Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 09-09-2009 7:40 AM by MI Health Facts. 3 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (4 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    • admin
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 11-22-2008

    2009 House Joint Resolution Z (Affirm right to independent (non-government) health care )

    Introduced in the House on August 19, 2009

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 08-29-2009 2:09 PM In reply to

    Re: 2009 House Joint Resolution Z (Affirm right to independent (non-government) health care )

     This is a step in the right direction Michigan, as far as State restrictions go.  But we have to pass HCR004/SCR004 in the Michigan Legislature to reassert our 10th Amendment rights over our out-of-control Federal Government.  Also, HR 1207/S 604 to bring the unconstitutional central bank, the Federal Reserve, under the supervision of Congress.

  • 08-29-2009 10:12 PM In reply to

    • gypsy
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 03-19-2009

    Re: 2009 House Joint Resolution Z (Affirm right to independent (non-government) health care )

    • Main Entry: 1op·tion
    • Pronunciation: \ˈäp-shən\
    • Function: noun
    • Etymology: French, from Latin option-, optio free choice; akin to Latin optare to choose
    • Date: 1593

    1 : an act of choosing
    2 a : the power or right to choose : freedom of choice b : a privilege of demanding fulfillment of a contract on any day within a specified time c : a contract conveying a right to buy or sell designated securities, commodities, or property interest at a specified price during a stipulated period; also : the right conveyed by an option d : a right of an insured person to choose the form in which payments due on a policy shall be made or applied
    3 : something that may be chosen: as a : an alternative course of action <didn't have many options open> b : an item that is offered in addition to or in place of standard equipment

    as in public "option".

  • 09-09-2009 7:40 AM In reply to

    Re: 2009 House Joint Resolution Z (Affirm right to independent (non-government) health care )

    The Congressional Budget Office has said in its analyses of the various bills before Congress and the US Sentate that the bills containing a government health plan would result in some people losing their private insurance. This would either be because lower-cost, high deductible plans would be legislated out of existence or coverage mandates would rule existing plans as "insuffiicient" coverage, even if the policy holders are happy with them. 

    A public option would also have government backing, and even if it is intended to be self-sufficient, it would merely be the latest in a long line of "self-sufficient" government-backed operations, like Amtrak, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to be guaranteed a bailout if they continuously operate at a loss. Insurance companies may be able to lower costs, but they cannot compete with a company capable of operating at a loss continuously without the fear of going out of business. It is much more likely that a public "option" would overrun the market, leaving it as basically the only option left - basically, what happened with Medicare.

    We could call the Bush administration fiscally responsible - that wouldn't make it so. Putting "option" on the name for a government-run health insurance company doesn't guarantee its status as one, either.

Page 1 of 1 (4 items)
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems