George's Bottom Line
Reporting and analysis from ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent and "This Week" Host George Stephanopoulos

George Stephanopoulos reports on events in politics, Congress and the White House for ABCNews, on the air and online. He interviews top newsmakers, discusses the events of the week and looks to the week ahead each Sunday on 'This Week.'

November 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30

« Previous | Main | Next »

Bottled Scorpions in Obama's Budget

February 26, 2009 8:15 AM

The bottled scorpions in President Barack Obama's budget?

His health care plan versus "cap-and-trade" legislation to battle global warming by setting carbon emission limits.

Will the White House choose or let the Senate decide?

Health care reform seems to have more support now. What do you think? Anyone disagree?

--George Stephanopoulos

February 26, 2009 in Barack Obama | Permalink | Share | User Comments (45)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I want everyone to have health care. I want everyone who can pay to pay-just like I do. If someone wants the Government to pay for it they should then be required to open up "their books" to the Government. If a family has a boat, a motorcycle, fancy jewels, fancy cars with wheels that cost 10k, then that stuff should be sold to pay for the care that they will receive. They as well as anyone on Government assistance should be drug tested on a regular basis and tossed off the roles if they refuse.

Posted by: david | Feb 26, 2009 9:29:22 AM

Healthcare right now; emission limits later this year or in next year's budget. Thanks Mr. S.

Posted by: j p | Feb 26, 2009 9:30:32 AM

The "health care plan" link above isn't working.

Posted by: Steady Jed | Feb 26, 2009 9:36:30 AM

I'm all for health care, but not for funding it by decreasing the deduction that "wealthy" individuals can take on charitable gifts. That's not going to help anyone.

Posted by: b | Feb 26, 2009 9:37:26 AM

You have to look at this as a compromise budget from Obama. Steep cuts combined with new taxes and a pathway to universal health care.

Conservatives must understand that they LOST the election. This is the best they can expect for awhile.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | Feb 26, 2009 9:39:11 AM

It is past time for both plans. This economy is showing why we need universal healthcare. I am afraid, however, that, like the stimulus, the WH will bow to pressure from the Congress and not do what truly needs to be done.

Posted by: Chris | Feb 26, 2009 9:40:06 AM

Am off to visit a neighbor who has had a triple bypass.
He will leave the hospital and pay nothing. It's called National Health. As a non-EU Yank I pay $450 per year. Visits to doctor, hospital care and all medicines are free. If this poor country can provide universal free healthcare, why can't the USA? And this country ranks second only to France as top in health care. The USA is down, just ahead of third world countries.

Posted by: molly | Feb 26, 2009 9:41:58 AM

I'm following George on Twitter, I've been ready for health care reform for years. Why should money decide who gets to live and die.

I"d like all medical be free to everyone and the only way that would happen is to socialize medicine.

Posted by: Philip Pomerleau | Feb 26, 2009 9:47:53 AM

Healthcare is important but it has waited forever; if we don't take steps to battle global warming now, hundreds of millions of people worldwide will be displaced and trillions (or quadrillions) of dollars in property destroyed. It's the COST of healthcare that needs control more than the PAYMENT. (Seems to me we need nuclear powered desalination plants to suck water from the oceans and solve the world's water crises; who knows, maybe that would have a tiny effect on ocean water levels too...)

Posted by: Jeff | Feb 26, 2009 9:53:07 AM

Posted by: Jon Feely | Feb 26, 2009 9:57:05 AM

I was just looking at the preliminary items in the budget summary and am extremely irked by the inappropriate MISUSE of the word "reinstate" in the following two items:

1)Reinstate the 36 percent and 39.6 percent rates for those taxpayers earning over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single)
2)Reinstate the personal exemption phaseout and limitation on itemized deductions for those taxpayers earning over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single)

This is NOT a "reinstatement" because it completely ignores and eliminates all of the inflation adjustments that are required to be made to IRS tax tables since 2001. In other words, the amount that was shown in IRS tables as the over-$250,000 bracket(the 39.6% bracket for BOTH single and married filing jointly taxpayers)in 2001 is now $372,950 (in 2009 tax tables). And the amount applicable to the 39.6% bracket for single individuals, was NEVER as low as $200,000. This is NOT just a repeal of the so-called Bush Tax Cuts. It is also an attempt to deny nearly a decades' worth of inflation and impose a much higher tax increase, especially on single individuals. This will result in a HUGE tax increase for many, many people who NEVER benefitted from the so-called Bush Tax Cuts. Where is the equity for those of us who are being vilified as "rich" but know we're not? I spend half my salary on housing, cut my own hair, do most of my own home repairs, NEVER eat out and spend less than $300 on clothes a year. But for some reason, I'm branded as rich even though I have to watch what I spend very carefully. A person who makes $250k in NYC has nowhere near the same standard of living as a person who makes $250k in Orlando, FL or numerous other places.

Thanks to these proposals, I will NOT be spending money to help improve the economy. I'll be spending it on taxes instead of those new windows and other home improvements for which I was saving.

Posted by: Susan | Feb 26, 2009 10:09:40 AM

Why bottled scorpions? Why not bottled dreams? Bottled needs? Bottled change? Bottled choices?

I understand the media's need to create controversy -- but why equate either solving significant health care issues or world health issues to venomous, life destroying creatures.

Personally, I reject your need to do that, and frankly, I expect more.

Why not moderate a discussion on the merits?

Posted by: Derek Beckwith | Feb 26, 2009 10:14:10 AM

I am an independant practitioner and as such have to go to the individual health care market. My premium is in excess of $800 per month individually and if I add my family it is in the $1500/month range. As a Realtor, the marketplace is making it difficult to stay afloat. Having worked in Healthcare for 25 years I know that the medical facilities get less than 50% of what the bill and the patient's portion is disproportionatly high. It is the uninsured that pay a premium price for healthcare. We got tort reform, what we need now is healthcare reform. Nearly 10 years ago a report on quality came out with a mandate to reduce medical error by 50% in 5 years. 10 years later we haven't moved much. Someone needs to ask why.

Posted by: Paul Gutting | Feb 26, 2009 10:18:57 AM

global warming can't be ignored but health care (coupled with health education)needs the lead now.

Posted by: Red Drum Group | Feb 26, 2009 10:20:42 AM

Health care does not matter when your crops die, your cities flood, and dry forests are consumed by fire. Let's work on global warming and stop being stupid. The coal companies can kiss my you know what.

Posted by: reason | Feb 26, 2009 10:24:12 AM

"Am off to visit a neighbor who has had a triple bypass.
He will leave the hospital and pay nothing. It's called National Health. As a non-EU Yank I pay $450 per year. Visits to doctor, hospital care and all medicines are free. If this poor country can provide universal free healthcare, why can't the USA? And this country ranks second only to France as top in health care. The USA is down, just ahead of third world countries."

Wow, Molly, what wonderful country are you in? I've never heard of a country in which doctors worked for free, drugs cost nothing to manufacture, hospitals cost nothing to run... it sounds amazing that everything is "free" there.

You didn't happen to get there by steering towards the 'second to the right, and straight on till morning', did you?

Posted by: I'm With Stupid | Feb 26, 2009 10:24:56 AM

Healthcare in this country is a disgrace. We are a country of opportunity, yet our sick and poor go without the basic necessity of healthcare because they can't afford it. My husband has cancer, and we are very lucky to have had independent insurance (self-employed) upon his diagnosis, as he had to give up his business due to health. If he had been employed and had to quit, he would have had to go out on Cobra which in the past has cost me over $1000.00/mo for family. Then, once the Cobra would have ran out and he wouldn't have to convert to independent then...they would have declined him coverage based on the preexisting condition of cancer. What a system! We as Americans should open our eyes and not be so cruel to our sick. There is no such thing as "affordable" healthcare. Our household spends nearly 50% of our expendable income in health care now and every year the independent policy keeps going up 30-40% a year in premiums. I work a good job, and I just hope I can keep my job to keep my husband alive.

Posted by: Tammy | Feb 26, 2009 10:28:39 AM

I want us to protect our planet as much as human beings can.
That said, I would really like the media to disclose the scientists and NASA astronomers that also point to Sun spots and solar flares. They are having an impact, too.

Obama and Gore want to blame us Americans because we drive SUV's, but there are many more factors.

Keep destroying business and industry and you will see your advertising revenue decrease. Think about that, Mr. Media.

Posted by: Mac | Feb 26, 2009 10:49:36 AM

My biggest worry in this would be how much $$ universal health care would cost us because of the illegal aliens who would be using this, and how it would cut down on services to legitimate American citizens. If somehow we were able to strictly regulate it so that taxpaying citizens received the services they are taxed for it would be great, but we won't.

We already are going bankrupt in the State of California because of this, and no one wants to address this issue because it is too HOT. All while hospitals are closing and our taxes are going UP.

Posted by: SCVdeb | Feb 26, 2009 10:49:48 AM

The best health care is a planet with a sustainable environment. I vote emissions limits.

Posted by: Art Roche | Feb 26, 2009 10:53:24 AM

My husband has been employed with the same large Company for over 15 years. We pay for the best paying healthcare policy that they offer. We have gone from paying a small fee for Doctors and medicines to minimal coverage at best. We no longer purchase most of our medicines through the policy, but through large store's special offerings. Recommended test's and health issues are often not completed since there will be no coverage and no money to pay for the services. The rate of our insurance for 2 people is more than we paid for a family of five several years ago. I've often wondered if I saved the money that goes out for insurance if I would be able to better afford the fees and services a few times a year. Then there would be the fear of a major illness and pre-existing conditions. Seems to me, the insurance companies should do more than just collect premiums! They know exactly where to set the minimums so that the average family pays all of their premiums and pays the majority of their medical expenses as well. It also seems that there is a logical solution which should start with the big insurance companies. One other thing that bugs me is the statements that show HUGE discounts if the insurance company pays, but the consumer pays grossly inflated charges. To me, these types of policies are abusive and demean the American Spirit. I've often wondered if having "for profit" health care is unjust.

Posted by: Denise Goodale | Feb 26, 2009 10:54:18 AM

Health care reform strikes me as the higher priority. Unless Congress addresses entitlements, the combination of our current massive deficit spending and the accelerating Baby Boomer retirements will eat our tax base alive. The interest on the national debt, the Pentagon budget of whatever size and entitlement spending alone will more and more crowd out discretionary spending something fierce. I will remain skeptical until someone points out where the new middle class tax base will come from. The wealthy cannot support the level of government commitments outlined by the President on Tuesday. I see health care as a growth industry with potential to create lots more jobs, particularly with the aging of America. Energy, on the other hand, seems to me to be more of a trade-off on the jobs front. Green energy production of whatever kind will create new plants and related jobs, but it also will reduce employment in the "old" coal burning plants, nuclear plants and higher-carbon emission plants sacrificing those jobs. The numbers are so hard to make work under any scenario absent massive spending cuts or tax increases.

Posted by: Sara Bartosz | Feb 26, 2009 10:58:47 AM

G, Where does Health Care Reform begin? The American public is starting to see the waste is in our society, largely do to the reporting by the Media.Go to any large Hospital and see who has the Money. Massive building projects, Staff parking lots full of BMW,Porsch's and Cadillac's. $400.00 Aspirin prescribed to patient Doctors complaining of the cost of Malpractice Insurance yet live a lavish life style.Drug company's also reap in huge profits and spend money like water on perks for Doctors and Hospitals. Where does reform start George, Like No. 5, need more imput! A bottle of Scorpions is not as dangerous as the Pandora's box of Health Care Reform

Posted by: Pappadeaux | Feb 26, 2009 11:05:49 AM

I am just your average jonnie, maybe a little better just a little then the average Joe. I pay my taxes like a good American, for thing I did not agree with for example
The war in Iraq I repeat IRAQ, the American spying program, torture I don't condone. I could go on and on, but never once did I stop paying my taxes. Now we have
a very popular, component president who wants to reinvest in America and it people and you all are coming out of the wood works, you’re out rage with his proposed
budget and stim package.

I have a 29 year old productive daughter and son in law; I am going to be a grandmother in a few months.
I to have vested interest in the next generation future, I want their tomorrows to better them mine. We send money all over
the world, why can’t we start taking care of our home and it people.

It is coming increasely clear to me that if this president success, the right wing knows it will be erailavent especially after
The last 8 years. I think the right will do everything in its power to bring down this administration even if it cause
devastation to this great country its economy and it people. In the word of Gov. Bobby Jendal (I pair a phase)
who amount us would do that to the next generation

Posted by: Rebecca | Feb 26, 2009 11:26:38 AM

By putting a cap on emmisions will help peoples health however, affordable health care will not help cap emmisions. I vote to take on emmisions first. Ofcourse, everyone wants free health care so thats going to be prefered over the emmision cap. I agree health care is expensive and there are a lot of politics behind the price of the service/care/tools and medicine. My fear of socializing medicine/health care is that quality of care will decrease due to lack of competition to improve techniques. Right now hospitals in my area compete against each other with the different types of testing/procedure equipment they have-IF medicine is socialized we wont have these options because every hospital will have the same equipment due to the need of equality amongist hospitals and their care. . . Think about it.

Posted by: Tara | Feb 26, 2009 12:21:29 PM

Post a comment