Dr. Rand Paul Comments on the U.S. House Rejecting ‘Obamacare Lite’

Senator Rand Paul ^ | 24 March 2017 | Rand Paul

[loveliberty2]

Clearly Democrats, and "Progressives" in other Party guises, are pressing toward a single-payer plan.

From the Liberty Fund Library is "A Plea for Liberty: An Argument Against Socialism and Socialistic Legislation," edited by Thomas Mackay (1849 - 1912), Chapter 1, excerpted final paragraphs from Edward Stanley Robertson's essay, "The Impracticability of Socialism":

"I have suggested that the scheme of Socialism is wholly incomplete unless it includes a power of restraining the increase of population, which power is so unwelcome to Englishmen that the very mention of it seems to require an apology. I have showed that in France, where restraints on multiplication have been adopted into the popular code of morals, there is discontent on the one hand at the slow rate of increase, while on the other, there is still a 'proletariat,' and Socialism is still a power in politics.
I.44
"I have put the question, how Socialism would treat the residuum of the working class and of all classes—the class, not specially vicious, nor even necessarily idle, but below the average in power of will and in steadiness of purpose. I have intimated that such persons, if they belong to the upper or middle classes, are kept straight by the fear of falling out of class, and in the working class by positive fear of want. But since Socialism purposes to eliminate the fear of want, and since under Socialism the hierarchy of classes will either not exist at all or be wholly transformed, there remains for such persons no motive at all except physical coercion. Are we to imprison or flog all the 'ne'er-do-wells'?
I.45
"I began this paper by pointing out that there are inequalities and anomalies in the material world, some of which, like the obliquity of the ecliptic and the consequent inequality of the day's length, cannot be redressed at all. Others, like the caprices of sunshine and rainfall in different climates, can be mitigated, but must on the whole be endured. I am very far from asserting that the inequalities and anomalies of human society are strictly parallel with those of material nature. I fully admit that we are under an obligation to control nature so far as we can. But I think I have shown that the Socialist scheme cannot be relied upon to control nature, because it refuses to obey her. Socialism attempts to vanquish nature by a front attack. Individualism, on the contrary, is the recognition, in social politics, that nature has a beneficent as well as a malignant side. The struggle for life provides for the various wants of the human race, in somewhat the same way as the climatic struggle of the elements provides for vegetable and animal life—imperfectly, that is, and in a manner strongly marked by inequalities and anomalies. By taking advantage of prevalent tendencies, it is possible to mitigate these anomalies and inequalities, but all experience shows that it is impossible to do away with them. All history, moreover, is the record of the triumph of Individualism over something which was virtually Socialism or Collectivism, though not called by that name. In early days, and even at this day under archaic civilisations, the note of social life is the absence of freedom. But under every progressive civilisation, freedom has made decisive strides—broadened down, as the poet says, from precedent to precedent. And it has been rightly and naturally so.
I.46
"Freedom is the most valuable of all human possessions, next after life itself. It is more valuable, in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health; but good laws, justly administered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the only thing that law can secure. Law cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of equality, all that law can do is to secure fair play, which is equality of rights but is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Individualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with that Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we may, is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, and that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the abnegations of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove." EDWARD STANLEY ROBERTSON

[Old_Grouch]

I read Paul’s Repeal Act and Replacement Act. All well and good, but I didn’t see any mention of pre-existing conditions. I understand the issue that if insurance companies are required to ignore pre-existing conditions, it’s not really insurance. However, I do not think any proposal that ignores the problem of what people with pre-existing conditions are supposed to do can pass Congress. That was an acknowledged problem that Republican’s discussed even before Obama was elected. How does Rand, or how does the Freedom Caucus, propose to deal with that? I can’t believe anything that just ignores those people will pass.

[Vigilanteman]

What would it hurt to try Rand Paul's plan?

Aside from disempowering:

1. The unlimited drug and alcohol rehab lobby.
   
2. The "You will pay for the consequences of us sticking our johnson in any body orifice" lobby.
   
3. The state regulator agencies who cater to these various lobbies.
   
4. The drug companies who think Americans should subsidize socialized medicine in other countries.
   
5. The insurance companies who want the government to guarantee their profitability.
   
6. The single payer lobby, etc.

[BlackAdderess]

The “Freedom Caucus” has ensured that Obamacare stays in place and continues to be “the law of the land”. You like your working class white mortality rates, you get to keep your working class mortality rates. (sometimes “despair” happens when no matter how many times you go to the doctor, and how well you document your plight, you get the runaround and eventually have to research a cure for yourself!)

[BlackAdderess]

"Middle-Aged White Americans Are Dying of Despair" from "the Atlantic"

[DoughtyOne]

Which one?

ObamaCare or it’s ugly sister Ryancare?

He won’t be blamed for either now.

It amazes me how many people went all in on the GOPe plan.

Ryan has been a GOPe guy since being voted Speaker.

Now Trump gets elected (basically over Ryan’s and the GOPe’s dead bodies), and folks instantly think he’s one of us?

For heaven’s sake why?

This thing stunk to high heavens.

[Shethink13]

Ladies and Gentlemen, Phase One is dead but Phase Two is STILL OPERATIVE.

Phase Two consists of the Secretary of HHS using the plain language of the bill to make changes. In fact, the Secretary has a LOT of power in this area.

The changes made by Sibelius right after passage of the bill can all be rolled back. In fact, and I hate to suggest this, but the Secretary COULD actually SABOTAGE the bill if they so chose.

Thank You!!!! I was wondering this myself. What is stopping President Trump from having Price make these changes right now?

Could this have been his plan all along? Pretend to push this stinker of a bill only to have to ride to the rescue of the voters and save them from the Obamacare disaster?

[ez]

Haha. There is no plan at all that is apparent to me at this point.

[thirst4truth]

Our Oregon Governor, the bi sexual, has cut the budget on all aspects of law enforcement across the state, to force the taxpayers through getting raped and mugged and robbed, beg her for more law enforcement, to raise taxes for more law enforcement.
She has said the extra revenue raised will also go to fund the illegals health care. Remember, Oregon is the state with the $300 million healthcare exchange failure, our former governor resigned over it. We have exactly two insurance companies that provide insurance in our entire state.