Just one company' estimate on increased health care costs because of this bill. People will DEMAND a single payer system after this bill. The Link
"Let me get this straight......we're trying to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a president that also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, andfinanced by a country that's broke. What the hell could possibly go wrong?" Besides all our other entitlements are working so well. I am sure this time they will get it just right.
While I have issues with mandated health insurance for reasons unrelated to cost, it's also not lost on me that this HCR bill does little to prevent insurance companies from jacking up premiums another 20% regardless. While this legislation is sorely lacking in many fundamental ways, one of the main reasons for my tepid support for it is that more major changes are sure to follow that would not be possible without the ball being put into motion now. If this passes, it will be a platform for further change that will carry electoral juice. Instead of this being a one and done piece of legislation, my cynical view is to expect that Dems will roll out bills for major additions -when it benefits them electorally- for things like provisions for a public option or Medicare buy-in for younger citizens. The ball is in the court of private insurance. This HRC bill would be a windfall for them due to the insurance mandate. If premiums drop across the board, Caterpillar and everyone else benefits. If they don't cooperate in kind and premiums continue their inexorable climb, look for big changes to be introduced to appease the masses.
Funny thing is, I agree with just about everything triple just posted, although it's the reason I'm opposed to it while he's for it. But I think everyone has to see that the bill that's being discussed right now is not an end point. I did have an issue with this:
I am sorry Media is not paying attention to the 38 so far Govs who are firmly against this for what it will do to their state budgets. How can people be so stupid as to say ," well the CBO says it reduces deficits so that is good enough for me?What about the unfunded mandates the states will have to pick up? As an example Tenn estimates this bill will cost Tenn an extra 750 million the first year here is the letter the Gov sent to his pols "Bob and Bart, the problem we are facing is simple: by 2013,we expect to have returned to our 2008 levels of revenue and will have already cut our programs dramatically – over a billion dollars. At that point, we have to start digging out — we will have not given raises to state employees or teachers for five years, our pension fund will need shoring up, our cash reserves (“rainy day fund”) will have been considerably depleted and in need of restoration, and we will have not made any substantial new investments for years. There will have been major cuts to areas such as Childrens Services that we really need to restore. On top of these, there are all the usual obligations to be met — Medicaid, for example, will continue to grow in excess of the economy and our tax revenues. It’s going to take at least a full decade to dig our way out and back to where we were prior to this recession. In this environment, for Congress to also send along a mandatory bill for three-quarters of a billion dollars for the health reform they’ve designed is very difficult. These are hard dollars – we can’t borrow them – and make the management of our finances post-recession even more daunting than it already is. … I very much want to support the President, and Lord knows we have plenty of people in Tennessee who need help with health insurance. But this is an extraordinary time for us (and we are better off than many states) and I will appreciate any way in which you can help us manage through this." end of quote That is ONE state.Wonder where Calif gets the money? Michigan? etc etc Any of you who think this reduces the budget, WHO will pay for it at the state level? Anyone? Any supporter, please answer. who pays for it at state level?
Lone Star, we have been talking about mulltiple bills and multiple reforms for a year and a half. This bill came out and was scored and made public, yesterday and will voted on Sunday. That is where the confusion is. Is student loan reform in there or not? What is the final language on abortion? These are qustions that got debated, but no final answer yet. That is why people are confused over what is in there and what isn't. The scary part I was referring to, is the effect on the economy IF and only IF this is how it is really going to effect companies and their bottom lines. Cat is interested in attempting to understand how this bill will effect them. Their best guess is 100 million. If that is the case, then it would seem expenditures for health care will go up, and dramatically. Couple this will higher taxes for people making as little as 40k, and wow. This is a bad bad bill. The current system has REAL REAl problems, but this bill just adds dung to the pile.
If you think this thing will hold down costs just remember this: The Democrats are removing the only cost containing portion of the prescription drug plan passed a few years back. There will be no cost containment in the prescription plan now and there will be no cost containment plan in this abortion of a bill if they are able to bribe and rahm it through. Get ready for about a 15% tax increase if not now, when the 30-45 million at first and later 80 to 90 million become eligible, by magic,(ask Tennessee and Massachussetts), for the freebie govt subsidized portion of this new beast. There are no cost containment provisions. Remember that. Remember you weren't supposed to see any tax increases unless your family made over 250K too, right? My big question is what will it take to turn back the clock once the Dems are booted in November?
zork Thst is an excellent question but since only the revenue gathering part of the bill go into effect right away and 99% of "benefits"not until 2014 and later I think it should be pretty good, the chance to turn it back. yes yes I know kids can stay on their parents policy until 26 right away but nothing substantial until 2014 The reality of this bill will shock anyone paying attention and I don't see most dems up for election in Nov surviving it they vote for it now
Right now, there are signs in plain sight that a plan for a Public Option will be put on the table in coming months (likely in the run up to the midterms). Harry Reid penned a letter this week basically promising that there will be a vote on a public option in coming months:
Lone Star, I don't think I've ever had anyone quote from a post of mine and then write as much as you did while still managing to completely avoid the point you quoted. Nice work!
Lone Star where do you suggest Texas find funds to pay for the unfunded mandates that will come? Or have you not paid any attention to the reports coming from states all over our country that there is NO money for this? How about the "Doc fix? WHO pays for that? Should it not be part of this bill? Is reality any part of your view?
Remember Yo the American people were solidly behind going into Iraq, they are solidly against this cluster. Big difference.
I agree that people should be able to buy insurance at a reasonable rate even if they have a pre-existing condition but people should also be held accountable for their personal choices, ie smokers should pay more, overweight should pay more.... No one should be dropped if they've been holding up their part of the bargain by paying their premiums. Maybe the way to force compliance is to up the penalty. If i'm going to be penalized 4K for not having insurance but the choice is paying 6K and actually having insurance then I would certainly pay the extra 2K. Government sucks at 'doing' pretty much everything but they are certainly the only instrument we have that has the power to set rules and standards that are in the democratic mold. I believe we ought to distinguish between catastrophic insurance and everyday insurance. Basically, everyone should be able to get a certain level of care, I suggest flex accounts for these and then utilize a different mechanism for catastrophic care. This catastrophic care pool of insurance could be paid for with and across the board payroll deduction for everyone. The patient would then be liable for only the first 5K or so. Enough to cross the threshold to resist abuse but not so much that a famiily would never recover from a family member getting sick.
or Yo, you could be against the invasion of Iraq, and FOR health care, but agaisnt this bill... like me. I do confess though, I am glad Sadaam is no longer in power, and that the weapons of mass destruction that were found have been destroyed. AT LEAST with the invasion, which I opposed there were some good benefits. Overall, I still think it was a bad decision. THIS bill in foresight, NOT just hindsight, is a BAD BAD bill. I really don't care about poll numbers. Not always anyway. I guess I am in the majority on both counts though.
Spot on Prodigal.. The question is are you in favor of THIS BILL, not if you want reform. I want reform, but not this POS that is being forced on us. There are going to be huge repercussions if/when this forced bill is passed.
I'm starting to think it may have been cheaper (albeit still damn expensive) to have just gone the single payer route. This bill is an abortion all in the name of BO's legacy.
Once the insurance companies go out of business, single payer will be on the way. Bankrupcy of the federal government should be right around the corner.
