RSS Feed
Newsletter
Widget
Black Lawmakers Jubilant Over Passage of Health Care Bill
Published by Pamela Gentry on Sunday, November 8, 2009 at 2:03 pm.By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Analyst
November 8, 2009 – Lawmakers expressed jubilant gratification along with tempered celebration with the passage of H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act. The president was quick to congratulate Congress understanding this bill will be one of the defining policies of his presidency.
Black lawmakers in the House were united early on a reform bill with a public option; so while they are pleased with the passages of H.R. 3962, they are cautiously optimistic of what the final bill will have after it is merged with the Senate version.
President Obama:
“The Affordable Health Care for America Act is a piece of legislation that will provide stability and security for Americans who have insurance; quality affordable options for those who don’t; and bring down the cost of health care for families, businesses, and the government while strengthening the financial health of Medicare. And it is legislation that is fully paid for and will reduce our long-term federal deficit.”
Rep. Barbara Lee, (D-Calif.) Chairwomen, Congressional Black Caucus
“While there is still much work to do, I applaud President Obama, Democratic Leadership and the Chairmen of the Tri-Committees for their efforts to bring us to this point.
“I also want to thank in the Tri-Caucus, Progressives Caucus and particularly the 42 members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Together we have led the fight for a strong public option, which is included in the health care bill that the House approved today.
“When others were pronouncing health reform dying—and the public option dead and buried—we kept on fighting! And we will keep fighting until a final health care bill is on the president’s desk that includes not only a strong public option, but provisions to achieve health equity, eliminate health disparities and to limit the rate of increase for those with private plans.”
Rep. John Conyers (D- Mich)
“While the bill is far from perfect, I supported it because it will expand access to health insurance to 96 percent of Americans, end discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, help our seniors by closing the prescription drug benefit donut hole, and increase competition and choice with a public insurance option.
I voted for this bill because the cost of inaction is too high. Each year, 44,000 people die because they do not have access to insurance. Without reform, this number would rise, Americans would be at greater risk of losing their coverage, and our business community would continue to fall behind international competitors as their future profits are drained by burdensome health care costs.”
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.)
“Legislation created by the bill will improve employer-based coverage for 403,000 Marylanders, will cover 44,00 0 Maryland residents who lack insurance and will provide 147,000 Maryland families with “affordability credits” to help them afford insurance.
It also improves Medicare for 90,000 beneficiaries in Maryland, including beginning closure of the prescription drug “doughnut hole” for 4,700 Maryland seniors.
On the financial front, this legislation will protect 900 Maryland families from joining the estimated one million nationally who declare bankruptcy due to medical costs.”
Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.)
“This may be one of the most important moments in our history,” said Rep. John Lewis. “It has been a long tough struggle, but we took significant steps this evening toward making a powerful difference in the lives of every American. This is not a perfect bill, but it is the beginning we must make to transform health care in America and make sure that healthcare is a right and not a privilege.”
Del. Elanor Norton (D-D.C.)
“The incredible diversity of the Democratic Caucus, representing Republican, right-leaning, moderate, and progressive areas, meant that we could go to the floor only with a bill that sensitively put all of America together into one convincing bill. That is why we have produced a bill that satisfies deficit hawks, who are more wary of increasing deficits than of any other issue, as well as single-payer advocates, who believe that only Medicare for all can markedly reduce costs while providing adequate health care to the middle class and the uninsured. Thus, there can be no doubt that the Affordable Health Care for America Act is a balanced bill.”
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.)
“This bill is not only morally right, but an imperative for working-class families” said Johnson. “When this bill becomes law, 166,000 households in my district could qualify for affordability credits if they need to purchase their own coverage, 65,000 seniors will benefit from a strengthened Medicare, 15,000 small businesses will be able to join the health insurance exchange and thousands of families could avoid bankruptcy due to catastrophic health care costs.”
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by Juicy_Amber09: Black Lawmakers Jubilant Over Passage of Health Care Bill – By Pamela Gentry, Senior Political Analyst November 8,… http://ow.ly/160isv...
Congress Passes Health Bill…MORE INFO:
Another Historic Feat for President Obama; See list of Democrats who voted NO; Rep. Cao link; Read complete 1990-page bill; Hear the Bill (audio version); Read the Stupak Amendment; WATCH: President Obama’s comments on historic Congressional vote.
Visit: http://blacks4barack.blogspot.com/2009/11/house-passes-health-bill-another.html
PROVERBS 29:7 . The Righteous Is Concerned For The Rights Of The Poor , The Wicked Does Not Understand Such Concern .
Peace & Blessings , Power To God’s People !
PROVERBS 3: 27 . Do Not Withold Good From Those To Whom It Is Due , When It Is In Your Power To Do It .
Peace & Blessings , Power To God’s People !
PROVERBS 16:3 . Commit Your Works To The Lord And Your Plans Will Be Established .
Peace & Blessings , Power To God’s People !
