What Happens Next? Health Care...

[locke]

For those curious how tonight's historic vote is going to effect us in the short term:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1914020220100319

The much vaunted health insurance exchanges don't happen until 2014
the mandate also doesn't happen until 2014

so over the next six months we will see the following happen
1.Adult children may remain as dependents on their parents’ policy until their 27th birthday
2.Children under age 19 may not be excluded for pre-existing conditions
3.No more lifetime or annual caps on coverage
4.Adults with pre-existing conditions may buy into a national high-risk pool until the exchanges come online. While these will not be cheap, they’re still better than total exclusion and get some benefit from a wider pool of insureds.
5.Small businesses will be entitled to a tax credit for 2009 and 2010, which could be as much as 50% of what they pay for employees’ health insurance.
6.The “donut hole” closes for Medicare patients, making prescription medications more affordable for seniors.
7.Requirement that all insurers must post their balance sheets on the Internet and fully disclose administrative costs, executive compensation packages, and benefit payments.
8.Authorizes early funding of community health centers in all 50 states (Bernie Sanders’ amendment). Community health centers provide primary, dental and vision services to people in the community, based on a sliding scale for payment according to ability to pay

[Syphon the Sun]

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

219 members of the House of Representatives broke a vow to the American people last night.

[buckshot]

It is a damn sad day for the USA !

[locke]

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

219 members of the House of Representatives broke a vow to the American people last night.

LMAO

[jotabe]

219 members of the House of Representatives broke a vow to the American people last night.

If that's true, someone, i hope, will sue them.

[Mich]

As usual, I find myself getting more worked up at the specific arguments people use and the fallacies therein than the actual thing being debated. "Healthcare being a basic human right" is one that gets me from the pro-bill side, "this is the end of America as we know it" is one from the anti-bill side.

[Wil]

It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine...

I find politics to be a lot more interesting when I don't actually have any firm opinion one way or the other. In any case, what they passed last night will either turn out fine and end up helping or royally f*** things up and everyone will scramble to try and fix it. Either way, it'll be interesting to watch!

[jotabe]

As usual, I find myself getting more worked up at the specific arguments people use and the fallacies therein than the actual thing being debated. "Healthcare being a basic human right" is one that gets me from the pro-bill side, "this is the end of America as we know it" is one from the anti-bill side.

Thing is, i don't see how they are fallacies. Human rights are things that are defined by human beings, and their legitimacy comes from an ample social consensus. You'd be hard pressed to find people in Spain, for example who doesn't think so, hence for us, it is a basic human right.
On the other hand, America has been vastly characterized for being one of the few, and the largest, western country without a socialized health care system. If that changes, then yes, it is obviously the end of America as we know it.

Edit: The only thing that i actually care about in this reform is: will there be financial help to buy expensive medicines for people who are "too rich" to be eligible to medicaid?

[Syphon the Sun]

LMAO

Roll your eyes all you want, Adam, but the Constitution does not give Congress the authority to do whatever they please, even if you personally really like what they're doing. (They don't have that authority even if 100% of the population really likes what they're doing.)

I wouldn't expect you to care that your pet legislation has all sorts of constitutional problems. Regulation of quasi-economic non-activity? Really? Is that part of Congress' authority to keep regular the commerce between and among states? But, like I said, I wouldn't expect you to care about any of its problems. After all, you're more partisan than Pelosi. It doesn't matter if Congress had to violate their oath of office to get you the bill. Even Congress' own think-tank thinks its pretty darn constitutionally questionable and an unprecedented power-grab.

But who cares about the precedent this sets? I sure hope the government starts mandating we purchase high speed internet service. After all, that's a "human right," now, too, if you hadn't heard. And all kinds of other goods and services that I may not need or want. Life would be just super if only the government could violate more of my rights without due process of law.

The government tried to mandate the purchase of private goods once before. It led to a revolution and the resolve among our founders that it never happen again.

[Mich]

Thing is, i don't see how they are fallacies. Human rights are things that are defined by human beings, and their legitimacy comes from an ample social consensus. You'd be hard pressed to find people in Spain, for example who doesn't think so, hence for us, it is a basic human right.
On the other hand, America has been vastly characterized for being one of the few, and the largest, western country without a socialized health care system. If that changes, then yes, it is obviously the end of America as we know it.

