Friday, February 6, 2009

Autistic Children Un-Needed in Oklahoma

Reprinted from

That’s not my personal opinion, but that’s the impression I have now that the Oklahoma House Committee voted against a measure to require insurance companies to cover autistic children.

The argument is that insurance rates for the uninsured would increase almost 8 percent. What does that even mean? The uninsured are not paying for insurance. That’s why they’re called uninsured. If their rates go up, they have the same out of pocket expense, nothing.

If the House is worried that there might be an almost 8 percent increase in insurance rates, cut the CEO’s pay by 1 percent. That should be more enough to cover it.

Add this failure to the “voting along party lines” excuse that cause beneficial bills to fail. I’m tired of this excuse. If there were a bill that required rectal exams each time you entered a grocery store, and Democrats opposed it, Republicans would support it. If there was a bill that required pelvic exams to registered fruit brats, and Republicans opposed it, Democrats would support it. Is there no independent thought Oklahoma’s legislature? Are party positions decided on the toss of Bill Self’s toupee?

This has nothing to do with what’s right or wrong, it has everything to do with pride among opposing political parties predetermined positions.

Here’s my predetermined position … you’re all jackasses.

No comments: