America's independent, non-partisan advocate for overburdened taxpayers.

 

Blog Contributors

Brandon Arnold
Vice President of Government Affairs 

Dan Barrett
Research and Outreach Manager 

Demian Brady
Director of Research 

Christina DiSomma
Communications Intern 

Timothy Howland
Creative Content Manager 

Curtis Kalin
Communications Intern 

Ross Kaminsky
Blog Contributor 

David Keating
Blog Contributor 

Douglas Kellogg
Communications Manager 

Sharon Koss
Government Affairs Intern 

Richard Lipman
Director of Development 

Joe Michalowski
Government Affairs Intern 

Diana Oprinescu
Communications Intern 

Austin Peters
Communications Intern 

Kristina Rasmussen
Blog Contributor 

Lee Schalk
State Government Affairs Manager 

Pete Sepp
Executive Vice President  

Nan Swift
Federal Government Affairs Manager 

"Security and Progress of the Nation"


Dan Barrett
March 21, 2010

The healthcare reform debate in the US House chamber continues to be a merry-go-round of parliamentary procedure questions, stories of trials and tribulations from constituents, and bill implementations. After a 13 hour day spent on Saturday, the House reconvened for a greatly anticipated and protested vote.

A significant debate arose from whether the earmarks included in the Senate bill would also be in the Reconciliation Bill. Republicans were largely stonewalled by House Democrats in getting an answer. While House Rules Chairwoman Slaughter said there is no individual state receiving special treatment through the Reconciliation Bill, Representative Issa of California then replied, “a bribe for one will turn into a bribe for many.” Here are some examples of the earmarks going into the bill supposedly dedicated to American ideals:

  • The Louisiana Purchase: Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster…during the preceding 7 fiscal years” which only includes the state of Louisiana. COST: $100 million
  • The Bismarck Bank Job: Allowing the Bank of North Dakota and the US Government to be the sole issuers of student loans. COST: $13.6 billion (increased Pell Grants)
  • Tennessee Hospitals: Justified as compensation for “Disproportionate Share Hospitals” in 2012 and 2013 only for that state. COST: $100 million
  • University of Connecticut Hospital: Expanding the large hospital earlier claimed “it doesn’t have to be in any particular bill.” COST: $100 million
  • $1,000 for every Vermonter: Additional Medicaid funding will guarantee $1,000 for every citizen in Vermont. COST: $600 million

The list goes on and on and more earmarks can be found in Representative Pitts of Pennsylvania’s article in the Daily Caller and in Representative Shadegg of Arizona’s handout.

Also, check out a simplified comparison chart of the original Senate and House bills, President Obama's proposal, and the newly released Reconciliation Bill.

If supporters of healthcare reform feel the bill before the House of Representatives is upstanding, transparent, and helps America move in a freer, more prosperous direction, they will not vote on such a bill that is riddled with reckless spending earmarks and state bribes.


 

Comment on this blog

Nickname
Comment
Enter this word:

User Comments

Submitted by Homer at: March 22, 2010
Universal health care will save money. Oh! I'm saving people money! I'm Mr Candy Man from gumdrop house on lollypop lane! By the way I was being sarcastic!

Submitted by Skay at: March 22, 2010
Dear NTU, I agree on many of your positions, but on health care I think you have not thought things through carefully. Universal health care will cost the country less, not more, in the long run. That means lower taxes. Where we really need to curb tax spending is on the military. The U.S. spends more on defense than all other countries of the world combined.