An Apple on Monday
Posted: June 16, 2009, 9:30PM
"I have a gift, Harry." President Obama told Senator Harry Reid when Reid complimented the President's speech a few years ago on President Bush’s war policy.
President Obama’s gift to deliver a good speech earned him just enough votes to get him elected, but as he's beginning to see it takes far more than a good speech to get what you want as President.
On Monday, the President gave a marathon pitch filled with his usual bumper-sticker-slogan scare tactics and d0-or-die crisis warnings to some very smart people in an attempt to muster support for his health-care plan. As a Pharmaceutical Representative for 18 years I know that when it comes to medicine you never camouflage the truth in front of any doctor.
So, in front of the American Medical Association, President Obama repeatedly denied that he supports “socialized medicine” or “government-run” health-care all the while proposing socialized medicine and government-run health-care.
Prior to that he even teased his “customers” that maybe, just maybe, he was going to support limits on malpractice awards only to dash their hopes by saying he does not advocate such policy. The President has a lot of confidence in his gift, but this time it drew a steady stream of boos.
Terminology aside, President Obama’s healthcare policy is deeply flawed. His “Public-Option” or government-run healthcare system will not allow for private sector options, rather it will slowly erode the private insurance market while imposing a government-controlled single-payer system.
The President’s plan undermines State authority. The Heritage Foundation does a fabulous job explaining why while offering a better approach.
Flexibility in Name Only: States have played a significant role in developing unique and innovative approaches to address the health care needs of their citizens. During the 08 campaign, then-candidate Obama promoted the idea of state flexibility, but as President he replaced this embrace of flexibility with an embrace of federal standards. Obama has already taken numerous steps to roll back many of the flexibilities extended to states in administering Medicaid and SCHIP.
Federal Control over Health Insurance: Currently, states regulate the health insurance available in their states. Under the Obama plan, the federal government would take over the role of regulator, leaving governors and state insurance commissioners to merely implement the new federal framework.
Unknown Costs to the States: The President's plan is estimated to cost close to $1.6 trillion over the next 10 years. There is no easy way to pay for this reform. New taxes on businesses and individuals during a time of economic recession would only hurt a state economy. Also, don't be surprised when the states themselves are left paying for part of the bill.
More Medicaid: The Bottom Layer of Health Care Reform
More Expansions, More Expensive: A key part of Obama's proposal is an expansion of Medicaid, increasing the total number of people on Medicaid to about 80 million by adding between 11 million and 18 million people. The Lewin Group estimates this expansion could cost close to $900 billion over the next 10 years. In addition, if states were also required to increase their Medicaid payments to Medicare levels, the Federal Funds Information for States (FFIS) estimates it would cost between $168 billion and $213 billion in the first year alone.
States Already Crippled by Medicaid Costs: The Government Accountability Office has told Congress that Medicaid in its current form is unsustainable. Congress has just provided states with an $87 billion Medicaid bailout. Medicaid cannot be fixed by giving it more to do.
Budget Shortfalls Persist: The National Governors Association projects states already face a $350 billion shortfall through FY 2011, although some of it will be offset by increased federal dollars. Medicaid costs are borne almost entirely by taxpayers, with recipients contributing little or nothing to the cost of their care.
A Better Approach to Health Care Reform
Promote True Federal-State Partnership: Instead of the top-down approach of a federal health care reform, federal policymakers should embrace the principles of federalism and allow states to develop innovative ways to address their unique challenges to health care reform.
Preserve State Flexibility: Ease the burden on states by giving them greater flexibility to modernize and manage the Medicaid and SCHIP programs. This includes preventing the weakening of existing state flexibilities.
Tackle Fundamental Medicaid Reform: Expanding Medicaid is neither new, nor innovative, nor reform. Rather than expanding Medicaid, there should be a serious effort to reform it. Such policies would include moving healthy "moms and kids" into private health insurance through tax credits, premium assistance, and vouchers and adopting a "money follows the person" model for self-directing long-term.
This demonstrates the problems with “Obamacare” that go well beyond what the AMA opposes, which is government-run healthcare. Which is socialized medicine. Which is what President Obama outlined in his camouflaged speech, only renaming it “Public Option.”
For more than an hour in front of the AMA, President Obama looked more like a defensive salesman desperately trying to close the deal, rather than the gifted speaker that made him President. This time, however, the good doctors didn’t buy it. Instead, they stayed away from President Obama and his unhealthy, socialized medicine scheme as if he'd eaten an apple on Monday.
Chuck
Comments
I find it interesting that when Senator Ted Kennedy, one of the loudest voices demanding socialized medicines, was in need of medical care himself, he quickly bypassed the VA Hospital (a perfect example of how poorly the government executes medical care) and checked himself into the private institution of Duke University Medical Center, one of the nation's hospitals consistently rated in the top 10. If Kennedy is such a strong believer in the country's ability to provide quality healthcare, why did he seek private care for himself? I am certain it was because Kennedy is fully aware that the government run facilities of the Veterans Administration provide subpar treatment in understaffed settings. Stepping into a VA Hospital is like stepping back in time. VA facilities are plagued with overworked & underpaid staff. Their medication formularies prevent access to new & novel chemical entities & instead rely on old & antiquated medications. They lack of funding prevents upgrades in building structures, equipment, etc. And just getting an appointment can take months. The US Census Bureau estimated that in 2005 there were 24.5 million veterans in the United States. Undoubtedly that number has increased by today. If the government cannot provide adequate care to these people, how in the world do you expect the government to provide adequate care to the 300+ million people living in the United States???
Great observation, Kris. The hypocrasy among these elitests like Kennedy is glaring and appalling. I find it interesting that when liberal democrats are introduced to a high profile cabinet post or in Sotomayor's case, the Supreme Court, they talk about how traditional conservative values like hard work, individual self interest and the freedom to achieve excellence is what got them to where they are today. You never hear them crediting liberal policies they support. They never say because of government intervention and entttlement is what made them succeed, when in fact it's just the opposite.
I am all for reform of healthcare, what I am not for is letting the federal government handle the reform. As already stated, if you want an example to judge by, just look at our Veteran's hospitals, which by the way, should be part of any healthcare reform that is done, it's appalling how badly run these hospitals are.
It's also scary how fast this administration is pushing for healthcare reform. I can only hope that support of this president's reform will continue to go down. There are alot of areas that should be looked at, such as torte reform, but you heard the president say that he's not for that, could it possibly have anything to do with how powerful the lobbyist are for lawyers in Washington?
And how about Medicaid reform? How can we possibly continue on the path we are going, giving health services to people who do not work and have no incentive to work.
And how about all of the money that is being spent on illegal immigrants healthcare without any chance of it ever being paid back?
Yeah, we need reform, just not what this administration is proposing.
A nude negro law will never come to pass with obama as president.
A rumor that began in Florida, August 2005 is just that, a rumor. Cobb no longer ignores this.
Add a Comment
Foundry Rooms |
Policy Anvil Room |
News |
Blogs |
Store |
About |
Contact
Advertise on The Conservative Foundry |
Copyright © 2012 The Conservative Foundry, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Web Site by Technology Services Group, Inc.
CONSTITUENT ALERT: Repeal National Health Care