You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #20: why would you 'assume' that? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-17-09 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. why would you 'assume' that?

VA Budget: Praise and a Warning
Tom Philpott | March 12, 2009

Many Cheers, Single Boo, Greet Obama's Budget for Vets

President Obama is drawing high praise from veterans' service organizations for proposing a Department of Veterans Affairs budget that would exceed by $1.3 billion what even VSOs suggested be spent next year.
------------
Obama's VA budget outline, with full details promised by late April, would raise VA spending to $112.8 billion in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. That's an increase of $15 billion, or 15 percent, over the current budget.
---------------------------------------------------------

VA already taps "third party" insurance plans for treatment of non-service-related conditions. Collections in fiscal 2008 totaled $2.4 billion. VA expects to college $2.5 billion this year. The total could jump to $3 billion next year if care of service-connected conditions are included.

Shinseki emphasized that this is only "a consideration" and not yet part of Obama's budget request. But members of the veterans' committees wanted Shinseki to know they won't support the proposal.

"Veterans with service-connected injuries have already paid by putting their lives on the line... We should take care of those injuries completely," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). Though she recognized that no formal proposal had yet reached Congress, Murray told Shinseki, "I can assure you it will be dead on arrival if it lands here."


Shinseki said the issue is solely about financing, and not about continuing to deliver superior care. "That is not discussable," Shinseki said.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Obama Administration Proposes Third-Party Billing for Combat-Related Injuries RamboLiberal  Mar-17-09 05:56 PM   #0 
  - They have proposed no such thing. It was one of many proposals being up for consideration.  SemiCharmedQuark   Mar-17-09 05:58 PM   #1 
  - Gibbs confirmed it is under consideration  RamboLiberal   Mar-17-09 06:01 PM   #3 
  - The proposal is what is actually submitted, not the ideas they are kicking around.  SemiCharmedQuark   Mar-17-09 06:02 PM   #4 
  - There's a really good article from Military.com here:  SemiCharmedQuark   Mar-17-09 06:03 PM   #6 
     - thanks for the link  barbtries   Mar-18-09 10:00 AM   #79 
  - it sure doesn't sound like an administration that would have single-payer as an ultimate goal...  dysfunctional press   Mar-17-09 11:09 PM   #69 
     - I'm biting my tongue...  timtom   Mar-18-09 05:13 AM   #75 
        - about what...?  dysfunctional press   Mar-18-09 07:40 AM   #77 
           - I made a snap judgement call  timtom   Mar-18-09 12:27 PM   #86 
  - Yeah, but it is a "trial balloon", and it absolutely is unacceptable..................  pattmarty   Mar-18-09 10:03 AM   #80 
  - I will find it very difficult to support the President in this.  cliffordu   Mar-17-09 06:01 PM   #2 
  - Executive Branch does not make laws. This is designed to be a hit piece. Use your common sense.  Bonobo   Mar-17-09 06:03 PM   #5 
  - Well, with single payer health care off the table, this is the next logical step. I am gutted, So  lib_wit_it   Mar-17-09 06:05 PM   #7 
  - More bullshit from WaPo.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 06:05 PM   #8 
  - Well WH better get out there and get this clarified  RamboLiberal   Mar-17-09 06:09 PM   #9 
     - Yeah, I'm sure they are all quivering with fear. nt  bemildred   Mar-17-09 06:20 PM   #10 
     - I agree with that. It is a terrible idea and Obama needs to shut it down.  SemiCharmedQuark   Mar-17-09 06:55 PM   #18 
        - Fortunately, it won't pass  mvd   Mar-17-09 08:49 PM   #54 
        - He's already received feedback. I don't understand what the goal here is.  SemiCharmedQuark   Mar-17-09 09:00 PM   #55 
           - The article says that..  mvd   Mar-17-09 09:54 PM   #65 
        - Obama had the chance to do that when he met with the vets but that did NOT  biopowertoday   Mar-18-09 12:45 AM   #74 
  - According to a Hill article I read earlier today, this "idea"  soccermomforobama   Mar-17-09 06:27 PM   #11 
  - I think he's just going for bargaining position with the insurance companies.  bc3000   Mar-17-09 06:29 PM   #12 
  - Leverage is good but no substitute for universal single payer  Mithreal   Mar-17-09 06:37 PM   #14 
  - This is going to be a long 4 years  Mithreal   Mar-17-09 06:35 PM   #13 
  - It's too bad  Politicalboi   Mar-17-09 06:40 PM   #15 
  - What dumbass came up with this idea?  Fire_Medic_Dave   Mar-17-09 06:42 PM   #16 
  - The idea is not off the table until Obama says "I will veto any act that will bill veterans' private  jody   Mar-17-09 06:49 PM   #17 
  - why would you 'assume' that?  stillcool   Mar-17-09 07:20 PM   #20 
     - Because of Obama's promise "I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in people's lawful right  jody   Mar-17-09 07:33 PM   #31 
        - Oh dear...You must hate politics..  stillcool   Mar-17-09 07:38 PM   #33 
        - No hate, I just don't trust any politician whether in my Democratic party or some other party. n/t  jody   Mar-17-09 07:41 PM   #35 
           - exactly. it's the whole world really...  stillcool   Mar-17-09 07:45 PM   #36 
              - That's your choice to blindly trust politicians but I won't. Your reply is nonsensical and in no way  jody   Mar-17-09 07:49 PM   #37 
                 - I don't 'blindly' trust anyone...  stillcool   Mar-17-09 07:56 PM   #40 
                    - Your words say "no" but your comments mean "yes". Have a good evening and goodbye. n/t  jody   Mar-17-09 07:59 PM   #41 
                       - Bye-bye...  stillcool   Mar-17-09 08:15 PM   #45 
        - aren't assault weapons  barbtries   Mar-18-09 10:35 AM   #82 
           - Nope.  Abq_Sarah   Mar-18-09 01:26 PM   #87 
           - No! Please don't confuse assault rifles, machine pistols & other firearms capable of full  jody   Mar-18-09 06:03 PM   #93 
  - From Raw Story  RamboLiberal   Mar-17-09 07:17 PM   #19 
  - Obama Administration Proposes Third-Party Billing for Combat-Related Injuries  TacticalPeek   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #21 
  - Do we get to bomb the private ins. co hq with mortars when they don't pay up?  DS1   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #22 
  - Astroturf.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #23 
  - Astro yourself.  TacticalPeek   Mar-17-09 07:41 PM   #34 
     - When the same thing pops up five times, with lots of Obama bashing, it makes me wonder?  bemildred   Mar-17-09 07:55 PM   #39 
        - Perhaps it should make you wonder if maybe Obama might be wrong about something for once?  TacticalPeek   Mar-17-09 08:20 PM   #49 
           - Eh, I can see we aren't going to agree.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 08:43 PM   #53 
              - Can we pre-agree that billing veterans' private insurance for combat-related injuries now is wrong?  TacticalPeek   Mar-17-09 09:05 PM   #56 
                 - If it is done in any way that increases costs to the veterans, yes, entirely.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 09:20 PM   #57 
                    - The vets will bear the brunt of this policy, since the insurance companies will just pass the costs  wmbrew0206   Mar-17-09 09:28 PM   #58 
                    - Not unless they are allowed to. Insurance companies are subject to the law too.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 09:33 PM   #59 
                       - Do you really think that the insurance companies won't pass this cost back to the veterans, one way  wmbrew0206   Mar-17-09 09:49 PM   #63 
                          - I think the insurance companies will do what the law says.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 09:54 PM   #64 
                    - don't you know you can't screw an insurance company?  barbtries   Mar-18-09 10:40 AM   #84 
                       - Sure you can.  bemildred   Mar-18-09 03:01 PM   #89 
  - I'm trying to find the silver lining here.  Cant trust em   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #24 
  - Apparently, this idea has been around since Clinton's term.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #25 
  - I hope you're right.  Cant trust em   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #27 
     - This is like the 4th or 5th time this lie has been posted here.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #29 
        - What lie is that?  Abq_Sarah   Mar-17-09 11:21 PM   #70 
  - article here..  stillcool   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #30 
  - Oh yeah, and this is a dupe.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #26 
  - It's a bad idea, but I must say this...  bluestateguy   Mar-17-09 07:28 PM   #28 
  - Now now RamboLiberal, you've gone and stirred up the apologists again, shame on you. n/t  jody   Mar-17-09 07:35 PM   #32 
  - Reports of a "new FDR" have been greatly exaggerated. (n/t)  brentspeak   Mar-17-09 07:51 PM   #38 
  - It's a shame. Because other than this possibility, his plan for veterans is steller.  SemiCharmedQuark   Mar-17-09 08:06 PM   #42 
     - Use em then lose em ?  ohio2007   Mar-17-09 08:12 PM   #44 
     - What's especially offensive is that it is to save 500 million dollars. Which is...nothing  SemiCharmedQuark   Mar-17-09 08:16 PM   #47 
     - Exactly. That's why it's so irksome.  TacticalPeek   Mar-17-09 08:34 PM   #52 
  - The bottom line is this  customerserviceguy   Mar-17-09 08:09 PM   #43 
  - How about those in the reserves and guard? they have insurance and a real world job but when they  ohio2007   Mar-17-09 08:15 PM   #46 
     - Nope  customerserviceguy   Mar-17-09 08:30 PM   #51 
     - PLUS, an injured veteran could max out his or her lifetime insurance cap  amandabeech   Mar-17-09 09:41 PM   #61 
  - There is no new proposal. This is about an existing issue.  ProSense   Mar-17-09 08:18 PM   #48 
  - "You just don't get it, do you Scott" - Dr. Evil  wmbrew0206   Mar-17-09 09:43 PM   #62 
     - "The fact the Gibbs would not say it was off the table" Good grief.  ProSense   Mar-17-09 10:21 PM   #66 
        - Yup, nothing but BS spin...... Oh sweet, sweet, irony. Enjoy the link.  wmbrew0206   Mar-18-09 03:32 PM   #90 
  - Letter to Obama re the problem co-signed by every major veterans organization in the country.  jody   Mar-17-09 08:23 PM   #50 
  - Why would I not be surprised if this was a Republican solution  soccermomforobama   Mar-17-09 09:33 PM   #60 
  - Vets angered by Obama plan get new hearing  bemildred   Mar-17-09 10:33 PM   #67 
  - I wonder what those exceptions are. . .  soccermomforobama   Mar-17-09 10:56 PM   #68 
     - There was some discussion of that in one of these threads.  bemildred   Mar-17-09 11:24 PM   #71 
     - Ah, here's something:  bemildred   Mar-17-09 11:26 PM   #72 
     - here:  Abq_Sarah   Mar-17-09 11:30 PM   #73 
  - Kick because major veteran's groups have written Obama challenging his plan. n/t  jody   Mar-18-09 07:14 AM   #76 
  - the bushies apparently  barbtries   Mar-18-09 09:58 AM   #78 
  - More Obama-BushCo stuff. Why was Obama elected? n/t  antimatter98   Mar-18-09 10:22 AM   #81 
  - I'm thinking this could affect recruiting.  limit18   Mar-18-09 10:36 AM   #83 
  - this is a nod to the "privatization" crowd. If you want to privatize profits,  alfredo   Mar-18-09 10:47 AM   #85 
  - Why are you blaming Rep.?  SgtSkectial134   Mar-18-09 02:24 PM   #88 
  - And it is no longer an issue. The Obama Admin comes through  wmbrew0206   Mar-18-09 05:26 PM   #91 
     - Semper Fi  SgtSkectial134   Mar-18-09 05:45 PM   #92 
     - "I still don't trust him... keep an eye on this guy Obama... "  ProSense   Mar-18-09 06:48 PM   #96 
     - Emanuel said "he needed to talk to Obama"! It's not over until Obama tells veterans "I will veto any  jody   Mar-18-09 06:08 PM   #94 
     - Yes, he came through. Too bad for the  ProSense   Mar-18-09 06:48 PM   #95 
        - I disagree, veterans won a major battle. Any president can expect united opposition in the future nt  jody   Mar-19-09 08:56 PM   #97 
 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC