Many decades ago, I majored in engineering. We had a little one credit course in which, in part, it was said that when a project was discussed, it was all right to propose alterations or even a new plan, but once a decision was made, everyone was to get together and make the plan work, even if you thought it wasn't the best plan or even if you thought it wouldn't work. So the question is, ACA (Obamacare) became the plan (became law, a decision was made) so what did Republicans do to try and make the plan work?
True, the ACA was passed by one political party although the plan was that of the opposing party; yet none of the opposing party voted for it. That is a big reason why the Republicans are having such a difficult time with repeal and replace for the ACA. It was really their plan.
A huge problem in our current politics is that there is never a real decision made. It sure makes it difficult for people to plan for the future. You have to plan for every eventuality.
When Republican Bush-43 proposed Medicare D (prescription drugs), Democrats voted for it. It was his fellow Republicans that gave Bush such a hard time, but it passed. Now there is no argument over Medicare D. President Reagan proposed that emergency rooms have to take all applicants, regardless of ability to pay. Democrats and Republicans both voted for it and there is no argument against it today. Come on Republicans, it is in your interest to propose some plan that Democrats can vote for or help fix the ACA.
Showing posts with label Medicare D. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Medicare D. Show all posts
Monday, July 17, 2017
Thursday, October 6, 2016
GEORGE W. BUSH IN RETROSPECT
I really can't be mad at George W. Bush because he never should have been president in the first place. He was an unsuccessful business man who was repeatedly financially bailed out by someone, presumably a Saudi Prince. The fault lies with us the electorate for electing him. Wait, he wasn't elected by us, the Supreme Court chose him. His opponent actually got more votes, but was done in by "hanging chads" and aggressiveness by Gays when Ohio was not ready for equality for them.
Granted there are lots of" landmines" in the way of a president becoming great.* For example, in retrospect, Eisenhower looks pretty good. He had positive cash flow twice in his presidential terms. Only Clinton (Bill) has had more. He made some fledgling moves on racial equality. He got the interstate highway system. Perhaps most important of all is that he showed us that sometimes the proper reaction to something is no action.
But then the Eisenhower negatives. He overthrew a duly elected prime minister in Iran for wanting the same oil deal from BP (actually the forerunner of BP) as Egypt got (half the profits). Things have been downhill with Iran ever since. And then there was the Hungarian uprising where we fomented them to revolt and then abandoned them.
But George W. Bush (Bush-43) had two absolute disasters that he plunged us into. One was going to war in the Middle East, something we have been mired in ever since. The other was the Great Recession (It is not PC to use the word depression any more) because he believed that the financial industry is "self correcting" and didn't need regulation. All of a sudden banks, as a result of the lack of regulation, stopped being staid conservative institutions and became go-go organizations. It didn't help that he also got a tax cut during the war that was performed on the cuff. We are still mired in both disasters but have done much, much better on the recovering economy that should be called The Great Recovery.
Many pretend to see no difference between a recession and a depression. Recessions are usually due to large buildup of inventories and recover when inventories work their way down whereas depressions are a collapse of a financial system and are self perpetuating unless something drastic is done.
There are those who say that the Great Depression was not overcome until WW-II with its enforced savings through rationing and lack of goods and a continued low birthrate. In the Great Recession, there is no all consuming distraction such as a World War, which is a great tragedy and certainly not to be recommended. Industry has to work its way out of the Great Recession with minor help by a congress (other than a small "stimulus program") that refused to have a major infrastructure program to help things along.
In fairness to Bush, once he recognized what he had done, he did start some action to save our financial system through the TARP Program, that Obama continued. But a lot of damage had already been done. Though saving the banks has been controversial, it was a key to the Great Recovery we have witnessed by President Obama.
Bush, of course did have some positives, perhaps the most important being Medicare-D (prescription drug coverage), though he left it up to the insurance industry to find a way to pay for it. He did recognize the importance of Hispanics to our culture. "Leave No child Behind" was well intended if much hated by the teaching community.
I will also give Bush credit for going to war in Afghanistan because we had to do something after the 9/11 (2001) attacks, even if it ended badly. President Reagan on the other had "cut and run" from Lebanon after the Marine Barracks massacre and embassy bombings in Lebanon and Kuwait, emboldening the terrorists into believing that, if we were hit hard, we would just withdraw.
George W. Bush's two disasters, unfortunately, greatly outweigh everything else and make him a candidate for the worst president ever, certainly a big step worse than President Hoover.
* http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/05/land-mines-in-way-of-becoming-great.html
Granted there are lots of" landmines" in the way of a president becoming great.* For example, in retrospect, Eisenhower looks pretty good. He had positive cash flow twice in his presidential terms. Only Clinton (Bill) has had more. He made some fledgling moves on racial equality. He got the interstate highway system. Perhaps most important of all is that he showed us that sometimes the proper reaction to something is no action.
But then the Eisenhower negatives. He overthrew a duly elected prime minister in Iran for wanting the same oil deal from BP (actually the forerunner of BP) as Egypt got (half the profits). Things have been downhill with Iran ever since. And then there was the Hungarian uprising where we fomented them to revolt and then abandoned them.
But George W. Bush (Bush-43) had two absolute disasters that he plunged us into. One was going to war in the Middle East, something we have been mired in ever since. The other was the Great Recession (It is not PC to use the word depression any more) because he believed that the financial industry is "self correcting" and didn't need regulation. All of a sudden banks, as a result of the lack of regulation, stopped being staid conservative institutions and became go-go organizations. It didn't help that he also got a tax cut during the war that was performed on the cuff. We are still mired in both disasters but have done much, much better on the recovering economy that should be called The Great Recovery.
Many pretend to see no difference between a recession and a depression. Recessions are usually due to large buildup of inventories and recover when inventories work their way down whereas depressions are a collapse of a financial system and are self perpetuating unless something drastic is done.
There are those who say that the Great Depression was not overcome until WW-II with its enforced savings through rationing and lack of goods and a continued low birthrate. In the Great Recession, there is no all consuming distraction such as a World War, which is a great tragedy and certainly not to be recommended. Industry has to work its way out of the Great Recession with minor help by a congress (other than a small "stimulus program") that refused to have a major infrastructure program to help things along.
In fairness to Bush, once he recognized what he had done, he did start some action to save our financial system through the TARP Program, that Obama continued. But a lot of damage had already been done. Though saving the banks has been controversial, it was a key to the Great Recovery we have witnessed by President Obama.
Bush, of course did have some positives, perhaps the most important being Medicare-D (prescription drug coverage), though he left it up to the insurance industry to find a way to pay for it. He did recognize the importance of Hispanics to our culture. "Leave No child Behind" was well intended if much hated by the teaching community.
I will also give Bush credit for going to war in Afghanistan because we had to do something after the 9/11 (2001) attacks, even if it ended badly. President Reagan on the other had "cut and run" from Lebanon after the Marine Barracks massacre and embassy bombings in Lebanon and Kuwait, emboldening the terrorists into believing that, if we were hit hard, we would just withdraw.
George W. Bush's two disasters, unfortunately, greatly outweigh everything else and make him a candidate for the worst president ever, certainly a big step worse than President Hoover.
* http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/05/land-mines-in-way-of-becoming-great.html
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
"...SIGNING LEGISLATION REPEALING EVERY WORD OF OBAMACARE,”
“Imagine in 2017, a new president signing legislation repealing every word of Obamacare,” the Texas Republican said Monday during a speech at Liberty University in Virginia.*
This quote is among the many "Imagine" statements made by Sen. Ted Cruz's candidacy speech for the Republican nomination for president. He has said it before, of course, and in fact he led the way to shutting down the government in an attempt to abolish the ACA in 2012. There are even conservatives who wonder what Ted Cruz is FOR. Well, is he for repealing the right of students to be on their parents health plan to the age of 26. Is he for letting insurance companies refuse health insurance to people because of preexisting conditions. Is he for letting insurance companies changing things they insure during mid-contract. These and others are things he is FOR.
Well let the record show that Obamacare has survived for five years in spite of such attacks. The problem is that Obamacare does need reforms (It should be single payer, for one example) and Cruz's attacks only serve to delay honest reforms. But Cruz does not want a good ACA. He wants no control of medical practices at all.
Suppose Cruz is elected president and repeals Obamacare, what does he do next? Will he get rid of Medicare D, or emergency rooms having to take all comers?** Or because these liberal initiatives were made by Republican presidents are they all right, even though they are not paid for?
* http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/23/white-house-scoffs-ted-cruzs-obamacare-repeal-vow/
** Ronald Reagan signed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which requires hospitals to serve patients in urgent need, and the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, or COBRA, which allows individuals to keep paying for coverage if they lose their insurance. In addition, with almost no support from his own cabinet, Reagan added catastrophic care to Medicare toward the end of his presidency, though the provision was later repealed. ..... George W. Bush pushed for and signed the expansion of Medicare to include prescription drug coverage. (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/05/julian-castro/julian-castro-says-seven-presidents-barack-obama-s/)
This quote is among the many "Imagine" statements made by Sen. Ted Cruz's candidacy speech for the Republican nomination for president. He has said it before, of course, and in fact he led the way to shutting down the government in an attempt to abolish the ACA in 2012. There are even conservatives who wonder what Ted Cruz is FOR. Well, is he for repealing the right of students to be on their parents health plan to the age of 26. Is he for letting insurance companies refuse health insurance to people because of preexisting conditions. Is he for letting insurance companies changing things they insure during mid-contract. These and others are things he is FOR.
Well let the record show that Obamacare has survived for five years in spite of such attacks. The problem is that Obamacare does need reforms (It should be single payer, for one example) and Cruz's attacks only serve to delay honest reforms. But Cruz does not want a good ACA. He wants no control of medical practices at all.
Suppose Cruz is elected president and repeals Obamacare, what does he do next? Will he get rid of Medicare D, or emergency rooms having to take all comers?** Or because these liberal initiatives were made by Republican presidents are they all right, even though they are not paid for?
* http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/23/white-house-scoffs-ted-cruzs-obamacare-repeal-vow/
** Ronald Reagan signed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which requires hospitals to serve patients in urgent need, and the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, or COBRA, which allows individuals to keep paying for coverage if they lose their insurance. In addition, with almost no support from his own cabinet, Reagan added catastrophic care to Medicare toward the end of his presidency, though the provision was later repealed. ..... George W. Bush pushed for and signed the expansion of Medicare to include prescription drug coverage. (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/05/julian-castro/julian-castro-says-seven-presidents-barack-obama-s/)
Friday, February 27, 2015
THE POLITICS OF CRITICISM
Rudy Giuliani mentioned something profound in his blast at president Obama. He was upset that Obama sometimes criticizes America. Now this really is a key difference between conservatives and liberals.
For reasons I don't fully understand, conservatives feel that you should only think good about America. They are serious about this and there was even a move in Colorado to remove all critical things about America from the school history books. It is a part of the makeup of conservatives and probably stems from their not liking change. After all, if everything is good, why change?
Liberals, on the other hand, think America can be improved and that it is part of the American makeup to do so, so they tend to have a stream of problems they see in America that ought to be fixed and make a more perfect Union: women should be able to own property, women should have the right to vote, slavery is immoral, Jim Crow is immoral, minorities should be able to vote, schools should be desegregated, the poor should have livable housing, buying a home should be color blind, hospital emergency rooms should be open to all, prescription drug insurance (Medicare D), low cost health insurance should be open to all (ACA), women should get equal pay as men in the same job, homosexuality shouldn't be a criminal offense, consenting adults should be able to marry the same sex, parents of American children should be able to stay in America. I've probably forgotten a few. Note that some of the liberal concepts were done by Republican Presidents, e.g. emergency rooms should be open open to all and Medicare D.
Some liberal benefits have not stuck, for instance, unions which led to the Golden Age Of Labor, but as unions decline, so have the fortunes of labor.
Not all liberal ventures have worked out. For example: the high rise complexes for the poor bred crime. When you think about it, if you put a lot of "failed" people together, you won't get success. Now many of these high rise communities for the poor have been pulled down.
For reasons I don't fully understand, conservatives feel that you should only think good about America. They are serious about this and there was even a move in Colorado to remove all critical things about America from the school history books. It is a part of the makeup of conservatives and probably stems from their not liking change. After all, if everything is good, why change?
Liberals, on the other hand, think America can be improved and that it is part of the American makeup to do so, so they tend to have a stream of problems they see in America that ought to be fixed and make a more perfect Union: women should be able to own property, women should have the right to vote, slavery is immoral, Jim Crow is immoral, minorities should be able to vote, schools should be desegregated, the poor should have livable housing, buying a home should be color blind, hospital emergency rooms should be open to all, prescription drug insurance (Medicare D), low cost health insurance should be open to all (ACA), women should get equal pay as men in the same job, homosexuality shouldn't be a criminal offense, consenting adults should be able to marry the same sex, parents of American children should be able to stay in America. I've probably forgotten a few. Note that some of the liberal concepts were done by Republican Presidents, e.g. emergency rooms should be open open to all and Medicare D.
Some liberal benefits have not stuck, for instance, unions which led to the Golden Age Of Labor, but as unions decline, so have the fortunes of labor.
Not all liberal ventures have worked out. For example: the high rise complexes for the poor bred crime. When you think about it, if you put a lot of "failed" people together, you won't get success. Now many of these high rise communities for the poor have been pulled down.
Monday, November 17, 2014
REPUBLICANS AND HEALTH CARE FOR THE POOR
So the electorate in its wisdom has turned congress over to the party that caused the problems. But all may not be lost. For example, President Reagan instituted the rule that Emergency Rooms had to take all comers. This was huge. I think it was one of the two most major things of his presidency (the other was breaking the Air Traffic controller's Union). Having Emergency rooms be the primary care source for the poor was maybe as large as the ACA, though it drives up the cost of those that can pay. And then President Bush (43) got passed (if barely) Medicare D, the prescription drug provision. Of course it had the weird "doughnut hole" that wasn't covered but it was huge too. A benefit of having Republican presidents pass health care provisions is that they remain unopposed. You don't hear of any opposition to Emergency Rooms having to take all comers even though it clogs the emergency rooms. You also don't hear opposition to Medicare D. Neither of these had any attempt to cover the costs. It is only the ACA that is opposed, certainly because it was passed by Democrats even though it was a conservative bill and attempted to cover the costs. Like Medicare D, it is flawed but was the best bill that could have passed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
