Hi 28° | Lo 4°

Letter: Yes, we did ask for health reform

Harriet Cady has it all wrong in her letter, “We didn’t ask for a national health care law” (Monitor, Oct. 2). It’s what President Obama mainly campaigned on in his first run for president, and he won. It was in the works when he won a second term, so “we” did ask for a national care law. Not Cady’s “we,” but the majority of us.

In 1992, I was traveling around in New Hampshire as a candidate myself, and I remember voters at forums saying, “We want national health care. Can we have it next year?” That would have been 1993, so even 20 years ago, “we” voiced quite a bit that health care costs sucking away savings or causing loss of homes was a big problem that needed fixing.

A flaw to this is that “single-payer” was lopped off, and that was the cost-control measure.



Legacy Comments13

This is for Itsa as the reply is ghosted. Had SS excess funds not been raided over the years, it would be solvent well into the future. Senator Rudman (Republican), and Senator Gramm (Democrat) championed a bill to prevent the raiding. President Clinton signed it into law and Bush Jr. had the law rescinded. So what parts did I twist? There is no agenda here I just told the facts. Are you upset that it was republican presidents that started the process of raiding the excess SS funds? Too bad. The bad thing is once that Pandora's box was opened, every president after did the same. Why would you turn green when the truth is given? Those funds should never have been touched and IOU's replaced instead.

Clinton claims to have balanced the budget but guess what? He used future SS receipts to make it seem as if the budget was balanced. Democrats ruled Congress for over 40 years and spent like drunken sailors. Your revisionist history does not fly Greenie.

Facts always destroy a liberals narrative. Since its inception there has been a massive number of polls from pollsters across the gambit. Overwhelmingly most every poll has real Americans against ObamaKare - Here is a list of every single poll ever taken on the subject. Congress did not even favor it until Obama falsely signed a Presidential Executive order on which he later reneged. I bet a democrat cant even remember that much less what they did to Senator Stevens

There is a big difference between being against Obamacare and being against health care reform. Most Americans want health care reform, being fed up with this "free market" approach that was promised to be more cost effective and more efficient. Instead we get ever increasing premium rates, and finger pointing by those who raise those rates, while they build new 100 million dollar office buildings and hand out 7 or 8 figure year end bonuses to their corporate boards. Double digit premium increases didn't happen when BCBS was still a nonprofit. Only the most anti Obama conservatives equate being against Obamacare as the same thing as people wanting to keep the same system in place. It's an absurd implication to make. Like most of the factoids reported by these factions or conservatives (the free market champions) it's a deliberate lie, a misrepresentation of the facts.

not a stitch of facts in that OPINION - 100% anti capitalist rant - care to quote a statistical source for any portion of that post

Who wants to bet that Ms. Cady is on Medicare? She's got her government supported health care. To hell with everyone else.

Tea partiers don't consider Medicare a government program, they think they paid for it all by themselves.

The government made a promise, all of us paid in to both Medicare and SS, I have since I was 14, so yes, I want that lofty liberal promise kept!

Great Idea there Itsa, however thanks to the Gipper (AKA Regan), the Excess funds from Social Security have been raided ever since to pay down the national debt and IOU's issued for payback to Social Security. Now, due to all presidents after him, we no longer have any excess in the SS coffers. Senator Rudman had the foresight to champion a bipartisan bill to prevent this "Corporate raiding" of the excess SS funds to balance the federal budget. This bill was signed into law by then President Clinton (one of the good things he did during his term as president), but in the early 2000's under Bush Jr. this law was rescinded and the raiding of the excess SS funds began anew. That is why SS is the way it is today. If the US government doesn't pay the interest on these IOU's, There is not enough funds left to pay those entitled to payments today.

gsec92, absolutely not true. That was 40 years ago when Reagan was president and funds were never in a lock box or account, EVER! I turned green when I read your lame excuse for Social Security. I know that you more than likely support Obamacare.......then how can you expect that will be paid and will work if we can't manage the first two entitlements which were really meant to be invested in treasuries and to be a payment once you retire. I plan on collecting what I paid in. Your history is somewhat accurate until you twist it to meet your ideological agenda. I was floor-ed by your twisting of the facts.

Well Itsa, you might be smart enough to know that ss and medicare are government run insurance programs but a lot of Republicans aren't that bright. A lot of people do want and need the ACA but since you don't need it, you don't think anyone should get it. I know, I know you don't feel you should be paying for anyone else's healthcare but that is how insurance works. You are paying for other people's social security and medicare right now.

Not all of us oldies think that, tillie. We're all in this together. I am as mystified by my TP peers as you are.

Ducklady, I just remember the pictures of the oldies with the tea bags on their hat with signs that said "government, hands off my medicare." Why they didn't protest Paul Ryan's budget that vouchered Social Security with signs saying "government, hands off my social security" shows just how duped they are by the Republicans

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.