Politifact's Biggest Lie Of 2010

We all know what it is, don't we?Health Care Reform is a polity takeover of the aid system.From Politifact:In the spring of 2009, a Republican contriver effected on a brilliant and powerful move distinction for President Barack Obama's enterprising organisation to upkeep America's upbeat shelter system. Frank Luntz, a consultant famous for his phraseology, urged party body to call it a "government takeover.""Takeovers are aforementioned coups," Luntz wrote in a 28-page memo. "They both advance to dictators and a loss of freedom."The distinction stuck. By the time the upbeat tending calculate was headed toward lawmaking in primeval 2010, Obama and congressional Democrats had sanded down their program, descending the "public option" concept that was derided as too such polity intrusion. The law passed in March, with new regulations, but no government-run plan.But as Republicans smelled earnest possibleness in the midterm elections, they didn't let facts intend in the artefact of a enthusiastic punchline. And few in the advise challenged their regular assertion that under Obama, the polity was going to take over the upbeat tending industry.PolitiFact editors and reporters hit chosen "government takeover of upbeat care" as the 2010 Lie of the Year. Uttered by dozens of politicians and pundits, it played an essential persona in manufacture open opinion most the upbeat tending organisation and was a significant factor in the Democrats' shellacking in the Nov elections.They saucer out that they are making no judgement most whether the Health Care Reform calculate was a beatific intent or a intense idea. They're meet locution that the statement "HCR is a polity takeover" is "simply not true."Here's what they said:PolitiFact reporters hit studied the 906-page calculate and interviewed independent upbeat tending experts. We hit over it is inaccurate to call the organisation a polity takeover because! it reli es mostly on the existing grouping of upbeat news provided by employers.It's genuine that the law does significantly process polity conception of upbeat insurers. But it is, at its heart, a grouping that relies on clannish companies and the free market.Republicans who maintain the Democratic organisation is a polity takeover feature that personation is justified because the organisation increases federal conception and module order Americans to acquire upbeat insurance.But while those provisions are real, the eld of Americans module move to intend news from clannish insurers. And it module bring new playing for the shelter industry: People who don"t currently hit news module intend it, for the most part, from clannish shelter companies.Consider whatever analogies most strict polity regulation. The Federal Aviation Administration imposes detailed rules on airlines. State laws order drivers to hit automobile insurance. Regulators verify electric utilities what they can charge. Yet that onerous conception is not described as a polity takeover.And politifact is not lonely in calling this untruth a lie. Here's factcheck.org:Despite the fact that the federal upbeat shelter organisation (a.k.a. the “public option”) is today absent from the bill, Republicans and standpat groups hit continued to claim that the calculate institutes a grouping aforementioned the digit in the United Kingdom, or Canada, or otherwise amounts to a polity takeover. It doesn’t. A clean government-run grouping was never among the leading Democratic proposals, such to the embarrassment of single-payer advocates. Instead, the calculate builds on our underway grouping of clannish insurance, and in fact, drums up more playing for clannish companies by mandating that individuals acquire news and giving many subsidies to do so.So when we read:Constitutional questi! ons hit tenacious the upbeat tending calculate since its introduction. But rather than come these issues head on, supporters of the governing hit shrugged them off. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked where the Constitution grants the power to bill an individualist dominion to acquire insurance, famously replied, "Are you serious?"This is the aforementioned tactic existence used by defenders of the federal takeover of upbeat care in salutation to the lawsuit against the new law. We know that this is a untruth - there is no federal takeover of upbeat care.By the way, the writer of that above passage, Nathan Benefield is the director of contract investigate at the Commonwealth Foundation. The aforementioned Commonwealth Foundation that's conventional most $2.2 meg over the past 2 decades or so from the foundations dominated by Richard moneyman Scaife (including $50,000 in "start up" assets in 1988).No concern who pays for it, it's ease a lie.