An impending battle: Obama’s second trillion for healthcare
Later today, the President will announce his plan to spend $634 billion to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system over the next decade. Most experts predict that the plan will eventually cost $1 trillion or more.
“We must also address the crushing cost of health care,” said Obama in his speech last night before a joint session of Congress. “This is a cost that now causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds. By the end of the year, it could cause 1.5 million Americans to lose their homes. In the last eight years, premiums have grown four times faster than wages. And in each of these years, 1 million more Americans have lost their health insurance.”
“We can no longer afford to put health care reform on hold.”
Robert Pear of the New York Times reports that from 2000 to 2008, the average annual premium for family coverage nearly doubled. Statistics, he reports, support the President’s claim that premiums have grown about four times as fast as wages. Today around 45 to 47 million Americans are uninsured.
How will the President pay for his universal healthcare system? The wealthiest Americans will be taxed at a higher rate, according to administration officials on Wednesday. Obama will allow Bush’s tax reductions for households earning more than $250,000 to expire. He will also place stricter limits on the benefits of itemized deductions. Additionally, the President seeks to use revenues from his environmental policy, which will require companies to buy permits when exceeding pollution emission levels. Ultimately, Obama hopes that corporations and Americans earning more than $250,000 will help fund the nearly trillion dollars for his healthcare plan.
Will the President’s plan work?
As in the 1990s, the President is bound to draw a fight from fiscal conservatives. Critics will argue that the economy will be even more stifled if the wealthiest Americans are taxed at a higher rate. For supporters of “trickle-down economics,” Obama’s plan is a step in the wrong direction.
“The size of the gamble that President Obama is taking every day is simply staggering,” writes David S. Broder of The Salt Lake Tribune.
Should the U.S. adopt some type of universal health care system? If yes, are there alternatives that should be considered? Could America afford a universal health care system? How difficult would it be to keep government from growing if government provides both health care and retirement? In the future, would we be able to reduce the size of government bureaucracy? Lastly, would a universal health care program be a type of welfare system and cause millions of Americans to become government dependents?
Im a Democrat and I think that if the Republican Party wants to become the New Republicans (no pun intended) they should bring Mitt Romney in here to salvage the party. Michael Steele was a race card move (yes Im an African american by the way just so you know) and Bobby Jindal is a young Indian. I say keep the white guy up front (this is not a racist statement) who has a keen business sense and has a fresh young face. THEN ease these other people in. Forget the Mormon nonsense Romney would have been a fresh face. I LOVE Huckabee he could have helped swing the religious right everyones way and I think he is an honest guy. Romney could help change the economy with his knowledge. Im all for universal health care as long as people can keep the health plans they want if they can afford them.
By all accounts Michael Steele is outspoken and conservative so why not give him the job? I would rather judge him on job performance than race. I agree that Mitt Romney is a good spokesman for the Republican party but really it has nothing to do with race or religion. He is articulate and an accomplished businessman.
I don’t understand what the comment about Bobby Jindal being a young Indian has to do with anything. Why does race play into this at all? The reason conservatives love him is because he can articulate conservative principles and when he was elected in LA he stayed true to what he promised. By the way, that is why so many love Sarah Palin. We are tired of empty promises and people who bend to political pressure when they get to DC. The good thing is we don’t have to choose between them yet. We need all their voices to be heard.
Former nurse here. Back years ago, people did not go without access to health care. If you were poor, you received pretty much free care at the teaching or “city” hospitals. People who could afford to pay, or had good health insurance, did not routinely go to the teaching hospitals for their care. At the teaching hospitals, you might have to wait for your care, and you might have a student delivering some of that care. Having only lived in bigger cities, I’m not sure how rural areas handled this, but typically the people that would use a city hospital–lived in the city. It might not have been perfect, but it was health care and it was “free.” I thought this system worked well.
Health insurance is a problem. Insurance companies cherry pick their customers, and are often very selective about what they will cover. I think they should be allowed to charge enough to stay viable, but pocketing huge profits is wrong, in this sector. Ditto for the drug companies.
Free health care for all is a nice thought, but it’s not really free when my taxes approach the 50% or more rate.
Colleen, thank you for your honest. However, as a Republican I reject the idea of “packaging.” We must run on concisely express ideas and principles and not on popularity.
Michael Steele earned his position because of the aforementioned ideals. He also endured closer scrutiny in his brief run than O did in his 2yr national run. He withstood the test as a qualified non-white person, and I gladly welcome him.
Mitt wasn’t mormon enough. Aspects of his conservatism were found only a short time before his national run. Had he remained true to his faith, I think he would have been more successful.
Huckabee’s evangilism was openly criticized more than color or mormonism. Hot Air in particular allowed people to post rancorous remarks. Therefore, I believe that Evangelicals-thanks in part to individuals such as Pat Robertson-actually have the highest bar to cross. This is important as Evangelicals are terribly prone to letting their hearts get in the way of their heads. That said, Huckabee and Romney would have both been stronger candidates than McCain IMHO.
Leave a comment!
Latest Video
Recent Events
View more photos >
Connect On
Subscribe
© 2009 The New Republicans. All rights reserved. By using this site, you accept our Terms of Use.