
Advertisement
Advertisement

Christine Morabito: I don’t think anyone wanted a shutdown, but it has given us the opportunity to make people aware that there’s a huge difference between essential spending and nonessential. I think the Republicans are trying to, you know, piecemeal fund things in the government. Congress has power to do that, but even their efforts to fund certain things are being thwarted. It’s making me wonder if maybe the liberals are trying to bring on as much hurt and inconvenience for people so they can use that to blame Republicans. It’s a big blame game.
Advertisement
Well, if it was only a select few Republicans, I don’t think the shutdown would have happened. It takes a few more than a couple Republicans. It’s interesting how the Tea Party is portrayed; one minute we're dead and the next minute we’re responsible for every scourge of mankind. You know, it seems like you can’t have it both ways.But would you agree with the assessment that Republicans, particularly those who are placating organisations like the Tea Party, are the ones who brought this situation to a head?
I think there’s some truth to that. I think what the Tea Party has done has given fiscal conservative Republicans the OK to do what they’re supposed to be doing in the first place. It’s because of the Tea Party that we’re having these discussions about government overreach and overspending. These were things that maybe a few Republicans were talking about before, but they never really had the backing of the people. I don’t think most people knew what was going on. The Tea Party has been able to educate people and the public about how we’re using and wasting our tax dollars. I think these Republicans who wanted to stand up for the taxpayers now feel empowered.
Advertisement
We go through that every time something like this comes up. Most Americans really want these people to stand strong and fight for the taxpayer.Wasn't the time for this kind of clashing before the bill turned into a law? The Supreme Court said it was constitutional. Hasn't the time to change the substance and implementation of Obamacare passed?
Well, we have never given up on fighting Obamacare. As Nancy Pelosi said, we’d have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it. What’s in it is not good. It’s not good for jobs. Workers are getting their hours cut. People are losing their insurance, which is something that’s not supposed to happen. Companies are cutting back on how many people they hire. None of that is good for the economy.So what would you do with the 48 million uninsured Americans?
We could have dealt with uninsured Americans without having the government take control of the entire health care system. It’s become very clear, within a few days of Obamacare going online, that they can’t even run a website. And they want to run one sixth of the American economy? Lots of union members are hourly workers, so they see how this is going to affect them. It’s a disaster.Getting back to the tens of millions of uninsured, how specifically do we deal with that?
You know, I’m not a health care expert – I don’t have the answers to that. There have been proposals by the Republicans to deal with the uninsured. I really think we could have done it without the government taking over the health care system.
Advertisement
I would say you have to look at the big picture. This is bigger than just a few days of the government being shut down. I think if we allow Obamacare to go forward it will destroy our American health care system as we know it. We need to talk about the spending. We’re $17 trillion in debt and we need to talk about that. In a way, this brings to light all the nonessential things the government does. My heart goes out to the people who are suffering, who aren’t getting paid right now, but we really need to – you know, in our own homes, when we look at budgeting issues we look at things we could do without. And I think we need to do that as a country as well.We’ve had a version of universal health care here in Massachusetts since 2006. We’re going on eight years and it has dramatically reduced the number of uninsured here in our state and hasn’t submarined the state’s economy. What do you make of that?
That’s a different issue, because that was something that was passed in our state. If every state looks at their health care situation and decides to impose like we did here in Massachusetts, that’s up to the states to do that. But for the federal government to think they can run the health care of everybody across the whole country is something that the Tea Party is really against. These things need to be handled at the most local level they can. Once centralised government comes in, everyone gets treated as a one size fits all situation and that’s not good enough for anybody.
Advertisement
We wouldn’t be having the discussion if the Senate had passed the budget like they were supposed to instead of having these continuing resolutions that mean we have to repeat this fight every few months. I think if they were doing their job to begin with, we wouldn’t be going through this right now.Do you think insurance companies should be able to exclude people with pre-existing conditions?
That’s a really tough question. I think there should be some place for somebody to go with pre-existing conditions, but I don’t think that’s the government’s job to tell a private organisation who they have to insure and who they shouldn’t. I don’t think that’s the government’s role.Doesn’t it become a moral issue though at some point?
Absolutely.But health insurance companies, if left to their own devices, are there to make money, right? Not to ponder the ethics or morality of what they’re doing.
Well, you know, now we get into this problem with Obamacare. Now that there’s no restriction on pre-existing conditions, young people are going to make the decision that it’s cheaper for them not to buy insurance, to pay the fine. Because they know if they ever get sick, they just have to sign up for insurance and there'll be no penalty. So, you know, I think you have to look at the unintended consequences. Again, I absolutely think there needs to be some place for these people to go.
Advertisement
I don’t have a huge problem with it. At 26, I kind of think you should be paying for your own health care, but that’s just my personal opinion.Do you think companies with 50 or more employees should provide health care to their workers?
I don’t think they should be forced to by the federal government, no.Then how should those folks go about getting health insurance?
Well, the ultimate goal for the Tea Party is to get the employers out of the health care business. Employers don’t want to deal with it. If employers go out of the health care business, then health care would open up to more competition. Then insurance companies competing with each other for the lowest rates and the price of health care would come down. The problem is that people don’t know what anything costs. You don’t have the option to shop around and find the best deal for your health care.Thank you, Christine.Follow Danny on Twitter: @DMacCashMore stuff about US politics:The US Government Shut Down Because Everything Is StupidNope, the GOP Still Isn't LibertarianRoad-Tripping with Rand Paul