FoxPolitics.net - Appleton, WI News - What's really going on in the Fox Cities

FoxPolitics.net Blogs

FoxPolitics News

Local/State Govt Links

Salaries

• Appleton School District, 2007-08
• City of Appleton
• Town of Grand Chute
• City of Menasha
• City of Neenah

Candidates

City of Appleton

• Elected Officials
• Salary Watch
• Directory
• Mtg. Agendas/Minutes

Advisory Board

Blogroll

Selected News Sources:
Business Jrnl of Milw
Christian Science Monitor
Daily Caller
Drudge Report
La Crosse Tribune
Milw Journal Sentinel
National Journal
New York Times
Public Policy Forum
Real Clear Politics
Stateline
The Hill
TPM
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times
WI State Journal
Selected Blogs - from the Right:
American Mind
Blaska's Blog
Boots & Sabers
Charlie Sykes
Dad29
Freedom Eden
Heritage Foundation
Jerry Bader Blog
Life Voice
Marketplace of Ideas
Marquette Warrior
Natl Review Online
No Runny Eggs
Patrick McIlheran
Real Debate Wisconson
RedState
Rhymes with Clown
Shark and Shepherd
The Lote Tree
Vox Populi
Wall Street Jrnl, Opinions
WI State Jrnl, Opinion
Wigderson Library & Pub
Wisconsin Family Voice
WPRI
Selected Blogs - from the Left:
Big Money Blog
Blogging Blue
Brenda Konkel
Caffeinated Politics
Capital Times
FightingBob
Folkbum's rambles
Griper Blade
Huffington Post
Lost Albatross
MAL Contends
Mid coast views
Moneyed Politicians
One Wisconsin Now
Open Left
Playground Politics
Political Environment
Rock Netroots
Talk to Tony
Uppity Wisconsin
Waxing America

Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie
My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more)

Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

8/9/2007
At what point exactly does personal responsibility kick in?

My mouth literally hung open as I got further and further into this week’s Cap Times editorial slamming Senate Minority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau). How can an educated person, much less an editor of an important paper in this state, make claims like this?

Here are the facts we can stipulate to (well, per media accounts – I guess I shouldn’t go over the edge by equating that with the facts…).

 State Sen. Kathleen Vinehout (D- Alma) pushes state-paid universal coverage because she didn’t pay for health insurance, estimated at $9,000 or $10,000 per year, and then was forced into debt for a son’s emergency appendectomy.
 Fitzgerald noted that Vinehout loaned her campaign $7,000 at about the same time she could have paid for health insurance for her family.
 Sen. Erpenbach (D-Middleton) responds to “personal attack on Vinehout,” saying Senator Fitzgerald “thinks his health care is too good for the rest of Wisconsin.”

Ok. All well and good. Then the Cap Times starts with the name-calling.
 “the glaring hypocrisy of a legislator who dines at the public trough while complaining about taxpayer-funded programs.”
 “Fitzgerald’s views are… ridiculous… anti-democratic.”
 “Fitzgerald does not represent Wisconsin citizens. [He] represents the… corporations that oppose… reforms because [they] fear that a humane and cost-effective universal health care program would cut into their profiteering.”

And then this.

“It appears that the Senate minority leader wants to create a new "poll tax" in Wisconsin. Citizens who cannot afford to pay the tens of thousands of dollars that it now costs to cover health care expenses for their families should, under Fitzgerald's logic, refrain from seeking public office. Only the wealthy and well-connected could serve in the Legislature of Fitzgerald's design.”

Here are snippets of one of the “community comments” responding to the ridiculous Editorial:

“Vinehout cries about not being able to afford health insurance because she blows the money on a political campaign, her kid gets sick, and she blames it on the system?.... Does this mean I can stop paying my car, home, disability and life insurance and can expect the government to pay for it?”

Well, I wouldn’t have talked about “blowing the money on a political campaign.” I would have simply said “…she made the decision to loan her campaign $7,000…” But otherwise, these are my sentiments exactly. Vinehout made a decision. And Fitzgerald pointed that out.

Because she couldn’t afford both the campaign and the health insurance, does that mean that one or both should be paid for by someone else? This is a new low in Wisconsin political logic and I’m outraged. What in the name of free health care is this country becoming?

COMMENTS

I'm sorry, I was on vacation.

Who's personal responsibility is Jo talking about? Sen. Scott Fitzgerald's or Sen. Kathleen Vinehout's?

The Cap Times said, "Sen. Fitzgerald tore into Vinehout for contributing to her 2006 election campaign rather than buy health insurance..."

Of course, this may be a sin in Sen. Fitzgerald's eyes because Sen. Vinehout helped make him minority leader instead of majority leader.

If Jo is talking about Sen. Vinehout's personal responsibility, was it her responsibility to keep the insurance companies fat and sassy and the Republicans in control of the state Senate?

Sen. Vinehout is obviously alive, perhaps to Sen. Fitzgerald's dismay, so apparently she didn't need the health insurance she didn't buy.

Do Wisconsin citizens have a patriotic duty, or is it our personal responsibility, to buy health insurance we don't use, so the insurance companies can keep half the money and distribute the other half to some small fraction of the people who need it?

Isn't that socialism? Or is it only socialism when government does the job more cheaply and efficiently and provides health care instead of denying health care?

For the sake of discussion, let's define socialism as any system in which the paper shufflers outnumber the productive workers.

In that case, the health care system America "enjoys" today may well be socialism.

Jo should do some research on how many state legislators refuse state health insurance coverage, and do a partisan breakdown.

And while she's at it, she should do research on how many state legislators contribute to their own campaigns, and do a partisan breakdown of that.

The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign may be willing to help with the latter.

And Jo should forgo cheap shots attacking responsible editorial comment.
Welcome back Rich. Full of vitriole I see. Sen. Vinehout could have used the health insurance, that's the issue here. You're going to have to get off your high horse one of these days, using corporate profits as your whining target.JE

Rich Eggleston (Thu Aug 09 09:35:51 2007)

***Isn't that socialism? Or is it only socialism when government does the job more cheaply and efficiently and provides health care instead of denying health care?***

Since when does government ever do anything "more cheaply and efficiently"? That is absolutely laughable.

May I give you a personal story? For several years I took over-the-counter quinine for leg cramps. A bottle cost about $3-4.

A few years ago the government decided that we of the great unwashed should not be able to buy quinine without a prescription. Cost? $40 per bottle and my insurance company won't pay for it because they claim it isn't proven that quinine stops leg cramps.

Then to add insult to injury it was decided by the powers on high that plain old generic quinine was way too hard for us to figure out so it went to a brand of quinine which brought the price to $44. All these figures are for a 30 day supply, by the way.

It wasn't the insurance companies who made these decisions. It was the government!!

The government makes way too many decisions without considering the ramifications. It's why we end up with $500 toilet seats in the government. There is so much fail-safe (read cya) on each step along the way no one could afford anything if the government were in charge.

I'd check into the government health care a little more closely, were I you.

See what's actually going on in Canada, not just what's written on paper.

C.R. Stevenson (Fri Aug 10 07:56:50 2007)

It doesn't matter what she did with the 7K - it's her money. The point is she - and her "economist" [consultant!] husband - are idiots for leaving their children exposed. (IF nothing else, a couple as successful and seemingly smart as the Vinehouts should have had SOME insurance for their children - and premiums are generally CHEAP for children!) No, they made a decision to gamble with their child's health, and they lost! The kid could have died for crying out loud because they were willing to gamble with $7K.

Beyond that, I agree, Rick...NO one should send THAT much money to an insurance company every year. It would be smart, and a WIN/WIN for Vinehout, if she'd promote HSA Legislation instead of a government run system: She, herself, would send less money to the fat insurance company and could fatten her campaign coffers with the left over premiums. AND, SINCE IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU AND YOUR NEEDS, SENATOR...by supporting HSA Legislation and convincing Doyle to stop vetoing it, the PEOPLE of Wisconsin would also be able to send less of their tax dollars to fat insurance companies for protection for their public workers and their teachers - and they'd also send less for their OWN coverage, too. PLUS, they'd get a tax break to boot. (Hell, we might even have some of OUR money left over to contribute to Vinehout's campaign!)

I've heard - for a long time now - that we are having a hard time getting good people to run for state office. She's a PERFECT example.

Michael Bina (Fri Aug 10 08:58:46 2007)

Opportunistic political mudslinging is so much easier and fun than deciphering health care. Yes, it's fair to point out Vinehout's statements as hypocritical given the turn of events, but she may have been motivated about universal coverage before her own personal anecdotes.

But I don't see where you can say she wasn't "personally responsible." She made her choices, took her risks, paid her bills.

It does point out the slippery meaning of "afford." Many folks say they "can't afford" health care or insurance. Sometimes "afford" is about choices. Sometimes the choices aren't there. Sometimes the choices seem pretty grim, and sometimes people make decisions for themselves that might not seem best or free of hypocrisy in someone else's eyes. I might say I can't "afford" to run against my Sen. Fitzgerald, but maybe it's because I won't sell my house to do it. (I knew we were in for trouble from the start when, in his first campaign's literature, he referred to that white Madison building as the "Capital".)
Ooh, that's not so good. Has the spelling error been repeated that you know of? Yes John, the issue is constructive dialogue about health care costs and health care coverage. We agree. Good points about "afford." Again, more variables in the difficult discussion of universal coverage that absolutely must include personal responsibility somewhere. JE

John Foust (Fri Aug 10 12:49:30 2007)

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend