The Right Prescription
RHINOCare: A U.S. Chamber of Horrors
RINO Republicans are just what the Obamacare doctor ordered.
Members of the U.S. House of Representatives are back home under siege from angry constituents terrified over the House version of ObamaCare. (View the videos here.) Meanwhile, a few Republican Senators remain huddled with Democrats on Capitol Hill trying to construct a legislative Trojan RHINO with ObamaCare hiding inside disguised as a bipartisan compromise. Call it RHINOCare — Republican Healthcare In Name Only — and it is nothing but a ploy to deceive people into inviting government-run healthcare into America.
The thought of the federal government taking over healthcare terrifies people. The revelation that the health bill in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 3200) would mandate “end-of-life counseling” every five years for every American age 65 and older has galvanized people’s opposition to a federal takeover. Although nothing in the bill explicitly requires medical care to be withheld from sick seniors, it is clear that the system being established is designed to control healthcare costs by closing the valve and pinching the flow and supply of care to seniors — all under the guise of “cost containment.”
The President is proposing a “cut-Medicare-first” strategy of cost control, and people have caught on. On top of that, the provision in the bill for mandatory “life counseling” (read “death and dying counseling”) is the final straw that convinces seniors that nationalized healthcare will put them out in the cold and into an early grave. The remark of a senior citizen at a recent Gate City, Virginia town hall meeting perfectly expresses the views of many older people: “The federal government just wants me to feel guilty for going on living.”
Democrat Rick Boucher who represents Virginia’s ninth congressional district is illustrative of the Democrats representing conservative constituents who are feeling the heat on healthcare. Constituents flooded Boucher’s office with calls and letters, and last week he voted against the House health bill when it came to a vote in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
But that isn’t the end of the story. Boucher also provides a case study of how one can expect the political drama on healthcare to play out as the debate heads into this congressional recess and beyond. Democrats like Boucher, who represent conservative districts and are feeling the heat from constituents, are attempting to tiptoe through a political minefield as they try to satisfy the folks back home while they toe the party line in Washington.
The first thing to realize is that House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi has a number of free passes to hand out to Democrats like Boucher. This phenomenon was evident on Cap-and-Trade when she was able to release 42 Democrats to vote against the measure — it carried the House by a margin of 219 to 212 — which makes it crystal clear how out of touch Boucher, who did not use his free pass, has become with his district.
The drill works this way. First, the majority leader determines how many of her flock want to vote against the measure. Then she gets about the business of buying and intimidating as many Republican votes as possible (she got eight Republicans on Cap-and-Trade). Finally, when she knows how many yea votes she can rely on, she distributes free passes to as many of her Democrats in a pinch as she can allowing them to vote against the party line and still leave a safe margin of victory.
In the case of healthcare, the game is going to be a little more complicated since it will involve tacit coordination between the House and the Senate and between the Democratic Leadership and critical Senate Republicans — all designed to give Democrats such as Boucher a safe path around the voters. Again, Congressman Boucher illustrates how it will happen.
Boucher has prepared the ground by drawing a false distinction between a “public option” (i.e., a government insurance plan that would compete against private insurance companies) and so-called “co-op insurance providers,” which he will claim are private, not government, providers. (Read his Jesuitical distinction here.) The fact is, co-ops set up a camouflaged, backdoor takeover. Co-ops will be analogous to the other quasi-public companies, so-called “government-sponsored enterprises” (GSEs) such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — a new Frannie Med — where the government-backed, government-subsidized system crowds out the private sector and then eventually goes belly up. Government will then blame the “market” for failing and demand a full public takeover.
This is the kind of political cover Democrats in conservative districts, such as Boucher, require. And here is where the U.S. Senate enters the Hand Jive. With the assistance of a few clueless Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee (Grassley and Snowe) and other squishy Republicans such as Bob Bennett from Utah (see his version of RHINOCare here), Senate Democrats are preparing a bipartisan “compromise” that provides the cover both for renegade Republicans who are desperate to vote “yea” for something and for Democrats like Boucher who find themselves stuck between a rock and a hard place.
According to recent press reports, the gang of six — three Democrats and the two above Republicans plus Wyoming Republican Mike Enzi — wants to put lipstick on this pig by replacing a public option with co-ops and substituting a mandate that all individuals purchase healthcare for one that requires all employers to provide healthcare for their workers. They will call it a great victory for “market-based” medicine and private industry; they will get the endorsement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AARP; they will promote it as “bipartisan; and they will demagogue anyone who opposes the “bipartisan compromise” as an “extremist disinformationist” who will go onto the White House watch list.
It is all a charade, a masquerade, an exercise in mass deception and demagoguery designed to slip a government takeover of healthcare past a skeptical and distrustful public. All it would take to strip away the fig leaf and expose the “compromise” for the indecency it is would be for the Senate Republicans to blow the whistle. Unfortunately, enough Senate Republicans and business interests appear to be in on the construction of this Trojan RHINO and the RHINOcare it is smuggling into America that it may be difficult to stop. Make no mistake, RHINOCare is just ObamaCare in drag, and it will be a U.S. Chamber of Horrors.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (107) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Lawrence A. Hunter
More Articles From The Right Prescription
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/06/rhinocare-rinos-a-us-chamber-o
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Confessions of a Soft-Drinking Newspaperman
- Gerry Ford at 100
- Walk the Line
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Robert| 8.6.09 @ 6:32AM
You are absolutely right.Spot on.
Darin| 8.6.09 @ 6:51AM
Sadly, this will probably work. Not because it's a good idea and not because it's best for the American people. It will work because it's complicated to understand, and the majority of Americans are mindless sheeple with the attention span of a nat with ADD. Unless someone can come up with a simple way to explain this, most people won't bother trying to figure it out.
With cap and tax, it was easy. It will reduce the availability of power-generation, decreasing supply and increasing costs. Health care is such a monstrosity that it contains a vast supply of targets. This wolf in sheeps clothing being discussed is far more dangerous because most people won't bother trying to figure it out.
melvin| 8.6.09 @ 7:01AM
"Democrats like Boucher, are attempting to tiptoe through a political minefield as they try to satisfy the folks back home while they toe the party line in Washington."
"Boucher, you ignorant buffoon, you are supposed to represent your constituents not your political party."
"Tow the Party Line," just who in the hell do you represent, the American people or Nancy Pelosi?"
It is beyond the pale of all rational thinking in how these, cockroaches," keep getting elected.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 8.6.09 @ 7:06AM
I sent this email to the dishonorable kitty bond at about 5:45 this morning:
You said “That is the kind of Justice I support, a judge that calls balls and strikes like an umpire, not letting their own personal views bias the outcome of the trial.” Then you announced your intent to approve a supreme court nominee who by her own words and actions before she was nominated to the office to which you so gullibly are handing her the keys that she does let her own biases guide her decisions. Now, I regret that you are retiring from the senate at the end of this term because that denies me an opportunity to vote against you. I also regret that I voted for you every time you ran for senator and for governor prior to that. I regret that I ever supported you because it is now evident that you no longer represent my interests, if you ever did. I am a pro-life advocate for a strong national defense and fiscal responsibility. I believe that the United States Constitution trumps every other man-made law. Sonia Sotomayor does not believe as I do and as I foolishly thought you did. By her own words she is a sexist. By her own decisions on the court of appeals, she is clearly racist. She believes that judges make law. She seeks to overrule the Second Amendment and deny American Citizens the right to bear arms. Under her watchful eye, our population will be powerless to oppose the tyranny her sponsoring executive seeks to impose on us as she will be nothing more than a rubber stamp for his rampant marxism. Good grief, he wants us to snitch to his office on everybody who is against his attempt to socialize our health care system. You took an oath to preserve, protect and defend The Constitution. By supporting its enemies, you are in violation of your oath. You also said, “While I reject the way Senator Obama approached nominations, that does not mean that I support the way Judge Sotomayor approaches judging. I disagree that the civil rights of a firefighter mean so little that they do not deserve even a full opinion before an appeals court. I disagree that we should inspire with suggestions that wisdom has anything to do with the sex of a person or the color of their skin. I disagree that judges should ever consider foreign law when looking for meaning in U.S. statutes or the U.S. Constitution. I disagree that the Second Amendment’s protection of an individual’s right to bear arms does not apply to States.” Then, in spite of all this you added, “But I do agree that Judge Sotomayor has proven herself a well qualified jurist.” Maybe under a Stalin, a Castro or a Chavez, but not on the United States Supreme Court. I did not dissent when you stupidly supported Breyer and Ginsberg or voted for the huge spending “stimulus” bill. I know that I should have, but even then I had little faith that those claiming to represent me really did. Well, I will be silent no more. There is a runaway train headed our way and if you and other congressional sycophants continue to give its engineer all the fuel his fire box requires, it will derail spectacularly taking this nation with it. I resent that you seem to be blaming your Conservative friends for your spineless caving to the democratic party leader. You are making yet another huge mistake in order to give this spoiled child yet another treat. For shame. Your job is not to suck up to the president, it is to represent those Conservative friends who sent you to Washington. You should be fired. But we can’t fire you. You quit. You should leave office now. Today. Don’t worry that the governor might appoint another democrat to replace you. The change would be undetectable. Jesus warned us to judge by their actions not their words. By your own actions, you are just another democrat.
Pingback| 8.6.09 @ 7:14AM
RHINOCare: A U.S. Chamber of Horrors links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Bill| 8.6.09 @ 7:17AM
Anyone in congress who wants to shorten their service there should vote for this turkey and we will vote their sorry butts out of office the next tip to the polls. The citizens of this country are awake and sick of what has been and is going on in Washington.
Robert | 8.6.09 @ 8:59AM
Funny how "medicare cuts" always come via the "providers", doctors and hospitals> Wonder if any of the vast federal monster that runs this show ever gets job cuts or furloughs??Betcha they INCREASE staffing, just to be able to better "monitor" health care.
Bob| 8.6.09 @ 9:05AM
Are you guys so lame you believe Hunter's lies? There is NO REQUIRED end-of-life requirement. It is an OPTIONAL service PAID FOR by the health care bill. You are LIMITED to one of these services every 5 years unless your physical condition has changed substantially. Why would you believe someone who lies like this? MORE people NEED living wills, advanced care directives, etc., so that they can have control of their lives. We Republicans believe that people should be responsible for their own lives. My wife used to run a nursing home. I can tell you that these things are very important to both individuals and to health care costs. Here is the text from the bill:
‘Advance Care Planning Consultation
‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).
I suggest you lemmings stop believing the lies you hear and start doing your own research. Now, I am against Obamacare, but this is one of the few provisions that is really good for individuals and the system.
Stop being manipulated lemmings and start doing your own research and thinking. Again, this bill provides FUNDING for this consultation and DOES NOT REQUIRE it.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 8.6.09 @ 9:15AM
Nothing is optional in a government controlled system.
Bob| 8.6.09 @ 9:19AM
So, Gill, are you in favor of getting rid of Medicare and Social Security? If not, then you don't know what you are talking about.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 8.6.09 @ 9:40AM
Morning, Bob, time to get busy and estimate some more facts to refute me. My statement holds because in other nations which have gone the nationalized care route there is no healthcare freedom. And just how much freedom is offered under Medicare and Social Security, both systems which have been bankrupted by the very government you want to control our lives? I pay into the Social Security and Medicare programs because I am compelled by law to do so. That is not freedom. Quick, give me your estimates on how much freedom we’ll have when your golden calf has his way with you.
Bob| 8.6.09 @ 9:49AM
Hey, Gill, at least I used reason and fact and said it was an estimate. You used talking points that were clearly wrong. I'd rather be approximately right than precisely wrong like you.
But you didn't answer my question -- are you in favor of eliminating social security and medicare? Please tell your favorite conservative politicians to back eliminating these programs and see if they are reelected.
Pingback| 8.6.09 @ 9:59AM
| Republican Party of Door County links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
crookedwren| 8.6.09 @ 10:02AM
Gill: Ditto long diatribe.
Bob: Have you heard about senior care in the UK? YES, I have had the living will documents -- and I've sat with my father's physician and said, "No, don't keep him alive on machines. He has told us all he doesn't want that." BUT THAT WAS BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS AND A PHYSICIAN.
Getting the govt involved -- making these 5-yr meetings mandatory -- will INCREASE this cost, NOT LOWER IT.
That govt official (who will NOT be trained in medicine, I'd bet) will have to be PAID. By us. The Taxpayer.
AND this Congress is making massive cuts in extending health care to seniors. It's a cut. Did you not include THAT CUT in your "quote"?
Do you not understand how Marxism and Socialism works in Health Care?
No one that I know of who is against Obamacare (or RHINOcare) is ignorant enough to think that health care costs and insurance problems don't need some serious attention.
And seniors understand that this govt. has been so poorly run and has gotten US so deeply in debt that we're going to suffer some privation in the future. We KNOW that some of the physicians who are close to the Obama Administration are definitely in the euthanasia and infanticide camps. Solidly, horribly so.
Is it INSANE to distrust this group with our LIVES -- and the lives of our children's children??????
I believe it is SANITY to tell this govt. that we don't want the govt involved in our health care decisions.
And I was a senior who was standing in Boucher's office, handing him a letter.
And I am a senior who has called him and emailed him.
And I am a senior who says to this govt. "HANDS OFF MY HEALTHCARE."
Bob, there is something called the Constitution that LIMITS the size and power of our federal govt -- or was intended to do so -- and then we began our adult lives (this generation of war babies and boomers.) We went to work and had babies and some of us were lucky. We could buy houses, but that meant mortgages to pay. Etc.
While we've been working hard, there have "agents for change" silently turning our govt and our youth into "agents for change." But do you know who these people are?
I do. I met them in the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations I was a part of back then (but was not hateful toward any serviceman. Quite the opposite. I honored them.)
These people sound terrific. They care about you -- and the little people "who doesn't know what's good for them" (not like this govt. does.) Everybody will have great health care. Everybody will have a job. Everybody will have. . . .
Sounds lovely, doesn't it?
But at what cost? And will I like that job? And will I want that tiny, dark apt instead of an affordable home?
These are Marxists and heavy-duty Socialists. And some of them are not even trying to cover their tracks anymore. They are openly so. And they are a marked part of this Administration. This Congress. This govt.
Bob, perhaps you are too young to remember the news reports of life on the other side of the Iron Curtain. Perhaps you are too young to remember the Soviet Union. Perhaps you didn't grow up with Cubans who LIVED UNDER FIDEL.
But I remember.
And this is what you are buying into.
Be careful.
It's not your pocketbook alone that's being taken from you.
It's your freedom.
And your Constitution.
Robert Rosencrans| 8.6.09 @ 10:11AM
Hey, who wouldn't be against Social Security and Medicare? Social Security is a Ponzi scheme and Medicare has driven medical costs higher and is going bankrupt. Sounds wonderful.
In the meantime, I find the article factual in the sense that the alleged negotiations are just a slick way of introducing the public option by concealing it behind another name. The whole concept makes about as much sense as calling oatmeal bacon.
The concept they are using is called an insurance exchange which would be a conduit for the public option. In addition to that the negotiators have other nutty concepts which would be humorous under other circumstances.
Here's a quote from the Washington Post this morning:
"The rest of the additional revenue -- about $250 billion -- would come from new taxes, primarily from an excise tax of up to 35 percent on insurance companies that sell extremely generous policies worth at least $21,000 a year for family coverage or $8,000 a year for individuals, according to aides involved in the discussions. About 7 percent of taxpayers hold such policies.
Lawmakers said insurance companies are likely to pass the cost of such a tax to policyholders, raising the price of those plans. That would create a strong incentive for employers to stop offering them, thus driving down overall health-care costs. With employers paying less for insurance, tax analysts predict, they would pay workers more in wages, increasing income tax collections by as much as $180 billion over the next decade. "
Think about that, they are going to tax the plans to pay for their evil health care plan, and in the same breath, hope their taxes will drive them out of business.
When the government forces the business sector into one type of business model, that reduces competition and drives up costs. Only vacuous politicians could create such concepts, issue such statements and then have the gall to criticize the public for questioning them at Town Hall meetings.
When I observe statements like that from politicians I can only ponder their personal insanity. In the meantime feel free to forward this to the White House snitch line.
The real scandal here is that health care has been used as an excuse to launch the Third Reich in America.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/05/AR2009080503996.html?hpid=topnews&sub=AR
jacksmith| 8.6.09 @ 10:25AM
LEAD, FOLLOW, OR GET OUT OF THE WAY. (Thomas Paine)
We have the 37th worst quality of healthcare in the developed world. Conservative estimates are that over 120,000 of you dies each year in America from treatable illness that people in other developed countries don't die from. Rich, middle class, and poor a like. Insured and uninsured. Men, women, children, and babies. This is what being 37th in quality of healthcare means.
I know that many of you are angry and frustrated that REPUBLICANS! In congress are dragging their feet and trying to block TRUE healthcare reform. What republicans want is just a taxpayer bailout of the DISGRACEFUL GREED DRIVEN PRIVATE FOR PROFIT health insurance industry, and the DISGRACEFUL GREED DRIVEN PRIVATE FOR PROFIT healthcare industry. A trillion dollar taxpayer funded private health insurance bailout is all you really get without a robust government-run public option available on day one. Co-OP's ARE NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A GOVERNMENT-RUN PUBLIC OPTION. They are a fraud being pushed by the GREED DRIVEN PRIVATE FOR PROFIT health insurance industry that is KILLING YOU!
YOU CANT HAVE AN INSURANCE MANDATE WITHOUT A ROBUST PUBLIC OPTION. MANDATING PRIVATE FOR PROFIT HEALTH INSURANCE AS YOUR ONLY CHOICE WOULD BE A DISASTER AND UNETHICAL, CORRUPT, AND MORALLY REPUGNANT. AND PROBABLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS WELL.
These industries have been slaughtering you and your loved ones like cattle for decades for profit. Including members of congress and their families. These REPUBLICANS are FOOLS!
Republicans and their traitorous allies have been trying to make it look like it's President Obama's fault for the delays, and foot dragging. But I think you all know better than that. President Obama inherited one of the worst government catastrophes in American history from these REPUBLICANS! And President Obama has done a brilliant job of turning things around, and working his heart out for all of us.
But Republicans think you are just a bunch of stupid, idiot, cash cows with short memories. Just like they did under the Bush administration when they helped Bush and Cheney rape America and the rest of the World.
But you don't have to put up with that. And this is what you can do. The Republicans below will be up for reelection on November 2, 2010. Just a little over 13 months from now. And many of you will be able to vote early. So pick some names and tell their voters that their representatives (by name) are obstructing TRUE healthcare reform. And are sellouts to the insurance and medical lobbyist.
Ask them to contact their representatives and tell them that they are going to work to throw them out of office on November 2, 2010, if not before by impeachment, or recall elections. Doing this will give you something more to do to make things better in America. And it will make you feel better too.
There are many resources on the internet that can help you find people to call and contact. For example, many social networking sites can be searched by state, city, or University. Be inventive and creative. I can think of many ways to do this. But be nice. These are your neighbors. And most will want to help.
I know there are a few democrats that have been trying to obstruct TRUE healthcare reform too. But the main problem is the Bush Republicans. Removing them is the best thing tactically to do. On the other hand. If you can easily replace a democrat obstructionist with a supportive democrat, DO IT!
You have been AMAZING!!! my people. Don't loose heart. You knew it wasn't going to be easy saving the World. :-)
God Bless You
jacksmith — Working Class
I REST MY CASE (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/25/why-markets-cant-cure-healthcare/)
Republican Senators up for re-election in 2010.
* Richard Shelby of Alabama
* Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
* John McCain of Arizona
* Mel Martinez of Florida
* Johnny Isakson of Georgia
* Mike Crapo of Idaho
* Chuck Grassley of Iowa
* Sam Brownback of Kansas
* Jim Bunning of Kentucky
* David Vitter of Louisiana
* Kit Bond of Missouri
* Judd Gregg of New Hampshire
* Richard Burr of North Carolina
* George Voinovich of Ohio
* Tom Coburn of Oklahoma
* Jim DeMint of South Carolina
* John Thune of South Dakota
* Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas
* Bob Bennett of Utah
Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 8.6.09 @ 10:35AM
crookedwren and Robert Rosencrans, I certainly hope you estimated your facts. Otherwise, Bob might disagree with you. This old teacher gladly would place a gold star on your comments if doing so wouldn’t muck up my monitor.
Bob, I favor freedom. That means I don’t want anyone else making personal decisions for me except my wife. Make of that what you will. I’m sorry, but any talking points I might use are no less valid than is your own opinion which is all your estimates are. You are willing to become a loyal subject of the Fourth Reich. I’m not. My Dad, who helped liberate those camps, told me how its predecessor fueled its ovens.
2Anglico| 8.6.09 @ 10:37AM
Every time you think you can have a reasonable conversation, a liar like jacksh.t shows up and a floater appears in the punchbowl. 37th worst "healthcare" - LIE. Who makes this stuff up? Why waste time reading trash.
Ryan| 8.6.09 @ 10:47AM
Hey Bob,
I'm not seeing any optional or non-optional language in the above, unless one of the sub-sections cover it. I have two problem with it existing, however:
1. It appears to involve the government, when it should be something only between a doctor and patient.
2. There is no explicit statement making it NON-mandatory. I can seriously see many authoritarians on either side taking advantage of it and perceiving it as a requirement. It's something that doesn't need to be in the bill, and something that is probably best effected through private, non-government insurance incentivizing such a meeting between doctor and patient. Yes, it's something that people should take personal responsibility for, but I don't feel that I should be paying for something that people should be taking care of on their own, and may often do anyway.
Personally, I'm fed up with some of the attitude in general that it's cheaper for society to pay for certain issues that arise out of lack of personal responsibility because it's more expensive to either correct the behaviour or deal with it. It's something wrong in principle, and it looks like it leads to a more slippery slope that is just as expensive down the road. I feel that it's what this whole healthcare debate is about.
Now, I'm not going overboard with the craziness that it requires people to suggest that death is better than continuing treatment, but we've seen similar happen in the UK and under other socialized programs.
JP| 8.6.09 @ 10:49AM
Unless there is a political erruption from the grassroots that demands the entire ObamaCare Bill be shelved in toto, ObamaCare will become a reality. Both the President and Pelosi want this bill in a bad way, and they are willing to lose significant seats in 2010 to make it happen. Negociating around the details is the wrong way to go. The entire bill must be voted down.
I'm afraid Pelosi's gambit will work. There are always enough RHINOs to provide cover. The only bright spot (and I don't consider it much of a concession) is that because of Cap and Trade and ObamaCare, the Democrats will come very very close to losing thier majority in the House. The backlash may be strong enough for them to also lose perhaps 5 seats in the Senate. Again, based on past GOP performances, this isn't much of a concession.
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 11:18AM
Who regulates the insurance companies? The government. The government already controls health care you buffoons.
Tim| 8.6.09 @ 11:20AM
Obamacare is going down, who rushes in to prop it up? Republican Senators! Why am I not surprised?
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 11:24AM
Go throw another tea party. That worked well for you. lol!
Paul from SA| 8.6.09 @ 11:42AM
jacksmith,
Kay Bailey Hutchison announced she is running for gov of Texas and will be giving up her seat.
An official media announcement is forthcoming. She said if Rick Perry obeys her demand that he resign since she wants the job, she will step down immediately; if Rick Perry refuses to follow her order and runs for reelection, she will not give up seat until her term is completed -- so she can remain in office to oppose ObamaCare.
I've noticed she is making more conservative-sounding statements lately, no doubt in preparation for her run for governor. However, she is definetely one RINO that needs to be replaced. She supported Comprehensive Immigration Reform (amnesty, free benefits for illegals, automatic Democrat party registration, no border security....).
------------------------------------------------------
We have the best healthcare in the world. It is more expensive because of gov't intrustion and other problems that are not addressed in ObamaCare. Many statistics cited by liberals about other countries are not accurate and don't indicate inferior care.
1) The biggest problem is non-catastrophic basic medical care is paid for by insurance (3rd party) and not by individuals.
2) Free medical care is available for people unwilling and unable to pay. Freeloaders are a big problem.
3) tort reform -- other countries don't have the Democrat trial lawyer problem we have.
4) health insurance companies are too regulated -- we need to eliminate coverage mandates, we need to allow cross-state policies, we need to allow more insurance competition
5) employer provided hcare is stupid.
------------------------------------------------
Social Security and Medicare should be eliminated. Refund the money I’ve contributed and I and others will be much better off.
Truth to Power| 8.6.09 @ 11:44AM
Oh fantastic. Some of you have riled up the pretentious gasbag 3/5 Bob. Now we will have to read one more version of his life story.
Paul from SA| 8.6.09 @ 11:46AM
If healthcare insurance companies are making a profit, that is GOOD. If they are making record profits, that is even BETTER. Those companies that are should be identified, recognized and rewarded.
If only healthcare was regulated like big-screen tv's. Imagine the service, quality, choices and prices!
Bob| 8.6.09 @ 11:50AM
Ryan, that senior provision is OPTIONAL. Gill is here with his talking points and doesn't care about the truth. The provision ALLOWS for the government to pay for this consultation so your doctor can do it without losing money. There is nothing in the text that forces you to be stupid. Nothing in this provision gets between your doctor and you -- it just pays for this as another fee for service item like your annual physical.
The irony is that this is one of the few provisions of the bill that I happen to like -- I do not like most of it. The real problem is that this Obamacare bill doesn't address the real cost issues. Our health care will be rationed some time in the future -- if not by a bill, it will be rationed further by insurance companies and employers refusing to buy Cadillac plans for their employees.
But again, if we are going to have a bill, I'd rather have this kind of senior advisory payment provision than most of the others.
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 12:04PM
WASHINGTON – The number of newly laid-off workers seeking unemployment benefits fell last week, the government said Thursday, a sign that the job market is making gradual improvement.
Job losses are likely to slow in coming months, economists said, a trend that could be reflected in the government's July unemployment report to be released Friday.
"We believe the lower claims figures are an important economic development and confirmation that the economy is turning the corner," Joseph LaVorgna, chief U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank, wrote in a note to clients.
Bow to your leader.
Hardius| 8.6.09 @ 12:09PM
Healthcare & the FDA under the same roof with the pharmaceutical cartels on one side and a corrupt Congress on the other side. What could possibly go wrong with that paradigm?
bob 2| 8.6.09 @ 12:14PM
Bob in answer to a question you posed earlier to gill.
Yes I am in favor of ending Social Security and eventually Medicare.
Both are failing. Ending them will be difficult and will require extended time to complete.
Take an employee that makes $ 10 per hour assume they never get a raise and they for 45 years. Deposit 15.65% of their income into an account paying 1.5-3% (long term passbook savings rates) pays $1100 per month to age 88 not calculating for any interest earned on the balance after age 65.
If the individual dies their family owns the money..
I suspect that higher returns could be earned but I wanted to address the risk argument before it was made.
The $1100 is in the range of what social security pays now.
Yes I know that 15.65 included both sides, individual and employer.... my point is that Social takes as much out and leaves the individual with nothing.
2Anglico| 8.6.09 @ 12:18PM
Bob, I agree with your analysis (because I read the actual bill) that the provision is not a mandate (yet). But the balance of the bill is ALL about control.
Durable Powers and all the rest have been around for a long time and lots of people CHOOSE not to adopt them for THOUSANDS of individual reasons. Sort of like dying without a grave plot or direction to be cremated or not. It is an imperfect world and the LAST institution I trust to achieve perfection is the Federal government. Social insecurity is example # 1.
2Anglico| 8.6.09 @ 12:23PM
bob 2- I pay the 15%- ALL the way to the top!!!!
If I could keep 1/2- I would be able to save an additional $1 million plus for my retirement. At 3% I would get $2,500/month income AND my family keeps the 1 mill!!! SS is a Ponzi rip off!!
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 12:27PM
WASHINGTON – Two Washington Post journalists are apologizing and their satirical online video series has been canceled following criticism of a joke they told about Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Post Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli killed the "Mouthpiece Theater" series Wednesday after pulling the latest episode from the paper's Web site Friday.
In the video, columnist Dana Milbank and White House correspondent and blogger Chris Cillizza appeared in smoking jackets to discuss the kinds of beer politicians might drink. Milbank said he couldn't reveal to whom President Barack Obama would serve a drink called "Mad B---- Beer." That line was followed by a brief picture of Clinton.
Defeated once again!
Al Adab| 8.6.09 @ 1:02PM
Gill, Paul SA:
Good to see you both speaking up. Be careful someone might send this posts to the white house and turn us all in. Spell the name right when you do.
RINO's are the Rep. party. What Conservatives are out there opposing Soto, "healthcare" (sic), cap and trade and the rest of the statist agenda deserve our support.
There will always be enough Republicans who want to be popular rather than principled to make the Lefts work easy. Many others of both parties are afraid of their constituents and are avoiding (or badmouthing) them when voters do try to face them (The Mob you know).
