Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrats. Show all posts

PostHeaderIcon Healthcare bill hurdles the senate



The democrat-dominated US senate has voted (60-39) to continue the healthcare bill debate towards making into a law on Satruday, November 11, 2009. There were 58 democrats and 2 independents who voted to clear the 2,074-page bill for the next stage of deliberations slated after the Thanksgiving holiday. All 39 Republicans rejected the bill.

Hailed by Pres. Barack Obama, the healthcare revamp which promises medical insurance coverage for 94% of the population needs about 1 trillion to finance is deemed too expensive. Those who oppose the bill worry more government control--- lesser Medicare services such as more taxes in insurances and payroll incomes, elective operations (cosmetic surgery,) and drug manufacture (i.e. H1N1 vaccine productin.) (Photo Credit: Hoffman, Brendan/ AFP/ Getty images) =0=

=============================================================

PostHeaderIcon Democrats introduce its controversial health reform plan



With about 2,000 voluminous pages detailing the healthcare proposal, the Democrats headed by Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) unveils a healthcare plan that many have found to be difficult to read. To enforce the bill, (introduced at the end of the week,) it is estimated to cost $1.055 trillion, way above from the proposed budget originally thought. The quote doesn’t include the $245 billion needed to halt the decrease in compensation of doctors and healthcare providers. The relaxation of government-funded Medicaid eligibility will increase the charity beneficiaries to 15 million within a 10 year period----raising expenses and taxes further--- making healthcare less affordable.

Rushed before the general public could understand the bill, the text of the legislation isn’t readily accessible for the public to read. In the bill, the proposed government-run “public option” has been retained with some room for doctors to negotiate their fees instead of being imposed upon by government.

On bill's unveiling at the west front of the Capitol Building, only attendees listed among the welcomed guests have been permitted to attend. The contrarians who oppose the proposal have been kept out of being part of the audience. Given a quick thumbs-up by Pres. Barack Obama, the legislation remains enigmatically deceitful and infuriating as before.

Republicans who question the bill insist it is too expensive with confusing hidden expenses which befuddle the legislators and public as well. Proponents of the bill however insist it will make available medical insurance to 96% of Americans with a net price tag of $900 billion when those who refuse to avail of the insurances are penalized. According to those who designed the proposed legislation, the cash generated from such penalty will be used to lower down the expenses of healthcare.

To further control cost of medical care, the proposal calls for drastic cuts of about $460 billion on government-run Medicare programs---- raising accusations that eventually, healthcare services will be rationed--- giving the government to much power to intrude on the lives of private citizens.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is unsure if the actual expenses quoted to underwrite the proposed healthcare revamp will be greater than what the democrats tell the public. The numbers are preliminary, but the likelihood is high that the cash requirements to enforce the bill will be high. There are suggestions that the belt-tightening proposal in this bill won’t bring down expenses as promised.

Eighty five (85%) of Americans are satisfied with the current health system, but they fear of losing what they believe is the best healthcare system of the world. Though most of them agree that a change to cut down the astronomical rise in medical cost which could bankrupt the system, they are not ready to give away the choices of doctors and the promptness of medical care delivery they enjoy. The current proposal failed to address tort reform and Medicare fraud which jack up expenses further.

In the proposed revamp, cost-cutting will include drastic cessation of certain Medicare services including programs for the prevention of diseases. Slashing the Medicare budget raises the lingering suspicion that healthcare will be rationed at the expense of the elderly, disabled and chronically ill. Approval of certain diagnostic tests, procedures, and treatments may be harder to get under this plan.

In spite of assurances to the contrary, the public, doctors and the rest of the medical community are not fully convinced. An income tax increase to be imposed on rich Americans is expected to generate $570 billion to help lower medical expenses thus approximating the 10 year spending projected in the budget. Whether this will materialize is the subject of disagreement and continuing debate.

Opponents of the bill believe that these grandiose projections and questionable assumptions are not realistic. They do not augur well for success since lack of trust, poor management, corruption, and failure in many government enterprises are worse as before. (Photo Credit: gnotalex) =0=

==============================================================

PostHeaderIcon Election change proposal by Sen. Ted Kennedy smacks with partisan politics?



Hampered by brain cancer, Sen. Edward Kennedy (Massachusetts-D) requested lawmakers in his state to change the law in anticipation of a vacancy that may occur if he dies in office. He wanted to do away with the current law requiring an election to replace the vacancy. Missing Washington due to his incapacity, he thought a delay in selecting his replacement can affect the voting outcome of a democrat-dominated legislature.

Yet back in 2004 when Kennedy’s fellow party-member John Kerry ran for presidency, he spearheaded and successfully junked the law of gubernatorial choice in replacing the vacancy because it was Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican and member of the opposite party who would choose a replacement if Kerry won as president.

So what he asks the Massachusetts lawmakers now is a complete turnabout, calculated to benefit his party. With a dominant Democatric party, Kennedy' proposal will likely be decided on his favor. However, many recall the controversies of selecting a replacement by the governor. The choices for Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in Chicago and New York when they became president and secretary of state respectively were marred by disappointments. Choosing somebody by election (vs. governor's choice) is more anchored on what is best for the people and not for the benefit of the party. (Photo Credit: www.dag.nl) =0=

==============================================================

PostHeaderIcon Accused of lying, Nancy Pelosi tries to rescue her credibility



A high ranking official in the Obama administration, democratic house speaker Nancy Pelosi was embarrassed as she was accused of lying. Early on she said she didn’t have any knowledge about waterboarding, an enhanced interrogation technique (EIT) that was used in 2002 during the Bush administration. After many convuluted explanations from Pelosi herself, evidence cropped up to hound her.

“GOP officials secured the release of an unclassified chart by the CIA that describes a total of 40 briefings for lawmakers over a period of several years. Pelosi's name appears once, as having attended a session on Sept. 4, 2002, when she was the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. Former Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla., who at the time was the chairman of the committee and later became CIA director, also was present.”---Yahoo News.com/ AP (05/14/09, Espo, D)

“Republicans accused Pelosi of not having her story straight. "The speaker has had way too many stories about this issue," said the top Republican in the House, John Boehner. He said it is "hard for me to imagine that anyone in our intelligence area would ever mislead a member of Congress."---Yahoo News.com/ Reuters (05/14/09, Cornwall, S; Holland, S)

According to former vice president Dick Cheney, the EIT was proven to be effective in protecting America against terrorist attack. There had been strong indications Pelosi knew more about waterboarding than she was prepared to admit. It was politically charged and she would rather not be associated with it.

In her rush to keep her credibility, she accused the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for “misleading” her and other lawmakers about the use of waterboarding. Instead of accepting that she was aware and therefore complicit in the use of the controversial interrogation technique, she blamed the Republicans of shifting the attention to her. For a thrid ranking official of the Obama administratin to politicize a matter which deals on security of America is grievously wrong. (Photo Credit: Gnotalex) =0=

UPDATE: March 15, 2009---CIA director Leon Panetta stood against Nancy Pelosi's claim that the CIA lies to members of congress. Panetta said CIA records show its agency's officers truthfully briefed lawmakers on the methods used in interrogation of terrorists.

===========================================================

PostHeaderIcon The US Elections: Not A Solution But An Enigma


The US elections is finished, Barack Omaba has won but my questions about the US electorate still linger.  I cannot comprehend why despite a disastrous presidency by George Bush of the GOP, John McCain was in contention for the whole of the campaign and might have even won if not for the financial crisis that hit the US.  In the Philippines, nobody will ever question, if ever elections are held right now, that candidates of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's parties will certainly be routed by a landslide.  Is the Philippine electorate more discerning then than America's electorate?  Maybe it is not this simple.

I have been told that in any US elections, the GOP has already 40% of the votes sewn, whoever the candidate is.  And that the Democrats will have a third of the votes locked.  So that means the election is only a contest who will will the remaining 27%.  I do not know if the term "independents/undecided" is the proper term for them.

But whatever, it seems Barack Obama won the bulk of the 27%.  Maybe it is only here that the unpopularity of Bush and his failed presidency is reflected.  So Americans are really loyal to their party or whatever that attracts them to it.  But not the Filipinos.  Maybe they know there is really no platform, no principles behind the promises and the posters.

But 40% is a significant minority and a strident minority at that.  I do not think Obama will have an easy rule.  This minority, who is used to smear tactics and spins can easily pressure a sitting president with catcalls the like of "soft on terrorism", "throwing away American gains/interests/strength", etc.

However American politics develop in the next four years, it cannot be denied that America is in deep crisis and its standing in the world is not firm.  If the Vietnam War turned to be the US' Waterloo after the '50s record prosperity, I predict that the consequences of its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will bite just as deep.

Topics/Categories

Feedjit Live Blog Stats

Topics/Categories

Add to Technorati Favorites

Ateneo de Naga HS Batch 74

ABS-CBN News

GMA News.tv

Philippine Commentary

Inquirer Breaking News