Skip to content

Wall Street Journal says, “The Worst Bill Ever”

November 3, 2009

That Wall Street Journal headline grabbed my attention and the information provided was worth the three minutes spent reading.  Six months ago I thought of someone who favored this flavor of health care reform as just having a different opinion than myself;  a different perspective on the role of the federal government.  Today, being as close to seeing details of the legislation as we’ve been and having the benefit of many different interpretations and opinions on the bills, things are very different.  Still there will be those who read the Wall Street Journal article “The Worst Bill Ever” and say to themselves, “Yup, that sounds like a good plan.”

As significant a piece of legislation that this may come to be, is it any longer appropriate to dismiss diametric contemplatives as merely having antipodal opinions? Forget the apathetic beneficiary/ benefactor who chooses not to work past an elementary level of understanding or engage in a second stage of thinking.  Rather, of the group consisting of informed and thoughtful opposing views, are the contrasting perspectives on this issue much more than tangential or parallel variances.  Can two that diametrically oppose each other with antithetical values be said to just ‘disagree?’  Or is there greater disparity between the two that, perhaps, is irreconcilable?

Read “The Worst Bill Ever” – Wall Street Journal, November 1, 2009.

  1. Probitee permalink
    November 3, 2009 8:47 pm

    Your blog reference to a Wall Street Journal article caught my attention but raised more questions than answers. Four months ago I found myself adamant about wanting health care reform. Admittedly my opinion was not based on having an abundance of facts, but in defense of my position there were few ‘set in stone’ facts available. During the ensuing four months, I have made great strides gathering more information about the issue, but I am still befuddled. Writing my Senator and Representative did not produce any worthwhile results, and despite my Representative responding, my Senator remained mute. After reading “The Worst Bill Ever” in the WSJ as per your suggestion that it was ‘worth it’, I will agree that the proposed Obamacare (sic), also known as ‘‘America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009’’ may be one of the most significant pieces of legislation facing Congress in our lifetime. Not only did I read the opinion article but managed to read through 277 comments as well. Forgive my naiveté, but is it common practice that articles of importance not have an author on such a prestigious news network site? This question is not an intentional slight, but when an issue of such notoriety causes as much rancor among the nations’ constituencies, it would be comforting to have a reference to know where the writer or writers’ allegiances lie. From a myopic perspective all I found was, “The Topics pages provide background information and data, news and features from our archives and the latest headlines from the Journal and the Web.” As a reader who has a penchant for the truth and who perpetuates a demand for honesty, I found the lack of specific references a bit disconcerting. The article appeared to have a Republican slant. Perhaps promoting fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) was the purpose. It certainly caused FUD for me. With due respect for your opinions and to the authors’, I believe Representatives and Senators will have an opportunity to amend the bill on the floor allowing for adjustments that may be more agreeable to everyone. Can you agree that the health care system has proven to be hard for presidents and policymakers to reach a consensus on because of its complexities? The intricacies of this issue extend beyond the political arena to those with no or limited insurance wanting to see coverage expanded, to those with good coverage who worry that changes will cost them more and disrupt a system that they think works pretty well. I worry too. My insurance premium rose twice in one calendar year and now costs half my monthly salary. Personally I would prefer to pay less and go to any doctor, specialist or hospital I chose. Unfortunately my current plan does not allow me those privileges.
    An article in USA Today on Politics stated “that officials who provided overall cost estimates did so on condition of anonymity”. Another statement by Representative Virginia Foxx from North Carolina reported her saying that people have more to fear from Democratic health care legislation than from terrorists. House Republican Leader, John Boehner of Ohio, said at a news conference, “Our goal is to make it as difficult as possible for Democrats to pass it. “ How can this kind of rhetoric not cause FUD? At independently sponsored telephone poll results indicated that a true majority support the Democratic proposal; albeit they are not super majorities., a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania found twenty-six lies and many misleading statements being reported about H.R. 3200. There were an estimated 46 million uninsured according to the 2007 Census and it is believed that number is higher now. These uninsured use the Emergency Room (ER) at hospitals now because they cannot be turned away under a 1986 federal law. Doesn’t that suggest they are using the ER for routine care? The current bill being espoused by House Democrats may not be the bill you or I agree should be legislated into law, but certainly we can agree that reform of the current health care system needs altering because it is unsustainable in its current condition.


  1. Response to Probitee’s Comment on “The Worst Bill Ever” « Hugoville

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: