Ok I am about to drop some truth bombs on my blog follower(s). I am was positive that due to this recent health care reform being passed that America was would be freaking out. That is why I decided that I once again needed to save America
Lets hit you with the reality of the problem. The USA spends more, per capita, than any other country on earth on healthcare. The reasons are pretty obvious we live a very unhealthy lifestyle, so our need for healthcare is greater than a place like Sweden. We have a lot of money to spend on healthcare because we spend less on other things, like food. Our leaders have used the "think of the children" idea to make us expect that all our healthcare is world class and all our healthcare facilities have the best equipment and training. most people (including republicans) agree that we have a "crisis" because our costs are moving up faster than inflation. I respectfully disagree Instead I would argue that cheap healthcare is available, just go to your local walk-in clinic or inner city hospital andtell them you can't pay and they will get you help anyway
I believe the problem, if it can be called a problem, is that we demand the best healthcare available in other countries and in our country, cheap healthcare is available, and good healthcare is available. Just like any other good or service, though, good healthcare is more expensive. This is not limited to our country. In the UK there are private non-NHS hospitals that those who can afford to, go to. they offer better care, but are more expensive. Our current system allows people to get good healthcare (if they can afford it) or cheap healthcare (which is decent, considering the cost)

Another thing you often hear is that insurance companies are raping us and making huge profits. This is simply untrue. The average profit margin for a health insurance company in the US is about 2.5 percent. for comparison, inflation is about 4.5 percent to 6 percent. Insurance industry profits are lower than nearly every other US industry. the reason the profits look so big is that insurance is such a voluminous business. when you are selling a product that nearly every person buys, it's easy to get to a billion dollars. the idea behind reform is to "bend the cost curve down" which means slow the growth of the rising costs of healthcare. This is good, but it's only half the equation. Bending the quality curve up, if you like, is the other half.

It's passed (officially) but i know there are several lawsuits lined up against the federal government already about it. It has more holes in constitutionally than a kitchen sponge. It passed the house and senate, but still has to be signed into law, and there will be tons of lawsuits because many people believe that parts of the bill are unconstitutional. and it doesn't go into effect until 2013. Some of the parts of the bill are as follows: require everybody to have health insurance. Many young and healthy people don't buy insurance because they simply don't need it because they don't get sick or injured. This means that insurance companies have to pay out more to the people that do pay for insurance. Giving them a little more income from people who won't need payouts will let them lower everybody's bills a bit. If it's unconstitutional it will have to be taken to the Supreme Court who will declare it as such. This will likely take several years to go through that process. .
If nobody sues, it will remain the law. If somebody sues, the courts will determine if it is constitutional.one thing i believe is unconstitutional is the mandate that everybody buy insurance. The constitution tells congress what exactly they can do, and every bill they pass has to be covered under the one of the provisions of the constitution. The one they use most often is called the "interstate commerce clause" which gives congress authority "to regulate interstate commerce" because buying health insurance is interstate commerce, they can regulate it. However, one of the provisions of the bill is a fine for those who don't buy insurance. The fine is, in effect, a punishment for doing nothing.
Our current congress believes such a fine will be covered under the interstate commerce clause because it has to do with healthcare. I believe that such a fine is unconstitutional because those that will be fined are precisely the ones who are NOT engaged in any interstate commerce because they aren't buying health insurance. In the bill, the section detailing the fine is headed "excise tax" however, an excise tax is a tax on a good or service. When you purchase no good or service, it is not an excise tax, it's a poll tax. the constitution however, demands that poll taxes be split equally over everybody. This poll tax does not fit that requirement.
The "excise tax" is so unconstitutional it boggles the mind how a group of lawyers could pass it. if you are interested, here's an article.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/12/Why-the-Personal-Mandate-to-Buy-Health-Insurance-Is-Unprecedented-and-Unconstitutional

Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress given the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party or purchase a good or service and, as this paper will explain, no decision or present doctrine of the Supreme Court justifies such a claim of power. Therefore, because this claim of power by Congress would literally be without precedent, it could only be upheld if the Supreme Court is willing to create a new constitutional doctrine
To assess the constitutionality of a claim of power under the Commerce Clause, the primary question becomes, "what class of activity is Congress seeking to regulate?" Only when this question is answered can the Court assess whether that class of activity substantially affects interstate commerce. Significantly, the mandate imposed by the pending bills does not regulate or prohibit the economic activity of providing or administering health insurance. Nor does it regulate or prohibit the economic activity of providing health care, whether by doctors, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, or other entities engaged in the business of providing a medical good or service. Indeed, the health care mandate does not purport to regulate or prohibit activity of any kind, whether economic or noneconomic. To the contrary, it purports to "regulate" inactivity.
The biggest problem is that the bill begins collecting taxes this year, for the next ten years, but only pays for 7 years (from 2013-2020) it's like buying a house on a 30 year mortgage but only being able to live in the house for 20. the only way to pay for the bill for the following ten years is to bring taxes up.
It's going to get struck down by the Supreme Court. I would be absolutely shocked if it didn’t