OK, People ... It’s TIME TO PAY ATTENTION. Time to act like thoughtful adults. Time to stop flinging half-truths and undocumented facts, emotional garbage and hate-filled rhetoric at people who hold differing opinions than yours. Time to stop abdicating our responsibility as American citizens by allowing talking heads and partisan pundits to make up our minds for us. Time to realize that no side has a monopoly on the truth – and that “truth” is always colored by personal experience and self-interest.
This is the first post of what I hope will be a thoughtful and thought-provoking blog on how national and state issues trickle down to the local level and effect real people in Montgomery and Bucks Counties. I plan to focus on the facts that inform my ideas, but I will never present something as fact when it is just my opinion. I want to say upfront that I am a proud liberal as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary: “Not limited to or by established, traditional, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas...Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress...broad-minded.”
So now I'll dive right in with the hot topic of the week: health care reform. I’m for it. And I was pleased and surprised when the Supreme Court of the United States, a.k.a. SCOTUS (aside: just when did the media decide we needed an acronym for everything?) refused to overturn the Affordable Care Act. But do I think this is the best of all possible bills? Hardly. It’s a complex, convoluted, compromised whale of a bill that tried to satisfy everyone–insurance companies, drug companies, doctors, employers, patients with insurance, patients without insurance, and, of course, competing political interests. It's a recipe for disagreement and confrontation, if there ever was one. It’s also laughable to label the program "Obamacare" since its signature and most divisive feature –the individual mandate–was originally proposed all the way back in 1989 by the very conservative Heritage Foundation. In 1993, Republicans twice introduced health care bills that contained an individual health insurance mandate. Advocates for those bills included prominent Republicans like Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Bob Bennett (R-UT) who later decided to oppose the concept once it was embraced by a Democratic President. Candidate Barack Obama actually spoke out against the individual mandate, but later sought it as a compromise that might make health care reform more palatable to Republican members of the House. Ah, the folly of youth.
But in all the media bluster and caterwauling over the Court’s pronouncement, some fundamental points–dare I say “truths”–are being swept aside: by the time the legislation is fully implemented in 2014, 30 million more Americans will have affordable access to basic health care; all insured Americans will have access to a wider range of preventive services; vulnerable, low-income seniors won’t have to choose between buying groceries and filling their prescriptions; people with pre-existing conditions will not be denied coverage and hospitals and physicians will be incented to follow best practices and keep people well, rather than only getting paid for treating them once they are already sick.
Is the bill expensive? Yep. It sure is. But so is our current system that relives on cost shifting (i.e. a hidden tax) in the form of higher insurance premiums for everyone (including businesses that provide coverage) to cover the cost of the uninsured. In Montgomery County alone, more than 32,000 uninsured people (7.4% of county residents) are now using ERs as primary health clinics, or only seeking treatment when they are critically–and expensively–ill.
Is this bill socialized medicine? Only if you believe that allowing private insurance companies to sell policies to the majority of Americans under age 65 (with no alternative, i.e. government, option) and retain up to 20% of the premium money collected, is socialism. Seriously, if that’s socialism ...than the NY Stock Exchange is being run by Bolsheviks.
Today’s sobering fact: 50% of all restaurants in Montgomery County are fast food restaurants, compared to 25% statewide.*
Source: countyhealthrankings.org
Health insurance premiums are calculated by insurance actuaries. In order to become an actuary, you must pass a long series of mind bending exams. When everyone is insured, the cost of insurance is less. Why?? Because the risk pool is expanded, more healthy people are brought in (like your children up to age 26 years). Everything else is ideological fluff. You believe that people with pre-existing conditions should be excluded? You believe that quality medical care is the privilege of the wealthy. You believe that Mitt Romney, Rush Limbaugh, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner care about you and your health needs? Ignorance is troubling. Showing your ass with ignorance should be troubling to those who feel the best health coverage is that coverage available to the wealthy. Who pays for healh care for the indigent now? You do. Please educate yourself with the fundamental issues before posting. It reflects poorly upon you. Who says that's true? How about 3 out of 4 Americans and the majority of the Supreme Court including the Chief Justice.
BY the way, insulting people is not the way to win them over to your argument. Let's face it, no one here is going to change their mind and you might as move on over to Huffington Post with the like-minded people.
Claiming that anything goes because of the words "general welfare" is fallacious. If that were true, then most of the rest of the Constitution, including the part that says not to infringe on life, liberty or property without due process would be null and void. We have a mechanism for amending the constitution to make major changes like socialized medicine the law of the land; this was not done.
It's a darn shame those complaining about it don't realize they've pulled your chain; you've been duped, they've validated your insecurities with the politics of resentment. This isn't about 'liberty' or 'freedom' - this about insurance company profits and the insurance industry's 'freedom' and 'liberty' - not yours. This is as big as the Civil Rights Act. This is a new day for an old problem. How sad they can't see it for the enormous step forward that it is. It's easier to complain I suppose.
Infant Mortality: Ranking #49 Source: CIA World Factbook Couple data like that with the fact that 45-50 million citizens were uninsured -& this in a country that claims to be the leader of the civilized world. In the face of such data, there's not a CEO in the country who would not be sacked if he did not make swift, massive, fundamental changes. Only one president, ever, has had the courage to successfully take on the entrenched powers that reao huge profits from a fundamentally flawed but profitable [to them] system, whose cut of the American economy amounts to almost $1 of every $5, & whose political power and influence is intimidating.
What's my alternative? A constitutional amendment instituting single payer, tied to the abolition of the unfair progressive income tax and institution of a flat tax with a large standard deduction. Details on the cost of the system already done... the numbers would need to be run to determine what the tax rate must be. Like it?
And the oddest impact of all, it is forcing top Democrats to contort their logic and call it a penalty for free riders (what a term) instead of a tax. Even though Justice Roberts called it a tax. All because, suddenly, 75% of the taxes collected will fall on those making under $125,000 per year - which breaks Obama's promises in a big way. What our essayist does not mention is the onerous burden that falls directly on the laps of small businesses. They must keep their employee count under 10 to avoid triggering IRS review. This is what happens when you pass a bill this big using tricks, lies and deceit with no support from the other party. It means elections have consequences. So if you favor repeal and replace, then vote for the party that will do that.
http://healthcare4allpa.org/
-Golden Cockroach
-Golden Cockroach
"Depending on your rounding, that would mean the tax increases resulting from the health care law would be about the size of tax increases proposed and passed in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter, in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush and in 1993 by President Bill Clinton. "The health care-related tax increases are smaller than the tax increase signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in 1982 and a temporary tax signed into law in 1968 by President Lyndon B. Johnson. And they are significantly smaller than two tax increases passed during World War II and a tax increase passed in 1961. "The tax increases in the health care legislation do reverse a trend of federal tax cuts and represent the first significant tax increases since 1993. But they are NOT the largest in the history of the United States. Rush's comments were rated "Pants on Fire."
Yes, the insurance part of health costs MAY go down; but I'll believe it when I see it. I did not go to actuarial school to "learn their trade", but the way I figure it the younger, more healthy Americans who will tend to bring the risk of health costs down will probably be offset by those poorer entrants with bad life habits, poor nutrition, living in higher crime neighborhoods, etc., etc. Yes, we already pay the costs of their treatments when they go to the ER or hospital. And I suspect will pay collectively higher premiums in recognition of their higher risks. Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see. But you can be sure that insurance companies will be using every manipulation possible to offset the added risk, even if it means they have to pay back excess premiums (although I'll probably pass out if I ever see a premium rebate from an insurer). On to of that we will now add another layer of bureaucracy to oversee the insurance industry, to help set-up and oversee the development and oversight of state-run exchanges, to manage the expansion of Medicare, etc. etc. And on top of all that is the realization that little - if anything - the Government ever touches ends up costing us less.
Just like people who smoke and pay a $1.00 or more in taxes per pack. You don't care. You don't smoke. You're not paying that tax. Do you pay tolls when you drive? You're paying a tax to use those roads to support those roads. A toll is a tax. I don't care if you pay that toll - you're using it, you pay it. Most people I know pay additional uninsured motorist insurance - they don't care. They're actually paying insurance for someone who doesn't have insurance! So, if you have insurance - why care? You're not paying anything. UNLIKE NOW - where $1000 a year of your insurance premiums go to pay for those who choose or cannot buy insurance because the 2 insurers in their area won't sell it to them. Now those who are refused insurance have a choice. They can buy insurance. Still leaves those who choose not to buy insurance. Now, all you who do have insurance will no longer have to support them. The uninsured will pay an additional tax to cover their healthcare, and you are off the hook. Does this mean insurers will rebate you? Probably not, they enjoy their $26M a year salaries as CEOs. However, the exchanges will provide competition for those shopping the best $ for their healthcare - combine the two and cost pressure should lower premiums. Works for me.
EVERYONE PLEASE CLICK ON THE LINK SHOULD COME UP