"To date the only Republican ideas I've heard of are allowing us to buy insurance across state lines (if this was law, the lowest standard of coverage in the least regulated state would become the standard of the whole country) and restricting victims of malpractice from seeking to be compensated. Neither of these would significantly reduce what we pay for healthcare "

Actually, it would. Obviuosly. But then you would have to concede that the Republican ideas are more practical and effective than the Democrats.

I showed that CarolC ie UNWILLING to pay for her health care. She said she could not get Medicaid, so the government is NOT going to give her coverage- THEY think she makes enough to afford it without help. She refused to consider high deductable ( and lower cost) insurance, since she does not feel that she is worth the $5000 deductable before insudrance covers her. I pointed out that I have increased costs due to MY choice to stay in the ( higher tax) state of MD to retain the plan I was in- but she insists that she cannot do anything anywhere except where she is, and will not push for the increased benefits ( and taxes) THERE.

I took a job with a commute of 1 1/2 to 4 1/2 hours , at a reduction in pay, to get the benefits including insurance- it is PART of my compensation. I have paid Medicare for the last 32 years, and will take the PAID-FOR Medicare benefits when I am qualified.

I will claim that those demanding coverage that they are not willing to pay for themselves to be the ones who "come up with solutions that aren't based in the real world."

The poor are covered by Medicaid- IF you want to raise the income level to get into it, FINE- JUST don't lie and say you are not raising taxes, because you are.






"Why don't you state your position rather than tossing around irrational attacks? "

I HAVE stated my position- THIS bill is BAD, WILL NOT provide the care sought, and would harm ALL of us.

I have made no irrational attacks- I leave that for you and those who seem to think that personal attacks on those that disagree with them are a replacement for reasoned discourse.