Sen. Kennedy's committee passes health care bill

[Joanne98]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate health committee has passed legislation to revamp health care, becoming the first congressional committee to act on President Barack Obama's goal of overhauling the system this year.

The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee voted 13-10 along party lines to pass a $600-billion measure that would expand coverage to nearly all Americans by requiring individuals get insurance and employers to contribute to the cost. The bill would provide federal aid to families and individuals making less than four times the poverty level, or about $88,000 for a family of four.

Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy, the chairman, wasn't there for the milestone vote. He's being treated for brain cancer.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.


Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jlMpJGn28kqCcgU-aGcYE_ZHW-ywD99EUB600

[John Q. Citizen]

1. This will be a major stimulas for the health insurance industry, that's for sure.

[No Elephants]

2. Article does not contain the terms "single payer" OR "public option"

I hope it was just an omission on the part of the article's author. If not, this seems a lot like the "plan" that has already failed in Massachusetts. Romney was basically forced into something and he vastly misrespresented the true cost of this type of plan.

[sfwriter]

3. Wow...

"The bill would provide federal aid to families and individuals making less than four times the poverty level, or about $88,000 for a family of four."

That is really good for a place like Missouri. Almost everyone will qualify.

[Xenotime]

4. That's wonderful.

[sfwriter]

27. No joke...

A friend told me this afternoon that her COBRA has been lowered by something Obama signed. She was laid off from the Springfield News-Leader in December.

I was surprised we will qualify. I expected the numbers to be much smaller. This will make a real difference to our budget, even if it is only $50 a month.

[No Elephants]

5. I wonder how many people will have to be hired and how many offices will have to be opened to

process all the applications?

[tomm2thumbs]

6. is that stimulus talk? hmmmm

I guess it goes without sayin'

updated: my <grin> in the subject line disappeared - so adding it back in here

<grin>

[Coyote_Bandit]

8. Ummmm......

Your regional bigotry has earned you a place on my ignore list. Welcome.

[sfwriter]

22. My regional bigotry?

Do you know what the median FAMILY income is here in Springfield, mo?

Where I live?

$29,000 +/-

It is lower for all but the largest cities. KC is $37,000 and St. Louis is $44,000.

That's per family, so they would almost all qualify if the number is pegged at $88,000.

I'm sorry the reality you live in doesn't include poverty in Missouri, but I have to deal with it here all the time.

This bill will help.

[Coyote_Bandit]

24. Funny

Your profile says you live in Alameda, California. Shall I post the screen shot?

So, where exactly do you live? Springfield? California? I find it odd that you would brag about living in a region defined by its poverty. That's the kind of thing most folks don't point out. It seems obvious to me that pointing out that nearly everyone in the entire population has such a low income that they qualify for financial assistance is an insult intended to reinforce many backwoods sterotypes.

FWIW, I am quite familiar with Springfield. And I am aware that there are areas surrounding Springfield where the poverty levels exceed those of the Appalachians. Springfield is very prosperous in comparison. Arkansas and Mississippi have the highest poverty rates in the nation. If you look at places like Izard county in Arkansas you will find the entire county population is less than 15,000. Those folks are mostly poor folks living amongst other poor folks, being educated in poorly funded schools and lacking much opportunity to escape their circumstances.

[sfwriter]

26. I moved to Springfield in 2007...

And as I pointed out, most of the state will qualify, which is great.

I miss Alameda like a lost love, but I work hard to make my new home a better place...

I work in the nonprofit community. I am a writer. I've written about the poverty in this area. I've tried to improve things. The poverty around here is a frequent conversation in my circles.

So what do you have against people from California? Sounds like you've got the regional bigotry thing covered both coming and going to me. You are just making assumptions that anyone talking about poverty in Missouri has some evil intent.

Your attitude is less than productive here. I'd like some sort of apology since I appear to be both factually and regionally appropriate, not to mention actually living here and qualifying, like most everyone in the state at $88,000 for a family of four...

You do realize that that number is four times the poverty rate right? A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL QUALIFY IN A LOT OF STATES. I think I said most people would qualify here. I stand by that. I've show you statistics to back up why I think that.

I only mention Missouri because that's where I live.

Now man up, admit you jumped the gun and toss an apology or at least a "my bad" my way so I don't spend half of tomorrow telling people what a self-righteous trolliceman I found lurking on DU.

[Coyote_Bandit]

31. "Most of the state will qualify which is great"

That kind of sounds like Michelle Bachmann bragging that folks in Minnesota are among the "workingest" people in the country because so many hold two and three jobs. She was mocked for her statement and many of the residents of her state took offense.

The poverty of Missouri (and thus the ability of their residents to qualify for assistance) was the primary point of your post number 3 in this thread.

Apparently you still fail to recognize that your commentary was offensive. Yet your comment was about a specific group of people, it reflected poorly on them and it failed to acknowledge that many others were similarly affected. You only acknowledged that after being challenged. The offense wasn't in the factual content it was in identifying one group out of many that were similarly situated.

I may not live in Missouri but I live in the region and am very familiar with the area. I also know a number of folks who do live there. Your comment was offensive and serves to reinforce the stereotypes that describe mountain folks, rural folks, and small town midwesterners as impoverished. Your statement also encourages the prejudices of blue state Dems on this forum who frequently rail against red staters and suggest the nation would benefit from their absence.

So you've lived in a small Ozark town for a year or two. Big frickin deal. By most standards you are still an outsider there to long-time residents. Likely a self-righteous outsider at that. Why else would you feel obligated to detail your good deeds to explain your presence there?

You want an apology because you singled out one group for something less than positive reasons? Not happening. Your commentary was incomplete, unproductive and offensive. Perhaps you would do well to refine those writing skills.

[sfwriter]

32. Yes, you call our region an "armpit" and "JOKlohoma"...

My intention was to comment that this is a boon to a really BROAD swath of working people here in Missouri and to clarify your ignorant accusation by pointing out there ARE large numbers of people in poverty here where I live.

What do you have against the poor, BTW? I was raised in Appalachia, east Tennessee. I don't see it as a stigma, but rather a symptom of poor opportunities and lately of red-state economic policies that tend to expand the problem and drive class division, not to mention a consumerist society that erodes wages and community.

My argument is also backed up by evidence, compassion and reason.

I felt I had to explain myself because I was accused of being a bigot, then an outsider and some sort of regional elitist for being from California.

Looking over your posts on DU, I see you have no problem bad mouthing the region with slurs like "armpit of the bible belt" and JOKlohoma in your own posts.

You are simply ignorant, hateful and wrong in this case.

Most of Missouri will qualify is all I said. That includes my family, BTW. You do understand that I said nothing about POVERTY. Poverty is in the quote from the story. That is your own internal demon. This bill pegs the number at FOUR TIMES poverty. Most people will be above the poverty line.

Anything else you have chosen to add to this, including your apparent disdain for outsiders comes from you. You saw the word poverty and freaked out slinging a baseless attack my way.

It makes me wonder what trauma you must have been through over the last few years to leave you so bitter. You should still apologize, but since you are incapable and your posts are largely fueled by your own internal misconceptions and misery, welcome to my ignore list.

You are the first and only person on it and I've been at DU since the beginning, before we had ignore lists. You are the first person I've ever seen who was so pig headed they couldn't realize their mistake and apologize. We usually get a better class of people around here.

:-)

[sfwriter]

28. Here, educate thy self...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=162x7509

That's the tale of my first week in town.

[sfwriter]

23. Not to keep beating an ignored horse, but...

Look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_locations_by_per_capita_income

These are the ONLY four places listed out of 972 in Missouri with per-capita incomes over the $88,000 limit for assistance.

1 Baker, Missouri – $182,000
2 Huntleigh, Missouri – $104,420
3 Country Life Acres, Missouri – $100,617
4 Ladue, Missouri – $89,623

That means .004 percent of the towns in Missouri have incomes higher than teh $88,000. Mind you, some may work three jobs or something, but statistically speaking...

...bite me. :-)

I mean that in a nice way though.

[lindisfarne]

13. People choose to live in one of the most expensive cities in the US. Move to Stockton if you need to

[sfwriter]

30. While overreacting to Coyote_Bandit...

I found this unique factoid:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker,_Missouri

Baker is a village in Stoddard County, Missouri, United States. The population was 5 at the 2000 census. According to the United States Census Bureau, it is one of only a handful of places in the United States with a population of five people. Due to its extremely small population of high income residents, Baker ranks second on the list of the highest income places in the United States.

I wonder what those five people are like?

[florida08]

7. dup

[Coyote_Bandit]

9. Too bad

there's no reform. Just a mandate for everyone to buy an insurance policy. Another failed policy (a la Massachusetts) waiting to be enacted.

[harun]

14. I finally heard a politician admit this for the first time, that this was

put in there to quiet their precious insurance industry by sending them thousands of new customers.

[Coyote_Bandit]

18. Could you

provide me a link to that comment?

Thanks.

[harun]

19. Wow, can't believe I found it again

Whole clip is good:

http://www.theyoungturks.com/story/2009/7/8/112035/5364/Diary/House-Democrats-Draw-the-Line-on-Public-Option

Question starts at 4:11, he lets slip about all the new customers for the Insurance Industry at about 5:19.

"Now they've said that if we give them all these new customers that they will not - they will cease the process of rating for pre-existing conditions and medical history and gender and all of those things, but we know with their history of such that they will find ways around that."

The mandatory insurance stuff has always been a gift to the Insurance Companies.

[Coyote_Bandit]

20. Thank you n/t

[primavera]

25. Yeah, that worries me too

Without a public option to provide an alternative to private insurance, there's nothing to break their stranglehold on the US healthcare system and they can, and most assuredly will, continue to fleece the American public for every cent they can wring out of us.

[Romulox]

10. Glad to see Teddy finally got his insurance company bailout plan together!

Not fighting for Universal Healthcare was very "liberal lion" like of him! :puke:

[mvd]

11. I noticed the new Yahoo! article took out..

talk of the public plan. I assume it's there, but in what form? Also, they took out something about protecting pharmaceutical companies' biotechnology creations from lower cost competition for 12 years. That's a concern. I'm sure it wouldn't win more votes anyway.

[Romulox]

12. LOL. Yes, I'm sure YAHOO didn't allow Teddy to advocate forecfully for a public plan!

Gimmeabreak! :hi:

[mvd]

15. Well the Yahoo! article was very uninformative in general

Done by AP, so no surprise.

[Romulox]

16. Ted can call a press conference to advocate for UHC whenever he chooses.

He hasn't.

[mvd]

17. I'm disappointed he isn't for single payer

Thought we could rely on him for that.

[Zhade]

21. Ah, Universal Insurance Care. Just as big a failure as when Clinton proposed it.

Such change, Obama.

[earth mom]

29. Yeah, it sounds like the insurance companies got what they wanted and the rest of us can suck it.

:(

[meow2u3]

33. The mandatory abortion provision is likely to be struck down as unconstitutional

If Catholic and other religiously affiliated hospitals whose religious beliefs bar abortion are forced to perform abortions, it would infringe on their right to practice their religion. This is a First Amendment freedom of religion issue; Congress cannot pass laws that would force people to compromise their religious beliefs or make them choose between their faith and their jobs.