Five Flaws of "Obamacare"

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by DamnYankee, Sep 3, 2009.

  1. DamnYankee
    Offline

    DamnYankee No Neg Policy

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,516
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +441
    This was particularly timely and meaningful after having read the OP in this thread
    http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...ce-reform-necessary-but-is-it-sufficient.html

    Perhaps it will strike a chord for some others.

    Obamacare’s five flaws
    There is little disagreement among liberals and conservatives that America's current health care system needs serious reform. But the Left's plan is seriously flawed.

    Heritage Foundation expert Nina Owcharenko dissects Five Major Faults with the Health Care Bills being pushed in the House and Senate.

    1. The public "option." Both proposals would create a government-run insurance plan which proponents claim would foster honest competition among private insurers. But how can there be fair competition when one of the players -- Washington -- is both writing the rules and playing the game? What's more, this scheme could lead millions of Americans to lose their private health insurance.

    2. Centralized regulation. Both the House and Senate bills would result in sweeping and complex federal regulation of health insurance. This would take oversight away from states and concentrate it in Washington -- and this oversight is best left at the state level.

    3. Greater dependency on government. Both bills would expand existing government health care programs and introduce massive new taxpayer-funded subsidies to buy health insurance. This would leave millions of Americans dependent on government for their health care.

    4. Employer mandate. The plans would force employers to provide coverage for all employees or face a massive tax. These "Play-or-Pay" mandates will raise prices, stifle economic growth and particularly hurt low-wage earners.

    5. Individual mandate. Both bills require that all Americans purchase health insurance. Those without coverage or whose plans don't meet the new federal standards would face tax penalties. Special interests are sure to "lobby intensively to expand the legally mandated health benefits, medical treatments and procedures, and drugs that all Americans must buy under penalty of law."

    Taken together or individually, these flaws would inflict serious damage on an industry that represents one-sixth of our nation's economy.

    Instead, Owcharenko suggests the government refocus its efforts on incrementally introducing real, cost-effective reform. Such a reform would grant more autonomy to individual states; extend tax relief to everyone who purchases private health insurance, regardless of employment; and rein in runaway spending on programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

    "Policymakers need to proceed slowly and deliberately," advises Owcharenko, "making sure that the initial steps they take are not disruptive of what Americans have and want to keep, actually work, and do not result in costly and damaging and unintended consequences." So far, they're on the wrong track.

    * * * * *
    And, as the "public option" debate continues to divide us

    President Obama has decided to decided to ease up on his push to include a public "option" in the health care reform plan. While the Left insists on its inclusion, the President, whose approval ratings have plummeted lately, seems open to its removal.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Political Junky
    Offline

    Political Junky Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    19,557
    Thanks Received:
    2,948
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,538
    LOL, The Heritage Foundation. Of course that wingnut group would oppose it.
     
  3. gcomeau
    Offline

    gcomeau Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    208
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Fremont, CA
    Ratings:
    +23
    While I am not myself a fan of the "public option", the people at heritage are ideologically driven idiots who are against it for ridiculous reasons.

    I don't like it because, frankly, it's minimally effective. It's a hobbled version of single payer with almost all the advantages of single payer stripped out.

    They don't like it because they're worried that even under those conditions *it will work too well* and out-compete the private sector providers and they don't want it to. That's just brain meltingly stupid on so many levels I can't fully articulate it.

    I really don't care WHERE the regulation comes from. I care WHAT the regulation is. Complaining about who institutes it is just more ideological temper tantrum throwing. "Wah, wah, we want the states to do it instead." Who the hell cares?

    No, it would leave them dependent on the government for their health insurance as opposed to their currently being without insurance or being dependent on a private corporation for your insurance whose primary objective is to extract maximum funds from your wallet. Guess which situation I would prefer? Which basically means, dependent on government to run the financial bureaucracy of health care while leaving the actual provision of care to the private sector just like always.

    And guess what? the traditional GOP "government bad, grrr" talking points aside, government is actually good at that. See: relative levels of administrative overhead of medicare and private insurers. Medicare does it FAR better.

    Not a fan of this either really. Regulate the insurers directly, there's no need to force employers into this equation. Get insurance costs under freaking control and they won't need to be forced to provide it, it'll just make good business sense and they'll do it anyway.

    Meh... it'll tick a few whiners off but it improves the health of the total system. If it was accompanied by sufficient regulation of the insurers themselves to actually keep prices under control I'd be in favor. I'd have to see them getting serious about those regulations though.

    Translation: "STALL! STALL!"
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. DamnYankee
    Offline

    DamnYankee No Neg Policy

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,516
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +441

    Translation:
    When unable to articulate flaws in the "opposition", bashing the source is the only defense.
     
  5. DamnYankee
    Offline

    DamnYankee No Neg Policy

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,516
    Thanks Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +441

    What if Medicare (which was, and still is, a huge "cash cow" for providers), Medicaid, KidCare/FamilyCare, SCHIP, SSI, SS, State Benefit, CHCPE, ConnMAP and ConnPACE (and even FEHB and private industry insurers if you like) were all consolidated into ONE GROUP HEALTH PLAN and every CITIZEN was eligible to participate, at a negotiated, regulated (cooperative) group rate? Negotiated and regulated by partners from each of the stake-holders? Would that not be "reform"? Wouldn't you think the Administration would have been open to such a suggestion? They did ask for input after all, and they sure as hell don't know what they're doing (see above).

    You don't think they're on the wrong track? Opinion duly noted....

     
  6. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    gcomeau wins. :clap2:
     
  7. KittenKoder
    Offline

    KittenKoder Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    23,281
    Thanks Received:
    1,711
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,714
    Veritas shows bias ... again. No, AllBiz found a good article that summarizes the points made by critics of this overbearing bill.
     
  8. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    And are full of shit
     
  9. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    And gcomeau dismantled the Heritage Foundation, which is like WND with stuffier prose and more expensive suits.
     
  10. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    thank you.
     

Share This Page