1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Sarah Palin: Obama and the Bureaucratization of Health Care

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, Sep 9, 2009.

  1. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,684
    Likes Received:
    6,376
    writing in the WSJ

    [rquoter]By SARAH PALIN

    The president's proposals would give unelected officials life-and-death rationing powers.

    Writing in the New York Times last month, President Barack Obama asked that Americans "talk with one another, and not over one another" as our health-care debate moves forward.

    I couldn't agree more. Let's engage the other side's arguments, and let's allow Americans to decide for themselves whether the Democrats' health-care proposals should become governing law.

    Some 45 years ago Ronald Reagan said that "no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds." Each of us knows that we have an obligation to care for the old, the young and the sick. We stand strongest when we stand with the weakest among us.

    We also know that our current health-care system too often burdens individuals and businesses—particularly small businesses—with crippling expenses. And we know that allowing government health-care spending to continue at current rates will only add to our ever-expanding deficit.

    How can we ensure that those who need medical care receive it while also reducing health-care costs? The answers offered by Democrats in Washington all rest on one principle: that increased government involvement can solve the problem. I fundamentally disagree.

    View Full Image

    Associated Press
    Common sense tells us that the government's attempts to solve large problems more often create new ones. Common sense also tells us that a top-down, one-size-fits-all plan will not improve the workings of a nationwide health-care system that accounts for one-sixth of our economy. And common sense tells us to be skeptical when President Obama promises that the Democrats' proposals "will provide more stability and security to every American."

    With all due respect, Americans are used to this kind of sweeping promise from Washington. And we know from long experience that it's a promise Washington can't keep.

    Let's talk about specifics. In his Times op-ed, the president argues that the Democrats' proposals "will finally bring skyrocketing health-care costs under control" by "cutting . . . waste and inefficiency in federal health programs like Medicare and Medicaid and in unwarranted subsidies to insurance companies . . . ."

    First, ask yourself whether the government that brought us such "waste and inefficiency" and "unwarranted subsidies" in the first place can be believed when it says that this time it will get things right. The nonpartistan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) doesn't think so: Its director, Douglas Elmendorf, told the Senate Budget Committee in July that "in the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount."

    Now look at one way Mr. Obama wants to eliminate inefficiency and waste: He's asked Congress to create an Independent Medicare Advisory Council—an unelected, largely unaccountable group of experts charged with containing Medicare costs. In an interview with the New York Times in April, the president suggested that such a group, working outside of "normal political channels," should guide decisions regarding that "huge driver of cost . . . the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives . . . ."

    Given such statements, is it any wonder that many of the sick and elderly are concerned that the Democrats' proposals will ultimately lead to rationing of their health care by—dare I say it—death panels? Establishment voices dismissed that phrase, but it rang true for many Americans. Working through "normal political channels," they made themselves heard, and as a result Congress will likely reject a wrong-headed proposal to authorize end-of-life counseling in this cost-cutting context. But the fact remains that the Democrats' proposals would still empower unelected bureaucrats to make decisions affecting life or death health-care matters. Such government overreaching is what we've come to expect from this administration.

    Speaking of government overreaching, how will the Democrats' proposals affect the deficit? The CBO estimates that the current House proposal not only won't reduce the deficit but will actually increase it by $239 billion over 10 years. Only in Washington could a plan that adds hundreds of billions to the deficit be hailed as a cost-cutting measure.

    The economic effects won't be limited to abstract deficit numbers; they'll reach the wallets of everyday Americans. Should the Democrats' proposals expand health-care coverage while failing to curb health-care inflation rates, smaller paychecks will result. A new study for Watson Wyatt Worldwide by Steven Nyce and Syl Schieber concludes that if the government expands health-care coverage while health-care inflation continues to rise "the higher costs would drive disposable wages downward across most of the earnings spectrum, although the declines would be steepest for lower-earning workers." Lower wages are the last thing Americans need in these difficult economic times.

    Finally, President Obama argues in his op-ed that Democrats' proposals "will provide every American with some basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable." Of course consumer protection sounds like a good idea. And it's true that insurance companies can be unaccountable and unresponsive institutions—much like the federal government. That similarity makes this shift in focus seem like nothing more than an attempt to deflect attention away from the details of the Democrats' proposals—proposals that will increase our deficit, decrease our paychecks, and increase the power of unaccountable government technocrats.

    Instead of poll-driven "solutions," let's talk about real health-care reform: market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven. As the Cato Institute's Michael Cannon and others have argued, such policies include giving all individuals the same tax benefits received by those who get coverage through their employers; providing Medicare recipients with vouchers that allow them to purchase their own coverage; reforming tort laws to potentially save billions each year in wasteful spending; and changing costly state regulations to allow people to buy insurance across state lines. Rather than another top-down government plan, let's give Americans control over their own health care.

    Democrats have never seriously considered such ideas, instead rushing through their own controversial proposals. After all, they don't need Republicans to sign on: Democrats control the House, the Senate and the presidency. But if passed, the Democrats' proposals will significantly alter a large sector of our economy. They will not improve our health care. They will not save us money. And, despite what the president says, they will not "provide more stability and security to every American."

    We often hear such overblown promises from Washington. With first principles in mind and with the facts in hand, tell them that this time we're not buying it.

    Ms. Palin, Sen. John McCain's running mate in the 2008 presidential election, was governor of Alaska from December 2006 to July 2009.[/i][/rquoter]
     
  2. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
  3. Nice Rollin

    Nice Rollin Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,856
    Likes Received:
    321
    sara palin wrote something? :eek:
     
  4. mc mark

    mc mark Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    468
    It's so cute watching Republicans champion Medicare and Medicaid after trying everything they could possibly do to destroy it over the last 40 years.

    *snicker*
     
  5. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    42,760
    Likes Received:
    2,992
    what's her solution, quitting?
     
  6. vlaurelio

    vlaurelio Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    21,310
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    any mention of her parents and trig?
     
  7. Franchise2001

    Franchise2001 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    20
    Summary:

    Sarah Quittin - We should work together. Common sense says you really shouldn't listen to me, but some of you lack common sense so you will anyways. Blah blah blah, Obama is lying, blah blah blah, federal government sucks at doing stuff, blah blah blah, death panels, blah blah blah, surply and deemand or something like that, blah blah blah, Dems control everything so we must kick and scream NO NO NO....


    Claim: Sarah Palin is intelligent and we should listen to what she has to say...

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Franchise2001

    Franchise2001 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    20
    Also, Palin loves to scare the ultra right winger masses...

    SOCIALIST, DEATH PANELS, PALS WITH TERRORISTS... all coined by the Quitter.... what a shame her worthless name had to be put next to a true american hero in John McCain.

    [​IMG]
     
  9. BetterThanI

    BetterThanI Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    381
    Wow. What insight. You really put some thought into that one, basso.

    Look, I can post articles, too! Aren't I astute.

     
    1 person likes this.
  10. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    22,299
    Likes Received:
    8,143
    Today is Sotomayor's first day on the court.
     
  11. kpsta

    kpsta Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2001
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    166
    Excuse me stewardess, I speak Sarah:

     
    #11 kpsta, Sep 9, 2009
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2009
    1 person likes this.
  12. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    56,811
    Likes Received:
    39,118
    And yet, sir, you did not start a thread with that line, post the entire article/column about it, and then move on to the next thread you intend to start with the next column you see while scanning the interwebs for what might be irritating to your presumed audience. Rinse and repeat. Endlessly, until no one pays any attention, except to toss a joke about it, or to ridicule it.

    What is wrong with you??
     
    #12 Deckard, Sep 9, 2009
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2009
  13. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,684
    Likes Received:
    6,376
    that's rediculous.
     
  14. Franchise2001

    Franchise2001 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    20
    [​IMG]
     
  15. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    56,811
    Likes Received:
    39,118
    Man, it chaps me when I misspell a word while rediculing a fellow member of ClutchFans!

    :( :eek: :p ;)
     
  16. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    53,971
    Likes Received:
    41,943
    Well first off under the status quo there already are unelected officials with life and death rationing powers they just happen to work for private health insurance companies.

    The whole rationing argument is a strawman since rationing already takes place.
     
  17. Franchise2001

    Franchise2001 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    20
    Please refrain from using sound logic in Basso threads.
     
  18. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    42,760
    Likes Received:
    2,992

    why do people think the insurance companies have more interest in your well being than the government? do these people not understand rationing is going on already?
     
  19. Cannonball

    Cannonball Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2006
    Messages:
    21,649
    Likes Received:
    1,907
    Yeah, but I prefer my health care to be rationed by people who are trying to turn a profit in the process.
     
  20. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,684
    Likes Received:
    6,376
    in fact, she speaks (writes) to this, noting that why replace one system of rationing with another, that is less efficient and more expensive, just in the name of "reform?"
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now