Why the Rush on Health Care?

6 Responses to Why the Rush on Health Care?

1. Tony J says:

   July 19, 2009 at 12:29 pm

   Funny, because I could have sworn that Obama recently won a landslide victory in a presidential election while promising to make healthcare reform a priority.

   I’m also pretty certain that the polling shows a very large majority of Americans are in favour of healthcare reform ASAP.

   If pushed, I could also commit to being damned sure that back in 1993/4, another Democratic president who promised to make healthcare reform a priority saw his policy wrecked by just these kinds of delaying tactics.

   And, y’know, now that I think about it, I’m pretty sure that I remember the GOP of the time opposing healthcare reform mainly because, if it passed, Democrats would have a lock on elections for the forseeable future because it would be – so -popular, and they couldn’t let – that- happen.

   But I suppose I’m just misremembering. None of those things could have actually happened.

   Snark turned off.

   Obama wants healthcare reform passed soon because that’s one of the things he was elected to do. He has, in short, a democratic mandate.

   Unless you’re actually calling for every Congresscritter in Washington to have to hold a referendum back in their constituency before voting on anything? That I could get behind, but I really don’t see how it has anything to do with the – actual – reasons behind a whole swathe of Congressmen wanting to delay and, eventually, defeat, a popular policy that would undermine the profits of the insurance and pharmacutical companies who give them so many lovely, shiny things.

   Snark back on.

   Unless you really – are – saying that all these Congressmen want to do is put off voting until they can talk to their constituents and ask for guidance, because they’re genuine democrats who believe the same things you do.

   In that case, wow, I didn’t see that happening. Godspeed the Republic, eh? They’re finally coming around.
2. Sheldon Richman says:

   July 20, 2009 at 7:07 am

   I thought a president, not a dictator, was elected. Congress, in theory, still passes laws and congressmen, again in theory, are supposed to represent their constituents. (This is the fiction, at any rate.) During the election, we didn’t know the details of the plan. Now we do. Gee, candidate Obama said he was against mandated insurance. That was before he favored it.

   Sorry, the mad rush is designed to keep members of Congress from hearing the sounds of falling public support. Read the latest polls.
3. Sheldon Richman says:

   July 20, 2009 at 7:34 am

   Oh, and the bill is over 1,000 pages. No congressman will read it, but at least let them go through the motions.
4. Barney Rebble says:

   July 20, 2009 at 9:35 am

   @Tony J

   Both the RIGHT and the LEFT in Congress have traditionally used obfuscation to hide their pork.

   The EXTREME emergency of TARP 1 (while Bush was in office) was an example of “business as usual”.

   The EXTREME emergency under which they have pushed the STIMULUS package through, and CAP and TRADE, and now HEALTHCARE, are just more of the same.

   What part of this are you not seeing?
5. Tony J says:

   July 20, 2009 at 12:13 pm

   @Barney Rebble

   I’m not seeing the part where Obama saying he wants a vote on healthcare reform sooner rather than later – because sooner is better, and later might well mean never – is an anti-democratic diktat grounded in fear that it’s actually an unpopular policy that Americans oppose. Because it’s not.

   And really, I don’t see any ‘obfuscation’ around healthcare reform on the part of the Administration. They won an election while promising to do it, so are doing it, and want to avoid a repeat of the failure to pass it in the ’90s. So they’re prioritising it.

   The longer America continues with a system that puts all the decision making power over people’s healthcare needs in the hands of profit-seeking insurance companies and pharmecutical giants, the more people will be hurt and impoverished by delay. Changing it quickly, before more people fall through the gaps and loose coverage, seems like an obvious priority for any Administration that thinks the current system is the wrong one.

   YMMV.
6. Barney Rebble says:

   July 20, 2009 at 1:27 pm

   @Tony J

   I disagree with you, and probably most of your politics. I see in the Obama-deception, the desire to “take over”, and also to “tear down” America’s present systems.

   However… here is some ammunition for your group.

   The Rush/OReilley/Hannity/Beck, et al group, like to mindlessly chirp on one theme that probably irritates us both. They constantly state that the poor can get “free hospital help”.

   In my rural Oklahoma town, there is a “nice” hospital (95 beds, 25-mile radius service area). About 3 years ago, the administrator of that hospital was speaking to our service organization at a luncheon. He gave how they view “what they are required to do for indigent patients”.

   I paraphrase, as closely as I can remember:

   “If a patient CANNOT pay, here is the limit of what we are REQUIRED to do:

   IF they can prove that they are about to die, or their condition will take a significant turn for the worse that will cause irreparable harm, and,

   IF they can prove that some other facility will accept them,

   THEN, we are REQUIRED to stablize them, and transport them as quickly as practical.”

   Additional note, ALL transportation to the “big hospital” 60 miles away is nowdays done by helicopter – minimum price $7,000.

   Note 2 – if you “drop in” without insurance, to this hospital, and feel all you need is a “shot of penicillin (toothache)”, the price is a minimum of $500 cash.

   Note 3 – ALL of the small doctor’s clinics will sometimes refuse to take “cash” customers, and will instead sometimes send you to the “hospital emergency room”.

   @Tony J – then you might ask, “Why are you not on my side on this issue?”

   Because I see Obama for what he is. Go google:
   “Cloward-Piven Strategy” “Saul Alinsky”

• Subscribe to our newsletter

• Help Us Grow

  As a reader-funded non-profit, we count on your support. Now you can help a little every month: just commit $3, $10, or whatever is comfortable today! Thanks to you, we will reach new readers, challenge more minds, and give you more of the “best conservative magazine in America.”

  Donate

• State of The Union

  • American Pravda: Barrels of Gunpowder and Sparks

    Ron Unz • May 17, 3:35 PM

  • IRS Scandal: Bureaucratic Failure or Political Corruption?

    Jordan Bloom • May 17, 12:25 PM

  • The Neo-Luddite Hour

    Scott McConnell • May 17, 7:09 AM

• Rod Dreher

  • View From Your Table

    May 19, 12:58 AM

  • If You Win The $600 Million Jackpot Tonight…

    May 18, 7:28 AM

  • A Little Town In West Feliciana

    May 17, 10:50 PM

  Daniel Larison

  • The “Isolationist” Label Obscures and Misleads, and That’s the Point of the Using It (II)

    May 17, 10:17 AM

  • Non-Interventionist Blowback?

    May 17, 8:34 AM

  • The Flawed Comparison Between Syria and Rwanda

    May 17, 7:13 AM

  Alan Jacobs

  • Strikeouts and Stigmas

    May 17, 10:44 AM

  • A Juxtaposition Posted for Your Reflection

    May 16, 10:15 PM

  Noah Millman

  • Liberals for Low Wages

    May 16, 12:11 PM

  • Under The Volcano

    May 14, 7:06 PM

  Ron Unz

  • American Pravda: Barrels of Gunpowder and Sparks

    May 17, 3:35 PM
•