Most Americans have heard enough about health care reform that anything the President says tonight will not change their minds, but more importantly will not change some hard facts.
The President indicated that a public option will create competition amongst health insurance companies, which in turn will lower costs. At least the President understands that competition does lower costs. But the government does not interject competition by offering “free” consumer health services. Simple economics dictates that lower costs are created by companies competing for consumers by setting lower prices.
In a public option scenario, the government will make the rules, set the price, and expect private insurance companies to compete with them. Private companies will necessarily fail. If the President really wants to encourage competition, he should ask Congress for a bill that permits private insurance companies to compete interstate. This will not only open up choices to the consumer, but will also lower costs.
Another easy way to lower costs is to cap monetary awards in medical malpractice lawsuits. One of the chief complaints of doctors in America is the cost of medical malpractice insurance, which ranges from about $80,000 to $250,000 per year. Lowering costs for doctors - lowers costs for the consumer.The President also indicated that any legislation he signs will not add money to the deficit. If the government is not planning to print money to pay for the public option, then it will pay by stripping funds from Medicare, Medicaid and by taxing the American people. If the public option moves forward, the tax payers will be collectively paying for other people’s health care. This is precisely why so many Americans are against the public option, because it turns our marked-based health care system into a socialist one.
The people who are protesting the current health care reform proposals are coming out in droves, like no other time in recent history, because they do not want the government in their lives, particularly with respect to their health care. But even with the obvious uprising against the public option, the President and Congressional Democrats will still try to get the darn thing passed.
This is where the President and Congressional Democrats will lose. During the mid-term elections next year, the American people will not forget being insulted, ignored and ostracized by the mostly government controlled media, many Congressional Democrats and even the White House. Be rest assured however, the same people that attended the many town hall meetings and “tea parties” across the nation will be the same people that go to the polls. It is at the ballot box, that our voices will finally and handily be heard.
I have just one question. Does Speaker Pelosi get to keep the jet if she’s not Speaker anymore?
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Behold a Pale Horse , September 09, 2009
On FOX News the other night, Dick Morris said that the Republicans taking the House in 2010 is very likely. However, the Senate would be more difficult since the Republicans already gained seats in 2004 and have fewer targets.
There is the history of the party that controls the presidency losing seats in Congress during mid-term elections. Republicans gained seats in 1966, 1978, and 1994 when the Democrats controlled the presidency. The Democrats said seats in 1970, 1974, 1982, 1986, 1990, and 2006. The two mid-term exceptions have been recent in 1998 and 2002.
The gains can be huge as they were in 1966, 1974, 1982 (in the House), 1986, 1994, and 2006 or small such as in 1978 and 1990.
How many seats with the Republicans gain? To quote an old Asia song, "Only time will tell."
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
