PC - From your link:
"When you file your taxes, if you can't prove to the IRS that you are in a qualified plan, you'll be fined thousands of dollars -- as much as the average cost of a health plan for your family size -- and then automatically enrolled in a randomly selected plan (House bill, p. 167-168). [anyone who has had their home hazard insurance or automobile insurance lapse knows how this one works - you get a notice and a bill for a large amount of money - and upon examination of all the documents you become aware that you really have no choice in the matter. Then you start shopping for something better, or begin providing proof of insurance that you actually already had in effect, so they may have duplicated insurance you might already have and for a time you are paying for both or for a very high priced policy of insurance. But don't worry, you'll be treated "fairly" by the government.]
....The goal is to reduce everyone's consumption of health care and to ensure that people have the same health-care experience, regardless of ability to pay. [This sounds good to some, one supposes, but to reduce everyone's consumption will have to result in denying certain groups certain medical services to make the system "cost effective." As Senator McConnell said on Meet The Press: "Costs and access"; those are the key issues, not some bureaucrat's idea of "fairness" of distribution]
Nowhere does the legislation say how much health plans will cost, but a family of four is eligible for some government assistance until their household income reaches $88,000 (House bill, p. 137). If you earn more than that, you'll have to pay the cost no matter how high it goes.
The price tag for this legislation is a whopping $1.04 trillion to $1.6 trillion (Congressional Budget Office estimates). Half of the tab comes from tax increases on individuals earning $280,000 or more, and these new taxes will double in 2012 unless savings exceed predicted costs (House bill, p. 199).
The rest of the cost is paid for by cutting seniors' health benefits under Medicare. [Don't care about this yet? Well you may before you realize it...someone you know, a parent, an aunt or uncle will soon be affected by this provision. Not you...? And SS and Medicare won't be there when you reach that age anyway, so what does it matter to you? That's just denial. It will affect you sooner than you think, and it won't be for the better.]
There's plenty of waste in Medicare, but the Congressional Budget Office estimates only 1 percent of the savings under the legislation will be from curbing waste, fraud and abuse. That means the rest will likely come from reducing what patients get. [so what will you need when you reach 65 that you don't need at 35 or 45 or 55? Can you think of anything...?]
One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years (and more often if they become sick or go into a nursing home) about alternatives for end-of-life care (House bill, p. 425-430). The sessions cover highly sensitive matters such as whether to receive antibiotics and "the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration." [Ahhhhh.....here we go. The same end of life choice"" to match the beginning of life "choice"...to be or not to be. But if you think it's the obligation of the old to get out of the way of the young, this one just might be for you.]
This mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse care. Do we really want government involved in such deeply personal issues?
Last edited:
