[Updates at the bottom of this posting as of 3:03am CDT on AD 9-10-2009]
President Obama’s speech covered many topics, lets first layout our President’s plan:
I. Keep the health insurance you have now.
1. Pre-existing symptoms or disabilities no longer will disqualify anyone from coverage.
2. No spending caps set by insurance companies.
3. No drop in coverage in the middle of an illness.
4. Limit on out of pocket expense.
5. Minimal requirements of coverage.
II. Public Option & Exchange
1. When losing your job you have the Public Option if you can’t afford insurance.
2. Insurance exchange markets will be required for insurance companies to participate in.
3. Tax credits for small businesses.
4. In theory this will not lead to a government take over.
III. Penalty for those that don’t choose coverage.
1. Required to carry basic health insurance, ie, Public Option or Exchange.
2. This penalty, in theory, will lower cost of health insurance.
_._
President Obama then, in my opinion, made the political miscalculation of this young century. He went after Fox News, Talk Radio, and singled out Sarah Palin for questioning the specifics contained in both the House and Senate Health Care bills. Pretty vindictive and unconstructive. President Obama belittled the office of the Presidency with primary school taunting.
_._
He then went into the funding of his health care plan.
He made a read my lips moment by declaring that there will be absolutely be no deficit spending.
How? By cutting $623 Billion in Medicaire cuts. He phrased it as scaling back on wasteful spending.
_._
Then in a bizarre moment President Obama then blamed President Bush again for him inheriting a bloated deficit.
_._
Finally President Obama played the Paul Welstone card by recalling the death of Senator Ted Kennedy and his wish for Universal Health Care.
He ended by saying that he will listen to what the Republicans want in the bill, but basically a health care bill will be pushed through with or without the Republicans.
_._
Public Option Note: He will offer this for those that cannot afford even the most basic health care insurance in the Health Care Exchange he proposed. He chastized those that would dare say the Public Option would eventually take over the Health Insurance Industry.
_._
Last Things: President Obama will address tort reform with the Republicans but would not commit to adding this to the final bill. He also said there will be no government funded abortions in any health care bill (I’ll believe it when I read the final bill). Finally he stated that illegal aliens will not be covered with any insurance coverage.
_._
For previous posting previewing this speech click here.
_._
Update I: If you noticed during the speech a few Republicans were waving a pamphlet. That pamphlet were the Republican proposals that have been offered, up to 32 I believe, to the Obama administration since President Obama’s term as president began. So all of his pronouncements that the Republicans have no ideas nor plans have been disingenuous. Hence why the Republicans were waving those pamphlets.
Update II: With President Obama saying that there will be no federal funds used towards abortion, he again was being disingenuous, and I might say a lier. Deal Hudson eloquently states why President Obama is being disingenuous:
Did he answer the challenge of the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue and address head-on the issue of abortion? Not really — he just repeated what he has said before: “No federal dollars will be used to fund abortion.” Yet, as Douglas Johnson, the legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, explains, “Obama brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component of the health care legislation that his congressional allies and staff have crafted.”
Johnson points out that the present legislation requires anyone enrolled in the government plan to pay premiums “calculated to cover the cost of all elective abortions — this would not be optional.” In other words, Obama is not calling these premiums “federal funds,” because they are not taxes. But, as Johnson says, “These are merely two types of public funds, collected and spent by government agencies.
“Want further proof that Obama is misrepresenting the reform? Obama and others in the Democratic leadership have been unwilling to support amendments clearly stipulating the very thing the president says is already the case: that no federal dollars will pay for abortion.
President Obama added a comment on another issue of interest to Catholics, saying that “federal conscience laws will remain in place.” Obama didn’t mention that on March 6 he removed the conscience protection for pro-life medical personnel put in place at the end of Bush’s second term, leaving nothing in its place.
To read the rest of what Deal Hudson wrote over at InsideCatholic.com click here.
For me the oddest statement in the President’s speech was the claim that “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. Period.” I’m not sure this can even by classified as a lie, as lying requires an intent to deceive, and I can’t imagine Obama thought anyone would believe him when he said this (so then why did he say it?)
I think President Obama actually believes that statement he said about not a single dime towards our deficits.
So I’m not sure if he can be accused of saying a lie. But if it does happen, does it qualify as a lie after the fact?
This proposal doesn’t come off as “reform.” Rather, it comes off as more of what we currently have: tons of regulations that introduce more cost and curb competition.
It’s not clear that Obama could even hold true to his promise for the length of his speech. Nine paragraphs after making his “not one dime . . . Period” pledge, he says that his plan would cost $900 billion, and that “most” of this would be offset by cuts in existing health care programs. Perhaps by most he means $899,999,999,999.91? Or maybe he means his pledge literally. He won’t sign a bill if it adds exactly a dime to the deficit, but if it adds billions that’s okay.
For full disclosure, I am not an expert on how the Health Care industry works.
With that said I do like the first portion of his speech that says pre-existing symptoms or disabilities no longer will disqualify anyone from coverage, no spending caps set by insurance companies will be allowed, coverage won’t be dropped in the middle of an illness, there will be a limit on out of pocket expense, and there will be minimal standards required in basic coverage.
I’m not sure if this will make insurance costs go up, drive companies out of business, and eventually result in a single payer system over a period of time.
But if this is possible without any of the above scenarios, I like it!
Tito, on another thread I was calling you out, takin it back now.
Really! If we could fix the pre-existing condition and employer control thing in healthcare, who could argue?
Master C,
I was busy typing up this posting when you left that message.
I like the portion I outlined, but without the public option.
If some regulations could be set up for the insurance industry without the public option then that would be ideal!
We need this change…YESTERDAY!
Millions of Americans presently have no health care, others who do, when faced with an illness go bankrupt, and others find out that suddenly they don’t have any healthcare at all and still others are covered but face high costs.
I’m 52 years old..and my job was outsourced 4 years ago.
Thankfully I have family but I pay $450.67 per month and my Asthma inhaler costs…$211.00 OUT OF POCKET.
Others are in worse shape.
Any Catholic that cannot see the good in this isn’t Catholic!
P. Edward Murray,
I certainly sympathize with the problems that you are facing.
Though I have to say that just because some of us oppose certain points of President Obama’s speech doesn’t make us not Catholic.
If you could explain why then we have a starting point, but just simply saying this doesn’t make it so.
Also you can’t force others to pay for something they don’t want to pay for nor are required to pay for.
“Primary school taunting”?
No, he just told the truth. Would that Palin and FOX NEWS would do the same.
Mr. Murray,
I have no health care. I pray that my health does does fail. I haven’t had a full-time job in nearly a year. I do fear bankruptcy if I experience any health programs.
That said, anyone who tries to get me health care on the backs of dead babies is not doing me any favors. I’d rather face financial ruin than see one more baby slaughtered.
In Christ,
Steve
Heather,
Denying that there are End-of-Life-Decision panels, aka, Death Panels?
Steve,
First, I know quite well where you are..I’ve been out of a job for 4 years…
I thought I had finally found a good company to work for and was promoted a Team Leader at our Panasonic National Diagnostic Center. So I was part of the management team lowest level.
One day I came in and learned that my entire office was to be sold. We were. And we were led to believe that we would just move to another location.
That didn’t happen.
At one point, we had 75 people working at our facility.
All the remaining jobs were outsourced to Manila.
I blame GWB and all Republicans..they didn’t give a care.
To all of them…outsourcing is just another way of making more profit.
And that is why I will never vote for another Republican as long as I live.
The lie and cheat period. They only care about themselves and other rich …very rich people.
As far as abortion is concerned you needn’t worry because this is what the president said…
“And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.”
And to anyone else reading…
We are living in a Depression…currently I have a brother & sister-in-law out of work. I have an Aunt & Uncle..both in their sixties…out of work and they are trying to start business.
Millions of Americans are in the same boat as Steve and I and if you aren’t yout of work you should be counting your blessings because it isn’t over yet.
Being unemployed for a long time is very hard but I’m also
I’m also caring for my 74 year old mother who has cancer and is still working and is partially disabled with a bad back so I must take her to work and back in a wheelchair.
This is what George W Bush did.
I know this is where Jesus wants me to be..to take care of my mother…something that many middle aged Americans face..caring for their elderly parents.
We need this change and we need the jobs to come back.
If this doesn’t happen then God help us because there is going to be a heck of a revolution!
Say the Chaplet of Divine Mercy!
Tito…
Have you ever heard of
“A living will”?
Please don’t tell lies.
P. Edwards Murray,
There will be abortion funding in the bill. You know better that the public option will offer coverage for abortion.
This is your first warning. If you’re unable to keep your emotions in check and call me a lier one more time then you will be banned.
You know there are End-of-Life Panels, aka, Death Panels, in one of the two congressional bills.
I can tell you my sob story as well, but I’m not here to score cheap political points.
If you really believe a revolution will occur if this bill doesn’t pass then you are beyond logic and reason.
If this bill does go through, one thing is for certain, we’ll have an entirely new executive and legislative branch come 2012. That is change that I can believe in.
Personally having witnessed the outrageous statements at my former Parish…St. Ignatius of Antioch Yardley PA..statements made just after the election…that voting
“The Economy” was wrong and that “Jesus would have something to say to me” I left that Parish in disgust.
Picking up my mother from her weekly Adoration, I noticed some flyers saying that this health care would include abortion….
Which it didn’t then and won’t now.
I’m of the opinion that The American Catholic Church is really split…many proclaim themselves to be Catholic and are more Republican than really Catholic.
And some are really Catholic.
I don’t know about you, but I was brought up to believe that being a Christian was more than abortion…
Did not Jesus say “Feed my Sheep”? Did he not say that if a man has no “cloak” to give him yours? Did he not say to give your money to the poor?
Do we not sing a song “Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me”?
Yes we sing that song and Pope John Paul II talked about
“A Consistent Ethic of Life”?
So remember…
Your vote is an action and actions speak louder than words.
Is it better to vote for one who says they are pro life but clearly discounts everything else that Jesus has said?
For the record, I believe in a “Consistent Ethic of Life” and I am a practicing Catholic and a Democrat.
One final note…
When I left St. Ignatius I could hardly believe that any priest or deacon could have said such a thing. Clearly sometimes priests forget that they live by charity.
The Deacon in question…his other job..is a
Tito,
I will not remain here and will never bother you again.
Say a Chaplet of Divine Mercy
P. Edward Murray,
You are more than welcome to say your peace, but please say it in charity.
It seems you are the one struggling with your Catholic identity vs. being a Democrat.
As for me I am not a Republican nor do I vote a clean GOP ticket.
I’ve donated all of my money to the local democratic party and have voted for many democrats, yet I vote as a Catholic, not as a republican nor democrat.
The life of a human being, especially an innocent child, is the utmost important issue.
If you feel that getting a free bottle of aspirin forcibly paid by someone else is more important than the life of an innocent child, then that is between you and God.
I’ll put you and your family in my evening prayers.
Catholic Anarchist,
Your disrespectful comments and vicious attack on the writers of this website will not be tolerated.
It is comments like yours that the American people are fed up with the way you and your ilk demonize those that protest President Obama’s health care bill.
“He chastised those that would dare say the Public Option would eventually take over the Health Insurance Industry.”
A Kool-Aid stand was set up in the lobby for those who have yet to see the light. Name ONE government program that has ever gotten smaller.
Buehler…BUEHLER…ANYBODY ?
“Any Catholic that cannot see the good in [ObamaCare] isn’t Catholic!”
“I’m of the opinion that The American Catholic Church is really split…many proclaim themselves to be Catholic and are more Republican than really Catholic.”
“For the record, I believe in a “Consistent Ethic of Life” and I am a practicing Catholic and a Democrat.”
Taken at face value, these comments add up to saying, essentially, that one must be a Democrat in order to be a “real” Catholic (never mind the Democrat-sponsored legalized murder of all those dead babies).
“Any Catholic that cannot see the good in [ObamaCare] isn’t Catholic!”
So, then, unless you support this particular version of health care reform, prepare yourself to be denied the Catholic funeral that that paragon of Catholic virtue Teddy Kennedy received.
“I’m of the opinion that The American Catholic Church is really split…many proclaim themselves to be Catholic and are more Republican than really Catholic.”
Mightn’t there be an even greater number that proclaim themselves to be Catholic that are more Democrat than really Catholic? There’s a whole generation of Catholic Democrat politicians, for example, that ignore Church teaching on fundamental issues such as abortion, euthanasia, and marriage. It’s funny: I see very few pro-life Catholics who proclaim themselves members of the Republican Party as readily as this gentleman proclaims himself a Democrat. Tito’s not a Republican. I’m not a Republican. And even those who are self-proclaimed Republicans tend to be willing to vote against the party when it comes to a “pro-choice” candidate (witness Catholics Against Rudy). Sad that we don’t see that same commitment from Catholic Democrats.
“I don’t know about you, but I was brought up to believe that being a Christian was more than abortion… Did not Jesus say “Feed my Sheep”? Did he not say that if a man has no “cloak” to give him yours? Did he not say to give your money to the poor? … Do we not sing a song “Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me”? … For the record, I believe in a “Consistent Ethic of Life” and I am a practicing Catholic and a Democrat.”
It’s ironic that whevever someone proclaims themselves to have a “consistent ethic of life”, it is almost ALWAYS the unborn who get short shrift, whose right to life is given a lower priority than whatever other policy issues happen to more closely coincide with that person’s own preferences. They proclaim a concern about “the least of these our brothers” without a hint of irony that they’re leaving out of the equation (or at least minimizing) the least of the least of these – the unborn.
I agree that we should all have a consistent ethic of life. That universal access to health care – in whatever form it is delivered – is part of that consistent ethic. But as long as our culture accepts a legal regime that fails to recognize the inherent humanity in the least of the least of these our brothers, such a consistent ethic of life is impossible. And, quite frankly, a government that provides legal cover for the murder of the innocent is unfit to run anything remotely resembling health care.
And besides, how dare anyone believe that their other policy priorities somehow take precedence over the very right to experience life that is endowed by the Creator upon the unborn? With apologies to Charles Dickens, it may be, that in the sight of Heaven, the millions of poor children in the womb have a higher priority in seeing the light of day than does someone in having the government pay for their “free” health care. So, yes, let’s have a consistent ethic of life, but let’s get our priorities straight about what that means, and stop using it as a tool for ignoring abortion in favor of a particular party’s big government agenda.
“It is comments like yours that the American people are fed up with the way you and your ilk demonize those that protest President Obama’s health care bill.”
Tito. I know. You’re going to start thinking I’m singling you out. But…the reverse happens just as frequently and just as viciously. And at least on this blog, the latter tends to be quite tolerated.
Jay,
I agree. Catholic Democrats really do not live up to their vocation as Catholics. Many are cowards. Many use the “seamless garment” as cover for voting for pro-choice candidates without even resisting pro-abortion legislation while performing some sort of intellectual gymnastics to distract attention from such a reality. But really, we are told that they are really pro-life because they are reducing the number of abortions by expanding access and/or funding to it.
But…I think concerns that “other issues” — and I’m not talking about everything else on the “progressive” agenda — are unfortunately neglected, or voting for pro-life Republican candidates, which some Catholics imply is mandatory (even you choose to try to opt to not vote for anyone at all over voting for a Democrat), might strike your conscience as endorsing a number of policies that you simply do not agree with and do not believe is good for our country.
In a sense, there is a sentiment that I don’t totally endorse — but I am very sympathetic to — is that many left-leaning Catholics feel boxed in. It is practically non-negotiable that you support a party that you fundamentally do not agree with and whom we tend to be suspicious about in regard to their commitment to actually stopping the evil of abortion — and I’m not saying the Democrats are the solution. I’m not trying to draw failure of one side to excuse the other. I am merely saying, these concerns — valid or not — usually are dismissed or there is a legitimate sentiment that right-leaning Catholics either totally reject such considerations or really don’t care. Whether that’s true or not is one thing, but it can seem that way. I repeat: it can seem that way. I’m not sure.
But to the plight of an orthodox pro-life Catholic Democrat, I am very sympathetic. Obviously, I am one. I did not vote for Obama, but if he were pro-life, I probably would have campaigned for him.
If Obama were pro-life (and I mean TRULY pro-life, not Harry Reid “pro-life”), I would probably vote for him, just to reward the Democrats for nominating a pro-lifer.
If the Democrats ever wised up to the fact that being pro-life was actually a political benefit to them, then we could really do something to end abortion in this country, and Democrats would likely become a permanent majority.
Eric,
I know you personally so don’t worry, your intentions are pure and I need someone like you (I have many) to help keep me on the straight and narrow.
Your comments and critiques of me are appreciated and spiritually humbling.
🙂
…and yes, it does go both ways, though for the moment, in my humble opinion, the GOP, conservatives, independents, and moderates are getting more of it than the liberals and democrats.
In Jesus, Mary, & Joseph,
Tito
Obama spent a rather long time last night composing what I believe will be remembered as the epitaph for ObamaCare. I have never seen a more inept performance by a President addressing a joint session of Congress. He is approaching lame duck status in his first year in office with his party in overwhelming control in both chambers of Congress. In the teeth of an economic and fiscal crisis of vast proportions there is effectively no one directing the ship of state. God help us.
Picking up my mother from her weekly Adoration, I noticed some flyers saying that this health care would include abortion….
Which it didn’t then and won’t now.
With respect, Mr. Murray, that’s simply not true. It did, and it does, as Michigan Representative (and Democrat) Bart Stupak recognizes.
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1918261,00.html
But you are absolutely right that health care is a human right, and you should have coverage. I just wish the pro-abortion pols would stop jeopardizing the possibility of health care reform with their games.
I think there are flaws in Obama’s proposal, I would prefer that any public option only be state- or region-level co-ops, and I’m sceptical of its ability to control healthcare costs as long as most healthcare is fee-for-service. But overall, I think it has a lot of good in it. I wish some pro-life Republicans like Chris Smith would tell Obama that they’d vote for it if it includes the Stupak amendment. With around 20 pro-life Republicans in the house supporting it and the 20 Dems who wrote the letter on abortion and healthcare, that would be enough to pass it and give it some bipartisan credentials, which Obama wants, and it would protect life.
You’re right about that, Zak. If the Dem leadership would be willing to maintain the status quo of no federal funding for abortion by including the Stupak amendment, then health care reform would pass with bipartisan support and the blessing of the USCCB.
I think it telling, however, that the administration that promised to find “common ground” on abortion is not even willing to maintain the Hyde Amendment status quo, despite its being the overwhelming majority view of the American people that tax dollars should not pay for abortions.
I think Zak is in the ballpark with the co-ops, but as a Catholic I would rather forget the state/regional level (implies government run) and take it a step further and suggest the the Catholic Church take the lead and reclaim the moral high ground by establish CATHOLIC Co-ops at the diocesan/parish level.
There are the beginnings of such a move in the diocese of San Antonio TX by the Catholic Medical Association – see:
http://www.cathmed.org/issues_resources/blog/new_guild_in_san_antonio_forming/
Imagine a network of Catholic medical clinics around the country (and world) like the Tepeyac Family Center
http://www.tepeyacfamilycenter.com/
and Divine Mercy Pharmacy
http://www.dmcpharm.com/
Also – Catholic hospitals (like many colleges) need to reclaim their Catholic identity.
JB, I like that idea.
What these folks who keep talking about a consistent ethic of life don’t seem to get is this very simple concept:
A consistent ethic of life begins with life.
Jb,
a step further and suggest the the Catholic Church take the lead and reclaim the moral high ground by establish CATHOLIC Co-ops at the diocesan/parish level.
A fantastic idea. Unfortunately the current regulatory environment (ie. massive government intrusion) makes such an idea very difficult to implement.
Matt,
I don’t know if it would be hard for a diocese to set up a healthcare coop that Catholics could buy into except for government demands to cover certain things. The trouble I see is when the co-op refusedto pay for contraception and gets in trouble with the government like Belmont Abbey College. One fears the government might also eventually mandate that insurance plans participating in its exchanges cover abortion too.
Zak,
agreed, but there’s a lot of other issues in the state level regulations as well regarding non-discrimination and covered procedures, etc.
Matt – what came to me as I read your response is to reaffirm what I said about reclaiming the high ground.
The battle cry of the feminist movement all these years has essentially been “this is MY body” – (sounds vaguely familiar), The regulations (and health care “reform”) have been a steady march towards telling people of faith that “your body has to follow our rules” regarding contraception and abortion – especially when we’re paying the bills.
Their “solutions” to every problem is always more and more of the same thing that got us into the problem in the first place, and things continue to get worse. It’s like a person that beats their head against the wall every day because it feels so good when they stop.
I believe that places like the Teyeyac Family Clinic and DM Pharmacy were raised up by God to say to the world “we’re getting off this merry go round”, and the result speak for themselves.
Many of the Dr’s across the nation that have stopped prescribing contraceptives and referring / performing for abortion have initially seen their practices suffer – only to come roaring back stronger than before.
To me – the logical place to put these kinds of places is where the people are – in the diocese. That’s how the non-profit Catholic Hospitals got their start – we need to get back to our roots.
God will do the work if he can just find a “few good men (and women)” to enlist. Now is the time to be bold – not timid. Remember the walls of Jericho !
Jay,
I’m not sure if the absence of abortion would win the bill any new votes. As far as I can tell, people object for various other reasons. But you might be quite right.
In regard to insurance, I’ve always thought the Knights of Columbus should offer health insurance. I think Catholics would buy it in swarms.
In regard to insurance, I’ve always thought the Knights of Columbus should offer health insurance. I think Catholics would buy it in swarms.
Amen, brother knight.
Though at this point they are probably effectively barred from it by the fact that you can’t offer health insurance across state lines. If that were removed, and voluntary associations could form pools in the same way as employers, I would think we could see a huge amount of positive change right there.
Eric, Darwin… I agree, the KofC seems like an excellent means of offering health insurance. As Darwin aptly noted, they are prevented from doing so by the regulations preventing insurance across state lines. Additionally, removing health insurance coverage as an employment benefit would serve to assist in this endeavor. Voluntary associations with interstate portability… sounds like a winner to me.