Anyway, there are several things that enrage me about this whole healthcare debate: its unConstitutional nature, the digusting way our “representatives” have responded to the will of the people, the accounting gimmicks being used to hide the true costs of these bills, etc., etc., so on and so forth, I could go on and on.

But what really gets my goat (Where did that expression originate, anyway?? What does that even mean? I don’t know but I like it!) is the fact that this isn’t even about healthcare reform. It’s about putting one-sixth of our country’s economy in the hands of our federal government.

When this whole debate really started heating up, I actually believed it was about the healthcare system. Silly me. I won’t go so far as to say that I believed our leaders had alturistic desires to help out the minority of Americans who don’t have coverage or can’t afford coverage–I knew deep down that their motives were purely political (Re-election? Desire to be part of a historical change? Who knows.), albeit completely misled and outside of their bounds of responsibility.

Now it’s easy to see the chain of events and how they add up: these Congressmen and Senators don’t give a lick about actually providing people with coverage that’s cheaper or better or more portable or what-have-you. They see the healthcare field as a vehicle for putting more government goons in power over the economy; a way to bring the entire population (eventually) under the control of a nanny state. Why? I’m not sure. Money? Idealogy? Ignorance? Hatred of the capitalist system? I have no idea, honestly. All I know is that they truly believe that we the American people can’t think for ourselves, can’t make our own decisions; that we aren’t smart enough or capable enough of governing ourselves; that we’d all be better off with them dictating (and taxing) the terms of our existence.

How far our leadership has come from the days of the Founding Fathers. The Declaration of Independence was the result of a revolt against much less grevious injustices than we’re seeing today. But our Founding Fathers had faith in We the People; they believed we could make this country work and become greater than any other country on Earth by doing things differently. By putting the power of the government into our own hands.

Maybe this Christmas, we can find that faith in ourselves again.

http://mcconnell.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=320943&start=1

So, I figured I’d eventually have to support the lesser of however-many evils would arise out of the whole debacle. But now that bills are finalized in the House and the Senate, I can’t find a lesser evil to support.

A few weeks ago I heard about a draft of a GOP bill (only 230 pages, vs the monstrosities put out by Pelosi and Reid) that actually contained elements of true reform that I could support (given no other option but gov’t involvement). Does anyone know what happened with that? I haven’t heard about it since.

But now? I only have one question: who’s going to pay for Obamacare when those of us who morally oppose federally funded abortions, mandated health insurance coverage, the creation of a mega-czar to oversee the whole mess, rationed care, and all that comes with the Democrats’ idea of “reform” are in jail because we refuse to buy it?

For what?!?

On the surface, it sounds much more reasonable than HR3200. But I’ve just started to read through the summaries and have yet to get to the actual bill text. And, after this summer, we all know that words are easily manipulated to technically say what people want to hear to gain support, but actually have a completely different meaning underneath and a different result in the long run.

A few ideas I find interesting (keeping in mind that my ultimate support for this bill depends on the details, which I need to read):

1. I don’t hear any mention of a mandate with this bill. Instead, they’re suggesting an automatic enrollment in federal coverage (like Medicaid) with the choice to opt-out. On the surface, I think this is a smart approach to deliver on the “extend coverage to all Americans” promise: people rarely opt-out of things they’re automatically enrolled in. Think about it: you don’t have to do anything, you’re in. It’s on you to take the time and go through the process to unsubscribe. But it’s not mandated coverage. That’s the part I like…you might be enrolled, but you have a choice about whether or not to stay enrolled. Obviously, my support of this option hinges on their definition of “opt-out” and what that process entails, and whether you have the choice to opt-in again if you so desire, and what that means for your existing coverage, etc., etc., but the fact that a choice even exists is a positive step in my opinion.

2. It also provides vouchers to low-income Americans if they want to opt-out of federal coverage and buy their own. Also a nice idea, on the surface. Not sure where the money for the vouchers will come from, but giving low-income people a choice in their coverage as well? I’ll at least give them a point for effort.

3. It will extend tax credits/deductions to people who don’t have coverage through their employer, hopefully making it more affordable for those people who fall through the cracks right now (temporarily unemployed, self-employed and insurance costs too much for their budget but their income disqualifies them for federal programs, etc.) to purchase insurance on their own. I like this idea better than raising taxes on wealthier people to pay for everyone else’s coverage.

4. It allows people to buy insurance across state lines (but there is a stipulation: you can only buy from another state if plans in your state’s premium costs 10% more than the national average…), thus giving people more control over which coverage they want to buy. I think this would be great in terms of competition and provide better prices for premiums, but the stipulation makes me wonder if it would ever be a real possibility. On the flip-side, the stipulation might stimulate enough competition within your own state that crossing lines won’t be necessary because you find great prices at home.

5. There are proposed reforms to medical liability and caps on awards, which would (hopefully) reduce the practice of defensive medicine and thus, drive down some costs.

Again, I have to read the actual bill instead of just the summaries, but this sounds like what should have been proposed in the first place and then been subjected to negotiations and amendments and such. I’m not sure how the Republicans have proposed to pay for this plan, or whether it addresses other concerns– like federally funded abortions, HSAs, end-of-life procedures, what it means for small businesses, etc.–but it’s a much more “competitive” approach that gives more power and choice to the people and the market (instead of a committee of beaurocrats) than I’ve seen so far.

So, who knows? I, for one, am just glad to see another option on the table, instead of just status quo or HR 3200. And I’m glad to see the Republicans putting up instead of just shutting up. It’s starting to feel like an actual conversation now instead of a one-sided, elitist contempt-fest.

You can read about HR 3400 here and here, and the actual bill here (there’s a link to the full text at the bottom of the page).

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/09/04/a-revolution-dawns-in-doncaster/

Maybe he can host a little ol’ Beer Summit of his own and give President Obama some tips. Or the whole Congress, for that matter. And they can pay for their own flights over there.

In 2007 I was working, my husband was in school, and our insurance was provided through my employer. Then I had a baby and chose not to return to work. But because we needed insurance for some medical issues, we chose to pay COBRA for the next 6 or 8 months. COBRA cost us around $850/month, as much as the rent on our apartment.

During that time, I needed to have a small procedure done. It came up just as we were considering ending our COBRA coverage, so we figured we’d see which was the more economical option: pay the $850 for another month of coverage or pay for the procedure in cash. I asked my doctor what the procedure would cost. She had no idea. I asked the front desk people what it would cost, they had no idea. I asked the billing people and all they could tell me was, “Oh honey, it’d cost a few thousand dollars at best.” No one could give me an exact figure. So, we paid for another month of COBRA.

But it’s hit me lately that, as consumers, it’s almost impossible for us to operate within the healthcare market the same way we operate within other markets. My husband, for example, is a huge deal hunter. He researches, he studies, he shops around, he gets the best deal he can find. I don’t think we pay full price for much of anything, and it’s great to be able to choose how we spend our money on the items we want or need.

With our healthcare, however, we don’t even question the cost. Why? Because “our insurance covers it.” Someone else is paying for it. We’ve even adopted the attitude that, “Well, I probably could just wait out this cold, but shoot, it’s only $5 to see the doctor, I might as well go in.” What does that doctor visit really cost? Who knows? $100? $10? If the healthcare market actually functioned like every other market in this country, I’d call around and see which doctor had the best rates (combined with the best quality of service) before going in and spending my money on a visit.

Before we blow trillions of dollars on sweeping healthcare reform, why don’t we focus on behavior reform? If consumers could understand comparison shopping and financial accountability, they’d force the market to become competitive, all without government involvement or mandates. How to achieve this, I have no idea, but letting the credit market crash would’ve been a good start.

This video demonstrates my point exactly! And I appreciate how he clarifies that insurance initially existed to cover huge expenses like cancer treatment, catastrophic emergencies, etc., not routine, day-to-day care. Can’t we get back to that way of thinking?

Politicians look at the current broken healthcare system in our country and instead of thinking like businessmen, they’re thinking like politicians. Instead of looking at the reasons the current system fails people (pre-existing conditions, immovable coverage [if you lose your job, you can't take your coverage with you without paying crazy amounts of money for COBRA], increased rates when you get sick, etc.) and trying to improve them, they’re trying to put in place another already-broken system just to create competition. Because, as politicians, they sincerely think that’s the answer.

Let’s look at their perspective: Healthcare needs reform: more Americans need coverage, the costs have to come down. As the government, they feel it’s their responsibility to provide the kind of reform that will extend coverage and lower costs. So, they’ll create their own healthcare system and insurance plans! This will cause competition among the existing insurance companies (= lower costs) and be an affordable alternative to private plans (= extend coverage). Their system will solve everyone’s problems and eventually completely dismantle the original broken system. Mission accomplished. (Except for the small problem that their plan won’t actually lower costs and millions more Americans will lose coverage as their companies transition over to the government plan, but those are facts none of the politicians are addressing because they conflict with their selling points.)

But the fact of the matter is that insurance companies are in business to make money. That’s why they don’t provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, why your rates increase after receiving coverage. Oh, those villianous capitalists.

Granted, I’m no CEO or business owner. And I’m completely against the government forcing us to do anything. But the feds are intent on pushing some kind of legislation through whether we like it or not. So it seems to me that what they should be doing is creating incentives for insurance companies to: provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, to make their individual plans more affordable and portable so if people lose their jobs they don’t go broke paying for COBRA, etc. Incentives that still keep the industry’s bottom line in mind but also solve the problems the whole system faces. Maybe incentives already exist and don’t work? I don’t really know. I’m still thinking through this whole politicians-trying-to-operate-as-businessmen idea.

The government option won’t make any money (I’m not aware of any government-run entities that make a profit; can anyone show me some?), it’ll continue to cost taxpayers (especially wealthier taxpayers) billions and trillions of dollars, and quality of care is completely going to suffer. If the government is going to compete with businesses in the private market, they need to actually think and operate like a business. When in Rome, Mr. Obama…

This article presents some great alternatives to the sweeping, competing bills being presented in the House. In short:

• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs).
• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits.
• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines.
• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover.
• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. [FYI: Doctors MUST pursue payment from their patients. If they don't, the IRS comes after them. Lawyers, coincidentally, not only have the option to take on pro bono work but they can deduct it from their taxes based on what they would have charged! So sure, your malpractice attorney "won't get paid if you don't get paid" but he'll still deduct it from his taxes; and your doctor's malpractice insurance just doubled. Thanks, Justice.]
• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost.
• Enact Medicare reform.
• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Just because people don’t agree with ObamaCare doesn’t mean they’re totally happy with the status quo. But lawmakers don’t seem to even step back from a government option in favor of true reform to the system–reform ideas like those presented above. Instead, they want to initiate a plan that will ultimately evolve into a single-payer system (no matter what Obama says, take a look at the math) and put the government in charge of your health.

Let’s look at options that take the existing system and improve it instead of throwing it out the window and putting a different, broken system in place.

I, personally, don’t even think this debate is that critical. (Gasp.) Sure, Congress and the media and the President keep throwing around that infamous number of uninsured Americans that need coverage now! What’s it up to today, 50 million? I’ve been digging around to find a breakdown of those 50 million people and the reasons they’re uninsured. I mean, hello, they’re the reason for this whole mess right? (Well, and a power-hungry administration, but that’s another post.) The most concise information I could find breaks it down as follows:

According to the US Census Bureau, 17 million of those without health insurance live in households having over $50,000 in annual income. That’s 38% of the uninsured in America.(2)

In fact, 9 million – 20% of the uninsured – reside in households pulling down more than $75K a year. (3)

And then there are the young invincibles. Over 18 million of the uninsured are people between the ages of 18 and 34. (4) They spend more than four times as much on alcohol, tobacco, entertainment and dining out as they do for out-of-pocket spending on health care.(5) They represent 40% of the uninsured in America.

14 million people without health insurance are eligible for government health care programs like Medicaid and S-CHIP but choose not to enroll. (7) They represent %31 – nearly one third – of the uninsured in America.

The U.S. has 12 million illegal immigrants who don’t buy health insurance but still get health care.

So, how many are truly uninsured? Around eight million. Just 18% of the 45 million that we hear about so often.

This data is based on 2007 Census info and other sources, but 8 million Americans equals out to about 3% of the population. Is it worth destroying our economic infrastructure to provide coverage to 3% of the population? Or is it worth it to examine alternate improvements to the existing system to provide that access?

And, let’s face it, the Democrats totally smelt it.

Which means one of two things (neither of which are good):

1. Lawmakers are so corrupted themselves that they assume everyone else is, too. Surely no one really opposes their healthcare reform plans but those villainous insurance companies and right-wing extremists so they’re the ones flooding the town hall meetings with the crazies.

2. They are so out of touch with their constituents that when the voice of the people actually becomes audible, they pull out all the spin tactics they can to invalidate it.

The Founding Fathers declared independence after the colonies were levied with a tax that amounted to less than 0.5%. Why? Representation! Or the lack thereof.

Now we’re faced with politicians who don’t want to hear what the people have to say because it conflicts with their own agendas. They’re choosing to ignore the voice of the people and, worse, are spinning it to the media that the protesters are only there to gain fame on YouTube, or because they were paid off by insurance companies, or because they’re antiestablishment nutjobs.

Oh, and let’s not forget that they want you to tattle on your neighbor if he speaks out against healthcare reform–because anyone who opposes it is obviously spreading “misinformation” and we can’t have that. So email the White House and let them know.

Have they forgotten their roles as representatives? Have they forgotten that it’s their job to act on behalf of the voice of the people? Have they forgotten it’s a Constitutional right for the people to speak their minds? If the majority of the people are in favor of the reform bills, fine; but don’t ignore the opposition just because it’s opposition. Don’t tell me my opinion–because it’s different from yours–isn’t valid because you think I’m crazy.

I don’t support violent, rude, or disrespectful protests, but I completely support our First Amendment rights. It’s looking more and more like our leaders don’t; instead, they’re sending the message that “You’re technically allowed to voice your opinion, but if it’s different from ours, it’s wrong and we’ll do all we can to shut you down.”

Are we going to stand for that?

This says it all much better than I can. Guess that’s why she gets paid for it, huh?