Atlasian National Healthcare Bill (Law'd)

[MaxQue]

Abstain

I would still like to know what we just did.

We created regional authorities to manage the healthcare program.

[Purple State]

Abstain

I would still like to know what we just did.

We created regional authorities to manage the healthcare program.

Sensible enough then. Aye ftr.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Abstain

I would still like to know what we just did.

We created regional authorities to manage the healthcare program.

Sensible enough then. Aye ftr.

Which I guess the Southeast could just use to ignore the program.

[MaxQue]

Abstain

I would still like to know what we just did.

We created regional authorities to manage the healthcare program.

Sensible enough then. Aye ftr.

Which I guess the Southeast could just use to ignore the program.

No, since the program is independant of regions.

[Purple State]

Abstain

I would still like to know what we just did.

We created regional authorities to manage the healthcare program.

Sensible enough then. Aye ftr.

Which I guess the Southeast could just use to ignore the program.

No, since the program is independant of regions.

That's what it looked like when I read it. These are federal organizations that are designated to run health care in specific regions. The regions cannot deny their existence and people are free to access the government run plan.

[afleitch]

That's what it looked like when I read it. These are federal organizations that are designated to run health care in specific regions. The regions cannot deny their existence and people are free to access the government run plan.

Exactly. They are essentially 'providers' in the sense they deliver local servives that are tailored to meet the needs of the populace. They are bodies based on the regions but only contiguous to them and are elected independently.

[Fritz]

Can we see a current version of the bill? Just so I refer to things correctly in the amendment I plan to introduce.

Amendments by Franzl, Morakai Blue, and Afleitch have passed (although Franzl's was irrelevant due to Morakai's doing the same thing).  Here is the bill as it now stands:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This amendment has been offered, and yet to be voted upon:

Amendment

Section 2 shall read as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

Much obliged Fritz.

Another amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MasterJedi]

I think this is an actual amendment so:

I hereby open up a vote on this amendment. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[afleitch]

While I extend gratitude to you Jedi for managing this...tricky thread I will have to speak to Franzl on this amendment. We had had a discussion and he had agreed to putting dental care back into the bill for minors, reconstructive dentistry etc; unfortunately and understandably it wasn't amended. I have no issue with the rest of the amendment but won't vote on it just yet.

[Fritz]

When the Senator making the proposal uses a phrase, such as "I'd like something like...", I think it's pretty clear that this is not the actual amendment being proposed, just a debating point on a potential amendment to be proposed.  Also nowhere in his post did Franzl indicate that this was his proposed amendment.

If we're really voting on this, than nay because it's not worded properly.  I request that MasterJedi abort this vote, as it does not appear to have been Franzl's intention that this be voted upon.

[Marokai Backbeat]

When the Senator making the proposal uses a phrase, such as "I'd like something like...", I think it's pretty clear that this is not the actual amendment being proposed, just a debating point on a potential amendment to be proposed.  Also nowhere in his post did Franzl indicate that this was his proposed amendment.

If we're really voting on this, than nay because it's not worded properly.  I request that MasterJedi abort this vote, as it does not appear to have been Franzl's intention that this be voted upon.

Ditto, nay.

[Purple State]

Yes, and it seems afleitch has retracted it until the wording can be finalized.

What is the amendment queue like at this point? I have one on financing the bill pretty far back at this point. Plus the one above. Who else has pending amendments? And bravo to MJ for working with us on this.

[MasterJedi]

Ok, I'll stop the vote.

[MasterJedi]

I don't know if anyone said anything about it yet but the main reason this won't work is there aren't enough doctors to go around. There isn't enough as it is now to care for everyone and the number of doctors and nurses is dropping each year. If we pass anything we'll be bringing on rationing in all but name so say bye bye to any care for old people and many others.

[afleitch]

I don't know if anyone said anything about it yet but the main reason this won't work is there aren't enough doctors to go around. There isn't enough as it is now to care for everyone and the number of doctors and nurses is dropping each year. If we pass anything we'll be bringing on rationing in all but name so say bye bye to any care for old people and many others.

I would disagree with that. There are many reasons to oppose this sort of system but to say there is a 'lack of doctors' so therefore it won't work is a bit off field. Cuba has more doctors per head than the UK, but the UK provides a better quality service. We have something like 2.2 per 1000 as opposed to 2.3 in the US and 3.3 in Sweden and 4.1 in Italy. Its not resources that are the issue but how they are best utilised.

[Fritz]

I don't know if anyone said anything about it yet but the main reason this won't work is there aren't enough doctors to go around. There isn't enough as it is now to care for everyone and the number of doctors and nurses is dropping each year. If we pass anything we'll be bringing on rationing in all but name so say bye bye to any care for old people and many others.

I would disagree with that. There are many reasons to oppose this sort of system but to say there is a 'lack of doctors' so therefore it won't work is a bit off field. Cuba has more doctors per head than the UK, but the UK provides a better quality service. We have something like 2.2 per 1000 as opposed to 2.3 in the US and 3.3 in Sweden and 4.1 in Italy. Its not resources that are the issue but how they are best utilised.

I agree, this is not a sound argument for opposing this.  Back it up with some kind of facts and maybe I will listen.

In the meantime, there are several real amendments out there that should be brought forth for discussion.

[MasterJedi]

Unless I'm mistaken this is the next amendment:

Section 2 shall read as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'll continue to vote to amendmend this to make it better. And if it's still bad like I suspect it'll be come in the final vote time there should be enough votes to sustain a filibuster. It only takes 4.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Aye on the amendment.

As for filibustering, go right ahead. I see no reason to unless you just want to whine about it. If you lose the vote, you lose the vote. You've not participated in this discussion in the slightest and now you want a filibuster? Speaks volumes about the opposition, in my opinion.

[MasterJedi]

Aye on the amendment.

As for filibustering, go right ahead. I see no reason to unless you just want to whine about it. If you lose the vote, you lose the vote. You've not participated in this discussion in the slightest and now you want a filibuster? Speaks volumes about the opposition, in my opinion.

There is no vote yet. I'm just giving it till tomorrow morning to open up a vote. This needs to get actual good debate time first since everything's so jumbled.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Aye on the amendment.

As for filibustering, go right ahead. I see no reason to unless you just want to whine about it. If you lose the vote, you lose the vote. You've not participated in this discussion in the slightest and now you want a filibuster? Speaks volumes about the opposition, in my opinion.

There is no vote yet. I'm just giving it till tomorrow morning to open up a vote. This needs to get actual good debate time first since everything's so jumbled.

My apologies, you generally don't bring up an amendment unless you wanted a vote on it, in the past, anyway.

I assumed that considering we've had pages of discussion on finances, you would've been satisfied with debate. Apparently not.

[Purple State]

I believe we have reached general consensus on this funding mechanism. I am open to additional methods to raise revenue as part of this amendment if anyone has ideas.

I would also appreciate if the GM could give us an idea of a) how much the bill will cost and b) how much this amendment would raise towards that end.

[Fritz]

Do you have an amendment to propose to the amendment, Mr. PPT?  I'm inclined to vote in favor of it, but I'd be willing to hold off for a  bit if you have changes you want to propose.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I don't know if anyone said anything about it yet but the main reason this won't work is there aren't enough doctors to go around. There isn't enough as it is now to care for everyone and the number of doctors and nurses is dropping each year. If we pass anything we'll be bringing on rationing in all but name so say bye bye to any care for old people and many others.

I would disagree with that. There are many reasons to oppose this sort of system but to say there is a 'lack of doctors' so therefore it won't work is a bit off field. Cuba has more doctors per head than the UK, but the UK provides a better quality service. We have something like 2.2 per 1000 as opposed to 2.3 in the US and 3.3 in Sweden and 4.1 in Italy. Its not resources that are the issue but how they are best utilised.

Could the honerable Senator explain what he means by "best utilised"? What do you think is a poor utilization of medical resources?

[MasterJedi]

I hereby open up the vote on the following amendment. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

Section 2 shall read as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.