53percenter's Blog

Is rabidly far-left Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D.-Washington) trying to become the Ilhan Omar of the health care industry?

Sure looks like it, given her new Medicare-for-All proposal set to go to the House for a vote. It’s so left-wing even the left-leaning Axios says it makes Bernie Sanders look like a piker. Here’s how bad it is:

Even Sen. Bernie Sanders can get outflanked in the race to define Medicare for All as Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) is set to introduce a bill today that would go even further than Sanders’ sweeping proposal.

Why it matters: Even as moderates and more conventional liberals are freaking out over the politics of such a dramatic upheaval, the left is still moving left, laying down ever-more-ambitious markers as they gain more and more influence over their party.

• Many of the broad strokes are the same: Both bills would eliminate most private insurance and most existing federal health programs, moving everyone in the country into a new single-payer system. Neither would allow co-pays or deductibles.
• Jayapal’s version, though, would cover some things Sanders’ bill wouldn’t — most significantly, long-term care like nursing homes. It also calls for a 2-year phase-in period, compared to Sanders’ 4 years.

What we don’t know: The cost.

 Axios also notes that the bill seeks to keep costs under control through a “global budget,” meaning a cap on how much money hospitals and nursing care facilities can get, which is a fancy way of saying: rationing. They call that “interesting.” The rest of us call it “Venezuela.”

The HuffPo praises it as: ”The Most Ambitious ‘Medicare For All’ Bill Yet.”

And it has even more horrible details: 

The program would be non-voluntary, which means you get care as the government determines, whether you like it or not. You’d not only lose your current insurance, you’d lose any right to buy insurance even if you wanted to pay extra on top of your well-raised taxes. Rest assured the dolings will be politicized.

The only private element would be for non-Medicare-covered services, such as optional plastic surgery. The boob jobs get saved. The rest of your health care? Not so much.

Abortion would be fully covered and paid for through those higher taxes, like it or not. One wonders if infanticide fees for babies who survive abortions will be billable hours now, too.

Much of nightmare would be “paid for” not just through soaring taxes, and don’t expect the projects for this to avoid cost overruns, but also by cutting doctors’ salaries, which is a great way to motivate them and the future doctors who are going to be needed. The insurance would be nationalized, but the hospitals and doctors would stay private, forcing the latter to remain on double-entry bookkeeping while the state would have no limits on who it could keep sending over for care. In Venezuela, this was the exact recipe for the country’s famous shortages and you can bet they’d show up here, too.

Here’s another one: It will be available, free of charge to “all residents,” according to the HuffPo piece, which obviously would include all illegal immigrants. With Democrats already dangling out free health care to illegals in California, leftist states suing to block any fence at our southern border as their “illegal immigration stimulus plan,” and congressional Democrats vowing to block any effort to put up a border barrier, too (Jayapal is one of the loudest voices on this by the way), you can bet that’s a dinner triangle for free health care, not just to all of Central America, but other prominent suppliers of America’s illegals: Somalia, the Philippines, Vietnam, South Korea, China, India, Brazil and Nigeria . Who wouldn’t?

Meanwhile, the transition period from the health care you have, to the Medicare you aren’t going to like? A mere two years. It would be a rather amazing jolt, and too bad for you if there any ‘glitches’ and you needed some service.

The HuffPo notes that the bill will have fewer sponsors as even Democrats blanch, but among those who are signing on are all those newly-minted Democrats from places such as southern California. Those representatives wouldn’t be around were it not for ballot-harvesting and who knows how many illegal votes – because the state after all isn’t saying. Which rather shows the coercive factor here – given that most of these places’ voters aren’t that left-wing.

The bottom line, though, is that the bill is even more extreme than what Bernie Sanders is proposing, and that says a lot about the state of the Democrats. They all want to stand out and they wall are now trying to out-Bernie Bernie and go open with what their real agenda is. Obamacare looks so mild compared to these lunacies. To propose something more socialist than the big socialist wants for you speaks to how crazily Chavista left the Democrats are now becoming. All that is holding them back now is President Trump and the Republican-led Senate, as Axios notes.

As Sen. Lindsey Graham once said in another context: “Boy, y’all want power. You want this seat? I hope you never get it.” 

Is rabidly far-left Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D.-Washington) trying to become the Ilhan Omar of the health care industry?

Sure looks like it, given her new Medicare-for-All proposal set to go to the House for a vote. It’s so left-wing even the left-leaning Axios says it makes Bernie Sanders look like a piker. Here’s how bad it is:

Even Sen. Bernie Sanders can get outflanked in the race to define Medicare for All as Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) is set to introduce a bill today that would go even further than Sanders’ sweeping proposal.

Why it matters: Even as moderates and more conventional liberals are freaking out over the politics of such a dramatic upheaval, the left is still moving left, laying down ever-more-ambitious markers as they gain more and more influence over their party.

• Many of the broad strokes are the same: Both bills would eliminate most private insurance and most existing federal health programs, moving everyone in the country into a new single-payer system. Neither would allow co-pays or deductibles.
• Jayapal’s version, though, would cover some things Sanders’ bill wouldn’t — most significantly, long-term care like nursing homes. It also calls for a 2-year phase-in period, compared to Sanders’ 4 years.

What we don’t know: The cost.

 Axios also notes that the bill seeks to keep costs under control through a “global budget,” meaning a cap on how much money hospitals and nursing care facilities can get, which is a fancy way of saying: rationing. They call that “interesting.” The rest of us call it “Venezuela.”

The HuffPo praises it as: ”The Most Ambitious ‘Medicare For All’ Bill Yet.”

And it has even more horrible details: 

The program would be non-voluntary, which means you get care as the government determines, whether you like it or not. You’d not only lose your current insurance, you’d lose any right to buy insurance even if you wanted to pay extra on top of your well-raised taxes. Rest assured the dolings will be politicized.

The only private element would be for non-Medicare-covered services, such as optional plastic surgery. The boob jobs get saved. The rest of your health care? Not so much.

Abortion would be fully covered and paid for through those higher taxes, like it or not. One wonders if infanticide fees for babies who survive abortions will be billable hours now, too.

Much of nightmare would be “paid for” not just through soaring taxes, and don’t expect the projects for this to avoid cost overruns, but also by cutting doctors’ salaries, which is a great way to motivate them and the future doctors who are going to be needed. The insurance would be nationalized, but the hospitals and doctors would stay private, forcing the latter to remain on double-entry bookkeeping while the state would have no limits on who it could keep sending over for care. In Venezuela, this was the exact recipe for the country’s famous shortages and you can bet they’d show up here, too.

Here’s another one: It will be available, free of charge to “all residents,” according to the HuffPo piece, which obviously would include all illegal immigrants. With Democrats already dangling out free health care to illegals in California, leftist states suing to block any fence at our southern border as their “illegal immigration stimulus plan,” and congressional Democrats vowing to block any effort to put up a border barrier, too (Jayapal is one of the loudest voices on this by the way), you can bet that’s a dinner triangle for free health care, not just to all of Central America, but other prominent suppliers of America’s illegals: Somalia, the Philippines, Vietnam, South Korea, China, India, Brazil and Nigeria . Who wouldn’t?

Meanwhile, the transition period from the health care you have, to the Medicare you aren’t going to like? A mere two years. It would be a rather amazing jolt, and too bad for you if there any ‘glitches’ and you needed some service.

The HuffPo notes that the bill will have fewer sponsors as even Democrats blanch, but among those who are signing on are all those newly-minted Democrats from places such as southern California. Those representatives wouldn’t be around were it not for ballot-harvesting and who knows how many illegal votes – because the state after all isn’t saying. Which rather shows the coercive factor here – given that most of these places’ voters aren’t that left-wing.

The bottom line, though, is that the bill is even more extreme than what Bernie Sanders is proposing, and that says a lot about the state of the Democrats. They all want to stand out and they wall are now trying to out-Bernie Bernie and go open with what their real agenda is. Obamacare looks so mild compared to these lunacies. To propose something more socialist than the big socialist wants for you speaks to how crazily Chavista left the Democrats are now becoming. All that is holding them back now is President Trump and the Republican-led Senate, as Axios notes.

As Sen. Lindsey Graham once said in another context: “Boy, y’all want power. You want this seat? I hope you never get it.” 

The day after Senate Democrats blocked a bill designed to protect babies born alive from botched abortion, Republican Senator Tim Scott (SC) took to the Senate floor to address his Democrat counterparts about the intrinsic value of every child’s life.

“We are a nation that must continue to value life, and for some reason, somehow, this body missed that opportunity to reinforce that value system before the American public, to say each child born, no matter your state, no matter your challenges: you have an intrinsic value,” said Scott.

The senator opened his remarks by explaining that he missed the vote on Republican Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act by four minutes due to a flight delay, which he found “quite frustrating.”

“But what’s frustrating even more than that,” Scott said, “is that, in a nation of good conscious, that we would be debating, having a conversation about, a child who was born — sitting there: alive — separated from her mother. And that there would be a question of whether or not that child should be able to continue to live.”

Scott noted that the issues of late-term abortions and infanticide were recently raised in New York and Virginia. Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) recently signed a bill to allow abortion up to the moment of birth for virtually any reason. In Virginia, Governor Ralph Northam (D) endorsed infanticide during a radio interview, again under the guise of feminism.

“This is an issue that has raised by comments coming out of New York, and more recently comments coming out of Virginia, when the governor, who happens to be, from my understand, a pediatric surgeon, suggested that it is okay to allow that child to die,” Scott said.

“I cannot imagine, whether you pro-life like I am, or you are pro-choice like others, that this would even be an issue of debate or discussion within the two sides. There is no side on this topic. There cannot be a side about life separated from the mother, whether or not that life should continue to live. This is common sense. This is human decency. This is not an issue of being pro-life, or pro-choice, this is being pro-child, which we all should be,” he continued.

Scott said there is no gray area when he speaks to Americans across the country from both sides of the aisle, from all demographics, regarding the value of children.

“There was no disagreement on the issue of infanticide,” he said of the folks attending a Black History Month event in South Carolina. “There was no disagreement, whatsoever. .. The one thing in common was the value of life.”

“There is nothing to debate regarding the sanctity of born children,” Scott said, adding, “We’re all come to the same conclusion, and that is that a child born deserves to live. This is a place of universal agreement.”

“Each child born, no matter your state, no matter your challenges: you have an intrinsic value,” concluded the senator.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would amend the criminal code to “prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.”

“If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws,” the legislation states.

“Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care,” it states.

WATCH:

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and 106 other Democrats will launch a “Medicare for All” bill on Wednesday that will shift every American to government health insurance and eliminate private insurance — with no funding plan.

Politico reported Tuesday:

The bill, co-sponsored by 107 House Democrats, doesn’t include a price tag or specific proposals for financing the new system, which analysts estimate would cost tens of trillions of dollars over a decade.

…

The proposal calls for a two-year transformation of Medicare into a universal single-payer system, eliminating nearly all private health plans. It would also expand Medicare coverage to include prescription drugs, dental and vision services, and long-term care, without charging co-pays, premiums or deductibles — and would provide federal funding for abortions. It would also potentially pave a path for a future Democratic administration to extend coverage to undocumented immigrants.

A few states have tried similar proposals, with no success. Vermont, the home state of socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders — who is running on a “Medicare for All” platform for president again — abandoned a similar single-payer health care plan several years ago: “[W]hen you just see the price tag, it’s very shocking,” one expert told NPR.

The House passed a resolution Tuesday that would nullify President Donald Trump’s national emergency declaration that would allow him to build a wall along America’s southern border. The House passed the bill with less than a two-third’s majority, which would not override a potential veto.

The House passed H.J.Res. 46, 245-182, a resolution that would terminate Trump’s national emergency declaration on February 15. The vote featured strong Democrat support for the bill and little Republican support for the resolution.

The Democrat resolution passed; however, it did not obtain enough votes to potentially override Trump’s veto of the resolution, should it also pass through the Senate.