Health Care Reform Loses Its Mojo
Many Democrats in the House and Senate were uncomfortable with the legislation taking shape on the energy and health care reform packages, created for the most part by the most left-wing members of the House and Senate — many of whom hail from the coastal states. The politics of George Miller, Henry Waxman, Nancy Pelosi, Ed Markey, and Barney Frank is not what got the Democrats their majority in the House, and Barbara Boxer and Chuck Schumer are not role models for many of the newly elected Democratic senators in 2006 and 2008. Democratic members from more conservative districts in the flyover zones slowed down the legislative process on both cap and trade and health care reform, and got some changes to the bills in the committees. But public opposition to the bills has hardened, particularly the health care reform bill, and the anxiety of Democrats in swing districts is rising. Many House Democrats are hoping that the Senate kills cap and trade, and either kills health care reform or produces a more palatable and much smaller package than the House version that made it through three committees.
In recent days, Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman indicated that it might not be a good idea to consider a major health care overhaul this year, given the still unsteady state of the economy. Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold commented this week that he doubted any bill would come up before the very end of the year, and maybe there would be no bill, period. There is the appearance of a breakdown in the will of some Democrats to fight for a bill, given the public resistance to the reform effort and the diminishing returns from the expensive campaign to sell it.
The huge increase in the estimate for the federal deficit for fiscal 2010 (now $1.5 trillion) and for the next ten years (now over $9 trillion, with a much higher CBO estimate sure to follow) has also complicated the health care reform effort. The history of federal health care entitlements is that the actual cost of each expansion was far higher than the original estimate, and in some cases multiples of the estimated cost. No rational observer believes that 45 million more people can be covered with a cost to the government of “only” a trillion dollars over ten years.
Add to this that liberal Democrats are pushing for a public insurance option that would compete for the enormous book of business of over 160 million privately insured Americans — and not just to provide subsidies for the uninsured. According to estimates by the respected Lewin Group, the public option would drive many of the now privately insured out of the private insurance system. Given the cost experience of Medicare and the serious over-utilization problem that has been endemic to the Medicare system since its creation in the mid-60s, the potential for a crushing addition to entitlement spending with a public option is real.
Americans are increasingly, and rightly, concerned about federal spending.
Addressing the federal deficit is now the number one issue for Americans, with health care reform registering barely half as many mentions and cap and trade far down the list. There are approaches to health care reform that are consistent with cost control, but they are absent from the Democrats’ bill. Tort reform could take a slice out of over-utilization in both the Medicare and private insurance systems. Allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines, with far fewer mandates for covered services, could significantly reduce the cost of insurance. Taxing the value of a corporate provided health insurance benefit, and giving individuals the choice of a tax-free voucher as well as higher salary in exchange for choosing an individual policy, would lead to far more comparison shopping and lower insurance cost.
Democrats want people to think health care is free and that you can get more people covered for less. But so long as most people have rich, comprehensive insurance packages, whether government or private market, and think somebody else is paying for it (the government, the corporation, wealthy taxpayers), the delivery system won’t change, individual and physician behavior won’t change, and costs will spiral.
Americans are smart enough to understand that the government’s approach to bringing costs down will eventually have to be a sledgehammer — the rationing and delayed care which is the case in the foreign health care systems Americans are most familiar with, Canada’s and Britain’s. It is no wonder that for older Americans it was a short trip from rationing to fear of euthanasia and speeding the elderly along their way, as is already the case in Oregon.
Until this week, I thought the Democrats’ huge advantage in Congress was so strong that a health care reform bill was still likely this year, despite public opposition. Now I think the odds are 50/50 at best. I read the decision by Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor to look into alleged abuses by CIA interrogators as an act of desperation — a bone for the left-wing base as the prospects for a health care bill acceptable to the base disappear. The Obama team wants to keep the base motivated and on its side. If they can’t deliver the next great entitlement, they seem to be betting that the base still hates George Bush and the Iraq war more than they love the public option. As to the impact of the investigation of CIA behavior on national security, the administration seems unconcerned. Regrettably, mistakes in this area do not just produce budget deficits.
It would be an enormous mistake to believe Obama-care is finished. Opponents must redouble there efforts to defeat it. Somebody meeds to send a message to across-the-aisle McCain to start behaving like a Republican. He had his chance and blew it because of similar ineptitude.
A related article of note. Please see especially the graph/chart:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html
Nothing but lies, threats and O-bot plants in their pathetic “scramble”.
On a lighter note…but just as true:
http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=3927
This bill needs to be opposed simply because of the debt this country is already in. I do not believe for one minute that this plan will either cover everyone who does not have insurance for health coverage (for whatever reason) or that the plan will lower costs and not increase an already out of control deficit and spending.
Regardless if the bill passes or not it is time to remove the democrat majority from congress and the senate. Now that more people are seeing through Obama they will be less likely to want a congress that will do his bidding.
I hope the current health care reform legislation is DOA when recess is over. I also think the Holder CIA special prosecutor action is a distraction at best, perhaps a “bone” to the far left. I suspect they are going to regret this…
The Democrat’s strongest Mojo may yet surface.
Think, “John McCain”.
Think, “We all must learn to be friends with each other”.
Think, “Gang of whoever – problem solved.. heh.. heh..”
McCain + Liberman + TBD = Don’t get too cocky before you personally see the dead rooster’s head laying on a platter.
What a pity this site cant lose its JEW HATER MOHO.
This effort by the government would end abruptly if the bill included the provision that all citizens must be included, including the congress and the president.
I agree with #1. Remember this same cast of clowns passed the “stimulus” boondoggle over the objections of the majority of people. Further agree – McCain is a disgrace – time for him to retire.
Everyone jokes about it, but if this is supposed to be a truly universal health care program, let’s put the usually rhetorical question to Congress. Why isn’t the U.S. Congress to be covered by this (and no other supplemental) program?
9. Wendell:
Majority of the people . . . an interesting concept. And if it were the actual definer of action to be taken, we wouldn’t have gone to war in Iraq, there would be price controls (re: government controls) on gasoline, Sotomayer, gays in the military, carbon caps, abortion rights in some or all circumstances, and yes, a public option. By all means, let the majority rule.
I’m a Thinker therefore I think Ted was murdered by the Democraps so the sympathy vote will push health care reform through unchallenged: “Teddy would’ve wanted it this way”
But then he could’ve been murdered by the Rethuglicans to create a power vaccum in the Senate and warn reformers to just let the bill die and go away, too.
Death to America
The monsterous plan puts “Health Care” into the hands of the politicians and bean counters, thus making the doctors and infrastructure staff mere commodities and federal employees.
11. Now and Then:
Its interesting that you would think majority opinion = your opinion. Groupthink a bit less and you might actually see the variety and proportion of what the public really thinks. Maybe even look at a poll that used random sampling and accounts for sampling related biases.
The health care plan is probably a payback to Unions etc…why else would these people come out and thug around for him? What else have they got to gain????
Even if the plan fails right now…he will bring it back in increments, and unless you are paying attention, you won’t know about it ..until it is in effect.
Obama is trying to dismantle the United States. The dollar will soon not be the main currency of the world, your vote will not mean much, and the brown shirts will watch your every m ove.
Health care in Kennedy’s name is a poor excuse for our congress to put it through even they know it is not what we want in general.
Ted Kennedy did a lot of good things, and a lot of bad things that over shadow it all. What is this… “one for the gipper”??? no matter what we want???
B.S at it’s best!!
Now and then: Nonsense. the “Majority” hardly consists of you and your other slacker buddies down at your local bar. Hearing a wet behind the ears “Socialist” bark about “the majority” and its wishes is richly comic stuff. You have not a clue what real and decent Americans think.
The majority of people are responsible adults, they are not gullible 20-somethings in dead end jobs projecting their frustration on the fate bizarre and perverted political “issues”. They have real lives-productive jobs, mortgages, children–you know, those things that you lack. The Dems may have snookered some last time, but no more. Goodness, even your masters’ doctored polls cannot cover up this mess now. It will just get worse, thank goodness.
Your perverse little wish list is at odd with most Americans and no matter how much you wish to fool yourself, this will obtain.
If the majority could ever get past the Democrats corruption of election, thet would never get into power. It will be fun watching you as the Democrats are push from power for a generation. It is inevitable now, that is it is inevitable if the Democrats do not do away with honest elections altogether. Given the thuggery of ACRON and the Unions, and the complete lack of honesty and the corruption of the Democrat leadership, and their hatred for America, this is a distinct possibility. Then there will be Civil War. SHould that happen, you will learn a great deal more about “the majority” than you ever cared to know.
Sotomayer, gays in the military, carbon caps, abortion rights in some or all circumstances
No the majority surely do not want any of this. How silly. <Gays in the military.
Too funny. The vast majority of people detest this as do the vast majority of the military. Sotomayer? Well, first, she got in, but second, if you put her appointment to a popular vote she would not even get 30%. The majority do not want incompetent, racist, arrogant spoiled little Affirmative Action brats on the SOCTUS. It is a threat to liberty, degrades the institution and thus the country. She is a source of embarrassment and shame. It would be interesting to talk to you after you grow up, assuming that you do, and see you face having this incompetent idiot spew out here preposterous “ruling” form the bench year after year.
You need to poke your nose out of Starbucks, you are getting tunnel vision.
The majority were behind the war behind Iraq, as were the Democrat leadershipand history, BTW, will show that it was the right decision. Did the fact that the Democrats held the Senate when the war commenced somehow escape you? You should really learn to think for yourself and stop regurgitating this Marxist nonsense. It just makes you looks childish. If there was wavering , it was due to the deceitful and treasonous agitprop effort of the Democrat Party. History will treat them savagely when all is said an done.
Gasoline price controls? what world do you live in? Do you think firms will create gas at a loss? In addition to learning to think for yourself, you might try to learn some basic economics. You might also learn how the Oil industry actually works. Too funny. You think that government is your “daddy” and it can just somehow “make things right” by government fiat? Don;t you remember the Carter Shortages? Oh, that right your real Daddy was in knee pants then.
BTW, and I am old enough to remember when there were price controls in this country, and not just on gasoline. It was pretty grim. You know wage controls come with price controls. Not much opportunity there.
You should look at GDP graphed against little socialist adventures like price controls over time.
It is more or less flat over the periods of price control.
Why would anyone want to go back to that? Nobody that had any experience with it, that is for sure. What does that say about you? Do you really want the government to regulate how much money you can make? You know you will have to get off your rump sooner or later and start building a life. The government cannot build a life for you, they can only cheapen it. Why hinder your own advancement before you even start?
I know many posters on here are just paid shills for the Democrats but I don’t understand where any of these liberals think the majority of this country wants a single payer system (what a public option will evolve into)? There isn’t one meaningful poll that says this (ie, HuffPo blog polls don’t actually count), in fact, it isn’t really even close.
Let’s face it this administration is full of economic incompetents are completely intellectually disingenuous about everything they support. They missed initial deficit estimates by almost 30% (and there is still room to move up)!! Why would anyone believe that this round of entitlements would be anywhere even remotely close to the $1 trillion they have released. But, I wouldn’t expect any liberal to have a full grasp of economics and budgeting, no need to when you leach and loot off of the productive your whole life.
We “thing” it has lost it’s mojo.
Obama is going to keep trying. It’s not nearly over.
There are many tricks the administation and its nominal majority can pull off to save the crazy train’s momentum in the fall.
In practical terms, What can we do to derail it? Probably several things, one of which is personal participation in an actionable item described in detail at Hugh Hewitt at townhall.com
For 10 bucks you can support Harry Reid’s capable opponent for the next Senatorial election in Nevada and put some healthy fear of God in Harry Reid’s head? For 10 bucks? What a deal! Do take a look.
There are probably other good things that can be done. If you know, please share.
It would appear that the marxist revolution has hit a speed bump.
Steve DeMarcus is right.
This country doesn’t need ANY new spending programs..especially entitlement programs.We simply can-not afford them.
The infinite horizon discounted value of unfunded liabilities for social security and medicare comes to a staggering total of $99.2 TRILLION.
In a nutshell, this is the money we would need TODAY, to cover all of the unfunded liabilities within Social Security and Medicare over the infinite horizon.
In simpler words… Our government has already promised to pay out 99.2 trillion dollars that we have no mechanism to generate to keep SS and Medicare funded in-perpetuity.(this doesn’t include the funded portions of those programs)
Basically, $99.2 trillion dollars worth of checks that they have already promised to bounce.
Seems the only people that are unaware, or unwilling to admit that we are out of money, are the very people who design our budget and spend our tax dollars.
I’ve long past hoping for responsible actions by our politicians, at this point, I would be ecstatic to witness something that even resembles sanity.
Sure, everyone is mourning the death of a long-time dedicate public servant, but if dems use his death and his name to ram home yet another irresponsible entitlement program, I’ll be very dissappointed, and we’ll all be Royally screwed.
Why do those of us who think politicized health care is a bad idea keep calling the left’s proposals “reform”? We don’t have to use the misleading words they want us to use. And it makes us sound silly when we oppose healthcare “reform.” I’m for “reform.” Who isn’t? What I’m against is the Democtrats’ proposal to further politicize health care. Things that get politicized are instruments of corruption, waste, abuse in the form of self-serving pandering for votes, and ultimate insolvency. Call it socialized medicine, politicized health care, health care nationalization, health care entitlement, or anything else that sounds right to you. But let’s stop falling into their trap by repeating the false advertisment that they build into the names they make up for the garbage they peddle.
You can kiss mom and pop goodbye if Obama-care gets passed. Palin told the truth. If Ezekiel Emmanuel’s recommendations are followed, the ultra-leftist brother of Rahmbo Emmanuel, the the Wiz’s chief healthcare confidant, your parents are toast. This is all about allocating resources (translation-rationing) and age will be the most important discriminator. For example; a 75 y/o retired senior, who spent his entire life working, paying taxes and raising a family will be considered less deserving of our precious healthcare dollars than say a 32 y/o druggy,chronic hepatitis C dirtbag whose lived off the teat his entire life. Simply because the 32 y/o scumbag has more potential productive years ahead.. The fact that the leech has yet to contribute anything to society excepting occasional vomitus after unplanned ODs, while the senior has spent his entire life contributing does not matter. The government will, essentially, have the final say as to when you’ve lived long enough. I suggest that you people take this seriously and get off of your asses, else, blow a goodbye kiss to mom and pop.
The Key point is that Obamacare WILL NOT solve the problem of people not getting health care. That is because the problem is one of supply and demand. You have more people needing health care then there is health care to provide to them. It matters not which option is used.
So what everyone is arguing about is the selection mechanism for those that get left out. Right now, it is the free market. Those without the money to buy insurance or pay directly don’t get health care. Obamacare wants to shift that selection process to the government. Call it “death panels” or what ever you want (triage is what the doctors call it) if the market place is no longer allowed to select who dies and who lives, some other mechanism will have to make that decision.
Unless, of course, America wakes up rational tomorrow and instead of quibbling of nonsense, decides to figure out a way to increase the supply of health care.
When there is a better match between supply and demand in health care, the problem will disappear. Magic? I think not.
They neat part about increasing supply is instead of adding to the deficit, it will increase the tax base.
16. Mongoose:
There are so many scatterbrained assertions in your wingnuttian screed, let’s just focus on the one you’re most certain about:
“Gays in the military. Too funny. The vast majority of people detest this . . . ”
Here you go:
Acceptance of Gay People in Military Grows Dramatically
Poll Data: Washington Post-ABC News Poll
15 Years of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
Public attitudes about gays in the military have shifted dramatically since President Bill Clinton unveiled what became his administration’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy 15 years ago today.Seventy-five percent of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll said gay people who are open about their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve in the U.S. military, up from 62 percent in early 2001 and 44 percent in 1993.
Now, you said that I “have not a clue what real and decent Americans think.” Either you were wrong about that, or you think 75% of Americans are not real and decent. Which is it?
How short and SELECTIVE your memory is Now and Then. I believe when the Gulf War started support for it was up in the high 70′s . So you cant just choose a time when people became disallusioned then claim that THAT is how it always was. Oh wait you are self deluding ‘libtard’ who voted for a man about whom you know absolutely NOTHING so YES YOU CAN.
Make that ‘disillusioned’ sorry just got up. But the rest of my comment was no mistake.