Times Herald: "Only in Washington"
Monday, March 22, 2010
'Only in Washington’
Passed by a margin of 219-212, the House vote, which adopted the Senate version of the health care reform bill with some changes, did not receive a single Republican vote. Thirty-four Congressional Democrats, including two from Pennsylvania, also voted against the measure.
Two local Republican Congressman made no bones about their very similar feelings on the subject.
"Only in Washington could you pass legislation that calls for the American people to spend 10 years paying for six years of benefits and call it reform,” said Rep. Jim Gerlach, R-6th Dist.
"The bill uses 10 years of taxes and Medicare cuts in order to pay for six years of programs,” echoed Rep. Charles Dent, R-15th Dist.
Similarity of mind was displayed on the other side of the aisle as well.
"The health care reform we passed (Sunday) will put an end to insurance industry abuses, extend lifesaving care to millions, strengthen Medicare and cut the national deficit” said Rep. Joe Sestak, D-7th Dist.
"Health care reform represents the largest deficit reduction measure in nearly a generation,” said Rep. Allyson Schwartz, D-13th Dist. "It will contain the rising cost of health coverage and improve health benefits for Americans who currently have insurance.”
That the legislation has taken on political overtones is, at this point, a given.
At least two candidates running to replace those who cast votes in the House issued their own statements as well.
"Democrats have rammed through the House of Representatives by the slimmest of margins legislation that raises taxes on the middle class and represents a government takeover of 17 percent of our nation’s economy,” said Pat Meehan, a Republican running to replace Sestak, who is running for the Senate seat now held by Arlen Specter.
And in comments that similar to those made by President Obama late Sunday night, Manan Trivedi, a doctor and one of several Democrats running against Gerlach in the 6th District wrote: "health care reform begins with this legislation, it does not end with this legislation.”
Saying this is what change looks like, Obama predicted that the vote would "give rise to a frenzy of instant analysis. There will be tallies of Washington winners and losers, predictions about what it means for Democrats and Republicans, for my poll numbers, for my administration” he said.
Once that fades, he said, "what will remain standing is not the government-run system some feared, or the status quo that serves the interests of the insurance industry, but a health care system that incorporates ideas from both parties.”
And while most Republicans might dispute that today, several of the main elements of the law passed Sunday are similar to the 1993 legislation offered up by Republicans as an alternative to the famously failed proposals of the Clinton administration.
A former Republican Senator from Minnesota, Dave Durenberger, recently told a reporter that a mandate that individuals buy insurance, subsidies for the poor to buy insurance and the requirement that insurers offer a standard benefits package and refrain from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions were all in the 1993 GOP bill as well as the current legislation.
Durenberger told Kaiser Health News that while those ideas, once Republican proposals, haven’t changed, the main thing that has changed is the definition of a Republican.
And of course, there has been no shortage of definitions being offered of what the House Democrats have now voted in favor of twice.
While more extreme definitions have ranged from "socialism” to "fascism,” local representatives were not shy about doing a little defining of their own.
A release issued by Schwartz’s office says the bill includes:
-Tax credits for small businesses to make employee coverage more affordable;
-Insurance companies will be banned from dropping people from coverage when they get sick, from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions, and from placing lifetime caps on coverage;
-New private plans will be required to cover preventative services with no co-payment.
Gerlach’s office offered its own bullet points, saying Republicans oppose the bill because it:
- Proposes to raid $53 billion from Social Security to appear as if it actually reduces the deficit
- Treats Medicare like a piggy bank, raiding more than $500 billion from retirees health coverage to fund creation of another open-ended health care entitlement;
- About 46 percent of families making less than $66,150 will be forced to pay the 2.5 percent tax on their adjusted gross income for failing to buy "acceptable” coverage.
"In my district, innovation, investment and jobs in the life sciences and biotechnology sector will be at risk because of a new $2 billion per year tax on items used for cancer screening, knee and hip replacement surgery and other life-saving procedures,” Gerlach said in a release.
"I am extremely disappointed that this legislation raises taxes on families and job creators, makes refusing to buy government-approved insurance a crime and slashes Medicare benefits for millions of seniors,” he said.
Schwartz was as specific about her constituents.
"There are 135,000 households in the district that could qualify for the largest middle-class tax cut for health care in history,” she said in her release.
"There are up to 15,000 small businesses that are eligible for tax credits of up to 50 percent of the cost of providing health insurance,” she said.
"There are 115,000 seniors who will benefit from improvements made to Medicare and 11,300 who will receive help paying for their prescription drugs,” said Schwartz.
In his prepared statement, Dent said he supports reform, but not the plan backed by Democrats.
"Done right, we will lift burdens that are holding employers back from growing and revitalizing our economy,” he said of reform he would support. "Done wrong, jobs will be lost and 10 percent unemployment will become the norm rather than the exception.”
Sestak disagreed.
"Roughly 40 million American citizens lack insurance. Every year, the epidemic of uninsurance costs our economy as much as $160 billion in lost productivity, and if we don’t bend the cost curve, in 30 years, health care costs will consume fully one-third of our economic output,” according to Sestak’s statement.
"This is one of the rare instances where the moral imperative is also the economic necessity,” he said.
Local politicians react to bill’s passage
By EVAN BRANDT
For The Times Herald
Passed by a margin of 219-212, the House vote, which adopted the Senate version of the health care reform bill with some changes, did not receive a single Republican vote. Thirty-four Congressional Democrats, including two from Pennsylvania, also voted against the measure.
Two local Republican Congressman made no bones about their very similar feelings on the subject.
"Only in Washington could you pass legislation that calls for the American people to spend 10 years paying for six years of benefits and call it reform,” said Rep. Jim Gerlach, R-6th Dist.
"The bill uses 10 years of taxes and Medicare cuts in order to pay for six years of programs,” echoed Rep. Charles Dent, R-15th Dist.
Similarity of mind was displayed on the other side of the aisle as well.
"The health care reform we passed (Sunday) will put an end to insurance industry abuses, extend lifesaving care to millions, strengthen Medicare and cut the national deficit” said Rep. Joe Sestak, D-7th Dist.
"Health care reform represents the largest deficit reduction measure in nearly a generation,” said Rep. Allyson Schwartz, D-13th Dist. "It will contain the rising cost of health coverage and improve health benefits for Americans who currently have insurance.”
That the legislation has taken on political overtones is, at this point, a given.
At least two candidates running to replace those who cast votes in the House issued their own statements as well.
"Democrats have rammed through the House of Representatives by the slimmest of margins legislation that raises taxes on the middle class and represents a government takeover of 17 percent of our nation’s economy,” said Pat Meehan, a Republican running to replace Sestak, who is running for the Senate seat now held by Arlen Specter.
And in comments that similar to those made by President Obama late Sunday night, Manan Trivedi, a doctor and one of several Democrats running against Gerlach in the 6th District wrote: "health care reform begins with this legislation, it does not end with this legislation.”
Saying this is what change looks like, Obama predicted that the vote would "give rise to a frenzy of instant analysis. There will be tallies of Washington winners and losers, predictions about what it means for Democrats and Republicans, for my poll numbers, for my administration” he said.
Once that fades, he said, "what will remain standing is not the government-run system some feared, or the status quo that serves the interests of the insurance industry, but a health care system that incorporates ideas from both parties.”
And while most Republicans might dispute that today, several of the main elements of the law passed Sunday are similar to the 1993 legislation offered up by Republicans as an alternative to the famously failed proposals of the Clinton administration.
A former Republican Senator from Minnesota, Dave Durenberger, recently told a reporter that a mandate that individuals buy insurance, subsidies for the poor to buy insurance and the requirement that insurers offer a standard benefits package and refrain from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions were all in the 1993 GOP bill as well as the current legislation.
Durenberger told Kaiser Health News that while those ideas, once Republican proposals, haven’t changed, the main thing that has changed is the definition of a Republican.
And of course, there has been no shortage of definitions being offered of what the House Democrats have now voted in favor of twice.
While more extreme definitions have ranged from "socialism” to "fascism,” local representatives were not shy about doing a little defining of their own.
A release issued by Schwartz’s office says the bill includes:
-Tax credits for small businesses to make employee coverage more affordable;
-Insurance companies will be banned from dropping people from coverage when they get sick, from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions, and from placing lifetime caps on coverage;
-New private plans will be required to cover preventative services with no co-payment.
Gerlach’s office offered its own bullet points, saying Republicans oppose the bill because it:
- Proposes to raid $53 billion from Social Security to appear as if it actually reduces the deficit
- Treats Medicare like a piggy bank, raiding more than $500 billion from retirees health coverage to fund creation of another open-ended health care entitlement;
- About 46 percent of families making less than $66,150 will be forced to pay the 2.5 percent tax on their adjusted gross income for failing to buy "acceptable” coverage.
"In my district, innovation, investment and jobs in the life sciences and biotechnology sector will be at risk because of a new $2 billion per year tax on items used for cancer screening, knee and hip replacement surgery and other life-saving procedures,” Gerlach said in a release.
"I am extremely disappointed that this legislation raises taxes on families and job creators, makes refusing to buy government-approved insurance a crime and slashes Medicare benefits for millions of seniors,” he said.
Schwartz was as specific about her constituents.
"There are 135,000 households in the district that could qualify for the largest middle-class tax cut for health care in history,” she said in her release.
"There are up to 15,000 small businesses that are eligible for tax credits of up to 50 percent of the cost of providing health insurance,” she said.
"There are 115,000 seniors who will benefit from improvements made to Medicare and 11,300 who will receive help paying for their prescription drugs,” said Schwartz.
In his prepared statement, Dent said he supports reform, but not the plan backed by Democrats.
"Done right, we will lift burdens that are holding employers back from growing and revitalizing our economy,” he said of reform he would support. "Done wrong, jobs will be lost and 10 percent unemployment will become the norm rather than the exception.”
Sestak disagreed.
"Roughly 40 million American citizens lack insurance. Every year, the epidemic of uninsurance costs our economy as much as $160 billion in lost productivity, and if we don’t bend the cost curve, in 30 years, health care costs will consume fully one-third of our economic output,” according to Sestak’s statement.
"This is one of the rare instances where the moral imperative is also the economic necessity,” he said.
[ Back to News ]
