What You May Have Missed
Most Popular
Across Site
In Opinion
- Save the Colorado River
- In our opinion: Editorial: A football playoff
- Letter: The question of morality in gay...
- Letter: Help individuals, but stop...
- What others say: The winners and the losers
- Revolutions challenge the human condition
- Letter: Two junior senators would spell...
- Save a generation by hiring, thoughtfully...
Most Commented
Across Site
In Opinion






At last, a refreshing voice of reason in the desert of bad ideas. This heath bill is wrong on so many levels, but people are willing to accept it because it is politically correct, it sounds right, just like Kennedy's "No Child Left Behind."
I wish more Americans would look into the facts and the possible unforeseen consequences rather than be swept away by rhetoric and oratory. Just the idea that no one knows what is in it should make us all suspicious.
Can't wait to hear the flames on this editorial.
This is just one of many legal issues with the health care redorm bill. Another: A clause stating the bill can NEVER be changed, is clearly unconstitutional.
"The federal government exists as a creation of the collective states, not the other way around."
If Nancy Pelosi could force her face to laugh that is exactly what she would do over that statement. Sen. Reid wouldn't crack a smile, but would bristle at the suggestion. Pres. Obama would claim it was never the intent of the framers and teleprompt us to sleep with an explanation. All believe that the federal government is one step below God and that that is an injustice they are going to correct.
You got that right!
NCLB originated in the Bush administration. Kennedy
supported the bill. Bipartisan effort, remember those days?
Back in the 50s there were states saying that they federal government could not decide education policy for states-- i.e. outlaw segregation. Requiring people who qualify for Medicaid or a government subsidy to purchase private insurance to enroll in those benefit programs is the only way to ensure that low income parents get health insurance for their kids.
The mandate has an exemption for people who cannot afford any of their available health insurance options. If you disagree with how the Senate defines "affordable" than you should be arguing for a bigger exemption. The courts usually defer to Congress on that kind of policy decision.
I wish the federal government wouldn't tax me to pursue their ill-advised and super-expensive WARS OF ADVENTURE in the Middle East.
Why has the DesNews singled out the Democrats for criticism? If this initiative is highly compromised it is partly due to the fact the Republicans' only goal was to see Obama's initiative fail. We all agree that U.S. health care is in great need of reform - but honestly, what good have the Republicans done?
The truth, as I see it, is that there is horrendous struggle, even a war, going on in our country between the guys who run the federal government and the petty dictators of the corporations who own and run the state governments.
The current health care bill is blast of the corporate cannons to wreck and destroy the government of the people. Written by the corporations with very little, if any, participation of representatives of the people, this bill is a crime against the people of this country and it’s ownership has been assigned to the democrats.
If this bill becomes law, there is little probability that a democrat or a minority will ever be elected again.
"Can the federal government force you to buy health insurance?"
Doesn't matter; nobody's proposing "forced" health insurance purchases.
Anybody who buys health insurance will do so "voluntarily."
Anybody who doesn't "voluntarily" sign up will probably pay a little extra tax in lieu thereof.
The government routinely pressures States and individuals into "voluntary" compliance by making the alternative too unpleasant.
Anybody out there old enough to remember the draft? Are you aware that each draftee "voluntarily" enlisted? From the Oath each took:
"I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion."
Of course, anyone refusing to "voluntarily" sign up risked a little jail time in lieu thereof.
The government is very well versed in constructing "offers you can't refuse."
Let's see, the federal government takes part of my wages as taxes. If I refuse they threaten to fine me and put me in jail. I don't voluntarily give the money to the government, mind you, they take if from me by force. Forcing someone to buy healthcare sounds oddly familiar.
They force the noncustodial parent to pay for Health insurance on their child.
But if your still married you don't have to cover anyone.
But they don't enforce visitation which is also law.
Follow the money....
DN is wrong. The Constitution is not a "creation of the states" but of the American people, who are SOVEREIGN. The preamble says "We the People" not "We the States." The states are not sovereign.
The biggest problem is trusting a Marxist Professor President. This is just a first step for the progressives on the road to a single payer system that Obama wants. More control, less money to provide for our own families, less to give to charities other than the federal government. Yes there are many problems with insurance care reform, and there are even more unintended consequences when we trust corrupt and conspiring people.
When will we learn?
KM: So true. When will we learn? You are still trusting the corrupt and conspiring Insurance executives whose sole motive is to provide a good return for their stockholders. Instead, shouldn't we be devising a system (and single payer is actually a good alternative) whose sole goal is to provide good healthcare for ALL Americans? I keep hearing how healthcare reform is going to limit my individual liberties, yet no one can tell me which liberties I stand to lose. How is nationalized healthcare bad?
I am guessing that everyone who has posted here so far enjoys the benefits of health care in one form or another? But if you suddenly lost all of your benefits you might change your stance. Case in Point:
My uncle lost his job and insurance in the bad economy and shortly thereafter suffered complications from high blood pressure which forced him to go to the hospital. Thankfully he is ok and got another job. But geuss what? That brief stint of unemployment and unfortunate timing of health complications have left his with huge bills to pay.
Justify that for me. Let he who is without health insurance cast the first stone
It's obvious that this isn't "HEALTH REFORM".
Think about it...
- Does this bill reform our "Health"???
- What in the bill even reforms "Healthcare"???
Why not call it what it is??? "Health INSURANCE Reform"?
Every rule change in this bill affects Health INSURANCE... NOT Healthcare!
Name a rule in this bill that changes/reforms Healthcare....
-Does it require doctors or hospitals or drug vendors to charge less??? NO!
-Does it require people to consume less??? NO!
-Does it require people to be more healthy??? NO!
So why don't we just call it what it is??? Rules intended to eventually do away with Private Insurance??? That's what it's obviously all about isn't it?
Life is full of problems; so whate eles is new.
Tried | 3:16 p.m.
That life is full of problems is probably understood and accepted by most people.
That more GOVERMENT is the only possible solution.... is where you'll probably start getting some kick-back.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments