Take A Number - Obamacare


While lots of people are focused on Sotomayor confirmation hearings (or not ZZxzzz) Congress & the president are bankrupting the country so deeply that recovery may not even be possible once completed.
~
Details are not pretty.

Tags

  1. obamacare
  2. item 12235
  3. item 12267
  4. $1 trillion

Comments


Mark de LA says
CBO's 'Partial' Analysis of House Health Care Bill: Over $1 Trillion .
Source: ...

It shows that of the $1.04 trillion, only 8 billion is in the first three years and only 77 billion in the first four years. That means that more than 90 percent of the cost is over the last six years.

So, the average cost of the second five years is about 172 billion annually. Put another way, 85 percent of the costs are in the second five years of the bill (2015-2019)

Even if costs miraculously remained flat from 2019 and beyond (rather than rising as they do from 2014-2019), the second ten years of this bill would cost more than $2 trillion.

Even if costs miraculously remained flat from 2019 and beyond (rather than rising as they do from 2014-2019), the second ten years of this bill would cost more than $2 trillion.

So…they’ve backloaded the costs and the consequences until after the next presidential election. They’ve also lowered their per-year cost by not implementing the bill until four years into their budget window.

... read the rest you will see how things are done in Washington.

Mark de LA says
The graphic needs to be in line so that the immediate impact of the bureaucracy being created by the Obamacare is visually digested.  I suppose I can make an attempt to shrink it so that that doesn't happen.
Here is the revised shrinkage of the PDF picture of the bureaucracy of Obama Here:

Mark de LA says

Source: ...

The legislation calls for a 5.4 percent tax increase on individuals making more than $1 million a year, with a gradual tax beginning at $280,000 for individuals. Employers who don't provide coverage would be hit with a penalty equal to 8 percent of workers' wages, with an exemption for small businesses. Individuals who decline an offer of affordable coverage would pay 2.5 percent of their incomes as a penalty, up to the average cost of a health insurance plan.

The liberal-leaning plan lacked figures on total costs, but a House Democratic aide said the total bill would add up to about $1.5 trillion over 10 years. The aide spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private calculations.


...
What we need is a hyperfast way to analyze the bills before Congress votes. If you type in the words health care into govtrack.us you get 1833 bills that mention health care.  Which one is the one that the current House of Representatives is considering?

Mark de LA says
Apparently our friends at Open Congress have a handle on HR 3200 here. The bill at govtrack if HR 3200 is the right one is here.  The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report from Rangle's committee is here. The latter is what has been generating all the news at Drudge & others.


Mark de LA says
The lobbying effort may someday appear here. HR3200 seems to be titled different in their database.

Mark de LA says
The Senate calls theirs QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HEALTH COVERAGE FOR ALL AMERICANS ACT or something like that. Here is an overviewHere is something else linked to from the Senate's own web page

The idea that everything is a crisis spawns con games, shell games & confidence rackets. An even cursory examination of Congress in collusion with the president can't dispell this idea. The only thing we can do to protect ourselves is to become hypervigilant & publish & flush the government or force changes when the time comes.  Will it take a total meltdown or can it be averted? Who knows? A government so big that it doesn't move when punched is a problem.  A government moving so fast that it appears to be a steam-roller is also a problem.

Mark de LA says
From the Senate's own web page finally a 615 page PDF on the bill.  Will it in fact guarantee it's purpose which is stated as:
source: ...

To make quality, affordable health care available to all Americans,

reduce costs, improve health care quality, enhance

disease prevention, and strengthen the health care workforce.


...someone should publish a set of metrics to access whether it is accomplishing what is intended.



Mark de LA says
It is not surprising that with a bureaucracy such as above that the amount of money spent on actual medical healthcare will be smaller than without it.

Mark de LA says
What Obama's health care plan means to New Yorkers chart: (NYPost).
source: ... Eighty thousand dollars a year worker with no health insurance, eighty thousand a year.  Remember, now, this is a group Obama has said will pay no increase in taxes.  Federal income tax, $16,000.  New York state tax, $5,000, New York City tax, 2,000, almost three.  So you're looking at $16,000 federal, $8,000 New York state and city, Medicare $2,300, and the new two-and-a-half percent no health care tax penalty on individuals if you don't have health care, $2,000 for a person making 80.  Her total tax bill on an income of $80,000 a year in New York City, $28,391.  Her income going to taxes, 35.48%.  I guarantee you that's a huge tax increase for this person.  Married couple combined income, one-and-a-half million dollars.  Federal income tax, $455,000.  New York state tax, $125,000.  New York City tax, $55,000.  So you're looking at $180,000 taxes in New York state and city, $455 federal, the new health care tax on them of 5.4%, $81,000.  That's a tax they're not now paying.  

... this is SICK!


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-17 10:41:18 12235
Apparently the chart published by MR above is being used as propaganda to kill health care reform.  A similar chart was used to help kill Clinton's plan.  But the reality of the situation is that health care is already very hairy - as shown in the linked chart.  MR is just repeating propaganda with the intent to obscure the process.  I hope some day one of his beloveds gets trapped is the mess that has evolved in our country because of his type of behavior.  I ask the question, does bloviation have  consequences?  Does clear thinking?  Is this kind of dialogue just a wast of time because of the partisan and special interest static just serves to get in the way of clear thinking about the problems that we face.   I think the latter.  Makes me think that i should be spending my time elsewhere and stop trying to get through to MR that he is just making more static.
Clinton health care was bad - Obamacare will bankrupt the nation. Forcing everyone to have health insurance & then taxing those that do & the employers that provide or penalizing those who don't while taxing anyone left who has money is indeed - SICK!!!
My chart is simple
get sick -> heal thyself (if possible); if not possible go to doctor & get medicine or go to hospital get more intensive help.  Arrange payments if necessary out of your own resources. Unfortunately you probably won't be able to find a doctor to help if Obamacare forces all of them to be part of the government system, as Hillarycare did.
Seth just can't stand opposing opinions & he can't shut up either.

Seth says
btw, in case your wondering why the river is wider, you might want to just hyperlink to the large chart above.  This does not need to be an inline graphic. 

Seth says
source: MR makes his arguments above
Forcing everyone to have health insurance & then taxing those that do & the employers that provide or penalizing those who don't while taxing anyone left who has money is indeed - SICK!!!
My chart is simple
get sick -> heal thyself (if possible); if not possible go to doctor & get medicine or go to hospital get more intensive help.  Arrange payments if necessary out of your own resources. Unfortunately you probably won't be able to find a doctor to help if Obamacare forces all of them to be part of the government system, as Hillarycare did.
Strangely enough there are parts of that which I agree with.  I'm not one to run to the doctor all the time and am continually amazed how my own body will heal itself time and again.  Even if something doesn't heal, one learns to live with it, without expensive medical attention.  My own policy is to stay away from doctors as much as i can ... i guess we both got that from GW.  I think that doctors can and do heal symptoms, but in the long run they make you less healthy.

That having been said, reasonable medical insurance is not affordable in this country for the average man.  Even now, since i get social security, if i was seriously sick or injured, after  medicare pays its part, i would be totally broke.  Sure i can get supplemental insurance for about $100/month and that  would cover most of my expenses.  Now bear in mind that is a government program ... and  it does work ... and it does make it  affordable for me.   Now go back several years before i got social security.  There is no way that i could have, even back then, afforded private medical insurance with comperable coverage.  The consequence being that if i had been seriously sick or injured and needed an operation and hospitalization, i would have had to go to the county hospital.  The government would have had to pay for my care anyway ... and i probabably would not have gotten very good care.   Point is that medical insurance in this country is broken ... and leaft  alone it  will only get worse.  It will continue to drag down the economy.   We need to fix it.

I actually want to talk with you about this, but i only want to deal  with the issues and not with the static. 

Mark de LA says
I think that every time hence that Seth cries about partisanship, hyper-partisanship & the like I will just refer him to 12254 ; the liberals in the M$M, the courts, the Congress & the presidency notwithstanding.


Mark de LA says
     One of the biggest reasons that health care is so expensive is that insurance itself has made it that way.  The mentality that says "get the most you can because someone else is paying for it" starts that giant ball rolling.  It gets only worse with Medicare & finally with compulsive medical insurance the coup de grace will have been given to the whole system.
Other factors is that hospitals & doctors have to protect themselves from multi-million$$ malpractice awards which are effectively a $$$-lottery for lawyers.

     Fast-forward to the future where health-care has no connection to the economy or politics or the law.  Here's what I see:

  1. An abundance of doctors & paramedical professionals who have mastered both preventive medicine & holistic medicine as well as anything that can help including traditional allopathic (AMA) through acupuncture etc.
  2. An abundance of hospitals & clinics that can handle both psychological & medical needs of communities.
  3. A healthier populace who has been trained since conscious to take positive control over their own health through proper nutrition, exercise & mental health.
  4. A grass roots, community level guild of healers & healing organizations that run the process of maintaining 1-3 above by being directly in touch with the consumers of health care themselves.
  5. A capital & economic system that provides for, but does not control #4 in a way that medical innovations & needs are provided as the population needs them.  A dynamically balanced external economy will be able to do this out of the excess of it's success. (I'm specifically not talking about the present day mentality of tax the rich).
  6. The quality of doctors & para-medical personnel will improve as schools show up in abundance & the economic incentives of getting rich dissipate into history. Old World dynasties of families of doctors may or not tend to be things of the past.
  7. Correcting mistakes, lacking the incentives of a get rich fast lottery for lawyers notwithstanding, will be a matter of applying the required change at all levels of the community not just more legalese written into paperwork for patients to sign away.
  8. Life & Death will be treated with dignity in all cases - no longer a matter of money.
  9. The Hippocratic Oath will be observed & affirmed by all who are in the profession.

Seth says
MR 2009-07-17 17:22:20 12235
seth 2009-07-17 15:32:02 12235
MR 2009-07-17 11:34:02 12235
I think that every time hence that Seth cries about partisanship, hyper-partisanship & the like I will just refer him to 12254 ; the liberals in the M$M, the courts, the Congress & the presidency notwithstanding.

... or you can take what i am saying to heart and acknowledge that carping on the other side for trivial reasons produces static in the process and distracts from a clear headed considerations of the issues.  Please direct your usual response that Obama also said that to dev/null.  It does not matter who said it.  It is in fact true.  And what is worse than trivial carping is when you copy some other person carp.  In that case you are just amplyfying static. 

Btw, i asked you to please deescalate your personal ad hominem insults to me.  The primary reason is that they do not read well to anyone else reading our blogs - nor even to us when we read back in history.  Nor do they help us get to the issues.  They are worse than the trivial partisan carping in that they are not even remotely about the issues being raised.  No they are about me ... well not even about me ... they are in fact about you.  I ask you again please do decist.  Again please direct any bs response to this to dev/null.  If you delete this, don't worry it will appear on my own blog later for all to see.

This is the last time I will tell you this.  If you do want to continue this dialogue, please give me the respect that i deserve.
Your dissing is carping to me. It all depends upon whose ox is algored as to whether something is carping or informing of facts as yet not acknowledged. Moderate your tone & I will moderate mine. Over time it may improve. I am sick of your carping about carping.

Well i have moderated my tone.  Please point out where (in the future please) that you have a legitimate tort on me.   All i need from you is an acknowledgment that it is our intention to clean this up.  It is easy to tell a tort ... it is a sentence where either you or I are the subject or object of the sentence ... that is, of course, unless you or i actually are the topic at hand.  In other words, we should talk about the issues in the items and not speculate about the dasterdly attitudes of the other person.  Of course if one wants to emphasize the fact that what one is saying is just their own belief, then of course that it is necessary and permitted to say things like: I believe X, etc.   I think if we can clean this up, then we both can have more pride in our writing, and who knows, it might even be interesting to others.  Kind of unique ... two brothers, one on the left, one on the right, having constructive dialogue and dealing the with real issues of the day.

I'm game ... are you?

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-17 15:32:02 12235
MR 2009-07-17 11:34:02 12235
I think that every time hence that Seth cries about partisanship, hyper-partisanship & the like I will just refer him to 12254 ; the liberals in the M$M, the courts, the Congress & the presidency notwithstanding.

... or you can take what i am saying to heart and acknowledge that carping on the other side for trivial reasons produces static in the process and distracts from a clear headed considerations of the issues.  Please direct your usual response that Obama also said that to dev/null.  It does not matter who said it.  It is in fact true.  And what is worse than trivial carping is when you copy some other person carp.  In that case you are just amplyfying static. 

Btw, i asked you to please deescalate your personal ad hominem insults to me.  The primary reason is that they do not read well to anyone else reading our blogs - nor even to us when we read back in history.  Nor do they help us get to the issues.  They are worse than the trivial partisan carping in that they are not even remotely about the issues being raised.  No they are about me ... well not even about me ... they are in fact about you.  I ask you again please do decist.  Again please direct any bs response to this to dev/null.  If you delete this, don't worry it will appear on my own blog later for all to see.

This is the last time I will tell you this.  If you do want to continue this dialogue, please give me the respect that i deserve.
Your dissing is carping to me. It all depends upon whose ox is algored as to whether something is carping or informing of facts as yet not acknowledged. Moderate your tone & I will moderate mine. Over time it may improve. I am sick of your carping about carping.


Mark de LA says
Let's say I am. How about addressing some of the issues raised way back several comments ago like my 9-point vision of the future. Are you interested in stuff like that?  Or perhaps you could comment on the out of control expenses & taxation being planned for Obamacare.


Seth says
source: MR above
Other factors is that hospitals & doctors have to protect themselves from multi-million$$ malpractice awards which are effectively a $$$-lottery for lawyers.
Well i certainly agree.  I wish i could find statistics about the percentage of our health care dollars that go to malpractice insurance.  I am very disappointed that Obamcare does not address this issue.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-18 06:33:26 12235
source: MR above
It gets only worse with Medicare & finally with compulsive medical insurance the coup de grace will have been given to the whole system.
Actually Medicare does a fair job ... at least most people say that ... references to that on the web are too numerous to cite.  Certainly the cost is affordable, and the care is readily available in that almost all doctors and hospitals accept Medicare.  Compulsory medical insurance actually drives down the per person cost.  We end up paying for emergency care for the uninsured in any case, so why not build it into the system. 
Medicare is rife with fraud - Google has 1,350,000 articles on the subject - Obamacare will be more enticing.
My experience with Medicare is that it is hard to find regular doctors who will accept Medicare because of what the govt requires. My regular doctor refused to take me once I had Medicare.  The one I finally found turned out to be a pill-pusher. I came in to get a refill of some medicine which I had been taking for a few years & he wanted me to take a bunch more medicine & do a bunch more tests all of which were unnecessary. I did some just to shut him up. In spite of the fact he said there would be very little cost, I got bills for a lot - he lied about how much Medicare would cover. You see, tied to money he made a lot more by getting more patients for longer times needing more medicine.   I finally moved & no longer take any medicine.  Unlike car insurance, compulsory medical insurance will make people think, wow! I am paying for something now that I didn't need before - I think I'll use it!

Seth says
MR 2009-07-17 21:56:47 12235
Let's say I am. How about addressing some of the issues raised way back several comments ago like my 9-point vision of the future. Are you interested in stuff like that?  Or perhaps you could comment on the out of control expenses & taxation being planned for Obamacare.

Ok we are on!

I'll have more to say about the control of expenses & taxation when i have more time to study the particulars of the bills going through congress.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-18 06:26:18 12235
source: MR above
     One of the biggest reasons that health care is so expensive is that insurance itself has made it that way.  The mentality that says "get the most you can because someone else is paying for it" starts that giant ball rolling. 
Well in the US where there still is a "pay for what you get" or a "pay through the nose for insurance" system, we end up paying the highest per person compared to any other country.  Cuba, on the other hand, where health care is free spends one of the lowest.
source: Health Care Spending
In 2000, the United States spent more on health care than any other country in the world: an average of $ 4,500 per person.
...
Cuba ranks 28th in the world, just behind the US [in life expectancy]. However, its spending per person on health care is one of the lowest in the world, at $186, or about 1/25 the spending of the United States.
I don't think any comparison of countries will bear out the assertion that "free implies high per person cost."   That said, a good system should discourage hypochondria like over usage. 
How many people flock to Cuba for healthcare? How many people flock to the USA to get healthcare when they have to wait in line in their own country to get healthcare? (like Canada & the UK)?

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-18 06:26:18 12235
source: MR above
     One of the biggest reasons that health care is so expensive is that insurance itself has made it that way.  The mentality that says "get the most you can because someone else is paying for it" starts that giant ball rolling. 
Well in the US where there still is a "pay for what you get" or a "pay through the nose for insurance" system, we end up paying the highest per person compared to any other country.  Cuba, on the other hand, where health care is free spends one of the lowest.
source: Health Care Spending
In 2000, the United States spent more on health care than any other country in the world: an average of $ 4,500 per person.
...
Cuba ranks 28th in the world, just behind the US [in life expectancy]. However, its spending per person on health care is one of the lowest in the world, at $186, or about 1/25 the spending of the United States.
I don't think any comparison of countries will bear out the assertion that "free implies high per person cost."   That said, a good system should discourage hypochondria like over usage. 
We are not talking about per person cost. we are talking about having so may people using the system who if they were paying for it probably otherwise would not. Such cloggs the system & causes rationing. When a system tied to the economy is overwhelmed it rations. My concept of free is a system not tied to the economy at all. Yours & Obamacare means everyone pays for everyone elses'  - they are quite different. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-18 06:47:17 12235
source: MR above
Fast-forward to the future where health-care has no connection to the economy or politics or the law.  Here's what I see: [see 9 points in 2009-07-17 12:11:22 above]
These are great, and with few exceptions, i think they are shared by Obamacare.  Note the following points of agreement in Obama's Guiding Principles at www.HealthReform.gov
  • Invest in prevention and wellness
  • Improve patient safety and quality of care
Nice! What do they mean in Obamacare?
I put my 9 points as a vision toward the future to work toward. Then from knowing what we want we must create human & techonological systems which get there from the grass roots upward - #4 & #5 are difficult but are at the heart of the new world. These are not 9 selling points to convince the country to spend trillion$ to achieve in a future far far away. You might think of my 9 points as the requirements of a system which is to evolve out of the current system in a smooth transition not something to be forced upon us. This is bottom up design. I haven't said how to get there yet.  I have no axe to grind. The first step is to get agreement with the requirements. Obamacare is only saying we will redistribute the cost of healthcare by regulation & taxation. He doesn't seem to be creating more & different types of Med Schools or medical personnel. He still has it tied to economics. There are vast differences between my approach & Obama's.

Mark de LA says
The question of would Obamacare pay for abortions - a very divisive issue if so. He promised in the campaign (while not using the A-word)
source: ...

In my mind reproductive care is essential care. It is basic care, and so it is at the center, the heart of the plan that I propose. … we’re going to set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don’t have health insurance. It’ll be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services... We also will subsidize those who prefer to stay in the private insurance market except the insurers are going to have to abide by the same rules in terms of providing comprehensive care, including reproductive care.


...& his people won't rule it out
Health Bill Might Direct Tax Money to Abortion (NY Times): ...

Under the House bill, for example, most insurers would have to provide an “essential benefits package” specified by the health and human services secretary, who would receive recommendations from a federal advisory committee. Opponents of abortion want Congress to prohibit inclusion of abortion in that benefits package, while advocates of abortion rights say the package should be left to medical professionals to determine.

In an analysis of the House bill, the National Right to Life Committee said that ordinary principles of administrative law could allow the Obama administration to determine what would be included in the benefits package. “There is no doubt,” the group said, “that coverage of abortion will be mandated, unless Congress explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of federal authority to define ‘essential benefits.

... .. so you see what you may be voting for without a specific clarification.



Mark de LA says
Apparently the ABORTION issue is getting warmer & 20 Democrats have written:
WSJ: ...

A group of 20 House Democrats signed a letter sent last Friday to House Democratic leaders stating they "cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan."

....

Both private plans and a public-health insurance plan would be available to individuals seeking health coverage through a health-insurance "exchange" created by the bill. The Department of Health and Human Services would make the final determination on what those plans would be required to cover.

The department would seek proposals on what to cover from a health benefits advisory council created by the bill. The anti-abortion Democrats state in the letter they want to ensure that the council "cannot recommend abortion services be included under covered benefits or as part of a benefits package."


...
maybe somewhat divided government works somewhat some of the time...

Mark de LA says
Apparently the Democrat Party is now in censoring mode against the Republicans for the above map of the new bureaucracy on health care being contemplated.  Rather than file their own corrections they quibble with terminology. Read the article here.
Source: ...

At the same time comes word from Rep. John Carter, R-Tex., that the same franking commission that is causing problems for Brady's chart won't let Carter use the words "government-run heath care plan" in a recording to be used to start a telephone town hall meeting. "What we proposed as language was as follows, 'House Democrats unveiled a government-run health care plan,'" Carter told a conservative publication. "Our response from Franking was, 'You cannot use that language. You must use, 'The House majority unveiled a public option health care plan,' which is Pelosi-speak or 'just last week the House majority unveiled a health care plan which I believe will cost taxpayers...'"


 
... doesn't sound bipartisan to me!

Seth says
MR 2009-07-14 20:21:24 12235
CBO's 'Partial' Analysis of House Health Care Bill: Over $1 Trillion . 

I think it is time to debunk this myth that Obamacare cost $1 trillion ...
source: Pearlstein

By now, you've probably also heard that health reform will cost taxpayers at least a trillion dollars. Another lie.

First of all, that's not a trillion every year, as most people assume -- it's a trillion over 10 years, which is the silly way that people in Washington talk about federal budgets. On an annual basis, that translates to about $140 billion, when things are up and running.

Even that, however, grossly overstates the net cost to the government of providing universal coverage. Other parts of the reform plan would result in offsetting savings for Medicare: reductions in unnecessary subsidies to private insurers, in annual increases in payments rates for doctors and in payments to hospitals for providing free care to the uninsured. The net increase in government spending for health care would likely be about $100 billion a year, a one-time increase equal to less than 1 percent of a national income that grows at an average rate of 2.5 percent every year.

...


Mark de LA says
I think what people are complaining about is that the government is trying to commit one trillion dollars to health care.  It is like buying a trillion dollar house - nobody but the bank is going to loan you that money, but with the interest & service on that debt it will cost double or triple.  Now are the Chinese or Arabs going to loan us that money? Medicare was supposed to be only a few millions to start, but in the end it many times what it was stated to cost. We're not fooled by the numbers that come out of the White House & Congress.  The recent cash for clunkers program ran out of money in a hurry.  Are we going to trust the same kind of people in government to run health care?
Laugh at the Democrats, I do! Sometimes it helps break wind & relieve tension of the moment.


See Also

  1. Thought This is outrageous! with 11 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  2. Thought 1.47 TRILLION and RISING! with 2 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  3. Thought Obama Union Thugs with 2 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  4. Thought Co-op or COOPs ? with 2 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  5. Thought Some fact checks with 1 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  6. Thought OBAMACARE with 1 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  7. Thought END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS ? with 1 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  8. Thought Flukes of Natural Order with 1 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  9. Thought Obamacare - cartoon coverage with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  10. Thought The Obamacare Fraud Train with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  11. Thought The THRUST of it all with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  12. Thought Freedom of CHOICE with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  13. Thought Obamacare Waivers with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  14. Thought WTF & beyond with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  15. Thought Joe Wilson was right with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  16. Thought Obama - Rhetoric of Thuggery & Con with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  17. Thought Obamacare with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  18. Thought The White House fights the people with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  19. Thought Fishy with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  20. Thought The Obamacare nanny state with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  21. Thought Cooperation Obama Style with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  22. Thought United States of Peloshivik with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  23. Thought A journey through the Bill to get an answer with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  24. Thought Lower the Debate, eh? with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  25. Thought Insurance Takeover with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  26. Thought Transparency as thick as London Fog with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  27. Thought Obama feels Pissed on? with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  28. Thought Whats Up With Dat? with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  29. Thought Weighing Health Care Proposals with 0 viewings related by tag "item 12267".
  30. Thought 14 + Reasons why HR3200+ should be DOA (NOW HR3962) with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  31. Thought Cotton with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  32. Thought Republican Response to the latest Obama/Pelosi BS on Obamacare with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  33. Thought Even the Software has politics in it with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  34. Thought Obama & Congress -VS- We the People with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  35. Thought Kagan to SCOTUS ? with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  36. Thought The Anticipation of SPIN is truly Delicious on Obamacare Decision with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  37. Thought IT IS NOT ABOUT .... reframing in politics with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  38. Thought Obamacare bitter pill with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  39. Thought Jon Stewart - Cant spin this turd with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  40. Thought On the Vote Today with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  41. Thought Stupak Sells his soul with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  42. Thought We the Suckers of the United States ...... with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  43. Thought Transfer of Wealth not Health Care with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  44. Thought Mark Care with 0 viewings related by tag "item 12235".
  45. Thought Step One refined debate (PRO) with 0 viewings related by tag "item 12267".
  46. Thought Step One refined debate (CON) with 0 viewings related by tag "item 12267".
  47. Thought Aligning Political Rhetoric with Reality with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  48. Thought OBAMACARE ! with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".
  49. Thought Great News with 0 viewings related by tag "obamacare".