Quantcast
Opinion

In our opinion: Obamacare reminds us that government often is the problem

Comments

Return To Article
  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 12:24 a.m.

    "The biggest loser in all this, however, seems to be the notion that big government can solve problems better than the private sector." Well, that depends on the problem. Big problems require big solutions. Health care is a big, big problem. Now, medicare is quite well run both itself and the supplementary private plans which go with it. You may note that medicare is run by the federal government. Before medicare, health care for seniors was a big, big problem. They were dying in poverty before their time - I know this for a fact because I witnessed it. Before medicare the only effective health care for the elderly was provided by the VA for vets (also big bad government).

    I begged the Obama people, though they never listened to me (it was practically impossible to get the White House to listen) to extend medicare to all. That would have worked, only requiring a re-scaling of current systems. Instead to accommodate the private insurance business we got Obamacare. Obamacare does not establish the government won't work, but it shows the White House chose the wrong option.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 12:30 a.m.

    " but the lack of a profit incentive, together with politics...generally get in the way of efficiencies." Profit incentive is the reason may senior care centers give lousy care. And of course the most efficient care for seniors would be to have them die at 70 years or less. That's efficiency I don't want. Health care doesn't belong in the for profit system.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:44 a.m.

    The failure of ObamaCare is a prime example of why the Federal Government was authorized to only handle seventeen duties by the Constitution. The Founding Fathers had just fought a bloody war with a "top heavy" government in England, a government that thought that it had the right to dictate to people worldwide. England learned that its sphere of influence did not extend into America. Perhaps Mr. Obama will soon realize that his sphere of influence does not extend past the Oval Office when he ventures far beyond the limits imposed on his office by the Constitution. Although he thinks differently, he has no authority to legislate or to pick and choose which parts of a law he will enforce or the time table that he will use to fully implement legislation that he signed into law.

    Although the news media has not reported faithfully on his every action as President, what it has reported shows that his every attempt at making business decisions has failed, from the seizing of two car companies to spending hundreds of millions of dollars on Solyndra to spending even more hundreds of millions on a failed website.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Nov. 20, 2013 6:09 a.m.

    The only difference between a citizen and a subject is the size of the government.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 6:54 a.m.

    Incompetance abounds in the Government. A huge chunk of it is at the very top. A billion here, a trillion there so what. Oh but his credentials were(now get this) a community organizer.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Nov. 20, 2013 7:24 a.m.

    Again with the all-or-nothing thinking.

    Govt is not all bad or all good. There needs to be a balance.

    Unfortunately, the thinking lately from some is to shut down the EPA and shut down the FDA.
    (but the minute something IS shut down, they scream bloody murder)

    That would work great if Corporations have not shown us time and time again that they will do extremely unscrupulous things in the name of profit.

    That is mostly why health care costs have skyrocketed.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 7:58 a.m.

    Yes, the war In Iraq and melt down of the private banking sector prove that.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:00 a.m.

    Yes, and government should not control liquor sales, marijuana sales and gambling in Utah.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:04 a.m.

    "One of his basic philosophies was that government, despite the misgivings of his opponents, could solve problems and make life better for Americans.

    So much for that." Then you go on to talk about the website? Really?

    Try talking to the millions who now can't be dropped because of pre-existing conditions, or the millions who now will qualify for Medicaid, or how about the hundreds of millions who won't immediately be affected at all by the law but who's future could with one layoff include all of the above.

    Enough of this it wasn't bi-partisan nonsense. It was a Republican idea in the first place and Republicans still objected to it. Then Mitch McConnell made the mistake of openly saying they would stop everything Obama tried. In addition Republicans had killed health care reform for 70 years.

    There was no way to have a bipartisan bill because there was not an ounce of Republican support for health care reform.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:06 a.m.

    I predict that ACA will work well. The underlying principles are sound, combining free market competition with strong public standards to prevent inequities and unnecessary human suffering. Anyone who has seen the tragedy that is the Primary Hospital ER knows that our former system was a major injustice.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:14 a.m.

    Take a second and think what our society would look like without social security, medicare and food stamps. If that's hard to imagine, travel south to Mexico City and walk the slums. A civilized society needs goverment for the betterment of all.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:22 a.m.

    president Ronald Reagan’s “nine most terrifying words” seem to resonate most: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Today the terrifying words have been downgraded even more to "We are from the government and we are here to take over".

    It's hard to be a liberal these days. The entire premise of liberalism is built on the sandy foundation of Obamacare - the grand socialist wealth redistribution scam. The scam was sold on top of a Mount Everest pile of lies and deceit starting with the way it first passed congress with democrats being "bought off" with tax payer money and then never ever reading the bill before passing it. "If you like your plan you can keep your plan" which is the latest lie .. perhaps the worst of all. This is outright fraud. Now we see Barack attempting to exempt his BIG union bosses from the law. Government in America is destroying America - very simply put. It will have to come from the good grass roots citizens to put a stop to this progressive melt down. Are there enough left?

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Nov. 20, 2013 8:45 a.m.

    To regard government as the problem is an easy out to avoid focusing on a difficult issue. The ACA never would have been enacted had there not been the lack of a comprehensive healthcare program in America. That was the problem.

  • dalefarr South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:06 a.m.

    Ok. The private sector contractors let us down and the Affordable Care Act isn't all it was sold to us. More importantly however, is the republican party's wholesale failure to work with the democrats to fix and improve the Act, or alternatively to offer a rational alternative.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:22 a.m.

    The DN editorial continually references FOX NEWS Entertainment.

    No problem.

    The news arm of the Republican Party is dutifully echoed by the news arm of the Republican Party in UTAH.

    Again...No problem.

    "...president Ronald Reagan’s “nine most terrifying words” seem to resonate most: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help...”.

    In the spirit of pro-republicanism...

    President Ronald Reagans' nine most terrifying words...

    I'm a REPUBLICAN ICON and I'm here to help.

    Perfect.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:24 a.m.

    Government is not nearly as often the problem as it is portrayed to be, including in these pages. It's easy, and indeed lazy, to simply disparage government, and thereafter not have to participate in it or propose better solutions. Our society isn't falling apart, we're tearing it apart.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:33 a.m.

    The argument that "Republicans" are to blame is nonsense. Not one Republican voted for ObamaCare. Not one!

    The argument that the Federal Level of government should provide healthcare is also false. Personal welfare is not on the list of authorized duties of the Federal Government. If healthcare is offered, it would be a duty of the States or of the people. Even the Supreme Court waltzed around that question by saying that ObamaCare is a tax and that the Federal Government has the power to tax us. They have not ruled on whether the ObamaCare tax is legal or not because it has not been implemented and because lower courts must first rule before the Supreme Court (an appellate court) can rule on the legallity of that tax.

    The argument that without ObamaCare millions of Americans would be without healthcare is false. ObamaCare has caused millions of Americans to LOSE their health insurance. It has caused anyone not subsidized by public money to pay much more for less coverage.

    ObamaCare was poorly conceived and poorly implemented. No wonder the Democrats would like to blame the Republicans for Obama's folly.

  • EW HENRIETTA, NY
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:50 a.m.

    Amen to the title. Anything that government has sole responsibility for, they no longer have to compete with private companies to do things more efficiently, with higher quality, or more thriftiness. There is no thrift in government at all: the annual federal budgets increase by as much as 10% each year no matter the federal revenue. Budgets in the private sector do not work this way, and why? Because they have to get people to buy their stuff and that means people have to want to consume their services. They have to be competitive. They can't just raise taxes to grow their budgets. They have more accountability in their spending, because if they spend into the red, they're out of business. Not so government. We're paying more for less benefit.

    If you want to argue that quality suffers in the private sector, you can make the argument that you get what you pay for. There are plenty of government regulations over private industry which may actually help increase safety and quality of life for Americans, but there are many others that just increase the cost of doing business without benefit.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    In my lifetime I've seen instances where government was able to be the solution to the problem, but honestly I've seen instances where government WAS the problem. If you can't acknowledge that... there's no use discussing it with people who think Government can do no wrong.

    Every administration has made mistakes. And every government that's ever existed has had problems. When you get the cult-like mentality like seems to surround Barack Obama (and Progressives in general)... no improvement CAN even be discussed, because they feel the need to defend government at all cost and shoot down anybody who brings up anything even SLIGHTLY critical, or that could be improved.

    Republicans did the same knee-jerk reaction when Bush was president. It's not a PARTY thing... it's a PARTISAN thing. Partisan cult-like devotion is the problem.

    I learned my lesson during the Bush years. I only hope that young people who only started to become politically aware during the Obama years can learn the same lesson before they become totally brainwashed by the partisan coolaid, and become convinced that government is the only solution to their problems.

    Government can BE the problem.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:23 a.m.

    The ideal of the United States of America is represented by a statue called the Statue of Liberty. Not the Statue of Equality.

    When Democrats, especially the liberal kind, get power, they concentrate on trying to use government to bring about equality in America. The result, if allowed, would ultimately bring about government forced equality, at the expense of liberty. If government takes away 100% of a persons work product then they are a slave. If it takes away 50%. They are enslaved to that government for half of their life and work. The big question of the day is how much do we as citizens want to be enslaved to our governments? Having no government would create anarchy, but too much would create tyranny. Where do you draw the line? I say around 20 to 25 percent at most. We Americans should have a great majority of our lives for our own use, and not that of government.

  • louie Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:39 a.m.

    If the "profit incentive" is so important to quality why is the Inter Mountain Medical Center non-profit? Why are schools non-profit or government run. Why don't we go to war by contracting with mercenaries? Perhaps the Editorial Board should look at health care as more than a typical commodity.

    To say the roll out is a disaster is a bit much. Is it really a disaster if the final result is more people have health insurance? In places like California reports indicate better than expected sign up statistics. Oh, and that is where the State government has taken the initiative to help facilitate the exchanges. For political reasons only, other states have elected not to. So governments can make things work if they want to.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    Because, corporations are so 'good' for you…

    when Walmart asks for donations…

    for your fellow co-workers.

  • 2 bit Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:42 a.m.

    RE: "The only difference between a citizen and a subject is the size of the government"...
    And may I add... "And who has the right/ability to defend themselves".

    IF the populace is defenseless against government abuse... they are "Subjects" not "Citizens".

    When the PEOPLE control the government.. they are "Citizens".
    When the Government controls the people... they are "Subjects".

    Currently we are still "Citizens"... but the trend towards being "Subjects"... is actually quite alarming.

    The Progressive agenda seems to be to enable the Government to rule over us... not for us to be able to rule the Government. THAT needs to be turned around.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:56 a.m.

    claiming the government is the problem with our healthcare system ignores the fact our healthcare system was severely broken long before the ACA came along. I had friends that a decade ago had to give up their practices and go back to hospital work because the insurance companies were cutting payouts at the same time they were erasing the rates to buy insurance. Government may or may not prove to be a an aid to this problem but certainly leaving it to the private sector has failed.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:15 a.m.

    Government is a big problem for criminals, cheats, liars, and others who make war on our attempts at civilization. That’s why we have government. If we didn’t have this sort of people in our society, we wouldn’t need a big government.

    Comparison of the rights and freedoms of today for Americans to those Americans of old; seems to point to the success of the American government. If the conservatives could point to any example of a government, a religion, an organized group or any other collective effort that has done as well, it might give validity to their lies.

    Government with a profit incentive will not be a good government.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:24 a.m.

    Pagan

    RE: "Because, corporations are so 'good' for you… when Walmart asks for donations…for your fellow co-workers"...

    Good point. At least every penny you give to Walmart is completely voluntary. We will know that evil corporations have become equal in their ability to get into your wallet when Walmart and other corporations can impose TAXES on you (like the government).

    At least with corporations like evil Walmart... any donations are completely voluntary (not the same for the government is it)? And every penny you spend at Walmart is completely voluntary (not the same for government is it)?

    You have so much bitterness for Walmart... why not save some of it for the Government? The government asks for WAY more "donations" than Walmart. So why is one good... and the other evil?

    At least I can CHOOSE whether to donate to Walmart or not.

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:37 a.m.

    Spring Street

    Anecdotal stories don't prove anything. You say that the private sector has failed in health care. There are many who would use their own anecdotal stories to claim the private sector has succeeded. Truth is, both government and private sector have successes and failures with this issue. The solution to health care problems however was not and is not some massive overwhelming single bill (ACA) that tries to solve and change everything. It should have been trashed, and several smaller problem specific pieces of legislation worked on and enacted in a bi-partisan fashion. The Democrats and Obama pushed for this massive bill only when they had a super-majority. It's no wonder that now some 57% of Americans don't like the result. Had the Republicans done something like this with a super majority they would likely be getting the wrath of Americans too.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:50 a.m.

    Ultra Bob

    You write as if you have never heard of how the LDS Church, for one, operates. Namely, pay as you go and stay out of debt. That is an example of a religion or organized group that has done a thousand times better at managing government and being more responsible than our current U.S. Government with a 17 trillion debt. That along with waste and fraud that is uncontrollable. You had to have posted what you did to bait a conversation, but I just had to respond. As for government with profit incentive, do you realize that the part of the country that is currently having the biggest financial boom is in fact the Washington D.C. area, where there is a glut of money, (taxed not created) making many people very rich? There is a ton of profit incentive in U.S. Government. Only instead of creating it, they tax us to get it.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:59 a.m.

    This entire editorial and most of the comments can be summarized in the truism, "you'll find what you're looking for".

    If your worldview is that government can't do *anything* right, you have some (limited) examples in the launching of Obamacare to color / re-color your worldview to that effect.

    But then you look like a fool when you repeat in public that generalization over & over that government can do absolutely nothing right, and people bring up innumerable examples of that not being the case. "The National Weather Service? They get forecasts wrong all the time! The CDC? Completely unnecessary, we haven't had polio in decades!"

    The same can be said about many topics, including the virtues and vices of free enterprise, Walmart, the Department of Defense, Mormons vs non-Mormons and just about anything else in the world.

    "Man will never walk on the moon, because the Earth is our realm, from our Creator".

    It's a lot easier to deal with the world in black and white, than measured reason & shades of grey.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    Ok liberals. If government is so benevolant, explain why all of their programs that are designed to help people end up causing more problems than they solve?

    You gave us the war on poverty, now we have intergenerational poverty because of the handouts.

    You gave us Social Security, now we are trying to figure out how to keep that program alive. At the same time retirement savings are on a decline.

    You gave us Medicare, now that trust fund is running dry.

    Obamacare has increased costs and cut coverage on insurance plans, while taxing medical device manufacturers more.

    Liberalism gave us the food pyramid, now we have rampant obesity.

    You gave us a monetary system based on faith and credit instead of something of value, now we have high inflation rates.

    What program does the government run that doesn't end up wasting money or become ineffective?

    To "marxist" and how would extending Medicare to all be any better? They deny more claims than private companies and they lose more money to fraud and waste than private companies do. They do that while costing more than a private insurance company.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:00 p.m.

    Re: "I predict that ACA will work well."

    Well, that makes one of you.

    Not even the most partisan of the mindless Obama crowd will go that far. The best that callow, benighted Obamabots can hope for is that American health care will limp along under Obamacare, just long enough to permit imposition of the much-worse wholly-government-owned socialized medicine that liberals actually crave.

    But, Obamacare CAN'T work well. It was never intended to work well. It's purpose is to collapse American health care so liberal political hacks can swoop down after the battle and shoot the straggling wounded of the best health care delivery system ever invented. Then, their plan calls for them to impose a single-payer disaster that will give them permanent control over who lives and dies in America, to the cheers and undying gratitude of the low-information America their "welfare," "justice," and "education" systems have created.

    But, it won't work. American health care will die. And, the misery and chaos that inevitably follow will be a liberal legacy.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 1:10 p.m.

    re:Craig Clark

    Actually you are both right and wrong. You are correct that health care in America needed (and still needs) an overhaul. The costs are out of control due to the tidal wave of law suits filed and Tort Reform would help with that in a BIG way ...but the Democrat's would have no part of it. There needs to be some sort of basic coverage for ALL citizens - not free - but low cost and coming from the free market and not the government. Obamacare is NOT about health care reform. Never was. Obamacare is about bringing America into a Socialist model ..like Europe ...and wealth redistribution is the gateway to that via Obamacare. Ronald Reagan warned over 30 years ago about socialized medicine being the gateway to Socialism in America and he was right. Think of the total control the government has over its citizens with socialized medicine. Your bill of rights are essentially compromised. If we want to reform health care then let's do it - without wealth redistribution. Since 2009 the GOP House has proposed several plans for health care overhaul with common sense initiatives ...all being shot down by Harry Reid.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 2:33 p.m.

    "The biggest loser in all this, however, seems to be the notion that big government can solve problems better than the private sector."

    The botched website was designed by private contractors. And, say what you want about Obamacare, the system we had that was the most expensive in the world (17.9% of GDP) while leaving 1/6th of people uninsured showed that the private sector did not have a handle on this at all.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 2:36 p.m.

    @EW
    "Anything that government has sole responsibility for, they no longer have to compete with private companies to do things more efficiently, with higher quality, or more thriftiness"

    Medicare is so efficient (around 5% overhead whereas insurance companies have so much higher overhead Obamacare limited it to no more than 20% or else they have to refund the difference) and thrifty that the reason the private insurance companies fought so hard to keep a public option out of Obamacare was that they were concerned that the public option would get too popular and drive them out of business.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 2:44 p.m.

    @Redshirt
    "If government is so benevolant, explain why all of their programs that are designed to help people end up causing more problems than they solve?"

    That's a faulty premise.

    "You gave us Social Security, now we are trying to figure out how to keep that program alive."

    Remove the cap on income subject to payroll taxes (I am not changing the tax at all, just having it apply to all income not just the first 150k or whatever it is). There, I just made it solvent until 2080 without any other adjustments.

    "they lose more money to fraud and waste than private companies do. They do that while costing more than a private insurance company."

    They have lower overhead costs than private companies and it only costs more because it's a plan for seniors who tend to disproportionately be sick while the private companies (until 2014) can throw people off their plans whenever they want declaring pre-existing conditions or some other thing.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 2:48 p.m.

    @patriot
    "There needs to be some sort of basic coverage for ALL citizens - not free - but low cost and coming from the free market and not the government. "

    The only way to do that is to somehow incentivize the free market to take on ALL citizens, possibly with subsidies to get them to take on the sick people. Oh right, we have that, it's called Obamacare.

    I still think it's funny that you all wanted to turn Medicare (through the Ryan budget) into a system of a marketplace where seniors get vouchers (aka subsidies) through which to purchase health insurance. You know... just like Obamacare (now I will point out that the reason liberals hate Ryancare isn't because of "hypocrisy", we just like single payer and Obamacare is a step in that direction while Ryancare is a step away from single payer Medicare).

  • 2 bit Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 3:11 p.m.

    atl134,

    Ya, Medicare is so efficient... it's only going bankrupt! And it's already the largest piece of the Federal budget pie by far. According to US Government Spending dot com this is they current spending distribution:

    26% Health Care
    25% Pensions
    22% Defense
    10% Welfare
    6% Interest
    4% Education
    3% Transportation
    1% General Government

    So only 1% of all our government spending goes towards actual Governing... "General Government".

    You would think about 99% of the Government budget would be for actual governing!

    But if you've actually convinced yourself that Medicare is efficient (despite all the documented and well publicized abuse and fraud involved)... there's really no hope.

    ObamaCare may be great. Like Obama said... You gotta give it a decade to find out if it's good or bad (by then everybody ought to be addicted to their subsidies and tax credits and there will be no going back). Try taking away anybody's tax subsidy... it's political suicide!

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 3:19 p.m.

    re:atl134

    "The only way to do that is to somehow incentivize the free market to take on ALL citizens, possibly with subsidies to get them to take on the sick people. Oh right, we have that, it's called Obamacare."

    You need to shut off your Obamacare view for a moment and think "outside the box". Obamacare does NOT incent the the free Market in any way. Obamacare creates a huge web of laws, regulations and penalties that Insurance companies must comply with which is exactly why so many polices are being cancelled right now - they don't meet the MANDATED Obamacare level and so they must be dropped. Insurance companies were ok to go along with the scam initially because they assumed (wrongly) that they would get a HUGE volume of new customers which has turned out to be bogus. People are NOT signing up via the exchanges for Obamacare but they are instead just going to medicare route due to the costs which will simply cause the whole system to implode eventually. Obama is now considering an Insurance Company bail out !! Also you only scratched the surface of the GOP proposals for healthcare reform...

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 3:19 p.m.

    To "atl134" so then you admit that the way that SS was set up, it was not sustainable.

    Why are you trying to contradict me using statements that only support what I say.

    Even with those proposed "fixes" it doesn't actually "fix" anything. It just patches it and puts off repair for a few more years.

    Actually anything going through the federal government has a high overhead. The overhead for the Federal Government is 25% to 30%. You can't just look at Medicare alone. That is like saying that your company's billing department is the most efficiently run business out there. To say that Medicare is so efficient, you ignore the cost for the IRS to collect taxes, and for Congress and other government offices to make budgets and transfer money to Medicare.

    If you want to do an apples to apples comparison, lets compare overhead costs of the insurance company's accounts payable department to Medicare. I would guarantee you that the private company will be more efficient.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 3:31 p.m.

    @happy2bhere

    I am not claiming government or the ACA is the whole solution or maybe even a significant part of it, but claiming the government is the problem, as the article does, is at best dishonest. Claiming that some how the private sector is magically going to come through on its own and be effective at this stage is preposterous

    As to my antidotal stories here are a few facts, A kaiser foundation study conducted in 2009 found there had been a 131% increase in health insurance premiums between 1999 and 2009. inflation had only grown by 28% in that same time period.

    According to a study out of Columbia University n 2008, the average profit of the 10 largest medical malpractice insurers in the U.S. was higher than 99 percent of Fortune 500 companies and 35 times higher than the Fortune 500 average for the same time period.

    As for my friends similar research shows that between 2001 and 2004 when malpractice insurance jumped and my friends lost their practices, there were no increases in payouts due to malpractice claims.

  • ConservativeCommonTater West Valley City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 3:42 p.m.

    "In Our Opinion" reflects back to the Republican Healthcare Plan..."if you get sick, DIE and do it quickly and quietly."

    Romneycare and anti-Hillarycare were Republican ideas.

    Most of all, Republicans forget about the press conference in 2009 in which Boehner, Cantor, and McConnell told the American people that they had a 4 page healthcare plan that was better than the ACA.

    "How much the Republican plan would cost and how many uninsured Americans would gain coverage remains unclear. Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said "we believe we can come up with a plan where every person in the uninsured has access to insurance."

    Blunt made clear, however, that there would not be a mandate that individuals purchase insurance or that employers offer it. He also claimed that the overall price tag would be significantly lower than Democrat's proposals.

    The four-page Republican health care outline lays out a plan that would allow states, associations and small businesses to pool together to offer health insurance. It would give tax credits to low and modest income Americans to help them buy health insurance. It would also let dependents under twenty-five stay on their parent's health insurance."

  • ConservativeCommonTater West Valley City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 4:12 p.m.

    We're still waiting for the details of the Boehner, Cantor, McConnell and Blunt healthcare plan.

    It's only been 4 years, I suppose they need more time to fine tune the details of their 4 page program.

    crickets, crickets, crickets....Boehner???? Anyone????

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Nov. 20, 2013 4:13 p.m.

    patriot,

    "....Obamacare is about bringing America into a Socialist model ..like Europe ...and wealth redistribution is the gateway to that via Obamacare...."
    ______________________________

    Just when I thought I’d heard it all, I hear that Obamacare is the gateway to wealth redistribution. I recall when years ago Republican critics made similar silly statements about Medicare.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Nov. 20, 2013 4:42 p.m.

    "When Democrats, especially the liberal kind, get power, they concentrate on trying to use government to bring about equality in America."

    Yup. Just like Republicans.

    Just like Medicare part D. Just like No Child Left Behind.

    "The big question of the day is how much do we as citizens want to be enslaved to our governments?"

    That might be the big question. But I can assure you, based on history, the answer is certainly NOT to elect Republicans. Which is what many on this board tell us daily.

  • RFLASH Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:02 p.m.

    If the government is too big, get rid of all Republicans and it will solve that problem, won't it! I say that any politician that feels so strongly about making our government smaller, should be willing to start with himself!
    So, if it were decided to downsize on a major scale, who gets to choose what stays and what goes? It isn't about big government, it is about WHO gets to control that government! Get rid of anything and everyone that has to do with the average American and keep only what is best for the very wealthy! What did we leave England for? Republicans would give everything to the few and you better believe that they will be from the upper class!
    Then we will see how much better a smaller government will be! ha Ha ha, it won't matter by then because they will be laughing at all the idiots who put them there!

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:13 p.m.

    pragmatistferlife
    salt lake city, utah
    Sorry to talk fact, but the best aspects of the ACA were proposed by Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Bill Bennett (R-UT). They were discarded by those drafting the ACA because the WH wanted the Republicans to have no credit for health care reform. This was the most partisan legislation in history with no effort to include the other side of the isle. It was only when Sen. Wyden refused to vote for the ACA that the good provisions were inserted. As the ACA's monstrous flaws become evident the Democrats are all for bipartisanship.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 5:20 p.m.

    What should we call it when the government takes money from some people to pay for the personal welfare of other people. I call that "redistribution". What do you call it? Where in the Constitution does the Federal Government have the authority to "redistribute" wealth from one person to another person? I can't find it.

    What should we think when Democrats tell us that ObamaCare is the plan that Republicans wanted when not one Republican voted for it? If ObamaCare were a Republican idea then Republicans would have supported it. Why would Democrats tell us that a bill that no Republican supported was "Republican"?

    How much waste is there in government programs? Well, let's look at two examples. Solydra lost about half a billion dollars. That was total waste. Obama made that loan when those who determine profit/loss in the government advised against it. How about the ObamaCare website? Anyone looking at the track record of the company selected to produce that web site would have seen that that company was not qualified to handle that job. Anyone care to tell us how much money will be wasted fixing that problem?

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 6:22 p.m.

    Perhaps the reason you don’t find redistribution in the Constitution is that they uses other words to give the same effect of their promise. Words like, “All men”, “equal justice”, “to the people”,

    Some people talk a lot about recycling. I suggest that they most important recycle item in our civilization is the money.

  • Owl Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 7:02 p.m.

    If the ACA is such an attractive program, why all the exemptions; unions, Congress, congressional staffers, big corporations? Only the middle class, whom the president vowed to protect, is left holding the bag.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 7:28 p.m.

    Yea 4601 and Bennett had massive Republican support for his ideas right...oh wait they voted him out because he was a RINO.

  • Phred Ogden, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:25 p.m.

    SCfan,

    Well stated. But how do you decide how much government is appropriate?

    Rather than pick percentages, what I would suggest is to go back to the constitution and identify those things that must be done on a national level based on the responsibilities given there in Article 1 Section 8. Then anything else should either be done by the state or local government, by private individuals, or not be done at all. It should be their choice.

    For example, Congress is not responsible for the insurance industry. That is why each state has an insurance commission and a single company cannot sell policies in multiple states. They can, however, set up an insurance company in each state they plan on doing business in, like Blue Cross Blue Shield of Utah, and it is subject to regulation by the Utah Insurance Commission.

  • ConservativeCommonTater West Valley City, UT
    Nov. 20, 2013 9:54 p.m.

    Mike Richards-S. Jordan

    "What should we think when Democrats tell us that ObamaCare is the plan that Republicans wanted when not one Republican voted for it? If ObamaCare were a Republican idea then Republicans would have supported it. Why would Democrats tell us that a bill that no Republican supported was "Republican"?

    Perhaps Republicans wouldn't support it because it was presented by Democrats, the leader of whom McConnell boasted that he would make (Obama) a one-term President and wouldn't vote for anything presented by Obama and the Dems. You may remember that, it was in all the papers.

    Since then, have Republicans voted anything other than NO? The Democrats are the party of "KNOW" Republicans are the party of "NO"

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Nov. 20, 2013 10:09 p.m.

    Oh, sure DN government is the problem,so let's turn control over to the Koch Brothers,the big corporations AND best of all Wall Street.

    If we keep electing people to the Congress that push this philosophy, foolishly advocated by this Newspaper, we will soon get what we deserve, a country ran for the interests of the few, no longer a democracy, but an oligarchy. It is probably already too late. But that is okay with you, is it not Deseret News?

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Nov. 20, 2013 11:11 p.m.

    As for the 4 page Republican healthcare plan:

    it doesn't do much to reduce the uninsured population. By 2019, the number of uninsured would drop by 3 million, leaving 52 million nonelderly Americans uninsured. That means 83% of legal nonelderly residents would have insurance coverage by 2019, roughly the same as it is today. The Senate Democratic bill, by contrast, would reduce the uninsured to 31 million, or 94%.

    It might reduce consumer protections. The flip side of several of the Republicans' new consumer options is a decrease in regulation. If insurance policies are sold across state lines, critics say, there could be an incentive for insurers to locate in the least-regulated states, allowing them to scale back coverage. And the Republican bill, unlike the Democratic bills, doesn't specifically bar insurers from excluding pre-existing conditions, even though that policy has broad support in both parties.
    (Politifact 2010)

    The CBO found the Republican alternative will have helped 3 million people secure coverage, which is barely keeping up with population growth. According to CBO, the GOP's alternative will shave $68 billion off the deficit while Democrats plan will slice $104 billion off the deficit over10 yrs.
    (WashingtonPost)

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 7:14 a.m.

    spring street

    Nice studies and info. You have left out some very important facts about the average American worker. Wages and salaries have either been flat or gone down. So, keeping up with the natural business increases has been harder than it would have been under normal economic circumstances. At the end of Bushs' Presidency, the economy had begun to turn sour. I blame the 2006 election of the Democrats giving Pelosi and Reid the purse strings for a lot of that. That plus Clinton Administrtion policies that forced lenders to sell houses to unqualified buyers. And we had the subsequent downturn. Now, Obama, 5 years later. No progress. But he is giving us another huge expensive government program. This was not the time to do this. Even many Democrats say Obama should have worked on the economy before trying the ACA. Obama has made this economy into a longer lasting resession that is should have been. And I don't see any light at the end of the tunnel. Only lower wages and higher taxes and expenses continuing to come our way.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    What can he do if he's playing gulf all the time.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    To "spring street" you only have half of the picture. You have not answered WHY insurance prices have increased. Luckily others have answered that question.

