Isn’t this bill from 2003? It says it is at the top of page 1…

Edit: Great cartoon, though, regardless of when the bill was proposed. :)

Good catch, swagger.

The answer is, yes, but it’s been reintroduced, and
is now gaining support from the new democrat majority.
Knowing when it was drafted that it would never go through, it was introduced as a symbolic bill.
But now, with the political climate the way it is, they’re starting to think they could actually pass something like this, so it’s back on the table.

Yes, this is pretty frightening considering most universal healthcare countries can’t afford the cost of providing care for their citizens.  And I thought the anchor baby law was bad…

I like the cartoon, very good.  I’d only make a couple of changes just to take an extra jab or two at a couple of entities--but I’m just mean:

1) In light of the Canadian quad identicals having to be birthed in Montana, I might have included in the waiting line a very pregnant woman clutching a Canadian flag.

2) In light of moore touting Cuba’s great system, it would have been nice seeing moore wearing a Che t-shirt. 

All apologies and they’re not meant as criticisms, that’s just the former editor in me coming out.

Line 14:

“Payment for conversions under paragraph (3) shall not be made for loss of business profits, but may be made only for costs associated with conversion of real property and equipment.”

Sorry, doctor, we realize that your income bracket dropped by a factor of 300%, but hey! At least we paid your the fair market depreciated value for all your stuff! Oh by the way, please continue giving out the best quality care our money can buy!

I don’t see *any* doctors in private practice who would support this in any way shape, or political affiliation.

HR 676- We’ll run your life, so you don’t have to! Imagine a world where every skinned knee, every stuffy nose, and every broken femur was fixed up quickly, at no cost to you.

Then, stop smoking that joint and have a closer look.

This thing is a time-bomb. What we have in HR 676 is another government bid to strip away more of your choices. It creates a vast new government entity headed by a small group of unelected officials. In fact, in this new system, no one with decision-making power will have that power vested in him(her) by the will of the people:

a) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise specifically 11
provided, this Act shall be administered by the Secretary 12
through a Director appointed by the Secretary.

This Director is repsonsible for doling out money to the various regional offices. So, what you have is an unelected official with an enormous amount of power and influence. The bill doesn’t have a mechanism for removing this Director, or what qualifications would be necessary in order to become the Director. The Secretary of Health and Human Services would decide. And guess what: the Secretary isn’t elected either.

But wait, there’s more!

Now that we have a Director for our new gigtantic government program, we need people to actually do the work. That is, doctors and nurses and such. Naturally, these people don’t work for free. So who gets to decide how much they are paid?

Ah, yes. The same unelected officials who get to dole out money.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Program shall negotiate a simplified fee schedule with clinician
representatives, after close consultation with the
National Board of Universal Quality and Access
and regional and State directors.

So doctors won’t get an opportunity to work for the fair market value of their profession. They’ll have to take what a group of unelected officals thinks is fair. I’m sure this kind of system will attract the best and brightest to incur gigantic student loans and endure years of intensive study so they too can be told how much they’re going to get.

One more, and then I’m done…

So, you ask, how shall we pay for this Director-Administered Utopia of Medical Happiness?

Here’s where they get sneaky:

(b)

ANNUAL APPROPRIATION FOR FUNDING USNHI PROGRAM.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act such sums as may be necessary.

And who gets to decide what is “necessary?” The Director, and his boss, the Secretary. And, somewhere along the line, Congress. Anyone consider the U.S. Congress a nimble, streamlined body of legislators who pounce on all problems and solve them with pragmatic gusto? Well, they’re the ones who are going to be bickering about how much of your money to give to this huge program.

Ok, but were will the money come from? Why, from YOU, of course. Check this out:

(c) INTENT.—Sums appropriated pursuant to subsection (b) shall be paid for—
(1) by vastly reducing paperwork;
(2) by requiring a rational bulk procurement of
medications;
(3) from existing sources of Federal government revenues for health care;
(4) by increasing personal income taxes on the
top 5 percent income earners;
(5) by instituting a modest payroll tax; and
(6) by instituting a small tax on stock and bond
transactions.

A “modest” payroll tax. In Congress-ese, that means, “the little guy taking it in the rear”. But as this is an equal opportunity rape, we’re also going to punish successful people by taking more of their money too. Not only that, we’ll stifle investment in businesses by penalizing people who trade stocks. Don’t worry, it’s only a “small” tax.

But the kicker is really the idea that the government is going to “vastly reduce paperwork.” I’m curious how a program which requires everyone to enroll using an application “no more than two pages long” is going to vastly reduce paperwork. Let’s say 80 million people sign up. Well, that means there will be 160 million pieces of paper added to the government pile. Not only that, but someone has to print and control the distribution of millions of new government ID cards. Sending ID cards in the mail requires envelopes. Of course, there will also be at least two or three pages of instructions to go with your new card. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the lunacy of this particular goal.

Ok, I’ll shut up now. But there are many more Zany Congressional Hijinks in that bill. I just don’t want to hog the stage.

Let me just say I spent 15 minutes researching through the US HoR site and one thing is 100% official.

Dennis Kucinich is an absolute lunatic.  I love all you people from Ohio, shoot I am orginally from there, but seriously there has got to be someone better for your state and the country than this man.  He is unbelievable.

Good catch, swagger.

Very good catch.  I was almost convinced from what artmonkey said that this was a direct result of Sicko.  Well done.  Always verify what you read I guess.

The answer is, yes, but it’s been reintroduced, and
is now gaining support from the new democrat majority.

Im not sure what that means (not familiar with your system in these areas).  Ive tried finding more info on this, but havent been able to.  When was it reintroduced?

I was almost convinced from what artmonkey said that this was a direct result of Sicko.

Wll, the bill itself wasn’t. However, part of Moore’s SiCKO campaign has been to promote this bill heavily. (He even has a link to support it on
the front page of his site.)

It was initially introduced in 2003, by Conyers, and has been reintroduced every session since; usually ending with it being unceremoniously shot down.
In this latest session, however, it seems to have a bit more life, very likely having more than a little to do with Moore’s influence.
Don’t forget, this is exactly what SiCKO is all about. This bill represents everything Moore wants to happen, and most likely had some influence on Moore’s making of SiCKO in the first place.

Im not sure what that means (not familiar with your system in these areas)

Up until the 2006 congressional/senatorial election cycle, the GOP held both houses, making a far-left bill like this fairly impossible to pass.
Now, with the DNC holding a controlling majority of both, it’s actually become possible to pass something like this.
Still not terribly likley, as it will pose serious political repercussions to anyone associated with it… but there are some (lots, actually… myself included) that believe that, with the right media promotion behind them (enter Michael Moore) the democrats might actually be crazy anough to try to push the issue.

Ive tried finding more info on this, but havent been able to.  When was it reintroduced?

You have? Really?
Err… and your first step was not to try wikipedia?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from H.R. 676)

United States National Health Insurance Act
Full title
To provide for comprehensive health insurance coverage for all United States residents, and for other purposes.
Acronym / colloquial name USNHI
Citations
Codification
Act(s) amended
Title(s) amended
U.S.C. sections created
U.S.C. sections substantially amended
Legislative history

* Introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R.676 by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) on January 24, 2007

Major amendments

The United States National Health Insurance Act also known as the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act and officially called HR 676, is a bill submitted to the United States House of Representatives by Representative John Conyers Jr., D-MI, along with 38 cosponsors, in 2003, and reintroduced each session. The act calls for the creation of a universal single-payer health care system in the United States, in which the government would provide every resident health insurance free of charge. The bill is currently in the Subcommittee on Health and has 76 cosponsors. HR 15, with a similar title, National Health Insurance Act does not provide universal health care.

The bill has drawn significant attention beginning in July 2007 because of the release of the Michael Moore movie Sicko which focuses on the status of health care in the United States

Dude, always click your wiki first.

Dude, always click your wiki first.

Just so long as you do it in the privacy of your own home.  Some guys were caught clicking their wikis on Sunset Blvd. a couple days ago, and spent the night in jail. :-b