The Cost of Doing Nothing on Health Care

Republicans are stalling. And if their tactics prevail, it will cost the U.S.

This is typical Republican theater; argue that they’re the party of fiscal responsibility while at the same time acting entirely opposite. Under the last president, with Republicans in the majority, they cut taxes and didn’t fund two wars. The irresponsibility of their actions have gone ignored by most in the media, including the supposedly “liberal” outlets.

Republicans are behaving reprehensibly, because they have become accustomed to claiming a moral high ground. In the case of healthcare reform, Republicans are 100 years behind the times, backing policy from their last popular dead president, who espoused that the government was the problem. The same president expanded government, changed the tax code and ran up the deficit, leaving a Democrat to fix it. That’s the narrative that Republicans are in deep denial over. No amount of Fox/Beck/Hannity/Limbaugh/O’Reilly is going to change the fact that Republicans are not facing the music. 2010 will not be 1994, if the Dems nut it up and pass healthcare reform legislation. The irony is that passing the evil Democratic legislation in front of Congress, which contains Republican ideas (before they flip flopped on those ideas; another in a long list of deep hypocrisies plaguing supposed fiscally responsible conservatives).

That aside, if the GOP continues its strategy of obstructionism, there is a human cost, one that will only ensure future GOP losses at the polls if nothing is done to fix the broken U.S. healthcare system:

The Cost of Doing Nothing on Health Care

Nearly every mainstream analysis calls for medical costs to continue to climb over the next decade, outpacing the growth in the overall economy and certainly increasing faster than the average paycheck. Those higher costs will translate into higher premiums, which will mean fewer individuals and businesses will be able to afford insurance coverage. More of everyone’s dollar will go to health care, and government programs like Medicare and Medicaid will struggle to find the money to operate.

Personal sidenote: I’ve never seen a bigger bunch of low class sore loser pussies than the GOP this cycle. At least in ’94, Newt Gingrich pretended to be an intellectual leader. There is no such thing now. The Tea Party is not even close to having the momentum that Newt had in ’94.

p.s. Dems, time to unify and pass it.

  • http://ecoecoamerica.blogspot.com/ southerngirl

    I am self-employed and can’t afford the high premiums for health insurance for my family. I’m worried that should something happen to one of us or someone gets really sick, we will lose everything we have worked for and end up bankrupt. Does the Republican Party care? No. They no longer care about the problems facing the American people. They are only out for themselves. Do the Democrats care? Some of them do, but the majority is only looking out for themselves, too. Congress no longer works for the American people. It works for big business and the American people are sh$t out of luck.

  • nobody

    The GOP has already lost power for its errors, so I think you can stop screaming about them sometime soon.

    Don’t like their objects to health care? If the program is that popular, let the Dems go to the polls and get the votes they need to do it without the procedural gimmickry. The refusal of Massachusetts to provide the 60th vote suggests they won’t. The insistence of the Dems on doing it now suggests they themselves think they wouldn’t.

    Which ought to make you wonder why they are insisting on this political suicide mission .…

    If all I wanted was for the GOP to win elections, I would encourage the Dems to just keep on going. But I hope they stop — if passed, this program will prove very bad for economy, and still worse for our politics.

    • http://blurbomat.com blurb

      I’m not convinced that I’m screaming. Dems are hypocritical, too, for the record. However, the audacity of the GOP has reached new heights. From a historical perspective, I’m documenting here because I’m astounded every day by the outright lies being perpetrated and by the sheer sore loser aspect of the GOP in this last cycle (it was almost as bad during the Clinton years and I think we know where Ken Starr and Newt took us).

      I don’t think reconciliation is as suicidal as not passing healthcare legislation. As has been noted elsewhere, the GOP has used it all the time when they didn’t have a super majority.

      I think the Massachusetts senate race was less about policy and more about personality (or the lack of it in the Dem candidate). I could be wrong. It just doesn’t read as the striking mandate that conservatives want it to.

      • nobody

        I’ve written it before: if you think the GOP’s rhetoric is unusual, you are kidding yourself. You are setting up a mindset where _every_ problem and failure is somone else’s fault. It’s very hard to discuss anything with that mindset.

        You are encouraging others, and yourself, to bitterness and anger with little hope of improving your own arguments, never mind finding some basis of agreement. “A man’s anger does not fulfill God’s justice.” You are choosing the Dark Side of the Force. You are going to end up thrown down the central air shaft of a large intergalactic battle station. Turn back.

  • nobody

    From the Federalist Papers, Introduction:

    “I am well aware that it would be disingenuous to resolve indiscriminately the opposition of any set of men (merely because their situations might subject them to suspicion) into interested or ambitious views. Candor will oblige us to admit that even such men may be actuated by upright intentions; and it cannot be doubted that much of the opposition which has made its appearance, or may hereafter make its appearance, will spring from sources, blameless at least, if not respectable–the honest errors of minds led astray by preconceived jealousies and fears. So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes which serve to give a false bias to the judgment, that we, upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong as well as on the right side of questions of the first magnitude to society. This circumstance, if duly attended to, would furnish a lesson of moderation to those who are ever so much persuaded of their being in the right in any controversy. And a further reason for caution, in this respect, might be drawn from the reflection that we are not always sure that those who advocate the truth are influenced by purer principles than their antagonists. Ambition, avarice, personal animosity, party opposition, and many other motives not more laudable than these, are apt to operate as well upon those who support as those who oppose the right side of a question. Were there not even these inducements to moderation, nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has, at all times, characterized political parties. For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.”

    • TheNephew

      That is nice to quote, the Federalists papers are a great example of American debate. But you forgot to get to the numerous parts where the federalists say that anti-federalists (small government, low tax advocate, and agrarian farmer politics) were lying, committing treachery, and subjecting the nation to national insurrection. Despite Hamilton, Jay, and Madison’s humble words at the beginning, lets not pretend that the federalists treated opponents with all due respect, instead they were frequently at each other’s heels with the same invective that exists today.

      Lets also not forget, if we are to listen to the federalists, that the They were concerned most about the whims and simple angers of a majority (See Fed paper 10 and 5–6). That is why our senators have 6 year terms, so that they can pass bills that a majority won’t like. (See federalist paper 62)

      However, lets also not pretend like conservative news outlets haven’t skewed this debate (See constant poll numbers saying america opposes the bill by 73%) Which is flat untrue http://​www​.realclearpolitics​.com/​e​p​o​l​l​s​/​o​t​h​e​r​/​o​b​a​m​a​_​a​n​d​_​d​e​m​o​c​r​a​t​s​_​h​e​a​l​t​h​_​c​a​r​e​_​p​l​a​n​-​1​1​3​0.html (Putting opposition solidly at around 50–52%)

      Furthermore, the GOP lost power, they don’t get to run the table when out of power. I think Blurb is trying to drive the point that Democrats need to power through the empasse in the Senate. Lets not pretend that reconciliation is some “new” measure to break througha filibuster (see Republicans 2–4 years ago) And lets also not pretend that Republicans have filibustered legislation using the same “america doesn’t want this” argument before; See Civil Rights bill 1964.

      • nobody

        I am quite aware that the Founders, and the Federalists among them, were no Boy Scouts. These were hard, practical men with the wherewithal to launch, sustain and win a guerrilla insurgency against the strongest power of their time. Their subsequent contests among themselves were hardly any calmer.

        But these political competitors understood the _political_ importance of reasoned and honest debate. It was not enough to organize voters or propagate convenient opinion. They also met the most reasoned and informed arguments of their opponents with the best responses they could muster. They knew that political victory depended on the opinions of the political center on the questions of the day. They also knew that this center would judge candidates’ temperamental and intellectual qualifications for office on the quality of their discourse on those questions. These judgments could only be swayed by honest argument, as those judgments can also detect and reject propaganda and rhetorical word-twisting.

        Neither of our present parties understand this. They are fundamentally unserious, their political popularity founded on promises of government spending and taxation that cannot be sustained. Both parties have abused the trust of citizens too busy to understand the abstractions of these future problems and too satisfied to enjoy the comforts imagined possible under those promises. We, as citizens, are responsible for not examining our representatives more closely, and we will pay large price in disappointments and bitterness for our neglect. But our attention to reasoning and careful statement will grow as the constraints of our economy increasingly undermine the credibility of our politicians’ promises. The lasting political victories will be those founded on serious answers to the questions that must arise then.

        Blurb’s point is that Republicans are grabbing for power. It’s true. He overlooks the truth that the Democrats are doing the exact same thing. And he’s ignoring the possibility that the Democrats’ partisan opportunism has lead them to policies so bad that even zombies like the GOP caucus can find strongly reasoned arguments against them.

        Compare the policy statements of our current politicians with the arguments of Hamilton for a central bank, or Webster on tariffs, or Lincoln and Douglas on slavery, or Nixon and Kennedy on foreign policy. Where any of these figures deficient in their electoral skills? But the policy discussions of our politicians look like the ramblings of imbecile children in comparison to theirs.

        You cannot simply play rhetorical, organizational politics, even when it seems to you that’s all the opposition is doing. You must also make strongly reasoned, factual arguments. It’s the only path to lasting political success, and it happens to be good for the country. THE NECESSSITY OF REASONED POLICY TO FACTIONAL AMBITION IS THE WHOLE POINT OF OUR DELIBERATIVE SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT. Focusing on the GOP’s failure to the exclusion of the Democrats’ misses the larger and far more serious problem.

  • http://ecoecoamerica.blogspot.com/ southerngirl

    Woo Hoo! A progressive who is in favor of health care reform has announced he is running against Blanche “block-health-care-reform” Lincoln here in Arkansas and progressives from around the country are raising money for his campaign. From The Huffington Post: “Progressive Challenger To Sen. Blanche Lincoln Raises $500,000 In Seven Hours.”

    http://​www​.huffingtonpost​.com/​2​0​1​0​/​0​3​/​0​1​/​b​i​l​l​-​h​a​l​t​e​r​-​a​r​k​a​n​s​a​s​-​s​e​n​a​t​e​_​n​_​4​8​0​3​7​5.html