Infinite Menus, Copyright 2006, OpenCube Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Stewart sees ‘great resistance’ to Obamacare among constituents
Sep 05, 2013 | 1097 views | 0 0 comments | 7 7 recommendations | email to a friend | print
REP. Chris Stewart.   
Courtesy photo
REP. Chris Stewart. Courtesy photo

Associate Editor

BOUNTIFUL — Rep. Chris Stewart’s constituents are overwhelmingly expressed “great resistance” to Obamacare, he said.

“As a former business owner, I know how tremendously this negatively could impact small business,” the freshman congressman from Farmington said.

That’s even as the mandate to start the program for large businesses, or those with more than 50 employees, has been pushed back a year.

“Part of it is the uncertainty, not understanding how the (insurance) exchanges work.” he said.

A key element that people think was promised but won’t be delivered is that health care costs would diminish while coverage increased.

“People were promised they could keep their doctors, but a lot are now saying that’s simply not the case,” Stewart said.

On the sequestration issue, he said “there was no reason for anyone to be furloughed.”

At the same time, this country “can’t keep doing what we’ve been doing for half a generation” – that is, spending more money than there is available.

For politicians to praise the fact the deficit this year is down to $580 billion from $1 trillion may be “great progress, but it’s horrible still,” Stewart said.

It’s necessary to look at everything, including entitlements, in terms of where cuts can be made, he said.

“If you care about Social Security, then help us save it,” the same with Medicare and Medicaid, Stewart said.

“If you care about the poor, work with us to save these programs. There are things we could do to create long-term viability that most people would accept,” he said.

Stewart decried EPA proposals to cut ozone levels that would be “impossible for large parts of the Western U.S. to meet.”

Many areas, including rural Utah, have larger naturally occurring ozone levels than what are being considered, he said.

In addition, such a change in standards could cost $90 billion a year, Stewart said, adding, “Show us the science. Help us understand on what basis are you going to make these new regulatory decisions? They haven’t been willing to do that.”

It’s not a matter of your politics, it’s wanting the Administration to be “open and honest,” he added.
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
Postings are not edited and are the responsibility of the author. You agree not to post comments that are abusive, threatening or obscene. Postings may be removed at the discretion of
Follow us on: