The Political Importance of Health Care Repeal

Day 2 of the 112th Congress and we’re already seeing some positive results. In addition to getting back to basics and reading the Constitution aloud on the House floor, the GOP led House also opened up hearing meetings on the repeal of the health care legislation. It looks like a vote in the House could come as early as Wednesday. While it’s likely that the repeal would pass easily in the House, Democrats have plenty of votes to block the repeal in the Senate and the President has indicated, as expected, that he would veto the repeal should it reach his desk.

Why even try? Isn’t it hypocritical for Republicans to introduce a piece of legislation they know has no chance of passing, when they were elected to address our country’s economic woes?

Not at all.

First, Republicans believe, and I tend to share the opinion, that the 2010 health care bill will hurt our already fragile economy.  I’ve already noticed some disturbing trends in my own, employee-sponsored health coverage, and everywhere you look you see stories about the negative impact of the bill on job creation. Taking every step possible to repeal this legislation shows Republicans are serious about tackling the tough economic issues of the day.

Consider also that many of the Republicans elected in November ran against the health care bill and promised to do all they could to reverse it if elected to office. By taking on this hot-button issue on the second day of the session, Republicans are following through on not one, but two of their campaign promises–the economy and repealing the health care bill.

So President Obama has vowed to veto the repeal, no big deal. This is actually the area where Republicans stand to gain the most. The health care debate was contentious the last time around and it cost many a politician their seat in November. Since that time, Obama has been able to score some key political victories–”Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, tax cut extensions, etc. Indeed, the “lame duck session” in December turned out to be be anything but “lame” for the Obama administration. Pushing for the repeal of the health care legislation moves one of Obama’s most unpopular pieces of legislation back to center stage. The President and Senate Democrats will be forced to once again to debate an issue that several key Democrats, Obama included, cannot afford to debate again.

Healthcare Reform as a Sonnet

I saw an eagle flying high today,

Disturbed by the mob, she searched for respite.

The mob’s anger was based in Marx and Che.

Men harassed by the bird and her free flight.

Detested because her independence,

Trapping the bird was a “big fucking deal.”

Puffing on a Red and lighting incense,

The Chairman leads the mob in for the kill.

At the urging of this Marlboro Man,

They hit the bird with their hammer and scythe,

To see the bird destroyed, his only plan.

Battered, beaten the bird appears to die.

As the move on to their Palace of Sin

Like the Phoenix, this bird will rise again.

Josh H. Ellis

3/23/10

The Truth of Health Care Reform Revealed

On Thursday, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released their preliminary cost estimates for the pending health reform legislation. Democrats lauded the reports findings, noting that the figures–cost of $950 billion and reduce the deficit by $150 billion over ten years–hit the marks President Barack Obama laid out when the health care debate began over a year ago. While these numbers may fall within the parameters dictated by President Obama–the New York Times does an excellent job of explaining how it was impossible for them not to–this battle has little to do with deficits or health care reform. In the end, it comes down to one word–”power.”

Regardless, it appears Democrats have the votes they need and passage is inevitable. Over the past couple of days, I’ve watched the reactions of several different factions involved in the debate.

As expected, members of the “Tea Party Movement” have expressed outrage at the bill and out of frustration have started directing their anger at the politicians involved with ramming the bill through. NBC reporter, Luke Russert, tweeted earlier that Tea Party activists were hurling racial slurs at  Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), one of the more visible faces in the health care debate, and other Democratic politicians. It’s unfortunate that some people feel the need to resort to ignorance to voice their opposition. Clyburn and other Democratic politicians are making a huge mistake in supporting the current bill, but it has nothing to do with the politicians’ race, hurling racial slurs at politicians will not prevent the bill from passing, nor will it help reduce the size of the Federal government.

Another group I’ve followed reaction from is the intellectual elitist/Hollywood crowd. This group, largely made up of people who have made a lot of money from doing virtually nothing–either through trust funds, inheritance or bad art–feels guilty for having so much and doing so little. This creates a void in their life and they spend their free time–something else they have plenty of–searching for ways to give their life meaning, supporting health care reform gives their lives’ this meaning. After all, they believe everyone will now have free health care and that a perfect utopia cannot be far behind. This group is ecstatic. While I strongly disagree with this segment of society, they’re so far out of touch with mainstream American society that I cannot hold this instance of bad judgment against them. They lack the proper knowledge to fully understand the practical implications this bill will have on American society.

