5/3/2011

“OUR STATES ARE OVERBURDENED”

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 3:42 pm

And so it was heard today via C-Span from a Representative from Virgin Islands, it must be so, right?

To understand even a little of such "in context" it may help to realize that the state of New York with its once new carpetbagger Senator Clinton was still not of attempts to have New York solve its own problems, as per healthcare coverage at least in competition with neighboring Massachusetts.

To comprehend such challenges usage of "comprehend" as such is rife with ideological and philosophical differences - and for starters much as with a posit that a nation that has all its states "overburdened" then is itself "overburdened" and such that "relief" for states suggests "relief" needed as much for nation of all such states.

Today we have a quiet revolution supposedly going on in New York State government and so as once reported/claimed as to a major reworking across all departments.  And, yet already ads are running suggesting that new Governor has already solved all of the issues and budgets that had state in worse shape it seemed than Wisconsin.  And, so how can it be so?  Have you yet heard of how Gov. Cuomo plans to see that all New Yorkers are to be covered for healthcare and within just the means of revenues from New Yorkers?

Still a great wonder is how Senator Hillary Clinton could be of New York State as its Senator all those years and without having worked out a burden sharing for New Yorkers by New Yorkers for a healthcare reform to cover all, while she so charged.

If all of our states are "overburdened" by healthcare than necessarily our nation is also "overburdened" with such as it is but the sum of our states and taxables of such states.  The money available to all is the money available to all - all of our states cannot be "overburdened" without our nation then already "overburdened."

If Senator Hillary Clinton didn’t try to help New York fix their own problems, and its new Governor Cuoma now claims all is "fixed" already - how?  How, can such be "fixed" if New York is "overburdened" but still responsible for all its own?  How could be fan of nationalised to socialized healthcare that is "Hillary" not have been to attempts atleast all those years to find New York based and centric socialist solutions?  Can it be that her only end is to a new and greater BIG GOVERNMENT only at national level?

It is quite befuddling that a new Governor Cuomo who seemed to have to unlearn most of what he was "expert" in during the Clintons’ 8 cannot have even gotten close yet to fixing "overburdened" New York State government - especially since little is out about how to rework state to carry its own weight and burdens, somehow, but necessarily, if only on county by county basis regarding healthcare coverage reforms.

I don’t know the ideology of "Hillary" once New York’s Senator that could have her those few years not of many hours dedicated to finding a competing solution for New Yorkers at least to rival Massachusetts.  I don’t know how she could only have been to a "nationalizing" to "universal" of a "burden shifting" without a "overburdened" fixing.

Can it be otherwise than that our states have been defficient in their duties to an "overburdened" and not conclusively to an irrefutable "our states are overburdened"?  So much has not been tried or fully debated as alternatives for our states and especially a county by county new basis for healthcare coverage and reforms. If all of our states are "overburdened" it really does figure then that our nation of funds from all such is too "overburdened" already and then no better a venue for solutions and fixes.

Our states cannot really be "overburdened" as per their healthcare! They can only be of an avoidance and inaction around a new federalism debate that would put all options on all tables and even at county tables – if it can be argued county business is national business it certainly allows that city business is county business and that states have many more options available before a ruling of "overburdened" should be acceptable.

If it is to be all about being able to spend other peoples monies how far should you really have to go, and be allowed to go, without arguing for and justifying such?  How much will our communities lose if an irreversible take-over of a sense of community is furthered around a premature "our states are overburdened"?

I haven’t had time to look into advertised quick success of New York’s new Governor and nor have I heard of seeming necessary stories about how he plans to show that New York can run itself within its means especially around state wide issues and costs per healthcare coverage for all.

I do much wonder, and still while befuddled that Senator Hillary Clinton still didn’t spend those years assuring New Yorkers could at least find ways to find coverage across their state for all of them, independent of taking from other states, also of need.

The single most near dispicable role of our current national government I would like to see no more of is the emotional appeals to a centralized and nationalized healthcare with regular speeches and stumping making individual Americans’ personal and trying medical stories as fodder and fuel. I don’t get that any program that makes it our national representitives job to exploit personal medical stories is us anywhere near on a good or right track.

Like, if a state is "overburdened", and even especially if all states are, then really what right do they have to call themselves states, states with "government." 

Our states cannot be "overburdened" so they can only be avoiding doing the necessary or hard work of being a government. If it can be argued that it must be "national" business then same argument has to also work as an arguement for it necessarily "state business."