|
 |
2/2/2010
Burri: So WAS Obama going to force people off their own insurance?
Was it a whoops? Or something more? President Barack Obama joined several Republican lawmakers at a retreat over the weekend to hash out some differences. Have a face-to-face. It's a good idea, usually, even if it doesn’t yield anything right away. Even if nothing concrete gets squeezed out the other side.
Well. Something good did come out of it, if only from the pundit’s point of view. Via RealClearPolitics, President Obama said:
If you look at the package that we've presented -- and there's some stray cats and dogs that got in there that we were eliminating, we were in the process of eliminating. For example, we said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your -- if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge.
So…ObamaCare was going to force people off of their own insurance, even if they liked and wanted it, and onto government care? Just like conservatives and Republicans have been saying all along?
But: no, no, no, scoffed President Obama; his administration; other Democrats; the mainstream press. Republicans are just trying to scare you. That’s just a bunch of ignorant teabaggers saying that.
That’s what they said. Until now, when…voila!
So. What does this say about the Obama administration?
They either knew about those “provisions that got snuck in” or they didn’t. If they didn’t, then they’re incompetent. If they did…well, what does that say? Were they willing to flip-flop on Obama’s promise? Wouldn’t be the first time, won’t be the last. Or were they really “in the process of eliminating” those provisions? If so, how? A bill that passed the House and, in different form, the Senate on such fragile compromises – compromises that might have collapsed with the tiniest change?
Most of all: when were they going to tell us? Ever? If the bill hadn't stalled? Was President Obama going to let the bill become law, even though these "stray cats and dogs" had "snuck" in there?
Best-case scenario: the Obama administration did know those provisions were in there, and was working – quietly, behind the scenes, with both carrots and sticks – to eliminate those provisions. This strange, off-hand admission of Obama's was actually a shot across the bow. A warning to Democrats: better let us kill those.
That’s best-case, though. The best case I can think of, anyway. But if the Obama administration were that cunning – that efficient – well, surely the Democratic Party (and liberalism in general) wouldn't be in such disarray right now. Surely, an administration so adept at political subtlety would have had more success.
Which means…if my best case scenario is right, Obama is some kind of a mad genius, striving toward some greater, ineffable goal, and his supposed defeats thus far are only part of his grand plan.
Remember: you read it here, first. And…if true, then I, for one, welcome our new big-eared overlord.
More likely, Obama wasn't ready for the Presidency when he got it. If he knew the provisions were in there, he didn't care. Or it was fine with him. There were no behind-the-scenes maneuverings to "eliminate" them. And his off-hand admission to the GOP was an accident: a teleprompter-less mistake.
Thank goodness for those. Else, we'd never know what Obama really wants.
Lance Burri blogs regularly via his site, The TrogloPundit.
COMMENTS
"Force people off their policy on to government care"? I think to determine whether this may happen in the recesses of the bill(whichever bill) is an exercise in further delaying meaningful health care reform. Who the heck can know that some group of people might be (in their minds) adversely affected? It is narrow issues like this that are used to inflame the public against any bill and we will all be the worse for it. Besides, there are a heck of a lot of people out there like me who would take "government care" any day compared to the forced "private care" that we have now. Where is our freedom of choice when a public option is killed?
dave allen (Tue Feb 02 06:17:39 2010)
"Narrow issues like this..." Really Dave?
Let that comment be a heads up to every reader ... this freight train may have stopped to refuel, but it's still on the track folks!
If you are one of the vast majority in this country who doesn't believe some pinhead in a D.C. cubicle should be deciding our medical futures, you need to see that this mis-characterized 'little detail'is in fact a compromise of an essential principal that was at the HEART of what this President promised.
The whole pitch was "if you like what you've got, you can keep it". Not a narrow issue ... THE selling point! So as Tony asks, was it a lie or a mistake?
Yes, every one of these bills should be held up. They should be more thoroughly vetted then the staff working at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave East, and if there is ANYTHING in there which degrades the quality or availability of health care to any of us, it should be eliminated NOW ... (not nudge, nudge, wink, wink "we'll take care of that later.")
Nothing EVER has been 'taken care of later' in D.C. and this administration has done nothing to show that it really will change the way business is done.
No, narrow issues are not to be dismissed - they are the heart of legislation and the reason that we are supposed to have transparency, reasonable debate, and why bills are NOT meant to be rushed through congress on a crash cart like a patient being rolled from the Emergency Room to a Surgical Suite.