This is a bunch of rhetoric from the black law makers there is on merit to this. The Government should just have laws that makes insurance companys have equality for people and if people don’t buy insurance for what ever reason that be there bill. Before doing things use cognition about things snafu can happen . you peope know Murphy’s Law ! Self responsible is not racist . Health prudence is how active you are and how you eat .
David apparently you have been living in a bubble or you are clueless when it comes to insurance in other communities. Some people really can’t
afford insurance base on their salaries,your average waitress and waiters
has to rely on tips and some people hardly leave a dollar. when you are on
the lower edge of the pay scale $50 is a lot to spend and it is just enough to
keep the hospitals from refusing you. Healthcare reform is really needed
what amazes me is the Senators from the poorest states who have the nerves to be against healthcare reform with half of the people are on medicaid.If we had healthcare reform we as taxpayers would not have to
pay more in local taxes to pay for healthcare in areas. People need to realize that this is a problem in every community, just not in the black community. I fine that blacks are more in tune to what is going on because most of them live in this situation.They have ability to listen and make sense
of what is going on. People who say negative things about healthcare reform are the main ones who make decisions out of fear,they listen to people who don’t have them in mind.
Health reform is not about race it’s about affordability.That is why many white lawmakers voted for the bills passage.Health insurance premiums are way too expensive and that is why a public option is needed. A person can eat right and exercise and still get sick,it happens all the time. Personal responsibilty is all well and good but falling ill does happen which is why people have health isurance if they can afford it.The insurance copanies know this but it does not give them the right to highway robbry with high premiums.
This is a bunch of rhetoric from the black law makers there is on merit to this. The Government should just have laws that makes insurance companys have equality for people and if people don’t buy insurance for what ever reason that be there bill. Before doing things use cognition about things snafu can happen . you peope know Murphy’s Law ! Self
cheap puma shoes online store http://www.pumaforever.com
RECONCILIATION:
Should Be A Household Word
By Greg Jones
Blacks4Barack
For some reason the media and even our politicians keep pounding the vital importance of the Senate obtaining 60 votes in the Senate to pass the health care reform legislation. There’s the non-stop ‘what will (Traitor) Joe Lieberman do’…or ‘will they get (R) Olympia Snowe’…or ‘will Harry Reid get the 60 votes he needs…’? 60…60…60 !!! That’s all we hear. I’m not sure if the media is trying to add drama to the health care issue in an attempt to stimulate audience ratings or if it’s an orchestrated tactic in hopes of keeping Americans ill-informed through the direction of our great politicians, but the FACT is, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid DOES NOT need 60 votes to pass the health care bill but in fact ONLY 51- a simple majority, which makes a huge difference-through a procedure commonly used and known as RECONCILIATION.
Reconciliation is ” a legislative process of the United States Senate intended to allow a contentious budget bill to be considered without being subject to filibuster (only needing 51 votes to pass). Because reconciliation limits debate and amendment, the process empowers the majority party “. The reconciliation procedure is limited to being used for budget related legislation that costs or raises substantial amounts of money. In the case of the Senate health care bill, that would include the expansion of Medicare or Medicaid, revenue-raising tax provisions, and even the creation of a public health insurance option, depending on how it’s written. So the reconciliation procedure CAN be used to pass the health care bill with only 51 VOTES !
The downside of the bill being passed through this procedure is that, due to a ruling known as the Byrd Rule, non-budget legislation designed to regulate the insurance industry could not be included in the bill and would have to be voted on in a separate bill which would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. But there is a strategy that can be used to overcome even this obstacle as described by Ryan Grimm of HuffPo:
But there’s another alternative, according to Martin Paone. Paone, who served as a Democratic Senate floor staffer for 29 years, has been advising Democrats as they craft their legislative strategy. He proposes that Democrats try to get 60 votes to waive the Byrd Rule — which would then allow the inclusion of those non-budget-related provision in one bill that would require only 51 votes for final passage.
What’s the advantage? And why would any senator who opposes the entire bill vote for such a waiver? The answer can be found in the specific proposals that would be in violation of the Byrd Rule. Mostly, those would include reforms to the way the insurance industry operates — for example, a ban on using preexisting conditions to deny coverage, or a law that insurance companies can’t drop a client just because they get sick.
Those are wildly popular reforms. Getting 60 votes to support those policies is much easier than getting 60 for a public health insurance option, which Republicans and some conservative Democrats oppose.
Conservative senators such as Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) or Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) could, in voting for a Byrd Rule waiver, put themselves on the record as being in support of popular insurance industry reforms, while still opposing final passage of the bill — a political strategy that may be appealing to them.
So, as the media continues their daily rant of how imperative it is that EVERY Democratic Senator vote yes on the health care bill remember one FACT that they seem to want to hide from We The People. There IS a way for the Senate to get the bill passed WITHOUT 60 votes…without Traitor Joe…without Olympia Snowe…without Mary Landrieu…making them absolutely meaningless in the debate.
Now, WE must let Harry Reid know that WE know that this option is in fact available to him. Call…Email…and DEMAND that if he feels he doesn’t have the 60 votes needed to block the filibuster, then We The People…
DEMAND
RECONCILIATION !
When they, our great politicians realize that WE KNOW that they have this option…they will be FORCED to use it…even if they had other intentions (like letting the bill stall or even fail). Help the word RECONCILIATION become a household word. Spread the fact that this IS in fact an alternate means of the Senate getting the bill passed. Since day one, President Obama has stated that he would not be able to create Change on his own…that he would need OUR help. Time to do OUR part by DEMANDING that our politicians do EVERYTHING possible, including RECONCILIATION, to stop 44,000 Americans from DYING each year due to the lack of access to quality health care, by passing health care reform-with a strong public option-for all.
Email the media to let them know that WE know
and are DEMANDING that our politicians
Get It Done
Everything in existence is reasonable;
learn form yesterday and predict tomorrow.
mbt m.walk shoes
cheap Nike Air Max 2010 Shoes
cheap nike dunk sb shoes
Mens High Nike Dunk SB
Mens Low Nike Dunk SB
Womens Low Nike Dunk SB
Womens High Nike Dunk SB
Nike Running Shoes
My friend recommended me a very interesting place ****** MatchWealthy.com ****** It’s where wealthy singles looking for someone to enjoy their wealthy lifestyle with.
http://wefherfghhnwepppiilkop.com wefherfghhnwepppiilkop
wefherfghhnwepppiilkop
Healthy Competition
How to Structure Public Health Insurance Plan Choice to Ensure Risk-Sharing, Cost Control, and Quality Improvement
By Jacob Hacker
Institute for America’s Future and The Center on Health, Economic and Family Security; University of California, Berkeley
April 08th, 2009
Related Topics: Health Care for All
Video highlights of report author Jacob Hacker and Institute for America’s Future co-director Roger Hickey discussing the findings.
A
• Download Healthy Competition: How to Structure Public Health Insurance Plan Choice to Ensure Risk-Sharing, Cost Control, and Quality Improvement here
• Jacob Hacker: “The Case For Public Plan Choice in National Health Reform: Key to Cost Control and Quality Coverage” (PDF)
• Jacob Hacker: “Health Care for America” report and the Lewin Group cost analysis
• Diane Archer: Massachusetts Health Reform: Near Universal Coverage, But No Cost Controls or Guarantee of Quality, Affordable Health Care for All (PDF)
• Frank Clemente: “A Public Health Insurance Plan: Reducing Costs and Improving Quality” (PDF)
• The Path to a High Performance U.S. Health System: A 2020 Vision and the Policies to Pave the Way
• Leaders and Experts Agree that a Public Insurance Option is Critical to the Success of Obama’s Health Reform Proposals (PDF)
Executive Summary
The debate over health care reform has increasingly centered on the issue of “public plan choice”—whether Americans younger than 65 who lack employment-based coverage should have the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan modeled after Medicare. The central argument for public plan choice is that such a plan, offered as a choice within a new national insurance “exchange,” provides an essential set of security guarantees, ensuring that Americans without insurance from their place of work can find a plan that offers them quality, affordable health care through a broad choice of providers in all parts of the country.
For public plan choice to provide such guarantees, however, the public plan must be properly structured, compete on a truly “level playing field” with private plans, and have the authority to use its bargaining power as one of many tools to encourage greater value in health care delivery. The most effective and easily implemented model for the new public plan is a “Medicare-like” plan that builds on Medicare’s administrative infrastructure and basic framework of coverage but is separate from Medicare’s risk pool and departs from Medicare in a number of key respects regarding payment and benefits.
To create a level playing field requires attention to the “three R’s” of workable public-private competition: rules that are the same for both the public plan and private plans, risk adjustment that protects plans from being competitively disadvantaged if they enroll a less healthy group of people, and regional pricing that allows private plans and the public plan to compete within regions on the same terms, rather than having the public plan compete on a national basis with regionally based private plans (whose premiums may be lower or higher
in any given region).
Finally, giving the public plan the authority to bargain for reasonable rates is an essential item on the menu of cost control—and one that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and other budget watchdogs are likely to “score” as producing savings (in contrast with many other currently favored cost-control strategies). Nonetheless, there are reasonable concerns about how the new public plan will use its bargaining power—concerns reflected in current proposals for a price-taking (rather than price-making) public plan that would have limited ability to secure fair rates.
However, a watered-down public plan would be a grave mistake. Instead, the public plan should include safeguards designed to ensure that providers are fairly represented and that bargaining for lower prices does not negatively affect patients’ access to care or shift costs onto private insurers. Indeed, a better alternative to a public plan without price-setting authority would be allowing private fee-for-service style plans to piggyback on the public plan in setting their own prices.
Public plan choice is rooted in existing precedents that have shown themselves to work, rather than speculative convictions about how a delicately balanced new system will operate. It must be part of any successful reform package. Without public plan choice, Americans without workplace insurance will be put in jeopardy, private insurers will lack an effective check on their actions, and the opportunity to place our crumbling framework of health financing on a secure foundation will be lost.