill says about these things.

If anyone knows exactly what the bill says please post, and if anyone has any opinions on things SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED in the bill feel free to post your opinions.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I also have heard numbers that people making salaries over 1,000,000 will be paying for 49% of the insurance by taxes. And then another part of the wealthy will be supplying 44%. I'm not sure about the exact numbers. If anyone knows please post.
 
There aren't any copies of the 1,000 page Bill out there on the internet yet; however, many of us do not know the things that have been added on that have very little if nothing to do with healthcare. And for the record, I am very moderate when it comes to politics however my faith always leads me a little to the right on social issues.

#1 Subsidized abortions are on the bill. Which basically means the tax-payer will be paying for people to get abortions (whether you are pro-life or pro-choice) you will be paying for it.

#2 Counseling regarding how to die for elder people. Basically the bill will pay for an aging baby-boomer to learn how to euthanize themselves. Funny how Kavorkian goes to jail for this same thing, but when our President wants it, it's okay.

Anyways, those are just a couple things for now that I personally believe do not belong in the healthcare bill. As far as how surgeries are going to be handled and other procedures as well as the payment options and how much the "Public Option" will cost, I do not know exactly what the Bill says about these things.

If anyone knows exactly what the bill says please post, and if anyone has any opinions on things SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED in the bill feel free to post your opinions.

Both of these assertions are false.

Also: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
Politics is a touchy subject -- perhaps citations for these "facts" would be useful?
 
#1 Subsidized abortions are on the bill. Which basically means the tax-payer will be paying for people to get abortions (whether you are pro-life or pro-choice) you will be paying for it.

Why not? You don't have to get one. And, not to mention, we've funded abortions in foreign nations since the end of the Bush administration (and before GW was POTUS). Oh, and if you consider yourself a pragmatist, consider the Freakonomics hypothesis – Roe v. Wade lowered crime rates?

#2 Counseling regarding how to die for elder people. Basically the bill will pay for an aging baby-boomer to learn how to euthanize themselves. Funny how Kavorkian goes to jail for this same thing, but when our President wants it, it's okay.

As a future physician in a medical system that's heavily burdened by old people (GOMERS etc.?), it's important that you recognize how end of life planning is key in making sure peoples' wishes are respected. This is not required, merely encouraged.
 
Sorry my citations are just from watching NBC news and attending Town Hall meetings. It was absolutely intense at the town hall meeting. I live in the richest city in Michigan so it was a lot of people mad at the Democratic leadership. I assumed those 2 facts were in the bill because they were the main heat of discussion at the Town Hall meeting and the leadership never said they weren't a part of the bill. In fact, the Congress women basically said the same thing as Vassar Liberal. I just thought it was funny because Jeffrey Fieger the lawyer in the Kavorkian case lives in my neighborhood and the topic was brought up. The main argument was morally people felt it was wrong to have people telling them how to die.

Anyways, my main point for this thread was to find out what was actually on the bill because it seems to be changing everyday and no one can find the exact truth. How can we argue and debate and contemplate a bill that we don't know the specifics of? I legitimately thought those things were on the bill because I have heard from two sources (the town hall meeting and NBC news) that those are on the bill. I wanted to hear the opinions on those things because I thought they were a part. I personally feel I should not have to pay for other people's mistakes and for people to learn how to die. These are strictly my opinions and that is why I started this topic, to hear others opinions and be able to approach this new bill with an open mind.

This being said, does anyone know anything that is for sure on the bill? Any numbers, anything? I have heard that the bill suggests a single-payor system and then there's this "public option" I hear and the whole beaurocratic death panel. It's just hard to know what to believe.
 
Oh another thing that someone brought up at the Town Hall meeting was that there is an amendment in place that does not allow one to change from public health to private insurance. I don't know this exact amendment. But if one were to switch to the "Public Option" they would not be allowed to switch back. The leadership said that this amendment would be changed in the bill, but then again we have no idea what is or what is not in the bill.

Also the subsidized abortion apparently is in the bill under the "essential benefits package". Not a huge deal for anyone who isn't against abortion, but a large amount of Americans are against abortion and this definitely disregards their views.



P.S. a citation on how the bill must cover abortion:
http://crooksandliars.com/dday/any-public-insurance-option-must-include-cove
 
Yeah... the bill has been available to read for some time now. The idea that it is not available is a complete farce. I personally downloaded a PDF copy a week or two ago.

The word abortion is not in the bill. The Republicans are objecting to the availability of "family planning" (birth control).

Mandatory end-of-life care is not in the bill. It is on page 425 and is specifically voluntary. It OFFERS counselling services to the elderly, which was previously unavailable under medicare.

The numbers and specifics keep changing because some people are using other bills as reference points. My references are to the 1018 page bill. There are at least 2 others in the legislature.
 
Mandatory end-of-life care is not in the bill. It is on page 425 and is specifically voluntary. It OFFERS counselling services to the elderly, which was previously unavailable under medicare.

And it's a damned good thing that they're offering it. Problems with anecdotal evidence aside, ask almost any physician, elder care attorney, or attorney who does estate planning or end of life planning, this is very important. A living will, healthcare proxy, and the like are key to protecting a patient's wishes. Why go full code on someone who doesn't want it?

The American Academy of Family Physicians has some useful information on this topic.
 
And it's a damned good thing that they're offering it. Problems with anecdotal evidence aside, ask almost any physician, elder care attorney, or attorney who does estate planning or end of life planning, this is very important. A living will, healthcare proxy, and the like are key to protecting a patient's wishes. Why go full code on someone who doesn't want it?

The American Academy of Family Physicians has some useful information on this topic.

I absolutely agree that it's a good idea. I think it's completely reasonable to offer those services, and would make the lives of many families easier, no longer having to puzzle over, "What would [loved one] actually want?"

The idea that we're going to have deathsquads killing off the elderly and children with down syndrome is simply absurd. No one in the government wants that, and I'd dare you to find enough physicians to even carry out such orders.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The idea that we're going to have liberal deathsquads killing off the elderly and children with down syndrome is simply absurd. The government wants that, and I'd dare you to not find enough physicians to even carry out such orders.

Sarah Palin'ed FTL.

But seriously...

I really have to get more jaded –*it's really disgusting to me that people will take something so helpful and lie through their teeth about it.
 
Last edited:
Mandatory end-of-life care is not in the bill. It is on page 425 and is specifically voluntary. It OFFERS counselling services to the elderly, which was previously unavailable under medicare.


I never said it was mandatory. I personally don't think it is something that should be offered from the government. I think there would be a huge discrepancy in the information provided on how to plan your death when seeing someone private and seeing a government employee. Again, this is coming from a kid who was in private schools his whole life so I have reasoning behind my beliefs.

And from personal experience in dealing with financial advising personnel "wills" are old news. There are now more efficient ways to plan your death, I think the most widely used one now is a thing called a bucket system or something of that nature.

Another thing about the whole providing advice on planning your death... many people assume this means teaching people how to euthanize themselves. I haven't had a chance to read the bill yet, Orgo II test tomorrow, Claisen Condensations and Malonic Ester Synthesis etc, but I was wondering if that was part of the bill because this is what many people are saying. A lot of the elderly were concerned about this at the meeting, and again the whole Jeffrey Fieger issue being a resident of the city he lived in. (He has a baller crib by the way).
 
Could someone please explain this to me:

Why has the bill not changed since it was released since early July? Is Congress debating over passing HR 3200, or modifying it? Will they eventually modify it? I've read excerpts of it, and there are some points I don't like... I'd be happy to point a few out if anyone is interested.
 
I never said it was mandatory. I personally don't think it is something that should be offered from the government. I think there would be a huge discrepancy in the information provided on how to plan your death when seeing someone private and seeing a government employee.

Frankly, you aren't batting very well on this thread.

The provision utilizes existing counseling infrastructure available through physicians and social service providers. Basically it pays for one session per five years, or more if the patient in question is suffering from a terminal condition. There is no army of government employees waiting to infiltrate the hospitals and nursing homes.

You can even find more accurate information on FoxNews:

A Harvard study released earlier this year directly linked end-of-life counseling with lower health care costs and better quality of life for patients with advanced cancers.

Researchers, who interviewed 603 advanced-cancer patients about whether they had end-of-life conversations with their physicians, found that patients who did had an estimated average of $1,876 in health care expenses during their final week of life, compared with $2,917 for those who didn't. Patients also associated higher costs with a worse quality of death during their final week and typically did not live longer if they received intensive care.
 
There aren't any copies of the 1,000 page Bill out there on the internet yet; however, many of us do not know the things that have been added on that have very little if nothing to do with healthcare. And for the record, I am very moderate when it comes to politics however my faith always leads me a little to the right on social issues.

#1 Subsidized abortions are on the bill. Which basically means the tax-payer will be paying for people to get abortions (whether you are pro-life or pro-choice) you will be paying for it.

#2 Counseling regarding how to die for elder people. Basically the bill will pay for an aging baby-boomer to learn how to euthanize themselves. Funny how Kavorkian goes to jail for this same thing, but when our President wants it, it's okay.

Anyways, those are just a couple things for now that I personally believe do not belong in the healthcare bill. As far as how surgeries are going to be handled and other procedures as well as the payment options and how much the "Public Option" will cost, I do not know exactly what the Bill says about these things.

If anyone knows exactly what the bill says please post, and if anyone has any opinions on things SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED in the bill feel free to post your opinions.

LOL at 1000 pages, its 150 words per page, i wish my papers could be like this.
 
Wow dude you really should stop listening to Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. It makes no sense to be that wrong about it.
 
Does it address tort reform or the fact that even people with insurance are too lazy/busy to go to their doctors now, when they have symptoms, and never actually listen to their doctors
 
Does it address tort reform or the fact that even people with insurance are too lazy/busy to go to their doctors now, when they have symptoms, and never actually listen to their doctors

Or how people chowin' down McDonald's twice a day somehow reflects the quality of medical care. My biggest gripe with this whole issue is people do not discern medical care vs health care.
 
John Stewart.
I have to admit that made me giggle. Anyway if you aren't going to take the time to read the bill then just stay away from the ideologues. I was watching "Real Time" last night and two republican congressmen ,Jack Kingston and Darrell Issa, wound not admit that there were no "death panels" even when they were shown an excerpt from the section of the bill in question. They had admitted to writing multiple sections of the bill. Its ****ing lunacy. Its even worse for those who don't have worry about being reelected ,Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh etc., who can lie or mislead without any real ramifications. Take everything you hear with a grain of salt. And if it sounds to crazy to be true then it probably is.
 
I have to admit that made me giggle. Anyway if you aren't going to take the time to read the bill then just stay away from the ideologues. I was watching "Real Time" last night and two republican congressmen ,Jack Kingston and Darrell Issa, wound not admit that there were no "death panels" even when they were shown an excerpt from the section of the bill in question. They had admitted to writing multiple sections of the bill. Its ****ing lunacy. Its even worse for those who don't have worry about being reelected ,Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh etc., who can lie or mislead without any real ramifications. Take everything you hear with a grain of salt. And if it sounds to crazy to be true then it probably is.

H.R.3200 - America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009
 
And the better alternative is the status quo??
 
Which bill are you talking about? There are three in committee in the House and two in committee in the Senate. Couple that with all of the House bills will have to be jived together and both of the Senate bills will have to be jived before anything can be passed in either house. After passing the composite bills, both houses will have to work together in conference committee to get a final bill out.

At this point, everything is up for debate and for discussion. The language of all of these bills are deliberately vague and thus, there is nothing other than the bare bones outlines out there and nothing has been passed. HR3200 has over 1,000 pages and is the one that most of the new media has been attempting to interpret for you folks who can't go to the committee websites and read for yourself. Do keep in mind that it's only one of several bills out there from several committees in both houses so don't get your knickers in a knot at this point because everything is pretty vague and up for discussion.
 
And the better alternative is the status quo??

You said if it sounds to good to be true then it probably is.
1. Will only cost 1 Trillion. hmmmmmmm
Will not cover illegal immigrants, Section 246 of H.R. 3200 specifically prohibits federal funds from being spent to cover illegal immigrants.

So what about EMTALA?

www.wikipedia.com

Medicare

The costs of Medicare doubled every four years between 1966 and 1980.[31] According to the 2004 "Green Book" of the House Ways and Means Committee, Medicare expenditures from the American government were $256.8 billion in fiscal year 2002. Beneficiary premiums are highly subsidized, and net outlays for the program, accounting for the premiums paid by subscribers, were $230.9 billion.

Part of the cost of Medicare is attributable to fraud, which law enforcement estimates cost taxpayers over $60 billion in 2008.[44][45][46] The Government Accountability Office lists Medicare as a "high-risk" government program in need of reform, in part because of its vulnerability to fraud and partly because of its long-term financial problems.[47] Fewer than 5% of Medicare claims are audited.[48]

Medicaid funding has become a major budgetary issue for many states over the last few years, with states, on average, spending 16.8% of state general funds on the program. If the federal match expenditure is also counted, the program, on average, takes up 22% of each state's budget.[14] [15] According to CMS, the Medicaid program provided health care services to more than 46.0 million people in 2001.[16] In 2002, Medicaid enrollees numbered 39.9 million Americans, the largest group being children (18.4 million or 46 percent)[citation needed]. Some 43 million Americans were enrolled in 2004 (19.7 million of them children) at a total cost of $295 billion. In 2008, Medicaid provided health coverage and services to approximately 49 million low-income children, pregnant women, elderly persons, and disabled individuals. Federal Medicaid outlays were estimated to be $204 billion in 2008.
 
I'm not a fan of the bill. However, I think that what is being said about the bill is silly--I just really wish they would get down to talking about what we should do to improve healthcare. It's my feeling that we are not examining other countries for what works/what doesn't work and coming up with our own hybrid program which is better. The notion that we have to become another Britain is fallacious. The shouting, the buzzwords being thrown around ("Socialized Medicine" - what does that mean, anyway?) and the mindless distractions are not improving the lives of a single American.
 
I'm not a fan of the bill. However, I think that what is being said about the bill is silly--I just really wish they would get down to talking about what we should do to improve healthcare. It's my feeling that we are not examining other countries for what works/what doesn't work and coming up with our own hybrid program which is better. The notion that we have to become another Britain is fallacious. The shouting, the buzzwords being thrown around ("Socialized Medicine" - what does that mean, anyway?) and the mindless distractions are not improving the lives of a single American.

Obesity - an Epidemic

Overweight and obesity has reached epidemic proportions in the United States, as well as worldwide.(3) Data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics indicate that the prevalence of obesity, defined as a body mass index >30 kg/m² has increased from 12.8% in 1976-1980 to 22.5% in 1988-1994 and 30% in 1999-2000. 4) Roughly 31% of American adults meet the criterion for obesity - about 59 million American adults. More than 64% of the US adult population have a BMI >=25 kg/m².(4) In an effort to increase public awareness of the epidemic proportion of obesity, the Surgeon General has issued a call to action to prevent and treat overweight and obesity and their associated health complications.(5)
 
I find it hilarious on this thread here, most pre-meds are gung-ho about this bill, and on the actual physician section of the site most are against it.

I find it hilarious that an attending actually posted the 48 things you need to know about Obama's plan. Comparing the claims on that list with the actual text of the bill has kept me in stitches all morning.

Alas, you will find as you progress that being a physician doesn't automatically make you very well versed in health policy. And we certainly have our own vocal minorities.

njbmd is right, there is no reason to get too hopping mad at this point. It's tough to see how they could to dump hundreds of billions (more) into health care over the next decade and we would all come out losers.
 
Going into a career making 150K is one thing. Having the possibility of going from 350K to 150K would make me hate this bill too.

your going to have the same 200k+ in student loans to deal with.
 
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=8517694&postcount=43

All I can say is 'notinkansas' hits the nail on the head, great post by him, posted in another thread. link above.

What most people don't realize is that doctors don't really start earning income, until much later in life than other professions, hence they more or less deserve the higher salaries, due to the amount of time spent in school/residency, to recover the money lost in that time period. even state schools aren't cheap you will still have 6 figures in student loans, not to mention other debts.
 
I am not a lawyer and frankly I don't feel as if I fully understand the language in this bill.

Does anyone know of an unbiased source that has translated the main changes of this bill into English? I don't want predictions, estimations, hyperbole, or any analysis. Just the facts.
 
Medicare is run much more efficiently than private health insurance, at in terms of overhead. We're talking low single digit overhead versus double digit (>15%) overhead in the private industry.

Shut up and suck on your thumb for a bit.

It's easy to be 'efficient' if all you do is write a check. Medicare doesn't worry about validity of claims, it simply sends the check. Or not. And because it has unlimited access to taxpayers money, Medicare doesn't care about its bottom line. In fact, Medicare will go bankrupt in next 10 years or so.

Now, coup de grâce: I am double-boarded US medical grad. Therefore, my opinion > yours.
 
Now, coup de grâce: I am double-boarded US medical grad. Therefore, my opinion > yours.

I hereby negate your opinion. Again.

Sincerely,

Another double-boarded US medical grad
 
I know that the so-called "Death Panel" is not in there..
 
Before you believe anything you hear about what is in the various bills being considered, look here: http://www.factcheck.org

The "death panel to kill old people" thing is just total bologna. The actual proposal was to provide reimbursement to doctors for advance directive consultations. Ie., if you have Medicare and want to talk to your doctor about setting up an advance directive/living will, Medicare would pay your doctor for that visit. That's it. No death panel, no mandatory visit, no binding arbitration or encouragement to commit suicide.
 
Before you believe anything you hear about what is in the various bills being considered, look here: http://www.factcheck.org

The "death panel to kill old people" thing is just total bologna. The actual proposal was to provide reimbursement to doctors for advance directive consultations. Ie., if you have Medicare and want to talk to your doctor about setting up an advance directive/living will, Medicare would pay your doctor for that visit. That's it. No death panel, no mandatory visit, no binding arbitration or encouragement to commit suicide.

That website has been proven wrong many times.
 
You can see for yourself rather than trying to decipher all these posts here.

Here is an overview of the bill done by several attorneys outlining the issues in the current bill. Gives page numbers and section numbers for each issue they bring up. You can check their accuracy in the bill itself as well.

Liberty Counsel overview of the HR 3200 Bill:
In PDF: http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf

In HTML: http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=19319

HR 3200 Bill itself:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf
 
You can see for yourself rather than trying to decipher all these posts here.

Here is an overview of the bill done by several attorneys outlining the issues in the current bill. Gives page numbers and section numbers for each issue they bring up. You can check their accuracy in the bill itself as well.

Liberty Counsel overview of the HR 3200 Bill:
In PDF: http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf

In HTML: http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=19319

HR 3200 Bill itself:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf

The liberty council is an extremely conservative group with their own agenda. I would just read the text of the bill, as opposed to someone else's interpretation of it... but you know... I am just a scientist. >.>
 
Top