Friday, January 30, 2009

Health care in the stimulus

The Wall Street Journal has the news.
Tom Daschle is still waiting to be confirmed as secretary of health and human services, not that he's in any rush. Democrats are already enacting his and Barack Obama's agenda of government-run health care -- entirely on the QT.
They learned with the Hillary Healthcare Debacle that most Americans wouldn't like talking about increasing spending on health care while in the middle of this huge financial crisis, so they just went ahead and wrote it in to the stimulus bill with nary a word from the leadership.
Still, it's the "stimulus" that has proven the real gift horse -- a behemoth that has allowed Democrats to speed up the takeover of health care under cover of an economic crisis. They initially claimed, for instance, the "stimulus" would provide Medicaid money to states struggling to pay existing bills. What in fact it does is dramatically expand the number of Americans who qualify for Medicaid.

Under "stimulus," Medicaid is now on offer not to just poor Americans, but Americans who have lost their jobs. And not just Americans who have lost their jobs, but their spouses and their children. And not Americans who recently lost their jobs, but those who lost jobs, say, early last year. And not just Americans who already lost their jobs, but those who will lose their jobs up to 2011. The federal government is graciously footing the whole bill. The legislation also forbids states to apply income tests in most cases.
This crap sandwich keeps getting more aromatic. Rather than risk a debate and transparent government, they're trying to stealth it into the stimulus.
Add it up, and Democrats may move 10 million more Americans under the federal health umbrella -- in just four weeks! Good luck ever cutting off that money. Meanwhile, the Democratic majority is gearing up for a Medicare fight, where it may broach plans to lower the eligibility age to 55. Whatever costs accrue, they'll pay for by slashing the private Medicare Advantage option.
It's time to write my Senators a scathing letter. This stimulus is stimulating me nearly into open rebellion.

6 comments:

J said...

So what should all those 100,000s of laid-off workers do for healthcare, Pawpaw? Not get sick? Their kids shouldn't break bones?

The other night on TV they were talking with some of the 10,000 workers recently given walking papers by DHL. One woman was guaranteed to be able to keep her health insurance for 3 years at a cost of $1,400 per month. Problem is, her new total income is $200 per week from unemployment insurance.

Our nation's financial crisis is about to pale in comparision to the human cost of a huge health care crisis. Decent, hard-working, and formerly middleclass Americans and their family members are about to start dying for lack of health care.

Anonymous said...

I have, in the past, had to provide my own health insurance. The trick is to really shop around, to have large deductables, and primarily look for catastrophic coverage.
Nobody said it was going to be easy, J. But it's not the end of the world if one doesn't have employer provided health insurance. I know because I've been there.

Termite

J said...

If you get laid off and lose your health insurance and you had a previous cancer or heart condition, etc., you can't get coverage. If one of your kids has diabetes, etc., it can't get coverage. Been there, done it. Couldn't get coverage.

Pawpaw said...

Who is DHL and why do I care about them at all?

There were times when I didn't have insurance and no one gave me anything. I've got insurance now, and I pay for it.

I'm sorry for those folks. I really am, but I can't pay for their medical insurance. I don't have the money.

Plus, it's unconstitutional on it's face. Somewhere, the libs got the idea that government can do anything. It can't, constitutionally. The document is only six pages long. Read it and tell me where it says the government can pay for medical insurance? It doesn't say that anywhere.

Standard Mischief said...

People have been kept shielded from the true cost of health care for so long, market forces haven't been keeping the prices in check. We need reform, but not socialized-insecurity-medicine . Please show me one example anywhere where state-run single-payer Hillary care has worked. (I'm looking for low costs, solvent, without therapy restrictions to cut costs, or rationing access to MRI machines) People supergluing their crowns back in at the place that used to be Great Britain is the antithesis.

In kind, I'll give you three places that the free market has worked to lower prices and increase access in healthcare. 1. Elective cosmetic surgery 2. Laser eye surgery 3. Generic prescription medicine (a program started by wal-mart, copied within 24 hours by Target, and further copied by Kmart, CVS, and others) Heck, local grocery chain Giant Food is offering free antibiotics just to get you in the door at their pharmacy.

Anonymous said...

Pawpaw said...
Plus, it's unconstitutional on it's face. Somewhere, the libs got the idea that government can do anything. It can't, constitutionally. The document is only six pages long. Read it and tell me where it says the government can pay for medical insurance? It doesn't say that anywhere.


PawPaw,

You just KNOW those same socialists are gonna claim it falls under the "General Welfare" clause......(rolls eyes...)

Termite