Midknight Review contrasts truth with Obama's very misleading and lengthy announcement of Wednesday morning. Understand that the Senate bill will grow Government by 118 agencies and Federal bureaucracies. "Reconciliation" is in view - a process intended for bipartisan bills having to do with budgetary items. Only three bills establishing policy have been run through this process in violation of the process just mentioned - in each case, a majority of 81 votes (on average) was registered when only 51 votes was required. Never, never has Reconciliation been used for a purely partisan bill.
Here are our corrections to Obama's rather ridiculous but well presented claims. Understand that Obama's little bill, brought to the so-called Summit, is not a part of the continuing negotiations. There is no such thing as an "Obama bill" ---- jds.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much, all of you . . . . . . .
Last Thursday, I spent seven hours at a summit where Democrats and Republicans engaged in a public and very substantive discussion about health care. This meeting capped off a debate that began with a similar summit nearly one year ago. And since then, every idea has been put on the table. Every argument has been made. Everything there is to say about health care has been said . . . . . . Apparently Obama thought 7 hours of bipartisan discussion balanced out 12 months of the most partisan legislative process in our life-times. This editor remembers folks saying - during the time of the Summit - "we hope this is the beginning of several such exchanges." Little did we know that while the GOP was making their case, he was planning his next partisan move and had no intentions of doing any follow-up. . . . . . . .
Democrats and Republicans agree that this is a serious problem for America. And we agree that if we do nothing -– if we throw up our hands and walk away -– it’s a problem that will only grow worse. Nobody disputes that. . . . . . . . Indeed, we do agree. In fact, it goes without saying. . . . . . . . .
On one end of the spectrum, there are some who've suggested scrapping our system of private insurance and replacing it with a government-run health care system. And though many other countries have such a system, in America it would be neither practical nor realistic. . . . . . . . . We have no clue why he took this rhetorical stance. Obama is a "public option freak." He is the one who said over and over again, "only the government can solve the nation's economic issues." In fact, there is no portion of societal endeavor Obama thinks should not be regulated or controlled by the Government -- his government. For him to pretend otherwise is an insult to everyone's sensibilities. . . . . . .
On the other end of the spectrum, there are those, and this includes most Republicans in Congress, who believe the answer is to loosen regulations on the insurance industry -- whether it's state consumer protections or minimum standards for the kind of insurance they can sell. The argument is, is that that will somehow lower costs. I disagree with that approach. I'm concerned that this would only give the insurance industry even freer rein to raise premiums and deny care. . . . . So why did this very circumstance increase competition and lower costs in the auto insurance industry? It is not that we do not know what will happen if competition is increased. He disagrees because he does not understand free market capitalist principles. He disagrees because he has spent his entire adult life in the theories of Saul Alinsk - teaching Alinski as a college professor at Columbia and Jeremiah Wright's view of the Marxist influenced Black Liberation Theology.
So I don't believe we should give government bureaucrats or insurance company bureaucrats more control over health care in America. . . . . And this is an outright lie.
Obama said in a speech at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. "Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy -- where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending; where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit." . . . . . .I believe it's time to give the American people more control over their health care and their health insurance. I don't believe we can afford to leave life-and-death decisions about health care to the discretion of insurance company executives alone. . . . . . yet his plan will do just this. For senior citizens and youth with long term and potentially fatal diseases, there will review boards that consider cost versus long term benefits. If the outlook is not good, the specific procedures will NOT be allowed. . . . .
I believe that doctors and nurses and physician assistants like the ones in this room should be free to decide what's best for their patients. (Applause.) . . . he names three classes of health care providers, two of which are not trained doctors. His plan proposes to increase the number of Americans on insurance by 30 million but does absolutely nothing to increase the number of doctors. That is because he intends to rely more on medical assistants and nurses. Is that a path for increasing the quality of care ?? . . . .
Now, the proposal I put forward gives Americans more control over their health insurance and their health care by holding insurance companies more accountable. Do you understand that this statement contradicts itself ??!! The individual's medical independence is not advanced when it is the Government which makes accountability decisions for him. In fact, there is nothing in the Senate bill that proves Obama's claim. . . . . . . .
It builds on the current system where most Americans get their health insurance from their employer. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. He forgot to mention the fact that if there are any changes to your health plan including premium increases, you lose this "freedom" ??? . . . .
If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. I can tell you as the father of two young girls, I would not want any plan that interferes with the relationship between a family and their doctor. He is not going to be on the same plan as many of the rest of us. Most Americans have what is called "Cadillac plans" and those plans will received a 40% tax assessment. My wife and I spent a little over $1000 a month on our health care. That would increase to 1400 dollars per month IMMEDIATELY. Certainly, Obama allows us to keep our plan but, if we cannot afford the plan because of his intervention, what good is that freedom ?? . . . . . . .
Essentially, my proposal would change three things about the current health care system. First, it would end the worst practices of insurance companies. No longer would they be able to deny your coverage because of a preexisting condition. True, but some procedures would be disallowed if they are deemed to be too expensive. No longer would they be able to drop your coverage because you got sick. No longer would they be able to force you to pay unlimited amounts of money out of your own pocket. Does anyone think that - over time time - government insurance premiums will not go up ? No longer would they be able to arbitrarily and massively raise premiums like Anthem Blue Cross recently tried to do in California -- up to 39 percent increases in one year in the individual market. Those practices would end. . . . Preposterous !! Insurance companies do not make "arbitrary decisions" with regard to premiums. Do you know that insurance companies typically work on a bottom line (profit margin) of less than 3%. Do you know that 53% of all government spending goes to overhead, waste and fraud? . . . .
Second, my proposal would give uninsured individuals and small business owners the same kind of choice of private health insurance that members of Congress get for themselves -- because if it’s good enough for members of Congress, it’s good enough for the people who pay their salaries. (Applause.) . . . Fine, but the Senate bill does not do this !! Also, this bill does no favors for small business. It is nothing more than a small business tax and will cut about 3 million jobs from the current economic recovery.
The bottom line is our proposal is paid for. And all the new money generated in this plan goes back to small businesses and middle-class families who can't afford health insurance. This is a preposterous lie. Absolutely none of the profit from this bill will go to small business. Midknight Review doesn't even know that Obama is talking about !! First, there are no provisions in the bill that speak to this promise. Secondly, there are no profits in this plan, only the promise of "savings." . . . . . . .
It would also lower prescription drug prices for seniors.Only after Big Pharma jacks their prices in anticipation of this plan's passage. There are no savings, here. And it would help train new doctors and nurses and physician assistants to provide care for American families. No training for doctors is included in this bill. This is a disgraceful lie. My son is an ER doctor in a near by Northern California town. He sees this Obama plan as the Government using doctors to balance the budget and to do so whether they like it or not.
Finally, my proposal would bring down the cost of health care for millions -- families, businesses, and the federal government. It does not bring individual health care down using the same coverage parameters. Everything changes for the individual currently covered by private insurance. . . . . . .
Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill . . . . It IS the Senate health care proposal. It does not "mirror" anything. . . . . . .
So that's our proposal. This is where we've ended up.
Obamas health care bill, 118 new agencies, what is reconciliation. public option, Senate bill
.
No comments:
Post a Comment