Will somebody please tell the republican senators?

@JollyRoger Actually, its not that hard. Allow interstate competition, allow people to buy the coverage they need instead of making them buy the coverage that the government says they need, and create a high risk pool like the ones that have existed for Workers Comp. insurance for decades. One of the worst parts of the current debate is all the blither about how many people might lose coverage if the law changes ... what the Hell is the difference (for most people) between having insurance that does not kick in until you are out of pocket for over 6,000 dollars and having no insurance at all? Oops. Sorry. I ranted a little more just then, didn't I?

@GoodoldBob I'll allow your rant as it explains a bit more.... I guess, as I'm Canadian, that I don't understand why a government CANNOT enact a law to protect the vulnerable people in it's country. The American 'liberty and freedom' bears too much resemblance to the 'laissez-faire' doctrine of letting the weak die so the country will be stronger.
Yes, here in Canada our taxes are higher and we do have people who are lazy and milk the welfare system, but all told, they are still too few to hurt 'the system.' In the USA you have a wide schism between the wealthy and the middle-class (I don't know if this chart is factual or even representative of the American class structure: http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0912/which-income-class-are-you.aspx). What does appear is that there seem to be many more RICH (1%) people than the POOR in the USA. Thus, there should be some room for altruism within the country as versus watching movie stars pitching for folks to send money to help poor kids in foreign countries.

@JollyRoger Maybe this is the difference between Canadians and Americans. After I worked to earn my money and paid all the taxes on it, I figure the government has no right to tell me how to spend what I have left. The whole "income inequality" thing is just an exercise in stupidity: 43% of us pay no taxes at all and receive generous subsidies at the expense of those like me who do pay.

@GoodoldBob So I hear and I can sympathize with that. However, I also hear that some of your 1%ers pay very little tax or take their money off-shore to avoid taxes. If that's the case (rumour only to me) then there's lots of room for improvement in the collection of taxes and the refocusing of tax money to help the poor - tax money that shouldn't need to come out of the pockets of the middle-class.
I should add: I'm not saying that all 'lay-abouts' need government assistance, but there are some people who desperately do.
My rant: I also think there's a big identity problem with folks in the USA in that they feel like 'second-class' citizens. Such feelings foster low self-esteem and thus very little ambition to try to elevate themselves up to the middle class. People whose vision is to be 'no better than Mom or Dad' aren't going to try to learn in school and they are likely to be swayed by their social environment - probably not for the best. BUT: Attitudes like "I earned it and I'll keep it all (if I can)." may be what foster that split between the middle-class and the poor. No: I'm not blaming the middle-class, I'm blaming your government for it's "laissez-faire" approach to poverty-stricken people.