Political Effect: An Agreement

I would just like to say something that may bring haters and lovers of MDL together into an agreement: If Obama wins this election, this company will cease to exist in a few years. As a current employee who loves their job (and yet has some complaints), I know what will happen. It's not just MDL; there are many competitors and other companies throughout the nation that won't be able to survive. Doctors know this and many are holding out for any change in their practice based on what happens Tuesday. They will all mainstream any testing and not care about any diagnosis as long as they follow the rules and regulations. If you work in the medical field and you're voting for Obama, you're an idiot.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself. I find in unreal that there are sales people in pharma, medical, diagnostics that support Obamacare. Either they haven't been paying attention or, like you said, they are COMPLETE IDIOTS. GO ROMNEY/RYAN!!!

 

I read through the Affordable Care Act. It seems like a big win for the clinical laboratory industry. 20-30 million new insured patients yield a poop-load of new testing volume. Preventative care for seniors yield more billable Medicare tests. 2013 will see a 2% cut in Medicare reimbursements, but depending on the lab, only 10% of their lab work will be affected. Again, the numerous new insured, those that will keep their insurance due to no caps and the payments of pre-existing conditions equates to a net positive. More of the budget is allotted to Medicare fraud, so this will benefit the labs that are playing by the rules while closing down the fraudulent labs.

What specifically regarding the Obama administration will be a detriment to the clinical laboratory industry, and what specifically regarding the Romney administration will be a benefit?

 

You did not read the "Public Law 111-148". It's 2400 pages. No politician has even read through it page by page....line by line.......word by word. Even Nancy Polosi said Dems must pass it so they can find out what's in it. Specifically, Obama = massive penalties on young workers, small businesses and others who choose not to buy expensive health insurance, beginning in 2014. Specifically, Romney = repeal it.

"The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) pointed out that there are no redeeming provisions of Obama's health care plan. AAPS observes that Obama's health care plan will significantly increase the overall cost of health care for a majority of United States citizens, plus reduce the quality of care that a free market system would otherwise provide. This law furthers the process of socializing the United States health care system begun with Medicare.[4][5] The centerpiece of ObamaCare is the individual mandate, a provision that makes it mandatory for every citizen to purchase private health insurance, which is unprecedented in American history. Through legislative mandates, ObamaCare requires private citizens to purchase health insurance, involuntarily fund abortions, and pay for sex offenders to use Viagra under the threat of legal sanctions if they do not. The new law imposes penalties that will increase to 2.5% of one's income if he fails to purchase government-approved health insurance.

On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court voted 5–4 that, while Obamacare exceeded Congress’s authority under the commerce clause, the law was a permissible tax under the Constitution. [6]. The constitutionality of Obamacare was originally challenged under the theory that it exceeded the limitations of the commerce clause; more than 20 federal lawsuits have been filed against ObamaCare since President Barack Obama signed it into law.[7][8] In total, 27 states have started or joined in a lawsuit against Obamacare.[9] A federal judge ruled on 13 December 2010 that a central component of ObamaCare, the requirement that most Americans carry insurance or pay a penalty, violates the Constitution. U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson is quoted as saying the law "exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power."[10] Then on 31 January 2011 federal judge Roger Vinson ruled that as a result of the unconstitutionality of the "individual mandate" that requires people to buy insurance, the entire law must be declared void.[11][12] The U.S. district judge declared ObamaCare unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause. In a footnote attached to the ruling, federal judge Roger Vinson cited Barack Obama's position in 2008 from an interview with CNN, when Obama stated that, "If a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house."[13]

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the invasive revenue generating device could produce as much as $36 billion over ten years.[14] The fines are euphemistically dubbed "shared responsibility payments."[15] Employers would be required to deduct the penalties from employees' paychecks.[16] The State of Massachusetts has had a similar program in place for several years, and many have elected to pay the penalties rather than purchase insurance, and many remain uninsured.[17]

ObamaCare will do more than detrimentally impact healthcare accessibility. According to the Heritage Foundation, Obama is intentionally sacrificing millions of jobs, at a time when unemployment is around 10%, with the Medicare surtax without any objective exception of increases in revenues.[18] ObamaCare will cost 650,000 U.S. jobs if it is not repealed. The Congressional Budget Office says the figure would be more than 800,000 people would lose their jobs. [19]

On January 19, 2011, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 245-189 to repeal ObamaCare (56 percent to 44 percent). In an historic repudiation of an entitlement program that was only 10 months old, the House voted to overturn President Obama's health care takeover.[20][21] Repealing the bill would eliminate $770 billion in the newly mandated tax increases, according to the CBO.[22] The CBO released accounting data which shows that repealing the national health care law would reduce net government spending by $540 billion in the ten year period from 2012 through 2021; that number represents the cost of the new provisions, minus Medicare cuts. The Tea Party Movement firmly supports the proposed repeal of ObamaCare.

On February 2, 2011, the U.S. Senate proceeded with a hearing to discuss the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and whether or not the individual mandate requiring Americans to purchase health insurance under penalty of a fine is constitutional.[23] The amendment to repeal ObamaCare failed in the Senate by a 51-47 vote.[24]"

Take that you liberal/socialist POS poster!

 

That previous post had wayyy too many facts for a liberal to comprehend. That, and they all lack common sense and reason. Liberalism certainly is a mental disorder.

 

The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

Is there a difference between a European socialist and a American liberal?

 

>>>You did not read the "Public Law 111-148". It's 2400 pages.<<<

Of course I read the parts of the document that had text about the law itself. The 2400 pages you are referring to includes editorials, blogs, citations and even newspaper articles. This is a tired republican talking point regarding the complexity of the act and the inability of republican law makers to respond. The act is around 900 pages and 200 pages of that is non-essential stuff for most readers. Very little text on each page and an average reader can scroll through each page in 30 seconds. You can also find non-partisan summaries of this act.

>>>No politician has even read through it page by page....line by line.......word by word. Even Nancy Polosi said Dems must pass it so they can find out what's in it.<<<

(Sigh) No. Another tired, GOP talking point. This is what she actual said: "We (Congress) have to pass the bill so that you (U.S. citizens) can find out what is in it (what is actually in it and not Fox News lies), away from the fog of controversy (Palin and her 'death panels')."

>>> Specifically, Obama = massive penalties on young workers, small businesses and others who choose not to buy expensive health insurance, beginning in 2014. Specifically, Romney = repeal it.<<<

The act will encourage everyone to be covered in order to lower healthcare costs for everyone. No “massive penalties.” The poor are already covered through Medicaid, most working and non-working people are covered. For the small, but critical part of the population that are not covered will have a chance to buy health insurance through an exchange, a virtual market place where insurance companies offer their lowest premiums. For those who still can’t afford it, subsidies will be provided. Small businesses? Only those with 50 employees or more will be required to offer health insurance. With a company that size, they SHOULD be offering health insurance and there is a case to be made that they will save money in the long run. Most companies of 50+ employees already offer health insurance for obvious reasons.

>>>"The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) pointed out that there are no redeeming provisions of Obama's health care plan. AAPS observes that Obama's health care plan will significantly increase the overall cost of health care for a majority of United States citizens, plus reduce the quality of care that a free market system would otherwise provide. This law furthers the process of socializing the United States health care system begun with Medicare.[4][5] The centerpiece of ObamaCare is the individual mandate, a provision that makes it mandatory for every citizen to purchase private health insurance, which is unprecedented in American history.<<<

Really? You’re going to cut and paste another extreme conservative view? The AAPS is the oldest conservative group in the country. The Affordable Care Act is supported by Democrats and not supported by Republicans. Duh. The AAPS filed a law suit once the law was deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court. Their rival group, the American Medical Association (AMA) applauds the Affordable Care Act stating that it’s a good thing that millions of Americans can now have the coverage they need to get healthy, stay healthy and stay alive!

>>>Through legislative mandates, ObamaCare requires private citizens to purchase health insurance, involuntarily fund abortions, and pay for sex offenders to use Viagra under the threat of legal sanctions if they do not. The new law imposes penalties that will increase to 2.5% of one's income if he fails to purchase government-approved health insurance.<<<

This is the most vulgar Republican, no, Tea Party talking point and just plain not true. This is the twisted illogic that comes from the most right-winged conservative think tanks in order to instill fear in the low-information, anti-Obama voters. The vast majority of Republicans distance themselves from this type of drivel.

>>>On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court voted 5–4 that, while Obamacare exceeded Congress’s authority under the commerce clause, the law was a permissible tax under the Constitution. [6]. The constitutionality of Obamacare was originally challenged under the theory that it exceeded the limitations of the commerce clause; more than 20 federal lawsuits have been filed against ObamaCare since President Barack Obama signed it into law.[7][8] In total, 27 states have started or joined in a lawsuit against Obamacare.[9] A federal judge ruled on 13 December 2010 that a central component of ObamaCare, the requirement that most Americans carry insurance or pay a penalty, violates the Constitution. U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson is quoted as saying the law "exceeds the constitutional boundaries of congressional power."[10] Then on 31 January 2011 federal judge Roger Vinson ruled that as a result of the unconstitutionality of the "individual mandate" that requires people to buy insurance, the entire law must be declared void.[11][12] The U.S. district judge declared ObamaCare unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause.<<<

Your quoting a staunch Republican judge that was part owner a GOP consulting firm that worked against healthcare reform? This might get past some of those low-information Republican readers on this forum, but not people who actually pay attention, and “read stuff.” And what do you have against the constitution? The law was deemed constitutional (as you pointed out).

>>> In a footnote attached to the ruling, federal judge Roger Vinson cited Barack Obama's position in 2008 from an interview with CNN, when Obama stated that, "If a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house."[13] <<<

Once again, a Republican talking point (yes, even a Republican judge from Florida) taken out of context to support a Republican position (sound familiar?). President Obama was not talking about The Affordable Care Act, but Hilary’s proposed approach to universal coverage. This is what they do in primaries. They often have a hyper-technical debate on various points.

The actual dialogue: OBAMA: “Let's break down what she really means by a mandate. What's meant by a mandate is that the government is forcing people to buy health insurance and so she's suggesting a parent is not going to buy health insurance for themselves if they can afford it. Now, my belief is that most parents will choose to get health care for themselves and we make it affordable.

Here's the concern. If you haven't made it affordable, how are you going to enforce a mandate? I mean, if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house. The reason they don't buy a house is they don't have the money. And so, our focus has been on reducing costs, making it available. I am confident if people have a chance to buy high-quality health care that is affordable, they will do so. That's what our plan does and nobody disputes that.”

This quote doesn’t apply to the Affordable Care Act because President Obama has put in measures to make buying insurance AFFORDABLE!

>>>The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the invasive revenue generating device could produce as much as $36 billion over ten years.[14] The fines are euphemistically dubbed "shared responsibility payments."[15] Employers would be required to deduct the penalties from employees' paychecks.[16] The State of Massachusetts has had a similar program in place for several years, and many have elected to pay the penalties rather than purchase insurance, and many remain uninsured.[17]<<<

Why would you even bring up the CBO? Are you just “cutting and pasting” from your conservative web sites w/o thinking about the overall point you’re trying to make? This is what happens when you don’t think for yourself.

The CBO’s reports that when the act is implemented, it will dramatically reduce the number of Americans without health insurance. It will also reduce the deficit. It also projects health care spending from the federal government, corporations, and individuals will stop rising so quickly, freeing up more money for other purposes.

And I’m sure there are some who will elect to take the fine and still be uninsured, but most people are law-abiding and the overall plan will work, as it did in MA, as Romney lauded on his last two debates.

