Increasing Deficits Causing Concern Over Health Care Plan

The Congressional Budget Office’s new estimate that the federal deficit will reach $7.14 trillion over the next ten years isn’t making Americans feel any more comfortable about supporting President Obama’s healthcare reform plan said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) in a conference call on Tuesday.

“We are running trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, and with these updated numbers that CBO is coming out with, clearly the fiscal picture has worsened...and I think that animates a lot of people’s concerns about an expansion of healthcare.”

Thune, who has held a few town hall events on healthcare in his home state during the August recess, said that the country’s fiscal situation is causing some folks to oppose certain elements of reform, such as the public option provision endorsed by Obama.

“A real concern on people’s minds is ‘Why are we looking now at doing something that will add costs, build on programs that are already halfway to bankruptcy...and on an unsustainable trajectory.’”

Thune, of course, was referring to Medicare, the government's heath insurance program for senior citizens. He did, however, say that Senate Republicans are open to supporting Medicare spending cuts that would “find savings” for the plan.

Thune reiterated his support for a recent report put out by the non-partisan National Federation of Independent Business Association. The study concluded that the three healthcare bills that have passed the House would increase taxes, and as a result would harm small businesses across the country.

Thune stated confidently that no Republican will support a comprehensive healthcare bill, although he suggested that a more incremental bill could achieve bipartisan backing in the Senate. However, Thune sounded skeptical that Democrats would allow Republicans to be a part of the legislative process once the bill shifted back to the House.

Thune also expressed doubts over the possibility that Democrats may attempt to pass legislation through the process of reconciliation, which would require lawmakers to split the bill into pieces and then vote on the different parts individually.

“As a policy matter, they could do it. As a political matter, it’s really difficult. Americans don’t want to see something jammed through,” said Thune. He added that although reconciliation is hard to understand, many of his constituents would oppose its use by Democrats on the grounds that “something as large as healthcare could be passed on a party line vote.”

Thune articulated that Republicans want healthcare reform to address issues like tort reform and long-term sustainability of Medicare. He maintained that Republicans are supportive of provisions that would prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to customers with pre-existing conditions, but suggested that most in the party are wary of a bill that includes any sort of mandate on individuals to obtain health insurance.

GOP "Distorting" Truth About Health Care Reform

Republican criticisms of democratically-backed health care legislation are “distortions” designed to scare the American public into opposing reform, said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) during a conference call with reporters on Friday.

Van Hollen sought to paint partisan attacks against the plan as being futile, arguing that that the “campaign of distortion during the medicare debate years ago didn’t work then, and it won’t work now.”

Van Hollen’s remarks illustrated how he and other Democrats have found a new buzz word with which to strike back at their detractors.

On the question of whether or not reform would mean granting health insurance to illegal aliens, Van Hollen replied, “The notion that the House bill allows illegals to get insurance is a distortion.”

As for concerns that the legislation would hurt small businesses, Van Hollen stayed the course; “The myth that somehow all small businesses will be heavily taxed is a distortion.”

Finally, Van Hollen addressed bi-partisan worries that the bill contains a mandate for taxpayer funded abortions, saying, “Republicans have tried to distort that issue, but that has been addressed.”

House Committee on Education and Labor Chairman Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) echoed Van Hollen’s assertions, accusing Republicans of “inundating Americans with lies and distortions.”

“We’ve seen this all before,” Miller said. “Republicans are scaring people into thinking that the government is going to take over their health care.”

The Play Has Been Called, But Is Washington Botching The Snap?

Before I launch into my analysis of the health care reform debate, I'd like to introduce myself to you, the talkradionews.com users. I am a native Washingtonian who grew up in nearby Montgomery County, Md., and attended the University of Maryland. Before coming to Talk Radio News Service earlier this summer, I worked for several years as a producer for a news/talk station in Washington. I can safely say that I am somewhat familiar with what goes on in our nation's capital. I enjoy covering politics (and sports as well) and I really enjoy getting a chance every so often to play the role of correspondent. I also enjoy blogging, something I haven't done a whole lot of lately (I'm working on convincing our web guys to start one on this site). Having said all that, this is my initial foray into the world of op-ed writing. So don't worry, if you think this column is terrible, well.....um.....hey, did I mention that Ellen will be back on Monday? All right, now that we've taken a minute to get to know each other, on with the show...

I am one of the millions of fortunate Americans who receive health insurance through their jobs. I understand, however, that for every Geoff Holtzman, there's a man or a woman out there who would like to be covered, but isn't. I also understand that even some folks who ARE employed don't have insurance because it's too expensive for their employer to provide and it's too expensive for them to buy on their own. In fact, I used to be one of these people back when I was working two part-time jobs, before I landed my first real full-time gig. We as a nation have a huge problem on our hands, I get it. This is why, even though I align myself with most conservatives, I feel it is important for Washington to do something about reforming the system. Maybe not today, maybe not even by the end of the week. But, ideally by the end of 2009, so this issue doesn't die in an election year.

I applaud President Obama for taking initiative on this issue. For God's sake, our country has needed health reform since the 60's. However, I think he's been hurting reform efforts more than helping them of late. And as a result, his approval ratings, both on the way he's handled health care reform and as a whole, have slipped recently. In my opinion, Obama started off with the right approach. He told Congress he wanted legislation (albeit by the August recess, but whatever), he laid out a few items he wanted included on the table, and then he basically let Congress go to work. I think most Americans appreciated this approach as opposed to the way the Clintons tried to shove Billarycare down Congress's throat. But, to paraphrase the administration that came before Obama, he hasn't stayed the course.

