Tommy and Molly for what is worth:

Your names makes this hard to take seriously. Since you are both unregistered,  one could easly suspect both names are really the same person, or you know each other?

Tommy, you cite the Constitution for your argument are you a constitutional scholar?  Your argument of SS or medicare as a pyramid scheme could be used to argue against the federal government in general.

It seems to me a pyramid scheme takes the money and runs, and offers the sun, but really never intended to do what it said it was going to do.  Usually in a pyramid scheme the inverters are greedy and have deluded or even simple aspirations of accumulated wealth. 

SS and Medicare provide what they offer, many people find them socialistic which is unacceptable to the corporate mentality of the plutocracy.

I’ve had it!!!!
CANADA can get it right with health care AND marriage, who would have known….the US was supposed to be the land of the free (to marry?)and the home of the brave ( to stand up to big Corp, ie: insurance industry, banks, et al, BIG MONEY LOBBYING MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS) ???? If I wasn’t so stupidly patriotic and pathetically hopeful that a new administration and support of the PEOPLE could change our country and maybe tilt the world… I’d just give up and move north. Not yet, but maybe…. the spineless Dems in the Senate will be the answer to my question: do I leave now or never?

We need a Coinstitutional Convention, first off. It is outdated.

Secondly, the Constitution provided for Legislators to legislate what they saw fit. As HUey Long said,. (paraphrase) The America people can have anything they want. the problem is, they dont seem to want anything.

It is not a matter of the cost, butk it is a matter of MONEY , like everything in an unregulated capitalist country. (universal coverage would be about 2% of GDP) It is a matter of will. If the politicians will give up death insurance industry money. If those that have good coverage are willing to give a little for those that have none. There are good systems all over the world to implement. The ‘Merkin people are not genetically different from anyone else. They need the same health care. When you are sick you get a CHOICE of seeing a good dr. (who is regulated , out of both a desire for decent care, as well as a need to keep costs down—not a profit motive)Other than that, you dont need a “choice” . If you want one, pay for it.

Social Security needs to be “reformed” , in that politicians should not be able to use it for anything else. Medicare needs to drop the privitization and be expanded to all.

It should be alot more simple than the DC crowd would have you believe. We could ask one of our allies to help—one who lives in a civilized country.
We DO NOT NEED a “special American plan”—how ridiculous!

Re: Tommy

For-profit medical heath insurance companies are very much part of the health care crises in the U.S.  It is as you say most insurers try NOT to pay benefits, and, therein, lies the problem - the millions the industry spends on political campaigns being the exception, of course.

If you doubt this, I urge you to do a little research and look at some of the Class action lawsuits filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. As you will note in this tidbit from a case filed against Blue Cross, the physicians are not the problem as you claim in your post:

“Blue Cross Agrees to Settlement in Antiracketeering Lawsuit”

“The state’s largest health care payment plan has settled a class action lawsuit filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. More than 90 percent of Blue Cross and Blue Shield health plans and the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association have agreed to implement key business practice changes and to restructure the way they administer and pay for medical care for enrollees. . .

In the settlement, which is similar to previous agreements with Aetna, CIGNA, and other defendants, Blue Cross agreed to many reforms. They include agreeing to:

Ensure the payment of valid clean electronic claims within 15 days and paper claims within 30 days. . .

Provide fee schedules to physicians . . .

Implement a definition of medical necessity that makes sure patients are entitled to receive medically necessary care as determined by a physician exercising clinically prudent judgment in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical practice . . .”

http://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx?id=5796

Re: Tommy

But the powers enumerated in the Constitution were created for the general welfare of our citizenry.  If there had been no concern for the general welfare of our citizenry, there would have been no reason for our founders to enumerate the powers identified in the Constitution – or for that matter no need for our founders to even create a Constitution in the first place.

As to a national health care system, since a large portion of our Nation’s citizenry are without health care, and/or struggling to pay for health care, and/or going bankrupt due to health care costs, I believe our Nation can only benefit by providing a national healthcare system for our citizenry.  To ignore this crisis, places the general welfare of our Nation at risk.

Yes, all present-day financial messes considered, it’s a very chilling thought.  Indeed, one can’t help but think about it, Marie Cocco.

