That’s the estimated share of Americans younger than 65 who’d sign up for the public option plan under the health care bill that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is steering toward House approval.

The underwhelming statistic is raising questions about whether the government plan will be the iron-fisted competitor that private insurers warn will shut them down or a niche operator that becomes a haven for patients with health insurance horror stories.

Some experts are wondering if lawmakers have wasted too much time arguing about the public plan, giving short shrift to basics such as ensuring that new coverage will be affordable.

“The public option is a significant issue, but its place in the debate is completely out of proportion to its actual importance to consumers,” said Drew Altman, president of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. “It has sucked all the oxygen out of the room and diverted attention from bread-and-butter consumer issues, such as affordable coverage and comprehensive benefits.”

The Democratic health care bills would extend coverage to the uninsured by providing government help with premiums and prohibiting insurers from excluding people in poor health or charging them more. But to keep from piling more on the federal deficit, most of the uninsured will have to wait until 2013 for help. Even then, many will have to pay a significant share of their own health care costs.

The latest look at the public option comes from the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan economic analysts for lawmakers.

It found that the scaled back government plan in the House bill wouldn’t overtake private health insurance. To the contrary, it might help the insurers a little.

The budget office estimated that about 6 million people would sign up for the public option in 2019, when the House bill is fully phased in. That represents about 2 percent of a total of 282 million Americans under age 65. (Older people are covered through Medicare.)

The overwhelming majority of the population would remain in private health insurance plans sponsored by employers. Others, mainly low-income people, would be covered through an expanded Medicaid program.

To be fair, most people would not have access to the new public plan. Under the House bill, it would be offered through new insurance exchanges open only to those who buy coverage on their own or work for small companies. Yet even within that pool of 30 million people, only 1-in-5 would take the public option.

Who’s likely to sign up?

The budget office said “a less healthy pool of enrollees” would probably be attracted to the public option, drawn by the prospect of looser rules on access to specialists and medical services.

As a result, premiums in the public plan would be higher than the average for private plans. That could nudge healthy middle-class workers and their families to sign up for private plans.

Best answer:

Answer by Paul
Again, another Democratic “steal from the rich and give to the poor” program that is a complete waste of time.

VOTE INDEPENDANT!

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by Toxicpanduh #2: Why does the left demonize “Health Insurance” and than make it mandatory?

Best answer:

Answer by PO’d
LL Liberal Logic.

30 million new customers as a reward for them “screwing us”.

What do you think? Answer below!

• Avoids forearm twisting for comfort and good health: The patented shape supports your hand in an upright neutral posture that generally avoids forearm twisting. The Evoluent VerticalMouse provides superior comfort and even relieved their wrist pain
• Comfortable and easy to use: The shape is thoughtfully sculpted for uncompromised comfort and easy-to-reach programmable buttons. No finger contortions are needed to operate the buttons
• Adjustable laser sensor: Pointer speed controls on the side allow convenient adjustment without even releasing your grip from the mouse
• Improved thumb rest: The thumb rest has been reshaped to provide even more comfort over earlier versions
• Pointer speed indicators: Top mounted LEDs show through the chrome thumb rest to indicate selected pointer speed including extra low (XL), low (LO), MD (medium), to high (HI)

The new Evoluent Vertical Mouse 4 – VM4L Left Hand Wired Mouse offers new features that add to the popular Evoluent vertical mouse design. Evoluent Vertical VM4L Mice now include a more contoured shape to better fit users’ hands, the option to change cursor speed without changing your grip on the mouse and a sleep mode to conserve notebook battery power.For starters, it is the only approved ergonomic mouse of University of California at Berkeley. The Evoluent Vertical Mouse 2 was evaluated in 20

Price: $ 81.95

On the left, September 2006; on the right, May 2007. Which do you think is better?


Image by soylentgreen23
I’ve been working hard lately to shift some of the excess weight I’m carrying around. When I arrived here in Poland not so long ago, I was a disturbingly large 85kg or so; now, I’m a shade over 74kg.

Strangely, it’s in the "before" photo that I’m surrounded by beautiful girls – how did that happen? And my taste in clothes hasn’t improved much…

The weight loss is down to a combination of going to the gym regularly, and eating more carefully. For instance, my personal favourite meal, at least here in Poland, has always been sausages with onions in white bread rolls with loads of mustard and ketchup, and a bottle of Cola Light to go with it. Now, I eat only healthy (healthier!) foods, and I’ve not had a touch of anything but water to drink for weeks now. I think it’s working.

Ad – Weight Loss Reporter (on Newsweek – Pulse360)


Image by George Morris
Why does this weight loss ad feature a picture of Melissa Theuriau? While I totally agree that she is an amazing photogenic French reporter, I rather doubt she’s a paid spokesmodel for this product.

I’ve noticed that ads served up by pulse360 seem to have a lot of blatant copyright abuse.

For more about recent advertising, check out my blog: A Copywriter’s Quest

Rob – 288 – July 2010 – Side 2


Image by robertstinnett
Getting fit and healthy showing off my weight loss so far.

Side view showing off my Celtic tattoo. July 2010 weighing in at just shy of 288lbs. Starting weight – 342lbs.

Basically, these groups are made up of people who are married but who have chosen to not have children. They are ABLE to have them, they just choose not to.

I see this as one of many assaults by godless liberalism on the nuclear family. They simply cannot stand to see a family that consists of a married couple (MAN and WOMAN) with their kids that functions properly. They have to bring all this other crap into our society, and they usually do it through the public school systems. I hear that they are teaching all of these “alternative lifestyles” in health classes now, which makes me glad I was homeschooled for most of my childhood.

And since I know someone is going to ask, I’m going to go ahead and say this. I got married when I was 16, and my wife and I had our first kid when I was 17. We now have five kids, and that’s five more soldiers in the army of God.

Best answer:

Answer by gjndf
Nothing wrong with not wanting children.

And just because someone CAN have children doesn’t mean they should HAVE to. Unless of course it also works for other things. You have arms, so you should become a painter. You have legs so why don’t you become a professional runner. Don’t want to? Well now you see how it feels to be told that you MUST have children, just because you have a uterus.

Edit: looking at your past questions you are satirizing christians. You were a pretty convincing fundie though.

Add your own answer in the comments!