Blue Dogs and Health Care
Recently, there has been much consternation about how the Blue Dogs are putting up roadblocks towards Barack Obama's desire to pass health care legislation.
Part of what the Blue Dogs demand is increased cost savings with another demand being that rural health care providers are not short changed in a new system like they are in Medicare.
What really upsets me is when the base of the Democratic party objects to including Blue Dogs' concerns in the health care legislation.
Eileen Levandoski at vbdems.org provides such an example. In a piece she titles "This is a catastrophe we must address NOW!" she objects to the cost increases necessary to meet Blue Dogs' demands. Cost is an issue, and she objects to the cost increasing aspects of what the Blue Dogs want. Please note the YouTube video she links to. It provides an example of rural citizens who are in high need of health care services.
Ahem. Does anyone notice a problem here? Unless the Blue Dogs' concerns are included in the proposed health care proposal, the health care package might not pass. If the health care package does not pass with Blue Dogs' concerns being addressed, the rural citizens health care needs that she points to are not going to be addressed anyway.
By the way, I can only speak with limited authority. My self claimed authority only comes from listening as I travel in rural areas as I travel around this nation. From what I know, rural areas are increasingly finding it more difficult to obtain any health care because there are no health care providers to deliver the services.
I find it amazing that Eileen would use as an example of such a segment of our society that needs health care to support her position that Blue Dogs must be opposed. The Blue Dogs are actually the ones standing up for the people she points to as an example. If she opposes the Blue Dogs, she actually wants to leave these people without health care.
OK, OK, they might still be able to get at health care. As long as they are willing to travel a couple hours to get it and do not have a problem with contributing to greenhouse gas emissions while they travel.
Part of what the Blue Dogs demand is increased cost savings with another demand being that rural health care providers are not short changed in a new system like they are in Medicare.
What really upsets me is when the base of the Democratic party objects to including Blue Dogs' concerns in the health care legislation.
Eileen Levandoski at vbdems.org provides such an example. In a piece she titles "This is a catastrophe we must address NOW!" she objects to the cost increases necessary to meet Blue Dogs' demands. Cost is an issue, and she objects to the cost increasing aspects of what the Blue Dogs want. Please note the YouTube video she links to. It provides an example of rural citizens who are in high need of health care services.
Ahem. Does anyone notice a problem here? Unless the Blue Dogs' concerns are included in the proposed health care proposal, the health care package might not pass. If the health care package does not pass with Blue Dogs' concerns being addressed, the rural citizens health care needs that she points to are not going to be addressed anyway.
By the way, I can only speak with limited authority. My self claimed authority only comes from listening as I travel in rural areas as I travel around this nation. From what I know, rural areas are increasingly finding it more difficult to obtain any health care because there are no health care providers to deliver the services.
I find it amazing that Eileen would use as an example of such a segment of our society that needs health care to support her position that Blue Dogs must be opposed. The Blue Dogs are actually the ones standing up for the people she points to as an example. If she opposes the Blue Dogs, she actually wants to leave these people without health care.
OK, OK, they might still be able to get at health care. As long as they are willing to travel a couple hours to get it and do not have a problem with contributing to greenhouse gas emissions while they travel.
posted by Little David at 7/29/2009 02:09:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home