Journal damn_registrars's Journal: When does a federal project become pork? 5
The current economic stimulus package is a political football of epic proportions. Opponents of it in particular are trying to declare it "full of pork" (to which I suggest they read up on the definition of pork barrel). Although there are some serious questions that could be asked about some of the projects and the significance of them to the American public.
After all, if pork is something that benefits only a small part of the country, then something for the entire country should therefore not be pork. And there are plenty of things listed in the stimulus bill that belong to all of us:
The interstate and US highway system: Anyone who drives on the interstate and US highways likely knows of some parts that could use some help. The system belongs to the American public. Being as it has federal oversight, it would reason that the interstate and US highway system would receive investments from the federal government.
But yet certain people want us to believe that repairing specific parts of this system would be pork? How else do you work on a highway? Even if you decided tomorrow to build a new highway from say New York to Los Angeles, you would still have to do that in specific locations. Highways don't exist in a vacuum, and you can't work on the whole system in a single shot from a repair, maintenance, and upgrade standpoint.
Government buildings: Again, these belong to the American populace. The federal government exists to serve the American people. Sure we could insist on dropping the maintenance of the federal government buildings, but what would be the real savings of that? At some point building decay will catch up and start to pull down the agencies that need those buildings.
Health Care: There, I said it. Like it or not, health care is part of infrastructure in the US. Sure we have failed to catch up with the rest of the industrialized world and provide real, meaningful universal health care to all citizens. But ultimately that doesn't matter, you get to pay for it anyways. Anytime someone with no coverage goes to the ER, you get to pay for their visit. There is no mention of single-payer health care in anything currently proposed, which is a crying shame. There is, however, money to make health care more efficient. Better efficiency means less waste, less wait, and possibly even less of your money being spent to help people with no coverage. Why on earth you would oppose this is beyond me.
After all, if pork is something that benefits only a small part of the country, then something for the entire country should therefore not be pork. And there are plenty of things listed in the stimulus bill that belong to all of us:
The interstate and US highway system: Anyone who drives on the interstate and US highways likely knows of some parts that could use some help. The system belongs to the American public. Being as it has federal oversight, it would reason that the interstate and US highway system would receive investments from the federal government.
But yet certain people want us to believe that repairing specific parts of this system would be pork? How else do you work on a highway? Even if you decided tomorrow to build a new highway from say New York to Los Angeles, you would still have to do that in specific locations. Highways don't exist in a vacuum, and you can't work on the whole system in a single shot from a repair, maintenance, and upgrade standpoint.
Government buildings: Again, these belong to the American populace. The federal government exists to serve the American people. Sure we could insist on dropping the maintenance of the federal government buildings, but what would be the real savings of that? At some point building decay will catch up and start to pull down the agencies that need those buildings.
Health Care: There, I said it. Like it or not, health care is part of infrastructure in the US. Sure we have failed to catch up with the rest of the industrialized world and provide real, meaningful universal health care to all citizens. But ultimately that doesn't matter, you get to pay for it anyways. Anytime someone with no coverage goes to the ER, you get to pay for their visit. There is no mention of single-payer health care in anything currently proposed, which is a crying shame. There is, however, money to make health care more efficient. Better efficiency means less waste, less wait, and possibly even less of your money being spent to help people with no coverage. Why on earth you would oppose this is beyond me.
Health Care (Score:1)
It's even in the Constitution. Ammendment 23, Second item, which reads as follows:
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
There you go. Congress can do ANYTHING to enforce the right of the citizens of the District of Columbia to vote in the US Presidential elections. Including universal health care.
And if you disagree with me, remember, you're not a lawyer, and I enjoy the taste of shit WAY more than anyone I know. You don't want to get into a tub of jello with ME
The reason I oppose government run health care (Score:2)
The "stimulus" bill creates a new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, which will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. Hospitals and doctors that are not "meaningful users" of the new system will face penalties. This isnâ(TM)t defined in the bill but will be left up to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose "more stringent measures of meaningful use over time." This bill wou
Re: (Score:2)
In particular:
This bill would apply a cost-effectiveness standard set by the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.
The treatments are tracked, yes. Info
Re: (Score:2)
As much as I hate to admit it, I was misinformed about the actual wording of the bill in question and I have to partially concede your point. I relied on a columnist to read the bill for me and I think she misinterpreted a section relating to the use of information technology and asserted that they were talking about patient care.
However, I do still believe that that is exactly what this bill will eventually bring. While the text of the bill is (disturbingly) vague, if you
Re: (Score:2)
If this gets closed on us, I'll post a new journal entry for the same topic, or you can feel free to do the same.
As far as I am aware (feel free to fact check this assertion - I've not spent the time to back it up with statistics yet), most research done even at public universities comes from the private sector - companies, endowments, and individuals are directing research with their funding in order to get that return on their investment
This is something that does vary from one institution to another, depending on a variety of factors. I am currently workin