Tag: health care

The Michigan Republican Party Issued this release today:

Lansing, MI--The Michigan Republican Party would like to remind Democrat candidate for secretary of state Jocelyn Benson that Michigan has 83 counties, not 82.

In a recent interview, Benson apparently had a little trouble recalling the number of Michigan counties when she said she had received donations from, "People in 50 of the 82 counties in Michigan..."

 "How can we expect Jocelyn Benson to run proper elections in the state when she doesn't even know how many counties there are in Michigan," asked Jennifer Hoff, MRP Communications Director.  "Apparently all that pandering to Howard Dean, George Soros and other liberal Democrats is distracting her from a basic understanding of the state she calls home.

 "We encourage Jocelyn Benson to visit the Library of Michigan's "Michigan Kids" web page as it lays out basic state facts for school children including the number of counties.  Or, she can visit Michigan.gov where the names of all counties are listed and numbered," Hoff said.

As I fought off "Milk through the nose" worthy guffaws, I realized there is a remarkable similarity to the common math issues that the Democrats seem to repeatedly reveal..  Obama thinking there are 57 or 58 states..  Spending more on health care saves money.. etc..

Despite suggestions that Stupak is raising a fuss over abortion funding in the bill, his constituency is more heavily concerned with the bill itself.  Not that the First District isn't overwhelmingly Pro-life, it is, but Stupak is falsely emphasizing the importance of abortion wording in the bill.

The First District is more concerned with the bill itself and it's constitutionality.

It's called a red herring argument.

"Michigan's congressional delegation appears split along partisan lines for any health-care vote -- with one notable exception: Rep. Bart Stupak.

The Menominee Democrat says he can't support the proposal he's seen and not just because it lacks a provision he authored in a previous version to bar insurers receiving government subsidies from paying for abortions.

He can't support an excise tax on higher-priced health care plans, even with the amount at which it kicks in moved higher, and he doesn't like that the effective date for some parts of the legislation has been moved as far off as 2018.

"That's insane," Stupak said."

Assessment from the office of Republican Leader John Boehner: During today's White House health care summit, President Obama made this claim:  "What we've done is we've tried to take every single cost containment idea that's out there.  Every proposal that health care economists say will reduce health care costs, we've tried to adopt in the various proposals."

No, not so much.

Despite the President's rhetoric, Democrats' job-killing health care proposals do not implement a single major GOP reform that would lower costs for families and small businesses.  Yes, Washington Democrats have recently begun incorporating into their rhetoric a few of the same words Republicans have long used.  But when you dig beneath the newly-minted rhetoric and actually look at the text of their bills, it quickly becomes evident that they haven't actually incorporated any of the major health care reforms Republicans support.  

Of course, even if these GOP reforms were incorporated, they would still be attached to legislation that includes job-killing tax hikes, deep cuts to Medicare, massive unfunded mandates on states, unconstitutional mandates on individuals, an "abortion premium" levied on taxpayers, vast new powers for the federal bureaucracy, and other unacceptable provisions the American people reject.

Initial reviews of the President's costly, job-killing health care proposal revealed it didn't include any new GOP ideas:

"Mr. Obama's plan, released ahead of a televised health summit with congressional leaders Thursday, didn't include any additional nods to Republican ideas." (The Wall Street Journal, 2/23/10)

"Obama's proposal was not the blank slate demanded by the GOP and was short on new ideas aimed at winning their support." (The Hill, 2/22/10)

"President Obama's `opening bid' on health reform is not designed to entice Republicans to join the game." (Washington Post editorial, 2/23/10)

A Reading Guide to the Senate Bill's Backroom Deals

"I think the health care debate as it unfolded legitimately raised concerns not just among my opponents, but also amongst supporters that we just don't know what's going on.  And it's an ugly process and it looks like there are a bunch of back room deals."

-- President Obama, interview with ABC's Diane Sawyer, January 25, 2010[i]

The White House recently released its own health care proposal[ii] in the form of changes to the 2,733 page legislation (H.R. 3590) that passed the Senate in December.[iii]  While the proposal purports to remove the "Nebraska FMAP provision" that saw 49 other states funding Nebraska's Medicaid largesse (known as the "Cornhusker Kickback"), it does not address other deals negotiated by Democrats in the Senate legislation.  Many other backroom agreements are included in the Senate bill, which the White House has now endorsed as the platform for Democrats to enact "health reform" into law:

Page 428--Section 2006, known as the "Louisiana Purchase," provides an extra $300 million in Medicaid funding to Louisiana.[iv]

Page 878--Section 3201(g), known  as the "Gator Aid" provision, shields certain Florida residents from Medicare Advantage cuts.  In December, 57 Senate Democrats voted not to extend this special deal to all Medicare beneficiaries.[v]

Page 2132--Section 10201(e)(1) provides an increase in Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments for Hawaii, meaning 49 other states will pay more in taxes so that Hawaii can receive this special benefit.

Page 2222--Section 10323 makes certain individuals exposed to environmental hazards eligible for Medicare coverage.  The definition used in the bill ensures the only individuals eligible will be those living in Libby, Montana.

Page 2237--Section 10324 increases Medicare payments by $2 billion in "frontier states."[vi]

Page 2354-- Section 10502 spends $100 million on "debt service of, or direct construction of, a health care facility," language which the sponsors intended to benefit Connecticut.[vii]

Page 2394--Section 10905(c) includes language exempting Nebraska Blue Cross/Blue Shield and Michigan Blue Cross/Blue Shield from the new tax on health insurance companies, despite an Administration-released report calling Michigan Blue Cross/Blue Shield's 2009 rate increases "disturbing."[viii]

Page 2395--Section 10905(d) exempts Medigap supplemental insurance plans sold by Mutual of Omaha, headquartered in Nebraska, from the new tax on health insurance companies.

These specific agreements and provisions also do not display the full scope of the White House's legislative deal-making.  For instance, the head of the pharmaceutical industry said the Administration approached him to negotiate a secret arrangement with his industry: "We were assured, `We need somebody to come in first.  If you come in first, you will have a rock-solid deal.'"[ix]  And former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean publicly admitted at a town hall forum that "The reason that tort reform is not in the [health care] bill is because the [Democrat Members] who wrote it did not want to take on the trial lawyers."[x]