"President Obama and Democrats saved my wife's life."

[Pirate Smile]

A Daily Kos Diary:

President Obama and Democrats saved my wife's life.

by AntonBursch
Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 06:15:05 PM PDT

My wife Melissa had a lump in her breast.

A long time back she missed a period during a 90 day pre-existing conditions time period after we got insurance. It was in her medical records because she asked for a pregnancy test from her doctor. Months later she stopped having any periods for a while and then started having a period that wouldn't stop. It cost A LOT of money to figure out what caused the problem and it was finally stopped with birth control. But because of that missed period way back the insurance company decided that this was a pre-existing condition and they wouldn't pay for anything.

We'll be paying for a couple more years before we finally pay back all those medical bills. We pay a number of bills at least $25 a month and it all adds up to about $325 per month. Not a small amount of money. I have a second job to pay these bills right now.

The lump in her breast doesn't appear to be cancer but we won't know for absolutely certain for another 4 months of waiting to see how it behaves. I would be lying if I said we weren't worried for worst case news in 4 months. What we aren't worried about is whether or not insurance is going to find some ridiculous excuse not to pay up for my wife if she needs it.

AntonBursch's diary :: ::
President Obama and Democrats in Congress saved my wife's life this year passing the Health Insurance Reform bill and making rescission against the law. Not just my wife's life but tens of millions of people's lives in the same situation.

There's more work to be done on Health Insurance Reform in this country and this Nov when it's time to vote I'm going to vote for Democrats to keep working with President Obama to keep making life saving change like the Health Insurance Reform Bill.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/13/884120/-President-Obama-and-Democrats-saved-my-wifes-life.

From the Comments:

My cousin...who was in Desert Storm.... (42+ / 0-)
came back poisoned and a rotten shell of a man. I've waited every day to hear that he's blown his brains out and he probably already would have had it not been for massive amounts of anti-depressants.

Obama's announcement about help for Vets with PTSD will probably save his life too.

ho'oponopono

by David Kroning II on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 06:22:56 PM PD


P.S. my best wishes for your wife...and, (46+ / 0-)
I know why you wrote this diary.

Don't take it so personally. Everyone has issues and for some it's just a game.

America is a HUGE and DIVERSE country and keeping it together with one over-arching narrative is very difficult in the best of times.

Obama, our first Black President, is an easy target. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't believe as a man he isn't doing what he thinks is best. He may not always explain it well enough and he certainly is making mistakes (don't we all?), but I think he's doing his best and learning as he goes along.

ho'oponopono

by David Kroning II on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 06:27:56 PM PDT


Thanks (36+ / 0-)
I have been personally touched by what not just President Obama but all those Democrats in Congress did and they won my confidence in a big way. I think it's important to speak up about how our party has done immeasurable good in the last year and a half because I think we've earned a chance to keep doing more good. For all the imperfections of imperfect people they have made real change for the better. That's all I ever dared to hope for.

The Ocean is Sacred

by AntonBursch on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 06:37:00 PM PDT


Thank you for having the courage (10+ / 0-)
and trust in this community to share such a personal story. My daughter has MS. I won't go into all the details. But now I can rest easier because of the Healthcare bill.

by jonnie rae on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 07:35:33 PM PDT

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2010/7/13/205419/775/3#c3

[Clio the Leo]

1. kick nt

[Pirate Smile]

7. I'll add some additional comments here that people may find interesting:

When HCR passed, what Lawrence O'Donnell said impressed me a lot.

He knows very well how Washington works ( or doesn't work). Having worked in the Senate Finance Committee, he had the benefit of inside knowledge.

During the Health Care Debate, he was critical of democrats, was pushing for the public option, even said that single payer would have been the better solution. And yet...

the night the Bill passed the House, he admitted to Rachel Maddow that watching the vote he CRIED. Yes... he was moved to tears... because he didn't think it would be POSSIBLE to pass that bill. Speaks volumes about how difficult passing even this moderate bill was...

I think not enough people realize what was accomplished. Granted, in the debate, a LOT of the progressive elements flew under the radar. There are many many good things in that bill.

by Lovepolitics2008 on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 08:47:32 PM PDT

My experience (7+ / 0-)
I'm a Federal employee and I have my health coverage with Kaiser Permanente.

Before the bill was signed, there was a formulary they used. If the drug you needed wasn't on the formulary, you had to pay the full market price. One Rx I need is Protonix, which wasn't on the formulary. I used to pay $150 for a 30 day supply.

After the bill became law, my Dr. renewed the prescription and said it was medically necessary for me to have it. I went to the pharmacy getting ready to pull out the Master Card. Instead, I was shocked to see the price was $10. For the same supply.

Every month, I'm going to have another 140 reasons to support this bill. And I can keep my Master Card in the lock box...

by Joe Bacon on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 08:17:33 PM PDT

Thanks to President Obama my 21 year old (10+ / 0-)
will be able to be on my health insurance, even though she has a number of health problems and had to drop out of school. She will now be able to go to school part-time, reducing stress that just made her health problems worse. No question that I am thankful for the bill that passed and Obama signed, and I will be voting for him.

by ladybug53 on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 08:13:26 PM PDT

Passing the bill saved many Native Americans too (5+ / 0-)
for two decades we have been trying to pass the "Native American Health Care Improvement Act" which was contained in the HCR bill. It will save many of my peoples lives for decades in the future.

I thank all of you good people who worked so hard to get it passed and refused to let it die.

by cacamp on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 08:41:52 PM PDT

A good point for everyone to remember:
Have you written to your local paper? (1+ / 0-)
Sorry it's late and I'm nodding off, no time to read all of the above posts. If it hasn't been said before, could you please send your eloquent diary to your local newspaper? And share with all your email contacts far and wide?

by norabb on Tue Jul 13, 2010 at 08:34:50 PM PDT

[iamjoy]

2. No Difference Between The Parties

anyone who says that ought to read this. I hate to think of what would have happened to Melissa if McCain were president and/or the Republicans had controlled either or both houses of Congress. Yeah, the bill is flawed, but if I were the person with a pre-existing condition and no insurance, I wouldn't really care because flawed is better than nothing.

[NightHawk63]

4. Amen!!!

Things like this are what make me so angry when Mike Malloy gets on his "let the Republicans have it" kick. I do understand the point that he is making, but we've seen what they can and will do when they're in power. To say that I've been totally happy with Obama or Congress since the election would be a lie. But, I KNOW that things are much better than they would have been if McSame had been elected.

[Bobbie Jo]

3. Recommended.

:kick:

[Number23]

6. +1 Happy to rec this lovely diary

[brentspeak]

5. Unfortunately, this is cancelled out by the enormous rise in premiums

Insurance companies will have a harder time of it trying to criminally rescind coverage, but they'll still have the satisfaction of forcing those individual policy holders to chalk up an (at least) http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2010/06/21/study-people-buying-own-health-insurance-face-20-increase/">20% rise in premiums.

If you're wealthy enough to afford the new rates, then that's good. If not -- you're dead.

[tilsammans]

8. Kickin' this to the moon!

HCR as it stands is far from perfect, but it's a start.

:kick:

[noamnety]

9. I'm glad his wife is okay.

I'm confused that he attributes it to mandatory coverage of preexisting conditions. I thought that part of the bill doesn't even go into effect this year. Am I wrong about that?

[zipplewrath]

16. No, you're not

It was a touching article, but I'm afraid this person still has some surprises coming. Depending upon their specific situation, it may not kick in for a couple of years, although alot of companies have started accepting folks early knowing it's coming. Furthermore, they may be surprised how much they still have to pay for their health care, even with insurance. He'll probably pay more than $325 per month, just for the premiums, and then a thousand or more on top of that every year for actual care (if she is as sick as his concerns express).

I have very good insurance, and a very good job, with a very good wage. And I spend ALOT on health care every year. That's not a complaint, but I don't think alot of people understand that it still costs money if you are sick. And $325 per month is a cheap policy for a family. I know people paying twice that with no pre-existing conditions.

[mdmc]

24. 1

[garthranzz]

26. the $325 is not for the policy

That's a pile of $25 per month for the actual bills, which are in the thousands. He probably pays a lot more for his family insurance, part of which covers his wife - the non-pre-existing element.

[zipplewrath]

28. Exactly

If he finds a cumulative $325 a month for actual health care bills difficult to pay, he's gonna be surprised at what a policy costs him, before he ever receives health care. Then he'll be more surprised what the bills are for an insured sick person are. I'm half way through the year, pushing $1000 out of pocket, and my colonoscopy is considered "preventative" so it didn't cost me much, just the nonperscription drugs. And we haven't been particularly sick. And none of those numbers include the premium. If I truly get sick, it's going to get expensive, fast.

[garthranzz]

43. Exactly - you missed the first sentence!

Here's what the person wrote: "A long time back she missed a period during a 90 day pre-existing conditions time period after we got insurance."

In other words, the person HAD insurance. The company refused to pay because it said a missed period was a "pre-existing condition." So IN ADDITION TO PAYING INSURANCE he had to pay thousands of dollars which THE INSURANCE SHOULD HAVE COVERED. The Insurance Reform bill prevents the company from taking premiums and denying coverage. Again.

Single payer is better, but this is better than nothing.

[zipplewrath]

44. I didn't miss it

My point is that if he had to take on a second job to pay the $325,he might be surprised to find out he's going to have to conitnue to do so, even when the condition is covered. The insurance company does have to cover her, but it can charge up to 3 times what he is paying now in premiums. And he'll still have medical expenses after that, and they won't be small. He'll be covered, and that's good, but considering he had to take on a job for the expenses he had, if she truely developes problems with her current condition, he's still going have alot of bills to pay.

[akbacchus_BC]

10. Is the revamped medical aid working for that family? Would love to

know?

[Pirate Smile]

11. kick

[JoePhilly]

12. My 12 year old neice now gets affordable coverage ... she survived cancer at 2.

And back then, the insurance company did not want to cover her treatment because the death rate for her cancer was over 90%.

It was a nerve cancer which usually happens in the brain. In her case it was in nerve cells NOT in her brain ... and that's probably why she survived.

For a long time, my sister thought the would lose their home. Finally, the insurer made a settlement offer which was no where close to what the treatments cost, but which was enough to get my sister above water again. She had no choice but take it.

Since then, my niece has been viewed as having a pre-existing condition. So she's had limited coverage, but basically no coverage for anything that might relate to that prior cancer.

Until the HCR bill passed. Now she's covered. And the rate is not unreasonable (as so many seem to think).

[Pirate Smile]

13. Thanks for sharing your niece's story.

We need to get those out for more people to be aware of because the entire RW, with an assist by some on the left, are trying to obscure it.

[TBF]

14. For every happy story we find, there are surely just as many who can't

pay for their medical care and have been denied coverage. But I do thank you for bringing this story, it is nice to read that someone was helped.

[JoePhilly]

15. Think about what you said above ....

"For every happy story" .... "surely there are just as many who can't" pay for their medical coverage.

Now consider that prior to passing the HCR bill, there were no "happy stories" at all.

The HCR bill did not solve this problem for everyone ... but it has solved it for many. And we know that if the GOP was in control, we'd be exactly where we were a year ago. Do nothing about it.

The HCR bill is not perfect. But its also not worthless. Its a good start. And we have more to do. But that won't happen if we let the GOP regain control.

[zipplewrath]

17. Zero sum gain

The problem is, with all the "good" things in it, it has some "bad" things as well.

The "baddest" is that it does little to nothing to address the core problem, which is the cost of medical CARE. It makes an attempt to control health INSURANCE costs. Unfortunately, insurance costs are tied to health CARE costs and those continue to rise at their unsustainable level.

But it does establish buying insurance as an obligation, and health care as an option. That was a net sum loss. It's why Obama ran AGAINST mandates and cadillac taxes.

[JoePhilly]

19. Actually, he ran against a mandate because ...

He said he didn't think you would need it.

That if you got control of the cost of premiums, and costs, the majority would get insurance.

In addition, for many, the premium costs will be subsidized, or covered completely.

And the reason this will help bring down costs is that preventative coverage will be easier to get, and often include zero co-pay ... so that people who waited until the had an expensive illness will get earlier and CHEAPER treatment to prevent some of the worst cases from developing in the first place.

And as for making the purchase of insurance an obligation ... Obama didn't do that ... any sane adult knows you need it. If you don't feel obliged to get coverage for your family, you still won't have to. But you will pay a tax for it.

[zipplewrath]

20. You don't need it

The only reason it was needed was the insurance companies were concerned that people would "wait until they got sick". It's not that there weren't people that would do that, but their numbers would be relatively small, and they would soon "get sick" and basically sign up. There were other methods for dealing with that, such as this thing called the public option. Alternately there could be a "penalty" for waiting (they do something like this with Medicare Part D). If you get sick and then go get insurance, your premium is higher, or there is a tax, or penalty, or some such funding mechanism. I suspect the primary interest of government in the mandatory feature, besides being nice to the health insurance industry, was that under the status quo, roughly half of the uninsured people already qualified for assistance in obtaining health insurance. This was a way of forcing those people to seek it out.

And they haven't "gotten control of premiums" because they haven't gotten control of health care costs, which are what drive premiums. People have insurance now and can't afford to use it. The preventative care is nice, until they actually decide you're actually sick. They you have to start paying. HMO's have been trying to control health care costs for a couple of decades with such plans, they haven't worked. People still get sick and they still need treatment, sooner only saves you a certain amount of money. Worse, then they survive and need continuing care.

The cost of premiums will only be subsidized to certain limits. It is clearly spelled out in the law. If your premiums are too high, and your income too low, you are exempt from having to have insurance. That's basically people with pre-existing conditions, and meager incomes. The WH estimates that after full implimentation, there will still be 25 million people without insurance.

It's a net loss, despite the fact that there are some nice pieces of low hanging fruit in it.

[JoePhilly]

32. Ummm ... no.

1) What you can not have is a mandate with no subsidies. If you want pre-existing conditions covered, then you need everyone, including the currently healthy participating. If there were no subsidies, I'd agree with you. But the subsidies, and other exclusions, mitigate that aspect.

2) Your claim that premiums are driven by actual health care costs is also wrong. The premiums were driven by what was unlimited profit margins. Prior to HCR, insurers found that they could save money by losing customers while also raising rates well above actual costs. Once you throw out the old and the sick ... all that is left is healthy people, who you gouge.

3) Prior to the bill there were about 40 million without insurance. So that's at least 15 million who will now get it ... yet you call that a NET LOSS.

Sorry ... while I agree that we want more ... this is a good start. And once again ... far better than anything the GOP would do.

[zipplewrath]

48. Except we do

We have a mandate with a big "out clause". It's only a mandate for those in certain income categories. If you make to little, and your premiums are too high, there is no mandate, but you don't get insurance either. It is very specifically written into the law. So apparently mandates are only required for certain people that we want to cover.

There is nothing about covering pre-existing conditions that requires "everyone" to participate. The insurance companies like it that way, but it is in no way required. Many insurance plans already cover pre-exiting conditions, and they don't have any mandates that people buy them.

Premiums are connected to health care costs, but that is not the only driver. However, over the last couple of decades, the large increase in premiums is primarily driven by the cost of health care.

Of that 40 million, roughly half already qualified for government assisted healthcare. So your bill didn't really change much, it just changes the WAY we get them covered. That's hardly a BFD.

[liberation]

37. Well, indeedy! It makes perfect sense to have to pay a tax for not purchasing a good

from what amounts to a natural monopoly and for which no public counterpart offering exists.


A mandate without a public infrastructure/umbrella does not make health care a right, it basically transforms healthcare from a commodity into a mandatory commodity.


Some of you make the proverbial good German look down right dissenting and anarchical in comparison.

[JoePhilly]

47. And I was about to take you seriously, until the last line ...

But I'll get to that in a second.

First ... if you get a mortgage on a home, you get a tax break. If you rent a house for the same amount, you don't. Of course you could choose to not live in a house I guess. I few health care similarly. Get coverage, and you don't pay the extra tax, don't get it, and you do because your costs are going to come back to the rest of us later.

But then ... the HCR bill includes money to build community health centers around the country in which preventative care will be free. You know that, right? No co-pays or deductibles. Prevention is where you save money in HC.

And then your claim of monopoly is also wrong. I would agree that the companies have up til now been able to carve up the states to obtain defacto monopolies, but when the exchanges go into effect, that won't be the case any longer ... in addition, the plans provided in the exchanges will be required to meet the same standards as the plans the federal government employees get --- the folks who I know who have access to those plans are thrilled with them.

Last ... the bill includes government oversight of premiums and increases, which had been allowed to grow at the "monopoly" like rate you seem to reference. This bill should end that.

Last thought ... when you make that "good German" comment at the end in regards to HC reform, you don't attack me so much as disparage those killed in the holocaust. In fact, I'd suggest you sound just as stupid as the Tea Baggers who scream that Obama is just like Stalin, Mao, or yes, Hitler.

edit:typo

[zipplewrath]

49. Kinda backwards

First ... if you get a mortgage on a home, you get a tax break. If you rent a house for the same amount, you don't. Of course you could choose to not live in a house I guess. I view health care similarly. Get coverage, and you don't pay the extra tax, don't get it, and you do because your costs are going to come back to the rest of us later.

This is backwards though from the health care tax. You're not getting a tax "break" for buying healthcare, you're getting a cost for not buying it. It's like getting taxed because you don't own a home. And home mortgage tax deductions are limited and influenced by your income. The more you make, the less the tax break becomes. Not so here. Once you exceed certain limits, the tax is pretty constant. (And that was intentional to some extent because they figured some very wealthy would just pay the tax, instead of getting needless insurance. That made for a nice revenue stream for them that they didn't want to discourage).

But then ... the HCR bill includes money to build community health centers around the country in which preventative care will be free. You know that, right? No co-pays or deductibles. Prevention is where you save money in HC.


I was aware of the CHC. I think the supporters over sell what these are and what they will do. First, there's no real requirement for what they are or will be. It will rise and fall with the costs and revenues. There's also no real requirement for them to be located based upon need. It is a given that they will be located based upon politics. And prevention is only a small part of controlling health care costs. HMO's tried that approach with very limited success. It is for a large variety of reasons, but none the less, prevention only does so much (a big part is because "prevention" is only partial. You can detect conditions earlier, and avoid some of the most expensive treatments, but the conditions will still exist. Early detection also means earlier costs. The prevention we all want, to save costs, is where we don't get the conditions in the first place. But that means addressing obesity and physical conditioning, as well as diet in general, and other lifestyle changes/avoidances. CHC won't do anything for that, even HMO's could only do so much).


And then your claim of monopoly is also wrong. I would agree that the companies have up til now been able to carve up the states to obtain defacto monopolies, but when the exchanges go into effect, that won't be the case any longer ... in addition, the plans provided in the exchanges will be required to meet the same standards as the plans the federal government employees get --- the folks who I know who have access to those plans are thrilled with them.

The exchanges are one of the largest unknowns in all of this. They will be VERY political. Both sides of this debate should be cautious about their claims. The weakness of the exchanges is that they can't cover multi-state areas as easily and efficiently as the commercial outfits can. They are also subject to local political influences. Conversely, they could be leveraged in the future as costs rise, to try to offset those rising costs. They could become very popular with the GOP on the state level as the small businesses cry about the costs of health insurance. No one is really sure how they will play out. We'll just have to wait and see. I suspect you'll see them be fairly effective in the eastern states with large population densities. West of the Mississippi it may not be such a useful feature.

Last ... the bill includes government oversight of premiums and increases, which had been allowed to grow at the "monopoly" like rate you seem to reference. This bill should end that.

The government also has this kind of authority over everything from utilities to cable rates. The cold hard fact is that health CARE costs are rising fast, and this bill does little to address that. As such, it will be able to do little to control health insurance costs, other than to limit the profits.

[Vinca]

18. I'm very happy for people who have been helped . . . then there's the rest of us.

After checking the cost of the pre-existing pool, I immediately realized I would need to exist 3 1/2 more years in pain until I'm eligible for Medicare and might get a hip replacement. At least it's not life threatening. Still too poor for private insurance and too well off for Medicaid. But as long as big insurance/pharma's happy, all is right with the world.

[Deep13]

21. Communist!

:sarcasm:

[liberation]

22. Am I the only one who actually read the story?

Hello?

[mdmc]

23. What a sad day

Having to spend lots of money and go into debt in order to avoid death. High Praise indeed!

[dccrossman]

25. Could be a large impact for my daughter

She's only 7 now, but she has a genetic condition that will be with her for her whole life. I nearly lost my employer-sponsored health insurance a couple of years ago and finally got first-hand experience on efforts to try and get private insurance or get a child into a state health program. It was terrible.

I'm hoping the current bill is only a first step and the more can be done over the coming years, but that will require more progressive Senators pushing against Jim DeMint's collection of conservative hypocrites.

[garthranzz]

27. Think of Armstrong on the moon

It's a small step...

but a vital one

[zipplewrath]

29. What is vital about mandatory insurance?

What about mandatory CARE? What is vital about 25 million still uninsured because the government doesn't want to pay the premiums. The entirety of the bill was a step backwards, despite it containing alot of little pretty stones.

[liberation]

34. I missed the part where every other industrialized nation in the world had already gone to the moon

on their way to mars almost half a century before Armstrong ever set foot there.

[slipslidingaway]

30. Pirate Smile - I really do not understand this diary and the claim that...

"President Obama and Democrats in Congress saved my wife's life this year passing the Health Insurance Reform bill and making rescission against the law..."

Do you???

What life threatening illness was she treated for since the HC bill passed? Also any help with recession will not be effective until 2014.

It is a nice headline, but it just does not make any sense to me.

:shrug:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescission#US_health_insurance

"...and the practice of health insurance rescission will be partially limited starting in 2014, following the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010..."

[no limit]

31. I hope his wife will be fine. But giving Obama credit for this is absolutely absurd

preexisting conditions aren't banned for another couple years. They will be able to join a high risk pool soon but what they will have to pay for that is still unknown. Probably won't be affordable for most folks.

[lark]

33. I've read that in NB and MA the pool cost is over $900/mo.

That is hardly affordable. Sorry, I don't have a link.

[liberation]

35. The logical dissonance is getting so out of hand that I hardly give a shit anymore...

... apparently the sacrosanct "health care reform" can't be discussed in a negative light yet for it has not gone into effect. OK I can sort of buy that, I know it is nothing but an overly dishonest attempt at squashing proper debate by artificially delaying it, but I can see the "logic" behind it. Whatever.

But then at the same time, we should praise this reform for apparently being able to time travel into the future and save anonymous people's lives from conditions that may or may not be cancer.


After which I start scratching my head and go whaaaaaaaa......

Same as it ever was.

[slipslidingaway]

36. Just read the headline and rec :) n/t

[Scarsdale Vibe]

38. As of Sept 23rd, rescission will be illegal, which is what the diarist addresses.

He is no longer afraid that his insurance company will come up with some bullshit excuse to not provide coverage based on a technicality. So, yes, Obama and the Dems in Congress have probably saved quite a few people's lives with this change.

[no limit]

42. From what I've seen rescission won't be limited until 2014. Where did you get Sept from?

[stevenleser]

45. Here is a .pdf that shows the date as Sept 23, 2010

http://ktbenefits.com/uploads/Health%20Care%20Reform%20Timeline%20Updated%20June%2017th.pdf

[bvar22]

39. At least the OP had the sense to call it what it was:

"The Health Insurance Reform Bill"

[kuroman992]

40. damn straight.

For every happy story we hear we will still hear more negative stories.
Mandating crappy insurance with high co-pays/decutibles/co-insurances, increased pharma profits/patent timelines, etc.etc.etc.

For every one happy story you find, I bet you I could find 10 negative stories of someone dying because of this broken healthcare system. And a taxpayer funded mandate for insurance company profits does not fix this crap. NOT EVEN CLOSE.
Profit and healthcare dont mix, you can cherry pick a few cases where this bill actually helped someone, but that doesnt change things.
This bill was a slap in the face to the people and ti will be YEARS before we try to fix healthcare again. They have declared mission accomplished while people are dying. Just like Bush did with iraq.
Single Payer NOW!

[stevenleser]

46. Damn wrong

For every 10000 happy stories, you will see one cherry picked by the Obama haters to try to further their BS narrative.

I'm just going to watch and laugh as this negativity becomes less and less tenable over time. You guys keep trying though.

[CTLawGuy]

54. [phone]

NT

[JoeyT]

41. Well if you want to be fair about it,

not to downplay this man's story or the life of his wife, but they've saved an awful lot of peoples' lives indirectly.
The repeated extending of unemployment benefits has kept the suicide rate a lot lower than it would have been otherwise.

I don't think he (or they) are always doing what they think is best. Sometimes they go in the wrong direction, cave, or just flat out start wrong. They are doing some good stuff, though. It's as important to cheer the good as to yell about the bad.

[Cha]

50. THanks for this Pirate Smile..

Of course a lot of good and even life saving occurrences are happening because we have a President who actually cares about people.

Quite the 180 from a full blown sociopath by the name of george bush.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

51. Thanks PirateSmile

It's always wonderful to see good news stories about the Obama Administration and the positive change it is bringing to America and the world. And thank you President Obama as well!

Change WE CAN Believe In

[angee_is_mad]

52. keep kicking

and kicking!!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. Kick.....

[Hekate]

55. Kick. Because it's that important.

[Egnever]

56. For all the imperfections of imperfect people they have made real change for the better.

:applause:

[Phx_Dem]

57. I hope Dennis Kucinich sees stories like these and takes heart

in the fact that he definitely made the right decision in voting for HCR.

There, but for the grace of God, go any one of us. One life saved, it ONE LIFE SAVED!