Monday, August 24, 2009

Facts About the Facts on Health Care Reform

Below is my response to the facts about the facts on health care reform from the White House.

The items in blue are taken directly from the white house website. 


Lie #1: "We Can Afford Reform, We Can’t Afford the Status Quo

Jared Bernstein, Chief Economist for the Vice President and Executive Director of the Middle Class Task Force, debunks the myth that we can’t afford health insurance reform. To the contrary, not only has the President demanded that reform not add to the deficit in the short term, but reform is the only way to get skyrocketing health care costs under control that will be devastating not for families , businesses, and for government deficits in the long term under the status quo."


The "status quo" is not what we are promoting. We are promoting freedom. The government has NO RIGHT to force us to have health insurance and they sure do not have the right to set up their a health insurance system. In the past, we have allowed the federal government to take away our freedoms in exchange for "security" and it has been proven that we give them an inch of our freedoms and they want more. Over and over again they have done it. Inch by inch they are stealing our freedoms. It's time for us to start taking back our freedoms.

We want the government to de-regulate and remove the government regulation that prevents us from accessing the thousands of health insurance companies outside of our states. Think of the competition there would be, if you just open the market! It seems like such a "duh" thing to do, why is no one considering it in Washington?

And as far as "not only has the President demanded that reform not add to the deficit in the short term"....so if the furniture company says to me that they will not charge my credit card for the furniture I purchased for a whole year, does that mean I'm not in debt? What a ludicrous statement.

Lie #2: "Congress did not vote to exempt themselves from reform

Linda Douglass of the White House Office of Health Reform answers a question from outside the recent town hall in New Hampshire on why Congress voted to exempt themselves from reform. This is a myth: there is no exemption and there has not been any such vote. To the contrary, reform gives all Americans access to an insurance exchange much like the one Congress has enjoyed, and just like Congress, Americans will be free to make their own choices."


Well, partial lie. It's true that Congress did not vote to exempt themselves from reform, because Congress has not voted on the bill, yet. But stating that we will receive the same access to insurance options as Congress is a lie. Congress has access to so many plans that they get to choose from from all across the country. We will only have access to the same plans we have access to now - those that are in our state. If the government would lift it's restrictions and let me buy insurance from ANY company in ANY state, that would really encourage competition and actually give us the same access Congress has to health insurance plans.

Lie #3 "Reform will expand your choices, not limit them

Linda Douglass of the White House Office of Health Reform answers a question from outside the recent town hall in New Hampshire on whether any government involvement in health care will end up limiting choices for consumers. This is a myth: even the addition of a public option will be just that – another option –and will not eliminate any choices to the consumer. To the contrary, this would bring down costs and expand choice."


While it is true that adding the public option as a plan, does expand our choices (by one). Again, if they really want to give us choices, they wold allow us to purchase insurance from outside of our state. But the way this bill has been written, they ARE limiting our choices because they have included language in it that limits the plans that can be offered. The basic plan, of which the government mandates what is covered. The enhanced plan, which is the basic plan with a lower level of cost-sharing. The premium plan, which is the enhanced plan with an even lower level of cost-sharing. Then there's the premium plus plan, which is the premium plan that also provides additional benefits, such as adult oral health and vision care, approved by the Commissioner. Really, it will only be the wealthy, that can purchase any kind of coverage beyond the basic plan - thus most of us will all be on the same plan - how is this expanding choices? And even the rich will have to have the services covered by their premium-plan approved by the government. (Note: this is where rationing has the potential for coming into play.)

Lie #4: "There is no panel to decide end-of-life care

Linda Douglass of the White House Office of Health Reform answers a question from outside the recent town hall in New Hampshire on why reform will empower a panel to decide end-of-life care for Americans. This is a myth that has unfortunately been spread far and wide by defenders of the status quo. There is no such panel in any of the bills being considered in Congress, period. To the contrary, the House bill gives Americans and their families more choice and access to counseling and information on these most difficult decisions if, and only if, they choose to pursue it."


This is a half lie. The bill does empower a panel to decide end of life care (as the panel will decide all health care decisions), but there is not specifically an end of life panel. Though, when those usually talking about end of life, they are talking about the section that talks about the government paying doctors to discuss end of life issues with their patients. This section does not include a panel, but says this "Secretary shall include quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a consensus-based organization".

Lie #5: "No bill puts off care for the disabled for "further study"

Linda Douglass of the White House Office of Health Reform answers a question from outside the recent town hall in New Hampshire on why a specific section of the House legislation (“section 1177”) puts off care for the disable pending "further study." This is a myth: for the disabled or their families, they can keep whatever care and coverage they currently have, but they will have additional options through Medicare for other voluntary programs. To the contrary, reform will make insurance more affordable, provide more options, and eliminate discrimination in purchasing health insurance so families won't be turned down if a parent or child has a pre-existing disability or other health condition."


To be honest, I cannot understand section 1177 as it only refers to other bills. Though, the reform purposed in HR3200 would not make insurance more affordable or provide more options. I will need to research this more, but for now this is what it says specifically:

SEC. 1177. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY OF SPECIAL NEEDS PLANS TO RESTRICT ENROLLMENT.

(a) In General- Section 1859(f)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-28(f)(1)) is amended by striking ‘January 1, 2011’ and inserting ‘January 1, 2013 (or January 1, 2016, in the case of a plan described in section 1177(b)(1) of the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009)’.


(b) Grandfathering of Certain Plans-

(1) PLANS DESCRIBED- For purposes of section 1859(f)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-28(f)(1)), a plan described in this paragraph is a plan that had a contract with a State that had a State program to operate an integrated Medicaid-Medicare program that had been approved by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services as of January 1, 2004.


(2) ANALYSIS; REPORT- The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall provide, through a contract with an independent health services evaluation organization, for an analysis of the plans described in paragraph (1) with regard to the impact of such plans on cost, quality of care, patient satisfaction, and other subjects as specified by the Secretary. Not later than December 31, 2011, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on such analysis and shall include in such report such recommendations with regard to the treatment of such plans as the Secretary deems appropriate.

Lie #6: "The Indian Health Service will be fine and Native Americans will benefit

Kimberly Teehee, Policy Advisor for Native American Affairs at the White House Domestic Policy Council, debunks myths being spread about how health insurance reform will affect the Indian Health Service. To the contrary, reform will allow Native Americans to keep the care they have now and has benefits for every American."


The Indian Health Service is currently not fine and this bill does pretty much nothing for the service. Indian Health Services is just another failed government program that will continue to be a failure.

Lie #7: "Reform will stop "rationing" - not increase it

Kavita Patel, who works with Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett and who worked for years before as a physician, debunks the myth that reform will mean a "government takeover" of health care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, reform will forbid many forms of rationing that are currently being used by insurance companies."


Again, this is a half lie. There is nothing in the bill that says the government will ration care. But the bill sets up the structure for the government to ration care. ALL countries that have socialized health care ration, because they cannot afford not to. They either outright ration or ration by not having health care accessible.

Here is a brief overview of the French system, which is known as the best Universal Health Care system:

The overall rate of social security and tax on the average wage in France in 2005 was 71.3% of gross salary. The government pays an average of 80% of the bill - leaving the other 20% (on average) for the citizen to cover either out of pocket or by purchasing additional insurance.

To counter the rise in health-care costs, the government has closed hospitals and installed a mandatory co-pay for a doctor visit, each box of medicine prescribed, and a fee per day for hospital stays and for expensive procedures.

A government body, ANAES, Agence Nationale d'Accréditation et d'Evaluation en Santé (The National Agency for Accreditation and Health Care Evaluation) is responsible for issuing recommendations and practice guidelines. There are recommendations on clinical practice (RPC), relating to the diagnosis, treatment and supervision of certain conditions, and in some cases, to the evaluation of reimbursement arrangements. ANAES also publishes practice guidelines which are recommendations on good practice that doctors are required to follow according to the terms of agreements signed between their professional representatives and the health insurance funds.

Lie #8: "The "euthanasia" distortion on help for families

Melody Barnes, the President's Director of the Domestic Policy Council, debunks the malicious myth that reform would encourage or even require euthanasia for seniors."


Again, this is a half lie. There is nothing in the bill that says the government will require euthanasia for seniors. But the bill sets up the structure for the government to be able to require euthanasia for seniors or any some other group.

Lie #9: "Vets' health care is safe and sound

Matt Flavin, Director of Veterans and Wounded Warrior Policy, explains that nothing in health insurance reform will affect veterans' access to the care they get now. To the contrary, the President's budget greatly expands coverage for veterans who have been denied access in the past."


I cannot find anything in this bill to support "the President's budget greatly expands coverage for veterans who have been denied access in the past". Largely because I do now know why a veteran would have be denied access. The only things in the bill concerning the VA is that when dolling out grants, preference will be given to "Training the greatest percentage, or significantly improving the percentage, of public health professionals serving in the Federal Government or a State, local, or tribal government". And "VA- Coverage under the veteran’s health care program under chapter 17 of title 38, United States Code, but only if the coverage for the individual involved is determined by the Secretary in coordination with the Health Choices Commissioner to be not less than the level specified by the Secretary of the Treasury, in coordination with the Secretary of Veteran’s Affairs and the Health Choices Commissioner, based on the individual’s priority for services as provided under section 1705(a) of such title."

Now, if there are vets that really do not have access to care. I am all for getting it to them. But, really, they need to fix the quality of care. The VA system is such a mess and I cannot believe how bad we treat them. I don't just want more vets to have access to care, I want them all to have access to quality care. Unfortunately, this is not something that the government has done or ever will do well.

Lie #10: "Reform will benefit small business - not burden it

Christina Romer, Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, debunks the myth that health insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on small businesses and help level the playing field with big firms who pay much less to cover their employees on average."


Yet another half lie. Those small companies that currently do not offer health insurance coverage because they cannot afford it will be hurt by having to pay the fees and taxes charged to businesses. Those small companies that do currently offer health insurance will be helped (well, that's as long as the fees & taxes applied to them do not go up). The average employer pay 12% of gross wages to health insurance premiums. The bill will have employers paying an 8% of gross wages into the government if they do not provide insurance for their employees. That is part of the problem as so many will be dumped from their current insurance. Did someone say Trojan horse?

Lie #11: "Your Medicare is safe, and stronger with reform

Robert Kocher of the National Economic Council debunks the myth that Health Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform would simply eliminate waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance companies."


Once a citizen is eligible for Medicare, they will automatically enrolled. Which mean the number of people on Medicare will rise - even though Medicare cannot pay their current costs. And if so much can be saved by eliminating waste and unnecessary subsidies, why have they not already done this? Maybe then the program wouldn't be billions of dollars in debt.

Lie #12: "You can keep your own insurance

Linda Douglass of the White House Office of Health Reform debunks the myth that reform will force you out of your current insurance plan or force you to change doctors. To the contrary, reform will expand your choices, not eliminate them."


As stated above, most businesses will opt for paying 8% of wages over 12%. Also, you care only allowed to keep your insurance if it does not change (don't get married, or have a child or change jobs). But, lets say that it does not change, this "grandfathered" cause expires in 5 years. Again, as stated above, it expands your choices in insurance companies by one.


I would like to address the idea of an insurance company not being allowed to refuse coverage to anyone and not being allowed to charge more to someone based on their health status. Can you tell me how they could afford to do such things without either going out of business or having to charge EVERYONE higher premiums to cover the costs? Trojan horse.

If we actually opened up competition by allowing us to purchase insurance from any company, the would be a market for those with health concerns bringing down their premium costs.

One more thing I would like to address, as there doesn't seem to be much about this out there. Private insurers will only be allowed to sell the plans that the government allows. Basically, we will all have the same plan (unless we can afford a premium-plus plan).


"(c) Specification of Benefit Levels for Plans-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Commissioner shall establish the following standards consistent with this subsection and title I:

(A) BASIC, ENHANCED, AND PREMIUM PLANS- Standards for 3 levels of Exchange-participating health benefits plans: basic, enhanced, and premium (in this division referred to as a ‘basic plan’, ‘enhanced plan’, and ‘premium plan’, respectively).


(B) PREMIUM-PLUS PLAN BENEFITS- Standards for additional benefits that may be offered, consistent with this subsection and subtitle C of title I, under a premium plan (such a plan with additional benefits referred to in this division as a ‘premium-plus plan’).

(2) BASIC PLAN-

(A) IN GENERAL- A basic plan shall offer the essential benefits package required under title I for a qualified health benefits plan.

(3) ENHANCED PLAN- A enhanced plan shall offer, in addition to the level of benefits under the basic plan, a lower level of cost-sharing as provided under title I consistent with section 123(b)(5)(A).

(4) PREMIUM PLAN- A premium plan shall offer, in addition to the level of benefits under the basic plan, a lower level of cost-sharing as provided under title I consistent with section 123(b)(5)(B).

(5) PREMIUM-PLUS PLAN- A premium-plus plan is a premium plan that also provides additional benefits, such as adult oral health and vision care, approved by the Commissioner. The portion of the premium that is attributable to such additional benefits shall be separately specified."


The only difference between the basic plan, enhanced plan, and premium plans are a lower level of cost-sharing - what is covered does not change. And these are the only plans that can be sold. If you go to the store to purchase Oreo's and one package of Oreo's cost $2.00 and another package costs $2.20, which Oreo's do you think most will purchase? Likewise, how many will pay more for the same insurance plan?

Trojan Horse

No comments:

Post a Comment