Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:25 AM
kpete (71,074 posts)
Repub Rep: I Don’t Think Someone Who Is Diagnosed With Brain Tumor Should Have Health Care Provided
Source: Think Progress
Republican Rep: I Don’t Think Someone Who Is Diagnosed With A Brain Tumor Should Have Health Care Provided By Igor Volsky on Jul 10, 2012 at 11:15 am On Monday evening, Rep. David Dreier (R-CA) said that insurance companies should be allowed to discriminate against people with brain tumors during a House Rules Committee debate of the GOP’s bill repealing the Affordable Care Act. The law, which Republicans will vote to eliminate on Wednesday, includes a provision prohibiting insurance companies from turning away sick people. But Dreier suggested that these individuals would be better off enrolling in state-based “high-risk insurance pools,” that could offer coverage to the individuals who are turned away from the individual health care market because they are too costly to cover: DREIER:And I believe my state of California has a structure in place to deal with pre-existing conditions. It’s a pooling process, which I think is one worthy of consideration, because while I don’t that think someone who is diagnosed with a massive tumor should the next day be able to have millions and millions and millions of dollars in health care provided, I do believe that there can be a structure to deal with the issue of pre-existing conditions. Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/07/10/513735/republican-rep-i-dont-think-someone-who-is-diagnosed-with-a-brain-tumor-should-have-health-care-provided/
|
118 replies, 19273 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
kpete | Jul 2012 | OP |
LoisB | Jul 2012 | #1 | |
JustABozoOnThisBus | Jul 2012 | #6 | |
CreekDog | Jul 2012 | #74 | |
The Magistrate | Jul 2012 | #21 | |
dixiegrrrrl | Jul 2012 | #35 | |
catbyte | Jul 2012 | #30 | |
valerief | Jul 2012 | #42 | |
hue | Jul 2012 | #47 | |
ChairmanAgnostic | Jul 2012 | #53 | |
awoke_in_2003 | Jul 2012 | #31 | |
smirkymonkey | Jul 2012 | #118 | |
sinkingfeeling | Jul 2012 | #2 | |
1StrongBlackMan | Jul 2012 | #3 | |
LeftishBrit | Jul 2012 | #7 | |
mazzarro | Jul 2012 | #18 | |
hue | Jul 2012 | #50 | |
christx30 | Jul 2012 | #86 | |
geardaddy | Jul 2012 | #9 | |
SammyWinstonJack | Jul 2012 | #80 | |
Skittles | Jul 2012 | #93 | |
lastlib | Jul 2012 | #4 | |
LeftishBrit | Jul 2012 | #5 | |
siligut | Jul 2012 | #8 | |
drm604 | Jul 2012 | #10 | |
geardaddy | Jul 2012 | #11 | |
Nay | Jul 2012 | #84 | |
geardaddy | Jul 2012 | #85 | |
Odin2005 | Jul 2012 | #111 | |
geardaddy | Jul 2012 | #113 | |
ejpoeta | Jul 2012 | #12 | |
wordpix | Jul 2012 | #94 | |
Liberal Veteran | Jul 2012 | #13 | |
wordpix | Jul 2012 | #95 | |
AngryOldDem | Jul 2012 | #14 | |
truebrit71 | Jul 2012 | #15 | |
Jackpine Radical | Jul 2012 | #46 | |
hue | Jul 2012 | #58 | |
AdHocSolver | Jul 2012 | #88 | |
AngryOldDem | Jul 2012 | #116 | |
siligut | Jul 2012 | #16 | |
geardaddy | Jul 2012 | #24 | |
AdHocSolver | Jul 2012 | #17 | |
4lbs | Jul 2012 | #19 | |
geardaddy | Jul 2012 | #27 | |
zipplewrath | Jul 2012 | #32 | |
LittleGirl | Jul 2012 | #20 | |
humblebum | Jul 2012 | #22 | |
permatex | Jul 2012 | #23 | |
avebury | Jul 2012 | #25 | |
pansypoo53219 | Jul 2012 | #26 | |
evilhime | Jul 2012 | #28 | |
Kablooie | Jul 2012 | #29 | |
still_one | Jul 2012 | #37 | |
Kablooie | Jul 2012 | #52 | |
still_one | Jul 2012 | #98 | |
catrose | Jul 2012 | #39 | |
Kablooie | Jul 2012 | #51 | |
patrice | Jul 2012 | #33 | |
riderinthestorm | Jul 2012 | #34 | |
CanonRay | Jul 2012 | #36 | |
HughBeaumont | Jul 2012 | #38 | |
demwing | Jul 2012 | #40 | |
tandot | Jul 2012 | #48 | |
kimbutgar | Jul 2012 | #54 | |
Raster | Jul 2012 | #55 | |
southernyankeebelle | Jul 2012 | #59 | |
JDPriestly | Jul 2012 | #66 | |
qanda | Jul 2012 | #76 | |
alphafemale | Jul 2012 | #83 | |
demwing | Jul 2012 | #92 | |
Justitia | Jul 2012 | #99 | |
wordpix | Jul 2012 | #105 | |
geardaddy | Jul 2012 | #114 | |
Skittles | Jul 2012 | #101 | |
barbtries | Jul 2012 | #103 | |
wordpix | Jul 2012 | #104 | |
Odin2005 | Jul 2012 | #112 | |
valerief | Jul 2012 | #41 | |
TBF | Jul 2012 | #43 | |
xxqqqzme | Jul 2012 | #44 | |
liberal N proud | Jul 2012 | #45 | |
Swede Atlanta | Jul 2012 | #49 | |
hue | Jul 2012 | #57 | |
Swede Atlanta | Jul 2012 | #60 | |
JDPriestly | Jul 2012 | #69 | |
wickerwoman | Jul 2012 | #100 | |
jtuck004 | Jul 2012 | #62 | |
JDPriestly | Jul 2012 | #67 | |
Lint Head | Jul 2012 | #56 | |
shanti | Jul 2012 | #107 | |
Lint Head | Jul 2012 | #109 | |
Iliyah | Jul 2012 | #61 | |
Enrique | Jul 2012 | #63 | |
ellie | Jul 2012 | #64 | |
JDPriestly | Jul 2012 | #65 | |
LynneSin | Jul 2012 | #68 | |
maddezmom | Jul 2012 | #70 | |
Smilo | Jul 2012 | #71 | |
JoePhilly | Jul 2012 | #72 | |
RKP5637 | Jul 2012 | #77 | |
Trillo | Jul 2012 | #73 | |
Quantess | Jul 2012 | #75 | |
TheMastersNemesis | Jul 2012 | #78 | |
shanti | Jul 2012 | #108 | |
SammyWinstonJack | Jul 2012 | #79 | |
Steerpike | Jul 2012 | #81 | |
Third Doctor | Jul 2012 | #82 | |
elbloggoZY27 | Jul 2012 | #87 | |
MissMillie | Jul 2012 | #89 | |
dipsydoodle | Jul 2012 | #90 | |
CreekDog | Jul 2012 | #97 | |
dipsydoodle | Jul 2012 | #102 | |
SnakeEyes | Jul 2012 | #91 | |
Tx4obama | Jul 2012 | #96 | |
Tom Ripley | Jul 2012 | #106 | |
Odin2005 | Jul 2012 | #110 | |
yurbud | Jul 2012 | #115 | |
Manifestor_of_Light | Jul 2012 | #117 |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:27 AM
LoisB (5,140 posts)
1. Gee I hope he doesn't get a brain tumor.
Response to LoisB (Reply #1)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:30 AM
JustABozoOnThisBus (22,899 posts)
6. Not to worry, his health insurance is very good
He's got his.
|
Response to JustABozoOnThisBus (Reply #6)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 03:15 PM
CreekDog (46,192 posts)
74. his insurance is government regulated, government provided, akin to the ACA model
ironic, isn't it?
and far, far cheaper than the rate those in California's "high risk pool" he was touting pay currently. |
Response to LoisB (Reply #1)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:48 AM
The Magistrate (93,528 posts)
21. His Brain Is A Tumor, Ma'am....
Response to The Magistrate (Reply #21)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:12 PM
dixiegrrrrl (60,005 posts)
35. Excellent!
Response to LoisB (Reply #1)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:05 PM
catbyte (32,394 posts)
30. I used to not wish these asshats ill, but
now, I say bring it on. I hope they get a very painful and expensive condition, like, say, TMJ. TMJ is usually only covered by dental insurance which is notoriously crappy. I want these shitheads to suffer the way they say they want to make others suffer. Maybe they'll find the compassion that is so lacking in their miserable souls, although I doubt it.
This is a big shift for me--I used to wish people the best, even teabaggers, but no more. I say give them a dose of their own mean-spiritedness and see how THEY like it. ![]() Diane Anishinaabe in MI & mom to Taz, Nigel, and new baby brother Sammy, members of Dogs Against Romney, Cat Division "Dogs Aren’t Luggage--HISS!” |
Response to catbyte (Reply #30)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:26 PM
valerief (53,235 posts)
42. Damn, how can you NOT wish these killers ill? Because they ARE killers. Their policies KILL. nt
Response to catbyte (Reply #30)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:47 PM
hue (4,949 posts)
47. It would be Ayn Rand "all over again!"
When the "philosophical vanguard" of the Tea Party/Conservative Right was sick in the hospital with lung cancer (she was a chain smoker) she filed for disability from the government--under a false name-- to help pay her bills though in all her writings she defiled all government assistance!
Yet the Tea Party/Right Wingers never see the irony of this--not an in depth perception of things. ![]() |
Response to catbyte (Reply #30)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:55 PM
ChairmanAgnostic (28,017 posts)
53. Hard to disagree. After all, these pathetic
tea bagger types wish all sorts of ills on us. All we do is return the favor.
|
Response to LoisB (Reply #1)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:08 PM
awoke_in_2003 (34,582 posts)
31. I know it is wrong...
but I hope he does
|
Response to LoisB (Reply #1)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 09:01 PM
smirkymonkey (63,221 posts)
118. He obviosily already has one.
Bastard.
![]() |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:28 AM
sinkingfeeling (48,067 posts)
2. So the GOP solution is to let the near-bankrupt states pay for such
catastrophic illnesses and not the insurance companies who are raking in premiums?
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:28 AM
1StrongBlackMan (31,849 posts)
3. Without reading the story ...
let me accurately complete the sentence:
Repub Rep: I Don’t Think Someone Who Is Diagnosed With Brain Tumor Should Have Health Care Provided UNLESS THAT SOMEONE IS ME OR A MEMBER OF MY FAMILY, THEN THE GOVERNMENT OWES ME ITS FULL WEIGHT AND EFFORT.
|
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #3)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:31 AM
LeftishBrit (40,326 posts)
7. Dreier is not at risk of a brain tumour, as he doesn't possess the relevant organ.
Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #7)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:45 AM
mazzarro (3,450 posts)
18. Maybe he will come down with mouth tumor -- n/t
Response to mazzarro (Reply #18)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:50 PM
hue (4,949 posts)
50. His mouth prob is apparent...
![]() |
Response to LeftishBrit (Reply #7)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 06:06 PM
christx30 (6,236 posts)
86. For him
A brain tumor would be misdiagnosed as rectal cancer, cause he has his head up his ass.
|
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #3)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:32 AM
geardaddy (24,522 posts)
9. You are correct sir!
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #3)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 04:18 PM
SammyWinstonJack (44,099 posts)
80. Well he EARNED his health care insurance, funded by taxpayers, doncha know?
![]() |
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #3)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:20 PM
Skittles (149,444 posts)
93. CORRECT
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:28 AM
lastlib (20,634 posts)
4. Dreier IS a brain tumor...
...on the body politic. He needs to be surgically removed from it. It cannot happen soon enough for me, or for America.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:29 AM
LeftishBrit (40,326 posts)
5. Evil pure evil
And this is the man whom Tony Blair chose as a mentor to his son, for an internship a few years ago.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:31 AM
siligut (12,272 posts)
8. These people are so used to making money off of the misery of others.
He doesn't see a person with cancer, he sees the price tag.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:33 AM
drm604 (16,230 posts)
10. Privatize the profits, socialize the costs.
Typical.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:34 AM
geardaddy (24,522 posts)
11. According to his Wiki page, he's a Christian Scientist
Response to geardaddy (Reply #11)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 05:14 PM
Nay (12,049 posts)
84. So you gotta ask -- WTH does he have health insurance at all? nt
And another point -- here's another asshole who is so stupid that he does not understand the theory of insurance.
|
Response to Nay (Reply #84)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 05:52 PM
geardaddy (24,522 posts)
85. Yep.
I wonder if he has health insurance, because CS's don't take meds or have surgery.
|
Response to geardaddy (Reply #11)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:35 PM
Odin2005 (53,521 posts)
111. And this, folks, is why WOO KILLS.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:34 AM
ejpoeta (8,933 posts)
12. the only way for any pools to work is if you mix high risk and low risk together.
IF all the high risk people are in high risk pools then you have a problem. Not sure why people don't see that. I have a friend who had a brain tumor. Actually he was lucky that it was not in the brain but on the outside and right in the front. He was not insured but Strong in rochester took care of him and he is doing great now and back to work. His bill was all covered by medicaid I think but am not certain. If it weren't for his getting quick treatment, he could have had a much worse outcome. They caught it before it got in the brain. It was growing and putting pressure on his brain causing seizures.
|
Response to ejpoeta (Reply #12)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:27 PM
wordpix (18,652 posts)
94. +1 VERY irresponsible/stupid of Dreier to say state should take on the burden of high risk only pool
not to mention the inhumanity of it.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:36 AM
Liberal Veteran (22,239 posts)
13. I believe only perfectly healthy people should be covered.
It isn't right that one day you can have be healthy and the next day have a heart attack and have tens of thousands of dollars of health care available to you.
Or let's just translate what he really means instead of my sarcasm. "I don't think people who get sick should be allowed to cut into health insurance company profits by having their illnesses treated. Won't someone please think of the health insurance companies?" |
Response to Liberal Veteran (Reply #13)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 09:28 PM
wordpix (18,652 posts)
95. that's the R way, pay forever & never get covered for anything
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:37 AM
AngryOldDem (14,060 posts)
14. Typical GOP response.
"Just die, already."
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:38 AM
truebrit71 (20,805 posts)
15. This, right here is what is wrong with not only republicans, but the US healthcare system..
I am an ex-pat Brit and as such was born and raised under an excellent national health service that over the years has taken very good care of me, and now, my aging parents. The very thought that every single one of its citizens are NOT automatically covered for whatever health issues they have should be to the eternal shame and embarrassment of this country.
There should be no need for health insurance companies AT ALL. Instead of arguing over who pays, or what carve-outs some insurance companies want their whores in congress to give them, why aren't people saying that the whole argument is crazy and there needs to be free healthcare for all? I understand that the republican party relies on stupid (mostly white) people to vote against their best interests when baited with the 'god, guns and gays' rhetoric, but even stupid white people get sick, go broke and then die...you would have thought that would have been the last, final eye-opener for these stupid motherfuckers, but apparently not, so they continue to elect people that work ACTIVELY against them once in office, but will vote against the "libruls" every single time because Faux Snooze tells them to.... Sometimes I really wonder about the sanity of folks in this country... |
Response to truebrit71 (Reply #15)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:45 PM
Jackpine Radical (45,274 posts)
46. You are entirely too charitable.
"Sometimes I really wonder about the sanity of folks in this country..."
|
Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #46)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:07 PM
hue (4,949 posts)
58. Haha! I'm totally with Ya' on that!! n/t
Response to truebrit71 (Reply #15)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 06:15 PM
AdHocSolver (2,561 posts)
88. Your comments got me to thinking about why people willingly vote against their interests.
The answer is in front of us if we choose to acknowledge it.
The right wing in this country is making use of a meme underlying American culture that is being stoked by that right wing for political and economic advantage. We see what that meme is in the so-called birther movement (the contention that President Obama wasn't born in the U.S. even though the President has a birth certificate to prove it). We see it in the hostility towards Latinos and towards Muslims as well as African-Americans (the major reason for the hostility toward President Obama by the right wing). It is mainly our culture of racist bigotry that is being stoked and manipulated by our right wing and the one-percent to create division in American politics. Practically every other modern industrialized country believes that society should provide access to affordable health care to its citizens, yet the country that spends the largest amount of money on health care has the highest percentage of citizens who can't afford it. **** How can people fret so much about tax evading millionaires, thieving bankers, and crooked hedge fund operators when "welfare queens" are getting all that free health care and driving Cadillacs on the taxpayer dime? ![]() **** We see this bigotry in Republican efforts to disenfranchise voters who vote in large numbers for Democrats, namely African Americans. We see this bigotry in the higher incarceration rate of African-Americans. The bottom line is that people's fear of those who are "different" from themselves is stoked by the Powers That Be and the right wing media, as well as common, ordinary racists and bigots. The right wing propaganda machine does its best to promote the idea that those that they want to demonize are somehow different from their base of supporters in order to rile up their base against the target. Hence, the continued challenging of President Obama's citizenship in order to predispose people to question and to reject his health care reform, his tax policies, and so forth. |
Response to truebrit71 (Reply #15)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 04:01 PM
AngryOldDem (14,060 posts)
116. +1
The whole debate over health care is astounding and sickening to me, and yes, I believe the United States is an embarrassment to the rest of the world over this issue.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:39 AM
siligut (12,272 posts)
16. He says he is a Christian Scientist too.
No one should even listen to this guy when it comes to western medicine.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:40 AM
AdHocSolver (2,561 posts)
17. This politician's comment would make a great ad for why people should NOT vote Republican.
They are providing the rope. Democrats should use it.
k and R. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:46 AM
4lbs (6,079 posts)
19. I know this from experience.
I was in one of these "high risk pools" in California for 5 years.
Having a pre-existing condition, no private insurer would insure me. I went into one of these high-risk pools in California. The monthly premium? $350. And it went up to almost $400 per month by middle of last year. The coverage was ok, but not great. For $350 month, my deductible was $1000, and prescriptions and such were $20. For anything the coverage was 70% of all costs. Thus, if I had to undergo surgery or something that cost, say $100,000 I would still have to pay $30,000. Lifetime coverage was only $2 million. After ACA passed, I was able to get private insurance in October 2011. $225 per month, and my deductible is $250. Prescriptions and such are still $20. However, my yearly max I'm liable to have to pay is $10,000. Also, now that ACA has been upheld, the maximum $7 million lifetime limit is gone. There is no more lifetime limit on my coverage. So, my monthly premium is cut 43%, my deductible cut 75%, my yearly max out-of-pocket cut 67%, no more lifetime limit. Yeah, I think that's a little better than being in a high-risk pool. |
Response to 4lbs (Reply #19)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:54 AM
geardaddy (24,522 posts)
27. I'm in a high-risk pool in Minnesota.
Monthly premium is $550 with a $1000 deductible. It's killing me.
|
Response to 4lbs (Reply #19)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:09 PM
zipplewrath (16,614 posts)
32. It's all about the profit
Health insurance isn't "insurance" at all. It's an extended payment plan. Everyone (for various values of "everyone"
![]() That conflict sets up the entire problem. Pools will naturally attract those most needing it. Insurance companies will work to attract those least likely to need medical care. Setting up a system to ENCOURAGE that division only makes the problem worse. The more you pool larger and larger populations together, the lower the individual costs can be. It is also how you can control the costs of care most efficiently because the demands and volumes can be more accurating anticipated and funded in manners that will allow the collection of revenue to be spread over longer periods of time. It is why all of our economic competitors are able to deliver health CARE at roughly 1/5th of what we do. They control costs of health CARE delivery, as well as spread them over large populations over long periods of time. Instead of some ill concieved nightmare of mandates and pools, and 50 state run exchanges and public health care clinics in combination with for profit hospitals. A system designed by the GOP to foil universal health CARE and deliver specified profits to the insurance companies. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:47 AM
LittleGirl (7,854 posts)
20. Just like Alan Grayson said
If you get sick, Die Quickly.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:48 AM
humblebum (5,881 posts)
22. How much does this guy pay for his health insurance? I am guessing zero. And
who is footing the bill for his healthcare? I'm guessing the taxpayers.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:48 AM
permatex (1,299 posts)
23. WTF
He must have a brain tumor to believe the shit he's spewing.
It never ceases with these RW asshole repukes, does it? |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:51 AM
avebury (10,835 posts)
25. Talk about death panels! nt
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:54 AM
pansypoo53219 (20,137 posts)
26. ooh, i think i agree with him, BUT isn't
that a death panel?
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:55 AM
evilhime (326 posts)
28. So all those years of paying
premiums either through an employer or personally or however, and then not being able to benefit from all those years of paying into it? And high risk health insurance if it's anything like high risk insurance for drivers would be cost prohibitive! Man these guys all suck. We need to stop offering THEM insurance!
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:57 AM
Kablooie (18,143 posts)
29. That's my representative!
To be fair, the title is misleading.
He doesn't say they should not get health care but says it should come from a high-risk pool instead of insurance companies. He's not suggesting they get no care at all. Clearly a debatable point, particularly in the light of ACA, but not exactly evil. Doesn't really matter what he says though, he's not running for another term. They redistricted Calif. and I'm now in a predominantly Democratic district instead of a GOP one so he gave up. He used to be a moderate Republican and would actually solicit opinions from Dems as well as Bubs but after they all drank the Kooltea he hasn't done anything. Next term I'm likely to have a Representative that may be representative. Finally! |
Response to Kablooie (Reply #29)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:13 PM
still_one (87,919 posts)
37. dryer is no moderate.
Response to still_one (Reply #37)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:53 PM
Kablooie (18,143 posts)
52. Hey, I've never seen that website. Very informative. Thanks.
Response to Kablooie (Reply #52)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:21 AM
still_one (87,919 posts)
98. No problem we are all here for each other. /nt
Response to Kablooie (Reply #29)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:17 PM
catrose (4,842 posts)
39. High-risk health care in my state
has a lower life-time cap any health insurance policy I've had. It's less able to afford such cases. Well, it would get rid of them quicker.
|
Response to catrose (Reply #39)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:52 PM
Kablooie (18,143 posts)
51. It's certainly no replacement for the ACA system.
Maybe better than nothing but not much better.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:09 PM
patrice (47,992 posts)
33. You all know what the one thing is that gets people through the greatest of horrors is?
e.g. the ONE thing that gets soldiers through the absolute Hell known as war is CARING for one another.
Representative Drier wants to KILL caring. He wants to kill our life-giving souls. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:11 PM
riderinthestorm (23,272 posts)
34. People with brain tumours don't have 6 months to wait to get into the state high risk pool
They'll be dead. Those state pools have a mandatory wait time of 6 months before you can APPLY. Then you get put onto the waiting list (which is usually months long. When we applied in IL, the waiting list was averaging 18 months) which can mean the average person is going more than 2 years before they are covered.
Even if said brain tumour patient DID manage to survive the wait, chances are he wouldn't be able to afford the premium - my husband's lymphoma meant our premium in the high risk pool was quoted at $900/month for pretty crappy coverage. So Representative Dreier is another de facto death panel advocate - "just die quickly" is clearly his mantra as well. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:13 PM
CanonRay (13,241 posts)
36. The real Republican health care: Let them die. Quickly.
Alan Grayson had it right.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:14 PM
HughBeaumont (24,461 posts)
38. Dreier is also a pro-offshore-outsourcer and a pro-Laissez-failist.
That rube fuck. Gee, Davey . . . how's kissing Bewsh's ass working out for you now?
http://dreier.house.gov/issues/hamburger_flipping.htm |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:23 PM
demwing (16,916 posts)
40. This was my son Ian
in May of 2008:
![]() This is Ian 7 months later, in December 2008, two weeks before he died: ![]() Ian had a brain tumor which took his life. I watched my son waste away from a healthy, happy, high-energy 9 year old kid who loved to go on hikes,wrestle with dad, and swim like a fish, to a shell of a human that could not urinate or pass stool on his own, could not walk, and could not even smile without pushing his lips into the right shape with his fingers. What kind of absolute inhuman monster would deny this child health care? If David Drier were burning to death in a pit of flames, I wouldn't piss on his head to put the fucking flames out. |
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:48 PM
tandot (6,671 posts)
48. I am so sorry for your loss, demwing.
The only conclusion I can come to is that most Republicans aren't human.
|
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:59 PM
kimbutgar (18,777 posts)
54. My condolences on the loss of your beautiful child.
I just can't get over how heartless and cruel the republican party has become. They have no clue the suffering of people. Typical sociopath.
|
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:59 PM
Raster (20,989 posts)
55. My sincere sympathies. Thank you for sharing Ian's story.
It is beyond criminal to ration health care based upon greed, no matter the rationale du jour. Beyond criminal.
Bless your heart. |
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:11 PM
southernyankeebelle (11,304 posts)
59. I am so sorry for your lose. You know you should send a picture of this lovely and ask
him if this was your child would you feel the same way if you were unable to afford health care.
I had a neighbor who had a beautiful teenage daughter late in life who had a brain tumor. She had a hard time for over a year. When she died at home all the neighbors took it pretty hard. We had a very close block of neighbors. I am still crying thinking about her and your son. She was 17 and a beautiful young girl. Life isn't fair sometimes. I will think about this man comments all day and be upset. I am ashamed of this new america. It's not like what I grew up with. |
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:18 PM
JDPriestly (57,936 posts)
66. My sympathy goes to you, demwing.
You are so right.
I think that we should start a movement to make all health insurance non-profit. Most of the companies were non-profit until the late 1970s or early 1980s, if I remember correctly. |
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 03:42 PM
qanda (10,422 posts)
76. My heart goes out to you
Ian was such a beautiful child. I am so sorry for your loss. There shouldn't even be a debate of whether a person, any person, deserves to receive healthcare.
|
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 05:07 PM
alphafemale (18,497 posts)
83. I'm so sorry for your loss and what your beautiful child had to suffer through.
David Drier is just another republican rat bastard.
|
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 07:16 PM
demwing (16,916 posts)
92. Health care is not an academic debate
It's not about money, it's about people.
If you can look a parent in the eye and say "We just can't budget your child's life into our profitability report" then you don't belong in the medical field, period. Go back to school, get a job that matches your soul, not one that causes conflict. It still crushes me to look at pics of Ian when he was at this stage, but it helps to underline my point that health care is an issue of love, not revenue. Put a human face on health care whenever you can. Shame the monsters with their own vile words. Make them sick of themselves, or so hardened to the pain they cause that their ugliness burns the eyes of all who are not similarly heartless. Once more, health care is not an academic debate, or a budgetary issue. Health care is a matter of life or death, individually , and to our society. Don't let the reform opponents forget it... Thanks to everyone for your support. |
Response to demwing (Reply #92)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:36 AM
Justitia (9,315 posts)
99. As the mother of a dialysis / transplant patient, I couldn't agree with you more.
My son is doing okay now - the future is never guaranteed & I worry absolutely every day, as I know you did too.
I am so very, very sorry for your loss. And thank you so very much for telling us Ian's story. |
Response to Justitia (Reply #99)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 12:18 PM
wordpix (18,652 posts)
105. as the daughter of an advanced Alzheimer's patient, +10000
A brain disease is nothing to dismiss as too expensive for the fat insurance corpos to handle.
|
Response to demwing (Reply #92)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:59 PM
geardaddy (24,522 posts)
114. So sorry for your loss DW
As a transplant patient who is in a high-risk pool, I agree with you. It's about people not profits.
|
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 02:50 AM
Skittles (149,444 posts)
101. .
![]() Ian was beautiful |
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 06:37 AM
barbtries (27,823 posts)
103. so sorry for your loss.
republicans are inhumane. your son is adorable.
|
Response to demwing (Reply #40)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 12:16 PM
wordpix (18,652 posts)
104. so sorry, and I'd love for you to confront Dreier with these photos
and ask him why he's a killer
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:25 PM
valerief (53,235 posts)
41. Someone, give that man a brain tumor and see if he changes his mind! nt
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:32 PM
TBF (31,869 posts)
43. The solution to health care reform is to immediately cut health care
for any and all members of Congress. Then they will have to try to get coverage on their own.
We will sit back at that point and watch how quickly they spin as they legislate reform. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:35 PM
xxqqqzme (14,887 posts)
44. That 'pool'
the ass hat mentions was the ONLY way I could get insurance after my accident. After 5 years of appeals, I was granted SS Disability and medicare. My premiums, in 1999, were $478/mo. I had just received a notice they were increasing to $529/mo. (I cannot imagine what the premiums are now). For disabled persons or someone unable to work, that 'pool' is useless.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:42 PM
liberal N proud (59,790 posts)
45. What a sick, no sadistic bastard.
Maybe someone with a cushy chair in Congress shouldn't have health care provided.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 12:50 PM
Swede Atlanta (3,596 posts)
49. In one respect I agree with him.....
At some point in this country we are going to have to accept the notion that healthcare must be rationed. There is only so much healthcare to go around and so many resources we can spend. Advances in medicine and technology enable us to treat and keep people alive much longer than before.
Today that rationing is done either by ability to pay (if you are without insurance) or by who insurers will insure, what they will cover, annual and lifetime caps, etc. The issue of who will be insured, minimum amount to be covered and elimination of caps are part of the ACA. All of that is good. But at the same time, if someone is diagnosed with a terminal disease or is so badly damaged in an accident that their chances of survival and recovery are extremely remote, can we afford to spend precious healthcare resources on these cases? Or should these cases be treated with palliative care? None of us want to discuss this but this is the elephant in the room. Do we spend potentially tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep grandma alive with machines and expensive drugs, etc. even if that is only likely to extend her life a few weeks or months? Or should we be a compassionate people, keep her comfortable, and let she and her family have some quality of time together? These same Republicans, however, that want to deny someone with cancer, healthcare, are the same ones that would deny someone the right to die with dignity and who would try to keep mom alive regardless of the cost. |
Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #49)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:02 PM
hue (4,949 posts)
57. these decisions should NOT be made by insurance reps, politicians, or CEOs of hospitals.
Furthermore there are quite a few documented cases where a person was diagnosed as untreatable or terminal and they recovered. Theses decisions should be made by firstly the Patient, Family, doctors and other chosen involved care givers and spiritual advisers. Each person and their situation is unique and should be treated as such--ie: not legislated, labeled or categorized in any way.
|
Response to hue (Reply #57)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:15 PM
Swede Atlanta (3,596 posts)
60. Hue, I agree......
The decision should be left to the patient, his or her doctor, family and, where applicable spiritual advisers.
But, if everyone decided to keep treating and treating and trying treatment after treatment even when the best educated assessment is the outcome is not going to be significantly different, we cannot afford it. Plain and simple, we cannot afford it. We cannot afford to do a quadruple bypass on every 85-year old when that patient is already suffering from other degenerative diseases and conditions that are likely to end their life within a few months. I agree there are documented cases where, against all odds, people survive. That's great. But can we as society afford to spend on the odd chance the outcome will be different than what doctors can reasonably expect? Maybe if you are a total private pay - you pay for all of the care out of your own savings. But other insured individuals in an insurance risk pool cannot afford to pay premiums into an insurance company that will continue to spend and spend just on the odd chance someone might make it. We are going to have to face these realities at some point. Today those decisions are made by insurance companies and the market. Someone will make those decisions. Question is do you want a company that is motivated by making a profit off of your illness to make that decision? Who? If you are paying for your care out of your savings I say that decision is up to you, your family and your physician alone. That is the law of the market. If you can pay - you get the care. |
Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #60)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:33 PM
JDPriestly (57,936 posts)
69. You are falling for a Republican lie. We don't do what you describe.
Haven't you heard about Do Not Resuscitate Orders?
If you haven't, you need to learn about it, and considering your view on this matter, I'm sure you will want to sign one right away. Further, even without these Orders, families have to make that fatal decision for their loved ones every day. It is painful. It really hurts. I hope you never have to literally pull the plug or the tube or decide that a loved one should die. Terri Schiavo's family was the exception. Most families decide that it is time to end their loved one's suffering. Spreading the fear that doctors will keep hopelessly ill patients alive forever is just more Republican cruelty. What an awful, awful bunch. Doctors deal with the reality that not every patient can be healed every day. It's really hard for them. And I have to add that one of the reasons we have learned so much about low-cost ways to treat illnesses is that we try to maintain life and heal the sick. Doctors learn a lot. If you get a brain tumor or what looks like terminal cancer, you will understand. By the way, check out your local hospice. That is where the terminally ill are given end-of-life care. And please stop buying the Republican lies. |
Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #60)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 02:38 AM
wickerwoman (5,662 posts)
100. If you were 85 years old
and suffering from multiple degenerative conditions with a prognosis of months would you choose to have quadruple bypass surgery? I sure as shit wouldn't and neither would anyone I know.
I would like the ability to make the best decision possible about my health care based on my condition, prognosis, willingness to take risks, tolerance for pain and discomfort and spiritual beliefs without having to factor in what my family can and can't afford. Every other civilised country in the world affords that right to its citizens. |
Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #49)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:46 PM
jtuck004 (15,882 posts)
62. If we take the profit out of it, the costs would drop sharply, and that would.
allow for a LOT more health care. Seems like no one wants to discuss this much either, 'cause all the oxygen is taken up with digging up excuses to support the latest care-for-profit strategy. Then again, if the Repubs can get the Democrats to make arguments like this for them, instead of dealing with the 50 million who don't have and can't afford health care, maybe they've already won. Reagan did it with the invention of his mythical welfare queen, now they are doing it with comatose people stealing all the health care dollars that would be better spent on us. |
Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #49)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:20 PM
JDPriestly (57,936 posts)
67. We spend whatever it takes to kill people in wars in countries in .
which we have utterly no interest and in which our soldiers and bombs and planes are not wanted.
If we spent that money on education and health care here, think how much better the entire world would be. Yes, of course, everyone should have the health care they need. We just need to stop killing people in other countries. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:00 PM
Lint Head (15,064 posts)
56. Rep. David Dreier (R-CA) is scum.
What a heartless piece of shit this jerk is.
|
Response to Lint Head (Reply #56)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:19 PM
shanti (21,603 posts)
107. TG, he's retiring this year!
according to his website
|
Response to shanti (Reply #107)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:32 PM
Lint Head (15,064 posts)
109. He'll probably end up as a lobbiest for the Health Care Insurance Industry.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:33 PM
Iliyah (25,111 posts)
61. The GOP house is still trying to repeal ACA
instead of focusing on JOBS.
The GOP motto "suffer and die quietly". |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 01:46 PM
Enrique (27,461 posts)
63. he's a one-man death panel
that said, even with the ACA, if you are uninsured and you develop a massive brain tumor, will you the next day be able to have millions and millions of health care provided to you?
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:11 PM
JDPriestly (57,936 posts)
65. David Dreier, the walking death panel.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:25 PM
LynneSin (95,337 posts)
68. I'm thinking this asshole has a brain tumor....
otherwise known as an anal wart!
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:40 PM
Smilo (1,928 posts)
71. A pox on this malignant growth who
believes death panels are just a-ok - what's next Drier you pos - extermination camps?
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:43 PM
JoePhilly (27,787 posts)
72. My neice had cancer when she was 2 ... this ass would have let her die.
At the time, the insurer tried to deny her coverage because she only had a 10% chance to survive.
Fortunately, my sister fought, got hospitals to treat her, nearly went broke, and then, against the odds, my niece survived. She's 16 now. And the GOP would be happy to allow her to never have health coverage for the rest of her life. |
Response to JoePhilly (Reply #72)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 03:45 PM
RKP5637 (65,643 posts)
77. GOP is fixated on owning vaginae, but after birth they don't give a
damn about anyone. As far as the GOP cares, most of humanity could die off as long as it didn't affect them. The GOP is a cancer to the survival of America.
It's great to hear your niece survived OK. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 02:45 PM
Trillo (9,154 posts)
73. Surprised he didn't claim that
there's no point in diagnosing brain tumors in poor people, since they can't afford treatment even if such conditions were discovered.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 03:35 PM
Quantess (27,630 posts)
75. Well, what else is he going to say?
A lie? That's how he really feels. Expect more repukes to start opening up this way.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 04:06 PM
TheMastersNemesis (10,602 posts)
78. He Will Probably Get Re Elected
Response to TheMastersNemesis (Reply #78)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:19 PM
shanti (21,603 posts)
108. he's retiring this year n/t
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 04:14 PM
SammyWinstonJack (44,099 posts)
79. VILE! What is wrong with these people?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 04:26 PM
Steerpike (2,667 posts)
81. What a sad state of affairs.
It is unfortunate for our country that there are a significant majority of citizens who have voted for these creatures. May Cthulu have mercy on our immortal souls.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 04:27 PM
Third Doctor (1,574 posts)
82. Someone who believes this
Should not have health insurance himself. Especially if his insurance is tax payer funded.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
elbloggoZY27 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 06:16 PM
MissMillie (37,453 posts)
89. I don't think anyone w/ his head up his butt should be elected to office
Take that Dreier
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 06:55 PM
dipsydoodle (42,239 posts)
90. An extreme example has been use here.
Fresh insurance on a grade 4 Astrocytoma would be the equivalent of insuring a car after a crash given that the chances of full recovery are remote. Unobstructed renewal of an exisitng policy after such a tumour became apparent is a different matter.
Insurance rates are based on the risk of an event : not a certainties the probability of which is 1. |
Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #90)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 11:09 PM
CreekDog (46,192 posts)
97. If you are not 100% against what Drier said, you are relegating this man to no treatment whatsoever
just let him die at home if he doesn't have the money for anything else.
it's not an extreme example. whatever his prognosis, have you the audacity to suggest he not get ANY treatment? not for pain, not for whatever? no doctor to even find out his prognosis? you been here a long time, i guess my impatience is that you seem to think no treatment isn't so bad if he's going to die anyway. ![]() and what you said about insurance rates are based on, that's BS. they are currently based on what the market will bear and many people aren't allowed in the market. |
Response to CreekDog (Reply #97)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 04:41 AM
dipsydoodle (42,239 posts)
102. If you knew me well enough
you'd know that what I mentioned is precisely what killed my wife back in 1990 when she was 45. I've also lost two friends and the wife of another acquaintance since then from the same grade of tumour - 4 is maximum aggressiveness.
You may also notice that I said "fresh insurance" and you said that rates are based on "what the market will bear". What the market will bear doesn't really come into a certainty when rates are set by actuaries. We don't have such a situation here : our NHS covers us from conception to the grave. That's what you need : not what you've got. |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 10, 2012, 07:01 PM
SnakeEyes (1,407 posts)
91. "health care" is pretty generic
but i think it depends on the survival rate and effectiveness of whatever treatment is being recommended. It makes no sense to drive up the cost of health care for you and I by performing treatments that won't amount to extended life much longer. UK's NICE has it right.
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 12:32 PM
Tom Ripley (4,945 posts)
106. I guess he's assuming that Brad W Smith won't develop a brain tumor
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 01:35 PM
Odin2005 (53,521 posts)
110. This guy is the definition of asshole.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 03:27 PM
yurbud (39,405 posts)
115. a one man death panel
Response to kpete (Original post)
Wed Jul 11, 2012, 04:09 PM
Manifestor_of_Light (21,046 posts)
117. My sister died of a fatal brain tumor.
She was a beautiful young woman. She survived 18 months after diagnosis and was aged 42. She was my big sister and my best friend. She had good insurance because she worked at M.D. Anderson Hospital in Houston, which is the largest cancer hospital in the world.
I miss her every day, and she died over 20 years ago. He can go to hell. |