Morning Bell: Obama Admits He’s “Not Familiar” With House Bill
Posted July 21st, 2009 at 9.16am in Health Care.
With the public’s trust in his handling of health care tanking (50%-44% of Americans disapprove), the White House has launched a new phase of its strategy designed to pass Obamacare: all Obama, all the time. As part of that effort, Obama hosted a conference call with leftist bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible.
During the call, a blogger from Maine said he kept running into an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance. He asked: “Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?” President Obama replied: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.” (quote begins at 17:10)
This is a truly disturbing admission by the President, especially considering that later in the call, Obama promises yet again: “If you have health insurance, and you like it, and you have a doctor that you like, then you can keep it. Period.” How can Obama keep making this promise if he is not familiar with the health legislation that is being written in Congress? Details matter.
We are familiar with the passage IBD sites, and as we wrote last week, the House bill does not outright outlaw private individual health insurance, but it does effectively regulate it out of existence. The House bill does allow private insurance to be sold, but only “Exchange-participating health benefits plans.” In order to qualify as an ?Exchange-participating health benefits plan,? all health insurance plans must conform to a slew of new regulations, including community rating and guaranteed issue. These will all send the cost of private individual health insurance skyrocketing. Furthermore, all these new regulations would not apply just to individual insurance plans, but to all insurance plans. So the House bill will also drive up the cost of your existing employer coverage as well. Until, of course, it becomes so expensive that your company makes the perfectly economical decision to dump you into the government plan.
President Obama may not care to study how many people will lose their current health insurance if his plan becomes law, but like most Americans, we do. That is why we partnered with the Lewin Group to study how many Americans would be forced into the government “option” under the House health plan. Here is what we found:
Approximately 103 million people would be covered under the new public plan and, as a consequence, about 83.4 million people would lose their private insurance. This would represent a 48.4 percent reduction in the number of people with private coverage.
About 88.1 million workers would see their current private, employer-sponsored health plan go away and would be shifted to the public plan.
Yearly premiums for the typical American with private coverage could go up by as much as $460 per privately-insured person, as a result of increased cost-shifting stemming from a public plan modeled on Medicare.
It is truly frightening that the President of the United States is pressuring Congress in an all-out media blitz to pass legislation that he flatly admits he has not read and is not familiar with. President Obama owes it to the American people to stop making promises about what his health plan will or will not do until he has read it, and can properly defend it in public, to his own supporters.-the heritage foundation
The Mayo Clinic on the House health bill: “Although there are some positive provisions in the current House Tri-Committee bill … the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher-quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite. … The real losers will be the citizens of the United States.”
Just like 1994 -- it's become a confusing mess. All the interest groups are screaming about how awful something would be if we do it, or how awful it will be if we don't do it. Aughhhhh!!!!!
We need a series of weekly televised debates on this topic. The Democrats and the Republicans would both send an official representative, and any other major bloc in Congress could also send a representative.
These people would be subjected to a series of questions (and follow-ups) from a panel made up of representatives of all the major interest groups: employers, doctors, patients, hospitals, insurers, universal care advocates, free market advocates, balanced budget hawks etc.
Each week would cover a different aspect -- universal coverage, quality of coverage, paying for all this coverage, reducing the overall healthcare costs, etc.
The media's job would be to make sure that everything was explained as clearly as possible. Right now it's a "ball of confusion"
Originally posted by Melanerpesthat would be nice. that would be the way to do it.Obama wants this rushed through before august,and its obvious he does not even know whats in it. Is this the sort of thing that needs to be rushed through?Especially w/out even reading it (like the stimulus)? I think not.
Just like 1994 -- it's become a confusing mess. All the interest groups are screaming about how awful something would be if we do it, or how awful it will be if we don't do it. Aughhhhh!!!!!
We need a series of weekly televised debates on this topic. The Democrats and the Republicans would both send an official representative, and any other major bloc ...[text shortened]... that everything was explained as clearly as possible. Right now it's a "ball of confusion"
Can a leader lead by responding to every half baked truth and red herringed critique of any long flagged proposal. This is like the no-win position you place a person in by constantly goading them to respond to the question, has your wife recovered from her bout of depression, now that you've stopped beating her. The fact that both assertions may be false hardly seems to matter, as a narrative that *proves* the case of the accuser, based on the irritation of the person being provoked, can easily be constructed by ramping up the intensity of your merciless hounding.
Originally posted by kmax87there is no half baked truths here.he is trying to push a bill through by august and cant even respond to whats in there because he does not know.He is not working for acorn anymore or being a chicago community organizer,he is the president of the united states.it is becoming more and more obvious to the american public he is in over his head.
Can a leader lead by responding to every half baked truth and red herringed critique of any long flagged proposal. This is like the no-win position you place a person in by constantly goading them to respond to the question, has your wife recovered from her bout of depression, now that you've stopped beating her. The fact that both assertions may be false har ...[text shortened]... ing provoked, can easily be constructed by ramping up the intensity of your merciless hounding.
Originally posted by scherzoOther questions to ask might be:
He's speaking about this right next to where I live. If I'm picked to go, I'm going to ask him a few questions about why the h we haven't implemented single-payer health care yet.
1. Why are we not out of Iraq yet?
2. Where are all the jobs being created from the stimulus package?
3. Where did all the money from the stimulus package go to?
4. Why is club Gitmo still open?
5. Have you read your own health care legislation yet?
6. Why is there such a rush to get it passed?
If by some miracle you are allowed to ask but one of these questions without either being censored or cut off, hats off to ya!!
Originally posted by whodeyAll good questions. Unfortunately, to ask a question about a non-health-care-related-topic when he's talking about health care would be out of place. #5 and #6 work.
Other questions to ask might be:
1. Why are we not out of Iraq yet?
2. Where are all the jobs being created from the stimulus package?
3. Where did all the money from the stimulus package go to?
4. Why is club Gitmo still open?
5. Have you read your own health care legislation yet?
6. Why is there such a rush to get it passed?
If by some miracl ...[text shortened]... wed to ask but one of these questions without either being censored or cut off, hats off to ya!!
I have had it with bills that the no one has ever read.
We need to pass a law that will require that before the president can sign anything, he needs to appear on TV and either read the bill out loud himself, or be present in the room while someone else reads it out loud.
Originally posted by Melanerpesthat sounds great but first you tell me how we get a bill proposed like that let alone passed and I am all for it! 🙂
I have had it with bills that the no one has ever read.
We need to pass a law that will require that before the president can sign anything, he needs to appear on TV and either read the bill out loud himself, or be present in the room while someone else reads it out loud.
Originally posted by MelanerpesWhat kills me is that they admit to having not read it. Perhaps we will see the end of that if they start taking heat for passing legislation purely on partisan positions or gaining personal pork instead of the actual bill itself?
I have had it with bills that the no one has ever read.
We need to pass a law that will require that before the president can sign anything, he needs to appear on TV and either read the bill out loud himself, or be present in the room while someone else reads it out loud.
These guys are far to busy to be bothered with reading the legislation they pass. Heck, Obama voted not present a gazillion times in Congress. He was even too busy to show up to vote let alone read that dribble. In fact, is the deficit to a gazillion dollars yet?
Originally posted by whodeySo who do the elected officials work for? I doubt it is for the people of the United States. The President has had congress rush several bills through and got them passed by the house and senate without anyone reading them. Now it looks like Obama is signing them into law without knowing what they mean as well. I should have gone into politics too. I could be on permanent vacation and get paid for it tax free. Of course a person doesn't want to say they work for foreign interests or they will be considered a conspiracy nut. I wonder if the Builderberger group sends these bills through that no one reads or understands?
What kills me is that they admit to having not read it. Perhaps we will see the end of that if they start taking heat for passing legislation purely on partisan positions or gaining personal pork instead of the actual bill itself?
These guys are far to busy to be bothered with reading the legislation they pass. Heck, Obama voted not present a gazillion t ...[text shortened]... how up to vote let alone read that dribble. In fact, is the deficit to a gazillion dollars yet?
Who cares what their motivation is for voting for these bills. What matters is that we oppose them and need to send the message that we oppose them. Have you notified your representatives that you oppose them? Then they can weigh the possible reprocussions of not representing the wishes of the populace at large. The real question is, would they fall on their swords just to get this stuff passed?
Originally posted by whodeyI'm sure Obama is well aware that extreme right wingers oppose his plan, since well, they oppose anything he does anyway. I'm certain that if Obama ordered the killing of poor people on the streets the extreme right would still oppose his plan.
Who cares what their motivation is for voting for these bills. What matters is that we oppose them and need to send the message that we oppose them. Have you notified your representatives that you oppose them? Then they can weigh the possible reprocussions of not representing the wishes of the populace at large. The real question is, would they fall on their swords just to get this stuff passed?