Centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3599 posts, RR: 20 Posted (9 years 1 month 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1950 times:
Quoting CNN: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republicans in the House of Representatives narrowly won passage on Wednesday of a controversial bill to trim about $39 billion from domestic spending over five years, capping a year-long push to cut health care for the poor and elderly and other programs.
By a partisan vote of 216-214, the House approved the bill, sending it to President George W. Bush for signing into law.
Quoting CNN: The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office this week said cuts to Medicaid spending would affect 13 million poor people, 20 percent of the program's participants. Many of those would be children, the CBO said.
The savings would include higher out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs and other medical care for the poor.
So by cutting health for poor and elderly, we are being responsible for providing health care? I see...wait...no I don't see.
Does anyone see a problem/conflict/hypocritical thinking here?
They were not cuts, they were simply a reduction in the projected increase. Whenever these bills are signed, there is an automatic increase built in, whether the increase is needed or not. This bill is to reduce the automatic increase.......
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1922 times:
Quoting SATX (Reply 3): 80% of the U.S. population describe themselves as "Christian" and yet this is how they treat the lowest of their brothers?
I think that you'll find that, in America, charity is seen as best served by charity, rather than via government largesse. Thus, the donation to private charitable foundations is very high in this country, despite instances, such as this one, in which government aid is effectively reduced (even if only as a reduction in the rate of increase).
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1910 times:
Quoting MidnightMike (Reply 2): They were not cuts, they were simply a reduction in the projected increase. Whenever these bills are signed, there is an automatic increase built in, whether the increase is needed or not. This bill is to reduce the automatic increase.......
An excuse. As is mentioned, this well mean an increase in health care costs for a lot of people who really can't afford it. Which means a lot of people-including children-will not get health care nor the medication they may need.
Ah, yes, that old "Compassionate Conservatism" working again. Give huge tax breaks to the filthy rich, and cut health care to the poor. The GOP at it's finest.