FLASH: San Francisco Scottish Fiddlers to give free concert in Children's Wonderland park (360 Glenn St.) today from 1-3 PM as part of the GVRD Concert in the Park series. More info HERE

Ethicalego (Kenneth Brooks) discusses current events from a critical thinking perspective rarely expressed elsewhere

 The House of Representatives attack the Affordable Health Care Act 2010.

By Kenneth Brooks

7/13/12

The U.S. House of Representatives voted 244-185 Wednesday to repeal in full the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. The news media and many politicians label the House action as a vote to repeal President Obama's health care law or Obama Care. They try to make the vote a symbolic display of opposition to Obama's law and the Supreme Court's decision to uphold it. In fact, those 244 votes was another example of Congress failing its duty to provide for the general welfare of the people.

Political leaders and news media called the Affordable Care Act ObamaCare since Congress passed it in 2010. This personalized label for the law biased Americans' thinking about it. They also muddled Americans thinking about tax cuts and jobs by mislabeling the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 as (President George) Bush Tax Cuts.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio said, "We are resolved to have this law go away, and we're going to do everything we can to stop it." Boehner blithely makes this remark as if his goal to destroy the people's Health Care Act is a noble goal. Instead, it was an ignoble failure by the House majority to consider the best interests of Americans. They have the duty to fix the health care plan, because adequate health care probably is fourth behind people's welfare concerns for food, shelter, and safety.

The House vote would have been reasonable if it settled a dispute over competing health care plans. Even Affordable Health Care Act supporters must recognize flaws in the law. Instead, House members voted to repeal the people's Affordable Health Care Act without a replacement. The House majority asserts that their opposition to the law centers on costs, especially costs to small and medium sized business owners. However, this reasoning is dishonest that selectively considers only one group's costs associated with health care and not another.

Healthcare costs affect workers and their families too. Perhaps workers could pay for health care or buy health insurance independent of employers' contribution if employers paid them adequate wages. Employers incur less labor costs by paying the reduced group rate for employees' health insurance than the costs of paying each employee a living wage. The Affordable Health Care Act makes health insurance for employees compulsory for employers to prevent those that provide it from suffering a competitive disadvantage with American competitors that do not provide it. Nevertheless, small and medium sized employers want to lessen labor costs by paying low wages and by not paying lower group-rate health insurance premiums for employees.

Small and medium-sized business owners may reason that no matter the low pay, the jobs they create is a better situation for workers than the condition of workers being unemployed. Perhaps this is true. However, business owners do not create jobs from selflessness. They employ workers for their labor that creates or that increases value in a product for profit making. Nevertheless, many business owners expect taxpayers and workers with health insurance to subsidize their labor costs and profits when hire workers at low pay and without health insurance coverage.

Employees that receive less than a living wage and without health insurance are one moderate-level illness or medical emergency of a family member away from devastating debt. They will use hospital emergency room service for primary care with or without the ability to pay for the service. Hospitals will spread the costs of unpaid bills for medical treatment to other patients that can pay, to people with health insurance or to government health care programs. Hospitals must do this or go bankrupt.

Millions of voters will cheer and gloat how Congress stuck it politically to Obama by repealing ObamaCare. Few of them will associate the loss of the people's Affordable Health Care Act with the increases they experience yearly in medical costs, health insurance premiums, and taxes that support health care for employees without health insurance.

Copyright © 2008-2012 Ethicalego.com Reproduction without written permission for profit making is prohibited. Reproduction for personal use and distribution that include the Ethicalego copyright and address is permitted.

Comments

Add New Search RSS

tramky   |July.18.2012 This is all nonsense! These Federal programs are ALL falling apart because American are living far too long. These schemes were all devised when the life expectancy in America was LESS than when you could begin to obtain the benefits of the programs. Now, you may receive benefits from these programs for far longer than you contributed to them in your productive, money-generating life. What is needed is for American to begin dying off at younger ages. Age 70 is probably the right age these days. We are generally unproductive in retirement, preferring to hang out playing slots at the local Indian casino or wasting time taking cruises on ships or 'playing with the grandkids'. None of this is helpful or productive, and serves to fill in while we spend half the money devoted to a lifetime of health care in the last year of our lives. Raising the 'retirement age' won't help when, in fact, age discrimination by employers is more rampant as ever. Employers was cheap idiots, not expensive, dottering geezers who look like their grandfathers. How many 70-year-old systems engineers or salespeople can be tolerated? Not many--NONE, in fact!

rocketman   |July.17.2012 And the quantities of facts and FUTURE policies that are embodied in ACA that we don't yet know about are fairly massive. In short, we still do not know what the ACA is going to do the health care system, to all those who are involved in that arena, or to patients and prospective patients. The ACA becomes fully effective and in force 2 years from now. We will not have a full understanding of what it has done to us until 2015. Having said all that, the ACA should NOT be repealed. But it must be revised in substantial ways. Some things are good for the nation, many are not. But what we need, what we DEMAND, is to be told the truth--the full truth--about the ACA, what it does, what it does not do, and the fact that it will RAISE costs, not decrease them. I believe that the increase in cost is generally worthwhile but it must be policed. NO illegal aliens can get ANY benefit whatsoever from ACA. That can not be an option or a mistake. If that is permitted at all, it will bankrupt the Federal government. If it is permitted at all, we DEMAND that the United States be given the full oil production of Mexico for the next 20 years--for free! And that would only be a down payment on what their citizens have cost American taxpayers while they have been in this country illegally. And people on temporary visas can not have access to this program in any way. This program is for AMERICANS and Americans alone. Illegals and visitors to this country must go HOME for their health care needs--THEY have an option. Most Americans do not--this is OUR country.

rocketman   |July.15.2012 jay is not quite accurate. The average employee of a business does NOT report anything about their health care coverage on their 1040 forms. That will change with the ACA; the IRS is working on an entirely revised set of personal income tax returns--all the 1040s, plus a cluster of other forms for employers. That is why the IRS is hiring thousands of new employees in the Federal civil service system. What is this about Republicans signing things? Not one Republican voted for the ACA. And for those who don't recognize the difference, the health care plan in Massachusetts was done at the STATE level, not the Federal level. The states have much more freedom under the Constitution than does the Federal government--talk about apples and oranges. Not even nearly the same thing. And the ACA was passed by Democrats in the dead of night without anyone except its authors having read it--that was decidedly NOT the case in Massachusetts. Apples & oranges, folks, apples & oranges! The Democrats supporting Obama are lying through their teeth. When the truth destroys your electability, and you are a hack, incompetent Chicago politician, you are left only with lies.

Mousy   |July.15.2012 So it's the government's fault that there are scam artists out there? So if I give my money to a Nigerian prince I can blame Obamacare?

Scam Artists   |July.14.2012 Federal trade regulators warned Friday that scam artists are using the healthcare law to ask for consumers' personal information over the phone. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said that the illegal activity began after the Supreme Court ruled on June 28 to uphold the vast majority of the law. http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/237817-ftc-healthcare-ruling-prompting-scams

Jay   |July.14.2012 And just to be clear, when I said "not all of this is accurate," I meant not all of rocketman's claims reflect the reality of the bill. Again, for specifics, I refer you to this link: http://www.reddit.com/tb/vbkfm

Anonymous   |July.14.2012 I don't know why the medical profession is so worried about ObamaCare. Eventually they'll be unionized which means shorter workdays, more paid holidays, increased amounts os sick leave and holiday pay, OVERTIME pay, and tenure. Throw in a pension and it will be a bonanza. Whith the government and unions in charge what could possibly go wrong?

Jay   |July.14.2012 "Proof of work, proof of income level, quitting a job, being fired from a job, specifics about your healthcare coverage--all of this must be reported to the IRS on a regular basis, by YOU, not by employers." Not all of this is accurate, but I already provide income info, employment info, and info about my health insurance to the IRS on my 1040 form and the Schedule C I file for my business. If you aren't self employed and work for someone else, you're already providing work info and income info yourself. I'll add this: The Affordable Care Act was passed by Democrats but it was designed by Republicans. In fact, it's based very closely on the health care law that was passed several years ago in Massachusetts -- which Mitt Romney helped draw up when he was governor.

rocketman   |July.14.2012 The ACA forces you to buy health care coverage or pay a tax, a fee, a penalty, it really doesn't matter. What DOES matter is that the Federal government will grab you money if you do NOT do what it wants you to do. By keeping the connection to employers in force, it continues one of the REAL problems with health care coverage in America. That was and is even moreso now a stupid arrangement that must be ended. But the ACA doesn't touch it. But it remains tha employers should have nothing to do with health care except to contribute to the cost an employee faces if the company wishes to. If it were privatized and personalized rather than put to the mercy of 'group plans', it would be portable and valuable. Now it is just a reason to stay in a miserable, soul-sucking job because moving out of a lousy job might mean you will lose your health care coverage. The ACA is paid for by coerced purchase of health care plans and by a host of new taxes that will be imposed by the various aspects of the law. A tax on medical devices of many kinds--taxes that won't really be paid by companies, but by their customers--YOU! NO company pays taxes or fees, their CUSTOMERS do. Which is why, whenever some Congressman says they are going to raise taxes on a business, they are saying they are really raising taxes on YOU, the customers of that business. It just becomes part of the price, and that is only going UP! And the ACA, constructed and passed only by Democrats, includes new taxes on things unrelated to healthcare. And wait 'til you see how close your personal relationship with the IRS will be under the ACA. The Internal Revenue Service is the financial bookkeeper for this healthcare scheme, and it will be up close & personal with EVERY American in ways far more intrusive and far more frequent than ANY previous contact Americans have with the Federal tax collector. Proof of work, proof of income level, quitting a job, being fired from a job, specifics about your healthcare coverage--all of this must be reported to the IRS on a regular basis, by YOU, not by employers. And if you don't do so, the IRS will be after you. Up close & personal. Have fun with that, folks.

Clarke Johnston   |July.14.2012 Implanted chips and euthanasia? What's next, black helicopters and FEMA concentration camps? An "October" surprise necessitating martial law and the suspension of the election?....?.....! Let's hope, as Salty Dog notes, that these all are figments of actively fertile imaginations.

Salty Dog   |July.14.2012 Lets be clear...I didn't say nor do I believe that Americans aren't smart. But I do believe that there is a legitimate roll for government in ensuring all citizens have access to health care ( without the immediate knee jerk commie pinko label). The euthanasia and implanted chips stuff is the product of healthy imaginations and perhaps a good dollop of pharmaceutical/Insurance Company/medical profession lobby cash.

Anonymous   |July.14.2012 @Salty Dog - Americans are smarter than you think. Americans know from experience that there is always a "hidden" agenda behind anything the "government" proposes. Americans know how such things as euthanasia and implanted chips, for example, somehow makes its way into "Obamacare". In other words, American people makes their own decisions how to live and die, not the "government".

Salty Dog   |July.14.2012 What a strange country you have here- while there is much to admire, the entire issue of universal healthcare is strictly third world stuff...and perhaps that is doing an injustice to some third world or to be more politically correct, developing country that takes better care of its citizens.. This entire dance around "Obamacare" or an affordable healthcare Act centers, of course on the vested interests and their powerful lobbies, rising health care costs and the very real danger of bankruptcy for anyone without the ability to maintain high insurance premiums. Premature death also seems to be a viable option for many Americans without insurance privileges. Central to all of this, of course, is that nasty word "socialism"....the bane of anything American. Those commie pinkos who push universality and cut into our Ambian profits. They undermine free enterprise and my ability to pay minimum wages. Not surprising since the entire american ethos is built on the virtues of capitalism and the "American Dream" in which simply working hard is the panacea for security and happiness. For me, its a no brainer. Nothing could be more unifying and the great leveller for a nation than the knowledge that a citizen, regardless of race, ethnicity or sexual preference, has access to health care without fear of immediate bankruptcy. Get it done and stop playing silly political games while people die unnecessarily.

Jay   |July.14.2012 I am surprised that so few people seem to be familiar with what the Affordable Care Act -- dubbed "Obamacare" first by critics and later adopted by the White House, as Clarke correctly explained below -- actually does, how it will be paid for, etc. Here are a couple good links with descriptions: http://www.reddit.com/tb/vbkfm http://www.baycitizen.org/health/story/what-supreme-court-health-care-ruling/ I found the first link particularly useful.

tramky   |July.14.2012 I sure wish commentators representing the Left would at least make an attempt to know what they are talking & writing about before they speak or write. Mr. Brooks makes this remarkable statement: "Political leaders and news media called the Affordable Care Act ObamaCare since Congress passed it in 2010. This personalized label for the law biased Americans' thinking about it." Why is this remarkable? Well, it's not because it 'personalized' the issue in a way that biased Americans' thinking about it. No, no, no! It personalized it so that the OFFICIAL campaign website for Barack Obama sells buttons, bumper stickers and T-shirts that read "I LIKE OBAMACARE", for prices ranging from $5 to $35. This is on barackobama.com. It is truly IDIOTIC that the cabal at that NAACP meeting BOOED Mitt Romney for stating that he intended to act to repeal Obamacare, AND it was even suggested by some black racists and Progressive media wingnuts that the use of that term might even have racist overtones. Not to worry--Barack Obama's campaign will SELL it all to you for thirty-five bucks in its Obamacare package. This is two-faced lying by the liberal Progressive movement and its media cohorts at its most venal. It is also worth noting that while Barack Obama has criticized Fox News, even to the ridiculous stretch that it is not a news organization, this information about the Obamacare campaign material being sold by Barack Obama's campaign came on--gee, who would have guessed it?!--Fox News. The absurdity represented by this President and his lackeys will continue to be exposed. The people of this nation MUST be informed of the real choice before the election. What is the title of the recent book about Barack Obama? -- "Amateur"? That about describes it all.

We Pay More and Get Less   |July.13.2012 USA spend the most on health care among all countries(more than Canada and Germany) so I am sure there is a way to provide care for all and, if done right, spend less. see: http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/oecd042111.cfm

Clarke Johnston   |July.13.2012 Addressing the term "Obamacare": While the court debate was still going on, conservatives and Republicans bandied the term about on purpose, to deride and belittle the Health Care Act. The term was meant to be used as a label for putting it down. But, the minute the court decision came out, in a totally political and even calculating move, the Presidents Press Secretary, Joe Carney, promptly took ownership of the term, and started using it immediately during the White House briefing. So, without weighing in on the merits or issues of the bill, one, in all honesty, has to observe that there was no small amount of word-smith horseplay going on. On BOTH sides of the isle, Thank You!

Clarke Johnston   |July.13.2012 Personal "health" responsibility, setting aside workplace and healthcare costs for the moment, is an issue that seriously needs addressing, as anonymous brings up. Choices and decisions, from diet, choosing (or not) to drink alcohol, using narcotics, abuse of prescription drugs, and of course tobacco consumption, all effect ones' life expectancy, health, and the eventual costs racked up by doctors and hospitals. Poor choices and bad decisions seem to be not factored into all of these equations or any national health plan. Somehow, and I don't know how, our society needs to turn up the heat on making wise decisions. Recently, I saw a young mother with a 4-year old daughter in tow at a "Stop'n Rob" quickie mart. Mom was buying the youngster two fistfuls of candy and soda pop for lunch, letting the child choose whatever she desired, nary a parental control in effect. I could only image this child two or three hours later, crashing from the sugar and salt frenzy she considers "lunch". Within a few years, this child could very well be suffering early onset diabetes, a tragic and growing trend. How do we (society) reach this mother? Television ads? Billboards she won't read? Newspaper articles she for SURE won't read? I just don't know. People just bristle when you "tell" them how to raise their children, and promptly proceed to do stupid stuff.

Anonymous   |July.13.2012 Obamacare is NOT preventative health. IF people were from the beginning practicing good dietary practices and physical exercises, the overall effect would be a serious reduction of the corrupt medical, insurance and pharmacy industries in the first place. Mankind all these thousands of years never needed "healthcare for all" - why now?

MR. LB   |July.13.2012 I don't think we have seen everything that is in the Health Care Plan. I hear to pay for the Health Care Plan there are tax increases that we have not been told about. Some how this plan has to be paid for, but how?

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.23

3.23 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."