Weekly Newsletter: May 4, 2009
Leading Democrat Admits Government-Run Health Care Will Rob Americans of their Current Coverage…
Last week, video emerged online of comments made by Democrat Rep. Jan Schakowsky—a senior Member of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s Health Subcommittee—at a “Health Care for America Now” rally in Chicago. During the speech, Rep. Schakowsky admitted that the so-called “public option” advocated by President Obama and Democrats in Congress will lead to a single-payer health system:
Next to me was a guy from the insurance company, who then argued against the public health insurance option, saying it wouldn’t let private insurance compete—that a public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single payer [loud cheering]. My single payer friends: He was right. The man was right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_MtLyDfXJA
Many Members may be concerned—but not surprised—by Rep. Schakowsky’s comments, as existing data from the non-partisan Lewin Group show that as many as 120 million people will lose their current coverage and end up in a government-run health plan under the Democrat proposal. Some Members may view Rep. Schakowsky’s speech as further reason to support health reforms that will let all Americans keep the coverage they have and let patients and doctors, not bureaucrats in Washington, make personalized health decisions.
…As the President Admits Government Will Ration Health Care
On Sunday, the New York Times Magazine included a wide-ranging interview with, President Obama. During the course of the interview, the President was asked about the future he envisioned for the health sector should his proposed reforms be enacted into law, and the role the government may play in slowing the growth of health costs. The President expressed support for the government serving as “an honest broker in assessing and evaluating treatment options,” particularly in Medicare and Medicaid, “where the taxpayers are footing the bill and we have an obligation to get those costs under control.” He continued:
The chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here…There is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place.
Some Members may be concerned by the President’s comments, which in his own words mark the start of a “very difficult democratic conversation” about how federal bureaucrats should be empowered to ration health care. Some Members may also question the veracity of statements by Rep. Schakowsky and others that health care will be a “right” under a government-run health plan, as many Democrats appear intent on giving federal bureaucrats the ability to ration that “right” to meet fiscal, political, or other expediencies.
Medicare’s Fiscal Status Deteriorates; Will a New Bureaucracy Save It?
This Wednesday’s release of the Medicare trustees report is expected to show a significant downturn in the health of the Medicare trust funds. A sharp slowdown in payroll tax receipts will likely result in a projected insolvency date for the Hospital Insurance (Part A) Trust Fund much sooner than last year’s 2019 prediction.
While Medicare accelerates down the road to fiscal bankruptcy, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus took the opportunity to advocate last week for a new bureaucracy outside the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to solve the program’s woes. In a hearing on Thursday, Baucus suggested that creating a separate entity to implement some of the reforms he envisions being enacted into law later this year would help spur change at an agency viewed by some as “hidebound, not very creative, a crank-turning bunch of folks.”
Some Members may agree with Baucus’ statement that “there are some very, very thoughtful people in health care who really, seriously, wonder if CMS is up to the job”—but question whether creating yet another bureaucratic fiefdom will help or hurt patients. Some Members may also view Baucus’ comments as reason why health reform legislation should be viewed as an opportunity for patients and doctors to retain control of personalized health decisions—not a new government health plan run by Washington bureaucrats.