On the "human right" issue, I've always assumed that human rights are something that mean to take them away from someone is to deny their humanity. Thus, a right that is guaranteed to you just by being human. Normally these are applied to 1)Life (without which you would be dead and not a human), 2)Liberty (without which you are treated as less than human, as commonly seen in slavery, but also including thought-crimes and such) and occasionally 3)Pursuit of happiness (without which one is denied having goals or any purpose to life). All of these rights are possible to be obtained without the help of another person, meaning that the only way a human doesn't have any of these rights is to have them physically taken away from them. Since healthcare is reliant on altruism of other people, it's not a right, merely a need and/or privilege. I'm not saying that it's a good thing or a bad thing, merely not a right.

And the "zomg America is ending" reaction only bugs me because, even if what you're saying about "America changing"="America ending" is to be taken for truth, people normally say it in a way to mean that every single person in America will be bankrupt or without a job within two years or some other hyperbolic statement.

[Syphon the Sun]

I'd add the right to hold property to your list, Mich, but yeah.

Unfortunately, what constitutes a "human right" has become so corrupted over the years that, seriously, a majority of people now believe internet access is a fundamental human right. I sure hope the right to free iPhones is next on the list.

[neo-dragon]

Congratulations guys! Now let me introduce you to this other groundbreaking idea called the "metric system".

I just don't get Americans.

[Gravity Defier]

Since healthcare is reliant on altruism of other people, it's not a right, merely a need and/or privilege.

So...even though I'm paying for health insurance (either through my paycheck or taxes), it is altruism? The doctors, hospitals, and all other companies involved in medicine are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts? Their paycheck isn't any sort of incentive? Their social status, while not that of a celebrity/professional athlete, isn't any sort of incentive?


Also, need trumps "right" as you defined them, in my book. I need air, more than I need happiness. I need to know if I get sick and don't know how to take care of myself, I don't have to choose between eating for the next month or going to have said illness taken care of.

If the wording bothers you, I personally think healthcare is a basic human need. When we have the technology and know how to fix something, it strikes me as counter-intuitive and just a little heartless to watch someone suffer from that thing because they don't have the money to fix it. Forcing them to wait it out or ignore it all together just quickens their path to death or makes it more expensive to treat them later, when it can no longer be ignored.



ETA: Privilege? How are you or the people you know using healthcare that it is a privilege? When anyone I know uses it, it is a need.

[Sonikku13]

I don't get people on my bus. Because they don't want universal healthcare, and they don't like Obama, they hurt me.

And yes, having an iPhone is a fundamental human right.

Syphon, you're forgetting that the Constitution gives implied powers to the United States government. It was Alexander Hamilton's argument for implied powers that won over George Washington.

The Congress shall have power... To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

The Supreme Court interprets that Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 gives Congress the power to enact legislation that isn't explicitly an enumerated power nor explicitly denied as a limitation of Congress in the Constitution. This was in McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819. Simply put, theres a precedent which allows universal healthcare to go through.

16% of American GDP goes to healthcare compared to 8.1% of GDP in Japan. But wait, why does Japan have a life expectancy of 82.6 compared to the American life expectancy of 78.1? Maybe this can be attributed to health care costs paid for by the government. The US pays 45.4% of all health care costs while Japan pays for 81.3% of all health care costs. This explains why health care is more expensive in the US, and because life expectancy in the US is lower than in Japan, something isn't right. If Japan spends 2,581 USD for health care per capita and gets a life expectancy of 82.6, the US should have a life expectancy of at least 85 with spending for healthcare of 7,290 USD per capita.

Statistics from here.

[starlooker]

Now let me introduce you to this other groundbreaking idea called the "metric system".

Okay, now you've gone too far. Health care was one thing. But the customary system is just what it is. It is tradition. It matters. Learning that 12 inches is a foot, 3 feet is a yard, and, um, 5000 some-odd feet is a mile is something deeply ingrained into the education of every schoolchild. Also, 32 above 0 is freezing. And, um, 200 some-odd degrees is boiling. I think. And that's just how it is. Because this is America, and in America, we believe in clinging to our traditions and ignoring the ideas that come from the rest of the world. Particularly socialized other parts of the world. Yeah.

Here's where I think Democrats and Republicans can get together and really hold the line. Perhaps someone should introduce legislation to that effect, and we can all rally around it and feel a spirit of unity?

[Gravity Defier]

5000 some-odd feet is a mile

5280.

5 two eight ohs

5 tomatoes


It helped my students, at any rate.

[Game Room Wannabe]

Winners: Lawyers
Losers: Everyone else

Winners: Republicans
Losers: Everyone else
Loser: Obama
Losers: Healthcare

[Syphon the Sun]

You might want to understand the language and its interpretation before trying to use it as supporting your position. The necessary and proper clause grants Congress the authority to make laws that are necesssary and proper to carry out enumerated powers. Legislation that enables the federal government to draft able-bodied men in a time of war would be upheld under this rationale, for instance. While the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power to draft, it is a necessary and proper means of carrying out the enumerated power of raising and maintaining an army.

It doesn't mean Congress can do whatever it pleases. It doesn't mean Congress can do anything the Constitution doesn't explicitly forbid. That's the entire reason the Constitution created enumerated powers for the federal government to begin with.

And as I've noted elsewhere, life expectancy is a terrible measure of quality of care, primarily because it doesn't take into account lifestyles of its subjects. You can have high-quality health care, but if you're overweight, smoking a pack a day, and drinking your dinner, you're probably not going to live long. Maybe you should take a look at disease survival rates. You'll be far more surprised than you might think.

[starlooker]

5000 some-odd feet is a mile

5280.

5 two eight ohs

5 tomatoes


It helped my students, at any rate.

That's cute. I knew that a two and an eight were in there somewhere. Just wasn't real sure of the order.

[Sonikku13]

You might want to understand the language and its interpretation before trying to use it as supporting your position. The necessary and proper clause grants Congress the authority to make laws that are necesssary and proper to carry out enumerated powers. Legislation that enables the federal government to draft able-bodied men in a time of war would be upheld under this rationale, for instance. While the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power to draft, it is a necessary and proper means of carrying out the enumerated power of raising and maintaining an army.

It doesn't mean Congress can do whatever it pleases. It doesn't mean Congress can do anything the Constitution doesn't explicitly forbid. That's the entire reason the Constitution created enumerated powers for the federal government to begin with.

And as I've noted elsewhere, life expectancy is a terrible measure of quality of care, primarily because it doesn't take into account lifestyles of its subjects. You can have high-quality health care, but if you're overweight, smoking a pack a day, and drinking your dinner, you're probably not going to live long. Maybe you should take a look at disease survival rates. You'll be far more surprised than you might think.

Although the Constitution does not specifically give Congress the power to establish a bank, it does delegate the ability to tax and spend, and a bank is a proper and suitable instrument to assist the operations of the government in the collection and disbursement of the revenue. Because federal laws have supremacy over state laws, Maryland had no power to interfere with the bank's operation by taxing it. Maryland Court of Appeals reversed.

The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

The Supreme Court does not define the "general welfare" clause in clause 1. It is up to Congress to define that then. The US Congress of 2008-10 has defined that universal health care provides for the general welfare for the USA. This also does lead to a wide interpretation of implied powers. Because of the general welfare clause, I can say this, and it would be supported by enumerated powers: to provide for the general welfare of the United States, we need universal health care.

You do have a point - health care rationing is bad. Thats not what I'm trying to promote.

Now, let me look up H1N1 mortality rates in countries, and when I find them, I'll get back to you.

On second thought, I'll go in a different direction, as life expectancy is one statistic, we can also throw in infant mortality rates of 6.7 in the USA compared to 2.6 in Japan. Seems like Japan overall has better access for baby health needs. Two in favor of universal health care. Want me to throw in adult HIV/AIDS prevalence rates? Thats 0.1 for Japan compared to 0.6 in the USA, cited from the CIA World Factbook. This shows a lack of preventative care, and thats three for universal health care.

[Petra456]

Somehow I completely forgot that they were voting yesterday and was happily surprised when I found out the results last night.

: )

[jotabe]

Disease survival rates isn't all that good either. It depends also on environmental variables.
Colon cancer will be more severe (and less likely to be survived) depending on habits and lifestyle. Lung cancer can creep up to unsuspecting non-smokers who are passive smokers more likely depending on smoking regulations.

[neo-dragon]

Now let me introduce you to this other groundbreaking idea called the "metric system".

Okay, now you've gone too far. Health care was one thing. But the customary system is just what it is. It is tradition. It matters. Learning that 12 inches is a foot, 3 feet is a yard, and, um, 5000 some-odd feet is a mile is something deeply ingrained into the education of every schoolchild. Also, 32 above 0 is freezing. And, um, 200 some-odd degrees is boiling. I think. And that's just how it is. Because this is America, and in America, we believe in clinging to our traditions and ignoring the ideas that come from the rest of the world. Particularly socialized other parts of the world. Yeah.

Here's where I think Democrats and Republicans can get together and really hold the line. Perhaps someone should introduce legislation to that effect, and we can all rally around it and feel a spirit of unity?

But it makes no frickin' sense! Actually, I think it bugs me more as a science teacher than as a Canadian. Do you have any idea how much more logical the metric system is? Of course you do, how could you not? 1 meter is 100 centimeters. 1 kilometer is 1000 meters. a kilogram is 1000 grams. Water freezes at 0 degrees, and boils at 100 degrees. It's just... logical!

This even came up the other day in one of my chemistry classes. I couldn't for the life of me explain why Americans cling to imperial units. My 11th graders were laughing at you.

[Petra456]

The metric system does sound tempting...

[locke]

I need to know if I get sick and don't know how to take care of myself, I don't have to choose between eating for the next month or going to have said illness taken care of.

The constitution wants you to suffer because your suffering is part of the pursuit of happiness of other people.

Aww, and I don't even have to bring up the necessary and proper clause or the general welfare clause.

[Wil]

Here's why: Americans don't want to change. We've grown up with the imperial system, and we know it so intuitively that changing would be far too much work. I know how long an inch is, and I can tell you how far away something is in feet or miles, or guesstimate the weight of something in pounds, but I couldn't tell you any of these things in metric.

[jotabe]

What's funny actually about the imperial systems is that it is not american or english or anglosaxon at all... it's actually roman.
Pounds, ounces, inches, feet, miles, leagues... are units we all used in the whole Europe. My grandparents used to talk about miles and leagues, my mother still often thinks in pounds, chocolate bits are called ounces... etc.

The metric system was just a rationalization that was "imposed" just as the imperial system was imposed in the anglo-saxon world: all those units used to vary from place to place, sometimes slightly, sometimes grossly, and a unification, a standardization was necessary, if they were to be used to make official land measurements.

[^Peter]

Very selfish; better not screw around too much with MY problems.

[Mich]

5000 some-odd feet is a mile

5280.

5 two eight ohs

5 tomatoes


It helped my students, at any rate.

Why was I not taught this? I can never, ever, ever remember this number.

And to backtrack a tad in the, erm, debate, I really wasn't saying whether it was good or not, it's just the semantics that get me. I'm all in favor of a socialist healthcare system that works, and I don't know enough about the legalese of what's going on to have a good position on if this one will work well or not. However, what I was saying in terms of altruism was that having a socialist healthcare system would be the people who can afford more than healthcare for themselves are giving it to the people who cannot afford it. Obviously, Alea, buying it yourself is not altruistic. I just don't appreciate the semantics of it. Stating something as a "right" is just an attempt to make people jump onboard, whether it is actually a right or not. Just like saying something is "socialist" in America is bound to make every dislike it, whether socialism is good or not.

[Gravity Defier]

People can't afford it because it's too expensive as it stands, IMO.

Also, altruism isn't the word you're looking for, I don't think. Paying into what you call a socialistic healthcare system is not altruism; despite the fact that some would be giving more on the whole, they would still get something out of it.

Really, the only language that peeves me about this whole thing is coming from people like Syphon, who somehow think it's accurate to compare healthcare to internet service. One is truly a need, even if it's just preventative (which is cheaper than reactive), and the other is the very definition of privilege and luxury.

[Sonikku13]

<facetious>Well internet access could be becoming a human right soon enough, just like iPhones. </facetious>

[Satya]

Aww, and I don't even have to bring up the necessary and proper clause or the general welfare clause.

General welfare is not a clause. It's a part of the preamble.

And honestly, I have no side on this debate. Let's face it. None of us really knows how this whole thing is actually going to effect us in when it's put into practice anyways.

And necessary and proper? A bit vague, don't you think? I think it would be "proper" for repeat child molesters and rapists to be summarily executed. Should Congress enact this?

Necessary? How about people doing what's necessary for themselves?

[zeroguy]

I want to sincerely thank locke for having a thread about a potentially political issue that managed to have a record-breaking streak of 1 post of useful information before devolving into a useless politics-fighting thread. You almost make me want to start paying attention to these things!

And now to get to the real issue at hand...

Congratulations guys! Now let me introduce you to this other groundbreaking idea called the "metric system".

"The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes it."

[locke]

oh yeah? Well my car gets 20 gallons per fortnight!

[Sonikku13]

Aww, and I don't even have to bring up the necessary and proper clause or the general welfare clause.

General welfare is not a clause. It's a part of the preamble.

And honestly, I have no side on this debate. Let's face it. None of us really knows how this whole thing is actually going to effect us in when it's put into practice anyways.

And necessary and proper? A bit vague, don't you think? I think it would be "proper" for repeat child molesters and rapists to be summarily executed. Should Congress enact this?

Necessary? How about people doing what's necessary for themselves?

The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

If it was only in the Preamble, then why is it in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1?

I can't respond further right now, am in school.