lumberjack in a desert

Posts Tagged ‘health care’

Feingold did his best to look responsible by opposing the financial reform bill to win points among voters in the upcoming election. Here is what he had to say.

Feingold’s stand has made it more difficult for his party to muster the 60 Senate votes it needs to pass what is a huge priority for the White House and frustrated some progressive groups who are his natural allies.

His position on the issue is unique in the 100-member Senate.

All the measure’s other opponents in that body are Republicans. Feingold is the only senator opposing the bill from the progressive side of the debate and the only one who is arguing that the new regulations are so timid and easy on Wall Street that passage would do more harm than good.

“It doesn’t do the job, and I’m not going to be part of basically defrauding the American people into thinking it does,” said Feingold in an interview that underscored his pointed differences with his own party on a reform package intended to prevent a repeat of the catastrophic financial meltdown of 2008.

It was all for show though, as I rightly predicted.  Much like the Democrats in Arizona begging Obama not to sue their state, Feingold is only worried about the upcoming election.  Feingold gladly voted for the $787 billion “stimulus” and the unconstitutional health care mandate.  My prediction was that Feingold could be a dissenting vote on the finance reform bill and look good for his constituents, while the two RINOs in Maine pick up the slack and help ram the bill through anyway.  Other than Scott Brown’s vote, I was right.   The bill readily passed without him, and will be signed into law next week. Meanwhile, Feingold doubles down on his campaign rhetoric as the November election gets closer.

I agree with the Journal Sentinel that the bill includes some positive consumer protections. But after listening to Wisconsinites frustrated about the prospect of future bailouts, I cannot support a bill that simply doesn’t get the job done.

I work for the people of Wisconsin, not Wall Street, and the people of Wisconsin deserve a bill that will protect them and their families from the pain of another financial crisis.

Feingold is doing his best to paint himself as a maverick who bucks the trend of the liberal Democratic Party’s  big spending, big government agenda.  But the facts of his record say otherwise.

According to the US Congress Votes Database Feingold voted with the Democratic Party 79.8 percent of 598 votes in the current congress.  Feingold is a rank-and-file Democrat according to GovTrack’s own analysis of bill sponsorship.

What about campaign contributions? He’s a man of the people who bucks the liberal trend of being in the pocket of corrupt union influence, stays away from the influence of greedy lawyers, and whose voting on health care is not determined by campaign contributions, right?  Well, no.

Top 20 Feingold Contributors

Nearly all of his contributions come from unions, lawyers, and health care industries.  Feingold is no different than Pelosi, Reid, and Obama. Its time to give this career politician the boot this November.

Update

I’ve had a couple people comment on the large number of contributions from the University of Wisconsin.  First, you need to remember that nationwide roughly 72% of college professors identify themselves as liberal (shocking, I know) while  only 15% identify as conservative. You also need to know a little something about Madison, WI (home of the largest UW school in the system).  Madison is such a large liberal stronghold, that around the rest of the state it’s commonly referred to as “The People’s Republic of Madison,” also commonly known as “78 square miles surrounded by the real world.”

I think this clip from Ghostbusters pretty much sums things up.

As proof that the last post wasn’t a joke, I offer the latest news out of the American Legion.

WASHINGTON, DC (March 16, 2009) – The leader of the nation’s largest veterans organization says he is “deeply disappointed and concerned” after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.

“It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,” said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. “He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.”

The Commander, clearly angered as he emerged from the session said, “This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ‘… to care for him who shall have borne the battle…’ given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm’s way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America’s veterans!”

Commander Rehbein was among a group of senior officials from veterans service organizations joining the President, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and Steven Kosiak, the overseer of defense spending at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The group’s early afternoon conversation at The White House was precipitated by a letter of protest presented to the President earlier this month. The letter, co-signed by Commander Rehbein and the heads of ten colleague organizations, read, in part, “ There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran’s personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable.”

Commander Rehbein reiterated points made last week in testimony to both House and Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committees. It was stated then that The American Legion believes that the reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate that VA treat service-connected injuries and disabilities given that the United States government sends members of the armed forces into harm’s way, and not private insurance companies. The proposed requirement for these companies to reimburse the VA would not only be unfair, says the Legion, but would have an adverse impact on service-connected disabled veterans and their families. The Legion argues that, depending on the severity of the medical conditions involved, maximum insurance coverage limits could be reached through treatment of the veteran’s condition alone. That would leave the rest of the family without health care benefits. The Legion also points out that many health insurance companies require deductibles to be paid before any benefits are covered. Additionally, the Legion is concerned that private insurance premiums would be elevated to cover service-connected disabled veterans and their families, especially if the veterans are self-employed or employed in small businesses unable to negotiate more favorable across-the-board insurance policy pricing. The American Legion also believes that some employers, especially small businesses, would be reluctant to hire veterans with service-connected disabilities due to the negative impact their employment might have on obtaining and financing company health care benefits.

“I got the distinct impression that the only hope of this plan not being enacted,” said Commander Rehbein, “is for an alternative plan to be developed that would generate the desired $540-million in revenue. The American Legion has long advocated for Medicare reimbursement to VA for the treatment of veterans. This, we believe, would more easily meet the President’s financial goal. We will present that idea in an anticipated conference call with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel in the near future.

“I only hope the administration will really listen to us then. This matter has far more serious ramifications than the President is imagining,” concluded the Commander.

Hey Obama, you want to find a way to save $540 million? Here, I’ll save you the time:

How about the 8570 earmarks worth $7.7 billion in the 2009 omnibus bill passed last week? Thats enough to cover the cost more than 14 times.
Instead of flying around Queen Pelosi in her own private Air Force Jet at the cost of millions to US taxpayers, make her fly on a commerical airline. Not only will it help an ailing industry and in turn insure Americans jobs, but it will free up military resources for far more important issues.

They’re all up in arms over the 165 million in bonuses for AIG execs, but what about the $630,000 AIG employees gave to politicians in 2008? Obama collected a total of $130,000 from AIG in 2008, while McCain accepted a total of $59,499. Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., the guy chairing today’s AIG hearing, received $12,000 in AIG contributions during the 2008 political cycle. Want the list?  Here you go.

1. Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., $103,100
2. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., $101,332
3. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., $59,499
4. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., $35,965
5. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., $24,750
6. Former Gov. Mitt Romney, (R) Pres $20,850
7. Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., $19,975
8. Rep. John Larson, D-Conn, $19,750
9. Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., $18,500
10. Former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (R) Pres $13,200
11. Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., $12,000
12. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., $11,000

Imagine how many Veterans that money could help.

Hate is a very strong word, and I really do not like using it. But I’ll be honest, I am really, REALLY starting to hate Obama. What next? Back billing me for the medical care I received at Walter Reed? The surgeries in Germany? The medivac in Baghdad?

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance.

Lawmakers say they’d reject a proposal to make veterans pay for treatment of war wounds with private insurance.

But the proposal would be “dead on arrival” if it’s sent to Congress, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, said.

Murray used that blunt terminology when she told Shinseki that the idea would not be acceptable and would be rejected if formally proposed. Her remarks came during a hearing before the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs about the 2010 budget.

No official proposal to create such a program has been announced publicly, but veterans groups wrote a pre-emptive letter last week to President Obama voicing their opposition to the idea after hearing the plan was under consideration.

The groups also cited an increase in “third-party collections” estimated in the 2010 budget proposal — something they said could be achieved only if the Veterans Administration started billing for service-related injuries.

Asked about the proposal, Shinseki said it was under “consideration.”

“A final decision hasn’t been made yet,” he said.

Currently, veterans’ private insurance is charged only when they receive health care from the VA for medical issues that are not related to service injuries, like getting the flu.

Charging for service-related injuries would violate “a sacred trust,” Veterans of Foreign Wars spokesman Joe Davis said. Davis said the move would risk private health care for veterans and their families by potentially maxing out benefits paying for costly war injury treatments.

If you are one of the Kool-Aid drinking Obama lovers, and think what he is trying to do is the right thing, please come over to my house. I’ll even give you my address. I would like to have a word with you about the real cost of freedom.