The culture of corruption.
-
majorspark
Remember when we were told a few years ago that the democrat party was going to remove the culture of corruption from Washington. The incoming speaker promised the following:
"The American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, D.C., and the Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5KC7zwdMfE
Is it OK to call bullshit now.
We were told the swamp of corruption in Washington would be drained now that the democrat party was in power in Washington. Many of my deceived fellow Americans cheered by the millions. I just shook my head knowing the culture of corruption was only changing faces.
The culture of corruption does not reside in a political party. It resides in Washington DC. It resides anywhere power is concentrated. The corrupt gravitate to it. They feed off of it. Great power is like a magnet for the corrupt. Not only that it swallows up many that had intentions of changing it, only to find themselves sucked into the cesspool in Washington.
In the news today we here of the latest. Charlie Rangel (D) - Rep US house. Former chairmen of the tax writing ways and means committee.
One who claimed to be a fighter for the common man. A great war hero. Worked his way from the ground up. Fought for civil rights. Braved bullets for his country even though in some parts of the nation he was not thought worthy to drink at the same water fountain as some of his fellow countryman. Sad to say even this man has succumbed to the culture of corruption in DC. 13 charges have been levied against him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/18/AR2009011802070.html
Then we got Obama's appointment of Timothy Geithner. In my opinion a tax evader. I realize the IRS tax code is unjustly complex and should be changed. I realize people have made innocent mistakes. With the litany of legal council, tax lawyers, and accountants, this mans wealth gave him access to, I smell an elitist rat.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/18/AR2009011802070.html
Now another. Maxine Waters. A brainless dingbat is on the chopping block with her own ethics violations.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100731/ap_on_go_co/us_waters_ethics
The swamp in Washington needs to be drained. It can only be drained by devolving power out of it. -
believer
The Queen Swamp Rat has declared that the swamp has been drained: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100803/ap_on_go_co/us_waters_ethicsmajorspark;438793 wrote:The swamp in Washington needs to be drained. It can only be drained by devolving power out of it.
Is Pelosi really this delusional? Her comments continue to astound me."Drain the swamp we did, because this was a terrible place," Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last week of the Republican rule in the House that ended in January 2007.
We'll see if the Republican alligators and swamp rats have learned their lessons when they are reintroduced to the DC Swamplands this November. I doubt it.
The culture of corruption that permeates DC is so entrenched on both sides of the political aisle it will take a Second American Revolution and a 50 megaton Hydrogen Peroxide enema to rid the swamp of the stench. -
I Wear PantsEvery single one of these guys deserves terrible things.
-
BGFalcons82
majorspark;438793 wrote:The culture of corruption does not reside in a political party. It resides in Washington DC. It resides anywhere power is concentrated. The corrupt gravitate to it. They feed off of it. Great power is like a magnet for the corrupt. Not only that it swallows up many that had intentions of changing it, only to find themselves sucked into the cesspool in Washington.
The swamp in Washington needs to be drained. It can only be drained by devolving power out of it.
Hear hear, major. I believe the framers of our country knew this could happen and thus, created a document that has stood the test of time for over 200 years. Bet they didn't know the current elitist class would be so coy at mutilating and ignoring it with such dexterity. We were given power over our government before and it's time to reclaim it. It's not about R vs. D. It's about our country's future, which is in jeopardy if we don't take control of it from the power mad politicians. As long as we have the 2nd Amendment, we have a chance to do it. A couple months ago, 4 elitists in robes thought the 2nd Amendment should be thrown out. We are that close to saying goodbye to the founding fathers. -
isadore^^^^^
Number 1. The Founders were from the elite by education and wealth
Number 2. Scandals
A Secretary of the Treasury blackmailed by his lover and her husband.
An ambassador to France having sexual relations with a 15 year old girl who is wife’s half sister.
Army commander abusing his expense account for more than 10 times the value of his salary.
And that would be Hamilton. Jefferson, Washington
http://www.epinions.com/review/George_Washington_s_Expense_Account_no_author_listed/content_482952973956
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hamilton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Hemings
And you can find many more examples if you go through the whole group of founders and framers.
Government by the People is never pristine. -
BGFalcons82
Isadore - I am NOT going to get into a history debate with you. Clearly, based on your posts I've read to date, you have studied it quite well. Whether or not you can relate today's events to yesteryear's is certainly debateable, as you find it necessary in your post to degrade our founding fathers.
Before you lambaste them more, please remember that these people were in the minority at the time, as most colonists were scared to death of the king and did not want to cause any trouble. Each one of the signers of the Declaration put their families, their lives, and their liberty on the line for the prospect of being free from tyranny. They were likely the most couragous Americans to ever live. I am a direct descendant of one of the signers and I can tell you his life was never the same after he stood up to the English. There are many among the Tea Party today that have the exact same feeling of freeing themselves from tyranny.
No one has ever said the founders were perfect. By your logic, only perfect people create perfection. This is an impossible scenario. I am constantly amazed by people that find it necessary to prove that these men were white, slave-defenders, wealthy, rich landowners, evil, homophobes, and most of all....human. Post all you want about their personal lives. Write away. They made the ultimate bet that their lives and the lives of their families were worth less than watching their countrymen suffer.
This country was founded by people for the people. It is nation of laws and freedom, not of men and someone's twisted view of "Fairness". Our republic used to be the epitome of the world, now as we try to make it like Western Europe, it is no longer the shining city on the hill. -
FootwedgeWhat happens if Obama pardons Maxine and Charlie?
-
BGFalcons82
^^^ Didn't think they were up on criminal charges in the House, only House ethics charges. Kind of like they made their Country Club mad and they are having a hissy. What's their punishment? A reprimand? Are you kidding me? Certainly Rangel has some answering to do on his tax evasion, but he'll get away with it... they always do.
-
Mr. 300
Funny thing about Obama and this current problem.....he's been extremely quiet, except that he hopes Charlie can end his tenure in congress with dignity. That's distancing yourself about as far as one can from a hornet's nest. He ain't touchin' no pardon.Footwedge;440762 wrote:What happens if Obama pardons Maxine and Charlie? -
I Wear Pants
I lol'd at you comparing the current Tea Party people to the founding fathers.BGFalcons82;440752 wrote:Isadore - I am NOT going to get into a history debate with you. Clearly, based on your posts I've read to date, you have studied it quite well. Whether or not you can relate today's events to yesteryear's is certainly debateable, as you find it necessary in your post to degrade our founding fathers.
Before you lambaste them more, please remember that these people were in the minority at the time, as most colonists were scared to death of the king and did not want to cause any trouble. Each one of the signers of the Declaration put their families, their lives, and their liberty on the line for the prospect of being free from tyranny. They were likely the most couragous Americans to ever live. I am a direct descendant of one of the signers and I can tell you his life was never the same after he stood up to the English. There are many among the Tea Party today that have the exact same feeling of freeing themselves from tyranny.
No one has ever said the founders were perfect. By your logic, only perfect people create perfection. This is an impossible scenario. I am constantly amazed by people that find it necessary to prove that these men were white, slave-defenders, wealthy, rich landowners, evil, homophobes, and most of all....human. Post all you want about their personal lives. Write away. They made the ultimate bet that their lives and the lives of their families were worth less than watching their countrymen suffer.
This country was founded by people for the people. It is nation of laws and freedom, not of men and someone's twisted view of "Fairness". Our republic used to be the epitome of the world, now as we try to make it like Western Europe, it is no longer the shining city on the hill. -
BGFalcons82
I Wear Pants;440816 wrote:I lol'd at you comparing the current Tea Party people to the founding fathers.
It is not a literal exactness, but merely a comparison of how many feel in the Tea Party. OK, maybe it's a reach, as no one is ready to die yet. But the anger is palpable in this country and we are indeed at a tipping point, IMO.
In another comparison, I'm sure there are Tea Party members that are every bit as heathen as our founders as reported by Isadore. I'm sure you can find some links to describe them as redneck southern white trash inbred neanderthals that couldn't pass 3rd grade. Go ahead, look them up....shouldn't take you very long with today's internet services. -
isadoreBGFalcon82 wrote:Isadore - I am NOT going to get into a history debate with you. Clearly, based on your posts I've read to date, you have studied it quite well. Whether or not you can relate today's events to yesteryear's is certainly debateable, as you find it necessary in your post to degrade our founding fathers.
Before you lambaste them more, please remember that these people were in the minority at the time, as most colonists were scared to death of the king and did not want to cause any trouble. Each one of the signers of the Declaration put their families, their lives, and their liberty on the line for the prospect of being free from tyranny. They were likely the most couragous Americans to ever live. I am a direct descendant of one of the signers and I can tell you his life was never the same after he stood up to the English. There are many among the Tea Party today that have the exact same feeling of freeing themselves from tyranny.
No one has ever said the founders were perfect. By your logic, only perfect people create perfection. This is an impossible scenario. I am constantly amazed by people that find it necessary to prove that these men were white, slave-defenders, wealthy, rich landowners, evil, homophobes, and most of all....human. Post all you want about their personal lives. Write away. They made the ultimate bet that their lives and the lives of their families were worth less than watching their countrymen suffer.
This country was founded by people for the people. It is nation of laws and freedom, not of men and someone's twisted view of "Fairness". Our republic used to be the epitome of the world, now as we try to make it like Western Europe, it is no longer the shining city on the hill.
The purpose of my examples was not to degrade the founding generation, but rather to put in a little perspective. The Founders and Framers were not pristine. And the present government representatives are not all a bunch of irredeemable scum. There was corruption then, and there are examples of statesmanship and political courage today.
Despite their involvement in the incidents mentioned I have great admiration for both Washington and Hamilton. I do not expect perfection from humans then or now. Look at the career of Winston Churchill sometime, one of the greatest but not without major failures, fiascoes and a life on the edge of alcoholism. One thing I am glad to see in reading the thread is major sparks giving Charlie Rangel some of his due for his contributions to our country.
You take great pride in one of your ancestors signing the Declaration as you should. But the charge of elitism rings much truer to signers of the Declaration of Independence and the framers of the Constitution. They were of the elite and they knew it.
The tea partiers have no real idea what it is to live under a tyranny. They think the representatives elected by majority votes of the electorate, carrying out their constitutionally mandated duties is tyranny.
Just to be historically correct the Hamiltion and Jefferson incidents took place after the Revolution ended
Not while the war you were describing was happening. Washington did run up his expense account during that war though. -
BGFalcons82
Isadore - I'm going to agree with you that the founders were the elite of their time. Which made it all the more amazing in that they would put all that they own and cherish on the table in a bet that they could rid themselves of the English. How many today would do it?
Today's 545 elitists have put nothing at stake. Oh...maybe their re-election you could argue, but how is that even comparable to putting the lives of their families and children on the line for the sake of freedom from tyranny? Not even close. Hell, when these bums finally leave Washington, they have salaries, pensions, insurance and any largesse you could imagine at their disposal. What a penalty for being refuted, eh? Maybe if they paid for their idiocy in blood they wouldn't be so happy to spend other people's money like it was coming out of a fountain, eh? THEN, you could compare today's elitists with our founding elitists. Just a thought. -
I Wear Pants
They aren't all idiots, of course there are some, but there are also some very intelligent people that align with the Tea Party and it's ideals. However, they have millions of miles to go before they can even be considered in the same sentence as the founding fathers (in their outrage of the current government and especially in the eloquence and reasoning of their arguments).BGFalcons82;440833 wrote:It is not a literal exactness, but merely a comparison of how many feel in the Tea Party. OK, maybe it's a reach, as no one is ready to die yet. But the anger is palpable in this country and we are indeed at a tipping point, IMO.
In another comparison, I'm sure there are Tea Party members that are every bit as heathen as our founders as reported by Isadore. I'm sure you can find some links to describe them as redneck southern white trash inbred neanderthals that couldn't pass 3rd grade. Go ahead, look them up....shouldn't take you very long with today's internet services.
Just like it's stupid to mention Obama or Bush in comparisons to people like Stalin and Hitler. -
believer
Tyranny, by definition, is the oppressive, arbitrary and/or unrestrained exercise of power. These are not necessarily qualities exclusive to dictators or despots.isadore;440856 wrote:The tea partiers have no real idea what it is to live under a tyranny. They think the representatives elected by majority votes of the electorate, carrying out their constitutionally mandated duties is tyranny.
When the elected enact laws, edicts, and regulations contrary to the will of the electorate then we witness arbitrary and unrestrained exercise of power.
Case in point: ObamaCare as a whole or at the very least provisions within it.
Nowhere in the Constitution did our nation's Founders even allude to the notion that the federal government is responsible for our personal health care let alone take away our personal choice to participate in government-mandated personal health care by threat of fines or perhaps worse. The broad statement "promote the general Welfare" in the preamble is a stretch. There's a distinct difference between "promote" and "provide."
When government - of any kind - tramples on free choice and personal liberties we have a form of tyranny masked in "good intentions." -
isadoreHardly arbitrary large majority of Americans were very critical of our -pre obama healthcare system and wanted change.
Hardly unrestrained because the issue went through an extensive examination beforehand with compromises and amendments made in the program.
The law may also be examined for constitutionality through our federal court system
Medicare passed to promote the general welfare with many provisions similar to obamacare has been in existence for 45 years and has not been ruled unconstitutional.
If the majority of the are unhappy with the changes they can vote to people amend or repeal that law.
The charges of tyranny are at best hyperbole and more likely paranoia. They cheapen the word. Nazi rule, Communist rule, Baathist rule, Taliban rule was tyranny. President and Congress elected by us and subject to removal by us after a fixed term in office is not tyranny. -
Writerbuckeye
Fact is: this Congress ignored a solid majority of Americans who said -- loudly -- that they did not want the Obama health care bill as it was written, and wanted it junked or dramatically changed.
Congress and the president simply ignored them and did the political thing, as opposed to the right thing.
If the courts don't strike this down, it sounds like various states are going to take up the right to refuse to participate. If the Missouri vote yesterday is any indicator, then lots of changes will be coming for this legislation, if not outright repeal. -
jhay78
Footwedge;440762 wrote:What happens if Obama pardons Maxine and Charlie?
Not a chance- I'm pretty sure both of them endorsed Hillary in the '08 primaries. -
isadore
The political thing to do would be to given into temporary public opinion rather than what you thing is best for the country. That is what Profiles in Courage was all about. Elected representative (actually Senators in the book) do what they thought was best. Then submitting to the will of the electorate.Writerbuckeye;441414 wrote:Fact is: this Congress ignored a solid majority of Americans who said -- loudly -- that they did not want the Obama health care bill as it was written, and wanted it junked or dramatically changed.
Congress and the president simply ignored them and did the political thing, as opposed to the right thing.
If the courts don't strike this down, it sounds like various states are going to take up the right to refuse to participate. If the Missouri vote yesterday is any indicator, then lots of changes will be coming for this legislation, if not outright repeal. -
majorspark
There is no doubt many of the founders were a distinct group that were, educated, intelligent, wealthy, training in law etc. Though this makes them an elite group in the technical sense of the word, when most of us are referring to elitist or elitism it is in the political sense of the word. The self righteous who believe they are of superior intellect. Those who seek to control their fellow man in every way possible. They look down on the common man with disdain. They believe the common man needs their rulership, not their service.
It is interesting to look at the bio's of the signers of the declaration. They were quite a diverse group. There were doctors, lawyers, politicians, teachers, farmers, businessmen, soldiers, ministers. Most were educated and intelligent, but not all were educated by the finest colleges that money could buy (Harvard, Yale etc), many were self taught or apprentices. Many were wealthy, but not all were born into the aristocracy. Many were self taught, self made men who started their own business or taught themselves a trade that was of value to their fellow man.
http://www.ushistory.org/DECLARATION/signers/index.htm
No doubt in this group there were a few with the political elite mindset. In the end they all singed a document that put all that at risk as well as their lives. They knew that if they failed they would either be imprisoned, swinging from a rope or living a life of exile.
They pledged it all with the following closing statement:
.And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor
Now it has been stated that some of our founders may have had some moral failings, were hypocritical, or even themselves corrupt. No doubt that some of these individuals existed. These kinds of people have always and will continue to be found in any organization of man, public or private. Most of the founders were aware of this. When they got together to form a more perfect union at the constitutional convention. They wrote a governing contract that limited the concentration of power in Washington and left the states with rest under the 10th amendment.
They knew all too well the dangers of central control of political power and money flowing through one place (London). some of them had personally witnessed the corruption going on there. One which held influence over a world empire. The founders who were prominent business men knew all to well who they had to go to move their products. Most of them sought to prevent such a concentration of power and money in one place. And with it a concentration of immoral, nefarious, and corrupt individuals to gather. Though these individuals represent a small minority in our society, when power and money is concentrated in one place they will gravitate there.
Before the ink was dry on the constitution those that were craving central power slowly began to creep into positions of power in the federal government. Over the years as the founders began to pass on, the federal government has steadily taken more and more power. Most times unconstitutionally. They will keep doing so little by little until the true keepers of the constitution, the American people stand up an throw out these impostors and charlatans.
As the original intent of the constitution was steadily encroached upon by the federal government, and outside of the amendment process state authority was taken and handed to Washington DC, through deception and misinterpretation of our founding document.
We now see what it has produced. A culture of corruption centered and firmly embedded in Washington DC. Now power and the flow of money are ever increasing its flow though Washington. Its now a one stop shop for the corrupt and those looking out for themselves and not the interests of the American people to collect federal cash. Hell they are putting up whole office buildings in DC to accommodate them. How can we continue to allow this.
This article is from 2005. I read an article on the same topic when the stimulus bill was passed and the correlation with a construction boom in Washington because of the corporate lobbyists heading to DC to feed at the trough. If I can find it I will add it. Here is a part of the article from 2005.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5073Money spent in Washington is taken from the people who produced it all over America. Washington produces little real value on its own. National defense and courts are essential to our freedom and prosperity, but that's a small part of what the federal government does these days. Most federal activity involves taking money from some people, giving it to others and keeping a big chunk as a transaction fee.
Every business and interest group in society has an office in Washington devoted to getting some of the $2.5 trillion federal budget for itself: senior citizens, farmers, veterans, teachers, social workers, oil companies, labor unions — you name it.
Walk down K Street, the heart of Washington's lobbying industry, and look at the directory in any office building. They're full of lobbyists and associations that are in Washington, for one reason: because, as Willie Sutton said about why he robbed banks, "That's where the money is."
It's not just money that's being sucked into Washington. It's human talent, the most valuable productive asset of all. Too much of the talent at America's most dynamic companies is now diverted from productive activity to either getting corporate welfare from Congress or protecting the company from political predation.
Slow economic growth can be blamed in large measure on just this process — the expansion of the parasite economy into the productive economy. The number of corporations with Washington offices increased 10-fold between 1961 and 1982. The number of people lobbying in Washington doubled in the late 1970s — and it has doubled again just since 2000. The number of lawyers per million Americans stayed the same from 1870 to 1970, then more than doubled in just 20 years. The Federal Register, where new regulations are printed, now prints a record 75,000 pages a year.
As the parasite economy grows, taxing some people and doling out favors to others, everybody gets sucked in. Even if you don't want a government subsidy, you need a lobbyist to protect you from being taxed and regulated by the other groups and their lobbyists.
God save the republic. -
BGFalcons82
major - Hear, hear. Thanks for taking the time and being so eloquent. You write for me and I will defend ye.
-
isadoreThe Framers of the Constitution were and acted like an elite
And in a society where few had formal education half the framers of the Constitution were college education, several of the rest had been to academies or had private tutors, the educational elite.
Hardly a cross section of society, 35 out of 55 had been trained as lawyers. 64%
And the signers of the Declaration
55 signers 26 were educated at Oxford, Cambridge, Edinborough, Princeton, Harvard, Yale and William and Mary another 7 were at academies or tutored
20 lawyers and 9 judges, 52%
In our present congress its 225 out of 535 42%
Our early leaders were elitist, they considered themselves better than the common man. Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson, Madison none trusted the common man, all believed in a deferential society where the governing class was composed of an elite. The idea the common man should play an active political role does not come into effect until the Age of Jackson and then its only for white men.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_111th_United_States_Congress
http://www.ushistory.org/DECLARATION/signers/index.htm
When the framers arrived in Philadelphia in 1787 they had seen the problems of a government that gave sovereignty to the states. The United States was near destruction because of the state rights emphasis in the governing document of the time, the Articles of Confederation. They had been sent to Philadelphia to amend that document. They knew that states rights document was a suicide pact for the United States, so they threw out and wrote a new document that provided a much stronger and sovereign national government. They included the supremacy clause and the elastic clause to guarantee federal law overrules state law and that federal power could expand to cover the needs of our expanding nation. Again and Again the states have shown themselves supporters of much of what is worse in American history, enemies of freedom aided the evil doctrine of states rights. That has been used again and again in our history to repress blacks and others. Luckily we have added the 14th Amendment to our Constitution to protect us from state abuse of power. -
cbus4lifeCount me as one of those decidedly on the left who isn't pleased with Obama at all, especially the version of the health care "reform" that was passed.
Such a great opportunity wasted. Both sides knew and wanted health care reform, i truly believe. Everyone agrees that reform is needed and can happen. If only we could have went about creating that reform in a way that took into account the ideas and wants of BOTH groups in Congress, and the American people as well.
Even though i'm currently eligible for another country's "socialized" health care, i'll be back in the states within a couple years, and will be hoping to see some real "change" in that respect, by then.
Will be interesting to see, that is for sure. I'm quite upset that the left didn't listen to and try to work more with those on the right who had solid ideas and proposals in regards to health care.
All i can think of when thinking of the health care bill was that it was passed only so that Obama et al could say, "Look, we did something," and not much else.
We still need reform. This "reform" bill is, pretty much, useless. Don't really see it fixing the real problems that Americans are experiencing in regards to health care in the states.
Essentially, just a waste of time. -
CenterBHSFan
cbus4life;442280 wrote:Count me as one of those decidedly on the left who isn't pleased with Obama at all, especially the version of the health care "reform" that was passed.
Such a great opportunity wasted. Both sides knew and wanted health care reform, i truly believe. Everyone agrees that reform is needed and can happen. If only we could have went about creating that reform in a way that took into account the ideas and wants of BOTH groups in Congress, and the American people as well.
Even though i'm currently eligible for another country's "socialized" health care, i'll be back in the states within a couple years, and will be hoping to see some real "change" in that respect, by then.
Will be interesting to see, that is for sure. I'm quite upset that the left didn't listen to and try to work more with those on the right who had solid ideas and proposals in regards to health care.
All i can think of when thinking of the health care bill was that it was passed only so that Obama et al could say, "Look, we did something," and not much else.
We still need reform. This "reform" bill is, pretty much, useless. Don't really see it fixing the real problems that Americans are experiencing in regards to health care in the states.
Essentially, just a waste of time.
Cbus,
Excellent post! You are one of about 2 "liberal" democrats that I know of that can honestly state their feelings about their views of President Obama and the healthcare ... um ... reform.
For some reason, most democrats would rather slit their wrists than to admit to anybody (especially on this forum) that there may be a little disappointment or disagreement with those two subjects. It's OK to not agree with every little thing. It's OK to think more or less should have or could have been done. It's OK to expect, and demand, better from our chosen political party!
If there's not a little dissention within ranks, the figureheads of whatever political party will never take notice and realize they're doing something wrong; and keep doing what they're doing, regardless.
I respect your ability and willingness to do just that. I wish more would. -
isadoreLetter from President Obama to Congress leaders after meeting March 2, 2010
I also left convinced that the Republican and Democratic approaches to health care have more in common than most people think.
For example, we agree on the need to reform our insurance markets. We agree on the idea of allowing small businesses and individuals who lack insurance to join together to increase their purchasing power so they can enjoy greater choices and lower prices. And we agree on the dire need to wring out waste, fraud and abuse and get control of skyrocketing health care costs…
No matter how we move forward, there are at least four policy priorities identified by Republican Members at the meeting that I am exploring. I said throughout this process that I'd continue to draw on the best ideas from both parties, and I'm open to these proposals in that spirit:
1. Although the proposal I released last week included a comprehensive set of initiatives to combat fraud, waste, and abuse, Senator Coburn had an interesting suggestion that we engage medical professionals to conduct random undercover investigations of health care providers that receive reimbursements from Medicare, Medicaid, and other Federal programs.
2. My proposal also included a provision from the Senate health reform bill that authorizes funding to states for demonstrations of alternatives to resolving medical malpractice disputes, including health courts. Last Thursday, we discussed the provision in the bills cosponsored by Senators Coburn and Burr and Representatives Ryan and Nunes (S. 1099) that provides a similar program of grants to states for demonstration projects. Senator Enzi offered a similar proposal in a health insurance reform bill he sponsored in the last Congress. As we discussed, my Administration is already moving forward in funding demonstration projects through the Department of Health and Human Services, and Secretary Sebelius will be awarding $23 million for these grants in the near future. However, in order to advance our shared interest in incentivizing states to explore what works in this arena, I am open to including an appropriation of $50 million in my proposal for additional grants. Currently there is only an authorization, which does not guarantee that the grants will be funded.
3. At the meeting, Senator Grassley raised a concern, shared by many Democrats, that Medicaid reimbursements to doctors are inadequate in many states, and that if Medicaid is expanded to cover more people, we should consider increasing doctor reimbursement. I'm open to exploring ways to address this issue in a fiscally responsible manner.
4. Senator Barrasso raised a suggestion that we expand Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). I know many Republicans believe that HSAs, when used in conjunction with high-deductible health plans, are a good vehicle to encourage more cost-consciousness in consumers' use of health care services. I believe that high-deductible health plans could be offered in the exchange under my proposal, and I'm open to including language to ensure that is clear. This could help to encourage more people to take advantage of HSAs….
There are provisions that were added to the legislation that shouldn't have been. That's why my proposal does not include the Medicare Advantage provision, mentioned by Senator McCain at the meeting, which provided transitional extra benefits for Florida and other states. My proposal eliminates those payments, gradually reducing Medicare Advantage payments across the country relative to fee-for service Medicare in an equitable fashion (page 8). My proposal rewards high-quality and high-performing plans.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/03/obama_embraces_some_republican.html