The Rochester Post-Bulletin, 1 December 2009, published an article about a health care meeting held by Tim Walz. It’s full of examples of how our Congressman works. In the table, below, the Post-Bulletin story is on the left; my comments are on the right.
| First District Rep. Tim Walz’”musts” for health care reform
• Includes Medicare reform that pays for value. • Gets rid of health insurance denials for pre-existing conditions. • Doesn’t add to the national deficit. • Covers as many people as possible. |
A value proposition is not defined in the legislation Walz already voted for. At best, it includes a study for a value proposition. Yet he says value reform is one of his requirements.
Outlawing denial of service for pre-existing conditions makes insurance more expensive for everybody. Why? Because those without it can wait until they have a condition to buy it. The legislation Walz voted for does not add to the deficit for one simple reason: dirty tricks. Here are just a few.
The CBO rules for calculating the impact on the nation’s budget were very carefully played to show a reduction of the deficit. Tim Walz either knows that or he’s an idiot. He’s not an idiot. That’s not health care reform. That’s politics. Some would call it fraud. I do. |
| Wayne Chilson of Austin said health care reform is needed but that the government should let the free market fix it and let insurance companies compete across state lines. “Everything the government touches becomes more expensive and less efficient,” Chilson said. A few audience members told him he was wrong. | Mr. Chilson is mostly correct. “Everything” is probably an exaggeration but there isn’t a government program or service of the size of health care that has cost less than projected.
Income taxes were going to be small and only for the rich. Obama is talking about tax rates of 50%. Social Security was a safety net for those without other pensions. Now, most retirees and the disabled count on it. Medicare was a safety net, now insures millions, costs way more than projected, and is going broke. |
| Walz warned Chilson to be careful about making blanket statements. “Because if you’re going to say, ‘Business does it well,’ I don’t have to point you very far beyond Wall Street to understand that that’s not the case either,” Walz said. | Mr. Walz is always quick with a retort but often, as with this one, once you get beyond the cuteness of it, it’s just stupid. Walz criticized a blanket statement by making a blanket statement.
We only have one federal government. It either gets it right or we all suffer. If a business gets it wrong, we can choose a competitor. Because there’s a competitor, if we already picked poorly, the business that got it wrong will often make it right. A business that gets it wrong too often goes away. The federal government is not going away, not matter what. Yes, there are Enrons in the world. One out of a million tells us nothing about the system as a whole. |
| The House’s bill is not a “fix-all,” Walz said, and he wants to include private insurers, which irritates some who want a single-payer system. | Almost 2,000 pages and it’s not a fix-all.It should address tort reform but does not.
It includes savings for Medicare by addressing fraud but that should be fast-tracked and separate. It’s another government-run Ponzi scheme. The government imprisons Ponzi schemers outside government. |
| “We need something. We need more. I’m willing, as I said, to compromise and move something that gets there, that gets this done,” Walz said. | Gibberish. |
| “It takes time to get there,” area Republican Brian Thiel told Walz. Congress needs to make sure the playing field is level and keep the process open for the public, he said. | Why is Thiel singled out as a Republican? There was no such label for Chilson or Fimon. |
| Michelle Fimon, 45, a breast cancer survivor from Austin and one of Walz’s guest speakers, said she thinks her only option is to stay in low-paying jobs so she remains eligible for medical assistance. She’s afraid insurance companies will deny her coverage because of her pre-existing condition. | This is curious. It is an opinion. Someone “thinks” she only has a particular option. Is she correct? With so many hard facts swirling around the health care debate, our august (?!) Congressman presents someone with an opinion whose validity is unknown. It’s a typical progressive pull on the heart strings that actually has nothing to add to the debate.
UPDATE: The tie of health care insurance to employers is part of our problem and the bill Walz voted for makes it worse by laying more requirements on employers to provide insurance. So, even if Ms. Fimon is correct, Walz’s vote did not help her! UPDATE: Walz and his comrades are full of sad stories. There are sad stories from Canada and England, too, where people have government run health care. Walz doesn’t share those. We covered one a few days ago. |
| Drug companies are increasing drug prices in anticipation that something might change with health care, [Walz] said. | Substantiation? Are drug prices rising? If so, is Walz reading the minds of those instituting the increases so that he knows their reasons for raising the prices? |
| Some people say they don’t want government intervening in health care, Walz said, but government is the people. | This is a whopper. Government is not the people. Government is of the people.
People who do not want the government intervening mean they want to reserve decisions about their health care for themselves just as they do for the food they buy, the clothes they wear, the home or apartment they pick, and so on. The plan Walz already voted for institutes government panels and boards that will make decisions for all of us, not as individuals, but as a mass of humanity. It will not allow us to choose health insurance from a multitude of choices based on lively market innovation that fits our needs and priorities. Rather, we will be restricted to what the government decides satisfies it as health insurance. Our cars have not become more sophisticated, our computers have not become faster and cheaper, our personal media players and cell phones have not become better and less expensive by having government tell us what is good. Innovation, competition, and consumerism have driven all those things and more. It is the only thing that can do the same thing for health care and the bill Walz already voted for has none of those things. None. Nada. He’s selling cow pie on a stick. |
| “That’s me. You can fire me. You can get someone else, you can do whatever,” Walz said. “Try that with a drug company executive; try that with an insurance company executive.” | Yes, we can get rid of Walz but only on a two year schedule. We cannot get rid of the federal government and what he and his comrades do within it except over long periods of time.
While most of us cannot remove an executive from a private enterprise, we can choose not to do business with them (any minute of the day). To make his comparison valid, Walz would have to agree to allow us to ignore the demands of the federal government with which we disagree. That’s not going to happen. |
Tim Walz is an amiable guy with a quick smile and answers for everything. The only problem is, a lot of what he says, if you think about, is either wrong or meaningless.
