Skip to comments.The Cure That's Worse Than the Disease
Posted on 08/07/2009 6:37:47 AM PDT by Kaslin
Senate negotiators moved a step closer to a comprehensive health care package this week, but the American public seems increasingly wary of what "reform" might mean. The latest polls show that the majority of Americans are satisfied with their own health insurance and are now worried that they might be the big losers once Washington starts meddling. And for all the talk about the uninsured in the current health debate, the most important constituency in determining whether a health care package passes Congress may turn out to be the happily insured.
According to the latest Rasmussen poll on the topic, 80 percent of Americans who already have health insurance rate their coverage as good or excellent. But it isn't just the Rasmussen poll that finds Americans generally happy with their own coverage. A similar poll by the Washington Post/ABC poll in June found that 81 percent of Americans were somewhat or very satisfied with their insurance, and an even higher proportion -- 83 percent -- felt the same way about the health care they receive.
We sometimes forget that the overwhelming majority of Americans -- over 250 million people -- already have health insurance of one sort or another. Any "reform" that reduces the range of services and choices available to the already insured or taxes their benefits will leave this group worse off than they are now. Yet these are precisely the kinds of cost-saving measures Congress must pass if coverage is to be extended to approximately 15 percent of Americans who don't have health care coverage now.
As members of Congress return home for the August recess, they are likely to encounter stiff opposition from constituents worried that health care reform will come at too dear a cost: higher taxes and worse care. Rowdy town hall meetings with elected officials in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Texas and other states have scared Democrats so much that they're now trying to blame the GOP for inciting the opposition.
President Obama's response has been to send out e-mails to 13 million people accusing those who question Democrats' health care plans of "filling the airwaves and the Internet with outrageous falsehoods to scare people into opposing change," and urging supporters "to fight lies with truth, and set the record straight."
But when it comes to truth-telling, it's the Democrats who have prevaricated. There is simply no way they can make good on their promise to extend health care benefits to over 40 million people who don't have it now without raising taxes, reducing benefits to those already ensured, or costing American jobs.
The president's plan is estimated to cost $1 trillion over 10 years. Senate negotiators are patting themselves on the back now because they've come up with cuts to the proposed plan that will save $100 billion. But there are precious few government entitlement programs that ever end up coming in on budget. The likelihood is that whatever the projected cost of this program, it will end up costing more than we anticipate.
Instead of trying to force an entirely new health care financing system on Americans who are generally satisfied with the care they receive now, members of Congress should be concentrating on a limited plan to assist those truly in need of health care who don't have the means to obtain it now. The number of people who fall into this category is far lower than the estimated 47 million we hear bandied about in political debates on the subject. That number includes millions who could afford to buy insurance but choose not to, as well as millions of illegal immigrants.
It would be far cheaper to come up with a limited plan that focused on providing care for the uninsured who are injured in an accident or who end up with a costly disease than to revamp health care for everyone. And if Democrats don't get that message soon, they will end up paying for it at the polls next year.
A simple question: How do you insure 47 million new patients, including illegals, with no new doctors and say the costs will go down?
That would be a smarter way to go.
My wife and I often talk about how crazy are society has become -- the minority feels entitled to rule over the majority. I know Obama got 51% of the vote, but that's not what I'm talking about.
Homosexuals are 2% of the population -- but everything seems to be structured so that they get whatever they want. Me? Ha! Why should my opinion on homosexual marriage have any weight? I'm in the majority -- I can go eff myself.
Muslims are 3% of the population -- but we never criticize their barbaric bloodthirsty religion. My religion? Ha! Let's mock Christianity non-stop. I'm in the majority -- I can go eff myself.
Blacks are 12% of the population -- and everything bad that happens in the black community is my fault because I'm a racist. I'm a white guy -- I can go eff myself.
80% of the people are happy with their current healthcare situation?? Screw 'em! Let's upset the whole apple cart, because there's a minority of people who want to change things.
it's more than might be
..all government induced "programs" that politicians raped for their own agendas and destroyed
meddling? hardly!...more like criminal abused
There are no 47 million uninsured people. The real figure is more like 10 million. Many of those so called uninsured people are young people, who make enough money to buy insurance but chose not to.
I heard a great comment from a lady at a town hall meeting captured on video by a freeper:
It took 6 months of consideration to pick out a dog for the Whitehouse, why can’t Obama allow more than 6 days or 6 weeks to pick a health plan?
I made a point to a Liberal the other day that even those folks DO get healthcare -- because they can always go to the emergency room. What they don't have is health insurance -- but they do get the care. She responded, "But it's so expensive! Emergency rooms are so expensive!"
I think her proposal is to spend twice as much, and degrade the quality of care given to 80% of the population, because -- you know -- the current system costs too much.
with force and other people's money
There once was a health care proposal
That wrote of control and disposal
The people did see
Their own Congress dont read
Representatives went indisposedal’
Yes, you are correct, but it does little good to argue logic with the state run media or brain dead Democrats. Besides, it makes my point seem even more ludicrous.
The plan is more than to insure 47 million. It is to equalize the health system. No one person will be able to get more than what some bean counter decides is his share, regardless of financial situation. And, even more alarming, the individual will be cut off at a given age, or because of a chronic illness.
Let’s face it, responsible individuals work for and plan for obtaining good health care. They understand that (at least in the past and at present) working hard and planning the allocation of their assets will assure that they are able to get prompt treatment of serious disease.
Equalizing the health care system is the ultimate, deadly descent into a collective system.
If the plan was to simply provide health insurance to the uninsured, would it not be more cost effective to extend the Cobra program, for instance?
Must see Twilight Zone episode
The Twilight Zone (1/2 hr) - The Obsolete Man
You don't, unless you either cut the quality or availability of the health care. What many people don't understand is this is NOT about providing medical insurance coverage for poor people, it's ALL about getting total government control over our lives via socialization of every aspect of our economy and society.
European style socialized medicine is the first big step toward a totally Marxist USA, after that the other Marxist projects ZerO has planned will seem relatively harmless. That is, until we are trapped in them and our freedom to choose how we want to live our lives and manage our own affairs is just a fond memory of the America that used to be. The "change" that tens of millions of mindless dupes enthusiastically voted for is a one step at a time, piece by piece, eventual change from a relatively free America to a Marxist "worker's paradise" similar to communist China or Cuba.
Face it folks, our worst nightmare of the last few decades is now reality. We now have a full fledged Marxist/communist in the White House and a gang of outright socialists in Congress eager to put his collectivist agenda into law. The new paramilitary law enforcement agency that ZerO plans to be his enforcers of this "change" hasn't been recruited and organized yet, and he isn't going to fully reveal his true agenda for "change" to full blown Marxism until after the 2012 election. He's counting on the frog not jumping out of the pot before then, but there are now a few hopeful signs emerging that the frog may come to his senses before it's too late, unless it's already too late. God help us if it is.
Of course it would, but as I said before, cost effectiveness, or even so-called "fairness" for the poor, is not the purpose of the plan. It's all about controlling our lives in every detail by an all powerful central government.
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.