Quantcast

How Will The Healthcare Reform Laws Benefit Everyday People?

Astro-Boy PHAET 2010/03/23 18:37:39
32 million more insured. Sounds good, but what about you?
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • dallin 2010/04/14 04:55:41
  • William 2010/04/13 19:38:18
    William
    I will have to pay the $695 fine. I cannot afford to pay for health care insurance for 14 months so I can get the tax break. So, there goes $695 that I might have otherwise saved or spent on other goods and services. I think this is the second time, since Lincoln's income tax, that a general mandate has been foisted on the American public.
  • miter167 2010/04/10 14:18:31
    miter167
    +1
    I think the plan is, ultimately, to drive the insurance companies out of business. Once that occurs, then the "public" option is the only alternative that remains. For the "pro-choice" individuals, consider this- Now your decision is no longer "private". The government will now have a record that you had one. Is that really what you want?
  • doctor dee 2010/04/09 17:24:04 (edited)
    doctor dee
    well i guess if i can't afford it I'll get to go to jail and get three hots and a cot and health care yahoo
  • Hebertprime 2010/04/08 22:10:26
    Hebertprime
    Sound good, but it isn't.
    Just like Canada everyone will get coverage, but that coverage will suck.
    ...
    Stupid Marvel comics, you guys need to stay out of politics.
  • klr43{ In God I trust} 2010/04/06 23:51:55
    klr43{ In God I trust}
    From what I have read of it more people will be hurt by it than helped. I kinda feel sorry for the younger adults who will be paying more to cover my old butt but hey they put the current admin in office so they should be the ones paying more.
  • kmay 2010/04/06 14:34:03 (edited)
    kmay
    Ahhhhhhhh....................... think of any real benefits just faux ones! It's front loaded with revenue and back loaded with excessive soending.....OUR DEBT!
  • RC 2010/04/02 15:06:08 (edited)
    RC
    I think the long game is population control. Kill off baby boomers and problem solved for now.Think about it. The strain on the system is gone. How dare them. We are the generation that stands in the way of the grand plan. Had the people not aborted milions of babies we would not have this imbalance in age distribution. So I believe the evil plan is, off the boomers, socialize everything (kids have no clue about freedom), gov't can stay in control. This maybe the law of unintended consequences, but can you be sure about that?
  • Edward 2010/04/01 10:02:31
    Edward
    +2
    the simplest answer i can give is [it won't] simplest answer simplest answer simplest answer simplest answer simplest answer simplest answer simplest answer simplest answer http://kloris.typepad.com/.a/... simplest answer httpkloris typepad simplest answer httpkloris typepad
  • blueyedevil 2010/03/30 04:57:21
    blueyedevil
    +3
    sure it sounds great, it'd also sound great if obama and pelosi came out tomorrow and said every girl get's a pony and every boy gets a bb gun, i'm aiming high though, i'm holding out for my own govt provided cadi, oldschool convertable of course. nothing's free, everything costs something, gonna mean higher taxes, and all those "greedy" rich people, who happen to sign your paychecks, are gonna have less money to pay you, or hire new employees, but that's cool, no one's really worried about unemployment, right?
  • Steve☮END THE FED☮ 2010/03/30 04:43:58
    Steve☮END THE FED☮
    +2
    I will pay higher premiums, and be forced to terminate employees. My private healthcare will no longer cover the acupuncture and reflexology that has worked for me.
  • SirClow... Steve☮E... 2010/03/30 20:53:28
    SirClownfear
    +1
    Thank you for letting people know that in a time of devastating unimployment that it will increase because employers are going to have to foot a bill that they can't afford. I'm sorry for how this will affect you and your employees. Good luck!
  • Explorer 2010/03/30 02:20:27
    Explorer
    Not a prayer's chance! Is nothing more than a tax bill with an obscene power grab attached. And it tooks hunderds of millions in tax payer money to bribe its supporters.
  • Eric 2010/03/30 00:39:03
    Eric
    I am trying to understand the math on this. This thing will supposedly result in 32 million more insured. It costs c. $5,000/yr for health insurance. So, that is $1.6 trillion over 10 years. Yet this bill only costs the government $954 billion over 10 years. The difference. $646 billion is costs that will be paid by the currently uninsured to buy their own coverage. Plus some employers who must now provide insurance. This smell like a tax increase on those unfortunate uninsured who must buy compulsory health insurance.
    If anyone has good data on the uninsured and how many will have to buy their own, unsubsidized, insurance please send me the link.
  • SirClow... Eric 2010/03/30 21:02:03
    SirClownfear
    I am one of those uninsured. I may be forced to quit my job and look for a better paying job that carries insurance. This might seem like a, "What's so bad about that?" kind of statement, but I have purposefully stayed in the job that I have because I believe in it. I work for a non-profit company that serves folks with developmental disabilities. Our company offers insurance, but it sucks and it's too expensive. Coverage for my wife and I on the lowest plan offered would be 450/month. I make $14/hr and I have 4 kids. All my children have insurance, but my wife and I don't and that is the sacrifice that we have made so that I can continue to CHOOSE to do the job that I do and that I love to do. My wife and I are not a drain on social services and we are smart with our money and because of the responsible way we manage our finances we actually have a little bit of money at the end of the month to put in savings in case of emergencies. What I don't have is $450 monthly expendible income.
  • Eric SirClow... 2010/03/31 00:39:07
    Eric
    +1
    Thank you so much for the feedback. I commend you on your ability to provide for yourself and your family on your income. Many lack that ability to handle finances responsibly. But you appear to be part of the "forgotten" group who might be hurt by this bill that the media seems to be ignoring.
    Best wishes to you and how this thing plays out.

    The CBO projection is: "Between 1 million and 2 million people who would be covered by their employer’s plan (or a plan offered to a family member) under current law would instead obtain coverage in the exchanges. Under
    the legislation, workers with an offer of employment-based coverage
    would generally be ineligible for exchange subsidies, but that “firewall” would be enforced imperfectly and an explicit exception to it would be made for workers whose offer was deemed unaffordable."

    Another 5 million will have to buy unsubsidies insurance and will not be eligible for that "firewall." At an average cost of $6,000/yr. Or a $30 Billion annual Tax increase on the middle class.
  • SirClow... Eric 2010/03/31 16:59:55
    SirClownfear
    Thanks for your kind response. I'm not a victim, but I do feel that the states and country should do more to benefit those like myself who sacrifice on the front line of working in nonprofit companies. Teachers get so many credits and perks and a base line teacher will get paid twice what I do when they start working. Auto insurance companies offer certain benefits to teachers and doctors. I'm really sick of that. There are those of us who do work that nobody else wants to do, or are able to do and we often stick with it for many years because we beleive in our missions. But most non-profit companies are small with handfuls of employees and there are no discounts to the companies because they are non profit. So the insurance that they can offer is too expensive. The last thing that our states need is to have nonprofit companies dropping out because those that we serve would then be the burden of the counties and the state and they don't have the infrastructure to handle it.
    Thanks for the info that you shared.
  • molly SirClow... 2010/04/02 03:47:17
    molly
    +4
    Huh? I'm a teacher with a masters degree, and my husband with no formal education makes more than me. Also I pay $500+ a month for insurance. So... Where are the perks?
  • SirClow... molly 2010/04/02 17:12:55
    SirClownfear
    Teachers are put on a pedestal in America which I can appreciate considering the wonderful teachers that my children have had in school. But there are those of us who work for non-profit companies who will never make as much money as a starting teacher and will be lucky if we get benefits. There are times when I go to apply for something like a loan or car insurance and they request to know if I'm a teacher or a doctor. When I ask I have been told that they offer percentages off. Those are things that are built into the societal frame that we in the non-profit realm will never see and I think that's unfortunate.
    I apologize if I came across insulting to you. I do appreciate teachers, well the good ones who love to teach.
  • molly SirClow... 2010/04/02 21:39:26
    molly
    Understood. It must be a geographical thing. We are constantly bashed and demeaned and belittled where I am. Any extra deals you speak of are through the NEA that we pay $500+ into a year. Otherwise, I totally need to find out. =)
  • SirClow... molly 2010/04/02 22:06:16
    SirClownfear
    +1
    I love the teachers where i'm at. We have a little school district that for the most part puts the student first. I can't stand the teacher's unions though. Well, to be honest, I can't stand the union at all. I truly think unions are a prime force in the dumbing down of America by aiding teachers to stay employed despite being proven ineffectual at their job. A teacher who has students that regularly succeed year after year should get paid far more than an old teacher who's students regularly fail or show lack of progress.
  • molly SirClow... 2010/04/02 22:16:57
    molly
    +1
    I have to agree with you. My first school I didn't want to join the union. I have never been a fan. I didn't want to contribute to that line of thinking. I was told that I would have to pay them anyway because they negotiate for me, but I would receive none of the benefits. I was floored. I was told I was better off joining the union. I did. Since I have joined the unions of the districts I've worked at, but I have not taken an active role because I just can't get behind the whole union mentality.
  • SirClow... molly 2010/04/05 14:20:40
    SirClownfear
    +1
    It's antiquated and with all the labor laws, I have a hard time seeing that they provide anything positive to industry. In fact I think they have had the reverse effect in the last 20 or so years and have contributed to industry leaving the US. My dad was a teacher and hated being made to stand out of a street corner holding a labor contract sign when they were protesting the school district. I think they have hurt education by securing jobs for teachers that should be politely escorted out the door for being inaffectual. It's sad when the education system has become another state beurocracy.
    My undeducated mind says that the system can be improved by districts paying teachers based on the success of their students. And if you want to amp it up even more I don't think it's such a bad idea to privatize education. Especially when school districts across the US are closing whole schools or even dozens of schools because they have become so bloated.
  • Michael 2010/03/29 23:00:16
  • NOPOTUS "In God We Trust" 2010/03/29 09:24:45
    NOPOTUS  "In God We Trust"
    +1
    my husband has many many health issues.This obama care will be the end of him.
    They're going to cut out his benefits.When it does happen i'd like to be the first private citizen to sue the fed government.
  • fred 2010/03/29 00:05:25
    fred
    +1
    it's going to be a train wreck for the nation if not repealed and replaced with something that promotes marketplace common sense.
  • paleale 2010/03/28 22:03:45
    paleale
    I assume you mean that everyday people are the middle class. When the tax bill comes due, I'll let you know.
  • Astro-B... paleale 2010/03/29 00:11:41
    Astro-Boy PHAET
    Okay, thanks! I love follow ups.
  • Jason 2010/03/28 08:13:58
    Jason
    +4
    27 March 2010


    Dear America,

    We are living in times of great consequence for this country. The downturn of the economy, rising national debt and unemployment has people turning their eyes and ears to Washington in larger numbers than we have seen in a very long time. These issues are punctuated by a debate over the recently passed health care bill which has divided our country more thoroughly than any issue since the Civil War.
    It seems that just about everyone in this nation is taking a side, fortifying their position and hunkering down for a fight. But what began as an emotional discussion about health care, insurance companies and tax dollars seems to have boiled itself down to blaming and name calling. Liberals are elitists and socialists. Conservatives are bigots and fear mongerers. Our politicians are fighting across the isles. The media has jumped on board and seems to spend more time discrediting each other than actually reporting the news. And we, as a people, promptly jumped in, chose sides and began casting stones.
    People, we have bought in to Washington’s game. While we bicker and fight, the politicians are grabbing money and power and laughing all the way to the bank.
    Depending on which survey you believe; somewhere between 40% and 7...









    27 March 2010


    Dear America,

    We are living in times of great consequence for this country. The downturn of the economy, rising national debt and unemployment has people turning their eyes and ears to Washington in larger numbers than we have seen in a very long time. These issues are punctuated by a debate over the recently passed health care bill which has divided our country more thoroughly than any issue since the Civil War.
    It seems that just about everyone in this nation is taking a side, fortifying their position and hunkering down for a fight. But what began as an emotional discussion about health care, insurance companies and tax dollars seems to have boiled itself down to blaming and name calling. Liberals are elitists and socialists. Conservatives are bigots and fear mongerers. Our politicians are fighting across the isles. The media has jumped on board and seems to spend more time discrediting each other than actually reporting the news. And we, as a people, promptly jumped in, chose sides and began casting stones.
    People, we have bought in to Washington’s game. While we bicker and fight, the politicians are grabbing money and power and laughing all the way to the bank.
    Depending on which survey you believe; somewhere between 40% and 75% of Americans opposed the health care bill. The House of Representatives just squeaked out 51% and passed the bill without a single republican vote. Is this leadership? Is this compromise? No matter which side you are on, does anyone feel like the other side is listening? And do any of us honestly believe that anything will really be different if we fill the legislature with republicans in November? I sure don’t.
    We have all bought in to this un-winnable game of tug o’ war and the only way out is to let go of the rope. The name calling and blaming only widens the gap and digs the other side deeper in to their position.
    For example: When you see a religious person holding a sign that says “God hates homosexuals or soldiers (or whatever this person thinks God hates) does it make you want to become a Christian? Or if you are Christian, does it make you proud to be one? The same rings true in political debate, or any debate for that matter. You will never convince someone to change their mind through anger, bitterness or hatred. And if you are not trying to change a mind, then why engage in debate in the first place? Is that not the point? Yelling, bickering and name calling convinces no one and accomplishes nothing.
    I did not choose my political views based on hatred for the other side. I do not hate those who disagree with me. My political views were born of love. Love for our country. Love for our Constitution and what it stands for. I love my countrymen. I love my freedom and I love your freedom.
    It is time we lower our voices and start talking again. It is time we start thinking about what we really believe and why. Most of all, it is time we start listening to each other again.
    We must realize that there are no perfect answers. There are no perfect people. We need to learn our history so we can understand where we came from and better see where we are going. We need to understand that our founders were certainly not perfect people, but they were able to come together and build the framework of a government that answers to its people. They had the foresight to know that government should be adaptive but that certain freedoms should never, under any circumstances, be taken from its people.
    Once we take a step back from our party affiliations and start open and honest discussion based on our values, we can begin to compromise and work together again. Once we have done that, we can stand together, unified by our love for each other and our freedom. Only then can we turn to Washington as one country and say with authority; “You work for US! We don’t need your parties, bribes, back room deals, lobbyists and special interest groups. You need us. You need our tax dollars and our votes. You need our support and until we see some compassion and integrity, you will NOT have it.”
    A great man once said; “United, we stand; divided, we fall.” Together, we can take back Washington and this country from our arrogant and power hungry politicians and return it to its rightful owners: US!

    Sincerely,
    Jason D. Hoffman, American
    (more)
  • patriotrooster 2010/03/28 02:22:39
  • obamabeatsmccain 2010/03/26 19:48:14
    obamabeatsmccain
    +2
    False: Medicare Benefits Will Be Slashed

    The claim that Obama and Congress are cutting seniors’ Medicare benefits to pay for the health care overhaul is outright false, though that doesn’t keep it from being repeated ad infinitum.

    The truth is that the pending House bill extracts $500 billion from projected Medicare spending over 10 years, as scored by the Congressional Budget Office, by doing such things as trimming projected increases in the program’s payments for medical services, not including physicians. Increases in other areas, such as payments to doctors, bring the net savings down to less than half that amount. But none of the predicted savings – or cuts, depending on one’s perspective – come from reducing current or future benefits for seniors.

    The president has promised repeatedly that benefit levels won’t be reduced, reiterating the point recently in Portsmouth, N.H.:

    Obama, Aug. 11: Another myth that we’ve been hearing about is this notion that somehow we’re going to be cutting your Medicare benefits. We are not.

    Is he wrong? Not according to AARP, by far the nation’s largest organization representing the over-50 population. In a "Myths vs. Facts" rundown, AARP says:

    AARP: Fact: None of the health care reform proposals being considered by Congress wo...

    False: Medicare Benefits Will Be Slashed

    The claim that Obama and Congress are cutting seniors’ Medicare benefits to pay for the health care overhaul is outright false, though that doesn’t keep it from being repeated ad infinitum.

    The truth is that the pending House bill extracts $500 billion from projected Medicare spending over 10 years, as scored by the Congressional Budget Office, by doing such things as trimming projected increases in the program’s payments for medical services, not including physicians. Increases in other areas, such as payments to doctors, bring the net savings down to less than half that amount. But none of the predicted savings – or cuts, depending on one’s perspective – come from reducing current or future benefits for seniors.

    The president has promised repeatedly that benefit levels won’t be reduced, reiterating the point recently in Portsmouth, N.H.:

    Obama, Aug. 11: Another myth that we’ve been hearing about is this notion that somehow we’re going to be cutting your Medicare benefits. We are not.

    Is he wrong? Not according to AARP, by far the nation’s largest organization representing the over-50 population. In a "Myths vs. Facts" rundown, AARP says:

    AARP: Fact: None of the health care reform proposals being considered by Congress would cut Medicare benefits or increase your out-of-pocket costs for Medicare services.

    To be sure, Obama hasn’t always thought that Medicare "savings" could be accomplished without actual cuts in benefits. Last fall, his campaign ran two television ads accusing Sen. John McCain of wanting “a 22 percent cut in [Medicare] benefits.” The basis for the ads was a newspaper article in which a McCain aide said the Arizona Republican would cut Medicare costs. But the aide said nothing about cutting benefits, in fact quite the contrary. We called the claim "false" when Obama made it against McCain, and it’s still false now when Obama’s critics are making the same accusation against him.
    (more)
  • obamabe... obamabe... 2010/03/26 19:48:56
    obamabeatsmccain
    +1
    False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered

    One Republican congressman issued a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare," and we’ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They’re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:

    H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS

    Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

    Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don’t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don’t offer it.

    "Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" July 23
  • obamabe... obamabe... 2010/03/26 19:49:40
    obamabeatsmccain
    +1
    False: Government Will Decide What Care I Get (a.k.a. they won’t give grandma a hip replacement)

    This untrue claim has its roots in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the stimulus bill), which called for the creation of a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. The council is charged with supporting and coordinating research that the government has been funding for years into which treatments work best, and in some cases, are most cost-effective. Supporters of this type of research say it can provide valuable information to doctors, improving care and also lowering cost.

    Betsy McCaughey, a former Republican lieutenant governor of New York (and now a professing Democrat), wrote in an opinion piece that the government would actually tell doctors what procedures they could and couldn’t perform. The claim took off from there, popping up in chain e-mails and Republican press conferences. It’s not true. The legislation specifically says that the council can’t issue requirements or guidelines on treatment or insurance benefits:

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the Council to mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies for any public or private payer. … None of the...





    False: Government Will Decide What Care I Get (a.k.a. they won’t give grandma a hip replacement)

    This untrue claim has its roots in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the stimulus bill), which called for the creation of a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. The council is charged with supporting and coordinating research that the government has been funding for years into which treatments work best, and in some cases, are most cost-effective. Supporters of this type of research say it can provide valuable information to doctors, improving care and also lowering cost.

    Betsy McCaughey, a former Republican lieutenant governor of New York (and now a professing Democrat), wrote in an opinion piece that the government would actually tell doctors what procedures they could and couldn’t perform. The claim took off from there, popping up in chain e-mails and Republican press conferences. It’s not true. The legislation specifically says that the council can’t issue requirements or guidelines on treatment or insurance benefits:

    American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the Council to mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies for any public or private payer. … None of the reports submitted under this section or recommendations made by the Council shall be construed as mandates or clinical guidelines for payment, coverage, or treatment.

    As for the health care bills themselves, the House’s H.R. 3200 sets up a center to conduct and gather such research within the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, an entity the CBO called “the most prominent federal agency supporting various types of research on the comparative effectiveness of medical treatments." Like the stimulus legislation, the bill states that: "Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the Commission or the Center to mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies for any public or private payer.’’

    The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill (not yet released in its entirety) calls for a similar center that “will promote health outcomes research and evaluation that enables patients and providers to identify which therapies work best for most people and to effectively identify where more personalized approaches to care are necessary for others,” according to the summary of the bill.

    This claim also stems from a fear that the U.S. will institute a system like that of the U.K., where the government provides and pays for health care. But none of the bills now being debated in Congress call for such a system, and the president has said he doesn’t want nationalized or single-payer health care, as we’ve said several times.
    (more)
  • obamabe... obamabe... 2010/03/26 19:50:25
  • obamabe... obamabe... 2010/03/26 20:48:43 (edited)
    obamabeatsmccain
    +1
    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7001

    ahh the republican lie machine marches on. FOUND GUILTY....
    By Brad Friedman on 3/19/2009 4:59PM
    KY Election Officials Arrested, Charged With 'Changing Votes at E-Voting Machines'
    Circuit court judge, county clerk, and election officials among eight indicted for gaming elections in 2002, 2004, 2006
    Used popular, unverifiable ES&S; touch-screens to flip votes...

    [Now updated at bottom with details from the indictments.]

    Those of us who have demanded transparent voting systems because we understand that only the ability for complete citizen oversight and transparency can effectively counter those who would game elections, have been disingenuously criticized over the years as somehow questioning the integrity of the hard-working, honest election officials out there.

    The fact is, those who know anything about computer security understand that it is the insiders who are, by far, the greatest threat to security on such systems, as even the phony, GOP-operative-created Baker/Carter National Election Reform Commission determined in its final report: "There is no reason to trust insiders in the election industry any more than in other industries."

    The best election officials in the country, however, will underscore that point, and agree that there is no reason any...



    http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7001

    ahh the republican lie machine marches on. FOUND GUILTY....
    By Brad Friedman on 3/19/2009 4:59PM
    KY Election Officials Arrested, Charged With 'Changing Votes at E-Voting Machines'
    Circuit court judge, county clerk, and election officials among eight indicted for gaming elections in 2002, 2004, 2006
    Used popular, unverifiable ES&S; touch-screens to flip votes...

    [Now updated at bottom with details from the indictments.]

    Those of us who have demanded transparent voting systems because we understand that only the ability for complete citizen oversight and transparency can effectively counter those who would game elections, have been disingenuously criticized over the years as somehow questioning the integrity of the hard-working, honest election officials out there.

    The fact is, those who know anything about computer security understand that it is the insiders who are, by far, the greatest threat to security on such systems, as even the phony, GOP-operative-created Baker/Carter National Election Reform Commission determined in its final report: "There is no reason to trust insiders in the election industry any more than in other industries."

    The best election officials in the country, however, will underscore that point, and agree that there is no reason any citizen should ever have to simply "trust" them.

    Over the years, we've detailed the arrests and other unsavory behavior of many of the not-so-good election officials who, we were told, should simply have been trusted (our "favorite" has always been the case of Monterey CA's Tony Anchundo, who told us on air we should "trust" him, just a month or two before being arrested on 43 counts).

    Well, now we've got a whole passel of still more crooked officials to add to the list. Moreover: The Kentucky officials arrested and indicted today, "including the circuit court judge, the county clerk, and election officers" of Clay County, have been charged with "chang[ing] votes at the voting machine" and showing others how to do it!
    (more)
  • joe obamabe... 2010/03/28 05:19:59
    joe
    Hmm thanks for the info, why no mention of ACORN though?
  • Spizzzo... joe 2010/03/28 09:04:18
    Spizzzo BN-0
    How about because ACORN had NOTHING in the least to do with this and because it is rapidly going away? Sheesh. Get some sense. Or some proof for your lame ideas.
  • joe Spizzzo... 2010/03/28 17:22:49
    joe
    Your arguement seems to be in favor of a voting system which upholds integrity and transparency? The reason I mentioned ACORN was because they were a mostly democrat backed organization charged with multiple counts of voter fraud. Attorney General JB Van Hollen in Wiscounsin represents one state where 5 ACORN individuals submitted multiple voter registrations for the same individuals. Many democratic leaders had dropped their support of ACCORN, but many others had not because they are generous contributors to the democratic parties campaigns. Multiple sources to confirm this online. My point is the Republican Party is full of scoundrels but no less then the democrats.
  • Spizzzo... joe 2010/03/30 09:09:52
    Spizzzo BN-0
    Get a grip and get some facts. Better yet, pay attention to your own facts and quit trying to confuse the issue with sloppy terms like "voter fraud". As you point out, ACORN was accused of voter REGISTRATION fraud, NOT VOTING fraud. Whatever it did, it had nothing to do (so far as we know so far) with producing fraudulent votes. What do you mean "mostly democrat backed"? If you mean the Democratic Party, then you are misinformed. You say you have multiple sources for this. How about pointing to a few? I've never heard of this. Rumors and hearsay do not count, BTW.
  • NOPOTUS... obamabe... 2010/03/29 09:29:03

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/08/23 17:22:06

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals