The government option = single payer
This is the only conclusion one can reach when we listen to Democrats speak about their intent. The following video has a few more Democrats than the one I posted previously.
Ed Morrissey drives the point home:
…they really do want a complete government takeover of the health-care system. ObamaCare is just the means by which they plan to accomplish it.
That being the case, there is no reason to use their focus group tested formulation or trust them when they try another friendly term such as co-ops. More information here about co-ops as envisioned by Democrats/liberals.
Besides their ultimate objective with a government option, the intentionally convoluted language of the current bills will create an explosion in regulation and a nightmare of paperwork that everyone will have to navigate as explained by DrRich (be sure to read it all):
It is complexity for complexity’s sake. When one parses out all the legalese, cross-references, and unnecessarily tortuous syntax, one is often (if not in each and every case) left with nothing concrete. To a great extent, the meanings of large sections of HR 3200 are not merely difficult to ascertain, but are fundamentally indeterminate. It has no definite meaning. It is designed for ambiguity.
This is legislation designed to create a legal framework under which huge cadres of unelected, politically-appointed policy mavens and bureaucrats will determine - by publishing hundreds of thousands of pages of regulations, rules, and guidelines - what our new healthcare system will look like. And until those regulations and guidelines are actually created - and this “creation” will be a never-ending process rather than an act - anybody claiming to know the precise nature of our new healthcare system under HR 3200 is engaging in one of the following: lying, projecting one’s own wishful thinking, or extrapolating on the perceived behaviors and beliefs of those who (one surmises) will finally get to make up all the rules. (source)
Nat Hentoff references a similar take in his editorial I am finally scared of a White House administration (thanks to HotAir headlines):
excerpt:
As more Americans became increasingly troubled by this and other fearful elements of Dr. Obama's cost-efficient health care regimen, Smith adds this vital advice, no matter what legislation Obama finally signs into law:
"Remember that legislation itself is only half the problem with Obamacare. Whatever bill passes, hundreds of bureaucrats in the federal agencies will have years to promulgate scores of regulations to govern the details of the law.
"This is where the real mischief could be done because most regulatory actions are effectuated beneath the public radar. It is thus essential, as just one example, that any end-of-life counseling provision in the final bill be specified to be purely voluntary … and that the counseling be required by law to be neutral as to outcome. Otherwise, even if the legislation doesn't push in a specific direction — for instance, THE GOVERNMENT REFUSING TREATMENT — the regulations could." (Emphasis added.)
It has become clear why Obama wanted this rushed through before the August recess. For someone who claims to desire talking and bipartisanship, he sure doesn’t like giving enough time to do so in an informed manner. Now that we’ve had the opportunity to see what was actually being shoved down our throats, it is no wonder Obama was a bit miffed and said the time for talking is through.
---
Filed Under: Politics -- Obama -- Healthcare_reform
Author: Mark K. Sprengel | 12:18:00 PM |
|
| 
Save To ~ Social Bookmarks | My Bookstore |
