BREAKING:Obama says he would veto bill letting you keep your present health care plan

[bigrebnc1775]

1. what if they were happy with their old policies?
2. obama promised them they could keep them, period
3. why is it better to force a 60 year old to pay for maternity and birth control?
4. who gave the govt the right to mandate the terms of a medical policy?
5. do you know what the word "freedom" means?

This was decided in 2010, upheld in 2012 by SCOTUS and the general election.

No it wasn't. they voted that the law was constitutional, not that it was a good law.

a biased media and black pride gave obama a second term-------oh, and some voter fraud in a couple of counties in Ohio and florida.

They voted that it was a tax which made it constitutional something it was not supposed to be.

 

[Antares]

1. what if they were happy with their old policies?
2. obama promised them they could keep them, period
3. why is it better to force a 60 year old to pay for maternity and birth control?
4. who gave the govt the right to mandate the terms of a medical policy?
5. do you know what the word "freedom" means?

This was decided in 2010, upheld in 2012 by SCOTUS and the general election.

No it wasn't. they voted that the law was constitutional, not that it was a good law.

a biased media and black pride gave obama a second term-------oh, and some voter fraud in a couple of counties in Ohio and florida.

Actually what was decided was that it WAS a Tax despite the Amins claims that it WASN'T a Tax.

 

[Zoom-boing]

we can now let people keep their plans after all...obama says that's fine.
Obama now decrees these plans as acceptable.
But then says republicans pushing to allow people to get these same plans are not acceptable.

Can someone explain just what the fuck obama is doing?

lsd.

 

[dblack]

No, it really would not be better. It would complete the bankruptcy of this nation.

I doubt it. Because, compared to the shell games we're playing with ACA, it would be above board and we could see clearly what it was costing us. We'd scale back our expectations to match what we could afford. It would be much better than setting the insane precedent of, essentially, granting corporations the right to levy and collect taxes.

ask the canadians who are moving away from socialized medicine as a failed experiment.

I suspect, I'd hope, that we'd 'move away' from it as well. I think I've been clear, I'm no fan of socialism. But corporatism is worse.

 

[paperview]

Nothing to "wiggle out of". People are already buying health insurance. Those that weren't were not doing so because they couldn't afford it. The ACA makes sure that now they can.

Remember that this is a Republican healthcare plan. It has the expectation that all households will carry health insurance. The only difference being that the households that previously could not afford it would be able to do so with the aid of subsidies.

first of all, there was no healthcare crisis before ACA. NO ONE in the USA was being denied medical treatment, NO ONE, even those here illegally were receiving first class treatment.

The poor were on medicaid, those with insurance were paying for those who did not have it. Nothing will change under ACA. The poor will not have to pay for their coverage and the rest of us will have higher premiums to cover those who do not pay-------exactly like we have now.

BUT, and its a big But, now we also have to pay for a huge new govt beaurocracy that will be created by ACA. It will suck up bilions and will slow everything down and set up all kinds of opportunities for fraud and abuse, not to mention waste.

The whole idea is lunacy. It will never work, and its already falling apart as obama tells one lie on top of the previous lies.

Does your planet have any oxygen at all?

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This was decided in 2010, upheld in 2012 by SCOTUS and the general election.

No it wasn't. they voted that the law was constitutional, not that it was a good law.

a biased media and black pride gave obama a second term-------oh, and some voter fraud in a couple of counties in Ohio and florida.

Actually what was decided was that it WAS a Tax despite the Amins claims that it WASN'T a Tax.

It is what it is never mind how many times obama denied that it was a tax.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Then why is it called a 'mandate'? You're simply denying the obvious, which sort of stymies discussion. The mandate is forcing people to buy more insurance than many of them want, and not funding the purchase. I'm not sure why it even matters to you enough to make a fuss over, but it very definitely is an unfunded mandate.



OK. So what? Republicans come up with bad ideas too? Yep.

Anyway, the point is, if we want to have welfare state policies, like EMTALA, we should pay for them honestly with taxes. Then, when we see the price tag in straightforward terms, we can decide, as a nation, if it's worth it. Playing all the shell games just keeps us chasing our tails.

So to cut to the chase you are endorsing Single-Payer as the solution?

No. I'd prefer government stay out of health care altogether. But I wouldn't be raising hell about single payer. It would be a far better approach then the current boondoggle.

