President Obama's speech on health care next week.

[Bob Jentges]

And the beat goes on.

I made a suggestion about tort reform quite some time back in a now closed thread, which was pretty much dismessed out of hand by some members of the Forum. We can all try to predict what President Obama will suggest, but here is an article indicating what he probably will not suggest, and why.

http://townhall.com/colimnists/HughHewitt/2009/09/04/without-tort-reform-it-isnt-health-care-reform--its-a-plaintiffs-lawyers-protection-act?page=1

In the same vein, here is an interesting article by a radiologist outlining his "...Plan for Legal Industry.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574387021307651050.html

[Bob Jentges]

I listened to the speech last night and decided to offer just a few observations of my own before I begin reading what the various media opinion writers have to say.

It seemed to be the same stuff that had been said in the other 28 previous speeches on the issue, which were not well recieved by many, if not most of the people after they began to look into the proposals closely.

Sometimes I wonder if he understands what is in HR3200? If he does it seems like is not candid with us in his speeches. If he does not, details as opposed to talking points will eventially carry the day.

He intends to pay for over half the cost of the program by eliminating $500B in waste, fraud and abuse from the Medicare program. The federal government eliminitating waste, fraud and abuse? If it can, why not do it now rather wait and hope his health care reform passes?

The only new thing I heard was a reference to medical malpractice tort reform, which surprised me until I heard him say it would not be in the bill, but rather would be tried in a pilot program or two to see how it works. Where North & South Dakota?

The skeptic in me suggests (and I think history supports) that if you go by Mr. Obama's spoken word you can be led into almost anything.

My prediction is that there is much, much work to be done if a bill is to be signed into law this year, as President Obama has told us will happen.

[Bob Jentges]

Well I'll be!

After the Baucus proposal which includes some version of Tort Reform it appears as though President Obama intends to actually follow through with what he said in his September 9 speech on that issue i.e. Tort Reform.

I guess I was wrong in my post #2 above about what his speech would not include, and my skeptisim about whether he would actually follow through may have also been misplaced. I trust his motives are pure.

The link below, "White House seeks ways to curb malpractice", is interesting.

http://www.breitbart.com/article_php?id=D9AP5CG1&sharearticle=1&catnum

[Dan Conner]

I listened to the speech last night and decided to offer just a few observations of my own before I begin reading what the various media opinion writers have to say.

It seemed to be the same stuff that had been said in the other 28 previous speeches on the issue, which were not well recieved by many, if not most of the people after they began to look into the proposals closely.

Sometimes I wonder if he understands what is in HR3200? If he does it seems like is not candid with us in his speeches. If he does not, details as opposed to talking points will eventially carry the day.

He intends to pay for over half the cost of the program by eliminating $500B in waste, fraud and abuse from the Medicare program. The federal government eliminitating waste, fraud and abuse? If it can, why not do it now rather wait and hope his health care reform passes?

The only new thing I heard was a reference to medical malpractice tort reform, which surprised me until I heard him say it would not be in the bill, but rather would be tried in a pilot program or two to see how it works. Where North & South Dakota?

The skeptic in me suggests (and I think history supports) that if you go by Mr. Obama's spoken word you can be led into almost anything.

My prediction is that there is much, much work to be done if a bill is to be signed into law this year, as President Obama has told us will happen.Actually Bob, the vast majority of people favor major health insurance/care changes. The majority favors a public option. A recent poll shows that even the majority of doctors favor a public option. I think it is premature to judge the content of our future healthcare laws.

[Bob Jentges]

Actually Bob, the vast majority of people favor major health insurance/care changes. The majority favors a public option. A recent poll shows that even the majority of doctors favor a public option. I think it is premature to judge the content of our future healthcare laws.

The last polls I saw (two today) indicated 54% of those polled are not in favor of any of the Democrat backed health care reform proposals out there now. Single payer is off the table and polls also show the majority of people do not favor a public option. In fact, from what I read and hear there very probably are not enough votes in Congress to pass a bill with a public option. I think there was Pew poll of doctors out today that indicated 65% of the doctors polled said they would consider leaving the practice of medicine if a public option was passed.

You are correct "...it is premature to judge the content of our future health care laws." I am beginning to think nothing will be passed this year, and that is dissappointing to me!

[Dan Conner]

The last polls I saw (two today) indicated 54% of those polled are not in favor of any of the Democrat backed health care reform proposals out there now. Single payer is off the table and polls also show the majority of people do not favor a public option. In fact, from what I read and hear there very probably are not enough votes in Congress to pass a bill with a public option. I think there was Pew poll of doctors out today that indicated 65% of the doctors polled said they would consider leaving the practice of medicine if a public option was passed.

You are correct "...it is premature to judge the content of our future health care laws." I am beginning to think nothing will be passed this year, and that is dissappointing to me!Well, I guess we have differing polls and statistics. I guess more about how to lie with statisitics. Kind of like the teabaggers who lied that they had 1-1.5 million demonstrators recently in Wash, When Capital Police and ABC News estimated the crowds at about 70,000. Big difference. You are dead wrong about the public option. Over 60% of physicians prefer the public option. Among all people, the percentage is even greater. You can talk about the votes all you want, we'll see what the final vote it. The reconciliation process looks like a good avenue to pass healthcare to me. Your Pew poll must be pretty old becauise the new poll of physicians favoring public option is recent and greatly favors public option.

Don't become disappointed. The status-quo will change. I think there will be healthcare legislation this year, despite healthcare insurnace companies spending hundreds of millions of dollars of our hard-earned health insurnace premiums to thwart the process.

Also, I just got back from Tokyo, where my daughter-in-law had her third daughter via caesarean-section. She received outstanding medical and surgical care. That's another single-payer system you know. Unfortunately too many people in the US scared of boogey-men about too many things, but particularly change.

There is undoubtedly one positive thing that will come about in coming healthcare legislation and that is outlawing the denial of payment of medical bills because of pre-existing conditions and because of too costly or too much use of needed medical care. It's too bad this had to be legislated . Insurnace companies have gotten to be the bain of existence for many patients.

[Bob Jentges]

I agree we must look at different polls. I think we might be able to agree that poll results can be skewed by how the questions were asked, and the politicial/ideological leanings of those polled.

You are probably not interested, but rather than spend time searching individual polls I often refer to the Real Clear Politics Poll Averages. Once in a while I come accross polls by Rasmussen, Gallop, Zogby and/or Pew which I consider fairly reliable.

One clarification from my previous post. I referred to a Pew poll. In checking back it was actually a September 15, 2009 Investors Business Daily/TIPP poll. For further clarification, that poll showed the following:

72% of doctors polled disagree with the Administration claims that
government can cover 47M more Americans with better care at lower costs.

65% of doctors polled say they oppose present reform plans.

45% of doctors polled said they would consider leaving the practice of
medicine or retiring early if present reform plans are passed.

I expect there will be plenty of polls to look at after the Presidents appearance on five (5) Sunday TV news shows this weekend and Letterman late night Monday, all presumably to promote health care reform. It will be interesting to see how those appearances effect the current favorable/unfavorable percentages. I still say they are not favorable to current reform plans because if the President thought he was winning the debate, why flood the airwaves?

[Dan Conner]

I agree we must look at different polls. I think we might be able to agree that poll results can be skewed by how the questions were asked, and the politicial/ideological leanings of those polled.

You are probably not interested, but rather than spend time searching individual polls I often refer to the Real Clear Politics Poll Averages. Once in a while I come accross polls by Rasmussen, Gallop, Zogby and/or Pew which I consider fairly reliable.

One clarification from my previous post. I referred to a Pew poll. In checking back it was actually a September 15, 2009 Investors Business Daily/TIPP poll. For further clarification, that poll showed the following:

72% of doctors polled disagree with the Administration claims that
government can cover 47M more Americans with better care at lower costs.

65% of doctors polled say they oppose present reform plans.

45% of doctors polled said they would consider leaving the practice of
medicine or retiring early if present reform plans are passed.

I expect there will be plenty of polls to look at after the Presidents appearance on five (5) Sunday TV news shows this weekend and Letterman late night Monday, all presumably to promote health care reform. It will be interesting to see how those appearances effect the current favorable/unfavorable percentages. I still say they are not favorable to current reform plans because if the President thought he was winning the debate, why flood the airwaves?

Very good. So the poll didn't address address government option or single-payer. You were misleading. First, there is no conglomerated healthcare plan. Pending House legislation is strongly considering a strong public option, but the proposed Senate legislation does not. I could very well be that the doctors strongly oppose a plan without a government option. That is bolstered by the following poll: http://www.examiner.com/x-13600-Philadelphia-Opinion-Polls-Examiner~y2009m9d15-Poll-Americans-divided-but-Doctors-united-on-health-care-reform.

That poll is from the New England Journal of Medicine. This is a medical periodical. Can't get much closer to doctors than that. In that poll 63% of doctors favored a government option or single-payer system. I'm sorry, but all of the polls you have mentioned are biased more than a medical periodical. Sorry Bob, but I think you need a better poll with more credibility. Also, you have a tendency to greatly distort what the poll results are, but good try.

[Bob Jentges]

I agree there is "no conglominated healthcare plan" and there will not be until the Senate comes-up with their plan and there is a House/Senate Conference.

Maybe President Obama should stop referring to "My plan" in the many, many speeches he gives on health care reform. If you have nothing better to do Sunday morning maybe you would count the number of times he refers to "My plan" on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, etc., and let me know. I will be busy with other things because I have heard enough about his non-existant plan.

If I misrepresented anything in the IBD/TIPP poll (which I mistakenly referred to as a Pew Poll) it was not intentional. Otherwise I would not have voluntarially corrected what I said from memory after checking back to find the poll I meant to refer to.

Rasmussen, Gallop, Zogby, Pew and the Real Clear Politics Poll Averages I cited as references are all biased but polls of doctors in medical publications are not?

[Dan Conner]

I agree there is "no conglominated healthcare plan" and there will not be until the Senate comes-up with their plan and there is a House/Senate Conference.

Maybe President Obama should stop referring to "My plan" in the many, many speeches he gives on health care reform. If you have nothing better to do Sunday morning maybe you would count the number of times he refers to "My plan" on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, etc., and let me know. I will be busy with other things because I have heard enough about his non-existant plan.

If I misrepresented anything in the IBD/TIPP poll (which I mistakenly referred to as a Pew Poll) it was not intentional. Otherwise I would not have voluntarially corrected what I said from memory after checking back to find the poll I meant to refer to.

Rasmussen, Gallop, Zogby, Pew and the Real Clear Politics Poll Averages I cited as references are all biased but polls of doctors in medical publications are not?WOW! You do get your shirt in a bundle over minor issues! Ultimately, it will probably be his plan when it is passed. Getting distracted over Obama calling it his plan is really petty. Bush referred to lots of legislation as his, even though it was Congress that passed and modified the legislation. Why are you so concerned about that? Sound like pettiness to me. Why weren't you concerned about that with Bush?

In addition to you incorrectly referring to it as a Pew Poll, you ignore a poll taken by a publication that does little but represent physicians. I find that immensely more credible than a non-physician pollster. I take it at its word that 63% of physicians favor single-payer or a government option of healthcare, period. You can talk all you want about independent pollsters, but most have a bias. The journal also has a bias, but it is the appropriate bias, in this case, representing doctors. Do you mean to tell me that you don't consider the weight of a doctor organization taking a poll of doctors as credible as your pollsters? Doctors speaking through their representative should trump all your polls. I think you need to come up with a more credible poll, but good try again Bob. Your prejudice is too obvious. You look for a rationale for your belief, instead of facts upon which to formulate a belief.

[Bob Jentges]

When President Bush proposed something (for example an energy bill, reforming Social Security, etc., etc., etc.) he sent written proposals to Congress. Most did not pass into law because Congress was controlled by Democrats the last few years of his administration. But "Bush" is no longer in office; forget about what he did or didn't do.

Maybe what President Obama says does not mean much to you. But words have meanings for most people, even if the person uttering them eventually does something quite differrent from what he/she says.

The campaign is over and many of the campaign promises have been already been broken. It's time for the Obama Administration to get enough members of it's own party behind their ideas and pass them. They have significant majorities in both the House and Senate. If their ideas are so wonderful they should be able to pass them without any Republican support. Maybe they are afraid to take ownership, or maybe they are concerned if they pass without Republican support or the support of the majority of voters it will damage their chances in 2010. It's time for some leadership; stop the campaigning for a few months!

On second thought, maybe the reason nothing gets done is because not enough members of the Administrations party think they are good ideas.

[Dan Conner]

When President Bush proposed something (for example an energy bill, reforming Social Security, etc., etc., etc.) he sent written proposals to Congress. Most did not pass into law because Congress was controlled by Democrats the last few years of his administration. But "Bush" is no longer in office; forget about what he did or didn't do.

Maybe what President Obama says does not mean much to you. But words have meanings for most people, even if the person uttering them eventually does something quite differrent from what he/she says.

The campaign is over and many of the campaign promises have been already been broken. It's time for the Obama Administration to get enough members of it's own party behind their ideas and pass them. They have significant majorities in both the House and Senate. If their ideas are so wonderful they should be able to pass them without any Republican support. Maybe they are afraid to take ownership, or maybe they are concerned if they pass without Republican support or the support of the majority of voters it will damage their chances in 2010. It's time for some leadership; stop the campaigning for a few months!

On second thought, maybe the reason nothing gets done is because not enough members of the Administrations party think they are good ideas.Man Bob are you wrong. During the first 6 years of his administration (3/4 of the time) the Congress was controlled by Republicans. Even when the Congress was controlled by Democrats there was legislation passed that he claimed as his, even though he opposed it. Short memory. Just like Pawlenty and Jindal have claimed credit for stimulous money, proposed by Obama and passed by Congress, passed out to businesses and constituents in the states of Minnesota and Louisiana. Why would I want to forget about Bush? He was the worst President in our country's history. Hopefully, you don't forget him either. Any person who thinks a little should be working to avoid repeating the same Bush mistakes and electing such a failure as a President. His ideas have bankrupted our country, caused hundreds of thousands of needless deaths, and caused a significant part of our middle class to disappear as new additions to lower income people.

If words mean so much to you, then why did you persist supporting the buffoon Bush? He continually messed up speeches and his use of the English language was the poorest of probably any President. He was famous for his lingual screw-ups and kept comedians in business imitating him. I never heard your concern about words then. Hopefully, there's no bigotry behind your Obama pettiness. Your criticism is extremely petty and unproductive.

WOW! And now you are concerned that Obama is not keeping campaign promises. What promises are you talking about? I would think you would be overjoyed that he wasn't keeping campaign promises because you wouldn't like his promises anyway. Maybe his healthcare will pass without Republican support. I would support him using the reconciliation process. I'm really confused about your statements of Obama's leadership when you so disagree where he wants to lead us. There is a tinge of hypocrisy in that statement. If he rammed his ideas through Congress, then you would be complaining about his lack of bi-partisanship. However, Bob don't fear, the President will propose and hopefully pass good healthcare legislation in his own time, not yours.

You are amusing. In earlier posts you want to waste all sorts of additional time considering and deciding on healthcare reform. Now you want it to be legislated now. I think you need to be more consistent. You are all over the map here. Start reading some of your prior posts instead of mine. You need to stay in touch with what you say, not me.

[Bob Jentges]

My phrase "the last few years" of an 8 year term is essentially the same as your reference to the last 2 years, but I do not want to be "petty".

I was not referring to President Bush's grammer, but rather the substance of what he said and how he followed through accordingly, whether you or me liked it or not.

If you do not know what campaign promises President Obama has broken, or changed his position on since his inauguration last January you might not be paying attention.

I do not know where you got the impression I wanted health reform legislation passed "now". From what I have seen/heard/read it is President Obama that has been putting the rush on. First it was Spring, then before the August recess, now by Thanksgiving or yet this year. I am much less interested in any time frame for passage than I am in what the legislation contains.

[Dan Conner]

My phrase "the last few years" of an 8 year term is essentially the same as your reference to the last 2 years, but I do not want to be "petty".

I was not referring to President Bush's grammer, but rather the substance of what he said and how he followed through accordingly, whether you or me liked it or not.

If you do not know what campaign promises President Obama has broken, or changed his position on since his inauguration last January you might not be paying attention.

I do not know where you got the impression I wanted health reform legislation passed "now". From what I have seen/heard/read it is President Obama that has been putting the rush on. First it was Spring, then before the August recess, now by Thanksgiving or yet this year. I am much less interested in any time frame for passage than I am in what the legislation contains.As far as timeframes in Presidential terms are concerned, say what you mean. In too many cases, you have to explain what you mean. There is another old saying that goes, "Mean what you say and say what you mean." You spend too much time explaining, retracting and morphing what you say. And quibbling over words said by the President is petty, especially considering Obama's predecessor. You judge Obama for his followup? He's now been in office 9 months, about the same time it took GW Bush to ignore all the warning signs for 911, and you talk about substance and follow through? Despite repeated and many warnings about a potential 911, he did nothing. Where was your outrage then?

Obama is following through with his campaign promises. However, he will do it on his timetable, not yours. He's trying to fulfill one of his most important campaign promises - healthcare. Unlike Bush, he has tried bi-partisanship. Don't worry though, he will follow through with or without Republican support.

Also, there you go worrying about his "broken campaign promises", as if you really want him to implement any of them. I think you need to get off your pettiness and discuss ideas instead of miring yourself in criticism. You should be glad he is breaking promises. So, what's your beef? I suggest you hold on, there'll be changes coming. They'll give plenty for reactionists to react to.

There you go again, concerned about the months healthcare legislation will be implemented. I suggest you worry about issues of more substance. You say you worry about substance, but then you worry about the calendar Come on! He'll propose and passs legislation when he and the public is ready. There is already a clear plurality in the public and among healthcare providers preferring at least a Government option. Many people are for single-payer. The lunatic far right extremists will probably continue to hurt their cause by their hateful and wacky antics. This will drive more and more people to favor the Government option and progressive healthcare reform. It is too bad that the right is burdened with so much hate and fear.

If you are so concerned about the substance of healthcare legislation, then drop the rants about timeframes and follow through. Our President will act when he deems it is best. Meanwhile, it would do you good to focus on the substance you say you care about. To me the most important element diminishing your credibility about your criticism of Obama was you unflagging loyalty to GW Bush's redundant failures as President. I think your criticism of Obama is radically mitigated by your faith in the incompetent and failed Presidency of GW Bush. Obama has already achieved success with the economy by arresting the slide to depression. He did that over the silly obstructions of Republicans who didn't want him to spend stimulus money. It seems to me Republicans, as well as conservatives in general, better start concentrating on things that work to improve our country, not take it back into the stone age.

[Bob Jentges]

This will not be another all day back and forth session for me. I want you to have time to count the times "My plan" is repeated on the morning TV talk shows.

With respect to the other lengthy repitious ramblings in your above post, I intend to only comment that maybe the reason I have to continuously explain myself to you i.e. "say what [I] mean" is because you seem to have difficulty comprehending plain English.

[Dan Conner]

This will not be another all day back and forth session for me. I want you to have time to count the times "My plan" is repeated on the morning TV talk shows.

With respect to the other lengthy repitious ramblings in your above post, I intend to only comment that maybe the reason I have to continuously explain myself to you i.e. "say what [I] mean" is because you seem to have difficulty comprehending plain English.Bob, you seem to be name calling. I've tried to refrain from that, but I would recommend you control your temper. Failing to make a cogent point is no reason to be bitter and personal. It's unbecoming.

I will let you count the "my plan". You seem to be obsessed by it. I would again remind you that there are serious issues to make, but counting "my plan?? Come on.

I'll tell you what. You count the "my plans." I guess that is the most significant thing you have to do. I plan to listen to the substanced of the debate. I'll count the number of times he says WMD's.

[Bob Jentges]

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id37207

"Top 10 New Revelations about Obamacare"

How many of these were in what the president frequently referred to as "My plan"?