This is very bad news for health care in the US
Daschle will be very good at getting the bad legislative changes through congress. This is very bad news.
One other question: doesn't Daschle have health care lobbying issues? Didn't Obama promise that there would be no lobbying related activities by his appointees.
Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle has accepted President-elect Barack Obama's offer to serve as secretary of Health and Human Services, according to an official familiar with the situation.
Atop HHS, Mr. Daschle is expected to play a key role in moving Mr. Obama's ambitious health care agenda through Congress. He was an early back of Mr. Obama's during the presidential primaries
As a veteran of Washington and of Capitol Hill, he brings knowledge about how to move legislation through Congress. He has a particular interest in health care and is co-author of a book published this year, "Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis." . . . .
One other question: doesn't Daschle have health care lobbying issues? Didn't Obama promise that there would be no lobbying related activities by his appointees.
Labels: healthcare, Obama
posted by John Lott at 1:48 PM
9 Comments:
Health Care is a big topic for me (and has been a frustrating one for me this month as my employer announced our health plan changes for the coming year). I spent a year entirely self-employed. Trying to find insurance for myself and my family was absolutely ridiculous to the point that it was a better deal for me to sign up for a Cobra plan through a former employer (fortunately it was recent enough that I could) rather than go solo into the crazy insurance world (let's just say that even though my monthly Cobra premiums were triple what I pay with my current employer...the Cobra premium was half the cost of the most basic coverage option I could obtain as a self-employed person for myself and my family)
But I have digressed.
Bad news in health care for the US is something that has been coming for the past year or more. I've listened intently over the campaign trail to both Obama and McCain spew out their proposed policies for health care. Both sides terrified me. They each proposed a policy with select advantages for a small portion of the population while ostracizing and harming the rest of the population.
With my company's insurance plan changes announced this month, my health costs for 2009 will probably increase by at least 30%.
While watching the campaign trail, I predicted that my health costs will double by 2012 (the end of the next presidential term).
It's about to be a very sad time for anybody to be sick, need surgery, or get into any type of accident.
Hmmm, one can't help but wonder if business is wanting to see some sort of national healthcare program (making the assumption that they, the corporations won't be taxed more to finance it) implemented to get rid of that cost of business...
Health care insurance is so expensive because healthy people lack insurance. People aged 18 - 30 do not have health insurance because they don't really need it. Add to that problem the people who do not have the money to pay for the expensive insurance and thus are unable to pay their medical bills. Hospitals have to pay their staff so they charge a high cost because a certain percent of people will not pay their bill.
If government made it mandatory for all people of this country to have health insurance, then we will start solving the problem with expensive health care. Just as all drivers are required to own car insurance to drive, people that want to take advantage of government owned, subsidized, or funded hospitals will be required to have insurance. When you get young people to contribute to the insurance fund it will lower the premiums of insurance and allow the poor to buy insurance. Both of these affects will lower hospital costs and insurance premiums. It will also allow the government not to have to take over the medical industry to keep prices stable, and also allow individuals to choose their insurance coverage and their doctor.
If the Democrats do in fact get the supermajority, and it looks as though they will, you may as well kiss your health care goodbye. They'll nationalize health care in this country so fast it'll make your head spin.
FountainheadZero
Join the irate minority.
Please, Lott, explain to us why this is very bad news. Maybe it's because uninsured people are so highly satisfied with being uninsured as you tried to suggest in your recent article?
For everyone else, see this post for a link to Lott's "insightful" contribution to the debate.
Hmmm... I notice, Lott, that you still don't have the courage to post my brief critique of your article. Hardly surprising.
Clark, I didn't post the incredibly long response that you had because it was so incredibly long and was simply nuts. If you looked at Table 1 in the paper, you will see that I have both very dissatisfied and very dissatisfied with dissatisfied. Just read the paper before you waste everyone's time.
Anyone reading the paper can see how in the text you deliberately create a distorted impression of reality. But that's what you do best isn't it? Spread disinformation far and wide and refuse to take responsibility for it. Create false impressions and then hide the evidence and the counter arguments and the truth.
Coward.
The discussion is prominently shown in the first table with its own clearly marked column makes it easy for anyone to see. Since you can't be civil, please don't bother to post here. Thank you for your time.
You seem to rely quite heavily on the tables to correct the distortions in your work.
And yeah, don't worry, I know you don't have the honesty to post this.
Post a Comment
<< Home