Those “Coulds and Woulds” in the Health Care Debate
Aug 21st, 2009 | 15 responses
I have frequently written about, quoted from, or published letters to the editors of our newspapers.
I have often said that one can find unbelievably good common sense and wisdom in such letters from ordinary Americans.
Once in a while, a politician’s letter to the editor finds its way onto the editorial pages.
Alarm bells should ring when this occurs.
I am not saying that politicians don’t have the right to express their opinions in such a manner.
I am not saying that politicians’ opinions expressed via such letters should be ignored or automatically condemned.
I am saying that one needs to carefully read and evaluate such letters, whether written by a Democrat or by a Republicans, because, after all, they are written by politicians.
One such letter appeared in USA TODAY yesterday.
It was a letter titled, “Health care plan doesn’t require proof of citizenship,” and written by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.
The letter was in response to an August 10, USA TODAY editorial opinion, “Misinformation, mayhem mar debate on health care.”
The opinion piece laments the fact that ”Some August town hall meetings around the country have degenerated into furious shouting matches, driven by outrageous misinformation borne of many sources.”
The editorial continues: “So in the interest of correcting some of the misinformation, here are a few truths that need to get moving,” and shines the light of truth and reason on such issues and subjects as euthanasia and death panels, “Socialism,” the ability to keep the insurance or health coverage “you got” and, finally, on the rumor that “Illegal immigrants will be covered.”
On that last issue, USA TODAY says:
In fact, no bill says this, and a key House bill explicitly forbids it. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, claims that the Congressional Budget Office says 5.6 million illegal immigrants would be covered. FactCheck.org says King is distorting CBO’s findings, which say no such thing.
In his letter to the editors of USA TODAY, King disagrees with USA TODAY, Democrats, FactCheck.org, “liberal blogs,” etc., and says:
USA TODAY’s editorial “Misinformation, mayhem mar debate on health care” cannot cover up for the fact that illegal immigrants would benefit from the House Democrats’ health care bill (Aug. 10).
According to the Congressional Budget Office, within 10 years, the non-Medicare population of the U.S. will include 14.1 million illegal immigrants. CBO projects that up to 8.5 million of those 14.1 million will not have health insurance, meaning the Democrats’ bill could benefit as many as 5.6 million illegal immigrants.
This is the result of Democrats blocking Republican efforts to require proof of citizenship. Democrats are on record voting to defeat amendments that would preserve the proof of citizenship standard.
FactCheck.org and liberal blogs have criticized this conclusion by pointing to language in the bill stating that illegal immigrants cannot receive health benefits. That language is purely a red herring — technically accurate but functionally meaningless except as a diversion.
No Democratic bill contains verification mechanisms, such as proof of citizenship requirements, to ensure that illegal immigrants would not receive benefits. Democrats in two congressional committees defeated Republican amendments introduced to close this loophole.
Their bill also suggests that if one member of a household were eligible for benefits (for example, a U.S.-born child of an illegal immigrant), then everyone in that household would be considered eligible. The Pew Hispanic Center estimated that there are almost 2 million families in the USA with illegal immigrant parents and U.S.-born children.
With these significant loopholes — no verification and family eligibility — illegal immigrants would benefit if liberals passed their bill that would lead to a government takeover of our health care system. Next time, perhaps FactCheck.org and those who print its opinions will check with the author of the facts before they go to print. My number is 5.6 million; what’s yours?
While I do not claim to be an expert on the proposed health care reform legislation as it presently stands, I am quite sure that it does not include language such as:
* “Illegal immigrants would benefit from the House Democrats’ health care bill.”
* “…the Democrats’ bill could benefit as many as 5.6 million illegal immigrants.”
* “…defeat amendments that would preserve the proof of citizenship standard.”
* “No Democratic bill contains verification mechanisms…to ensure that illegal immigrants would not receive benefits.”
* “Their bill also suggests that if one member of a household were eligible for benefits…then everyone in that household would be considered eligible”
* “Illegal immigrants would benefit if liberals passed their bill that would lead to a government takeover of our health care system.”
(Emphasis mine)
I am no legislative expert either, but I do not believe that legislative proposals are analyzed, passed or rejected based on woulds, coulds, assumptions or suggestions. I believe that the process works better when such analyses and debate are based on hard facts.
To this ordinary American, the use of coulds and woulds, and “suggests that”, smacks of another attempt to perpetuate just one more myth about the proposed health care legislation.
Most amazing, King even refers to specific language in the bill stating that illegal immigrants cannot receive health benefits, as: “Purely a red herring—technically accurate but functionally meaningless except as a diversion.”
Perhaps Mr. King and his Republican colleagues might be much more effective—and credible—if they would work with Democrats to address such perceived “loopholes” and to improve other aspects of the proposed legislation, instead of continuing to invent and propagate their own red herrings and absurdities—such as “Democrats want to pull the plug on Grandma; provide free abortions,” etc.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
15 Responses to “Those “Coulds and Woulds” in the Health Care Debate”
From crooksandliars.com:
The next right-wing smear of health-care reform: Illegal immigrants will get benefits! (Er, no, they won't.)
Thanks for the specific langiage of the proposed legislation, SteveK.
No coulds, woulds, “suggests” or red herrings there. Only clear, specific language.
Doesn't really matter, the public option is dead, Hoyer joins the list of those backing off of it. That is pretty much the final nail in the coffin.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/hoyer-not-f…
Good catch, Dorian. Fudgy language (like could and would and suggests that) is always worth peering into.
The problem with a lot of the misinformation and scare tactics is that they are generally based on something else — something easily twisted. Thus, I am curious about the CBO report. What were they referring to?
Polimom:
factCheck.org discusses this whole issue.
http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-hea…
In part,
So, where does King get his 5.6 million figure? His press release says that the CBO projected that the uninsured would include 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019. The CBO’s analysis of the House health care bill estimates that in 2019, 17 million would remain uninsured “nearly half of whom would be unauthorized immigrants.” This is where math comes in: Taking the 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019 and subtracting half of 17 million (8.5 million) gets you … 5.6 million illegal immigrants that have suddenly gained coverage, right? Actually, no. About half of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have health care coverage now.
As the CBO itself said in a December 2008 report: “studies indicate that of the roughly 12 million unauthorized immigrants in this country [now], about half have health insurance and half are uninsured.” Those studies were done by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center. Its oft-cited work on the numbers of unauthorized immigrants said that illegal immigrants were more likely to be uninsured principally because “the occupations and industries in which the unauthorized work tend to be those where employers do not provide insurance.” The center’s report said 59 percent of adults and 53 percent of children with illegal status are uninsured.
That's the problem with today's political culture, aided and abetted by the media, PM. They speak a form of jargon that's the new Latin to keep the great unwashed ignorant of what really goes down in the corridors of power. It is a full time job to be an informed citizen in today's environment and too many on the right and left are eager to join the priesthood in hopes of some scraps falling off the table.
Polimom:
factCheck.org discusses this whole issue.
http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-hea…
In part,
So, where does King get his 5.6 million figure? His press release says that the CBO projected that the uninsured would include 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019. The CBO’s analysis of the House health care bill estimates that in 2019, 17 million would remain uninsured “nearly half of whom would be unauthorized immigrants.” This is where math comes in: Taking the 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019 and subtracting half of 17 million (8.5 million) gets you … 5.6 million illegal immigrants that have suddenly gained coverage, right? Actually, no. About half of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have health care coverage now.
As the CBO itself said in a December 2008 report: “studies indicate that of the roughly 12 million unauthorized immigrants in this country [now], about half have health insurance and half are uninsured.” Those studies were done by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center. Its oft-cited work on the numbers of unauthorized immigrants said that illegal immigrants were more likely to be uninsured principally because “the occupations and industries in which the unauthorized work tend to be those where employers do not provide insurance.” The center’s report said 59 percent of adults and 53 percent of children with illegal status are uninsured.
So instead of saying “You will be able to keep your current insurence” you should say “You may be able to keep your current insurance”? Is that the kind of thing you mean?
Most people who get their health insurance through work (non-governmental) are in a “may be able to keep” position already.
Management providing private health insurance to their employees are always shopping price and negotiating employee contracts as it is… so your point is moot.
Polimom:
factCheck.org discusses this whole issue.
This comment keeps getting deleted, let me try once more
http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-hea…
In part,
So, where does King get his 5.6 million figure? His press release says that the CBO projected that the uninsured would include 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019. The CBO’s analysis of the House health care bill estimates that in 2019, 17 million would remain uninsured “nearly half of whom would be unauthorized immigrants.” This is where math comes in: Taking the 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019 and subtracting half of 17 million (8.5 million) gets you … 5.6 million illegal immigrants that have suddenly gained coverage, right? Actually, no. About half of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have health care coverage now.
As the CBO itself said in a December 2008 report: “studies indicate that of the roughly 12 million unauthorized immigrants in this country [now], about half have health insurance and half are uninsured.” Those studies were done by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center. Its oft-cited work on the numbers of unauthorized immigrants said that illegal immigrants were more likely to be uninsured principally because “the occupations and industries in which the unauthorized work tend to be those where employers do not provide insurance.” The center’s report said 59 percent of adults and 53 percent of children with illegal status are uninsured.
Polimom:
factCheck.org discusses this whole issue.
This comment keeps getting deleted, let me try once more without the url
In part,
So, where does King get his 5.6 million figure? His press release says that the CBO projected that the uninsured would include 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019. The CBO’s analysis of the House health care bill estimates that in 2019, 17 million would remain uninsured “nearly half of whom would be unauthorized immigrants.” This is where math comes in: Taking the 14.1 million illegal immigrants in 2019 and subtracting half of 17 million (8.5 million) gets you … 5.6 million illegal immigrants that have suddenly gained coverage, right? Actually, no. About half of illegal immigrants in the U.S. have health care coverage now.
As the CBO itself said in a December 2008 report: “studies indicate that of the roughly 12 million unauthorized immigrants in this country [now], about half have health insurance and half are uninsured.” Those studies were done by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center. Its oft-cited work on the numbers of unauthorized immigrants said that illegal immigrants were more likely to be uninsured principally because “the occupations and industries in which the unauthorized work tend to be those where employers do not provide insurance.” The center’s report said 59 percent of adults and 53 percent of children with illegal status are uninsured.
It sounds to me that Rep. King wants stronger language than is in the current version of the bills. I disagree that this is an “invented red herring.”
I get his point (and tend to agree), without proof of citizenship, we all know that “people who are here illegally” will receive benefits. The government bureaucracies, while large, are not large enough to verify that each and everyone that is given benefits is in fact a legal citizen of the U.S.
Based on his letter, it sounds like he has tried to work with the Democrats. He clearly stated, that the Democrats have rejected efforts to add verification of citizenship to the bills. Working with the Democrats has clearly failed and now he is appealing to the people via a letter to the editor.
I agree there is a lot of misinformation and stupid comments being made by both sides; however, I do not see this as one of them.
I heard Obama talk about this and he sort of waffled on the issue, saying that illegal aliens wouldn't be covered except for emergency situations. Since current law already requires ERs and hospitals to treat these folks until they are stabilized am I right in thinking the new system won't be any different than the old system? Aliens will still receive medical care but the cost will continue to be passed along to other patients and insurers? Or is the government now agreeing to bear the cost of emergency treatment for this population?
Maybe somebody could define this.
SECTIONS 242 and 246 are replete with statements of (proposed) law, that individuals who are not lawfully present in the US may not receive funds to purchase insurance, and it ends with the unequivocal statement that “Nothing in this Act shall allow Federal payments for individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”
I am no lawyer, but that doesn't sound like a “red herring to me.”
I don't know about emergency treatment under the proposed law, but if people want to deny that to illegal immigrants, I guess they should talk to their Reps, to put that into law.
If there is no way to check does it matter if someone is illegal? It has long been a tactic used by some. If you are against a law don't bother changing it, just make it uninforcable.