From: cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.gov (Mark Taylor Evert)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Sick to death
Date: 3 Sep 1992 22:59:20 GMT
Organization: Loral Space Information Systems

In article <1992Sep3.210155.5765@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> 
lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
> Bill Clinton's 128 tax increases. Distortion. Refuted numerous places.

Still, he did raise them a lot more than he lowered them.   I'm sick of 
Democrats calling Bush a liar over "No new taxes".  I don't think he 
intended to deceive anyone when he said that... and I think that he felt 
that the circumstances that existed justified he change of heart on the 
matter.  

> Hilary Clinton believes children should be able to sue their parents for
> limiting their nintendo playing (and other absurd things). Distortion, 
read
> her paper.

I did, and to some extent, I agree that this has been distorted.   I think 
Dan Quayle's "incompetance " has been distorted a lot by the 
Democrats and media also.

> The Canadian health care system is a failure....Canadians hate 
it....there are
> long waits for basic care.... Lies and distortion. Every study I've read 
has
> refuted these statements
> and every Canadian I've talked to would not trade their system for ours.

I think the key to health care is to control costs, not socialization.   
I'm not wild about Bush's position on this.   Someone sent me a proposed 
system that had some neat aspects to it.  It sort of combined the best 
features of a free-market system with some of the features of a socialized 
system.  It's a little long to print here, though.

> As a scientist, I am particularly bothered by this kind of arguement 
because
> it amounts to one huge speculation. During the depression Roosevelt 
admitted
> that he had doubts about many of the programs he started to help the
> situation. However, he felt that the only way to decide whether they 
would
> work was to try them out. That is what I call proof by experiment.

Good, let Congress implement some of Bush's programs that they have 
bottled up for so long.  After all, when we elect a President, there is a 
national mandate of sorts which I believe supercedes some of the 
congressional interests which are often regional.  After all, the President is the only one elected on a national basis.  I'll say the same thing about Clinton if he is elected.  My message to congress is:  If you want the President to be accountable, you've got to cooperate.  Otherwise, no one is accountable...the situation that we are presently in, unfortunately.

> Despite
> statements to the contrary, there is little market competition in health 
care.

I agree!  I want more.

> Insurance companies charge outrageous premiums for malpractice
> insurance while ambulance-chasing lawyers bring ridiculous charges of
> malpractice to our already over-burdened legal system. How much is this
> costing us?

You won't have an argument on this from most Republicans, especially 
Quayle.  Unfortunately, Clinton's health plan will do nothing to solve 
this problem and Clinton would seem to be the last person to advocate tort 
reform.

> What
> are the republicans so afraid of?

I'd be willing to try it in conjunction with tort reform and some other 
ideas which would make the industry more competitive.   One idea which I 
think is workable, would be to give everyone a fixed lifetime budget 
(entitlement) and let them chose their doctors.  This will encourage 
competitiveness.  Certain safety nets could be put in place for 
catastrophic things like liver transplants.  I have a copy of a plan sent 
to me by a netter which though not perfect, has many good ideas and could 
be the basis of a system.

While we are at it, why are the Democrats in Congress afraid to give the president a line item veto?

> The fact of the matter is that we the voters need not depend on anyone's
> rhetoric to make our decision (not even mine :-) ). Clinton and Bush have
> records to be examined. Voting is more than watching a few sound bites,
> listening to a few speeches, listening to a few media analyses and 
pulling
> a lever. Responsible voting requires us to check the records of these men
> and to demand detailed statements of their plans before making our 
decision.
> Don't be a sheep or a random number generator, do some research and vote
> responsibly.

I agree...and don't forget that the executive branch is not the only one 
which implements and controls policy.   Research your congresscritters 
while you are at it.  

Mark T. Evert
Friendswood, TX

My opinions are my own.