Posted on 08/20/2009 9:41:02 AM PDT by MaestroLC
Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.) said on Wednesday that providing healthcare to uninsured Americans is "not what this healthcare reform debate is about."
In making his comments, Ross, who is the centrist Blue Dogs' health reform point man, questioned one of the primary healthcare goals of the White House and Democratic leaders.
"That is a side benefit to healthcare reform and an important one," Ross told the Arkansas Educational Television Network. Instead, the fifth-term congressman said the bill should focus on "cost containment."
The Energy and Commerce Committee member reiterated that he wants to pass a health reform bill by the end of this year, a desire that may irk some Republicans who supported his effort to slow the bill before August recess.
"The extreme right had a two-week love affair with me," Ross said. "The extreme right, simply, they do not want healthcare reform. And so, they saw me as killing healthcare reform because I put the brakes on healthcare reform."
The influential fifth-term Democrat identified several provisions that would prevent him from voting for the bill.
On the public option, Ross said he would not vote for a plan that would "force government-run healthcare on anyone. Period." But he also said that the House bill contained a public plan that is "strictly…an option."
Providing government subsides for abortions, coverage for illegal immigrants, rationing of care, and deficit increases comprised Ross' deal-breakers.
"I've got the extreme right and the extreme left angry with me so I must be doing something right," he said.
Ross said the bill should reduce costs by allowing the Medicare to negotiate prices with drug companies and by dropping co-pays for preventitive doctors' visits.
In the end, Ross acknowledged that the House version may not make up the bulk of the final bill. He estimated that 90 percent of the conference committee bill would come from the Senate Finance Committee's version.
I think Obamacare passes the full House, but more difficult in the Senate. Any type of passage could, and probably will, set off a massive backlash against Obama and Dems the likes we have not seen in many decades from the American people. The town hall protest anger is for real. Polls prove Obamacare is not wanted by the American people. I don't see it subsiding any time soon. Bring on 2010...
dropping co-pays?
The town hall protest anger is for real. Polls prove Obamacare is not wanted by the American people. I don’t see it subsiding any time soon.
________________________________________________
I don’t either, babe. I don’t either. People are finally waking up!
“Blue Dog” my ass.
So insuring “everyone” isn’t the aim??? Oh really - tell it to The Won and his groupies. I too think this will pass the house but stall in the senate, like cap ‘n tax...just close enough to being law to scare the crap out of everyone so they get off their couches and DO something...hooray. ‘Bout time!!!!!
Uh, huh.
THE HISTORY OF THE PUBLIC OPTION
"The public option was part of a carefully thought out and deliberately funded effort to put all the pieces in place for health reform before the 2008 election -- a brilliant experiment, but one that at this particular moment, looks like it might turn out badly. (Which is not the same as saying it was a mistake.)...
It was a real high-wire act -- to convince the single-payer advocates, who were the only engaged health care constituency on the left, that they could live with the public option as a kind of stealth single-payer, thus transferring their energy and enthusiasm to this alternative."
How in the Hell can he sit there and say he wouldn't want healthcare forced on anyone but at the same time say the House bill is strictly an "option?" We all know that the public option will crowd out the private insurance and voila! Government run healthcare.
Hey Ross - those "extreme right" are the majority of voters who voted for you. While they're going to oppose you, you'll never get the backing from the DNC and the left-wingers. MoveOn.org is not going to run ads on your behalf. See where the middle of the road gets you?
Whoa.
That’s not what Obama said.
“(CBS) President Obama goes before the country tonight to make his case for sweeping health care reform. He’s already been pushing his health care agenda for months. But some of his claims deserve a second look.
CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews provides this reality check.
“It will mean lower costs and more choices and coverage you can count on”
Claim: expand coverage to most uninsured
Fact: All bills do this. Fine Print: Coverage starts in 2013”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/22/eveningnews/main5181012.shtml
Democrats seem to have a problem speaking out both sides of their mouth, their rears and a few other orifices on the human body.
BMW, Mercedes Benz and Ferrari are all expensive automobiles that are out of reach for many Americans. Should the government also take over the auto dealers so that the cost off these vehicles is contained?
but the new line is complete BS.
+++++++++++++++
This is about the 5th new line we’ve seen in two weeks...Lucy, you’ve got some ‘spainin’ to do!
‘spainin’ = ‘splainin’
Cost Containment? Cost containment is what he wants? Two words:
TORT REFORM
Make it three?
TORT REFORM NOW
TORT REFORM FIRST
THIS DOCUMENT from Price Waterhouse confirms that the cost of medical care in the United States could be lowered by AT LEAST 10% if we had a sensible Tort Reform!
YET: The HOUSE BILL had NOT ONE WORD about TORT REFORM, which would LOWER costs by over $100 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR! Reminder: the House bill will raise costs by about $1,000 BILLION dollars during the next ten years, and by $200-250 BILLION per year after that! If these Congressmen are serious about cost containment, let them address TORT REFORM FIRST! Then, I'll entertain their thoughts about other changes in the health care system in the United States.
Blue Dog: Tells you what you want to hear and then votes however the Democrat Party tells them to vote.
If he goes against his constituents, he is on his way out.
sw
LOL!
Because the problem is with Medicare, a government program -- and also a parallel problem with Social Security. Both programs are in trouble as they stand, and this will get much worse as the huge number of baby boomers go onto them.
The Dem plan is quite clever: deny much of the treatment seniors currently get and you save on Medicare costs AND reduce life expectancy, thus saving SS outlays.
Of course, they also need cash from younger Americans, so they will drag them in to help pay for health-care for indigents and aliens. But the seniors will take the brunt.
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.