The Scoop

In the News

August 5, 2009

Five Questions for Health Care Townhalls

From Long Island to Philadelphia to Austin, Texas, Democrats returning from Washington to host townhalls are getting an earful from constituents about their concerns over President Barack Obama’s health care plan. Despite the fact that all recent polls show that a majority of Americans do not support Obamacare, the left still has the audacity to claim that the concerned citizens showing up at these events are health insurance industry stooges.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) told the Center for America Progress: “These health insurance companies and people like them are trying to load these town hall meetings for visual impact on television.” But when actual journalists have reported on who is showing up at these events, they are telling a different story. Reporting on events in Pennsylvania and Texas, the New York Times describes the protests as “organized by loose-knit coalition of conservative voters and advocacy groups.”

This country deserves a respectful, honest debate about health care. And the hundreds of townhalls Members of Congress will be hosting across the country this August are just the place for that conversation to happen. Here are just five questions Americans should be pressing their elected leaders on over the coming month:

1) Can you promise me that I will not lose my current plan and doctor?
President Obama says it is “not legitimate” to claim the “public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system.” But Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman have all admitted that the public option will inevitably lead to government-run health care. The independent and non-partisan Lewin Group estimates that about 83.4 million people would lose their private insurance if Obamacare became law.

2) Can you promise that you and your family will enroll in the public plan? Members of Congress and their families currently receive health care through the popular, and completely public-option-free, Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) which allows members of Congress to choose between 283 private health insurance plans. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) proposed an amendment that would require all members of Congress and their staffs to enroll in the newly-created public health insurance plan. His amendment passed by just one vote in the Senate Health Committee. In the House, Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) offered a similar amendment and all 21 Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee voted it down. If the public plan is so great, then Members of Congress should be willing to forfeit their private coverage and join the millions of Americans who would be moved into the public plan.

3) Can you promise that Obamacare will not lead to higher deficits in the long term? President Obama said that he would not support health care legislation that would add to the national deficit. But Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Elmendorf has stated that the House health care legislation would “generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget window.” To help Obama keep his promise, Rep. Patrick Tiberi (R-OH) offered an amendment that would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to submit an annual report to the President and Congress, comparing the expected revenue and spending under the bill’s provisions for the upcoming 10-year period. In the event that projected spending under the bill outpaced revenue, the Secretary would have to reduce spending so that it would not exceed revenue. Democrats defeated Tiberi’s amendment.

4) Can you promise that government bureaucrats will not ration health care for patients on the public plan? President Obama promised on July 22 that health care reform would keep the government out of health care decisions, but both the House and Senate bills call for an increased role of comparative effectiveness research (CER). More information on health care effectiveness is good, as long as doctors and patients are the ones empowered to use that information. Conservatives in both the House and Senate offered amendments prohibiting the use of CER by government to mandate, deny, or ration care. These anti-rationing amendments were defeated in both the House and Senate.

5) Can you promise me that my tax dollars will not fund abortions? The House bill, as currently drafted, allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to outline the minimum benefits that must be included in any health plan. There is no specific provision in the bill that would require insurance coverage of abortion. However, since the decisions over benefits are left to the Secretary of HHS, with recommendations from a newly created Health Care Benefits Advisory Committee, there is nothing to prevent the current or future Secretary from including abortion coverage in Americans’ health insurance. Conservatives in both the House and Senate offered amendments that would prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. The taxpayer funded abortion bans were defeated in both the House and Senate.

Commenting on the townhall phenomenon, University of Pennsylvania political scientist Kathleen Hall Jamieson tells Politico: “If this comes down to vocal individuals, the Obama campaign ought to be able to always outnumber their opponent. And if they’re not, then that’s a problem.” So far it appears that Obamacare has a townhall problem.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Bookmark and Share
Comments Author: Conn Carroll
  • trueconserv
    I work for the health insurance industry presently, and have worked 20 in the pharmaceutical industry. The bill forming in Congress really is a good deal for our industry and I wish people would stop slandering it. It accomplishes our primary legislative goal, which is to stifle competition. Folk's, this is all we really care about in the industry. Tort reform and cooperative won't make any significant difference, so we don't worry about that, as long as we keep competition far from our doorstep. For over 95 years our drug companies have worked just fine under the cartel system and kept profits high. The fact that we were able to mandate in the bill that everyone purchase private insurance was certainly a coup for us, but sauce for the goose. Remember what the great John D. Rockefeller said, "Competition is a sin! If you prevent it, no one on earth can make you lower your prices."
  • if they can't run sucessfully medicare,mediaid, social security , cash for clunkers, stimius funds and the post office they think they can run healthcare
  • Robert
    I think most people would like to see some reform. I think we should begin by limiting the malpractice suits and the looser pays the cost.
    Second: I see no reason for American Drug Companies, funded by the American taxpayer, to sell drugs in Canada and Mexico at a deep discount price. Most of the R&D is paid for by the Americans.
    Third: There is a potential problem with people loosing their homes if they have a catastrophic illness. Why not have a government sponsored catastrophic health insurance similiar to government flood insurance? Of course we would purchase this insurance from the government.
  • epauls
    Without LEGAL REFORM there can be no HEALTH REFORM.

    Why does ACLU have direct access to Washington and I do not? ACLU uses their defense of the Bill of Rights to destroy the Bill of Rights. Appears our colleges have made more physical improvements to Law Schools than to Engineering Schools. Has the Sophist Society returned?

    How many Obama political contributions came from Planned Parenthood (Billion $ industry) and ACORN?
  • Gary Fargo
    As a retired Marine, Iwas aware of the problems that the military hospitals were having with dependents being brought in for care that could be treated at home . Sniffels, colds , etc. The main reason was because it was basically free. My worry is the same thing could happen witha a government run healthcare program. The hospitals and Doctors offices would be overrun. I believe there should be some sort of insurance reform, but not the healthcare itself. I spoke with my Doctor this week, and he tells me as a General Practioner his Malpractice insurance runs about $15000 a year & if he specialised it could be as much as &50000 or more. Tort reform is also needed but Lawyers voting Against Lawyers? HaHaHa
  • Name
    Sounds like your grasping at straws.
    But then again some people are just better than others.
  • mtwohie56
    The democrats are not going to let this issue die, unless the people have some sort of coherent mass rally point to voice our majority opinion and demand our elected officials adhere to our demands to leave the system alone. The democrats are going to ram this through using the obscure legal tactic of a reconciliation vote in the house and senate. chuck shumer has pretty much assured us that this will happen if a plan to their satisfaction is not passed. The republicans MUST stand up for their constituents and ensure this does not happen, I think if this is rammed down our throats by the democratic leadership we will see violence agains some of these self serving politicans in Washington.
blog comments powered by Disqus