Fact Check on HR 3200
I just received an e-mail from Colette Campbell, the NJ Director of Americans for Prosperity, that should be passed along to anyone and everyone on your e-mail list. It is, in my opinion, the most accurate, objective analysis of the proposed “health care reform” bill now before the House of Representatives.
Please forward this to everyone you know so they are up to date and do not place themselves in the embarrassing position of being proved wrong on this vital issue.
The battle over our health care is reaching new heights. There has been a flood of misinformation via the internet regarding House Bill H.R. 3200, the most prominent of the proposals currently being advanced. While this bill is dangerous, it is essential those of you who are attending Town Hall meetings, calling legislators, getting on talk radio and writing letters to editors have all of the correct facts. The left is already calling criticism of this radical governmentalism of our health care false and nasty. A well educated citizen is the best defense of our liberty we can put forth. I am sending you a comprehensive analysis of one of the more popular lists of claims about the bill prepared by our Americans for Prosperity staff. I know it is long, but please take the time to read this. You can’t afford not to.
(Disclaimer: We are discussing H.R. 3200, the current House proposal, which as of August 6, 2009 has not had the amendments from the three House committee markups included in the text.)
CLAIM: Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
This is TRUE. A commissioner will coordinate with the Secretary of Health and Human Services to create a report detailing the size, scope and stability of self-insured plans. The goal of this report is to “ensure that the law does not provide incentives for small and Mid-size employers to self-insure.” In other words, this bill will work to eliminate self insurers.
CLAIM: Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill does not outline rationing in this section.
However, what it does do is establish cost sharing limitations. These government imposed limits on benefits paid are the statutory groundwork for what could become Rationing once costs inevitably spiral out of control in a government run system.CLAIM: Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (And, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
This is TRUE. A health care advisory committee will be established with the intent of Defining “the essential benefits package … including categories of covered treatments, Items and services within benefit classes, and cost-sharing.” This new bureaucracy is Essential if politicians want to impose a mandate Americans to get coverage. Bureaucrats will then decide what qualifies as acceptable coverage to meet that mandate.
CLAIM: Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. This section is an extension of the issue discussed above.
CLAIM: Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare
services.This is FALSE. The referenced section refers to non-discrimination of coverage, which has cost implications, but does not discuss providing coverage to non-citizens.
CLAIM: Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcare.
This is FALSE. However, the section in question does pose other problems. We invite you to read and ponder the implications: “Enable the real-time determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card.”
CLAIM: Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
This is TRUE. The bill allows Health and Human Services to “enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance.”
CLAIM: Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill provides for a reinsurance program for employer based plans. This provision is troubling because it puts taxpayers on the hook for improperly managed private retirement health care systems. As the claim suggests, union retirement plans are some of the most under funded in the country and stand to gain significantly.
CLAIM: Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
This claim is TRUE and undisputed.
CLAIM: Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
This is FALSE. The section merely outlines the limits for the types of plans that will be allowed in the exchange.
CLAIM: Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
This is TRUE. However, plenty of people in this country don’t speak English as their first language but are not illegal aliens.
CLAIM: Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Aerators to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. This section does not talk about ACORN but does outline an outreach program to educate individuals and employers about the government system. However, it is certainly a legitimate concern to consider who the government would contract to conduct this “outreach and education.”
CLAIM: Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
This is TRUE. The commissioner of the health board would be instructed to create a process under which someone that “has not elected to enroll in an Exchange-participating health benefits plan is automatically enrolled under Medicaid.” This is another in a line of bureaucratic programs that will further limit and control an individual’s choice in care.
CLAIM: Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No “judicial review” is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
This is TRUE. The section clearly states that there “shall be no administrative or judicial review of a payment rate or methodology” used rate-setting decisions. This provision is critical if government wants to be able to use its coercive power against the private insurers.
CLAIM: Page 127: The American Medical Association (AMA) sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. This section establishes various levels of participation for physicians, including: preferred, participation non-preferred and other providers. These categories each contain limitations on the level of services government will reimburse for and the level of cost sharing that patients and providers must bear.
CLAIM: Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill states that an employer must enroll an employee in the government plan unless the employee specifically opts out and instead “elects coverage under an employment-based health benefits plan offer by such employer.” This is a vehicle through which private insurers will be squeezed from the marketplace. The government-run program will be able to offer lower premiums to the employee who will
be forced to choose between the size of the withholding from his paycheck and the quality of care offered.CLAIM: Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400,000 or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
This is TRUE and undisputed.
CLAIM: Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250,000 – 400,000 who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
This is TRUE and undisputed.
CLAIM: Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t’ have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
This is TRUE. The bill states “any individual who does not meet the requirements of [the government program] is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent … of the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income.”
CLAIM: Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
This is TRUE. The bill specifies that the mandates and tax penalties do not apply to individual who is a non-resident alien. However, it does not say Americans will pay for them.
CLAIM: Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
This is TRUE. With regards to determining government-determined “affordability credit,” the Health Choice Administration is empowered to gain access to tax return information or other such information that may be required to determine eligibility.
CLAIM: Page 203: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” Yes, it really says that.
This is TRUE. With regards to a calculation of the amount of credit offered in a different
section of the bill, it does say that, the “tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.”CLAIM: Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected.”
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill does not specifically limit care to seniors.
However, it does seek to contain costs by asserting a new fee schedule for payment. This could have the effect of inducing physicians to limit the choices of seniors to receive certain care that does not fit the new schedule.CLAIM: Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you’ll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill sets up new service categories, and pays according to the category. However, placement of physician classes into the categories and expenditures per service category are established by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
CLAIM: Page 253: Government sets value of doctors’ time, their professional judgment, etc.
This is TRUE. The government will decide the value of doctor’s “time, mental effort and professional judgment, technical skill and physical effort, and stress due to risk.” The market determination for the importance of these functions is completely eliminated under the public plan.
CLAIM: Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
This is FALSE. This provision establishes a best practices and productivity improvement incorporation program.
CLAIM: Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
This is TRUE. However, it is a reclassification of an existing regulation and contract standards.
CLAIM: Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill requires a review of cancer hospital payments be undertaken and costs adjusted accordingly. Although this will likely have the effect of lowering reimbursements and thus limitation quality care, the bill does not, in itself, ration care.
CLAIM: Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable readmissions.
This is TRUE. “In order to account for excess readmissions in the hospital, the Secretary shall reduce the payments that would otherwise be made to such hospital.” Once again, this is government asserting its own bureaucratic judgment in the place of doctors and hospitals and punishing those who do not conform.
CLAIM: Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
This is TRUE. This is an extension of the above provision that relates to hospitals, only this time, applying it to physicians. Payment reduction will occur if a physician “sees an individual within the first week after discharge from a hospital or critical access hospital.”
CLAIM: Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare
companies!This is PARTIALLY TRUE. This section refers to rural operations and contains a percentage of ownership that doctors are not allowed to exceed. However, physician owned operations are very important in many rural areas and limiting a doctor’s ability to own an operation could severely cripple care.
CLAIM: Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without
government approval.This is TRUE. This section limits the ability of physician-owned facilities to increase “the number of operating rooms, procedure rooms or beds of the hospital at any time after the date of the enactment.”
CLAIM: Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on “community” input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The section provides an opportunity for community input in the proposed expansion of the facility. However, it does not hinge on community approval.
CLAIM: Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill does affect a shift toward a focus on outcome based medicine. This section requires a report to “reflect the outcomes of care experienced by individual enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans.” This type of reporting will lay the groundwork for the limitation of care to those procedures that the government believes produces the best outcome.
CLAIM: Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
This is TRUE. This section is a continuation of the empowerment of Health and Human Services to define what qualifies as adequate coverage.
CLAIM: Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
This is TRUE. The section is entitled “Extension of Authority of Special Needs Plans to Restrict Enrollment.” The section also requires a study into special needs treatment.
CLAIM: Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
This is TRUE. The section expands an existing Telehealth program.
CLAIM: Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
This is TRUE. An end-of-life care consultant program is endorsed and outlined explaining the role of such a consultant and the required actions that much be taken by a consultant.
CLAIM: Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill does require that this information be provided. However, it does not contain an estate tax provision.
CLAIM: Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
This is TRUE. A list of end-of-life resources available from the government is required to be provided.
CLAIM: Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill does not mandate this program, it establishes the parameters under which such a program is offered.
CLAIM: Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. The bill contains a section allowing for an individual to leave a medical order with an end-of-life consultant, who will then execute it should the need arise.
CLAIM: Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of life.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. Similar to the above claim, an end-of-life planner will carry out the wishes of the patient, including treatments wanted and not wanted.
CLAIM: Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
This is TRUE. Government will reach out to and fund community-based medical homes that provide care and supervision of primary care by doctors. However, there is nothing to suggest ACORN would benefit.
CLAIM: Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
This is TRUE. Similar as outlined above.
CLAIM: Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. Although the bill strikes coverage for clinical social work, it expands the Social Security Act to include marriage and family therapists. However, it relates to private therapy services.
CLAIM: Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.
This is PARTIALLY TRUE. Similar provision as was provided above for marriage counseling. Of the 47 total claims that were offered from the first 495 pages of the 1018 page bill, Patients First finds:
- 25 to be TRUE
- 18 to be a PARTIALLY TRUE
- 4 to be FALSE
H.R. 3200 is a massive reordering of America’s health care services with a heavy bias toward injecting the government’s judgment in place of doctors, installing bureaucratic control in place of patient discretion and enacting significant tax increases in hopes of stemming the deficit busting costs of the new programs.
The analysis above provides a starting point for the digestion of the complex and onerous provisions in the current House proposal. On balance, I find the provisions examined to be a significant threat to the quality of our country’s health care. But don’t take my word for it, read the sections of the bill outlined above and make your own decision. That’s the best way to fight back against the big government mentality that is attempting to seize the nation.
OMG!!! We’re screwed!
A blatant attempt to grab more power over our lives, not an effort to improve the level of health care in America…
Egomaniacs, thy name is democrat…
Back-forwarded this to all the people who sent me the original Email. I was lazy and just posted a link rather than copy-paste the whole thing. Might be seeing some visitation if it gets bounced around.
*eats*
As a home care nurse I have to say some of this in effect already- you just don’t know it.
This is gonna be long so bear with me…
The gov’t already collects info on MC/MA patients. From our stand point it’s called an OASIS tool see-
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/homehealthqualityInits/. It is designed to gather info about pt’s from homecare agencies at admission, during the length of care (every 60 days as needed) and at discharge. It is also designed for the gov’t to assess outcomes.
Home care agencies are now paid per episode- not visit. If the pt is rehospitalized and comes out ( with the same diagnosis) that agency recieves no more money for this episode. It matters not if the pt is extremely non-compliant. The agency is still responsible.
All wound care supplies, incontinence supplies, all nursing, physical/ occupational/ speech therapy and all personal care assistants (CNA’s) costs come from this episode payment. It is up to the agency (nurse usually) to manage those funds.
At pt discharge info is collected again and put in the computer. The info is compared with other agencies in their region. This allows an individual to compare one agency with another.
It sounds like a good idea but.. and there is always a but…the comparison is based on how the admissions person answers the questions in the beginning. Which can lead to fraudulently making a pt on paper worse off then they really are.
This is also - and I have to say finally- coming true for convalescent homes and hospitals. For instance- if a pt gets a bladder infection from catheter insertion while in the hospital- the hospital is docked. Likewise for bed sores and hospital acquired infections.
For convalescent homes the hit comes from bed sores mostly. Technically, there is no reason why any person admitted into a facility should come out of it with pressure ulcers. It’s due to complete lack of care or quality care.
All I’m saying is that this has been around for a while. And while it causes a huge amount of paper work all around, when push comes to shove it makes the admission assessment much more thorough and makes lack of care accountable.
It’s outcome based- and that leads to quality care.
As far as ACORN- God help us. I hope the great Bayou State does a good job of investigating this “community” organization.
With all of that said- Gubment run health care sucks all the way around. If it wasn’t the gov’t trying to run it - I might be for it.
Obama and his minions want absolute control over our lives. Nothing more. Nothing less. That is what this bill is all about. They are willing to destroy the best Healthcare System in the entire world to satisfy their lust for power.
At this point in time, it appears that my 2 Senators are not going to hold any townhall type meetings where they can be addressed face to face. Lincoln has been on TV today taking emailed questions and questions from various local news readers. Pryor is holding telephonic “townhall meetings”. His office did call twice this evening in an attempt to get me to participate (must be all those kind emails I sent him during Cabinet nomination time). Alas, I was outside mowing the yard…
My worthless and weak, far left, former Marine, former physician, Oregon transplant Representative took cover behind Rep. Ross (professed leader of the Blue
BallsDogs) and the Children’s Hospital when they met with ‘we the people’ on short notice last week. I don’t look for that to happen again…What are they afraid of, it’s only a little tar and some chicken feathers?…
As others have stated, this is about control.
PrecedentMackDaddy and his handlers do not care about our health care. They just want to install socialism in the USoA.
A thought: watch for them to renumber the pages so you can’t go to a meeting and make a claim based on “on page xxx is says.”
Thank you, Colonel Rash, for posting this succinct piece. It’s hard to wade through all of the data on this “health care debate” in order to be prepared for townhall meetings.
The sadest part, though, is in realizing that many fight only over the details of the various “plans”, but loose sight of the principle that the government has no business being involved in health care in the first place”!
Thanks for the deep dive analysis. I like to see these kind of details.
To me, these details run counter to the general outrage over the specific administration of the plan. It looks like the problems in that area are not nearly as bad as the protesters make it seem.
I wish there were more outrage over the basic concept. Medical Care and Insurance are not the province of federal government in this country. It runs counter to our basic principles.
The business of America is Business. If they would focus on tort reform and lower the costs, I think the existing healthcare industry would be able to lower costs and provide a better solution.
Adding the federal government into the equation will undoubtedly increase costs. It’s as certain as the tenet that “Power corrupts, and Absolute Power corrupts absolutely”.
In my opinion this cant be re-tweeted or shared enough! Good job man, on this! I have been sharing it.
Tara, I do the same thing as you do and know all about the non compliant patient. MOST of my patients are non compliant. Had they complied with doctor’s orders and nurse instruction, the readmission would not have occurred.
Here is a related video. It says something about hospitals and doctors being penalized for readmissions, and how the bill does not provide protection for these entities when the readmit is due to pt non compliance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeIKo-9ze-0
Ann on August 11, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I have to say that it pisses me off to no end being responsible for the CHOICE of being non-compliant. To hold doctors and hospitals accountable for a patients choice to not listen makes blood shot from my eyes.
It’s all about CHOICE.
Oh, I forgot- that only applies for abortions, not every day decisions or health care. Stupid me.
Actually, Ann and Tara Sue, take a look at the bill. It seems to penalize the hospitals if the actual risk-adjusted readmission rate for an endorsed methodology is greater than the expected risk-adjusted readmission rate. Wouldn’t the “risk-adjusted” part cover patients’ noncompliance?
I hope you all have written letters to your representatives and told them how you will cast your vote in the next election if they vote any other way than “no” on this legislation.
Calling them as well doesn’t hurt either. It’s the only real threat you have against them as citizens
Good analysis, however, the most important part of the bill is not adressed.
Section 102, “Protecting the choice to keep current coverage”, takes into account one’s current “grandfathered health insurance coverage” as long as it’s in place day 1 of year 1 of the proposed enactment of this bill.
After that, private plans have to fully comply with government standards, making insurance companys essentially a puppet enterprise of the federal government.
Healthcare insurers are likely to go out of business because they won’t be able to sign up new clients after day 1, year 1 of ObamaCare. Secondly, the public plan won’t have to make a profit and doesn’t have to pay taxes on profits, which means there is no competition. Employers will for certain begin enrolling employees in the cheaper public plan.
The demise of the system is in the single above section, thus guaranteeing a single payer plan…which is after all the end-game by Obama.
I’ve written my representatives and told them to support the bill or else I will vote them out next election.
After that, private plans have to fully comply with government standards, making insurance companys essentially a puppet enterprise of the federal government.
–So when US cars in 2002 had to comply with the fuel efficiency and EPA rules, the big three, Honda and Toyota became puppets of the US government?
Sorry, that is just so not true, Linda.
Oooooh lookie here..!
We have an idiot in the house!!
Jim, you are confusing the definition of the word ‘puppet’ with the word ’subjects’.
A puppet is simply the definition of an entity that explains that there are strings attached to it, which cannot be cut without the dire consequence of crippling the entity, whereas, YOUR particular implication is that of a subject/s that has no choice, but to well….. be ’subjected’ to their superiors.
Tara Sue’s use of the word ‘puppet’ was appropo and more than correct in explaining the truth of the matter as she described it.
In fact, it explains the EPA rules as well, because it cripples the car companies if they don’t listen to and follow the government’s rules, yet… it doesn’t make them direct subjects of the government - they can still sell cars somewhere, somehow, it justs cripples them if they cut that string (EPA compliance) off.
But I don’t expect liberals and various other political hacks to understand word usage.
The proof of this is that little ole’ Sarah Palin has managed to impregnate into the consciousness of all Americans’ minds, the phrase “death panel”, thus setting her opponents on a tail spin, trying to dispel the phrase….by using this phrase over and over and over again!!
This is simply brilliant, because the unintended consequences and the end result of Obamacare is indeed, people dying before necessary.
The problem with your analysis, Mad Dog, is that the Big Three (and probably the others) agreed to the fuel economy rules before they became law. If the Big Three became a puppet or a subject, they did so voluntarily.
And by your definition, every employee who has healthcare coverage through an employer is a puppet of that employer.
You have graduated from “Annoyance” to “The Enemy”. Congratulations.
*eats*
I am the enemy, I guess.
I strongly support no pre-existing coverage exclusions or denials and the community ratings for the insurance costs. I can live without the public or single-payer option if there is a viable co-op market.
Congrats, Jim!
You have evolved from an idiot to a punk, with that dissertation!
The car companies “volunteered” because they knew the rules were coming down the pike, and so because of the strings attached, it literally forced their hand if they wanted to compete on that level.
The only way an employee could be a puppet of their employer because of health insurance, is if they get punished for not using that same coverage option as offered by the employer.
Which is exactly what Obamacare, will IN FACT do!
Did the cat eat your brain, Jim?
No. I lived in Detroit when the new fuel efficiency rules were passed. The Big Three thought they made good sense and that they could meet the rules with ease. It also showed to people that they were being a good citizen.
If you leave your employer, you will lose your healthcare coverage, subject to your ability to purchase continuation for 18 months under COBRA. If you have any sort of potentially significant pre-existing condition, you will probably not be able to get individual insurance afterwards in most cases at any price. That would create a dire situation. So why aren’t employees puppets of employers?
So Jim, the automakers were softly browbeat into believing things would be better if they did this, prior to them proving for themselves that they can indeed meet those EPA standards, on their own accord?
Right?
Right.
Which is why true free market optional incentives would have been the better way to get it done.
The employer based health care option that you describe, does indeed make the employee a puppet of said health care system, as opposed to being a puppet of the employer.
This is why the free market principle, of the employer providing a health care benefit as a taxable income, is the best option, because it makes such individual health insurance coverages truly portable.
Then to that, you add the option of individuals being able to buy into a group rate, plus eliminating state mandates that prevent insurance providers from easily crossing state borders, you would have the start of a great plan.
Of course, we don’t have the free market alternative in about 80% of the cases currently. And what you’d want is the insurance to be provided by a third party, not the employer, because anything the employer provides ends when the employment relationship does.
Jim… The auto industry example is way off. It doesn’t fit at all. Sure, Mad Dog played along and baited you, but seriously have your brain cells deteriorated to the point that you are completely incapable of a rational thought process? I think so… but being the charitable soul that I am, I will illuminate the subject matter for you.
First, in the example of EPA vs Big 3, et al… you are presuming that there is a corollary between a regulatory body and a full fledged business operated by the government. There isn’t. The EPA simply regulates… it does not actually sell cars supported by tax payer money (until GM). Therefore the EPA can not actually control the market influences to the degree that it could if it owned say… Honda. In which case it could sell every car for $100 - at a HUGE loss - and literally drive every other auto maker out of business.
Second, you make the poor assumption that the government plays fair - which runs contrary to historical fact i.e. Medicare. Note that Medicare is the largest carrier for seniors… there are very limited amounts of heavily subsidized competition. This is because the government not only makes the rules for everyone… but it also sets them to its own advantage. Not to mention the fact that it can operate in the “red” permanently without consequence - unlike a business that would go under.
Now, in your pathetic comparison you transpose regulation with actual business market command.
In reality we are talking about the government actually owning and operating a “business.” One in which it sets all of the rules and can operate at huge losses. The puppet analogy is appropriate because the government forces all private insurers to do precisely as the government does - or they will be shut down. However, these private businesses aren’t being funded by tax payers and can not operate in the “red.” Meaning that government literally gets to pull the strings… The government gets to determine that every other business must cover everyone for everything and drop out-of-pocket costs, etc… Costs that the government essentially created to begin with. Costs that do not effect the government… and inevitably each and every private insurer will either be forced out of business or be forced to raise its premiums to drastic heights where only the wealthiest can afford it.
Just like Medicare… Just like insurance in Europe… Just like insurance in Britain… Just like insurance in Canada.
I can live without the public or single-payer option if there is a viable co-op market.
–I think you missed this in my post, Max.
Yes!
OH MY GOD!!
Co-ops! That’s just what we need!
Brilliant idea!
Let’s have a Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac of Health care!
Why didn’t I think of that?!
No I didn’t miss it…. You missed my point. To summarize… your comparison was completely off base, irrelevant to the topic, and to put it plainly - horrible.
Here’s what could happen under the obamacare plan…
http://www.irwinmitchell.com/News/Alzheimers-Drugs-Aricept-Exelon-Reminyl-Banned.htm
Gov’t agency decides “it’s not cost effective”…
Here’s what was in the Stimulus bill that was rushed thru w/o anyone reading more than a few passages because “it’s an emergency!”. An emergency where 6 months out approx 27% of the allocated monies had been spent. Some emergency.
But, I degress…
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/16/health/policy/16health.html
Why was this money included in the 787 Billion $ “stimulus bill”?
Comparative effectiveness is a fav of Rahm’s brother, Dr. Frankenrahm…
Dementia in all forms, downs syndrome (don’t tell Trig), Cerebal palsy, muscular dystrophy (don’t tell Stephen Hawking), etc..
All subjected to quality of life, comparative effectiveness rulings by a gov’t panel WITHOUT an avenue to appeal any adverse ruling, adverse to them that is.
That’s the American way…
Hail the Great and Powerful, O
Read this article and then look at what section 1233 of HR 3200 will do…
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aGrKbfWkzTqc
Then read Govenor Palins’ response to the WH criticizing her for using the term “death panels”…Her response can be found at Conservatives4Palin.com
Seniors, children and the unborn should be afraid of this of the wording in this bill, HR 3200 as interpreted by Dr. Frankenrahm…
“Please sir, I want some more…lube”
Oliver Gohawgs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtZE-srMHAA&feature=related
Mr. Rash!
Thanks for posting this. I’ve sent it to my father-in-law in FL and thanks to the wonders of cyberspace it’s landing in in-boxes everywhere. The seniors in his circle are pissed and this lovely information will help them get involved. More fuel for the fire.
–LSH
Max, I am missing your point. If the government is not running the business (by being the single payer option), all your issues are irrelevant.
You admit that EPA regulation is different than a situation where government runs the business. I agree. Right now, health insurance is regulated by the fifty states (pretty heavily regulated, including approvals of policy premiums (or at least profits) and on the terms of the insurance). If the federal government regulates health insurance, it would be like the current situation or the EPA regulations.
So what is your point, other than insulting me?
And Mad Dog, right now the state governments heavily regulate insurance. They approve the policy pricing (or at least profit margins) and the terms of the policies being offered. So how are co-ops of private companies whose offerings are regulated by the federal government any different from the current situation, except that the federal government is involved instead of state goverments.
Have you missed the entirety of the debate over HR3200? Or are you just that dense? Currently the fed AND states regulate health insurance (and health care)… which is part of the real problem - but I digress. In HR3200 the so called “public option” comes to life…. In which case the government actually WOULD be running a business - a health insurance business. Making my points completely relevant and your comparison completely off base.
Not only would there be a public option… but the “company” that owns that policy is also the group that regulates the whole of the industry… meaning that the “puppet” analogy is also quite apropos. Not to mention that the fed insurance policy would operate without the added burdens of current state regulation - which the other providers would still be subject to.
Are you getting it yet, Jim?
As for insulting you, that isn’t my objective, nor is it my doing. It is your doing… it is just a byproduct of you opening your mouth (figuratively speaking).
And I’ve said I’m okay with their not being a public/single payer option as long as the co-ops are viable (which is where I think this whole thing will end up, anyways, when passed by Congress).
Where’s the disagreement?
Jim.
For the last time, as clear as I can explain (*paraphrasing Thomas Paine): “Government is a necessary evil and the more simple it is, the less problems there will be with such government and the easier it is to resolve the problems that government was established to fix in the first place.”
- “The only reason we even have need for government, is because virtue is neither hereditary nor permanent.
Therefore, the origin and rise of government is rendered necessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world, and here too is the end of government, vis a vi: the natural need for humans to be free in order to be at their creative and productive best.”
“Absolute governments - those executed by the rule of law - have this advantage with them that they are simple, for if the people suffer, they know the head of from where their sufferings spring from, and likewise they know the remedy and are not bewildered by a variety of causes and curses.”
*paraphrased from chapter one of: Common Sense, - by Thomas Paine, circa 1775 - 1776.
** “But currently, the “constitution” of our own government is becoming so complicated, that there is a danger of the people suffering from so much unnecessary regulation and complex bureaucracy, that it could take years to unravel it and figure out what the problem is, with every “political physician”, talking head, pundit and political hack opining with unresolvable differences and conflicting solutions.
** Adapted for our current situation and paraphrased from chapter one of: Common Sense
———
So Jim, anymore bullcrap from you and I will demand that you become well versed in the first chapter of: Common Sense - by Thomas Paine, before I even debate you again.
I think a good portion of us are good with doing away with that, too. But that’s a state issue that’ll take more localized focus and the discussion here is regarding the national level.
*eats*
Heh:
The disagreement is right there… you say that you are fine w/o a public “option.” But the bill you adamantly support has a public option as a major part of the parcel. So essentially, you support a bill…. because it is a bill… and because we need a bill. Not because what’s in it is actually right.
Aside from that… my entire spiel was mostly about trying to show you that HR3200 isn’t regulation… it is industry take over and that your comparison of “Federal Cross / Federal Shield” and the EPA was a piss poor one.
Nearly every single claim here is wrong. Whether its ignorance or willful deception doesnt matter. Your fears are being stoked with lies. You should be pissed off at having been duped.
For the real truth and objective coverage of health see http://www.factcheck.org:
http://factcheck.org/2009/08/twenty-six-lies-about-hr-3200/