Quantcast
U.S. & World

Defying veto threat, House OKs health law change

Comments

Return To Article
  • t702 Las Vegas, NV
    Nov. 15, 2013 12:53 p.m.

    "Friday's vote came as Obama arranged a meeting later in the day at the White House with insurance company CEOs..." that's great the president is now reduced to an insurance salesman, the only problem insurance salesmen know their stuff, Obama is clueless, he has zero experience in doing anything. The dude is dying to vote on this, no doubt he'll vote present

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 1:34 p.m.

    So we'll see if the Senate and Harry are willing to make the President a liar or if they are willing to really help people. Oh, what a sticky wicket when one doesn't tell the truth and it catches up to them.

    (Why would anyone be unhappy with Obamacare----after all, it's such a wonderful fix, a great bargain, and it's as easy to sign up for as falling off a log. In fact millions have already effortlessly enrolled online and over the phone. Plus, the coverage is indescribable.)

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 1:52 p.m.

    the BIGGER news is that 39 Democrats joined with Republicans to pass the bill...the bill Barack said he will veto of course because it came from the GOP..regardless of whether it is good for the country or not. It has gotten to the point where not even Democrats are willing to follow Barack anymore seeing him as an un-moving demagogue rigid in ideology and short on common sense. The man is worse than just a lame duck because not only has his credibility gone south but his likeability is at an all time low as well. Bottom line - we are leader-less in the White House.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 2:11 p.m.

    This is how changes in laws (as opposed to policies) are supposed to happen... from the legislative branch of the government and not as an executive order... the way Obama keeps trying to unconstitutionally change things.
    Obama will likely veto this bill because it's not a change initiated by him. Consequently, he wouldn't get the credit for it. Heaven forbid if Republicans were to get any credit for something positive in Washington with the next election less than a year away!

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 2:28 p.m.

    Everyone is focusing on the 39 Dems voting for this.

    FYI? 222 Republicans voted for this, and Republicans have the majority in the house.

    What did you honestly expect to happen?

    Just because you have the majority in the House, does not mean you run the entire government. America is not JUST Republican.

    Now that Obama is trying to ADDRESS the problem, Obama is a 'salesman' for corporations.

    Keep in mind, under our last President, we were STILL being dropped, and no one did…anything.

    'Wellpoint DROPS Coverage For Some Women With BREAST CANCER' - By Mary Ellen Egan - Forbes Magazine - 04/23/10

    'Yesterday, an investigation by Reuters revealed that Wellpoint routinely drops coverage of women with breast cancer. According to the report, Wellpoint used a computer algorithm that automatically targeted...'

    Some of the arguments about the ACA are lacking facts.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 2:32 p.m.

    @toosmart
    "So we'll see if the Senate and Harry are willing to make the President a liar or if they are willing to really help people."
    except the fact is this law as it stands goes well beyond just helping those that like their plan to keep it. It basically guts the ACA's protections standards for all customers causing a harm not "help." At what point do we stop letting insurance companies run amok.

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 3:25 p.m.

    Republicans need to let this go.

    This is what Democrats have wanted for decades, and now they have it. Republicans and Conservatives have warned about it for the same amount of time. It's here; it's failing just like we taught people. So why on Earth would you want to fix it? This is the Democrats' mess--let THEM own it 100%.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 3:27 p.m.

    @Tators
    No, he's going to veto it because he just wants to delay it one year while Republicans want to get rid of it forever.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 15, 2013 3:30 p.m.

    "The final vote was 261-157 as lawmakers clashed over an issue likely to be at the heart of next year's midterm elections."

    This is what this is really about. If they had really wanted to get the passed, simply putting a time frame on the bill.... say a two extension for people and insurance companies to get this sorted out.... it would fly through both houses and be signed. But since the bill is yet another political statement rather than a real fix, it includes language that makes its term indefinite, it will likely get a reading in the Senate.

    Pass something for two years, and if need be, continue it as needed, just like they do with the budget. But no, this is about forcing people to make statement votes rather than votes they no will lead to ultimate legislation to fix the problems.

    Enough political games.... lets get down to doing the real business of the people, rather than doing the business of the party.

  • Justmythoughts Provo, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 3:36 p.m.

    If the President was truly sorry for his "lie"... he would NOT oppose the House bill. The house bill is what everyone thought Obama was saying when he said we could keep our insurance.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Nov. 15, 2013 4:16 p.m.

    Wow! Hundreds of billions spent on shovel ready jobs. Didn't happen!

    Millions spent on Solyndra. Lost tax money!

    Now the the healthcare trainwreck!

    Don't understand how some keep supporting our commander

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 4:37 p.m.

    @justmythoughts
    no actually it goes well beyond that removing protections for new policy consumers allowing insurance to deny people with pre existing conditions and sale the same old high deductible low benefit insurance for jacked up prices.

  • Cowboy Dude SAINT GEORGE, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 5:13 p.m.

    I challenge President Obama, Senator Reid, and Congresswoman Pelosi to take their State Health Insurance License test.

  • Cowboy Dude SAINT GEORGE, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 6:15 p.m.

    "it's failing just like we taught people. So why on Earth would you want to fix it? This is the Democrats' mess--let THEM own it 100%."

    Because, when we redistribute wealth, the economy slows down. This is bigger than health care. We must fight now for our country, not sit back and hope the President fails so we can say...told you so.

  • Razzle2 Bluffdale, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 6:36 p.m.

    Cowboy Dude "I challenge President Obama, Senator Reid, and Congresswoman Pelosi to take their State Health Insurance License test."

    Until then it should be illegal for them to be selling their insurance plan.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 15, 2013 11:07 p.m.

    $4 trillion spent on Iraq.

    $24 billion spent on the Government shutdown.

    $50 million spent on 47 failed attempts to repeal the ACA.

    Reagan tripled the debt.

    W. Bush doubled the debt.

    You cannot say any of that, about Obama.

    Want lower debt?

    Vote Democrat.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Nov. 16, 2013 12:36 a.m.

    The web site will be fixed by the end of November--Obama

    Hmm?

  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    Nov. 16, 2013 6:36 a.m.

    No one in the administration is canceling insurance policies. The Insurance industry is on a great quest to cancel policies months before 1 Jan 2014 and when people call in a panic they are sold a policy outside the published Exchange rates and they buy. The policy holders are simply profits to these companies. Contrary to the law, policies grandfathered are being canceled as well now. Shame on them. Any system that keeps "free market" tactics like this is not good, time for Single Payer.
    Every person cancelled who was walked through the Exchanges for their State or Fed found they bought a superior policy at an affordable price. You will not see people bankrupt like before. These people are much better off, especially with the provisions of preexisting conditions and they cannot be dropped. The House is doing a great disservice to the citizens of this country, bowing to the money of the industry.
    To paraphrase Congressman Grayson: "Congress needs to go, and go quickly".

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    Nov. 16, 2013 9:28 a.m.

    Granted, prior to the ACA, people were unjustly being dropped from their insurance policies and something needed to be done. Now, it seems that the President has achieved his goal in making everyone more equal --- millions are being dropped from their policies.

    Government was never intended to be a business. Goverments regulate the playing field, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare and install infrastructure. They don't open shop and they don't legislate the closure of businesses nor people's life styles.

    It always seemed to me that if corrections were needed for the overall medical care in this country, it could have been done in a different way than with a 2,000 page document that includes everything from Family Planning to lower dollar amounts required before businesses file 1099 forms. The next time we need to find a burglar, let's not burn down the city to do it.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Nov. 16, 2013 9:28 a.m.

    * Can't believe how dishonest people are of pre-existing condition. If everybody waited for an illness to get insurance, companies would go broke.

    * Some people keep blaming George Bush. Wow! I'll make this perfectly clear,--all American wars combined, does not equal 4 trillion dollars. Not even one trillion. Democrats struggle with accurate reporting and decieve many.

    * With out doubt, Obama holds the worlds record for adding to a debt. To say other wise is not being truthful, or honest.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Nov. 16, 2013 11:57 a.m.

    "Reagan tripled the debt.

    W. Bush doubled the debt.

    You cannot say any of that, about Obama.

    Want lower debt?

    Vote Democrat."

    Spreading this misconception again?

    Fact: Obama added as much to the debt as Bush, but did it in LESS than FOUR years! At that rate, Obama would more than double the debt by the time he is done in office (especially if he finds a way to get another term, which given his moral compass I would not at all be surprised to see him find a way to stay in power).

    Fact: Obama added MORE debt than Bush did. Not less.

    Even if $50 million was spent trying to repeal Obamacare, that's $50 million spent trying to save the country. That's much wiser than the trillions Obama is spending trying to destroy the country.

    Also, how can the Democrats possibly oppose this bill? We learned in 2010 that most Democrats need to pass bills so they can find out what's in them.

  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    Nov. 16, 2013 2:45 p.m.

    ulvegaard
    In this case Government is not a business, it is a facilitator. It writes no health insurance policies and does not compete with the Insurance industry. The web site was a place to shop for policies. The insurance companies then wrote the policies. Mass has one now and is doing great, ask the citizens there and the former Gov. I am in a group policy and already meet the ACA standards. Good thing, I had open heart surgery when I was 40, do you think I could buy any insurance for my family and me? SHould I just "die quickly"?
    Many States developed their own websites. Our Gov. here in Florida has done everything possible to disenfranchise the citizens. He has spent millions in legal fees trying to stop our citizens from finding affordable health insurance. A great disservice. He could have used the millions and bought a copy of the Mass program and we would have the service and made better use of Millions.

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Nov. 16, 2013 5:08 p.m.

    Worf~
    You are correct about the dishonesty regarding preexisting conditions. There is an article "Obama's Pre-Existing Conditions Whopper" on Forbes, 10/9/13 by Paul Roderick Gregory. It breaks down (with links) how the number of people with preexisting conditions is greatly inflated.

    Itsjustmeagain, it would be a violation of Hipaa portability rules if you were denied a new policy if you've had continuous coverage previously.

    A few Hipaa rules (via the Labor Department website):

    The law defines a preexisting condition as one for which medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received during the 6-month period prior to an individual's enrollment date (which is the earlier of the first day of health coverage or the first day of any waiting period for coverage).

    Group health plans and issuers may not exclude an individual's preexisting medical condition from coverage for more than 12 months after an individual's enrollment date.

    Under HIPAA, a new employer's plan must give individuals credit for the length of time they had prior continuous health coverage, without a break in coverage of 63 days or more, thereby reducing or eliminating the 12-month exclusion period.

  • Itsjstmeagain Merritt Island, Fl
    Nov. 16, 2013 9:40 p.m.

    I only wish that were true. Had I been laid off or fires, I would not be eligable for the group plan I am in now through my employer.
    A young lady with Diabedies was taken off her Fathers plan the day she graduated. She could not get a policy. She died a year later. Why do we let that happen?
    All the company needs is an excuse. A person with acute acne problem who did not state it on his application, needed serious medical attention was dropped because of a "fradulent application".

    I go on Medicare in a year. I'll get the supplimental through my present insurer. I see this as the way to go for America, a Single Payer System.

  • LoveLife Riverton, UT
    Nov. 16, 2013 11:05 p.m.

    So, you are saying that the government's regulations and rules that have already been put in place for healthcare don't work, and people find ways around them? Color me shocked! The obvious answer must be more government.

    Obamacare isn't fully implemented yet, but we've already seen cronyism, fraud, negligence, going way over budget, intimidation, and bribery (just to name a few)-all at the expense of the taxpayers.

    Had any company behaved the way the government has so far, the top executives would be arrested. No one has been held accountable for anything. I can't understand for the life of me why anyone thinks the government can run healthcare.