Reply With Quote
Health care can be reformed without having to specifically deal with immigration issues.
Yes though, if we were able to effectively fix the immigration issue, it would provide synergistic benefits.
true, true. what we need is a truly machiavellian government that only pretends to be christian.What? Why can't Obama get this damned Democratic Congress to write a bill outlawing illegals from getting hurt? Or outlawing hospitals from helping them? This demonrat lib Congress can't do anything right!
Health care can be reformed without having to specifically deal with immigration issues.
Yes though, if we were able to effectively fix the immigration issue, it would provide synergistic benefits.
This. It could certainly help, but it's no reason to throw up one's hands and give up if it is not addressed.
"Illegal immigrants" are already being served in our current system, because medical ethics demands that anyone with life-threatening injuries be treated if they show up in the ER. You cannot ask doctors to violate the Hippocratic oath.
However, it is FAR MORE EXPENSIVE to treat people in ERs than through regular doctors' appts. Therefore, it stands to reason that the best way to prevent our current status quo is through:
1. Doing a better job tracking illegal immigrants
2. Either making illegals citizens and mandating they have insurance - either public option or a private plan they pay for themselves, depending on their income - or
3. Deporting them.
This is really the only way to solve this part of the health care crisis. The current system, the status quo, is unsustainable. That is what Obama has been saying since Day 1.
I disagree. Sticking with just refugee by websters definition it's a person who flees to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution. What makes you think the USA considers all of these refugees legal?
If they have legal refugee status, they are legal refugees.
illegals and the uninsured are both a strain on healthcare ineed but EMTLA is as much a moral and ethical issue as it is a financial one.
I agree that immigration reform is going off on a tangent. I'd prefer not to put the hospitals in the business of immigration enforcement. But the issue of who has to pick up the tab for the illegals in the emergency rooms is still something that needs to be addressed one way or the other if healthcare reform is going to stand any chance at success. Obama has been telling us over and over that people without insurance are driving up healthcare costs and illegals are one huge block of people without insurance. I don't think it's too much to ask Obama for an explanation as to how they will be dealt with.
First thing I thought when I saw this thread was 'District 9'...
I agree that we can reform health care without having to specifically deal with immigration issues. But I don't think we can reform health care without specifically dealing with the uninsured. Find a way to ensure that they're the ones paying for the healthcare they receive here and then it doesn't matter whether they're here legally or not. I just don't think that getting to them through their employers is going to be an effective way of doing that.
yes, illegals are a big part of the burden (especially on emergency medicine and clinics) but i also believe we need to:
place administrative costs in check and bring down the cost of drugs (because realistically doctors are going to keep handing out drugs like candy and patients are going to keep seeing drugs as the quick fix) as well as get insurers to stop dropping "lemon" patients onto the government's lap.
but we all know that no president is going to wrestle with the insurance companies, who are spending 1 million dollars a day just to fight health care reform, or the pharmaceutical companies.
ethically and legally, hospitals and health care providers still need to see patients in need so the answer can not be to shut the doors.
There is a difference between the legal term "refugee" and a more general usage of the word. I was assuming that the post you mentioned was referring to the legal term.
Even if they meant it in the sense of "person who flees a foreign country" without getting legal recognition for it (which would be pretty stupid...), you'd only be up to 3 categories of "illegal" immigrants in your example.
good thing they use more than Webster's dictionary in the supreme court huh?
I love all this bash the immigrant sentiment... way to use your heads.
If you start putting the employers than hire illegals in pound me in the ass jail, you'd see that illegal population drop pretty fast.
That seems the most humane way to deal with the issue. I'm also for a path to amnesty. The people who sign up for it will not only pay taxes in the future, but also pay some sort of fee to sign up to the program. And the people who DON'T sign up for it will get caught and deported like they do now. So, as I see it, more money in our pockets.
There's certainly a chance that it will encourage more illegal immigrants... but it doesn't look like that lack of encouragement has done much to stem the tide the past decade or two.
I think we should be able to shoot illegals.
I'm guessing you're just trolling here? Obviously, we're not allowed to just shoot people who break laws.
A little bit of trolling and a little bit of wishing.
but what about the free market!!!!! you can't mess with the free market you Marxist!
At least you admit it.
This has gone on long enough. Don't be fools. They're trying to bring you into the illegal immigration debate. It's out of bounds, this was about health care.
Go back and read that carefully. And the le:
Joe Wilson of South Carolina said Obama lied, but he didn'tThat is the only mention. Wow. They don't get a tax break on filed income taxes. That is the only thing they are excluded from. Not health care, just tax credits.The bill specifically says that people in the United States illegally are not eligible for tax credits
How many illegals file a tax return? Now continue reading
FAIR has a point that illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange — whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," the report said.
Yes... they could theoretically BUY health insurance. But they won't be covered for free. It's much like the system now, where illegal citizens could buy health insurance.
Who pays for the care of the illegal aliens that don't buy insurance?
So they don't get the 8% payroll tax deduction back, but get full health care on our dime.
Think that's right?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions