Smaller Government Equals Less Problems
A common situation has occurred at numerous town hall meetings this summer as politicians face their constituents on the topic of healthcare reform. Voters are mad and most object to more government control or a takeover of their healthcare choices.
It is refreshing that the public has finally engaged their political representatives on not only a government takeover of healthcare but the fact that spending is out of control, debt is crushing the economy and destroying the future for generations of Americans.
What is not refreshing is that Senator Grassley and others still don’t get it, exactly. No scale back, no little healthcare takeover, no little spending programs, we do not need any of it. Drop the idea. Continue the discussion on solving issues but drop the ‘reform’ idea as it stands now. Government needs to be scaled back and not increased by any legislative measure now before Congress. Government is out of control and spends too much. Not every problem can or should be solved with more government. The solution is less government. We cannot afford more of it.
Congressman Inglis could have stopped with opposing Obamacare. Instead, like Grassley, he somehow feels compelled to distance himself from the liberal complaint that the GOP is the party of ‘no’. He could have simply explained dropping the healthcare reform idea would satisfy most of his constituents. But instead, he suggests other ideas.
There is little public support for healthcare reform and even most POLS are not happy with it. Yet some POLS keep trying to find reform rather than drop the idea. And there are other healthcare ideas that should not see the light of day.
There’s another government idea ripe with problems. Like most government ideas they make it sound like a good thing. But the problem is in the details. With your medical records available to anyone who can gain access to the ‘electronic’ system the chance for abusing the system and exposing your personal data increases.
Those who support the liberal agenda will continue to push it. And those POLS opposed to it will continue to find an alternative even if no one wants it. The White House and Congress would find life much simpler as well as getting things done that people favor if they would just stop spending and increasing the size of government. Correcting the problems they have already caused would be a good place to start.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
August 21st, 2009 at 5:02 am
Well, I’ve ranted here before about electronic medical records. They’re doing it without the bill even being in effect!!!!
I don’t know Inglis but that word “enforce” attached to the government - just like a RINO. When I hear someone say “everyone must have health care,” the way to say that is it would be wise for everyone to buy health care.
No Stanford they do not get it. Let’s start with tort reform.
BTW, thanks so much for the help with my video sound:-)
August 21st, 2009 at 10:39 am
conservative talking points include tort reform, tax credits and medical savings accounts (the last two are similar) for improvements to healthcare. While those can be helpful items in the mix they are not without problems also. But at least they do not present the problems that HR3200 and similar proposals do.
For instance, in tort reform eliminating ‘frivolous’ lawsuits would be a good idea. How you do it is another question. To eliminate malpractice suits altogether would be a bad idea. Right not it is an idea without a solution.
If as Haniity has said, medical savings accounts, which I always thought were stupid, were used to offset catastrophic events how much money would one have to put in such an account to make a difference?
I’m not dissin’ these conservative talking points, just saying there is nothing wrong with these options but I just don’t know how much effect they would have and if it would be a worthwhile or noticeable improvement.
That’s the problem with reform. The country needs everyone to contribute ideas and have a mechanism for working together. If we had for instance a reasonable body for something like arbitration to resolve problems before they become a malpractice suit all could benefit, including those paying malpractice premiums. As it stands now, current mechanisms if they still exist are a joke.
You may not be able to correct a situation where a patient died and someone thinks it was a wrongful death. But when medical services have a bad outcome other than that those involved should be able to correct many of them without additional burden on the patients.
Just me ranting. But I still don’t want what the liberals are selling. I want something reasonable. Something that solves the problems without undue burden on anyone concerned. And that won’t happen with the current proposals.
Hey Maggie, thanks for stoppin’ and the heads up on the vid thing was no big deal. And you’re welcome.