By Sandra Miller - 05/27/08 05:20 PM EDT
(Regarding article, “Illegals haunt McCain,” May 22.) The main reason reimbursement of illegal aliens’ medical costs isn’t a burning issue is that its purpose is carefully disguised.
It’s hush money to buy hospitals’ silence on how illegal aliens have destroyed America’s healthcare systems. Although the “reimbursement” is only 2 to 5 percent of the true cost (with the rest passed along to paying patients) it’s been enough to buy the “ethical grounds” for hospitals’ self-righteous refusal to inquire about immigration status.
Without their hush money, hospitals might join Americans to demand enforcing laws against both illegal aliens and employers, securing the border against illegal entry (including a real fence), and reducing the illegal alien numbers by the attrition via enforcement plan.
Or the hospitals might demand repeal of the 1986 Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) that created this problem in the first place.
May Sen. John McCainJohn McCainWhy a power grid attack is a nightmare scenario Senate fight brews over Afghan visas Trump: Illegal immigrants treated better than veterans MORE (R-Ariz.) and his fellow sellouts face an uphill battle. The current reimbursement bill passed only because it was Sen. Jon Kyl’s (R-Ariz.) price for his yes vote and influence on the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill.
American Hospital Association spokesman David Allen’s hypocritical claim that hospitals’ “mission is to take care of patients, regardless of race, ethnicity, citizenship, etc.” is a surprise; they certainly don’t object to asking personal questions or refusing treatment of taxpaying, law-abiding Americans who are uninsured.
So the powerful hospital lobby remains solidly in the ranks of special interests that have sold out the American people by supporting illegal migration. And John McCain? Despite his claims that he “gets the message,” he’s been a full-fledged, card-carrying member of that club for years and shows no sign of change.
Sen. Biden naive on terror threat
From Mark Alesse
(Regarding article “Biden: 20 percent of GOP ‘probably ready to go to war on any circumstance,’” May 23.) Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) has a foot-in-mouth problem.
He is reported in The Hill to have said that “20 percent of Republicans are probably ready to go to war on any circumstance.” And recently in The Wall Street Journal he accuses President Bush of “obsessing” about the war on terror, and failing to focus on the larger, more important problems such as “persistent poverty,” “global warming” and “the spread of diseases.” Is it true that this man is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? Well, better that than secretary of state.
If the senator is really more worried about poverty than terrorism, he should think about the global economic effects of rendering Manhattan real estate uninhabitable by the explosion of a dirty bomb. Apart from the human catastrophe involved in a Diaspora of 8 million people, trillions of dollars of real estate value, backing loans of almost equal magnitude, would become worthless paper in an instant. From there, a worldwide economic collapse would follow that would make today’s sub-prime crisis seem trivial.
That, and worse, is the risk of taking terrorism lightly, as Sen. Biden and the Democrats so reflexively do. To view the terror threat otherwise is beyond them, because that would be to share President Bush’s understanding of the gravity of the issue.
And no, there aren’t any Republicans “ready to go to war on any circumstance,” senator, but count your blessings that there are many Republicans ready to fight terrorism on any soil to prevent catastrophe at home and to preserve freedom.