Posted tagged ‘government health insurance’

Fact-Checking the Obama Health Speech

September 10, 2009

o-youlieReason magazine editor-in-chief Matt Welch has the best post-speech fact-check I’ve seen so far. Going beyond just the basic true/false of what Obama said about the (nonexistant) health reform plan, Welch takes measure of the president’s character and how willing we should be to trust his promises.

 

A brief excerpt:

Again and again last night, the president’s numbers didn’t add up. “There may be those—particularly the young and healthy—who still want to take the risk and go without coverage,” he warned, in a passage defending compulsory insurance. “The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits.” No, it means that, on balance, the healthy young don’t pay for the unhealthy old. The whole point of forcing vigorous youth to buy insurance is using their cash and good actuarials to bring down the costs of covering the less fortunate.

Such fudges reveal a politician who, for whatever reason, feels like he can’t be honest about the real-world costs of expanding health care. “Add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years,” he said, trying hard to sound like those numbers weren’t pulled out of Joe Biden’s pants, and won’t be dwarfed by actual costs within a year or two. “We’ve estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system–a system that is currently full of waste and abuse,” he said, making him at least the eighth consecutive president to vaguely promise cutting Medicare “waste” (a promise, it should be added, that could theoretically be fulfilled without drastically overhauling the health care system). Any government-run “public option,” he claimed, somehow “won’t be” subsidized by taxpayers, but instead would “be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects.”

Read the rest

Stop Obamacare Now

July 26, 2009

Picture-5

(Via Campaign For Liberty)

Stop Obamacare Now!
By David McKalip, M.D.

Congress is foolishly basing its health system reform proposals on the same approach used in Massachusetts. The state has failed to achieve “universal coverage” with about 200,000 (2.6%) of their state still uninsured. In fact, most of the newly insured were covered by receiving heavily subsidized insurance from the state — not due to the mandate to buy private insurance out of pocket. Due to budget overruns, they recently voted to remove coverage from 30,000 legal aliens for a $130 million savings and last year released others who couldn’t afford costly coverage from the mandate. Health care costs are rising much faster than nationally with spending up by 23 percent. Insurance premiums have increased 10-12 percent per year, nearly double the national average. The state is facing $1.5 billion this year in health spending and now is considering cost control programs that will limit care doctors provide to patients. There are too few providers for the increased demand – due to price fixing of doctor pay for decades by the federal government. Thus patients are waiting long periods to see doctors — especially in primary care. Congressional proposals to fix this included allowing nurse practitioners to be designated primary care “providers”, negating the years of training doctors receive and discouraging more doctors from entering the profession to compete against nurses for the same business.

Fortunately there are good Congressional proposals to address these problems and to allow American to escape from the government’s medical cage. Congressman Ron Paul has authored HR 2630, the “Protect Patients and Physician’s Privacy Act”. The bill states that all individuals shall have the ability to opt out of any federally mandated, created, or funded electronic system for maintaining health care information. He also is offering HR 2629 the “Coercion is Not Health Care Act'” which forbids the Federal Government from forcing any American to purchase health insurance, and from conditioning participation in any federal program, or receipt of any federal benefit, on the purchase of health insurance.

Read the rest

Congressman Paul himself was in Michigan yesterday at a private reception for conservatives. He was speaking about Obama’s “monstrous” health care reform plans.

Former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has a frank prescription for the health care plan making its way through Congress: Scrap it.

“I think it’s monstrous,” Paul said.

“I don’t think it will improve medical care in this country. I think it’s very, very costly and we don’t have any money. And they don’t have any way of paying for it.”

Continue reading

The Great Divider

July 17, 2009

obama-whatsthatA new Rasmussen poll indicates that only 35% of Americans are still in favor of creating a government health insurance company to compete with private insurers.

50% of those polled are opposed to the idea with 15% undecided.

Mr. President, are you listening?

CBO Says Reform Will Increase – Not Decrease – Federal Health Care Spending

July 16, 2009

In the relentless stream of bad news about health care “reform”, this comes in from The Washington Post (emphasis mine): 

CBO Chief Criticizes Democrats’ Health Reform Measures
Director Says Proposed Changes Would Increase Health Care Spending

 Instead of saving the federal government from fiscal catastrophe, the health reform measures being drafted by congressional Democrats would increase rather than reduce public spending on health care, potentially worsening an already bleak budget outlook, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said this morning.

 Under questioning by members of the Senate Budget Committee, CBO director Douglas Elmendorf said bills crafted by House leaders and the Senate health committee do not propose “the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount.”

 “On the contrary,” Elmendorf said, “the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health-care costs.”

 Though President Obama and Democratic leaders have said repeatedly that reining in the skyrocketing growth in spending on government health programs such as Medicaid and Medicare is their top priority, the reform measures put forth so far would not fulfill their pledge to “bend the cost curve” downward, Elmendorf said. Instead, he said, “The curve is being raised.”

 Continue reading

No Such Thing as a Right to Health Care

July 13, 2009

From F. Paul Wilson on True/Slant.com. The article and the ensuing comments are thought-provoking and well worth your time.

There ain’t no such thing as a right to health care

There.  I said it.  Someone had to.
The acronym would be TANSTAARTHC.  Nowhere near as euphonius as TANSTAAFL.

I broach the subject because I can’t seem to turn on a TV or radio without hearing, “Health care is a human right.” The phrase has entered the zeitgeist. Google it and you’ll get 25k hits. Google “right to health care” and you get 200k. Maybe I’m not listening hard enough, but I hear no one questioning its validity.

A right is intrinsic. It’s not given to you, it’s something you’re born with. Its existence is not dependent on the actions of others. In fact, only by the actions of others can it be taken from you.

I find the alone-on-a-desert-island rule a convenient way to differentiate genuine human rights from the poseurs.

Let’s start with the basics: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. You’ve still got those on a desert island. You may not be happy there, but you don’t have a right to happiness, only to seek it out.

On a desert island, you still have the right to free speech. And freedom of religion. And freedom of sexual expression. You also have the freedom to smoke or inject whatever available substances you care to.

You do not have the right to three squares a day because there are no farmers to provide them; you do, however, have a right to grow or forage whatever you can. You don’t have a right to a roof over your head because no carpenters live on the island, but you do have a right to erect one.

And you don’t have a right to health care because doctors and nurses and drugstores don’t exist on the island.

No point in belaboring this. Genuine human rights do not require the participation of anyone outside the individual. Anything that does require the aid or intervention of another party is something else. I’m not sure what it is, but it’s not a human right.

Continue reading