CBO: Republican health plan would reduce premiums, cut deficit

Americans simply do now want this bill!! And for Pelosi and her gang to shove it down our throats is just wrong
----------------------

Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 9:21am EST
Polls: Majority oppose House health plan, inclusion of illegals, abortionsJacksonville Business Journal - by Mike Sunnucks

A new poll shows Americans oppose the health care reform bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives over the weekend. Another survey by the same pollster, Rasmussen Reports, shows that Americans tend to oppose covering abortions or illegal immigrants in a new government health system.

Democrats in the U.S. House passed the bill Saturday. It includes creation of the government-run health option favored by President Barack Obama, which would operate alongside private insurance companies. The bill that passed the House also restricts government health spending and coverage for abortion – a provision that was key to its passage. The bill now moves to the U.S. Senate, where the public option faces more opposition.

The Rasmussen poll conducted Nov. 7 and Nov. 8 shows 52 percent of the 1,000 voters surveyed opposed to the House bill and 45 percent in favor.

Other recent Rasmussen polls show only 13 percent of those surveyed supporting coverage for abortions and 48 percent in opposition.

On the immigration issue, 83 percent of those questioned by Rasmussen said applicants for government health coverage should be required to prove they are U.S. citizens, while 12 percent oppose such a requirement. The immigration and abortion surveys were conducted in September and also questioned 1,000 voters.
---------------

 

oh son,, you are going to get slaughtered here

 

I wonder if Republicans just automatically run to Rasmussen anytime they need a poll that shows the opposite of what everything else shows.

I'm starting to think that the end result bill here (after merging with the Senate) is going to be a total wreck, though.

 

umm just look at the numbers. Why dont you do some research before posting?
His budget exceeds all 8 years of Clinton. And let me make it clear I am no Bush supporter he spent like crazy and spent money we didnt have. Obama is only accelerating that. And just in case you dont know this is how many zeros are in a trillion
1,000,000,000,000

If you want to see that in graphic form click here for what a trillion dollars looks like in $100 bills

Also read this for the out of control spending occuring
--------
Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures
Posted March 24th, 2009 at 10.20am in Ongoing Priorities.

President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama’s budget deficits in context of President Bush’s.

What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending. Riedl details:

■President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.
■President Bush began a string of expensive finan*cial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.
■President Bush created a Medicare drug entitle*ment that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new govern*ment health care fund.
■President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Presi*dent Obama would double it.
■President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already in*creased this spending by 20 percent.
■President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.

■President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has been now been added.

CLARIFICATION: Of course, this Washington Post graphic does not perfectly delineate budget surpluses and deficits by administration. President Bush took office in January 2001, and therefore played a lead role in crafting the FY 2002-2008 budgets. Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama’s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.
----------------
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/

 

it's not just the Rasmussen who is a non-partisan organiizations. Most polls I have seen including the ones from the liberal media show little support for the health bill they are trying to ram down our throats.. Even a lot of democrats do not support this bill. The bill passed by 5 votes. 5! And the dems have a huge majority in the house. Plus one GOP rep voted for the bill.

 

also let me just add that this debate of repbulicans vs democrats is stupid. I want our representives to acutally read the bill and come up with a solution. The bill was over a 1000 pages long and most of the r****ded didnt even get the chance to read it before casting their yes vote. they only voted yes according to party lines. Which is ridiculous!

 

Let's try remedial math:

Clinton budget, 1993: $1.51 trillion
Obama budget, 2009: $3.10 trillion

I'm curious how you get an Obama budget that totals 8 times Clinton's budgets.

 

Just to clarify, you're simultaneously arguing that our representatives don't know what's in the bill (not true, by the way) AND pointing to a poll of the public who would have even less clue what's in the bill and saying that's a useful representation of public opinion?

 

also the bill passed by 2 votes, not 5

but who's counting

 

Let's see I think you're still missing death panel, birth certificate, and Muslim.

 

Bush was not a Conservative?

Please give me an example of a past Republican President that was "Conservative" and didn't grow the government.

 

Don't ask don't tell, illegal immigrants, special needs children are God's gift to the world..

 

uh...senator....

Poll: Nebraska Senator clashes with constituents on public option

According to a new Research 2000 poll, 46 percent of Democrats in the decidedly red state would be less likely to support Nelson in a primary should he choose to filibuster the public option. Conversely only seven percent would be more likely to cast a vote for the Democratic Senator.

Even worse news for the former Nebraska Governor is that by a 53 to 31 majority, all Nebraska voters think that Nelson's judgment could be influenced by the $2 million in campaign contributions he received from health care and insurance companies.

Despite an overwhelming number of Republicans in the state, the poll also showed that Nebraskans on the whole want a public option, with 46 percent desiring the reform, and 44 percent against it.

As a whole, Nebraskans do not trust the health insurance industry. Of the 503 citizens polled, 69 percent said they believe insurance companies put their own interests before that of their customers, while only 19 percent thought the opposite.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/281537

 

glad to see there are still some Democrats with their head screwed on right. Again everyone the Health bill is suppose to cost 1.1 trillion and that is low estimate according to mang experts. How does the govt get 1.1 trillion dollars? they dont have any money. The only way is to take from you.. and to take from the hard working americans.

 

Do you believe the good senator should vote against his constituent’s wishes?

 

If this is way y'all who oppose healthcare reform are thinking no wonder we have problems.

The problem that I see with those of you getting all worked up about socialism and other things is that the status quo right now isn't working either. Health care cost have been spiralling up and likely to continue to do so if we just largely continue with what we have. Like it or not those without insurance have to be paid for one way or the other. Going to an emergency room, even at a non-profit isn't some magically cure all for the uninsured as that just means everyone else's cost get raised.

I agree there are some problems with the Democrats plan but compared to doing just some marginal fixes or nothing it is better.

 

How come Bush's tax cuts didn't have to be "deficit neutral"

 

First off the Republican bill does not ban insurers from rejecting people based on pre-existing conditions. Second, if they did ban the use of pre-existing conditions it wouldn't lower costs for high risk patients. The companies could charge a **** load of money to the point where buying insurance would be a waste.

 

And of course, screw the hard working americans who simply can't afford health insurance. Only those at top of the chain matter, vanish the rest I tell you!