No Way: Republican Leadership Has a Plan to Reform Health Care

October 2nd, 2009 by Karina

Health insurance reform opponents continue to spread myths about the health insurance reform debate and America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, including the notion that President Obama and Congressional Democrats are refusing to consider a Republican health care plan. Despite this near constant complaint, the Republican Leadership has failed to offer a comprehensive health care bill – of any kind – for consideration.

MYTH: As we debate health insurance reform, President Obama and Congressional Democrats are refusing to consider a comprehensive Republican health care reform bill.

 

FACT: There is no Republican health care reform bill. Neither the Republican leadership of the House nor of the Senate has offered comprehensive health care legislation for consideration—nor has a group of Members coalesced around a comprehensive solution. In fact, Republicans held the White House and both chambers of Congress for much of the last decade and didn’t pursue solutions they claim to support now—including protecting Medicare and ending insurance company practices of dropping coverage or denying care for people who get sick.

As the AP reported today:

Republican leaders chose not to draft their own comprehensive bill…Aware of the criticisms, House Republican leaders have compiled lists of bills and principles that various colleagues have offered this year. But even the whole list combined doesn’t match the breadth and detail of the massive Democratic-crafted health care bills that have moved through five congressional committees and may soon reach the House and Senate floors in some form.

Republicans are noticing:

Earlier this week, Republican Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA), whom the Republican Party picked to give the Republican response to President Obama’s first joint address to Congress in February, acknowledged Republicans haven’t offered up any real ideas:

I think now is the perfect time to pivot and to say, not only here’s what we’re against, and not only here’s how we’re going to contrast ourselves, but here’s what we’re for.

And today, Steve Schmidt, Senator John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign manager, described the Republican Party as “holistically…bereft of ideas” on health care.

source: Nancy Pelosi blog, The Gavel

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 7983 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform

September 16th, 2009 by Office of the Speaker

Rightardia comment: Tenth Amendment arguments are reminiscent of Dixiecrat arguments during the Civil Rights era of Martin Luther King. The Supreme Court rarely supports 10th Amendment arguments because of the supremacy clause of the federal government in the US Constitution. 

In the United States Constitution, article VI, paragraph 2,  the supremacy clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land".


Of interest, the Constitution of the Confederate States of America also had the same supremacy clause. 


States' right arguments are a right wing wet dreams.

 

Reform opponents continue to spread myths about components of America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, including the nonsensical claim that the federal government has no constitutionally valid role in reforming our health care system—apparently ignoring the validity of Medicare and other popular federal health reforms.

MYTH: “Health insurance reform could be unconstitutional … or violate the 10th amendment.”

FACT: As with Medicare and Medicaid, the federal government has the Constitutional power to reform our health care system.

The 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:



But the Constitution gives Congress broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce. Congress has used this authority to regulate many aspects of American life, from labor relations to education to health care to agricultural production. Since virtually every aspect of the heath care system has an effect on interstate commerce, the power of Congress to regulate health care is essentially unlimited.

The 10th amendment does not authorize states to constrict Congress’ power under the commerce clause. As the Supreme Court has held, Congress can bar racial discrimination in Ollie’s Barbeque in Alabama (Katzenbach v. McClung) or the growing and sale of medical marijuana in California (Gonzales v. Raich), even in the face of state laws permitting such behavior.

The 10th amendment does place one significant limit on Congress and the federal government: Congress cannot “commandeer” state officials to administer programs. It must get the consent of state officials who are asked, e.g., to run health programs for the poor or to help build highways.

Typically, Congress obtains that consent by providing financial support to the states. A state is free to refuse the support and refuse to assist the federal government in administering the program, but Congress can authorize the federal government to administer the program on its own.

Thus, Congress cannot force a state to administer a health insurance exchange, but it can authorize the federal government to administer such an exchange in any state that declines to do so.

One of the myth’s most highly visible proponents has now “backed away from earlier statements” in an interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos:

Stephanopoulos: So just to be clear, are you suggesting that any parts of the plan as the President has laid it out are unconstitutional?

Gov. PAWLENTY (R-Minnesota): Well, I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s a legal issue. I was raising it as much as a practical matter, that there are some things that the federal government shouldn’t do, doesn’t do well, and should leave to the states.

On the shared responsibility requirement in the House health insurance reform bill, which operates like auto insurance in most states, individuals must either purchase coverage (and non-exempt employers must purchase coverage for their workers)—or pay a modest penalty for not doing so. The bill uses the tax code to provide a strong incentive for Americans to have insurance coverage and not pass their emergency health costs onto other Americans—but it allows them a way to pay their way out of that obligation. There is no constitutional problem with these provisions.

source: Nancy Pelosi blog, The Gavel


Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 9401 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Health care Fascism 101: If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.

Free Coverage for Undocumented Immigrants?
September 11th, 2009 by Karina

Health insurance reform opponents continue to spread myths about components of America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, including the thoroughly debunked myth that the House bill will provide taxpayer-financed health coverage for undocumented immigrants. The facts disprove their politically divisive distortions and, in some cases, simple misunderstandings of what’s in the bill.

Myth: The House bill will provide undocumented immigrants with free, taxpayer-financed health coverage.

Fact: This myth has been thoroughly debunked by at least four independent organizations and news media outlets:

The nonpartisan Pulitzer Prize-winning PolitiFact.com debunked this myth as a “Pants On Fire” lie:

In fact, the legislation specifically states that ‘undocumented aliens’ will not be eligible for credits to help them buy health insurance, in Section 246 on page 143. The bottom line here is the e-mail is making things up. The bill does not say anything close to ‘All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services.’ We rate this chain e-mail statement Pants on Fire!

FactCheck.org debunked this myth as one of “Twenty-Six Lies About H.R. 3200″:

That’s simply not what the bill says at all. …The bill does explicitly say that illegal immigrants can’t get any government money to pay for health care. Page 143 states: ‘Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.’ And as we’ve said before, current law prohibits illegal immigrants from participating in government health care programs.

Newsweek debunked this myth as one of the “Five Biggest Lies in the Health Care Debate”:

The House bill doesn’t give anyone free health care…Will they be eligible for subsidies to buy health insurance? The House bill says that “individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States” will not be allowed to receive subsidies.

The Associated Press debunked this myth in their “Spin meter” article:

Grover Norquist, president of the conservative Americans for Tax Reform, criticized the proposed changes to Medicare … ‘It’s $500 billion that won’t be going to the elderly,’ Norquist said. He added that to achieve Obama’s goal of universal coverage, the savings will go to ‘illegal immigrants, people who can self-insure, and healthy 30-year olds who don’t want to pay for insurance.’ None of the health care bills provides coverage for illegal immigrants.

Source: Nancy Pelosi blog, "The Gavel"

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 10118 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com