Live&DieBillsFootball

Well, you're talking about a lot more government intervention which will put you at odds with your "rightie" friends. So, you're saying that the government should force insurance companies to charge the same group rate to all. I assume that the government would have to review this rate and monitor premium increases and profits generated under these established rates. Also, the government under your scenario would have to monitor the insurance companies to ensure that they cover all pre-existing conditions. And also to make sure that one company does not cherry pick the good risks. Maybe create a federal bureau of insurance bureacracy to handle this one. Lastly, you use the tough love approach to those who can't afford insurance or choose not to participate although you feel that we can still burden the hospitals and Medicaid with those who are bleeding or unconscious. So in the end, you have created a new Federal bureacracy to regulate and monitor this industry, made all individuals responsible for purchasing insurance out of their own pockets, and told the uninsured that they can die in the streets. Sounds like a good plan.

I don't think that people should be partisan when it comes to issues of spying against our country. I don't care if he was hired under Clinton, Bush or whoever. A spy should be dealt the sternest punishment available. This should also be true of anyone who violates laws against classified information including Berger and anyone found to be guilty in the Plame investigation. Everyone should know that classified information is not to be "mishandled" or "accidentally leaked", and you had better be prepared to pay the consequences if you violate the law.

Several reasons: 1. If the employees buy insurance directly they lose the benefit of group rates. 2. Insurance companies would love to deal individually since they could pick and choose who to cover or base their rates on family history, etc. Who would write a new policy for someone with diabetes, high blood pressure, or heart disease? Or if they do, the rates will be higher for these people. 3. Most individual policies limit coverage for pre-existing conditions. Group policies don't. 4. If you give people the option to pay themselves, you will see even more people choose to go without insurance. Your proposal would definitely benefit companies that currently cover employees as well as benefit insurers who would be able to reject high risk people. The only individuals that may see a benefit are those in perfect health who may get a better rate. Most individuals would be worse off. Lastly, it would put an even larger burden on hospitals and Medicaid due to the increased number of people who can't afford, choose not to purchase, or are rejected for insurance.

Of course the rest of the country is providing assistance to the areas hit by Katrina. Donations to the Red Cross and Salvation Army have been coming in from all areas of the country. The Federal government is providing all kinds of help from housing to education to cash payments. Bush has pledged to spend $200 Billion to rebuild the areas hit. The amount of money donated and pledged by the Federal Government is unprecedented. All of these dollars are being spent to help people like yourself who do not have inurance to cover their losses. I would recommend that you contact FEMA, Red Cross, Salvation Army, and other agencies that are distributing goods and money to your area. There is a ton of money available to help but it is still not enough to rebuild everyone's life the same as it was before the hurricanes. Hopefully, you will be able to get assistance and low-cost loans to get your life back together. Good luck to you!

I don't mean to be mean-spirited. I have lived in the South and vacationed on the "Redneck Riviera". I think that the beaches are beautiful and I would consider it a great place to live if not for the frequency of hurricanes. MS only gets hit every 8 years on average, but it seems that the Gulf Coast gets hit somewhere every year with a hurricane that causes damage. In my opinion, living there is a crap shoot and you had better be ready for the inevitable hurricane. It also doesn't help matters much that the coast is way overbuilt. If you choose to live there insurance would be more than a good idea. Unfortunately, a lot of people have to learn this lesson the hard way.

Yes, it's called sarcasm. Jeb acted like it was a crisis when he tried to take Schiavo into state custody. He also intervened to try to get a judge to delay pulling the plug. Then after it was all over, he had her death investigated including looking into how long it took her husband to call 911 when she collapsed 15 years earlier. The state of Florida must not have had much going on for Jeb to use the FL state Legislature and court systems in his personal crusade.

"We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." — Edward R. Murrow "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, right or wrong, is not only un-patriotic, but it is morally treasonable to the American people." - President Theodore Roosevelt Yeah...that's some real garbage.

You might want to take that up with that "whacky" group that wrote the US Constitution.

I was getting tired of the last one too. Thanks for the new one.

Yeah, Jeb did a good job of handling that Schiavo crisis.

He had a blind trust, but was aware of what was in it. Then he sold the stock prior to the bad news. Sorry, but there is going to be an investigation and if he lied he should go to jail just like Martha. And before you start calling me partisan, let me say that I hope that they investigate and indict a few Dems too. The cesspool in DC can use a little cleaning on both sides of the aisle.

Nothing about Alabama surprises me. I moved to Alabama in 1982, the same year that George Wallace was elected as Governor by winning a large percentage of the black vote. I asked some of my Black co-workers how they could support Wallace after all of the Civil Rights stuff in the 60's. They told me that at least with Wallace they knew what they were getting.

I didn't say anything about being tolerant of the liberal agenda. My complaint was with his intolerance of liberal viewpoints. There's a big difference between the two. I would think that a moderator of this board would show a little more tolerance of other people's viewpoints.

I'm sorry but your presidential campaign slipped by me without notice. Hopefully, you got more votes than Gary Coleman. Here's a tip: Next time, run for Condo President or Dog Catcher and get a little momentum going before you try the Presidency again.

I don't remember seeing any of his campaign where he laid out his opposition to the Republican party, as I don't watch much on cable access channels. I just read his posts where he parrots the same arguments as the RNC on issues such as Delay, Katrina, SCOTUS, and his intolerance of liberal viewpoints. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I assume it's a duck.

I don't know him personally, just through the board. Although he doesn't call himself a Republican, he takes the Republican side of every debate and calls any comment from the left either a partisan attack, or calls the poster a Libertard, or Dummycrat. Yet he likes to act like the all knowing OZ. To me, it sounds like Right wing partisan drivel although not to the extent of some of the others like RiO and Wacko. I have yet to see him give a concrete proposal to fixing anything other than pooh poohing any idea given.

But it's ok for you to be an apologist for the RNC. HYPOCRITE, thy name is KRC.

There are companies who do this now. At these companies all employees HAVE to join the health insurance plan UNLESS they can demonstrate alternative coverage to the company. Lots of companies do this now without any federal bureacracy. Possibly another way to get more companies to cover all employees would be to eliminate the federal tax deduction for employee health benefits UNLESS the company offers benefits to all employees. This would make more companies "volunteer" to cover all employees.

Well, last year we were 0-4 and ended up just missing the playoffs. You just never know what might happen. No matter what, I'll still be rooting for the Bills to win each game. Besides, as lousy as we've played, nobody else is doing much in our division. The Jets are done, the Pats are having problems and the Phins will tank very soon. As lousy as the Bills have played we were only one or two breaks away from winning yesterday. If McGee stays on his feet, we would have led at halftime. If not for the penalties on Fast Freddie's long punt return and WM's run, we may have had 2 more scores. BTW, Lindell does suck. Everytime he kicks from beyond 40 he gets the yipps. A lot of kickers would be 9 for 9 if they didn't have to attempt any FGs beyond 40 yds.

And if all employers treated their employees like Wegman's, we wouldn't need to mandate that large employers provide health insurance. Unfortunately, not many do and the cost of medical treatment for many of these people falls on Medicaid which ends up being paid by taxpayers. It looks like we have 4 alternatives: 1. Companies voluntarily cover employees 2. Companies are mandated to cover employees 3. Society pays for them via Medicaid and force hospitals to treat for free 4. Hospitals and doctors refuse to treat uninsured people If companies don't voluntarily provide insurance for their employees, we are stuck with one of the other alternatives. Right now, we have chosen #3, and we have seen state and county budgets balloon due to Medicaid costs. You may not like mandated benefits, but it is preferable IMO to the current system of Medicaid providing medical care.

Now that would be a lively confirmation hearing!

Mickey, I agree with you that the majority of people want to see the underinsured treated but they don't want to think about how much it is costing us. Medicaid is killing state budgets in blue and red states. You're right that everyone knows that there is a problem but nobody wants to offer a solution that will improve the situation. One of the solutions from the right is for companies to stop covering their employees and put the responsibility on the employee to buy their own insurance using Medical Savings accounts. IMO, this will just make the problem much worse. If employees have the option of buying their own insurance or going without, you will see many more uninsured people. IMO, if a company offers medical insurance, it should be mandatory for all employees to accept the coverage unless they already have similar coverage through a spouse or other family member. Walmart offers medical insurance to their employees, but most employees decline it due to the high cost. I don't think that they should have the option to decline unless they have other coverage. This would cause Walmart workers to either find other employment or force Walmart to pay more of the costs. We need to get the working poor off Medicaid. The only way to do this is to force employers to offer coverage and force employees to accept it. This will lead to higher prices as companies pass on their costs, but it will also lead to a lower burden on hospitals and Medicaid. We are going to pay for it one way or the other, but I would rather keep the insurance with private companies rather than government programs.

Delay has to be one of the slimiest politians of all time. I just wish that the indictment was for something more serious. $150,000? He probably steals more than that on a bad day.

I would have more faith in the article if it was written by someone without an agenda. The article states that the writer is the author of the new book The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy: The Untold Story of How Democratic Operatives, Eccentric Billionaires, Liberal Activists, and Assorted Celebrities Tried to Bring Down a President — and Why They'll Try Even Harder Next Time. Doesn't sound like someone non-partisan.