Schwarzenegger says he will veto universal health care measure

AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 9/5/06 | AP

[NormsRevenge]

SACRAMENTO

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Tuesday that he will veto a universal health care bill that is headed for his desk, claiming the measure would set up a "vast new bureaucracy" that would be too expensive.

The Republican governor said the single-payer system proposed by Sen. Sheila Kuehl would "cost the state billions and lead to significant new taxes on individuals and businesses, without solving the critical issue of affordability.

"I won't jeopardize the economy of our state for such a purpose," the governor said in a statement.

Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, said Schwarzenegger's comments indicated he "has not read the bill, doesn't understand the bill or is being completely misdirected by his handlers." She said the measure would save money.

"Where there are no cost controls at all now, and enormous administrative overhead and profit for insurance companies, there would have been a transparent system that actually would succeed in making health care coverage affordable in California," she said in a statement issued Tuesday.

The bill would provide every California resident with health insurance through a system controlled by a new entity called the California Health Insurance Agency. It would be under the control of a health insurance commissioner appointed by the governor.

The legislation also would establish a state commission to recommend to the governor and Legislature how much to charge patients and businesses in premiums to help pay for the system.

Kuehl said the premiums would have "taken the place of all premiums, copays and deductibles we now pay, saving every person who now pays for health care significant money."

The bill was approved by lawmakers last week as they wrapped up their 2006 session, but it has not reached Schwarzenegger yet, aides said Tuesday.

Schwarzenegger's Democratic opponent, state Treasurer Phil Angelides, also opposed the measure.

___

On the Net:

Read the bill, SB840, at http://www.senate.ca.gov

[Gritty]

[GregH]

thanks, it is hard to see why he hasn't done so. Defeating DiFi is a huge task, but Mountjoy is trying even when he doesn't have much campaign funds or support from national GOP senate committee. Arnie probably does not want to be dragged in that race, he is trying to have balance of attracting independent voters support and not demotivating his conservative base.

[goldstategop]

He's not opposed on conservative grounds. Just that it : "costs a lot of money?" That's a very weak objection to state run health care.

(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )

[ArmstedFragg]

...saving every person who now pays for health care significant money...

"Saving them significant money on their own costs, however they will also begin paying of half a dozen other people."

[ArmstedFragg]

add "the costs of" (half a dozen, etc.)

[NormsRevenge]

well, heck , let's just borrow some more money then, it's never stopped him before.

[goldstategop]

As P.J O'Rourke has been fond of jesting, "If you think medical care's expensive now, wait til its free." I'm sure next the Democrats will find as way to eliminate Arnold's expense concern and we'll have it. When two liberals are opposed to this particular measure, you can bet what's holding it up are not principles but technical objections. And those can be addressed.

(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )

[TortReformer]

Then all the Kaliforniacrats will pollute your state...keep 'em there...

[This Just In]

Permanente is just a fancy word for Permanent. As in; permanently without quality health care. As a child, my father's health-care (for lack of a better word) was through Kaiser. I've suffered from a medical condition from an early age through adulthood, and I can't tell you about the number of occasions I had to endure substandard medical care through Kaiser. Furthermore, for many years my mother suffered from acute abdominal pain. Throughout the years, the doctors performed different tests, and concluded that it was gastritis. Finally, after a few years, they decided to do exploratory surgery. When they examine my mothers stomach, they discovered that my mother had cancer throughout the organ, and that it was metastatic. My mother did not live very long after their discovery. She was in her early 50's.

I realize this is anecdotal, but my personal experience, and history reveals, that government has no business provided health-care to its citizens.

[defenderSD]

I saw a news article about the global warming bill that said the governor has the power to suspend those regulations if the state's economy is damaged by the regulations on CO2 emissions. So Arnold and future governors can ditch those regulations if it starts to hurt the Cal economy.

I think global warming caused by CO2 is totally unproven but there are other reasons to cut down on burning coal, such as substantial amounts of real pollutants released by some coal plants: sulphur dioxide gas, NO2, lead, and uranium. So hopefully that bill will lead to replacement of some coal plants with natural gas and clean nuclear power plants and that will be the end of it. That could help clean up the air in the entire western US, which is getting dirtier because of pollution drifting over here from China. (When will the MSM start to blame China for increased pollution in North America?)

[goldstategop]

I wouldn't knock Kaiser Permanente. In California, its the only affordable health care for the middle class. And while not perfect, its worlds above the health care provided by public health hospitals in California. They took good care of my father when he was dying and I don't owe them a dime. When he was alive he got drugs and regular checkups and that was all paid for under Medicare. HMO's are the California answer to the problems of providing quality health care to millions of people at a price they can live with.

(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )

[massgopguy]

Didn't they learn anything from MediCal?

[ElkGroveDan]

I saw a news article about the global warming bill that said the governor has the power to suspend those regulations if the state's economy is damaged by the regulations on CO2 emissions

The question is who determines the threshold of a "damaged economy"? If it's predicated on a subjective declaration, we all know how economic indicators can be adjusted, massaged and manipulated to reach any conclusion you want. My guess is that Greenold Schwarzenegger will never take such a step. If he tried he has surrounded himself with too many liberal women shrieking in his ear to ever let him do so.

[what's up]

He's good on universal health care...bad on stem cell research.

[defenderSD]

IIRC, the governor has the power to declare an economic emergency and make budget cuts to balance the state budget, regardless of what the legislature thinks. Arnold did that a few years ago but then was able to restore most of the budget cuts because of rising tax revenues. So I would hope that this "global warming" bill has similar provisions that give the governor the power to decide unilaterally if the economy is being significantly damaged. I doubt that Arnold would have signed the bill without those provisions giving him that power. This is worth some research time.

[Jack Black]

In effect, this plan, like all others before it, takes negotiated and earned benefits payable to certain wage earners and redirect them to others who have not paid, nor worked for those benefits.

Gee, that's a pretty good definition of Socialism. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs".

I expressed my desire (somewhat sarcastic) for Arnie to sign this, as it would have helped (along with the absurd Green Energy bill) bankrupt the state, and thereby demonstrate the futiliy of the current move toward socialism.

I notice the bill refers to billing employers. Here's the version I like: pass this and everyone in CA gets a bill for their new state insurance every month! And paying this bill is mandatory! (Jail if you don't). Employers could be required to send the money they were paying for insurance to employees effective day X. This would be the opposite of "witholding", in terms of psychological impact.

For once you'd see: "government is costing my money and taking away more freedom of choice".

[ElkGroveDan]

IIRC, the governor has the power to declare an economic emergency and make budget cuts to balance the state budget, regardless of what the legislature thinks.

No. That's known as the Mid-Year Budget Correction. Many states have it but not California. It was part of Proposition 76 on the November 2005 Special Election ballot. It failed.

[calcowgirl]

thanks, it is hard to see why he hasn't done so. ...

According to FairOpinion [here and here], Arnold has to distance himself from all Republicans or else he will lose:

• Sure, you want Arnold to trot out McClintock and run on "McClintock is conservative" to get 35% of the voters vote for him, if he is lucky, and 65% AGAINST him. Brtilliant strategy, if you want Angelides to win.

• Arnold runs around campaigning for the Republican candidates in CA, even hopeless ones, like Mountjoy, it doesn't do the Republicans any good, Arnold ends up typecasting himself and loses to Angelides.

[goldstategop]

According to FO, conservatives are losers in California. They should sit in the back of the bus and shut up.

(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )