Thursday, November 14, 2013

IF IT'S NOT BROKE, DON'T FIX IT

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan...period."

""hat was not a lie. I just didn't know what was going to happen.

"I said if you like your plan, you can keep your plan if it hasn't changed?"

"Even though I didn't add that part in my previous statements, they were not really left out. It's in the bill (which we didn't get to read until it was passed)."

"OK. It didn't work and that's on me (even though it is really on the American people, who could not understand that I was including things in my first statement that I did not say and now I have to fix it)."

So, if it was a good plan, and if President BO (the amateur president) knew what he was doing, and if millions did NOT get to keep their plan, but it was a good plan and was working like it was supposed to, (except for where it wasn't)...

WHY DID HE HAVE TO GO ON TV TODAY TO TELL US HE WAS GOING TO FIX IT?

YOU DON'T FIX SOMETHING THAT ISN'T BROKEN. 

IF YOU HAD TO FIX IT

IT WAS BROKEN!!!!


A comment by Mustang sums it up: The president’s announcement (and his response to questions) tell us two important things. First, the president’s proposed administrative fix is completely impractical, suggesting that Mr. Obama is out of his depth in understanding simple frameworks. Six states have already changed their laws to conform to ACA rules and regulations. For the citizens of these states, there is no “going back.” For everyone else, state insurance commissioners, who have largely completed their regulatory and oversight work for 2014, will now have to reopen the files and take another look at what can even be done, given that insurance companies have already begun to implement new state rules. The second thing we learned is that Obama has only attempted to give himself (and all the other communists who passed ACA without any idea what was in it) some cover in the next election.

18 comments:

Dave Miller said...

Joe, you have stated many times on your blog that you believe congress should honor and do the will of the majority of the people of the US.

There is a strong majority of people in the US who favor the concept of Universal Health Care. Not necessarily Obamacare, but a plan that would insure everyone.

Perhaps if people like you and the Republicans in Congress got on board with the majority of people in the US, we could get this fixed.

I've heard a lot from the GOP about repealing the ACA, but precious little about any plan to replace it with another plan that gets us closer to the universal plan that America wants.

Do you have any ideas for getting us there?

Clearly what we had before was not doing it.

Duckys here said...

You my find this interesting, Joe

The article bears on Dave's question about Congress honoring the will of the people and at least learning to compromise.

The article expressly deals with an attempt by Obama to end around one of those free trade agreements. Bad ju-ju.

But I was struck by this snip:

"Obama’s relationship with his own party is already on the rocks as a result of Obamacare (not just the rollout but the increasing recognition that the program has more fundamental flaws), so he has limited political capital available to whip Democratic Congressmen back into line."

Obama was adamant about limiting single payer from the beginning and certainly did not lobby for it. Now we find that surrendering to private health insurers is problematic.

I doubt the right is going to attempt to join forces with disgruntled Dem (who may well pay a political) price and get something workable done.

Your ideas on a solution?

Joe said...

DM: You've fallen for the liberal myth that Americans want Universal Health Care. It isn't so.

GOP presented a good plan, but you and other liberals either ignored it or dismissed it out of hand because it wasn't your plan.

Ducky: Compromise is fine as long as you're not compromising principles. Do you know about principles?

Xavier Onassis said...

So you have a problem with the President taking full responsibility (The Buck Stops Here) for the problem and proposing a solution to get it fixed?

Maybe you prefer the George W. Bush approach where, when asked directly, he couldn't think of a single thing he had ever done wrong, couldn't think any mistake he had ever made, or anything he would have done differently.

Really???

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "DM: You've fallen for the liberal myth that Americans want Universal Health Care. It isn't so."

NONSENSE! Americans DO want it! That is why they are booking trips to other countries where it is available! Google "medical tourism".

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "GOP presented a good plan..."

Oh really? What plan was that?

Dave Miller said...

XO... The GOP never, and Joe will be unable to present any shred of evidence that the GOP ever proposed and offered up legislation to 1. Provide universal health care or 2. Deal with the issues of pre existing conditions.

Ideas are one thing, passing a plan is another. What plan did the GOP pass Joe?

And Joe, I've not fallen for the myth. I've seen the polls by the same people who correctly predicted a Harry Reid win against Sharron Angle and an Obama win against Romney.

If it could be shown that a majority of Americans wanted universal health care, should the government pass that law, under your majority rules theory?

Duckys here said...

Joe, can a for profit insurance system be made Pareto optimal?

Duckys here said...

Yeah Joe, I know about principles. Don't be a jerk.

Lone Ranger said...

Interesting how the libs here have redirected the conversation from Obamacare to health care. The fact is, according to the latest Rassmussen poll, 55& of Americans favor the repeal of Obamacare. There you go, Congress. Represent the people.

It is also in the nature of democrats to FORCE people to obey their lefty policies. Obamacare is a MANDATE. If not obeyed there will be PENALTIES. Trust these Stalinists to use a stick to make their policies work. They wouldn't even think of using a carrot.

For instance, if you want to lower insurance costs, use the strange concept of FREEDOM. Lift the ban on selling health insurance across state lines. That wouldn't cost taxpayers a single penny. Allow greater access to Health Savings Accounts. And, lighten the back-breaking burden of federal regulations on insurance companies.

Xavier Onassis said...

Tonto's Catcher - "For instance, if you want to lower insurance costs, use the strange concept of FREEDOM. Lift the ban on selling health insurance across state lines."

This is hilarious and once again proves that conservatives have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

There is no "ban" on selling health insurance across state lines.

The states regulate insurance companies, not the federal government.

If you want insurance companies to be able to sell their plans across state lines, it would require the federal government to expand their ability to regulate interstate commerce and usurp the rights of the states! Something conservatives typically whine and cry about!

Please, at least TRY to be consistent in your beliefs so you don't look stupid.

Joe said...

DM: "...a strong majority of people in the US who favor the concept of Universal Health Care."

O You Who Are Always Accusing Me Of Lack Of Substantiation, where are your statistics from? Site your sources. (Actually, since this is an opinion driven blog, you really don't have to, but it might be helpful).

XO: "Google "medical tourism".

I did. Turns out the majority of it is by wealthy people, many of whom pay for their own medical care because they can afford to and are looking for a "bargain." Often the bargain ends up being in a country without the government protections that you love so much.

And by the way, people coming here from other countries far out numbers the people going from here to other countries for medical care. Heads of state don't even seek care in their own countries. They come here.

Ducky: "Yeah Joe, I know about principles."

Knowing ABOUT them and having them are two different things.

LR: Doesn't the misdirection get tiresome?

As for liberty and freedom, not one liberal I have ever met cares that mandates, requirements, force and penalties has nothing to do with either liberty or freedom.

Dave Miller said...

Joe, you are right, you seldom provide back up for your claims, telling me to use Google.

Here is one example...

http://www.ibtimes.com/two-thirds-americans-back-universal-health-care-poll-431376

The key factor being found in the second paragraph. When you add the people who favor Obamacare [admittedly small] with those who back universal care, you come to almost 65% of Americans favoring the concept of universal care.

So, let me ask again... if it could be shown that a majority of Americans favored Universal health care, should our congress follow those wishes and pass it as law?

Dave Miller said...

Lone, you can try answering the question too.

We all know we have Obamacare because the GOP would never go for single [govt] payer, which the dems wanted.

Obamacare/healthcare it is all wrapped up in the same issue.

If you take the people who want single payer out of the antiobamacare polling [because they are upset the ACA did not go far enough] the numbers against the plans drop well below 50%.

Since you seem to favor majority rule, is that an absolute value of yours? Should the majority view of the people always carry the day?

selahV said...

Keep on pluggin' Joe

Joe said...

selahV: Nice to hear from you! I'll just keep pluggin' along. Visit your site periodically. Good, as always. Need a few new posts, though...yes?

Lone Ranger said...

the media calls it a ban. Politicians call it a ban. I will call it a ban.

Once again, XO would rather argue like a little kid than debate serious issues.

Xavier Onassis said...

Tonto's Catcher - You can call it a ban. Or a tree. Or an elf.

The bottom line is, the states regulate the insurance companies within their own states.

That's a fact.

They have always done so and there is no federal regulation banning the state controlled insurance companies from extending their offerings across state lines.

If you want an insurance company in one state to be able to offer their insurance in another state where they are not licensed or sanctioned, that would require an EXPANSION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S INTERSTATE COMMERCE POWERS to compel ALL of the states to recognize and sanction ALL insurance companies from every other state!

Good God. Do you not even have the 32 brain cells necessary to cobble together a consistent narrative that expresses a coherent point of view?

Are you for or against an expanded federal government that usurps and supersedes states rights?

I'll look forward to your finely nuanced and well documented intellectual dissection of the subject and your unassailable conclusion.

Or just some randomly cut and pasted quote or video from someone smarter than you.

That shouldn't be too hard to google.