Ron Rosenbaum, Writer

January 30, 2010

Remind Me: What is the Tea Party Plan to Cover the Unnsured?

Filed under: Uncategorized — ronrosenbaumwriter @ 10:06 am

Or are they just content to see them suffer and die in greater numbers because they are poor? Remember this is not a question about Obamacare and its flaws. If you dodge the question with a typical loutish rant on that subject it’s an admission of ignorance or cruelty. This is a question about what you, Tea Partiers would do if you had the power. I’d like to hear specifics, else you’ll in effect be admitting you just don’t care.



  1. If they actually drank tea, the would come down and get a plan. Very big victories for Obama with the GDP boost (confirming economists’ predictions from a year ago) and he general approval of the proposed worldwide bank fund from Davos. Couple this with the rmovl of the KSM trial in NYC, Obama’s trumpeting of his Al Qaeda kills and Hillary’s major crackdown on China and we have the makings (fingers crossed) of a new metrosexual, soulful and stirring FDR, aka BHO, the Better Humanity Organization

    Comment by charlie finch — January 30, 2010 @ 10:21 am | Reply

  2. Cross post:
    “Education Secretary Arne Duncan called Hurricane Katrina “the best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans”

    Where are you ron…?

    Now I’m not accusing all democrats of holding these views, but I haven’t heard many cries of outrage or calls for disavowal. Disavowal it ron… wheres the piece I demand it NOW NOW NOW…. you clearly support his position because your a racist, blah, blah, blah, blah, more ron talk.

    As for the retardation you display in this comment… insurance has never lowered the cost and health nor will it every lower the cost of health… it is just another shell game of collectivism to make it look like their doing something. So in point your question is a typical loutish rant on that subject and is clearly an admission of ignorance or cruelty.

    The only way to help poor ppl get better health care is to lower the cost of health care… which of course has nothing to do with insurance(expect insurance plans like yours which may increase the cost of healthcare).

    Comment by robotech master — January 30, 2010 @ 11:13 am | Reply

  3. “Remind Me: What is the Tea Party Plan to Cover the Unnsured?”

    “They” do not have one. “They” are against slavery.

    Comment by Langley — January 30, 2010 @ 12:10 pm | Reply

  4. Oh, please…! I expect MUCH less sanctimonious BS from a mind like yours.

    Try Googling “Paul Ryan”, of any of a dozen Republican or conservative names for good, solid proposals that would ACTUALLY address insurance, instead of revolutionizing and nationalizing our heath-care…top to bottom.

    Comment by Ragspierre — January 30, 2010 @ 12:23 pm | Reply

  5. … cover the uninsured…

    Is the “uninsured” the “strawman” now?

    Nobody says anything about the uninsured, the tea partiers and the sane people in this country want Congress to slow down to do whatever they wanted to do, Obamacare, Pelosicare, or Reidcare. Frankly, what the people care is to understand why if their ideas were so good, why couldn’t they slow down and explain them to us, the stupid people, the unenlightened. Why nobody read the 2000 pages of legislation, anybody actually knew what they were getting us into? If the legislation was so good, why paid Nebraska hundreds of millions of our money to get out of the scheme? Who is going to pay for their Obamacare, the man behind the tree? Unfortunately, we, the people of the other forty nine states, are behind the tree?

    Is that fair?

    Comment by ic — January 30, 2010 @ 1:13 pm | Reply

  6. It’s a voluntary program. Anyone who wants to can pay the premiums for someone else who they know doesn’t have insurance.

    have a wonderful day

    Comment by rashputin — January 30, 2010 @ 1:22 pm | Reply


    “There so many things man with nice voice need to explain gooder. Like, if some people still need health insurance, why not just give them insurance voucher, like housing voucher or food stamps? Why put entire U.S. medical system in Cuisinart and set on Liquefy?

    How come House bill create 111 new boards, commissions, and programs? …And how come Medicaid and Medicare not doing the job? Isn’t that what they for? And if they not do job, then why should people think even bigger program will?

    Man with nice voice also need to explain why it so bad that U.S. spend more on health care than other countries. U.S. spend more on clothes and iPods, too. …Old man want to get knee fixed, why stop him? Him want to buy big new tender woman parts to make hot young trophy wife even hotter, what wrong with that? …But man with nice voice need to point out where in Constitution it say White House get to make that call for him…

    Whole issue make brain hurt. Good thing man with nice voice in charge. Him have right ideas. Just need to try new angle, that all. Talk slower. Talk louder. Use small words.”

    Comment by ic — January 30, 2010 @ 1:31 pm | Reply

  8. I’m curious why we have to have a plan for something like this. No one took these people’s insurance away; they lost it presumably because they couldn’t pay for it, or the jobs that provided it went away. Why does there have to be a centralized, standardized, bureaucratized plan for this?

    One central problem on the left is that no one has satisfactorily explained how the Federal Government can force *all* citizens to buy something, whether they want it or not. If Bill Gates gets sick, he can *buy a hospital*, but we’re going to force him to buy health insurance he may not want. I gather that liberal legal scholars are giving as their opinion the idea that it’s somehow included in the 14th Amendment’s interstate commerce clause; that seems an awfully long stretch to me.

    OK, so I’ve been thinking about it while writing this, and I’ve come up with a “plan”. It’s unacceptable to liberals, of course, because it doesn’t create 5-8 million unionized civil servants, but I’ll propose it anyway. We remove the Sherman anti-trust exemption for the health insurance companies, and make them really compete with one another. We create a tax write-off for people rich guys who want to buy health insurance for the “uninsured”. Between these two things, health insurance ought to be available to those who can’t now afford it. Yes, a few people will slip through the cracks and still be uninsured. Massachusetts has universal health care, and insures 97% of its citizens…which means it isn’t perfect either. It’s also seen its health care costs skyrocket while the program has been in place, showing that the promise that such a plan will contain costs is empty, at best.

    The truth is, Ron, that no plan *ever* proposed is anything like perfect. I prefer the one that in its imperfection doesn’t bankrupt the rest of the country, and leaves the citizens with some freedom to still make choices of their own. Sorry about that…

    Comment by DavidN — January 30, 2010 @ 2:00 pm | Reply

  9. Ah the great moral arbiter at work again. If you don’t play by Ron’s rules then you’re “[admitting] ignorance or cruelty”. Careful now!

    You know what else Ron? The NRA doesn’t have a plan for dealing with the hole in the Ozone layer? Maybe they hate the environment?

    NOW doesn’t have a plan on how to help the American economy recover, maybe they hate American workers and want unemployment to stay high?

    The Tea Partiers are also against the Stimulus. Are you going to accuse them of hating economic recovery because they don’t have their own Stumulus planned?

    They’re also against raising taxes and exploding the debt. Clearly since they don’t have their own tax scheme laid out they must not care about fiscal restraint.

    Mr. Rosenbaum this behavior is outright trollish, and this is the most naked and clumsy of strawmen.

    It seems that, you’re angry that the common “anonymous” rabble have the gal to protest their benevolent government planners.

    Sure their plan has flaws (how gracious of you to admit that Obamacare isn’t perfect), but that doesn’t matter they have a plan!

    Do the people that dislike it, in such right-wing like Massachusetts, have their own plan?

    No, they’re just rabble. Clearly, they hate the poor.

    I also like your assumptions:
    1) That the Tea Parties are unified by some central command and have a single platform.

    2) That if a person is aghast and horrified at plan X then they must, must, present something that is better than the status quo.

    Comment by Jack — January 30, 2010 @ 2:21 pm | Reply

  10. Want to know how intellectually lazy Mr. Rosenbaum is on this subject?

    Go to PJTV and you’ll see a video called. “Mr. President, Here Is A Simple, 10-Point Plan for Health Care Reform”

    It’s presented by Dr Peter Weiss on the noted pro-tea party website PJTV. As a subsidiary of PajamasMedia, Mr. Rosenbaum may have heard of it.

    This is a follow-up report posted on January 28. And is still on the front page of the PJTV site. The original plan was posted in November which can be found here.

    This is just my transcription of the list he presents there may be errors. I recommend watching the whole thing and his other Medically Incorrect videos.

    1. Health insurance companies should be allowed to sell insurance across state lines.

    2. Affinity groups should be allowed to buy health care for their members.

    3. Regulate coverage. Prohibit denial of treatments ordered by physicians. Prohibit nonpayment of claims. And restrict decisions to declaring fraud. [Ed. Dr. Weiss’ words were unclear hear may have miss transcribed last point.]

    4. Malpractice reform: We need to decouple malpractice determination from awards.

    5. Restructure Medical Training.

    6. Encourage major illness insurance. Especially for middle age and use tax credits to encourage.

    7. Pharmaceutical companies that receive federal funding for research and development have cost limitations on markup for those drugs.

    8. Enhance Medicare and Medicaid oversight for fraud and abuse.

    9. Eliminate physician mandates. Prevention measures should be determined by ancillary medical staff.

    10. Tax deductions for major illness insurance, not for the major comprehensive plans.

    Dr Weiss thinks that a 10-point plan would allow for a transparent discussion and debate.

    And transparency has been sorely lacking.

    10 points, yeah it’s no unread 2000 page bill full of backroom deals, pork, and who knows what else.

    And there’s the Republicans 200 page plan, and the Small Bill (small bill . org) but it can go even smaller.

    I’m not sure on this plan. Especially number 3, but this is much easier to debate and understand than the giant monstrosities.

    Is this a plan of the Tea Partiers? Well no, since that group is a grassroots organization without any central control.

    But it shows that there are plans out there.

    And Mr. Rosenbaum, you would already know this, if you had even an iota of interest in what your fellow Pajamas staff are up to.

    So, maybe instead of merely trolling the Pajamas websites you should actually, well, read them.


    Comment by Jack — January 30, 2010 @ 4:10 pm | Reply

  11. To 10. Jack

    Facts to ron is like garlic to vampires… their is no logical reason why it causes them massive pain, suffering and engages them… but it does.

    This post was just ron latest download of the DNC talking points.

    Comment by robotech master — January 30, 2010 @ 5:15 pm | Reply

  12. Mr. Rosenbaum: Apparently, you are having a bad day. Back away from your keyboard and get some fresh air.

    Just because someone disagrees with your solution to a problem doesn’t mean they’re evil or don’t see that a problem exists. To portray them as such is intellectually dishonest and–dare I say it?–illiberal. It’s the kind of attitude one sees in children.

    A more rational approach would be to presume that your opponent is acting in good faith, to seek to understand.

    Why in the world, you might ask yourself, would anyone in their right mind refuse free universal health care when there is so obviously a need to rectify our current system? If it were as easy as that, most people would agree with you.

    But it isn’t.

    In very broad strokes in no particular order: 1) because socialized medicine has failed in the UK over the last 60 years; 2) because the Left’s plan is not “free”, it requires money we do not have, we’re broke; 3) because the Left’s plan is like a wrecking ball, destroying the 90% of the system that works in order to fix the 10% that’s broken; 4) because it increases the size and scope of the government, intrudes into the average citizen’s life and privacy, and micromanages our existences; 5) because it creates a permanent political majority; 6) because it is a direct assault on our freedom: our freedoms took centuries to win and most Americans are in no mood to blithely throw them away for the cheap comforts of being taken care of by the State (Being out of control of your life–“serfdom” as Hayek calls it–is inimical to freedom-loving people; You may believe in marxism–and you are entitled to–but the rest of us just don’t. Sorry.); and because it is one step closer to the slippery slope of totalitarian rule.

    Socialism failed at the cost of millions of lives, or haven’t you been paying attention? People have seen enough to realize they don’t want it.

    Your opponents are not evil or stupid, they just have some very substantial reasons to see things differently. We are interested in helping our fellow citizens, but not with this misguided, politicized, dishonest and immoral plan.

    Your disdain is logically absurd, emotionally immature, and runs counter to the great tradition of western liberal thought.

    Comment by ahem — January 30, 2010 @ 5:40 pm | Reply

  13. Since a huge proportion of the “uninsured” (perhaps as high as 70-80% of the 30,000,000 cited) are illegal aliens, I’d deport the vast majority of them — VOILA! — problem solved.

    BTW this would solve most of America’s catastrophically overcrowded schools, solve many of our budget crises, and create millions of job openings for REAL Americans who are desperately seeking work.

    Comment by Morton Doodslag — January 30, 2010 @ 8:42 pm | Reply

  14. Well, Jack @ 10 almost beat me to it, but here’s an even shorter list of specific conservative/Republican health care reforms — the sort of stuff that tea-partiers are agitating for (I know I am — I’ve been sick a lot in my short life and I would LOVE a freer healthcare market):

    1) Give individuals the same tax breaks that employers get for health insurance, phase out the employer health-insurance tax break, or both. This decouples health insurance from employment, which we desperately need (losing your insurance when you need it the most makes no sense).
    Fun fact: health insurance and employment would’ve never been linked in the first place in a free market — the fact that this outrage happened at all is because of the WWII wage caps and the resultant change in the tax code. In other words, prior government solutions are largely responsible for the mess we’re in today.

    2) Allow purchase of insurance across state lines.

    3) Allow affinity groups to create their own risk pools.

    4) Medical malpractice reform.

    5) Relax the state mandates of what insurers must cover, so that people won’t have to purchase coverage that they don’t need.

    6) Disallow insurers from dropping coverage (once coverage has been established) for any reason other than non-payment of premiums.

    7) Subsidize the poorest and sickest among us directly for their medical care, rather than subjecting them to Medicare, Schip, and so on (I know firsthand how awful these programs can get). As Milton Friedman says, a direct subsidy is more honest — and more efficient — than an indirect subsidy pretending to be something that it ain’t.

    I’ve got a five-page essay on this subject, detailing why these seven steps will work, but I won’t copy it here. I’ll just confine myself to this politely-worded and specific “loutish rant”. Enjoy, Mr Rosenbaum. You asked for it, after all.

    Comment by Anjika — January 30, 2010 @ 11:21 pm | Reply

  15. Sorry Charlie I had agreed in the past to overlook Ron’s ramblings because I had a greater appreciation for his larger works… but I am tired of this. If Ron could ever give a full intellectual post on the level of VDH or respond to some of the posts of VDH or jump over to NRO and take on Krauthammer or Steyn or even Will I would be impressed. These other guys concerned with society. call out other intellectuals and refute arguments and have a back and forth. Ron does nothing like that. he is not concerned with dissenting opinion because his parents sucked and brought him up that way, as he has said in previous posts. I do not like the man and will no longer support him with my time.
    It is a shame because I will miss Charlie, which is the one reason I have continued to read this blog.
    Good Night and Good Luck… and Goodbye.

    Comment by bryan — January 31, 2010 @ 12:25 am | Reply

  16. Ah, Bryan, we hardly knew ye!!! Don’t get yanked by the crank!!! Dowd Obama Gay Watch: Today she calls him a “diffident debutante”

    Comment by charlie finch — January 31, 2010 @ 4:03 am | Reply

  17. Give people jobs.

    Comment by Rob — January 31, 2010 @ 8:10 am | Reply

  18. “The poor” already have their health care subsidized by our taxes in a thousand different ways. Between CHIP insurance, Medicaid, Medicare, laws governing access to emergency and pre-natal care, widely-exploited schemes that have opened disability-based coverage for conditions including mild learning defects, taxpayer-funded public hospitals, clinics, and other medical services, tax breaks for donating to not-for-profit medical institutions, prescription care coalitions subsidized by tax breaks, programs exchanging medical education subsidies for public service, and the common practice of billing the insured far more than others for identical treatment to recoup costs, poor people in America generally receive better healthcare than people who work but don’t earn much or have trouble getting coverage — the working and middle-classes. The poor are fine, thanks to our generosity, which you deny.

    The problem is providing access to medical care to those not used to relying on other people’s labor to meet their every need. And that’s a very different discussion. But if you know so little about the current state of low-income medical provision in our country, why write about it, let alone fling about accusations and demand facts of others?

    Nicely, though, others provided them here. And they are far more interesting than your disturbed, adolescent wail that poor people are dying while your readers of enjoying watching them do so. What a sick thing to say.

    Comment by Tina Trent — January 31, 2010 @ 11:12 am | Reply

  19. Forgot to add another reform to my list:

    8) Streamline the FDA approval process so that it costs less for drug manufacturers, who, not being fools pass the cost along to the consumer.

    For example, right now, a drug that has been shown in another developed country, such as France or Germany, to be safe and effective, must still go through the whole FDA approval process, which is wasteful and redundant.

    Likewise, emphasizing informed consent rather than the precautionary principle when approving medications would make access to experimental drugs easier and cheaper. For example, I suffer joint pain, and I would gladly take the risk of a slight increase in risk of heart attack if it means that I can be pain-free, mobile, and generally leading a productive life. Many seniors felt the same way when Vioxx was taken off the market. As long as I am competent to understand the risk involved, why should such a life-improving drug be off-limits to me?

    Comment by Anjika — January 31, 2010 @ 2:57 pm | Reply

  20. Well, how about tort reform, cross state lines, etc.? How about trying incremental reforms, so that we can gauge the effectiveness of the reforms instead of diving headlong into your desired socialized medicine?

    How about pissy jerks like you acknowledging the trillions that insurance-for-all will cost? I’m not necessarily opposed to spending the trillions, but given the country’s current financial straits, a modicum of honesty would be nice, though clearly beyond your hatefully-framed paradigms (do you ever pose questions that amount to “agree with me or you’re a hateful scumbag” to your lefty friends?).

    As you apparently support a plan that will result in worse coverage at greater cost for the nation as a whole, your typically sneering, pissy post is a clear indication that YOU support more people dying. Is that loutish? Perhaps, but anyone who argues that there’s no alternative out there to Obamacare is willfully dishonest. So you are pissy and dishonest. Well done.

    Comment by chrisa798 — February 1, 2010 @ 1:20 am | Reply

  21. Remind Me: What is the Tea Party Plan to Cover the Uninsured?Or are they just content to see them suffer and die in greater numbers because they are poor?
    Given the below facts, I would suggest that you rephrase your question. The facts are that a substantial proportion of the uninsured are not poor, and can afford insurance. The facts are that the averaged uninsured person already gets about $1,500 of free health care per year. The facts are that at least in normal economic times, a substantial proportion of the uninsured will be insured within four months time.

    When you rephrase the question to deal with your ignorance and your sneering, I will answer the question.

    As I have previously stated, your attitude shows me why I am a Post Liberal. Sneering and self-righteousness in the absence of knowing what you are talking about will not get you far, Mr. Rosenbaum. That you phrase your question in light of these facts shows you don’t know what you are talking about when it comes to health care.

    The media repeat claims of 40 million to 50 million uninsured Americans, but Facts from the Census Bureau and research organizations discredit it.

    Fact: Nearly 10 million (9.7) of the 45.7 million uninsured are “not a citizen.” That makes every media claim of uninsured Americans higher than 35.9 million is wrong.
    Myth: The 40 million to 50 million uninsured cannot afford health insurance.
    Fact: More than 17 million of the uninsured make at least $50,000 per year (the median household income of $50,233) – 8.4 million make $50,000 to $74,999 per year and 9.1 million make $75,000 or higher. Two economists working at the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded that 25 to 75 percent of those who do not purchase health insurance coverage “could afford to do so.”

    Myth: The 40 million to 50 million uninsured do not get health care.
    Fact: The National Center for Policy Analysis estimates that uninsured people get about $1,500 of free health care per year, or $6,000 per family of four.
    Fact: An Urban Institute study found that 25 percent of the uninsured already qualify for government health insurance programs

    Myth: People will remain uninsured without government assistance.
    >Fact:The Congressional Budget Office says that 45 percent of the uninsured will be insured within four months. CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin also said that the frequent claim of 40+ million Americans lacking insurance is an “incomplete and potentially misleading picture of the uninsured population.”
    >Fact: Liberal non-profit Kaiser Family Foundation put the number of uninsured Americans who do not qualify for government programs and make less than $50,000 a year between 8.2 million and 13.9 million. (The 8.2 million figure includes only those uninsured for two years or more.)
    >Fact:CBO analysis found that 36 million people would remain uninsured even if the Senate’s $1.6 trillion health care plan is passed.

    Comment by Gringo — February 1, 2010 @ 8:33 am | Reply

  22. Hrmmm… I see that my comment with the numerous references to helpful articles, websites, and think-tanks hasn’t posted yet.

    A shame, really, as those references are ample evidence that we free-market types have been seriously considering how to improve the plight of the sick.

    Also, other readers may have found the content of those references interesting in their own right. Aren’t these comments a place where we can share relevant information?

    Comment by Anjika — February 1, 2010 @ 9:50 am | Reply

  23. 21. Anjika: often blog comments software throws out comments with a lot of links to it. Try breaking it up into smaller pieces.My suggestion: no more than two links per posting.
    IMHO, Mr. Rosenbaum’s questions to the opposite side of the aisle are phrased in the manner of “When did you stop beating your wife?”

    Comment by Gringo — February 1, 2010 @ 11:53 am | Reply

  24. The uninsured already get health care, including any freakin warm body that happens to fall across the border, therefore there is no reason to mess with health care in this country.

    Comment by whosebone — February 2, 2010 @ 6:01 pm | Reply

  25. I was once uninsured – insurance would have cut too deep into my beer money. Now I have kids so I buy insurance and less beer.

    Lots of comments above about available programs.

    I really don’t care about the uninsured. If you are too lazy earn insurance money and can’t be bothered to sign up for one of these programs – please do the gene pool a favor and die in an alley.

    Comment by Old Soldier — February 17, 2010 @ 7:42 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: