Representative Raul Grijalva D-Ariz., is co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and writes an opinion column for USA Today. He spoke out against a bipartisan effort saying that Republicans don’t want to kill a public option they want to kill reform. He backed up this argument with rather lame examples of conflicting statements he claims were made by Republicans. “For example, this month the Republican attacks on the public option have been rife with doublespeak. In one breath, we hear that "the government can't do anything right" while, in the next breath, we hear that "the government would run a public option so well and so inexpensively that it would knock out competition." Which is it?” Well it really is both. The government overburdens with paperwork, and regulation – as in a 13 page form to be completed for Reimbursement for Cash for Clunkers? 13 pages????? Get real. As to the second statement, the context is that the government has access to our tax dollars to fund whatever inefficient system they build, the ability to continue to increase the deficit, no tort liability and no property or other tax to build into their cost structure. It is not that government management of the program would be efficient, it is that the government has no accountability to her people for how money is spent.
The Obama administration uses an Urban Institute report to support the public option:”Right now, there's no incentive for insurers or big hospital groups to negotiate with each other, because they can pass higher payments on through premiums," said economist Linda Blumberg, co-author of the report. "A public plan would have the leverage to set lower payment rates and get providers to participate at those rates." "The private plans would come back to the providers and say, 'If you don't negotiate with me, you're going to be left with only the public plan,'" Blumberg continued. "Suddenly, you have a very strong economic incentive for them to negotiate." Today our health care system is already dependent on government spending. More than 46% of all medical service in the USA, about $1 trillion annually, is paid for directly by taxpayers – through Medicaid and Medicare. In addition to what government pays directly, it pumps in more than $200 billion a year in tax subsidies to Medicare Advantage and Medicaid HMOs designed to address both member and provider concerns with traditional Medicaid and Medicare levels of care and reimbursement.
In any case the wheels seem to be falling off the public option unless jammed through by the process of reconciliation. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Democrats would consider the voting tactic, known as reconciliation (which requires only 51 votes instead of the normal 60), if necessary to pass a bill by year's end if Republicans won't work toward a bipartisan solution. Talk about resorting to this maneuver comes as Republicans dig in against the idea of a government-run insurance program as an option for consumers and a requirement that employers provide health insurance to their workers. "I think it's a real mistake to try to jam through the total health insurance reform, health care reform plan that the public is either opposed to or of very, very passionate mixed minds about," Lieberman said. Even Sen. Kent Conrad, the Senate Budget Committee chairman, acknowledged that "it's an option, but it's not a very good one." He has warned that nonbudget items in health care legislation would be challenged under the rules allowing reconciliation Republicans including Senate Republican leader would like to start over "with a genuine bipartisan approach."
"The American people will be very troubled by a single political party's 'my way or the highway' attitude to overhauling their health care, especially when it means government-run health care, new taxes on small businesses, and Medicare cuts for seniors," McConnell, R-Ky., said in an e-mail to The Associated Press . To Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, "that would be an abuse of the process.". Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., also suggested that a fresh start was needed."Bringing up of the health care situation in the midst of recession, the unemployment problems ... was a mistake," Lugar said. "For the moment, let's clear the deck and try it again next year or in subsequent times."
If the Democrats jam through this bill in the face of all of the documented opposition of the American people - they should be VERY WORRIED about the 2010 elections. As one North Carolina Democratic Senator said at his town hall when asked about the potential for a single payer system: ”of course it’s a possibility – don’t you people get it? There are consequences to elections”.
0 comments:
Post a Comment