Slashdot Mirror
US Government Shutdown Ends
An anonymous reader writes "After more than two weeks of bickering that made the schoolyard appear civilized, Congress has finally passed a bill to reopen the U.S. Federal Government. 'The Senate passed the measure by a vote of 81 - 18, followed by approval in the House by a vote of 285 - 144. The bill now goes to the President, who will make remarks on Thursday regarding the reopening of the federal government. ... Earlier in the day, Speaker Boehner conceded that the House would not vote to stop the Senate-negotiated agreement. In a statement, the Speaker said that, after a fight with President Obama over his signature health care law, " . . . blocking the bipartisan agreement reached today by the members of the Senate will not be a tactic for us." The agreement will raise the debt limit until February 2014, fund the government through January 2014 and establish a joint House-Senate committee to make spending cut decisions.' CNN adds, 'Obama, for one, didn't seem in the mood Wednesday night for more of the same -- saying politicians in Washington have to "get out of the habit of governing by crisis." "Hopefully, next time, it will not be in the 11th hour," Obama told reporters, calling for both parties to work together on a budget, immigration reform and other issues. When asked as he left the podium whether he believed America would be going through all this political turmoil again in a few months, the President didn't waste words. "No."'"
As an Australian, I've been protected by a national health scheme since 1975. I do not have to pay for ambulances because I live in Queensland. If I present at a hospital all I have to do is show my medicare card and I'll either be seen straight away or an appointment will be made. I've had my share of misfortune, and have had several surgeries for life threatening conditions. I've paid for them all when I was younger, and was paying tax.
Now I'm a pensioner. I pay $5.80 (I think) for most prescriptions. I saw my GP for about an hour today. I didn't have to pay a thing.
I'm going to hospital in a few weeks to investigate some growths. I won't have to pay a thing.
If I wanted to, I could pay and get faster, higher priority treatment. I have that choice.
What is the problem that so many Americans have with socialised medicine? A healthy community is a productive community and pays more taxes to get the job done. I just don't understand why you have a debate about it.
I agree with you on all points but one -- this wasn't really a chance to stop the crazy. The budget is too out of control to come up with a fix in a few days. It is going to take a very difficult debate among the entire electorate to decide which sacred cows are going to be slaughtered. It has gotten to the point where no politician is willing to bring the subject up because everyone is going to feel some very real pain in order to solve all of this.
It is going to get ugly, without a doubt. The sooner it is tackled, the less ugly it will be. I think it is a 70/30 chance to be bloody, as well.
Everyone who remembers the great depression is at least in their eighties, and they were just children then. Ask them what it was like in order to prepare yourself. Those days were ugly, and we may see a repeat. Only this time, instead of 50% of the population being rural/farm and having the ability to at least grow a garden for their own food, today only 1% of the population lives on farms and 99% is at the end of a food supply chain with a 5 day buffer. Just a few days ago EBT went out in a few states for a couple of days and we came close to food riots. The only reason we didn't have actual riots is that WalMart let people simply shoplift any food they wanted.
Nobody ever scared anyone with tales of $50 ER visits. Who'd buy insurance to cover cheap healthcare?
Australians; we buy insurance to cover the free healthcare.
Would you care to speak about comparative annual deaths rates from cancer, diabetes, general malnutrition, violent crime with deaths directly attributable to lack of ready access to competent medical care, etc? I'll do your homework for you if you're not competent enough.
Write failed: Broken pipe
Actually, no. It's well known Markos has always wanted a single payer system. Which wasn't obtainable as congress did not have enough votes to pass one.
The left compromised to get the ACA signed into law. For them, it's not perfect, far from it. But they recognised that to govern, compromise is necessary. A useful lesson that would have saved taxpayers millions if only the Tea Party caucus took heed.
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
It's worth pointing out (as was said below), that most Democrats would support a single-payer government healthcare system, either on a federal level (like the NHS in Britain), or through federal mandates for states to create their own single player (as in Canada).
For a bit of context, lets look at the history
The RomneyCare-lite package that was passed was a huge compromise of ideals for most left-leaning politicians. This plan as it was passed was about 90% Republican/Conservative and was drafted originally by the conservative partisan think-tank The Heritage Foundation. It enjoyed prominent and vocal support throughout the 1990s from folks like Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole. In fact, Republicans in the senate proposed a nearly identical version of this law in 1993 as an alternative to Bill Clinton's proposed health care reforms (including an "individual mandate" and "health exchanges" and Medicaid Expansion).
In fact, the most controversial portion, the "individual mandate" was the brainchild of Republican senators Orin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, Bob Bennett, and Kit Bond in 1993 and was agreed to by Republican president George HW Bush, as well as by 43 Republican senators in preliminary voting.
In 2006, Republican Mitt Romney implemented a nearly identical plan, with broad Republican support in his home state. It was accepted as an alternative to the single-payer system proposed by Democrats in the state senate and passed with broad bipartisan support, though there was more support from Republicans than Democrats (some of whom saw it as to corporate-focused).
In 2007, Republican US Senator Bob Bennett introduced the bill to a senate subcommitte for adoption as US Federal law and the bill enjoyed broad bipartisan support.
In 2008, when it had been revised down to most of what was in the current bill, Democrats pushed strongly for a "public option", which was basically a government-run insurance company to compete with the private insurance companies, which Republicans at the time claimed to be their primary disagreement with the bill. In a show of compromise, Democrats agreed to remove the "public option" from the bill.
But by then, Republicans had made it a rallying cry of their party and were going to stick with opposition to the bill, often in defiance of their previous position, as a matter of principle.
The rest is history.
Yes, there are legit reasons to be annoyed or disappointed with it, but the rhetoric "the communist, authoritarian" claims and frequent citations of the bill as "the worst law in American history" are completely absurd. I mean... beyond absurd to such an extreme level that it defies reality that people believe it.