Seriously folks...
 

do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

Seriously folks...
 

In article ,
says...

do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?


I was amazed to find out that the committee uses real understandable
language to debate the bill and to pass it out of the committee and then
convert the bill to legislativese for the vote on the floor of the
Senate.

As stated in the article, it is too easy to slip a provision in here and
there that without anyone on the committee knowing about it.

Seriously folks...
 

On 10/3/09 8:30 AM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?



Serious people don't read or quote from the right-wing extremist
christian news service.


--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

Seriously folks...
 

On Oct 3, 8:30*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

Seriously folks...
 

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:30:04 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

Is it surprising? They are writing laws. Plain English is too vague and
filled with too many contradictions. Hell, a misplaced comma can change
the whole meaning, providing loopholes. Most professions have their own
language. I'm sure you have read scientific articles. Understandable?
Only to another scientist, maybe.

Seriously folks...
 

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 13:31:57 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:30:04 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

Is it surprising? They are writing laws. Plain English is too vague and
filled with too many contradictions. Hell, a misplaced comma can change
the whole meaning, providing loopholes. Most professions have their own
language. I'm sure you have read scientific articles. Understandable?
Only to another scientist, maybe.

Well, that's a good point - I agree to some extent. Some of the stuff
I read looks like worm scratchings to most, but it's understandable to
me. :)

My larger point, and I think it's an important one, is this. We pay
the legislators to write laws. Almost all of them are lawyers. If the
lawyers who write the legislation don't understand the legalesse that
they themselves are responsible for understanding, then what's the
point?

When I fill in at UCONN, the people that hire me expect me to
understand the subject I'm instructing and be able to impart that
information to the students clearly and precisely.

Shouldn't we expect our legislators to do the same?

Seriously folks...
 

On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 09:46:43 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Oct 3, 8:30*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

So making it more complex is better? Wouldn't you think that making
it simpler to deal with would be a better goal?

I don't have trouble understanding my insurance plan. I have a list
of what is and isn't covered, a formulary sheet that describes what is
covered fully/partially or not at all for prescriptions, a rate sheet
for reimbursement for my outlay, complete description of co-pays that
I'm responsible for and those procedures that are fully covered, a
contact person if I have questions.

How hard is it?

Seriously folks...
 

On 10/3/09 3:21 PM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 09:46:43 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 3, 8:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

So making it more complex is better? Wouldn't you think that making
it simpler to deal with would be a better goal?

I don't have trouble understanding my insurance plan. I have a list
of what is and isn't covered, a formulary sheet that describes what is
covered fully/partially or not at all for prescriptions, a rate sheet
for reimbursement for my outlay, complete description of co-pays that
I'm responsible for and those procedures that are fully covered, a
contact person if I have questions.

How hard is it?


I have a card. Everything in the hospital is covered, including a
semi-private room. Doctor's office visits are covered, with a $10
co-pay. Generic prescriptions require a $5 co-pay, non-generics require
a 20% co-pay. Cosmetic surgery for vanity reasons is not covered, but it
is covered to reconstruct after a disease or an accident. Oh, yeah...80%
of my lasik eye surgery was covered 10 years ago. No need to read
complicated rate sheets, because it all fits on one side of one sheet of
paper. If there's a change, the administrator sends out a note.
Oh...there's a $200 annual deductible.

Unfortunately, most Americans do not have the sort of friendly health
insurance I have.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

Seriously folks...
 

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:16:18 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 13:31:57 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:30:04 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

Is it surprising? They are writing laws. Plain English is too vague
and filled with too many contradictions. Hell, a misplaced comma can
change the whole meaning, providing loopholes. Most professions have
their own language. I'm sure you have read scientific articles.
Understandable? Only to another scientist, maybe.

Well, that's a good point - I agree to some extent. Some of the stuff I
read looks like worm scratchings to most, but it's understandable to me.
:)

My larger point, and I think it's an important one, is this. We pay the
legislators to write laws. Almost all of them are lawyers. If the
lawyers who write the legislation don't understand the legalesse that
they themselves are responsible for understanding, then what's the
point?

They definitely should understand the law, and what it contains, but I'm
not sure they need to understand the legalese. Although, it would be a
plus if they did. They have hired help, staff, to do the grunt work, if
you will. Personally, I don't see the big deal. Many businessmen don't
understand accounting. That's why we have accountants. Builders don't
need to be architects, etc. etc.

When I fill in at UCONN, the people that hire me expect me to understand
the subject I'm instructing and be able to impart that information to
the students clearly and precisely.

Shouldn't we expect our legislators to do the same?

Personally, I would prefer our legislators to reflect our society. I
think it would be a good thing if there were fewer lawyers in Congress.

An alternative would be to make all laws understandable in plain
English. However, given our 200 plus years of precedents, I don't see
that happening. Given the controversy over the meaning of the word "is",
plain English probably is unworkable in law.

Seriously folks...
 

On Oct 3, 3:04*pm, H the K wrote:
On 10/3/09 3:21 PM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:



On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 09:46:43 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 3, 8:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
*wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

So making it more complex is better? *Wouldn't you think that making
it simpler to deal with would be a better goal?

I don't have trouble understanding my insurance plan. *I have a list
of what is and isn't covered, a formulary sheet that describes what is
covered fully/partially or not at all for prescriptions, a rate sheet
for reimbursement for my outlay, complete description of co-pays that
I'm responsible for and those procedures that are fully covered, a
contact person if I have questions.

How hard is it?

I have a card. Everything in the hospital is covered, including a
semi-private room. Doctor's office visits are covered, with a $10
co-pay. Generic prescriptions require a $5 co-pay, non-generics require
a 20% co-pay. Cosmetic surgery for vanity reasons is not covered, but it
is covered to reconstruct after a disease or an accident. Oh, yeah...80%
of my lasik eye surgery was covered 10 years ago. No need to read
complicated rate sheets, because it all fits on one side of one sheet of
paper. If there's a change, the administrator sends out a note.
Oh...there's a $200 annual deductible.

Unfortunately, most Americans do not have the sort of friendly health
insurance I have.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

Herr Krause. most of your fellow citizens don't have a green card like
yours, either.

But no fear. In time that too shall come to pass.

Seriously folks...
 

H the K wrote:
On 10/3/09 8:30 AM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?



Serious people don't read or quote from the right-wing extremist
christian news service.



The quote was from your Sen. Thomas Carper. CNS only published his words.

Nice spin attempt, WAFA, but you failed again.

Seriously folks...
 

wf3h wrote:
On Oct 3, 8:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

I understand my plan. What confuses you?

Seriously folks...
 

H the K wrote:
On 10/3/09 3:21 PM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 09:46:43 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 3, 8:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

So making it more complex is better? Wouldn't you think that making
it simpler to deal with would be a better goal?

I don't have trouble understanding my insurance plan. I have a list
of what is and isn't covered, a formulary sheet that describes what is
covered fully/partially or not at all for prescriptions, a rate sheet
for reimbursement for my outlay, complete description of co-pays that
I'm responsible for and those procedures that are fully covered, a
contact person if I have questions.

How hard is it?


I have a card. Everything in the hospital is covered, including a
semi-private room. Doctor's office visits are covered, with a $10
co-pay. Generic prescriptions require a $5 co-pay, non-generics require
a 20% co-pay. Cosmetic surgery for vanity reasons is not covered, but it
is covered to reconstruct after a disease or an accident. Oh, yeah...80%
of my lasik eye surgery was covered 10 years ago. No need to read
complicated rate sheets, because it all fits on one side of one sheet of
paper. If there's a change, the administrator sends out a note.
Oh...there's a $200 annual deductible.

Unfortunately, most Americans do not have the sort of friendly health
insurance I have.


And neither will you, if the Obamanation administration has their say.
Enjoy it while you can, WAFA!

Seriously folks...
 

On Oct 3, 3:21*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 09:46:43 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Oct 3, 8:30*am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

So making it more complex is better? *Wouldn't you think that making
it simpler to deal with would be a better goal?

what makes you think they aren't? and who said simple is better?

I don't have trouble understanding my insurance plan. *I have a list
of what is and isn't covered, a formulary sheet that describes what is
covered fully/partially or not at all for prescriptions, a rate sheet
for reimbursement for my outlay, complete description of co-pays that
I'm responsible for and those procedures that are fully covered, a
contact person if I have questions.

and that will be issued with the new plan.

Seriously folks...
 

On Oct 3, 7:38*pm, The D wrote:
H the K wrote:


Unfortunately, most Americans do not have the sort of friendly health
insurance I have.

And neither will you, if the Obamanation administration has their say.
Enjoy it while you can, WAFA!-

chuckle guess you just think folks who are unemployed shouldn't get
health insurance at all

Seriously folks...
 

On Oct 3, 7:35*pm, The D wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 3, 8:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?

I understand my plan. *What confuses you?

what makes you think you won't understand the new plan especially
because you'll keep your current insurance?

oh. rush told you otherwise

res ipsa loquitur

Seriously folks...
 

On Oct 3, 3:16*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:


My larger point, and I think it's an important one, is this. We pay
the legislators to write laws. Almost all of them are lawyers. *If the
lawyers who write the legislation don't understand the legalesse that
they themselves are responsible for understanding, then what's the
point?

and you think the lawyers for health insurance companies are judged on
how well they write for the public?

Seriously folks...
 

In article , news1
@gmail8.com says...

H the K wrote:
On 10/3/09 8:30 AM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?



Serious people don't read or quote from the right-wing extremist
christian news service.



The quote was from your Sen. Thomas Carper. CNS only published his words.

Nice spin attempt, WAFA, but you failed again.

Typical liberal, look at the masthead only.

Seriously folks...
 

On 10/4/09 9:34 AM, BAR wrote:
In articleloqdneX9FrzwQlrXnZ2dnUVZ_gZi4p2d@giganews. com, news1
@gmail8.com says...

H the K wrote:
On 10/3/09 8:30 AM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?



Serious people don't read or quote from the right-wing extremist
christian news service.



The quote was from your Sen. Thomas Carper. CNS only published his words.

Nice spin attempt, WAFA, but you failed again.

Typical liberal, look at the masthead only.




I don't trust what Pravda, the Christian News Service, or World Nutcase
Daily call news.


--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

Seriously folks...
 

wf3h wrote:
On Oct 3, 7:38 pm, The D wrote:
H the K wrote:

Unfortunately, most Americans do not have the sort of friendly health
insurance I have.
And neither will you, if the Obamanation administration has their say.
Enjoy it while you can, WAFA!-

chuckle guess you just think folks who are unemployed shouldn't get
health insurance at all

Really? The illegal aliens have better health coverage than me - they
pay *nothing* and clog our "emergency" rooms. The unemployed Americans
aren't denied that same health care.

Seriously folks...
 

wf3h wrote:
On Oct 3, 7:35 pm, The D wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 3, 8:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930
Seriously?
what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?
I understand my plan. What confuses you?

what makes you think you won't understand the new plan especially
because you'll keep your current insurance?

oh. rush told you otherwise

res ipsa loquitur

I haven't read it (the new plan). Evidently, neither has congress.

Seriously folks...
 

On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 21:12:38 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Oct 3, 7:38*pm, The D wrote:
H the K wrote:


Unfortunately, most Americans do not have the sort of friendly health
insurance I have.

And neither will you, if the Obamanation administration has their say.
Enjoy it while you can, WAFA!-

chuckle guess you just think folks who are unemployed shouldn't get
health insurance at all

Should we all get the same health care coverage and quality of
treatment that our legislators do?

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Seriously folks...
 

On Oct 4, 5:17�pm, Roger wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 3, 7:35 pm, The D wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 3, 8:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930
Seriously?
what makes you think people understand the healthcare system we have
now?
I understand my plan. �What confuses you?

what makes you think you won't understand the �new plan especially
because you'll keep your current insurance?

oh. rush told you otherwise

res ipsa loquitur

I haven't read it (the new plan). �Evidently, neither has congress.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And neither have any of the folks rabidly condemning it....but anyone
who disagrees with them are Nazis

Seriously folks...
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 21:12:38 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Oct 3, 7:38*pm, The D wrote:
H the K wrote:


Unfortunately, most Americans do not have the sort of friendly health
insurance I have.

And neither will you, if the Obamanation administration has their say.
Enjoy it while you can, WAFA!-

chuckle guess you just think folks who are unemployed shouldn't get
health insurance at all

Should we all get the same health care coverage and quality of
treatment that our legislators do?

We should have the same options and they should not have options we
have, that's the sneaky part when they are asked. They always say "we
will have the same options as you", but will not say if we will have the
same options as they do... watch carefully next time one is asked...

Seriously folks...
 

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:04:26 -0400, tiny wrote:


Should we all get the same health care coverage and quality of
treatment that our legislators do?

We should have the same options and they should not have options we
have, that's the sneaky part when they are asked. They always say "we
will have the same options as you", but will not say if we will have the
same options as they do... watch carefully next time one is asked...

It's not just legislators, I believe it's all federal employees who have
that coverage. And, no, you will not get the same options as long as you
are depending on private business for your health insurance.

Seriously folks...
 

On 10/5/09 10:34 AM, thunder wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:04:26 -0400, tiny wrote:


Should we all get the same health care coverage and quality of
treatment that our legislators do?

We should have the same options and they should not have options we
have, that's the sneaky part when they are asked. They always say "we
will have the same options as you", but will not say if we will have the
same options as they do... watch carefully next time one is asked...

It's not just legislators, I believe it's all federal employees who have
that coverage. And, no, you will not get the same options as long as you
are depending on private business for your health insurance.


Virtually all federal employees/retirees are eligible for the FEHBP
program.

The federal government exerts close oversight over the program. There
are several hundred different plans available.

This, from wiki, is pretty accurate:

The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) is a system of
"managed competition" through which employee health benefits are
provided to full-time permanent civilian government employees and
qualified retirees of the United States Government. The FEHBP allows
insurance companies and employee associations such as labor unions to
develop health, dental, and allied plans to be marketed to governmental
employees.

These plans are available to employees during an "open enrollment" once
probationary status has been passed by a new employee, during which time
the employee, if accepting enrollment, will be covered fully in any plan
he or she chooses without limitations regarding pre-existing conditions.
After the initial enrollment, changes can be made only upon a
"qualifying life event" such as marriage, divorce, adoption or birth of
a child, or change in employment status of a spouse, or during the
annual "open season," during which employees can enroll, disenroll, or
change from one plan to another. The exact dates of the open season
change from year to year, but are basically from the Monday of the
second full week in November through Monday, the second full week of
December.

Premiums vary from plan to plan and are paid in part by the employer
(the U. S. Government agency that the employee works for) and the
remainder by the employee: the employer pays an amount equal to 72
percent of the average plan premium for self-only or family coverage
(not to exceed 75 percent of the premium for the selected plan), and the
employee pays the rest. Certain employees (such as postal workers) have
a higher portion of their premiums paid as the result of collective
bargaining agreements.

Some plans, particularly the one offered by some employee unions such as
the National Association of Letter Carriers, and by the Blue Cross and
Blue Shield Association on behalf of its member insurers, are
nationwide; others are regionally-available plans such as HMOs. The
FEHBP is open to members of United States Congress; in the 2004
presidential campaign, Senator John Kerry proposed opening enrollment in
this plan to all Americans.


--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All