He’s at it again
President Obama gave yet another speech on his healthcare plan before a friendly audience and continues to say the same things that even his most ardent supporters know to be false:
when you’re talking with some of your friends and neighbors, they might say, “Well, that all sounds pretty good, but how you going to pay for it?” That’s a legitimate question, because I inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit when I came into office. That’s the other thing people have been a little selective about. They don’t seem to remember how we got into this mess.
But it’s a legitimate question: How are we going to dig ourselves out of this big financial hole we’re in? So let me try and answer. The plan I’m proposing is going to cost $900 billion over 10 years. That’s real money. Although that’s less than we spent on Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It’s less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed during the previous administration. Wars and tax cuts that were not paid for and ballooned our deficit to record levels and didn’t help America’s working families.
We won’t make — we won’t make that mistake again. We will not pay for health insurance reform by adding to our deficits. I will not sign a bill that adds a dime to our deficits, either now or in the future. What we will do is pay for it by eliminating hundreds of billions of dollars in fraud and waste and abuse, including billions of dollars in subsidies for insurance companies that pad their profits but aren’t improving care.
So let’s get this straight: we don’t have the money for Obamacare, but that’s okay because it costs about as much as Iraq and Afghanistan. We don’t have the money for Obamacare, but that’s okay because we couldn’t afford the Bush tax cuts either. Oh, yes, we forgot the part about paying for the plan by cutting fraud and abuse and “subsidies” to fat-cat insurance companies. Huh?
George Will on Obama and those fat cat insurance companies: “His speech to Congress was the 122nd time he had publicly discussed health care…His incessant talking cannot combat what it has caused: An increasing number of Americans do not believe that he believes what he says…He suggests health-insurance companies are making excessive profits. But since 1996, profits of the six such companies in the S&P 500 have been below the 500′s average.” It can’t be good news for the administration that Obama has taken to repeating his inanities in campaign style to red-meat audiences.
This is getting to be really embarrassing.
September 16th, 2009 at 3:35 am
Still blaming all his problems on the previous administration… WOW.
Get a clue dude, that argument doesn’t work anymore. This is YOUR MESS!
What’s next, you gonna call all the patriots racist? Cuz guess what… that one doesn’t work anymore either.
September 16th, 2009 at 5:31 am
do you con’s have an alternative plan? not doing ANYTHING is already going to add to the deficit, everyone actually following the issue knows that the system is heading to bankruptcy as is.
so i guess we should stick out heads in the sand and do nothing.
OR, we could revamp a system that partially works by covering those left out of it currently.
September 16th, 2009 at 10:35 am
Yeah, I don’t understand your point. Are you saying that the principle of spending “good” money after “bad” is “okay”? By revamping a system, are you looking to streamline the system so care is rationalized and economized?
Does your system revamp mean that you are moving to a system similar to that in other countries? Which country’s benchmark are you targeting?
September 16th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
The problem with the proposed reform is that it is too expensive. Why not allow the sales of insurance across state lines? (Nit pickers, stuff it. You know I know insurance that is registered with a state insurance commission can be sold “across state lines.”) NY will not allow an insurance plan to only cover catastrophic illness. Gee, what does that do to my premiums?
Yes, I am aware that we all pay for the abuse of emergency room care. Fix it.
The savings from eliminating fraud and abuse – what is stopping you from doing that now? Even making this claim is an admission of negligence or incompetence.
Even I’m bored with the tort reform defensive medicine debate. Given a choice between doctors and lawyers, I’m with the doctors.
Enough. Wrecking a system that delivers a decent outcome and drives health care advances at the expense of my freedom is not the charter of my government. Less government is the prescription, not more.
September 17th, 2009 at 1:01 am
Try to argue with actual facts — about those dreaded “other countries’ ” healthcare systems:
“The World Health Organization ranks U.S. healthcare well below most of Europe, Canada and Japan. France and Italy rank at number one and two while the U.S. is in the thirty-seventh slot. Most of the countries that rank above the U.S. have some form of socialized medicine. Japan, which ranks tenth on the WHO list, is at number one in life expectancy with 74.5 years being the average while the U.S. is twenty-fourth in life expectancy, again well below much of Europe, Canada and Australia as well.
