Judy, the other issue that I see is... well, he said he would require everyone who is able to afford it to carry their own. How does that look in practice?

Right now, you hear of people who are frustrated because they make too much to qualify for public assistance, but not enough to afford to buy what they need for themselves. There's that whole 'just on the cusp of making it' place people find themselves in, where they made the decision *not* to pursue greater financial stability because jumping to that next step is too far a step in their minds. So they exist just under the poverty level for years and years because they fear the time they'd have to exist in that 'no mans land' between assistance and having to pay for things themselves.

I know Obama talked about making sure people don't lose their insurance just because they switch jobs. I understand that, but that is different than what I am talking about. I'm talking about that insurmountable mindset many find themselves in. If we give free policies to the poverty level people, and expect people who are above the poverty level to carry their own, there are people who will never make that jump out of poverty because they'll suddenly have a big premium they'll have to pay.

And speaking of that... do they just make our employers take it out of our checks like our social security contributions?

And speaking of social security... nine years ago Al Gore and his lock box were beating the drum about the looming social security crisis. Is it still looming? If so... shouldn't we be fixing that elephant in the room before adding a line item equal to 1/6th of the US economy to the national budget?

He kept saying he wants this legislation to stipulate that if it will require increasing the national debt to do something new related to health care that lawmakers must pay for those new expenditures with cuts elsewhere. That sounds great, but when has congress NOT just voted in a new element to something and waived prior spending limits?