Star One Smart Blog's

An interesting development in the Health Care debate. Joe Lieberman, driven from the Democratic party by Howard Dean and the far-left cabal he represents, has poured a load of Connecticut molasses into Barack Obama's signature power grab...

Lieberman Suggests Health Care Reform May Have to Wait

“I’m afraid we’ve got to think about putting a lot of that off until the economy’s out of recession,” Mr. Lieberman said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “There’s no reason we have to do it all now, but we do have to get started. And I think the place to start is cost health delivery reform and insurance market reforms.”

Nope, no mention of single-payer or government-run health care there. Insurance market reform is a pleasant idea; one needed change would be to allow health insurance companies to sell across state lines. We, consumers, could reward the better plans with our business; competition would ensure the lowest prices possible. But Democrats don't care for that sort of thing...if a health insurance consumer purchased a policy in a state that has fewer onerous regulations and mandates (those mandates and regulations increase the cost of a policy) then consumers would, in essence, 'vote' with their dollars against that state's policies. Can't have that; Democrats want to completely control every level of health care by way of mandate, driving the prices to the high-pitched levels we see today. Republicans wanted this sort of reform; but guess what? Democrats opposed it...

“Beware, some of you state legislators,” said Merrill Matthews, Ph.D., director of the Council for Affordable Health Insurance. “The introduction of the Health Care Choice Act portends that your days of micromanaging health insurance, driving up premiums--and the number of uninsured--with costly mandates and guaranteed issue are near an end.

“Should this bill become law,” noted Matthews, “Americans will have access to affordable health insurance coverage despite many of your best efforts to deny them that opportunity.”

“We need the opportunity to shop in a national marketplace,” said John C. Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis. “If we can buy wine across state lines, why not buy health insurance as well?”

The Health Care Choice Act of 2005 (HR 2355 and S.1015) died from Democrat's maneuverings. H.R.4460 (2007) also died in committee.

Now, Republican Senators have introduced another 'better than Obamacare' Health Care reform bill, the "Patient's Choice Act of 2009"...

A key feature of the Patients’ Choice Act is a $5,700 annual tax credit for families ($2,300 for individuals) designed to cover employees’ out-of-pocket share of employer-sponsored health plans—an average annual cost of $4,200 per family.

The provision is similar to Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) campaign proposal to reform the tax treatment of health insurance by offering tax credits to help workers afford their choice of health coverage. But the Patients’ Choice Act doesn’t alter the tax code for employers, meaning businesses won’t see their tax burdens spike as a result of their employees’ newfound freedom to choose their own health care plans.

Peter Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget, explained the benefit to be gained from revising the federal government’s tax treatment of employer health plans in testimony before the Senate Finance Committee in June 2008.

“Imagine what the world would be like if workers [understood] that today it was costing them $10,000 a year in take-home pay for their employer-sponsored insurance, and that could be $7,000 and they could have $3,000 more in their pockets today if we could relieve these inefficiencies out of the health system,” Orszag said.

The Republicans’ plan would increase workers’ take-home pay and decrease their tax burdens, allowing them to better afford the health insurance policy and benefits of their choice. [emphasis mine -ed.]

And, believe it or not, those 'evil' Republicans also included coverage for 'the poor' in this plan...

Better Care for the Poor

Another provision of the Patients’ Choice Act is aimed specifically at lower-income Americans who are currently relegated to bureaucrat-run programs such as Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Recognizing those government-administered programs are so inefficient and undesirable that nearly half of prior-enrolled individuals and families decline to sign up for more than one year of nearly free benefits, the act’s sponsors included a provision establishing a path to private coverage and efficient medical care for those poorest Americans.

The act would provide low-income Americans with $5,000 debit cards for purchasing private insurance or paying for health care out of pocket, thereby giving them the resources to acquire effective health care.

Up to 25 percent of any unspent dollars on the debit card would roll over and be added to the next year’s balance, creating an incentive for recipients to exercise wisdom and restraint in using their health care money.

There's a win-win situation for health care reform. Why do the Democrats not favor this sort of intelligent reform? Maybe because it's introduced by Republicans?




It's all about power. Democrats are statists who prefer a state-run program, so as to garner the votes from sheeple that are attracted to something for nothing; the promise of cradle-to-grave care given by the Government-as-Nanny state. With those votes they stay in power.

The sheeple who vote for these statists don't know (or don't care) that government-run single-payer health systems will take away their freedoms to choose doctors and decide what sort of treatments they want, and would drive up health care costs (just as Medicare and Medicaid drove up health care costs, starting in 1965). And, if a thing is perceived to be 'free', freeloaders will clog the system. Since nothing in life is truly 'free', we will see health care costs skyrocketing; the only control for those out-of-control costs (and for the freeloaders clogging the portals) would be health care rationing. Death panels, anyone?

It's as simple as TANSTAFFL.

---