The healthcare issue: As dead as the deer in “Tommy Boy”
I was in a workshop yesterday when the speaker announced Nancy Pelosi had declared the healthcare bill dead. That’s not exactly what I’m reading this morning, although lots of what I’m reading is good.
I had a chance last night to ask Rep. Mike Pence what he’d been hearing. As the 3rd ranking Republican House leader, his ear is as close to the ground as anyone’s. He said the chatter was the Dems would try to pass healthcare in bits and pieces.
So no, the issue of socialized healthcare isn’t dead. No one should rest on any laurels.
Someone in another meeting said to think of the healthcare issue like the deer scene in the movie Tommy Boy. Recall Richard (David Spade) had just hit a deer, and he and Tommy (Chris Farley) decided to put what they thought was a dead deer in the back seat of their car. Here’s what happened next…
I think that’s a good analogy. And with that scene in mind, read this Bloomberg story recapping yesterday’s events…
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said her chamber lacks the votes to pass the Senate’s health-care legislation, dashing hopes of a quick resolution for President Barack Obama’s top domestic priority.
“In its present form, without change, I don’t think it’s possible to pass the Senate bill in the House,” Pelosi told reporters today in Washington.
Senate Democrats no longer have the 60 votes they need to overcome Republican delaying tactics and pass legislation after a loss in the Jan. 19 special Senate election in MA. That means the party had to change course from its plan of combining separate House and Senate bills and sending the new measure back for votes in each chamber.
Passing the Senate plan, as is, would be the quickest option because it could go straight to Obama’s desk for his signature. Democrats are considering scaling back the bills to win passage, and Obama may start a new effort to reach out to Republicans, who have been united in opposing the legislation, according to a person familiar with the discussions.
Pelosi, a CA Democrat, said she isn’t ruling out anything and that her party remains committed to passing legislation that would cover tens of millions of uninsured Americans and attempt to curb rising medical costs.
“We have to get a bill passed,” she said.
House Democrats oppose Senate provisions including a tax on the most expensive, employer-provided health-insurance plans, Pelosi said. A House leadership aide said Democrats in the chamber would be open to passing a modified Senate bill, rather than passing the current one and depending on a 2nd piece of legislation later that would make fixes.
“We are not in a big rush,” Pelosi said. Congress will “take the time it needs to consider the options,” she said.
Bringing Republicans back into negotiations increases the chances that a scaled-down measure might pass even with defections by Democrats who want a more far-reaching bill….
Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have spent the last 2 days talking to their members and trying to plot the next steps. After House Democrats met this morning behind closed doors, several said there is an emerging consensus that breaking the legislation into pieces might be the best path.
“The sense is we shouldn’t drop the subject, but maybe we need to look at some pieces of it,” said Representative Jose Serrano, a New York Democrat.
That would fit with a suggestion Obama made yesterday.
“I would advise that we try to move quickly to coalesce around those elements in the package that people agree on,” Obama said in an interview with ABC News broadcast last night.
Obama’s preferred elements include new insurance industry rules, such as the elimination of lifetime caps on insurance plans and a ban on insurers denying people coverage because of pre-existing medical conditions, according to an administration official. They also include subsidies to help some individuals afford coverage, and cost-containment steps such as empowering an outside panel to control Medicare spending.
A group of 25 House Democrats have begun circulating draft proposals for smaller bills that would not include an individual or employer mandate, any new entitlement programs, or a public option to compete with private insurers….
An initial bill would deal with controlling costs and revising the way doctors and hospitals administer and charge for health care. A 2nd would address the antitrust exemption for insurers and a 3rd would address physician concerns about liability, Pascrell said.
Passing health-care legislation “in micro fashion would allow people to understand what’s in it,” Pascrell said. “I’m saying let’s step back and take this in small steps.”…



“I would advise that we try to move quickly to coalesce around those elements in the package that people agree on,” Obama said in an interview with ABC News broadcast last night.
Surely you can’t object to this. Or do you just object to everything?
Stay vigilant. All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. And make no mistake about it: the “health care” (government expansion) bill is evil. The civil government has no right to take one citizen’s money to pay for the healing (or killing) of another. Responsibility for health care rests in the hands of the family and the church (and the omniscient God who has only given the civil government limited responsibilities to keep law and order).
If the omniscient God doesn’t want universal health care, I’m sure it won’t pass. Don’t worry.
“”We are not in a big rush,” Pelosi said”
———————————–
Really? Could’ve fooled me…
Maybe PP’s asking for their money back…
Hal, the omniscient God has given us the freedom to be wise or to be foolish. He has not given us (or Himself) freedom from the consequences. What a man sows, he must reap. The wages of sin are death.
Well, there is a way out of my sins and some of their consequences (the most serious consequences), but that way involved considerable cost to Someone else. He had to suffer the consequences. However, He chose to do so. No civil government took His life from Him, but He gave it when the right time had come.
Hal,
This isn’t about health care. It is about a government takeover of another sector of our lives.
From the Politico:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31839.html
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman captured the left’s winter of discontent Thursday with a blog post in which he wrote that he’s “pretty close to giving up on Mr. Obama, who seems determined to confirm every doubt I and others ever had about whether he was ready to fight for what his supporters believed in.”
Rhode Island Rep. Patrick Kennedy: “We’ve done a damn good job at righting this ship. And now it’s starting to move in the right direction. Now what happened?” he said. “We lost the sense of urgency that we’re still doing it every single day, because this isn’t over yet.”
The problem, from the perspective of the White House, is that fractious Democrats provide all the political direction of a nine-needled compass — and often send contradictory messages about how they want him to proceed.
“We all pretty much knew for sure we were going to lose Massachusetts,” one person in attendance told POLITICO on Wednesday. “And yet, last night and this morning, we had absolutely no message guidance from the White House, [the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee] or [the Democratic National Committee]. There was no leadership…
———————————————————–
The progressive\liberal\humanists have engaged the enemy and are awakening to the reality, the enemy is them.
But Rhode Island democRAT Rep. Patrick Kennedy , clueless son of dearly departed Ted Kennedy, still believes the problem is only a failure to communicate to Americans what progressive\liberal democRATS have done, are doing and will do.
Heres a hint son of Ted:
RASMUSSEN:
Obama Approval Index: -18
Strongly Approve 25%
Strongly Disapprove 43%
Total Approval: 45%
Paddy you are dumber than you wrongly believe your fellow citizens are.
yor bro ken
Posted by: Hal at January 22, 2010 8:59 AM
“If the omniscient God doesn’t want universal health care, I’m sure it won’t pass. Don’t worry.”
—————————————————
HAL,
That reminds me of the story about the creative fellow who said that every week on the sabbath he would throw his paycheck toward the heavens and he only kept what GOD sent back down.
A safer strategy, in the absence of knowing GOD’s will, would be to pray like everything depends on GOD and work like everything depends on you.
yor bro ken
Hal,
I’ll agree with you. However, I feel that the problem in DC, as well as in most message boards about the subject, is that the basics that we all agree upon aren’t all that agreed upon.
For instance, is not covering pre-existing conditions a problem that must be fixed? Maybe. There are definitely issues of overreach (you didn’t disclose x illness from 15 years ago, so we retroactively drop you because you now have an unrelated expensive claim), but I can understand why individual policy insurers (as opposed to group plans) have real issues with this. I mean, if you couldn’t be turned down for pre-existing conditions, why would you apply for insurance before you had a severe health ailment? Heck, otherwise why would you apply for insurance anytime before the day before you have complicated surgery and cancel it as soon as the follow-ups were done? That’s an extreme example, but some people would do this. Similarly, lifetime caps might be low for some individual insurance plans, and maybe state health insurance regulators should set higher minimum caps. But, I don’t know how comfortable I am saying that a $1-2 million lifetime limit is extreme. That’s a lot of medical care, even if you have complicated surgeries.
