Monday, February 7, 2011

Who is responsible for Obamacare? Mitt Romney? Mike Huckabee? Sarah Palin? ........?

I was thinking the other day about The house repealing Obamacare and the fact that it really was only a symbolic gesture. Then I thought to myself, wouldn't it have been great if Obamacare was never deemed necessary to begin with.

There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that guarantees health care for it's citizens. I believe this was intentional. I think our fore fathers realized back then that certain issues regarding it's citizens should be delegated to individual states. In fact, if you think about it, individual states have the option and ability to pick-up where the U.S. Constitution leaves off. Under the 10th Amendment, states have the right to create laws that pertain to the safety and well being of it's citizens. Which brings me back to Obamacare.

What if over the years, individual states had evaluated the health care needs of their citizens and proceeded to create a course of action based on their states particular circumstances? Would there have ever been a call for a national health care bill like Obamacare?

There were a few states, that did tackled this issue. Among them, Massachusetts and Minnesota to name a few. Not enough states though took the initiative. Hence, Obamacare.

With the 2012 Presidential elections just around the corner and the issue of Obamacare being on most peoples front burners, I thought it might be interesting to take a look at the top 3 potential candidates for President in 2012 and what their efforts were in their own states regarding health care needs.

I think most of us are familiar with Mitt Romney's Massachusetts' Health Care bill commonly referred to as RomneyCare. We are familiar with all the arguments for and against his state health care initiative. One of the best explanations of this program can be found here.

It was obvious in Massachusetts that years of ignoring the problem and not coming up with solutions that create an atmosphere that supports a free market approach, had gotten us no where. Mitt Romney tackled this issue head on with a state government that was controlled by Democrats. He gave Massachusetts residents what they wanted without raising any taxes. His plan is still popular with 68% of it's citizens and is only responsible for less than 1.5% of the State's budget.

But what of Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee?

According to Gallup, these are the rankings out of the 50 states for having the least uninsured:

Massachusetts 1
Arkansas 37
Alaska 38

The following is what I found on Governors Palin and Huckabee and their efforts to meet the health care needs of their constituents. In my search of their administrations, I've found that they didn't do very much. What little I found, is listed below.

Governor Sarah Palin:

The Alaska Health Care Strategies Planning Council: The Council will advise the Governor and the Legislature on ways to effectively provide access to quality health care and to help reduce the costs of health care for Alaskans.

If you follow the link above to the Planning Council's website, you will find that they were disbanded not long after they were formed.


Governor Mike Huckabee:

Arkansas Kids First Act: ARKids First allows children to receive regular medical checkups for uninsured kids

The Healthy Arkansas Initiative: This program aimed at improving the health of Arkansans through lifestyle changes.

If anyone knows of any other initiatives of either of the Governors, now is your chance to list them under comments for others to see. Only list initiatives that you can provide LINKS to the source.

Now I'm not laying any blame on Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee for Obamacare, but one has to wonder, if they and the other Governors had tackled their own state's health care needs, Would we find ourselves in the mess we're in today?

56 comments:

Anonymous said...

Excellent post Bosman. One of your best.

When it comes to Obamacare, there is plenty of blame to go around. NONE with Mitt Romney. Lots with the inaction of those who might have been able to meet this challenge head on in their own states.

zeke

phil said...

WOW!

Alaska and Arkansas 37th and 38th with those who lack health insurance. I can't wait to hear the Huckabites and Palinites spin on this one.

Anonymous said...

Alaska 21.1%
Arkansas 21.2%

of the people in those states lack health insurance. Those are horrible numbers.

tina said...

Excellent points!

Many governors blew it when they had the chance to do something.

Now all they do is complain about those few who did.

Max said...

You make some valid points.

I suppose, it's a matter of priorities. Many of these Governors felt that other issues were more important in their states. Perhaps if they had acted there would not have been a call for a national health care law.

One thing for certain is, That Mitt Romney can not be blamed for Obamacare. The only thing he is guilty of is trying to address the issue in his state.

Anonymous said...

Romney's not getting off that easy.

I must say though, This piece gets an A++ in spin.

Obamacare is everybody's fault but Mitt's.

Bill589 said...

Bosman is right. If other states took away their citizens rights, bankrupted their states, and lowered their quality of healthcare, then the federal government wouldn’t have to.

Got to give Mitt credit where it's due.

Anonymous said...

Bill,

How would you like being part of the 21% uninsured in Alaska?

Anonymous said...

CONT.

Do you think all 21% is BY CHOICE?

Anonymous said...

Huckabee and Palin were asleep at the switch!

OhioJOE said...

"Obamacare is everybody's fault but Mitt's." Repeat that non-sence as long as you want, but many of us are not buying that spin. The number of insured people per state is irrelivant. What next? Is Mr. Romney going to take credit for the number of people who have car insuance. Mr. Romney did not give me a car or a job (which is what it should be) so I for one am not going to give any government official credit for the fact that I have health, car and house insurance.

Doug NYC GOP said...

I was reading the NRO about Romney and Egypt and saw the comment below from a reader, regarding MaCare. I thought it was pretty good. Link to article below his comment.
-----------
Ryanmatthewb 02/01/11 12:44

"As a former MA resident (just recently moved to Austin, TX) I think there is a perspective that is often lost in the whole Romney discussion."

"For one, when your state implements legislation that adversely impacts you at least you can move to another state (like I did). This system sets up competition for resources, talent, companies, revenue, and prosperity amongst all states. That TX has no state income tax is a major draw to people living in MA, CA, NY etc. This puts pressure on those states to reform. The harder MA makes life for its residents, the more will shuffle out to NH, the south, or wherever (and census data shows us this is happening). Obamacare is dangerous because there is no state to escape to, and that is a point that Romney rightly makes."

"Secondly, there is a harsh political reality when trying to get anything done in MA. The state is so incredibly liberal. Romneycare MAY have been a better option than some of the other hairbrained commitments the State of MA had made to keep paying hospitals for the uninsured that walk through their doors. Additionally, with a supermajority Democrat legislature there were a lot of elements incorporated into Romneycare that Romney did not support."

"In that light I just don't think that Romneycare should weigh so negatively against him, especially in light of the overwhelming positives he brings to the table (experience, intellect, fiscal conservatism etc.)"

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/258543/mitt-romney-egypt-its-very-clear-mubarak-has-move

Revolution 2010 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Revolution 2010 said...

Bravo Bos!

You make some excellent points that have not seen discussed in the blogosphere.

Ann said...

Excellent Bosman!

It's hard to argue with your logic on this.

Anonymous said...

I can answer that one for all of you. I will make it really simple....Obama and the Democrats are responsible for it. Not Palin, not Huckabee and not Romney. The Democrats are. That was simple.

A.J.R.

illinoisguy said...

Bill, might I ask how a program that cost 1.5% of as state's budget, and is within its projected budget can be bankrupting a state? You guys are hilarious! What other state would not absolutely love to pay only 1.5% of their state's budget on healthcare, and be number 1 in the nation at the same time?

Anonymous said...

IG,

Your problem is, You are CORRECT!

illinoisguy said...

Even a blind old boar finds an acorn once in a while. :)

OhioJOE said...

"Bill, might I ask how a program that cost 1.5% of as state's budget," He was using that as an example, he did not say that a particualr state was bankrupt. Further, if HC comprises only 1.5% of the budget, why do you need to enforce mandidates?

Anonymous said...

Look at Alaska's and Arkansas UNINSURED.

21.1% and 21.2%. Sounds like a lot of emergency room visits to me!

I wonder who's paying for those visits?
ANSWER: Those who are insured.

Anonymous said...

"if HC comprises only 1.5% of the budget, why do you need to enforce mandates?"

=====

So THE SLIME who don't want to purchase it, don't even get away with even a cent of free healthcare.

OhioJOE said...

"21.1% and 21.2%. Sounds like a lot of emergency room visits to me!" Hahaha, so insurance is supose to stop emergency visits or greatly reduce them. I've been around far too long to fall for that line.

illinoisguy said...

OJ, to make it fair to the taxpayers! There is not place for the Socialism of freeloaders in the USA.

illinoisguy said...

OJ, when they walk into the emergency room, they have to be treated. You need to make a doctors appointment, and they ask about things such as your ability to pay. Otherwise, they can be booked up for months!! lol

Anonymous said...

I know the point you are trying to make Bos. And you bring up very interesting line of reason.

But in my opinion those responsible for Obamacare, are those who have drummed the viewpoint that healthcare is a right, that a compassionate nation must provide government compassion. This is the left and Obama at the helm.

Not something Romney believes. Oh he may believe that we are a compassionate nation and I fully agree, but compassion is something the Government does worst. And government largesse solves nothing.

Lori*

Anonymous said...

OhioJOE,

So WHERE do the 21% go when they're sick?

How about the portion of the 21% who can't afford insurance, don't you think they would like to pay less through an insurance pool? Same companies at a discounted rate.

Anonymous said...

"How about the portion of the 21% who can't afford insurance, don't you think they would like to pay less through an insurance pool? Same companies at a discounted rate."


Insurance companies are willing to do this ONLY if everyone must be insured

ConMan said...

You're fighting a losing battle here. The anti-Romney folks are more worried about the rights of the deadbeats than the rights of those fed up paying for them.

OhioJOE said...

"How about the portion of the 21% who can't afford insurance, don't you think they would like to pay less through an insurance pool?"
In Socialist countries, these some jokers get treated. In fact, they have more of these characters.
"Same companies at a discounted rate." They actually can get discounts. That is the dirty little secret few people tell us.

"There is not place for the Socialism of freeloaders in the USA. " The MA tax payers are still paying at least as much for these characters, so much for you r free loading arguement.

phil said...

OJ,

Just saying something like,

"How about the portion of the 21% who can't afford insurance, don't you think they would like to pay less through an insurance pool?"
In Socialist countries, these some jokers get treated. In fact, they have more of these characters.
"Same companies at a discounted rate." They actually can get discounts. That is the dirty little secret few people tell us.

"There is not place for the Socialism of freeloaders in the USA. " The MA tax payers are still paying at least as much for these characters, so much for you r free loading arguement."

doesn't make it so. However the fact that EVERYONE (including the FREELOADERS) are paying SOMETHING NOW, means that more money is being taken in that wouldn't be taken in if there were no mandate in MA.

Anonymous said...

OJ, you're wasting your time. The Rombots use questionable numbers then call anyone who questions those numbers names. They question the CATO institute but trust the democratic state of Massachusetts numbers. It's not worth your time. I know that it is better that nothing was done in Alaska compared to what happened in Mass. The worse part is that Romney is supposed to be a solutions guy, yet he went about the whole thing ass-backwards but it doesn't matter...if Romney promoted gay sex...these guys would bend over and take it and swear it was socially conservative.

jerseyrepublican

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Bosman, I didn't buy this argument a year ago when you tried peddling it on ROS and I don't buy it now. I'm sure lesser minded Romney supporters love it but the fact remains that NOTHING is better than MassCare.

If Romney's MassCare inspired ObamaCare, I don't have the answer to that but I do know that Axelrod has been all over the news stating that it did. I do know that President Obama has been all over the news stating that it did. When push comes to shove, that narrative will take hold and Romney and his supporters say "NA-ah" won't change that...true or not.

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

That's your opinion, Jersey, but the Heritage Foundation sure didn't think it was ass-backwards. They helped create it. Neither did a lot of other conservatives at the time.

Now it's all political, and doesn't have much to do with reality anymore. It's just a club used to beat Romney over the head. Any straight reading of it shows the plan was a good solution.

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

I love how you guys trot out the Heritage Foundation to give credibility to MittCare. The Heritage foundation was WRONG TOO. The plan is a freaking disaster right now. Even Mitt admits that he would have done it different.

Anonymous said...

Martha, there are too many conflicting numbers to make sense of the program any longer. For every piece of data you show me, I can show you data that conflicts with it.

I still don't understand why not one Massachusetts resident has had their taxes decreased or have lower insurance premiums since MassCare took effect?

jerseyrepublican

Doug NYC GOP said...

"I love how you guys trot out the Heritage Foundation to give credibility to MittCare" - RWN

But it's fine for you guy's to qoute CATO. Bit of a double standard, no?

For all the catostrophic trouble you guys predict will befall Romney, you certianly get very anxious and testy.

If you believe what you say, you should be relaxed and laughing your way to palin's nomination, no?

Anonymous said...

It's a two-way street Doug. The same can be said of your guys statements about Palin.

jerseyrepublican

Socrates said...

I've noticed that NOT ONE Palin or Huckabee supporter had anything positive to say about Palin's or Huckabee's health care initiatives.

I also noticed they did not question the GIST of this post in that. Would there have been a push for national health care if there had not been a need because states had dealt with this matter themselves?

Anonymous said...

JR-
MA care was not instigated to lower costs, it was passed to get more people insured in the private health system. The fact that insurance premiums haven't gone down nor have taxes decreased is irrelevant since that was not the main purpose of the legislation. I know that you believe it should have been a cost cutting measure, but that is not what it was.

AZ

Doug NYC GOP said...

Here's a decent place to start to educate yourselves on Ma Health Care reform...uh...for those who are interested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform

Doug NYC GOP said...

This article has some interesting points...

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/insurance/health-care-law-repeal/19813778/

Eskimo said...

Palin didn't care about the uninsured in Alaska. She and her kids, got insurance for nothibg.

Her husband qualifies for free care because of his Indian heritage so she and the kids all do as well.

ConMan said...

Jerseyrepublican,

"....the fact remains that NOTHING is better than MassCare"


Not to the citizens of Massachusetts!
Are you a citizen of Massachusetts?

truth-b-told said...

Palin, Huckabee and all the other Governors who ignored this issue in their states are to blame.

Anonymous said...

AZ, with all due respect, the point of the program was to get "freeloaders" off the bill by giving all citizens access to "affordable" insurance. If the mandate was so successful in doing that then the savings should have been reflected in less taxes and lower insurance premiums.

All I ever hear is how much money the "freeloaders" were costing the residents that payed for insurance and how much it was costing tax payers...since Romney solved that problem by issuing the mandate, then those costs should be vanished and the savings should have been reflected in lower taxes, lower insurance premiums and lower hospital bills. I've yet to see any evidence of those savings.

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Eskimo, just because she and her kids are entitled to free healthcare does not mean that they used it...in fact I would assume, that if they had, that it would have been a much bigger story during the health care debate.

Can you provide any proof that shows that the Palin family used that service?

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

ConMan, I do not have to be a citizen of Massachusetts to question the programs and policy initiatives that a potential Presidential candidate had signed into law while Governor of Massachusetts. In my opinion, I feel doing nothing would have been better than passing a health care bill that included an individual mandate.

Since you are in such favor of the mandate, then why are you against it for the country? Obviously, in your mind, it was helpful so wouldn't it be helpful for the rest of the country to rid us of those dastardly "freeloaders?"

Anonymous said...

Socrates...oh sweet Socrates, I don't want to blame anybody other than Obama and his administration and the Democrat Senators and House Members who passed ObamaCare...for ObamaCare. But if I am asked who is more responsible and my choices were Governors who did nothing or Romney who signed a health care bill that included mandates...fine...then you guys are pushing me into a corner and I am forced to say that Romney is more responsible than the other Governors...there...you got your answer.

jerseyrepublican

Right Wingnut said...

Eskimo, Please provide proof that the Palins recieve free health care. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

RW, Eskimo is code for ellie or Martha.

ConMan said...

Jerseyrepublican,

"Since you are in such favor of the mandate, then why are you against it for the country? Obviously, in your mind, it was helpful so wouldn't it be helpful for the rest of the country to rid us of those dastardly "freeloaders?"'


What I'm in favor of is states being allowed to pass laws for their constituents. I don't give a rat's ass about the mandate in Massachusetts.

My reasoning? Not very complicated. I don't care because I DON'T LIVE THERE.

Now a NATIONAL MANDATE would affect me. Duh, get the difference?

Anonymous said...

ConMan FTW!

Anonymous said...

So, you're against the MassCare mandate? My guess is you wish that Romney never signed that into law and attempted to veto it but instead of being honest about it you are hiding behind the state's rights argument...which is a good point but I doubt it will help him in the elections. Perhaps someone with more principles might admit that the mandate sucks and they wish that their political superhero didn't pass it...then maybe I could take you even remotely serious.

jerseyrepublican

ConMan said...

Jerseyrepublican,

"Perhaps someone with more principles might admit that the mandate sucks and they wish that their political superhero didn't pass it...then maybe I could take you even remotely serious."

Now why would I want to say that.

68% of MA residents like the bill. Why would I want to deny them what they desired? As stated before and obviously way over your head, the MA mandate doesn't affect me. And unless you live in MA, doesn't affect you either.

Anonymous said...

ConMan, you can continue to berate my intelligence all you want, but the fact remains is that Romney wants to be the President of the United States and he wants me to vote for him, then I have every right and a responsibility to look at what he has done in the past.

Who cares what 68% of Mass. residents like...my bet is that 60% of them Democrats...my question to you is how you feel about the insurance mandate?

jerseyrepublican