Just want to chime in briefly on the ongoing healthcare debate.
I'm very troubled by what's coming out of the White House and the left in this debate. Those of you who've read my blogs this summer have figured out that I lean conservative, and I do on most things. I like to think of myself as moderately conservative--not far right, like the idiots who think President Obama isn't a natural-born citizen. In fact, there are some issues where I would lean somewhat to the left (such as the environment, civil rights, welfare, etc.) if it were not for the incredible arrogance on the part of liberals. You can see that front and center in the debate about healthcare.
You may have noticed media coverage of town hall meetings across the country usually portray those who strongly disagree with the President's plan less than favorably. Prominent Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid dismiss and demonize opponents as Nazis, fascists, and quite frankly, as stupid. It's this arrogance that turns me off on liberal issues. To me, their attitude to the people of this country is: Just do what we tell you. We know what's best for you.
Thank God we live in a democracy, because the increasing opposition to healthcare reform is lowering the President's popularity in all major media polls; and, in fact, has caused him to shift tactics, from pushing government takeover of healthcare, a la Europe and Canada, to health insurance reform, with a public option for those who can't afford it. As I stated in a previous blog, most people (85% in fact, say most polls) are happy with their insurance. It's not access, but cost, that concerns people. The public is increasingly aware that President Obama's plan would lead to some sort of rationing; and, the Congressional Budget Office has repeatedly stated that, far from reducing cost, government involvement would add about $1 Trillion to the national debt!
If liberals truly wanted to reduce health care costs, they would do three things: first, allow insurance companies to sell in every state, not just the state they're based in. We can buy auto, home, and life insurance from anyone, anywhere, but we can't buy health insurance from another state. Lifting this restriction would increase competition and lower costs; second, enact tort reform. Limit medical malpractice to the actual damages sustained, not punitive damages. Every study and poll of the health industry documents quite clearly that doctors order unnecessary procedures and tests for the sole reason of preventing lawsuits; however, many doctors are sued, anyway, and most settle out of court, and these costs get passed on to the consumer; third, allow insurance co-ops, where insurance companies or small businesses can share their costs, especially for those who can't afford it on their own. Insurance regulations would need to be tightened, to protect the consumer, but it works in the Auto and Home insurance industries (ex: Texas Windstorm Insurance Association).
Unfortunately, most liberals aren't considering these options. Many Democratic leaders, such as Barney Frank, are on record as favoring a complete government takeover with a single-payer system, such as in Canada. If anyone objects, they are demonized, patronized, and dismissed. Well, most people haven't attended Harvard, but we can tell when we're being condenscended to, and I think this is a large part of the reason the public doesn't trust government to make health care decisions for them.
In closing, a short observation. My condolences to the Shriver and Kennedy families over the recent death of Eunice Kennedy Shriver. Also, her brother, Senator Ted Kennedy, is battling cancer. Mrs. Shriver is a hero to me for her work witht the Special Olympics. I don't necessarily feel the same towards Senator Kennedy, but I do respect his decades of public service. But consider this: they live in Massachusetts, which has a single-payer government run insurance plan (signed into law by former Republican governor and former Presidential candidate Mitt Romney), but has bankrupted the state and has led to a cut in services. Did Senator Kennedy and Mrs. Shriver use the Massachusetts health system? No! Did they go to Canada, Britain, France, or anywhere else liberals hold up as the ideal health care system? No! They paid for their health care with private insurance paid for either by the public, in Kennedy's case, or out of pocket, like Mrs. Shriver.
Actions speak louder than words.
I'm very troubled by what's coming out of the White House and the left in this debate. Those of you who've read my blogs this summer have figured out that I lean conservative, and I do on most things. I like to think of myself as moderately conservative--not far right, like the idiots who think President Obama isn't a natural-born citizen. In fact, there are some issues where I would lean somewhat to the left (such as the environment, civil rights, welfare, etc.) if it were not for the incredible arrogance on the part of liberals. You can see that front and center in the debate about healthcare.
You may have noticed media coverage of town hall meetings across the country usually portray those who strongly disagree with the President's plan less than favorably. Prominent Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid dismiss and demonize opponents as Nazis, fascists, and quite frankly, as stupid. It's this arrogance that turns me off on liberal issues. To me, their attitude to the people of this country is: Just do what we tell you. We know what's best for you.
Thank God we live in a democracy, because the increasing opposition to healthcare reform is lowering the President's popularity in all major media polls; and, in fact, has caused him to shift tactics, from pushing government takeover of healthcare, a la Europe and Canada, to health insurance reform, with a public option for those who can't afford it. As I stated in a previous blog, most people (85% in fact, say most polls) are happy with their insurance. It's not access, but cost, that concerns people. The public is increasingly aware that President Obama's plan would lead to some sort of rationing; and, the Congressional Budget Office has repeatedly stated that, far from reducing cost, government involvement would add about $1 Trillion to the national debt!
If liberals truly wanted to reduce health care costs, they would do three things: first, allow insurance companies to sell in every state, not just the state they're based in. We can buy auto, home, and life insurance from anyone, anywhere, but we can't buy health insurance from another state. Lifting this restriction would increase competition and lower costs; second, enact tort reform. Limit medical malpractice to the actual damages sustained, not punitive damages. Every study and poll of the health industry documents quite clearly that doctors order unnecessary procedures and tests for the sole reason of preventing lawsuits; however, many doctors are sued, anyway, and most settle out of court, and these costs get passed on to the consumer; third, allow insurance co-ops, where insurance companies or small businesses can share their costs, especially for those who can't afford it on their own. Insurance regulations would need to be tightened, to protect the consumer, but it works in the Auto and Home insurance industries (ex: Texas Windstorm Insurance Association).
Unfortunately, most liberals aren't considering these options. Many Democratic leaders, such as Barney Frank, are on record as favoring a complete government takeover with a single-payer system, such as in Canada. If anyone objects, they are demonized, patronized, and dismissed. Well, most people haven't attended Harvard, but we can tell when we're being condenscended to, and I think this is a large part of the reason the public doesn't trust government to make health care decisions for them.
In closing, a short observation. My condolences to the Shriver and Kennedy families over the recent death of Eunice Kennedy Shriver. Also, her brother, Senator Ted Kennedy, is battling cancer. Mrs. Shriver is a hero to me for her work witht the Special Olympics. I don't necessarily feel the same towards Senator Kennedy, but I do respect his decades of public service. But consider this: they live in Massachusetts, which has a single-payer government run insurance plan (signed into law by former Republican governor and former Presidential candidate Mitt Romney), but has bankrupted the state and has led to a cut in services. Did Senator Kennedy and Mrs. Shriver use the Massachusetts health system? No! Did they go to Canada, Britain, France, or anywhere else liberals hold up as the ideal health care system? No! They paid for their health care with private insurance paid for either by the public, in Kennedy's case, or out of pocket, like Mrs. Shriver.
Actions speak louder than words.
