The Daily Citizen, Dalton, GA

Opinion

Discussion

Welcome to our online comments feature. To join the discussion, you must first register with Disqus and verify your email address. Once you do, your comments will post automatically. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including unpopular ones. We ask only that you keep the conversation civil and clean. We reserve the right to remove comments that are obscene, racist or abusive and statements that are false or unverifiable. Repeat offenders will be blocked. You may flag objectionable comments for review by a moderator.
comments powered by Disqus
March 16, 2010

History is bound to repeat itself

Dalton Daily Citizen

DALTON — Robert M. Ball, a former commissioner of Social Security under Presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon, said, “Medicare was created because the elderly had difficulty securing affordable private insurance coverage.” Wow, how ironic that this is the same message Congress and our president are trying to make, just substitute “uninsured” for elderly. What is this government thinking? Have they learned nothing from the failure of Medicare. Yes, we said failure. No sane person would classify a business model that creates debts so large that they are unsustainable and will bankrupt the very group that funds the business as a success.

According to many studies that looked at funding for a wide range of groups, no matter what the wage level, marital status or retirement date, a man or woman can expect to receive benefits that will cost the system far more than the taxes he or she paid into the system. That is a failure. Richard W. Fisher, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, has remarked that in order to “cover the unfunded liability” for the Medicare program today over an infinite time horizon, “you would be stuck with an $85.6 trillion bill” which is “more than six times the annual output of the entire U.S. economy.”

The idea that this government body will ignore the history and financial failure that is Medicare and the will of the people — with all major polls showing this country does not want this bill passed — and will try and force it through on a purely partisan vote with a bunch of payoffs and kickbacks just proves how bad this legislation has become. We would like to see some measured form of health care reform, but nothing on a national scale. Let the states decide based on a basic national formula of minimum benefits that must be made available by each state. What works best for the citizens of Georgia probably is not a system that fits the needs of Rhode Island or Hawaii. If a state chooses to fund a system that is more comprehensive than other states or its citizens only want a minimum plan with low costs that is less intrusive, then the free will of the U.S. citizen will determine where they want to live and pay taxes.

Ask California and New Jersey what is going on in their states, where people are revolting and leaving to escape a state government that has overstepped its authority in their view. We can stop being Georgians and move and become Virginians if that is a better place to live with the benefits we want, but it is not reasonable for Americans to stop being Americans because our national government fails us.  

A few troubling issues in the health care bill

Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson points to a number of flaws with the Senate health care bill. Here are just a few that caught our eye:

• For his “yes” vote on health care, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., got a provision inserted that guarantees the federal government will pick up his home state’s costs to expand Medicaid. No other state gets that special treatment.

• The bill says that firms with fewer than 50 workers in every industry but one will be exempt from fines for not providing health insurance. That one industry is construction, where firms with as few as five workers would be subject to tax penalties. Unemployment in the construction industry currently tops 27 percent. By making it more expensive to hire workers, the bill would just drive that rate higher.

• The bill would create a new board of unelected bureaucrats to determine how Medicare spending could be cut.

 

Text Only
Opinion