On today’s “Morning Meeting with Dylan Ratigan” on MSNBC, Iowa Senator Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, said that even if the
committee’s final version of a health insurance reform bill gives him everything he says he wants, he will vote against it.
When NBC’s Chuck Todd, in a follow-up question on the show, asked the Iowa Republican if he’d vote against what Grassley might consider to be a “good deal” — i.e., gets everything he asks for from Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D) — Grassley replied, “It isn’t a good deal if I can’t sell my product to more Republicans.”
In short, Grassley says he’s willing to walk away from legislation in which he gets everything he wants. Over to you, Max Baucus…
Why won’t our politicians lead nowadays? Is it really that hard to explain to your constituents why unpopular legislation should be passed? It seems that everyone’s afraid to stick their necks out on anything.
#97–brm==”You still don’t know what a ’straw man’ is, but whatever. /// heh, heh. as in Einstein doesn’t know math, but whatever.
My arguments against our Federal gov’t being the single payer is that it can’t run it’s other large programs. /// I’ll be just as general: yes it does.
If it could, we wouldn’t always be discussing “what to do” about Social Security, Medicare/caid, the VA, Amtrak or the Post Office. /// “What to do” means stop raiding its assets so that these programs can perform their stated objectives. THAT has nothing to do with how they are run. The same “what to do” applies to every other activity is society. Silly argument–the false dichotomy. (hah, hah!!)
Of course this is the point where someone will say, “but you drive on teh highway!” /// No, I don’t.
If you can say with a straight face that you believe the aforementioned programs are well-run, /// Don’t know about Amtrak, but the other programs are well run. Its their funding that gets raided by the politicians to pay for other graft. Thats a different issue.
you’ll have a hard time understanding why the opposition wants to take health care reform one step at a time. /// They don’t. The “opposition” want the status quo and the incremental position is just red herrings (you know what a red herring is????) to maintain the status quo.
What all members of the opposition have in common is a simple request for some proof that this isn’t going to bankrupt us. /// You can’t prove what is to happen tomorrow. This is meant to be a process. Make a change, grade it, change as needed. What everyone does agree on is that the status quo is bankrupting America. How would you prevent current trends without changes that would actually affect those trends?
A report that says we can find the money while we’re transitioning to single-payer isn’t proof. /// I agree.
Sorry, but it’s obviously not enough, or else people wouldn’t be freaking out. Why does Obama need to enact a new plan while streamlining the existing programs? Can’t he streamline first? /// Yes, but as stated, he appears to confuse being bi-partisan with befing effective. He should ram thru single payer/universal care. All nice and streamlined bringing many of the changes that will by necessity and lack of alternatives be the eventual rememdy==just like every other nation has already determined.
Could we please just find the money before starting another program? It shouldn’t be too much to ask for, and that’s exactly what we’re asking for at these town hall meetings. /// I agree. Single Payer—-yeaaaaa team!!!
#89 – Redneck,
You’re mistaking the pursuit of happiness with actual happiness. You can pursue my wife, though she will likely find you too stupid to bother with.
But, one can’t even pursue happiness if one is need of medical care and unable to get it.
Do you think water is a basic right? What about a basic level of food, say the one provided by food stamps, for example? Why not health care? How do you see it as different? Without it you die, just like water.
#101:
“Its their funding that gets raided by the politicians to pay for other graft.”
And who has been in control of the gov’t for the last two and a half years? I don’t trust either party to run something like this.
“What everyone does agree on is that the status quo is bankrupting America.”
Right, but where we disagree is that I think it’s because of too much gov’t intervention, and you think it’s because they’re not involved enough.
“How would you prevent current trends without changes that would actually affect those trends?”
A functioning market where prices are accurately reported would be a good start.
That’s my big beef with health care – the prices are inflated, and largely unknown. How can we know who’s getting screwed on costs when we don’t even know the real value of this stuff?
Chuck Grassley – early contender for the 2009 Profiles in Cowardice award.
#92 – brm,
I don’t disagree that an improperly regulated financial industry has hurt us, but a big part of our problem is our trade deficit.
Aside from Goldman Sachs making money hand over fist selling the treasuries for the stimulus package, all of the banks I’m hearing about were in serious trouble. Some are starting to come back now due to the stimulus and other factors.
As for our trade deficit, do you really think the deregulation has nothing to do with that as well? What about the regulations that encourage corporations to “move” to the Caymans to avoid taxes? These are all loopholes created during the last 28 years AFAIK.
#93 – brm,
Just because a bunch of relatively tiny, economically and politically homogeneous countries can do it doesn’t mean a huge federation can or should do it.
Um … wow … you just managed to completely insult and denigrate the entire developed democratic world. In case you didn’t know, every single developed democratic nation, including the entire EU, has universal health care. In case you didn’t know, absolutely every single one of them beats us in both life expectancy and infant mortality. But, don’t worry, it’s just the CIA world factbook that says so and that may be biased.
#103–brm==good job. An entire post without something totally idiotic in it. Are you learning, or just tired?
1. “And who has been in control of the gov’t for the last two and a half years? I don’t trust either party to run something like this.” /// 2.5 years??? Hah, hah. Ok. Forget my intro. Only an idiot approaches public policy issues from a position of “trust.” Where can anyone even start a discussion with you?
2. “Right, but where we disagree is that I think it’s because of too much gov’t intervention, and you think it’s because they’re not involved enough.” /// Whereas I see just the opposite. So==what we can both agree on is that the government intervention was not correct and must be changed.
#3–“A functioning market where prices are accurately reported would be a good start.” //// As would a land of lollipops and sugar cane. “When you see the world as a hammer, all problems are nails.” And your hammer is “the free market” which has never existent and cannot exist regarding healthcare—by definition. There are no willing, informed buyers able to go elsewhere. Stop being a hammer.
4. “That’s my big beef with health care – the prices are inflated, and largely unknown. How can we know who’s getting screwed on costs when we don’t even know the real value of this stuff? /// Not even a good rant. WE ARE ALL GETTING SCREWED. How many times do you have to be told/demonstrated/see for yourself–this?
I didn’t realize a hammer could be full of shit. Must be messy if you ever get around to hitting that nail.
So what are the make-or-break issues for Grassley moving forward? Grassley says there are four: no public option, no rationing, no government bureaucrats getting between doctors and patients, and tort reform.
#92, brm,
loss of industry because we can’t compete on price (thank you unions and minimum wage.)
What are they teaching kids today?
The US is the least unionized of all the industrialized countries. It is also performing among the worse economically and in almost every other measure. When unions were strongest is when the United States was the world leader in health care and standard of living.
If you really want to know what has hurt the American economy, it is the MBAs in charge and Wall Street expectations of high profits every quarter.
#94, Link,
Could you find a more error prone article? That has to be one of the stupidest links I have ever wasted my time on.
HINT, doctors make lousy economists.
#97, brm,
If it could, we wouldn’t always be discussing “what to do” about Social Security, Medicare/caid, the VA, Amtrak or the Post Office.
It is the right wing nuts that continually tell us those programs don’t work. All indications are that they work very well.
Of course this is the point where someone will say, “but you drive on teh highway!”
Maybe you do, along with the other High Schoolers. But I drive on THE highway.
If you can say with a straight face that you believe the aforementioned programs are well-run, you’ll have a hard time understanding why the opposition wants to take health care reform one step at a time.
Well, that is only because the “opposition” are being led by those who hate America and want to see her fail. If the “opposition” are so intent on reforming health care, why have they not offered any ideas beside tort reform (ya screw those who the doctors already screwed) and tax breaks?
Could we please just find the money before starting another program?
The money exists. And I want a SINGLE PAYER system. The money currently spent on health insurance premiums are already a tax. Channel them to the government Health Care plan and you have your savings, everyone is insured, and an easy payment plan.
#112, And I want a SINGLE PAYER system.
With no regard for what the rest of the country wants or what the Constitution allows? Careful, you are treading on that Libertarian thing you don’t like.
Besides, if it’s that important to you, move to a country that already has it. You know, one of those ones that America should be emulating. I believe the Royalists and you would get along well.
#110 – Mr. Fusion,
If you really want to know what has hurt the American economy, it is the MBAs in charge and Wall Street expectations of high profits every quarter.
Yes. And, without ever looking farther ahead than about 6 months to a year. Afterall, why should a CEO plan a year in advance when s/he can take the $123 million golden parachute and start again elsewhere?
I think a CEO that actually had a long range plan would be seriously at a disadvantage. Certainly s/he would not be rewarded.
Besides, a healthy company with a long range plan earning 8% a year on the stock, who needs it? I want the next get rich quick scheme in my portfolio. All I have to hope is that it doesn’t collapse while I’m holding it.
#114 – LibertyLover,
I would love to go into a business deal with you. It is clear that what you want is to pay a lot and get very little. I would love to be on the other side of any business deal in which you are involved.
Right now, the current system that you love so much that you don’t want to emulate one of the other developed democratic nations of the world costs at least 50% more as a percent of GDP than any other nation’s health care.
Further, for that 16% of GDP (Germany is second at 11% of GDP and they cover everyone), we get over 20% of the population uninsured or underinsured. We get the shortest life expectancy and highest infant mortality of any developed democratic nation.
Perhaps we should consider joining the civilized world where people are not allowed to die because they lost their job.
Or, perhaps I could interest you in a business deal. I know of a few really good ones but am only letting a few very special people know about them … cash only … and in small unmarked bills.
#116, I’ve offered you a job already. HC is cheaper here than up there. You turned me down so don’t give me that, “I would love to go into a business deal with you,” bullshit.
If the US is so bad, why do the OTHER countries continue to look to us for leadership and help and any other of a dozen things? Is it just possible, just maybe, we are doing things right?
Those other countries are scaling back their medical services substantially because they can’t afford “free” healthcare for everyone anymore.
Universal, State-Sponsored, Healthcare is a dismal failure.
Besides, the Constitution doesn’t allow it according to the 10th Amendment. Perhaps you can convince your local state reps to do something at the state level. I have no problem with that.
Anecdote:
I talked with a guy from Norway last month. He was bragging on his country’s HC system. He said nobody goes without. I asked what prices were like over there. He said they had some of the highest prices in Europe because of the taxes (and then quickly added) “that makes sure the poorest get HC.”
I then asked, “How do the poor afford to buy things then if things are so expensive?”
He looked at me like a deer in the headlights then said, “I guess they stay home and listen to the radio.”
“How do they get to work if they can’t afford cars?”
“A lot of them don’t work because they can’t afford them.”
“So what do the poor do?”
He then got mad and exclaimed, “You Americans are so selfish!”
Ah, the sweet smell of success as another liberal is forced to face the truth.
Is they what you really want? A class of people that can’t even afford the necessities of life to support themselves but have access to a HC system YOU are paying for?
I don’t. Let them get a haircut and a job.
So what are the make-or-break issues for Grassley moving forward? Grassley says there are four: no public option, no rationing, no government bureaucrats getting between doctors and patients, and tort reform.
Translated:
1. No public option = less competition for the big Health Insurance Companies that contribute so heavily to the Republican party.
2. No rationing = leave the rationing where it is, in the hands of faceless Health Insurance Company bureaucrats ordered to deny as many claims as they can to boost corporate profits.
3. No government bureaucrats getting between doctors and patients = leave the faceless Health Insurance Company bureaucrats in between the doctors and patients.
4. Tort Reform = don’t let the people who get screwed or harmed by doctors or insurance companies to have any way to collect damages.
Yup, he’s a Republican.
#117 Besides, the Constitution doesn’t allow it according to the 10th Amendment. Perhaps you can convince your local state reps to do something at the state level. I have no problem with that.
Gosh, LL, maybe you could point me to the Constitutional Amendment that was enacted to allow the state-sponsored healthcare program called Medicare to be created.
Take your time.
Is they what you really want? A class of people that can’t even afford the necessities of life to support themselves but have access to a HC system YOU are paying for?
And here we have LL’s philosophy in a nutshell. If they’re too poor to be able to afford health insurance, let ’em die. All righty then.
#119, Gosh, LL, maybe you could point me to the Constitutional Amendment that was enacted to allow the state-sponsored healthcare program called Medicare to be created.
So, your entire argument is based on, “Two Wrongs Make A Right?”
BWAHAHAHAHA!
You’ve got other issues than reading comprehension.
Perhaps that is where Liberals get their definition of a “right?” From two wrongs?
#119, And here we have LL’s philosophy in a nutshell. If they’re too poor to be able to afford health insurance, let ‘em die. All righty then.
You think that because I don’t believe in a Federal Insurance Program, I’ll let everyone without insurance die? Man, what kind of mind have you got?
That’s your fear talking, not common sense.
#117, Loser,
Those other countries are scaling back their medical services substantially because they can’t afford “free” healthcare for everyone anymore.
Is that another of Boss Limpdick’s rants? Please post something to show us other countries are “scaling back”. And it helps your credibility if you use something other than Leibertarian crap.
#122, I don’t have to prove it. You are the one trying to convince me to approve the implementation of such a monstrosity, so get crackin!
I would prefer you answered my other question first, though.
#121, Loser,
You think that because I don’t believe in a Federal Insurance Program, I’ll let everyone without insurance die? Man, what kind of mind have you got?
Actually, yes.
If you have a plan that would help those without insurance get medical care then please tell us.
Please note, your lack of compassion for your fellow human being makes you a perfect Christian.
#122, Oh, and just for the record, I am on record as saying I don’t listen to “Boss Limpdick.”
#124, Please note, your lack of compassion for your fellow human being makes you a perfect Christian.
That’s rich coming from someone who’s admitted they would let 10 strangers die to save their wife.
When are you going to answer WHY?
I love it when liberals toss out words like “compassion” in defending ObamaCare. It’s not compassion; it’s compulsion.
Answer me this: What good is compassion when it is mandated by another person? Compassion comes about only through a personal choice to sacrifice for someone else. It is the result of acting on one’s own agency to help another.
Social programs, like the proposed health care legislation, invalidate any human choice in the matter. It takes away one’s freedom to choose. Government would rather take my money so it can redistribute it, rather than allow me to give it on my own accord.
Compassion is obviously a factor when you vote for representatives who push programs that are compassionate. AFTER that, you again have the opportunity to act individually as compassionately or not as you wish.
So simple, even a retard should get it, but none of you do.
Whats dumber than a retard???????
Thats right===a LIEBERTARIAN.
Hah, hah.
Dolts.
So, your entire argument is based on, “Two Wrongs Make A Right?”
BWAHAHAHAHA!
No, my argument is based on: Medicare didn’t need a constitutional amendment, so health care for the rest of us won’t either.
But I’m glad you’re such a happy guy.
#127 eaglescout1998 complains about his tax dollars going to benefit other people. Oh, the horror! Forced to pay for roads that other people drive on. Forced to pay for gov’t research to cure diseases he doesn’t have. Forced to pay for the Army to defend parts of the country he doesn’t live in. Forced to pay for OSHA to keep workplaces safe where he doesn’t work. Forced to pay for EPA to keep the air clean where he doesn’t breathe. Forced to pay for Medicare for elderly people who aren’t his parents. WILL THE HORROR NEVER END???
eaglescout1998, meet LibertyLover. Two selfish bastards who want to take the benefits from other people’s tax payments but don’t want to pay any themselves. Two loony Libertarians, peas in a pod.
#130, Answer the question.
Would you let 10 strangers die or your wife?
Sigh… sorry to quote myself from other threads, but I’ll post this here for your convenience:
Give it up, LL. Asking your bogus question again and again just makes you look more and more loony. Just admit it, you’re selfish, like you said, and you want the benefits from other taxpayers’ dollars, you just don’t want to pay yourself. Have the courage of your convictions, don’t weasel around trying to justify it. Just say it out loud:
“I, LibertyLover, think paying taxes is for suckers. I want all the benefits of society that other people’s taxes pay for, but I don’t want to pay any taxes myself.”
There, was that so hard?