New study shows 151 Congressmen get the Public Option now

catmando · 10-25-2009, 05:39 PM

The 55 hypocrites listed below, including RON PAUL, get Medicare but voted against the Public Option.

NEWS: New Weiner Study Shows 151 Members of House and Senate Get the ?Public Option? Now

Weiner Calls on GOP Opponents of the Public Option to Give Up Their Medicare

WASHINGTON, DC?A new study by Representative Anthony Weiner (D ? Queens & Brooklyn), member of the Health Subcommittee and Co-Chair of the Caucus on the Middle Class, revealed that 151 members of the House and Senate currently receive government-funded; government-administered single-payer health care - Medicare.

On the list of recipients are 55 Republicans who have steadfastly opposed other Americans getting the public option, like the one they have chosen.

Weiner said, ?Even in a town known for hypocrisy, this list of 55 Members of Congress deserve some sort of prize. They apparently think the public option is ok for them, but not anyone else.?

The list of congressional recipients of Medicare who also oppose the public option is below:

Rep. Ralph M. Hall
Rep. Roscoe G. Bartlett
Rep. Sam Johnson
Rep. C.W. Bill Young
Rep. Howard Coble
Sen. Jim Bunning
Sen. Richard G. Lugar
Rep. Don Young
Sen. Charles E. Grassley
Sen. Robert F. Bennett
Rep. Vernon J. Ehlers
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch
Sen. Richard C. Shelby
Rep. Jerry Lewis
Sen. James M. Inhofe
Rep. RON PAUL <---------------
Rep. Henry E. Brown
Sen. Pat Roberts
Sen. George V. Voinovich
Sen. John McCain
Rep. Judy Biggert
Sen. Thad Cochran
Rep. Harold Rogers
Rep. Dan Burton
Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon
Rep. Frank R. Wolf
Sen. Christopher S. Bond
Rep. Michael N. Castle
Rep. Joe Pitts
Rep. Tom Petri
Sen. Lamar Alexander
Rep. Doc Hastings
Rep. Cliff Stearns
Rep. Sue Myrick
Rep. John Carter
Sen. Mitch McConnell
Sen. Jon Kyl
Rep. Phil Gingrey
Rep. Nathan Deal
Rep. John Linder
Rep. Kay Granger
Rep. John L. Mica
Rep. Walter B. Jones
Sen. Jim Risch
Rep. Ed Whitfield
Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner
Rep. Virginia Foxx
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison
Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite
Sen. Saxby Chambliss
Sen. Michael B. Enzi
Rep. Elton Gallegly
Rep. Donald Manzullo
Rep. Peter T. King
Rep. Ander Crenshaw

http://weiner.house.gov/news_display.aspx?id=1364

Just for you batboy...

otisthebat · 10-25-2009, 05:41 PM

where is your source?

and yeah im sure members of congress cannot afford their own health insurance. congress doesnt use government healthcare.

OatsandSteak · 10-25-2009, 05:43 PM

How do you opt out of medicare? Isn't it available for all seniors?

thepointman · 10-25-2009, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by otisthebat

where is your source?

and yeah im sure members of congress cannot afford their own health insurance. congress doesnt use government healthcare.

You are wrong. They use the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan: http://www.opm.gov/INSURE/HEALTH/

http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/BG1123.cfm

Quote:

The FEHBP is not experiencing the severe financial problems faced by Medicare. It is run by a very small bureaucracy that, unlike Medicare's, does not try to set prices for doctors and hospitals. It offers choices of modern benefits and private plans to federal retirees (and active workers) that are unavailable in Medicare. It provides comprehensive information to enrollees. And it uses a completely different payment system that blends a formula with negotiations to achieve a remarkable level of cost control while constantly improving benefits and enjoying wide popularity.

catmando · 10-25-2009, 06:00 PM

...congress doesnt use government healthcare. batboy

I just linked to Rep. Weiner's website. Go there and tell him he's wrong.

otisthebat · 10-25-2009, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catmando

...congress doesnt use government healthcare. batboy

I just linked to Rep. Weiner's website. Go there and tell him he's wrong.

well i dont know what to tell you. medicare is for seniors that cant afford health insurance. are you telling me that members of congress cant afford their own insurance? it might just be that they are eligible, since his site doesnt show the source for his data.

Inev · 10-25-2009, 06:11 PM

Isnt it true that all government officials have to receive that health care? i could be wrong.

Also, if ron paul is against government health care for the people, what makes you think that he would want it either? he would only be a hypocrite if he wanted health care for the people and not himself.

and health care for congressman =/= health care for Americans.

Spetsnazos · 10-25-2009, 06:18 PM

time to blindly defend Ron Paul!!!

r0gue6 · 10-25-2009, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OatsandSteak

How do you opt out of medicare? Isn't it available for all seniors?

I don't think you can opt out.

otisthebat · 10-25-2009, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spetsnazos

time to blindly defend Ron Paul!!!

i didnt see anyone defending ron paul in this thread.

Melkor · 10-25-2009, 06:23 PM

It's a simple matter of age, as far as I understand it. Once you hit the age requirement you are enrolled automatically. I am watching a 60 Minutes special on Medicare fraud right now, and they say that all you need is a name, address and birthday for someone and you can charge any amount you want to Medicare and they will pay it almost without exception. You have to provide no proof of service, treatment etc, and it didn't sound like there was any question about enrollment beyond age requirement.

catmando · 10-25-2009, 06:25 PM

Also, if ron paul is against government health care for the people, what makes you think that he would want it either? he would only be a hypocrite if he wanted health care for the people and not himself. Inev

He is on the list as receiving Federal healthcare and he voted AGAINST the Public Option for the rest of America. That pretty much meets the requirements for hypocrisy.

Melkor · 10-25-2009, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catmando

Also, if ron paul is against government health care for the people, what makes you think that he would want it either? he would only be a hypocrite if he wanted health care for the people and not himself. Inev

He is on the list as receiving Federal healthcare and he voted AGAINST the Public Option for the rest of America. That pretty much meets the requirements for hypocrisy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

It's a simple matter of age, as far as I understand it. Once you hit the age requirement you are enrolled automatically. I am watching a 60 Minutes special on Medicare fraud right now, and they say that all you need is a name, address and birthday for someone and you can charge any amount you want to Medicare and they will pay it almost without exception. You have to provide no proof of service, treatment etc, and it didn't sound like there was any question about enrollment beyond age requirement.

I would bet you reps that it's purely age-based. If you look at those 151 Congressmen they are going to be over the age-requirements for Medicare. It's a non-issue. Warren Buffet would be on that list.

F23 · 10-25-2009, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

I would bet you reps that it's purely age-based. If you look at those 151 Congressmen they are going to be over the age-requirements for Medicare. It's a non-issue. Warren Buffet would be on that list.

Quote:

Enrollment in Medicare Parts A and B is automatic. Shortly before your and/or your family member's 65th birthday, Social Security will mail the Medicare card(s) and start deducting the Part B premium from the Social Security check.

From a UCSF Hospital patient Pamphlet
http://ucsfhr.ucsf.edu/files/medicarechart05.pdf

The copy-pasta troll is defeated yet again.

Melkor · 10-25-2009, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F23

From a UCSF Hospital patient Pamphlet
http://ucsfhr.ucsf.edu/files/medicarechart05.pdf

The copy-pasta troll is defeated yet again.

I hear liberal crickets chirping in here right now.

thepointman · 10-25-2009, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

I hear liberal crickets chirping in here right now.

Feel free to respond to this then:

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

You are wrong. They use the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan: http://www.opm.gov/INSURE/HEALTH/

http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/BG1123.cfm

Quote:

The FEHBP is not experiencing the severe financial problems faced by Medicare. It is run by a very small bureaucracy that, unlike Medicare's, does not try to set prices for doctors and hospitals. It offers choices of modern benefits and private plans to federal retirees (and active workers) that are unavailable in Medicare. It provides comprehensive information to enrollees. And it uses a completely different payment system that blends a formula with negotiations to achieve a remarkable level of cost control while constantly improving benefits and enjoying wide popularity.

reyalp · 10-25-2009, 06:58 PM

another fail thread by catmando

reyalp · 10-25-2009, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

Feel free to respond to this then:

That's not government healthcare. That's government insurance.

thepointman · 10-25-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reyalp

That's not government healthcare. That's government insurance.

That's what Medicare is. Nobody is calling for government health care. Very few countries have that, actually. The biggest example being the UK.

asylumz · 10-25-2009, 07:13 PM

Yeah the federal government is a bunch of thugs, what's your point?

otisthebat · 10-25-2009, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Enrollment in Medicare Parts A and B is automatic.

fail thread is fail.

Melkor · 10-25-2009, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

Feel free to respond to this then:

The FEHBP is just insurance for government employees. My own father is on that. It's part of employment with the government. Ron Paul is also paid by the Federal gov't, is that also wrong somehow?

thepointman · 10-25-2009, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

The FEHBP is just insurance for government employees. My own father is on that. It's part of employment with the government. Ron Paul is also paid by the Federal gov't, is that also wrong somehow?

No, it's not wrong, unless you're arguing that a government run option is a bad idea because the government can't run an effective insurance system while at the same time enjoying the benefits of good government run insurance. Which is what Paul (and those other Republicans) are doing.

Melkor · 10-25-2009, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

No, it's not wrong, unless you're arguing that a government run option is a bad idea because the government can't run an effective insurance system while at the same time enjoying the benefits of good government run insurance. Which is what Paul (and those other Republicans) are doing.

It's all good if you can benefit from competition and private sector economics while at the same time paying for the service with funds stolen from the private sector. FEHBP is nothing more than health insurance provided by the Federal gov't. It is conditional upon employment with the Federal gov't. It is no different in that way than your own insurance, if you have any, except that it is paid for with tax revenues instead of money earned.

thepointman · 10-25-2009, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

It's all good if you can benefit from competition and private sector economics while at the same time paying for the service with funds stolen from the private sector. FEHBP is nothing more than health insurance provided by the Federal gov't. It is conditional upon employment with the Federal gov't. It is no different in that way than your own insurance, if you have any, except that it is paid for with tax revenues instead of money earned.

Why should health insurance be tied to employment? Why can't we buy into a government plan instead of a private one? Do you think private insurers should only let people who work at certain companies by their insurance?

Melkor · 10-25-2009, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

Why should health insurance be tied to employment? Why can't we buy into a government plan instead of a private one? Do you think private insurers should only let people who work at certain companies by their insurance?

I'm all for delinking insurance from employment. Government policy is what has created that link, and until I can get the same tax benefit for buying insurance that my employer gets it will remain that way.

Your argument is that Ron Paul is a hypocrite for taking FEHBP, which I am just pointing out is nothing more than one of the benefits of his employment as a Congressman, no different than your own employee-sponsored health insurance other than who pays for it.

thepointman · 10-25-2009, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

I'm all for delinking insurance from employment. Government policy is what has created that link, and until I can get the same tax benefit for buying insurance that my employer gets it will remain that way.

Fair enough

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

Your argument is that Ron Paul is a hypocrite for taking FEHBP, which I am just pointing out is nothing more than one of the benefits of his employment as a Congressman, no different than your own employee-sponsored health insurance other than who pays for it.

My problem is that they say that government can't run effective health insurance when their very own plans (that they use and enjoy) demonstrate the opposite. If everyone had the level of insurance given by FEHBP, America would be in amazing shape (metaphorically).

Melkor · 10-25-2009, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

My problem is that they say that government can't run effective health insurance when their very own plans (that they use and enjoy) demonstrate the opposite. If everyone had the level of insurance given by FEHBP, America would be in amazing shape (metaphorically).

Other than the fact that we would be trillions of dollars in the red and the monetary system would collapse. Other than that everything would be awesome.

reyalp · 10-25-2009, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

That's what Medicare is. Nobody is calling for government health care. Very few countries have that, actually. The biggest example being the UK.

We are among the few, then, given the VA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thepointman

My problem is that they say that government can't run effective health insurance when their very own plans (that they use and enjoy) demonstrate the opposite. If everyone had the level of insurance given by FEHBP, America would be in amazing shape (metaphorically).

How many people are enrolled in FEHBP?

thepointman · 10-25-2009, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

Other than the fact that we would be trillions of dollars in the red and the monetary system would collapse. Other than that everything would be awesome.

I don't think that has to be the case. How come no other country's health insurance schemes have collapsed?

Quote:

Originally Posted by reyalp

We are among the few, then, given the VA.

Nobody wants the VA writ large.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melkor

How many people are enrolled in FEHBP?

Must be at least 3 million.