AARP endorses House health care reform bill

JoeTheJuggler · 5th November 2009, 11:02 AM

The story:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/...are/index.html

I recall someone on one of these threads insisting that "seniors" are opposed to what was then being called Obama's healthcare plan. At the time, AARP was studiously avoiding making a statement of endorsement or opposition.

This could be a significant boost to keeping the "public option" in when it comes time to combine House and Senate versions.

JoeTheJuggler · 5th November 2009, 01:37 PM

I see the AMA has also endorsed it.

MattusMaximus · 5th November 2009, 02:00 PM

Yup, it's a big boost for the Democrats. It's going to be hard for the anti-reformists to spin this one.

JoeTheJuggler · 5th November 2009, 11:56 PM

I have to admit I was pretty pessimistic about the public option's chances of making it to a final version of the bill, but now it's looking a lot more promising.

pipelineaudio · 6th November 2009, 12:30 AM

Like there was any doubt the seniors would oppose being allowed to buy name brand drugs instead of the generics.

Have you ever been in a pharmacy?

Magyar · 6th November 2009, 05:34 AM

Originally Posted by pipelineaudio

Like there was any doubt the seniors would oppose being allowed to buy name brand drugs instead of the generics.

Have you ever been in a pharmacy?

I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer.

parky76 · 6th November 2009, 07:57 AM

"the AMA and the AARP are clearly secretly working for the Kenyan-born President."

parky76 · 6th November 2009, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by Magyar

I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer.

u can order meds from Canada online. the US gov. will not crack down on individual purchases for individual use.

only use a website that requires an Rx.

Newtons Bit · 6th November 2009, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by Magyar

I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer.

The current health reform bill will not change this. Obama agreed to a deal earlier this year with Pharma earlier this year to not change the status quo on patented medicine.

JoeTheJuggler · 6th November 2009, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by pipelineaudio

Like there was any doubt the seniors would oppose being allowed to buy name brand drugs instead of the generics.

Have you ever been in a pharmacy?

There certainly was doubt about how seniors felt about the entire health care reform bill.

Palin and her "death panels" tried hard to convince people that we were out to euthanize grandma. There were real concerns that a pretty huge savings was going to come from administrative budget cuts to Medicare without reducing benefits.

Quite a few older folks (my mom, for example) were lied to by their churches, having been told that these reforms would mandate federal tax money to pay for abortions.

I'm quite certain someone in this forum claimed that both seniors and the AMA were against this sort of reform package.

So I would say yes, there was doubt that seniors--or at least the AARP-- would endorse it.

dudalb · 6th November 2009, 01:15 PM

My main concern about the bill is they are very vague about how it will be paid for. It might well be worth a general tax increase..which is what will happen, but I think the Dems should be honest about it, and not attempt a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

pipelineaudio · 6th November 2009, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by Magyar

I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer.

This is when they have to pay out of pocket. When they have a drug plan that pays for it (even if its limited in total for the year) its a whole different story

JoeTheJuggler · 6th November 2009, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

My main concern about the bill is they are very vague about how it will be paid for. It might well be worth a general tax increase..which is what will happen, but I think the Dems should be honest about it, and not attempt a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

I agree with you to the extent that I don't think Obama should have pledged to sign no bill that would add to the national debt.

The net cost of these various reform packages (that will make a decent attempt at extending healthcare coverage to nearly everyone) is very likely to be less than the cost of the Iraq War fiasco. (And that's not counting the fact that the invasion and occupation of Iraq had a cost in lives and the insurance reform will likely result in saved lives and improved health.)

I think Obama could have more reasonably pledged not to start another "preventive" war based on highly spun versions of shaky intelligence (and that's being polite). The savings realized right there would offset the cost of health insurance reform.

5th November 2009, 11:02 AM	#1
JoeTheJuggler Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 9,579	AARP endorses House health care reform bill The story: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/...are/index.html I recall someone on one of these threads insisting that "seniors" are opposed to what was then being called Obama's healthcare plan. At the time, AARP was studiously avoiding making a statement of endorsement or opposition. This could be a significant boost to keeping the "public option" in when it comes time to combine House and Senate versions.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

5th November 2009, 01:37 PM	#2
JoeTheJuggler Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 9,579	I see the AMA has also endorsed it.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

5th November 2009, 02:00 PM	#3
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 6,479	Yup, it's a big boost for the Democrats. It's going to be hard for the anti-reformists to spin this one.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher Critical Thinking Education Group (CTEG) "Are you good without God? Millions are." - Chicago Coalition of Reason

5th November 2009, 11:56 PM	#4
JoeTheJuggler Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 9,579	I have to admit I was pretty pessimistic about the public option's chances of making it to a final version of the bill, but now it's looking a lot more promising.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

6th November 2009, 12:30 AM	#5
pipelineaudio Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Wickenburg, AZ Posts: 2,164	Like there was any doubt the seniors would oppose being allowed to buy name brand drugs instead of the generics. Have you ever been in a pharmacy?
	__________________ Can someone give me a better name for SLAG FAIRY?

6th November 2009, 05:34 AM	#6
Magyar Muse Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: the edge of reason Posts: 766	Originally Posted by pipelineaudio Like there was any doubt the seniors would oppose being allowed to buy name brand drugs instead of the generics. Have you ever been in a pharmacy? I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer.
	__________________ "Only two things are infinate, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not so sure about the universe." Albert Einstein "There is no heresy or no philosophy which is so abhorrent to the church as a human being." James Joyce

6th November 2009, 07:57 AM	#7
parky76 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 11,797	"the AMA and the AARP are clearly secretly working for the Kenyan-born President."
	__________________ "To doubt everything and to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions, both dispense with the need for thought" -Henri Poincare

6th November 2009, 07:59 AM	#8
parky76 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 11,797	Originally Posted by Magyar I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer. u can order meds from Canada online. the US gov. will not crack down on individual purchases for individual use. only use a website that requires an Rx.
	__________________ "To doubt everything and to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions, both dispense with the need for thought" -Henri Poincare

6th November 2009, 08:00 AM	#9
Newtons Bit Master Poster Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,256	Originally Posted by Magyar I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer. The current health reform bill will not change this. Obama agreed to a deal earlier this year with Pharma earlier this year to not change the status quo on patented medicine.
	__________________ "Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein

6th November 2009, 12:22 PM	#10
JoeTheJuggler Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 9,579	Originally Posted by pipelineaudio Like there was any doubt the seniors would oppose being allowed to buy name brand drugs instead of the generics. Have you ever been in a pharmacy? There certainly was doubt about how seniors felt about the entire health care reform bill. Palin and her "death panels" tried hard to convince people that we were out to euthanize grandma. There were real concerns that a pretty huge savings was going to come from administrative budget cuts to Medicare without reducing benefits. Quite a few older folks (my mom, for example) were lied to by their churches, having been told that these reforms would mandate federal tax money to pay for abortions. I'm quite certain someone in this forum claimed that both seniors and the AMA were against this sort of reform package. So I would say yes, there was doubt that seniors--or at least the AARP-- would endorse it.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

6th November 2009, 01:15 PM	#11
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 13,167	My main concern about the bill is they are very vague about how it will be paid for. It might well be worth a general tax increase..which is what will happen, but I think the Dems should be honest about it, and not attempt a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

6th November 2009, 03:53 PM	#12
pipelineaudio Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Wickenburg, AZ Posts: 2,164	Originally Posted by Magyar I Have NO idea what that is supposed to mean - my experience seniors could give sh8 about brand named drugs! And yes I have parents and in-laws and my wife works with exclusively over 65 people. The one UNIVERSAL theme I hear is how they hate the fact that they can't buy meds from Canada for a 1/3rd of the price. and currently the BS with COLA. My father in law has been on the same meds for years and every year including this one it has gone up. This year his total meds went up by jsut under $500 for the year. But since there is no inflation he's that much poorer. This is when they have to pay out of pocket. When they have a drug plan that pays for it (even if its limited in total for the year) its a whole different story
	__________________ Can someone give me a better name for SLAG FAIRY?

6th November 2009, 04:05 PM	#13
JoeTheJuggler Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 9,579	Originally Posted by dudalb My main concern about the bill is they are very vague about how it will be paid for. It might well be worth a general tax increase..which is what will happen, but I think the Dems should be honest about it, and not attempt a bunch of smoke and mirrors. I agree with you to the extent that I don't think Obama should have pledged to sign no bill that would add to the national debt. The net cost of these various reform packages (that will make a decent attempt at extending healthcare coverage to nearly everyone) is very likely to be less than the cost of the Iraq War fiasco. (And that's not counting the fact that the invasion and occupation of Iraq had a cost in lives and the insurance reform will likely result in saved lives and improved health.) I think Obama could have more reasonably pledged not to start another "preventive" war based on highly spun versions of shaky intelligence (and that's being polite). The savings realized right there would offset the cost of health insurance reform.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons