This guy Weiner is an idiot. He acts like he has some moral superiority when all he was interested in was furthering his own self-centered and selfish needs. I am glad this guy is gone. We all would have been in big trouble eventually with this moron. GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH
By the way Betsy, you seem to be forgetting something important here. The government option is a system of PAYMENT not a system of health care. Way to completely miss that point, you fucking insurance company shill.
@spiderpig85 You're concerned about the VIDEO? The audio is atrocious. Line-in, folks. I don't care what the audience had to say, I want to hear what the microphone in front of the speakers said.
There is a point well made in this debate, for which most of us are probably unable to prove without the (CBO?) official numbers. Is preventive care essential? Logic would indicate that providing authorized health care to those without it would by itself incentivize those recipients to seek out that care, rather than wait until emergency care is required. It's fundamental, but so true. If the numbers support this, then why not do it? Stop the debate!
Well, I keep this up today, and I'm a definite 'wiener'. What a memory during this debate. Yeah, the substance is right on. But, I'm just now trying to compare the two points of debate. He had me from 'hello'. Sorry, but how can anyone be more accurate about their points, or more passionate? The funny thing is that existing 'status-quo' complains that more government is wrong. If only they were not profiting from a basic human/American right - health care. Profit elsewhere please.
@OccasionallyBearded Incredibly obnoxious. Why do they feel they need to applaud for 15 seconds after every other sentence and murmur incessantly? STFU or GTFO.
Nation of hope? More like Nation of Hope I dont have to declare bankruptcy just to keep myself or family member slowly die. And preimiums go up whenever that CEO wants to get their 5-10 million dollar bonus from the shareholders, by increasing the % of profit for that year to whatever the shareholders set as their desired goal. I swear, competition is why? So we should just go with only 1 insurance, let them have a monopoly on it, that will lowere cost. Gawd this is so painful to watch.
We are richer? So the trillions of dollars we have borrowed from China and billions more from other nations is just a figment of our imagination? As for the new and invasive procedures that are developed, are only affordable by rich people, I know of 24 different people who had their tumor infested prostates removed in Thailand, because what they charge, plus the round trip air fair, and 1-2 week recovery period is 1/4 the price charged in US, and NONE of them had ANY complications.
Govt. will dictate an SOP? First stop talking as if there will ONLY be govt. healthcare, private insurance will be providing it. Plus Health Insurance already does this by denying claims that they feel were not necessary. Like that couple who had a baby who was covered by their health insurance, but had to get emergency surgery to repair a congenital defect with his heart or die within 6months & the health insurance denied their claim saying that it was a preexisting condition & only14 DAYS OLD!
That women has the reading comprehension skills of a 5th Grader. That section she posted @18:19 is a Grace Period of 5 years to give the employment-based Health Insurance time to meet specific requirements to PROTECT their clients. At the end of grace period, they can not add anyone else to that policy. They can't change the terms, conditions of service or benefits & no change in cost-sharing These requirements will prevent them from price gouging premiums, deductables & from decreasing coverage
Newly insured will use healthcare 70% more than currently insured? Did you eat paintchips when you were a kid? Of course they will use it more, THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY IN YEARS OR THEIR ENTIRE LIFE. Let alone the fact that MANY of the uninsured, arent uninsured because they cannot afford it, its because NO HEALTH INSURANCE company will insure them & many because they fall under 'high risk' or 'dog policy' classification. Or they had insurance, got sick, then had policy canceled. Gawd she is stupid.
How can anybody take this guy seriously?? If anybody can point out in the constitution where it gives the federal gov't the power to dictate healthcare your reading some other countrys constitution... and um.. just a thought..where are we gonna get healthcare professionals if the evil "profit" is taken out of the equation??? Would you spend years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to school to enter Weiners World of profitless healthcare.. ?? And try to explain dropped for pre-existing?
How can anybody take this guy seriously?? If anybody can point out in the constitution where it gives the federal gov't the power to dictate healthcare your reading some other countrys constitution... and um.. just a thought..where are we gonna get healthcare professionals if the evil "profit" is taken out of the equation??? Would you spend years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to school to enter Weiners World of profitless healthcare.. ??
You're a moron. The commerce clause gives the government the ability to govern over almost anything related to finance in the United States. Medical insurance is, at the end of the day, INSURANCE, and so theoretically it can be regulated by the government.
@Rawrlor Ha Ha I'm a moron... Oh sorry.. I didn't realize there were smart people paying attention.. Otherwise I'd have kept my stupid mouth shut.... So Ok GENIUS... since your so amazingly F'n intelligent... Go find in the commerce clause where it gives the government the authority to force a citizen to purchase something or penalize them if they do not. Go ahead.. then come back and copy/paste it up here so everyone can see how right you are.... I'll be anxiously awaiting your enlightenment.
@bishopville Come on GENIUS... The commerce clause isn't that long.. it shouldn't take you long to prove your genius... I just know you'll be back any second... Oh who am I kidding.. Ya can't!!! The commerce clause does NOT give Congress any power to force a citizen to purchase anything... Nor is there any other part of the Constitiution of The United States that does... Thanxebye!! ....The Moron
@Rawrlor Holy Cow!! Damnit a smart person was paying attention again!! I'm sorry Rawrlor!! I'm sorry that you are so F'n smart that you don't even have to pay attention to the world around you and you still know everything!! Well let me "The Moron" enlighten you a bit!! THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE in Obummers new Health Care Catastrophe makes it FEDERAL Law that you either have a gov't approved amount of health insurance or you pay a penalty to the federal gov't.. where the hell have you been hidin?
@btskidz ...as opposed to the rich getting it, and the poor wishing for it...on the grounds of healthcare, everyone should have health insurance that won't drop them when the profiteers deems a person a poor investment, and will drop them, because the medical bills might interfere with a billion dollar bonus.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE MOST DANGEROUS THREAT TO THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE THAT EVER HAS BEEN.PLEASE AMERICA DONT GIVE UP YOUR FREEDOMS TO BITCHES LIKE BETSY ROSS MC CAUGHEY
PLEASE DONT READ THIS. YOU WILL GET KISSED ON THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE. TOMORROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE. HOWEVER IF YOU DONT POST THIS COMMENT TO AT LEAST 3 VIDEOS YOU WILL DIE WITHIN 2 DAYS. NOW UV STARTED READIN DIS DUNT STOP THIS IS SO SCARY. xSEND THIS OVER TO 5 VIDEOS IN 143 MINUTES WHEN UR DONE PRESS F6 AND UR CRUSHES NAME WILL APPEAR ON THE SCREEN IN BIG LETTERS. THIS IS SO SCARY CAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS
by you saying he should be impeached when he is a representative shows how big of a fucking idiot you are... you probably don't understand half of what hes saying
Have you ever noticed that when people can't counter an arguement with an equally strong or superior arguments, their supporters recogonize the fact and will create a rucus or jeer, boo and hiss; These are the same ones that in complete frustration, will pass to violent acts like throwing things,sending poison pen letters or telephone threats.
Your first sentence doesn't make sense. That being said, the fact that you capitalized correctly suggests that you're an adult. By combining both the nonsensical first sentence with your (assumed) adulthood, I've reached the conclusion that you're a silly goose.
I love how she failed to mention that the same study she cited on US breast cancer survival rates also said that Japan and France had higher colon and rectal cancer survival rates.
betsy mccaughey is a idiot. i mean a complete and utter moron. weiner called her out because of her very very close relationship with the insurance co's. i side with him.
@derekHSmith are you not getting the message? The hc system is flawed. The US pays more per person for hc than any western country, and america doesnt even have a single payer system or 2-tier system. Plus if your born with cancer, and then cant get insurance b/c of the preexsisting condition wtf do expect them to do when they get older you heartless prick. Spend 650 000 000 000 a yr on military, but have a real issue with paying 200 000 000 a year to help people thats fucked.
You know what - both McCaughey & Weiner are phonies!!!! Look at Weiner - I mean this far left liberal congressman looks like he was separated at birth w/Slim Goodbody & Bob Saget!!!! You shoulda seen McCaughey's approval ratings as Lt. Gov of NY - definitely not good!!!! She ruined Pataki's legacy as Gov. (then again Pataki kinda did it to himself but it certainly didn't help w/McCaughey as Lt. Gov.)!!!! If she runs for public office again - I mean - YIKES!!!!
McCaughey is more of a sham than (fmr NJ Gov & Bush Adm lackey) Christine Whitman - who's been leading a double life as a lesbian & is a flip flopper just like her good buddy Rudy Giuliani (Adam Sandler's pal)!!!!
@splicedenergy Don't worry. In the event that an atheist would run for office, he would claim that an atheist would murder babies and hate America (or something similarly ridiculous) because the candidate wouldn't be a Bible-thumping, Catholic, "In God We Trust" patriot.
And despite how stupid that is, people will believe it.
Watching the debate, prior to the vote for the bill, on CSPAN a "conservative" caller called in to express his views "against" healthcare reform. During his call he made this statement to summarize his viewpoint, "having healthcare is NOT an entitlement." That statement is echoed by many conservatives, and sums up their selfishness. For a party that consider themselves "The Family Values" party, and only truly have christian morals, they are pretty heartless and evil. Does the bible teach this?
Single payer health care will start at the state level. California passed it twice, 2006, 2008. The Governor vetoed it. They have a single payer bill, SB810 all set to go for 2010. Governor Arnold will no longer be in office and AG Brown, who leads in polls say he would sign the bill.
California will save 7.6 billion dollars a year and cover every US citizen in the state.
Once one state passes single payer it will spread like wildfire. There are at lease 10 states that have SP in the works.
And Weiner is an idiot, he said that $0.32 above $1.00 that the private insurance *pays* is "profit" ...I'm confused. Yes, her making it a pie chart was retarded, but it was very clear. The public plans (Medicare/Medicaid) paid roughly 80% per dollar of cost to the hospitals, while private insurance pays 100% + 32% on top ...the implication being that private insurance is covering the lack of cost coverage by public plans. He lied completely claiming that was profit.
He also listed inflated executive salaries, advertising and payments to shareholders... all of which will be saved by a single payer system and could be put back into health CARE.
I don't understand why people laugh when she said we spend more because we make more... Dr. Blumenthal said the same exact thing... the people in the crowd are obviously too intellectually stunted to actually listen instead of letting their political affiliation dictate a predetermined response to no matter what she says.
I couldn't find the comment you posted in response to mine.
But no - health care is not "the general welfare", for if it were, so would ANYTHING that the majority of us (hell, even the minority of us) use on a daily basis.
The tenth amendment makes it pretty clear: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Its not about if it is a basic right. It is about whether or not it is enumerated in the constitution. Learn a little constitutional history. The Hamiltonian view is that spending is an enumerated power as long as it promotes the general welfare and does not target one state in particular. Explain what the Welfare Clause, that is Article 1, section 8, Clause 1 means if not this.
You keep shoving Hamilton down my throat - he started one of this countries first Central Banks (which, under your definition would be General Welfare). Jefferson was opposed to just about everything that Hamilton had to say. And even Hamilton's writings were self contradictory.
If "General Welfare" means what Hamilton wanted, then both the 10th and 9th amendments specifically would be worthless, and there would be no point to the rest of Art. 1 Sec. 8.
of the general welfare clause. The problem is that there is NO definition!
Jefferson:
"They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union."
[the federal branch claim] "a right to do not only the acts to effect that which are specifically enumerated and permitted, but whatsoever they shall think or pretend will be for the general welfare."
General welfare = what is specifically enumerated in the Constitution.
I agree that there have been other sides to the issue, but that is my point. It is not cut and dry as you said. In fact if we look at it historically, The 9th and 10th amendments have not been understood to say that only that which is specifically mentioned can be used. Even if this is the case Healthcare could be considered under the commerce clause. In fact there is precedent, by those whose job it is to interpret the constitution.
Well, the precedent is wrong. It's that easy - the Supreme Law of the Land's tenth amendment clearly states that Unless the constitution grants the congress the authority to legislate the law, the states are the ones who have to write the law.
The commerce clause?! are you nuts?! There's NO way that giving someone health care could be considered commerce-related. Once again, any precedent saying otherwise is wrong.
Health Care is NOT a federal issue, it's a state's issue.
if "provide for the common defense" means Congress has power to grant authority to invade Iraq then surely "promote the general welfare" means Congress has the power to grant authority to ensure Americans have healthcare. I'm real big on state rights too but some things like education, healthcare, and workers rights need to have a national involvement.
The retort to your argument is simple, if disguised, and i'm sure you'll agree. We SHOULDN'T (obviously) have invaded Iraq, it was clearly NOT constitutional if only for the sole reason that it is mostly being paid for by inflation.
I, unfortunately, disagree on the education et. al. - there is no area in the constitution to provide for those things. It is purely a state's right issue. The "general welfare" is simply for the welfare of the UNION.
Check out all the controversy over Article 5. I don't like the idea that Congress can give authority to use military force without officially declaring war but Article 5 says they have almost unlimited power. Some guy named Hamdan sued cause he was in guantanamo bay and he won but not because it was unconstitutional, but because congress didn't give authority to do it. If Congress says people get education and healthcare, then people get education and healthcare. Thats the power of Article 5
The Supreme Court has said Congress can amend or even veto text of the Constitution. You have to prove to the Supreme Court that universal healthcare or public education or whatever other law congress passes is a violation of your rights, and even if you do, precedents like state secrets or presidential power of clear and present danger can override your individual rights. Saying universal healthcare is unconstitutional is a losing battle cause ur ignoring the whole premise of article V.
Article 5 simply states that if the congress wants to amend the constitution, they can. They need a huge majority to pull it off, and THEN they can enforce whatever change they've made.
So... they need to change the constitution first to say "healthcare is considered the general welfare" (which it isn't), and THEN they can pass the law.
I guess you think child labor laws are unconstitutional since they exist as the result of congress. While you're at it tell all the elderly people their medicaid and social security is unconstitutional aswell. And tell college students their pell grants are illegal. And tell neil armstrong he illegally walked on the moon. None of these things are expressed specifically in the constitution, but they still exist.. u know why? cause they don't infringe on ur rights. TO FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION
Most of that stuff is up to the states to decide. Just because the federal government doesn't do something doesn't mean that the states can't / wouldn't do something.
And about the moonwalking - even Richard P. Feynman, the great physicist, agrees - the attempt to get to the moon would've cost less money and lives if the federal government wasn't involved.
Hey there's no way that we would have walked on the moon already if the gov wasn't involved. Anyways In WWI a supreme court case said free speech like anti-draft anti-war could be silenced if it posed a "clear and present danger" (it actually strengthened the first amendment believe it or not due to previous precedent). In WWII FDR signed order which sent japanese decedents into camps including American citizens. Supreme court upheld his power to do it. Later gov apologized but thats it.
So are you arguing that it's a good thing that the government can take away our "inalienable" rights? I'm not quite sure what you're arguing with that last statement, but it sure sounds like you think the system is a mess.
FDR took away everyone's gold, stole japanese families possessions, and yes, the government took away our freedom of speech NUMEROUS times during needless wars that were fought for stupid reasons that would've been prevented if the gov't couldn't finance them with inflation.
Nah my point is i'm just saying taking a stand against universal healthcare or even just an optional public insurance by means of saying its unconstitutional is kind of ridiculous. I'm all for small government and protection of rights but better access to healthcare is something that will help the average American. People get all caught up in politics/ideologies and forget to take a step back and look at the issues from a common sense perspective.
I agree completely with what you've said. My argument is the exact same thing. I'm just very loyal to the Constitution - it is one of this planet's greatest treasures.
I also love the idea of everyone getting health care in some form - but allowing the federal government to just tax us for $3k each and then still leave 25 m of us uninsured is despicable at best, and paves an unjustifiable precedent.
If a little old lady growing a couple marijuana plants in her closet is interpreted as commerce, buying and selling health insurance is definitely commerce.
Rofl, yeah! Not only was it defined as commerce, it was defined as INTERSTATE commerce. Brilliant, right?
but the important thing is "IF". Just cuz some jackass judge says it is, doesn't make it so! We're the people of the United States! Let's rise up and vote these twats out of office!
These are ALL just examples of the federal government overreaching it's authority. Just like Truman taking over the steel mills, and FDR stealing our gold! VOTE EM OUT!!!
The supreme court is picked by the presidents, so if the presidents are all corrupt, eventually so will the supreme court.
Obviously your point about the marijuana growing granny proves just how ridiculous they've become, and something DOES need to be done. We need to return back to the constitution and our founding fathers if we even hope to survive for another century.
Slavery? You're crazy. John Marshall is the one that said the constitution is what the SCOTUS says it is, and he is effectively right. We can sit here on youtube with our half educated opinions, but it doesn't matter unless the SCOTUS agrees with us.
Get out of here with your conspiracy theory nonsense about all presidents being corrupt.
If the Supreme Court decided that the president has the right to do anything he wants unless it's specifically denied to him in the constitution, then the constitution is meaningless.
I don't know if they ever have given the president this authority, but they've certainly come close many many many times in the past.
It's not a conspiracy theory - it's just fucking reading the constitution and comparing it to what we have now.
You're right!!!!!! JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE IRAQ WAR, JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE DEREGULATION OF CORPORATIONS, JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE FREEDOM ACT, RIGHT? JUST LIKE BUSH AND TORTURE, JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE ECONOMIC CRISIS, RIGHT? JUST LIKE BUSH AND 6 YEARS OF ABANDONMENT OF THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM AGAINST OSAMA BIN LADEN, BECAUSE TRUST ME HE WAS THE HAPPIEST ONE ABOUT THE WAR IN IRAQ?
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
[The mission of the Constitution, do you think health care could fit under general welfare? We are still trying to form a more perfect union for all Americans.]
Ummmmm.. article 1, section 8, clause 1 of the us constitution. "The Congress shall have Power To ...pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." Now there are conflicting stories on what this means, Madison took it to mean that Taxation had to be connected to other powers, and Hamilton thought it meant government could spend for the welfare of the country. This includes agriculture and Education and arguably healthcare.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
So, NO, Education and Health Care are NOT to be provided to people by the FEDERAL government. States, sure, Federal, no.
i think people misunderstood me.. that blonde lady was lying about something regarding hospitals in New York and i'm assuming intelligent students figured that out and were telling her that she was lying.. and then when they started settling down someone gave a last shout of "you lie" jokingly .. just thought it was funny
Calling Betsy McCaughey a "patient advocate" is like calling religious creationists "science advocates" when they demand that religious nonsense be taught in school biology classes. AKA bullshit.
On the illegals fact, I hope you're right and not because I want them necessarily to have health care but because it's a problem that can only be resolve that way. And you can say anything, that they shouldn't be here but the fact of the matter is that they are, and believe if you ask them why they would like to be legalized is not because the want government help, it's because they want to work like everyone else and yes, you guess it, Pay taxes, although most of them do already.
The result, it would add a small amount of competitive pressure in many insurance markets that are currently served by a limited number of private insurers
The higher costs of those less healthy enrollees in the public plan would probably be offset partially but not entirely. The rest of the added costs would be reflected in the public plans premiums.
Costs & premiums of competing private plans would on average be "slightly lower" if no pub plan was available!
We are already paying for health care as taxpayers...it goes in their pockets...they have a safety net..we don't!
Who doesn't get it?
We give Drug research billions in federal grants(taxes)they turn around and charge us 100% the actual cost of producing the drugs...who doesn't understand that?
All we want is for the market to establish a proper price...we privatize profits...and SOCIALIZE loses...
bigtex501: 3. coverage for illegals is simply UNTRUE & right-wing spin. Also if illegals go to the hospital, it's still federally mandated they must be treated which will still drive up costs.
4. Those numbers don't add up if medicare is made cost effective by eliminating waste and providing coverage for top-quality non-hospital care (which is in various bills).
5. This has not been a quick process. It's been deliberated for nearly 5 months.
3. on illegals... would you believe what obamer himself says????
obamer....9/16...(HCI)
"We need to LEGALIZE UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS so THEY TOO can have affordable H.C. insurance like us" spin???
4. 9-9-09 Democrat Congressman Andrews of the House Budget Committee admitted in an interview on Fox News that $550 billion of the savings that are to be in the Democratic bill are coming directly from cuts to Medicare & Medicaid but does NOT know specifically where the money will come from!
3. correct, undocumented illegals need to get legalized or deported. if they stay illegal forever, they'll end up going to the ER, driving up our costs. jeez.
4. That is why there is not 1 bill - there are 4 bills floating around that will eventually get narrowed down to 1 bill. during this deliberation, thats when those questions will be answered. but, you said that we're moving too fast and rushing. obviously, you're just bickering and not for anything except opposing everything. Good bye.
3. Sorry, but obamer's already made a deal at the HCI debate to legalize illegals!
And did YOU know your buddies the Democrats voted DOWN an amendment to REQUIRE CITIZENSHIP prior to care given in the U.S.?
4. And I know you as a liberal would prefer to wait until the last minute to see what the Dems draft up & shove down our throats before We The People know what we're going to be FORCED into!
Debates SHAPE what the politicians are doing instead of letting them do whatever they want!
5. You don't know very much about this process.. do you?
Did YOU know that members of Congress had LESS than 24 hours to read the "stimulus" bill before it's passage?
Did you know there's FIVE health care bills currently up for discussion in Congress at the moment???
Did you know TODAY the Baucus bill is STILL waiting on a vote due to the last amendments that were added to the bill, the CBO has YET to crunch the numbers to see what the FINAL cost will be?
are we talking about the stimulus plan already passed, or health care. and, i've already said there are 4-5 bills on the table, which is why the process ain't over. but you said that the dems are "rushing this through." make up your mind. I refuse to continue a discussion with someone who obviously is just venting, disgruntled and doesn't want anything done about health care. if you did, you'd offer ideas instead of only objections to everything. Goodbye!
Didn't you know about the stimulus bill that your buddies the Democrats wouldn't give more than24 hours to read before it's passage????
And do read what I say instead of making it us as you go.... but yes, the Dems would LOVE to rush this through and NOT give We The People tiem to read the "final" version when they get done adding amendments to it!
Remember, this was supposed to be rushed through this last August?
And it's 5 bills... NOT 4 or 5 bills being disscussed in Congress!
The complaint about inadequate reading time for this or any piece of legislation is either dishonest or reveals incompetency.
I have an organization, and like thousands of other orgs, when we are presented with a legal, administrative, offer, or other kind of document to read that is lengthy, we simply form a working group, divide the doc into sections and draft a collaborative note.
If the Republicans are unable to set this simple and sensible process, then they are unfit to govern.
Why allow 72 hours? The republican that requested that admitted that the only reason for the 72 hours to read was for the lobbyists to read it. These are the people that are happy with the way things are now.
JayHorusRa1, Really? Is that why President Obama promised to have bills online for five days (120 hours, by the way) so the American people could read what was in the bills before he signed them? Because he's controlled by lobbyists?
I have no problem with it being posted, however the President said it was for the people to read it, the Republican admitted it was for the lobbyist. Might be semantics but just going by what they both said.
That may be the case. I am just pointing out that the Republican that requested the time frame admitted that he only wanted it so that the lobbyist could read it. Also if Obama is going to post it for five days anyway before he signs it why bother posting it for 3 days before hand if they are not trying to stall. Kind of a moot point if you ask me. Oh and by the way thank you but I can count and know how many days 120 hours comes out too ;)
Why don't you really check the congressman/woman and senators who are opposing the bill or simply don't want any type of bill, and see how much money they get from the Health Insurance Industry and Big Pharmaceuticals, after you see those numbers think if these people are opposing reform because they're looking out for your interest or because they're puppets of these industries. And I'm not just talking only about Republicans but some Democrats as well.
See the comment I made to Standup.... it's obamer's deal with the pharma lobbyist in return for campaign contributions!
But the main battle is the removal of our freedoms to choose over government mandates!
Do you know that under this plans... if you choose NOT to buy health insurance for ANY reason.. the Feds will increase your taxes up to $3700 a year (or levy a fine as obamer put it)?
And... if you have insurance... it MUST meet set requirements or you get taxed all the same!
BigTex please think about the kind of Freedom you're talking about. Under the current system of no competition and complete monopoly of private health insurance, no matter the name of the company you pick you will get same faulty service. So technically you don't really have freewill in what serves you best if you are not offer something different to chose from, so by that token you're health is really control by corporations.
About the mandates for health insurance, I think it makes sense. Yes, it may seem like the government is forcing you, but if you don't tackle the people who can afford health insurance and choose not to, and instead prefer to go to emergency rooms and dump the bill on taxpayers. If you pressure them to get one then we solve this problem and we have a new pool of healthy young Americans who are protected if they need but don't require as much assistant as the sick.
I think the your analogy of clothing with health is irrelevant, because what kind of clothes your buy whether they're expensive or cheap is up to you. Clothing is a commodity, health care is not. You said it, we as "consumers" and that's exactly the point if it's clothing yes we are consumers and we can choose not to buy certain things to lower the cost of certain brands or clothes, however when it comes to health care you shouldn't have to be consumers but recipients as a human right.
I don't agree with the mandate to get health insurance, however there wouldn't be a mandate if people just agreed that a universal/ medicare for all was the solution. In 2007 9 Republican senators Co-sponsored a universal healthcare bill. How come they don't support it now? We have a shitty bill now cause all the good stuff has been gutted due to compromise. Baucus and Grassley r top 2 receivers of campaign contributions from insurance and only group that didn't have public option in bill.
I'm all for a mandate if it says that catastrophic healthcare is paid for by government. I'm not for a mandate that says people get fined if they don't give money to insurance companies lol. A tax on being alive.. wtf is that? McCain/Palin solution is to take tax payer dollars and give it back to tax payers on condition they give it to insurance companies. Obama plan is to build on a broken system. Either Universal Healthcare or Class Healthcare is inevitable.. which would u prefer??
A tax on being alive? Well...I guess you could call it that. I think people need to cover their own asses though. If an uninsured person (who can afford insurance) has to go to the emergency room, gets surgery and is in ITC for a month, I'd rather the insurance company have to pay for all of that rather than the hospital, and I'd hate to see that person get saddled with 10s of thousands of dollars of medical bills and go bankrupt.
The answer is simple, politics and big money. It is smarter for Repubs to oppose the bill and introduce amendments that will weaken the bill. It will allow them to say "I told you so."
However, Obama doesn't get off scott free, since he isn't doing a good job of taking charge of the debate. In addition, he came in conceding on health care, just imagine if he started with single-payer and settled for the public option. Just imagine how where this debate would be...
This has been flagged as spam show
WEENER GOT OWNED AGAIN.
jodavidable 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This guy Weiner is an idiot. He acts like he has some moral superiority when all he was interested in was furthering his own self-centered and selfish needs. I am glad this guy is gone. We all would have been in big trouble eventually with this moron. GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH
qusarah 7 months ago
Hey!! Weiner, your not suppose to beat down a woman but in this case it is apropriate.
daveusaz1218 8 months ago
By the way Betsy, you seem to be forgetting something important here. The government option is a system of PAYMENT not a system of health care. Way to completely miss that point, you fucking insurance company shill.
bsphil 9 months ago
The US is the best... assuming you have the resources.
You don't have the resources? Guess what, you're fucked.
bsphil 9 months ago
1995 called. They was their video quality back. What is this VHS? Tracking... Tracking...
spiderpig85 9 months ago
@spiderpig85 You're concerned about the VIDEO? The audio is atrocious. Line-in, folks. I don't care what the audience had to say, I want to hear what the microphone in front of the speakers said.
bsphil 9 months ago
@spiderpig85 way to go I spilled my drink laughing at that comment!!!
olympic007 7 months ago
There is a point well made in this debate, for which most of us are probably unable to prove without the (CBO?) official numbers. Is preventive care essential? Logic would indicate that providing authorized health care to those without it would by itself incentivize those recipients to seek out that care, rather than wait until emergency care is required. It's fundamental, but so true. If the numbers support this, then why not do it? Stop the debate!
k9sjose 9 months ago
Well, I keep this up today, and I'm a definite 'wiener'. What a memory during this debate. Yeah, the substance is right on. But, I'm just now trying to compare the two points of debate. He had me from 'hello'. Sorry, but how can anyone be more accurate about their points, or more passionate? The funny thing is that existing 'status-quo' complains that more government is wrong. If only they were not profiting from a basic human/American right - health care. Profit elsewhere please.
k9sjose 9 months ago
Very obnoxious audience
OccasionallyBearded 10 months ago 2
@OccasionallyBearded Incredibly obnoxious. Why do they feel they need to applaud for 15 seconds after every other sentence and murmur incessantly? STFU or GTFO.
yourvideosucksdotcom 10 months ago
is she drunk??
brw0044 10 months ago
I wish the voters in his district will silence this guy for good in the next election.
djm9063 10 months ago
@djm9063 oh shut up. you obviously didnt watch this video
Cullen592 10 months ago
@djm9063
You must be just as stupid, and gullible as the rest of the people who think killing this is the right decision.
The woman is a complete con-artist, supporter of the companies that rape us so throughly for our money.
TheLordValarath 10 months ago
Nation of hope? More like Nation of Hope I dont have to declare bankruptcy just to keep myself or family member slowly die. And preimiums go up whenever that CEO wants to get their 5-10 million dollar bonus from the shareholders, by increasing the % of profit for that year to whatever the shareholders set as their desired goal. I swear, competition is why? So we should just go with only 1 insurance, let them have a monopoly on it, that will lowere cost. Gawd this is so painful to watch.
xinecallaw 10 months ago
We are richer? So the trillions of dollars we have borrowed from China and billions more from other nations is just a figment of our imagination? As for the new and invasive procedures that are developed, are only affordable by rich people, I know of 24 different people who had their tumor infested prostates removed in Thailand, because what they charge, plus the round trip air fair, and 1-2 week recovery period is 1/4 the price charged in US, and NONE of them had ANY complications.
xinecallaw 10 months ago
Govt. will dictate an SOP? First stop talking as if there will ONLY be govt. healthcare, private insurance will be providing it. Plus Health Insurance already does this by denying claims that they feel were not necessary. Like that couple who had a baby who was covered by their health insurance, but had to get emergency surgery to repair a congenital defect with his heart or die within 6months & the health insurance denied their claim saying that it was a preexisting condition & only14 DAYS OLD!
xinecallaw 10 months ago
That women has the reading comprehension skills of a 5th Grader. That section she posted @18:19 is a Grace Period of 5 years to give the employment-based Health Insurance time to meet specific requirements to PROTECT their clients. At the end of grace period, they can not add anyone else to that policy. They can't change the terms, conditions of service or benefits & no change in cost-sharing These requirements will prevent them from price gouging premiums, deductables & from decreasing coverage
xinecallaw 10 months ago
Newly insured will use healthcare 70% more than currently insured? Did you eat paintchips when you were a kid? Of course they will use it more, THEY HAVEN'T HAD ANY IN YEARS OR THEIR ENTIRE LIFE. Let alone the fact that MANY of the uninsured, arent uninsured because they cannot afford it, its because NO HEALTH INSURANCE company will insure them & many because they fall under 'high risk' or 'dog policy' classification. Or they had insurance, got sick, then had policy canceled. Gawd she is stupid.
xinecallaw 10 months ago
how did this woman get cheered on?
anti404 11 months ago
@anti404 The people cheering are dumbass republicans.
xinecallaw 10 months ago
28:30 Canadian Frederick Banting won the nobel prize for discovering insulin, one of the greatest leaps for medical science in the last century
uprooting 1 year ago 5
I'll take the doctor before a weiner.... weinerfacts (dot) com
Glenn666 1 year ago
Weiner lives in a pie-chart... anybody can spew numbers and point at a chart.. get out in the real world and get a clue..
bishopville 1 year ago
How can anybody take this guy seriously?? If anybody can point out in the constitution where it gives the federal gov't the power to dictate healthcare your reading some other countrys constitution... and um.. just a thought..where are we gonna get healthcare professionals if the evil "profit" is taken out of the equation??? Would you spend years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to school to enter Weiners World of profitless healthcare.. ?? And try to explain dropped for pre-existing?
bishopville 1 year ago
@bishopville you'll understand in about 10 years when Medicare collapses why this bill was signed.
arzgania 1 year ago
@bishopville Where in the constitution does it say car insurance in mandatory or get a fine and license suspended whats your feelings
splicedenergy 9 months ago
How can anybody take this guy seriously?? If anybody can point out in the constitution where it gives the federal gov't the power to dictate healthcare your reading some other countrys constitution... and um.. just a thought..where are we gonna get healthcare professionals if the evil "profit" is taken out of the equation??? Would you spend years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to go to school to enter Weiners World of profitless healthcare.. ??
bishopville 1 year ago
@bishopville
You're a moron. The commerce clause gives the government the ability to govern over almost anything related to finance in the United States. Medical insurance is, at the end of the day, INSURANCE, and so theoretically it can be regulated by the government.
Obama is NOT trying to "dictate your healthcare".
Rawrlor 1 year ago
@Rawrlor Ha Ha I'm a moron... Oh sorry.. I didn't realize there were smart people paying attention.. Otherwise I'd have kept my stupid mouth shut.... So Ok GENIUS... since your so amazingly F'n intelligent... Go find in the commerce clause where it gives the government the authority to force a citizen to purchase something or penalize them if they do not. Go ahead.. then come back and copy/paste it up here so everyone can see how right you are.... I'll be anxiously awaiting your enlightenment.
bishopville 1 year ago
@bishopville Come on GENIUS... The commerce clause isn't that long.. it shouldn't take you long to prove your genius... I just know you'll be back any second... Oh who am I kidding.. Ya can't!!! The commerce clause does NOT give Congress any power to force a citizen to purchase anything... Nor is there any other part of the Constitiution of The United States that does... Thanxebye!! ....The Moron
bishopville 1 year ago
@bishopville
Did you read what I fucking said? The government doesn't force anyone to pay for insurance, you tard.
Rawrlor 1 year ago
@Rawrlor Holy Cow!! Damnit a smart person was paying attention again!! I'm sorry Rawrlor!! I'm sorry that you are so F'n smart that you don't even have to pay attention to the world around you and you still know everything!! Well let me "The Moron" enlighten you a bit!! THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE in Obummers new Health Care Catastrophe makes it FEDERAL Law that you either have a gov't approved amount of health insurance or you pay a penalty to the federal gov't.. where the hell have you been hidin?
bishopville 1 year ago
I see the pie chart is about Financing. I wonder where Health fits in.
Sparklfoot 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The pie chart is about Financing, I wonder where is the section for Health?
Sparklfoot 1 year ago
The pie chart is about Finanacing, I wonder where is the section for Health?
Sparklfoot 1 year ago
I wish 2012 saw a Sander/Weiner ticket...I supported Obama, but this guy, along with Sanders literally destroys people with their smarts...
caseycollison 1 year ago
Typical Democrat. Wants to take over private industry so they determine what people get, how much & when.
btskidz 1 year ago
@btskidz ...as opposed to the rich getting it, and the poor wishing for it...on the grounds of healthcare, everyone should have health insurance that won't drop them when the profiteers deems a person a poor investment, and will drop them, because the medical bills might interfere with a billion dollar bonus.
caseycollison 1 year ago
weiner is an idiot and a child
WhatsUpRiverdale 1 year ago
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE MOST DANGEROUS THREAT TO THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE THAT EVER HAS BEEN.PLEASE AMERICA DONT GIVE UP YOUR FREEDOMS TO BITCHES LIKE BETSY ROSS MC CAUGHEY
worseto 1 year ago
This womans a idiot,dam..know your facts before you speak..she looks like a idiot next to Weiner.
marie1w 1 year ago
weener is a punk that needs a good ass kicking for his rampant ignorance. A walking example of why the libs will be sent packing.
steelersX01 1 year ago
@steelersX01 You're an idiot. LOL
impronb 1 year ago
@impronb -You say that as if the opinion of a child would actually mean something.....to anyone.
steelersX01 1 year ago
@impronb -You say that as if the opinion of a child would actually mean something.....to anyone.
steelersX01 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PLEASE DONT READ THIS. YOU WILL GET KISSED ON THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF YOUR LIFE. TOMORROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE. HOWEVER IF YOU DONT POST THIS COMMENT TO AT LEAST 3 VIDEOS YOU WILL DIE WITHIN 2 DAYS. NOW UV STARTED READIN DIS DUNT STOP THIS IS SO SCARY. xSEND THIS OVER TO 5 VIDEOS IN 143 MINUTES WHEN UR DONE PRESS F6 AND UR CRUSHES NAME WILL APPEAR ON THE SCREEN IN BIG LETTERS. THIS IS SO SCARY CAUSE IT ACTUALLY WORKS
davidiscoolnotschool 1 year ago
Wow some people applauded this crazy woman
So many lunatics and uniform people in America =(
yes4me 1 year ago
oh that's the crazy lady who questioned Obama birth... and talk about death panel. Why I am so much not surprised how much a lunatic she is?
yes4me 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Anthony Weiner for President 2016 yes yes yes.
OBrian1944 1 year ago
You gotta hand it to Betsy. It takes a lot of guts to stand up there and look like that big of a fuckhead.
xxxMrAwesomexxx 1 year ago
the guy sitting in the back keeps staring at her ass????
gunda549 1 year ago
by you saying he should be impeached when he is a representative shows how big of a fucking idiot you are... you probably don't understand half of what hes saying
schmidt21kid 1 year ago
Betsy couldn't find her own asshole at high-noon with a flashlight is she followed the stink.
sage0857 1 year ago
this jew has the biggest nose to smell the money
bykashka75 1 year ago
HEY BETSY, what does Insurance CEO dick taste like ??
rickbar123 1 year ago
I never saw an old bitch take such a big spanking before! :) Go Anthony!
danbarn72 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The failure of Government is all around us.
Want Health care? Bring home our troops DemoRepublican war mongers
End the Fed and the inside 911 wars will end with them
Be a responsible American not accountable for Bigger Government war Mongers.
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Allamericom 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The failure of Government is all around us.
Want Health care? Bring home our troops DemoRepublican war mongers
End the Fed and the inside 911 wars will end with them
Be a responsible American not accountable for Bigger Government war Mongers.
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Allamericom 1 year ago
Have you ever noticed that when people can't counter an arguement with an equally strong or superior arguments, their supporters recogonize the fact and will create a rucus or jeer, boo and hiss; These are the same ones that in complete frustration, will pass to violent acts like throwing things,sending poison pen letters or telephone threats.
briquetaverne 1 year ago
52:33
Oh cry me a fucking river.
carlrs15 1 year ago
WEINER is da man
run for Pres brother
rickbar123 1 year ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Anthony Weiner would never have been able to take McCaughey on a fact-based debate that was not stacked in her favor.
Have you been listening to Weiner in recent weeks? He continues to lose his sanity.
butters8686 1 year ago
Your first sentence doesn't make sense. That being said, the fact that you capitalized correctly suggests that you're an adult. By combining both the nonsensical first sentence with your (assumed) adulthood, I've reached the conclusion that you're a silly goose.
teddyfaley 1 year ago
nonsense
jesusANme 1 year ago
weiner kicked her ass!!!!!!!!!!!!
montroclq 1 year ago 4
betsy is not a complete idiot parts are missing.
moondoggie1327 1 year ago 3
Wow, the Betsy McCaughey fans are really rude!
Lethkhar2000 1 year ago
I love how she failed to mention that the same study she cited on US breast cancer survival rates also said that Japan and France had higher colon and rectal cancer survival rates.
Lethkhar2000 1 year ago 3
Where did this debate take place?
Lethkhar2000 1 year ago
betsy mccaughey is a idiot. i mean a complete and utter moron. weiner called her out because of her very very close relationship with the insurance co's. i side with him.
cjm608 1 year ago 32
@cjm608 is a LEECH!
Democrats are LEECHES!
LEECHES off of Hard Working Americans!
GET A JOB! SUPPORT YOURSELF - WORKING PEOPLE ARE TRIED OF PAYING YOUR WAY!
YOU ARE BNKRPTING THE U.S.
derekHSmith 7 months ago
@derekHSmith you must be related to betsy. you both have no clue.
cjm608 7 months ago
@derekHSmith are you not getting the message? The hc system is flawed. The US pays more per person for hc than any western country, and america doesnt even have a single payer system or 2-tier system. Plus if your born with cancer, and then cant get insurance b/c of the preexsisting condition wtf do expect them to do when they get older you heartless prick. Spend 650 000 000 000 a yr on military, but have a real issue with paying 200 000 000 a year to help people thats fucked.
lordrazr 6 months ago
@WakeUp182
Like we have good quality, affordable services now?
kevinbgoode 2 years ago 2
You know what - both McCaughey & Weiner are phonies!!!! Look at Weiner - I mean this far left liberal congressman looks like he was separated at birth w/Slim Goodbody & Bob Saget!!!! You shoulda seen McCaughey's approval ratings as Lt. Gov of NY - definitely not good!!!! She ruined Pataki's legacy as Gov. (then again Pataki kinda did it to himself but it certainly didn't help w/McCaughey as Lt. Gov.)!!!! If she runs for public office again - I mean - YIKES!!!!
bucky468 2 years ago
McCaughey is more of a sham than (fmr NJ Gov & Bush Adm lackey) Christine Whitman - who's been leading a double life as a lesbian & is a flip flopper just like her good buddy Rudy Giuliani (Adam Sandler's pal)!!!!
bucky468 2 years ago
Comment removed
bucky468 2 years ago
Anthony Weiner for President!
thechad708 2 years ago 61
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@thechad708 Weiner for prez? Hahahahah... Weiner? Hahahahah... No Jew with a big ass nose will ever become president of the USA.
zzap999 1 year ago
@zzap999 I'm sure for many years people said the same about a black man.
Boobalopbop 1 year ago
@Boobalopbop half black man. hahahaha...
zzap999 1 year ago
@zzap999 Ignorant brainwashed fools like you set this country back, Your a disgrace to the USA. You would be better off dead.
AZVolume 1 year ago
@AZVolume J..J..J..Jew lover...
zzap999 1 year ago
@zzap999 Can't wait for an athiest to run, you people won't have a damn thing to bitch about
splicedenergy 1 year ago
@splicedenergy Don't worry. In the event that an atheist would run for office, he would claim that an atheist would murder babies and hate America (or something similarly ridiculous) because the candidate wouldn't be a Bible-thumping, Catholic, "In God We Trust" patriot.
And despite how stupid that is, people will believe it.
ZootALarz 1 year ago
@thechad708 if only he would change his last name...
kshoemusic 10 months ago
Watching the debate, prior to the vote for the bill, on CSPAN a "conservative" caller called in to express his views "against" healthcare reform. During his call he made this statement to summarize his viewpoint, "having healthcare is NOT an entitlement." That statement is echoed by many conservatives, and sums up their selfishness. For a party that consider themselves "The Family Values" party, and only truly have christian morals, they are pretty heartless and evil. Does the bible teach this?
DisturbedInOhio 2 years ago 4
For a woman that lies as much as she does, she sure gets a lot of clapping.
GorgonLuvs8008135 2 years ago 4
SB 810, a bill already twice vetoed twice (!) by Schwarzenegger.
Saskatchewan was the first province to adopt single payer health care in Canada, ... the proof was in the pudding and it became national policy.
Spytheweb 2 years ago
Single payer health care will start at the state level. California passed it twice, 2006, 2008. The Governor vetoed it. They have a single payer bill, SB810 all set to go for 2010. Governor Arnold will no longer be in office and AG Brown, who leads in polls say he would sign the bill.
California will save 7.6 billion dollars a year and cover every US citizen in the state.
Once one state passes single payer it will spread like wildfire. There are at lease 10 states that have SP in the works.
Spytheweb 2 years ago 4
And Weiner is an idiot, he said that $0.32 above $1.00 that the private insurance *pays* is "profit" ...I'm confused. Yes, her making it a pie chart was retarded, but it was very clear. The public plans (Medicare/Medicaid) paid roughly 80% per dollar of cost to the hospitals, while private insurance pays 100% + 32% on top ...the implication being that private insurance is covering the lack of cost coverage by public plans. He lied completely claiming that was profit.
njcarlos1 2 years ago
Rep. Weiner said ,"overhead & profit."
He also listed inflated executive salaries, advertising and payments to shareholders... all of which will be saved by a single payer system and could be put back into health CARE.
mchughhimself 2 years ago
I don't understand why people laugh when she said we spend more because we make more... Dr. Blumenthal said the same exact thing... the people in the crowd are obviously too intellectually stunted to actually listen instead of letting their political affiliation dictate a predetermined response to no matter what she says.
njcarlos1 2 years ago
Anthony Weiner is the man. Nobody commands the issue of health care reform like this guy. Definitely a rising star in the DNC.
NathanielFaunce 2 years ago 2
39:00- 2% of the democratic primary
thomasonfa 2 years ago
I couldn't find the comment you posted in response to mine.
But no - health care is not "the general welfare", for if it were, so would ANYTHING that the majority of us (hell, even the minority of us) use on a daily basis.
The tenth amendment makes it pretty clear: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
So, no, health care is not a basic right.
evangrogers 2 years ago
Its not about if it is a basic right. It is about whether or not it is enumerated in the constitution. Learn a little constitutional history. The Hamiltonian view is that spending is an enumerated power as long as it promotes the general welfare and does not target one state in particular. Explain what the Welfare Clause, that is Article 1, section 8, Clause 1 means if not this.
nospacesallowed 2 years ago
You keep shoving Hamilton down my throat - he started one of this countries first Central Banks (which, under your definition would be General Welfare). Jefferson was opposed to just about everything that Hamilton had to say. And even Hamilton's writings were self contradictory.
If "General Welfare" means what Hamilton wanted, then both the 10th and 9th amendments specifically would be worthless, and there would be no point to the rest of Art. 1 Sec. 8.
you asked for another defintion...
evangrogers 2 years ago
of the general welfare clause. The problem is that there is NO definition!
Jefferson:
"They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union."
[the federal branch claim] "a right to do not only the acts to effect that which are specifically enumerated and permitted, but whatsoever they shall think or pretend will be for the general welfare."
General welfare = what is specifically enumerated in the Constitution.
evangrogers 2 years ago
I agree that there have been other sides to the issue, but that is my point. It is not cut and dry as you said. In fact if we look at it historically, The 9th and 10th amendments have not been understood to say that only that which is specifically mentioned can be used. Even if this is the case Healthcare could be considered under the commerce clause. In fact there is precedent, by those whose job it is to interpret the constitution.
nospacesallowed 2 years ago
Well, the precedent is wrong. It's that easy - the Supreme Law of the Land's tenth amendment clearly states that Unless the constitution grants the congress the authority to legislate the law, the states are the ones who have to write the law.
The commerce clause?! are you nuts?! There's NO way that giving someone health care could be considered commerce-related. Once again, any precedent saying otherwise is wrong.
Health Care is NOT a federal issue, it's a state's issue.
evangrogers 2 years ago
if "provide for the common defense" means Congress has power to grant authority to invade Iraq then surely "promote the general welfare" means Congress has the power to grant authority to ensure Americans have healthcare. I'm real big on state rights too but some things like education, healthcare, and workers rights need to have a national involvement.
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago
LOL, i love that common defense statement!
The retort to your argument is simple, if disguised, and i'm sure you'll agree. We SHOULDN'T (obviously) have invaded Iraq, it was clearly NOT constitutional if only for the sole reason that it is mostly being paid for by inflation.
I, unfortunately, disagree on the education et. al. - there is no area in the constitution to provide for those things. It is purely a state's right issue. The "general welfare" is simply for the welfare of the UNION.
evangrogers 2 years ago
Check out all the controversy over Article 5. I don't like the idea that Congress can give authority to use military force without officially declaring war but Article 5 says they have almost unlimited power. Some guy named Hamdan sued cause he was in guantanamo bay and he won but not because it was unconstitutional, but because congress didn't give authority to do it. If Congress says people get education and healthcare, then people get education and healthcare. Thats the power of Article 5
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago
The controversy over article 5? of the constitution? the article that gives congress the ability to amend the constitution?
I don't know how that could possibly be construed to mean that congress can do anything it wants to...
evangrogers 2 years ago
The Supreme Court has said Congress can amend or even veto text of the Constitution. You have to prove to the Supreme Court that universal healthcare or public education or whatever other law congress passes is a violation of your rights, and even if you do, precedents like state secrets or presidential power of clear and present danger can override your individual rights. Saying universal healthcare is unconstitutional is a losing battle cause ur ignoring the whole premise of article V.
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago
Article 5 simply states that if the congress wants to amend the constitution, they can. They need a huge majority to pull it off, and THEN they can enforce whatever change they've made.
So... they need to change the constitution first to say "healthcare is considered the general welfare" (which it isn't), and THEN they can pass the law.
evangrogers 2 years ago
I guess you think child labor laws are unconstitutional since they exist as the result of congress. While you're at it tell all the elderly people their medicaid and social security is unconstitutional aswell. And tell college students their pell grants are illegal. And tell neil armstrong he illegally walked on the moon. None of these things are expressed specifically in the constitution, but they still exist.. u know why? cause they don't infringe on ur rights. TO FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago 2
actually you're right.
Most of that stuff is up to the states to decide. Just because the federal government doesn't do something doesn't mean that the states can't / wouldn't do something.
And about the moonwalking - even Richard P. Feynman, the great physicist, agrees - the attempt to get to the moon would've cost less money and lives if the federal government wasn't involved.
evangrogers 2 years ago
Hey there's no way that we would have walked on the moon already if the gov wasn't involved. Anyways In WWI a supreme court case said free speech like anti-draft anti-war could be silenced if it posed a "clear and present danger" (it actually strengthened the first amendment believe it or not due to previous precedent). In WWII FDR signed order which sent japanese decedents into camps including American citizens. Supreme court upheld his power to do it. Later gov apologized but thats it.
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago
So are you arguing that it's a good thing that the government can take away our "inalienable" rights? I'm not quite sure what you're arguing with that last statement, but it sure sounds like you think the system is a mess.
FDR took away everyone's gold, stole japanese families possessions, and yes, the government took away our freedom of speech NUMEROUS times during needless wars that were fought for stupid reasons that would've been prevented if the gov't couldn't finance them with inflation.
evangrogers 2 years ago
Nah my point is i'm just saying taking a stand against universal healthcare or even just an optional public insurance by means of saying its unconstitutional is kind of ridiculous. I'm all for small government and protection of rights but better access to healthcare is something that will help the average American. People get all caught up in politics/ideologies and forget to take a step back and look at the issues from a common sense perspective.
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago
I agree completely with what you've said. My argument is the exact same thing. I'm just very loyal to the Constitution - it is one of this planet's greatest treasures.
I also love the idea of everyone getting health care in some form - but allowing the federal government to just tax us for $3k each and then still leave 25 m of us uninsured is despicable at best, and paves an unjustifiable precedent.
Well said, good sir.
evangrogers 2 years ago
If a little old lady growing a couple marijuana plants in her closet is interpreted as commerce, buying and selling health insurance is definitely commerce.
NathanielFaunce 2 years ago
Rofl, yeah! Not only was it defined as commerce, it was defined as INTERSTATE commerce. Brilliant, right?
but the important thing is "IF". Just cuz some jackass judge says it is, doesn't make it so! We're the people of the United States! Let's rise up and vote these twats out of office!
These are ALL just examples of the federal government overreaching it's authority. Just like Truman taking over the steel mills, and FDR stealing our gold! VOTE EM OUT!!!
evangrogers 2 years ago
No, if a jackass judge says it's interstate commerce, then it's interstate commerce. The Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is.
NathanielFaunce 2 years ago
wow, you actually believe that?
Enjoy your slavery!
The supreme court is picked by the presidents, so if the presidents are all corrupt, eventually so will the supreme court.
Obviously your point about the marijuana growing granny proves just how ridiculous they've become, and something DOES need to be done. We need to return back to the constitution and our founding fathers if we even hope to survive for another century.
evangrogers 2 years ago
Slavery? You're crazy. John Marshall is the one that said the constitution is what the SCOTUS says it is, and he is effectively right. We can sit here on youtube with our half educated opinions, but it doesn't matter unless the SCOTUS agrees with us.
Get out of here with your conspiracy theory nonsense about all presidents being corrupt.
NathanielFaunce 2 years ago
If the Supreme Court decided that the president has the right to do anything he wants unless it's specifically denied to him in the constitution, then the constitution is meaningless.
I don't know if they ever have given the president this authority, but they've certainly come close many many many times in the past.
It's not a conspiracy theory - it's just fucking reading the constitution and comparing it to what we have now.
evangrogers 2 years ago
You're right!!!!!! JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE IRAQ WAR, JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE DEREGULATION OF CORPORATIONS, JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE FREEDOM ACT, RIGHT? JUST LIKE BUSH AND TORTURE, JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE ECONOMIC CRISIS, RIGHT? JUST LIKE BUSH AND 6 YEARS OF ABANDONMENT OF THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM AGAINST OSAMA BIN LADEN, BECAUSE TRUST ME HE WAS THE HAPPIEST ONE ABOUT THE WAR IN IRAQ?
ppaco18 2 years ago
ermmm... yes?
Bush was a god awful president who should've been impeached. No doubt about that.
I'm not quite sure what your point was...
evangrogers 2 years ago
All these people keep arguing over whether or not we should have health care.
How bout this - WE READ THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION!!
WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
9th and 10th amendment are pretty clear - NOPE! the federal government can't provide health insurance.
'nuff said
evangrogers 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
[The mission of the Constitution, do you think health care could fit under general welfare? We are still trying to form a more perfect union for all Americans.]
thomasonfa 2 years ago
Ummmmm.. article 1, section 8, clause 1 of the us constitution. "The Congress shall have Power To ...pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." Now there are conflicting stories on what this means, Madison took it to mean that Taxation had to be connected to other powers, and Hamilton thought it meant government could spend for the welfare of the country. This includes agriculture and Education and arguably healthcare.
nospacesallowed 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Tenth Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
So, NO, Education and Health Care are NOT to be provided to people by the FEDERAL government. States, sure, Federal, no.
evangrogers 2 years ago
haha someone yelled out "You Lie" at around 1:16. somebody should chop up that little part into a small clip of its own cause it's pretty funny.
xleeca 2 years ago
Another Republican idiot shouts out "you lie"?
Eric8542009 2 years ago
i think people misunderstood me.. that blonde lady was lying about something regarding hospitals in New York and i'm assuming intelligent students figured that out and were telling her that she was lying.. and then when they started settling down someone gave a last shout of "you lie" jokingly .. just thought it was funny
xleeca 2 years ago
All the Straw Men debating here should watch out for the fires....
Prop215Films 2 years ago
Weiner kicked her ass.
SeanKentComic 2 years ago 5
I just want the government to pay the tab. Its a miser in character so it'll penny pinch.
And its easy to argue against one identity.
PersonalJesus348 2 years ago
Calling Betsy McCaughey a "patient advocate" is like calling religious creationists "science advocates" when they demand that religious nonsense be taught in school biology classes. AKA bullshit.
sleepcity 2 years ago 2
weiner is the man!
brideshead1921 2 years ago 5
Thanx for bringing this debate to a broad audience tpmtv.
Now if we could get some intelligent debate here in the forums and dispense with the sophistry...
maskedphrogg 2 years ago 2
WHAT'S THE TRUTH?
NEED TO KNOW?
Google for YOURSELF (copy & paste) below sentences...
health care reform bill will begin in 2013 at the earliest
Democrats mandate health care insurance
CBO September 16 2013 requirement for residents to obtain health insurance
obama cuts billions from medicare
The goal is to reduce costs and guide your doctors decisions (H.R. 1 EH pages 442, 446).
obama legalize illegals to get them health care
Democrats declare that a Value Added Tax should be added
bigtex501 2 years ago
On the illegals fact, I hope you're right and not because I want them necessarily to have health care but because it's a problem that can only be resolve that way. And you can say anything, that they shouldn't be here but the fact of the matter is that they are, and believe if you ask them why they would like to be legalized is not because the want government help, it's because they want to work like everyone else and yes, you guess it, Pay taxes, although most of them do already.
ppaco18 2 years ago
@ppaco18 Just curious... How do you know what they pay???
bishopville 1 year ago
CBO Sep 16th
Public Option
The result, it would add a small amount of competitive pressure in many insurance markets that are currently served by a limited number of private insurers
The higher costs of those less healthy enrollees in the public plan would probably be offset partially but not entirely. The rest of the added costs would be reflected in the public plans premiums.
Costs & premiums of competing private plans would on average be "slightly lower" if no pub plan was available!
bigtex501 2 years ago
We are already paying for health care as taxpayers...it goes in their pockets...they have a safety net..we don't!
Who doesn't get it?
We give Drug research billions in federal grants(taxes)they turn around and charge us 100% the actual cost of producing the drugs...who doesn't understand that?
All we want is for the market to establish a proper price...we privatize profits...and SOCIALIZE loses...
Who's the F'ing communists now?
beckpod1 2 years ago 3
Americans are too rowdy ... they should shut up and listen.
mrblob20 2 years ago
bigtex501: 3. coverage for illegals is simply UNTRUE & right-wing spin. Also if illegals go to the hospital, it's still federally mandated they must be treated which will still drive up costs.
4. Those numbers don't add up if medicare is made cost effective by eliminating waste and providing coverage for top-quality non-hospital care (which is in various bills).
5. This has not been a quick process. It's been deliberated for nearly 5 months.
Nuthin wrong with serious debate but stop lying!
jnthnlck 2 years ago
jhth,
3. on illegals... would you believe what obamer himself says????
obamer....9/16...(HCI)
"We need to LEGALIZE UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS so THEY TOO can have affordable H.C. insurance like us" spin???
4. 9-9-09 Democrat Congressman Andrews of the House Budget Committee admitted in an interview on Fox News that $550 billion of the savings that are to be in the Democratic bill are coming directly from cuts to Medicare & Medicaid but does NOT know specifically where the money will come from!
bigtex501 2 years ago
3. correct, undocumented illegals need to get legalized or deported. if they stay illegal forever, they'll end up going to the ER, driving up our costs. jeez.
4. That is why there is not 1 bill - there are 4 bills floating around that will eventually get narrowed down to 1 bill. during this deliberation, thats when those questions will be answered. but, you said that we're moving too fast and rushing. obviously, you're just bickering and not for anything except opposing everything. Good bye.
jnthnlck 2 years ago
jnth
3. Sorry, but obamer's already made a deal at the HCI debate to legalize illegals!
And did YOU know your buddies the Democrats voted DOWN an amendment to REQUIRE CITIZENSHIP prior to care given in the U.S.?
4. And I know you as a liberal would prefer to wait until the last minute to see what the Dems draft up & shove down our throats before We The People know what we're going to be FORCED into!
Debates SHAPE what the politicians are doing instead of letting them do whatever they want!
bigtex501 2 years ago
Jnth,
5. You don't know very much about this process.. do you?
Did YOU know that members of Congress had LESS than 24 hours to read the "stimulus" bill before it's passage?
Did you know there's FIVE health care bills currently up for discussion in Congress at the moment???
Did you know TODAY the Baucus bill is STILL waiting on a vote due to the last amendments that were added to the bill, the CBO has YET to crunch the numbers to see what the FINAL cost will be?
Do catch up with the times!
bigtex501 2 years ago
are we talking about the stimulus plan already passed, or health care. and, i've already said there are 4-5 bills on the table, which is why the process ain't over. but you said that the dems are "rushing this through." make up your mind. I refuse to continue a discussion with someone who obviously is just venting, disgruntled and doesn't want anything done about health care. if you did, you'd offer ideas instead of only objections to everything. Goodbye!
jnthnlck 2 years ago
jnth,
Didn't you know about the stimulus bill that your buddies the Democrats wouldn't give more than24 hours to read before it's passage????
And do read what I say instead of making it us as you go.... but yes, the Dems would LOVE to rush this through and NOT give We The People tiem to read the "final" version when they get done adding amendments to it!
Remember, this was supposed to be rushed through this last August?
And it's 5 bills... NOT 4 or 5 bills being disscussed in Congress!
bigtex501 2 years ago
The complaint about inadequate reading time for this or any piece of legislation is either dishonest or reveals incompetency.
I have an organization, and like thousands of other orgs, when we are presented with a legal, administrative, offer, or other kind of document to read that is lengthy, we simply form a working group, divide the doc into sections and draft a collaborative note.
If the Republicans are unable to set this simple and sensible process, then they are unfit to govern.
readmorephilosophy 2 years ago 2
Readmor,
You should check on things 1st before false accusations!
Sept -26-09
Democrats vote DOWN an amendment allowing ***72 hours to read*** ANY proposed bills!
.
Reason for NOT allowing "72 HOURS" to read the bill after the posting?
During the Senate Finance Hearings.....
The Democrats felt that the "American People" would **NOT be able to understand the wording** in these Bills and it would be "TOO CONFUSING"?
Google.....
Washington Times Democrats block GOP demand for more time
bigtex501 2 years ago
Why allow 72 hours? The republican that requested that admitted that the only reason for the 72 hours to read was for the lobbyists to read it. These are the people that are happy with the way things are now.
JayHorusRa1 2 years ago
JayHorusRa1, Really? Is that why President Obama promised to have bills online for five days (120 hours, by the way) so the American people could read what was in the bills before he signed them? Because he's controlled by lobbyists?
MooseOfReason 2 years ago
I have no problem with it being posted, however the President said it was for the people to read it, the Republican admitted it was for the lobbyist. Might be semantics but just going by what they both said.
JayHorusRa1 2 years ago
JayHorusRa1, Doesn't that mean that President Obama's five-day pledge would help lobbyists more and he should take back that pledge?
MooseOfReason 2 years ago
That may be the case. I am just pointing out that the Republican that requested the time frame admitted that he only wanted it so that the lobbyist could read it. Also if Obama is going to post it for five days anyway before he signs it why bother posting it for 3 days before hand if they are not trying to stall. Kind of a moot point if you ask me. Oh and by the way thank you but I can count and know how many days 120 hours comes out too ;)
JayHorusRa1 2 years ago
By the way, the reason for the 72 hour amendment was mostly so the lobbyist who pay the senators can read the bill and tell them what to do.
ppaco18 2 years ago
Why don't you really check the congressman/woman and senators who are opposing the bill or simply don't want any type of bill, and see how much money they get from the Health Insurance Industry and Big Pharmaceuticals, after you see those numbers think if these people are opposing reform because they're looking out for your interest or because they're puppets of these industries. And I'm not just talking only about Republicans but some Democrats as well.
ppaco18 2 years ago
ppaco,
See the comment I made to Standup.... it's obamer's deal with the pharma lobbyist in return for campaign contributions!
But the main battle is the removal of our freedoms to choose over government mandates!
Do you know that under this plans... if you choose NOT to buy health insurance for ANY reason.. the Feds will increase your taxes up to $3700 a year (or levy a fine as obamer put it)?
And... if you have insurance... it MUST meet set requirements or you get taxed all the same!
bigtex501 2 years ago
Comment removed
ppaco18 2 years ago
BigTex please think about the kind of Freedom you're talking about. Under the current system of no competition and complete monopoly of private health insurance, no matter the name of the company you pick you will get same faulty service. So technically you don't really have freewill in what serves you best if you are not offer something different to chose from, so by that token you're health is really control by corporations.
ppaco18 2 years ago
About the mandates for health insurance, I think it makes sense. Yes, it may seem like the government is forcing you, but if you don't tackle the people who can afford health insurance and choose not to, and instead prefer to go to emergency rooms and dump the bill on taxpayers. If you pressure them to get one then we solve this problem and we have a new pool of healthy young Americans who are protected if they need but don't require as much assistant as the sick.
ppaco18 2 years ago 3
ppaco,
The main point is the government FORCING it's ideals on the American people instead of supporting OUR freedoms!
Under your theory, where will it end???
In stores... shoplifting costs US ALL billions of dollars in losses that we, as the consumer MUST pay for as well....
So... should the government;
FORCE us to buy our clothing at a "slight" discount, raise our taxes, mandate the clothing we're going to wear all because of shoplifting?
And if you DON'T buy clothing pay in more taxes?
bigtex501 2 years ago
I think the your analogy of clothing with health is irrelevant, because what kind of clothes your buy whether they're expensive or cheap is up to you. Clothing is a commodity, health care is not. You said it, we as "consumers" and that's exactly the point if it's clothing yes we are consumers and we can choose not to buy certain things to lower the cost of certain brands or clothes, however when it comes to health care you shouldn't have to be consumers but recipients as a human right.
ppaco18 2 years ago
I don't agree with the mandate to get health insurance, however there wouldn't be a mandate if people just agreed that a universal/ medicare for all was the solution. In 2007 9 Republican senators Co-sponsored a universal healthcare bill. How come they don't support it now? We have a shitty bill now cause all the good stuff has been gutted due to compromise. Baucus and Grassley r top 2 receivers of campaign contributions from insurance and only group that didn't have public option in bill.
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago 2
Not even some kind of mandate for catastrophic health care?
dougmanjones 2 years ago
I'm all for a mandate if it says that catastrophic healthcare is paid for by government. I'm not for a mandate that says people get fined if they don't give money to insurance companies lol. A tax on being alive.. wtf is that? McCain/Palin solution is to take tax payer dollars and give it back to tax payers on condition they give it to insurance companies. Obama plan is to build on a broken system. Either Universal Healthcare or Class Healthcare is inevitable.. which would u prefer??
willieFTWparker39 2 years ago
A tax on being alive? Well...I guess you could call it that. I think people need to cover their own asses though. If an uninsured person (who can afford insurance) has to go to the emergency room, gets surgery and is in ITC for a month, I'd rather the insurance company have to pay for all of that rather than the hospital, and I'd hate to see that person get saddled with 10s of thousands of dollars of medical bills and go bankrupt.
dougmanjones 2 years ago
The answer is simple, politics and big money. It is smarter for Repubs to oppose the bill and introduce amendments that will weaken the bill. It will allow them to say "I told you so."
However, Obama doesn't get off scott free, since he isn't doing a good job of taking charge of the debate. In addition, he came in conceding on health care, just imagine if he started with single-payer and settled for the public option. Just imagine how where this debate would be...
thomasonfa 2 years ago