Second, the current health bill does virtually nothing to reform malpractice. I don’t advocate limiting damages from true malpractice to only lost wages and medical bills, but still there should be some threshholds and guards so that the abuses are addressed. For instance, a loser pays provision might cut back on a lot of contingency cases that are filed simply hoping for a settlement offer. Without significant malpractice reform, you will still have a lot of doctors performing unnecessary tests because they have to cover their assets. It’s such a problem that new physicians don’t even realize they’re doing it- they’re being trained to do so in medical school.
Should we let the government health programs be able to negotiate (notice negotiate, not dictate) drug prices for federal drug programs? Sure, I can live with that.
Fourth, allow insurance companies to sell policies across state borders. These insurers can be governed by federal regulators. (A system like this is already in place for banks. There are state chartered banks whose primary regulator is the local state division of banking/finance, and there are national regulators such as the Office of Thrift Supervision, the Federal Reserve Bank, and the Comptroller of the Currency.)
However, I don’t know how much more I agree with, and I don’t know if many Democrats would be open to this limited amount of reform. And frankly, I don’t trust Nancy Pelosi to not sneak in a few pet provisions into any bill, much less Ben Nel$on to not craft out special provisions in the $enate.
I guess I ask you Hal, what would you consider to be acceptable minimal parts of the legislation?
The Incredible Deflation of Barack Obama
By Mortimer B. Zuckerman
Posted January 21, 2010
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/mzuckerman/2010/01/21/mort-zuckerman-the-incredible-deflation-of-barack-obama.html?PageNr=1
The air is seeping out of the Obama balloon. He has fallen to below 50 percent in the poll approval ratings, a decline punctuated by his party’s shocking loss in the Massachusetts special election.
In a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, only 23 percent said they “trusted the government just about always or most of the time”—the smallest proportion in 12 years, and the all-important independent swing voters who decide elections now favor Republicans by 52 percent, up from 30 percent.
More worrying for the administration is that while Obama gets the approval of 76 percent of non-whites, his approval among whites is down to 41 percent, according to Gallup. This is a huge change that literally puts the Democratic control of Congress at risk.
[These ‘independents’ must be those same angry white men, clinging to their God, their gun and their wallets, who liberals blamed for electing W.]
yor bro ken
Michael @ 1:47,
Great comment! Are you running for political office any time soon?
Hi Janet,
No, and I’m not interested in running for office, either. I have respect for individuals who run with true concern for their local community. Unfortunately, it seems like most politicians from both parties are narcissists whose God is in the mirror, and I don’t think I could get down and dirty to win elections. Maybe I could, but I don’t want to become that type of person.
Right now, I’m busy with my job, my wife and three beautiful daughters, and I can’t wait to see them tonight. I don’t want more than that.
Michael, I can’t blame you! Just thought I’d ask.
* * * * *
Hey folks,
Planned Parenthood is up to more shenanigans in Aurora, IL. See Steve Trombley’s opinion piece today in the Aurora Beacon News.
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/beaconnews/news/opinions/2004370,2_4_AU22_LETTERS_S1-100122.article
Janet, the president and CEO of PP Illinois is a guy? WHAT!? I thought that pro-choicers believed that men should have absolutely nothing to do with abortion decisions! Oh well… I guess they only apply this rule to pro-lifers. ;)
More of billionaire liberal Mort Zuckerman, former backer and supporter of B.O. speaking his mind
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/12899/Liberal_Mort_Zuckerman:_Obamas_Done_Everything_Wrong.html
Zuckerman calls B.O. everything but a barbarian, a bigot and a tyrant.
Well Mort being the wordsmith that he is found sweeter sounding terms to say the same sort of things about a politician he once whole heartedly endorsed.
yor bro ken
1 – 2 mil is not that much. My 6 month old was diagnosed with epilepsy at one month and has run up a quarter mil bill already. Thank God for the ketogenic diet! I know of twin premi boys who each had a million dollar bill from several months in the hospital. Granted, my itemized statement is a joke, $25 for a single empty sterile syringe, but it’s what the hospital charges.
segamon @ 5:42,
Unfortunately there are as many misguided men as women when it comes to abortion. Look at all the old abortionists – they’re all “men”.
***
Speaking of men, they suffer from abortion – we can’t forget them. They (in addition to women) also benefit from post-abortive counseling.
Correction:
“Speaking of men, they suffer from abortion – we can’t forget them. They (in addition to women) also benefit from post-abortion counseling.”
I’m very much in favor of the House passing through parts, one at a time, and getting official votes on the record. Reform is definitely needed – I think we’ve all known too many families (or been a family ourselves) that are struggling with health care bills.
It is a shame something bigger couldn’t get done, but get parts though. And get official votes on the record on it. I think the GOP folks can easily justify killing the overall bill because there were many controversial parts of it. If you strip down smaller parts though (like pre-existing conditions), now folks have to put up or shut up.
Ex-GOP Voter said, “Reform is definitely needed – I think we’ve all known too many families (or been a family ourselves) that are struggling with health care bills.”
Reform is needed, but it’s needed to get rid of Medicare. The civil government has no jurisdiction (or very little, at least) over my body! Keep out!
For the same reason, the civil government may not compel me to pay for someone else’s bills. Taxes are necessary to pay for soldiers, policemen, judges, congressmen, and senators–and all the supporting bureaucracy (vigilantly limited). Taxes might also necessary for some works for the general welfare e.g. roads. Education? I’m not so sure. Health care? Definitely not!
Families that are struggling with health-care bills ought to go to their support networks i.e. the church.
Well Jon, I hope you’ve declined any health insurance options then and pay out of pocket. Only seems fair in your views.
EGV,
Health insurance and tort reform is a must and I have already pointed out time and again how this could come about without costing the taxpayer a dime.
Like Geico and Allstate, health insurance companies could be competing for our business. People could get tax breaks for health insurance and health savings accounts.
Also, people could take much more personal responsibility for protecting their own health.
Of course people struggle with medical bills. People struggle with legal bills. People struggle with personal finances. I certainly have. The gov’t can hardly be expected to come to our rescue every time.
Come to think of it didn’t Bill Clinton put out an appeal for donations to his legal fund during the Monica Lewinsky, um, fiasco? See, it isn’t just medical bills people can have a struggle with.
EGV, I’m not saying, “No,” to private health care. Can’t Americans buy health insurance? They’ll get it cheaper ultimately, anyway. The civil government never does anything efficiently. It doesn’t have to.
And if there is national health care, it is perfectly fair for me to use it. I as a tax-payer am paying into it.
But I’m not an American. I’m from Canada, from the province of Ontario. The Ontario government has promised to provide everyone with health insurance, and so we have long waiting lists. Unless you need something important like a sex change or abortion, you’ll just have to wait. Trivial operations like a heart bypass get put in a queue for a year or two. (Things are probably not this bad, but things are bad.)
I’m a Canadian, but I don’t live in Canada. I don’t have health insurance. I’m not sure I could afford it. Luckily (providentially), I’m young and I’m healthy. I try to stay healthy. And I believe that when I die, I will go to heaven.
I wish the great country of the United States all the best. That’s why I want its government to get out of the health care business.
Hi Jon,
I did some googling and found that 875,000 Canadians are on waiting lists.
Thanks, Mary. I also just found out the following with Google. I knew there was something bad because I knew an elderly man in my church who had to wait a very long time.
abstract for “Ontario score and cardiac risk during waiting for elective coronary bypass grafting” in the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, Volume 110, Issue 2, Pages 167-174
Background
Waiting lists for coronary bypass grafting are of major concern in several countries and prioritisation systems to the surgery have been proposed. The aim of this study was to verify the adequacy of Ontario score in predicting cardiac events during the waiting for elective coronary bypass grafting.
…
Results
Median waiting time was 126 days… Total complications and death occurred within acceptable waiting times by Ontario recommendation in 47.8% and 36.4% of the cases, respectively…
Conclusions
Ontario score showed a limited value in predicting cardiac events during the waiting for elective coronary bypass grafting. The results emphasise the need for shortening the wait in order to reduce complications in the period.
I just realized something. Mary said that 875,000 Canadians are on waiting lists. However, there were only 33,300,000 Canadians in 2008. If these statistics are true, then 2.6% of all Canadians are on waiting lists!
Mary – I actually agree with much of what you say, and I hope and think that now what will come is a series of smaller bills to do things like eliminate the pre-existing condition qualifications – find some sort of lawsuit limit – and find other things that are common place that will cause reform.
I still mourn the loss of the bigger bill a bit just because I think it really would have helped start to control costs, which is a massive issue – but like immigration reform, social security reform, and any other big piece of legislation, I truly believe it gets more about winning and losing than doing right by the country – and I think the case might have been like this with health care reform (and I agree it was like that with Bush and social security reform as well – something that needed reforming, but it became more about beating him than figuring out how to help the country long term.)
I think the last few posts on Canada is the best representation of the PR battle that failed in reform. I’ve seen a few polls/studies that showed that once people understood the bill and reform, support was much higher – but misinformation was massive throughout the process and the right did a wonderful job of pushing a few images that simply didn’t exist.
The whole example of Canada is wonderful. If anyone thinks the system that was proposed was even remotely close to the system in Canada – that person would be ignorant at best and deceitful at worse. It is as bad as Sarah Palin pushing the death panels – it is as bad as lying in my book and does no service to the public discourse. Folks can debate the merits of the Canadian system all day long, but how it relates to America I’m not sure – but again, the simple fact that it came up in health care discussion so many times shows how little people knew of the bill (mostly it was laziness – the process was much longer and more wide open than any major piece of legislation in my life time).
EGV,
By turning the insurance companies loose to compete with each other you will resolve many of these issues such as pre-existing conditions.
Its when insurance companies have a monopoly that they are able to pick and choose.
Yes I would definitely support smaller bills that address the real issues concerning health insurance reform, tort reform, free markets and competition, etc., not the monstrosity that was being pushed through with bribes and midnite votes.
EGV,
Apparently Canada started out like we are now, a “gov’t option”, with all good intentions. Now Canada is contracting American hospitals on the border to serve their citizens.
The point with Canada and also England is the fiasco that is gov’t run care. Why do we think our gov’t would do any better, especially considering its track record when it comes to running much of anything?
The right wing media? May I remind you the MSM is in the tank for Obama, even providing air time for Obama health care “infomercials” so its not like this has been one sided.
Also, didn’t Obama suggest at some “townhall meeting” that “grandma” may have to settle for “pain pills” and not receive a pacemaker under gov’t run care?
Note to Obama: Patients requiring a pacemaker, including the young son of a very dear friend, are not in need of and will definitely not benefit from “pain pills”. Their condition can only be treated with a pacemaker.
Why do we think our gov’t would do any better, especially considering its track record when it comes to running much of anything?
Good posts, Mary. The proposed 100+ federal bureaucracies weren’t going to be staffed with unpaid volunteers, were they? How does adding thousands of bureaucrats and increasing provider overhead costs to comply with mandates reduce cost? Even the CBO admitted uncertainty whether reductions in Medicare spending would actually materialize but as required, made their estimates as if they would. They also admitted that it was uncertain if reduction in spending would result from increased efficiency or reduced access to care/poor quality of care. The legislation shifted costs but did little to nothing to actually reduce them. It’s time for reform legislation that puts people above party and increased consumer choice ahead of special interest paybacks.