ObamaCare - exchanges ,report your states options!

[Phatscotty]

America is a great nation for many many things. And if I was an American I would be very proud of some of it's incredible attributes.

Healthcare and Education are not two of such attributes; if I was an American I would be embarrassed.

we are embarrassed, about what has happened to our education and healthcare system since the government started interfering over the last 50 years. Before gov't interference, we were at the top, if not close to it.

As unhappy and even angry as I am personally with many of the federal policies regarding education, I'm far more EMBARRASSED by what states are doing to education in this country.

What do you mean by what the states are doing to education as opposed to feds?

Primarily, Kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana and BY GAWD DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS are literally gutting the whole idea of what education is. Critical thinking skills are being literally eliminated from curriculum by state standards. Actual science in the form of things like evolution (it's far from the only example, but it is the most obvious) are literally being denounced as "just theories" when there is overwhelming evidence regarding them. Stuff that is really and truly embarrassing to me as an educator.

and....the correct way to view it would be that the federal government eliminated CTS's a long time ago, and now the states are starting to take action. Basically what Woodruff is saying is "don't mess with education! You might ruin it!"

It's already been ruined Woody. This state action is the response, not the cause...... LMFAO

[kentington]

America is a great nation for many many things. And if I was an American I would be very proud of some of it's incredible attributes.

Healthcare and Education are not two of such attributes; if I was an American I would be embarrassed.

we are embarrassed, about what has happened to our education and healthcare system since the government started interfering over the last 50 years. Before gov't interference, we were at the top, if not close to it.

As unhappy and even angry as I am personally with many of the federal policies regarding education, I'm far more EMBARRASSED by what states are doing to education in this country.

What do you mean by what the states are doing to education as opposed to feds?

Primarily, Kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana and BY GAWD DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS are literally gutting the whole idea of what education is. Critical thinking skills are being literally eliminated from curriculum by state standards. Actual science in the form of things like evolution (it's far from the only example, but it is the most obvious) are literally being denounced as "just theories" when there is overwhelming evidence regarding them. Stuff that is really and truly embarrassing to me as an educator.

The Federal government has absolutely had a hand in screwing things up (testing as the sole determinant of success, and this is a problem with many states as well, not just at the Federal level), and that stuff pisses me off. But I recognize that the intent behind the Federal attempts was/is good, and that includes things like No Child Left Behind (which I hate!). But it doesn't embarrass me the way the state-level stuff does, because I DON'T AT ALL believe that the intent behind them is good, and yet people are being swayed into it for (primarily) religious reasons.

I do believe evolution is just a theory and I don't really want this to turn into a thread about that. Just a preface.

I don't see the harm either way as far as that subject goes. If you believe in Christianity, or other religions that have a creator and do not have evolution, then you should know that your kids do have a choice in the matter. Meaning, they will eventually be faced with the decision to believe one way or the other and you shouldn't hinder that. I don't mind evolution being taught, I don't like it when it is a platform for teachers to degrade religion, again everyone has their beliefs.

I HATE No Child Left Behind.
What do you suggest would be better than testing to determine the success of a school?

[Phatscotty]

Before the federal government took over, state and local governments were in charge of education.

But that's just when we our education system was #1 in the world.....

The moment the Feds came in with their one size fits all approach, was the moment we ceased to be #1.

[Woodruff]

America is a great nation for many many things. And if I was an American I would be very proud of some of it's incredible attributes.

Healthcare and Education are not two of such attributes; if I was an American I would be embarrassed.

we are embarrassed, about what has happened to our education and healthcare system since the government started interfering over the last 50 years. Before gov't interference, we were at the top, if not close to it.

As unhappy and even angry as I am personally with many of the federal policies regarding education, I'm far more EMBARRASSED by what states are doing to education in this country.

What do you mean by what the states are doing to education as opposed to feds?

Primarily, Kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana and BY GAWD DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS are literally gutting the whole idea of what education is. Critical thinking skills are being literally eliminated from curriculum by state standards. Actual science in the form of things like evolution (it's far from the only example, but it is the most obvious) are literally being denounced as "just theories" when there is overwhelming evidence regarding them. Stuff that is really and truly embarrassing to me as an educator.

The Federal government has absolutely had a hand in screwing things up (testing as the sole determinant of success, and this is a problem with many states as well, not just at the Federal level), and that stuff pisses me off. But I recognize that the intent behind the Federal attempts was/is good, and that includes things like No Child Left Behind (which I hate!). But it doesn't embarrass me the way the state-level stuff does, because I DON'T AT ALL believe that the intent behind them is good, and yet people are being swayed into it for (primarily) religious reasons.

I do believe evolution is just a theory and I don't really want this to turn into a thread about that. Just a preface.

Of course it's a theory in the sense that it's not a completely hard-core proven concept...just like the theory of gravity is just a theory. However, there is enough overwhelming evidence available supporting the general idea of evolution that it must be accepted as a general concept while the details that make it up are still being determined. In other words, it's a "theory" in the scientific meaning of the term, not in the general "common use" sense of the term.

I don't see the harm either way as far as that subject goes. If you believe in Christianity, or other religions that have a creator and do not have evolution, then you should know that your kids do have a choice in the matter. Meaning, they will eventually be faced with the decision to believe one way or the other and you shouldn't hinder that. I don't mind evolution being taught, I don't like it when it is a platform for teachers to degrade religion, again everyone has their beliefs.

Oh, I absolutely agree that there is no reason for teachers to degrade anything about a child or their home life, and certainly evolution should not be used as an excuse for that.

Remember my mom, the ultra-conservative? She's deeply religious, but she believes in evolution. She simply believes that God used evolution to create the species (as in the six days of creation took place over the course of the majority of evolution).

What do you suggest would be better than testing to determine the success of a school?

Testing absolutely should be A PART of the process, but it really should be a rather small part, rather than the overwhelming part that it is now. All that testing-success has done is led to teachers "teaching to the test". Literally, there are teachers who feel they are forced to teach to the Federal and state tests rather than teaching things like critical thinking skills, understanding HOW to learn (because there are many methods of learning, and individuals learn in different ways), things like that. The sense of curiousity that students initially have gets quashed under the weight of rote memory. There is no joy in learning for learning's sake, only drudgery in memorizing details that have no connection to one another. NO WONDER kids hate school...God, I would too. Thank heavens I teach a subject that doesn't have Federal or state standards, and can make sure that my classes are interesting and so that my students are learning.

Now that I've ranted a bit...to answer your question. It's a tough one, because people want objectivity in determining success, and I absolutely understand that desire. I feel that's the part where testing SHOULD come into play (again, as a rather small part). Otherwise, students should be tested not in knowing certain things on a test, but in showing that they understand the creative process that is learning. They can show actual critical thinking skills. Unfortunately, tests of that nature tend to be rather subjective...and that makes people uncomfortable, because everyone wants hard evidence.

An individual teacher's success should have far more to do with their teaching methods and procedures, showing in the classroom that they understand how to use them in class to help their various students learn (in their different ways). Again, this is subjective, but to a trained observer, it is obvious. An experienced teacher can tell within 15 minutes if a classroom is a failing classroom or not...I certainly have seen it myself.

[Woodruff]

Before the federal government took over, state and local governments were in charge of education.

But that's just when we our education system was #1 in the world.....

The moment the Feds came in with their one size fits all approach, was the moment we ceased to be #1.

Has anyone ever told you that your narrow view of the world causes you to miss a lot of critical information? I'd hate to think I was the first.

[BigBallinStalin]

It shouldn't have anything to do with healthcare, except for people started one day claiming that healthcare is a right, and that somehow gives them to right to infringe on everyone else's rights and property....

No more than saying that preserving open and navigable waterways and clean air infringes upon everyone else's property rights.

Well, that would be different because it mainly hinges on the ownership of the property rights.

So, the property rights for your own money, which you've earned legitimately, is clear. That money is yours. However, most "open and navigable waterways" are owned by the government (federal, State, or municipal), which tend not to really care about the quality because they lack a profit motive that aligns their self-interests in keeping it clean. Instead, there's incentives for gaining votes and bureaucratic incentives which create different outcomes from the incentives you face with owning your own money.

Clean air is entirely vague. Technically, if you own land, you own everything down to the core of the Earth and up to infinity; however, you can't charge airplanes a toll when they cross through your airspace (which you don't really own because the government says so), and it tends to be very difficult to determine the impact and also the original owner of negative externalities as they cross into your airspace.

[Woodruff]

Primarily, Kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana and BY GAWD DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS are literally gutting the whole idea of what education is. Critical thinking skills are being literally eliminated from curriculum by state standards. Actual science in the form of things like evolution (it's far from the only example, but it is the most obvious) are literally being denounced as "just theories" when there is overwhelming evidence regarding them. Stuff that is really and truly embarrassing to me as an educator.

and....the correct way to view it would be that the federal government eliminated CTS's a long time ago, and now the states are starting to take action. Basically what Woodruff is saying is "don't mess with education! You might ruin it!"

If that's what you've taken from my statements, then you've entirely misunderstood everything I've said. Which doesn't particularly surprise me, I must say.

And if you believe that the state action of "further eliminating critical thinking skills" is a legitimate action as a result of the Federal government eliminating critical thinking skills, then I can only believe that I must have missed listing your state as well.

It's already been ruined Woody. This state action is the response, not the cause...... LMFAO

Your village must be missing you by now. I'll bet they're worried.

[BigBallinStalin]

Where as we've had that pesky government meddling in Educ/HC for ever and we seem to do fine...

Yeah, don't make us jealous, Lootifer.

[BigBallinStalin]

Great, glad to hear it. Please appreciate and acknowledge that you don't have a bunch of obsessed jackasses who do not even live in your country bickering and complaining to you everyday, trying to control how you and your countrymen live your lives.

Thanks. Maturity level flying high as always eh?

And you chose to open the discussion on an international forum PS.

Internationally there are many many data points that point to government supplied healthcare (and education) being far superior to the American pseudo-freedom model (I say pseudo because the insurance model is kinda like a stunted hybrid in my opinion).

While I am well aware you guys can do whatever the f*ck you like; doesnt bother me. But theres no denying that your freedom is leading to poorer healthcare; especially for those who are poor.

How does our freedom lead to poorer healthcare, especially those who are poor?

[Phatscotty]

Before the federal government took over, state and local governments were in charge of education.

But that's just when we our education system was #1 in the world.....

The moment the Feds came in with their one size fits all approach, was the moment we ceased to be #1.

Has anyone ever told you that your narrow view of the world causes you to miss a lot of critical information? I'd hate to think I was the first.

Care to delve into the topic matter and explain? I was stating a fact, and has nothing to do with my world view. And btw you are the first one I have ever seen call a fact someone's personal world view.

What critical information did I miss?

[kentington]

Testing absolutely should be A PART of the process, but it really should be a rather small part, rather than the overwhelming part that it is now. All that testing-success has done is led to teachers "teaching to the test". Literally, there are teachers who feel they are forced to teach to the Federal and state tests rather than teaching things like critical thinking skills, understanding HOW to learn (because there are many methods of learning, and individuals learn in different ways), things like that. The sense of curiousity that students initially have gets quashed under the weight of rote memory. There is no joy in learning for learning's sake, only drudgery in memorizing details that have no connection to one another. NO WONDER kids hate school...God, I would too. Thank heavens I teach a subject that doesn't have Federal or state standards, and can make sure that my classes are interesting and so that my students are learning.

Now that I've ranted a bit...to answer your question. It's a tough one, because people want objectivity in determining success, and I absolutely understand that desire. I feel that's the part where testing SHOULD come into play (again, as a rather small part). Otherwise, students should be tested not in knowing certain things on a test, but in showing that they understand the creative process that is learning. They can show actual critical thinking skills. Unfortunately, tests of that nature tend to be rather subjective...and that makes people uncomfortable, because everyone wants hard evidence.

Understood. I am one of those people that everyone hates because I can take tests easily. I actually prefer it to classwork. I learn while drawing in class. I have had so many papers handed back to me with F's because of doodles even when the answers are correct. I didn't mind, cause I would just take a test and Ace it. But my sister had trouble with tests and she would study and actually know the information. I just naturally remember a lot.

An individual teacher's success should have far more to do with their teaching methods and procedures, showing in the classroom that they understand how to use them in class to help their various students learn (in their different ways). Again, this is subjective, but to a trained observer, it is obvious. An experienced teacher can tell within 15 minutes if a classroom is a failing classroom or not...I certainly have seen it myself.

I feel sorry for a lot of teachers. I mentioned my brother in laws class before and that is the norm. Kids don't care and their parents don't care. Teachers can't replace poor parenting and you will always be fighting that. It seems to be getting worse though. This makes it hard to be objective about results too.

[Woodruff]

Before the federal government took over, state and local governments were in charge of education.

But that's just when we our education system was #1 in the world.....

The moment the Feds came in with their one size fits all approach, was the moment we ceased to be #1.

Has anyone ever told you that your narrow view of the world causes you to miss a lot of critical information? I'd hate to think I was the first.

Care to delve into the topic matter and explain?

The fact that you believe it's such a singular, linear situation is laughable, and shows very clearly that you have an overly narrow, rigid view of the world and how it operates that causes you to miss a lot of critical information.

I was stating a fact

It's funny how facts can be manipulated by dishonest people.

What critical information did I miss?

We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

[Phatscotty]

Before the federal government took over, state and local governments were in charge of education.

But that's just when we our education system was #1 in the world.....

The moment the Feds came in with their one size fits all approach, was the moment we ceased to be #1.

Has anyone ever told you that your narrow view of the world causes you to miss a lot of critical information? I'd hate to think I was the first.

Care to delve into the topic matter and explain?

The fact that you believe it's such a singular, linear situation is laughable, and shows very clearly that you have an overly narrow, rigid view of the world and how it operates that causes you to miss a lot of critical information.

I was stating a fact

It's funny how facts can be manipulated by dishonest people.

What critical information did I miss?

We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

Still, you are talking about me. I'm asking you to talk about the issue. Why isn't it linear? What else is not being considered?

If my statement is not a fact, can you show me where it is wrong, as far as the issue goes, and not insult me personally?

Again, can you point out the information I missed?

HOLY F'N DODGE KING!

[Woodruff]

Before the federal government took over, state and local governments were in charge of education.

But that's just when we our education system was #1 in the world.....

The moment the Feds came in with their one size fits all approach, was the moment we ceased to be #1.

Has anyone ever told you that your narrow view of the world causes you to miss a lot of critical information? I'd hate to think I was the first.

Care to delve into the topic matter and explain?

The fact that you believe it's such a singular, linear situation is laughable, and shows very clearly that you have an overly narrow, rigid view of the world and how it operates that causes you to miss a lot of critical information.

I was stating a fact

It's funny how facts can be manipulated by dishonest people.

What critical information did I miss?

We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

Still, you are talking about me. I'm asking you to talk about the issue. Why isn't it linear? What else is not being considered?

If my statement is not a fact, can you show me where it is wrong, as far as the issue goes, and not insult me personally?

Again, can you point out the information I missed?

HOLY F'N DODGE KING!

I just did point it out, you flipping moron. I'll say it again, and this time I'll type really slowly so you can keep up..."We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

As far as insulting you...you insult yourself far more than anyone else could even if they tried. You just don't seem to realize it.

[Phatscotty]

How do you know that healthcare isn't a right?
You weren't born with a voting ballot in your hand either.

Because it can't be a right. For healthcare to exist, you have to have wealth. If all the money is taken out or unavailable for healthcare in a certain area, how could it possibly be a right?

Are you actually positing that there was no concept of caring for anyone's health before there was currency?

No. And if, as you post, just possessing the mere concept of caring for someone's health = healthcare, then all our problems are solved!

[Phatscotty]

Before the federal government took over, state and local governments were in charge of education.

But that's just when we our education system was #1 in the world.....

The moment the Feds came in with their one size fits all approach, was the moment we ceased to be #1.

Has anyone ever told you that your narrow view of the world causes you to miss a lot of critical information? I'd hate to think I was the first.

Care to delve into the topic matter and explain?

The fact that you believe it's such a singular, linear situation is laughable, and shows very clearly that you have an overly narrow, rigid view of the world and how it operates that causes you to miss a lot of critical information.

I was stating a fact

It's funny how facts can be manipulated by dishonest people.

What critical information did I miss?

We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

Still, you are talking about me. I'm asking you to talk about the issue. Why isn't it linear? What else is not being considered?

If my statement is not a fact, can you show me where it is wrong, as far as the issue goes, and not insult me personally?

Again, can you point out the information I missed?

HOLY F'N DODGE KING!

I just did point it out, you flipping moron. I'll say it again, and this time I'll type really slowly so you can keep up..."We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

As far as insulting you...you insult yourself far more than anyone else could even if they tried. You just don't seem to realize it.

no, you didn't. You have been dodging and insulting for a few pages now. Do you ever reads your own posts? You have not said one single word to me that is about the topic, not even when repeatedly asked simple and direct questions. All you can talk about is me, because you are obsessed and a stalker.

Fuk

[Woodruff]

How do you know that healthcare isn't a right?
You weren't born with a voting ballot in your hand either.

Because it can't be a right. For healthcare to exist, you have to have wealth. If all the money is taken out or unavailable for healthcare in a certain area, how could it possibly be a right?

Are you actually positing that there was no concept of caring for anyone's health before there was currency?

No.

You certainly seemed to be stating that outright...as in literally.

And if, as you post, just possessing the mere concept of caring for someone's health = healthcare, then all our problems are solved!

You seem to be intentionally misunderstanding the phrase "concept of caring for anyone's health" to mean "caring about anyone's health" rather than "actually caring for someone's health". I'm not sure why you're doing that, but perhaps that's the reason you don't see the concept.

[Woodruff]

Has anyone ever told you that your narrow view of the world causes you to miss a lot of critical information? I'd hate to think I was the first.

Care to delve into the topic matter and explain?

The fact that you believe it's such a singular, linear situation is laughable, and shows very clearly that you have an overly narrow, rigid view of the world and how it operates that causes you to miss a lot of critical information.

I was stating a fact

It's funny how facts can be manipulated by dishonest people.

What critical information did I miss?

We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

Still, you are talking about me. I'm asking you to talk about the issue. Why isn't it linear? What else is not being considered?

If my statement is not a fact, can you show me where it is wrong, as far as the issue goes, and not insult me personally?

Again, can you point out the information I missed?

HOLY F'N DODGE KING!

I just did point it out, you flipping moron. I'll say it again, and this time I'll type really slowly so you can keep up..."We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

As far as insulting you...you insult yourself far more than anyone else could even if they tried. You just don't seem to realize it.

no, you didn't. You have been dodging and insulting for a few pages now. Do you ever reads your own posts? You have not said one single word to me that is about the topic, not even when repeatedly asked simple and direct questions. All you can talk about is me, because you are obsessed and a stalker.
Fuk

I think I see the problem. You're physically unable to read any post that's not addressed directly to you personally! You should really see a doctor about that. He'll probably do some tests, and then tell you to stop wearing your ass for a hat.

[john9blue]

there is a difference between taking someone's rights and violating someone's rights.

What is the actual difference between having no rights and having your rights taken away from you?

similarly, someone who steals from you doesn't "take away your right to own property", otherwise you would have no legitimate reason to want your stuff back (because someone like woodruff would claim that you no longer have a right to your property because "your right was taken from you").

You really need to learn basic reading comprehension. Perhaps you can squeeze that in sometime in between your various Phatscotty defenses, Mr. Moderate.

a complete non-answer. can't say i expected anything more.

Really? My point about there being no difference between having no rights and having your rights taken away from you is a complete non-answer? Or is it that it's just an answer you don't have a response to, Mr. Moderate? It'd also help if you'd actually read what I right instead of just assuming what I'm saying because I'm a dirty liberal to you.

you didn't make a "point", you merely stated your opinion, which i disproved with a counterexample. you then proceeded to tell me that i was illiterate.

[Woodruff]

there is a difference between taking someone's rights and violating someone's rights.

What is the actual difference between having no rights and having your rights taken away from you?

similarly, someone who steals from you doesn't "take away your right to own property", otherwise you would have no legitimate reason to want your stuff back (because someone like woodruff would claim that you no longer have a right to your property because "your right was taken from you").

You really need to learn basic reading comprehension. Perhaps you can squeeze that in sometime in between your various Phatscotty defenses, Mr. Moderate.

a complete non-answer. can't say i expected anything more.

Really? My point about there being no difference between having no rights and having your rights taken away from you is a complete non-answer? Or is it that it's just an answer you don't have a response to, Mr. Moderate? It'd also help if you'd actually read what I right instead of just assuming what I'm saying because I'm a dirty liberal to you.

you didn't make a "point", you merely stated your opinion, which i disproved with a counterexample. you then proceeded to tell me that i was illiterate.

I did, in fact, make exactly the point I stated I made. That you're not seeing it isn't a sign of your tremendous reading comprehension skills, certainly. That probably happened because you weren't answering that question.

[Phatscotty]

I just did point it out, you flipping moron. I'll say it again, and this time I'll type really slowly so you can keep up..."We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

As far as insulting you...you insult yourself far more than anyone else could even if they tried. You just don't seem to realize it.

I think I see the problem. You're physically unable to read any post that's not addressed directly to you personally! You should really see a doctor about that. He'll probably do some tests, and then tell you to stop wearing your ass for a hat.

PFff yeah okay woody! I will go see a doctor!

btw, here is the definition of trolling again

a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

[Woodruff]

I just did point it out, you flipping moron. I'll say it again, and this time I'll type really slowly so you can keep up..."We've been talking about it for at least a page now. Why don't you go back and actually read it?

As far as insulting you...you insult yourself far more than anyone else could even if they tried. You just don't seem to realize it.

I think I see the problem. You're physically unable to read any post that's not addressed directly to you personally! You should really see a doctor about that. He'll probably do some tests, and then tell you to stop wearing your ass for a hat.

PFff yeah okay woody! I will go see a doctor!

btw, here is the definition of trolling again

a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Thanks for the definition, but in this particular instance, you are the one who is trying to disrupt the normal on-topic discussion. Were you going to go read the information you were allegedly looking for, or did you want to continue to pretend that it's not there because it wasn't addressed specifically to you? You're actually missing an interesting conversation.

[GreecePwns]

Government has 0 return.

Phatscotty, why didn't you tell us you were an anarchist?

[Night Strike]

Let's get back to the original premise of this thread:

According to the latest estimates, President Obama’s health care law, also known as “Obamacare,” will cost around $2.6 trillion over the next 10 years, nearly $1.7 trillion more than Obama’s initial promise of $900 billion.

The Senate Budget Committee — the Republican side — released the following chart today depicting the rising costs of Obamacare. Notice that the cost estimates have increased with each and every estimate:

They also provided this explanation:

“President Obama promised a joint session of Congress in 2009 to spend $900 billion over ten years on his health care law: ‘Now, add it all up, and the plan that I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years.’ Adding up all the different spending provisions in the health care law, however, (including closing the Medicare ‘donut hole,’ implementation costs, and other spending) total gross spending over the FY 2010–19 period is about $1.4 trillion, based on CBO estimates,” the Senate Budget Committee Republican staff explains.

“And most of the major spending provisions in the law do not even take effect until 2014. Congressional Democrats delayed these provisions in order to show only six years of spending under the plan in the original 10-year budget window (from FY2010-19) used by CBO at the time the law was enacted. Therefore, the original estimate concealed the fact that most of the law’s spending only doesn’t even begin until four years into the 10-year window. A Senate Budget Committee analysis (based on CBO estimates and growth rates) finds that that total spending under the law will amount to at least $2.6 trillion over a true 10-year period (from FY2014–23)—not $900 billion, as President Obama originally promised.”

According to The Weekly Standard, the chart was published today to coincide with the House vote to repeal Obamacare. House Republicans with the help of five Democrats voted in favor of repeal the law 244-185.

As the chart explains, “Estimates of the gross outlays under the President’s health care law in nominal dollars using CBO estimates of major coverage provisions, as well as Senate Budget Committee Republican projections based on CBO estimates of the remaining costs.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/estimated-cost-of-obamacare-is-now-2-6-trillion-nearly-1-7-trillion-more-than-obama-promised/

[BigBallinStalin]

If that's true, then I wonder what the Obama supporters, like PLAYER and JB, think about this?

I heard them mention that Obamacare would lower costs (with no mention on changes in quality). Are they beginning to realize that they've been duped? (Well, not PLAYER; she expects to be paid off).