Quantcast
Utah

Gov. Gary Herbert issues last-minute plea to President Obama regarding health care reform

Comments

Return To Article
  • Doogie South Jordan, Utah
    Dec. 11, 2012 5:34 p.m.

    Gov. Herbert if the federal government doesn't cave to your request you should tell them you are not going to participate in the state mandated program. To date 23 state have stated they will participate, 20 states have said they won't and 7 including Utah are undecided. The only way that we have left to defeat Obamacare is for the states to say they will not participate in the federally mandated exchange. You need to take a stand on this and not cave in!

  • Ett Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 8:19 p.m.

    I fear the Governor's plea will fall on deaf ears. I sincerely hope he has the fortitude to opt for "not at all." My wife is battling terminal brain cancer, and has received the best care with as little burden on us as we could ask for. The system wasn't as broken as Pr. Obama made out. Stand firm your Honor.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 8:45 p.m.

    Gov. Herbert is a good man, and sincerely wants to provide better health care for everyone with flexibility and regard for costs and effectiveness.

    His plea will be rejected by Obama, who seeks to destroy private health care delivery, and the insurance concept that supports it, so that he can replace it all with a single government run health care rationing system.

    Nothing in Obamacare schemes does a thing to increase the supply of doctors, nurses, hospitals, clinics, CNAs, labs or medical device providers to increase the availability and reduce costs of medical care. Instead it taxes the providers, encourages people to leave the field, and hospitals to close, hurting every American.

    Obama will reject Gov. Herbert's request, and probably take his time doing it. At that point, Utah MUST refuse to set up an Obamacare "exchange."

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Dec. 11, 2012 9:25 p.m.

    My family has had experiences with health insurance in Utah.

    ACA, if allowed to operate as the Republicans who first proposed it long ago, will be a Godsend for all of us.

    Why must partisan politics always trump common sense in Utah?

  • EDM Castle Valley, Utah
    Dec. 11, 2012 10:24 p.m.

    To the first three comments, when Obama was first elected in 2008, not one single American said that our health care system was just fine as is. Every American wanted a better system. Remember? Obama took on the challenge. Republicans obstructed all the way. Ironically, what we got was based on a Republican Massachusetts model, and Utah was already way ahead of the game on insurance exchange. What's the problem, if not for the "D" stamped on the federal proposal?

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Dec. 12, 2012 6:40 a.m.

    Governor, don't waste your breath. If Obama was even slightly interested in cutting costs and serving the people we would not have created a monstrosity that creates 1968 new bureaucracies, will drive costs through the roof and violates the constitution in multiple ways. Obama's purpose is to force every American to become dependent upon the US government. He wants your life to depend upon the government. Once this happens over 80% of the population will become reliable Democrat voters.

    Why would anyone deliberately destroy the most powerful economy in the world? The most insidious thing about socialism is not the fact that it destroys economies but the fact that the perpetrator ends up looking compassionate. First he destroys your job, then he give you welfare and we all go; "Man, am I happy we have that welfare check coming in. If it were not for Obama, we would be toast. Sure glad those mean Republicans are not in power, we would be out on the street begging." NO. You would still have your job if those mean Republicans were in power.

    Bail out on the exchanges. The only winning move is not to play.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Dec. 12, 2012 6:48 a.m.

    @ EDM

    Obama Care only has three things in common with the Massachusetts model:

    1. It deals with health care.
    2. It has insurance exchanges.
    3. It has an individual mandate.

    The Massachusetts model does not create 1968 new government bureaucracies.
    It does not create a situation that will ultimately drive every private insurance carrier into bankruptcy.
    It was designed to reduce costs (but fail in that respect). The Obama plan drives costs through the roof.
    It does not include death panels who decide who gets to live and who dies. Obama care does not even allow you to spend your own money for treatment they deny.

    Obama Care delegates so much authority to the executive branch that along with the new financial regs and all the other programs that delegate authority to the executive branch that congress is now irrelevant. The separation of powers no longer exists. The house has no power over the purse strings. We have not had a budget in three years. The house is powerless to drive the agenda and it was intended to be the most powerful part of the federal government.

  • Bill Shakespeare Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 7:02 a.m.

    Republicans against Obama care? Yawn.

  • Cherilyn Eagar Holladay, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 8:11 a.m.

    This is the kicker, my friends...read closely:

    "'This decision reminds us that we shouldn't let our hard-earned federal tax dollars go to other states that choose to expand," he said. "The feds are offering states a fantastic financial deal. It would be fiscally irresponsible not to take it.'

    "He said Medicaid expansion, which has already met a lot of controversy in the state, 'should be a top priority' in the 2013 legislative session."

    And thus we are led down the path to tyranny.

  • KTC John Wetumpka, AL
    Dec. 12, 2012 9:04 a.m.

    Dear Gov. Herbert,
    I hope that you do not trade away the freedom and independence of the good citizens of Utah for federal money, regardless of the claimed source of that federal money. In the long run, volutarily surrendering your legal rights never turns out to be a good decision. History has already vindicated the well-reasoned dissenting opinions of wise justices that forewarned of the dire consequences that have now come to pass in America. Had the opinions of those dissenting justices been heeded, our nation would never have become immersed in federal deficit spending aimed at lifting people socially based on the limited federal right to regulate interstate commerce. The entire federal healthcare system is based on an absurd legal fiction. Please remember, the states created the federal government---not vice versa. It is time to say enough and you have a sterling opportunity.

  • EDM Castle Valley, Utah
    Dec. 12, 2012 9:10 a.m.

    @The Rock

    I'm as disappointed as you are that the current plan doesn't adequately address spiraling costs. My point is that back in 2008 our country was so ripe for reform - EVERYONE wanted it - and it is Republican obstructionism that has left us so far off the mark. Why couldn't we have a government option to compete with private insurance to keep costs down? How did competition suddenly become a bad idea?

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 9:23 a.m.

    Why should BO grant a reguest from a red governor from a red state? It will never happen.

    Governor, just say no to BO's tyranny.

    If our tax dollars go to states that cave and we get none, we should sue under the 14th amendment. The SCOTUS has already ruled states don't have to participate. Of course, we know the constitution means nothing to the dems if it stands in their way.

  • Joshua Steimle Draper, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 9:45 a.m.

    Instead of trying to grab federal dollars we should be refusing them, and the strings attached to them, and joining the movement to nullify Obamacare.

    Obamacare has nothing to do with politicians wanting people to have good health coverage. It has everything to do with getting votes and obtaining more power. These people cannot be trusted. I don't just mean those with a D in front of their names, I mean none of them can be trusted, D or R. All politicians are guilty until proven innocent, and we can't gauge their innocence until they're out of office and we can track how much harm they've done.

  • dalefarr South Jordan, Utah
    Dec. 12, 2012 10:40 a.m.

    The main thing wrong with the State plan is it doesn't work. Still leaves 300,000 uninsured Utahns.
    "They had better die and decrease the surplus population". Ebenezer Scrooge.

  • Mike in Sandy Sandy, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 10:50 a.m.

    The Gov should stay out of Washington, and start fixing our pathetic education system here.
    He said it was his "top priority".
    But then, he IS a politician, and that sounded good when he was grovelling for votes....

  • Doogie South Jordan, Utah
    Dec. 12, 2012 11:00 a.m.

    Yes we all wanted reforms to health insurance. Everyone that has made a comment in support of Obamacare seems to have a short memory. As I recall, none of the Republican suggestions were even taken into account when this bill was being passed. The Democrats just ramrodded this through as they had the majority in both the Senate and the House. As a result of this legislation and the ramifications that it had the House won back a Republican majority in the next elections. People are tired of political chicanery, this bill is not logical. Do you know who they have being the watch dog on this? You are correct if you guessed the IRS. They are going to hire an additional 16,000 agents to make sure that it is followed (among other things if you get my drift). You think you have problems now with the IRS and federal government breathing down your neck wait a few years!

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 11:12 a.m.

    Utah does not want to help the medically indigent. Period.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 11:19 a.m.

    Oh, and Governor Herbert, if you intend in ANY way to restrict my medicare benefits you will face an insurrection.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Dec. 12, 2012 11:31 a.m.

    To "dalefarr" too bad it is the government that is doing its best to reduce the excess population.

    The cuts to Medicare will decrease the number of doctors willing to work with the elderly. That will cause the elderly problems since they will not be able to get care unless they have money set aside for supplemental insurance.

    Next, you have the recent changes to organ transplant lists that the government maintains. They have shifted the rules so that working aged people rank high on the list, while the elderly and young do not.

    Plus, what happens in 3 years? The article mentioned that additional funding for Medicaid would only last 3 years. What then? Won't the poor and elderly be thrown out again once the Federal money dries up?

  • Brother Wolf Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 12:44 p.m.

    We ought to get our house in order.

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Dec. 12, 2012 12:59 p.m.

    @ EDM

    You say; " I'm as disappointed as you are that the current plan doesn't adequately address spiraling costs. My point is that back in 2008 our country was so ripe for reform - EVERYONE wanted it - and it is Republican obstructionism that has left us so far off the mark. Why couldn't we have a government option to compete with private insurance to keep costs down? How did competition suddenly become a bad idea?"

    Private insurance companies have to make a profit and their average profit is only 3.3% That is tiny. Government can ignore profits and drive private insurance companies out of business.

    Private businesses find a way to reduce costs and become more efficient. Government never will. They have no incentive to do so.

    If government denies coverage you are stuck. You can sue a private provider.

    The reason medical treatment is so expensive is because of government intrusion. As Reagan said; "Government is the problem, not the solution."

    And, NO, not everyone was for reform.

    The Democrats first made the best health care system in the world "not work" so they could "fix it" by enslaving us all.

  • Mamma C HEBER CITY, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 1:07 p.m.

    Governor Herber, we are counting on you to be bolder and more courageous than ever. Please stand up to the would-be king Obama. Please just say no for all who have voted for you and have placed trust in you. Utah has always had an independent spirit and we should not bow to this immoral and unconstitutional health mandate.

  • Bill Shakespeare Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 1:16 p.m.

    You gotta love this pathetic grandstanding by his Honor the Gubna.

  • Sqweebie Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 2:35 p.m.

    Wow. Gov. Herbert - it must be wonderful having awesome insurance that you pay a small deductable if any along with no co-pay when you visit your doctor. Bet your doctor even orders tests - no problem you go and get them - no red tape or hoops to jump through. Well many of us on the other hand either go without the necessary testing we need. Are you proud of yourself for mammograms to no longer be paid by medicaid? What about when a person's doctor wants them to have a stress test because of high blood preasure? I've been trying to get one for four years - medicaid refuses to cover it. But I'm quite sure that if you went to the doctor today and he told you you needed special testing you wouldn't blink and eye and go to it. Governor it's time that you and the rest of those who hold state and federal jobs lived within the budget of an average person and have the same state/federal insurance that you expect the citizens to have namely medicaid/medicare. I'm sure you will enjoy the same "special" treatment medicaid patients get.

  • kargirl Sacramento, CA
    Dec. 12, 2012 3:11 p.m.

    As long as health care is subject to the free market, the best care will still go to those with the best health, the most money, and who are the least likely to need it. And we still will have lower positive outcomes here and higher per capita health costs than other first-world countries, and many other countries besides. If you care enough, do some research. It's depressing. You see, it costs a lot for these doctors to be part of the free market and still help people on Medicare, or Medicaid. We can start with paperwork...and the fact that they can't always do what their patients need done, either. The way the system is set up, often the care provided is penny-wise and pound-foolish. We fought that here with the effort to cut inhome services, a program that saves money over nursing home placement. That, not Medicaid and other programs like that, are why we have people not receiving care. It's death panels, yes, and poverty is the overseer, not the President or any governor. Is that fair to you? If you think so, at least own up to it.

  • RN4moms Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 12, 2012 4:57 p.m.

    Medicaid is a mess. The AFA (Obamacare) is also a mess and compounds the two when increasing the rolls of Medicaid recipients. It is a paperwork nightmare trying to prove need, especially for the self-employed. Until they fix the Medicaid problems I can never support adding more to the overworked system. Mental health under Medicaid is especially difficult and the system the people are forced to use is overcrowded resulting in mentally ill being untreated. People give up because of the boondoggle it is. Like Obamacare, other problems need to be fixed; not just throw more people into the equation.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Dec. 13, 2012 9:21 a.m.

    To "kargirl" and under a universal care system, only the high ranking government workers and officials get care at the best facilities. Just like in Cuba and the former USSR.

    Go and look into the Universal care systems. They typically have poor care, and limit what you can get done through them.

    If you want to make care more affordable, and better for everybody that is simple. Get the government out of the way. They have added so many regulations and mandates, you could cut the cost of insurance in half if you went back to 1980 levels.

  • mbelledu Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 14, 2012 9:53 a.m.

    1) Governor Herbert's request will not be approved because it does not conform to the law that was democratically passed. Once we Americans get past the name-calling, the sweeping and loaded words, and the knee-jerk repetition of "the" party line we might just discover that the law is in everyone's interest.

    2) Governor Herbert is lauded by some for such abstract concepts as preserving "freedom," avoiding "socialist health care," and retaining maximum "flexibility." Look closer at our "Avenue H" exchange system. It is ONLY for businesses. Individuals are left out. So, for instance, the age group 55-64 (only half of which is employed full time in the US) is unable to benefit from Utah's self-styled "exchange." The law was created so that all Americans would be able to benefit from A) a convenient pooling of the latest market information, B) what should be highly welcome free-market competion engendred by the exchanges, C) a new range of choices created by the exchanges.

    Please Governor Herbert, for the sake of all of us Utahns, businesses AND individuals alike, go with the law instead of playing to "the" (passionate but uninformed) gallery.

  • Schwa South Jordan, UT
    Dec. 15, 2012 6:33 a.m.

    America disgusts me. Health care for our sick people does NOT equate to tyranny.