http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/20/755597/-Under-Bush,-my-taxes-went-down-$250-and-my-health-insurance-premiums-went-up-$5,000
Interesting Blog article about health care costs.
Printable View
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/20/755597/-Under-Bush,-my-taxes-went-down-$250-and-my-health-insurance-premiums-went-up-$5,000
Interesting Blog article about health care costs.
Sorry you cant access the article here.
And how is Bush responsible for rising Health insurance costs?
A good portion of the increase in health care costs is because doctors have to pay huge malpractice insurance and practice defensive medicine. That's thanks to the Democratic Party's cronies, the trial lawyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by lloyd Handwerker
I think the point of the article is that everyone who supported Bush always
pointed to his tax cuts and ignored the fact that health insurance costs
were going through the roof. Bush and the Republicans have always been
bankrolled by the Insurance industry and they did nothing to rein in costs
during his 8 years.
As a small business owner, I can tell you this.
That during the Bush years, my federal personal income tax DID decrease by about 15%. But in order to make up for federal spending cuts, my local and state taxes, excise taxes on utilities like phones and electric. And increased property taxes raised my overall tax bill by 5%. So, it was a losing proposition for me. That's why I couldn't support another Republican during the past election. I like people who tell me the truth. At the very least the Democrats didn't lie and tell me they were going to lower my overall taxes.
As for health care. I think it IS the Doctors and Drug Makers along with the insurance companies that are to blame for the high cost of health care. I don't think legal fees really amount to even 1% of the overall cost of health care. I think people are just sold way too many drugs and services for things that they could probably cure with good diet and excercise.
LLoyd,i have to say that this is the most ignorant assinine statement you have ever said,i can give you personally 100 republicans i know who never supported Bush for those reasons you say in this statement..Quote:
Originally Posted by lloyd Handwerker
He reformed medicare and laid out the Blue print for the Obama healthcare plan of using it as a guide,negotiate rates on care and RX drugs out of strength.
Insurance companies,lawyers and Drug companies give equally to each party and candidate,they are the problem,they write the laws and the Tax loopholes that benefit one industry over another..
Candleman,appreciate and respect your thoughts,but that is the republican mantra since Ronald reagan,cut income and other taxes and then cut the subsidies to the states to pay for them in the budget,as all politics is local and best enforced locally,another words if your state or city is run tight andQuote:
Originally Posted by candleman
Fiscally sound you are ok,but if not,this is where the power of the vote is most held strongly IMHO to effect change...
Why should the federal gov't have to come to the states and mandate regs that are unfunded and then not pay for them...
Education should be funded locally and by school boards with out politics involved to teach our children right and funding should be equal to all..
Reagan started all this raising fees through Utilities and cable and phone companies,it was the great hidden Tax hike of the century,why i think he failed with his trickle down bullshit..He also made all cabinet divisions be self suppoorting with higher fees,like Passports,park fees,licsense's and such..ETC
i frankly dont understand your points johnny. Republicans didnt use the Bush tax cuts as their major and sometimes only talking point? Bush refused to allow passage of legislation to lower drug costs. Wonder why. Lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM
Contributions from drug and insurance companies tilt towards the Republicans. Which party wants the Public option in the health care plan?
Democrats of course. Who opposes it? insurance companies, Drug companies (although lately they have been trying to negotiate with the
Obama administration because they see the writing on the wall and want
the best deal possible) and the Republicans.
Check this out.
http://www.citizen.org/congress/camp...es.cfm?ID=6542
If you read down quite a bit you will find statistics about contributions to
Repbulicans. I can find you many other studies on Republicans contributions
from the Insurance and Drug companies if you dont want to google it yourself.
I believe it says 69% to Republicans.
That is not equal as you say.
Johnny,
Why dont you read the Krugman article under the heading Costs and Compassion before you write back.
"quote" LLoyd:Bush and the Republicans have always been
bankrolled by the Insurance industry and they did nothing to rein in costs
during his 8 years."Quote"
I'll take your word on the 69%,but sitting presidents and parties always get more,you should know that..and 69% rep to 31% dem in a republican administration is not as you say Republicans always backed by insurance co.'s
The prescription drug industry, using its connections and campaign cash, is well on its way toward blocking comprehensive Medicare drug coverage for America's seniors and people with disabilities, Public Citizen shows in an in-depth investigative report.
The report is being released in more than 50 cities in 25 states today as seniors, health, labor and consumer groups conduct a national day of action to "Fight for Independence from Drug Industry Price Gouging" and protest U.S. House passage of the Republican drug bill.
"By deploying an army of lobbyists and making huge campaign contributions, the drug industry has succeeded in blocking a comprehensive Medicare drug benefit that reins in sky-high drug costs," said Frank Clemente, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch.
The report, Addicting Congress: Drug Companies' Campaign Cash & Lobbying Expenses, is especially timely as the U.S. House of Representatives last week approved a pro-drug industry bill (H.R. 4680, the Medicare Rx 2000 Act) by the narrowest of margins -- 217 to 214, largely along party lines. Crafted by House Republican leaders in a matter of weeks, this proposed expansion of Medicare benefits has serious shortcomings: It depends on the private insurance industry and HMOs, rather than the Medicare program, to provide coverage, and it will do little to contain escalating costs.
Among the report's chief findings are the following:
The drug industry is spending vast sums on lobbying to hire well-connected former members of Congress and key staff to promote its financial interests before Congress. Overall, the drug industry spent $235.7 million from 1997 to 1999 to lobby officials in Congress and the executive branch. This amount does not include tens of millions more spent on television, radio and newspaper ads, direct mailings and telemarketing efforts.
1999 drug company spending on lobbying put the industry at the top of the Washington heap: Spending rose from $74.3 million in 1998 to $83.6 million in 1999 -- a 13 percent increase -- as public pressure to pass a Medicare prescription drug benefit mounted. On the Medicare drug benefit and pricing issue alone, companies have hired 297 lobbyists -- the equivalent of one lobbyist for every two members of Congress, an astonishing rate of coverage.
Since 1993 the drug industry has given $33.4 million in campaign contributions to candidates and parties. Moreover, its giving has grown exponentially. Contributions are projected to reach $13.8 million for the 2000 cycle -- a 43 percent increase over 1998 and a whopping 147 percent increase over 1994.
The industry's campaign spending has become more and more partisan in favor of Republicans. Overall, 69 percent of the contributions ($23 million) have gone to Republicans and 31 percent to Democrats ($10.4 million). The Republican share has risen from 60 percent in the 1994 cycle to 73 percent thus far in the 2000 cycle.
"Soft money" -- unlimited contributions from the companies and their executives to the political parties -- has become the favorite form of campaign contribution for the drug industry. It accounts for 55 percent of all donations thus far in the 2000 cycle. Soft money enables industry honchos to maximize their influence over congressional leaders who help raise party money and determine the legislative agenda. Eighty percent of all drug industry soft money is now being directed to Republican Party committees.
The drug industry's soft money contributions nearly tripled from the 1994 cycle ($1.7 million) to the 1998 one ($4.6 million). If drug industry soft money spending for the 2000 elections continues to rise at the rate it did in the last election, the final 2000 figure is projected at $7.5 million -- a 344 percent jump from 1994 and a 65 percent jump from 1998!
To work its will in Congress where Medicare prescription drug legislation is written, the drug industry has redirected the bulk of its soft money away from the two national party committees to the congressional campaign committees. Republican congressional committee collections rose from 39 percent of the total given to all Republican Party committees in the 1994 cycle to 61 percent in this cycle. Soft money to Democratic congressional committees went from 13 percent of the total given to all Democratic Party committees in 1994 to 85 percent in 2000.
Drug industry "hard money" contributions to candidates from company employees and political action committees help explain the recent House vote. The average drug industry contribution to proponents of the pro-industry House Republican bill was $18,984, which is 78 percent more than the $10,667 average contribution to opponents.
Moreover, the report reveals the cozy working relationship between Republican leaders and the drug industry and between the drug industry and "renegade" Democrats, including strategy sessions, close collaboration to craft legislation favorable to the industry and attack consumer-oriented bills, and a revolving door between Congress and the industry that will make your head spin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
more resources
» congress | campaign | special interest
Because Public Citizen does not accept funds from corporations, professional associations or government agencies, we can remain independent and follow the truth wherever it may lead. But that means we depend on the generosity of concerned citizens like you for the resources to fight on behalf of the public interest. If you would like to help us in our fight, click here.
LLOyd this report proves my point,read it again,Clintons were sitting thwen and got most till they tried to do a healthcare plan,then oh we better kill that and start giving to Republicans...Geez also this is from 2000,very dated but still proves my point,which was your general attack on Republicans as in every one was worried about tax cuts and took the eye off healthcare explosion of costs,well beg to differ it was a few rush head rightwind nuts who were saying that and stop watching Oberman the ARS..
Let me fill you in LLOyd on the rules of Lobbying,if the Drug and Insurance companies thought a Crack Whore from D.C had influence over a congressman's vote ,they would give her money too..
And just so we are clear here,i'm not against public healthcare,as long as it follows the Medicare form,which i think is ok,if we are going to have one,with options for private as now if that is what you want.
[QUOTE=JohnnyIrishXM;43195]"quote" LLoyd:Bush and the Republicans have always been
bankrolled by the Insurance industry and they did nothing to rein in costs
during his 8 years."Quote"
I'll take your word on the 69%,but sitting presidents and parties always get more,you should know that..and 69% rep to 31% dem in a republican administration is not as you say Republicans always backed by insurance co.'s[/QUOTE
Its not my word on the 69% it is a fact. i gave you the link to read it.
Once again you say something without statistics to back it up. The party in power doesnt always get a higher percentage of money. Yes it does move
in the direction of the Party in power but Insurance and {haramaceutical industy have spent more on the Republicans over the years because they
have the same policy interests.
I totally agree with you but certain industries interests align with certain Parties.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM
Want to take a wild quess who the Oil, Gas, Coal and Nuclear industries give the overwhelming majority of money to ? it aint rocket science.
Have a great weekend
Ok. lets see how this all plays out. Yes i like private and public options.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM