Columns and OpEds

[Print]  [Email]        

Hugh Hewitt: Obamacare is to Medicare what ACORN is to Children's Protective Services

By: Hugh Hewitt
Examiner Columnist
September 21, 2009

That's the line that was best received by the 600-plus-person audience at a debate on Obamacare I participated in along with University of Colorado Law School professor Paul Campos on Thursday night in Denver. Campos, who writes for the Daily Beast and is a reliable lefty, earned enormous points with the mostly hostile-to-Obamacare crowd simply for showing up to defend the general outlines of the various "reform" proposals under consideration by the Congress. That's more than most Democratic members of Congress will do, and with reason. Obamacare can't be defended if the right questions are asked of its proponents -- questions almost never posed by the legacy media.

Our debate's moderator was John Andrews, a former state senator in Colorado, founder of the Independence Institute and now head of Colorado Christian University's Centennial Institute. Andrews structured our exchange so we could ask each other questions. And as would be the case in any setting, Obamacare cannot be defended against very simple, very direct questions.

Here are the handful of questions every sponsor of any version of Obamacae ought to be obliged to answer -- in detail:

1. Can you specify, at least to the level of tens of millions, exactly where the $300 billion in cuts to Medicare proposed by president will come from?

2. The president and his allies agree that the cost of Medicare Advantage programs will have to increase for seniors. By how much? Will those increases arrive annually?

3. The president and his allies agree that some Medicare services will have to be cut. Which services?

4. Forty-five percent of doctors responding to a recent Investors Business Daily/TIPP poll responded that if Obamacare passed, they would consider quitting or retiring. Do you believe them? Even if only a significant portion of these disgruntled doctors retired or quit as a result of the passage of Obamacare, wouldn't that make the delivery of health care much more difficult than it already is?

5. The five-year survival rate of women with breast cancer in the United States is higher than that of women in Great Britain. The five-year survival rate for American men with any form of cancer is much higher than the same survival rate among all European men. How do you account for such a disparity?

These and other simple questions explode the premises surrounding Obamacare. Professor Campos quite passionately argued that there were enormous gaps in America's health care system and pointed to the appalling number of personal bankruptcies that result because of the extraordinary cost of health emergencies.

But the fact that there are enormous problems with the American health system has nothing to do with the efficacy of the proposed solutions offered in all of the versions of Obamacare. Lung cancer is a terrible disease, but it cannot be treated by open-heart surgery. Too often, the critics of American medicine are offering not just the wrong prescriptions but proposals certain to kill the patient.

Significant majorities of Americans now recognize that all the president's men have not been able to come up with anything remotely approaching an acceptable plan for mending some of the holes in American health care. Seniors, especially, have recognized the target on their collective back, and they are rebelling en masse. Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl said on my show last week that "senior citizens ought to be extraordinarily fearful of all three of these bills."

"Seniors should be deathly afraid," he continued, "and I use that phrase advisedly."

Seniors are deathly afraid of Obamacare, and with good reason, as are tens of millions of other Americans who like their health insurance and didn't vote to have it overhauled even if they voted for "change." Congressional Democrats ignore the deep, passionate and -- crucially -- informed opposition to Obamacare at their political peril. Continued attempts to jam down this huge lurch to the left will result in a massive swing to the right in November 2010.




To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

jgh

Sep 22, 2009

Here is a prime example of a "death sentance" that would be given under Obamacare. I recently saw my gastroenterologist prior to routine colonoscopy & complained of "bloating". He noted I'd complained of this 2 yrs back & ordered a CT. CT showed problems that led to his ordering a mesenteric dopler ultrasound which showed serious artery problems in my tummy. I am scheduled for arteriogram & probable angioplasty tomorrow. If angioplasty isn't sufficient I will need a double bypass. I am 78, in otherwise good health, still productive in real estate-
Try this scenario on with Obamacare! I'd be a statistic!

 

Ed out West

Sep 22, 2009

Obama is starting to look more and more like Carter. And worse, grossly overexposed, next to Clinton he looks a little President on training wheels or the “little train that could”.

 

John D. Froelich

Sep 22, 2009

Great Questions! No Answers!

 

s. valenti

Sep 22, 2009

Obama has mismanaged this whole issue of health care reform. He failed to articulate a coherent program or the need for one and then he turned it over to Congress - a body with lower approval ratings than George Bush!

We can't trust the media either. Where are the stories about how unrealistic it was for Obama to demand resolution of this monumental challenge by August!!!!

 

dave

Sep 22, 2009

Liberals want "Utopia".
They just can't explain how to get there in one piece...

 

logic 101

Sep 22, 2009

This hard question approach works great in a debate setting, but be wary of using it elsewhere. I asked some specific questions of people pushing obamacare on facebook, and all I got back was a stream of invective, no debate, no facts. Most obamacare supporters only understand sound bite, and if pressed, anger quickly at the messenger.

 

jko

Sep 22, 2009

The lunacy of politics is that its pundits and commentary attempt to describe "issues" in macro terms - whether in the mega-billions of dollar spent or saved, on in terms of flat-out stupid allegations of "death panels."

But then how else to demonize badly needed reform? Are we all so blind as to not see the indirect financial burden we all bear due to a flawed and entrenched status quo? I confess that I derive some assurance that what is being proposed alienates some constituencies. It will always be impossible to satisfy everyone, and the degree of efficacy is often in inverse proportion to the degree of compromises made.

 

jko

Sep 22, 2009

It is also naive to identify any particular administration as having the sole responsibility for reform. The issue is systemic, and therefore, only the government is in a position to mandate corrective measures.

The private sector has no obligation to address the public good. Tens of millions of individuals satisfied with their coverage? O.K. What then about the other tens or even hundreds of millions without adequate coverage or with no coverage at all?

The "system" still pays for errors made by its participants. For example, a breakfast tray is late to be delivered to a patient that just received their insulin. The patient's blood sugar crashes and sent to the intensive care unit. The hospital then gets to bill Medicare for the ICU bed, and all the services it has to render to remedy its own blunder. Does that sound like the hallmark of a good health care system?

 

wsblack

Sep 23, 2009

quote from jko:
The private sector has no obligation to address the public good.

That is why we establish laws around how companies should behave to ensure that the profit motive does not come at a cost to the community. The objective of the average company SHOULD be profit. If it isn't they would not exist and people would not be employed.

Healthcard SHOULD be reformed, but we should take the system we have now, identify the deficiencies and close the gaps. We have the best medical care in the world and we can make it better and more affordable. Handing it over to the government will make it worse, and eventually, less available.

 

jko

Sep 23, 2009

wsblack: I agree with you that laws must be amended so as not to favor or advantage any particular private interest, and only the government can so amend them.
However, in my 30 years of administrative health care experience, the primary effect of privatized health care is cost-shifting out of the private organization - whether to other secondary coverage or directly to the pocketbooks of their membership through cost-shares, restricted formularies, and other hurdles that usurp the professional/patient relationship.
The profit motive and the inertia of the health care industry itself has been ineffective or incapable of creating a system that reduces the gap between the haves and the have-nots. (Please note that I said "reduces" not eliminates...)

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Display Name:

Comment:




Sports

Houston Rockets coach Rick Adelman, center, reacts with his staff Jack Sikma, left, and Elston Turner, right, to a called foul against his team as they play the Atlanta Hawks during the third quarter ...

Tracy McGrady says he's ready to play, Rockets believe it's still too soon after knee surgery

Tracy McGrady is eager to play. The Houston Rockets say he'll have to wait. Full story

Economy

NC state treasurer issues gift ban for employees, limits on soliciting for charity

State Treasurer Janet Cowell unveiled new rules Friday banning employees from taking gifts from companies that do substantial business with the agency and setting a limit on charitable solicitations. Full story

Entertainment

Pedro Almodovar discusses his childhood, his influences and what he won't put on film

Sex. Drugs. Prostitution. Pedophilia. Rape. Pedro Almodovar has been able to translate some of the most delicate subjects to the big screen with grace and humor. Full story