What would have happened if we had the Republican, “Have I Got A Deal For You,” system of private savings accounts instead of the guaranteed monthly benefit that Social Security provides? 

I have no doubt that a majority of Americans have noted by now that it’s not the bankers and Wall Street bailing out their government - it’s their government bailing out the bankers and Wall Street.

Besides throwing trillions of borrowed money to prop up fake wealth in the failing, read insolvent, banks how about the gargantuan defense budget? You can only drop a bomb once and then you have to make a new one. How is that a fiscally sound policy, let alone effective national security? Cut the DoD spending by at least two-thirds, and not just cut the increase in spending but the whole thing, and there will be money to solve the healthcare crisis which will trickle down to to the businesses who will then be able to afford to keep their workers, or even hire more…. That alone should be the major part of any stimulus package!

Thank you, Marie Cocco.  It is about time we started to defend our “entitlements”.  What a conservative label for programs that have proven their solvency.  If we had allowed the Bush entourage to change SS it would be in real trouble now and so would a lot of people.
Keep up the good work and keep telling them to leave Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid alone!  They have a lot of other programs they can screw up that won’t have such a devastating effect.

Good article Marie, important too.

There is no reason that Social Security should be changed at all.  Many economists have proven its solvency.  But many lawmakers and administrations have STOLEN from these funds.  I think heads should roll on this one since the money WAS NEVER THE GOVERNMENT’S IN THE FIRST PLACE.  William Greiter from the Nation explains:

“Federal budget analysts try to brush aside these facts by claiming the government is merely “borrowing from itself” when it dips into Social Security. But that is a substantive falsehood. Government doesn’t own this money. It essentially acts as the fiduciary, holding this wealth in trust for the “beneficial owners,” the people who paid the taxes. This is the bait and switch the establishment intends to execute.

He also identifies the culprits of this bogus “crusade”(or criminal act, if you prefer),

“ Peter Peterson, a Republican financier who made a fortune doing corporate takeover deals at Wall Street’s Blackstone Group, is the Daddy Warbucks of the “fiscal responsibility” crusade.”

AND, “The authors of this plan are sixteen economists from Brookings and Heritage, joined by the American Enterprise Institute, the Concord Coalition, the New America Foundation, the Progressive Policy Institute and the Urban Institute. “Our group covers the ideological spectrum,” they claim. This too is a falsehood. All these organizations are corporate-friendly and dependent on big-money contributors.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090302/greider

All they want is to steal even MORE of your money.  To claim that this is stealing from our children is also bogus, WE PAID for this security, THEY STOLE IT, if anyone is stealing from our children, IT IS THEM.  They’re just looking for a patsy to pin it on.

William Greitner’s article is very good, print it off, pass it around, let everyone know who the crooks are.  People are not stupid.

President Obama knows that SS, Medicare and Medicaid are not in danger.

Then why does he whip up the foam of reform?

Mr. Obama has already told us that “entitlements” must help to pay for “stimulus” and reducing the budget deficit from more than 1 trillion to about 500 billion dollars in a few years.

Why?

Because he does not dare to do what he promised during his campaign, namely raise the taxes of incomes above 250,000 NOW.

Folks, it is time to stop believing anything presidential candidates promise they will do once they are elected.

Why doesn’t Obama say that he knows there’s nothing wrong with Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid (although the latter have been cut cut and cut horribly already)?

If President Obama doesn’t know, why?

The US public beat back, by show of opposition, (I still can’t call the man “president”), Mr. Bush’s plan to privatize social security.  I fear that just as Bill Clinton was able to pass things Republicans couldn’t, such as welfare destruction as we know it, President Obama might.

Many good writers, in addition to Marie Cocco, have spoken the truth over the years to keep Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid “safe” from the greedy who are at the top, or have been propagandized (not many, but the mainstream media “bought the lies”).  The late John L. Hess, journalist, spoke out against the lies for years.  His blog is still online: http://www.johnlhess.blogspot.com

There’s an excellent post by Dave Lindorff, on his blog, Feb. 23, 2009 on fighting the lies about Medicare and Social Security.  http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/  (Older person still new online; hope the links are OK)

It is amazing to me how the greedy, whether Wall St. or Right wingers, want every last penny…from us, the retired, the disabled, the older, the poor…

The very word “entitlement” is misued . Convservatives use it in a way that implies, “you think or act like you are entitled”, when, in fact you ARE! We all should be—we paid for it.

Here is what physicians for a Natl health Plan have to say about the Baucus/Kennedy plan for incremental insurance coverage.

This is what Physicians for a Natl Health Plan say about the incremental insurance coverage being planned by Baucus/Kennedy.(Baucus is preventing single payer from being brought to the floor—please tell him to stop blocking action, as the Dems have been reminding GOP to do…))

“Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) recently unveiled his proposals for incremental health reform, which largely mirror the ideas of President-elect Barack Obama and Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.).

However well-intentioned, the Obama/Baucus/Kennedy approaches share a fatal flaw: they preserve a central role for the private health insurance industry.

To varying degrees, they would mandate that everyone buy private health insurance - the private insurance that is failing us today. Some of these plans offer a Medicare-like, public option that people could buy into, but experience with Medicare shows that the private plans refuse to compete on a level playing field. They cherry-pick healthier patients and insist on more than their share of payment.

Experience with mandate-based plans in Washington state (1993), Oregon (1992) and Massachusetts (1988 and today) shows that they simply don’t work, achieving neither universal health care nor cost containment.

As long as we rely on private health insurers, universal coverage will be unaffordable. These companies generate immense overhead costs and force doctors and hospitals to spend heavily on billing and paperwork.

Administration consumes about one-third of every health care dollar in the U.S. By contrast, in countries with nonprofit national health insurance, administrative costs consume only half that amount.

There is a cure, however. Eliminating the private insurance industry would save $400 billion annually in administrative costs, enough to ensure that everyone is covered and to eliminate all co-pays and deductibles.

At this critical juncture, a single-payer plan is the only medically, morally and fiscally responsible path to take.”

As far as the Constitution—it is too old. We need a Constitutional Convention. Yes, I said it.

Maybe the Confederacy needs to take off on its own again. We wont fight this time—promise! Yes, progressives may move up here, first…but dont actually expect “prpgress”! lol..

The main thing to remember is that it’s YOUR MONEY not theirs. You should decide what happens to it not them. The Republicans have been itching to get their corrupt fingers on that money for some time. George W. Dropkick tried to ‘privatize’ (code for stealing all the money) social security and only a concerted campaign by the well-informed and articulate stopped him from doing it. No doubt the money would have ended up in Iraq or Afghanistan to prop up his futile and ridiculous wars while Americans went hungry and homeless. Dropkick and his bionic friend with the artificial heart Dick (darkside) Cheney think it’s normal for Americans to starve and be homeless. Keep ‘em keen is their motto.

Tommy’s astute and sophisticated Constitutional analysis has a rather attractive silver lining:  no more Federal Reserve Bank, corporate “personhood”, “Department of Homeland Security” or Pentagon!

I’m not saying it makes up for all the senior citizens dying of starvation and untreated health problems, but hey—no plan is perfect!

Tommey,

would you support a National Health Care Program? Would it not be safe to say, everything is a scheme which you do not intend to utilize?  You understand the Constitution so well, maybe you should take your case to the supreme court?  Since you are an expert on the Constitution what does it say about taxes and IRA’s, and corporate rights?

Comprehensive health care reform—in line with EVERY OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRY—will make the Medicaid/Medicare issue evaporate, leaving us with only SS to deal with.

After all, comprehensive health care means, um, comprehensive! Meaning if you are young or old or employed or not.

Return of Work Houses and Poor houses. Exactly what Americans despised about the English Rulers. The very foundation of the labor movement.
It’s not just a travesty, it’s disgusting and utterly UnAmerican.
Funny how Repugs adhere to the condemnation o fDarwin, except when it come to money. then they LOVE ‘Survival of the fittest’(unless of course that means their corps will go extinct).But as usual this is a total misrepresentation of Darwins theory. His hypothesis was not Suvival of the fittest- it was the observation of the survival of the most Adaptable.But this would run in direct conflict to their desire to remain unchanged. Tax Cuts? And Cries about the Deficit? Now after the damage has already been done by this Oxymoronic doctrine.Who needs a tax cut when we have no income, or own property to tax? How are we to work on bringing down the deficit the Repugs had no concerns with if the tax base is further depleted?
Logic eludes the Repugs, apparently so does the Histroical facts about what constitutes REAL American values or our History.
Survival of the Fittest..Fine then let the Banking Corps Die and OUR Debts to them go with them.
Survival of the fittest…Fine then admit your party LOST because you were not fit to lead.
survival of the Fittest…fine stop hiding behind your propped up Religous Fanatics and come out and compete on level ground- Dump the faned ‘Morality’ schtick and prove you have the fortitude to fight fair.Shoving out a few ‘minorities’ and Holy roller to fight your battles proves only your weakness and lack of ability to Adapt!

Tommy,
    The first sentence in the Preamble includes the phrase “to promote the general welfare”.  Any program or law which Congress passes and the President signs and is not overturned by the Supreme Court is, by definition, “constitutional”.  Moreover, one can easily and LOGICALLY argue that providing financial and health saftey nets for our elderly citizens does, in fact, “promote the general welfare”. 
Heaven forbid that you should get to be “elderly”, Tommy.  And since recipients are subject to means testing and various age requirements, one might argue that they are also “fairly administered”. By contrast, show us the part of the Constitution that indicates that being able to nuke the entire world 57 times over is either “prudent” or promotes anybody’s “welfare” - certainly a vastly expensive and expansive interpretation of “national defense”. 
Having successful programs like these so-called “entitlement programs” conveniently alleviates the rest of the citizenry from caring for orphaned, elderly, or functionally debilitated people - who would otherwise impose significant drains on community facilities.  I am presuming, of course, that you Tommy are not raising orphans or caring for indigent elderly folks all by yourself.
It’s basically impossible to pull one’s self up by the bootstraps when one lacks boots or shoes.

What a great article. The fact is that every Trust Fund our country has has been raided, first, I believe by Nixon, and then Reagan and onward.

When there was a rash of plane crashes in the 80’s, survivors and their families turned to the government to improve (pay for) ground equipment only to find that Reagan had raided the Airport Trust Fund almost dry.

The mentality of the criminals in our government is: drain our country’s assets dry and call it “good business”. Our presidents then proceed to look the other way.

At least, I hope, this recession will teach us all the lessons we need to learn again. Learn it hard but learn it good.

Big cities are now swelling with blind, lame, feeble and unemployed citizens that were once comfortable. Now those unfortunates must look elsewhere for comfort.  During economic calamities workers left cities and traveled to the farms. Pol Pot chased millions out of the city when the Cambodian government collapsed. He expected them to take up farming. Most of them died of starvation. Few survived by living off the land. Today’s big city residents cannot be expected to escape and live off the land. Their only salvation is the welfare check.  Let’s hope the government never runs out of printing ink.

Social Security is big juicy pot of money and special interests and some politicians want to have their fingers all over it. To them it looks like a big pork fest, also it to them is an your face form of socialism, (successful at that) so unacceptable to special interests. 

The same interests coupled with others is why a National Medical Plan has never happened, same interests waving the socialism red flags has worked for all these years. Only their influence during the depression was put on hold, so now may be the time to get National Medical Insurance?

It’s not the Social Security system that is the problem; it’s the political system whereby SS funds are borrowed by the government to spend now.  If there actually was a hands-off trust fund there would be no trouble.

But that same CBO report states quite clearly (second paragraph) that outlays exceed revenue in 2019 and that the trust fund will be gone by 2041.  It doesn’t say whether it’s talking about real money or the intragovernmental IOU’s.  This is the second or third piece i’ve read that quotes that CBO study and i’m beginning to doubt that any of the authors have actually read the study.

The left is being disingenuous when it says that there’s no need for reform as a push back to the silly rightest idea of privatizing the system.

Or, we’re faced again with a fair percentage of the Boomer population basically saying, “I’ll get mine and the precious children can fuck right off.”

The “dark art of disinformation” is certainly an accurate description of what has been occurring, and agree the term “entitlement reform” needs to be wiped out of the political dictionary - as it has been applied anyway.

The term could be recycled and used to form a commission to investigate the kickback entitlements that so many of our political representatives have come to expect from the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries.