The Socialists in Massachusetts rise up!
To: rightinthemiddle
It wouldn’t be so bad going without insurance if the uninsured weren’t charged three or four times what the insured were.
A family where the breadwinner lost his job could be looking at 1500 a month in COBRA payments to keep insurance.
Or they could take their chances that no one will get seriously hurt and sick and risk losing their home if someone does.
Mrs VS
To: rightinthemiddle
$61,950 is “low income”? I thought that was The Rich? Oh, that’s right, you’re not Rich until you make $62,000. That $50 sure makes a difference. There’s such a fine line between genius and stupidity.
3 posted on
08/22/2007 9:20:55 AM PDT by
massgopguy
(I owe everything to George Bailey)
To: rightinthemiddle
yikes...do the math....
"...children in families earning up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level, or $61,950 for a family of four. The change was made last year with federal approval and brought coverage to about 14,000 more Massachusetts children.
In Massachusetts, the program is the main means of insuring children in families above the poverty level who do not qualify for Medicaid and who frequently cannot afford private insurance. The state's health insurance initiative did not include any other effort to cover children.
The new federal rules could block enrollment of more children above 250 percent of the poverty level and could make it tougher for the state to continue covering about 4,500 already enrolled. State officials said they do not yet have a count of the number who are eligible but not enrolled."
Shoot me now.....
5 posted on
08/22/2007 9:30:03 AM PDT by
stylin19a
(Go Bears !)
To: rightinthemiddle
Teddy sure loves his pork.
6 posted on
08/22/2007 9:31:06 AM PDT by
cake_crumb
(May I never live to see the day America has a 'popular war'. God bless our troops.)
To: rightinthemiddle
This is nothing but corporate welfare for politically-connected insurance companies and their lobbyists, paid for by taxpayers who lead semi-responsible lives.
To: rightinthemiddle
This is election year rhetoric almost verbatim. This S-chip program is socialized medicine......it is Universal Health Care through the back door.....it is an entitlement that is unconstitutional. The "children" in this case is from cradle to 25 years of age......something is wrong with the whole picture. Drive by Media's approach, don't fall for it. President Bush will veto it if it infringes on the 'rights' of taxpayers as well as the U.S. Constitution, he will also ask for some parental responsibility....not government responsibility.
Hillarys 15 minutes of fame
.Universal Health Care
..from behind closed doors.
Veto this Mr. President!
13 posted on
08/22/2007 9:51:08 AM PDT by
yoe
( NO THIRD TERM FOR THE CLINTON'S!!!)
To: rightinthemiddle
Giving of your own time and money to assist the needy, without harboring ulterior motives, is compassionate.
Almost everything else, including taking time and money from others (by implied threat of force) to give to the "needy" is just plain stealing. It's even worse because Ted Kennedy et al. has ulterior motivation...buying votes to stay in power.
17 posted on
08/22/2007 10:52:32 AM PDT by
rabscuttle385
(Sic Semper Tyrannis * U.Va. Engineering '09 * Friends Don't Let Friends Vote Democrat * Fred in 2008)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson