Published: Wednesday, July 30 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT
It needs it but it won't get it.One political party is
determined to kill Obamacare. There's no negotiation or compromise with
them.Our only hope is to retain the senate and take back the house.
I and many of my friends on the left begged for "medicare for all."
It's doubtful Obama could have gotten that through Congress, but he should
have tried. The future of health care looks bad in the United
States given our current politics. It's as though the political right
wants to punish low and moderate income people through denial of health care.
Politicians of all stripes need to understand there is building rage among the
Obama just gave waivers to people living in US territories, including Puerto
Rico. Everyone now has a waiver, except the American taxpayer.
The Not Very Affordable Care Act needs to be repealed. That will require a
A-- The entire idea was originally proposed by republicans, but, since it would
cost rich donors lost income, they abandoned it.B-- Health care reform
should have been done in the Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush
administrations, but the lobbyists for those donors stopped it.C--
President Obama practically made a fool of himself asking republicans over and
over again to contribute ideas to the bill when it was before Congress.D--
No bills improving the ACA have been introduced by republicans.E-- About
50 attempts at repeal have come out of the House, while nothing on fixing
unemployment, immigration or the infrastructure has been done.The DN
is correct that the ACA should be kept, but, I am sorry to say, totally dreaming
to suggest that the present version of the republican party will assist in
improving it.Hospital corporations, multimillionaire doctors,
pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, and others give obscene amounts
of money to Congress. I would venture that every poor child could be fed with
half that money.Why not call for lobbying reform that might change
Congress, or the end to "safe districts" that effectively kill the 2
The ACA is not this huge government handout. It assists only the most poverty
stricken. What it has done is set laws that the Republicans should have passed
during the Reagan years. What the ACA does not need is the
Republicans putting their GREEDY fingers into it!!
"negotiate in good faith for substantial changes to the law with which
legislators from both parties are able to live."Negotiate in
good faith.. Now there's a novel idea. Except both sides must do it to be
effective.This article only seems to chastise Obama.The GOP
has voted 50+ times to repeal it, but have yet to agree on anything in order to
improve it.The American people would welcome constructive changes.
Can someone please point out ANY provisional changes that the GOP is proposing?
"the Affordable Care Act shows that it needs a bipartisan overhaul"Think so huh?You know, the ACA could have been bipartisan to
begin with. The President practically begged Republicans to help design the law,
but they spurned his offer."I want to consult closely with our
Republican colleagues . . . What I want to do is to ask them to put their ideas
on the table. . . . I want to come back and have a large meeting, Republicans
and Democrats, to go through, systematically, all the best ideas that are out
there and move it forward." - B. H. Obama February 8, 2010But NO
. . . Smug Republican Legislators REFUSED to do their jobs. Apparently, they
didn't realize that legislators are supposed to legislate. Instead, they
REFUSED to participate in crafting the MOST IMPORTANT LAW of the 21st
century.And now Republicans say "the Affordable Care Act shows
that it needs a bipartisan overhaul?"Well now . . . That window
of opportunity may have SLAMMED SHUT.Think of it as a learning
experience.When Republicans learn to elect competent representation,
then they will get competent representation.. . . Does that make
Do you really think that the Republican/Tea Party wants to do anything but
destroy this bill? No Republican/Tea Party member of the House or
Senate dares to offer constructive changes to the ACA. It is party doctrine,
akin to the laws of gravity and the wishes of the NRA, that no one can support
the law known as Obamacare. Any Republican/Tea Party member who dares voice
acceptance of the healthcare act would be drummed out of office, even if he/she
would be offering changes that make it work better.I don't know
why the DN is offering this hint and wink to the public that suggests
constructive change is possible. I doubt that Sen. Hatch's bill is all
that serious either. He wishes to remain Senator for life, and knows how the
political winds blow in Utah.
An appreciated comment from the DNews, but I wish that some attention had been
also given to the unconstitutionality of mandating insurance via Congress, and
the hardship caused by such onerous mandates. I wish to be free to choose my
own insurance or to have none at all, and foot my own bills if I create them.However, YES, there should be a bipartisan overhaul, or preferably
rejection, of the "affordable" (laugh or cry out loud) health care act.
In the latter, legal and preferred, course the states might legally, and one
hopes wisely, broach the subject at a state level.
There is an old saying, "One rotten apple will spoil the entire barrel".
Obamacare has terminal flaws; it will never get any better and is dying an
excruciating death on its own! Like the cancer that it is, the most humane thing
we can do is to put it out of its misery; repeal it before it can metastasize
and continue to infect our entire economy and cause even more devastation than
it has already!
Funniest op-ed ever. What evidence can you offer to suggest that the current
House of Representatives has any interest whatsoever in fixing anything, at all?
The editorial said, "Yet many who are eager to see its collapse are offering
few alternatives to address the nation’s pressing health care
problems." The "nation" has no health care problem.
PEOPLE have health care problems. The Constitution allows the federal level of
government to tax us to pay for the seventeen duties we have assigned to the
federal level of government. ALL other duties are to be left to the States or
to the people. The Federal Government is directly responsible for
high health care costs. FDR froze wages. Companies started offering
"health care" in lieu of wages. Now, everyone expects "free"
health care. Nothing is free. Company sponsored health insurance is in lieu of
wages. Doctors need extra people on staff to handle insurance
claims. Prices reflect those additional people.People think that a
doctor visit costs $20, when the insurance company pays $200 or more.Their are 50 states. Let each one handle health care issues, as Romney did in
Massachusetts. At least one of the States will get it right.
The obstinate abstinence of the GOP when it comes to the ACA is embarrassing if
not negligent. It is yet another example of the hijacking of my lifelong
political party by extremists, and why I cannot support that radical sect any
You want to make adjustments to the ACA and as a starting point use Hatch's
bill? The very first principle of the Hatch bill is the complete repeal of
"Obamacare" The next overriding principle is whatever the
bill says the states can say no and do what they want.From there
they move to completely gut insurance plans of comprehensive coverage. First
all mandated services are repealed, then if your plan is a good plan you will be
taxed as ordinary income on everything your employer pays above 65% of the
premium. So far which of these changes look like improvements to
the health care coverage of Americans?Next they move to cost with
the ever popular tax credits. No subsidies. Of course if you're poor you
already don't pay federal taxes, but hey let's give you some more
credits you can't use to pay that monthly premium. And of
course the whole ineffective health insurance situation will be fixed by the
creme de le crème (I'm sure that's not spelled right)..tort
reform. When you all come up with something useful let us know,
A wise and balanced commentary. Thank you.
It is disturbing how divided people have become on the ACA and other issues,
taking sides with one or the other party. A house divided cannot stand.Those arguing for the ACA apparently do not see it as a scheme of the
government to get more tax revenue. The ACA will only raise costs of health
care. And, as people delay routine health procedures, since it will be paid out
of pocket because the high deductible has not been met, we will see more
serious/costly health care needs increase.It is not the governments
responsibility to provide healthcare. People need to stop equating health
insurance to health care. healthcare is right eating, right thinking, and
exercise/work it is a personal responsibility. The cost burden of the ACA will
be put on the backs of taxpayers not yet born and that is not right.
"the most humane thing we can do is to put it out of its misery; repeal it
before it can metastasize and continue to infect our entire economy and cause
even more devastation than it has already!"OK Thid. For the
sake of discussion, lets say you are correct.The way I see it, in
years to come, medicare/medicaid are slated to completely bust the budget.
Would you agree with that? If not, what data are you looking at?So,
the way I see it, the problem MUST be addressed.We have 3 choices as
I see it.1) reduce benefits2) combat the rising costs (which
by any measure are way out of line compared to other countries)3) raise
taxes to cover the shortfall.So, if the GOP is successful in
repealing, what is the plan going forward?What is your plan.I
am still amazed that with all this endless talk of repeal, the GOP has not
agreed on ONE plan to combat the inevitable.One could argue that the
Dems are misguided in their attempts to fix healthcare, but at least they
acknowledge a problem.The GOP acts as if the old system was
It is evident that American capitalism cannot deliver health care to the people.
Health care will come to the vast bulk of our population only with socialism.
There is no other alternative.
This whole AFA was "rammed" through Congress. No Democrat would dare
speak out against BHO because of the political backlash. They still won't
because of the same reason! The 2,000+ page document was not read by anyone in
Congress because of the rush to vote on it in the eleventh hour (Pelosi,
"We'll have to read it later to find out what's in it!) There were many bribes and payoffs to get Senators to vote for this awful
bill. (i.e. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska for one.) We all knew it was a train
wreck from the beginning, and nobody in the GOP voted for it. The many, many
offers Republicans made were ignored. The public was outraged that the Congress
was exempt from this mandate. Then came the many, many executive orders with
changes made by BHO with his pen. And it continues! We lost 3
outstanding doctors because of it, one retired, one left to go teach in a
university, and the other left to go to Switzerland to practice. Obamacare needs
to go in my opinion. Let the states and free enterprise handle health care, not
big government and the IRS!
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments