What is it about the American public that makes them so gullible? I mean, most folks seem to believe everything they read or hear as the gospel truth, especially when the message has been designed to evoke their most emotional feelings about matters. Take the effort by Obama to apologize for the problems with the ACA rollout. No one is actually believing the rollout disaster is a real indication of the Act's overall effectiveness, but the politicians and their supporting Media have piled on to the problems by blaming technical glitches for the entire premise of the Act as being doomed to failure. But are the tech problems the real problem?
Perhaps, but the focus has been pivoted to the fact that millions of Americans have had their existing insurance policies canceled, thereby forcing them into the ACA exchanges - and the mere fact that Americans are LOSING their existing insurance is what the politicians and the Media have jumped all over - and successfully trounced Obama into submission over. But isn't the problem somewhat caused by the insurance industry playing both sides against the middle? I mean, the insurance industry had to have known in 2010 that policies would have to be canceled to become ACA compliant, so why the sudden surprise with cancellations? Where was the insurance industry from 2010 to 2013 to clarify what was really going to happen when policies had to become ACA compliant? More importantly, where was the Obama Administration to see to it that the transformation of policies under the ACA was well understood by the American public so there would be no surprises like sudden "cancellations?" What did the insurance industry know and when did they know it when it came to the fact that millions of Americans would be forced off their existing insurance plans in favor of the ACA? Don't bet on having House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair Daryl Issa (R-CA) demand those answers!
Add the bluster Charles Krauthammer's recent article claiming Obamacare's failure is the permanent death of "Liberalism." In light of the fact that Liberals overwhelmingly preferred ObamaCare maintain A Single Payor system like Medicare, Krauthammer once again misleads his gullible followers. So why wasn't ObamaCare single payor? Because the GOP refused to entertain the notion AND the insurance industry lobbied hard against it - so hard they convinced Obama to trust them when it came to moving existing policies under the requirements of the ACA. Is Obama the gullible one in this discussion? Requirements like a cap on administrative profits vs. actual expenditures on health care or the elimination of pre-existing conditions or a the cap on lifetime health care spending for the seriously ill are all mainstays of the ACA/ObamaCare. Yet this week, the GOP-led House passed a bill allowing everyone to keep their existing insurance plans - even though they include every lousy bit of coverage the Act was designed to protect Americans from. Can we say, "Hello Pre-Existing Conditions, my old Friend?" Can we say "Hello huge administrative expenses for insurance profits instead of health care?" Can we say "Hello lifetime caps on health care coverage for the seriously ill?" (See HR3350). You get the point! Will Americans ever learn that folks on the Hard-Right of the political spectrum believe in one thing and only one thing - Business comes first because cash is king (as long as you have it). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that money cannot buy you health, but it can help to keep you healthy. Isn't keeping Americans healthy more important than keeping insurance companies profits healthy instead?
As President Ronald Reagan once said; "If we love our country, we should love our countrymen." I am sure he meant to include the elderly, hungry and sick in that statement. Have a great week!
Perhaps, but the focus has been pivoted to the fact that millions of Americans have had their existing insurance policies canceled, thereby forcing them into the ACA exchanges - and the mere fact that Americans are LOSING their existing insurance is what the politicians and the Media have jumped all over - and successfully trounced Obama into submission over. But isn't the problem somewhat caused by the insurance industry playing both sides against the middle? I mean, the insurance industry had to have known in 2010 that policies would have to be canceled to become ACA compliant, so why the sudden surprise with cancellations? Where was the insurance industry from 2010 to 2013 to clarify what was really going to happen when policies had to become ACA compliant? More importantly, where was the Obama Administration to see to it that the transformation of policies under the ACA was well understood by the American public so there would be no surprises like sudden "cancellations?" What did the insurance industry know and when did they know it when it came to the fact that millions of Americans would be forced off their existing insurance plans in favor of the ACA? Don't bet on having House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair Daryl Issa (R-CA) demand those answers!
Add the bluster Charles Krauthammer's recent article claiming Obamacare's failure is the permanent death of "Liberalism." In light of the fact that Liberals overwhelmingly preferred ObamaCare maintain A Single Payor system like Medicare, Krauthammer once again misleads his gullible followers. So why wasn't ObamaCare single payor? Because the GOP refused to entertain the notion AND the insurance industry lobbied hard against it - so hard they convinced Obama to trust them when it came to moving existing policies under the requirements of the ACA. Is Obama the gullible one in this discussion? Requirements like a cap on administrative profits vs. actual expenditures on health care or the elimination of pre-existing conditions or a the cap on lifetime health care spending for the seriously ill are all mainstays of the ACA/ObamaCare. Yet this week, the GOP-led House passed a bill allowing everyone to keep their existing insurance plans - even though they include every lousy bit of coverage the Act was designed to protect Americans from. Can we say, "Hello Pre-Existing Conditions, my old Friend?" Can we say "Hello huge administrative expenses for insurance profits instead of health care?" Can we say "Hello lifetime caps on health care coverage for the seriously ill?" (See HR3350). You get the point! Will Americans ever learn that folks on the Hard-Right of the political spectrum believe in one thing and only one thing - Business comes first because cash is king (as long as you have it). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that money cannot buy you health, but it can help to keep you healthy. Isn't keeping Americans healthy more important than keeping insurance companies profits healthy instead?
As President Ronald Reagan once said; "If we love our country, we should love our countrymen." I am sure he meant to include the elderly, hungry and sick in that statement. Have a great week!
RSS Feed
