Freedom Line Blog

After taking intense criticism for not being open and transparent, the House of Representatives just posted a new version of health care “reform” online.

If you have a slow Internet connection, then you better take a coffee break while downloading.  The bill is 1,990 pages or more than six football fields long when placed end-to-end.

Pelosi’s pledge on the legislation, “It will not add one dime to the deficit.”  How does she get there you ask? Of course by raising taxes in an effort to make the bill “deficit neutral.”

More analysis to come…

According to intrade.com, the online prediction market, Harry Reid’s (D-NV) announcement of a modified public option put the chances of ObamaCare’s passage on the ropes.

Earlier this month, markets gave the public option a 30 percent chance of passing before December 31, 2009.  After Reid’s announcement of a “compromise” bill, the odds are now just 7.1 percent, according to intrade.

Let’s hope the market is right, as it usually is in all aspects of life.  Call your Senator at 202-224-3121 and tell them to oppose Senator Reid’s pathetic attempt at health care “reform.”

From the Associated Press:

A government-sponsored ‘public option’ for health care lives, though it may be more attractive to skeptics if it goes by a different moniker, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday.

“In an appearance at a Florida senior center, the Democratic leader referred to the so-called public option as ‘the consumer option.’  Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., appeared by Pelosi’s side and used the term ‘competitive option.’

“Both suggested new terminology might get them past any lingering doubts among the public – or consumers or competitors.”

Read the full article here.

In the past two weeks, Senators Harry Reid and Max Baucus, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and other higher-ups in the administration have been behind closed doors crafting a government takeover of health care.

Senator Reid has been the chief architect of a plan to “meld” bills from the Health Education and Labor Committee and the Finance Committee.  Today, Reid emerged from his smoke-filled room with legislation that includes a so-called public option and a health care co-op.

This compromise between liberal Democrats and uber-liberal Democrats now heads to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which will attempt to put a price tag on the rag-tag, budget-busting piece of … legislation. The White House hopes this version of ObamaCare will be enough to garner at least 60 votes in the Senate.

Call Congress at 202-224-3121 and tell them to vote “No” on Senator Reid’s health care “compromise.” Click here for more details on the legislation.  Click here for CFIF’s coverage of the health care debate.

Despite claims from some on the left, including the White House, that health care reform will lower visits to the ER, new statistics from Massachusetts prove that individual mandates could actually increase ER visits.

A survey of Massachusetts emergency physicians found that 42% said emergency care had “somewhat increased,” while 22% of respondents said ER care had “significantly increased.”

The main platform of health care reform in Massachusetts is an individual health care mandate for virtually all residents.  (Residents who fail to obtain coverage can face fines of up to $912.)  Dr. Angela Gardner, President of the American College of Emergency Physicians, noted, “The idea that emergency departments are filled with people who don’t need to be there is simply not true.”

Thus, despite increased access to care in Massachusetts, ER’s across the commonwealth are still inundated with patients.  This finding isn’t too surprising.  Sure enough, people will actually go out of their way to save their lives, even if government tries to get in the way.

P.T. Barnum, the American businessman, politician and showman remembered most for his celebrated hoaxes, is widely credited with coining the phrase, “There’s a sucker born every minute.”  Judging by the fortune he was able to acquire on his traveling band of circus freaks, one would be hard-pressed to argue Barnum’s point.  Indeed today, nearly 150 years later, the so-called leaders of the current Congress are seemingly taking Barnum’s words to heart.

“Medicare for Everyone” — That’s the headline branded above the fold today on the front page of the Capitol Hill newspaper The Hill.  The accompanying story leads with:

Say hello to ‘Medicare Part E’ — as in, ‘Medicare for Everyone.’

“House Democrats are looking at re-branding the public health insurance option as Medicare, an established government healthcare program that is better known than the public option.

“The strategy could benefit Democrats struggling to bridge the gap between liberals in their party, who want the public option, and centrists, who are worried it would drive private insurers out of business.”

In other words, Congressional Democrats have resorted to scheming up a public relations re-branding campaign in an effort to sell their government-run public option (the hoax) to an American public (in their minds, the sucker) that has thus far rejected it at every turn.

Step right up folks!  Welcome to the modern day version of “The Greatest Show on Earth” that is “health care reform.”

Proponents of ObamaCare have couched their language in terms familiar to conservatives and libertarians: choice, option and freedom.  We’ve been told that a ‘Public Option’ will be available to compete with private health care companies.  White House officials want Americans to forget that more than 88 million patients could lose their private health care and be forced into the government option.

Peering into Harry Reid’s newest health care incarnation, which you can read here (with our commentary here), the new Senate health care bill is all about force, not choice.  In the first 100 pages alone, there are dozens of examples of “requirements” on doctors, patients, states and the federal government.

