• Answers
  • Web

GOD  

FAMILY

SELF

COUNTRY

 

In that order!                                                                                      

If It Is Healthcare...Keep It Healthcare! Why Put Street Projects In An Already Gigantic Health Bill?

Sweeping healthcare legislation working its way through Congress is more than an effort to provide insurance to millions of Americans without coverage. Tucked within is a provision that could provide billions of dollars for walking paths, streetlights, jungle gyms, and even farmers’ markets.

The add-ons - characterized as part of a broad effort to improve the nation’s health “infrastructure’’ - appear in House and Senate versions of the bill.


Critics argue the provision is a thinly disguised effort to insert pork-barrel spending into a bill that has been widely portrayed to the public as dealing with expanding health coverage and cutting medical costs. A leading critic, Senator Mike Enzi, a Wyoming Republican, ridicules the local projects, asking: “How can Democrats justify the wasteful spending in this bill?’’


But advocates, including Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, defend the proposed spending as a necessary way to promote healthier lives and, in the long run, cut medical costs. “These are not public works grants; they are community transformation grants,’’ said Anthony Coley, a spokesman for Kennedy, chairman of the Senate health committee whose healthcare bill includes the projects.


“If improving the lighting in a playground or clearing a walking path or a bike path or restoring a park are determined as needed by a community to create more opportunities for physical activity, we should not prohibit this from happening,’’ Coley said in a statement.


The Senate health panel’s bill does not specify how much would go to the community projects. A Senate staff member said the amount of spending will be left up to the Obama administration. A House version of the bill caps the projects at $1.6 billion per year and includes them in a section designed to save money in the long run by reducing obesity and other health problems.


It is not clear yet how the money would be allocated. The legislation says that grants will be awarded to local and state government agencies that will have to submit detailed proposals. The final decisions will be made by the secretary of Health and Human Services.


The proposal was inserted at the urging of a nonprofit, nonpartisan group called Trust for America’s Health, which produces reports about obesity and other health matters. Part of the group’s proposed language for the community grants was inserted into the Senate bill. It called for “creating the infrastructure to support active living and access to nutritious foods in a safe environment.’’ The group provided examples of grants for bike paths, jungle gyms, and lighting, though the Senate bill doesn’t list those specifics.

Jeffrey Levi, the group’s executive director, said that “it is easy to satirize’’ the projects, but they are needed to improve America’s health.


However, it can be difficult to quantify the benefits of a park or pathway, leading some critics to say such funding is an example how the healthcare legislation has spiraled out of control.


Enzi has said that instead of paying for pathways, it would be more effective to encourage lower insurance premiums for individuals who can prove they have taken steps to improve their health. He said that construction grants belong in other bills.


Enzi, the top Republican on the Senate health committee, has unsuccessfully pushed an amendment that would specifically prohibit the use of funds for sidewalks, streetlights, and other infrastructure projects.


Kennedy spokesman Coley said such proposed amendments are counterproductive, stressing that the projects would be modest and are not intended to replace larger ones that can be funded in other bills. Nonetheless, he said, the projects “may be a very cost-effective and long-lasting intervention.’’


Share Send to a friend Watch Report
 
 

3 Posted Answers
Order by

 
7 helpful answers

Wink

You could not be more RIGHT ON. Your answer is GREAT !

Posted 2009-07-11T20:28:29Z
willow4455 was invited by Yedda to answer this question.

 
11 helpful answers

When we put short term gains before long term consequences, we invite disaster.

Generally speaking I agree.

I often feel when I am reading related legislation or listening to press conferences on health care reform that the committees could have just sat down with real, non-partisan economists, insurance paralegals and accountants, and people and asked:What are we doing wrong, where is the waste in the system today, and how can we fix it.  I just think that in a case like this going outside the beltway and saying no to lobbyists would have saved a whole lot of trouble.

It is common knowledge that the United States wins both the "least health for wealth" and "hardest to hug" awards, and if you want to go after health care-you can save a whole lot of trouble by going after health problems too.  So in that respect the pork barreling is a great idea; however though, it is nearly impossible to provide defendable metrics to administer appropriation- So like most of the health care legislation: Its heart is in the right place, but it is impractical

Posted 2009-09-12T00:01:06Z
Qurinnious was invited by Yedda to answer this question.

 
1 helpful answer

Obama, Clinton and Democrats:

The new national health-care plan should work a lot like the H1N1 shots.  They promised so many to be out for the use of patients that need them.  Right, we got less then 1/3 of what they promised.

Speak and listen to what you sound like. Speak and you are sometimes caught up in lies, once again.  Smile, like nothing is wrong.

Posted 2009-10-20T03:56:09Z
LittleBeakedOwl was invited by Yedda to answer this question.

Sign in to participate

Got an answer for MarineReconDad? Would you like to comment on the posted answers, or vote for the one which you think is the best?

Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).

Explore Related Questions

Other people asked questions on similar topics, check out the answers they received:


Q:

What American Media Fail To Tell You About Nationalized Health Care ...,Great Britain's Health Care Nightmares! ...

This is what the American Media, and Obama don't want the American People to know about nationalized health care. And it is not ...
Submitted by MarineReconDad   9 months ago.
  • viewed 1717 times
Last answer posted 12 days ago by Sweet Gypsey


Q:

America Speaks On Health Care, Why Aren't Obama And The Democrats Listening?

As health care reform legislation moves forward in Washington, the political environment is somewhat different than the last ...
Submitted by MarineReconDad   5 months ago.
  • viewed 629 times
Last answer posted 14 days ago by Sweet Gypsey


Q:

Nationalized Health Care Fallacy; The Drugs You Need Will Be Provided By The Government!

Suninitib (Sutent) For kidney cancer. Licensed, but the Department of Health has yet to refer it to Nice for a recommendation ...
Submitted by MarineReconDad   9 months ago.
  • viewed 340 times
Last answer posted 1 month ago by Sweet Gypsey



» More...

Feed - Subscribe to changes to this Q&A Blog
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Answers
  • Web
Copyright © 2006-2009, Yedda Inc. and respective copyright owners · CC License