Free Fire Zone ~ October & November 09

Written by Christianity and the Confusion on October 1st, 2009

   This is the Free Fire Zone message board for October. The previous FFZs can be found by using the search engine located below the Google/dictionary box, by doing a search of “Free Fire Zone” you will be able to see all previous ones.  Feel free to reply to any post there or restart the thread here.


    This message board is for posting what ever you like. If you notice that some pages are missing try looking in the Archives. Some may find this page useful when their regular boards are not working. Here all are welcome, after registering you will be able to post. To start a new thread click on the Post a comment you can gave that thread a title by replacing the Free Fire Zone with your title. Enjoy this board and remember no personal insults.


41 Comments so far ↓

  1. Anonymous says:

    MR. GREGORY: Your wife famously talked about the vast right wing conspiracy targeting you. As you look at this opposition on the right to President Obama, is it still there?
    PRES. CLINTON: Oh, you bet. Sure it is. It's not as strong as it was, because America's changed demographically, but it's as virulent as it was. I mean, they're saying things about him–you know, it's like when they accused me of murder and all that stuff they did. He–but it's not really good for the Republicans and the country, what's going on now. I mean, they may be hurting President Obama. They can take his numbers down, they can run his opposition up. But fundamentally, he and his team have a positive agenda for America. Their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail, and that's not a prescription for a good America. We actually need a credible debate about what's the right balance between continuing to expand the economy through stimulus and beginning to move back to fiscal balance. We need a credible debate about what's the best way to get to universal coverage.
    Now, the one Republican who's come up with a good idea is Senator Snowe. She deserves a lot of credit for saying when we did this Medicare prescription drug bill, instead of giving the government the power to negotiate for lower prices we gave the drug companies a chance to offer them, but we held the power in reserve. And if there was any state in America where there was no competition, you could do it. So let's do that for health care. That's a good idea. That's, that's the kind of debate the country needs, and I hope that the Republicans will come forward with it. These…
    MR. GREGORY: But do you worry about a repeat of '94 politically?
    PRES. CLINTON: It, it–there's no way they can make it that bad, for several reasons. Number one, the country is more diverse and more interested in positive action. Number two, they've seen this movie before, because they had eight years under President Bush when the Republicans finally had the whole government, and they know the results were bad. And number three, the Democrats haven't taken on the gun lobby like I did, and they took 15 out of our members out. So I don't think it'll be–whatever happens, it'll be manageable for the president.
    Meet the Press' transcript

    I just don't see why Republicans are so hateful, they talk about bipartisanship but it looks like they think that means their way or the hi-way! Can anyone tell me what are the Republican solutions?

  2. Anonymous says:

    How can you take Mr. “I didn't have sex with that woman” word on anything?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Well, the change of failures has begun, first the Olympics, next government health care and what will fail next after that?

    Obama and his wife, Michelle, had taken their star power to the Danish capital to make Chicago's case, ignoring the carping from Republican opponents who charged it was a bad time to go with foreign policy challenges in Iran and Afghanistan and the U.S. Congress bogged down in a domestic healthcare debate.
    “I'm asking you to choose Chicago. I'm asking you to choose America,” Michelle Obama told committee members.
    Her husband said, “If you do, if we walk this path together, then I promise you this: The city of Chicago and the United States of America will make the world proud.”
    All that was for naught as Chicago was eliminated in the first round of voting, a decision that brought gasps from the Chicago contingent at the Copenhagen meeting.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Clinton is like most Libs, paranoid! There never was a conspiracy against him, but watch the Left resurrect that fear mongering about Obama. Oh, watch out those mean old Republicans are at it again!

  5. Anonymous says:

    I just wonder where Jack lives, it doesn't sound like he loves America much with all that hope for failure. It would have helped the economy a lot if the Olympics had picked Chicago, but I guess all those people out of work don't matter to a good old Republican. Do you hate the President so much that you want to see us continue towards another Great Depression?

  6. Anonymous says:

    This is a free advertisement.


    Did you know that one in eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime?

    And did you know that when breast cancer occurs in women under the age of 40, it is often detected at later stages, is more likely to be aggressive, and may be less responsive to traditional therapies?

    Despite these facts, there is a lack of awareness about the risks and unique challenges facing young women with breast cancer. A bill recently introduced in the Senate would change that.

    Help increase survival for young women with breast cancer.

    Urge your senators to co-sponsor the EARLY Act.

    Click here to send your letter TODAY.

    Click here to urge your senators to co-sponsor the Breast Cancer Education and Awareness Requires Learning Young (EARLY) Act of 2009.

    Young women with breast cancer struggle with many issues that women who are diagnosed with breast cancer later in life may not face. And because diagnosing breast cancer in young women can be more difficult, these women often don't learn about their disease until it is in advanced stages and more life threatening.

    The EARLY Act will address these unique concerns in three key ways:

    • Public education. The bill will initiate an evidence-based public education campaign about breast cancer in women under age 45 — with an emphasis on women at higher risk due to their race, ethnicity or genetic heritage.
    • Resources for health professionals. The bill will educate health care professionals about the risk factors and unique challenges that face young women diagnosed with breast cancer.
    • Support services. The bill will provide grants to organizations that provide credible health information directed to young women diagnosed with breast cancer.

    When breast cancer is detected early, the five-year survival rate is 98 percent. But because many younger women are diagnosed at later stages with more aggressive breast cancer, their survival rate is lower. With increased awareness for genetic counseling and testing, early detection, and treatment, we can improve the odds. But we need your help.

    Please take a moment to write your senators today and urge them to co-sponsor the EARLY Act.

    The EARLY Act has been introduced in the House and has received overwhelming support. In fact, over 360 House members have signed on to become co-sponsors. To garner the same level of support in the Senate and ensure the bill makes it to President Obama's desk, your senators need to hear from YOU!

    Thank you for all that you do. Together we can one day end the suffering and death caused by cancer.


    Ambassador Nancy Brinker
    Founding Chair, Susan G. Komen for the Cure®
    Board Member, Susan G. Komen for the Cure® Advocacy Alliance

  7. Anonymous says:

       I find it to be shameful that the Right would be so partisan that they would rejoice at this as if it were a blow to the President. As you have said, this would have been a big plus to the economy and America which should surpass any loyalty to party. To put one's political affiliation above the National interest is as unpatriotic as one can be. If Republicans want a different President, they will have that chance in 2012, but until then they should pray that this President is successful for the Nation's sake. To simply be opposed to anything Democratic is quite un-American. Republicans need to put aside their partisanship and work together with the Democrats in a democratic manner (small d democratic) to assure the well being of all Americans. To do anything else is to show contempt for everything on which this Nation was founded.

  8. Anonymous says:

    What about all the Bush bashing that went on for the last 8 years by the Dems?

  9. Anonymous says:

       It is a misnomer that Mr. Bush was ever treated with anything close to the contempt that the Far-Right has shown to the President. At this same point in that Republican administration all Americans were rallying behind Mr. Bush and it wasn't until we began to ask why did 9/ll happen? Why were the fifty-two warnings ignored? Why can't we have any investigation? Why are we attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11? It was at that time that the Right attacked us and when we exercised our Constitutional rights to question that White House, you Republicans whined that we were bashing poor Mr. Bush. Forget about the 3000 American that died on 9/11, forget about the million innocent Iraqis that died because of a lie, forget about the ten thousand Americans who either die or were maimed for that lie, forget about the good will of the world that the Republicans wasted and focus on the fact that Liberals were supporting America and it's ideals while the Right was trashing them! How dare you equate what you Right-wingers have been doing to the patriotic stand that we took?

  10. Anonymous says:

    It's pretty outrageous that Republicans would cheer against America, I'm really disappointed, I thought the Republicans on this blog were better than that.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, that lie was wrong and cheating on his wife was wrong too, but that was between the two of them and shouldn't have ever been brought to the public by the Right. That alone should prove that there was and still is that Right-wing conspiracy at work. There are only two things that I would disagree with Bill Clinton on; one is that the RWC is any less for President Obama and part of Clinton's troubles were his own making. That doesn't make what the Right has been doing okay, it's not! Both Clinton and Obama won their elections fair and square, that's something that Bush couldn't say honestly! No one is saying that Republicans have to shut up and go along with whatever President Obama wants, but this trash talk is wrong!

  12. Anonymous says:

    NBC News and news services
    updated 11:44 a.m. PT, Fri., Oct . 9, 2009
    OSLO, Norway – President Barack Obama said Friday he was surprised and humbled to win the Nobel Peace Prize and would accept it as a “call to action” to work with other nations to solve the problems of the 21st century.
    Nobel officials said their stunning pick was meant to build momentum behind Obama's initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.
    The president will donate the entire $1.4 million prize to charity.

    Visit for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

    What is wrong with some of the people on the right? This is a great thing which should make all Americans proud, but not the Raved Right. They don't even mind being on the same side and sounding like the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. If I were a Republican, I would be ashamed right now of the likes of Beck and Limbaugh. I will say that McCain acted far better than the Hate America First crowd.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Here is another video in which Rachel Maddow explains why President Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and marvels at the inability of some Americans not to feel pride at the honor.

    Visit for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

  14. Anonymous says:

    I agree, I don't know what is wrong with these people. They are reducing themselves to nothing more than Obama haters. They just don't want to see President Obama succeed at anything. I think that they would cheer if there was another terrorist attack. How can they call themselves patriotic?

  15. Anonymous says:

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in an interview on the “Today” show, with Ann Curry said this:

    Visit for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

  16. Anonymous says:

    Thanks Donna, that was good, I know that some people were hoping for a little civil war in this administration and Hillary isn't going to give it to them. I just wish that the extreme right would recognize that we all are Americans and that this administration is out to protect and defend the rights of all Americans.

  17. Anonymous says:

    I bet you girls are still put out that a woman's libber didn't get the White House. I don't care what title she has, she'll always be untrustworthy!

  18. Anonymous says:

    You wonder where I live? Are you questioning my loyalty? I'll have you know that I'm a true blue American, who just doesn't like seeing the President of the United States pimping for the old boy network in Chicago. I just don't like seeing my taxes going for Obama's photo opts!

  19. Anonymous says:

    What a load! Ok, Obama is a nice guy, but what has he done to deserve this? Can anyone name me one thing that Obama has done yet?

  20. Anonymous says:

    In the wake of Rush Limbaugh being booted from a group of investors bidding to buy the St. Louis Rams football team, a minor media tempest has been stirred by conservative commentators who charge that Limbaugh has been falsely accused of making racist remarks.
    Central to their charge are two quotes allegedly made by Limbaugh–in which the radio host supposedly praised slavery and Martin Luther King assassin James Earl Ray–that cannot be documented and may be bogus. Many of the commentators claim that the case against Limbaugh is based on little more than the two dubious quotes.
    For instance, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly (10/15/09) claimed that besides one well-documented racist remark Limbaugh made in the 1970s, the case that Limbaugh says racist things is non-existent: “The reason that Limbaugh is not going to be able to buy into the NFL is because a bunch of made-up stuff became legend. And he got hammered.” O'Reilly added: “So what we have here are accusations without merit. But in our hypermedia age, that's enough to paint someone as a racist.”
    Limbaugh defenders, however, have to ignore many well-documented and easily checkable racist and race-baiting remarks made by the talkshow host over a long period of time.
    **Arguing during the 2008 campaign that no one is permitted to criticize Barack Obama: “You can't criticize the little black man-child. You just can't do it, 'cause it's just not right. It's not fair. He's such a victim.” (Radio, 8/20/08; audio available at Media Matters, 8/20/08)
    ** “We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this is the first black president.” (Hannity, 1/21/09, archived on Nexis; video available at Media Matters, 1/22/09)
    ** Reacting to a report of black students assaulting a white student on a bus (an incident that police determined was not racially motivated), Limbaugh brought in Barack Obama: “In Obama's America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering, 'Right on, right on, right on.'” (Media Matters, 9/15/09)
    ** On learning from a caller to his show that St. Louis was extending a light rail system into East St. Louis–a community of some 40,000 residents, almost all of whom are black (radio, 6/27/94): “They got a light rail system to East St. Louis where nobody goes?”
    ** “Look it, let me put it to you this way. The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.” Limbaugh (10/14/09) admitted making this remark, but claimed it was a response to the actions of one player who was penalized for taunting an opponent. Limbaugh admitted that his language “makes it look racial, the way I chose to describe it. I could have perhaps chosen a different term.”
    ** Limbaugh praised former segregationist Sen. Strom Thurmond for calling a gay soldier “not normal”: “He's not encumbered by being politically correct…. If you want to know what America used to be–and a lot of people wish it still were–then you listen to Strom Thurmond.” (TV show, 9/1/93, transcript archived on Nexis) In the America that “used to be,” Thurmond was one of the country's leading racists, running for president in 1948 on the Dixiecrat ticket, with a platform that opposed federal anti-lynching laws and boasted the slogan, “Segregation Forever!”
    ** In 1992, on his now-defunct TV show, Limbaugh expressed his ire when Spike Lee urged that black schoolchildren get off from school to see his film Malcolm X: “Spike, if you're going to do that, let's complete the education experience. You should tell them that they should loot the theater, and then blow it up on their way out.” (TV show, 10/29/92; transcript archived on Nexis)
    ** Limbaugh admitted to Newsday's Richard Gehr (10/8/90) that as a DJ in Pittsburgh in the 1970s he had once dismissed a black caller by saying, “Take that bone out of your nose and call me back.”
    ** “Have you ever noticed how all newspaper composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?” (Newsday, 10/8/90)
    ** Discussing a Chicago inner-city schoolteacher punished for using a math question that focused on the price of prostitution and cocaine habits, Limbaugh suggested that the teacher should be credited for “understanding the culture these kids come from.” The math question began: “Rufus is pimping three girls.” (TV show, 5/24/94; transcript archived on Nexis)
    See FAIR's Archives for more on:
    Rush Limbaugh
    Race and Racism

  21. Anonymous says:

    Did you see this?

    Rev. Al Sharpton Threatens to Sue Rush Limbaugh

    In the op-ed, Limbaugh attacks Sharpton, who was critical of Limbaugh's involvement in the Rams bid.

    In 1998 Mr. Sharpton was found guilty of defamation and ordered to pay $65,000 for falsely accusing a New York prosecutor of rape in the 1987 Tawana Brawley case. He also played a leading role in the 1991 Crown Heights riot (he called neighborhood Jews “diamond merchants”) and 1995 Freddie's Fashion Mart riot.

    Sharpton quickly responded, making it clear he did not appreciate Limbaugh's words.

    “I am definitely going to prove he makes reckless, unaccountable statements,” Sharpton said. “Which is why he was forced out of buying an NFL team in the first place.”

    If Sharpton sues Limbaugh, it will be interesting to see if it gets very far. Both men have plenty of money and access to top lawyers, and it doesn't make much sense for this to drag out into a long legal battle.
    Limbaugh has gained a lot of publicity over his failed attempt to help buy the Rams, and there's no question he will — at some point — address Sharpton's comments on his radio show.

  22. Anonymous says:

    This is an email that I received from NARAL.

    I'll be honest—we all expected a fight from the usual anti-choice agitators on health-care reform. We expected it from Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)1, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)2, the Family Research Council3, and the American Life League4.

    But did you know that an anti-choice Democrat is carrying the right wing's water on this issue?

    Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan is ready to jeopardize the entire health-care reform bill to stand between women and their doctors.

    He's willing to undermine health-care reform—blocking the landmark bill from even coming to a vote—in order to impose an abortion ban on women in the reformed health system. His proposal would take away coverage from women who already have it.

    Women can't afford to lose.

    Watch our new video and then take action before Democrat Rep. Stupak gets his way:

    Tell Congress to stand with women,
    not Rep. Stupak.

    We've made it through five congressional committees, but if we can't beat Rep. Stupak's sneaky road block on the House floor, it will all be for nothing.

    I can't overstate the consequences of what anti-choice Rep. Stupak is trying to pull. We must win this one. Women can't afford to lose.

    Lawmakers in Congress need to know they must continue to reject any and all attempts to impose an outright ban on abortion services in a reformed health-care system—and they need to make sure that reform gets a fair vote.

    Speak up now and tell your member of Congress to draw the line—NO more cloak-room politics, NO excuses for anti-woman diatribes, and NO new abortion ban.

    I know we can count on you.

    My best,

    Nancy Keenan

    Nancy Keenan
    President, NARAL Pro-Choice America

    1 “Bachmann warns of abortions at school,” The Hill, October 1, 2009,
    2 “Taxpayer-Funded Abortion Is Not Health-Care Reform,” National Review Online, July 23, 2009,
    3 “FRC spot looks to tie public option to abortion funding,” CNN, July 29, 2009
    4 “Pro-Lifers Take Death Lightly,” The Rachel Maddow Show, September 16, 2009,

  23. Anonymous says:

    What is wrong with wanting to control where our tax dollars go?

  24. Anonymous says:

    Right! I don't want my taxes going to a baby killing abortionist!

  25. Anonymous says:

    This really pisses me off, who do you think you are? I pay taxes too, a lot of taxes and I want them to go to protect a woman's right to choose. When it comes to killing babies which abortion isn't, I didn't hear any Republicans, including you condemning Bush for murdering thousands of innocent babies in Iraq. I sure didn't like seeing my taxes going to that, why didn't I get a say in that?

  26. Anonymous says:

    Just calm down, I know how worked up you women lib types get, all angry because God didn't make you a man. President Bush didn't set out to kill any babies but abortionists do.

  27. Anonymous says:

    I have no desire to be a man, but if I were I sure wouldn't take out my small manhood on innocent women who only want to chose what happens to their own bodies. And Bush knew that innocent babies were going to die because of his lie and war!

  28. Anonymous says:

    I disagree with Jessica on just about everything, but there's no call for that rudeness, Jack! I want equal pay and equal opportunities too, but the last thing that I want is to be a hairy man! Hey Jack, why does it sound like you hate women?

  29. Anonymous says:

    Who hates women? I just think that Women libers are angry because they secretly wish that they were men.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Thank you Carolyn, I'm going stop for tonight before I say something that I'll regret.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Special Comment on Health Care Reform in this country, and in particular, the “public insurance option.” In March of 1911, after a wave of minor factory fires in New York City, the City's Fire Commissioner issued emergency rules about fire prevention, protection, escape, sprinklers. The City's Manufacturers Association in turn called an emergency meeting to attack the Fire Commissioner and his 'interference with commerce.' Link

    Visit for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

  32. Anonymous says:

    Oct. 23: Countdown guest host Lawrence O’Donnell offers a fact-check of the Fox News claim that it was the White House who started the war with Fox.

    Visit for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

  33. Anonymous says:

    This is a perfect article from the Huffington Post.

    Just who is this jerk, Rick Scott who bankrolls the propaganda-mongering Conservatives for Patients' Rights? He and his group are fabricating negatives about Canada's health care system and I resent this. I am an American who has lived in Canada for more than 35 years. I can vouch that the system is more than adequate and is not run by civil servants but by doctors who are able to treat everyone, rich or poor.
    Mr. Scott, and other conservatives (code for rich) are against universal health care without any justification whatsoever. Their criticisms are in accurate and should not be broadcast.
    Where are the ethics in network broadcasting? I saw one of Scott's ads on CNN recently and wondered why the same curation of content was not imposed on CNN advertising messages as is upheld editorially. If CNN is unwilling to vet content, then where is the FCC?
    Here are the facts as to why Canada's medical system, far from perfect, is dramatically better than America's:
    1. Canadian and European systems are on average 10% of GDP while in 2007 the U.S. cost was 16.2% even though tens of millions were not covered. These escalating costs represent America's biggest competitive disadvantage going forward.
    2. Canada's health care system which fully looks after 32 million people costs roughly what the private-sector health insurance companies make in profits in the United States looking after less than half the population for excessive premiums.
    3. America's health care system is even more uncompetitive if litigation costs and awards for medical bills are added. One estimate is that this adds another 3% to the 16.2% GDP costs of the American-style health care. In Canada and Europe, medical costs are borne by taxpayers as a whole so there are no court costs and awards necessary.
    4. Canada's and Europe's health care systems enhances economic productivity. Workers diagnosed with illnesses can still change employers and be employable because they are not rejected by employers with health benefits due to pre-conditions.
    5. Infant mortality is much lower in Canada and Europe than in the U.S.
    6. Outcomes with major illnesses, such as cancer and heart disease, are better than in the United States.
    7. Longevity is better in Canada and Europe than in the U.S.
    8. No emergency is neglected in Canada.
    9. Some elective procedures may take longer if compared to blue-ribbon U.S. health care but that's no comparing apples with apples. More appropriately, the overall population's care should be compared and there are tens of millions of Americans who are uninsured or uninsurable.
    10. No one in Canada goes broke because of medical bills whereas ARP estimates half of personal bankruptcies are due to unpaid, high medical bills. More Americans go bust or lose their homes due to medical costs than the sub-prime problem.
    11. Canadians are able to choose their own physicians and to seek multiple opinions.
    12. Canadian doctors and nurses are better trained than American counterparts and U.S. physicians must study for at least a year in order to qualify to practice in Canada.
    13. Drugs made and invented in the United States are cheaper in Canada, Europe and Japan because our communal health care means volume discounts and savings passed along to society. Americans are overpaying.
    14. Americans are being cheated by a patchwork quilt system where the highest risk people — veterans, the indigent and elderly — are insured by governments but the “gravy” or young, healthy people are handed over to private insurance companies.
    Is Canada's system perfect? Or Europe's? No and nobody said it was. Networks should stop allowing propagandists to tell lies and any arguments about other countries' practices should be ignored as totally irrelevant.
    The United States is a rich and talented nation and it's very upsetting to me, as an American, that it does not have the world's best medical care for its citizens instead of one of the worst.
    Americans deserve better.
    Read more at:

  34. Anonymous says:

    Thank you for posting this, I'm so sick of Republicans playing the victims when they're the ones doing the attacking!

  35. Anonymous says:

    The only reason that the Left hates Fox is because it is the only place where the Liberal Media isn't in control.

  36. Anonymous says:

    Is this too good to be true? Does anyone think that this isn't a good thing?

  37. Anonymous says:

    I'm watching the election results and it looks like the Democrat Party is in trouble. This could be a sign of things to come. I can imagine Obama watching the news and sweating, he is being hit with the realization that the American people are rejecting his socialist agenda.


    Go Republicans

  38. Anonymous says:

    I don't get why you liberals hate Wal-Mart so much. You guys say that you're for the little guy, for the poor, so I would think that you would cheer Wal-Mart's efforts to keep prices low for those people. Maybe, Wal-Mart just isn't elitist enough for you Democrats.


    Go Republicans

  39. Anonymous says:

    Good God Blondie, you're some dreamer. So what, republicans won two races? Maybe you didn't notice that there was a Democratic win where that hadn't happened in some 60 years. So what do you make of that?

  40. Anonymous says:

    We don't like seeing a big/rich/powerful corporation abusing it's employees. Wal-Mart doesn't care about the poor, all they care about is getting as much money out of them as possible. And you know what you can do with that elitist stuff!

  41. Anonymous says:

    Word from the White House: Business Roundtable Hewitt Report “Health Care Reform: Creating a Sustainable Market”

    It's no secret that institutions of all stripes focus their communications on certain messages day to day. We thought it would all be a little more open and transparent if we went ahead and published what our focus will be for the day, along with any related articles, documents, or reports. 

    Supporting report: “Health Care Reform: Creating a Sustainable Health Care Marketplace,” Business Roundtable, November 2009 (pdf)

    Business Roundtable Hewitt Report “Health Care Reform: Creating a Sustainable Market”

    The BRT report confirms that the status quo is unsustainable.  The BRT report finds that without health reform, costs will continue to rise at the same trend they have for the last ten years.  The report concludes that without reform, by 2019, employment-based spending on health care for large employers will be 166% higher than today on a per-employee basis. 

    The BRT report confirms that Congress is moving in the right direction on both fiscal responsibility and cost containment.  The BRT-Hewitt report finds that many of the delivery system reform policies that are currently in health reform legislation will make important contributions to cost reduction, when implemented effectively. As the report explains, “[a] number of the proposed reforms offer real promise, not only to save federal dollars, but also to reduce the rate of increase in private sector spending if adopted and implemented appropriately.”

    • These policies include: value-based purchasing, a new CMS Innovation Center, “accountable care organizations” and reducing preventable hospital re-admissions.   The BRT report also notes that with additional steps such as administrative simplification, electronic medical records, and increased information transparency for better decision-making, even more savings could be reached.  Some of these additional policies were included in ARRA and many others are included in health reform legislation currently pending in Congress.
    • With health reform, as much as $3,000 could be saved by 2019.  The BRT-Hewitt study finds that with many of the legislative reforms currently in the health reform bills, costs could be reduced by as much as $3,000 per employee.  


    My thoughts:
    There are a lot of lies being spread about what health care reform will do, I think we should look at what the White House is saying instead of Fake (Fox) News. I know that the truth isn't as sexy as all the spin, but some times the boring truth is what we need.

Leave a Comment