Post by dgriffin on Dec 22, 2009 7:41:59 GMT -5
The Buffalo News
No to health bill
Bureaucratic nightmare isn't reform, but a costly cave-in that will cause harm
This isn't what we asked for, and it's not what we need.
Health reform was supposed to rein in the explosive costs of health care in this country, deliver better results and cover more people. It was always going to be difficult, but it wasn't impossible.
Instead, under current plans, Americans are likely to get a bill that drives unsustainable costs even higher, does not completely solve the problem of the uninsured and does little to improve the quality of medicine. And it won't kick in until as late as 2014. But taxes, mainly on the wealthy, would go up pronto.
This was supposed to be the moment for health care reform but, much as it pains us to say it, President Obama and Congress — Democrats and Republicans — have badly missed the opportunity. They need to start over.
No one likes this bill. Not Republicans — who, it must be said, would vote against Christmas if they thought supporting it would benefit Obama — and some Democrats. Indeed, the former chairman of the Democratic Party, Howard Dean, himself a physician, said the bill should be defeated.
Voters understand what is going to happen and have turned against it. An NBC poll found that just 32 percent believe the health reform plan is a good idea, versus 47 percent who say it's a bad idea. Gov. David A. Paterson says the bill will add at least $1 billion to the state's Medicaid bill.
Indeed, it seems mainly to be congressional Democrats who favor this bill. After decades of failure, they are desperate to pass the bill, but they are placing their zeal ahead of true reform. Thus, they gave in to Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who represents the insurance companies and objected first to a public option that could have restrained costs and then to expanding Medicare. Both were scrapped, though the public option remains in the House bill.
Then they let Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., hijack the bill. To secure his vote, they made abortion coverage more difficult and then finished the deal by buying him off with $100 million in additional Medicaid funding for Nebraska. Taxpayers of the other 49 states will pay for that.
The problems are multiple, but they flow from Obama's lack of leadership on the plan and from Congress' resulting willingness to give the store away to the usual special interests — insurers, trial lawyers and drugmakers. The legislation that took shape in the Senate last week throws millions of Americans and businesses overboard to protect the pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies that Lieberman serves.
The number one reason to pursue health reform is to control costs that have doubled since 2001. They are already at 16 percent of gross domestic product and are forecast to reach 20 percent in only a few years. Yes, it is also important to cover the uninsured and to restrict some of the worst practices within the insurance industry, but without cost control, all other efforts at reform are destined to fail. The arithmetic has to work. It doesn't.
While the Congressional Budget Office has projected that new revenues and cuts in spending would reduce future federal budget deficits by $132 billion between 2010 and 2019, no conscious person believes Congress will follow through with spending cuts.
What is more, a more recent report from government analysts at the federal Health and Human Services Department warned that the nation's $2.5 trillion annual health care tab would actually grow somewhat more rapidly under the Democrats' approach than if Washington did nothing.
In the weakest economy in decades, with unemployment around 10 percent, Washington can't make matters worse for American businesses, who pay the lion's share of health coverage.
Where is the effort to combat the $210 billion annual cost of defensive medicine? Malpractice suits drive up the costs of doctors' insurance, but far worse on the economy and the soaring cost of care are the unnecessary tests doctors order to protect themselves. The bill does nothing to combat this insidious problem.
This isn't a recommendation to do nothing. Health care reform remains urgently needed in this country. It is appalling that 50 million Americans have no insurance, that some insurers cut their clients off when they get sick and that we spend far more on health insurance than any other developed country and get results that are only mediocre.
The Senate bill is not without its strengths. As Victoria Reggie Kennedy, widow of Sen. Edward Kennedy, observed in Sunday's Washington Post, the Senate bill would provide coverage to 30 million Americans who lack it. Insurance companies would no longer be able to deny coverage because of a pre-existing condition. They would not be able to drop coverage when people get sick. Those are virtues upon which a stronger bill could be built.
Often in American politics, it is better to take half a loaf than to hold out for more. Don't allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. The problem is that this bill isn't even half a loaf. Not only is it insufficient, but it will almost certainly create a costly worse result.
It's time to try again. The political calendar will hinder that work, since it's hard to get Congress to do anything difficult in an election year. But that risk is more acceptable than passing a health reform bill that makes matters worse.
www.buffalonews.com/149/story/901525.html
A republic is OK. Sometimes a democracy is better.
No to health bill
Bureaucratic nightmare isn't reform, but a costly cave-in that will cause harm
This isn't what we asked for, and it's not what we need.
Health reform was supposed to rein in the explosive costs of health care in this country, deliver better results and cover more people. It was always going to be difficult, but it wasn't impossible.
Instead, under current plans, Americans are likely to get a bill that drives unsustainable costs even higher, does not completely solve the problem of the uninsured and does little to improve the quality of medicine. And it won't kick in until as late as 2014. But taxes, mainly on the wealthy, would go up pronto.
This was supposed to be the moment for health care reform but, much as it pains us to say it, President Obama and Congress — Democrats and Republicans — have badly missed the opportunity. They need to start over.
No one likes this bill. Not Republicans — who, it must be said, would vote against Christmas if they thought supporting it would benefit Obama — and some Democrats. Indeed, the former chairman of the Democratic Party, Howard Dean, himself a physician, said the bill should be defeated.
Voters understand what is going to happen and have turned against it. An NBC poll found that just 32 percent believe the health reform plan is a good idea, versus 47 percent who say it's a bad idea. Gov. David A. Paterson says the bill will add at least $1 billion to the state's Medicaid bill.
Indeed, it seems mainly to be congressional Democrats who favor this bill. After decades of failure, they are desperate to pass the bill, but they are placing their zeal ahead of true reform. Thus, they gave in to Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who represents the insurance companies and objected first to a public option that could have restrained costs and then to expanding Medicare. Both were scrapped, though the public option remains in the House bill.
Then they let Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., hijack the bill. To secure his vote, they made abortion coverage more difficult and then finished the deal by buying him off with $100 million in additional Medicaid funding for Nebraska. Taxpayers of the other 49 states will pay for that.
The problems are multiple, but they flow from Obama's lack of leadership on the plan and from Congress' resulting willingness to give the store away to the usual special interests — insurers, trial lawyers and drugmakers. The legislation that took shape in the Senate last week throws millions of Americans and businesses overboard to protect the pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies that Lieberman serves.
The number one reason to pursue health reform is to control costs that have doubled since 2001. They are already at 16 percent of gross domestic product and are forecast to reach 20 percent in only a few years. Yes, it is also important to cover the uninsured and to restrict some of the worst practices within the insurance industry, but without cost control, all other efforts at reform are destined to fail. The arithmetic has to work. It doesn't.
While the Congressional Budget Office has projected that new revenues and cuts in spending would reduce future federal budget deficits by $132 billion between 2010 and 2019, no conscious person believes Congress will follow through with spending cuts.
What is more, a more recent report from government analysts at the federal Health and Human Services Department warned that the nation's $2.5 trillion annual health care tab would actually grow somewhat more rapidly under the Democrats' approach than if Washington did nothing.
In the weakest economy in decades, with unemployment around 10 percent, Washington can't make matters worse for American businesses, who pay the lion's share of health coverage.
Where is the effort to combat the $210 billion annual cost of defensive medicine? Malpractice suits drive up the costs of doctors' insurance, but far worse on the economy and the soaring cost of care are the unnecessary tests doctors order to protect themselves. The bill does nothing to combat this insidious problem.
This isn't a recommendation to do nothing. Health care reform remains urgently needed in this country. It is appalling that 50 million Americans have no insurance, that some insurers cut their clients off when they get sick and that we spend far more on health insurance than any other developed country and get results that are only mediocre.
The Senate bill is not without its strengths. As Victoria Reggie Kennedy, widow of Sen. Edward Kennedy, observed in Sunday's Washington Post, the Senate bill would provide coverage to 30 million Americans who lack it. Insurance companies would no longer be able to deny coverage because of a pre-existing condition. They would not be able to drop coverage when people get sick. Those are virtues upon which a stronger bill could be built.
Often in American politics, it is better to take half a loaf than to hold out for more. Don't allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. The problem is that this bill isn't even half a loaf. Not only is it insufficient, but it will almost certainly create a costly worse result.
It's time to try again. The political calendar will hinder that work, since it's hard to get Congress to do anything difficult in an election year. But that risk is more acceptable than passing a health reform bill that makes matters worse.
www.buffalonews.com/149/story/901525.html
A republic is OK. Sometimes a democracy is better.
