This is a sample of a five page piece I am working on for the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. The footnotes have been omitted from the blog article, but when the full article is posted on the ERLC web page I will link to it so you have all the sources.
Rhetoric v. Reality:
The rhetoric – The government plan is more affordable: President Obama continues to claim in interviews and press conferences that health care reform will save money and make health care more affordable than our current system. If this were true, why the need to raise taxes and cut other programs and shift costs onto the states in a massive ponzi scheme?
The reality: In order to help pay for the costs of health care reform President Obama recently said in an ABC news interview, “that he would propose a reduction in the charitable tax deduction for those his administration considers wealthy.” This will drive down the amount of money people donate to charitable organizations which will further burden those relying on charity, those who are least able to help themselves. Other ideas to pay for the plan include a 3 cent tax on sugary sodas. As Senator Michael B. Enzi of Wyoming has said, “With its trillion dollar price tag, this bill is anything but affordable”.
The health care reform bill would mandate that all Americans sign up for insurance or pay a fine. Id. The same requirement would extend to businesses to either insure their employees or pay a government fine. Id.
Furthermore, due to the high cost of the legislation and the $320 million dollar deficit in funding, the bill would charge a surtax on wealthy Americans, beginning with a 1 percent levy for couples earning $350, 000 and rising to 5.4 percent on income above $1 million.
This plan is anything but affordable. It will ensure that the percent of the average American’s budget that goes towards health care actually increases either through direct expenditures on higher premiums or increased taxes or both if you are deemed significantly wealthy. Currently $84.00 out of every $100.00 spend on health care is spent by someone (en employer, insurance company, or government) other than the recipient of the care. Id. That seems like a pretty good deal for the American consumer as it currently stands. What this plan will do is create stagflation and greater unemployment as those in the higher tax brackets either will not invest in jobs or will do so outside the United States where the tax regimes are not so oppressive.
Lastly, the plan contemplates taxing your current health benefit or removing its tax exempt status. This would mean the money your employer contributes to your insurance plan would now be taxable. It would also mean purchasing supplemental policies for dental, vision, or medical flex spending accounts would have to be done with after tax dollars, effectively making them much more expensive. A study by the Council for Affordable Health Insurance estimates that the President’s proposals could increase premiums by 75 to 95 percent. Further evidence that this plan is anything but affordable!
The rhetoric – Cutting costs: The Democrats continue to say that the proposed legislation will cut costs in the health care system. They claim that increased competition brought about by a government option, the implementation of information technology in the system, a shift to focusing on preventative care, and other reforms will lower the cost of health care.
The reality: Douglas Elmendorf, Director of the Congressional Budget Office [CBO] told the Senate Budget Committee that, “On the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs”. House Republican Leader John Boehner said of the report from the CBO, “The Director of the Congressional Budget Office today confirmed that the Democrat’s government run plan will make health care more costly than ever, making clear that one of the Democrat’s chief talking points is pure fiction”. Id.
The rhetoric – The plan is Deficit Neutral: President Obama and the Democrats continue to say this bill will be deficit neutral, meaning it will not increase the national debt. President Obama’s budget director Peter Orszag stressed, “The CBO numbers are only so high because the estimates keep current Medicare reimbursements to doctors in place. If you take that off the table in terms of new policy, the House bill is deficit-neutral”. This begs the question, if the payments are off the table, where are they going?
The reality: The Senate Finance Committee members are proposing a giant ponzi scheme with the states where the states would be required to finance the entire cost (states currently pay only 43 percent of Medicaid costs) of the proposed expansion through taking on new debt by issuing bonds that the Federal government is supposed to back. This is an effort to keep the costs off the books of the Federal Government and disguised. Id. If this sounds familiar that is because you are probably remembering the Enron book cooking scandal that bankrupted the company and destroyed the pensions and lives of thousands of workers and investors. Congress is cooking the books on health care and we all will end up paying in the end.
Congressional auditors reported that the legislation would add more than $230 billion to the federal deficit over the next 10 years. CBO Director Elmendorf, while addressing Congress, went further to state that the costs of health care are, “growing faster than inflation, wages, and the overall economy…likely impacting future deficits”.
The rhetoric – The government plan will improve quality of care: President Obama says, “Government will make health care cheaper and better”.
The reality: According to Sally Pipes of the Pacific Research Institute, “To reduce costs they will have to ration – deny – care”. Id. Rationing the health care you can receive is certainly not improving the quality of care. Moving to a system of evidence based medicine, which the Senate bill includes, will not improve the care. (More on evidence based medicine on page 3) Moving to a system of rationed care or evidence based medicine will lead to denial of remedies to the American consumer. The only difference between the current system and the government plan will be who tells the consumer No, that treatment is not covered. The reality is that the current American system which is partly profit driven allows for the reduction of waste and costs in pursuit of profit and provides the world with advances in medicine that ease pain and save live. Id. The logical end point of the path that Congress is moving us down is rationed care and long waiting lists, essentially Medicaid for everyone.
The rhetoric – The government plan will make sure everyone is covered: The Democrats and Republicans continue to justify these changes by promising access to health care and insurance for everyone.
The reality: The reality is quite different. Estimates vary on how many people will be swept up under the new plan. The most quoted number says there are approximately 50 million people currently without health insurance. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that at the end of a decade under the new plan, 15 to 20 million would remain uninsured. Id. Other reports split the difference and estimate that even after paying a trillion dollars, 1,000,000,000,000, (twelve zeros); we still will have about 17 million uninsured. This plan no matter what anyone tells you will not get us to the lofty goal of universal coverage.
The rhetoric – Without the government intervention health care costs will bring down the economy: Across the board Democrats and the President tell us that without government intervention the current health care problems will prolong the recession and drag down the economy.
The reality: The statement above may be true. Without changes and improvements the system is facing very significant challenges. Recession and the retiring baby boomer generation needing significantly more health care resources compound these challenges. However, the solution the Democrats and President Obama propose is a nuclear option. Their proposal would not be a slow death of the health care system and the economy, but rather a preemptive strike. The US Chamber of Commerce in a letter to the Ways and Means Committee wrote, “The tax increase would be devastating to small businesses, which have led America out of the last seven recessions and create two out of every three jobs during a recovery.” Moreover, they claim that the legislation as proposed would, “override long-standing tax treaties, damage U.S. relationships with major trading partners, and could prompt retaliation by foreign governments against U.S. companies operating abroad, further aggravating already jittery financial markets”. Id. This is a complete repeat of history in another form. As you may recall at the outset of the Great Depression one of the aggravating factors that drove the world economies into a tailspin was retaliatory escalating import and export tariffs and excise taxes.
To increase taxes at a time when the economy is sinking is simply unheard of. The Heritage Foundation has said, “Not a single economic school of thought advocates raising taxes during a recession or threatening to do so in its aftermath. To call for a tax increase during the largest recession in 70 years is downright reckless”.
The Bottom Line:
The bottom line is that the above items are only a smattering of the numerous changes and problems that the currently proposed legislation has to offer the American people. If these bills go through we would see drastic changes to the quality of life for all Americans. This legislation opens the door or outright proposes fundamental changes that would position our health care system to be a larger version of those offered in places like Canada and the United Kingdom. If you have seen the 20/20 expose on those systems then you should ask yourself, do we really want that kind of system here? Do you want to wait for months at a time to get treatment? Do you want the government to cost benefit analysis the cost of treatment against your life expectancy or your expected contribution to society post care to determine if you receive the treatment? Do you want to pay more for less? Do you want to see the national debt become up to 80% of Gross Domestic Product by 2019? If you answered NO to all those questions, then the time to act is now. Contact your Senator and Congressman by both phone and email. Tell your friends and family to do the same. Only if the outcry becomes loud enough will this legislation be stopped.
For more information and a good read check out this article.
No comments:
Post a Comment