Dee2008, anything with a somewhat important effect on commerce is within Congress’ powers.

Jimbo3 on August 18, 2009 at 12:30 PM

Well quite simply the definition that I found on Wolfram Alpha for commodity is: articles of commerce. That is a pretty simple definition, but it doesn’t meet I think what my competitors want to call commodity, note that is just a guess.

S: You’re saying that health care is different than everything else.

W: Health care is not a commodity.

According to Rep Anthony Weiner (D- NY) health care is not a commodity and since the definition of commodity is Articles Of Commerce then the Government has no business trying to regulate health care

Case Closed let’s all go get a beer and throw dart’s at Berry’s likeness.

This is not the real number.My cousin works for AARP she told me last week if you count the people who have quit AARP and combine that with the number who just chose not to renew.The real number is around 132000.

thmcbb on August 18, 2009 at 11:03 AM

… and if you count the number of people who have refused to join once they’ve become [ahem] eligible the number is probably even higher.

/Let’s just say I can express first-hand knowledge of that fact and let it go at that.

If you have a chance to find out, I’d be interested to know if there’s also been a decline in new memberships – in other words, people who were considering joining but decided not to because of AARP’s position on ObamaCare.
Missy on August 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM

You can count me as one of those deciding not to join in the first place. I think I’ll check out ASA instead. I’ve heard callers on Rush and other shows mention it before.
Conservative Baby Boomer.

AARP = UNION minions.

/

Guys, keep this in perspective. According to Wikipedia, AARP has 40 million members!

60,000 / 40,000,000 = 0.15% of their total membership rolls. Another commenter claimed that non-renewals take the number up to 130,000… Again, 0.325% of total membership. That’s a rounding error, guys, not a mass exodus!

What IS significant, though, is that AARP really isn’t endorsing any of these plans.

Outlander on August 18, 2009 at 12:30 PM

Bad PR has a multiplier effect over time. Could screw up their profits. AARP is a big time insurance company. They’re in it for the anticipated wind fall promised by the Oh’s! plan. I’m sure they were assured their support would be low key until Oh! went off the telley and blew their cover.
OK to be a Capitalist company as long as your a lefty sharing your profits with the dem’s!

Anything that remotely smells like bullsh*t is tossed overboard abruptly.

Make of that what you will, bullsh*tters.

Click the Orange Button to your right…JOIN and then mail your TORN AARP card along with your new ASA membership number to 3700 Mansell Rd., Suite 220, Alpharetta, GA 30022 to get a second year of membership for free!”

ricer1 on August 18, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Thanks, ricer1. I’m going to do just that.

I don’t see your points, but maybe I’m missing something that proves your points.

Jimbo3 on August 18, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Oh I see. The battle was lost decades ago. Nothing to see here, just a rusted hulk of free enterprise. We may as well just fold up and let the government take over and eliminate private insurance altogether.

Because there really is no difference at all between some government interference and the complete take over of an entire industry.

Kudos to CBS for

a balanced and informative piece

doing your damned job.

Sad world we live in.

http://defendglenn.com/sargento-worst-company-in-the-world.html

Dee, the co-ops are to be owned by their customers/policyholders, like Blue Cross. Federal regulation is not different than state regulation in practical effect, except that federally-regulated co-ops will be able to offer their insurance across state lines, and avoid the problems people now have when they move (they have to get new insurance with new companies in new states, subject to pre-existing condition issues, unless they are covered by an employer).

Jimbo3 on August 18, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Mmm-hmmm. And what happens to my insurer? A private company subject to state regulation, federal regulation, paying taxes and NOT seeded with taxpayer dollars–and, most importantly ALLOWED TO FAIL (unlike the public plan and/or co-op). Don’t you see the imbalance here? Don’t you see that the aim of this ‘federal’ plan is to squeeze out the private insurers? Obama wants a single payer system. The Democrats want a single payer system. They have said so, over and over and over. You need to wake up.

How do you know that the co-ops would undercut private insurance, receive seed money or incentivize employers to drop existing coverage?
Jimbo3 on August 18, 2009 at 1:05 PM

If you will note, I said the public plan/co-ops as presented. The devil will be in the details but from the way it has been discussed co-ops are just a smaller version of the public plan. They would be subject to national regulation/rate setting/etc.- unlike private insurance and they would be headed up by federal appointees.

Schumer even went one step further and declared that he wanted one national co-op run and regulated by the government. Now if you can tell me how that differs from the public plan, please let me know.