HEALTH CARE WRAP

Opinion

Discussion

November 11, 2009

Excerpts from recent editorials on health care reform:

Anonymous The Kokomo Tribune Wed Nov 11, 2009, 03:41 PM EST

Restriction may have little effect

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a liberal lawmaker from San Francisco, faced some wrenching political choices going into Saturday’s vote on a health care reform bill.

Centrist “Blue Dog” Democrats were seeking concessions for their votes. The biggest one, sought by Roman Catholic bishops, would have blocked use of federal subsidies for health insurance that covers elective abortions.

You could argue that a more skilled politician might have seen this play coming and deflected it. Yet at the moment of truth, Pelosi made the right call. Had she not acceded to the demands of the Blue Dogs, the House probably would have rejected a potential expansion of health care coverage to 36 million Americans. ...

Without a doubt, the House-approved restriction on abortion funding will complicate the Senate’s deliberations. If included in a final bill, it would likely prompt many private insurance companies to drop abortion as a covered procedure. Otherwise, such companies would be unable to compete for low-and middle-income customers who would be eligible for subsidized insurance under the legislation.

For pro-choice advocates, this is a rallying cry, but it’s one they must keep in perspective. A 2003 study found that only 13 percent of abortions were directly billed to insurance companies. In other words, the House abortion restrictions contained in the House bill may have far less effect than some fear – or some hope for.

– Sacramento Bee

Preserve Medicare-style plan

The Democratic-controlled House took a historic step in passing a health-care bill over the weekend, yet the measure – unless it’s modified – could mean the death knell for health reform this year.

... [T]he House plan clearly cannot serve as the only template for the bill that eventually reaches President Obama’s desk. Primarily, that’s because it’s unaffordable in its present form despite bearing the title “Affordable Health Care for America Act.”

Unfortunately, the House measure does little to rein in escalating health-care costs, and that, in the end, would harm the middle class and small businesses alike.

Although the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the measure would reduce federal deficits by about $104 billion over a decade, the House conveniently excluded $250 billion in estimated Medicare payments to doctors over the same decade. ...

One of the surest means to tamp down costs is to implement a Medicare-style health plan, as the House proposed. So even though the so-called public option is a deal-killer for Republicans and a few conservative Democrats and independents like Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, the Senate must find a way to craft a compromise that preserves this key reform measure.

– The Philadelphia Inquirer

Improve upon House action

It’s light on cost savings and weak on the public option. It risks setting abortion policy that could turn into a poison pill for reform. But the flaws of the health care legislation that passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Saturday pale before the stellar accomplishment it represents: a significant step toward a national health care policy approaching the standard of the rest of the industrialized world. ...

And while last summer the voices of naysayers were loudest, a groundswell of public opinion now is rising in favor of reform. ... It’s time for companies struggling to pay rising insurance premiums to speak up. It’s time for groups holding out for the all-government single-payer option to compromise and get behind a plan that represents reasonable progress toward health coverage for all. ...

Let’s hope the Senate can muster courage and creativity to take what’s been done, improve upon it and make history.

– San Jose Mercury News

Text Only | Photo Reprints

Opinion

Cast a vote for centers
The issue: Vote centers in Howard County.

Our view: Centers are less expensive to operate and more convenient for the average voter.

February 9, 2012
White shouldn’t return to office
The issue: The conviction of Indiana’s secretary of state.

Our view: Charlie White’s ouster from office should be permanent.

February 9, 2012
Editorial - Feb. 8, 2012: Grand success for Indianapolis
The issue: The Super Bowl.

Our view: Indianapolis left a great impression on thousands of visitors.

February 8, 2012
Letters to the Editor: Feb. 8, 2012
As Hoosiers celebrate the conclusion of a truly remarkable Super Bowl experience, there is even more good news that should fill us with pride. More Indiana students are graduating from high school than ever before.

February 8, 2012
Which religions will we include?
The Indiana Senate last week approved a bill that would allow public schools to teach creationism, as long as they include theories from multiple religions.

February 6, 2012 1 Photo
If you say so
In an opinion piece we published Thursday, state Rep. Mike Karickhoff announced why he voted against “right-to-work” legislation. His reason: The community told him to.

February 5, 2012
Cheers and jeers - Saturday, Feb. 4, 2012
Karickhoff acted ‘cowardly’

The Rev. Robin Wentworth Mayer and Horst G. Mayer of Kokomo send the Jeer for state Rep. Mike Karickhoff’s silence during the “right-to-work” debate:

“Mr. Karickhoff, for someone who’s new to office, you’ve certainly learned the art of talking out of both sides of your mouth.

February 3, 2012
Let’s drug test our lawmakers
Perhaps it’s appropriate that a measure passed by the Indiana House this week would ask not only welfare recipients but Indiana lawmakers to consent to a drug test.

February 3, 2012
Editorial - Feb. 2, 2012: Peru delivers a message
The issue: Peru’s collection of $20,000 last year from property owners who failed to keep their yards mowed.

Our view: Aggressive enforcement can help a city’s finances, but the benefits go beyond dollars and cents.

February 2, 2012
Karickhoff: Reason behind my ‘right-to-work’ vote
There is no doubt the “right-to-work” debate has brought mixed emotions, not only to our state but District 30 as well. There were only a handful of House Republicans who did not vote in support of this legislation. Let me explain why I felt it was necessary for me to vote in opposition to right to work.

February 2, 2012
More Opinion Headlines

Opinion

Search Results

Discussion

HEALTH CARE WRAP

Excerpts from recent editorials on health care reform:

Site Map

Contact Us