RSS Feed MenuSouth Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint has had some bad innings over the past weeks, but this Thursday press release from his office shows that the senator has at last found exactly the right tone on the healthcare debate. The Republican party is not fighting nationalized medicine in order to beat President Obama. It’s fighting nationalized medicine because Republicans know that choice and competition will deliver better care at lower prices.
DeMint: Americans are Beginning to Win the Health Care Debate
Says now is the time to work on common sense solutions
U.S. Sen. DeMint (R-South Carolina), chairman of the Senate Steering Committee, made the following statement today after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-California) announced that the Senate and House will not vote on President Obama’s health care takeover bill before the August recess.
“Americans are making their voices heard and beginning to win the health care debate for true reform, not a government takeover,” said Senator DeMint. “No one should be forced into a one-size-fits-all government plan that lets bureaucrats tell seniors what pills they can take or tells moms and dads what procedures their child can have. Americans are calling our offices with a simple message: ‘keep your hands off my health care.’ That’s why I have introduced the Health Care Freedom Plan that allows every American to own a health care plan they control and keep the plan they have if they like it.”
Senator DeMint is the author of the Health Care Freedom Plan, which provides all Americans with access to vouchers to get personal health insurance. The plan also allows Americans to access more affordable health coverage across state lines and limits frivolous medical lawsuits.
“There are serious problems with health care today and now is the time to work on common sense solutions that reduce the cost of health insurance and make it available to every American. I will continue to fight for health care freedom and true reform – and against any government takeover – so that all Americans can have guaranteed access to a personal health plan that they can afford, own, and keep, forever.”
“I am very pleased my Democrat colleagues have now rejected the President’s strategy to force through a bad bill before anyone has had a chance to even read it,” said Senator DeMint. “Americans can win this debate but they are going to have to continue speaking out. They know the promises the President has made do not match up with the policies he is pushing. Over the August break, they need to connect with their Congressmen and Senators and let know that Washington shouldn’t make their families’ health care decisions.”
ottovbvs // Jul 25, 2009 at 10:31 am
………So now it’s no longer about breaking this petit Bounaparte on the field of Waterloo…..it’s maintaing the status quo which is working so well……..tell it to the marines David
sinz54 // Jul 25, 2009 at 10:48 am
A google search for “Obama Waterloo” yielded 910,000 hits.
Sen. DeMint’s earlier comment that “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him,” has been widely reported on the blogosphere and even the foreign press. So was Obama’s comment to the Blue Dog Dems that if they succeed in stopping ObamaCare, “it will destroy my presidency.”
And you know something? There’s nothing wrong with that. If you oppose Obama, and you find a battle that can defeat his administration, you go for it. That’s politics.
Those really are the stakes. Especially now that the Senate has delayed work on health care till the fall–and the 2010 elections start to loom. Those Blue Dogs don’t want to campaign in their relatively conservative districts with an ultra-liberal health care plan that does nothing about cost containment.
As for Senator DeMint’s “Health Care Freedom Plan,” my challenge still stands: Have the Congressional Budget Office review it and score it. I’ll bet my rent money that it will do nothing to reduce costs either.
By the way, I wish those Republicans who advocate buying coverage across state lines (without any government regulation, of course) would realize how this collides with managed care networks. For example, suppose I, a resident of Massachusetts, had bought HMO or PPO coverage from Harvard-Pilgrim Health. Harvard-Pilgrim is a very good plan. But all the doctors in its network are in New England. How does that help someone from Ohio or California who wants coverage. Furthermore, suppose I move to another part of the country, say Florida. I can’t keep my Harvard-Pilgrim plan, because they don’t have any Florida doctors in their network.
Republicans, including McCain, never seem to realize that this is a problem.
Washington Planner » Weekend Required Reading // Jul 25, 2009 at 1:37 pm
[...] Frum reports that Jim DeMint found exactly the right tone on the health care [...]
ottovbvs // Jul 25, 2009 at 1:42 pm
sinz54 // Jul 25, 2009 at 10:48 am
“And you know something? There’s nothing wrong with that. If you oppose Obama, and you find a battle that can defeat his administration, you go for it. That’s politics.”
………Just as long as we know it’s politics……nothing to do with the public good or the national interest……I’m afraid DeMint and the Republicans motives are fairly clear and this little press release isn’t going change that perception
txanne // Jul 25, 2009 at 2:39 pm
I would call it damage control.
sinz54 // Jul 25, 2009 at 3:22 pm
ottovbs: DeMint isn’t trying to stop Obama because he hates him personally. He’s trying to stop Obama because he believes Obama’s proposals are wrong for the nation.
And at least DeMint isn’t trying to smear Obama personally. He’s engaged Obama on the issues, which is as good as it gets in politics these days.
ottovbvs // Jul 25, 2009 at 6:35 pm
sinz54 // Jul 25, 2009 at 3:22 pm
“ottovbs: DeMint isn’t trying to stop Obama because he hates him personally. ”
………….unlike someone we know…….and how would you know that btw?
Chekote // Jul 26, 2009 at 8:38 am
DeMint’s Waterloo comment was dumb. Non-partisans, non-ideological Americans are looking for solutions not partisan games. Attacking Obama personally, attacking Obama’s policies for the sole purpose of scoring political points is a loser for the GOP. They should focus on attacking the merits of Obama’s legislative agenda AND provide solutions.
LJS // Jul 26, 2009 at 10:09 am
“Republicans know that choice and competition will deliver better care at lower prices.”
I’m confused, this is what we had for at least 20 years, it has not worked. My small business of 20 years is getting killed by health care. Every year its up 20% or 30%.
Why should we think the republicans have the answers, they had 6 years of complete republican control, they did nothing, not one thing to help control the cost.
Why should we trust them now? Where were they the previous 8 years? Now they are only because they are forced are they addressing the issue, & I still do not know what they are proposing?
I am an independent who continually finds my self more & more disgusted with the righteous do nothing Republican party.
I’m not sure what Obama’s plan is yet, I’m not even sure he does, but it is at least a recognition of and attempt to fix a problem!
In my book that alone puts it way ahead of what the Republicans are doing.
ottovbvs // Jul 26, 2009 at 10:29 am
LJS // Jul 26, 2009 at 10:09 am
” I’m confused, this is what we had for at least 20 years, it has not worked. My small business of 20 years is getting killed by health care. Every year its up 20% or 30%.”
………..Basically because the healthcare industry is set up as a “for profit enterprise”……..This is the dichotomy that lies at the heart of the health insurance industry which basically exists for their health not yours………unfortunately a large segment of the right who are just as at the mercy of industry as anyone else are essentially being mugged by their ideology…….I’ve bought, or signed off on, health insurance for as many as 3000 people……..our increases apart from a couple of years in the mid 90’s averaged around 10%……….If you remember that a typical family plan costs around $13,500 that means that a big company with say 50.000 employees is paying hundreds of millions in premiums……it is totally unsustainable……it’s estimated the current $2.4 trillion a year is going to be $4.3 trillion in 9 years time………it’s like a train coming towards you and basically the Republicans just want the industry gravy train to keep running…….DeMint with all his talk of Waterloo’s and breaking the president is what passes for statesmanship in today’s Republican party.
sinz54 // Jul 26, 2009 at 11:10 am
ottovbvs sez: “I’ve bought, or signed off on, health insurance for as many as 3000 people……..our increases apart from a couple of years in the mid 90’s averaged around 10%”
But if you asked any of your employees to show you their medical bills, you would have found that the cost of care was also increasing sharply. It’s not that the insurers are making a higher and higher profit margin for themselves. It’s that health care just costs more–the providers are charging more and more.
It’s not that doctors are getting richer and richer, or that hospital endowments are getting larger and larger.
It’s that new treatments and new technologies are extending life–but are not providing the economies of scale to drive down costs.
Health care costs a lot more, in real dollars, than it did in 1950. But you’re getting a lot more too. In 1950, I would probably have died of my illness within a year or two after diagnosis. Senator Fred Thompson’s lymphoma would have killed him too. Today, both of our conditions are treatable–and we can live quite a while with them. But the treatment is expensive–it’s costing Thompson $100,000 a year to treat his lymphoma, and it’s costing me $70,000 a year to treat my kidney failure. In 1950, the “inexpensive” alternative was: Death.
One of the reasons why the life span of Americans (despite obesity and sedentary lifestyles) has continued to increase, is that we’re paying for it.
I think you will find that while health care costs less in absolute dollars in other Western nations, the rate of increase of health care costs is troubling there as well. And there, they are responding with rationing–denying certain treatments to the elderly and so on.
Americans won’t tolerate rationing by the government. We want the absolute best care that money can buy, to extend our lifespan by even a few days.
ottovbvs // Jul 26, 2009 at 11:33 am
11 sinz54 // Jul 26, 2009 at 11:10 am
“that the cost of care was also increasing sharply. It’s not that the insurers are making a higher and higher profit margin for themselves. It’s that health care just costs more–the providers are charging more and more.”
………No one disputes that the major problem is the increasing cost of the provision of care……I’ve said it here numerous times………Nonetheless the health insurance business is highly lucrative and makes it’s money by charging the maximum amount it can in premiums and paying out the minimum in claims which are in insurance company lingo “losses”
“I think you will find that while health care costs less in absolute dollars in other Western nations, the rate of increase of health care costs is troubling there as well. And there, they are responding with rationing–denying certain treatments to the elderly and so on.”
………….US costs are in round terms are twice those of western Europe both per capita and as a percentage of GDP………..You must know this so I’ll be polite and say you spinning……..You are also peddling deliberate falsehoods about denying treatments to the elderly…….cases in point from my own experience……mother in law 86 had hip replacement about two year ago and receives constant outpatient treatment for minor ailments……..wife’s aunt 96 in and out of hospital every five minutes for various health problems…..no charge of any kind whatever for any of it
Chekote // Jul 26, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Basically because the healthcare industry is set up as a “for profit enterprise”……..
And that is wrong, why? The food industry is also a for profit enterprise. I mean we need food more than healthcare since without it, you won’t live very long. The reality is that the profit motivation has been instrumental in the development of new drugs and treatments. The problem with costs has to do with 1) litigation and 2) people who don’t pay or low reinbursements by Medicare and Medicaid. Any real solution has to address those two root causes.
ottovbvs // Jul 26, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Chekote // Jul 26, 2009 at 12:49 pm
“And that is wrong, why? The food industry is also a for profit enterprise.”
………..Nothing whatever just as long as you recognize that they are operating principally for their benefit and not yours and that very often this conflicts with the wider public good…….the comparison with food industry is totally fatuous I’m afraid because with food you can choose how much of it you want and the product is very cheap…….neither is true of healthcare ………Nor do you know too much about root causes…….. Malpractice insurance and settlements account for no more than 1% of the annual cost of US healthcare……….Low Medicare reimbursements are a root cause of the industry’s cost problem?????……really
Thinwhistle // Jul 26, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Interesting use of the phrase “play the game” says it all about the Republican view. For Republicans, this issue is a “game” in which the goal is to stop Obama. For tens of millions of Americans, this is no game: this is the single biggest domestic problem this country faces.
DeMint’s comments are, to me, despicable, and all the more reason why Democrats who attempt to work with Republicans on this issue are engaged in a fool’s errand. These are not two parties who simply share different ideas about reform. There is one party that views the current situation as a crisis in need of reform; and there is another party who does not. Republicans don’t care about universal coverage (until they lose their healthcare and get sick…).
Obama’s biggest mistake is to even try to have a bipartisan discussion on this issue. You are dealing with an opposition party, characterized by evil people like Senator DeMint, whose sole purpose is to kill each and every reform measure. If you disagree, then tell me, where is the Republican plan to reform healthcare to bring about universal access? We didn’t see it 16 years ago, and we didn’t see it during the 8 disastrous Bush years when Republicans (who had no trouble chucking bipartisanship to ram their agenda through) did absolutely nothing on this issue. Stop pretending that you care about this issue. You are satisfied with what you have, and you are too selfish to care about those less fortunate. At least have the courage to admit the truth instead of hiding behind false (and grossly overdue) concerns about the deficit.
ottovbvs // Jul 26, 2009 at 5:49 pm
15 thinwhistle // Jul 26, 2009 at 3:52 pm
” Interesting use of the phrase “play the game” says it all about the Republican view.”
…………..You have to remember the last time Republicans really used to think, and it was a requirement to have at least an inkling of what you were talking about, was back in the days of George Bush senior………..when I watch the Republican leadership on this issue from senators like DeMint to people like Steele it’s quite clear they either know next to nothing about the problem (Steele is pathetic) or they are just spinning and obstructing.
“Obama’s biggest mistake is to even try to have a bipartisan discussion on this issue.”
…………..Actually I don’t agree with you on several counts……Firstly, particularly in the senate you can’t just shut the Republicans out of the process. Secondly what’s he got to lose by making the effort, he looks like he’s making an effort to be bipartisan while the longer this plays out the more it becomes apparent to everyone that for Republicans ultimately this is about “breaking Obama.”….. Finally, when we move out of this phase he ultimately has the votes to pass this on reconciliation if he has to and he’ll have an entirely plausible story to justify that approach……… Most of the posters here from the right have no idea how the process works……you can tell from their comments ……provided he can go into conference with five bills that contain all his key needs he can assemble a bill to his liking that can ultimately pass on recon……Republicans and the media keep getting excited everytime these bills hit some problems in committee but they were always going to hit these problems, did anyone think this was going to be easy……..Obama’s strategy is actually most demoralizing for his strong partisans because in the good old American way they want instant gratification(and most of them are bit shaky on process too)……..Ultimately there’s going to be a bill, it will contain 95% of what Obama wants and if it gets minimal Republican support he’ll look like a hero and if it get none he’ll get the credit for having tried and the Republicans will look like bunch of a@#@holes……..ultimately it’s win win for president.
sdspringy // Jul 26, 2009 at 7:49 pm
The Dems can, without a single Rep. vote pass any healthcare legislation they want. Otto can’t count.
The only thing preventing legislation right now in other Dems. Rep have absolutely nothing to do with preventing legislation at this time. The Dems have the majority in the House and a filibuster proof Senate. So if healthcare legislation goes down, it falls exclusively on the Dem, (jacka$$) party.
Also Otto reference to medical procedures preformed 2 years age have absolutely nothing to do with the current debate. Under current legislation being considered those decisions will include the new czar. The proposed cost savings from Medicare/Med. will come from some source, that being denial, rationing, or government requirement of reduce reimbursement. If reduced reimbursement is used the cost roll back to me and you.
anniemargret // Jul 26, 2009 at 9:45 pm
Our elected officials are *supposed* to be working for the ‘common good.’ They are *supposed* to be public servants. You are absolutely correct, ‘thinwhistle’ : “… Interesting use of the phrase “play the game” says it all about the Republican view. For Republicans, this issue is a “game” in which the goal is to stop Obama.” Spot on. They’re playing political games with people’s lives. For 8 years, they sat on their behinds and wouldn’t touch it with a 10′ pole. As Ralph Nader says, those with the ‘gold-plated insurance’ are the ones protesting the most. Either they ought to step up to the plate and work with the Democrats on this vitally important issue, or they ought to just admit at the outset that they don’t give a R.A. Or as that ‘honorable’ Senator Grassley recently told a citizen when asked if he could get health care as good as he does, replied, “…just get a job with the federal government.’ Arrogant as hell. But doesn’t that pretty much sum up the GOP on this issue?
sinz54 // Jul 27, 2009 at 9:18 am
thinwhistle asks: “If you disagree, then tell me, where is the Republican plan to reform healthcare to bring about universal access?”
The lack of universal access is NOT the “crisis” in health care.
The TRUE crisis in health care, as polls show the public knows, is rising costs. The cost of health care has been rising faster than inflation, and consuming a greater and greater portion of GDP.
The problem with you liberals is that you just want universal coverage, cost be damned. And that’s why your liberals in Congress are coming up with a plan for universal coverage that INCREASES costs to the nation by a trillion dollars.
All the polls, Gallup, Rasmussen, etc., show that the majority of Americans consider cost containment to be the higher priority.
Even the diarists on DailyKOS are now admitting that they made a serious mistake in trying to sell universal coverage without first dealing with cost containment.
sinz54 // Jul 27, 2009 at 9:20 am
thinwhistle: Until you can get a plan together that the CBO scores as actually controlling rising costs, you have no argument.
Remember: The 80% of Americans who have private insurance now don’t give a hoot whether the 20% don’t. What they do care about, is rapidly rising premiums, co-pays, and deductibles, for THEMSELVES.
sinz54 // Jul 27, 2009 at 9:21 am
aniem
sinz54 // Jul 27, 2009 at 9:23 am
anniemargaret sez: “As Ralph Nader says, those with the ‘gold-plated insurance’ are the ones protesting the most.”
That includes many unions, in case you hadn’t noticed.
Unions like the UAW had negotiated contracts in which the UAW agreed to major give-backs in wages, in exchange for a commitment from management that their generous health care benefits would remain untouched. The UAW’s health care benefits package is among the most generous in the nation.
Now they hear Congress making noises about taxing “overly” generous health care benefits, effectively reducing the after-tax benefits those unions get. They might well consider that a breach of contract–and a breach of the promises Obama made to those unions.
Oneon1isto // Jul 27, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Sinz: You mention (correctly) Obama’s starting to tick off unions by suggesting health care benefits be taxed, since that’s (in a really warped way) taxable lack-of-expense meaning income. Or something like that.
I actually think that means he’s heading in the right direction. The healthcare conundrum is going to require sacrifices across the board. If Obama’s plan manages to piss everyone off, I think we have ourselves the right plan!
A side note: Ya’ll are going to call me out as a hippie, but I bet if we just legalized marijuana, we could tax the heck out of it and just pay for our reform. Sin-tax to the rescue!
sinz54 // Jul 27, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Oneon1isto: I’ve been in favor of decriminalization of marijuana for a very long time.
So was William F. Buckley.