The other alternative is what the British did earlier this year: They created an exciting new “Patient’s Bill of Rights,” promising every Briton the “right” to hospital treatment within 18 weeks. Believe it or not, that distant deadline shimmering woozily in the languid desert haze can be oddly reassuring if you’ve ever visited a Scottish emergency room on a holiday weekend. And, if the four-and-a-half months go by and you still haven’t been treated, you get your (tax) money back? Ah, no. But there is a free helpline you can call which will give you continuously updated estimates on which month your operation has been rescheduled for. I mention these not as a preview of the horrors to come, but because I’ve come to the bleak conclusion that U.S.-style “health” “reform” is going to be far worse.
People need to keep fighting this to turn 3 Dems in the House. That’s all it would take arguably.
The Senate is a done deal. They’ve all signed their suicide pact in blood.
But the House has a number of members who know their only chance for re-election is to switch and vote against this thing.
Given that we’ll start January with a terrible economy and Obama on the defensive for national security issues courtesy of Janet’s performance today, moderate Dems are going to start realizing that being associated with Obama is toxic.
Do we need to make some changes in health care? Yes - but this current bill is horrid. Government by its nature is a bureacracy. When has that proven more efficient than the free market? The English and Canadian health care systems are rife with long delays and sub standard care. This is what we want to turn the great health care system in the world into?
Bill, the answer to your question is yes. Why? Because lately in various levels of government, bad legislation is better than no legislation at all. It gives the appearance of actually doing something.