An oft repeated declaration is that the U.S. has the best healthcare in the world. It is, also, stated that people across the globe come to the U.S. for medical treatments, such as the King of Jordan, who recently went to the Mayo Clinic for surgery. This outcomes happens when people can afford the high costs for travel and care. Likewise, U.S. citizens do the same, but in a reverse sort of fashion.
For example, Richard DeVos, co-founder of AMWAY and a staunch Republican, went to Great Britain for a heart transplant and talk show host Charlie Rose went to France for heart surgery. These sorts of options, of course, do not exist for most Americans and, certainly, very few choices exist at all for the U.S. citizens who cannot afford healthcare coverage altogether.”
September 17th, 2009 at 6:47 am
I am personally suspect of Whorld Health Organization reports. Let’s see how this H1N1 – swine flu kerfuffle plays out. I realize it has been around for almost 3 years in Asia with minimal impact. I think WHO generates reports for political purposes and therefore take their opinion with a grain of salt.
If you feel comfortable with a WHO approved sticker on your government’s service… all the power to you.
September 17th, 2009 at 8:15 am
Steve Says:
“Try to argue with actual facts”
Fact: the U.S. Constitution does not identify health care as an area that the U.S. Government may exercise powers. Therefore, by the 10th Amendment, it is reserved to the States and/or People.
Now let’s argue about some area that the Federal Government IS permitted to exercise powers. How about enforcing the law by arresting people who attempt to defraud the government? Yes, ACORN, I’m talking about you…
September 17th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Frank, surely you know the Preamble to the Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
As Wikipedia states, “An example of the way courts utilize the Preamble is Ellis v. City of Grand Rapids, 257 F. Supp. 564 (W.D. Mich. 1966). Substantively, the case was about eminent domain. The City of Grand Rapids wanted to use eminent domain to force landowners to sell property in the city identified as “blighted,” and convey the property to owners that would develop it in ostensibly beneficial ways: in this case, to St. Mary’s Hospital, a Catholic organization. This area of substantive constitutional law is governed by the Fifth Amendment, which is understood to require that property acquired via eminent domain must be put to a “public use.” In interpreting whether the proposed project constituted a “public use,” the court pointed to the Preamble’s reference to “promot[ing] the general Welfare” as evidence that “[t]he health of the people was in the minds of our forefathers.” “[T]he concerted effort for renewal and expansion of hospital and medical care centers as a part of our nation’s system of hospitals, is as a public service and use within the highest meaning of such terms. Surely this is in accord with an objective of the United States Constitution: ‘* * * promote the general Welfare.’”
September 17th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
So government judges voted for an expanded interpretation favoring government power. Color me surprised.
September 17th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
> “Frank, surely you know the Preamble to the Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Of course I am familiar with the language that liberals use to try to justify an unconscionable attempt to control of all aspects of American life. That does not mean that those grasping attempts bear any relationship to the actual constitution or clear meaning of the founders.
> The court pointed to the Preamble’s reference to “promot[ing] the general Welfare” as evidence that “[t]he health of the people was in the minds of our forefathers.”
Perfect example of the courts run amok in stretching the clear language of the constitution to fit their desires and prejudices. Please identify the location of the word “health” in the Constitution. Please.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:22 am
Frank, I presume then that all government funding of medical research is also on your shit list, as well as the regulations of the FDA and EPA, and aid from the Veterans Administration,.
September 18th, 2009 at 6:06 am
Well, I do believe in the Constitution, Steve. You seem like a moderately bright guy; work the rest out.
September 18th, 2009 at 9:33 am
It seems a quantum leap from “promote the general welfare” to “provide food and health care for all”. Does anyone really believe the founders thought government should supply everyone’s needs?
Obama’s math is 900,000,000,000 = 0
Obama, with no real plan, is going to remake the health care industry with a smile I guess … so this guy Baucus comes out with a more balanced budget plan, and not one was standing with him.
There is no plan, but maybe if they stomp their feet and keep claiming “now is the time to act” … they’ll just pass something terrible and declare victory.
September 18th, 2009 at 1:20 am
Promote the general welfare does not equal provide for the general welfare.