I have to agree. On the upside the conversion of the ACA into Single-payer takes nothing more than a simple amendment to allow anyone to purchase Medicare on the exchanges.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

first of all, there was no healthcare crisis before ACA. NO ONE in the USA was being denied medical treatment, NO ONE, even those here illegally were receiving first class treatment.

The poor were on medicaid, those with insurance were paying for those who did not have it. Nothing will change under ACA. The poor will not have to pay for their coverage and the rest of us will have higher premiums to cover those who do not pay-------exactly like we have now.

BUT, and its a big But, now we also have to pay for a huge new govt beaurocracy that will be created by ACA. It will suck up bilions and will slow everything down and set up all kinds of opportunities for fraud and abuse, not to mention waste.

The whole idea is lunacy. It will never work, and its already falling apart as obama tells one lie on top of the previous lies.

Does your planet have any oxygen at all?

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

I feel the same way about you.

 

[Redfish]

Nothing to "wiggle out of". People are already buying health insurance. Those that weren't were not doing so because they couldn't afford it. The ACA makes sure that now they can.

Remember that this is a Republican healthcare plan. It has the expectation that all households will carry health insurance. The only difference being that the households that previously could not afford it would be able to do so with the aid of subsidies.

first of all, there was no healthcare crisis before ACA. NO ONE in the USA was being denied medical treatment, NO ONE, even those here illegally were receiving first class treatment.

The poor were on medicaid, those with insurance were paying for those who did not have it. Nothing will change under ACA. The poor will not have to pay for their coverage and the rest of us will have higher premiums to cover those who do not pay-------exactly like we have now.

BUT, and its a big But, now we also have to pay for a huge new govt beaurocracy that will be created by ACA. It will suck up bilions and will slow everything down and set up all kinds of opportunities for fraud and abuse, not to mention waste.

The whole idea is lunacy. It will never work, and its already falling apart as obama tells one lie on top of the previous lies.

Does your planet have any oxygen at all?

yep, plants produce it and animals consume it.

But, since you disagree, tell us who in the USA was being denied medical treatment before ACA. Give us a list by category, age, race, location, nationality, or any grouping you choose. WHO was denied medical care in the USA?

 

[paperview]

Does your planet have any oxygen at all?

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

I feel the same way about you.

Feel whatever you want.

You've yet to prove me wrong. Ever.

 

[Redfish]

first of all, there was no healthcare crisis before ACA. NO ONE in the USA was being denied medical treatment, NO ONE, even those here illegally were receiving first class treatment.

The poor were on medicaid, those with insurance were paying for those who did not have it. Nothing will change under ACA. The poor will not have to pay for their coverage and the rest of us will have higher premiums to cover those who do not pay-------exactly like we have now.

BUT, and its a big But, now we also have to pay for a huge new govt beaurocracy that will be created by ACA. It will suck up bilions and will slow everything down and set up all kinds of opportunities for fraud and abuse, not to mention waste.

The whole idea is lunacy. It will never work, and its already falling apart as obama tells one lie on top of the previous lies.

Does your planet have any oxygen at all?

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

Ok, dingleberry, same question for you. before ACA who in the USA was being denied medical care? list em, name em, categorize em, tell us who they were.

 

[Derideo_Te]

1. what if they were happy with their old policies?
2. obama promised them they could keep them, period
3. why is it better to force a 60 year old to pay for maternity and birth control?
4. who gave the govt the right to mandate the terms of a medical policy?
5. do you know what the word "freedom" means?

This was decided in 2010, upheld in 2012 by SCOTUS and the general election.

No it wasn't. they voted that the law was constitutional, not that it was a good law.

a biased media and black pride gave obama a second term-------oh, and some voter fraud in a couple of counties in Ohio and florida.

Voter "fraud" is allowed in red states? Got any actual indictments to substantiate those allegations?

 

[Derideo_Te]

first of all, there was no healthcare crisis before ACA. NO ONE in the USA was being denied medical treatment, NO ONE, even those here illegally were receiving first class treatment.

The poor were on medicaid, those with insurance were paying for those who did not have it. Nothing will change under ACA. The poor will not have to pay for their coverage and the rest of us will have higher premiums to cover those who do not pay-------exactly like we have now.

BUT, and its a big But, now we also have to pay for a huge new govt beaurocracy that will be created by ACA. It will suck up bilions and will slow everything down and set up all kinds of opportunities for fraud and abuse, not to mention waste.

The whole idea is lunacy. It will never work, and its already falling apart as obama tells one lie on top of the previous lies.

Does your planet have any oxygen at all?

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

And don't forget, those are on his good days too!

 

[paperview]

Does your planet have any oxygen at all?

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

Ok, dingleberry, same question for you. before ACA who in the USA was being denied medical care? list em, name em, categorize em, tell us who they were.

Here's some:

Twelve-Year-Old Died In 2007 From Abscessed Tooth After His Family's Medicaid Lapsed. In 2007, as The Washington Post reported:

Deamonte Driver, a 12-year-old homeless child, died Sunday in a District hospital after an infection from a molar spread to his brain.
At the time he fell ill, his family's Medicaid coverage had lapsed. Even on the state plan, his mother said, the children lacked regular dental care and she had great difficulty finding a dentist. [The Washington Post, 3/3/07]
​

Seventeen-Year-Old's Insurance Revoked After He Tests HIV Positive. According to Huffington Post, in 2009:

The South Carolina Supreme Court has ordered an insurance company to pay $10 million for wrongly revoking the insurance policy of a 17-year-old college student after he tested positive for HIV. The court called the 2002 decision by the insurance company "reprehensible."
[...]
Mitchell learned that he had HIV when, while heading to college, he donated blood. Fortis then rescinded his coverage, citing what turned out to be an erroneous note from a nurse in his medical records that indicated that he might have been diagnosed prior to his obtaining his insurance policy.
Before the cancellation of the policy, an underwriter working for Fortis wrote to a committee considering whether or not to rescind his policy: "Technically, we do not have the results of the HIV tests. This is the only entry in the medical records regarding HIV status. Is it sufficient?" The underwriter's concerns were ignored and the rescission went forward. [Huffington Post, 9/17/09]
​

Woman Denied Coverage For Breast Cancer Because She Wasn't Diagnosed At Correct Clinic. From The Wall Street Journal:

In June 2003, Shirley Loewe went to Good Shepherd Medical Center here with a softball-size lump in her breast and was diagnosed with a rare form of breast cancer. She didn't know it, but she had just made a big mistake.
Ms. Loewe was uninsured. Under federal law, she could have gotten Medicaid coverage -- and saved herself a lot of hardship -- if she'd gone to a different clinic less than a half-mile away. But by walking through Good Shepherd's doors, Ms. Loewe unwittingly let that opportunity slip and embarked on a four-year journey through the Byzantine U.S. health-care system.
It was an odyssey that would take her to five hospitals, two clinics, two charitable organizations and two nursing homes in two states. She was denied assistance or care at least six times along the way, for reasons that ranged from not being poor enough to not being sick enough.
Ms. Loewe eventually got treatment, but at personal cost and great aggravation. [The Wall Street Journal, 9/13/07]
​

Woman's Double Mastectomy Denied Over Disputed Acne Treatment. CNN reported that in 2009:

Robin Beaton found out last June she had an aggressive form of breast cancer and needed surgery -- immediately.
Her insurance carrier precertified her for a double mastectomy and hospital stay. But three days before the operation, the insurance company called and told her they had red-flagged her chart and she would not be able to have her surgery.
The reason? In May 2008, Beaton had visited a dermatologist for acne. A word written on her chart was interpreted to mean precancerous, so the insurance company decided to launch an investigation into her medical history.
Beaton's dermatologist begged her insurance provider to go ahead with the surgery.
[...]
Still, the insurance carrier decided to rescind her coverage. The company said it had reviewed her medical records and found out that she had misinformed them about some of her medical history.
Beaton had listed her weight incorrectly. She also didn't disclose medication she had taken for a pre-existing heart condition -- medicine she wasn't taking when she originally applied for coverage. [CNN, 6/16/09]
​

9/11 Responders Without Insurance Face Inferior Coverage For Sustained Injuries. From The New York Times:

The largest health study yet of the thousands of workers who labored at ground zero shows that the impact of the rescue and recovery effort on their health has been more widespread and persistent than previously thought, and is likely to linger far into the future.
The study, released yesterday by doctors at Mount Sinai Medical Center, is expected to erase any lingering doubts about the connection between dust from the trade center and numerous diseases that the workers have reported suffering. It is also expected to increase pressure on the federal government to provide health care for sick workers who do not have health insurance.
[...]
There should no longer be any doubt about the health effects of the World Trade Center disaster," said Dr. Robin Herbert, co-director of Mount Sinai's World Trade Center Worker and Volunteer Medical Screening Program. "Our patients are sick, and they will need ongoing care for the rest of their lives."
Dr. Herbert called the findings, which will be published tomorrow in Environmental Health Perspectives, the journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, "very worrisome," especially because 40 percent of those who went to Mount Sinai for medical screening did not have health insurance, and will thus not get proper medical care. [The New York Times, 9/6/06]
​

Thousands Of Americans Have Been Denied Health Coverage And Care

Twenty-Five Percent Of Adults Under 65 Say They Or A Family Member Have Been Denied Coverage Or Charged More For Having Pre-existing Condition. According to a June 2013 survey from the Kaiser Foundation, one quarter of respondents under 65 "say that they or a family member has ever been denied insurance or had their premium increased because of their pre-existing condition":

Americans with pre-existing medical conditions often face problems in getting and retaining good health insurance coverage, an issue dealt with directly by ACA in its "guaranteed issue" provision, which prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage to individuals on the basis of health status or pre-existing medical conditions beginning in 2014. The June survey finds that roughly half (49 percent) of adults under age 65 say they or someone in their household has a pre-existing condition, and many of them report problems related to getting and keeping insurance.
One quarter (25 percent) of these individuals (14 percent of all non-elderly adults) say that they or a family member has ever been denied insurance or had their premium increased because of their pre-existing condition. Further, nearly one in ten (9 percent) of these individuals say that in the past year, they or someone in their household has passed up a job opportunity, stayed at a job they would have quit otherwise, or decided not to retire in order to maintain their health coverage. [Kaiser Foundation, 6/19/13]
​

Forty-Five Thousand Americans DieEvery Year Due To Lack Of Insurance. In September 2009, a Harvard Medical School study found that a "lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States," The New York Times reported. The paper explained:

Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States -- a toll that is greater than the number of people who die each year from kidney disease.
[...]
The Harvard study found that people without health insurance had a 40 percent higher risk of death than those with private health insurance -- as a result of being unable to obtain necessary medical care. The risk appears to have increased since 1993, when a similar study found the risk of death was 25 percent greater for the uninsured.
The increase in risk, according to the study, is likely to be a result of at least two factors. One is the greater difficulty the uninsured have today in finding care, as public hospitals have closed or cut back on services. The other is improvements in medical care for insured people with treatable chronic conditions like high blood pressure. [The New York Times, 9/17/09]
​

Study Found That In 2010, Three Americans Died Every Hour From Lack Of Coverage. According to a June 2012 report from Families USA, "Across the nation, 26,100 people between the ages of 25 and 64 died prematurely due to a lack of health coverage in 2010," which works out to "three every hour." The report also found:

Between 2005 and 2010, the number of people who died prematurely each year due to a lack of health coverage rose from 20,350 to 26,100.
Between 2005 and 2010, the total number of people who died prematurely due to a lack of health coverage was 134,120.
Each and every state sees residents die prematurely due to a lack of health insurance. [Families USA, June 2012]
​

Over 7.5 Million People Denied Medical Care By Health Plans In First Six Months Of Bush's First Term.According to data from the Census Bureau and a report from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation analyzed by Families USA, "[M]ore than 7.5 million people experienced a problem with their health plan that resulted in a denial or delay of health care" in the month from President George W. Bush's inauguration to June 2001. Families USA wrote:

[A]pproximately 18.1 million Americans per year between 18 and 64 years of age experience a problem with their health plan that results in a denial or delay of medical care. [Families USA, 6/21/01]

Because Fox Asked, Here Are Examples Of People Who Were Denied Health Care | Research
​

 

[Redfish]

So to cut to the chase you are endorsing Single-Payer as the solution?

No. I'd prefer government stay out of health care altogether. But I wouldn't be raising hell about single payer. It would be a far better approach then the current boondoggle.

I have to agree. On the upside the conversion of the ACA into Single-payer takes nothing more than a simple amendment to allow anyone to purchase Medicare on the exchanges.

medicare is for people over 65 who have had money taken from their paychecks to pay for it.

you may mean medicaid, which is free to the poor, no one purchases it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

I feel the same way about you.

Feel whatever you want.

You've yet to prove me wrong. Ever.

that's not hard to do until you runaway.

 

[Redfish]

This was decided in 2010, upheld in 2012 by SCOTUS and the general election.

No it wasn't. they voted that the law was constitutional, not that it was a good law.

a biased media and black pride gave obama a second term-------oh, and some voter fraud in a couple of counties in Ohio and florida.

Voter "fraud" is allowed in red states? Got any actual indictments to substantiate those allegations?

those two states were blue in 2012, blue because of voter fraud.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

keeping the wingnut base pumped up and motivated, but is it enough?


this line of attack will fade as time goes by...

 

[Antares]

I wondered the same thing myself. Just about every post I read from him is either absurd, completely wrong or downright gibberish.

Sometimes a combination of all three.

Ok, dingleberry, same question for you. before ACA who in the USA was being denied medical care? list em, name em, categorize em, tell us who they were.

Here's some:

Twelve-Year-Old Died In 2007 From Abscessed Tooth After His Family's Medicaid Lapsed. In 2007, as The Washington Post reported:

Deamonte Driver, a 12-year-old homeless child, died Sunday in a District hospital after an infection from a molar spread to his brain.
At the time he fell ill, his family's Medicaid coverage had lapsed. Even on the state plan, his mother said, the children lacked regular dental care and she had great difficulty finding a dentist. [The Washington Post, 3/3/07]
​

Seventeen-Year-Old's Insurance Revoked After He Tests HIV Positive. According to Huffington Post, in 2009:

The South Carolina Supreme Court has ordered an insurance company to pay $10 million for wrongly revoking the insurance policy of a 17-year-old college student after he tested positive for HIV. The court called the 2002 decision by the insurance company "reprehensible."
[...]
Mitchell learned that he had HIV when, while heading to college, he donated blood. Fortis then rescinded his coverage, citing what turned out to be an erroneous note from a nurse in his medical records that indicated that he might have been diagnosed prior to his obtaining his insurance policy.
Before the cancellation of the policy, an underwriter working for Fortis wrote to a committee considering whether or not to rescind his policy: "Technically, we do not have the results of the HIV tests. This is the only entry in the medical records regarding HIV status. Is it sufficient?" The underwriter's concerns were ignored and the rescission went forward. [Huffington Post, 9/17/09]
​

Woman Denied Coverage For Breast Cancer Because She Wasn't Diagnosed At Correct Clinic. From The Wall Street Journal:

In June 2003, Shirley Loewe went to Good Shepherd Medical Center here with a softball-size lump in her breast and was diagnosed with a rare form of breast cancer. She didn't know it, but she had just made a big mistake.
Ms. Loewe was uninsured. Under federal law, she could have gotten Medicaid coverage -- and saved herself a lot of hardship -- if she'd gone to a different clinic less than a half-mile away. But by walking through Good Shepherd's doors, Ms. Loewe unwittingly let that opportunity slip and embarked on a four-year journey through the Byzantine U.S. health-care system.
It was an odyssey that would take her to five hospitals, two clinics, two charitable organizations and two nursing homes in two states. She was denied assistance or care at least six times along the way, for reasons that ranged from not being poor enough to not being sick enough.
Ms. Loewe eventually got treatment, but at personal cost and great aggravation. [The Wall Street Journal, 9/13/07]
​

Woman's Double Mastectomy Denied Over Disputed Acne Treatment. CNN reported that in 2009:

Robin Beaton found out last June she had an aggressive form of breast cancer and needed surgery -- immediately.
Her insurance carrier precertified her for a double mastectomy and hospital stay. But three days before the operation, the insurance company called and told her they had red-flagged her chart and she would not be able to have her surgery.
The reason? In May 2008, Beaton had visited a dermatologist for acne. A word written on her chart was interpreted to mean precancerous, so the insurance company decided to launch an investigation into her medical history.
Beaton's dermatologist begged her insurance provider to go ahead with the surgery.
[...]
Still, the insurance carrier decided to rescind her coverage. The company said it had reviewed her medical records and found out that she had misinformed them about some of her medical history.
Beaton had listed her weight incorrectly. She also didn't disclose medication she had taken for a pre-existing heart condition -- medicine she wasn't taking when she originally applied for coverage. [CNN, 6/16/09]
​

9/11 Responders Without Insurance Face Inferior Coverage For Sustained Injuries. From The New York Times:

The largest health study yet of the thousands of workers who labored at ground zero shows that the impact of the rescue and recovery effort on their health has been more widespread and persistent than previously thought, and is likely to linger far into the future.
The study, released yesterday by doctors at Mount Sinai Medical Center, is expected to erase any lingering doubts about the connection between dust from the trade center and numerous diseases that the workers have reported suffering. It is also expected to increase pressure on the federal government to provide health care for sick workers who do not have health insurance.
[...]
There should no longer be any doubt about the health effects of the World Trade Center disaster," said Dr. Robin Herbert, co-director of Mount Sinai's World Trade Center Worker and Volunteer Medical Screening Program. "Our patients are sick, and they will need ongoing care for the rest of their lives."
Dr. Herbert called the findings, which will be published tomorrow in Environmental Health Perspectives, the journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, "very worrisome," especially because 40 percent of those who went to Mount Sinai for medical screening did not have health insurance, and will thus not get proper medical care. [The New York Times, 9/6/06]
​

Thousands Of Americans Have Been Denied Health Coverage And Care

Twenty-Five Percent Of Adults Under 65 Say They Or A Family Member Have Been Denied Coverage Or Charged More For Having Pre-existing Condition. According to a June 2013 survey from the Kaiser Foundation, one quarter of respondents under 65 "say that they or a family member has ever been denied insurance or had their premium increased because of their pre-existing condition":

Americans with pre-existing medical conditions often face problems in getting and retaining good health insurance coverage, an issue dealt with directly by ACA in its "guaranteed issue" provision, which prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage to individuals on the basis of health status or pre-existing medical conditions beginning in 2014. The June survey finds that roughly half (49 percent) of adults under age 65 say they or someone in their household has a pre-existing condition, and many of them report problems related to getting and keeping insurance.
One quarter (25 percent) of these individuals (14 percent of all non-elderly adults) say that they or a family member has ever been denied insurance or had their premium increased because of their pre-existing condition. Further, nearly one in ten (9 percent) of these individuals say that in the past year, they or someone in their household has passed up a job opportunity, stayed at a job they would have quit otherwise, or decided not to retire in order to maintain their health coverage. [Kaiser Foundation, 6/19/13]
​

Forty-Five Thousand Americans DieEvery Year Due To Lack Of Insurance. In September 2009, a Harvard Medical School study found that a "lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States," The New York Times reported. The paper explained:

Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States -- a toll that is greater than the number of people who die each year from kidney disease.
[...]
The Harvard study found that people without health insurance had a 40 percent higher risk of death than those with private health insurance -- as a result of being unable to obtain necessary medical care. The risk appears to have increased since 1993, when a similar study found the risk of death was 25 percent greater for the uninsured.
The increase in risk, according to the study, is likely to be a result of at least two factors. One is the greater difficulty the uninsured have today in finding care, as public hospitals have closed or cut back on services. The other is improvements in medical care for insured people with treatable chronic conditions like high blood pressure. [The New York Times, 9/17/09]
​

Study Found That In 2010, Three Americans Died Every Hour From Lack Of Coverage. According to a June 2012 report from Families USA, "Across the nation, 26,100 people between the ages of 25 and 64 died prematurely due to a lack of health coverage in 2010," which works out to "three every hour." The report also found:

Between 2005 and 2010, the number of people who died prematurely each year due to a lack of health coverage rose from 20,350 to 26,100.
Between 2005 and 2010, the total number of people who died prematurely due to a lack of health coverage was 134,120.
Each and every state sees residents die prematurely due to a lack of health insurance. [Families USA, June 2012]
​

Over 7.5 Million People Denied Medical Care By Health Plans In First Six Months Of Bush's First Term.According to data from the Census Bureau and a report from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation analyzed by Families USA, "[M]ore than 7.5 million people experienced a problem with their health plan that resulted in a denial or delay of health care" in the month from President George W. Bush's inauguration to June 2001. Families USA wrote:

[A]pproximately 18.1 million Americans per year between 18 and 64 years of age experience a problem with their health plan that results in a denial or delay of medical care. [Families USA, 6/21/01]

Because Fox Asked, Here Are Examples Of People Who Were Denied Health Care | Research
​

Um....may I point out that the question was not about isurance but care?

Nobody gets denied "care" it is illegal to do so.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No it wasn't. they voted that the law was constitutional, not that it was a good law.

a biased media and black pride gave obama a second term-------oh, and some voter fraud in a couple of counties in Ohio and florida.

Actually what was decided was that it WAS a Tax despite the Amins claims that it WASN'T a Tax.

It is what it is never mind how many times obama denied that it was a tax.

What the radical reactionaries on the far right think does not matter.

They cannot ignore constitutional, electoral process and SCOTUS opinion, all of which negates their disagreement.

The constitutionality of this issue is over unless SCOTUS otherwise opines in the future.