“We don’t want somebody sitting back saying you’re not holding the mop the right way. Why don’t you grab a mop? Why don’t you help clean up?” — President Barack Obama, October 16, 2009

Partisan, rhetorical, and deceptive taunts. What an enticing invitation to the discussion table! I’ll take it.

So far the elephants have been kicked out of the decision-making room. Sen. Olympia Snowe may have bought a spot at the table a couple weeks ago with her committee vote in support of the Baucus bill, but the Democratic leadership hasn’t even come close to letting any other Republicans contribute ideas.

Yes, Republicans do have ideas — “mops,” if you will — but the President apparently doesn’t care or doesn’t want our help. He’d rather deride us.

Last week, I spoke to Rep. John Shimkus (IL-19) who is the Republican congressman from Principia College’s district. During the President’s address to the joint session of congress, Rep. Shimkus held up three GOP bills, which included tort reform, interstate insurance purchasing, and health savings accounts.

The fact is that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have ignored Republican alternatives, and then labeled us as the party of “no.”  During the campaign President Obama promised to move us past the “smallness of our politics.” I guess that’s another “change” that isn’t happening.

The democratic leadership aren’t the only politicans ignoring solutions. Most of DC has missed the elephant in the room, and no, this time I’m not talking about a Republican.

We must reform Medicare and Medicaid; these programs are the single largest reason why health-care costs are so high.

Medicare and Medicaid pay doctors and pharmaceutical companies at a rate set by the federal government. Recently, the Senate voted, but failed to pass, a bill lowering this rate. This would have made the problem even worse.

Medicare and Medicaid already only pay about 85 cents on the dollar of what private costumers pay, and in order to break even, doctors and pharmaceutical companies overcharge private insurers to make up their lost revenue.

Basic economics tells us than when a price is mandated below market value, a shortage develops. However, with only 48% of the industry under these price controls, doctors and pharmaceutical companies can afford to stay in business by just charging the insurance companies more to make up for it. The insurance companies then pass these costs on to consumers through significantly higher premiums.

Oh, and by the way, the seemingly dead public option would multiply these practices.

Medicare and Medicaid have also aided in setting a terrible precedent for insurance companies.

Private insurance plans, following the lead of Medicare and Medicaid, have also begun to include routine procedures and tests. Insurance is designed for when the abnormal happens. Your car insurance doesn’t cover tune-ups; it covers accidents.

When health insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid cover routine procedures and tests, the individual consumer doesn’t care how high the procedure is priced, because someone else is fronting the bill. This raises costs for everyone.

Ok, so there’s no doubt that the semi-socialized programs already fused in our health-care system are bringing up costs. Why haven’t we heard about this from anyone in Washington?

Medicaid and especially Medicare are very popular among people getting the free health-care. The elderly in this nation are a huge voting block. The AARP would freak out if any politician were to mention that these programs need to be reformed. This political pressure has forced even Michael Steele to endorse Medicare.

This is asinine coming from the supposed head of the supposedly fiscally responsible GOP. Medicare and Medicaid are not only hurting our current health-care system, they are on a crash course leading us to unsustainable debt. Without reform, my generation will drown in debt.

We cannot just get rid of Medicare and Medicaid tomorrow. It’s not easy to unwind government reliance. Retirees and near retirees have planned on having this. We have to give everyone involved a better option, not a public option.

For current Medicare and Medicaid recipients, the government should grant them a voucher to choose any plan they prefer. Whatever voucher money they don’t spend they get to keep, incentivizing them to chose wisely and economically. Empowering personal freedom and cutting out the government middleman would bring down prices for all.

This reform, mixed with other policies like tort reform, mandate reduction, interstate insurance purchasing, and health savings accounts, could positively revolutionize our health-care system.

Both sides have mops; mops can do two things: remove dirt or spread it around. The above solutions — clean liberty-based mops — remove the dirt of government intervention. By greatly expanding the government’s control, Obama’s, Reid’s, and Pelosi’s mops just spread more dirt around. Let’s grab the clean mops.

Hello WTP listeners!

Our liberal college has mandated a time change for our show. We the People will now be live Sundays from 8-10 pm CST.

Join us this week for our sit-down interview with Congressman John Shimkus. We’ll be talking to him about his endorsement of Mark Kirk, plus the latest on health-care. Illinois gubernatorial candidate Dan Proft will also join us.

Make sure to listen in to our premiere at this time slot tomorrow, Sunday, from 8-10 pm CST!

Remember, in times of great crisis, humor is your greatest medicine.

The Nobel Peace Parody

By Ron Meyer

“It is very clear what I have done so far… nothing.” – Saturday Night Live’s Fred Armisen impersonating President Barack Obama

He asked for the Olympics; he failed.  He asked Israel to stop settling in the West Bank; he failed.  He asked Palestine and Saudi Arabia to engage Israel; he failed.  He promised to close Guantanamo Bay; he failed.  He asked Iran to stop its nuclear weapon ambitions; he failed.  He asked Honduras to restore their former president; he failed.  He asked China and India to reduce their greenhouse emissions; he failed.

Before last Friday, President Obama seemed to have lost his notorious luster. His epic campaign speeches – which continued well after the election and inauguration, promising a new type of foreign policy that would revolutionize the status quo and change the world – appeared to have had no effect in world affairs.

Even liberals were starting to wonder, “What’s up?” His idealistic goals of ending the spread of nuclear weapons and solving the world’s longest conflicts had hit rock walls. For all of us living in the real world, we weren’t surprised: making progress on these problems takes more than just flowery words and speeches. It’s impossible to do that much in nine months, even with Obama’s magic powers.

The real question is: How can someone who has accomplished next to nothing win a Nobel Peace Prize?

Don’t get me wrong – it’s possible he could create more peace in the world, but that has yet to be seen. Why not give him the award a few years down the road?

In short, it’s because the Nobel Peace Prize has become so ideologically based that the award is a joke.

Greg Mortenson spoke last week at Principia College. After his talk, I thought he should have been given the award, but upon revision I really didn’t want Mortenson’s name to be tarnished by association with the likes of Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, and Yassir Arafat.

Jimmy Carter was a complete failure as president. After his short tenure, he has focused on bad-mouthing the U.S. everywhere he goes. His odd missions – Palestine and elsewhere – have done nothing except legitimize radical terrorist groups.

Al Gore is a partisan who manipulated statistics to scare people into following his cause. While manmade warming may be real to some small extent, Gore’s statistics blew even the craziest of scientists out of the water.

Yassir Arafat was a terrorist. Arafat wanted nothing more than to wipe Israel off the map through bloody attacks on innocent civilians.

Not all recipients have been nut-jobs. Many Nobel Prize winners such as Mother Teresa were truly deserving, and have changed the world for the better, but lately the panel that awards the prize has been trying to forward its leftist ideology instead of awarding exceptional accomplishments.

Its latest choice attempts to forward a political message in three ways:

First, it shouts “Hallelujah!” for the sheer fact that George W. Bush isn’t president. Even though Obama has not significantly changed Bush’s foreign policy, the hatred of Bush was so strong that the committee wanted to tell the world that any pacification of the US is “progress.”

Second, it encourages Obama not to increase the troop presence in the Middle East. With key decisions coming up for policies on Afghanistan, Israel, Iraq, and Iran, the Nobel committee may be trying to push Obama to give into the pacifist wing of his party. It makes it tough for the most recent winner of the Nobel Peace Prize to escalate troop levels in Afghanistan.

Third, the committee gave him the award to give him more political capital. The Nobel committee is so arrogant that it actually believes this award will help him in future negotiations. The committee recognized that, while everyone likes him, no one is listening to him, and that maybe – just maybe – this award will spark Obama’s magic wand back to life.

On the contrary, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman points out that the committee “did President Obama no favors by prematurely awarding him its peace prize.” While the committee may believe its message is being forwarded, it may be further tripping up the president instead by giving him this embarrassing award.

Friedman recommends that the president not accept the award on his own behalf, but on the behalf of the American troops. The troops have kept America safe, bringing peace to the world numerous times. I approve. This sort of appreciation would be great for the country, not to mention for Obama’s approval ratings.

It’s too bad that this move would require one thing which the President will not be giving up anytime soon: his ego. If I’m wrong, I will admit it in this column, but after listening to his lofty and self-absorbed speeches for two long years, I’m not too worried.

WTP will be speaking to a 9-12 group in Bethalto, IL. Join us for the event which starts at 6 pm will go for about an hour. We’ll be talking about the Constitution, the youth movement, and the news of the day.

Here’s the address: Bethalto Senior Center, 100 East Central, Bethalto, IL.