Here is a brief snippet of what to expect.  Of course, this represents just over 6% of the new mandates and regulations contained in the 1,502 page bill.  Unfortunately, most of the language below is completely unintelligible.

1) Requiring that all new health benefits plans offered to individuals and employees in the individual and small group markets be qualified health benefits plans.

2) SEC. 2201. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: New plans must be qualified health benefits plans. Each State shall provide that each health benefits plan which is offered in the individual or small group market within the State shall be a qualified health benefits plan.

3) An offeror of a plan shall not be treated as meeting the requirements of this subsection unless the plan also accepts, renews, or continues in force coverage of an individual who is eligible for enrollment in the plan by reason of their relationship to the named insured under the plan.

4) Each offeror of a health benefits plan shall establish annual and special enrollment periods meeting the requirements of section 2236(d)(2).

5) Each State shall establish 1 or more rating areas within that State for purposes of applying the requirements of this title.

6) The contribution amount for any plan year may be based on the percentage of revenue of each offeror or on a specified amount per enrollee and may be required to be paid in advance or periodically throughout the plan year.

7) An employment based plan meets the requirements of this paragraph if the plan—provides benefits appropriate for individuals between the ages described in subsection (a)(2)(C) and that are certified as so appropriate by the Secretary; implements programs and procedures to generate cost-savings with respect to participants with chronic and high-cost conditions; and provides documentation of the actual cost of medical claims involved and for which reimbursement is sought under this section.

8 ) Each State shall phase in the application of the insurance reform requirements under subpart 1 to grandfathered health benefits plans offered in the small group market within the State.

9) SPECIAL RULE FOR RATING REQUIREMENTS — A State law shall not be treated as offering more protection to consumers than the protection offered by such requirements if the State law imposes ratios that are greater than the ratios specified in section 2204(b).

10) Each State shall — require each offeror of a qualified health benefits plans offered through an exchange — to provide an internal claims appeal process; to provide notice in clear language and in the enrollee’s primary language of available internal and external appeals processes and the availability of the ombudsman established under section 2229(a) to assist them with the appeals processes.

11) PLAN REQUIREMENTS — An offeror meets the requirements of this subsection with respect to a qualified health benefits plan if the plan offers a benefits package that is uniform in each State in which the plan is offered and meets the requirements set forth in paragraph (3) the offeror is licensed in each State; the offeror meets all requirements of this title with respect to a qualified health benefits plan, including the requirement to offer the silver and gold levels of the plan in each exchange in the State for the market in which the plan is offered; and the offeror determines the premiums for the plan in any State on the basis of the ratings rules in effect in that State for the ratings areas in which it is offered.

12) The State provides that the amount of the monthly premium an eligible individual is required to pay for coverage under the standard health plan for the individual and the individual’s dependents.

13) The amount of the monthly premium an individual is required to pay under either the standard health plan or the applicable second lowest cost silver plan shall be determined after reduction for any premium credits and premium subsidies allowable with respect to either plan.

14) The Secretary shall each year conduct a review of each State program to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section.

15) INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANTS: An applicant for enrollment in a qualified health benefits plan offered through an exchange shall provide the information required by any of the following paragraphs that is applicable to an enrollee.

Below is the latest from Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Michael Ramirez.

 View more of Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website.

The Baucus Bill, passed by the Senate Finance Committee last week, has been written and filed… all 1,502 pages of it.  The public posting of the bill is, of course, after the Committee passed it without reading it.  After the absolute certainty that it isn’t going to be the bill on which the entire Senate votes.

You can read it here, but we wouldn’t recommend wasting your time.  Harry Reid and other members of “the most open and transparent Congress in history” are presently working behind closed doors with senior aides of “the most open and transparent Administration in history” to draft yet another version of ObamaCare that will ultimately be considered by the full Senate.   News reports indicate that a floor debate on the new, secret “reform” legislation could begin as early as next week.  But that all depends on whether the White House and Senate negotiators are able to buy off the docs and finish their other back-room wheelings and dealings by week’s end.  

Didn’t President Obama promise to air all health care reform negotiations on C-SPAN?

For all you policy junkies out there who just can’t resist, we must warn you that reading the Baucus Bill can cause severe anxiety, eye strain, sudden spikes in blood pressure, heart palpitations and chronic disgust in your government.  If you decide to proceed, it’s best you read it online rather than printing it off and carrying it over to that comfy Lazy Boy.  It’s still unclear whether hernia operations will be included on the final list of government-approved procedures covered by what is likely to be your new government-approved insurance plan.

