Martin K. Bayne <[log in to unmask]> in his posting
To: Multiple recipients of list PARKINSN [log in to unmask]
Subject: lies, dastardly lies, and photo-ops on
Sunday, January 10, 1999 at 12:24 AM
said:
A lame duck, impeached, minority President, on trial in the Senate is not
in the best position to make substantive changes in the health care
delivery system. And there's a reason it's called the "Long-Term Care
Initiative" and not the "Long-Term Care Law" -- a minor detail known as the
legislative branch. (and they may have a thing or two to say about an
obvious and flagrant photo-op from an impeached President) Besides, don't
you think it's a bit odd that the cornerstone of this "initiative" is the
"National Family Caregivers Support Program," a program ostensibly
authorized and funded through the Older Americans Act. Did everyone forget
the OAA failed to get re-authorized in the 105th session?
I say, we should remember also that Mrs. Clinton tried to change our health
delivery system. She was new to the system and stepped on the toes of - or
ignored - the power elite who wanted to keep the status quo in place unless
change would further add to their own opportunities to needlessly milk the
system. Now that our present system is breaking down under the burden of
paperwork caused by the multiple payer system, those who caused the problem
loudly proclaim that it's the Clinton's fault.
We also have our own lobby group, the A.A.R.P. to blame for the lack of
long term care under Medicare. They were influenced to help torpedo the
long term care Medicare coverage by the few but vocal retirees from major
corporations whose retirement benefits included long term care. The few
relatively rich [rich in long-term health care] fearing their loss of a few
dollars of extra Medicare premiums spoiled the benefits which would have
benefited the great majority. Now that some retirement benefits are being
curtailed by major corporations, these people are now asking why the
system isn't better.
The polls consistently show a high approval rate for President Clinton's
work as president. President Clinton was less than presidential with the
Abishag Monica Lewinsky vamp, but that was on his own time. I am glad to
have the president working for us. If he could run for president in 2002,
he would have my vote!
Mr. Bayne continues:
In fact, a number of notable long-term care bills and resolutions were
introduced during the 105th session of Congress --unfortunately, none of
them made it out of committee to the floor of the House or Senate. With the
exception of the accelerated premium percentage phase-in for qualified LTC
insurance, congressional leadership has remained consistently impotent in
its unwillingness to address the issue of long-term health care head-on.
And this bears repeating; this is not a rank and file issue, it's a
leadership issue. Nancy Johnson(Long-Term Care & Retirement Security Act),
Christopher Shays(Promoting Individuals Under LTC Insurance), John
Mica(Civil Service Long-Term Care Insurance
Benefit Act), Christopher Smith('98 Long-Term Care Advancements Act) and
Charles Grassley(Long-Term Care & Retirement Security Act) all introduced
bona fide LTC bills or resolutions in the 105th Congress. But introducing a
bill is *substantially* different from getting it to the floor for debate
and a vote. Getting it to the floor takes vision, commitment and party
leadership. All eyes are now on Messrs. Hastert & Lott as we gird our loins
for the 106th session, and renew the promises we've made to our frail
elders.
I say, it is a sad situation to have Larry Flynt as the person who will
save us from the tyranny I expected from Livingston as Speaker of the
House, but, Thank you Larry.
