What’s the Real Story With The Health Care Reform Bill ?
Council of Foriegn Relations Member Robert Reich tells us what the President should say
A story from 08/13/2009 said…A memo obtained by the Huffington Post confirms that the White House and the pharmaceutical lobby secretly agreed to precisely the sort of wide-ranging deal that both parties have been denying over the past week. The memo, which according to a knowledgeable health care lobbyist was prepared by a person directly involved in the negotiations, lists exactly what the White House gave up, and what it got in return.
It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government’s leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada — and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements. In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says: “Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion.”
Critics on Capitol Hill and online responded with outrage at the reports that Obama had gone behind their backs and sold the reform movement short. Furthermore, the deal seemed to be a betrayal of several promises made by then-Sen. Obama during the presidential campaign, among them that he would use the power of government to drive down the costs of drugs to Medicare and that negotiations would be conducted in the open.
PROMISES BROKEN?
We recently learned that President Obama has secretly made a sweetheart deal with Billy Tauzin, the former congressman turned chief lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry. In return for $80 billion in projected cuts — and $150 million in supportive television ads Obama has apparently sworn to protect the industry from congressional efforts to, among other things, let the government use its bargaining power to lower prescription drug costs.
Now flash back to April 2008, when the Obama campaign put out this ad, in which Obama held Tauzin up as an example of everything that was wrong with the game-playing in Washington.
The Coming Death of Private Health Insurance
What is being sold in Washington, D.C. as “insurance reform” by Obama and the Democrats is actually a plan to strangle the insurance industry and force Americans into single-payer medicine.
If legislation is passed that looks anything like the currently proposed bills before Congress, insurance companies will be forced to take all applicants for policies that include thousands of mandated benefits possibly including things like abortion, marriage counseling or in vitro fertilization. Insurance companies will either exit the business or raise premiums and co-pays to survive. Private insurance will become increasingly expensive and unaffordable for Americans who will now be forced to buy it.
Inevitably, the government will subsidize insurance policies for millions of Americans priced out of the market. However, since no government can provide all the free health care that people want, it will be forced to begin the rationing of medicine to prevent national bankruptcy.
Some Democrats in Congress have been honest about this. Last week, Barney Frank said “I think, if we get a good public option it could lead to single-payer – and that’s the best way to reach single-payer.”
The President is a proponent of Single Payer Healthcare plans, too
DON’T FOOL YOURSELF INTO THINKING THEY HAVE GIVEN UP SINGLE PAYER
The Real Cost of the Baucus Bill: $2 Trillion+
Thursday, October 8, 2009 – From the Cato Institute
Michael D Tanner:
The CBO scoring makes it clear that the Baucus bill’s reduction in future budget deficits comes not from controlling government spending or reducing health care costs, but because of a rapid escalation in tax revenues. The bill imposes a 40 percent excise tax on health-insurance plans that offer benefits in excess of $8,000 for an individual plan and $21,000 for a family plan. Insurers would almost certainly pass this tax on to consumers via higher premiums. As inflation pushes insurance premiums higher in coming years, more and more middle-class families would find themselves caught up in the tax. In fact, overall, the tax increases in the bill are more than double the amount of deficit reduction. This isn’t a health care efficiency bill or a cost containment bill. It is a tax and spend bill, pure and simple.
Michael F Cannon:
The CBO score of the Baucus bill is like a mystery novel with the last 50 pages missing. It fails to reveal both the full cost of the bill and the budget gimmicks that Mr. Baucus uses to hide that cost. The Baucus bill will not reduce the deficit, and it would ultimately cost taxpayers more than $2 trillion—just like every other bill Congress has produced so far. The biggest gimmick employed by the bill is that its individual mandate pushes more than half of the legislation’s cost off-budget, and onto businesses and individuals who will have to shoulder that burden. A real-world parallel already exists in the Massachusetts health care plan, where private-sector mandates account for 60 percent of the cost. In 1994, CBO counted those mandated private payments in the federal budget, and it helped kill the Clinton health plan. This time around, Democrats were very careful to craft their mandates so that they just barely avoided having the CBO include those payments in the federal budget. But the CBO’s decision does not change the fact that those private-sector mandates are part of the cost of this bill. The second-biggest gimmick is assuming that Congress will let the “Sustainable Growth Rate” cuts in Medicare physician payments to occur. Starting in 2003, Congress has repeatedly blocked those cuts, and there is no reason to think that Congress will behave any differently in the future. So yes, provided that the sun rises in the West, the Baucus bill would reduce the federal deficit.
REID LIKELY TO MAKE ENTIRE HEALTH BILL AMENDMENT TO UNRELATED TAX BILL
10/07/2009 By Nicholas Ballasy, Video Reporter, CNS NEWS http://tinyurl.com/yk4cjf9
A senior aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told CNSNews.com that it is “likely” that Reid will use H.R. 1586—a bill passed by the House in March to impose a 90-percent tax on bonuses paid to employees of certain bailed-out financial institutions—as a “shell” for enacting the final version of the Senate’s health care bill, which Reid is responsible for crafting.
Left claims 218 in sight for ‘robust’ public plan from TheHill.com
By Mike Soraghan – 10/08/09 06:05 AM ET http://tinyurl.com/y8ph7k2
Liberal tells House Democrats that they have nearly enough votes to pass their preferred version of health insurance reform.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), the leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told a closed-door caucus meeting that the group’s “whip count” showed it had 208 of the 218 votes needed to pass what liberals call a “robust” public option. That version would link rates to Medicare plus 5 percent.
Woolsey would not confirm the 208 figure in an interview, but three sources in the meeting said that is the number she cited. “I said we have the votes to pass a robust plan,” Woolsey said. “This is without leadership stepping up and saying, ‘We’re for this.’ ” Woolsey declined to provide a list of names to House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), who has been tasked by leadership with keeping track of where the votes are.
Clyburn told Woolsey that his ongoing, informal tally doesn’t show the liberals’ version of the public option having that kind of support. “That’s not the vote count he has,” said Clyburn spokeswoman Kristie Greco. “We’re not there yet.”
But any momentum liberals sensed early Wednesday was dampened after the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) announced its analysis of Sen. Max Baucus’s (D-Mont.) bill, noting that it would extend coverage to millions of Americans while also cutting the deficit.
Blue Dogs and other Democratic centrist are certain to note the CBO score as proof that the House bill should hew more closely to the Senate Finance Committee legislation.
Some House members, particularly centrists, questioned Woolsey’s 208 figure, noting that last Thursday the Progressive Caucus presented Pelosi with only about 150 names. Centrist Blue Dogs are infuriated by the continued push for a government-run plan they believe the Senate will never agree to. And another Progressive Caucus source said the liberals’ whip count, begun last week at the behest of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), found 176 solid “yes” votes, about 15 “leaning yes,” 30 undecided and 23 solid “no” votes.
AND JUST WHO ARE THOSE BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS? – You may want to give them a call
This is a list of the Blue Dog Democrats, along with the contributions they have recieved from lobbyists with influence over this decision. Don’t be afraid to let them know YOU know when you call them to urge the to vote AGAINST this bill.
See also-
WHO ARE THOSE PUSHING FOR TRANSPARENCY ON THIS BILL
HOW MUCH HAVE YOUR SENATOR AND THOSE PUSHING THIS BILL RECEIVED FROM THE
HEALTH CARE LOBBY?
Read more http://tinyurl.com/rb8t8a
Soldier For Liberty 
Columns by Soldier For Liberty are interesting and you are right that “shinning a bright light, we as a people can begin to peacefully remove the power hungry congress”
I lived in the UK and experienced poor HnS health care but get hate mail when I point out the truth at Elitepro-travel.com
jen
October 12, 2009