Where it goes from here I don't know. But, if we cannot resolve these issues through the legislative process as the Constitution provides, and that seems unlikely as the Left is pursuing their faith based agenda against all odds, then alternatives are not pretty. None of us wishes for that so let us hope that enough office holders begin to understand that defending our Constitution is the first priority even at the cost of their seats. Frankly I think voters will reward those who stand on principle against this rush toward state control.
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 1:07PM
t-minus 2 hours until Sotamayor confirmation
Dustoff| 8.6.09 @ 1:24PM
Bob...
One question neither you or other libs have answered. If this plan is SO good, why did the Senate and Congress excempt themselves?
When were Ted Kennedy's age, can you GUARANTEE that we will have have the same care. Or be told, sorry no money because of your age. Which is all ready happening in Europe.
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 1:56PM
The World Health Organization has carried out the first ever analysis of the world's health systems. Using five performance indicators to measure health systems in 191 member states, it finds that France provides the best overall health care followed among major countries by Italy, Spain, Oman, Austria and Japan.
The U.S. health system spends a higher portion of its gross domestic product than any other country but ranks 37 out of 191 countries according to its performance, the report finds. The United Kingdom, which spends just six percent of GDP on health services, ranks 18 th . Several small countries – San Marino, Andorra, Malta and Singapore are rated close behind second- placed Italy.
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 2:00PM
In North America, Canada rates as the country with the fairest mechanism for health system finance – ranked at 17-19, while the United States is at 54-55. Cuba is the highest among Latin American and Caribbean nations at 23-25.
Tim| 8.6.09 @ 2:22PM
Ask your commissar about new GULAG*, The Opiate of the People!
-What if my insurer won't pay for GULAG?
-Under government plan, everybody qualifies for GULAG with no co-pay.
*Warning :GULAG side effects include sudden weight loss, insomnia, hypothermia, diarrhea, crab lice and pneumonia.
Michael Tomlinson| 8.6.09 @ 2:32PM
Good news in liberal polls Obama is down to 50%. The bad news by next year thanks to his policies 50% of homeowners will owe more than their houses are worth up from what was a historic high in Obama's first year of 16%.
Free thinking Americans need to keep hammering Congress on Democrats neo-fascist health rip-off and the massive decifits and unemployment they are causing.
Hopefully, by Christmas Obama's poll numbers will be so low even the liberal blue dogs (his loyal bitches) are forced to abandon him.
Dustoff| 8.6.09 @ 3:27PM
I wonder why our LIB poster fail to put up any polling when it comes to people who have, say Cancer or Heart trouble and which country they will have the best chance to survive in.
JeffW| 8.6.09 @ 3:34PM
Nice to see the trolls jacksmith and *Pigs have figured out the cut and past option. They have been busy little beavers the past 2 days. I guess there is something making them nervous enough to put all that overtime in for the astroturf/propaganda machine.
Bob, Medicare is 10x more expensive than it was projected to by when it began. Can we afford for this trillion dollar piece of crap to be 10x more expensive as well? What Obama says his health care reform is about and what it says on paper are 2 different things. Health care needs reform but not this kind of goverment run takeover. Name one goverment program that has ever been succesful and come in on time or on budget.
JeffW| 8.6.09 @ 3:37PM
jacksmith,
By the way those numbers you have been pasteing are skewed. Other nations count their infant mortatily differently than we do, not to mention their other statistics. Even if they reported the same, since the W.H.O. is a arm of the anti-US UN I would expect them to be slanted.
Blacque Jacques Shellacque| 8.6.09 @ 4:00PM
Obamacare is going down, who rushes in to prop it up? Republican Senators!
It's not called the "Stupid Party" for nothing....
Sue| 8.6.09 @ 4:09PM
To Bob: Why do we have to have "funding" for information of this type to be provided to senior citizens? The funding in and of itself will be fraught with fraud, abuse, and another layer of care "bureauracy" that I don't think we really need. Advance directives are great, living wills are great, power of attorney is great, but these are things that individuals will obtain for themselves, not at the directive of the government.
This is an example of the "nanny" state and how taxpayers' money just keeps getting wasted over unnecessary programs. Maybe something like this would be better presented through our public education system - you know, a senior class for high school or college - "How to ensure that Grandma and Grandpa's Personal Wishes are Taken care of."
Do it through the public education system and it won't cost us a dime. That structure is already set up and the with the liberals in charge of it, I'm sure it would be quite understandable.
The questions all people need to ask themselves is, "does the government really need to be doing this?" With ALL of these bills, they could be whittled down to nothing - which would be the point.
Bob| 8.6.09 @ 4:10PM
2Angelico -- Like I said before, my wife ran a nursing home. The primary reason people don't make a living will or any care directive is that they don't know about them. I believe in giving people information and letting them come to their own decisions. Furthermore, Social Security and Medicare were not designed for responsible people who make good incomes. They were designed as a social safety net. I'm not sure where the optimal balance lies, but we'd have a whole lot more crime without these programs. I grew up in a poor black community and have seen the impact of a lack of social programs. Crimes are very expensive to a society in terms of police, courts, and lives. Furthermore, you may be a good investor, but most people know very little about investing. Do you really want the welfare rolls to rise to a point where it is more expensive than having social security?
I have a greater problem with Medicare. It was designed when the average age of dying was 68. It is now 77. Medicare should be age indexed and there should be tort reform associated with it. Besides, since hospitals cannot turn away patients, you will pay for it either through your health insurance or your hospital bills in any event. (Unless you are happy turning away people in need).
Dustoff -- you and the other right wing extremists always call people libs with whom you don't agree. I was against the bailouts and against the stimulus plan. I want to cut down the size of government. I don't want undocumented aliens to have hospital rights or children born of non-US citizens in the US to have citizenship. I think Medicare needs to be reduced by age indexing and limiting benefits. If that makes me a "lib", then so be it. I am pro-choice -- and proud of it.
I also stand for people getting a good education and if they can attend Ivy League schools, they should be proud. Higher education is good. I also stand for using facts and truth to make decisions, not Republican or Democrat talking points -- or the many lies we see here or on Huffington Post.
I know that in YOUR Republican Party, I don't belong. I certainly don't belong in the Democrat party. I won't become an independent since I want to vote out people who don't believe as I do, criticize higher education, and utilize belief rather than reason. If someone is a social conservative first, and a fiscal conservative second, I'll vote against them. If someone lacks a good education, it is likely I won't vote for them. However, if someone has a decent education and is a fiscal conservative, they get my vote every time.
So, Dustoff, you are, indeed, a right wing extremist.
Mike| 8.6.09 @ 4:11PM
I just looked up the WHO's report claiming America's is 37th in the world, it has no credability.
Bob| 8.6.09 @ 4:19PM
Sue, I don't care where the education comes from. However, I believe that this type of knowledge will reduce health care costs so the investment dollars will be well spent. So, I consider this an investment that will bring higher returns. That said, I am an experimentalist by training and nature. I believe we should have a couple of plans and "test" them in a small number of States. Then we can compare the results and choose the best option. In business, you almost never go out without both research and a test market.
That is why I keep on showing that tax cuts are not stimulative. I first thought they were because people would spend the money on productive items. But that turns out not to be true after you complete the macro analysis. And I feel the same way about stimulus spending -- it is obvious that if you spend money you should raise GDP. However, the government is an inefficient spending vehicle and spending is no more effective than tax cuts in stimulating the economy. Therefore, I think the government should just pay for what it spends and keep out of the incentive business totally.
JeffW| 8.6.09 @ 4:23PM
Bob, you said you were a experimentalist by training and nature and believe we should have and test a few plans. We did, check the state run plans in Tn, MA, and OR. They don't look so hot.
As for your last line about the goverment just paying for what it spends and keep out the incentive business. On that we are in agreement.
Sue| 8.6.09 @ 4:28PM
The health care bill now before Congress was pretty much written by academia. You can access the discussions, conference power points, etc. at healthforum.brandeis.edu/meetings/conferences. There are discussions about establishing a national health insurance exchange, federal strategies for promoting affordable biologics; enhancing market competition; implementing bundled payments for health care services, etc. The most important fact is that they all know that "private payers" have been supporting the Medicare and Medicaid system now for about 20 years. The problem is that private insurance is now becoming so expensive (because of the reimbursement rates from Medicare and Medicaid) that they are afraid that the private market will meltdown sooner rather than later. Because of the government's involvement in health care since 1965, the free markets have been unable to compete on the same playing field. The private market now pays 127% of the costs, while Medicare/Medicaid pays between 95% and 94%. This is one reason that private premiums have risen drastically over the past 10 years - in addition, the federal mandates to cover items heretofore not covered by private care and you have exploding premium costs.
So, basically, we have been paying a hidden tax and the government knows it. The problem is, while we have been suffering with the increases in our premiums, both parties have continued to spend like crazy people stuck in bi-polar mode, and now, they expect us to LET them off the hook by taking over everything so they can control the costs. They haven't cared to control the costs for the past 45 years; why do any of us think they care to do so now?
The real issue is power. They know the public programs are unsustainable because of the retiring baby boomers. They are hoping to control ALL of healthcare, thereby, fulfilling LBJ's and FDR's goal of "the great society" and lining their cronies and their pockets with any "windfall" that may occur.
Just look at Bob's comment about "end of life" consultation. This is mandated in this bill and another whole agency/profession will be feeding at the pig trough and our pockets will be emptier.
I beg of you, all of you, get the facts and e-mail your friends, business associates, anyone, and stop this ridiculous folly. There are other ways to reform health care. But this way is truly giving up control over your lives and your money.
Dustoff| 8.6.09 @ 4:40PM
BOB
Dustoff -- you and the other right wing extremists always call people libs with whom you don't agree.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now that's a laugh Bob. It was YOUR LIB posters who have thrown one child like remark after another as we try to talk about health care.
Maybe you should try reading a few next time and NOT get caught up in the democrat talking points their bud! I called you a LIB because people like you dismiss the point about Congress & Sentate having their own health care. So who do you think will get the best care, them or you.
Taking any bets there bob.
Not that it matters Bob.
I hold my medical deg as a Fire/Medic and a flight nurse. I can talk this game all day because, I live it.
Sue| 8.6.09 @ 4:42PM
To Bob: They have already "done the testing" at sites. And the results are in. Check out the Baptist Health System, San Antonio and the use of "episode-of-care" policy replacing "fee-for-service."
Now, I'm not sure that I buy into the results of their testing. They claim that by "bundling" payments to physicians and hospitals and including ALL types of health care delivery professionals, they can achive more "efficiencies" and better "outcomes."
I say the efficiencies cannot be achieved because of the "new" infrastructure they are going to be putting into place to replace the old infrastructure. Just look at the "end of life" consultation models. This will require billions of dollars to implement and therefore, you will already be behind the eight ball with containing costs.
They also have the belief that by "gainsharing" with the providers they will become more efficient in their performance. People are not "piecework" and with "gainsharing" if you come in UNDER the government's established "criteria," you get bonuses, however, if you come in "OVER" the established criteria you get burned. Now everyone who works for a living understands just what is needed to do your job to 1) keep it; 2) maybe do enough to get recognized for a promotion; 3) really do a lot so one day you may end up running the company. I say the doctors are only human and they WILL not sacrifice their time, money, and effort to deliver care they will not get paid for. They will find a way to "game" the system to ensure that they will not be penalized under this government plan.
Coordination of care is great, but you cannot "mandate" it and hope for better outcomes by implementing draconian rules and regulations. Morality cannot be legislated. The lack of it can be punished, and morality cannot be taught by government bureaucrats.
Dustoff| 8.6.09 @ 4:43PM
So, Dustoff, you are, indeed, a right wing extremist
++++++++++++++++++
What's the matter Bob. I hit a nerve.
Bob| 8.6.09 @ 4:47PM
Sue, first you admit that "end of life" consultation is NOT mandated, and then you say it is! That said, I agree with you that this is a bad bill. However, I still think that "end of life" consultations is a good thing from a cost perspective. There are no real Republican proposals -- they are all straw dogs.
That said, you've made some excellent points. Just keep to the facts and don't make up mandates that aren't there and you'll do fine.
JeffW -- you are right that we can learn from those states. However, the results have been so politicized that we really don't know the truth. To have a proper analysis, we need to INDEX those results to NATIONAL trends to find their relative merits. Then you determine the parts that work and the parts that don't. You implement what works and throw out the things that do not work. That is what a rational person would do.
Sue| 8.6.09 @ 4:52PM
To Bob: You can obtain a lot of information about taxes, deficit spending and the debt on the Peter Peterson Foundation website.
Mr. Peterson and Mr. David Walker produced and disseminated the documentary, I. O. U. S. A. They talked about the coming train wreck and the entitlement spending. Mr. Walker is the former Comptroller of the U.S. having served under both democrat and republican presidents. The film is pretty good, until you get to the part about Bush. Now, I understand that the Republican controlled Congress spent madly just like some of the Democrat controlled Congresses, but his attack against Bush was uncalled for in this film.
He and Mr. Peterson along with Warren Buffet supported Mr. Obama for president. What do you think they are saying now?
Not only is our government's spending increasing at an astronomical rate, never seen before in history, but the INCREASES are not for the entitlements! And, we're talking about EXPANDING the entitlements! I'm sure Mr. Walker, Mr. Buffet and Mr. Petersen are appalled, but that's what you get when you support candidates for public office that do not share the same "principles" as most of the citizens - which happen to be "limited" government and a support of the federal constitution and state's rights.
Hopefully, they'll do another documentary highlighting the expected results of the spending by Obama in his first year of his presidency.
I won't hold my breath though.
Sue| 8.6.09 @ 4:55PM
Bob: I mean to say that "end of life" should not be mandated by any government agency - but if you're going to do it, do it at the state level as an "education" program - voluntary - which of course, wouldn't be "mandated." Kind of like this "volunteer service" crap that seniors have to do to graduate!
Sue| 8.6.09 @ 5:07PM
Bob: I disagree with you about "no" Republican proposals. The problem is you come to the table already tainted by "social" engineering politicians. You see, there has never been a crisis with health care in America. It's all made up. But, I will concede that because of government interference in the "free" market, there will become a crisis.
If one believes in the federal constitution and limited government, one believes in personal responsibility. Now some say that personal responsibility is fine, but there will always be some who just aren't "responsible." This is true, but you do not take away the freedom of every citizen to pay for those who aren't responsible. Government should find ways to accomodate for those in society who are unable to work or infirmed. I also believe that government provided safety nets for economic downturns are a necessity in our society - especially since so many of us have gotten away from the small communities with church organizations.
There is no reason that a "safety" net couldn't be provided for the citizens who are struggling to find a way to pay for a medical event that will bankrupt their families. We have COBRA; we have Medicare disability; we have Medicare insurance, we have worker's compensation, we have auto accident insurance, and we have other accesses if needed.
Government requires disabled people to wait TWO years for Medicare insurance coverage; then, you can't purchase a medi-gap policy until you turn 65. That's crazy. People who become disabled through no fault of their own or through health reasons, should have the opportunity to buy into medicare and purchase a med-i-gap policy. Now, insurers would say that because of a pre-existing condition, they can't afford to sell them a policy - others' premiums would rise. The government could fund the "reserves" for these cases with the insurance providers and partnership with them.
The other issue is portability of insurance. The rules and regulations could be removed to allow insurance companies to sell across state lines and formulas could be developed based upon age, etc. so the reserves could follow the insured.
Also, corporate tax rates could be cut; a deduction could be given to ALL individuals so their disposable income to purchase health insurance or medical needs is not TAXED.
There are a multitude of other actions that we could take. But a complete takeover is not one that we should take.
defeated pigs| 8.6.09 @ 5:16PM
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is lauding the barrier-breaking confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to be the first Hispanic justice on the Supreme Court.
Said the president: "With this historic vote, the Senate has affirmed that Justice Sotomayor has the intellect, the temperament, the history, the integrity and the independence of mind to ably serve on our nation's highest court."
Sotomayor will be sworn in on Saturday and appear with Obama at the White House on Wednesday.
Obama spoke moments after the Senate confirmed Sotomayor (SUHN'-ya soh-toh-my-YOR') on Thursday.
The president called the occasion a wonderful moment for Sotomayor's family — and for America.
She replaces retiring Justice David Souter, who has retired.
contented pig| 8.6.09 @ 6:15PM
She seems like a nice lady; perhaps I'll invite her over for some empanadas with mole sauce.
Pingback| 8.6.09 @ 6:22PM
We have to face the fact that the President is not an honest guy « Jim Blazsik links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Big J| 8.6.09 @ 6:24PM
Bob's comments tell you everything you need to know about the effects of too much higher education. More brains than most of us posting here, but not a LICK of common sense.
How in the world can you tell me that the same entity that has bankrupted:
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Amtrack
Postal Service
....is going to "lower costs" and "reform" health care? Are you completely mad, Bob?
Here is a telling comment: "It is an OPTIONAL service PAID FOR by the health care bill." Well, Bob, if you truly believe that the BILL is paying for anything, it is no wonder no one can carry on an intelligent conversation with you.
Even more importantly, if you have the slightest inclination that either of the bills are within the realms of the constitution, well, your "ivy league" education has failed. Miserably.
I've said it before, as have others. I'll say it one more time for the thick skulls in our midst:
1) TORT REFORM
2) SHIFT BURDEN AND REWARD FROM EMPLOYER TO INDIVIDUAL
3) ALLOW MORE CHOICES REGARDING COVERAGE LEVELS, RANGING FROM "CATASTROPHIC" TO "GOLD PLATED".
4) ALLOW SMALL BUSINESSES TO BAN TOGETHER VIA TRADE ASSOCIATIONS TO LOWER COSTS.
5) TORT REFORM
Take note Bob: Not one suggestion listed above raises taxes, "suggests" end of life counseling, or increases government intrusion into our private lives one iota. Not one bit.
I find it difficult to swallow that a man of your "intelligence" would be so quick to give control of such a large portion of our economy to such incompetent buffoons.
Sure does say an awful lot about your "ivy league" education.
One more thing, Bob. Until the day that you actually EXPERIENCE, first hand the nightmare that is health care administration (that is to say, until you start signing your John Hancock on the bottom of someone else's paycheck), may I suggest that you keep your mouth shut?
B. Johnson| 8.6.09 @ 7:33PM
First, people might want to consider "signing" the anti-Obamacare petition, now over one million signers, at the following link.
http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/form.php
Related links.
http://actionpack.ncpa.org./
http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/
Next, given that the federal Constitution is silent about public healthcare, the 10th A. automatically reserves government power to regulate healthcare to the states, not the Oval Office and Congress.
The problem is that the state sovereignty-ignorant people have been electing state lawmakers and federal senators who, unsurprisingly, are as state sovereignty-ignorant as the people are. Consequently, federal and state “leaders” are not doing their jobs to protect the people from the power-hungry, Constitution-ignoring federal government, particularly where constitutional unauthorized federal taxes and spending are concerned.
In fact, speaking of state sovereignty, Chief Justice Marshall had established the following case precedent, now wrongly ignored, which appropriately limits the power of the feds to lay taxes.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” –Chief Justice Marshall, GIBBONS V. OGDEN (1824)
So not only were Obama’s Stimulus Package and proposed Obamacare not constitutionally authorized, but based on Justice Marshall’s official words, the feds never had the power to lay taxes to finance such programs in the first place.
Finally, the following link is an analysis as to how the ill-conceived, anti-state sovereignty 16th and 17th Amendments got us into this big federal government mess.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=199792
DSAMMIS| 8.6.09 @ 8:23PM
Sen. Mel (Soyania) Martinez will not be up for reelection. He long ago realized he was out of his depth and has announced that he would not run for reelection. I knew when he was elected the "hispanic" issue would dominate his decisions. How long did he last as head of the RNC, a week? My theory is that he will play big in the near future when our relationship with Cuba takes a turn toward normal.
Jim O'Brien| 8.6.09 @ 9:08PM
Obama and Congressional Democrats (Socialists) believe that everyone has a "right" to medical care. They are wrong. People do not have a right to medicine any more than they have a right to free food, free housing, free clothing, free retirement, free cars, or free vacations. Genuine rights cannot exist which depend on taking away from some citizens and giving to others, or which depend on government edicts. Socialized medicine includes laws that ration and deny treatment, laws that take my property (money) in order to pay for others' medical treatment, and laws that ban freedom of choice in decisions that affect my very existence. Socialized medicine violates my Constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property.
Socialists, who have learned absolutely nothing from the collapse of the former USSR, think government bureaucrats are capable of running a medical care system for over 300 million people. They plan to destroy private medical insurance, dictate which doctors and hospitals I am allowed to use, and dictate what surgery, procedures and drugs I am allowed to have. The Socialists want to expand the government's role in every way, including more control over what doctors and hospitals are paid, and more control over prices charged by pharmaceutical companies. Well, price controls have never worked, and never will. They will lead to a scarcity of doctors and hospitals, life-threatening delays for patients who need urgent medical care, low quality care, and an end to private initiatives in the development of new surgical procedures, other treatments, and new drugs.
Right now Americans enjoy the best medical care in the world despite the government. The government is already involved in roughly one-half of all health care spending, through Medicare, Medicaid, State, and local programs. And Congress continues to use federal income tax regulations to limit our choices and control our lives. Instead of more government involvement in medicine, we need far less. Government is the problem, not the solution. The best way to improve medical care is not to give more power to the government, but to tear down the wall of federal controls and allow free enterprise to work.
Sue| 8.6.09 @ 9:36PM
"I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but exceptions to powers not granted; and , on this very account, would AFFORD A COLORABLE PRETEXT TO CLAIM MORE THAN WERE GRANTED. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, TO MEN DISPOSED TO USURP, a plausible pretence for claiming that power.
It ought also to be remembered that the citizens who inhabit the country at and near the seat of government will, in all questions that affect the general liberty and prosperity, have the same interest with those who are at a distance, and that they will stand ready to sound the alarm when necessary, and to point out the actors in any pernicious project."
Federalist 84 - Alexander Hamilton
Mr. Obama believes that "because" certain powers are not listed specifically in the Constitution, this does not preclude the government from doing those certain things. He has said that he would like to see a Supreme Court that would go further than the Warren Court and grant a wider latitude for the federal government.
These beliefs were never pointed out by the MSM. Does our Constitution saye limited government? Or, does government have the power to centralize anything it wishes?
His belief is similar to the misbehaving child who in unbelief states, "but you didn't say I COULDN'T!"
This is what we have for a president today. One who has been schooled to believe that the Constitution is not one of limited government.
Thanks to our great ivy-league liberal professors with tenure!
Pingback| 8.6.09 @ 9:46PM
NEXT MIAMI TEA PARTY: Recess Rally Against ObamaCare – 8/22/2009 « FactReal links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Robert Rosencrans| 8.7.09 @ 6:24AM
Big J: Excellent post.
Pingback| 8.7.09 @ 3:33PM
NEXT TEA PARTY: AGAINST OBAMACARE – August 22, 2009 « FactReal links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Richard Baker| 8.7.09 @ 8:39PM
Bob:
As Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are already insolvent or soon to be, exactly what value is your estimate? If you are foolish enough to believe that optional means just that, remember that the 12 week unpaid leave provision has MANY in Congress wanting it to be employer paid leave. Optional in congress is always a precursor to Mandatory. Obtuseness is a poor substitute for reason. Do remember what Mark Twain said about "Lies, damn lies, and Statistics".
What about the DINOs?| 8.8.09 @ 12:01AM
I find it amusing that the conservative crazies love to complain about so called "RINO" republicans . The conservative nuts complain much more about the RINO's than the liberals complain about the DINOs, or Blue Dogs in the democratic party. The fact of the matter is that liberals are much more open minded than conservatives are, and though they may disagree with some viewpoints of the Blue Dogs, they will not tear them apart like the conservatives do to the moderate republicans. The fringe liberals may get upset about the Blue Dogs, but even mainstream conservatives fuss about the moderate republicans. The Blue Dogs/DINOs helped the democrats gain more power in 2006 and in 2008, and if the conservatives want the same results out of the republicans, they will have to accept the RINOs, even though they may disagree with them on some issues. We cannot have a party of extremes, and the republicans are much more extreme than the democrats because they do not have their own version of the Blue Dog coalition. The Blue Dog coalition proves that the democratic party is much more willing to reach out to people of varying political stripes, while the republicans seem only to be willing to reach out to the conservative crazies. With that being said, health care reform will be passed no matter what those idiots at the townhalls do. Those poorly educated rednecks do not represent me or the American people. The democrats will come to an agreement, because they welcome the Blue Dog ideas much more so that republicans welcome the RINO ideas. However, it is good to see that some republicans are open to supporting health care reform. Kudos to them for willing to stand up against the conservative crazies. With an agreement of the democrats as a whole with some RINO republican support thrown in, the health care bill will likely pass, though it will be modified moderately to compromise. However, something is much better than nothing.
Pingback| 8.8.09 @ 10:04AM
Ask NOT what you can do for your country, you have no CHOICE: Serf’s Up! « the “silen links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Osamas Pajamas| 8.8.09 @ 2:07PM
When I listen to Nazi Pelosi lie through her teeth again and again, in favor of OhBummer's hijacking of healthcare, I think of being on a terrorist-hijacked plane, and I say this to my fellow passngers.
"Let's rush the bxstards, they're gonna kill us anyway, so make sure that we crash the fkg plane before they get where they want to go."
We don't owe one moment of our time or one cent of our money to these predatory humanitarian thugs. What we owe them to jump on the brakes, causing them to smash through the windshield.
Yi Ha ***
Minister of Information
Peoples' Capitalist Republic of Whizbangistan
*** Pronounced "YEEEEEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!"
Joe Heathen| 8.8.09 @ 7:58PM
This time, the Republicans/Tea Baggers/Bifers are genuinely organized by virtue of their union bosses Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage, Prager, et al.
-
Yeah, really organized. So organized, they're being brought in from out-of-state to beef up the crowds. Just like the NSDAP did at Munich, Nurnberg, or Vienna.
-
And who can afford to pay for all of the transportation, food, and lodging? Well, just like Krupp, Thyssen AG, IG Farben, and AEG paid for the NSDAP movement of "crowds", so does United Healthcare, Aetna, Bayer, Eli Lilly, and Lewin Group (the impartial GOP study group owned by the American Pharmaceutical Association).
-
Of course, Joe Sixpack gets to pay for all of the "crowds" through higher healthcare insurance premiums but hey, what the hell, that's what capitalism's all about.
-
Unfortunately, when Joe Sixpack develops a medical condition his/her (Josephine Sixpack) insurance carrier doesn't want to cover, the carrier will deny it until Mr./Ms. Sixpack is dead and any heir is therefore stuck with the expense or bears the expense of suing the carrier.
-
Ain't life great when you deny yourself any choices and do so out of willful, indeed proud, stupdity? Just lookit the choices the Palindrone's made in life.
-
Besides, if the GOP representatives have such a great health proposal for Americans, (1) why hasn't it been revealed or (2) why wasn't it enacted when Cheney was president?
-
Answer: the GOP doesn't have fecal matter except for an Oxycontin addict as their leader.
icr| 8.9.09 @ 2:41PM
"Who regulates the insurance companies? The government. The government already controls health care you buffoons. "-pig
Try to think of something(aside from most private sexual activity) that the govt doesn't regulate. Ergo, the govt already controls just about everything. So we already have Stalinism, but without -for the time being- the Gulags.
sadf| 8.10.09 @ 1:59AM
HOBOKEN, N.J. – cmc audio rca Divers pulled a helicopter and four more bodies out of the murky Hudson wbt audio rcaRiver on Sunday in their search for victims, wreckage and explanations from a midair collision of a sightseeing helicopter and a small plane that killed nine people.
The dead audio rcafrom Saturday's crash include three fathers and their three teenage sons. The private plane carried a wbt rcafamily from Pennsylvania, and the helicopter held five Italian tourists celebrating a couple's 25th wedding anniversary.
The plane approached the helicopter, wbt binding postswhich had just taken off for a 12-minute tour, from behind and clipped it with a wing,wbt rca type sockets
Searchers fought swift currents, wbt rca type plugsdealt with visibility as low as one foot, and dodged debris dumped along the river bottom as they brought four more bodies on to boats. One was found in the fuselage of the helicopter, New Jersey State Police Sgt. cmcStephen Jones said. Two bodies remained missing.
Trackback| 9.25.09 @ 6:01AM
Homeowners Insurance Coverage, on Homeowners Insurance Coverage, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
دليل مواقع | 12.17.09 @ 11:30PM
Thanks
توبيكات | 12.17.09 @ 11:36PM
Thank You
حكاوينا | 12.17.09 @ 11:37PM
Goood
Trackback| 12.21.09 @ 9:25PM
new hampshire credit repair, on new hampshire credit repair, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
hp f4480 printer | 2.2.10 @ 8:43PM
very insightful post. Keep it up.
دردشة يمنية | 6.10.11 @ 3:09AM
niceee
دردشة يمنية | 6.10.11 @ 3:09AM
niceee
بنت مصر | 6.12.11 @ 4:06PM
niceee
دردشة | 6.12.11 @ 4:07PM
Thanks for sharing the useful information.