The individual health care mandate contained in the so-called Baucus Bill will hit low-income taxpayers, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

The CBO recently released a chart to the public which illustrated that those making $30,000 to $40,000 (100% to 200% of the federal poverty level) would pay over $200 million in fines for failing to obtain government-approved health care.  This $200 million projection represents 26% of all fines to be paid to the federal government.

In contrast, individuals making close to $100,000 would pay around $100 million in fines, or only about 9% of all fines.

Click here for the chart.

From the chatter on the Internet and in the newsrooms you’d think Maine Senator Olympia Snowe’s vote in favor of the Baucus health care “reform” bill out of committee is newsworthy. According to the Associated Press, Snowe’s “Yes” turns a starkly divided blue-red, 13-10 vote into a 14-9 “bi-partisan” shocker. To wit:

But Snowe’s decision gave the vote a significance that transcends partisan divisions. For months, congressional Republicans have been virtually unanimous in denouncing the Democratic bills as an unwarranted expansion of government influence.”

So, even though “for months” congressional Republicans have been “virtually unanimous” in criticizing Democrats’ plans to overhaul American health care, one Senate Republican voting “aye,” constitutes a landmark in bi-partisanship?  Hardly.  Even Snowe acknowledges that she’s only voting for this version of the health care bill, and remains undecided about the inevitable modified version(s) still to be written. 

The real story here is how Snowe managed to dominate an event that would have had exactly the same effect had she been fly fishing today. Snowe’s vote isn’t about switching sides in a policy debate, or answering history’s call. It’s about solidifying her standing as a moderate to be negotiated with when Democrats need Republican cover for passing liberal legislation. Although Baucus failed to get a true bi-partisan bill out his committee, he did succeed in snaring a token R. One hopes an enterprising reporter at one of the Washington dailies will keep a close eye on the next few Appropriations bills to see how much Maine just benefited from its Senator selling her (qualified) support.

The Senate Finance Committee just approved Sen. Max Baucus’ version of health care “reform.”  The vote was 14-9, with all Democrats voting for the bill.  The only Republican voting for the bill was Olympia Snow (R-ME).

The bill will now be reconciled with the Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions (HELP) Committee bill.

Despite expressing “concerns” about the Baucus “health care reform” bill, Senator Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) announced she will vote “yes” today in the Senate Finance Committee.

There has been a great deal of debate over the relationship between tort reform (capping non-economic damages in lawsuits) and health care.

Well, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has provided some research to support the notion that tort reform would actually cut health care costs and reduce the budget deficit.

According to the CBO:

[I]mplementing a typical package of tort reform proposals nationwide would reduce total U.S. health care spending by about 0.5 percent (about $11 billion in 2009). That figure is the sum of a direct reduction in spending of 0.2 percent from lower medical liability premiums and an additional indirect reduction of 0.3 percent from slightly less utilization of health care services….  Enacting a typical set of proposals would reduce federal budget deficits by roughly $54 billion over the next 10 years, according to estimates by CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee of Taxation.”

Courtesy of the Washington Post, this illustrates that in spite of massive spending, in spite of new mandates and in spite of new insurance regulations, an average family of four could still end up paying over one-fifth of their income on health care costs under the Baucus Bill.

The Senate Finance Committee will vote today on the latest version of health care “reform,” the Baucus Bill.  Senator Baucus is expected to strike the gavel around 10:00 am (EST), with a vote expected later in the afternoon.

Make sure to call your Senator and tell them to vote “No” on the Baucus Bill.  The Congressional Switchboard number is 202-224-3121.

Here are the members of the Finance Committee, Senators that could decide the fate of health care in the U.S.

• Max Baucus (D-MT)
• John D. Rockefeller (D-WV)
• Kent Conrad (D-ND)
• Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
• John Kerry (D-MA)
• Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
• Ron Wyden (D-OR)
• Charles Schumer (D-NY)
• Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
• Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
• Bill Nelson (D-FL)
• Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
• Tom Carper (D-DE)

• Charles Grassley (R-IA)
• Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
• Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
• Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
• Jim Bunning (R-KY)
• Mike Crapo (R-ID)
• Pat Roberts (R-KS)
• John Ensign (R-NV)
• Mike Enzi (R-WY)
• John Cornyn (R-TX)

Well, it only took the Obama administration a half-day to find folks to trash an insurance industry study that calculates much higher health care insurance premiums under the Baucus version of ObamaCare.

“I really don’t think it’s worth the paper it’s written on,” AARP Executive Vice President John Rother  said, according to the Associated Press. 

That couldn’t be the same AARP that sees nothing distressing in Medicare cuts of $500 billion or of significant cuts to Medicare Advantage under the Baucus plan, could it?  The AARP that sells insurance  that will competitively benefit from cuts in Medicare Advantage?  The AARP that sells tons of stuff to seniors by making those seniors believe that AARP is their lobbyist while laughing all the way to the bank?