Sponsored by

Comments on

Barber: Congress needs to get to work, stop political games

The Affordable Care Act needs serious improvements, and Congress should come together to find bipartisan fixes to improve this law. Rather than focus on real solutions to the problems embedded in this law, leadership in Washington has wasted many days – and millions of your dollars – trying to repeal the law rather than make the necessary changes.... Read more»

have your say   

5 comments on this story

1
1768 comments
May 23, 2013, 12:46 pm
-0 +0

First off, anyone who gets elected the way Barber did in the special election has no right whatsoever to accuse others of playing “political games”. His campaign was based on everything that is wrong about politics, and he told many outright lies, but of course the brain dead sheep around here bought it because it was the “D”...

I applaud and support those to are trying to repeal Obamacare, or to put it another way, to make a wrong right. No one could possibly know everything that is in a 2700-page bill. No 2700 page bill about anything whatsoever should ever be passed. It should be broken up into sections and then each section passed or not passed based on the individual merits of that particular section. Add to this Pelosi saying “well, you got to pass it to see what’s in it”...were I in Congress, that right there is enough all by itself to vote no, regardless of the topic.

Obama wants us to live in a country where you have to prove you have health insurance, but you don’t have to prove you’re a citizen. How in the hell does that work?!?!?

I’m not opposed to health care reform, but it needs to be done in the right way, and it needs to be done by people capable of seeing the real world and not just living with their head in the clouds. One of many examples: any plan that adds millions of patients but zero doctors is a recipe for disaster. I say take Obamacare, throw it out, and let’s try again with a much better, more realistic approach once we have a real president.

2
542 comments
May 23, 2013, 12:57 pm
-0 +0

The ACA authorizes money to increase the primary care workforce by training more doctors, nurses, nurse-practitioners and physician assistants. It includes more graduate medical education training positions, with priorities for primary care and general surgery, and more money for scholarships and loans for all health professionals. The law expands the number of patients seen at community health centers in areas with too few doctors and increases the number of staffers who work in the centers. It also expands nurse-managed clinics at nursing schools where nurses in training see patients who live in the area.

http://www.aarp.org/health/medicare-insurance/info-03-2013/how-to-beat-doctor-shortage.html

3
1768 comments
May 23, 2013, 1:01 pm
-0 +0

@Dylan Smith

Well, that’s wonderful news. Now, are we going to train these millions of new patients to be sick, or are they already sick?

And, does this new personnel take overnight crash-courses, or are they going to endure the years upon years of training that existing doctors do? And, if they do, then what do all these already-sick people do in the interim? What does the heavily-overburdened system do in the interim?

4
542 comments
May 23, 2013, 1:10 pm
-0 +0

@Bret Linden

What are those sick people doing now, Bret? They’re not going untreated; they’re costing those who can afford to pay for health care even more by using emergency services, driving up expenses.

What’s your solution?

5
1768 comments
May 24, 2013, 9:05 am
-0 +0

To your first question I say touche.

To your second question, I say it is invalid. If was asked on the faulty premise that the absence of a better idea automatically converts a bad idea into a good idea.

I personally don’t trust the same government who is trying (and not doing a good job) to convince me that closing the Cherrybell station somehow saves money to run healthcare, or even be in the business.

Though I’m a capitalist, I will concede that there are some scenarios where it is just not working as it should under the current system. Gas prices is one scenario. Healthcare would be another. I wouldn’t mind less regulations in some respects to health care, more regulations in others (especially in price controls), but as far as the government actually entering the business…that’s a disaster.

As I said, throw out this crap and try again the right way. 2700-page bills, and have to pass it to see what’s in it, are NOT the right way to do things.

Sorry, we missed your input...

You must be logged in or register to comment

Click to enlarge

Will Seberger/TucsonSentinel.com

Barber in November.

Categories

news, politics & government, business, health, local, arizona, opinion, guest opinion, breaking
Sponsored by

Top Commenters

  • Bret Linden: 1766
  • Dylan Smith: 540
  • Cactus Dave: 339
  • buddhaboy: 316
  • Roberto De Vido: 270
  • Brittanicus: 176
  • Quietwoman2: 172
  • EllieMae: 152
  • TucsonGirl: 116
  • janamg: 88
Sponsored by

Yes!

I want to help TucsonSentinel.com offer a real news alternative!

We're committed to making quality news accessible; we'll never set up a paywall or charge for our site. But we rely on your support to bring you independent news without the spin. Use our convenient PayPal/credit card donation form below or contact us at donate@tucsonsentinel.com today.

Subscribe and stretch your donation over time:

$10/mo. Printer's Devil
$15/mo. Cub Reporter
$20/mo. Stringer
$40/mo. Correspondent
$50/mo. Senior Correspondent
Enter your own monthly amount (number only)

Or give a secure one-time gift with PayPal or your credit card:

$5,000 Newshound
$2,500 Copy desk chief
$1,000 Trusted source
$500 Correspondent
$250 Stringer
$100 Cub reporter
$50 Printer's Devil
$25 Informed Source
$10 Dear Reader
Enter your own amount (below)

TucsonSentinel.com is an Arizona nonprofit organization fiscally sponsored by FCIR.org, a 501c3 charity. Your contribution is tax-deductible.

User Guidelines

Please be respectful and relevant. Thought-provoking. Or at least funny.

We want comments to advance the discussion and we need your help. Debate, disagree, yell (digitally) or laugh, but do it with respect.

We won't censor your comments if we don't agree with you; we want viewpoints from across the political spectrum. We're dedicated to sparking an open, active discussion. We believe people with differing opinions can spark debate and effect change.

Comments are open to registered users of TucsonSentinel.com.

Keep in mind:

  • A conversation involves sharing and respect. Support your viewpoint with facts, not attacks.
  • Ask questions. Search out answers.
  • Remember that being part of a community requires tolerance for differing views.
  • We can't ensure that all comments are based in truth. The only comments we endorse are those we write ourselves.

TucsonSentinel.com does not allow:

  • Hate speech. Blatantly racist, sexist or homophobic slurs or calls for violence against a particular type of person, etc. will be removed.
  • Obscenity & excessive cursing. Sometimes a well-placed curse word - if you're creative enough to get it past our auto-censor - can express your point in just the right way. But we say '%*$& no' to cursing for cursing's sake. And lose the explicit sexually-descriptive language. It doesn't contribute to the debate and there are plenty of other places on the Internet to find it.
  • Flaming. During a heated discussion, unkind words may be spoken. We can live with a certain amount of rudeness in the name of provocative conversation, but a pattern of personal attacks (name-calling, mocking, or baiting) is not acceptable nor are threatening or harassing comments. Show some respect, please.
  • Explicit political endorsements. As a nonprofit we can't allow electioneering. Analysis and explanation of political issues and candidates are encouraged, but specific calls to vote for or against a measure or politician should be done elsewhere.
  • Spam. Solicitation of products or services isn't allowed; contact us about advertising, we'd love to talk to you. Links to off-topic sites may be deleted.
  • Copyright or IP infringement. Lengthy quotes and violations of 'Fair Use' aren't allowed. Anything you post should be your own work.
  • Overposting. Don't bore people and waste electrons with identical comments on multiple stories or repetitive comments that don't advance a conversation.
  • Trolling, sockpuppetry, and other abusive behavior. Please don't feed the trolls and don't pretend to be someone you're not.
  • Gossip. Don't bring up others who can't defend themselves. We don't give out personal information; you shouldn't either.

Comments that violate these guidelines may be removed. We reserve the right to make up the rules as we go along.

Flagging

Commentors are solely responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. Users who violate these standards may lose their privileges on TucsonSentinel.com.

Sentinel editors can't read every comment. Trolls, spammers and other troublemakers can slide under the bridge. We rely on you to help maintain a healthy conversation - more than likely, you're reading these comments before the editors.

What if you see something inappropriate? Use the 'Flag' button to send it to a moderation queue. Help us out and tell us why you're reporting it; please don't report someone just because you disagree with them. Boy who cried wolf and all that. We'll take appropriate action on violations.

We will not edit comments to alter their meaning or censor comments because of political content.

We will not remove comments solely because they are heartless, cruel, coarse, foolish or just plain wrong. Your disapproval can maintain a decent signal to noise ratio. Ultimately, however, self-policing is the best method.

Bottom line, don't be a jerk.

Sign up for TucsonSentinel.com email newsletters!

find us on facebook
Sponsored by
Sponsored by
Sponsored by