When it gets too hard to dig through all of the spin on both sides, I tend to take a step back, read the actual bill and act on common sense.
This alone proved to me that the Democrats and the President were not being truthful. They continue to try and shoot down the argument that this is a public takeover of health care by stating that if you like your coverage you can keep it. That may be technically true. Only your existing coverage of choice will be allowed BY LAW. You don’t dare change to another plan of your choice or enroll “any individual”. Does this mean adding your spouse after marriage or a job loss or a change to add a new child? You would have to believe that they count as “individuals”. So this will force millions of people out of plans they like and into government mandated coverage. Especially, younger more dynamic families and those switching jobs. In today’s economy that is tens of millions of people.
SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.
(a) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE DEFINED.—Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term ‘‘grandfathered health insurance coverage’’ means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.
Next major element of contention is the budget neutrality released by the CBO. Very confusing how this ratings are controlled but one element jumped out at me. The cost is 950Billion and this will “save money” because they are raising taxes by over 300billion and shaving Medicare payments to doctors by 500billion. This leaves very little room for the actual payments of premiums. The fact that premium payments will be far less than tax increases (on only the rich) and cutting payments to doctors for services rendered. It sounds a lot like redistribution to me.
Add to this that the house already passed a bill to reverse the cuts in payments to doctors (a costs of $247billion). It is stuck in the Senate which I guess gave them the ability to count that $247Billion as savings because they technically have not yet reversed it. That bill alone will reverse the budget neutrality of the bill.
In summary; three facts that should show you there is no way this bill should pass.
1. Keeping your own coverage is very limited and will force millions of people to buy government mandated plans.
2. It is supported primarily by redistribution of wealth and not a lower cost plan or a cost savings plan.
3. To be budget neutral it relies on future cuts in benefits, payments and tax increases. All items that they are unlikely to pass in a hostile political environment.
