Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Congress / Woods Lamar Attacks! Whatever Happened to Finding the Good and Praising It?
Posted by Jeff Woods on Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:52 PM
WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) today made the following remarks on the floor of the U.S. Senate:
"Massachusetts voters yesterday sent a clear message that the Democratic majority in Congress is not in touch with the American people and that we should restart the health care debate. Senator-elect Scott Brown's independent voice will help provide a much-needed check and balance to a Congress that has become dominated by more taxes, more spending and more Washington takeovers."
"Nothing demonstrates that need more than the so called health care reform--a 2,700-page attempt to remodel 17 percent of the American economy that was concocted in secret, presented to the Senate over the weekend before Christmas during the worst snowstorm in years, voted on in the middle of the night and passed five days later on Christmas Eve without one single Republican vote."
"Now that the people have spoken, we should abandon these arrogant notions of trying to turn our entire health care system upside down all at once and instead set a clear goal of reducing health care costs, and then work together step by step to re-earn the trust of the American people - an approach Republican senators urged exactly 173 times on the floor of the Senate during the last year."
"A good place to restart the health care debate would be to abandon plans to send a huge bill to states to pay for Medicaid expansion."
"The sixty senators who voted for this so-called health care reform legislation ought to be sentenced to go home and serve as governor for two terms and try to pay for it."
"Because what these senators would find is that states are broke and that there will be either higher state taxes or higher college tuition or both to pay for what the Democratic governor of Tennessee has called 'the mother of all unfunded mandates.' That mandate arrogantly expands Medicaid and, to help pay for it, will send a three-year, $25 billion bill to governors, who in turn will send the bill to taxpayers and students. That's like your big-spending Uncle Sam hiring someone to paint your house and then sending the bill to you, even though you've told Uncle Sam that you've spent all your available money sending your kid to college. Remember, Uncle Sam doesn't have to balance his budget, but you do."
"I speak today not only as a United States Senator but as a former governor worried about our states and as a former president of a great public university worried about our college students, many of whom are seeking an education to find a job. Washington policies are turning our federal constitutional system upside down. They are transforming autonomous state governments into bankrupt wards of the central government. In doing so, they are making it harder for states to support public higher education, therefore damaging its quality and the opportunity for Americans to afford it. Gov. Schwarzenegger of California says 'with a $19 billion deficit the last thing we need is another $3 billion bill [for Medicaid].' At the University of California, students are paying a 32 percent tuition increase. Why? Because, according to The New York Times, 'the University of California now receives only half as much support from the state per student as it did in 1990.' And why is that? Because when governors make up their budgets, it usually comes down to a choice between exploding Medicaid costs and higher education, and Medicaid--hopelessly entangled with expensive Washington policies and mandates--wins."
"The second recent big blow to states and to public higher education has been the stimulus package, which was hailed as bailing states out but instead will soon push them over a financial cliff."
"Now some in Washington are suggesting a new stimulus program to bail out the states. Why should we even consider such a thing when the last stimulus package is about to help the push the states off a financial cliff? And why would we pass a new health care bill that makes it worse for states--that is, for every state but Nebraska?"
"The No. 1 topic on the minds of most Americans today is jobs. Running up the cost of health care, raising state taxes, damaging the quality of our universities and community colleges and restricting access to them is a good way to kill jobs, not to create jobs."
"Wouldn't a better course be to restart the health care debate, and take a series of steps to reduce health care costs without the Medicaid mandate? Instead of expanding Medicaid and sending the states the bill, why not reform Medicaid which has become an embarrassing, administrative nightmare where $30 billion a year goes to waste, fraud and abuse, according to the Government Accountability Office? Instead of dumping 15 to 18 million more low-income Americans into a Medicaid program in which 50 percent of doctors won't take new patients, shouldn't we try a better idea?"
Comments (12)
Showing 1-12 of 12
Why didn't you introduce a series of steps to reduce health care costs over, say, the last decade, Lamar? Like when y'all were in charge of everything?
like
dislike
Sen. Lamar Alexander said today on the Senate floor that "Democratic policies are pushing the states over a financial cliff" and "turning them into bankrupt wards of the central government."
And that is a 100% economically accurate statement.
Gilbert - I've learned a lot from you about the advantages of those small government utopias like Haiti. Why can't the U.S. government be reduced so that we can live the good life like those in Haiti?
Senator Alexander thoughtfully supported the important Medicare Part D bill, passed just before President Bush's 2004 re-election. Part D will add $7.2 trillion in unfunded expenses over the years. The Congressional Budget Office says the current health bill will reduce the federal deficit. Please thank Senator Alexander for helping Mr Grover Norquist to shrink government "down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." The country was in terrible shape after President Clinton left the Federal government with a large budget surplus. Senator Alexander will help drown the country in debt so, in the future, we too can enjoy the benefits of a Haitian-style government.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
http://www.slate.com/id/2238098/
"Gilbert - I've learned a lot from you about the advantages of those small government utopias like Haiti. Why can't the U.S. government be reduced so that we can live the good life like those in Haiti?"
If you are an admirere of the status of Haiti, then that makes you JOE THE LIBERAL - since that situation was entirely caused by liberal polices that turned the place into one big welfare plantation.
"since that situation was entirely caused by liberal polices that turned the place into one big welfare plantation."
We should be shocked by opinions like these but Gilbert specializes in hyperbole. The truth is, an EARTHQUAKE caused the recent damage but going back and looking at their extreme poverty, CORRUPTION, not liberal or conservative policies, is the root problem. Stop listening to El Rushbo, Gilbert!
And here in the U.S., the states were already being "pushed over a financial cliff" after Supply-Side Republican economic polices.
Food for thought about spending: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/01/obamas-spending-cuts-vs-bushs.html
By God Gilbert, your economic knowledge and perspicacity is just too valuable to ignore. Too precious to let go to waste. The next time we have a properly conservative maximum leader you need to be one of his inner circle of advisers.
Hell, you could even start off as an assistant for economic affairs to Senator Alexander. Who knows, he might yet become President. And I'm sure he'd be relieved to have council from one as learned as thou.
"We should be shocked by opinions like these but Gilbert specializes in hyperbole. The truth is, an EARTHQUAKE caused the recent damage but going back and looking at their extreme poverty, CORRUPTION, not liberal or conservative policies, is the root problem"
I didn't say anything about the earthquake you dipstick. I was repsonding to Joe the faux conservative's snarky remark about the generic status of Haiti.
And that is indeed the result of a liberal policy. The county has been existing off of foreign aid - the international version of welfare - for decades.
Whatever behavior you economically reward, you will get more of. The world has been propping Haiti up - rewarding them for doing nothing for themselves. Therefore they have continued to do nothing for themselves.
In contrast to the Dominican Republic on the other side of the same island which is doing OK.
Gilbert, my point still stands. And I won't even take a personal shot at you. First of all, the Dominican Republic maybe not in as bad a shape as Haiti, it is hardly "doing ok." It is extremely poor. And comparing the economic aid that the world has given Haiti with American style "liberalism" is beyond laughable, especially since a good portion of that aid is charitable, from organizations like the Red Cross and the Salvation Army. Most people in Haiti live on about a dollar a day so whatever "welfare" they supposedly get, the average person isn't seeing it. And believe me, the Dominican Republic also gets a lot of charitable largess. The government is just much less corrupt and people actually see the results. And the main problem in Haiti is political corruption. Dance around that all you want Gilbert. Making grand statements in blogs, as you like to do, doesn't make your argument persuasive.
The more I think of it, the more ridiculous your argument is, Gilbert. If it wasn't for the Marshall Plan after World War II, much of western Europe, a) wouldn't have recovered economically and b) would have probably fallen to the Communists. Japan became what it was because of international aid, aka, according to Gilbert, as "liberal welfare." The difference between those societies and Haiti is largely corruption. And there's nothing that you or anyone else in the history of the universe can say to change that.
"Gilbert, my point still stands"
That's what you think.
"And comparing the economic aid that the world has given Haiti with American style "liberalism" is beyond laughable, especially since a good portion of that aid is charitable, from organizations like the Red Cross and the Salvation Army."
Welfare is welfare regardless of who is
paying for it.
"And the main problem in Haiti is political corruption."
Uh huh and what funded that corruption?
All the money that continued to be thrown in there for decades with no procedures set up for any accountability for it being used effectively to achieve any measurable results.
And that is liberal ideology with a capital L - just keep throwing more money at it.
Just like the liberals squealed like stuck pigs at any and all attempts to reform the welfare systems in this country into being anything other than a guaranteed check for life for the people on it with no accountability.
And just like the liberals are constantly whining that the problem with public school systems is that we just aren't throwing enough money at it and of course also - with them being in the pocket of the teachers unions - fighting tooth and nail against any and all attempts to establish any sort of accountabily for results.
