"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
Pitch in with the Prince William Young Republicans and help defeat Obama in 2012!
Mainstream Media Picks Up Insurance Scandal
By Greg L | 3 December 2009 | Virginia Politics | 11 Comments
The Kaine Administration’s attempt to sneak taxpayer-funded health benefits for the same-sex partners has broken from the blogosphere to the mainstream media today with a pair of articles in the Hampton Roads Pilot and the Northern Virginia Daily today, and no doubt it’s going to spread from there. Of course neither publication credits BVBL with breaking the story, but that’s hardly a surprise. Even without the attribution given that journalistic standards would generally require, its good to see this scandal breaking open so Virginians will know what their lame-duck Governor and Chairman of the Democratic National Committee is trying to do with their tax dollars.
The big deal here, beyond the prospect of Kaine trying to sneak in support for “domestic partnerships”, is that the Commonwealth already spends $647 million providing health benefits to state employees and their dependents. Although Kaine is trying to claim that this isn’t going to cost taxpayers money (something not disclosed in the proposed regulation that looks more like a response to public outrage rather than the original intent here) vastly expanding the number of people covered under the state employee health plan is going to require a government expansion simply to manage eligibility, enrollments and claims. No matter which way you slice it, this is going to cost taxpayers money. We just have no idea what the bill will be. We do know that this biennium the state is running about three billion dollars in the red, though.
The only alternative to this regulatory change according to the administration is “National Health Care.” How nice. It seems that voters were spot-on when they decided Virginia Democrats have no other plans but to grow government and increase taxes, instead of thinking for a moment whether taxpayers have any interest in such an inane idea as allowing state employees to put their roommates, same-sex partners, extended family, and even boarders on the Commonwealth’s health insurance plan in the first place. If the only alternatives Democrats have to offer is socialized medicine or putting a huge chunk of Virginia’s population on the state health insurance plan, no wonder voters are looking to Republicans to offer sound policy alternatives that make sense.
Trying to hide this only makes it worse. If this was such a good idea, then how come not one Democrat offered a bill in the General Assembly to do this, which would have easily facilitated an open discussion? The easy answer is that whoever tried it would have gotten hammered in the next election, and rightly so. This is the mother of all dumb ideas, and one that clearly flies in the face of the desires of the electorate. Instead Kaine got his unelected bureaucrats to try to sneak this through, hoping we wouldn’t notice.
Maybe Democrats ought to change their name to “The Stalinist Party”, because what they tried to pull is anything but “democratic.”
UPDATE: The WashPo picks up the story as well.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
11 Comments
Views: 628
Loading ...
Thanks for keeping us updated.
I read it first over at freerepublic.com, which linked to the public comment board.
So maybe you should yell at them for not crediting you.
I mentioned you there though…
The Stench of Moral Rot
The normative statistics for a homosexual in the USA include a Bachelor’s degree: For gay men, the median household income is $83,000/yr. (Gay singles $62,000; gay couples living together $130,000), almost 80% above the median U.S. household income of $46,326, per census data.
Higher than average household income = more tax dollars to the state. Lots of Northern Virginians think it unfair that they pay more taxes than their southern neighbors, but tax dollars aren’t doled back to the area in equal percentage. They whine that they want something done about this inequity. If you feel that way, don’t you think other groups that give more than they get should receive the same consideration?
Families pay the same for health insurance whether they have two or twelve kids. Likely, the ones with more kids represent a greater expense to the health plan than would two high-income men living together in a commited relationship. It’s even possible, if not probable, that the insurance outlay for the gay couple is less than what they would pay in premiums. That certainly cannot be said of a family with multiple children.
People in this forum have already said they couldn’t care less about the homosexual aspect of this argument, and that they wouldn’t mind the opportunity to insure a parent, or brother, or other family member instead of a spouse. To many, it’s about the strength of commitment to a person, not about a marriage license.
If this is just about dollars, why not charge a graduated premium based on the number of children in the household? Why extend eligibility, or offer discounts to anyone other than the actual employee? The state could save a whole lot of money that way.
Why is it the responsibility of the state to provide health insurance to non-employee adults? Why doesn’t the state provide auto insurance to people who live with state employees as well? Why not insure co-habitants of state employees against losses from lawsuits, frogs falling out of the sky, and plagues of locusts?
Or more properly, why insure co-habitants of state employees for anything at all?
The state has no business doing anything other than standard employee benefits to state workers, solely for the purpose of being competitive in the marketplace for good employees. Any time government wants to re-purpose employee benefits for the purpose of broad social engineering, it puts taxpayers at risk. There’s no valid purpose in doing so, it wastes taxpayer dollars for dubious reasons, and is entirely unrelated to the purpose of providing competitive employee benefits.
There is simply no defensible reason for this.
Wow, I wonder if David Marsden supports this? After all, he says he wasnts to “work with both parties to hold the line on taxes.” Easier to hold the line on taxes if you cut wasteful spending, isn’t it?
I heard on the channel 4 news this AM that Kaine’s expasion of health insurance coverage would extend to any adult living under the same roof with a state employee. The broadcast further stated that his includes homosexual partners, non-married heterosexual partners, adult children, in-laws, and even room mates! This is insane!
The final decision will rest with governor-elect McDonnell. let’s hope he’ll display more common sense and fiscal restraint.
Forgot to source my statement. I couldn’t find a link to the NBC 4 story, but this Washington Post article says essentially the same thing:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/03/AR2009120304329.html
The Washington ComPost finally had an article on this yesterday. And today they broke with the news of a breech of the email system in England revealing the collusion to hide facts on global warming! Wow… maybe tomorrow they will report that high button shoes are out of fashion!
JM is right …
Since this change would have to be enacted by McDonnell - Kaine hasn’t given anything to anyone… except to take a parting shot at the new governor.
Tim Kaine: Obama’s choice to lead the DNC …. produced such great results in VA races for the AG, lieutenant governor and governor for his party.
Tim Kaine’s legacy: An emaciated state budget and nanny statism.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/04/dnc-chair-thank-goodness-these-corrosive-tea-partiers-are-destroying-the-gop/
I completely agree with Greg when he says, “Why is it the responsibility of the state to provide health insurance to non-employee adults?” If you work, then YOU and only you should get insurance. Why should the rest of us bear the costs for your spouse, life partner, or kids? Let them get their own jobs. It’s high time we put a stop to people thinking they’re entitled to insurance just because they’ve got some sort of relationship with someone that has a job. Good call, Greg.