Impeding changes to our Health Care system

[classicman]

A letter to a local congressman. NOT from me, but a real letter. . .

Just another Congressman who thinks every taxpayer personally wants more from the government. A boilerplate reply looking for another vote in November.
I for one want less-less intrusion, less control, less taxes.
How is this going to be paid for? Just like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were supposed to be self-funding.
No matter how big government says it will be paid for, there are never enough dollars because the program keeps expanding.
What's in the bill for all the big advocates- drug companies, AARP-most seniors wonder how its going to be paid for?

What makes this program so special that it will be run efficiently and cost-effectively? Unlike any other federal program ever.

I cant believe how out of touch with reality Congress and the President are. There's an old saying: "You've been a BS'er so long, You're starting to believe your own BS!"

A pox on both your houses, and the White House. All should be de-elected. Congressional sessions should be reduced to one month a year. Then you would really focus on the vital matters, like national security, and economic growth. You can't do damage when you are not in session.

Institute REAL campaign finance reform-your campaign can only raise funds in your district-every dollar needs to be publicly disclosed within 24 hours-make everything transparent immediately-no foreign money-really-no corporate contributions outside their headquarters district. Get the money out and maybe Congress would concentrate on whats best for the country and not whats best for the next election cycle.

A real response would be appreciated, point by point, but if thats too much trouble dont waste my time, I know you have a campaign or two to run , and it takes a lot of money to do it. All I have is a vote.

thank you,

[Clodfobble]

Mr. Clod came across this youtube video last night. It's kind of interesting in its own right, but the last 30 seconds is what really makes it memorable. A bit of NSFW language.

[classicman]

The response:

Dear Mr. XXXXX,

Thank you for contacting my office regarding health care reform legislation. I greatly appreciate your input on this matter, and I apologize for any delay in my reply.

As you may know, on March 21, 2010, I voted to ensure access to affordable, high quality health insurance for all Americans. Taken together, H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), and H.R. 4872 the Reconciliation Act of 2010, ensure affordable health coverage for 32 million otherwise uninsured American citizens, institutes market reforms to make health insurance more competitive and more affordable for individuals and small businesses, all while reducing the federal deficit by $143 billion over the next ten years. PPACA passed the House by a vote of 219 to 212, while the Reconciliation Act of 2010 was approved 220 to 211. The PPACA now awaits the President's signature, while the Reconciliation Act of 2010 awaits Senate passage.

I ran for Congress to reform our health care system after my 4-year-old daughter was diagnosed with brain cancer. I have worked to provide all Americans with access to the same lifesaving medical care I was able to provide my daughter through my U.S. military health insurance. Furthermore, with this legislation, Congress is finally tackling the problem of ever-increasing health care costs and health insurance that doesn't protect those enrolled in plans from this growing burden. Roughly 40 million American citizens lack insurance. Every year, the epidemic of uninsurance costs our economy as much as $160 billion in lost productivity and if we don't bend the cost curve, in 30 years, health care costs will consume fully one-third of our economic output. This is one of the rare instances where the moral imperative is also the economic necessity.

PPACA allows individuals to keep the private insurance they have now, while also establishing new state health benefit exchanges with additional private plans. These exchanges create a transparent and functional marketplace for individuals and small employers to purchase insurance plans as a part of a larger pool of consumers. As a result individuals and small businesses can benefit from the lower premiums that larger employers currently enjoy. Additionally, health insurance plans will have new consumer protections, which include:

--Requiring insurers to cover a minimum set of benefits and minimum portion of individual's health care costs,
--Requiring insurers to cover young adults on their parent's plan up to age 27,
--Preventing insurers from taking away coverage just because an individual gets sick,
--Stopping discrimination against individuals due to pre-existing conditions, age or gender,
--Eliminating lifetime and annual caps on coverage, and
--Limiting proposed premium increases, while allowing individuals to appeal denial of care to an independent organization.

It is clear that competition and transparency in our health care system will best discipline -- and in time drive down - costs. These new exchanges, with the common sense consumer protections they include, will provide Americans with the affordable, quality choices they deserve.

PPACA establishes health insurance coverage as a shared responsibility between individuals, employers, and the government, a concept I have long touted. Taken together, these provisions bring individuals into the system and cover them upfront, replacing the current system of inconsistent, incomplete and more costly emergency care that raises costs for everyone. The bill mandates, with limited exceptions, that individuals purchase health insurance. Government would be responsible for ensuring that every American has access to quality health insurance by providing subsidies to qualifying low- and middle-income families and expanding Medicaid so more individuals in poverty can participate in the program. Larger businesses must offer health coverage for all their employees, by either providing workers with health insurance directly or paying a penalty that helps individuals afford to purchase insurance in the exchange if any of their employees qualify for the subsidy.

To further aid small businesses, which currently spend 18% more for health insurance than larger employers, the legislation provides tax credits to smaller employers to assist in paying for employees' health insurance. Employers with fewer than 100 employees would be able to purchase insurance through the exchanges. Businesses with fewer than 50 employees would be exempt from the employer responsibility. Additionally, the bill provides tax credits to smaller employers to assist them in providing health insurance to their employees.

Critically, this legislation addresses the economic consequences of the status quo. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, PPACA does not increase the deficit. In fact, the bill will reduce federal deficits by approximately $143 billion dollars over the next ten years and will continue to reduce deficits by as much as $1.2 trillion in the following decade. The Department of Health and Human Services has reported that the bill will extend the solvency of Medicare by up to five years.

This bill is an incredibly important step to expand access to care, improve the insurance on which Americans currently rely and lay the groundwork to better address costs in the long term. However, it is only the first step, and I am most supportive of continued efforts to restrict long-term growth of health care costs.

In addition to insurance market reforms, the bill makes many improvements to the Medicare program, including gradually eliminating the Medicare Prescription Drug donut hole and co-payments for preventative care. It implements pilot programs, such as Accountable Care Organizations and Medical Home Models, which are aimed at reducing cost by incentivizing quality and not quantity of care. These initiatives, which encourage physicians to take on more responsibility for patient care, will hopefully be leveraged to reduce wasteful spending while encouraging doctors to provide better care. The bill also invests significantly in the health care workforce, making primary care a more attractive option for new physicians and authorizing more funding for training of doctors and other medical professionals.

Our nation's year-long debate leading up to this historic legislation was both challenging and reassuring. Through hundreds of hours of hearings and markups, several hundred amendments considered from members of both parties, as well as thousands of town hall meetings across the country, this was a truly comprehensive debate on the issues. At times, I would have liked to see both sides act with greater accountability and transparency. In the end, however, it was important for the House to hold a straight forward vote on these important pieces of legislation, which will benefit millions of Americans.

Thank you again for your letter. If I can be of any additional assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to our future correspondence.

[Trilby]

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

I've been to Sex Pistols concerts where the people behaved better.

Shame on the repubs. Shame on them.

[wanderer]

grrrrr..........more tax to pay!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by wanderer

grrrrr..........more tax to pay!

It doesn't effect you.

[wanderer]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

It doesn't effect you.

Why? I earn!

[skysidhe]

I certainly don't think the sky is falling but I sure don't want my health care mandated. Offered yes but mandated and fined if you don't is unconstitutional. That isn't a fear mentality that is just a fact.

Originally Posted by skysidhe

I certainly don't think the sky is falling but I sure don't want my health care mandated. Offered yes but mandated and fined if you don't is unconstitutional. That isn't a fear mentality that is just a fact.

The "unconstitutional" arguments are very weak....both in terms of Congress's taxing powers and the commerce clause.

IMO, the state AGs planning to sue makes for great political theater and raises their profiles so they can run for higher office, but winning on the merits of their case...highly unlikely.

It is even unlikely that the courts will accept the case, given that the AGs (and the states) are not the "injured" party. The ones would could sue would be those forced to buy insurance, but the questions is, can they sue before they are "injured" which wont happen until 2014.

[Happy Monkey]

Mandates are necessary. There's no way around it. If you don't have mandates, you can't eliminate the "preexisting condition" travesty, which is the most important part of the whole bill.

[Pie]

Not enough. If we look at the "how much do you earn?" thread, it looks like the vast majority of dwellars will not be paying more.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Pie

Not enough. If we look at the "how much do you earn?" thread, it looks like the vast majority of dwellars will not be paying more.

I suspect that anyone who gets insurance from their employer will certainly be more, that is what the insurance companies are saying anyway. And for some it maybe more than they are prepared, and now required, to buy.

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

And for some it maybe more than they are prepared, and now required, to buy.

Insurance for most every company insured employee is virtually unchanged. Except for one provision. Government welfare to medicaid provisions is being removed. Welfare to company health plans means some companies must scale back some provisions of their plans or pay for what the Federal government was once providing through tax credits - corporate welfare.

For those without health care, details to a solution must be implemented by each state. Like auto insurance, states must create an exchange where insurance is provided by corporate insurance companies at rates competitive to those offered in big corporate plans. Every state must be and is encouraged to innovate. Try different methods to make this free market work. Some states may even group together to form a larger exchange.

Critical details (like all insurance) are under the domain of the states. Amazing how many are so critical when the states have not even defined their programs. Nothing says the states must pay for anything. But by the time it is all done in four years, everyone must have and must be provided the oppurtunity to buy insurance from some insurance company.

Insurance companies must conform to free market principles which most insurance companies wanted anyway. Gouging by medical insurance companies will result in pressure both from the free market, and now also by state insurance commissioners. Regulators can now confront issues such as coverage routinely dropped for mythical pre-existing medical conditions. The free market must now make insurance available to everyone. Markets (exchanges) that will make that possible must be implemented by every state.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by skysidhe

I certainly don't think the sky is falling but I sure don't want my health care mandated. Offered yes but mandated and fined if you don't is unconstitutional. That isn't a fear mentality that is just a fact.

I can only assume you feel the same way about auto insurance, then?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

As a matter of fact, Cloddie, yes I do. Though it's tempered.

It's quite like the biker slogan about "Helmet Laws Suck." They do, but helmets themselves do not. You might have to get a few beers into a stubborn doctrinaire biker to get him to admit it, but unless he's fuckin' with you for the lulz, he will.