Republicans Have No Credibility on Health Care
Jacob Weisberg's recent piece on slate.com asked, "Are Republicans Serious About Fixing Health Care?" The answer, unsurprisingly, is "no." What is more important about the article is that it reminds us who created the massive deficits and debt that the Republican cannot stop talking about (and blaming Dems for it, of course).
Jacob discusses the last time the Republicans tinkered with health care - changing the prescription-drug coverage under Medicare when Republicans controlled the Executive and Legislative branches. Republicans used so many low-down dirty tricks in getting that legislation through that they have absolutely no credibility when it comes to accusing the Dems of abusing their power currently.
Remember that they were also greatly cutting taxes on the rich at this point - so not only were the Republicans reducing revenue to the government, they were greatly increasing its expenditures while also still not providing quality health care reform! Weisberg sums it up nicely:
Thanks to something called the "doughnut hole," drug coverage disappears when out-of-pocket costs reach $2,400, returning only when they hit $3,850. Simply stated, the bill cost a fortune, wasn't paid for, is complicated as hell, and doesn't do all that much—though it does include coverage for end-of life-counseling, or what Grassley now calls "pulling the plug on grandma."
Read the rest of the article for more helpful context on just how much damage the Republican health care reform has done to the federal fiscal future.
In my lifetime, the vast majority of federal debt comes from Republican Administrations whereas Democratic Administrations are more responsible and tend to legislate within their means. As my friend James wrote awhile back, the Republicans are like arsonists that bitch about the fire department wasting water.
Left unmentioned, but worth bringing up is that Republicans have always hated Medicare and would prefer to let old people fend for themselves in the market to a functioning government program that has greatly reduced poverty amongst the elderly as well as reducing the load on people my age who might otherwise be saddled with the massively greater debt if my parents became ill after retiring (I hope they get to retire!)
Recent comments
- Yeah, in the context of
2 weeks 5 days ago - comparison
2 weeks 5 days ago - Interesting comparison but
2 weeks 6 days ago - It's a slippery slope though
2 weeks 6 days ago - markets
3 weeks 1 day ago - interesting article & comments
3 weeks 1 day ago - MMA
5 weeks 6 days ago - Yup
6 weeks 8 hours ago - Hmmmm
6 weeks 9 hours ago - Pigs is pigs
11 weeks 4 days ago
Recent Tweets
- SportShotChris: I'm #reading The Big Short by Michael Lewis http://t.co/KyI2k3jY
- SportShotChris: RT @elforesto: Komen is still a terrible charity. They regularly bully people with bogus copyright claims. Why would you WANT their co ...
- SportShotChris: RT @stopthecap: HissyFitWatch: ATT's Failed-Merger Tab Will Be Covered by Customers http://t.co/DuAlRBYF

Comments
Unfortunately...
Most of the dems are not interested in health care either. Certainly some are, but they got rolled by the status quo, legalized bribery, what's in it for me greed heads. Until we get money out of politics, it ain't gonna change. I have gone from 100% for health care reform to about 96% against the current bill. The only reason I can think to pass the piece of shit that they crafted is to avoid giving the repugnants a win. Most of any esteem that I held for Obama has disappeared with my support for the bill.
As has always been?
It would seem that while I agree totally with you, this is the same problem we have had at least since FDR. Though we remember many of the important programs he established (programs often labeled socialist by those who oppose them merely because they oppose them, not because they have any understanding of socialism), most have forgotten that those programs had many problems when established and many argued they did not go far enough. So it goes. We adapt and move on, always assuming things are worse now than they have been.
Humans are good at forgetting - this is not a flaw, it is essential to our survival as a species because many of the things we forget give us hope for the future. Noting this is not the same as endorsing it, as selective memory is also important to avoid continuously repeating mistakes. Fox News has absolutely no sense of history - they live every moment and react to it based on an ideological prism rather than any understanding of human events.
All of this leads to my point - that this reform totally sucks but if it is remembered at all, it will be as a great triumph.
It is much worse
If you take a look back on the earth shattering pieces of legislation, you will see that it has gotten a huge amount worse. Take the Social Security Act - there was no pork whatsoever. No give away to Wall Stree or the Bankers. Look at the Voting Rights Act of 1964. No pork. No give aways to the southern states to make it more palatable. Then look at Medicare part D. A horrible bill that was written by the repugnants to give big pharma a ton of money. Now, the latest abortion. Give aways to the insurance industry, big pharma and hospitals. The dems take the horrible ideas of the repugnants and make everything much worse.
Where does it go from here?
Gonna get worse
I would be shocked if those well versed in the legislation you noted could not point out behind-the-scenes deals to get votes. However, I would not be shocked if things are indeed worse - and if I had to guess, it will get worser from here. But the next generation will adapt.
Post new comment