Month: September 2009

“We did not come here to fear the future, we came here to shape it”

Full text of President Obama’s address on health care to the Joint Session of Congress

Wednesday, September 9, 2009
****

Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, Members of Congress, and the American people:

When I spoke here last winter, this nation was facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month. Credit was frozen. And our financial system was on the verge of collapse.

As any American who is still looking for work or a way to pay their bills will tell you, we are by no means out of the woods. A full and vibrant recovery is many months away. And I will not let up until those Americans who seek jobs can find them; until those businesses that seek capital and credit can thrive; until all responsible homeowners can stay in their homes. That is our ultimate goal. But thanks to the bold and decisive action we have taken since January, I can stand here with confidence and say that we have pulled this economy back from the brink.

I want to thank the members of this body for your efforts and your support in these last several months, and especially those who have taken the difficult votes that have put us on a path to recovery. I also want to thank the American people for their patience and resolve during this trying time for our nation.

But we did not come here just to clean up crises. We came to build a future. So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future – and that is the issue of health care.

I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last. It has now been nearly a century since Theodore Roosevelt first called for health care reform. And ever since, nearly every President and Congress, whether Democrat or Republican, has attempted to meet this challenge in some way. A bill for comprehensive health reform was first introduced by John Dingell Sr. in 1943. Sixty-five years later, his son continues to introduce that same bill at the beginning of each session.

Our collective failure to meet this challenge – year after year, decade after decade – has led us to a breaking point. Everyone understands the extraordinary hardships that are placed on the uninsured, who live every day just one accident or illness away from bankruptcy. These are not primarily people on welfare. These are middle-class Americans. Some can’t get insurance on the job. Others are self-employed, and can’t afford it, since buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer. Many other Americans who are willing and able to pay are still denied insurance due to previous illnesses or conditions that insurance companies decide are too risky or expensive to cover.

We are the only advanced democracy on Earth – the only wealthy nation – that allows such hardships for millions of its people. There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage. In just a two year period, one in every three Americans goes without health care coverage at some point. And every day, 14,000 Americans lose their coverage. In other words, it can happen to anyone.

But the problem that plagues the health care system is not just a problem of the uninsured. Those who do have insurance have never had less security and stability than they do today. More and more Americans worry that if you move, lose your job, or change your job, you’ll lose your health insurance too. More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won’t pay the full cost of care. It happens every day.

One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn’t reported gallstones that he didn’t even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it. Another woman from Texas was about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer more than doubled in size. That is heart-breaking, it is wrong, and no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.

Then there’s the problem of rising costs. We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages. It’s why so many employers – especially small businesses – are forcing their employees to pay more for insurance, or are dropping their coverage entirely. It’s why so many aspiring entrepreneurs cannot afford to open a business in the first place, and why American businesses that compete internationally – like our automakers – are at a huge disadvantage. And it’s why those of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it – about $1000 per year that pays for somebody else’s emergency room and charitable care.

Finally, our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers. When health care costs grow at the rate they have, it puts greater pressure on programs like Medicare and Medicaid. If we do nothing to slow these skyrocketing costs, we will eventually be spending more on Medicare and Medicaid than every other government program combined. Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.

These are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system. The question is how.

There are those on the left who believe that the only way to fix the system is through a single-payer system like Canada’s, where we would severely restrict the private insurance market and have the government provide coverage for everyone. On the right, there are those who argue that we should end the employer-based system and leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.

I have to say that there are arguments to be made for both approaches. But either one would represent a radical shift that would disrupt the health care most people currently have. Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn’t, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the past several months.

During that time, we have seen Washington at its best and its worst.

We have seen many in this chamber work tirelessly for the better part of this year to offer thoughtful ideas about how to achieve reform. Of the five committees asked to develop bills, four have completed their work, and the Senate Finance Committee announced today that it will move forward next week. That has never happened before. Our overall efforts have been supported by an unprecedented coalition of doctors and nurses; hospitals, seniors’ groups and even drug companies – many of whom opposed reform in the past. And there is agreement in this chamber on about eighty percent of what needs to be done, putting us closer to the goal of reform than we have ever been.

But what we have also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have toward their own government. Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics. Some have dug into unyielding ideological camps that offer no hope of compromise. Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned.

Well the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together, and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do. Now is the time to deliver on health care.

The plan I’m announcing tonight would meet three basic goals:

It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don’t. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government. It’s a plan that asks everyone to take responsibility for meeting this challenge – not just government and insurance companies, but employers and individuals. And it’s a plan that incorporates ideas from Senators and Congressmen; from Democrats and Republicans – and yes, from some of my opponents in both the primary and general election.

Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan:

First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.

What this plan will do is to make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse. That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.

That’s what Americans who have health insurance can expect from this plan – more security and stability.

Now, if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage. We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange – a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It’s how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it’s time to give every American the same opportunity that we’ve given ourselves.

For those individuals and small businesses who still cannot afford the lower-priced insurance available in the exchange, we will provide tax credits, the size of which will be based on your need. And all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned. This exchange will take effect in four years, which will give us time to do it right. In the meantime, for those Americans who can’t get insurance today because they have pre-existing medical conditions, we will immediately offer low-cost coverage that will protect you against financial ruin if you become seriously ill. This was a good idea when Senator John McCain proposed it in the campaign, it’s a good idea now, and we should embrace it.

Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those – particularly the young and healthy – who still want to take the risk and go without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their workers. The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits. If some businesses don’t provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an unfair advantage over their competitors. And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek – especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions – just can’t be achieved.

That’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance – just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still cannot afford coverage, and 95% of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

While there remain some significant details to be ironed out, I believe a broad consensus exists for the aspects of the plan I just outlined: consumer protections for those with insurance, an exchange that allows individuals and small businesses to purchase affordable coverage, and a requirement that people who can afford insurance get insurance.

And I have no doubt that these reforms would greatly benefit Americans from all walks of life, as well as the economy as a whole. Still, given all the misinformation that’s been spread over the past few months, I realize that many Americans have grown nervous about reform. So tonight I’d like to address some of the key controversies that are still out there.

Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.

There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.

My health care proposal has also been attacked by some who oppose reform as a “government takeover” of the entire health care system. As proof, critics point to a provision in our plan that allows the uninsured and small businesses to choose a publicly-sponsored insurance option, administered by the government just like Medicaid or Medicare.

So let me set the record straight. My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75% of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90% is controlled by just one company. Without competition, the price of insurance goes up and the quality goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly – by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by jacking up rates.

Insurance executives don’t do this because they are bad people. They do it because it’s profitable. As one former insurance executive testified before Congress, insurance companies are not only encouraged to find reasons to drop the seriously ill; they are rewarded for it. All of this is in service of meeting what this former executive called “Wall Street’s relentless profit expectations.”

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. The insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.

Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea. They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government. And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won’t be. I have insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects. But by avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits, excessive administrative costs and executive salaries, it could provide a good deal for consumers. It would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better, the same way public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students without in any way inhibiting a vibrant system of private colleges and universities.

It’s worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight. But its impact shouldn’t be exaggerated – by the left, the right, or the media. It is only one part of my plan, and should not be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles. To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it. The public option is only a means to that end – and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal. And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.

For example, some have suggested that that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies. Others propose a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan. These are all constructive ideas worth exploring. But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice. And I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need.

Finally, let me discuss an issue that is a great concern to me, to members of this chamber, and to the public – and that is how we pay for this plan.

Here’s what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. Period. And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize. Part of the reason I faced a trillion dollar deficit when I walked in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last decade were not paid for – from the Iraq War to tax breaks for the wealthy. I will not make that same mistake with health care.

Second, we’ve estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system – a system that is currently full of waste and abuse. Right now, too much of the hard-earned savings and tax dollars we spend on health care doesn’t make us healthier. That’s not my judgment – it’s the judgment of medical professionals across this country. And this is also true when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid.

In fact, I want to speak directly to America’s seniors for a moment, because Medicare is another issue that’s been subjected to demagoguery and distortion during the course of this debate.

More than four decades ago, this nation stood up for the principle that after a lifetime of hard work, our seniors should not be left to struggle with a pile of medical bills in their later years. That is how Medicare was born. And it remains a sacred trust that must be passed down from one generation to the next. That is why not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.

The only thing this plan would eliminate is the hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud, as well as unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies – subsidies that do everything to pad their profits and nothing to improve your care. And we will also create an independent commission of doctors and medical experts charged with identifying more waste in the years ahead.

These steps will ensure that you – America’s seniors – get the benefits you’ve been promised. They will ensure that Medicare is there for future generations. And we can use some of the savings to fill the gap in coverage that forces too many seniors to pay thousands of dollars a year out of their own pocket for prescription drugs. That’s what this plan will do for you. So don’t pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut – especially since some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past, and just this year supported a budget that would have essentially turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program. That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare.

Now, because Medicare is such a big part of the health care system, making the program more efficient can help usher in changes in the way we deliver health care that can reduce costs for everybody. We have long known that some places, like the Intermountain Healthcare in Utah or the Geisinger Health System in rural Pennsylvania, offer high-quality care at costs below average. The commission can help encourage the adoption of these common-sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals throughout the system – everything from reducing hospital infection rates to encouraging better coordination between teams of doctors.

Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan. Much of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers. This reform will charge insurance companies a fee for their most expensive policies, which will encourage them to provide greater value for the money – an idea which has the support of Democratic and Republican experts. And according to these same experts, this modest change could help hold down the cost of health care for all of us in the long-run.

Finally, many in this chamber – particularly on the Republican side of the aisle – have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the cost of health care. I don’t believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So I am proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush Administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these issues. It’s a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.

Add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years – less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration. Most of these costs will be paid for with money already being spent – but spent badly – in the existing health care system. The plan will not add to our deficit. The middle-class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term.

This is the plan I’m proposing. It’s a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight – Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.

But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.

Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true.

That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed – the ones who suffer silently, and the ones who shared their stories with us at town hall meetings, in emails, and in letters.

I received one of those letters a few days ago. It was from our beloved friend and colleague, Ted Kennedy. He had written it back in May, shortly after he was told that his illness was terminal. He asked that it be delivered upon his death.

In it, he spoke about what a happy time his last months were, thanks to the love and support of family and friends, his wife, Vicki, and his children, who are here tonight . And he expressed confidence that this would be the year that health care reform – “that great unfinished business of our society,” he called it – would finally pass. He repeated the truth that health care is decisive for our future prosperity, but he also reminded me that “it concerns more than material things.” “What we face,” he wrote, “is above all a moral issue; at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.”

I’ve thought about that phrase quite a bit in recent days – the character of our country. One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom and our healthy skepticism of government. And figuring out the appropriate size and role of government has always been a source of rigorous and sometimes angry debate.

For some of Ted Kennedy’s critics, his brand of liberalism represented an affront to American liberty. In their mind, his passion for universal health care was nothing more than a passion for big government.

But those of us who knew Teddy and worked with him here – people of both parties – know that what drove him was something more. His friend, Orrin Hatch, knows that. They worked together to provide children with health insurance. His friend John McCain knows that. They worked together on a Patient’s Bill of Rights. His friend Chuck Grassley knows that. They worked together to provide health care to children with disabilities.

On issues like these, Ted Kennedy’s passion was born not of some rigid ideology, but of his own experience. It was the experience of having two children stricken with cancer. He never forgot the sheer terror and helplessness that any parent feels when a child is badly sick; and he was able to imagine what it must be like for those without insurance; what it would be like to have to say to a wife or a child or an aging parent – there is something that could make you better, but I just can’t afford it.

That large-heartedness – that concern and regard for the plight of others – is not a partisan feeling. It is not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character. Our ability to stand in other people’s shoes. A recognition that we are all in this together; that when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand. A belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play; and an acknowledgement that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise.

This has always been the history of our progress. In 1933, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it. In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down. They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind.

You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom. But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, and the vulnerable can be exploited. And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter – that at that point we don’t merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.

What was true then remains true today. I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road – to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.

But that’s not what the moment calls for. That’s not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it’s hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility, and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things, and that here and now we will meet history’s test.

Because that is who we are. That is our calling. That is our character. Thank you, God Bless You, and may God Bless the United States of America.

President Obama’s Call To The Nation On Health Care Reform

President Obama gave a fantastic, inspiring speech this evening, fully explaining all of his goals on health care reform, attacking the myths and lies that have been spread by propagandists and critics, and calling on the country to unite around the need to give this nation what every other democracy in the world has–a commitment to health care for everyone.

He gave credit to Republicans who have worked on various aspects of health care in the past, including John McCain and Orrin Hatch. He called for bipartisan cooperation to promote a plan that would protect all Americans from illness and injury. He invoked the memory of Ted Kennedy as a leader who felt the moral cause to insure all Americans for the basic right to good health care.

It was disturbing to see most Republicans most of the time sitting on their hands, looking bored and uncaring. Some seemed distracted by their Blackberrys, leaving a terrible image for the younger generation, that it is acceptable to be rude and avoid listening to a person presenting a speech. House Minority Whip Eric Cantor particularly stood out in this regard, and that is not the type of image he should be wanting to present. 🙁

Health care propaganda has just been designed to insure continued high profits for the health care industry, and many Republicans have been well supported by lobbyists for that industry, and that is not going to be a benefit to their party in the long run. The GOP stands out as the party of NO, the party of no interest in solving this problem, and showing an image of being uncaring and mean spirited.

The hope is that the President’s eloquence and passion will finally lead, as he stated, to action on a subject that was first promoted almost one hundred years ago by Theodore Roosevelt during his 1912 Progressive Party campaign for President.

In conclusion, this moment hopefully will be a watershed moment on the way to true health care reform!

Republicans, The Constitution, And Health Care Reform

As the health care debate heats up tomorrow night when President Obama delivers a prime time speech to a joint session of Congress, we get word that Republicans are claiming that health care is not allowed to be a subject of government initiatives under our venerable Constitution.

Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, himself a medical doctor, makes this statement in a very assertive way: The Constitution forbids any action on health care reform.

Let’s think about this: Where does it say in the Constitution that the Congress cannot deal with the issue of health care? Nowhere, Senator Coburn!

But I have a question for Senator Coburn: Where in the Constitution does it say we can have a military draft, or Social Security, or Medicare, or Civil Rights laws, or Environmental Protection Laws, or Consumer Laws, or any of the myriad of laws that have been passed in the 220 year history of our Constitution? The answer is nowhere!

BUT the Founding Fathers, a lot wiser group than most of the members of the Congress, and certainly than most Republicans who have always opposed almost ANY legislation designed to deal with real problems other than building up the military, DID come up with a solution to problems they could not foresee in 1787.

What did they put into the Constitution? ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8–the ELASTIC CLAUSE–which reads that Congress shall make all laws which are NECESSARY AND PROPER, FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE AND THE GENERAL WELFARE!

That “elastic clause” is the basis of ALL significant laws that have been passed in our more than two centuries of America under the Constitution.

And it is clear without question that it IS necessary and proper, for the common defense and general welfare, to pass health care reform, and that it is perfectly legal and constitutional!

So, Senator Coburn, stick to medicine, not the Constitution, which you have no clue to its meaning. You are NOT following the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, no matter what you might think. Health care reform is a necessary step at this point in our history!

Newt Gingrich, Laura Bush, And The National Review Agree On Obama Education Speech

Imagine this: The former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich, no friend of President Obama, believes that the Obama education speech was a great speech.

Former First Lady Laura Bush also expressed support of the President’s message, and said she believed overall, Obama is doing a good job as President.

The National Review, the leading conservative journal of opinion, declared that the Obama speech was the BEST of his Presidency, quite a coup for the President to gain the backing and support of the most significant and legitimate opposition political periodical.

So do all the parents, the conservative talk show hosts, and the political operatives of the Republican party feel foolish, as they should, with spades? No! Instead, such conservative luminaries as Laura Ingraham, Monica Crowley, and Michelle Malkin, trying to compete with the “boys” that have more notice than they do, proved they are just as outrageous and crazy, despite the fact that we would like to believe that women are the smarter sex and use more reason. I would believe that, but these women mentioned above contradict that belief I so strongly hold! 🙂 LOL

Realize that Obama won today, and made conservatives and Republicans who were reckless, as always, with the truth, look totally ridiculous and out of touch.

Any thinking American will see that the intention of the opposition is not to improve America, but instead keep it as it is–a haven for the rich and privileged, and also the biased and bigoted, who don’t want to see any improvement or change that might affect their position of power and wealth.

But it is time to let these forces of reaction be made aware, that their time of domination is over! We will bring change and reform whether you like it or not! You had your chance and you blew it!

Rush Limbaugh: Competing With Glenn Beck For Looniest Talk Show Host!

Rush Limbaugh seems to feel that he is not gaining enough attention, so he is now competing subconsciously with Glenn Beck for the title of Looniest Talk Show Host!

Limbaugh now claims on his talk show that President Obama’s education speech earlier today can be compared to what Kim Jong Il, the North Korean dictator, does in his country on a regular basis: promoting indoctrination and brain washing of the younger generation.

So it is promoting indoctrination and brain washing for the President of the United States to call upon students to do their homework, study and learn, show respect for their teachers and parents, take their future seriously, and work to improve their lives and that of their families and their nation.

It seems to me that if Rush Limbaugh had followed this advice years ago and finished college and stayed away from drugs, he might have a more respectable public image than he has!

Sure, he makes millions of dollars a year and has millions of devoted fans who hang on his every word, but we all know his fans are as delusional and misguided as he is. All he knows how to do is to divide people, wish for failure, promote dissension, manipulate gullible people’s minds, and sow bad blood between people of different economic means and racial and ethnic groups.

Rush Limbaugh has no desire to make the country better, but rather to exploit people’s insecurities, promote hate and envy, and all the while, enrich himself without any sense of conscience or morality.

Any thinking person should answer Rush Limbaugh’s promotion of poison by boycotting his show, condemning his negative attitude on everything that promotes progress, and stop rewarding him for his bad behavior.

It is time for people of good intentions to start a campaign to remove this peddler of hate, along with Glenn Beck, from the air, and stop rewarding these two despicable figures with prolific salaries, making fools of us and laughing all the way to the bank!

Bill Clinton’s Advice To Barack Obama: Move Ahead On Health Care Reform

Former President Bill Clinton has advised President Obama to move ahead on reform with or without GOP support.

Clinton points out that there are enough Democrats to bring about health care reform without Republican backing if that party’s members refuse to back any bill. We should move ahead and not let the opposition prevent change because of their unwillingness to compromise and support any legislation.

It is clear to me that if we are to let the Republicans dictate what is to be done in health care, we will lose the best opportunity in a generation to bring about what has been talked about on and off since the time of Harry Truman–the need to protect ALL Americans by providing low cost health care that has no people left out because of preconditions medically.

Obama, by his victory by a larger margin than any President in a generation, needs to keep his promise to his supporters and fight for what he feels we need–a public option and REAL reform of the whole health care system. Democrats need to remember that they have won this election in 2008 decisively, and the winners decide the future, not the losers.

The Republicans know how to promote their victories, and Democrats need to stop apologizing for their triumph last November and assert their authority to change the future.

We are waiting with baited breath for what we hope will be a President utilizing the techniques of Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, and Ronald Reagan to accomplish his goals.

Bill Clinton failed to accomplish his goal 16 years ago of health care reform. It is time for Barack Obama to fulfill what President Clinton was unable to achieve!

The Obama Education Speech: What Was The Ruckus About? NOTHING!

President Obama’s education speech, to be delivered on Tuesday at an Arlington, Virginia high school, and just released on the White House website, should cause radio talk show hosts, parents, and politicians who were screaming and yelping all kinds of crazy, whacko thoughts to feel a sense of embarrassment and a symbolic “egg all over their face”! Much ado about nothing is the sum total of the speech.

What did President Obama say in his speech? He said students need to have a sense of personal responsibility. They need to study, do their homework, obey their parents and teachers, plan for a career by finishing school, rather than dropping out.

Obama emphasized the importance of exposing oneself to education to find something that inspires every young person, and that could lead to a career that is rewarding and productive, not only to that person and his family, but to the broader society in America. Obama said training, working hard, and learning is essential for success. All students have to develop their talents, skills and intellect to solve problems that will benefit the nation at large.

Students should have no excuses for dropping out, or cutting classes, or talking back to their teachers, no matter what their personal situation, as the only way to make one’s life better, Obama states, is to get an education. A good attitude can make for a good future. One must not let a failure define you for the future, but instead struggle harder to overcome adversity, as many successful people have had to do. Hard work is unavoidable for success, and students should consult with a reliable adult to help them along the way. Most importantly, do not give up on yourself, the President warns.

Now I ask all of the naysayers: What is wrong with this message? Why did you feel the need to promote disrespect and hate for our President among your children in particular, and among Americans at large, in general? Why do you have to see evil intent in our leadership at a time when it is essential to promote UNITY to overcome the many challenges we have? Why is it you have to play politics and divide the country when we can accomplish so much more if we only see the crises we are in, as a united nation?

I know, realistically, the bitter attacks will not end, but I will say it would be a wonderful thing if we would give at least enough credit to our President, that even if we do not all agree with everything he says and does, that at least he has the right intentions.

Do not, please, paint him as a dictator, a Hitler, a demagogue, and even an evil man, who one so called Baptist preacher prays should die in office. That is not true religious doctrine, to promote hate and wish death. This kind of hate needs to be condemned universally. Realize that those who promote such hate and division only do so for their own advancement, not the good of the nation, and we as a nation need to say “ENOUGH”!

Steven Anderson: A Sick, Deranged, Dangerous Baptist Minister Who Should Be Condemned!

