Several unrelated postings for this blog :
Yesterday's strong rejection of any public health option by the Senate finance committee was obviously a very welcome event. All 10 Republicans held firm(including Maine moderate Olympia Snowe), and were joined by 5 and 3 Democrats in the respective votes. In addition to the importance of the committee vote itself, I believe it prognosticates severe difficulty for passage of a public option in by the full Senate. It is notable how strongly Red state Democrats are opposed to the idea. Democratic Senators from states such as Arkansas,Florida,Louisiana,Nebraska and others have already voiced strong concerns and/or will be under intense pressure to vote against any such plan. One poll in La. for example found respondents against a government run health option by a 2:1 margin.
Tomorrow is the opening round of negotiations with Iran. It will be interesting to watch both the tone and content of the talks. I fear the Obama administration is only interested in talking tough to the press, as opposed to the Iranians. The chance of meaningful sanctions, at least at this stage seems unlikely. I hope I am wrong.
Lastly, I would like to suggest reading Maureen Dowd's piece in the Times today. Although right thinking people would ordinarily avoid her column like swine flu, today is an exception. She wrote an insightful and touching mini-memoir about William Safire. It is actually interesting to get a glimpse of an arch liberal's interaction with and estimation of one of the great conservative writers of our time.
Paul Ratzker
Friday, September 25, 2009
THE PARTY OF NO
It was disappointing to read today's front page New York Times review of their recent poll. Basically, it found that Americans are skeptical regarding Obama/Democrats health care plans. In fact, despite Obama's recent address to Congress and his appearance on five Sunday news shows this week, 55% of those surveyed feel he has not explained his plans for changing the health care system. Unfortunately, the same survey found that 76% felt Republicans in Congress have not clearly explained theirs. The Democrats and a compliant media have successfully portrayed the Republicans as the "Party of No". That is simply being in opposition to reform without any ideas of their own.
Actually, many Republican strategists and politicians have very clearly expressed well defined proposals. These have generally appeared in the Wall Street Journal, FOX News etc. Clearly these ideas have not reached the general public. I feel the best way to counteract this would be for all Republicans to articulate two to three of the following very well defined principles and challenge the Democrats to challenge why they are against them.
1. Malpractice Reform: Caps on non- economic damages have been successful in California for 35 years. Most recently, Texas demonstrated that malpractice reform very quickly leads to increased health care availability, lower premiums and greater competition. There is no need for "demonstration projects".
2. Tax breaks or credits for individuals buying health insurance: There is no reason for individuals not to have the same tax benefits that businesses do.
3. Allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines: If one can buy auto insurance in any state, why can't one purchase health insurance as well? Individual state mandates often require one to purchase coverage for such things as in vitro fertilization, chiropractic care, or even hair transplants. Obviously, many would choose to forgo these items in favor of cheaper policies. Nothing would increase the competition amongst the insurers ,something that Democrats supposedly favor,more than this.
The public best understands brief , well defined points. Republicans would be best served by simply asking why Democrats are opposed to malpractice reform that has not only clearly worked, but is also favored by the overwhelming majority of Americans. Why are they opposed to allowing individual tax breaks for health care coverage? Why are they opposed to allowing Americans to choose from any and all available policies throughout the country? In other words, make the Democrats the "Party of No".
- Paul Ratzker
Actually, many Republican strategists and politicians have very clearly expressed well defined proposals. These have generally appeared in the Wall Street Journal, FOX News etc. Clearly these ideas have not reached the general public. I feel the best way to counteract this would be for all Republicans to articulate two to three of the following very well defined principles and challenge the Democrats to challenge why they are against them.
1. Malpractice Reform: Caps on non- economic damages have been successful in California for 35 years. Most recently, Texas demonstrated that malpractice reform very quickly leads to increased health care availability, lower premiums and greater competition. There is no need for "demonstration projects".
2. Tax breaks or credits for individuals buying health insurance: There is no reason for individuals not to have the same tax benefits that businesses do.
3. Allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines: If one can buy auto insurance in any state, why can't one purchase health insurance as well? Individual state mandates often require one to purchase coverage for such things as in vitro fertilization, chiropractic care, or even hair transplants. Obviously, many would choose to forgo these items in favor of cheaper policies. Nothing would increase the competition amongst the insurers ,something that Democrats supposedly favor,more than this.
The public best understands brief , well defined points. Republicans would be best served by simply asking why Democrats are opposed to malpractice reform that has not only clearly worked, but is also favored by the overwhelming majority of Americans. Why are they opposed to allowing individual tax breaks for health care coverage? Why are they opposed to allowing Americans to choose from any and all available policies throughout the country? In other words, make the Democrats the "Party of No".
- Paul Ratzker
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Standing up to Washington is nothing new
THE TRUTH IS THAT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL, PRIME MINISTERS HAVE HAD TO SAY "NO" TO PRESIDENTS OF THE US.
IN ESSENCE THE PRES. HAD TO BACK DOWN JUST FOR A PHOTO-OP.
As was clear, he did not allow either Abbas or Bibi to speak.Had they done so, it woulkd have been clear, that they are not on the same page.
Year after year, Arabs go out of their way to screw themselves by being impractical.Why Abbas believes he will see Bibi talk about a divided Jerusalem , or stopping natural growth of settlements is beyond me.
As the new year unfolds, and we get closer to Congressional elections, this issue will fade in importance.This is especially true if the Reps pick up Va. and N.J. gubernatorial races this Nov. and unemployment stays at 10%.
By then we will know what if anything will have passed in healthcare,but it doesn't look like a major Obama victory.Tnen will come "tax and trade", and again a major battle that will take administration energy.Add this to Afghanistan, and the Pres. has a fullplate.
Today we leave for Israel until after Succoth, and my son-in-law Dr. Paul Ratzker will be blogging as his schedule permits.
Again a G'mar chatimah tovah, and a good yom tov to all
IN ESSENCE THE PRES. HAD TO BACK DOWN JUST FOR A PHOTO-OP.
As was clear, he did not allow either Abbas or Bibi to speak.Had they done so, it woulkd have been clear, that they are not on the same page.
Year after year, Arabs go out of their way to screw themselves by being impractical.Why Abbas believes he will see Bibi talk about a divided Jerusalem , or stopping natural growth of settlements is beyond me.
As the new year unfolds, and we get closer to Congressional elections, this issue will fade in importance.This is especially true if the Reps pick up Va. and N.J. gubernatorial races this Nov. and unemployment stays at 10%.
By then we will know what if anything will have passed in healthcare,but it doesn't look like a major Obama victory.Tnen will come "tax and trade", and again a major battle that will take administration energy.Add this to Afghanistan, and the Pres. has a fullplate.
Today we leave for Israel until after Succoth, and my son-in-law Dr. Paul Ratzker will be blogging as his schedule permits.
Again a G'mar chatimah tovah, and a good yom tov to all
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)