The Democrat claims that the Obama health care bill will reduce the debt and help balance the budget, but reviewing those calculations shows that they're going to collect higher taxes for 10 years and provide health care for only 6 years. Imagine that. Isn't that a little misleading? Four years of health care taxes with no health care. Imagine if you wanted to buy a house and you had to make 4 years of payments before you could move in, and then finally when you moved in, you found out you had rationed use of the property. You couldn't choose where to park your car, like in the garage. You had to drive blocks away down to a public parking lot and then wait in line for a stall. Ten years of taxes, 6 years of benefits, followed by rationed care. You wouldn't buy a house under those terms, and Congress shouldn't pass a health care bill under those terms either. We can do better. We can have health care reform that lowers costs by addressing preexisting conditions, by lowering defensive medicine costs, by having commonsense tort reform. The Republican alternative lowers the price of health care by 10 percent, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That's what this Congress ought to pass.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker critiques the Obama health care bill's financial implications and advocates for Republican alternatives.
Share
More from Todd Tiahrt
I was just on the steps of the Capitol speaking to a Cold War veteran who served this country admirably and then went to serve the Fire Department in the State of Mississippi. He has driven all the way from Mississippi to Washington, D.C…
First of all, Madam Speaker, I would like to thank Dennis Moore for his leadership in this legislation. He has always sought during his career in Congress to find bipartisan legislation that we could work together on. I appreciate and also…
This is National Ag Week, and I want to express my support and appreciation for our Nation's farmers and ranchers, especially those from my home State of Kansas. Kansas farmers produce more than 350 million bushels of wheat, 200 million…
I would argue that of the $655 billion that we've already had to borrow, you're taking some of that money and applying it to this program so, again, borrowing money from the Chinese.





