GOP improved health bill

December 23, 2009

There's several things wrong with Jack Kinstlinger's letter "GOP digs its political grave" (Readers respond, Dec. 22).

I'm sure it's convenient for Mr. Kinstlinger to assume that a bill that is now wildly unpopular will one day be wildly popular. That's within his rights.

Rewriting history, however, is not. In fact, the 1935 Social Security bill was supported by the vast majority of Republicans in both the House and the Senate, which is a far cry from the unanimous Republican opposition to the current bill.

I would also point out that the current bill has been drastically downsized from the original proposal, and it now appears that neither the public option nor federally financed abortions will make their way into the final bill.

Lastly, Republicans have supported health care reform all along and printed an 800-plus page first-step solution to the problem. The Republican plan dealt primarily with the component Americans care most about - bringing down the cost of health care. This is a far cry from the Democrats' plan, which many suspect will increase the cost of health care, raise taxes, infuse the government into personal decisions and, like Social Security, eventually go bankrupt. All that, and it was passed on the backs of special favors and kickbacks to dissenting Democrats. One may ask the question: Why, if this program is so good, did Sen. Harry Reid have to all but exempt Louisiana and Nebraska from the mandates in order to get their senators in line? If it's good enough for the rest of us, why not Nebraska?

I guess we'll find out in the 2010 elections if Mr. Kinstlinger's prophecy of American acceptance is correct or not. Regardless, this bill is a far cry from the disaster House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Reid first tried to roll out, and for that we have the Republican Party and the American people to thank.Michael P. DeCicco, Severn

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.