Without a doubt, the most smug group are the Democratic politicians. Power drives politicians. This goes for Republicans as much as Democrats, but the Democrats have control of both houses of Congress and are the party responsible for this health care bill. This bill was born out a hunger for power, but sold to the American people as a humanitarian necessity. Simply put, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama could care less how much the average American is paying for insurance premiums, nor do they have any real interest in the number of Americans currently without health insurance. These politicians care only about power and health care reform provided the perfect opportunity to control over a large portion of the American economy currently run by the private sector. This group is walking around D.C. right now, chest stuck out, nose stuck up, fake smiles chiseled on their faces, overjoyed that their dream is nearing reality, soon they will have power our Federal government has never seen.

Then there’s me. I’ve made it clear from the beginning that I don’t believe the Federal government has any role to play in health care reform, unless it’s removing itself from the equation altogether. While I do believe reform is needed, I don’t believe that the Federal government is the proper to agent to usher in that reform.

But what about the poor people without health insurance? Our nation is filled with the most generous people on the face of the planet. I have no doubt that, if provided with sufficient tax credits, American people would gladly increase their charitable donations to churches and other altruistic organizations. People run charities a lot better than the Federal government.

When I look at this health care bill, I am saddened by the unabashed bigotry of some of the bill’s detractors. I’m offended by the bravado of the elitists on the East and West Coasts of this nation, who look to the government to solve their personal issues, at the cost of millions of average middle-Americans. I’m disgusted by the egos of the Democratic politicians, so hungry for power, that they’re willing to totally destroy our constitutional Republican form of government, which has worked so well since the founding of our nation. Most importantly, I remain resolute that this socialism starter course will not take hold in the bowels of the Americans people, but rather be discharged as the filthy excrement it is. The first big BM? November 2010.

The Democrats Faulty Logic on Health Care Reform

Faulty logic abounds in the world of politics.  Almost every political campaign features candidates attacking each other with countless ad hominem attacks and campaign speeches filled with straw man arguments. Unfortunately, the faulty logic does not end there and often extends into the formation of a politician or a political party’s agenda, as evidenced by the Democrat Party’s response to Scott Brown’s upset victory in Massachusetts.

Even though Brown ran his campaign as a referendum on the pending health care legislation and won, Democratic leaders insist they will continue to push for reconciliation of the House and Senate bills, claiming it’s the “will of the people”. Normally, when a politician uses a generic qualifier like “will of the people,” he or she implies they have a mandate to fulfill.

But how does a politician determine a mandate?

Most pundits agree that a third of this country leans to the right, a third to the left and the other third somewhere down the middle. Regardless of the candidates, you know that the right leaning group will vote for the Republican candidates and the left leaning group will vote for the Democratic candidates, which means whichever candidate can win over the largest chunk of the final third of the voting block will win the election. This group of voters have been labeled “moderates,” “independents,” and perhaps most eloquently, the “silent majority.” In most elections, candidates attempt to identify an issue where their position will appeal to a much broader segment of this voting demographic and political pundits will label their obligation to follow through on this campaign promise as their “mandate.”

There is no empirical evidence that a majority of this key voting population referred to in the statement, “the will of the people”, supports the Democratic plan for health care reform. I have friends in every range of the political spectrum–from the Right of Rush Limbaugh to the Left of Vermont’s self-described “socialist” Senator, Bernie Sanders, and everywhere in between. Of these people, the only ones I know who support the Democratic plan are people who would have voted for Barack Obama, or other Democratic candidates, regardless of their opponents, based solely on the (D) behind their names. In fact, all the empirical evidence (i.e. polling data, town hall meetings, etc.) I have seen shows a majority of the independent voting population strongly disagrees with the Democratic health care agenda

The Democratic Party’s decision to stubbornly push an obviously unpopular health care bill, in spite of mounting political casualties, hinges on the logically flawed argument that this legislation is the “will of the people.” In the absence of clear empirical evidence, this argument assumes that more of the independent voters voted for Barack Obama, and Democrats in Congressional races in both 2006 & 2008, based on their positions on health care reform. The argument does not account for the number of independent voters who voted Democratic in the races simply out disappointment with Republican majority rule, the number of Obama voters simply caught up in the cult of personality surrounding the figure or any independent voter who cast a Democratic vote in 2006 or 2008, without once considering the candidates position on health care.

As the Democratic Party continues to ignore the real concerns of this silent majority, they have gradually raised their voices in opposition, but their screams appear to have landed on deaf ears. Perhaps the Democratic Party should try a more honest approach and describe their attempt at health care reform as the “will of the Democratic Party.” At least then they would begin to acknowledge that it is a majority of their Party, and not a majority of the American population, that desires to see their attempt to nationalize health care in the United States succeed.

Swine flu!

Everywhere I look today, people are talking about the “swine flu.” Evidently, this is the real deal, a “potential pandemic” situation according to experts.  I’m not doubting that at all; however, I am curious as to how this particular virus flew under the radar for so long. We’ve been hearing about the “bird flu” for almost a decade, yet until two nights ago, I had never heard of “swine flu.”

There seems to be so many questions regarding this situation. How did it spread so quickly? Who is most at risk? How deadly is it? How worried should we all be?

I guess my initial reaction is that its one more reason to secure our borders. The governments of the United States and Mexico can say what they want, but the potential of a deadly virus spreading across our porous borders is a real threat.  I don’t think anyone can give us an accurate count of how many people cross the U.S./Mexico border, illegally and legally, each day.  We know that many who cross illegally, often travel in groups, which I would think be a great source for the spread of a virus like this. 

Instead of talking about the borders, the political angle will turn to public health and the I’m sure Obama and the Democrats will use this a pawn to push through pieces of socialize medicine legislation. It’s a shame really.

I’m going to look more into this, but for now, I guess I can be happy that local officials are being somewhat proactive.

The way health care ought to be…

As Barack Obama gathers the greatest minds in health care together, I thought I would share my personal experiences with the medical community in hopes of helping solve the health care crisis. 

I grew up in rural East Texas, in a town where literally everyone knew your name. I couldn’t wait to get out of there and I’m glad to live in the city now, but there are several aspects of that small town lifestyle that I miss, especially my doctor.  The small medical clinic in town provided health care for three generations of my family. There was no need to take medical histories, the same doctors that treated me had treated my grandparents, parents, aunts, uncles and cousins. There was no need to waste a lot of time feeling out paperwork, as soon as you walked in the door the office staff pulled your file and you were on your way to being treated. 

Once you got inside the examination room, the doctor came by, inquired about the problem and made a diagnosis. Again, there was no need to check any guidelines or recommend any superfluous tests, the doctor made a diagnosis based on the empirical evidence in front of him.  Before you left, the doctor asked about your family and eased any concerns you may have about your visit.

I didn’t realize how unique this situation was until I visited the doctor for the first time in Dallas. 

True story, two years ago I was trying to flush the toilet and broke the plastic handle. The sharp edges sliced my thumb wide open and since it was a Friday evening I decided to go to an urgent care center. I gave the office staff my insurance information. They informed me that since my carrier was closed for the evening I would be responsible for the entire cost of my visit and they would file claim on my behalf later.

An hour later, I was led back to the examination room. A physician assistant examined my wound, gave me a shot and stitched me up. It wasn’t until I got ready to check out that I experienced the most painful moment of the evening. For an examination by a physicians assistant, some stitches and a tetanus shot, I owed the urgent facility well over $500, out of pocket. I knew that I would get reimburshed for a majority of the cost, but I was still appalled that I had to pay the same price to see P.A. that I would to see a M.D. 

So what does this have to do with the current health care problem and what can we learn about the health care I received in my small town?

In my hometown, I was more than just a patient. I had an established relationship with my health care providers, something non-existent in the heavily regulated world of urban medicine. I can only imagine how impersonal health care would be if the Federal government had even more control over it.

What about costs? Obama’s people will tell you that health care costs are outrageous and even I just shared how I get ripped off by an urgent care facility, thankfully I have insurance–crappy insurance, but insurance all the same. When you have a personal relationship with health care provider, money becomes a secondary factor to your care. The clinic that housed my health care providers was very flexible with payments. You and your health care provider figured out what you could pay and how you could pay for it. Again, if and when the Federal government seizes control of the health care industry, they will attempt to destroy this personal relationship with health care providers.

I don’t expect everyone to be able to find health care like I’ve been blessed to have. However, I do think my story illustrates that the health care industry is not as out of control as those on the Left will have you believe. There is very little regulation, in fact many of the health care providers in my hometown violate many of the Federal regulations in place, and the health care I received there is far superior to anything I have received since living in Dallas. If anything, I think it proves that less regulation can lead to a better relationship between patient and health care provider, which in turn will lead to better treatment.

Obama’s health care summit

So Chairman Obama has gathered together members of the medical community and politicans from both sides of the aisle to discuss health care.This is another step towards socialized medicine.

If you ever want to know what a business would look like it were socialized, look no further than the post office. I walk into the post office and the customer service is non-existent. The lines are always long, the postal service refuses to use operate all of their windows, on more than one occasion I’ve been in a long line when the postal worker decided it was time to take a break, regardless of the lengthy of the line. When you finally make it to the front of the line, the postal worker who assists you makes you feel like you are the biggest burden in their life.

The United States Postal Service does not exist to make a profit. They exist to provide a government mandated service and the postal workers do their job only to draw their government check. Indeed, the U.S.P.S. seems to reward “bad business.”

So the next time you think it would be nice to have the government pay your medical bills, just remember the post office, because if Chairman Obama gets his way, your local doctor’s office will operate in the same manner. This is a bad idea that must be stopped.