News has just emerged of a clergyman, who is obviously sick, deranged, and dangerous, and should be condemned by all thinking, moral people.

I am referring to Pastor Steven Anderson of the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Arizona, who has openly been preaching for the death of President Obama. He thinks Obama is a very evil man and deserves death.

Needless to say, this is disgraceful, unacceptable rhetoric, and it amazes me that ANYONE in his congregation or anywhere else, could possibly term this as acceptable freedom of speech. How can a man of God say such things and expect to be respected and keep his dignity? It seems to me that despite his obvious civil liberty to speak, that he should not be kept on as pastor of his church, as it reflects terribly on the church and its members if they see no problem with keeping him as their leader. Any such thought shows real sickness in our society and should be condemned. Also, the Secret Service should keep close tabs on Pastor Anderson as a possible promoter of violence against the President, as freedom of speech should not include death threats against any occupant of the White House.

We are in deep trouble as a nation with clergymen preaching hate and calling for the death of our President, no matter who he might be. This only makes clear the constant danger that our President faces as he tries to deal with a multitude of issues facing the nation. And it has to make one wonder if a lot of this hate is based on race more than anything else, a sad commentary on America in 2009. 🙁

Hints Of Another Supreme Court Retirement For Next Summer

There are sudden hints of a possible retirement by the summer of 2010 of Associate Justice John Paul Stevens from the Supreme Court.

Stevens, appointed by President Gerald Ford in his only appointment to the high court in 1975, will have served on the court for 35 years by then, making him close to the longest serving member ever, but not quite, as at least Associate Justice William O. Douglas served 36 years on the Court. Also, Stevens is already the second oldest Justice ever, but if he leaves next year, will not break the record of Associate Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, who was 91 when he retired.

So the possibility of breaking both records by 2012 might not be possible after all, but the question is why Stevens would be leaving, since he seems in fine health at age 89. We do not know, but we realize that he is not, for the first time, planning more than one year ahead in appointing law clerks, as he has done regularly in the past.

So President Obama might have an appointment just as the election season gets hot next summer for the midterm election. And to top it off, who can say whether Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg might also leave, by choice or necessity, after having twice had cancer.

Imagine if Obama has TWO appointments soon, likely before the 2012 election, replacing three liberals with hoped for equivalent liberals within one term. There are guaranteed to be battles with the Republicans in the Senate no matter what, but not quite the same as if a conservative were to retire, which is far less likely anytime soon.

A Crucial Week For President Obama

The week of Labor Day and remembrances of September 11 is indeed a crucial week for President Obama.

Not only is he going to engage in a much criticized education speech to the nation’s students, and also attend the Pentagon ceremony on Friday to commemorate September 11’s eighth anniversary, but also his speech to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night on the health care reform plan will be a turning point for his administration.

It can be said that Obama underestimated the opposition to his health care plan, and its well oiled machine. He also failed to show discipline in planning the bill, leaving too much control to Congress, which has led to a sense of chaos on what exactly the bill is supposed to cover. His earlier insistence on a quick vote only undermined the whole idea and promoted suspicion of his motives.

So in a sense, Obama has to start anew on Wednesday and state CLEARLY what his aims and motives are, and appeal for his party to unify, and for some Republicans to join in on dealing with one of the toughest issues Congress has had to face in many years.

He needs to tell us that a public option is essential, and that he is willing to use whatever techniques and tactics needed to get it through, with the preference for a bipartisan bill and a unified Democratic party, but willingness to use the Democratic majority to his advantage if need be. He has to calm the fears of the elderly, in particular, who seem to believe that Medicare would be under attack.

In other words, he must be a diplomat, but also show willingness to go the distance and play “hardball” if need be, and not worry about alienating some groups, as no President can possibly unite everyone, but the majority should rule and a program NEEDS to be promoted, maybe with some compromise, but not giving up the heart and soul of the legislation.

Those who oppose Obama and want his downfall must not be catered to, and Obama has to be concerned less with being liked and being popular, and more with being successful and respected.

In a sense, he must be a combination of Lyndon Johnson with his aggressiveness, Franklin Roosevelt with his craftiness, and Ronald Reagan with his commitment to principle.

This is indeed not an easy task, and we all need to hope he can accomplish what needs to be done for the nation. If he fails to accomplish his goals, it could be the achilles heel of his Presidency, and that would be terrible for both him and the people of this country.

So those who support his goals must root him on with our willingness to fight for him, and even, a little praying for good to result!