The last part of the healthcare legislation was sent to Obama just recently, and was met with much opposition by an unruly crowd who waited outside for the vote. This new piece had many 'fixes' to Obama's proposed plan, and includes more benefits for seniors and the middle-class. After being put to a vote, it came out 220-207, for the bill. The reason this bill was under scrutiny again is because there were a few minor changes made to it, and it needed to go back to Senate to be reviewed again. Republicans have been strongly against the bill, wanting funds to go towards something they deem more useful, such as creating jobs. The bill will cover 32million uninsured Americans and will take away some unpopular insurance ploys, such as dropping coverage after a major illness, or rejecting those with a pre-existing conditions.
Republicans want less central government, and more individual rights, whereas the Democrats want a stronger federal government to insure everyone is taken care of, working towards the common good. My opinion on this healthcare bill is that it would be better to have everyone choose what's best for them, choose their insurance, and how much coverage they want. A good analogy is to compare universal health insurance with "grocery insurance", because it demonstrates how people might take advantage of the coverage. This is especially true when people realize they won't have to pay for extra minor expenses, which costs the government more money, and will put America further into debt. I believe in the concept of rugged individualism- though not to the extreme-because it would mean no one would be lazy about searching for the best health insurance deal and would perhaps think twice before spending extra money on minor doctor check-ups that are not always necessary. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul
Friday, March 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)