Jeff Riedl (Tue Feb 02 07:04:51 2010)
Jeff,
"pinhead person in a cubicle?" Are you so totally naive to believe that private insurers in cubicles are somehow looking out for my best interests or the best interests of anyone other than themselves? At least with public coverage (like Medicare) I and every citizen has access to the rules and can vote for a change. It is comments like yours that show how ignorant most Americans are about our system and how simple it is to be at the whims of the private insurance system. The reason why many are afraid of changes is because they are coddled by their employer's coverage and never were exposed to what really happens in private insurance. Anyone who has had to be on their own for coverage (or fight for coverage for employees) like I have knows what really goes on. Lets just get rid of employer coverage and have everyone fend for themselves, then you would see real change. I think that calling public servants "pinheads" is an insult to all the very talented and dedicated public employees who provide valuable services for us all and where our society is enriched and ennobled. Just try to go a day without those "pinheads" you refer to. We are nothing as a nation if we lose our soul and denigrate the public institutions that have served us so well so far.
dave allen (Tue Feb 02 07:51:53 2010)
Dave,
Full disclosure. Once upon a time I WAS one of those pinheads in a corporate cubicle paying medical bills for an insurance company. While there, we had some major medical expenses. Ultimately we ended up filing for bankruptcy a couple of years later due to the massive amount of medical debt incurred.
So yeah, I get it that the private sector setup we have now doesn't work.
But I also "get" the false claim that every citizen will have a voice in the 'public plan'. You mean like the voice we have in tax law with the IRS?
Don't give me the pompous attitude that you know best for me. Last I read, all men were created equal and quite frankly, I think I'd like to keep it that way ... thank you very much.
Canada and any number of other places beckon for those who believe in socialism and think it's the better way to do business. Individual liberty and freedom are founding principles of this nation. If you want to just strike those principles from our foundation, perhaps you should just have the anatomy to say so rather than continually nibbling at the edges.
Jeff Riedl (Tue Feb 02 09:00:19 2010)
Actually, yes, Dave. At the two health insurance companies I worked for, it WAS our ONLY job to look out for the best interests of customers - it was drilled into our heads everyday: Find ways to offer COMPETITIVELY priced products and services; figure out how to squeeze a penny out of every dollar in premium; look to minimize EVERYONE'S risk; and oh yes, try to make a profit, too, (so we can keep the lights on and provide decent jobs opportunities).
As far as "talented and dedicated" public employees (SERVANTS, you called them), how come they don't contribute to Social Security - how come they have their own retirement plan funded by us (servants, if you will)? That sounds ENTITLED to me!
How come they have their OWN CADILLAC health insurance plan that the peeps can't participate in? How come us slavish business owners have to do Zero-Based budgeting like we did at the insurance company EVERY YEAR?
How do the 'Slaves get off pushing a $3.8 Trillion Dollar Budget down the Master's Throat? How come the Servants are soooo looose with the Master's Money? Are they stupid - or just pinheads?
It really doesn't look like servitude to me (and my tax returns), Dave. It doesn't look at all like they're very: "dedicated" "valuable" "enriched" or "enobled" servants either! It looks like the inmates are running the aslyum. Or, in your vernacular" "it looks like the Servants are running the Plantation. Well, it's time they feel the lash! And by God, I believe you will, Dave. Very SOON!
michaelbina (Tue Feb 02 09:04:16 2010)
Ooh Dave, that got you some needed response. Michael, I appreciate your insights. You are right on. Mostly I appreciate hearing that of course the health insurer must look out for its client - or that client won't be around long. AND must balance that with looking out for corporate dollars or that corporation won't be around long. Love that capitalism.
Jo (Tue Feb 02 09:32:17 2010)
Yeah...back then, if we didn't look out for our clients (who were business owners and employees who choose to buy OUR insurance), a LOT of other insurance companies were in the market to compete and gladly "steal" "our" clients. Unfortunately, there's not much competition in health insurance today (thanks, in part, to government over-regulation and mandated benefits/services), and the customer loses. And, when they have no place to turn in a free, competitive marketplace to get their problems problems fixed, the government gladly steps in to say, "We pinheads will do it better...let us get rid of everyone else and, we'll be a great insurance company for you and your PREMIUMS."
And, in theory, the government probably CAN do it better 'cause they make ALL the rules and set all the prices... Again, the "Servants" are running the plantation.
michaelbina (Tue Feb 02 10:11:51 2010)
Health Insurance companies do not have your best interest at heart. You are a cost and only a cost. And, as long as the insurance company can shift you to someone else's account or deny you care when you get sick they will do so. Any well meaning insurance company employee individually has very little power to help you if the policy is to get rid of your cost. And Jeff, label what every other sane country in the world does today as "socialism' and label the roads and schools like that if you will. Go ahead but labels mean nothing other than to confuse the facts. The fact is that all those other countries have more cost effective delivery of health care than we do and employers are better off for it. I'm an employer and I know lots of employers and they're getting crushed by the cost of health care and the time it consumes. Give me 'socialized " medicine any time so I can get back to business. By the way , look at those poor suffering Scandinavians, Germans, and French. Show me how bad their economies are because of health care . Quite the contrary. The fact is that this country has miserably failed in health policy and we refuse to acknowledge (because of philosophy rather than facts) that we got it wrong, terribly wrong and just about everyone else has it right (or mostly so).
dave allen (Tue Feb 02 10:30:43 2010)
You--and you only--have your best interests at heart. Obama knew that universal health care and your private plan are incompatible. He's slick.
Obama is a propaganda machine (aka a liar). Recall during his presidential campaign that he promised an ethical and transparent administration and claimed the rule of law would be the touchstone of his presidency. But now we get secrecy, stonewalling and refusals to make public White House visitor logs as required by law. He uses tax dollars to persuade artists and the National Endowment of the Arts and the agency that runs AmeriCorps into propaganda machines to promote his agenda. His administration's central activity is the political allocation of wealth and opportunity. It's not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.
Janice Taylor (Tue Feb 02 12:21:04 2010)
Everything about this "healthcare" plan is a corruption of anything that's good for this country.
****The fact is that this country has miserably failed in health policy and we refuse to acknowledge (because of philosophy rather than facts) that we got it wrong, terribly wrong and just about everyone else has it right (or mostly so).****
May I point out that this country has not had a health care policy? Like Topsy, it just grew and then a personable young man showed up on our doorstep and said, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help". And help us he did. We got one mandate or law after another which managed to strangle the open market. Uncapped lawsuits against doctors which managed to raise their premiums so high they had to pass the costs on to their patients. This also ended in extra tests to make sure they wouldn't be sued if, for a minor ailment they might get sued. No open state borders so you can get what insurance you want when you want it and can pick from any insurance company in the world.
There are also little things such as a bill that's in the works right now that wants people to only be able to have cold tablets by prescription. This will result in having to go to the clinic to be seen by some health care provider at cost to the patient and the doctor which again raises costs plus time.
Government interference has brought on most of our insurance problems. More interference isn't going to fix it.
I can tell you the story of quinine which was available at WalMart or any other store of that type for about $4 for a bottle of 30 and which in the space of a few years was taken off the market and available only through a prescription from one company at a cost of $700 for 180 tablets. I'll let you do the math. This was meddling by the government for nothing. There's more to the story but not enough room nor time.
Think about what you're asking for. You might get it!
C.R. Stevenson (Tue Feb 02 13:44:48 2010)
Give me 'socialized " medicine any time so I can get back to business. By the way , look at those poor suffering Scandinavians, Germans, and French. Show me how bad their economies are because of health care.
Dave - we agree wholeheartedly. You believe those countries have a better way of doing it and I think it would be a great idea for you to take advantage of any one of those plans. Where they are offered.
I'm not stopping you!
Then again, you shouldn't be forcing me to participate in one of their plans. That's the point.
Jeff Riedl (Tue Feb 02 13:49:18 2010)
Jeff, public option is just that an Option. What the opposition to meaningful health care wants to do is not have people like me who want good public option care have any then force me into their corrupt private system. I'm not personally saying you'd have to participate but don't force me to participate anyway in your system. And believe me if I could use their system I would, just like the tens of thousands of Americans going to India, Thailand, Mexico etc to get quality care they can afford.
dave allen (Tue Feb 02 18:05:45 2010)
Cr,
you're right about how the system evolved. But it is because the moneyed and ignorant interests fought so hard to protect their turf that the government regulations are as ineffective as they are. We have a 1950s chevy with 300,000 miles on it and no one has the guts or power to replace it with a new car. All we do is add more options on a fundamentally flawed based. Taiwan totally restructured their system a few years ago by studying what should be done based on successful models around the world. They did it and we cannot. More government control at the basic level will yield the best results from private industry just as we have here with highways, bridges etc. Every other country has some mix of public and private and they work quite well. Not like us.
dave allen (Tue Feb 02 18:13:30 2010)
Excuse me... When was the last time your employer allowed you to chose your own health care provider?
Anyone have to switch doctors two or three times this past decade because your employer switched providers and your current doctor(s)was "out of network?"
Oh yes, and how many providers offer a group practice where the odds of you seeing your primary physician without a six week advance appointment are about the same a winning a lottery?
Anyone ever have to debate a health claim with your employer chosen provider? Anyone ever have to beg for a second opinion or wait weeks for an appeal to be reviewed?
The customer is not you, it's your employer. Increasingly your employer is more concerned with reducing costs than flexibility or quality of care in the group plan.
I don't pretend to advocate a public option as the "be all and end all" of health care reform. But those of you pretending that private insurance is so much better have not talked to many real folks in the Valley. The competition would be welcome by many of us who have less than a ringing endorsement for the insurance industry.
Dennis (Tue Feb 02 19:15:28 2010)
***the government regulations are as ineffective as they are***
But the problem is that the regulations aren't ineffective. They're way too effective and their object is to stop any kind of progress in insurance providers and inject government control.
I don't want government health care and I resent the fact that the government wants to force me to have it. I want people without resources or long term diseases or disabilities to be taken care of, not those who are perfectly capable of their paying for their own.
My husband worked for 38 years on a job and has always had health insurance from his employer, which we still receive. We've always had good health care at a reasonable price. Now, since Medicare has kicked in our yearly cost has tripled and our co-pay has gone up $15 and $10 for physician and specialist office visits. Don't talk to me about government health insurance. I know what happens after all the promises are made.
C.R. Stevenson (Wed Feb 03 09:49:11 2010)
|
|
Blog Archives
| 2010 |
  December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Solberg: Healing After an Abortion
• Basketball fans eyeing extension of Miller Park sales tax
• Nanny sex-ed bill goes to Doyle
• A first. Village limits pension contribution for employees
• Nanny State update: Toothbrushing mandated
• Obama pushes education inflation
• WI Investment Board votes to borrow to juice up returns
• So Republicans have brought nothing to the table?
• You have got to be kidding me
• Nygren: Governor Continues Terms of Failure in State of the State
• Sen. Fitzgerald: Governor down the wrong track at high speed
• Phosphorus is the new CO2. $Billions in Wisconsin
• More Obama giveaways
• A reprimand? Would you keep him on the job?
• Burri: Sarah Palin for Prez troubles me
• Quote of the Day – Obama after the pie-eating contest
• Populism, abused and trampled
• Fitzgerald: Senate Republicans Propose Real Job Creation Agenda
• Stripped down health insurance – it’s about time
• Ok GOP, scrap the Party of NO; time to lead
• No way Feingold is a Coakley. Is Wall a Brown?
• Burri: Conservatives off the chart for a RINO?
• Paltry quid pro quo?
• Doyle says ARRA has ‘created or retained’ 44,000 WI jobs
• Does most of the public fall for this stuff?
• When you get signatures, always get a couple extra
• Blame it on the outmoded computers
• Scott Brown victory does not scuttle health bill
• 8th Congressional Candidate Forum, Jan. 25
• Scott Walker Meet-and-greet, Monday, Jan. 18
• Aren’t consumers taxpayers too?
• MORE taxes on investment income - dreadful and wrong
• Join the blaze orange army and say ‘Enough is Enough’
• The future of government-run health care
• Tax on banks is a really bad idea
• Roth, Savard on the stump, grassroots style
• Savard speaking in Appleton, 8 PM, Wed., Jan. 13.
• Rahmlow: Savard, Bies frontrunners for State Senate
• Burri: Failing Political Correctness 101
• School contracts and Race to the Top
• Senator Feingold worrisome and big red flags
• Psephological?
• This is really important. Contact Rep. Kagen. Now. Please.
• This is exactly what we need from Governor Doyle
• This guy is my hero
• Why am I not surprised?
• Talk health reform with Feingold (Th), Petri (today)
• Give the Mayor power over MPS - if he can break contracts
• Burri: Yup, Dems really are going to bypass a conference
• The $2.7 billion Wisconsin deficit no one told you about
• Walker launches county accountability website
• Rahmlow: Why is Van Hollen dodging the Nebraska deal?
|
| 2009 |
December
|
November
|
October
• The Lawton-Bader files
• Yup, it’s the TAX LEVY, not the tax RATE
• Ellis: costly automobile insurance laws must be rolled back
• If not Barrett, who?
• The subsidy game
• Burri: Bailouts, Banks, Health Care, and the Mob
• Attend Appleton Schools budget meeting tonight
• A public option WON’T increase costs? That’s delusional!
• Appleton Schools budget meeting Monday
• Wisconsin should be screaming for accountability
• Burri: If anything, we need more obstructionism around here
• WI on the leading edge - in the wrong direction
• Rep. Montgomery: Utility Customers Join State’s Crime-Fighting Efforts
• Public Conservation and Recreation Lands Total 16.5% of State
• In the crow's nest of the Titanic, shouting 'Iceberg!'
• Is Rep. Nelson a political hack?
• Health care: The road ahead will be brutal
• Kagen's pandering again
• Birthers - good stuff for you
• How much do we bend over backward for seniors?
• The trouble with health care is paying for it
• Two-parent families: The Gold Standard
• Burri: Kids... the joys and blessings
• Very, very worried about health care
• Rep. Huebsch: Wisconsin is proof government health care isn’t the answer
• School district contracts push up tax levy
• What? Obama, the Peace Prize?
• TODAY - hearing on Campaign Finance Reform
• Appleton School District tax levy up way too much
• CBO report is out - and the bill isn't even written yet?
• So, how much do YOU budget for health care?
• Burri: Copenhagen trip was amateurish
• “Sotomayor, you have blood on your hands...”
• Cap and Trade. Always follow the money
• Rep. Kagen gets (almost) free health services
• I actually agree with Rep. Kagen
• Future Wisconsin Conference for Conservatives, October 10, Wauwatosa
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
|
| 2008 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
• Important votes Tuesday, including Appleton Common Council
• Democrats are becoming supply siders??
• Further debunking Hillary myths
• WEAC has created an unsustainable monopoly
• From Mark Gundrum: One of the greatest honors an American can experience
• 'Operation Chaos' working?
• Joe Martin the best candidate in Appleton's 8th
• State programs to cut? - Volume II
• Oh the naivete of youth
• Not just disingenuous - flat wrong
• Steve - you will be missed
• Make cuts only AFTER you're elected....
• Getting serious: What programs can we cut?
• Rep. Steve Kagen joining me on Jerry Bader Show today
• Rep. Van Roy: Dental Care Pilot Program
• Has Dave Obey turned the corner on earmarks?
• Speaker Huebsch: Governor turns down Federal Aid?
• Mark Rahmlow: "We're Broke."
• As taxpayers, how do we know if it's a Chevy or a Lexus?
• This is trash talk - about a veteran
• Frank Lasee: Take time to get the Compact right
• 'The Gableman Ad' - is it racist?
• Roth thankful, Kagen shaking money tree
• Gov. Doyle's office not enamored with Freedom of Information
• Governor Doyle will never do it
• Leadership on smoking ban? Not Hanna
• Rep. Van Roy speaks out about smear ads
• You're threatening me about potholes?
• Losing the Hastert seat is NOT a trend and NOT curtians for the GOP
• First suggestion for 'slashing' programs
• Big money-saver for municipalities
• More one time fixes. Nuts.
• Any chances???
• I'm doing the Jerry Bader Show, today, the 11th
• Representative Frank Lasee: Final Waltz of the Season
• Guest Blog: It's not the county's business to be in the nursing home business
• Yup, Hillary won Texas and Ohio
• Gableman/Butler race featured - and it isn't pretty
• Lies from Planned Parenthood and NARAL
• He who sacrifices liberty.....
• Duh.
• The Troha sentencing, Doyle and that $200K
• Guns, passion and "originality"
• How hard is it anyway, to shut down a government program?
• Voting is a PRIVILEGE. And so are property taxes....
• Guest Blog: Governor Doyle, cancel your Ireland trip
|
February
|
January
|
| 2007 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Lots of ideas. No money.
• The Cigarette Tax - "Poor Policy Instrument?"
• School budget Lite?
• Frankenstein - not in the library, but in the legislature
• A librarian, a legislator, a president
• $1.25/pack - NO, NO, NO, and NO
• Kagen and Reagan in the same breath?
• Menasha: behind the 8-ball, but not biting the dust
• Any way you slice it, Wisconsin government wants (further) in on health care
• The World is Flat...what about health care?
• The PAC - too precious to fail. Day 3
• News follow-ups: Appleton West, Kagen at the White House
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail - Day 2
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail
• New Transit Tax coming your way
• Rep. Petri has his finger in the dike - I guess
• AASD Retirement Costs Burdensome
• Health care, health care, health care, health care
• Water rate increase was no slam dunk
• Education for all is just a bad dream
• New Year's resolutions from a parade snob
|
| 2006 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
| 2000 |
May
|
|
