Rendell: Healthcare Bill Must Increase Insured

Gov. Ed Rendell said Thursday he won’t sign a health care reform package that doesn’t provide a ‘‘significant increase’‘ in the number of people with coverage or extend benefits to those who are already sick and can’t otherwise get insurance.

‘‘My goal is to make sure that every Pennsylvanian can get access to health care, that just because they have a pre-existing condition, that they’re not shut off,’‘ Rendell said at a news conference.

The fact that people with such conditions can’t get care is ‘‘nuts,’‘ Rendell said. ‘‘That’s saying we have a health care system that doesn’t apply to the people who need it the most.’‘

Filed under:

Nice to hear

that Rendell is standing up for the uninsured and needs to help the Underinsured too. It is nuts that Health Insurers get to deny coverage, or that we currently have a system that does not help those who lose their coverage when they lose their employment.

It is incredibly criminal that PA Republicans do not support helping the uninsured when their own health care is FREE and taxpayer paid!! They need to start paying – then we will hear a different story.

No one should go bankrupt or not be able to afford health care.

We should be hearing from

We should be hearing from the anti-nanny crowd shortly. They love this kind of stuff. This blog will be littered for the next few days that this is just another nanny attack on those that feel helping people is a sin. Strange they have no problem collecting unemployment, Social Security ( no, that isn’t all your money that you collect. It comes from all of us), Medicare and a thousand other benefits our “socialistic government” gives to YOU.

Those disgusting ant-nanny

Those disgusting ant-nanny people! The fools think that just because they were forced to pay 14% of their income to Social Security every day they worked, that it’s their money.
It’s not. It’s nannies. Everything belongs, or should belong to nanny, because only nanny can spend it wisely.
While socialized medicine isn’t working in Europe, it does work in Canada, because Canadians can come down here for medical help any time they need it.
Where will they go when nanny takes over?
Those anti-nannies make me sick. Why don’t they just all die? Come to think of it, socialized medicine will help get rid of them.
Besides, people in America are now living longer than ever. That hurts us all, because it makes Global Warming worse. So, more death is the answer, and socialized medicine will help!

If you had your way, what

If you had your way, what would the world be like? There is always plenty of criticism, but never solutions. What would you do?

I’m not exactly sure what

I’m not exactly sure what you are saying, but at what point does a civilized society turn its back on its less privileged and simply say you are on your own. Sure we could all stop paying taxes and stop paying into Social Security and set up our own retirements and live happily ever after, but that isn’t what this country is all about. I suppose helping others sounds a bit Socialistic, but it also sounds a bit human. It is a fact of life that there are folks that need help and those of us that are doing OK should help. Maybe we should setup a system where helping fellow Americans should be an option. Where helping people should be a choice. That way those that are above ever needing help don’t have to help those less fortunate. But if you are above helping, when its your turn you are shit out of luck.

Socialism as faux issue

Calling anything “socialist” or “socialized” in our nation has by an easy smear for the past 50 years or so, but it is becoming less so. Younger people don’t connect the word to Il Duce or the USSR, so it simply doesn’t have the pejorative connotation it once did.

But, as others have noted, we have a whole raft of programs which are, by and large, socialized; The Interstate Highway System, the entire Military complex, Public schools, Social Security. And we rely on the socialized oversight of the FAA, the FTC, the FDA and dozens of other agencies to keep our food safe and our airlines in order. Wanna get rid of all of them and let everyone fend for themselves?

This entire, “the government is bloated and inefficient” argument has been around for decades and represents nothing more than a straw man. Of course, what’s funny is that nothing every changes, no matter who ends up “in charge.”

The “anti-nanny” tripe that has been bandied about here is a specious non-argument in the ripe tradition of the GOP, where name-calling takes the place of informed discussion. Indeed, if the constant anti-nanny writer actually had one, I’m sure she would call him to task for his socially unacceptable ranting and pedantic raving…

Pilt

Nanny failed to force

Nanny failed to force employees in couple of counties in Texas to pay into Social Security. Instead, they get to invest their money.
They get all their cash back (hundreds of thousands of dollars!) in a lump sum on retirement. PLUS, they get two to four thousand dollars A MONTH.
Only a crazy person couldthink Social Security is a good deal. Social Security is certainly not a good enough deal for government employees, who have a far, far better system than they allow us peasants.
Nanny’s dream has come true. Nannies get richer, we get poorer.

Socialist Banking now

why not healthcare. We can use taxpayer $$ billions to bail out banks that make poor investment decisions – but we can’t come up with some tax dollars to make health care more affordable.

Can we please stop being nannies to Banks?

Post new comment

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote> <img> <div class="pullquote">
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • You can use Textile markup to format text.

More information about formatting options

We’ve developed a participation policy to help guide the tone of discussion in our community. Please read it to learn more about participating in Keystone Politics.