Comments (24) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   bikemaster said, 2 months ago

   Well drawn ‘toon. Now, just for fun, let’s re-label that brief case: “Public Health Care” ……..then, add about fifteen additional Government employees standing around the bed with multiple forms to fill out………….poor Grandma! Not only would she be unable to comprehend those numbers with all those zeroes, she’d be scared to death by that mob of goons!

2. 

   sclark55 said, 2 months ago

   Show Grandma the bill - hmmm - this sounds a little like a document we heard about a few weeks ago written for veterans.

3. 

   treered said, 2 months ago

   with private health care, they wouldn’t have put the plug in in the first place….

4. 

   believecommonsense said, 2 months ago

   good toon, danziger, and actually it applies more to people under 65 than over 65. Could be anybody.

5. 

   scottfreitas said, 2 months ago

   The solution–as many within the GOP keep pointing out–is for government to write laws which create more competition, especially interstate competition among insurance companies. current Demoncrat-crafted laws have so stifled competition that only a few insurance giants (those deemed as “too big to fail”) tend to be allowed to offer coverage within any given state.

   Oh, also the trial lawyers like John Edwards who got filthy rich by robbing doctors, blaming doctors, lying about doctors, holding doctors responsible for countless 1000s of things beyond human control, etc NEED TO STOP. But the Demoncrats wont alow any tort reform, so there you go.

   As always, the Demoncrats first create all the problems, then demand to be allowed to take everything over and control it themselves. (Big Government).

6. 

   believecommonsense said, 2 months ago

   What those of you who propose this interstate competition theme fail to tell people is that the intent is to usurp laws individual states have proposed to curb insurance industry abusive practices. It is also quite hypocritical, of course, since conservatives usually promote state rights, but in this case, they are proposing throwing state rights out the window.

   Want an example? Here in CA the Legislature passed legislation banning what was becoming an industry-wide practice of paying for less than a 24-hour stay in a hospital for women giving birth. It was coined drive-by-birthing and due to insurance industry pressures, hospitals were routinely sending women home 12 to 18 hours after giving birth. The health problems of both mother and child increased dramatically because of this practice until it was stopped by the Legislature.

   This is what the GOPers are trying to get rid of. Insurers choose not to offer their product in some states because of these safeguards the states have passed.

   I’ll have to do more research, but I believe some states have passed laws that require insurers to cover colonoscopies for those over 50 and similar early detection tests that seem rather obvious would be good for the insurance subscriber and cost-effective in the long term.

7. 

   fritzoid said, 2 months ago

   “Oh, also the trial lawyers like John Edwards who got filthy rich by robbing doctors, blaming doctors, lying about doctors, holding doctors responsible for countless 1000s of things beyond human control, etc NEED TO STOP. But the Demoncrats wont alow any tort reform, so there you go.”

   The trial lawyers don’t decide whether a case can proceed to trial. That’s the judge’s job. The trial lawyers don’t decide whether a plaintiff can prevail on a complaint. That’s the jury’s job. The trial lawyers don’t get to dictate the damages awarded. That’s the jury’s job.

   Generally speaking, a personal injury plaintiff has an enormous uphill battle winning a case against a major player like an insurer or a multinational corporation. The best lawyers are usually the most expensive, and guess who can generally afford better lawyers?

   If a plaintiff’s lawyer lies about a doctor, he can be disbarred. If the cause of the complaint is truly beyond anyone’s control, that can be argued to the jury. And if you GET the sort of “tort reform” I imagine you’d LIKE, then what recourse does a person have when malpractice/negligence does in fact occur?

8. 

   ahab said, 2 months ago

   Gee, eight years to accomplish something and what did shrubby do?

9. 

   HOWGOZIT said, 2 months ago

   Ahab–you must be too dense to ascertain.

10. 

    deadheadzan said, 2 months ago

    Yes, the cartoon does apply more to those under 65 who don’t have Medicare. As grandma I feel safe that I have good health insurance. Young families that do not have affordable health care options are the ones I feel sorry for. I went to work as a nurse for the state of Pa. in order to get the health care benefit for my family. My husband was a self employed grain farmer and general contractor at the time. This was more than 35 years ago and health care costs have sky rocketed since then. I think true freedom in this country would be to have affordable health care that an individual could take with her. That way she could be self employed or travel anywhere and not be dependent on certain employers. It would certainly encourage the enterprenours among us.

11. 

    meowdam said, 2 months ago

    There is no way g’ma would still be covered too many pre existing conditions plus coverage caps would have kicked in by now.
    Gonna miss her .. sniff

12. 

    ChuckTrent64 said, 2 months ago

    And theynever consult with YOUR Dr. & to whom are THEY accountable?

13. 

    4uk4ata said, 2 months ago

    “Well drawn ‘toon. Now, just for fun, let’s re-label that brief case: “Public Health Care” ……..then, add about fifteen additional Government employees standing around the bed with multiple forms to fill out………….poor Grandma!”

    Hmmm, most public healthcare plans are cheaper and turn fewer insured people away. Grandma is indeed lucky to be on Medicare.

14. 

    David said, 2 months ago

    Yes, these politicians say “OOhh, Private insurance is Soooo EVIL….yet they insist upon having a private insurance company cover them and quickly exempt themselves from the insurance requirements in the health reform bill.

    Talk about two-faced!

15. 

    fritzoid said, 2 months ago

    Insurance companies are like any other machine. They’re either a benefit, or a hazard. If they’re a benefit, it’s not my problem.

16. 

    believecommonsense said, 2 months ago

    david wrote: and quickly exempt themselves from the insurance requirements in the health reform bill.

    I’ve read that on this site before, but have never asked about it.. Can you provide a link to a site that backs up the claim that Congress exempted themselves from this bill?

    They do, after all, participate in a public option insurance now, like all federal employees.

17. 

    believecommonsense said, 2 months ago

    Some states allow insurers to refuse to provide insurance to a woman who’s been the victim of domestic violence. (And isn’t that just great …. add one more financial burden to the woman who wants to get away but is dependent financially on her abuser.)

    The call for letting insurers offer policies nationwide is a blatant attempt to get around state laws that prevent this kind of abusive practices and clear discrimination. I keep saying this and no one ever comments so i don’t know if I’m not getting the point across or if no one cares …? This could allow all insurance cos. to offer only the lowest common denominator available! It could affect every person who has private insurance!

18. 

    dtroutma said, 2 months ago

    The toon simply has it right.

19. 

    deadheadzan said, 2 months ago

    Yes, no need to pull the plug, just shock her to death with the cost of medical expenses.

20. 

    4uk4ata said, 2 months ago

    @ David: seriously, all federal employees have healthcare plans. Actually, during his campaign Obama iirc said he wants a public option BASED ON what the US congress(wo)men have. As long as the public option is good enough to rival theirs for the money, I am ok with it.

    Plus, as I already said, so far the drafts have said anyone can keep their private plan if they like it. That is, if the private companies don’t turn out to be too inefficient to compete… Hey, that’s their problem.

21. 

    ahab said, 2 months ago

    Howie, you can only fathom your own shallow intellect.

22. 

    ahab said, 2 months ago

    Tell me oh mouthy Howzer what did Bush do for health-care? Besides the great big fat gift to the Drug companies at the end of his 8 years.

23. 

    juanito8254 said, 2 months ago

    Appropos what one Brit once said: life is a game to those who think, and a tradgedy to those who feel.

24. 

    churchillwasright said, 2 months ago

    AHAB: Hey Genius! David Axelrod was a big time lobbyist for the drug industry during those 8 years. Do I need to tell you who he is?