I am so sick and tired of people branding something they know nothing about..so this will be an educational thread. 1st off we need to discuss a few things. We have a guy who ran a Business and Fed office who has never held an elected office suddenly becoming a tax specialist..job creator and health care expert along with knowing nothing about foreign affairs. He is in 1st place. Has he ever balanced a budget ? Worked within an executive position with ANY opposition party to do anything ? Like get health care ? What about Perry ..what is his record on health care in Texas..yet now he is another tax whiz guy ? Out of the blue ? Let Forbes take the heat..answer the questions.. His job creation track record..inherit a state budget with ZERO TAXES and completely wreck it. Again HC was or is a determining factor in driving budgets.NOT TAXES...Health Care.. Health care along with the idiotic energy policy of screwing the American consumer to advance crony political ideology is why we have the mess today. Killing bad guys is cool..but a sniper team with a single bullet could have done it months/years ago and saved everyone time and grief. So now Romney care. I will use this article as exhibit A.Written in June of this year by the Boston Globe..Not any political hack team... http://articles.boston.com/2011-06-26/lifestyle/29706413_1_overhaul-mitt-romney-health-care Here are a few tidbits to get your juices flowing ..I encourage you to actually read the article..it is past 3rd grade comprehension..so try and see past your image of some doom and gloom Massive government strangle hold deal. 1st interesting paragraph for debate.. At the time, Romney thought the revolution in health care that he, more than anyone, drove into law would redound to his benefit as a presidential candidate. Who else on the Republican side had tried to do anything as difficult or ambitious much less gotten it done? END. Read it again..who else on either side at the time had gotten universal heath care done ? Not restructure taxes..kill bad guys..create trillions in debt or create 9 % unemployment. Health care. Pt. Romney..and he has never RUN away or flipped on this main piece of legislation. There's more of course.. But the 1st part is NOT questionable. No one on the Republican side had done more for his state or elected voter than Romney has for Health care in Mass. Since you wont read..fire away with your debate points..the article will make many fears go away.
It looks like it would be a lot better to just go with a single payer system and get the for-profit insurance companies out of it. Tax money paying for health care makes more sense than spending it on war for economic gain.
I agree with you 100%. It would also go along way towards curing our economic ills. Most personal bankrupty result in some form of medical financial problem. Also home foreclousures are mostly the result of medical bills.
The last 2 post are OK..except that they are just theories on principles yet to see the light of day Who on any party has ever submitted a bill .. offered a path..formed a majority opinion or even balanced a state budget while doing such a deal ? No one..Remember Romney turned around a state budget..balanced it and created A surplus..WHILE doing health Care and his unemployment was 4.2 %. Did Perry do that in 2 terms..?? Mitt did it in 1. 4 years..compared to nothing in 8 years. Here is some more on Romney care.. From the link.. A detailed Globe examination of voluminous health care and financial data, and interviews with key figures in every sector of the health care system, makes it clear that while there have been some stumbles — and some elements of the effort merit a grade of “incomplete’’ — the overhaul has, after five years, worked as well as or better than expected: END. Now compare that to OBAMA CARE. Ever wonder why liberals are pulling for Perry or Cain and FEAR ROMNEY ? Romney care has had 5 years to see weaknesses and strengths and many now say it worked better than expected. Obama care has had a year and everyone sees pitfalls..mistakes..and you wonder why OBAMA wants to COMPARE IT TO ROMNEY CARE. Blame Bush..I mean blame Romney..it was his idea..Wait ..I feel something Obama always has an escape goat handy. Back to Romney care..From the article.. Many more businesses are offering insurance to employees than were before the law. The fear going in was that the opposite would happen. ( oops..bet you didnt know that ) The plan remains exceptionally popular among state residents — indeed its popularity has only grown with time. There are some unhappy sectors — notably small business owners, who had hoped to see moderating premiums and chafe, in some cases, at the heavy-handed enforcement of the rules by the state. And support for the requirement that individuals obtain insurance is down to a slender majority, a recent poll shows. But there is no significant constituency here for repeal. ■ And while health care costs continue to grow at alarming rates, as they have nationally, the consensus of industry leaders and health care economists is that this trend cannot be fairly traced to the makeover but rather to cost pressures baked into the existing health care payment system. Massachusetts does have the highest health care costs in the nation, but it owned this dubious distinction long before “RomneyCare’’ was born. Taken in sum, it is a far cry from what critics of Romney, and of Obama, are saying about the Massachusetts plan. The attacks often rely on distortions, omissions or flagrant inaccuracies, and typically ignore the fact that the law accomplished its principal goal — expanding coverage to nearly every citizen. END.. There's more..but let's see how Paul supporters and Perry people would argue that Romney care is Obama care. 1 program has broad support.. The other doesn't . 1 program was transparent in openness and discussion.. Obama's was passed in a special deal without debate. I can almost hear mandates in the back ground..bring it..
Well, fine, Lets do Romney Care then. Call it what you want. We need healthcare for all Americans. But The Republicans will be against it no matter what you call it. They are againt HillaryCare, ObamaCare, RomneyCare, or any HealthCare, including Medicare.
Some Republicans are against anything..just as some democrats are.The point is Mass. has 99 % coverage ..It did what it said it would do. The guy who did it balanced his budget doing it..Obama tripled the national debt and his plan wont save anything. Think Obama can use that in a debate with Romney ? Really ? And the guy who did it is saying each state can do what ever it wants. Seems better than just throwing rocks against glass houses. Be it is a state deal..the people of that state can repeal it..Can we repeal Obama care ? Another HUGE deal..the way it was formed..and passed. Next up read the link..SEE ANYWHERE WHERE SPECIAL FAVORS LET POLITICAL FRIENDS OFF THE HOOK FOR SUPPORT ? Not Unions..large companies that gave Obama money..not picking winners and losers. Romney care is not Obama care.. Not even close.
The Affordable Health Care Act (what detractors call Obama Care) will not be fully implemented until 2014. Why not wait until we see what it actually is before shooting it down? Whatever it's shortcomings it's the most progressive healthcare change to be passed by congress in a long time. For those who say health care isn't a right I say paved highways are also not a right. But we have those. Why not health care?
We could wait..but if inspectors find a bridge plank rotting do you wait until the bridge goes down before trying to fix it ? This debate was about cost..who was covered..who got special exemptions for support and the process used to pass it. We are already finding out ( by just reading Obama care ) that it was poorly written..probably not up to court arguments and not anywhere near cost neutral as advertised. It allowed Cadillac plans to continue..giving favoritism to political groups who dont even have a pony in the ring. Romney care has none of that.. lets examine more from the globe link..Here are the critics 1st Perry "And so when Texas Governor Rick Perry, a possible GOP presidential contender, took a shot in 2010 at the Massachusetts plan, he claimed that, “The number of uninsured people in Massachusetts is about the same as it was when the mandates were passed in 2006.’’ Perry was Flat-out wrong, as his office later acknowledged to the Austin American-Statesman." and ..Huck.. ( The guy from Arkansas who knows what a Mormon believes in..) " Or when former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee — who recently announced that he will not run in 2012 — wrote about the Massachusetts experiment, he pointed to the rapid rise of health insurance rates in the years since it went into effect. But he failed to note that price inflation was by no means limited to Massachusetts. Or that the cost of insurance for families, by far the largest category, had grown even faster in 10 other states, including his own while he was governor." And some from the right.. " And then there was Governor Patrick’s experience in Washington, when he went to testify earlier this year about how the Massachusetts plan has worked. Before he could open his mouth, he received this blunt greeting. “Looking forward to what you have to say about a failed program in your state, MassachusettsCare,’’ said Representative Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee. Blackburn didn’t back up her slam at the time, and her office promised specifics to the Globe, but never delivered." End Quotes.. Next up..specifics.. Not just those who speak without knowing..but by actual study. and you might be surprised..
What happens to both the Mass. plan and the fed plan if the scotus decides the mandatory insurance purchase requirement is unconstitutional? This seems to be the key to both plans.
It's Unconstitutional on the Federal level because the Constitution doesn't have the Power to do so because it's mentioned that the document is used as a Restriction against the Government not the People. Now to clarify on the Constitution the 10th Amendment grants that privelage to States to determine their own Healthcare standards whether it be mandatory or not. So Obamacare is indeed unconstitutional and Romneycare doesn't apply to being unconstitutional.
Thanks Roelath..I wasn't quite sure on the way to say that... I would have gone that the majority of states would have to vote to support such a deal ? Legality is not my area..but on principle just forcing a quick vote from a rigged majority before you lose it without the bill being read would raise red flags to anyone. Certainly not the way Romney care was passed in Mass. Both sides had a hand in writing the law..not just one party..or one Man. Here is from page 7 on my link by the Globe.. Mandates..?? Have the individual and employer mandates — political kryptonite to many in the current GOP presidential field — worked? Yes. The number of uninsured individuals is way down, and the percentage of businesses offering insurance to employees is up. Opponents of mandates on business had predicted that employers, rather than offer coverage, would choose to pay the penalty and let their lower-income employees apply for subsidized insurance instead. In fact, the opposite occurred here. Before 2006, 70 percent of employers offered coverage, 10 percentage points above the national average. In 2009, the figure in Massachusetts was 76 percent, according to the Massachusetts Employer Survey by the state’s Division of Health Care Finance and Policy. The national rate remained at 60 percent. There has, however, been one unexpected side-effect of this success. Because more businesses chose to insure employees rather than pay the $295 per-employee penalty, revenues from the penalty have run well below expectations. Some $48 million per year was projected, but actual yield has been, on average, a third of that or less. END QUOTE. So the mandate deal is overblown..like needing to have car insurance to drive..homeowners insurance to buy a home..You need health insurance to get heath care. All regulated by the states..not mandated by a particular political party that seeks to reward followers and penalize those that didnt vote to support Obama. The search for the truth can be rewarding and surprising.
Infrastructure, however, IS a responsibility of the federal gov't. Building interstates is one thing they do pretty well. On healthcare: "Wait until we see what it actually is before shooting it down??" That sounds like Pelosi and it's a crazy idea. It's too late then to do anything about it. I don't want the federal gov't being the gatekeeper regarding my heathcare. And the more people in it, the more of a gatekeeper they'll be.
aah..really ? NO. The Federal government cant deliver mail on time under budget much less bridges. When the people can really see the cost effectiveness and over spending on roads and bridges would they still feel that way? PRIVATE COMPANIES build roads and bridges....all the Federal Gov. does is mis manage Money that isn't theirs in the 1st place. Crony politics determine where the roads will be repaired and a failed buddy system hi jacked by UNIONS mean that competitive bidding does not happen. You've all read local companies complaining that the Feds took the higher bid..often without reason ..( other than a money payoff is received for doing the work..) by some out of town construction out fit. Then the cost over runs..shoddy work..delays and blame game starts. The local county board lets out contracts here in Mn for road repair.. States should do the same.Keep the federal BS out of everything. DEFENSE..is the #1 job and responsibility..not building roads or other nations infrastructure. States can manage health care.. The feds cant.
Who says road building is the responsibility of federal government? They do it and we accept it as normal. The constitution says nothing about road building. Everyone pays for road building but corporations and those who travel benefit from it more than the general population. I realize the importance of roads. But if a road is not built fewer people will die than if health care is unavailable or unaffordable. You don't want the government being the gate keeper to your health care. How is preventing a health insurance company from denying treatment for pre-existing conditions gate keeping? Allowing poor people to see a doctor isn't gate keeping. It's gate busting.
The postal service has been delivering mail for 200 years. And they do it all with the revenue from selling stamps, not with tax money. Counties may pay for road work on county roads. But it's the feds who fund a large percentage of the interstate highway work. "Crony politics determine where the roads will be repaired and a failed buddy system hi jacked by UNIONS mean that competitive bidding does not happen" I'm sure crony politics is a fact in some states. But to say the unions hi-jack the system tells me you don't know what you are talking about. "DEFENSE..is the #1 job and responsibility" Why is that? Why is protecting the wealth of our more successful citizens more important than saving the lives of everyone? We haven't spent any money on actual defense in 60 years. But we've spent most of our treasury and killed thousands of our young people fighting for profits for the few.
I can see the point that we need Government over sight with regards to balancing the playing field in terms of regulation.. Same as with banking .and education. When a Paul says..let states do it all..you realize every state is not created equal ? Some state have vast natural resources Like Texas..and allow a cheap un documented work force to permit no sales Tax. Other states that do the same ..Florida..with its tourism....Alaska with all that oil and no people.. Some states like California HAD IT ALL and mis managed the whole deal. Now the rest of the country will need to bail them out..( in the form of a national sales tax as proposed..) So.. some form of National rules balancing out the needs of the country V.the desires of the state are needed. Education is like that..heath care too. States like Texas could chose not to educate their kids or give them health care..while Minnesota and Mass. believe in the opposite.Kids dont have a say where they are born or where their parents chose to live to avoid paying taxes. The taxes that pay for a quality education and health care system.
You do realize the postal service receives Federal money to help its budget ? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/25/post-office-funding-neede_n_179077.html Dan Blair, head of the independent Postal Regulatory Commission, suggested that other savings are possible through closing small and rural post offices _ something Congress has resisted in the past. He added that it may be necessary to increase the limit on the amount of debt the post office can carry. Blair also noted that Congress could consider appropriating money to help the post office. The agency does not receive a taxpayer subsidy for its operations, although Congress does subsidize overseas voting and free mail for the blind. William Young, president of the National Association of Letter Carriers, stressed in his testimony that the agency is not seeking a taxpayer bailout, "but we are here to ask the Congress for help." "At this moment, the survival of the Postal Service _ a venerable institution that is literally older than our country _ hangs in the balance," Young added. END. Rules that dont allow for fair competition. The counties take care of county roads..and they ( the voters ) have a greater say and cost control over that deal. Each step up , we get less say and we get less control and then the crony politics take over. States are responsible for state roads...but just like the counties cannot fund every bridge.If that was the case..poor rural counties would have no roads and no bridges.A couple of bridges take up a whole county budget. Same with states.. so you get National involvement and politics.Why should people in Mass. pay for Nevada roads they may never drive on ? And the same goes for the Nevadan's driving through some over budget tunnel in Mass. Politics and Unions dont go hand in hand ? Giggle..See Obama ..and I am a second generation 35 year retired constucton Union guy..I may know more than you.. You do realize we dont have a military draft ? The poor didn't need to join to save those rich people...and the rich didn't need to die serving those who dont give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about anything but themselves...but they did. Thank god for the small stuff. USA.
Except for overseas mail and a perc for the blind the postal service seems to fly on it's own... as the article you linked says. You have no basis for your union bashing. Hate Obama if you wish. That's not the point. You are thinking backwards on this; "The poor didn't need to join to save those rich people...and the rich didn't need to die serving those who dont give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about anything but themselves...but they did." As long as we maintain a pool of poor people we will have cannon fodder for our war machine. If we had a draft it wouldn't be so easy to go to war for these BS reasons the government comes up with. The rich dying for the poor in war? That's a stretch. We are at a time when very few people of means go into the military.
Key word: INTERstate. A highway system that goes all the way through the country? Who do you think would coordinate that? Actually, it does. Article I, Sec 8: "to establish Post Offices and post Roads; I can change my private health insurance if I'm unhappy. If the fed gov't is in charge, I can't. Just like now....I just got on Medicare; I have no other choice. But since they don't pay for everything, we are also required to have a Supplemental. But guess what? The federal gov't controls that too.....because unless a procedure or drug is covered by Medicare (the gatekeeper), the supplemental won't cover it either. So, just like they will under ObamaCare, the federal gov't controls it all. Have you ever talked to anyone from the federal gov't regarding your healthcare---like the V.A. or Medicare offices? It's talking to bureaucrats. And yes, ObamaCare effects me too in this way: Because they are cutting Medicare and paying doctors and providers less and less-----it will soon become harder and harder for me to see a doctor that I would like to see. The choices are less under a government-run healthcare system and the decisions are the gatekeepers.
You can change it if - - - you can afford it or Obama's plan is not overturned and you have a pre-existing condition. Your post really points out the need for a single payer plan, not less government intervention.
Can you change your social security program ? How about your retirement ? Investing in just a Vanguard index fund would have made me way more money? How does the government mess everything up so easily. The government does not have a track record that deserves MORE support. Educate the worker..let the private economy take over. Who builds tanks and machine guns ? The government ? Nope.
ONLY if you like someone else making your decisions for you----or think you are incapable of doing so.
Give it up dude. Romney is part of a dying breed. Everyone is sick of that Bush type neo-conservatism. nobody wants a cross between Bush and Obama. Nobody cares about mitt romney. he's not going to win
"We can accomplish the same thing for the ENTIRE nation." - Mitt "Flip Flop" Romney on his government healthcare plan (w/ the mandatory-individual mandate), quoted in his book All Apologies. Which then magically disappeared in the paperback edition after Obama was elected and started enacting RomneyCare nationwide, precisely what the flip-flopping RomneyBot supported in his book. I'm telling you, Princess Mitt the flip-flopper must have a liberal, evil twin brother out there that did and said all these things that he now all of a sudden opposes. Or it could be that he suffers from a chronic case of amnesia/schizophrenia/split-personality disorder. Of course, it could also be that he is simply a lying, flip-flopping scumbag. You decide.
