Category Archives: Health care

How Did We Get Here?

Posted on by

Once upon a time, the most distinguishing characteristic between Republicans and Democrats was a difference in opinion on how to solve social problems and improve our nation.

For example, Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton and presidential candidate Robert Dole all agreed to the need for universal healthcare. They simply offered different means of accomplishing it. Indeed, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed into law by President Obama was actually based upon ideas by Nixon, Dole and Mitt Romney – all Republicans.

Contrary to current party ideologies, it was a Republican senator who authored the first anti-trust act. It was a Republican president, Theodore Roosevelt, who most aggressively enforced it to break up large corporate monopolies such as Standard Oil. And contrary to the Republican Party’s conservative heritage, it was Republican presidents, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, who created most of our national debt.

Similarly, it was a “liberal” Democratic president, Bill Clinton, who most aggressively controlled revenue and spending resulting in annual budget surpluses.

Unfortunately, the subtle gap between the ideologies has turned into an ever-expanding gulf.

Even as the Democratic Party has moved to the center right, the Republican Party has lept to the way-off-the-map extreme right. Republicans no longer talk about merely limiting government. They now talk about “starving the beast” and declare the government as the enemy. Indeed, they have set their sights on eliminating entire departments and agencies.

They demand an end to the intrusion of government into their lives. At the same time, they want to tell women what they can and cannot do to their own bodies.

They protect the incomes of millionaires and billionaires while rewarding corporations for sending middle class jobs overseas. They rail against class warfare as they continue to redistribute wealth upward. They approve of billionaires paying a lower percentage of their incomes than working people.

They praise the Founding Fathers while denying the very principles they fought for. Though the Founding Fathers declared that “all men are created equal,” Republicans deny equality to gays, blacks, latinos and anyone else who is different. Thanks to Republican appointments to the Supreme Court, corporations now have the rights of people. And since the same Republican-appointed members of the Court ruled that money equals free speech, large corporations have more rights than people.

The differences between the parties are abundantly clear. The question is how on Earth did we ever get here?

Origins Of The Right’s Misplaced Hate Of Obama.

Posted on by

I confess that I’ve long been confused about the intense (and, I believe irrational) hatred of President Obama, when it appears to me that he has been guilty of nothing more than trying to correct the problems created by the previous administration.

Upon reflection, I believe it stems from the Right’s unfailing belief in the so-called “free” market.

When the economy, led by the housing market and a lack of common-sense regulations, careened off a cliff in late 2008, the Bush administration recommended a bill to Congress that called for the US to spend billions in order to prop up the failing banks. Lacking the support of Republican leaders in Congress, the measure initially failed. But when the stock markets crashed as a result, enough Congressmen were persuaded to change their votes and the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) went into effect.

The program ultimately stabilized the markets and the economy enough to prevent the Great Recession from turning into a second Great Depresssion. Yet many Republicans were furious. They believed TARP to be a government intrusion into the infallibility of free market principles. When President Obama subsequently offered government-backed loans to General Motors and Chrysler in order to stave off the collapse of the American automobile industry, the free market Republicans and Libertarians went ballistic.

Capitalizing on an idea by a Republican strategist, groups such as the Koch-funded American FreedomWorks spent millions to rally free market believers to protest. They labeled the movement a modern day Tea Party. It turned out to be the perfect way to inspire the Republican base which was dispirited following the 2008 elections.

Teapublicans deluded themselves into believing that the Great Recession was not the fault of the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act or the Bush administration’s lax oversight of the financial industry.

They focused, instead, on President Obama’s attempts to fend off an economic Armegeddon. In addition, they convinced themselves that the national debt, which had doubled under President Bush, was now the fault of President Obama. They believed the auto bail-outs and economic stimulus were evidence that the administration was moving toward socialism. The President’s eventual signing of a bill to reform the out-of-control healthcare system added even more fuel to the torches being carried by the Tea Party.

When viewed in context, the Teapublican fears seem irrational. But when viewed through a partisan lens and slavish devotion to free market principles, regardless of their consequences, the fears are understandable, if not logical.

Moreover, this helps to explain why so many lower and middle class Americans vote against their self-interest by supporting Republican candidates determined to transfer wealth upward through tax breaks for the wealthy.

Over many years of listening to Fox News pundits and Rush-to-the-table Limbaugh, these people have become convinced that all of their problems will be solved if only we rid ourselves of government intrusion and allow Teapublican leaders to work their free market magic. Indeed, these voters are likely convinced that the only thing standing between them and unimagined riches are evil Democrats, who in their Teapublican minds, are trying to replace capitalism with socialism, or worse yet, communism or fascism.

Never mind that many of these people don’t have a clue of what any of these “isms” actually mean. Hence the Tea Party signs that read “Keep your government hands off my Medicare.”

Teapublican Lie #21.

Posted on by

“Teapublicans are pro-life.”

I guess it depends on whose life we’re talking about.

Yes, Teapublicans do protect the unborn by fighting all abortion, even if carrying the child to full-term endangers the health of the woman. But, after the child is born, as far as they’re concerned, it’s on its own. For example, Teapublicans have opposed or cut funding for stem cell research that could save lives, even if the stem cells are taken from umbilical cords after the birth of a child.

Teapublicans have opposed or cut funding for so-called “Welfare Moms” that would help to feed and house children. They have opposed funding for SCHIP, the federal program that provides healthcare to children of those living below the poverty line. They’ve opposed the extension of unemployment benefits forcing many families into homelessness. They’ve opposed programs such as Early Childhood Family Education. They’ve opposed sex education, which might result in fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions. Indeed, they’ve opposed education in general, as evidenced by their draconian cuts to the funding of public education in virtually every “Red” state.

What Teapublicans do favor is easy access to guns which result in the homicides of more than 12,000 Americans annually. They also seem to favor war, such as the “blood for oil” wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which have killed tens of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan children, not to mention more than 4,600 US troops.

So even though Democrats favor a woman’s right to choose when it comes to her own body, tell me. Which is the true pro-life party?

The Least Generation.

Posted on by

If the heroes of WWII were the Greatest Generation, how would you describe those who have followed in their footsteps? I’d have to say the reviews are mixed.

Take my generation of so-called Baby Boomers.  We started out by fighting for Civil Rights. When confronted with a lame and unjustified war in Vietnam, many of our generation fought despite reservations while the rest of us fought to end wars against those who never attacked our shores. A few years later, we fought to win equal rights for women. And many of us took up other noble causes such as fighting for a cleaner, safer environment.

All of that was admirable. But what have we done lately? Moreover, what has the post-boomer generation (those who are now in their 40s and 50s) done? Let’s just say they may be remembered as the Least Generation.

While the Greatest Generation believed in shared sacrifice in order to obtain lofty goals, such as overcoming the Great Depression and overthrowing despotic dictators such as Adolph Hitler, the Least Generation voted to give themselves tax cuts. While the Greatest Generation built our nation’s infrastructure with hard work and tax dollars, the Least Generation has stood idly by and watched that infrastructure crumble.

While the Greatest Generation toiled and sweat to earn a better future for their children, the Least Generation has mostly reserved its sweat for the athletic club. While the Greatest Generation fought for labor unions and workers’ rights, the Least Generation has fought to destroy them.

While the Greatest Generation scrimped and sacrificed to maintain the war effort, the Least Generation has mostly patted soldiers on the back with a very public “thank you for your service” and privately told themselves “thank God that’s not my son or daughter.”

In recent years, politicians from the Least Generation such as Michelle Bachmann and Eric Cantor have shown they’d rather play partisan politics than do what’s best for our country. They have voted to end welfare. They have cut Medicaid, public education, Early Family Childhood Education and social services while cutting taxes for millionaires and billionaires. They have fought to maintain subsidies and tax loopholes for the world’s largest and most profitable corporations while refusing to extend benefits for the unemployed.

They have voted to cut Social Security rather than raise the cap on FICA contributions for those making more than $106,800. They’ve voted to end Medicare rather than root out the causes of inflated medical costs or negotiate the cost of pharmaceuticals with manufacturers. And they were willing to risk government default rather than risk alienating their wealthy contributors by raising taxes.

Let’s hope the next generation does better. But I’m not optimistic.

Teapublican Lie #16.

Posted on by

“Cutting Medicaid and Medicare will save money.”

Anyone who would say this is either lying or doesn’t understand how the healthcare industry works. 

If you kick millions of people off of Medicaid and raise the cost to seniors for Medicare, they will put off going to the doctor as long as they can. Minor ailments then become major ailments. When they’re finally forced to seek help, they have no place to go except the Emergency Room where the costs of treatment can be as much as 100 times that of a doctor’s office or clinic. Since most hospitals are mandated by law to accept all patients, regardless of their ability to pay, the costs are passed along to patients who have health insurance.

So the Teapublicans who don’t want to help pay for someone else’s healthcare treatments through an efficient, well-managed government program will actually wind up paying much more through the rise in premiums for their health insurance policies, through increased taxes, or both.

Our nation’s healthcare costs are already four times the cost of healthcare in other advanced nations. Cutting Medicaid and Medicare will only make things worse.

“Obamacare” (more precisely, Nixoncare, Dolecare or Romneycare, since they proposed the program first) will definitely help. It will offer healthcare insurance to 55 million people who are currently uninsured, and it will institute some cost containment measures to an industry that has seen costs rise at a rate more than ten times the rate of inflation.

But it doesn’t go far enough.

According to a hospital CEO whose opinion I respect, this nation needs to return to a form of managed care (Health Maintenance Organizations). Under the system, the healthcare providers would be charged with keeping us healthy. The providers would also be charged with following best practices, which have been shown to produce the best outcomes, and limiting unnecessary or unproven care.  (Or, in Teapublican terms, “death panels” with the responsibility to review extreme procedures that are proposed for patients with terminal diseases.)

This is one of the most important steps in solving our healthcare crisis as noted in a 1990s study by the MIT Sloan School of Management.  That study showed that, in the US, more than 70 percent of all healthcare expenditures occur in the last six months of a patient’s life. In other words, we tend to ignore our health until something goes drastically wrong.  Then we spare no expense to prove that the diagnosis of a fatal condition is essentially correct.

It’s clear that we need an entirely new approach to healthcare and “Obamacare” is an important first step.  Repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will only make things worse. So will the other Teapublican proposals.  We can’t throw the poor off of Medicaid, cut Medicare for the elderly, maintain our out-of-control health insurance system and cut the deficit.

The healthcare industry and the economy are like a large, overinflated balloon. If you push one place, it expands somewhere else.  To make improvements, you have to change the entire entity at once.

The Kings and Queen of Mean.

Posted on by

So far, the debates between Teapublican presidential candidates have been very entertaining. Watching them is somewhat like watching Voldemort, Simon Legree, the Joker, Scrooge, Alfred E. Neuman, Lex Luthor and the Wicked Witch of the West face off to see who can be nastier, more spiteful, more repugnant and more snide.

Yet the sentiments of the audiences have been even more revealing.

In one debate, an audience of upper middle class white Californians actually broke out in applause upon the mere mention of Gov. Perry’s 234 executions. In another debate, when confronted with the question of whether or not the government should allow a hypothetical uninsured young American die, members of the pitchfork crowd in Tampa screamed “yes.”

And these are the religious so-called “values” people?

If voters are unwise enough to put them in charge of our country, we won’t have to build a bigger fence to keep immigrants out of our country. We’ll have to build one to keep our own citizens in.

World’s Greatest Nation? Really?

Posted on by

Although many Americans are fond of calling the US the greatest nation on Earth, that hasn’t been true for many years. Certainly we have the world’s most powerful military, but that’s no criteria for greatness. Neither is the fact that we are still the world’s richest nation, despite the downgrade in our credit rating by Standard & Poors.

But greatest?

Does a great nation tolerate an ever-widening gap between billionaires and the working poor? Does a great nation leave tens of millions of its citizens without access to health care? Does a great nation allow millions of its children to be homeless? Does a great nation allow its education system to become third-rate? Does a great nation allow its infrastructure to decay and collapse merely to give another tax cut to large corporations and the wealthy?

Does a great nation use its financial and military power to prop up brutal dictatorships around the world? Does a great nation bankrupt the small farmers of neighboring countries by subsidizing corporate farms then demonize those farmers when they cross the border looking for jobs? Does a great nation demean those who labor to build things with their hands, to put out fires, or to teach its youth? Does a great nation begrudge a comfortable retirement to its elderly? Does a great nation allow large corporations and the wealthy to elect its politicians?

How can a nation be called great when it rewards greed and corruption? When its judicial system rules that corporations have rights superior to those of its citizens? When its financial institutions are allowed to grow so large they are immune to failure from their own mistakes? When its corporate lawyers are tasked with seeking out financial and legal loopholes that allow their clients to game the system? When its politicians are more concerned with scoring political points than the welfare of its voters? When its citizens are more interested in the antics of its celebrities than those of its government? When it allows its previous leader to run up a huge debt, and then blames the leader who inherited it?

We didn’t need Standard & Poors to tell us that our nation is on the verge of bankruptcy. When it comes to fairness, ideas and ethics, the US has been on the verge of bankruptcy for many years.

If Teapublicans Have Such Great Ideas, Why Do They Lie So Much?

Posted on by

Why do they generate and circulate a seemingly endless number of blatantly false and misleading chain emails that demean our President?
Why do they try to shout down everyone with whom they disagree?
Why do they parrot talking points instead of rationally debating issues?
Why do they protect the obscenely wealthy and attack the poor?
Why do they complain about immigration then hire illegal immigrants to do their landscaping or repair their roofs?
Why do they preach small government then pass laws giving government power to prevent gay marriages and lawful abortions?
Why do they fight to ban abortions while, at the same time, fighting against sex education and the contraceptive practices that would help avoid them?
Why do they revere police and firefighters for responding to 9/11 then try to take away their right to collective bargaining and health care?
Why do they praise those in the military and ignore veterans in need of help?
Why do they revere President Bush for adding $7 trillion to our national debt and crashing our economy then attack President Obama for adding $1.4 trillion in trying to fix it?
Why do they complain about the excesses of Wall Street bankers while trying to block laws that will regulate them?
Why do they slash budgets for education while complaining that the US is falling behind other nations?
Why do they complain about unemployment as they cut federal budgets to force even more layoffs?
Why do they complain about government health care while telling the government to keep its hands off their Medicare?
Why do they complain about passing health care reform after a 10-month debate then pass a bill to kill entitlements with virtually no debate.
Why do they talk about helping small businesses then undercut them with policies that only benefit large corporations?
Why do they refuse to eliminate tax loopholes for corporations that claim an offshore P.O. Box as their corporate headquarters?
Why do they subsidize big oil companies and refuse to subsidize renewable alternatives?
Why do they call themselves conservatives when they’re against conservation of our environment?
Why do they demand compromise then refuse to consider alternate ideas?

Republicans In Denial (As In Denial Of Any Democrat Proposal)

Posted on by

Today, Congressional Republicans pulled out of negotiations to resolve the deficit.  And (here’s a shocker) they blamed Democrats.  Their reasoning is that Democrats insist on tax increases rather than merely relying on more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicare and other programs. 

“Let me be clear.  Tax hikes are off the table,” said House Speaker John Boehner. 

So, according to Republicans, even though the major cause of the deficit is the Bush era tax cuts (primarily for the wealthy), the only way to cut the deficit is by cutting spending for Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Planned Parenthood, Public Broadcasting, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Consumer Protection Agency, the Department of Education, etc.  At the same time, Republicans refuse to consider cuts to subsidies for Big Oil and corporate agriculture which they say would be tax hikes.  Of course, they also want to repeal the Affordable Care Act and repeal regulations on the financial industry.

So according to Republicans, when it comes to deficit negotiations, everything is on the table.  Except anything that Democrats want.

I guess that’s what passes for “bipartisan negotiations” these days.

Republican Agenda Has Never Been More Clear.

Posted on by

Following the vote by House Republicans to cut Medicaid and turn Medicare into a certain-to-fail voucher system, Senate Republicans filibustered a bill that would end oil subsidies to the most profitable companies on Earth.  They followed that by doing the same to a bill that would end subsidies for Ethanol.

In doing so, Republicans have made it abundantly clear that they don’t care about cutting the deficit.  Not really.  If they did, they would gladly trim these subsidies from our budget resulting in savings of billions of dollars.

As evidenced by their assault on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, unemployment insurance, education, women’s health providers, the environment, labor unions, first responders and teachers, they certainly don’t care about ordinary citizens.

What Republicans do seem to care about is protecting the profits of their corporate masters. You know, the large corporations that were given all the rights of citizens by the conservative-dominated Supreme Court so they could anonymously spend millions to elect Republican candidates.

The connection couldn’t be more obvious.