news
The man one of them will oppose on the Nov. 2 general election ballot terms their promises short-sighted and pure politics.
"Calls to repeal the bill are politically motivated," U.S. Rep. Travis Childers said Wednesday. "I voted against the bill. It's time we move forward in working to make it better."
The Booneville Democrat said that while he was one of 34 Democrats to vote against the bill, he supports many of its provisions, such as medical insurance exchanges, coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and the idea that if you like what you have, you can keep it.
"But for me, the bad - in particular, the high cost of the bill - outweighed the good," he said. "I will continue to support common-sense reform provisions and work to change measures that would negatively impact the people of the 1st District."
Calling for repeal are the three candidates hoping to win the Republican primary on June 2.
Tuesday, state Sen. Alan Nunnelee announced he will work for repeal of "any federal health care takeover passed in 2010" and to "replace it with real reforms that lower health care costs without growing government."
Former Eupora Mayor Henry Ross said he pledges "to fight to repeal the legislation through any means possible."
McGlowan, a former Fox News commentator, said that even while it's important to fight for the law's repeal, "we must, as Mississippians, band together and rise up now, with every fiber in our being, to stop Obama-Care from ever hurting the first Mississippian."
Their health care views echo a party strategy being picked up around the country by Republican candidates.
But some campaign-watchers say that the possibility of repeal is remote as long as President Obama is in the White House and can veto their efforts.
"It would take Republicans winning 113 (more) seats to make the House veto-proof," said Dr. Marty Wiseman, director of the Stennis Institute for Government at Mississippi State University. "That seems unlikely."
An override of a presidential veto takes a two-thirds vote of the Senate and the House. In the Senate, the GOP currently has 41 of 100 votes.
But House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Wednesday that while a potential Republican majority may not be able to repeal health care reform, it probably would refuse to fund it.
Wiseman said some GOP strategists apparently have gauged that supporting only the repeal may turn out to be politically dangerous when the public begins to find benefits they agree with, such as mandatory coverage for children with pre-existing conditions and financial help with prescription drugs to seniors on Medicare.
"This morning, the new slogan was 'Repeal and Replace,'" Wiseman said after listening to talk radio. "It may be a real leap of faith to ask voters to let you repeal something without knowing what could replace it."
McGlowan also urged state Attorney General Jim Hood to comply with Gov. Haley Barbour's request to join other state attorneys general in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the health care reform law.
Barbour has said that if Hood doesn't file suit by today, he will do it himself.
Contact Patsy R. Brumfield at (662) 678-1596 or patsy.brumfield@djournal.com
.
And people wonder why we're last in everything. Duh!!
Look at who we elect!!
I too would love for Social Security and Medicare to be repealed.
But they'll never do that. Why? Because Social Security is a pot of money that they can dip into whenever they want, and they do so frequently, to try and cover their ridiculous spending.
If they REALLY wanted to fix America they'd start with these things:
1) The FairTax Act(HR 25 & S 296)
2) Tort reform. (Probably go to a "loser pays" system.
3) Congressional term limits
4) Repeal this recently passed health care bill.
5) Earmark legislation.
I think that we'd all be amazed at the positive impact these 5 actions would have on our country.
Once they were in place, they could revisit the issue of health care reform and perhaps pass legislation allowing us all to purchase health insurance across state lines, etc.
But, unfortunately they'll never do those things.
Why? Because we have a legislature full of politicians and not statesmen.
I don't believe our founding fathers ever intended that people would make a career of politics.
Unfortunately until we get term limits we'll never have enough STATESMEN to do what's right for the country over what helps them get re-elected.
BTW, just saw a Rassmussen poll that said that 68% of those polled were either thought their health care would be worse under the newly passed health care plan or thought it would do them no good at all.
Perhaps come November that 68% will implement some "voter imposed term limits".
Travis Childers is a JOKE! And the ones that are running to replace him are not much better. It's a sad state of affairs for North Ms.
A vote for Travis Childers is a vote for a Democrat lap dog. A vote for Alan Nunallee is a vote for a Republican lap dog. Either way we have lap dogs as our leaders in Washington. Just plain and simple partisan puppets.
I'd like to see social security and medicare done away with, at the very least give people the option to opt out. I'd let the govt. keep every dime I've paid in on both for the opportunity to forfeit my 'benefits' and the govt would never pull that money from my pay check again. I can manage my retirement/disability/health care better and more efficiently than the govt ever has or will. Too bad I'm not given the freedom to do so.
And yes Travis, the calls to repeal are politically motivated. They know that is what the constituents want. Not making it better, like you say we should do, but repealing! We all want reform, but this bill goes well past that, and you know it.
Where was Childers during the debates and why did he not try to pass a better bill to begin with. He will NEVER push for tort reform and limit massave payments to his trial lawyer base.
Childers voted for the massave spendelous bill that has not created one single job, except for massave government jobs.
Only Pelosi benefits from Childers being in Washington.
We are headed in the direction of having non-workers and deadbeats running the government.
Washington is working hard to limit free enterprise in this country and to limit incomes of the true workers. WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THIS RECKLESS SPENDING?