Thursday, September 10, 2009

Nothing new in Obama speech to Congress

I don't know about you, but I heard absolutely nothing new in President Barack Obama's speech to Congress last night. As a reiteration of previous statements and speeches, I don't think it was deserving of a joint session or national television coverage.

He said what he's said before and didn't add to the discussion. It sounded more like a campaign speech designed to 'put to shame' those he considers his opponents, though I do not believe he succeeded.

If he'd presented something new or announced a major policy change, I would feel differently. But he didn't, and I don't.

I've read H.R. 3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, and I know that many of the things he stated in his speech are not true.

While the bill does say that illegal immigrants are not to be covered, it does not include any way of identifying who is or is not a citizen. Because there is no way of verifying citizenship before providing coverage, it is likely that illegal immigrants can be covered under this bill.

Obama said that you can keep your coverage if you want. However ... the bill says that all plans must meet certain criteria established by the government in order to 'qualify' as 'benefit plans.' If your employer does not meet those criteria, you will be required to change to a plan that has the government mandates. That's not 'keeping your coverage' - that's the government deciding what coverage you MUST have and then penalizing you and/or the employer if you don't.

He said that this will not add to the deficit, though every entity that has examined the bill says that it will. Obama says that savings and efficiencies will cover the extra costs. If there are savings and efficiencies to be had - do them now! Prove to the American public that they do exist and show us exactly how much they will produce in dollars and cents. Then - and only then - could you go forward with 'utilizing' those savings to pay for an expansion of government. (Personally, I'd like any 'savings' returned to the taxpayers, but I realize that's not the thinking of our politicians.)

He said he's open to other ideas. Two ideas expressed loudly and often at the town hall meetings and by many in emails and phones calls are tort reform and interstate competition (allowing insurance companies to sell products across state lines). Here are two prominent ideas that a majority of Americans believe would help provide instant reform. They are not even considered as part of the bill, nor were they addressed by the president. How 'open' to ideas are you if you continue to ignore those two concepts that the majority of Americans support?

In the end, it was the same old-same old from the President and I don't believe it swayed the public one way or the other.

If you'd like another perspective on the speech, I recommend Erick Erickson's post at RedState.com

6 comments:

Hooda Thunkit (Dave Zawodny) said...

Maggie,

Yep, I too wasted almost an hour hoping to hear something new but it was not to be.

Just another heaping helping of stale "deja vu" stew. . .

Tim Higgins said...

Maggie,

This speech fell under the category of: "If you can't dazzle them with ability, baffle them with BS."

Welcome to the fertilizer factory!

My only regret of the night was the apology issued by Rep. Joe Wilson. One should never have to apologize for telling the truth.

Maggie Thurber said...

Tim - Rep. Wilson's behavior was inappropriate to the office of President. While the Dems booed Bush during one of his State of the Union speeches, it does not excuse bad behavior.

To shout out in that manner was rude. While it was the truth, it was still rude.

It was good and appropriate that he apologize for his rudeness. That is the measure of man and his character.

I'm still waiting for Obama's apology to the police officer he called 'stupid.'

Tim Higgins said...

Maggie,

I agree with the fact that it was a breech of manners and of protocol, and as such demanded an apology. It disturbs me however that manners and protocol only seem to be expected of one party.

It is likewise disturbing that telling lies in a speech to a joint session of Congress does not appear to rise to the same level of manners.

Maggie Thurber said...

Tim - we are in agreement on your points.

I guess I stand by my long-standing opinion that just because 'they' do it, it doesn't make it right...or that we must resort to their level of bad behavior because the other side (and the MSM) have double standards.

-Sepp said...

Maggie, Obama wasn't "lying" so to speak because it's obvious that even HE hasn't bothered to read his own bill...he's just "misinformed" as to the fact and fictions of it all!

As for Wilson...yeah, he violated decorum. As for the democrats being offended by it...maybe if Wilson had just thrown a shoe instead they would'nt have such a problem? They were cheering the guy who did it to Bush! I'm surprised the iraqi shoe thrower isn't Obama's "shoe czar" yet.

Google Analytics Alternative