It's fine with me if Senator Hatch wants to repeal Obamacare, but only if
he can replace it with something that will better address the issues that
Obamacare purports to address. The United States has far and away the most
expensive health care in the developed world, and is one of only a handful of
developed nations without universal health care. Senator, I'd like to see
your detailed plan to bring health care costs under control and ensure that all
Americans have (at a bare minimum) catastrophic health insurance of some kind.
If you have no plan (which seems to be the Republican way these days), please
spare us the silly rhetoric.
Another Republican running on NO.Fine, I am not thrilled with
Obama/Romney care.But, we know that healthcare costs are
skyrocketing. The democrats tried under Clinton and now under Obama
to do something to address the growing costs, as it affects such a large part of
our budget (medicare/medicaid)So? What have the Republicans
proposed? In the last 20 years, what are their ideas?Insurance
across state lines and Tort Reform?That's their solution? Weak
at best.Yes Orrin. It is easy to shoot holes in someone else's
ideas and proposals.But much harder to put forth a comprehensive
plan and let others shoot holes in it.What are your ideas? And NO
is not an idea.
Senator Hatch,With all due respect, I think you are overstating
things when you say "This case is not about health-care policy, but about
whether we still have a real Constitution. This case is about whether our
written Constitution still defines and limits federal power until the people say
otherwise."First, given your political history, I would doubt
that you are a strict constructionist.Second, you are certainly
aware of the constitutional process. The constitution's primary genius is
about distributed power to the three branches of govt. Once all three branches
have weighed in, a law (even if we disagree with it) is constitutional.In this case, two branches have weighed in and we are waiting for the third.
In late June, we should know if the law has passed the test outlined in the
constitution.Is the law good or is it bad? Those are separate
questions. But once all the constitutional officers have had their say, then
the will of the people will have been expressed through their representatives.
And, if all agree, then the law will be constitutional..
Rather than try to repeal this law, Republicans ought to work with Democrats to
improve this law. Any improved law should continue to to ensure all people can
get decent health care regardless of income or pre-existing status. The fact
that kids up to 26 can be covered under their parents policy is also worth
keeping.The new law ought to cover congress, they should not have a
separage health care system than the people they serve. Doing this will ensure
that congress has high motivation to make this a quality system.
Repeal would be great opportunity to re-think joining every other developed
country -- with universal care and better care for the money. If repealed we
need to immediately get started on a financially viable Medicare for all or
public option. Returning to the days of emergency-room care for all covered by
taxes and insurance must end.
I came to look at the comments expecting the normal Obamacare bashing that
accompanies most of these.What I found are reasonable comments from
On the other hand, JoeBlow Twin Lights, and cjb.I'm not seeing
any significant party bashing or anything of the sort. Good job guys. I also agree that Obamacare may not be perfect, but it is a start.What some of the opponents of the bill fail to realize is that health
insurance isn't very accessible to many. Even those who are employed. While
my current employer offers benefits, they don't help pay for any of the
costs. Insurance for my family would cost roughly $1,200 per month. Health
insurance payments should not rival mortgage/rent payments. Also, I
have found that it is very difficult to get maternity coverage without it coming
from your employer. There is one insurer in my area that provides maternity on a
personal policy and that is only on policies with deductibles over $2,500. In
2014, all carriers will be required to have maternity coverage on their plans.
I support Healthcare Reform. Any politician who opposes it needs to
address the issues that made it become a necessity.
This is raw politics and nothing more. It is not good public policy. Hatch had
a chance to have major input on the legislation, but he literally walked away
and would not even attend the meetings on it. This as part of the Republican
obstructionism program and refusal to compromise. They put politics over the
good of the public. So until Hatch and his party put up a comprehensive plan,
and they have failed to do so to date, they should shut up. Seriously. Put
your money where your mouth is. Just saying "Repeal!" does nothing but
continue the status quo. Enough of the blah, blah, blah while you continue to
accept political donations and who knows what for your own benefit. Senator,
your credibility on this is nil, nada, nothing, zilch, zero. For crying out
loud, you were the chairman of committee that could have led reform, but you
didn't. We have the highest costs and the worst results in the modern
world, and you have nothing to offer.
Senator, where is your plan to improve health care for all Americans? I'm
not saying that the Affordable Care Act is "great". It may not even be
"good". But if changes are needed, then propose some solutions. Thomas
Paine said, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way." So far, Senator, I
haven't seen you lead or follow.
Wow! I am amazed, look at all of these reasonable well thought out comments.
Maybe there is hope for Utah yet! I agree, it is easy to bash Obamacare, but not
so easy to come up with a solution yourself. Any potential solutions I have
heard from the Republicans have bean weak at best, laughable at worst. We need
real solutions to an ever growing problem. Stop spending all your energy and
time attacking the other guy and spend it coming up wth real solutions or
working to change and improve the solution we have. As someone with a
preexisting condition I welcomed Obamacare, for the simple reason that it would
guarantee I could not be turned down for insurance coverage for something that
happened to me when I was 2 years old. What is your solution for that Mr. Hatch?
First, let me thank the DesNews for printing this fine piece of campaign
literature. Hatch has to please the tea party in order to get elected, and all
his grandstanding about repealing Obamacare certainly seems to be doing the
trick. But, as others have rightly asked, where is Hatch's comprehensive
health-care reform plan? Where is the Republican alternative? Oh, wait. They
have already given us their plan. It's called Obamacare. Highly ironic
isn't it, that Obama is getting slammed for pushing into law a health-care
bill that is basically a combination of ideas cooked up by the right-wing
Heritage Foundation and that Massachusetts monstrosity Romneycare.I
especially liked the part of Hatch's diatribe where he labels Obamacare
unconstitutional. As if he is the sole arbiter of that decision. Well, talk is
cheap. And as this Republican primary season has shown, candidates are willing
to say just about anything to please the extremists who control the party now.
Sad, but if we follow the Republican lead on health care, we'll have 100
million people uninsured, and the rest of us will be footing the bill for their
Just about everything Senator Hatch wrote about Obamacare is true. What he
failed to mention is that in 1993 he co-sponsored a bill with an individual
mandate. He also failed to mention his 2003 vote for health care expansion which
increased our unfunded debt by $15 trillion. It was this kind of
hypocrisy from our senior republican leadership that made toothless any GOP
opposition to Obamacare.
I have a conservative alternative to Obamacare: Freedom. If the government would
stop regulating healthcare so tightly and allow more competition costs would
come down. Why can't insurance companies compete across state lines? Why
does it take so long to get a new drug or device approved? Why does it take
months to get an appointment to see a specialist? The answer to all these
questions is government regulation.Other steps that would reduce
costs and improve access are severing the tie between insurance and employment.
I wouldn't even be opposed to giving every individual a tax credit to buy
his or her own insurance. It's absurd to give that tax benefit to an
employer. Get government out of the market and watch prosperity ensue.
The sad thing about this is that republicans have no plan. I say no plan.
Hatch and others are convinced that the state of heath care in this country does
not need fixing. We will continue to spend more than any civilized western
country and not get any better results. Are we not mature enough to work towards
a solution. I think many Americans are feed misinformation concerning
government run health care. Can anyone please explain why it is:1.
In other countries government run programs are more efficient and cover
essentially the entire population. They pay a smaller percentage of their
total income on health care. 2 Especially in Europe you can not argue
with some the results, they have longer life spans and lower infant mortality
rates.3. Bankruptcies associated with medical debt is non-existent in
these other countries.4. Of those countries who have gone to government
sponsored programs have not turned back.Lets pull heads out of the
sand. You first Mr. Hatch
For once, I agree with the left-leaning readers weighing in here. If AFA is so
bad--and it is--then conservatives need to present a SPECIFIC PLAN for fixing
our broken health care system. I need much more than 200 words to even
summarize my plan, but I hereby issue a "call to action" to all
businesses and citizens, the "bare bones" of which follows:Basic problem--most health care is extremely and unnecessarily expensive.Secondary problem--most Americans expect insurance to pay almost ALL of
their health care costs (understandable,considering the high costs, but the
principle of insurance is to protect us from the unusual and unexpected)Root cause of above problems--departure from basic principles of
personal responsibility and accountabilityCommon
misconceptions--high costs are due to "modern technology", expensive
lawsuits, greedy insurance companies, etc.--these are mostly symptoms, not root
causes.First step in solving above problems: businesses and
citizens--take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY--band together and use all available
means to identify all elements of the huge amount of "fat" in
today's health care costs,then begin holding providers ACCOUNTABLE to
implement policies and practices needed to bring costs back to reasonable levels
re: Louie"Bankruptcies associated with medical debt is
non-existent in these other countries."Yes, you are right,
Louie--in "these other countries", it is the COUNTRY, not the citizens,
that go bankrupt. Prime example right now, with others to follow--Greece.
I would be hard pressed to say what the solution is to fix our messed up health
care. It's hard to undo what began back in 1965 with the introduction of
Medicare and government regulation on the health care. This ball started rolling
a half century ago and is a result of government interference in something that
was none of their business to get involved in. If you want to fix this, you
have to get the government out of it. How to do that without causing an awful
lot of pain to those who depend on these poorly ran government programs is a
complex and difficult problem to say the least. It used to be laughable to
think about socialized medicine for this country because our medical care far
exceeded anything in any other country. But that has been chiseled away with
government requirements for health insurance, each requirement causing unseemly
rate hikes to us all. We are now at the point that to some, socialized medicine
is looking better and better. Believe me, it used to be so much better, before
the government got hold of it. I am sad for our nation and it's future.
Utah businessman: Greece is hardly an example of medical cost causing their
doom. Historically, long before they had socialized medicine their government
went through bankruptcy a number of times. Did you get the message we spend
more by far then any other country, in part, because of our inefficiencies and
"for profit" programs.
Government currently makes up *half* of all health care spending in the US. Yet
we rail against a for profit system? The user of health care services pays only
10 cents of every dollar cost, yet we complain about a free market system?The answer is to make health care more free, not less so.
I can find fault without problems. No MBA needed. No Law Degree needed. Even
my youngest child can point out when things aren't working right.What we need is bright people who know how to fix things. If there are
problems with Obama/Romneycare - fix them. Repealign tosses out many very
positive aspects, existing conditions coverage not being the least of these.
But the cowardly way to address this is just say lets toss the baby out with the
bath water, and pretend the problems that drove us to Obamacare have all self
heald themselves.Cameraon - the problem is not with the free market
system. The problem is we have many uninsurred people out there for what ever
reason. These people have the right to "free" treatment through the
emergency room doors - a law signed into practice by Ronald Reagan. What that
law did cover is who will pay for these free Emergency Rooms visist. We have
turned the Emergency Room into a walk-in free clinic, with no funding. These
cost have to be covered. They way these expenses covered now is thruugh higher
rates to those who do have insurance.It is a very broken system.
It is funny to read the usual liberal commentors. Nearly every one of them has
expressed a desire for MORE government and MORE regulation as a means to lower
insurance costs.Unfortunately more government and more regulation
only drive up the cost of insurance. Just look at how much insurance has
incrased over the past 30 years, now when you look at a graph of the number of
mandates on insurance programs over the same 30 years, you find that we have
gone from under 400 mandates in 1980 to 2268 in 2011. Who do you think pays for
all of those mandates? The insurance companies don't because they have
razor thin profit margins.To "Cameron" government also ranks
first in healthcare money lost to fraud. They lose as much money to fraud as
the private insurance companies do, but only insure 1/2 as many people.
I thought Orrin Hatch was against legislating from the bench. This law was
passed by a majority in the House and Senate and signed by the President. Now
you're running to the courts to get the result you couldn't get in
Congress? I thought you were against such things.
Considering obamacare will increase average premiums by 2100 from UNbiased
reports, doing NOTHING is better until we can think of something better.Great job Hatch!Keep up the good work!
Oh, I get it. If the mandate is a Republican idea (which it is), it makes
sense, it's good government. But if it's a Democrat advocating for
it, it's socialism, tyranny, and unconstitutional.