On the right, there are those who argue that we should end the employer-based system and leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.If he wanted to be balanced, he could say that on the left, there are those who argue that we should end the employer-based system and leave individuals to get health insurance from government. Instead, I thought he made single payer sound less threatening.
He said,
I believe a broad consensus exists for the aspects of the plan I just outlined: consumer protections for those with insurance, an exchange that allows individuals and small businesses to purchase affordable coverage, and a requirement that people who can afford insurance get insurance.This is probably correct, although I personally would not sign on to that consensus. The "consumer protections" have been tried in various states, with bad results. They raise the cost of insurance and lower the number of companies providing insurance. The consensus amounts to the Massachusetts plan, under which costs shot up.
He said,
Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan.And if we don't pass this plan, does he intend to keep the waste and inefficiency, out of spite?
He said,
some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past, and just this year supported a budget that would have essentially turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program. That will never happen on my watch.In that case, Medicare spending will never be brought under control under his watch. And if Medicare spending is not brought under control, then he certainly will not be the last President to have to address health care reform.
Basically, it was a "Win one for the Gipper" (in this case, Ted Kennedy) speech. Intellectually, it amounted to a vacuous claim that health reform will be a free lunch, because we'll get rid of all the waste, fraud, and abuse.
I'm afraid what is happening with the Senate Finance Committee bill is much more nefarious than anyone would be lead to believe. Republican politicians call it a “public-private partnership” between big insurance and the federal government. But what is the reality? It is an entity best described as a government maintained insurance cartel.
The Nightmare That Is The Senate Finance Committee Healthcare Proposal – RINOCare Gone Wild (http://tinyurl.com/ltf66q)
I can say with absolute conviction that what we are about to see coming out of the Senate is everything a public option would give you - rationing, loss of medical liberties, the whole nine yards. It now becomes a question of who is driving the bus - the government or government maintained insurance cartels. I would argue that neither option is desirable.
It all depends on whether you are talking about government controlled socialized medicine or government controlled fascist medicine. I do not use the word fascist in a demeaning way, but use it as a descriptive adjective that fits its definition - that of an authoritarian nationalist political ideology and a corporatist economic ideology.
Both extremes do nothing to address the real problems, but the fascist solution has a real chance of passing the Senate due to its bi-partisan appeal. As I state in the article, it was very telling that lobbyists received a copy of the committee bill before the administration.
Conservative, liberal, or independent - if you think you have a ally in Congress, chances are you are wrong. Your opinion counts last in the political calculus of politicians within the beltway. That is, until your voice is heard.
No to the government and no to big business. Does that not address the grievances of both sides? Time to scrap this bill and start over. There are real solutions that don't drive the deficit to more dizzying heights, regulate big insurance, and drive down costs with free market competition and tort reform. Ideologues need not apply. It's time for the pragmatic adults to step in and the children to nap.
I'm afraid what is happening with the Senate Finance Committee bill is much more nefarious than anyone would be lead to believe. Republican politicians call it a “public-private partnership” between big insurance and the federal government. But what is the reality? It is an entity best described as a government maintained insurance cartel.
The Nightmare That Is The Senate Finance Committee Healthcare Proposal – RINOCare Gone Wild (http://tinyurl.com/ltf66q)
I can say with absolute conviction that what we are about to see coming out of the Senate is everything a public option would give you - rationing, loss of medical liberties, the whole nine yards. It now becomes a question of who is driving the bus - the government or government maintained insurance cartels. I would argue that neither option is desirable.
It all depends on whether you are talking about government controlled socialized medicine or government controlled fascist medicine. I do not use the word fascist in a demeaning way, but use it as a descriptive adjective that fits its definition - that of an authoritarian nationalist political ideology and a corporatist economic ideology.
Both extremes do nothing to address the real problems, but the fascist solution has a real chance of passing the Senate due to its bi-partisan appeal. As I state in the article, it was very telling that lobbyists received a copy of the committee bill before the administration.
Conservative, liberal, or independent - if you think you have a ally in Congress, chances are you are wrong. Your opinion counts last in the political calculus of politicians within the beltway. That is, until your voice is heard.
No to the government and no to big business. Does that not address the grievances of both sides? Time to scrap this bill and start over. There are real solutions that don't drive the deficit to more dizzying heights, regulate big insurance, and drive down costs with free market competition and tort reform. Ideologues need not apply. It's time for the pragmatic adults to step in and the children to nap.
I just want affordable insurance that is not tied to my company. It makes no sense to have insurance tied to our business. What if I want to start my own business? What if my wife's mlm takes off and I go to work for some mlm companies or some other crazy scenario? Being trapped tied to one company limits mobility, limits risk taking, limits going after dreams. Especially once you have kids.