Health Care Debate - Summerfield, FL

Costing tax payers another trillion dollars so those who earn benefits can pay for those who don't is wrong.

I was judged disabled recently because a prior condition caused the for-profit insurance industry to deny me a policy at any price. I was a successful entrepreneur, self-taught and self-employed, but eventually the growth in cost and a relapse of my illness flattened me. My condition was always manageable, but I was still blackballed. If I could have bought into Medicare at age 50, I would never have become disabled.

I have come to believe that for-profit insurance for basic health care is profoundly immoral. I believe that it is far less expensive by every measure to lift up people who're having difficulties than it is to clean up the mess of an irreparable situation. Broad, basic health care is best done through the government, like Medicare. For-profit insurance should be confined to luxury and non-essentials like cosmetic surgery.

The trend of the legislation doesn't go far enough in my opinion, but it's a start that makes further reform possible, that gives the predatory, greedy insurance industry yet another chance to reform itself - not that I think they will - and keeps us health care consumers thinking and questioning the status quo.

will raise taxes, people who are insured will pay for those who aren't

we need to be able to cover people between 55 and 65 who don't work and have pre-existing conditions. sell us the insurance for 500 a month. no cost to the public.

will raise the deficet raise taxes and destroy our health programs and expand the federal government.

the people between 55 and 65 are more then willing to pay for their own medical but they just cannot buy it because of ANY pre existing conditions. I'm
talking about people who don't work but can afford ins.