Skip to comments.Steve Forbes Wants A Replacement Of The HCR Bill With One That Would Be Like The Food Stamp Program?
Posted on 01/04/2011 8:22:45 AM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
I was watching Forbes on Fox yesterday, and I could have sworn that I heard Steve Forbes say that a potential repeal and replace of Obama Care could be accomplished by Republicans pushing for a repeal and a replacement with a Health Care bill that would be similar to the food stamp program - and it would be set up on a sliding scale basis.
This got me to thinking...
How could Dems possibly be against this?
First of all, it could be set up as being voluntary - no individual mandate. No one is required to sign up for food stamps, and no one would be required to sign up for this, either. Those that want to keep their private coverage could. Obama himself said when campaigning against Hillary Clinton for the Democrat nomination that you couldn't mandate health care coverage anymore than you could mandate home ownership.
Secondly, costs could be kept down with allowing competition across state lines, tort reform, and requiring that when people moved up the economic ladder that they pay back what they used under this system.
This proposal would box Obama in as this would force him to say that he would be against a HCR system that is similar to the food stamp program, would force him to continue to support the individual mandate when it would no longer be necessary, and force him to have to let go of the gov't having total control that it will have under Obama Care.
What say you?
I swear I am just going to liquidify, quit working and get on the dole.
I would rather have what Forbes suggested that have Obama Care. I can tell you that...
Obama isn’t about healthcare....he’s about control...so of course he will be against anything except control.
“I swear I am just going to liquidify, quit working and get on the dole.”
I’m with you ... the Republicans will care for us.
Still digesting the idea. Not sure I even want to see the Fed government get that involved. The old camel nose into the tent metaphor. That said, the government already IS involved too much, and we probably aren’t going change that.
I wish Forbes would run for President. His economic leadership would be very attractive to the folks that overwhelmingly voted GOP last November.
Stevie Forbes just ANOTHER RINO New York Trust Fund “know-it-all” POS.
When Steve Forbes can introduce legislation get back to me.
Well, for one thing, the Food Stamps program doesn’t require you to pay back what you used once you move up the economic ladder.
What other errors of fact are there?
Besides, as far as I can tell, the Libs want people dependent on them, not making free choices. That kills the idea right there.
I’m confused. Is this supposed to be a replacement for MediCaid?
I say F*** NO! Repeal the bill and leave medicine alone.
I don’t like the food stamp system either. Easily scammed. Wasteful.
So we’ve gone from “Compassionate Conservatism” to “Simple Socialism”?
Having said that, it’s probably as good as it’s going to get. The food stamp system does work pretty well at doing what it does: committing violence against the Constitution by picking pockets to give to those less fortunate.
Steve should address the question: Where in the Constitution does it authorize the Federal government to do what he is proposing? (Or is he proposing this be a state initiative, which I’d have much less trouble with?)
The pragmatist in me sighs, it's the best we can expect.
Food stamps are less easily scammed than you might imagine. i’d go into that in some depth but having worked with those folks over the years off and on to improve the security of the program I probably shouldn’t. Odds are good I’d give away something.
Forbes can suggest legislatuion, though.
Folks... this would probably be a lot better than the Medicare system in place today.
Because it would introduce price competition back into the equation. Consumers could shop around for medical services based on price and quality of service.
Prices would be set by the market instead of insurance company middlemen.
Choice + Competition = a Market that works.
A disaster to replace an existing disaster seams like a plan
Maybe you should change your name to lazy welfare capitalist?
And Forbes’ suggestion would box Obama in and expose him on that.
1.competition across state lines/good idea
2.tort reform/never happen even if you had a gun to
every hacks head
3.requiring that when people moved up the economic ladder that they pay back what they used under this system/sounds like the college loan pay back program that didn’t work out
I don’t want the fed to get that involved, either. But I would take this over Obama Care if no other option was available.
Agreed. He is a RINO.
I see it all the time. Someone sells food stamps for half the value by buying food for someone else, getting cash and going home with someone elses’ prescription Xanax.
It used to be for the very poor and they advertise that family of four making $30,000 or something can be eligible. lol.
It's a different discriminatory pricing scheme.
Many of the complaints about Obamacare so far have focused on the mandatory purchasing of insurance. But, I say, if the price of that mandatory insurance is reduced to next to nothing for some, isn't this really discriminatory pricing? Isn't that the main idea here? Doesn't Steve's idea do much the same thing?
Of course, there's a whole host of other screwed up rules in this 2800 page monstrosity, but let's pick that up another day.
It doesn’t sound too laissez-faire to me.
“the theory or system of government that upholds the autonomous character of the economic order, believing that government should intervene as little as possible in the direction of economic affairs.”
There is no error, other than that other people than Forbes have even suggested that those using HC pay back at least a part of what they owe when they rise up the economic ladder. They haven’t suggested the same thing for use of the food stamp program. You conflated the two.
But how could libs be against this HC program suggested by Forbes as it would be just like the food stamp program, given that no one is forced to sign up for food stamps and given that Dems have never suggested that people be forced to sign up for food stamps - even if they are eligible for them?
Might want to talk to the cops about that, or move out of that house.
Food stamp program fraud is a tad more difficult.
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.
I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents...Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.
Agreed it isn’t Laissez Faire at all. As if I need a lecture on this economic system. But the pragmatic side of me says that this is better than Obama Care.
I guees you would rather have Obama Care if you had no other choice but taking it or taking what Forbes suggetsted. Sad.
Anyway, I would consider Forbes’ suggestion to be a last ditch proposal if all else fails.
CVS pharmacies have “Minute Clinics”, and there is a “Little Clinic” at a Kroger grocery store near where I live. Not too expensive and the wait’s usually pretty short.
That about sums it up.
Yes, and some states even allow people to get cash in change when they use food stamp cards. This is just wrong. And now, with all the free meals available in the schools, year-round, plus they send free food home with many of the students, there must be some duplication of our tax dollars supposedly feeding some of the families multiple times.
What, you get x number of health care bucks per month and can buy whatever drugs you want with them?
Ad Homs are quintessentially liberal. You aren't a liberal are you?
Anyway, if it all comes down to taking what Forbes suggested ot taking Obama Care (if we end up with no other options, SCOTUS upholds the individual mandate and so on), what else would you propose?
I say fight on til then, but if we are left with no other choice than what Forbes suggested, then I would rather have that than Obama Care any day of the week.
I guees you would rather have Obama Care if you had no other choice but taking it or taking what Forbes suggetsted. Sad.
Anyway, I would consider Forbes suggestion to be a last ditch proposal if all else fails
I'd rather have good men and women that abide by the constitution than have either Obammie care or Forbe's idea of an alternative to it.
Big government is a cancer whether it's sponsored by someone with a "D" before his party affiliation, or an "R" (don't get me started on the "L" Party).
this is what you posted. It appears to be attributed to Forbes. If he didn't say it, you should have made that plain.
“But how could libs be against this HC program suggested by Forbes as it would be just like the food stamp program, given that no one is forced to sign up for food stamps and given that Dems have never suggested that people be forced to sign up for food stamps - even if they are eligible for them?’
Dems not only suggested that people be required to sign up for health care, they passed a law to REQUIRE it. CONTROL! They are going for control, not free choice. That is how they can object. Many of the people who don't have health care insurance don't have it because they chose to NOT have health care insurance. The Libs don't like that. Not any more, anyway. They are less and less about free choice, and more and more about “We'll take care of you. Even if you don't want us to.” They also plan on making all us "rich" people pay for those who can't.
The states already have this and the Feds are involved by reimbusing the states a percentage of the costs. It is called Medicaid.
The direction of this administration seems to be toward having as many people as possible renting rather than owning homes and collecting government assistance rather than working. I suppose its a vision of the new world order, but how can it work ...who would pay for everyone to just hang around until the checks and stamps come in the mail?
Back when it was the coupons it was pretty easy - people were always selling them for half-face-value in the bars I worked at. One time when someone stole a huge quantity from the main office, they were selling for ten cents on the dollar. And you CAN SO buy cigarettes with them; I've seen it. People confuse 'legal' with 'possible' all the time.
What say I? I say NO. Our government has no business being involved in anything outside its assigns in the Constitution.
Anything remotely along the lines of a remake is simply perpetuating the wrong direction the Left has driven this lumbering truck to date.
Everything we find of distress with our government today is directly related to past Leftist meddling with our Constitutional system. It has to stop.
NOTHING HALFWAY. IT HAS TO BE STOPPED COMPLETELY, and that which the Left has accomplished has to be reversed.
I remember a story a couple of months ago about the cops being called on a guy dumping something behind a building.
turned out he bought cases of bottled water with FOOD STAMPS and was pouring them down the drain. Why? So he could get the 5 cents per bottle refund and buy cigarettes.
Perfectly legal. The cops had to let him keep pouring.
The same suggestion has been made as a alternative if "mandates" are found unconstitutional - purchase of health care via the exchanges (which are a market mechanism, and would likely be attractive to many economic conservatives if they had not been part of a Democratic proposal) would instead be made voluntary.
The problem is that to make any such system work, you need to deny care to those who voluntarily chose not to insure, otherwise the rest of us just and up paying (one way or another)for their care he they turn up at ER or public or charity clinics.
Since we are not going deny such care (at least to a much greater extent than we already "ration" care by income and insurance status), all such schemes encourage freeloading.
For this perspective if does not make much difference if you offer people "heath care stamps" eligible for the purchase of individual health insurance or offer people the opportunity to purchase subsidized insurance via exchanges (except that their pooled purchasing power will likely be greater via an exchange), as long as such purchase is voluntary before need, and care is available to non-purchasers, there will be a strong incentive to avail yourself of free care "at need" rather than "pre-pay" via the purchase of insurance.
This side of the equation does not get much attention: lots of people are thinking "OMG, I will be forced to buy insurance", while ignoring the fact that those of us paying taxes are already "insuring' those who will not insure themselves.
Yup ~ the poor are probably stealing us blind ~ which is why they are still poor.
let's see, if somebody on food stamps used his card three times a day to buy a $3.45 sandwich (no kitchen, no refrigerator, semi-homeless ~ this is normal), and each time got $0.55 change back, that'd be $1.65 per day, or about $24 billion per year if you had 40,000,000 people on food stamps.
With food stamps running $68.88 per week, that's a total budget of $143 billion per year.
Nope, doesn't seem to me making change is running it in the ditch ~ and at max that'd be about 17% of total program costs.
I suspect a very high percentage of food stamps value goes for food which is eaten by the intended targets.
And hey, almost everybody on food stamps now uses a food stamp card, not actual food stamps, so they get to keep that change and spend it on something else ~ like vitamins even.
A secret to life ~ if you find yourself fixated on foodstamps and see them as probably the single greatest source of fraud and theft in this country, you probably should check in with a minister or rabbi, or priest, and have them take you to see some poor people on food stamps so you can talk to them. Even rabbis know some poor people ~ and you will find they know all the other people who work with the poor as well.
Health insurance for the poor is already here and won't go away. It would be smart to move it towards the Food Stamp model which provides food for tens of millions of people without burdensome record-keeping for the retailers and no bureaucracies to set up and monitor special reimbursement procedures.
It allows the food industry to operate normally while still feeding the poor.
Liberals would hate it, though. They understand full well that the poor are, by and large, irresponsible and won't watch their health without being tailed by government agencies and given free taxi rides to the doctor.
Threatening them with $250,000 fines ain't gonna' work either.
What your asking for is some spontaneous organizing on the part of the target population ~ and I doubt you'll care for the results. Now it's not going to hurt me ~ I'm ready with the armbands to sell them, and all that. $2.00 a head should make me quite wealthy.
I heard an interview with him on Bloomberg radio a couple of weeks ago, discussing various financial matters. His commentary on the challenges facing the municipal bond market was very astute, and he demonstrated a very good understanding of current political/economic issues.
He even offered some interesting personal financial advice for the listeners. The host asked him something to the effect of: "You are very wealthy and successful, so your personal circumstances may not translate well to everyone who is listening -- but do you have any personal financial advice that you would give, that can be useful to people in all different income/wealth levels?"
Forbes' answer: "The one thing I've done that would make sound financial sense for just about anyone is that I've lived in the same home for the last 35 years."
nope. It’s based on monthly income; if you make $2150 or less you’re eligible. When I was recovering from the hip replacement, I investigated. I was making $7/month too much, with a family of 5.
BTW, YMMV depending on which state you are in, I’m in Oklahoma.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.