Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed

  • Advertise on RightMichigan.com


    Get the RightMighigan.com toolbar!



    Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?

    Raise the curtain.

    Pure Bamboozle

    By Croton Crier, Section News
    Posted on Sat Feb 11, 2012 at 03:32:28 PM EST
    Tags: Health Care Compact, tea party, principles, Michigan House, Michigan Senate, SB 693, HB 5014, federal funding, e-records, Snydercare, Obamacare, health insurance exchange, health care, republican party platform, free market, socialism, regulation, corporate welfare, state sovereignty, health care freedom, compacts, Obama bucks (all tags)

    November 2010 brought great hopes to Michigan. Many new members elected to the MI House and Senate vowed to stop the hemorrhage of debt, regulation, and taxation. Perhaps the greatest hope of freedom loving people was the promise to end Obama care and its unconstitutional overreach into our personal lives.

    While some states rejected Obama care and its federal funds, Michigan Republicans have accepted federal funds meant to implement Obama care. Despite the public outcry against Obama care, the Michigan Senate voted in December to set up the framework to implement Obama care in Michigan. Senate Bill 693 (Michigan Health Insurance Exchange) sets the stage for Snydercare: the Trojan Horse for Obama care. Vigilant patriots and conservative groups exposed this vote.

    These same groups have lobbied to stop the House from carrying the Senate's torch. It seems the House has stopped it. But, have they? Looking back to October 2011, the Michigan House passed House Bill 5014 that provides federal funding for state approved electronic health care record systems. Looking into the requirements for Obama care, e-records is a tool to lay a foundation for Obama care. "The 2009 Recovery Act, better known as the stimulus bill, set aside more than $20 billion for incentives to healthcare providers that deploy and meaningfully use certified electronic health records systems."1 But, we are not to worry, it isn't paid for by Obama care, only by Obama bucks.

    According to Michigan Votes, House Bill 5014 "passed to appropriate an extra $320.4 million for two items. The first is $119 million that is nearly all federal money for a program to provide incentive payments to health care providers and facilities to adopt state-approved electronic health care record systems. The second appropriates the money from a new 1% tax on health insurance claims designed to `game' the federal Medicaid system to get higher federal payments to Michigan's welfare system."2

    So, the dirty little secret is out: MI Medicaid is broke. Despite the "Relentless Positive Action" spilling out of Lansing, Michigan still has serious debt and we depend on federal funding to cover our bills. (Article here)

    The Republican party platform states Republicans believe the key to real reform is to give control of the health care system to patients and their health care providers. You could have fooled me. Not only have we had to BEG the House to stop Snydercare, now they want a compact of states to have control over our health care. But, don't worry, it's a step in the right direction. Excuse me, it is a
    step in the SAME direction: government control over an industry. "Vesting regulatory authority over health care in the states" and "states governing health care effectively" sounds like Obamanomics is here to stay in Michigan.

    I wonder if MI Republicans share that the National GOP are preparing a bill to replace, not repeal, Obama care3? See article here. Similarly, the Health Care Compact that the MI House wants as an alternative to Obama care is an affront to tea party values of smaller government, lower taxes, and less regulation. (HB 4693 here.) But, hey, they have no problem violating their own platform so what should we expect? Not much in the way of policies that promote freedom and liberty.

    We are exchanging control over our health care from the federal level to the state level. I do not want the state government to "govern" my healthcare any more than the feds. If tea party accepts this compact instead of real free market reforms, the free fall into socialized medicine is complete. When you lay down with dogs, don't be surprised when you wake up with fleas.

    The MI Senate didn't want to bow down to the feds so passed SB 693. But, now we will bow down to a compact of states? Where is the free market in that? DC isn't telling us what to do, but Chicago, Indianapolis, and Toledo can? Free market demands less regulation, less compacts, less dirty political deals. Where is the legislation repealing over-reaching regulation? Where is the resolution urging US Congressmen to push for interstate purchase of health insurance? Where is real torte reform?

    There is only one compact our political elite need to grasp, and that is our liberty protecting Constitution which says the federal government cannot bully the states or its people. That power ultimately resides in the states which is the people. The loss of the free market and liberty will be complete unless Tea Party and liberty minded people do not allow Republicans to bamboozle them with legislation that mixes free market solutions and socialism.

    Rise up, People!

    1http://money.cnn.com, "National electronic health records network gets closer", November 18, 2011.

    2http://michiganvotes.org, 2011 House Bill 5014: Appropriations: Supplemental Budget.


    < Saturdays Divertere: Building A Better Tomorrow | Words Have Meaning >

    Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

    Display: Sort:
    compact (none / 0) (#1)
    by Tom McMillin on Sun Feb 12, 2012 at 08:14:04 AM EST
    Since I authored HB4693, I of course believe its a good piece of legislation that will get the feds out of healthcare and restore freedom to our citizens.  Once approved by Congress, compacts trump the federal government - in this case, it'd be like a block grant for medicare and medicaid, with zero strings attached and zero that could ever be attached by the feds...this will mean that we in MI could ensure we can buy insurance across state lines, that we can put in place more reasonable tort reforms to keep costs down, that we can give vouchers for medicaid/medicare - and give more choices...that we can have as much freedom in this area as we, the citizens of MI, desire.
    And yeah, I've been down this road with others who haven't looked into it enough and who think a Healthcare Compact is big gov't.  Of course its not - its just the opposite.  Its taking back a principle of the 10th amendment.  Healthcare is not an enumerated power of the feds...so it belongs to the states.

    And from naysayers, they never say what their solution is -- just some majical hope that Congress and the Prez will have a dream and wake up channeling the Founding Fathers.  Short of that, we'll hear nothing.

    Mostly correct, except on the Compact (none / 0) (#2)
    by THE MC Mackinac Center Blog on Sun Feb 12, 2012 at 08:57:05 AM EST
    Jack McHugh here -

    Crier, your analysis is mostly sound, but you're misreading the Health Care Compact. This is less about health care than it is about restoring federalism.

    On your larger point, that Repubs are going the wrong way on health care in general, that itself is part of a much larger problem: We need to change the climate of public opinion on this (and more) in order to get the kind of reforms necessary to save the country. Your criticisms mostly focus on "elites," but the real challenge is changing that climate of opinion. If successful, the politicians will dutifully follow where the public leads them.

    On the compact, among other things it would allow member states to "opt out" of Obamacare. It also block-grants Medicaid and Medicare to member states, letting them manage those programs as they see fit. (For example, how about a Paul Ryan "premium support" plan for both programs in Michigan?)

    Each state would get a pro-rated portion of annual appropriations for these programs, based on their share when entering the compact. It does not bind congress to spend any particular amount on those programs. Instead, that provision prohibts a future congress from "penalizing" member states when it hands out the loot.

    It sounds like you want to eliminate those programs, and good free-market, limited government conservatives won't disagree that long term, that's where we want to go. We're won't get there overnight though: Replacing the welfare state with the voluntary institutions of civil society will take generations, and it's all dependent on changing that climate of opinion. In the short term, we probably can reform the programs in Paul Ryan-esque ways so they at least don't bankrupt the country.

    But here's what the compact is really about: Who decides? The feds or the states?

    For example, you don't like the feds holding a gun to states' heads on creating Obamacare exchanges? You should support the compact.

    Everyone here agrees that the federal government has consistently violated the constitution by arrogating to itself massive powers the founders intended to be in state hands. The compact is about states pushing back. It's about picking a fight between state government establishments and the federal government, creating a "focused conflict" on federal over-reach that will engage the people as a political issue.

    Hey, we can whine and moan about federal over-reach until the cows come home, and it won't do squat. This is about translating those complaints into a political issue that forces congress-critters and state lawmakers to declare: Which side are you on?

    Put them on the spot like that, and a majority will go do the right thing - potentially leading to a very signifigant power shift from DC to the states.

    Not just on health care, either - look for more compacts in the future on energy and other matters.

    All those who would like to see that kind of "focused conflict" on federalism become a hot political issue raise your hands. If your hand is up, you'll like the compact.

    Jack McHugh
    Mackinac Center

    The compact will only create more problems. (none / 0) (#3)
    by KG One on Sun Feb 12, 2012 at 09:22:32 AM EST
    First off, the definition of what is covered is so broad that I can drive my truck through it.

    "(c) "Health care" means care, services, supplies, or plans related to the health of an individual and includes but is not limited to:

    (i) preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, rehabilitative, maintenance, or palliative care and counseling, service, assessment, or procedure with respect to the physical or mental condition or functional status of an individual or that affects the structure or function of the body,"

    Where's the language relating to reproductive "health care"?

    Given the recent flap between the Obama Administration and the Catholic Church, not only should that have been on the radar, but very clearly spelled out in this legislation as well.

    Problem two:

    (4) The commission shall collect information and data to assist the member states in their regulation of health care, including assessing the performance of various state health care programs and compiling information on the prices of health care.

    The commission shall make this information and data available to the legislatures of the member states. Notwithstanding any other provision in this compact, no member state shall disclose to the commission the health information of any individual, nor shall the commission disclose the health information of any individual.

    What you wrote and what will actually happen are two very different things.

    Identity theft is a major problem in America, and it's growing. A problem that is re-enforced in today's paper.

    The federal government has to contend with data breaches all the time. Why should the state be expected to fare any better?

    Three,$29-billion is an awful lot of money.

    According to the last budget numbers that I've read, HHS spending for 2013 is projected to be $21.7-billion.

    Why is there an increase tucked in there?

    And lastly, if we're talking about the Constitution, I looked up the state's role in this area. Here's what it had to say:

    Art IV § 51 Public health and general welfare.

    Sec. 51. The public health and general welfare of the people of the state are hereby declared to be matters of primary public concern. The legislature shall pass suitable laws for the protection and promotion of the public health.

    Progressives love to say that the federal government can do whatever it wants because of the "general welfare" clause (so does a sitting members of congress...but I digress). There is a big difference between providing something and promoting it. So where does anyone from Lansing get off saying that this is even remotely a legitimate function of state government?

    you mean Exchange (none / 0) (#27)
    by Tom McMillin on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 02:03:48 PM EST
    Folks - don't confuse an Obamacare Exchange with a Health Care Compact.  

    Two totally, completely different things.

    Conservatives fight tooth and nail against an Obamacare Implementation Dept (Exchange); but we fight for the Health Care Compact, which is completely anti-Obamacare, anti-Obamacare Exchange, and pro-10th Amendment, pro-"get spending out of Washington and closer to the people".

    Display: Sort:


    Make a new account

    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!
    create account | faq | search