Now we know what's in the healthcare bill: ObamaCare disaster

Updated on Saturday, September 11, 2010 at 1:48PM by Kay B. Day, Editor

Remember Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's comment about the healthcare bill--how we had to pass it so we could see what's in it? As time goes by, we're seeing what's in it and the net effect is that it will cost the government and the consumer more. The bill has already cost or will cost approximately 700 people their jobs because the government rolled student loans into the deal.

Think Google is blind to politics?

Click to read more ...

Progressive docs diss health bill as ‘false promise of reform’

Not all liberals are giddy about passage of healthcare legislation. Physicians for a National Health Program, a leading voice among liberals for healthcare reform, issued an official statement to media on Monday.

“We take no comfort in seeing aspirin dispensed for the treatment of cancer,” said PNHP.

The group pledged to continue working for “single-payer national health insurance, and expanded and improved Medicare for all.”

That end goal is in conflict with conservative approaches to healthcare. However, the PNHP points out a number of negatives in the Senate healthcare bill and they are correct about these key failures the public and most Congressmen who voted for the bill are likely unaware of because they did not read the bill they voted for and supported:

Click to read more ...

‘The Process’ is called Democracy

Letter to the Editor

Florida representative Kathy Castor [D-Fla.], commenting on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s [D-Calif.] plan to avoid a vote on the healthcare bill and instead "deem" it passed so they can get on with the leadership’s agenda, stated,"At this point, process is not important.”

The Florida Federation of Republican Women drew record attendance at the celebration for their 60th anniversary. Attendance at the Tallahassee meeting jumped by 35 percent. [Photo by Kay B. Day]That single statement is the single most frightening thing about the whole healthcare debate. Why? Because that statement shows a monumental lack of understanding of what the American political system is, or ought to be, about and an equally great lack of respect for the will of the American voter.

“The process” as Congresswoman Castor disdains it, is the system whereby we elect people to represent us to do what we want done with our country. “The process”  holds that, in the course of representing us, our elected officials should become informed of the issues before them and should consult with their constituents to determine their feelings. “The process” has it that they should then cast their vote  after conscientious study, first having determined that the way they plan to vote is the best thing for their constituents and that it is in keeping with the will of said constituents.

When did it become acceptable that our elected officials vote for bills without so much as reading them?

In all too many instances, that is exactly what many did last summer when the President was urging that his healthcare plan (then only 1001 pages long) be passed before the summer recess.

Now the House and Senate “leadership” wants healthcare to become law without even a vote. They want it to be “deemed” passed. When the people complained about this kind of high- handed trickery, the ‘Honorable’ Congresswoman sniffed that “the process” was not important. 

Yes, it is just “the process.”  The process for which good men died in the Revolution, the same “process” good men defended in the Civil War; the very same process brave people risked life and limb to be able to participate in during the Civil Rights struggle of the sixties. Too many good people have fought and died for “the process” to chuck it now on the altar of naked political ambition.

Oh, and Congresswoman?  Heed the process. Otherwise, the process might find you unemployed come November.

Ana Gomez-Mallada, Esq.
First Vice-President
Florida Federation of Republican Women
Lighthouse Point, FL

Democrat, now Republican, legislator decries federal healthcare takeover

Updated on Saturday, March 6, 2010 at 1:41PM by Kay B. Day, Editor

By Kay B. Day

Rep. Parker Griffith (R-Ala.) switched to the GOP in December, 2009. He is an outspoken critic of fiscal policies current Democrat leaders endorse. [Photo from Rep. Griffith's US House website.]Dr. Parker Griffith represents Alabama’s Fifth Congressional District and the former Democrat legislator is no fan of Obama/Pelosi-care. As a matter of fact, the healthcare boondoggle Democrats are rumored to be so desperate to pass they may use reconciliation is a major reason Griffith crossed Party lines to become a Republican in December. Griffith’s comments as part of the weekly Republican address reflect the impossibility of being a fiscal conservative in today’s Democrat Party.

Click to read more ...

CNN poll reflects great divide between big, small government philosophy

Commentary by Kay B. Day

CNN released results of a national survey of Americans about the power of the federal government, and the results aren't very surprising. I've often said Americans are not as stupid as Washington politicos believe. CNN said 56 percent of those polled believed, "[T]he federal government poses a threat to rights of Americans."

Respondents' views broke down predictably along partisan lines. CNN disclosed, "[O]nly 37 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Independents and nearly 7 in 10 Republicans" agree with the majority.

The CNN survey about government power reflects a great divide between those who believe government is the solution to everything and those who believe less government leads to more solutions to everything.

A perfect example is healthcare. Criticism towards other Americans for their chosen lifestyles is in vogue only because government has assumed control of a large sector of the healthcare market. If I must pay for my choices, it's no one's business what I do. Only because government has agreed to subsidize so many are choices significant.

I've often wondered what the impact would be if everyone in America shed their health insurance and/or opted out of Medicare. At the same time, what would happen if Medicaid were extended only to the truly needy? Would we then have a truly freemarket for medicine? Maybe, if we also instituted reasonable tort reform.

A wrinkle in the solution stems from the government increasing its own employee rolls even as the private sector trims rolls. For every government employee hired, the taxpayer will subsidize benefits. I've frequently suggested a simple means of decreasing federal expenses. As jobs become vacant, fill them only if they are vital and necessary to the wellbeing of the nation.

CNN's poll comes as no surprise. Washington would do well to acknowledge the value in the survey findings.

Media report Democrats rant about entitlements, but ignore they blocked reform under Bush

Updated on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 1:03PM by Kay B. Day, Editor

Commentary by Kay B. Day

As Democrats rant about alleged GOP obstructionists and threaten to ram a hybrid healthcare bill down American throats, the only conclusion an informed rational person could come to would be the need to start over. Social Security is in trouble, Medicare is in trouble, and although Congress had a chance to act 4 years ago, they didn’t. Democrats blocked reform and they were proud to do so.

First, consider a report from trustees of the Medicare and Social Security trust funds. In May, 2009, the report predicted Social Security trust fund assets will be depleted in 2037. The picture for Medicare is equally bleak: “[W]hile Medicare's annual costs were 3.2 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2008, or about three quarters of Social Security's, they are projected to surpass Social Security expenditures in 2028…”

When President George W. Bush wanted to reform social security, many of us who would gladly accept responsibility for decisions about the money we are required to pay in were denied the opportunity by Democrat obstructionists.

Click to read more ...

Distrust of health plan rooted in lack of trust for Congress and ‘snuck in’ provisions

Commentary by Kay B. Day

President Barack Obama’s plan for expanding health insurance to include all Americans is titled ‘The Obama Plan: Stability and Security for all Americans.’ On Thursday, Republicans will meet with Democrats, purportedly in an effort to salvage one of Obama’s greatest hopes. Or the meeting may just be, as some Republicans have charged, ‘a photo op.’  And only time will tell what we end up with between the House and Senate bills that form the basis for retooling healthcare. Neither the House bill nor the Senate bill was handled with the transparency the president promised when he campaigned. And we must admit to ourselves House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) do not inspire trust. Why do I say that?

Click to read more ...