The Hill's Briefing Room blog included a story about an important
poll that shows 60 percent of Americans, including 57 percent of independents and
even 33 percent of Republicans, back the public option.
This is an important poll. It was conducted by Thompson Reuters,
a highly reputable and nonpartisan media organization. It included a sample of 2,999
people, much larger than average, with a margin of error of only 1.8 percent, much
smaller than average.
President Obama's national healthcare bill mandates that employers must provide health coverage to all employees. This proposal would seemingly include coverage for tens of millions of illegal immigrants.
This is an outrage. There are close to 60 million illegal immigrants in this country. Effectively forcing Americans to subsidize cradle-to-grave healthcare costs for these people would cost U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars annually, while further incentivizing illegal immigration.
Previously, we reported to you that our national polling showed that the under-30 voters were the strongest supporters of the Obama healthcare initiative. While seniors opposed it by almost 2-to-1 and voters 30-64 opposed it by five- to 10-point margins, the under-30 voters backed his program by 58-30.
Hill's A.B. Stoddard sits down with pundits John Feehery and Chris
Kofinis to discuss how the healthcare bill may play out in the Senate,
and the three consider what Sarah Palin is planning a run for: president, or Oprah's Book Club?
With all the reports coming out that recommend we scale back
on life-saving medical exams there is one we might soon see from still another
group of experts.
This one concerns depression. It concludes that diagnosis,
medication and counseling won’t work anyway, so why bother trying? After all,
the best we can expect from dealing with negative feelings are false positives.
The recent decision of the federal government to recommend
that women abstain from annual mammograms illustrates well exactly how ObamaCare
would force a deterioration in the quality of medical care, particularly for
The panel evaluating the effectiveness of mammograms did not
find that they don’t work or that they do not save lives. Rather, it found that
the lives they save are not “worth” the cost of annual testing. This
bureaucratic balancing of human life and financial cost lies at the core of the
government-managed healthcare in the Obama bill.
Former President Bill
Clinton hit up the weekly caucus lunch of Senate Democrats on Tuesday,
imploring them to shelve enough differences to pass healthcare
reform. "We're winning," he told them, which couldn't be further
from the truth.
As I listed
in my column this week,
obstacles to passage of healthcare reform continue to mount. Getting to 60
votes in the Senate appears not implausible but impossible at this point — yes,
it can happen, but nobody knows how.
Harry Reid can pass a bill in the Senate that has no public
option or an easy opt-out, shallow subsidies for the uninsured, a low total
cost, weak penalties for not having insurance, no coverage for abortion and no
general tax increase (except for the premium and medical device taxes).
And Nancy Pelosi can pass a bill in the House (on final
passage) that has a public option with no opt-out, steep subsidies for the
uninsured, harsh penalties if they don’t buy insurance, a higher cost, full
abortion coverage and a surcharge income-tax increase.
The question is: Can either one’s bill pass the other’s