@leah
Obviously you have some specific experience for you to have commented that way. Without any other information it is hard to say if Obamacare would have a positive or negative impact on your situation.
Also obviously Mr. Sensenbrenner isn’t talking about any individual case, but making a general statement about how Obamacare will shift health care decisions even farther from the patient / doctor than the current system does. Obamacare moves the needle even farther to bureaucrats (government rather than insurance); which is worse for the patient, not better.
At least with the current system our employers can exercise some influence on the bureaucrats. With Obamacare what little influence there is today will be gone. When was the last time anyone other than special interests had any sway with the FDA, IRS or USDA or any government agency?
I would rather stay with the current system, as flawed as it is, than to move to government health care.

As it stands, if your employer doesn't want to provide coverage, he doesn't have to. If your insurance company doesn't want to cover a procedure, it won't, regardless of how much you and your doctor feel it's necessary. Does it really make a difference what kind of bureaucrat is standing between you and medical treatment?

Ladies will be denied artificial knees, pacemakers and prosthetic limbs? They won't be allowed to have dental care? No more MRIs or CAT scans for the ladies?

Wow.

Right, Randy, so the best thing is if the government sets in place penalties that actually encourage employers to push currently covered employees out in the open market (because it's cheaper overall to pay the penalties) where their medical costs will skyrocket. All so you can qualify for an insurance program you're unlikely to be able to afford. Brilliant.

What about my man parts?

If you have to ask...

One more thing:

"We will empower families and doctors to make health care decisions — not Washington bureaucrats."

Tell that to Michael Schiavo, who had Washington bureaucrats overrule a medical decision he and doctors had made about his wife. The bill was sponsored by Mr. Sensenbrenner.

@Rick -- Look up Terri's Law, sponsored by Mr. Sensenbrenner, which was a last ditch tactic to forestall the decision of a Florida court. I realize that there's no correlation between Schiavo and the AHCA. I was just remarking on the hypocrisy of that one statement by Mr. Sensenbrenner.

Who do you think pays when special taxes are applied to the cost of medical devices?

Right. If I need a new knee and have no health coverage, I'm not getting that new knee, tax or no. Who's losing jobs then?

What makes you think you're going to get a new knee under AHC? How do you think they're going to keep the costs down, Randy? How much do you think a pre-owned, no frills wheelchair costs compared to a now-more-expensive-than-ever knee replacement?

Yeah, but that's got nothing to do with making healthcare more "affordable" - for anyone.

Well that at least sounds good, but it's fantasy.

Since Obama care has been in effect,my health insurance has gone up and the benefits have gone way down. No, it is not more affordable for me. In fact it hurts a lot! I am at the low end of the tax bracket, so don't tell me that this is best!

@Norma Jean, you must be mistaken if you think Obamacare has anything to do with your alleged health care premium increase and reduced benefits. Most of the law won't even take effect until 2014, and the whole package is designed to *benefit* private insurers by providing them with a flood of new customers.

The effect you claim to have seen is not widely reported: surely if legions of Americans were seeing increases in their premiums as a result of the new law, conservatives would be gleefully pointing this out!

The only logical conclusion is that you are lying because you believe it will influence public opinion. Do feel free to provide specifics of your experience to refute my assertion, though.

Regards,
Keith Brady

@Keith,How dare you accuse me of lying. You have no idea what my insurance is like. I don't care about public opinion. I just know what my last year has been like paying out of pocket,which I have never had to do before. This is for routine services. Sorry if you don't agree,just telling it like it is. This is still a free country with freedom of speech ,is it not?

@ Johnny, Yes I do agree with you that the insurance company's have made millions and we have had to pay for it. There has got to be a better way to cut the costs without gouging the consumers.

Norma there is a better way it is Obamacare, but the ones that are loosing all the money they were stealing from medicare fraud and some companies that do not pay any taxes would like us to think Obamacare is bad.

Next year when you kid is 27 he/she won't have a min. wage job anymore?

Well he/she won't have insurance unless he/she gets mother to hand over some money and he/she starts contributing to the pool (to benefit us all).

Slight correction -- We all pay for the medical care of the uninsured, except for the uninsured who have any personal wealth to lose, in which case they lose the house the car, the bank account, and then we pay for them.

It doesn't happen only to the uninsured. Years ago I worked with a man who was going bankrupt because the insurance company had refused to cover his late wife's last round of chemotherapy.

Well Greg, like Willie Sutton, the other 'Famous Bank Robber' once said "because that's where the money is."

They are, they are taxing home sales... Go figure.

That would work, as long as serious illness was purely a lifestyle choice. But some diseases like cancer and MS just kind of happen. And when they happen to you, you can no longer work, so you lose that insurance. You're too expensive to insure, so you can't afford it on your own. They can drop you and refuse to issue you another policy.

Is that the sort of survival of the fittest you're okay with? Because that could be you, sick and losing everything.

Lifestyle 'choices' account for more than half of the cost of healthcare. Could most everyone afford the cost of health insurance if it was half the price of what it is today? The the most significant contributors to the cost being double what it needs to be are: obesity(BMI>30) @ about 20%,overweight(30>BMI>25) @ about 10%, and smoking @about 15% of the cost of borne of every person paying for healthcare.

So, please tell me where in the 'Affordable Healthcare Act' they found,identified and targeted these most obvious and 'self inflicted' causes/costs of healthcare, for near elimination, so my costs, and yours, go down by 50%?

@Jay Sykes -- If that's the case I should be able to find affordable health insurance as a lifelong nonsmoker with a BMI of about 23. Except that I'm 63, and insurance companies think I'm a serious chronic illness waiting to happen.

As I recall, there was talk of a tax on soft drinks, which had the industry up in arms about the government taking away our freedom of choice.

Another part of the high costs is overuse -- those with health insurance go to the doctor for every little thing and demand antibiotics for things like colds. That's bad medicine, and it drives up the cost for the rest of us.

@Randy... Current Federal Law(prior to Obamacare) prevents health insurance 'health incentives' from being more than 20% of the policy cost. So, even if we can identify major personal choices that lower 'your costs' by 50%, one can only see a 20% policy cost savings, within your age rated group;the government has stuck you with paying for others personal choices.

No doubt we can find many areas that raise costs and individual exceptions to the rules. I'm just trying to pick the biggest and lowest hanging fruit, it just happens to be almost half the fruit on the tree. Why climb to the top of the tree?[you might fall and break your leg :) ]

Here is a WSJ 2009 op-ed about Safeway grocery that explains some of this: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124476804026308603.html

The bill as it stands, along with the exemptions being allowed is a sham and corrupt; much like the politics that exists in the Windy City (hence the name). How coincidental it is the home of the man in office that railroaded this trash can full of hidden hazards upon the citizens and businesses of the USA.

Daniel S - Most bills that go through Congress are the same what makes this any different than the rest. It is not all on the President, all the excess spending has been a result of Congressmen Democtratic and Republican alike. In the case of Obamacare It will impove the competitive capabilities of this country. You are correct though it needs to be modified and improved overtime and not by reducing responsible decisions that were made to cut fraud and tax the health care industry. Obamacare also puts responsibilities on some healthcare companies that are abusing their nonprofit status some are making large profits while overcharging with excessive rates on those who cannot afford it, have wasteful spending, and are not paying taxes.