Weekly Newsletter: March 23, 2009
Democrats Support Government-Rationed Health Care
Last week’s House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing on health reform resulted in a significant disclosure about the Democrat health agenda. During the hearing, Professor Uwe Reinhardt—a witness called by the Committee’s majority—was questioned about his recent New York Times blog post in which he called the views of those who “believe that health and life are ‘priceless…an utterly romantic notion, and, if I may say so, also an utterly a silly one [sic].” In response, Dr. Reinhardt defended his rationale and advocated explicit rationing of health care benefits by the federal government (the exchange begins at 2:27:45 of the video):
If you are dealing with a collective insurance fund, then those who preside over those funds do have at some point to ask themselves ‘At what price do I buy additional life-years, quality-adjusted life-years, or additional health?’…I raise the question, why should health care be the only area in an economy, in society, where I have the right to say ‘Spend the limit, spend $5 million on me, and let the taxpayer pick up the tab?’…I think that notion, to my mind, is romantic, and in fact silly.
Many Members may be concerned by these comments, which suggest that the federal government not rationing health care is “silly.” Unlike other sectors of the economy, more than half of all health spending is paid for by the government, meaning that federal bureaucrats—not consumers, doctors, or patients—will be making the decisions on the true value of human life. Given that other countries’ initiatives in government rationing have not slowed cost growth—but have harmed patients—some Members may support other alternatives that empower patients and doctors to take control of their health, rather than relying on federal bureaucrats to determine who will—and will not—have access to life-saving treatments.
We recently released a new document highlighting how government control and rationing of care has adversely impacted health systems in other countries; the document can be found here.
“Transparent” Administration Stonewalling on Budget Details
This week, the House and Senate Budget Committees will begin the process of marking up Congress’ concurrent budget resolution. Yet nearly one month after President Obama submitted his budget outline document to Congress, officials at the Office of Management and Budget have refused to release the assumptions underlying their request. These baseline assumptions involve numerous questions of policy—for instance, whether the Administration presumes that Medicaid bailout funds for states, and a new entitlement to subsidies for COBRA continuation health insurance, included in the “stimulus” will be extended further—yet the Administration has denied requests by Republican staff to release their projections.
Some Members may question why an Administration that promises “sound budget practices” and “fiscal transparency” is keeping its budgetary assumptions under lock-and-key. Some Members may further wonder whether this lack of transparency hints at additional expansions of health care spending—including in another “stimulus” bill—not yet disclosed to the public or Congress.
Article of Note: A Liberal’s Support for Consumer Choice
Last Tuesday, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson used a recent personal mishap to offer his own perspective on the health care debate. Recounting an episode from last month where a kitchen accident resulted in an infection, hospitalization, and emergency surgery, Robinson noted that the firsthand experience of a medical injury changed his view of health reform: “What’s changed is that I also feel more strongly about the ability to make my own choices. I decided where I would be treated and, ultimately, what would or wouldn’t be done. I’m willing to pay for that.”
While disagreeing with Robinson’s suggestion that tax increases—as opposed to spending restraint and a realignment of federal priorities—finance coverage for the uninsured, many Members may support his newfound appreciation of the power to choose one’s own doctor, hospital, and treatment. Some Members may also agree with the comment made by Robinson’s surgeon that “‘If…Obama had [his] way with health care, it wouldn’t be me doing this operation. It would just be some guy,’” perhaps one picked by a federal bureaucrat.
Read the article here.