Universal Health Care was within easy reach. This was a "no brainer," a goal that should have been the crown jewel of President Obama's first term as President. Everybody wanted it, no one opposed.
And reduced health care costs were even easier. The formula for dropping health care costs was so simple that even our Congress could have figured it out.
Alas, the Health Care Restructuring we are about to get served is the absolute worst of all possible worlds. We will like not have any public option (not that I wanted one). And we will not have universal choice. We will be stuck with our current policies with lower benefits, less choice, more governmental controls (Sarah Palin's Death Panels, but with a kinder, gentler name) and costs that will quickly spiral out of control.
Thinking Democrats and liberals like MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan are protesting mightily, but it's falling on deaf ears.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
As Ratigan and others have said, Congress is being boxed in by the odd couple combination of Labor Unions, who don't want their members to be able to chose a different plan, and businesses who are too stupid to realize that they should be begging to get out of the Health Care Business, not lobbying to stay in control of a system that will surely bankrupt them.
So we will get higher health care costs, a massive tax increase and government controlled care. And, because no one is willing to consider tort reform, we will get fewer doctors, fewer hospitals and higher premiums to cover malpractice insurance.
Finally, we are not really getting universal coverage, instead most people will face stiff fines if they somehow fail to purchase insurance they might not be able to afford.
13 comments:
And universal coverage would have made this better in what way?
Vigil I doubt the WSJ is a fair and balanced arbiter. Regardless, without the public option this bill is little better than nothing. Personally I believe the single payor system as exists in Europe and Canada is the way to go but it will take many years to reach that point. The business interests are too strong in this country.
Mike, Did you watch the Dylan Ratigan MSNBC video above? Watch that before simply disregarding the WSJ Journal article. Free Choice was opposed by Big Business and Big Labor Unions, both.
It's all about those with power KEEPING the power.
Dylan ratigan is not the be all and end all of journalism Wizard. Secondly, if this were true why are the labor unions firmly behind Obama and make it clear they WANT the public option?
Seriously MM? The corrupt Union organizers want more people lining union pockets in the form dues.
Congress would fund fund part of health reform with a cap on the tax exclusion of employer-sponsored health insurance but only at a level "significantly above" the cost of the standard plan offered to federal employees. The measure would also exclude policies bargained under current union contracts.
Join a union, loose your self worth, gain an tax break.
Mike, I think you've missed the entire point here. Ratigan (who isn't a journalist, but a commentator/pundit) is STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC OPTION.
This is another, related, issue, that would actually allow consumers to select health insurance like they do auto or home owners insurance, from a large group of companies.
Under the Democrat plan snaking it's way through Congress you would get absolutely NO CHOICE under virtually any circumstances. If your employer (or union) offers insurance, you MUST take that option and that option only at the price your company (or your union) says you must pay.
No competition, no options. If your company makes it's deal with the devil, you have to buy your insurance from the devil.
Mike, Do you realize the Free Choice Amendment eliminated (without a vote) by the Senate Finance Committee was written by and sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat? Wyden is just about the only Senator NOT in the pocket of the Insurance Companies.
You need to call your Senators and tell them to SUPPORT the WYDEN FREE CHOICE Amendment.
I don't think people are really reading or writing seriously in this conversation. Mike absent-mindedly addressed Wizard as "Vigil", and his slip was not caught by the next five comments. I'll check back later to see if you guys' quaaludes have had a chance to wear off.
Not yet, huh? Maybe open the windows and let some air in?
Good catch Vigil.
Thanks, Mike. The two of us should come in here more often, just to get the air circulating, huh?
Do you know who will protect you from Washington? The Constitution, that's who. Remember federalism, and that hinky 10th Amendment? Our system was deliberately designed to limit the damage a central government could inflict on its people. The states would provide multiple experiments in local control, each tailored to its constituents. Don't like the way your state handles an issue? Find one you like and move there. Need guidance on an issue? Look at what others are doing and learn from them.
The whole debate about "health care" should be handled at the state level. That's true of a great many issues that have been usurped by the federal government. The federal government was meant to have as little impact on individual citizens as possible. In its present form, the federal government is so powerful and intrusive that grabbing the levers of power are of supreme political importance.
Want deliverance from busybodies and nitwits in Washington? Support federalism.
Post a Comment