Ah, if only: Apply disclaimer rules to government, too
By Colin McNickle
Published: Saturday, June 29, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Ah, if only the same federal government that requires pharmaceutical companies to include long-winded disclaimers about their respective drugs' side effects itself was required to include disclaimers about the side effects of its “beneficent” programs.
Consider Medicaid expansion. The Obama administration touts it as the right thing for the states to do to give those in need the care they “deserve.”
Disclaimer: “Initial federal government subsides will dry up, resulting in higher state taxes. Uncompensated-care reimbursements for hospitals will shrink. Private health insurance markets will cease to exist. Those not truly in need will be able to offload their costs to taxpayers. Recipients will be subjected to longer waits, worse care and difficultly finding a physician who accepts Medicaid. Those experiencing a dejection of longer than four months should consult a physician immediately.”
Consider ObamaCare itself, the Affordable Care Act, that, in true Orwellian fashion, turns “affordable” into a euphemism for “more expensive.” Yet, it offers “Better care for lower costs,” touts Organizing for Action, President Obama's shell subsidiary for socialized medicine.
Disclaimer: “Costs will be higher. Care is rationed. Some employers will lay off employees to meet coverage thresholds. Economic growth will slow. Because of increased compliance costs, some physicians may not participate. Others will retire, leaving a physician shortage and creating a shortage of available appointments and longer waiting room times. Those experiencing a dejection of longer than four months should consult a physician immediately. Admission of dichotomy not included.”
Consider the president's proposed new climate plan. It will preclude the construction of new coal-fired power plants and shutter existing coal-fired facilities while placing severe new “emissions” (think CO2) restrictions even on natural gas-fired plants.
Disclaimer: “Will severely retard the economy on multiple levels by significantly raising the cost of electricity. Heating and cooling costs will rise. Will cause job losses in all energy-related sectors, including truck, barge and rail transportation. Taxes will increase to help offset the cost of bolstering hardly reliable energy sources — solar, wind, chipmunks on running wheels — promoted by political cronies. Those experiencing a dejection of more than four months should not consult a physician (they've all retired) and should not count on unemployment compensation (there's nobody left working to pay into the now-bankrupt fund).”
The new disclaimer rules also should apply to state programs. Think of the deal to remove the wholesale gasoline sales tax cap, giving Pennsylvania the highest gasoline tax in the United States. This is the tax increase that the insufferable asses in Harrisburg insist is not a tax increase. They also swear on a stack of per diems and other perks that wholesalers won't pass the cost along to consumers.
Disclaimer: “Will increase the cost to transport anything and everything by motor vehicle. Will discourage new businesses to relocate to the Keystone State. Additional revenues will be squandered on transportation projects required to pay a 28 percent premium to the organized-labor cartel. Will cause a spike in blood pressure and bulging eyes and lead to Empty Wallet Syndrome. Those experiencing such symptoms should consult their ballot box at the next available opportunity.”
Colin McNickle is Trib Total Media's director of editorial pages (412-320-7836 or firstname.lastname@example.org).
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Police probe 2 armed convenience store robberies
- Feeling better, Penguins’ Orpik rejoins teammates for practice
- Washington’s McKenzie chooses Virginia Tech over Pitt
- Starkey: What did Super loss signify for Steelers?
- NHL violence concerns former Penguins’ pest Cooke
- Pittsburgh police make 122 arrests tied to eight-month drug investigation
- Steelers rookie receiver Wheaton is waiting for chance to contribute
- Depleted Penguins knock off Wild, run home winning streak to nine
- Steelers’ Foster has definitive role this year
- Picasso may pose $365,000 tax dilemma for Wexford raffle winner
- New Kensington couple posts humorous sign for thieves who stole Christmas decorations