Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Republicans

damn_registrars's Journal: Heritage Foundation, In Their Own Words 44

Journal by damn_registrars
Smitty has recently linked to a Heritage Foundation page trying to distance itself from the mandate in the health insurance act of 2010. It isn't a surprise that they would want to try to make it look like the mandate wasn't their idea, as it is wildly unpopular with their base. What is surprising, though, is how epically they failed in distancing themselves from it.

For example (from the actual article):

I held the view that as a technical matter, some form of requirement to purchase insurance was needed in a near-universal insurance market to avoid massive instability through âoeadverse selectionâ (insurers avoiding bad risks and healthy people declining coverage). At that time, President Clinton was proposing a universal health care plan, and Heritage and I devised a viable alternative.

My view was shared at the time by many conservative experts, including American Enterprise Institute (AEI) scholars

That rather plainly shows that indeed people in the Heritage Foundation wanted a mandate. Reading on...

the version of the health insurance mandate Heritage and I supported in the 1990s had three critical features. First, it was not primarily intended to push people to obtain protection for their own good, but to protect others. Like auto damage liability insurance required in most states, our requirement focused on âoecatastrophicâ costs â" so hospitals and taxpayers would not have to foot the bill for the expensive illness or accident of someone who did not buy insurance.

Isn't that the same kind of "herd mentality" that they are demonizing the democrats over right now?

Second, we sought to induce people to buy coverage primarily through the carrot of a generous health credit or voucher, financed in part by a fundamental reform of the tax treatment of health coverage, rather than by a stick.

And the supreme court ruled that the mandate in the 2010 bill is, indeed, a tax. The stick analogy does not hold here.

And third, in the legislation we helped craft that ultimately became a preferred alternative to ClintonCare, the âoemandateâ was actually the loss of certain tax breaks for those not choosing to buy coverage, not a legal requirement.

... same as above.

So in other words, the Heritage Foundation acknowledges that the mandate in the Health Insurance Industry Bailout Act of 2010 is a facsimile of what they wanted. They can pretend that they somehow did not have a role in the crafting of this lousy bill, but they cannot show that they have not advocated for what it does.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Heritage Foundation, In Their Own Words

Comments Filter:
  • ...with corrupt motivation at the basis of institutions, both public and private.

    Why marvel at any manifestation of this corruption as though it were some deviation from standard?

    Fish do not see water, men do not see thoughts. So too, is the corruption pervasive and invisible. Capitalism as finance is fundamental corruption. It cannot be reconciled with either Democracy or true religious belief.

    History has seen this problem, and the inevitable solution in the past... It will see it again.

    So? Welco

    • Why marvel at any manifestation of this corruption as though it were some deviation from standard?

      Actually, I have been arguing for some time now that our country - in spite of what some may claim - has been on a continuous march towards ever increasingly conservative stands on pretty much everything. Hence while it does disappoint me greatly that we ended up with this conservative dogpile of legislation called the Health Insurance Industry Bailout Act of 2010 (or "Obamacare" if you want to attach the name of a conservative president to it) it does not surprise me. Everything Obama did leading up to

      • I am getting to the point where seeing the nation dissolve seems like a good thing.

        The Progressive pool of debt seems our likely solvent.

        • The Progressive pool of debt seems our likely solvent.

          Considering the fact that the most conservative presidents end up contributing the most debt to the nations balance sheet, you are describing a comparatively small pool there.

            • I told you before I'm not interested in watching your political videos. Provide a transcript.

              On a different note, it must really suck to be in the majority in slashdot and be allowed to post as often as you like. I have to keep waiting to post this reply - I'm only allowed to post once every 5 minutes - as I just replied to your other message.
              • Have no idea what anyone could possibly find even slightly political about the linked video. Then again, you call Obama 'conservative', so quite literally anything is attainable with you. Will you arrive at sanity, by random chance?
                • Have no idea what anyone could possibly find even slightly political about the linked video

                  I'm not watching videos that you link to, for any reason. Every video you have linked to that I can recall to date has been a total waste of my time.

                  Then again, you call Obama 'conservative'

                  I call Obama conservative because he is demonstrably more conservative in action than any other president our country has ever had. Not at all similar to how you call him a communist as a result of your complete lack of understanding of what communism is actually about.

                  • I'm not watching videos that you link to, for any reason. Every video you have linked to that I can recall to date has been a total waste of my time.

                    Oh, so, like the Senate Benghazi report and the NYT. We're equal.

                    I call Obama conservative because he is demonstrably more conservative in action than any other president our country has ever had.

                    Come on: he's the Lefty savior--just ask the media and academia. You're really got to curb your blasphemy.

                    • I'm not watching videos that you link to, for any reason. Every video you have linked to that I can recall to date has been a total waste of my time.

                      Oh, so, like the Senate Benghazi report and the NYT. We're equal.

                      No. We are not equal in any way, shape, or form on that matter. You are intentionally choosing not to read researched material that was made publicly available after detailed topical research, and bragging about not reading it. I am pointing out that nothing of value has been posted to youtube for which no transcript of the same exists. I will not watch your political videos because they are a waste of my time. You refuse to read printed material that your political movement auto-discardds for you bef

                    • No. We are not equal in any way, shape, or form on that matter.

                      Have I mentioned that you're the best recently. I'm getting rather tired of your hooey, and I'm pondering just gearing down and telling you how cool you are for a while.

                    • I just want you to read the text that you link to. I cannot force you to read. However, you make yourself look rather silly when you link to text that does not support the message that you claim it does. If I linked to the bible and claimed it supported sacrificing goats to Satan I would expect you to call me out on it. You are linking to modern texts and making claims that are not in line with what they explicitly say, I have pointed that out.

                      Why you brag so openly about not reading is unclear. I'
                    • Who can touch your infinite coolness?
                    • Could you wander further off topic? How is the weather where you live?

                      We understand how much pride you have in not reading. You don't have to brag about it in every post you write.
                    • To wander about town, knowing that people see me and are awash in envy!
                    • Did you just reach for a random deadly sin and decide to try to find a way to end your comment in it? You certainly didn't seem to feel a need to connect your comment to the discussion.
                    • by Red4man (1347635)
                      You don't believe there's such a thing as sin. Therefore, your comment does not connect to the discussion. Therefore, you are guilty of what you accuse snitty of doing.

                      Therefore, you're a HYPOCRITE. And as we all know, that's the worst thing a liberal can be.

                      Please report to your nearest FEMA re-education camp, you hateful bigot.
                    • That is even a pitiful example of half-assed trolling coming from you. Whoever gave you the red4man password would be regretting that decision if they were still reading this site.
                    • by Red4man (1347635)
                      That is even a pitiful example of half-assed trolling coming from you.

                      FREEZE, DUMBASS! This is the grammar police! You are under arrest for bludgeoning the English language.

                      The word "even" does not make sense in the context of that sentence. You should have written:

                      That post is a pitiful example of half-assed trolling coming from you.

                      Of course, that statement would make you a horrible liar (kiss me, pudge!), so I'm sure that what you meant to type was actually:

                      That post was an amazing example o
                    • Better effort? Yes.

                      Still a failure? Also yes.
                    • by Red4man (1347635)
                      You're the coolest of them all.* ** *** ****

                      * and by all I still mean all your sockpuppet accounts.
                      ** but not really cool
                      *** I mean, you're still a dickhole
                      **** But you knew that and delight in that fact.
        • Your "debt" is a lie

    • by Red4man (1347635)
      Fish do not see water

      Of course they see water. Have you ever caught a fish? Ever dropped it when taking it off the hook? Fish will flop for all their worth trying to get back into the water, which they can see.

      I hate it when people write in plateaus like this. It's just a lame trick to make the writer sound clever to disguise the fact that the writer doesn't know what they're talking about.
      • "Platitudes".

        Now, back to sleep with you...

        • by Red4man (1347635)
          Now, back to sleep with you...
          You gotta buy me dinner first. Just what kind of guy do you think I am? *slap*

          It's been 3 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment

          Oh, OK. I'll elaborate.

          While I'm not a cheap date, damn_registrars, on the other hand, is a total whore. He'll sleep with you for nothing. In fact, his OCD will prevent him from doing anything else but be your bottom.
          • Oh, I'm so flattered. You came to my journal, and instead of talking about the topic you chose to talk about me.
            • by Red4man (1347635)
              talking about the topic you chose to talk about me.
              Of course -- It's your favorite subject outside of what smitty, pudge, RG, are doing. I dare say you like talking about yourself even more than you do creating sock puppet accounts.

There is no royal road to geometry. -- Euclid

Working...