Lately, he's been touring the country, campaigning for reform like it's 2008 all over again. Mr. President, please, we get it. We get the fact that you really really really want health care legislation passed. We understand what it will do for you, both in 2012 and for your legacy. But you're smothering us. Listen, this thing has a good chance of passing by the end of the year, regardless of whether conservatives rail against it or Blue Dogs take time to address fiscal concerns. You need to stop stumping. Trust me, every time you go out and try to "sell" this plan to the public, they see it as exactly that, a sales pitch! What you ought to do is take your foot off the gas and let your operatives take care of winning hearts and minds in Congress. Rahm Emanuel's closed door meeting with members of the Blue Dog coalition in Nancy Pelosi's office that produced a subsequent compromise should tell you something.

(Deep breath)

Now, are there components of the legislation that bother me? Of course. I am wary of a public option. I don't believe that it will make the health insurance industry more competitive. On paper, it makes sense. But its application will eventually bankrupt the private system, which will in turn do two things. First, it will cause enormous job loss. Secondly, it will create a single payer system. I can't support a plan that does either of these things.

Do I support a co-op? Not necessarily, and for two reasons. First, the state of Massachusetts tried doing this in 2002. At first, it worked to bring more people into the system. However, eventually it led to massive costs and placed a huge financial burden on the state. (On a related side note, the beauty of the Massachusetts health care debacle is that you can blame both Democrats in the state legislature as well as Republican Governor Mitt Romney for being behind it.) Next, Blue Cross, one of the biggest health insurance mega corps in the country began as a co-op. What does that tell you? It tells me that at some point, a non-profit health insurance company is going to want/need to privatize, grow, and make some dough.

The only solution I've heard that makes sense to me so far is for Congress to get serious about tort reform. Why? Because the fewer number of medical lawsuits there are, the less doctors and physicians will charge their patients and/or order unnecessary tests, procedures and prescriptions in an attempt to protect themselves. Now, I am not a legal expert (can you tell?) nor do I pretend to be one, so I'm not going to elaborate on tort reform. But, that's the purpose of op-eds, right? To get you all thinking.......

So, the bottom line is this: First, we need health care reform and we need it relatively soon. Next, President Obama needs to stop selling us on the idea of a public option and how it A) won't negatively impact the private insurance industry and B) won't increase the deficit by billions of dollars. And finally, Congress needs to come to terms that it might be time to start getting tough on lawyers in this country.

Does that make sense?

High Health Costs Forcing Americans To Go Bankrupt, Cut Back On Care

By Annie Berman - Talk Radio News Service

The current health care system is not bankrupting America; Rather, outrageously high medical bills, mounds of credit card debt and expensive mortgages are what cause Americans to file for bankruptcy, experts said Tuesday at a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.

Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of one-time Democratic Presidential hopeful John Edwards, shared statistics with the committee regarding vast medical costs forcing Americans into declaring bankruptcy. Edwards explained that such costs force households into cutting back on what they spend on health care.

“According to a recent Kaiser Family Foundation survey, concerns about affording needed medical care led insured individuals to cut back on care due to cost. Responses included postponing care (34%), skipping a recommended medical visit or treatment (30%), not filling prescriptions (27%), and skipping doses or cutting pills (21%),” said Edwards.

University of Michigan Law Professor and bankruptcy expert John A. E. Pottow offered his definition of medical bankruptcy to the committee.

“It could mean someone whose medical debts exceed…a certain percentage of their income. Or it could mean someone who lost income or a job, or even had to mortgage his or her home, due to medical bills,” said Pottow.

Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a physician and Harvard University medical professor, argued that only a single-payer system can make health care coverage available and affordable to all Americans, and would “save hundreds of billions we now waste on insurance overhead and bureaucracy”. Woolhandler also claimed that private insurance is fundamentally defective and the tremendous amount of over-treatment by doctors causes medical bills to go way up.

However, the committee’s ranking Republican member, Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), took issue with Woolhandler’s sentiments.

“Here’s my big concern, and that is that somehow the answer to medical bankruptcy is nationalized healthcare…If a [nationalized healthcare system] saves hundreds of billions of dollars, it would be a first in history for government to do something of this complexity and actually save money,” said Franks.

“If indeed private insurance is fundamentally defective…with all the crises that people face with healthcare, if you put it in government hands, even to a partial extent, you will diminish the dignity of the patient and the pressure will be on giving less healthcare…I am convinced that healthcare will become more expensive...Instead of having financial bankruptcy, we will have health bankruptcy,” said Franks.

Health Care Is In The House

By Courtney Ann Jackson-Talk Radio News Service

Democratic Representatives say there is a rapidly closing window for passing health care. A health care bill, known as the Dingell bill, will come out Tuesday. Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) mentioned that the bill is not exactly what he would have put together, but that he believes if the U.S. is going to do something about the problem, it must be better addressed.

“This is a great opportunity. If we waste it, I can’t tell you when it will return,” said Dingell.

Dingell was joined by Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) and Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) for a health care discussion Tuesday. The Representatives agreed that health care brings a “unique American challenge” that requires an “American solution.”

Kind used a different analogy than that of Dingell and said they were trying to get healthcare “across the finish line.” No matter what the analogy, the point was clear that Democrats want to get the debate going, now.

Altmire said Republicans and Democrats are not that far apart in their ideas but a systematic reform is necessary. He said it would be nice to have Republican support and it would be a chance for them to be part of an important piece of legislation.

“It will not be a perfect bill but we hope it’s one that advances in the right direction which will lead to increased quality [health care] at a lower cost for all Americans,” said Altmire.

The Representatives highlighted aspects of the debate that bring about concerns such as: the costs, a level playing field for insurance companies, and a public option.

At this time, the New Democratic Coalition has not put out a position on a public option, according to Kind. He said it would be a tough sell for some members but that failure is not an option.