Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Back At It

After the shootings in Tuscon, and the call for civility in political discussions, I was hopeful. I don't mind spirited debate; hell, I don't mind downright arguing. But the use of violent rhetoric and images needs to stop, so I was hopeful. But, little more than a week later, and the GOP is back to form, calling for the 'killing' of job-'killing' Obamacare.
Do we need that image in our collective consciousness? No; especially not when you consider the idea that using the word 'killing' in any kind of political discussion or movement is wrong, but also when you realize that health care reform is not costing any jobs.
That's right. It's not. It's just another way for the GOP and their ilk to get you on their angry little bandwagon. Killing jobs. Obama. Killing.
But the Republicans claim: 1.6 million jobs lost under health care reform, which they've put in their new bill, the Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act. Their bill will most likely come up for a vote soon, and will probably pass the House, but fail in the Senate; and even if it somehow does pass, President Obama would certainly veto the proposal. But let the GOP run with this, certain to fail, bill, and ignore the economy or the wars or the environment. Get stuck in a go-nowhere bit of politicizing because you think it will win you support.
But, back to the job-'killing'. The GOP bases their claim of 1.6 million jobs lost on an August 2010 Congressional Budget Office [CBO] report that stated the Affordable Care Act would reduce the amount of labor in the economy by about 0.5%, because more people would choose to retire earlier, thanks to the reduced cost of health insurance.
So, people would retire, not be fired? Well, that isn't job-'killing' because if someone retires, doesn't it open up their position for someone, say, oh, I don't know, an unemployed person to fill? And, then wouldn't that actually help the economy, getting more people back to work?
FactCheck.org points out that people leaving the job market because it is financially possible for them to retire is entirely different from 'killing' jobs: "The House Republican leadership. . . badly misrepresents what the Congressional Budget Office has said about the law. In fact, CBO is among those saying the effect 'will probably be small.'"

House Republican leadership badly misrepresents; or lies. Their fanning the flames with their choice of words, and they're downright lying about health care reform. This is what you voted for, America.



D said...

While I am totally for reform and the bill and agree with everything you said, a friend of mine who works for a local healthcare company was just telling me that they are laying off 500 people and outsourcing to India, citing the reform making it necessary because their profits are squeezed and the regulations are too harsh. I think the profit viewpoint is moreso to blame... anyway, just wanted to share... I try to be partisan and it may merit some further research.

Cubby said...

I was convinced that this kind of rhetoric would take a holiday after the election, but it looks like the rhetoric faucet is still wide-open.

Robyn said...

I knew we were asking for too much when we wanted both sides to become civil. Can you imagine a world where Louie Gohmert and Steve King are nice? I can't.

the dogs' mother said...

All I know is it confused the heck out of the twins' boiler plate policy. Started at $98 a month, shot to $210 a month after the bill passed and then, oops, they figured it out again and dropped to $162 a month.
GB went from $440 a month to $210 a month on our policy.

I figure we'll win some and lose some with all of it however it comes out.

D said...

As far as the rhetoric, it's gone from that to patronizing... and I don't know which is worse.