Why Obamacare is the best thing that's happened to this country in years

Fish and Bread

Dona nobis pacem
Jan 31, 2005
14,109
2,389
✟60,685.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Read posts 1-7 (or beyond, if you so choose) on the thread I'm linking to. They aren't very long.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7697713/

Then, if you want to argue about Obamacare, come back over here and argue. Please don't disturb this man in his final weeks on earth by arguing in that thread. Just consider what he's going through, and saying there, and think about things, and come back over here to argue if you need to argue.

I just felt like this should be here, because I think this encapsulates in a nutshell why I support the Affordable Care Act so ardently, why I'd support further moves towards universal health care, and why I'm a Democrat. That's what it's all about for me.
 

Kotton

Senior Member
Feb 8, 2002
1,357
105
Kansas
Visit site
✟20,964.00
Faith
Catholic
I just felt like this should be here, because I think this encapsulates in a nutshell why I support the Affordable Care Act so ardently, why I'd support further moves towards universal health care, and why I'm a Democrat. That's what it's all about for me.
I found nothing in the posts that changes my opinion of 'Obamacare', but it is a very good view of how to accept death. His realization that it is God who guides all and he is thankful for what he has. "now i am feeling a sense of peace knowing it will all be over soon...I am beginning to appreciate so many things i never even noticed."

I had much the same feeling just months ago while lying in the hospital for over two weeks, knowing I was very sick and could have died. Thinking of how much God had given me, and not always was I thankful enough.

His statement did not explain anything about health care that said he would be without care.
"I've always been a liberal, but love Obama especially cuz health care...he's the reason I'm able to see the doctor

:confused:
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Which is why we should go single payer.

Be patient! That's exactly what Obamcare--more properly ObamaTAX--will do. There are too many problems with Obamacare for it to be sustainable. It will cost jobs (it's already doing so); not all states have to bankrupt themselves by expanding Medicaid, so that is a problem; the CBO says it will cost 2.6 trillion; there's still the HHS lawsuits that need to be dealt with; Obamacare is going to cause a doctor shortage; then there is yet another problem with them ramming it through without checking the fact that some regulations forbid it (I'll see if I can find that article for you); and I think there are some other problems. It will collapse under it's own weight (or at least that was the plan--actually had a youtube of the claim back in 2009 when the Catholic Church had its campaign against it because of not only the abortion but rationing involved that leads to euthanasia.

Here's one of the articles (still looking for the other):

http://townhall.com/columnists/johncgoodman/2012/11/10/did_the_election_save_obamacare/page/full/

Found it. Something about certain regulations not allowing certain things of Obamacare and they rammed it through so quickly that they failed to note it:

http://www.redstate.com/realquiet/2...re-exchange-gop-governors-should-just-say-no/

(Gosh, I wish that either the media would actually do their jobs or that some of the search engines were not so dang biased. It takes me near forever to find articles unless they parrot the going "talking points".)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tallguy88

We shall see the King when he comes!
Supporter
Jan 13, 2009
32,459
7,737
Parts Unknown
✟240,396.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Which is why we should go single payer.
icon14.gif
 
Upvote 0

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Be patient! That's exactly what Obamcare--more properly ObamaTAX--will do. There are too many problems with Obamacare for it to be sustainable. It will cost jobs (it's already doing so); not all states have to bankrupt themselves by expanding Medicaid, so that is a problem; the CBO says it will cost 2.6 trillion; there's still the HHS lawsuits that need to be dealt with; Obamacare is going to cause a doctor shortage; then there is yet another problem with them ramming it through without checking the fact that some regulations forbid it (I'll see if I can find that article for you);
Here's one of the articles (still looking for the other):

Did the Election Save ObamaCare? - John C. Goodman - [page]

Found it. Something about certain regulations not allowing certain things of Obamacare and they rammed it through so quickly that they failed to note it:

Health Care Hardball: Why Democrats in Washington and around the country are praying that GOP governors create a state run health care exchange. GOP governors should just say no. | RedState

(Gosh, I wish that either the media would actually do their jobs or that some of the search engines were not so dang biased. It takes me near forever to find articles unless they parrot the going "talking points".)


One thing that is often left out of the Affordable Care Act discussion is our moral obligation as Christians to provide for the needy and less fortunate.

Even the Pope advocates government healthcare. See: Pope, church leaders call for guaranteed health care for all people By Sarah Delaney Catholic News Service
"VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Benedict XVI and other church leaders said it was the moral responsibility of nations to guarantee access to health care for all of their citizens, regardless of social and economic status or their ability to pay. . . . . The care of man, his transcendent dignity and his inalienable rights" are issues that should concern Christians, the pope said.

Because an individual's health is a "precious asset" to society as well as to himself, governments and other agencies should seek to protect it by "dedicating the equipment, resources and energy so that the greatest number of people can have access."
_________________________________
_________________________________

As long as abortion is legal in this country (and both Romney and Obama support abortion,) it will be very difficult to remove abortion from insurance coverage. The U.S. laws on abortion would have to change, before one could expect it to be excluded from healthcare coverage.

But does the Affordable Care Act really
provide full federal funding for abortions?

PolitiFact gives this claim a "Pants on Fire" rating, and you can read the facts at this link: Rep. John Carter says health care law provides full federal funding for abortions, but that's not so

So, do we continue to deny healthcare coverage for millions of Americans, because some of the funding may end up being used in abortions?
Don't misunderstand me. I am against abortion. (Though, if I became pregnant through rape; I don't know how I would feel about it. I don't think any woman can say for sure, unless it happens to them.)

So, as Christians, we are in quite a moral dilemma. The Pope wants governments to provide healthcare, but with his religious beliefs imposed upon all. Is that really separation of Church and State? Wouldn't that open the door for other religions to push to impose their beliefs upon healthcare reform as well?

and I think there are some other problems. It will collapse under it's own weight (or at least that was the plan--actually had a youtube of the claim back in 2009 when the Catholic Church had its campaign against it because of not only the abortion but rationing involved that leads to euthanasia.


As for the
euthanasia/death panel issue, see PolitiFact's Lie of the Year: 'Death panels'

Care rationing has been going on for decades. For years, insurance companies have used all kinds of measures to dictate care, disrupting the doctor-patient relationship and demonstrating the blatant willingness to sacrificing the welfare of patients in the name of profit.


Managed Care Utilization Review and Financial Risk Shifting:Compensating Patients for Health Care Cost Containment Injuries


“. . . .
.After 1970, however, a new triangle of relationships came into being. In this triangle, the third-party payer not only contracts with the patient to finance the patient's health care needs, it also contracts with physicians and other providers to provide those health care needs. Two problems arise from this second contractual relationship. First, through “utilization review,” the third-party payer assumes the right to direct the means and methods of providing the health care services. Second, through its contracts with providers, the third-party payer induces compliance with utilization review by means of financial rewards and penalties, or financial “risk shifting.”

. . . .
private*6 insurers and government health insurance programs ration care by restricting choice, denying services, and decreasing availability. . . .

The clear problem with this approach is that
physicians, concerned that they will be left to cover costs *7 for which the third-party payer refuses reimbursement, will cut necessary services and will leave patients almost completely out of the decision-making process. . . .

. . . .Without proper controls, the zeal of
third-party payers to lower costs encourages physicians not only to eliminate unnecessary care, but to eliminate beneficial care as well. . . .

___________________________
___________________________


Internal Medicine: Claims/Risk-Reduction Workshop

Numerous themes became apparent from the recent panel review:
. . . . .Allegations of premature hospital discharge have become more common. This is a difficult area for physicians because of demands by insurance companies and utilization reviews.

As managed care becomes an inevitable fact of life, physicians must be wary of third-party decisions with consequences that increase liability exposure. . . . .


________________________
________________________


Hospice Patients Alliance “Lynching the Elderly and Disabled” Why We Need an Elder Justice Act

“Charles Phillips, MD reveals that large HMOs such as Kaiser and others are training their physicians as "gatekeepers" who deny effective treatment to patients in order to increase the corporation's and the physicians' income.”

_____________________
_____________________


Sacrificing Patients for Profits: Physicians Incentives to Limit Care and ERISA Fiduciary Duty


Look at the offenses, and the fines issued through 2009:

Report of Health Insurer Fines Issued by State Regulatory Agencies


So, it's only now that
people are upset about third parties coming between patient and doctor, and healthcare rationing through criteria guidelines for healthcare? I don't get it.

Anna

Link to Affordable Care Act

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

WarriorAngel

I close my eyes and see you smile
Supporter
Apr 11, 2005
72,739
9,305
United States Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟428,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
When the economy is doing well - less ppl are on government programs - making it easier to afford to care for the indigent - via medicaid.
When the businesses are losing income - and jobs start disappearing - who wins?

The Catechism and the Church who work with the poor in all countries - teach ppl to work for their food.

Furthermore; this quote doesnt state insurance - but care is to be accessible.
So again - lets look at actual context.

to guarantee access to health care.

Which is NOT a claim to guarantee insurance - but care. And in America - no one was ever turned down.
NOW - when the cost is too high to maintain the society - many will BE turned down for care - starting with the elderly - soon after the disabled.

UHC goes against what the Vatican was saying - because not all be guaranteed access to health care. In fact - many will die because they will be refused when it is rationed.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
. . . .Furthermore; this quote doesnt state insurance - but care is to be accessible.
So again - lets look at actual context.

to guarantee access to health care
.

Which is NOT a claim to guarantee insurance -


So without insurance coverage of some kind, how does the government guarantee access to health care for all citizens, regardless of social and economic status?

but care. And in America - no one was ever turned down.

NOW - when the cost is too high to maintain the society - many will BE turned down for care - starting with the elderly - soon after the disabled.


Even people with insurance are denied access to necessary healthcare due to determinations made by insurance companies.


Those with no coverage are at the mercy of free clinics (horrible conditions there--have you visited any lately?) and hospital emergency rooms--poor way to receive healthcare and very expensive for our country.


UHC goes against what the Vatican was saying - because not all be guaranteed access to health care. In fact - many will die because they will be refused when it is rationed.


For years people have been dying due to healthcare rationing. Did you read any of the links I posted? Why are you not upset by the rationing that already exists?


. . .Care rationing has been going on for decades. For years, insurance companies have used all kinds of measures to dictate care, disrupting the doctor-patient relationship and demonstrating the blatant willingness to sacrificing the welfare of patients in the name of profit.

Managed Care Utilization Review and Financial Risk Shifting:Compensating Patients for Health Care Cost Containment Injuries

“. . . . .After 1970, however, a new triangle of relationships came into being. In this triangle, the third-party payer not only contracts with the patient to finance the patient's health care needs, it also contracts with physicians and other providers to provide those health care needs. Two problems arise from this second contractual relationship. First, through “utilization review,” the third-party payer assumes the right to direct the means and methods of providing the health care services. Second, through its contracts with providers, the third-party payer induces compliance with utilization review by means of financial rewards and penalties, or financial “risk shifting.”

. . . .private*6 insurers and government health insurance programs ration care by restricting choice, denying services, and decreasing availability. . . .

The clear problem with this approach is that physicians, concerned that they will be left to cover costs *7 for which the third-party payer refuses reimbursement, will cut necessary services and will leave patients almost completely out of the decision-making process. . . .

. . . .Without proper controls, the zeal of third-party payers to lower costs encourages physicians not only to eliminate unnecessary care, but to eliminate beneficial care as well. . . .


Internal Medicine: Claims/Risk-Reduction Workshop
Numerous themes became apparent from the recent panel review:
. . . . .Allegations of premature hospital discharge have become more common. This is a difficult area for physicians because of demands by insurance companies and utilization reviews.

As managed care becomes an inevitable fact of life, physicians must be wary of third-party decisions with consequences that increase liability exposure. . . . .


Hospice Patients Alliance “Lynching the Elderly and Disabled” Why We Need an Elder Justice Act
“Charles Phillips, MD reveals that large HMOs such as Kaiser and others are training their physicians as "gatekeepers" who deny effective treatment to patients in order to increase the corporation's and the physicians' income.”





Look at the offenses, and the fines issued through 2009: Report of Health Insurer Fines Issued by State Regulatory Agencies
 
Upvote 0

WarriorAngel

I close my eyes and see you smile
Supporter
Apr 11, 2005
72,739
9,305
United States Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟428,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private


So without insurance coverage of some kind, how does the government guarantee access to health care for allcitizens, regardless of social and economic status?

Basically - the Pope is saying all must receive care - regardless how they can pay.




Even people with insurance are denied access to necessary healthcare due to determinations made by insurance companies.


Correction - insurance companies cannot deny care - only their payment of said care.
In which it would come from the person.

AND - you are either forgetting or have no knowledge that the elderly can be refused care under Obama.
Refused care - because the cuts of medicare - and the panels that will determine if they are 'viable' to receive said care.
AKA rationing for those they feel will live to enjoy a decent period of time to outset the cost..

Grandma's and paps everywhere should be shaking - their number via the government might be up - minus how this usurps the throne of God as the only One to determine 'when' someone should die or not. Someone elderly could live a good life til their 100 - but wont - if they dont receive care a age 79.

The government knows best.


Those with no coverage are at the mercy of free clinics (horrible conditions there--have you visited any lately?) and hospital emergency rooms--poor way to receive healthcare and very expensive for our country.

Wait til Obamacare takes effect.

According to some in England - the hospitals [all the state run - which is all of them] are run down - and dirty. And they are understaffed. Because working for government pay - wont actually incite Dr's to stay in the field or new ones to emerge.

So complain about theose conditions? It's going to be norm for everyone.

OC will be more expensive for this country.
The expense - less working. More poverty.



For years people have been dying due to healthcare rationing. Did you read any of the links I posted? Why are you not upset by the rationing that already exists?
















Take the rationing - and put it on steroids.
Rationing - you think thats bad - it's getting worse now and more still.
 
Upvote 0

WarriorAngel

I close my eyes and see you smile
Supporter
Apr 11, 2005
72,739
9,305
United States Pennsylvania
Visit site
✟428,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Isolated cases vs the grand scheme of it - has to be looked at.

Taking some minor situations to say 'look this doesnt work' then condoning the same thing on a grander scale - doesnt work well for an argument imho.
 
Upvote 0

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
. . . .Pope, church leaders call for guaranteed health care for all people By Sarah Delaney Catholic News Service
"VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Benedict XVI and other church leaders said it was the moral responsibility of nations to guarantee access to health care for all of their citizens, regardless of social and economic status or their ability to pay. . . . . The care of man, his transcendent dignity and his inalienable rights" are issues that should concern Christians, the pope said.

Because an individual's health is a "precious asset" to society as well as to himself, governments and other agencies should seek to protect it by "dedicating the equipment, resources and energy so that the greatest number of people can have access."

Basically - the Pope is saying all must receive care - regardless how they can pay.
You are avoiding my question:
So without insurance coverage of some kind, how does the government guarantee access to health care for all citizens, regardless of social and economic status?
_____________________________

Correction - insurance companies cannot deny care - only their payment of said care. In which it would come from the person.
If you can't afford to pay for the care out-of-pocket, denial of coverage becomes denial of care.

AND - you are either forgetting
or have no knowledge that the elderly can be refused care under Obama.

Refused care - because the cuts of medicare - and the panels that will determine if they are 'viable' to receive said care.

AKA rationing for those they feel will live to enjoy a decent period of time to outset
the cost..


Please cite the section of the Affordable Care Act that establishes panels to determine if a person is "viable" to receive care and rations according to those they feel will live to enjoy a decent period of time to offset the cost.


Grandma's and paps everywhere should be shaking - their number via the government might be up - minus how this usurps the throne of God as the only One to determine 'when' someone should die or not. Someone elderly could live a good life til their 100 - but wont - if they dont receive care a age 79.

Again, where is this found in the Affordable Care Act?


___________________________


You didn't respond to this either.

Care rationing has been going on for decades. For years, insurance companies have used all kinds of measures to dictate care, disrupting the doctor-patient relationship and demonstrating the blatant willingness to sacrificing the welfare of patients in the name of profit.


. . . For years people have been dying due to healthcare rationing. Did you read any of the links I posted? Why are you not upset by the rationing that already exists?

____________________

There were already limits and guidelines in Medicare regarding covered services before Obama ever took office.

Keep in mind that President Reagan, President George H.W. Bush, and President Clinton all cut Medicare in various ways.

See PolitiFact:Mitt Romney said Barack Obama robs Medicare of more than $700 billion to pay for Obamacare

"• President Ronald Reagan cut Medicare by reducing payments to hospitals, and he cut benefits by raising deductibles.

• President George H.W. Bush cut benefits by repealing a law that would have expanded coverage for drugs and catastrophic illness.


• President Bill Clinton cut Medicare by changing payments to doctors and other providers, which could be considered to have an indirect effect on beneficiaries."

_________________

I have Medicare. I'll give you a personal example of Medicare's restriction of coverage before President Obama took office.

In 2006, my doctor referred me to an Oncologist to check for possible cancer in the lump on my thyroid. The Oncologist ordered a PET Scan. When I went to have the test done, I heard two staff members discussing the order for this scan. One said, my Oncologist wanted the scan done. The other kept saying, "but she has Medicare." The first kept say, but Dr. ____ wants the test done. Finally, they stopped arguing and proceeded with the PET Scan. [They didn't ask me to sign an
ADVANCE BENEFICIARY NOTICE (ABN)--which is presented to Medicare patients when the provider knows Medicare will not pay for a test/service etc. An ABN asks you to either agree not to have the test, or agree to pay for the test. This was a $6,000 test. So, if presented with an ABN, I would have had to agree not to have the test.]

The PET Scan results showed two suspicious areas of possible cancer--one in my thyroid and also a spot on my right breast.


Medicare denied payment for the PET Scan, because the suspicion of cancer did not meet Medicare guidelines for having this particular test.
After the Medicare denial, I realized why the two staff members were arguing. The one that kept saying, "but she has Medicare," knew Medicare would not cover the cost of the PET Scan for diagnostic purposes.

I had more biopsies of the thyroid and they all came back negative---but the surgical biopsy of the breast came back positive for Breast Cancer. The scary thing is, I had a mammogram and bilateral ultrasound of the breasts
the same day as the PET Scan--and the cancer did not show up in either of these tests.

The PET Scan detected the cancer before it had become invasive.
This is the same PET Scan for which Medicare denied payment. I personally appealed the Medicare decision, and Medicare overturned the denial and paid the claim for the PET Scan. If the PET Scan had been negative, there is no way Medicare would have overturned their decision to deny payment.

________________________________________

The last 11 years of my career as a Healthcare Professional, I worked in a Medical Center in Case Management; and the last 6 of those years--appealing insurance company denials and reporting insurance companies who violated the law in issuing denials and handling appeals. I can't use my personal experience as proof. That's why I cited multiple sources in previous posts that support what I know to be true through first hand experience.

The things that insurance companies do in the name of profit is so disturbing.
Profits drive the private sector; and many people do not realize that in far too many cases, profit comes before the well being and even the life of the patient.

So, if you have some time, go back to the links I provided and read the documentation that supports what I have said here.


_______________

I am in no position to predict or even agree or disagree with the financial consequences the Affordable Care Act will or will not bring to our country.

However, if you are going to c
laim the government will decide who lives and dies or that panels will determine if the elderly are viable to receive care; you need to quote the Affordable Care Act.

Succeed or fail, at least President Obama is trying to help solve our country's healthcare problems.

Peace and blessings,
Anna



 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,074
5,544
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟272,768.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,074
5,544
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟272,768.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Do you use a computer with fear?

I can shut the computer off and walk away from it. Same with a cell phone. I can leave any chip-embedded plastic cards at home, or I can slap them between two little sheets of lead so they're unreadable.

But a chip embedded in your arm? There's no way to shut it off, and there's no way to get rid of it, short of digging it out with a Ka-Bar knife and smashing it with a hammer.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums