Posted at 4:40 pm on October 8, 2009 by AllahpunditTo cleanse the palate, some light comedy from this morning’s F&F. I’m loath to knock him given his willingness to incur nutroots wrath by admitting he respects the boss, but who’s he trying to kid with his testament to The One’s support for the public option? Read the speech to Congress, he says. Okay, let’s read it:
Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. The insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up…
It’s worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight. But its impact shouldn’t be exaggerated – by the left, the right, or the media. It is only one part of my plan, and should not be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles. To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it. The public option is only a means to that end – and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal. And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.
For example, some have suggested that that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies. Others propose a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan. These are all constructive ideas worth exploring. But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice.
So, does Barack Hussein Obama seem to be just a little bi-polar these days? It is so hard to know. Think of all the times he says different things, depending on who he is talking to, especially about health care reform, otherwise known as ObamaCare. (Or should that be Obamacide?) You decide:
Obamacare, as critics have dubbed the president's plan to socialize health care, will be flooded with lawsuits if it ever becomes law, according to an organization that works to protect rights and liberties of Americans. In an alert issued this week, Liberty Counsel, run by President Mathew Staver, promised his organization "is prepared to challenge the constitutionality of the bill since Congress has no authority to require every person to obtain insurance coverage and has no authority to fine employers who do not provide the coverage standards that are required in the bill." "In addition," he warned, "the bill still requires citizens to pay a fine if they don't maintain insurance for themselves and their families." The promise came just before the U.S. Senate approved its version of the health-care reform plan. The House has adopted a version that must be reconciled with the Senate's before moving to the president's desk. Among major sticking points are a government-run "option," as well as abortion funding, which has drawn strong opposition from the public. But like demanding that everyone drive a blue car or watch a specific television network, the concept of mandatory health insurance set by the government just doesn't appear in the U.S. Constitution, Staver argues. He told WND that if the plan gets to the point of being signed into law by Obama, "We will sue." He said Liberty University will be a plaintiff along with other groups or individuals. "The thrust is that Congress lacks the power to force health care coverage on individuals," he said. "It lacks the power to fine employers that do not have or provide health care coverage according to the mandates of the bill." He said Liberty University, like many businesses, has a brief waiting period for new employees before its health insurance coverage applies. Because of that, the educational institution would face a fine of $600 per employee under the new law. Also, the health care plan pending in Congress "exempts certain religions but not others," Staver noted. Congress, he said, cannot simply regulate anything it wants. Instead, Congress' authority has limits, such as taxing and spending and commerce. "They're going to have a hard time proving that this affects interstate commerce, individuals who don't want insurance coverage," Staver said. The problem, however, is bigger than just the health-care plan. "It is scary. This Congress will do just whatever it wants to do, notwithstanding the law or the will of the American people," he said. For that reason, he said, the imposition of such health-care provisions must be challenged. "It's a political power grab that rewrites American history," he said. READ FULL STORY >
Posts
