Comments (84) | Add a comment
EDITORIAL
For bankruptcy and socialism
Tools
With their plan to create a vast new federal health care bureaucracy in the face of the worst recession in generations -- a recession already exacerbated by unprecedented federal borrowing and spending -- Washington's "progressives" may have finally reached for their "bridge too far" -- if not their Waterloo.
No one's really sure what's in the latest so-called "health reform" bill -- Friday it turned out the latest version would raise to 3.8 percent a new job-killing tax on investment income, meaning "overall tax rates on income from interest, annuities and royalties would rise to as much as 43.4 percent," according to Bloomberg News. The new scheme would also impose a new 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning services!
But the more that Americans have learned about what's in the bill, and the more they've seen of the corruption and chicanery being used to force it through, the larger the majority that's turned against it.
How can new taxes in a bill that was still being changed in the House on Friday win new approval in the Senate, where the Democrats now lack the 60 votes required to block a filibuster? They can't. But the radicals don't care. They've gone so far as to propose sending the bill to the White House anyway, merely pretending both houses have OK'd the same measure.
On Friday, both Democratic Congresswoman Shelley Berkley and freshman Nevada Rep. Dina Titus said they'd vote for this monstrosity.
Make no mistake: A vote for ObamaCare means these representatives have declined to stand with the Nevadans who sent them to Washington. Instead, the ladies will have lined up with the purple-shirted SEIU thugs who last August called black conservative activist Kenneth Gladney the "n" word and beat him to the ground outside a rigged "town hall" meeting in St. Louis for passing out yellow "Don't Tread on Me" flags.
Vote now and wait for things to quiet down? Court challenges both to the insurance mandates in this bill, and to the procedural trickery being used to force it through, will festoon the courts for months and years to come, even as our overseas trading partners increasingly balk at buying the promissory notes needed to fund this wobbling house of cards.
Rep. Titus and Rep. Berkley should reconsider.
Trending topics:
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
There sure are a lot of people who post here, that want something for nothing. Or rather, want someone else to pay for something they want (or think little sally down the street, needs).
So Dr. Utopia whipped up a little magic elixir and with the help of the friendly IRS jackbooted thugs, we (who work) will get to pick up the tab for someone else.
It's always the compassionate liberal who is so free with the working man's money, but so tight with their own.
I wonder why that is? There is absolutely no law preventing any of those politicians ( or any of you big hearted liberals) from paying for anyone's "pre-existing condition".
When America is bankrupt, and our money is worthless, who's gonna pay for little sally's pre-existing bills then?
RE: David
Deregulation of insurance companies to go and compete where they wish will inevitably lead to the following, though probably not on President Obama's watch:
Insurance companies will flock to some markets and flee others where demograpahics are less profitable.
Bundling and further consolidation of the health insurance industry as key executives and majority shareholders make timely acquisitions and mergers for personal gain. This outcome will only exaceberate higher costs and the need for reform, greatly complicated by even larger insurance companies too big to fail even more entrenched with long time Senators on Capitol Hill.
Here is a local parallel. Did bundling of the gaming industry lower room costs or raise them? Did new growth come to exclude offerings for certain customers, or was their diversity in product, meaning something for everyone?
Answer: Everyone went after the same best customer. Which is what insurance will do in select markets.
RE: David
Weird seems to be the new majority in America.
The University of Illinois and the University of Texas at Austin have both researched the math on tort reforms in Texas and both objective studies have concluded there is no material effect on healthcare costs.
Please share your hundred of billions in savings statement with each and every person having a cause of action against Dr. Desai in Clark County.
Dr. Desai will (has) put up legal barriers to protect assets from claims in court, as many as can be bought under the cost-benefit rule through legal expertise.
Greg your going weird,
Here is a small list of the ways that health reform could actual lower costs (Something the Democrats have apparently no intention to do)
1. Tort reform (savings of hundreds of billions).
2. The use of HSA's (which Whole Foods and the state of Indiana have used successfully to lower health care costs while maintaining or increasing the quality of health care.
3. A system like Safeway's where you reward people who take better care of themselves would greatly reduce costs. Safeway has used this plan to hold their costs flat for the last ten or so years.
4. An increased use of nurse practitioners or doctor's assistants to cover minor health problems and lower the cost of a doctor's visit would help.
5. A system where all doctor's and all insurance companies use the same form would cut down on the cost of compliance.
6. A way for people to be able to shop across state lines for their health care would lower costs through competition.
7. A way for people to be able to shop the various doctor's to see who has the best price for a particular non emergency service would lower costs through competition (This has been used to bring down the cost of laser eye surgery by thousands of dollars.)
These are just a few ideas of how to bring down costs. None of which are in the Democrats "health reform" bill.
food for thought...obama said in three different speeches that he want s a civilian security force as large and and as well funded as the military....Why??
When he starts this force through the house and senate are you all going to good lil' dummies and lie down while he does this....then if term limits for president is reversed are you going to go the way of the hugo chavez regime and watch as our freedom of speech disappears with more of his idiotic ideology....
think about it.....those speeches are probably still on youtube....you know the ones that all the hope and change nuts did not hear...