Dean Heller, R-Nev., told some 70 members of Carson City’s Rotary Club Tuesday he has voted against all the stimulus projects, including the Cash for Clunkers program, because they will run up the national debt but won’t work. [See Heller’s voting record and campaign financing information here.]
“The more government gets involved in our economy, the more the free market struggles,” he said.
But one member of the group at the Carson Nugget took offense when Heller asked how many in the room had taken advantage of Cash for Clunkers. A man raised his hand, prompting Heller to say: “Congratulations. Everybody else in the room paid for your car.”
The man headed for the door, telling Heller: “I have better things to do than be insulted by a man who hasn’t learned anything. I’ll never vote for you again.”
Heller said the comment wasn’t intended as an insult, but was aimed at the program he says is an improper use of government money.
He asked the audience what’s next, cash for flat-screen TVs?
“I know I embarrassed someone and I apologize for that, but I don’t think everybody has a right to own a new car.”
Heller said he would do four things to “turn this economy around on a dime” — cut the payroll tax in half, eliminate the capital gains tax and estate tax, and dramatically lower the corporate income tax.
Heller said while all the debate in Washington for the past few weeks has been over health care, what he hears most from Nevadans is that they need jobs. At more than 12 percent, Nevada’s unemployment is among the nation’s highest.
The stimulus was designed to help create jobs and was recognized from it’s inception that it would take time. He apparently didn’t specify just how he would “turn this economy around on a dime.”
Heller said he supports health care reform but that the plan must include tort reform if it is to make any progress in controlling costs. He also said any public health care program should be capped at the estimated number of uninsured in any state.
“Pre-existing conditions should not be an impediment to getting coverage,” he said.
Glad to hear Heller supports health care reform. He apparently didn’t detail what he would do about tort reform. In the big picture tort law is not the major problem in cost control. The core problem is monopolization of health care by the for-profit health insurance industry and the influence of Wall Street. Read what Wendell Potter has said. I expect Potter is far more conversant with the issue than Heller.
He said barriers preventing health insurance companies from competing across state lines should be removed to increase competition and help lower costs.
“You can go anywhere and get your car insurance,” he said. “Any health care reform should include that.”
Heller also said he supports removing barriers to reimportation of pharmaceuticals and to the laws preventing importation of drugs produced by other industrialized nations.
“Our pharmaceutical costs are sky high compared to other industrialized nations,” he said.
Source: Nevada Appeal
Related posts:
- Heller claims national health care offers health care to illegal immigrants
- Beware of Democratic healthcare reform by Dean Heller
- Don’t vote for Dean Heller, he is not your health care friend
- Republican Dean Heller voted twice to end Medicare
- Republican Senator Dean Heller voted to ship jobs to China
Heller obviously knows nothing about car insurance, for one. My CA insurance company can’t provide insurance for my NV-domiciled vehicles, and vice versa.
As for tort reform, most doctors pay more for the convenience of accepting credit cards than they pay for malpractice insurance.
What a crock…
Jim, thanks for the comment. As to Heller’s position on Cash for Clunkers I suspect he is simply following the Republican Party’s talking points. Re tort reform. I wasn’t aware that doctors pay more for the convenience of accepting credit cards than their premiums for malpractice insurance. Thanks for the info. Tort reform is the standard complaint about trial lawyers representing plaintiffs who have sustained bodily damage from negligence in the practice of medicine. As I understand the complaint some people want to cut off plaintiff’s access to money damages for their injuries. Of course those that complain haven’t had the wrong leg negligently amputated or a surgical instrument left in their body following surgery, and such matters.