    Read "HEALTH INSURANCE MANDATES IN THE STATES" by CAHI. They find that 20% to 50% of the cost of insurance (PreACA) was due to government mandates.

    Also read "The True Effects of Comprehensive Coverage: Examining State Health Insurance Mandates" by the BRAC. They have a graph that shows the number of mandates rising quite fast over the past 30 years.

    As those two articles show, it is GOVERNMENT that is driving up costs.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    RE: Mike Richards "Where in the Constitution does the Federal Government have the authority to "redistribute" wealth from one person to another person? I can't find it."

    Where in the Constitution does it say "the United States will have a capitalist economic system?" I can't find it.

    Also, if you think the Feds can't get anything right you must be scared to death of flying - the FAA air traffic control system you know. Shudder!

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 11:01 a.m.

    To understand more fully the failure of Obamacare, everyone should read "Unskilled and Unaware of It" by Kruger and Dunning. Here's an excerpt from the abstract:

    "People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it."

    Read the whole thing. It is an accurate description of Barack Obama.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 21, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    " If it takes away 50%. They are enslaved to that government for half of their life and work."

    And what is it called when you require someone to pay for the benefits they actually recieve..? What percentage is just. How much is it worth to have a military that defends us from terrorist. What is it worth have a global presence strong enough that we don't end up in things like the Arab Oil Embargo again? How much is it worth of your pay to know that the medicines your doctor prescribes to you is safe, or the food in your kitchen will not harm your family? What is that worth? 5% of your pay? 10?

    Is paying for what you get "enslavement". Freedom doesn't mean everything in life should be free.

  • Turtles Run Houston, TX
    Nov. 21, 2013 12:43 p.m.

    @Mike Richards - "Where in the Constitution does the Federal Government have the authority to "redistribute" wealth from one person to another person? I can't find it."

    Are you this vocal about the amount of wealth that has flowed up to the top 1% at the expense of the middle-class? Crickets

  • Turtles Run Houston, TX
    Nov. 21, 2013 2:14 p.m.

    Whatever may be wrong with Obamacare, or for that matter Dodd-Frank, carbon regulation, the Federal budget, or other policy matters, Republicans never seem to an realize an advantage because they refuse to offer any realistic alternatives. People may be frustrated with Democratic bungling, but Democrats are at least perceived as making an effort and basing those efforts on reality.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Nov. 21, 2013 10:48 p.m.

    @Turtles Run "...basing those efforts on reality."

    Like the "reality" that a bunch of unemployed young people can afford to subsidize everyone else's health care?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 22, 2013 10:48 a.m.

    Well one thing is for certain - government at least for national health care - is CERTAINLY NOT the solution. I think that is obvious now even from all the but the most brain washed Obama folks.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Nov. 22, 2013 3:48 p.m.

    "Republicans never seem to an realize an advantage because they refuse to offer any realistic alternatives. People may be frustrated with Democratic bungling, but Democrats are at least perceived as making an effort and basing those efforts on reality."

    Or maybe Republicans do have alternatives, but you never hear about them because the Democrats control the media and want you to think that Republicans have no alternative. They have ideas. And even IF they didn't have alternatives, it is safe to say that the alternative of no Obamacare is significantly better than having Obamacare.

    Also, why does Obama threaten to veto a bill passed by Republicans that will make his promise of "you can keep your doctor" a reality? Either he was not sincere in his apology (meaning he doesn't really care about people being able to keep their doctors) or he refuses to compromise in any way. Or both reasons.

    Either way, that's a prime example of Republicans making an effort to fix the problem while the Democrats seem intent on keeping the problems ongoing.

  • MaryannT ,
    Dec. 1, 2013 1:02 a.m.

    We live in a time where the role of government is vastly misunderstood. The LESS government intervention in our lives, the better! It is not the role of government to manage every aspect of our lives or to solve all our problems. Because the federal government has been so consistent in making a mess of things, they are the LAST ones I would want dictating my health care. The government is not our "mommy," and the more we expect our leaders to take care of us, the more freedom we lose to act independently.