>>>ObamaCare will do more than detrimentally impact healthcare accessibility. According to the Heritage Foundation, Obama is intentionally sacrificing millions of jobs, at a time when unemployment is around 10%, with the Medicare surtax without any objective exception of increases in revenues.[18] ObamaCare will cost 650,000 U.S. jobs if it is not repealed. The Congressional Budget Office says the figure would be more than 800,000 people would lose their jobs. [19]<<<

LOL! Now you’re quoting the Heritage Foundation, the most extreme conservative think tank? Yikes! OK, but the facts are not their friend.

Sorry, the CBO did not predict a 650,000 job loss. That Republican talking point came from another CBO report that stated the economy will use less labor primarily because many people will choose to work less, or retire early, as a result of the new law. The CBO projection mostly a reduction in the supply of labor, which is not the same as a reduction in the supply of jobs.

On the contrary the right-leaning NFIB Research Foundation (Small Biz Assoc.) stated that the Act will actually increase the demand for healthcare goods and services, thereby increasing employment in healthcare-related sectors. The number of ambulatory healthcare professionals (physicians, dentists, and other healthcare practitioners) needed will increase by 330,000. An additional 327,000 staff will be required to work in hospitals. Some 157,000 more nurses (net of retirements) will be needed to staff doctors’ offices, outpatient clinics, and other provider locations. And payrolls at insurance companies will expand by 76,000 workers.

>>> Take that you liberal/socialist POS poster!<<<

Yeah, that pretty much illustrates the small-mindedness that went into your response. Not one original thought from you just a litany of Tea Party talking points and GOP campaign lies.

But as the GOP Presidential campaign already said, “we’re not going to let fact-checking get in the way of our campaign.”

Fortunately there are political historians and the collective memory of the electorate that will ensure these lies be part of the historical narrative.

 

You Idiot, dont you know that health care is a human right!

 

And you are certainly a Moron with no sense of politics, history and western philosophy. The very essence of liberalism stems from the discourse and the free exchange of ideas; reason. Great men and women throughout history and in the modern era were/are great people that shaped our culture. Regardless of your political leanings, no one with even a modicum of intelligence disputes this.

 

Really? Is this a serious question? Didn’t you take even a remedial political science course in high school? You must have been able to at least get into a Jr. college. Nothing? Here’s an idea. Pick up a book. Find one with pictures in it if you have to. Turn off Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. If nothing else, it would be so much better for the rest of us.
Stupid people are time-consuming.

 

I believe that health care is a human right! Go Obama! Go Pro-Choice! Obamas gonna win !!!! Lucky America!

 

People who posted the previous posts, let me fill you in on something: This website is meant for those in the medical field. I'd love to see you bring these points up to the doctors and hospitals you're selling to. As a matter of fact, please do, and then come back in and fill us in on how that went.

 

You believe healthcare is a human right? What else do you believe is a "human right?"

Great liberal talking points you made here. What is the difference between "modern liberalism" and European socialism? Call it what you will. In different countries they use different names, but in all the world there are only two schools of thought. Big government and little people or little government and big people. You'e quite generous with other people's money. Communism worked real well, right? Markism? Socialism? Yes. Those countries are quite prosperous. How often have you seen a country taxing themselves into prosperity?

 

I think people who tag programs with words like "socialism" and then run in fear are fools. I maintain that the value of a people is measured by the care they express toward their fellow man. Countries that make sure that large groups of their fellow citizens are not left out in the cold, begging in the streets, denied the benefits of modern medicine because they can't afford it. Would you rather let someone starve, or let them benefit from a program you consider socialistic?

 

omg....a tree hugger.

 

Yep. FDR had it right. Government CAN be a good thing (hello Sandy). Pure capitalism is an idea. I'm a capitalist and part of the 2%, but I understand that I'm able to flourish within our post-1920s system of government.

 

I dare anyone to go to a client office tomorrow and ask a doctor how they feel about the election.

 

Happy Birthday!!! Welcome USSA!! And so........history repeats itself.

 

Yep. Now have more moochers than providers.

 

No, one day you might be in a situation where you will need other people, other help and potentionally government help. No one likes this to happen, but it happens at the most inopportune time. Moochers mooche a lot of things, but not the basic healthcare they can't afford.