Connect with us

Healthcare

Mixed feelings on Trump’s current opposition to Obamacare bailout

Published

on

Donald Trump Opposes Alexander-Murray

In today’s political atmosphere, conservatives and federalists must take victories when we can. It shouldn’t matter if those victories come through ignorance or error, but for whatever reason I’m stuck on President Trump’s opposition to Alexander-Murray, the proposed Obamacare bailout bill.  I’m glad he opposes it, but I’m annoyed by his reasons for doing so. They’re wrong.

It’s hard to discern full intention from a Tweet, but if I’m reading the President’s 140-character statement on the proposed bill properly, I can only assume he doesn’t quite understand what’s being proposed.

There are two problems here. First, the bill wouldn’t bail out insurance companies. It bails out Obamacare’s low-income recipients. The money that President Obama illegally procured was to allow insurance companies to charge below-market prices for coverage by compensating them with the difference. They get their money with or without the bailout. It’s just a question of whether the low-income families pay the difference or the taxpayers.

The second confusing part of the Tweet is supporting insurance companies who have made a fortune off Obamacare. Granted, Obamacare has been what the insurance companies have wanted for decades, but they weren’t making the fortunes they expected. That’s why so many of them are pulling out. If they were making fortunes through Obamacare, they wouldn’t be running as quickly as they can away from the program.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not suggesting that they’re not making money. Those who have survived are poised to make even more money as choices have been eliminated. The herd has been thinned so that those who remain have greater opportunity for profits. Still, the President seems to be missing the point.

We need a full repeal. We need this repeal to be implemented in appropriate stages; some pieces of Obamacare can be eliminated immediately while others can be weened off over time. We can get things to the best point we’ve ever been in the modern era’s healthcare world by fixing some of the problems that existed before Obamacare while eliminating the federal government as a whole from the health insurance industry. If the President understood this, we’d have a much better chance of seeing real change for the better. Instead. we have a Congress that doesn’t know how to move forward and a President who isn’t even aware of which direction he’s heading, let alone where he’s taking the nation.

Some “pragmatic” conservatives would say we need to help the low-income families so the GOP doesn’t lose majorities in 2018. First, I’m not one who’s too concerned about majorities since it’s clear there’s very little difference between the major parties. Second, by bailing it out, the GOP takes ownership. They need to declare that they won’t bail anybody out because the whole program has been a failure from the start. They need to do everything they can to remind everyone that Obamacare was failing before President Trump took office. They need to put ownership back where it belongs, in the hands of the Democrats, so they can force them to choose between repealing it or allowing it to collapse.

The good news is that this bailout is less likely to happen without the President’s support. The unfortunate aspect is that the President doesn’t know why he doesn’t support it and Republicans on Capitol Hill won’t admit why they do.

Christian, husband, father. EIC, NOQ Report. Co-Founder, the Federalist Party. Just a normal guy who will no longer sit around while the country heads in the wrong direction.

Federalists

The Obamacare Debacle: Why we need a second political party

Published

on

By

Sometimes you simply hope that your predictions will be wrong and that events will miraculously turn out differently; unfortunately, this is not one of those times. Most people with a modicum of common sense anticipated that the Republicans would now take the blame for the troubles of Obamacare, and that has come to pass.  The aphorism ‘You broke it, you bought it’ comes to mind, and while somewhat unfair to the situation, perception is reality in the world of politics.

Tear it down and start over.

While not endeavoring to reign blows upon a deceased equine, this is why the Republican party needed to keep its promise on Obamacare. It’s also the reason why it’s time to sweep away the old and begin anew with a brand new second major political party. That phrase was deliberately used because it has become quite evident that the Republican and Democratic parties have started to merge in far too many ways.

The Obamacare debacle is a prime illustration of this unfortunate merging. O’Sullivan’s First Law explains this to a fair degree since the denizens of a certain party will – over time – want to keep the bureaucratic levers of power with the false idea that they can have it run more efficiently. Besides the simple expedient of term limits, a new party could start anew with a mandate to avoid this political trap.

An illustration from the world of engineering seems more than appropriate in this instance. There are times when a machine or structure has become so riddled with worn out or failed components that it is far better to simply scrap or tear it down and build something from scratch. The aphorism is to start with a clean sheet of paper such that the old assumptions and constructs are swept away in favor of something entirely new and innovative. “We’ve always done it this way” is replaced with questioning skepticism with regard to what works, and what doesn’t.

Existing components that have proven to be of service can be utilized in the new construct but only if they meet certain criteria, not simply because they are carried along with everything else of the old. By the same token, members of the old party can become a vital part of the new but only if they are up to the task.

The final word on the Republican party.

It is more than likely that the people responsible for that bureaucratic mess will use it to good political advantage against those who opposed it in the first place. We should be getting rid of governmental interference in the free market, but instead will see a complete control with national socialist healthcare [i.e., the ‘single payer’ deception].

There is no other choice than to limit the damage now with a new party that will stay true to conservative principles. The results of the alternative are too horrible to contemplate.

Continue Reading

Democrats

Chuck Schumer threatens Obamacare fix over GOP tax bill repealing individual mandate

Published

on

Chuck Schumer threatens Obamacare fix over GOP tax bill repealing individual mandate

Chuck Schumer went after the GOP’s proposed tax plan today, saying the bill the Democrats currently support to bail out Obamacare, Alexander-Murray, will not get their support if Obamacare’s individual mandate is repealed.

“Any Republican senator who thinks they can pass the individual mandate and then turn around and get Alexander-Murray passed is dead wrong.”

The Senate Minority Leader has supported the plan to save the Affordable Care Act, but is now holding it hostage to try to preserve the individual mandate that forces millions of Americans to pay for health insurance they don’t want.

Further Reading

Chuck Schumer: Democrats won’t back Alexander-Murray if Obamacare individual mandate is repealed

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/chuck-schumer-democrats-wont-back-alexander-murray-if-obamacare-individual-mandate-is-repealed/article/2640780Republicans on Tuesday added repeal of the individual mandate, which requires Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a fine, to their tax overhaul bill. Senate GOP leaders also said that if it were to pass, they would also be willing to take up a bipartisan bill known as Alexander-Murray, which includes payments to insurers and flexibility for states. The proposal was meant to win over centrist Republicans, who worry about some of the projections from the Congressional Budget Office showing that 13 million more people would be uninsured in a decade if the individual mandate were to be repealed.

Continue Reading

Healthcare

It’s a health issue: The left opens up a new front in the war on liberty

Published

on

By

Its a health issue The left opens up a new front in the war on liberty

The desire for control has differentiated Left from Right, now the Left is using health concerns to further this effort

The desire for control on the part of the Left is the main difference between the two sides of the political divide. As a general rule, Left continually advocates increased government control with everything from taxation to climate change. One of the Left’s newest methods is to use health issues with nary a concern over those pesky notions of liberty and freedom.

The Left began using this with the 2nd amendment, with everyone’s health and safety taking precedent over that restraint on the government. And now they are expanding the assault, moving into the areas of free-speech

The Leftist case for restricting liberty due to health concerns

Back in June the LA Times published an Op-ed basing the need for restricting free-speech on health issues:

The case for restricting hate speech

http://beta.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-nielsen-free-speech-hate-20170621-story.htmlIn fact, empirical data suggest that frequent verbal harassment can lead to various negative consequences. Racist hate speech has been linked to cigarette smoking, high blood pressure, anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and requires complex coping strategies. Exposure to racial slurs also diminishes academic performance. Women subjected to sexualized speech may develop a phenomenon of “self-objectification,” which is associated with eating disorders.

And most recently the New York Times published an opinion piece titled: We’re Sick of Racism, Literally In that opinion piece, the author asserts that one doesn’t even experience racism ‘in person’ to have an adverse impact on their health:

Worse, we know that racism doesn’t have to be experienced in person to affect our health — taking it in the form of news coverage is likely to have similar effects.

The piece concludes with this:

We shouldn’t need the specter of disease to denounce hatred in all its forms. Racism, bigotry, sexism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, xenophobia, should have no place in our society. But the illness associated with discrimination adds injury to insult and magnifies the suffering of these times.

The Takeaway

One can easily see where this is going to lead. Soon enough it will be more important to remove the restraints of the 1st and 2nd amendments on the government due to health concerns – no matter the consequences to liberty – because who can argue against better health for everyone?

The problem is that history has shown that increasing Leftist control has always lead to far worse consequences than detailed in these opinion pieces.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.