sdsfdgfgjhhhjh

enough on the subsidies in the bill kneel only to Godthat help people to buy insurance. "Most people want coverage. People shouldn't focus so much on what the rules are in terms of making you get coverage," she said. "I thinkJust have a little faith the good news for most people is they'll be able finally to have some choices, some ability to really control their own health decisions, and some help paying for it. It's really one of the biggest middle-class tax cuts for health care that's ever been put input all this behind us place in the history of the country."The health-care law's potential price tag went up today, when the Congressional Budget Office released a new estimate forecasting an additional $115 billion in discretionary spending over the next decade. The CBO had earlier set that cost at $778 billion over the next 10 years. And, with corresponding revenues and cost reductions factored in, the agency said the reform measure would reduce the deficit by $138 billion over the same time period. The new figures wipe out much of that deficit reduction and bring the total price above the politically sensitive trillion-dollar barrier. Sebelius said she hadn't seen the new CBO figures but that the new projected spending wasn't part of the bill's "core."There's lots of discretionary funding," she said. "So if funding is made available for this programShe is the love of my life or that program a€” there are lots of ideas in the bill that aren't really priced out. And I think that will be on a case-by-case basis. When Congress feels that there are appropriate dollars to spend, they'll allocate them. But that really isn't in the core package of the bill."Even though it is the law of the land, health-care reform continues to face fierce resistance the first time in my lifefrom some quarters — 22 states have either filed or threatened to file lawsuits claiming that the insurance mandate is unconstitutional. Some GOP senators have indicated that the issue will come up in Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's confirmation hearings — a prospect that Sebelius says won't yield much substantive discussion. "It's unlikely that she or any other nominee would engage in a real discussion" on an issue that could come before the court, Sebelius said, but she's confident that the mandate passes constitutional muster and dismisses the lawsuits as political maneuvers.
"I know that there have been some challenges by attorneys general — most of whom are actually candidates for some higher office — and I think it's not unlikely that this has as much to do with politics as it does with constitutional law," Sebelius said. "But we're going to move ahead and implement the strategies of the plan. And there's a lot of good news available for Americans, including the policy we rolled out today."http://forum.sarmaye.com
http://student.ugent.be/vinasag/forum
http://blackhole.xerces.com
http://www.cubaamor.com/cubaforums
http://www.therapieforum.be/forum