Repealing Obamacare. The betrayal of the Establishment is showing with this push to "modify" the onerous "Affordable" Care Act and not entirely repeal it, which is what required. I have five examples of where Obamacare logic hurts us, and why the law must be repealed in its entirety.
- Pre-existing Conditions Ban. This effectively prevents insurance companies from charging higher rates for people in higher-risk conditions. People with past heart situations, cancers, obesity, and other conditions that continually require treatment cannot, under the current law, be docked higher rates for higher risk. You cannot reward the healthy CrossFitter or marathon runner and punish the obese who eats junk food. In school insurance, for example, there is a condition that specifically states "Play, Practice, or Travel related to varsity (United States or Canadian Codes of) Football in 10th, 11th, and 12th grades" will not be covered by school insurance. In industry, certain higher-risk lines of work (electrical linemen, industrial workers, et al) have much higher insurance rates because of the higher risk of serious injury or death from these jobs. In flood insurance, two equal homes may be built, one next to a body of water near a flood plain where the risk of flooding is much greater than one where the home is much higher and the risk is slim to none. Using Obamacare logic, both houses must be insured at the same rate, instead of the much higher risk home being charged a higher rate. This regulation believes there can be no penalty for higher risk people than lower risk. Think about the logic with prize indemnity insurance. If you are offering one million dollars for a Hole in One contest, if you assess it on a 500-yard Par 4 or 5 hole, it will be much cheaper to insure than a Par 3 of 250 yards or shorter, where the risk is much greater. Why is this type of common sense prohibited in health insurance?
- Absurd Coverage Mandates. Why does a man need to be covered for the gynecologist or maternity care? Why does a woman need to be covered for prostate exams? Under the current policies, this is mandatory, but logic is nothing and "equality" emotionalism means more than common sense, especially with San Francisco leadership that wrote the law pushing the values of that city. Now see too the military's social engineering making taxpayers pay for the "gender transitioning" that Americans rejected. How is it again that these few cities have power?
- The IPAB, aka Death Panels. We are seeing that in England with one child being sentenced to death by the state for his disease instead of being able to fly over for treatment. Do we want the sanctity of human life or the convenience of death by mandate of the state? This makes the state the warden for children, not parents. Could we see a time where politics determine who lives and dies?
- Government in Charge of College Financing. Higher education now requires students to be funded by the state, as the federal government now controls all education financing in order to pay for socialised medicine. This is another major reason the law must be repealed in its entirety. We saw it first with the state casinos creating the first chapter, and now regulations on banks in this act demand state-run student financing. Eliminating this would save millions for students.
- Prohibition of Doctors from Owning Medical Practices. The law gives government-owned hospitals advantages over doctor-owned hospitals, which is why Obama officials demanded a ban on doctor-owned hospitals. This creates a higher cost since they have used the law to ban competition. If I wanted to help my brother (a pediatrician) and sister-in-law (a gynecologist) invest as a minority partner in a doctor-owned hospital, I would definitely be a partner as an investor. But sadly, they are not allowed to own their own practice under this law.
How Low Can You Go? The dress code issue for women's golf has been a hot button issue in an attempt to demand more modesty in the sport. Some fans are very unhappy with the domination by Korean women and what they called frumpy outfits. But as I noted last month on the dress code in choral concerts, I attended last week a concert that Dr. LaRoche was singing, and she had a ballgown, while the mezzo had a sleeveless black dress that went past the knee. The bass wore a suit and tie, and the tenor had dark slacks, a sport coat, and a white dress shirt and tie. But the choir itself was a bit on the side that I wonder what has happened to standards. No ties for men, and women were "Henry Ford Black". Choral dresses and suit would be apropos, but what has happened? Here's evidence.
Phelps vs the Shark? The discussion over the "fake" race between Michael Phelps and a shark only had me reminding myself of a show NFL Films did nearly 30 years ago, the "Dream Season" where 20 all-time NFL teams were matched in simulations to determine which team was the best of all-time (the 1976 Pittsburgh Steelers defeated the 1972 Miami Dolphins). In a similar manner, producers decided to film actual movements of sharks over distance in natural habitat, and allow Mr. Phelps to don illegal swim gear (FINA banned aerodynamic wetsuits in 2010 from swimming) to see if he could beat a shark over a pattern. These "dream" concepts allowed viewers to ask the question if a champion swimmer faced a shark who would win. Ideas such as that reminded me of the 1970's Blockbusters with Bill Cullen, a game show where the question was if a single player was better than a family pair. These questions have been there since the dawn of time, and while many complained about it being fake, we can always ask ourselves questions, so they are placed to a test.