Tag Archives: Republicans

One More Thing on Health Reform

Could not ignore Joe Paduda’s first post this morning, which is also covered on the Health Wonk Review blog.

He lays out in great detail who would be affected by passage of this zombie legislation, and who would come out ahead,

It’s enough to make you sick, that such people exist who will take away health care from the very people who put them in office, and don’t care that many of them will die because they can no longer get health care.

Comedian Jimmy Kimmel went on his show the other night and confessed to the entire country about his newborn son’s heart disease. What was the response from the Nazi right? Attacks.

Why do these people continue to vote against their own economic interests? There are many reasons for this. The first one is simply, they don’t believe Democrats. And why? Because for far too long, Democrats have engaged in Identity Politics, and have ignored the heartland.

Second, the Democrats have generally avoided campaigning in, or developing their local or state parties in those states most likely to vote Republican, but would benefit from Democratic policies in education, job creation, health care, etc.

Third, Republicans have done a great job of convincing people of an “us versus them” mentality. Republicans sound like “us”, act like “us”, enjoy the same activities as “us”, where “they” do not. You hear the words, “elite”, or “elitist” thrown around, as was done yesterday in response to Kimmel’s plea by an alt-rightist.

Forth, Republicans know how to frame an argument by using simple words and phrases, where Democrats go into long, drawn out lectures on policy. They talk to Americans as if every American has a college degree in political science or sociology. Yex, polls do so that many Americans agree with Democratic policies, but we know that polls are not always accurate.

The last election proved that.

Lastly, the Democrats have been late to the party as to what is happening to working people, both blue collar and white collar workers. In fact, the Republicans know all too well what is happening, as they are responsible for the prolongation of their misery, and will do nothing to stop what is about to happen when jobs are replaced by automation.

Universal Basic Income (UBI)? Not from this crowd of neo-fascist, libertaritards. (Take that, Rush Limbaugh!) Want some more Oxycodone?

As we are witnessing day by day, the US is going backwards. All the way back to the 19th century, the very century the GOP is most comfortable with, because that is when they had complete control of the entire government, and their friends in industry were getting richer and richer, and there were no government programs or laws protecting workers and the poor.

So if this zombie health care law gets passed, look out…there will be more zombies where that came from.

Ding, Dong, Health Care “Reform” Is Dead: A Political View

Time for another rant, but this time it is based on actual facts, plus an understanding of the real reason repeal and replace of the ACA is not going to happen.

There are many reasons for why repeal and replace has failed; some of them have to do with the complexity of the health care marketplace, others have to do with the fact that all the negative things the opposition said about the law did not come to pass, even though some people are paying higher premiums, or cannot find a doctor because there aren’t enough where they live and have to travel long distances to find a doctor (primary or specialist), or the insurance companies have exited the exchanges, thus limiting the number of payers.

Joe Paduda has been conducting an ACA Deathwatch, and yesterday, Joe wrote that ACA repeal will not happen.

This, he says, is due to the defection of one major GOP legislator, Fred Upton, of Michigan.

But what Joe does not say is why the GOP has been so single-minded in wanting to destroy the ACA (besides the obvious reason of tarnishing Obama’s legacy).

The one guiding principal and reason for “repeal and replace” is solely due to the adoption by the Republican Party (or should I say takeover) by out and out libertarians, and rampant libertarianism.

This has nothing to do with the Libertarian Party, although many members of that party were Republicans in the past; case in point, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, who ran for President last year as the Libertarian Party candidate.

To prove to you that this is the case why the GOP has been so one-track minded, one only has to read the response from former GOP Congressman Joe Walsh (you remember him, the guy who yelled “you lie” to Obama during the SOTU speech).

Walsh, not to be confused with the Joe Walsh of rock and roll, said the following in his tweet response to Jimmy Kimmel’s tearful admission that his newborn son had a heart defect that needed surgery, and Kimmel defended the right of others not as fortunate as him and his wife to afford that surgery, which would have been fatal to any other child whose parents could not afford it.

Here is the exact tweet:

Joe Walsh@WalshFreedom

Sorry Jimmy Kimmel: your sad story doesn’t obligate me or anybody else to pay for somebody else’s health care.

At first, you might think this guy is a heartless SOB, but if you read the tweet carefully, and look closely at the word “freedom” after his name, and the tweet itself, you will see that to Mr. Walsh and the rest of his “Freedom” Caucus, it is not that he is heartless, it’s that he is brainless.

Because only a brainless idiot still clings to a political philosophy that time and again has been discredited. He believes he nor anybody else is obligated to pay for someone else’s health care, but I bet he does not feel that way when other people have to pay for his or his children’s public school education, or their ability to have lunch while in school or to even have books to read and pens and pencils with which to do schoolwork with. Or to bring it even closer to home, to have other people (namely taxpayers) pay for his health care when he was in Congress. Do as I say, not do as I do.

Or maybe he sends his kids to private school?

You see, the real reason the GOP is against the ACA is they don’t believe it is the role of the government to do anything for anyone, and that includes providing health care. They are fundamentally opposed to it on philosophical and ideological grounds, and like their Speaker, are slavishly devoted to the rantings and writings of a 20th century novelist and the reactionary views of an economist few have ever heard of.

You know, of course, where the Freedom Caucus came from? It is the legislative part of the Tea Party, founded by former Congressman Tom DeLay (there’s a name for you), and the Tea Party has nothing to do with a hot beverage. It means “Taxed Enough Already”.

But the real impetus behind the Tea Party was not the old folks demanding the government keep its hands off their Medicare. It came from the very wealthy who donated large sums to elect Republicans to office. It started with Howard Jarvis in CA, spread under Reagan and both Bushes, and popped up during the debate over the ACA.

Jimmy Kimmel said the problem with health care was partisanship; however, as written in Salon, the problem is with one party…the Republicans. This by no means lessens the impact of Kimmel’s plea.

The response from President Obama, DNC Chairman Tom Perez, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was overwhelmingly positive.

The current occupant continued his insane view that the ACA was dead. Sort of like saying Andrew Jackson could have prevented the Civil War, or that he recently met with Frederick Douglass.

Finally, the defeat of repeal and replace is laid at the feet of those GOP congresspersons who are vulnerable in the next election, and are hesitant to incur the wrath of their constituents, if the recent town hall meetings are any indication.

Like health care itself, the defeat has many reasons, but at the core lies the simple fact that libertarian, free market solutions are more dangerous to the health of the American people than the alleged disaster the GOP has painted the ACA with.

Disaster Averted

Yesterday’s crushing defeat of the so-called “American Health Care Act” or AHCA, signals the end of the seven-year long attempt by the Republican Party to legislatively kill the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Yet, as was pointed out on one cable news network last night, it won’t stop the health insurance industry from getting the Republicans in Congress to kill parts of the law slowly by eliminating the taxes that go to pay for the coverage.

Call it “genocide by stealth”, since millions of Americans will die, as per the Congressional Budget Office (CBO’s) scoring of AHCA. If they can’t kill the law outright, the so-called “Freedom Caucus”, actually the Congressional version of the Tea Party, will kill it slowly.

Why do you think they keep saying it is a disaster and it is crumbling? It’s because they are dead set against anyone getting health care unless someone else can make a profit from selling a policy.

Then there is the other question, the one usually raised by liberals and progressives, especially those who supported Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders last year in the primaries, as to why we are the only Western country without universal coverage.

The answer is complex, but not complicated (“who knew health care was so complicated?). First, everything the government of the US has ever implemented for the benefit of people has had to pass muster with the Constitution. It either has to be covered by the Constitution directly, or implied through the taxing mechanism.

Second, the Founding Fathers never mentioned or promoted the right to health care, as the prevailing political and social philosophy of the day was concerned with freedom, liberty, and private property. It has been unclear what, if anything, was meant by the phrase, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, let alone, the phrase, “promote the general welfare.”

Why they never mentioned health care and why other nations have it, is due to the fact that the US was founded during the first half of the period historians call, “the Enlightenment”, when the right to private property, liberty, and freedom were the topics of discussion on both sides of the Atlantic. Basically, the difference between Classical Liberalism (Conservatism) and Modern Liberalism (Liberalism) is between negative rights (the right not to be killed) versus positive rights (the right to a job, education, housing, health care, etc.)

Canada gained its limited independence from Britain nearly a hundred years after we did, and therefore was influenced by the philosophy of the second half of the Enlightenment, which stressed involvement by government in the economy.

The only time the Founders cared about providing some kind of health care plan was directed towards a particular group of citizens in the late eighteenth century, as I wrote about in this post.

What is now called the Public Health Service began as a government-sponsored, health plan for merchant sailors on ships entering and leaving US ports and on inland waterways. It was never challenged in the Supreme Court as unconstitutional, nor was it ever attacked by members of the opposition party. In fact, it was supported by both Federalists and Anti-Federalist politicians of the day.

The third reason why we don’t have universal, single-payer is because the government allowed employers to provide coverage during WWII to attract women into the workplace when the men went overseas. The UK is often cited as an example for single-payer, but what most supporters of this type of plan do not realize is that because of the devastation the UK suffered at the hands of German bombs, their health care system needed to be re-built from scratch, so the government stepped in with the NHS. Even Churchill supported it.

Fourth, we have always provided health care to certain at risk groups like the poor (Medicaid), the elderly (Medicare), and to children (CHIP), as well as to former service persons and their families (Tricare), etc. Perhaps the way to begin to get universal coverage is to merge all of these programs into one, then expand it to cover everyone else.

But for the time being, a major disaster was averted, but we should not think this is the end of the debate, nor is there victory. The battle lines are drawn, and the enemy is not surrendering. This is not a time for congratulation, but for vigilance and resolve.

 

Another Fine Mess

Republican politicians are the Stan Laurel of American politics. For those not familiar with the famous comedy team of Laurel and Hardy from the first half of the 20th century, Stan Laurel was the one who always got the boys into what Oliver Hardy called, “another fine mess.”

laurel-hardy

Stan Laurel is the one on the left.

I call the GOP the Stan Laurel of politics because after three expensive wars that have drained our economy, and the financial meltdown they left the outgoing administration, they now want to repeal the Affordable Care ACT (ACA), more commonly referred to as “Obamacare.”

Some genius on Facebook recently said that he wanted them to repeal Obamacare because he was getting his insurance from the Affordable Care Act. His friends took him to task for not knowing that it is one and the same.

But the embodiment of Stan Laurel in the Republican Party should be Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan. For those unsure of who he is, here is his picture.

ryanrand

He’s on the left. The person to his right is his idol, Ayn Rand (throw in Rand Paul and you get ‘Ayn Rand Paul Ryan Ayn Rand, moving one name and some letters and dropping others). Paul Ryan, among other things, wants to eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the ACA as well. I am sure unemployment and work comp are also on his agenda.

The only books on economics Ryan has ever read are “Atlas Shrugged” and the “The Fountainhead.” Works of fiction, just like his party’s proposal to repeal and replace the ACA. Replace with what? Before it was called “Obamacare” it was called, “Romneycare”, as it was the plan Mitt Romney and Ted Kennedy enacted in Massachusetts. [It should be noted that Rand towards the end of her life, lived on Welfare and Social Security; so much for rugged individualism]

So, this is really a Republican idea that they want to repeal, but don’t know what to replace it with, or even if they will replace it. They certain will, from all I have seen and heard, blow a hole in our budget if they do repeal and replace it with something worse. Another fine mess, GOP!

Here’s another picture of Paul Ryan, next to his long-lost sibling, Alfred E. Newman.

separated-at-birth

A striking resemblance, don’t you think?

Fellow blogger, Joe Paduda, has been chronicling an “ACA Deathwatch” and what repeal means.

So, if you don’t believe me when I say the GOP will get us into another fine mess, listen to Joe. And be aware that there are alternatives to the disaster that awaits us if they do repeal the ACA, but ignore them at your peril.

And Now For Something Completely Different

Image

I thought I might like to go off topic and write about something other than medical tourism and its implementation into workers’ compensation.

Many of you may have certain views and beliefs about the Affordable Care Act (ACA, or PPACA), and believe that government-run, tax supported health care is unconstitutional, despite what the Supreme Court ruled. However, you will be surprised to learn, as I did the other night, that some of the Founding Fathers, namely John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and Jefferson’s Treasury Secretary, Albert Gallatin, supported the establishment of federal marine hospitals under an Act signed into law by John Adams in July 1798.

In an earlier life, I was a double major in Political Science and History, among other Social Science and Humanities courses, and hold a Masters’ degree in American History from New York University. Generally, when one studies American history and American politics, emphasis is usually placed on such acts as the Alien and Sedition Acts, or the very important first cases heard by the Supreme Court such as Marbury v Madison or McCulloch v Maryland. But the Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen was never a part of my courses, even when I studied American social or labor history.

As reported in two separate articles in Forbes magazine in January 2011 by Rick Unger, a Forbes Contributor, Unger describes how the 5th Congress, presided over by Thomas Jefferson in the Senate, and Jonathan Dayton, the Speaker of the House, who was the youngest man to sign the Constitution, passed the first government run and mandated health insurance program.  

In the first article, “Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance – In 1798”, Unger explains that the Founders realized that foreign trade was essential to our young economy, and they relied on the nation’s private merchant ships and sailors to carry out that trade. What precipitated the enactment of this law was that the job of a merchant sailor was very dangerous and difficult, and the sailors were exposed to tropical diseases and hurting themselves. This caused a reduction in manpower, and often left a ship’s captain without enough men to get out of port, which was bad for business and for the economy.

Recognizing that a healthy maritime workforce was needed, the Congress and the President did something about it. When it passed, it authorized the creation of a government operated marine hospital service, and mandated that privately employed sailors be required to purchase health insurance.

The Marine Hospital Service was a series of hospitals built and operated by the federal government to treat injured and ailing, privately employed sailors. It was paid for by a mandatory tax on the sailors (a little more than 1% of their wages) that was withheld from their pay and turned over to the government by the ship’s owner. This was not optional, if you wanted the job, you had to pay.

Image

Ships were no longer permitted to sail in and out of our ports without the health care tax being paid. This was the first national payroll tax. A sick or injured sailor would be given a voucher (in those days they actually paid off) once his payments were confirmed to have been collected and paid to the government, then the voucher would allow them to be admitted to the hospitals.

A few of these hospitals were privately operated, but the majority of the sailors were treated at federal maritime hospitals. This was expanded to include the Mississippi and Ohio rivers. This program eventually became the Public Health Service, and still exists today.

The second article, “Thomas Jefferson Also Supported Government Run Health Care”, published in Forbes four days after the first article, confirms that other Founding Fathers supported the idea of mandated health coverage and a government run hospital system.

So what does this mean? It means that the Tea Party/Libertarian/GOP attempts to overturn the ACA (aka Obamacare) because it mandates that all individuals purchase health insurance, is not only Constitutional, but that the very men who started this nation, Adams and Jefferson, and those who signed the Constitution, believed that such a mandated health care system for merchant sailors was necessary. And since the Constitution is for all the people, not just a certain class of people, like merchant sailors in the 18th or 19th centuries, or today’s military personnel, their spouses and children, veterans, old people, the poor or rich, white Men and a few Women in Congress who get taxpayer supported health care, but the rest of us do not.

It also means that Grover Norquist must be a Monarchist or a traitor to the Republic because he stated that his goal was to take back the country before the Socialists took over. Before learning about this Act, I thought that meant Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Obama, but now it seems it means that John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton (Really?… Alexander Hamilton, the guy on the ten dollar bill and the guy who assumed all of the debt the original thirteen states incurred during the Revolution and started our national economy), as well as a former Treasury Secretary and Speaker of the House were Socialists, according to Norquist and the Tea Party-types. Then I guess the British Crown really was a Capitalist enterprise. Who knew? The American Revolution was fought for Socialism, except Socialism did not exist for a few more decades, and Karl Marx was not even born when this Act was passed.

So whenever anyone tells you that health care isn’t a right, that it is an entitlement and that forcing people to pay for health care is un-American, or un-Constitutional, refer them to the Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.