Paul Ryan: "What side of history do you want to be on?" Video

Wisconsin's First District Congressman Paul Ryan on the House floor debate on H.R. 3962

http://www.house.gov/ryan/healthcare
http://www.facebook.com/reppaulryan
http://twitter.com/reppaulryan
http://www.youtube.com/reppaulryan


I firmly believe that this is the most consequential vote each of us will take in our service here in Congress.

When you expose this bills budget gimmicks, does it increase the debt and deficit? Yes.

Will it take coverage away from seniors, raise premiums for families, and decrease health care innovation? Yes.

Will it raise taxes on small businesses and workers, and cost us nearly 5.5 million jobs when our unemployment rate is 10.2%? Yes.

Does this bill mean the government will take over running our health care system? Yes.

But what is worse is this bill replaces the American Idea with a European-style social welfare state. This bill more than any other decision we are going to make in this body will lead to millions of Americans becoming dependent on the state rather than being dependent upon themselves.

This is not about health care policy if it were, we could pass a bipartisan bill to fix whats broken in health care without breaking whats working in health care.

This is about ideology. What side of history do you want to be on? Will you be on the side of history where you stick with the people and the principles that built this exceptional nation? This is the choice we face.

Tell your friends:

realtruthpursuit: Problem is - Pelosi isn't working to keep what is already in place - and the fees and punishment involved make no sense - and the lack of choice makes no sense - - - we do have public healthcare as well already - - - medicare and medicaid - THOSE needed fixing - and the government should have simply opened up competition between the states in the Free Market which would automatically have more companies open up and go down in price. This is a take over not a help.

quizerry: They won't open access to plans across State lines because their pockets are lined with industry money. Both sides have acted in the interest of the big corporations. It is now that the people are finally taking a stand and telling Washington enough is enough you work for us. Not big business or your own greed for power. I hope 2010 2012 bring great change they will never forget. Our healthcare system may have a lg private sector but private isn't free market when Government calls all the shots.

lorezapocalypse: The idea of buying health insurance across state lines is a terrible idea because insurance companies will just relocate to the state with the least regulation. This will decrease competition and make the insurance companies less accountable to consumers. The fact is that the proposal takes the power to regulate insurance companies away from the states and all but requires the federal government to intervene to pick up the slack. It will create far more problems then it solves.

Lanceshizzy: The federal government does not have a medical license. Taxes will be raised on everyone, those who do not accept a plan will be fined, doctors who don't do what the government wants wont be in business.

Lanceshizzy: "one size fits all mentality threatens to turn doctors into nothing more than lab technicians for the government"

Lanceshizzy: What is amazing is the president thinks the very entity that created the waste, fraud, and abuse will be able to get in there and create a good health care system.

Lanceshizzy: There are many options out there I'm just trying to get people to start thinking more.

lorezapocalypse: I would believe you if what you weren't just repeating congressional republican talking points. I'm sorry, but if you want people you think more you kind of have to start thinking more for yourself first.

tynews2001: Cato "is a non-profit public policy research foundation." If you have read their studies, then you would see that they are incredibly balanced in their representation of data and use empirical evidence. Compare the heavily government regulated healthcare industry to the relatively incredibly deregulated technology industry. In the former prices are going up significantly, something not natural in the market place to that degree, and in the latter prices have gone down. It isn't ideology.

HoustonTeaParty: Nice speech Mr. Ryan. However, those numbskulls have no idea what the principles that built this nation even are. Next time, spend a bit of time educating them first and your speech may have a better effect.

lorezapocalypse: The example you brought up is perfect in showing how the Cato finds evidence to reach a forgone conclusion, instead of conducting honest inquiry. For the analogy of the technology compared to human medicine to not be a fallacy technology has to be similar to human health, which it isn't in the least. If I can't afford a computer, I don't buy it. If one of my family members gets sick, I spend whatever I can to save their life. It's this type of intellectual dishonesty that typifies Cato.

tynews2001: You are misrepresenting how a health care market without government intervention would work. With health savings accounts and without HMOs and the like, people would compare the hospitals with the lowest prices and best outcomes just like any other product. To say that health care somehow defies the laws of a market economy doesn't make sense. To rectify this anomaly, one must only look at how heavily regulated health care is and how involved the government has become with it.

lorezapocalypse: You seem sure of how health care would work outside of government interference, and from what you are saying this seems to be coming from your ideological belief that government interference of any kind is bad, as opposed to an actual understanding of how health care works. I think that medicine undergoes pressures unlike any other industry and so to apply simplistic generalizations about the proper role of government to the issue is myopic. So, what industry is it that you think is analogous?

tynews2001: The burden is on you to prove your statement of why the hc industry defies a market economy. While my opinion does come through the prism of an ideological perspective, it does so with a lot of research on hc specifically and more broadly on how a free market operates. The pressures from normal, unregulated market forces on hc would bring down costs, as I pointed out previously. Look to colleges. The fed has gotten heavily involved in providing funds for students and prices have sky rocketed.

lorezapocalypse: You are right that having debt easily available drives prices up in the markets that are affected. We saw that in the housing market. However this affect is specific to liberal lending requirements, and there isn't an analogous feature with health care. All government involvement in the economy is not the same, which is what you equating. Education inflation is near as high as health care, but does not come from the same problems, so it is not analogous.

tynews2001: Yes, Nnt all government involvement in the economy is the same. They all have varying degrees of negative seen and unseen consequences. College inflation is due to the government paying out huge sums for kids to go to college. Without these funds, market forces would bring down the cost. HC inflation is caused by the consumer being so distant from the actual cost of care. With Health Savings Accounts, people see the prices and in turn this allows for actual competition and prices will drop.

lorezapocalypse: I think I probably should be defending my positive assertions more, because even if you are wrong that does not mean I am right, but I think your ideas are worth exploring. I hope thats ok with you. So, your argument is that consumers being distant from the actual costs creates inflation. Putting the role of the government aside, are you supportive of the idea of insurance, the collective pooling of risk to mitigate the negative effects of unexpected events that have major financial costs?

tynews2001: Of course :) I love discussions. Yes, when consumers do not take into account the cost of the goods they are buying because a third party is involved it increases the cost. It was Gov that created the wedge. Insurance is a good thing, yes. Its role, though, should only be for catastrophic events and not routine care. However, due to regulation (with the support of insurance companies), insurance now pays for everything which creates the wedge between the consumer and the cost.

lorezapocalypse: Well I would argue that in fact, its the role of doctors and the fee per service model. Consumers cannot make rational decision about medical choices, because they don't have the medical expertise to make such determinations. The role of doctors is one of the way in which Medicine is unlike other industries. Doctors because they are paid for each survive they do are incentivized to over prescribe unnecessary treatment or when treatment is necessary advocate the most expensive option.

tynews2001: Do you at least concede that the government has played a role in health care inflation? Also this isn't true. Most consumers aren't experts on the majority of things they buy, and yet they are able to make good decisions. They can also consult others who do know more about it. See: "Who Says Consumers Can't Make Decisions?" Doctors do not make it any different; they are just like the mechanic or any other industry. If doctors do that, they will likely lose business. People will catch on.

lorezapocalypse: I'm ideologically for or against the government, so if it is to blame for something I'm willing to concede that, but you have not put forward a convincing case. As I've said in the past being ideologically tied to a position means the government HAS to be to blame, not that it necessarily is. Fee for service as one of the causes of healthcare inflation makes a whole lot of sense as it incentivizes extra and more expensive care.

tynews2001: It is hard to to convince anyone of any complicated issue in 500 characters. If you would like we could continue our conversation through messages which would allow for more lenience. You act as if consumers can make no logical decisions on complex issues. You cut us short. You should read that article I showed you. I am not saying government is to blame for all of our problems, however it is the cause of for a lot of them. As I said, if doctors vastly over-care they will get caught.

heisenbart: The pressure medicine undergoes is perpetrated by the government. Clinton tried the same thing when he said that if we don't fix it NOW the economy will collapse. Stop this fearmongering. Ryan is pointing out the simple truths about this bill and yet all you want to do is obfuscate, complicate and defamate. Your gig is up, the people understand you are on the wrong side of history. Good bye Obamaoists by next elections.

lorezapocalypse: I would have taken what you where saying seriously, but you called me an Obamaoist. A person who would use that type of clueless name calling is not somebody whose politics I would consider. You have no idea what I believe beyond that I am critical of the Cato Institute's policy prescriptions, yet you are here with insulting labels and assumptions.

tomestubbs: The corporatocracy& its influence-corruption over everything will make the economy collapse! Republicans R on the side of serving the vested interests of corporate power only they R the Fuck ups. And their time is up! You can go along w their unsustainable stupidity!Its about time for the Grand Old Pachyderms (GOP) to go the direction of the Woolly Mammoth. You got it so wrong!

Author: RepPaulRyan; Uploaded: Nov 7, 2009; Duration: 1:53; Views: 11876

Tags: paul-ryan  health  care  congress  budget  wisconsin  ways-and-means  office furniture ofsted reports ofsted office of fair trading ofcom officers club official uk top 40 office angels office office depot