Can Healthcare Insurance Really Be Required?

Many in favor of the healthcare bill and its mandated healthcare coverage for all Americans say that it is the same as requiring all drivers to get Auto Insurance.

I think we need to remember one thing.

In America we have the RIGHT to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. So there is a right to be alive, and have a life, and live a life, and be alive (oh, I said that already)….Well, you get the point.

In the new healthcare bill the Democrats want to say that since we are alive we have to have health insurance and that it is similar to having auto insurance.

Well, let me clear something up for my friends on the left. Auto insurance is only required if I want to drive. If I do not drive, then I do not have to have auto insurance. Driving is a privilege, not a right. So I can understand having to have auto insurance to drive; however, now the Democrats want to suggest that in order to have the right to live, you must have health insurance.

To live our lives in America is a right that we are privileged to have. To force people to have to buy insurance or face a fine or jail time would seem to be unconstitutional at best. Of course, when was the last time Washington allowed the constitution, or the facts, to get in the way?


Better check my policy,
Bill

HealthCare Bill Part 2

Here is the second in a series of blogs that will address the amendments added to the comprehensive healthcare bill that is supposed to “reform” the healthcare system in America. This one deals with some of the problems as reported by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

Senator Sanders is the only acknowledged Socialist in the United States Congress and has several problems with the current bill which he expressed on his senate website. Here are a few of them paraphrased. You can see the entirety of his statements on his official senate website. So using Senator Sander’s own writings, here are a few of the problems with the bill as they deal with insurance REFORM from a socialist, hard left point-of-view.

First, the bill contains provisions that will place caps on what insurance companies can spend on things like executive salaries and other non-medical costs. Now here comes the Funny part, there are no penalties for exceeding these caps. So where is the motivation for the insurance companies to avoid going over the caps? Where was this when I was a kid and my parents told me not to eat any candy before supper? This could have saved me a few encounters with Dad’s belt. So this is insurance REFORM (that word sure does get used a lot).

Here’s another REFORM – everyone will have to get coverage now. To cover those healthy young people who usually choose not to have coverage, insurance companies will be selling them low premium, high-deductable, catastrophic healthcare plans. Now, those people will have to pay for insurance they probably won’t need and they’ll have an absurdly high deductable if they have to use it. A high deductable that would be similar to their costs without health insurance, thereby defeating the purpose of mandating coverage in the first place. So who reaps the windfall here? I know, I know, big insurance – Nice REFORM.

Lastly on insurance, based on the customer’s age, insurance companies will be able to vary the cost of the coverage by three to one for varying customers. This makes the insurance affordable for some and not for others, but this isn’t age discrimination or anything. Once again, here is some more REFORM that helps who?

So these are only some of the problems with the insurance REFORM portion of the healthcare bill that Senator Sanders pointed out. He has many more on his website covering other topics and they are all pretty eye-opening.

By the way, even with these problems and without his desired single payer health system, he is voting for the bill, but that has nothing to do with the special deals placed in the bill for his home state of Vermont – Nah.


Healthcare Bill or Insurance Entitlement…You Decide,
Bill

HealthCare Bill Part 1

Here is the first in a series of blogs that will address the amendments added to the healthcare bill was supposed to take strides to “reform” the healthcare system in America. This one deals with an amendment that was important to Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd.

Senator Dodd is credited with taking the healthcare torch and running with it after cancer left Teddy Kennedy incapacitated. Senator Dodd did an excellent job as the acting chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and it is important to give credit where credit is due.

One of the provisions Senator Dodd worked hard to include (this last Saturday night) was a provision adding $100 million to build a healthcare facility in Connecticut. Okay, technically this money is not specifically for Connecticut. It is to be dispersed under the direction of the Health And Human Services Department (HHS). While this is theoretically true, it should be pointed out that there is a big “NOT SO FAST BUCKO,” that should be highlighted here.

The fact is that the language in this legislation does leave the money up to the discretion of the HHS. Simply stated, the HHS has to award the money to “a health care facility that provides research, inpatient tertiary care, or outpatient clinical services.” It must be affiliated with an academic health center at a public research university in the United States “that contains a State’s sole public academic medical and dental school.” (OK, maybe that’s not so simply stated)

Pretty nifty writing there, but what that means is that Senator Dodd’s home state University of Connecticut (UConn) is one of about a dozen schools who could even compete for this grant. One has to imagine that UConn will have a pretty good chance of collecting this money with Senator Dodd being the chair of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs and a senior member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.

Not sure how this affects the reform of healthcare in America, but it’s not a bad pick up for a Connecticut senator who is doing poorly in the polls with a reelection campaign coming up in 2010 – Just Saying.

Go Huskies,
Bill

Slow Down Harry!

So Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada) says that all the contrary talk about the senate healthcare plan is reminiscent of past obstructionism to civil rights legislation. Normally I would not even begin to entertain Harry and his usual quips of unqualified remarks made in haste to cover his rear; however, this time he leveled the criticism at the Republicans. Well, let us help Harry and do just a little check on the facts.

First, Abraham Lincoln is credited with freeing the slaves and guess what, he was…Brace Yourself… a Republican! SHHHHH, don’t tell Harry, he’s on a roll.

Second, when the great liberal leader Franklin Roosevelt had his chance to advance civil rights did he? He had 13 years to do something and only in his last few years with the persistence of his wife and other influential leaders did he even do anything. Oh there were bills, but with a heavy hand from the congressional legislators, nothing was done. Plus, Roosevelt’s reliance on southern legislators and governors for support of his social agenda made it easy for FDR not to back civil rights legislation. Job security over what is right – sounds like modern day Washington.

Now for the Third Strike! In 1964, Democrat President Lyndon Johnson was championing civil rights, who was it that blocked the legislation in the senate? You guessed it, the Democrats who stopped cloture by voting 44 out of 67 democrats to stifle the legislation.

Now, I am not saying that the Democrats of today would have voted the same way they did back then. What I am saying is that Harry has got to get a better handle on himself. I know he’s under the gun and the big man came down to see them Sunday, but come on, at least give us a better analogy than this, especially when Harry is in the party that was the obstruction of his analogy.

Slow Down Harry - Later,
Bill