Friday, January 29, 2010
Specific Issues with Proposed Senate Health Bill
Joe C. sent me this video (below) as a means of quickly running through issues in the Senate version of the health care bill that was initially offered last July. This is an earlier version than the one that passed the vote on Christmas Eve (a mere month ago), but you can check the claims of the video below with that of the actual text of the bill here (PDF file). The page numbers and lines mentioned in the video correspond with that PDF file.
The updated (current) version of the Senate bill is HR 3590 and can be found in text format here. The problem with connecting the video to this current version is that we don't have the same page and line numbers in this new bill as those mentioned in the video. But if you search the obsolete PDF version, you can find section heading numbers, then use your browser to search to those numbers (press CTRL-F to get on-page search ability, for the non-geeks) and compare the current with obsolete versions (geeky enough?). Plenty of work, but I noticed some of this garbage indeed remains within the current version of the bill.
Do some research, come to your own conclusions, and share what you find with others. After all, according to President Obama's recent state of the union address, American citizens are opposed to this bill because he failed to properly inform us of the bill's true contents:
Hey, Mr. President--I think I've found some better approaches. In fact, I wrote about them here months ago.
The updated (current) version of the Senate bill is HR 3590 and can be found in text format here. The problem with connecting the video to this current version is that we don't have the same page and line numbers in this new bill as those mentioned in the video. But if you search the obsolete PDF version, you can find section heading numbers, then use your browser to search to those numbers (press CTRL-F to get on-page search ability, for the non-geeks) and compare the current with obsolete versions (geeky enough?). Plenty of work, but I noticed some of this garbage indeed remains within the current version of the bill.
Do some research, come to your own conclusions, and share what you find with others. After all, according to President Obama's recent state of the union address, American citizens are opposed to this bill because he failed to properly inform us of the bill's true contents:
Still, this is a complex issue. And the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people. And I know that with all the lobbying and horse-trading, this process left most Americans wondering, "What's in it for me?"
...
As temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look at the plan we've proposed. There's a reason why many doctors, nurses, and health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo.
But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know.
Hey, Mr. President--I think I've found some better approaches. In fact, I wrote about them here months ago.
Labels: H.R. 3200, H.R. 3590, health care, health insurance, Obama, president, Senate, state of the union
Thursday, January 7, 2010
No C-SPAN for Health Care Wrangling?
With all the talk during candidate Obama's presidential run regarding transparency and accountability, perhaps it's right he catches some flack with the recent denial of open, transparent debate with the health "reform" bills in the House and Senate?
Perhaps you've heard the story going around lately? Here's the take at C-SPAN. What's the view from White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs? The Washington Examiner records an interesting exchange on this topic. How's that for transparency and accountability? I even found that elusive letter that remains unseen by Robert Gibbs, and you can see it, too. Something tells me Robert Gibbs might be avoiding seeing this letter (cue stunned music).
True, the president is part of the executive branch, while congress is part of the legislative branch of government. But if I remember right, the promise of "no new taxes" made by president Bush--though this was an issue for the legislative branch--was something that brought quite a lot of pain to the president at the time when not delivered.
Broken promises:
Perhaps you've heard the story going around lately? Here's the take at C-SPAN. What's the view from White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs? The Washington Examiner records an interesting exchange on this topic. How's that for transparency and accountability? I even found that elusive letter that remains unseen by Robert Gibbs, and you can see it, too. Something tells me Robert Gibbs might be avoiding seeing this letter (cue stunned music).
True, the president is part of the executive branch, while congress is part of the legislative branch of government. But if I remember right, the promise of "no new taxes" made by president Bush--though this was an issue for the legislative branch--was something that brought quite a lot of pain to the president at the time when not delivered.
Broken promises:
Labels: accountability, C-SPAN, debate, health care, House, Obama, promise, Robert Gibbs, Senate, transparency
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]