This evening Congress moved one step closer toward passing the Democrats' snake oil healthcare rationing bill which will result in premature death for the elderly.
Hey, I'm all for helping more middleclass Americans who have no healthcare coverage get some assistance from the government in meeting their healthcare costs, but not on the backs of grandmas and grandpas. We all have/had them, and one day we ourselves will fall into one of those categories. In America, we expect that the elderly will have available to them excellent medical care when they need it, without rationing of treatment.
Common sense tells us that a limited number of medical workers cannot add tens of millions more patients to their practices without shortages in care. Add to that enormous problem a reduction in Medicare costs of nearly half a trillion dollars, and what do you get? Seniors waiting in line for medical care. We can anticipate that far too many will die prematurely because the waiting period will be too long. What if one of these is your loved one?
If our members of Congress were looking out for the interests of average Americans, why were there no efforts made to reduce healthcare costs? Why did they not open competition across state lines. That could dramatically reduce costs, as could tort reform, which didn't see the light of day.
Now that the Senate has passed its initial cloture vote on healthcare legislation, they will move toward a full debate after Thanksgiving. Eventually, they will have to work with the House to get a bill to send to Obama for his signature. Abortion may be the biggest area of disagreement, and passions will be stirred on both sides of this controversial issue.
Read what the National Right to Life has to say about the latest step in healthcare legislation:
National Right to Life to Obama and Reid:
You wanted debate? Now you'll get debate – on government-funded abortion.
"As National Right to Life has previously noted, Senator Reid's bill [on page 118] would authorize the federal government to pay for any and all abortions through a huge new federal health insurance program, the 'public option,' and also to subsidize purchase of private plans that cover abortion on demand. President Obama and Reid know that the substance of these abortion-promoting policies is deeply unpopular, so they seek to conceal the reality with layers of contorted definitions and money-laundering schemes.
Obama and Reid wanted debate – so now they'll get debate, on their cloaked provisions that would cover abortion on demand in proposed new government-run and government-subsidized insurance plans.
Obama and Reid are seeking to block enactment of the bipartisan Stupak-Pitts compromise, adopted by the U.S. House of Representatives on November 7 by a vote of 240-194. This amendment would prevent government funding of elective abortion through the proposed 'public option,' and would also prevent federal subsidies from paying for private insurance plans that cover elective abortion.
During the weeks ahead, National Right to Life will continue to fight the efforts of President Obama and congressional Democratic leaders to cover abortion on demand in two huge new federal health programs. The Senate bill faces additional 60-vote hurdles in the future. Moreover, a courageous group of pro-life Democrats in the House of Representatives will oppose final approval of health care legislation if the Stupak-Pitts Amendment is gutted or removed."
Hey, Mr. Pro-life, Senator Casey (D-PA), how does it feel to vote against your conscience? Your dad would be mortified by your actions. Selling out your values for the advancement of your career. But then, what should we expect from a man who was one of only seven who voted to continue funding the corrupt ACORN after it was exposed by Hannah Giles and James O'Keefe for supporting prostitution and tax evasion. Remember, Pennsylvanians, Casey's year of reckoning is in 2012.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Yea, with bribes and kickbacks.
Democrat and Corruption go hand in hand.
There’s no need to worry if it passes the Senate, Either way if a bill passes with a significant negative impact on the middle and upper class you can kiss the Democratic majority in the Senate and possibly the House goodbye in 2010. The voter backlash will be on an epic scale never seen before in the history of the USA.
Republican's will repeal this POS legislation in 2012 just like the Democrats repealed No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D.
Who knows where to download XRumer 5.0 Palladium?
Help, please. All recommend this program to effectively advertise on the Internet, this is the best program!
No CHild Left Behind and Medicare Part D haven't been repealed at all. So yeah, I hope you have the same chance of success in repealing healthcare reform.
Figures that you'd "lose" my dissection of your misstatements and lies.
I didn't post your comment, Diogenes, because you refuse to stop the name-calling which I warned you about. Make your case without the name-calling, and I'll always post it.
I will comment on what you said though. Many uninsured are getting healthcare as you stated, but nothing like it will be if they have insurance. They'll want medical care for every little illness or discomfort just because it's available to them. The result will be rationing, especially with the enormous cuts in Medicare. The elderly will be hit hard.
Granted, there probably is that
much fraud in Medicare which could be eliminated. But, in reality, when did any politician on either side of the aisle ever make any effort to clean up fraud? It ain't gonna happen.
I apologize for referring to you as a liar, simply because you lie. My mistake.
No lying here. We just disagree. I happen to believe what I post. How is that lying?
How do you lie? You claim that there will be rationing, yet you have nothing to back up that claim AT ALL except your good word. And we know how little that means.
And the claim that tens of thousands of patients will suddenly come out of the woodwork and overburden our medical professionals is just insane. And thinking that, with insurance coverage, they'll now seek treatment for "every little illness or discomfort" is not only irrational, but downright elitist. Do YOU seek medical care for every little illness or discomfort"? Doubtful, if for no other reason, you probably have deductibles and/or coinsurances like most of America. So will the newly-covered patients. When it's coming out of their pocket -- just like it is when it comes out of OUR pocket -- you just don't do that.
That's not a difference of opinion between us. That's a misstatement of fact. A lie, if you will. The thing is, they come out of your mouth with such frequency, you can't even tell the difference between a lie and the truth. All you care about is what will advance your Religious Rightwingnut viewpoints, and what will not.
Debra: Saul Alinsky radical rules INVERTED works, I've tried it and it's actually a great tool that leaves liberals dumbfounded and confused.
Alinsky advocated using every means available — legal or illegal, moral or immoral — to take power.
Christians have been to passive in their approach to fighting the left, that's why this country is in the hands of corrupt politicians.
The outcome may actually justify the means to save America from the radical left's quest for power.
Diogenes: From the CATO institute website:
In 1798, President John Adams signed a law that required the owners of American ships to withhold 20 cents a month for each crewman’s pay and to forward the money to customs offices in various ports. Customs officers were required to forward the money to the secretary of the Treasury, who would use the money to pay the hospital bills of ailing sailors. The funding also supported a network of marine hospitals.
These programs were the ancestors of today’s giant federal health programs, Medicare and Medicaid, and provide an early illustration of the problem with government-funded health care.
In its first years, the [Marine Hospital Service] MHS was plagued by administrative problems…Further problems arose because funds generated by withholding taxes from sailors’ pay frequently fell short of the cost of providing medical services. Eventually, the MHS was forced to impose a four-month limit on the amount of time a patient could stay in a marine hospital and to deny care to those with chronic or incurable ailments. MHS officials constantly had to appeal to Congress to allocate supplemental funds.
We’ve seen these problems of cost overruns, administrative mismanagement, and rationing whenever government has pushed its tentacles further into the health care system.
Post a Comment