Skip to comments.Fred Thompson: Romneycare At A Glance
Posted on 01/06/2008 2:30:43 PM PST by Fred
click here to read article
What’s it gonna’ be tonight “McLame vs Pretty Boy Mitt” or
“I’m Lying as Fast as I can Huckleberry” vs “Back N Mass Mitt” or “Did I mention 911 Rooty” vs Fred Thompson?
U.S. Army Retired
Did the courts mandate the $50 co-pay or did Mitt just fail to veto it?
Did the courts mandate the Planned Parethood representative being on the board or did Mitt just fail to veto it?
What would have happened would have been best for all concerned especially the taxpayers and those in actual need. It would have defaulted back to Medicaid like before and would have been once again overseen by the State Inspector Generals Office where at least there was representation and accountability.
It wasn't broke to start with and didn't need fixing until Medicaid in Tennessee was purposely destroyed by Dem and RINO alike.
BTW didn't some of Ned's former cabinet end up running a few of those Hey Moes? It was federal dollars involved so yes Fred was also to blame and I don't call that a stretch. I was one of many who wrote Dear Fred and Dear Sen Frist letters asking that they step in and stop the funding and the madness. It's a sad commentary on the state of the Tennessee GOP when it took a DEM Liberal Governor to finally take a needed stand.
Regardless of what Haislmaier says, forcing folks to buy health insurance, or pay a substantial fine is not deregulation.
He could have vetoed it.
>>>>Sen. Hillary Clinton on RomneyCARE: “To come up with a bipartisan plan in this polarized environment is commendable.”
RomneyCARE is Healthy People 2010. That is HillaryCARE. This was Hillary’s little health scheme. Bill Clinton approved the funding before he left office.
This initiative was stimulated by President Clinton’s commitment to eliminate disparities in health for racial and ethnic minority populations by 2010.
DHHS OFFICE OF HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTION
AND THE HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010 INITIATIVE
Dr. Randy Wykoff, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, DHHS, presented an overview of Healthy People 2010, including the Leading Health Indicators, and possible ways to maximize this initiative. Healthy People 2010 is coordinated by the DHHS Office for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
Dr. Wykoff noted that Healthy People 2010 is a comprehensive set of national 10-year objectives that are developed through a collaborative process involving both the public and private sectors. All the objectives are specific and measurable over time based on data. The document, published and distributed by the Federal Government, also is a statistical description of the health status of Americans, including racial and ethnic disparities; a textbook on current public health priorities; and an important part of the national strategic plan for improving health. Healthy People 2010 is the third iteration of an effort that began in 1979 with publication of the Surgeon General’s Report on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. Ever larger and more complex, this iteration has two overarching goals, 28 focus areas, 467 objectives, and 10 leading health indicators.
The Council considered 327 applications requesting $70,492,343 in total costs. The Council recommended
238 applications for a total cost of $31,211,337 (see Attachment II).
How does a governor veto a court order? I thought only legislative bills can be vetoed.
The state mandated state funded abortion for those that could not afford it. It wasn’t attached to any bill he could veto.
The money mandated by the court order is appropriated, right? A budget passes with the money in it, right?
That is also perfect and 100% “preemptive health care” ( Ron Paul style )
You’re a liar, plain and simple. You should be ashamed of yourself.
The corruption and mismanagement of TennCare were Tennessee state government issues. Securing the funding obligation from the Federal Government as long as it was in existence was the obligation of the federal representatives in the House and Senate.
Had Fred refused to do the job he was elected for by the people of Tennessee and did not secure the federal funding, he would have been thrown out of office for being grossly incompetent and negligent. And TennCare would have gone broke years earlier and everyone, including the children would have been unfunded.
Not only that, but doing what you seem to think Fred should have done would have gone against his principles of federalism. Interjecting himself as a referee into internal state policy would have been stepping outside of his role as a representative for Tennessee in Washington. It’s was not his place to unilaterally decide not to get funding from Washington for state programs. That would be a gross dereliction of duty. You look like a fool for even suggesting it.
In fact, the sickest thing is that Romney's only interest in borders is to have
stolen ideas and effort from others.
Candidate Romney, takes time from attacking the GOP candidates,
and from paying and distributing false rumors against Fred Thompson and others,
to take deceitfully assume credit for Duncan Hunter's fence -- without attribution
on this Photo taken from Romney's 2008 Presidential campaign flier.
Myth: "I just received the endorsement of the NRA, Duncan Hunter's Fence,
Massachusetts Citizens for Life, everyone at FreeRepublic, and the Mauck family."
Next they’ll be saying the Heritage Foundation is a subversive organization! :^)
It had to have been part of some bill. In this case, it was part of the state health-care bill along with the $50 co-pay for it.
Did the court mandate that a Planned Parenthood rep had to sit on the board as well? Mitt didn't veto that either.
|You are telling me I should be ashamed when you support a candidate who has facilitated the slaughter of innocent human beings throughout his political career? You need to go look in the mirror and see who should be ashamed because it ain't me!!
U.S. Army Retired
Just in case anyone missed this interview! GO FRED!
No wonder Romney did not allow a vote by the citizens.
Romney's already on record as saying that only 7% of MA citizens were uninsured. In yesterday's debate, Romney furthermore said that 1/4th of these (of the 7%) already were earning $75,000 a year. So first of all, some of these "slugs" you reference are wealthy "slugs."
I would say that another 3% of the MA population (who were uninsured) are probably in the $35,000 to $75,000 range & could also have probably afforded at least a scaled-down form of insurance...which would leave just over 2% of the MA population who couldn't actually afford insurance.
So, here we have such draconian mandates for many beyond the 2% all to cover just over 2% of the population.
Fred better get in gear or he is toast.
|Huh. Mitt...is that you?
U.S. Army Retired
He could have, at a minimum, line-item vetoed the requirement for a Planned Parenthood rep to be on the health board. He didn't.
The current policy of government intervention into the health care business has removed that standard old fashioned approach. Bottom line. Government has no business in the health care business. Period.
Standby for the Romneybots to rally to the defense of this Mitt’s version of Hillary Care.
IT WAS FEDERAL DOLLARS what part do you not yet understand? As for the children? The only obligation should have been to children of deceased or disabled workers. If it had went broke then that would have resolved a lot of issues. Here is what you do not understand. It was more or less Universal Health Care. It was a dumping programs so big name insurers would not have to take persons with such things as Hypertension. Now you explain this to me I'm all ears. How come when I became disabled and lost my employer's coverage I was turned down for coverage? Under Medicaid I would have been covered. I got on it not because of my disability but because of Hypertension. You're from Cali and know very little about Tennscares history and the corruption it brought. You don't know about the doctors in this state being blackmailed by a Big Name insurer to either sign on or loose their business in the private sector.
Now then if it was simply a matter of a state issue then why pray tell did he have to go to Washington DC for funding and waivers?
My point is that ultimately the blame rested with the Governor. If Fred had been and done squat, then you’d have reason to saddle him with it. It is state officials that deal with state policy, not federal (even if there was ultimately some overlap here). He wasn’t about to start a civil war with Scumquist.
Out here in CA, we have lots (thousands, millions?) of uninsured individuals who use Public Hospitals to take care of them because they have no other place to go. The Public Hospitals must treat them. And the taxpayers pay the bill.
So one way or another, those of us who have private insurance pay for those who don’t.
|See #71. You would have to be a sick puppy to support someone who has furthered the Culture of Death throughout his political career. There's a bottom line for you.
U.S. Army Retired
Thank you, you explained that far better.
First of all “nothing” is much much preferable to imposing socialized medicine.
Second of all, everyone I know has coverage and if they are really too poor and don’t have it through work, they are covered by medicade. (Another bloated beuacracy, we don’t need to supplament with another). Mitt and Hillary want to penalize us all based on this made up 47 million uninsured figure.
And third, Fred and many other conservatives advocate market based solutions that will address the underlying problems of overpriced health care. It is the govt. mandated third party payer system that has caused prices to sky rocket. Just look at those procedures that aren’t covered by insurance, the prices for things like laser eye surgery and lypo has actually went down over the last decade.
OK, there's two components here: (1) the $50 abortion subsidy; (2) A Planned Parenthood League rep included as a permanent member of the "payment policy advisory board." On this post, I'll just address documentation for the second point:
April 12, 2006--Mitt signs his "Commonwealth Care" into existence, thereby expanding abortion access for poor women. As governor, Romney could exercise veto power to portions of Commonwealth Care. Did Romney exercise this power? (Yes, he vetoed Sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 & 137). What prominent section dealing with Planned Parenthood as part of the "payment policy advisory board" did Romney choose NOT to veto? (Section 3) That section mandates that one member of MassHealth Payment Policy Board must be appointed by Planned Parenthood League of MA. (See chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, section 3 for details).
Unfortunately it may be too late by the time the hospital treats you. I didn’t get timely care and ended up in hospital two months with an expensive chronic condition that will never go away. Oh, and I have a minimum wage job; how much was I supposed to have in a savinghs account?
Mitt sponsored slavery?
And now he’s prepared to take the Romney disaster nationwide.
Getting the government OUT of healthcare would be the single best thing you could do to provide affordable healthcare to all.
Given the government’s track record, having the government do absolutely nothing else regarding healthcare is probably the most for which we can hope.
There is one field of medicine that has greatly expanded access, increased treatment options, and reduced costs. That is the field of Plastic Surgery and it is no accident that it is almost entirely paid for by the individuals who seek treatment. The government hasn’t had an opportunity to screw it up.
The dam@ stinking program would have never existed without federal money and federal approval from which was obtained on the support of the state U.S. Senators. That is how it worked. Remember? Fred did nothing to address it. He did everything to encourage Taxquist. But I got a feeling if Taxquist was running instead of Fred I'd be hearing major defense of him as well.
|If Ronald Reagan were alive today he would want to b*tchslap all these RINOs and their supporters.
U.S. Army Retired
In all fairness, Mitt's veto was proven useless here.
Should he have vetoed on principle? Perhaps.
It would not have made a difference.
I am against the health care mandate altogether, so the point is moot.
The $50 abortions were thrown in by a judge. Romney had nothing to do with it.
|Today's winner of the Flip Romney Talking Points Parrot Award for Mindless Mumboobery
U.S. Army Retired
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.