Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamplighter
I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours (i.e., how the Republicans have compromised, lately)  |
How about every debt limit being raised since Obama came into office?
The Republicans want generally LESS government regulations and intrusions into our lives. LESS spending by the gov't, LOWER taxes, means less $$$ taken out of our paychecks and wallets.
There was no mandate given by the Constitution, that the House needs to keep funding programs it doesn't like - and that includes raising the debt limit - but the Republicans have gone along with it, several times. WITHOUT demanding any programs be removed from the Democrats.
Now your turn. Name spending cuts (not FUTURE spending cuts that probably will never materialize, but ACTUAL NOW spending cuts), that Obama and the Democrats have supported.
How about them noisy crickets, eh?
Quote:
If not "pilot programs" of some kind, prior to passage of the ACA...
...what do you consider the Massachusetts' program under Romney?
...what do you consider the Oregon program under Kitzhabber ?
...there were probably several trial projects in other states earlier under
federally approved variations of their own Medicare/Medicaid programs.
|
But they're a FAR cry from Obama Care, and the Mass. program has practically bankrupted the state - a total failure. The Oregon program CAN'T bankrupt the state, but it's also harsh - nonetheless, I would definitely support this program.
Quote:
|
Of course I've not yet seen an opponent of Obama that didn't consider every situation "not the right way to do it" or "not the right time to do it". Those are standard bullet points for the GOP.
|
I agree, it happens WAY too often. A real distrust and dislike builds up as the lies roll out, however. Lies like the "video demonstration causing the attack", in Benghazi. That was horrible. I can't begin to tell you how much goodwill and trust Obama lost after that fiasco.
Quote:
Maybe we can agree that the regulations were probably not "read" by
every Congressman, but the overall plan was discussed for a long time, with central features being made aware to everyone.
(You've listed a few in the paragraph below...)
The regulations for Obama Care weren't even mostly WRITTEN when the vote was made. They were passing a law that was totally incomplete.
Quote:
Pre-existing conditions and allowing cross state competition - obvious improvements.
The 85% rule is simply one tool to force the insurance companies
and the health care providers to put their $ into delivery of care,
not advertising or CEO salaries or high MD payments or ultra-high cost hardware ?
I assume you are not opposed to all that; but if so, what are your reasons ?
|
No, I'm not opposed to them - I strongly support them!
Tort reform doesn't belong in this ACA legislation for several reasons,
Not only because it takes away the rights of patients to seek
recourse in the face of what courts determine to be negligence or malpractice,
but the health care insurer is not (usually) the same insurance carrier
as the "malpractice insurance company" for the medical personnel.
Tort reform did not fly previously, but it had little to do with the Democrats.
It failed to be enacted due to the lawyers in the crowd... many of whom were Republicans.
|
We need Tort reform. Requiring a surgeon to carry hundreds of thousand of dollars cost, per year of malpractice insurance, is ridiculous, and just jacks up the cost of health care, incredibly. The reform bill don't have to be a part of the ACA - we just need them.