House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has regained her confidence for passing health care reform. In a recent statement, Speaker Pelosi insisted that democrats would keep trying different strategies in order to pass health care reform.
Although certain aspects of health care reform have yet to be settled between the House and the Senate, Pelosi assured the public, "That doesn't mean that is a substitute for doing comprehensive. It means we will move on many fronts, any front we can.
The Speaker's newfound confidence in passing health care in the future stands in contrast with her earlier statements after the election of Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate. At that time, Speaker Pelosi admitted that democrats simply did not have enough votes in the Senate to pass health care for the time being.
Now, however, Speaker Pelosi appears confident that they will find a strategy for passing health care reform. "We will go through the gate," the Speaker stated. "If the gate is closed, we will go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we will pole vault in. If that doesn't work, we will parachute in. But we are going to get health care reform passed for the American people for their own personal health and economic security and for the important role that it will play in reducing the deficit."
For more information, please visit:
Pelosi: Pole vaults and parachutes
Do Health Care Reform Supporters Have New Reason to Hope?
Pelosi Says She'll 'Poll Vault' Obamacare Through Congress
Jock Pelosi Says She'll "Pole Vault" Obamacare Through Congress (Video)
We'll Pole Vault In" for Health Care Passage
Comments
Sounds just like the illegals that California is flooded with. Came through the gate, or over the fence, or poll vaulted.
This is getting ridiculous. SEAT SCOTT BROWN NOW!!!!!!
TELL NANCY TO PACK IT UP. IM NOT PAYIN FOR SOMEBODY ELSE,S HEALTHCARE. IF SHE THINKS ITS SO GOOD HOW COME SHE DOSENT PARTICIPATE IN THIS HEALTH CARE PLAN? SHE THINKS SHE IS SPECIAL, AND THE REST OF US GET A WAIT IN LINE PLAN. DIRTY SOCIALIST.PULL UP THE LADDER IM ABOARD! THE HELL WITH YOU TAX PAYERS, YOUR STUPID FOR PAYING THEM ANYWAY! I GOT MINE! MAY YOU ROT IN HELL FOR BACKING SUCH A PLAN. YOU WILL SET HEALTHCARE BACK 200 YRS! GEORGE GABRIEL
you try to pole vault over Pelosi we willl kick the pole out from under you! You will not succeed!
SOCIALIZED HEALTH CARE DOES NOT WORK!
THE TIME HAS COME,VOTE NANCY PELOSI OUT!!!
Socialism can work. Examples: The public library and public college are socialist institutions. Economies can thrive and prosper with big government and some socialism. The US was greater when it had higher tax rates during and after WWII (70-91% top rate) until the 1970s Fed screwed up. The largest per-capita GDP US states are the big-government states. All 4 socialist/capitalist Scandinavian countries have larger per-capita nominal GDPs than even the US. State-owned banking provides government alternative sources of money and the economy alternative sources of credit. The Bank of North Dakota and almost all Chinese banks are state-owned, and generate very much extra income and wealth for their respective governments and economies. During the recent worldwide recession, ND is the only state in the US and China is the only country in the world whose governments and economies kept truly prospering and growing like mad. Read the "Web of Debt" book and blog and be educated.
These 8 studies are a small sample of the epidemiological science implying that universal healthcare is a moral imperative: (1) Measuring The Health Of Nations: Updating An Earlier Analysis (up to 101,000 or more Americans die annually from lack of healthcare.) (2) Analysis of 23 million US hospitalizations: uninsured children have higher all-cause in-hospital mortality (60% higher) (3) Lack of insurance negatively affects trauma mortality in US children (200% higher for uninsured child trauma patients) (4) Downwardly Mobile: The Accidental Cost of Being Uninsured (80% higher mortality for uninsured adult trauma patients) (5) Association of Insurance with Cancer Care Utilization and Outcomes (60% higher cancer mortality for uninsured) (6) Health Insurance and Mortality in US Adults (40% higher for uninsured overall) (7) Health Insurance Coverage And Mortality Among The Near-Elderly (much higher mortality for uninsured) (8) Does Medicare Save Lives? (20% lower ER-admitted mortality)
Here are the 3 most important reasons why public financing of healthcare via a strong public option is a strong moral imperative for all of the not far from 100 million dumped by the private market to be left to rot to death with little or no healthcare via being underinsured or uninsured: (1) The abortion issue makes it politically impossible to provide public financing of healthcare via subsidies to shop for private insurance. (2) ERs and free clinics are no answer for those left to rot to death. ERs are legally required to treat only emergencies. But the vast majority of healthcare needed to prevent premature death is not an emergency at the time. The few free clinics provide very limited care for only the poorest. (In 41 states, disallowed on Medicaid include all non-disabled singles <65 and in poverty and so most homeless.) (3) The science I cited @ February 2, 2:08 PM shows that those left to rot to death die at much higher rates - up to 101,000 or more deaths annually.
The same argument could be made for people "rotting to death" under other health care system, particularly those with long wait times for treatments. Some people do die while waiting in those queues for treatment. Others die later because by the time they received treatment, their disease progressed too far to successfully treat. No system is perfect.
Continued on from earlier...
However, all of this is irrelevant to the fact that many Americans do not seem to want the version of health care reform being proposed by the government. If the government pushes through this version of health care despite the people's wishes, then we have ceased to be a government of the People, by the People, and for the People.
Continued on from before...
Most Americans are not against health care reform itself. They are simply against the current plan for it. Congress should start fresh and explore other ideas for reform to improve the health care system, rather than totally remaking it. Tort reform, tax credits, and vouchers for those without insurance are all good places to start.
The vast majority of those not far from 100 million uninsured or underinsured Americans are paid by their employers not far from the poverty threshold, making less - most much less - than roughly $15/hr. If health insurance companies lowered their premiums, deductibles, and copays enough to make healthcare truly affordable for all those employers and employees presently out in the cold, then those companies would see their revenues and profits significantly decrease - it may be mathematically impossible for them to remain profitable. Also, read "I Am Not a Dog" online to see the insurance companies choosing more profit over saving lives. This along with the science and legal facts I cited @ Feb2,2:08PM and Feb2,2:11PM imply that only government, via some sort of public option affordable to all, can end the suffering of those very many millions without healthcare and save the lives of those up to 101,000 or more dying annually from lack of healthcare.
In the US but not in Canada, the poorer people are, the higher the mortality rates. Here is one study showing this: "Relation between income inequality and mortality in Canada and in the United States". And this, where the first study I cited @ Feb2,2:08PM shows that Canada has a very much lower health care amenable mortality rate than the US, and that up to 101,000 or more Americans die preventable deaths annually, much higher mortality rates than all the other 18 richest OECD countries, including Canada and the UK. Also, I cited @ Feb2,2:11PM legal facts showing that most homeless are still denied even just Medicaid, where ERs and free clinics are not an answer (and this includes all other poorer people). Conservatives promoting continuing to deny Medicaid to these homeless (and to all others in poverty still denied Medicaid) is astoundingly anti-ethics and anti-morality.
In the US, roughly speaking, the private market fully covers 35-40% and partly covers (underinsured) a bit <10% of the 300,000,000 population. Nothing covers a bit >15%. Government covers the remaining 35-40%, almost all abandoned by the market. So the market has abandoned fully covering 60-65%, not far from 200 million, and increasing, because it's maximally profitable to fully cover only an increasingly small minority of the population at costs they and their employers can truly afford. Hundreds of epidemiological studies on healthcare and mortality exist. All show higher rates of mortality in a private enterprise system and for those this system abandons but not saved by government. I cited 8 @ Feb2,2:08PM. All this science with the fact that private enterprise has chosen to abandon not far from 200 million and counting shows that the conservative "solution" of government getting out of health care would not lower mortality, but raise it significantly.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!