Posts Tagged ‘Government Health Care’

Latest Research

October 27, 2009

Strong Public Plan Means Heavy Cuts to Hospitals

Behind closed doors, the House and Senate leaders are trying to cobble together very different and complex provisions of their respective bills.

A key issue is the impact of the public plan, a government run health plan intended to compete against private health plans. In the House version of the bill (H.R. 3200), payment to doctors and hospitals will be pegged to Medicare rates. Specifically, the bill calls for payment for medical services to be set at Medicare payment levels with a 5 percent increase for only certain physicians.

In the aftermath of the debate on physician payment updates, much of the media focus has been on the impact on doctors. But what is often overlooked is that while doctors could lose income, there are many areas of the country where the expansion of Medicare payment for hospitals would cause many hospitals to go broke. (more…)

Tags: , , ,

Latest Research

October 12, 2009

Pony Up, Working Families

Under the Baucus plan, just about everyone who is not covered by a government health program will be required to purchase insurance by 2013. To help pay for the mandated minimum coverage, individuals and families with incomes below four times the poverty line will receive a subsidy calculated on a sliding scale worth a percentage of their income, while those with incomes up to three times the poverty line will also qualify for a cost-sharing subsidy.

However, even with help from the government subsidies, families will be required to pay substantial out-of-pocket costs for health insurance. As analysis from The Heritage Foundation has shown that on average a family of four with an income at two times the poverty line will be forced to shell out 16 percent of their income to buy insurance – and this is even after all the subsidies. (more…)

Tags: , , ,

Latest Research

October 6, 2009

Obama’s Physician Press Conference Could Have Used a Shot in the Arm

In what was billed as doctors trekking across the country to enthusiastically support President Barrack Obama’s health care agenda, his press conference at the White House on Monday was in need of serious resuscitation.

From a lackluster response among the 150 doctors (outfitted in their “spiffy-looking” white coats lest we forgot who they were) at the event to Obama’s same go-to talking points to justify massive federal spending and Washington control of health care, it’s hard to understand how this conference added any value or differentiation from the dozens of other talks the President has given on his health reform push.

“We have now been debating the issue of health insurance reform for months,” Obama said during his quick press conference, which lasted roughly 9 minutes and didn’t include any comments from the visiting doctors or questions from the press. “At this point, we’ve heard all the arguments on both sides of the aisle. We’ve listened to every charge and every counter charge.” (more…)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Latest Research

October 1, 2009

Government-Run Health Care by Next Thursday?

The Washington Post front page blares: “Prospects for Public Option Dim in Senate.” Don’t believe it. Yes, the Senate Finance Committee did vote down two amendments that each would have added a government-run insurance plan to the committee’s health care bill. But two key Democrats who voted against Sen. Jay Rockefeller’s (D-WV) public plan, Bill Nelson (D-FL) and Tom Carper (D-DE), voted for Sen. Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) version.

According to an independent analysis of Senate Democrat public statements on the public option, that raises the number of Democrats on record supporting a public option from 47 to 49. Moreover, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), chairmen of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, told the liberal “Bill Press Radio Show” yesterday that Democrats “comfortably” have the remaining votes to reach 51 and pass a public plan once the debate moves to the House floor.

But what about Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus’ (D-MT) claim yesterday that, “No one has been able to show me how we can count up to 60 votes with a public option.” That may be true, but it is also irrelevant. The question is not whether Democrats can muster 60 votes to pass Obamacare; they only need 51 votes to do that. The only time the number 60 will be relevant is when the Senate votes on whether to end debate and vote on the final bill. This is a separate question. We can see Senators from red states like Ben Nelson (D-NE), Blanch Lincoln (D-AR), and Kent Conrad (D-ND) voting against an amendment creating a public option. But voting with Republicans against their party and against their President to support a Republican filibuster? That would take a lot of courage. It would guarantee that these Democrats would face fierce opposition from their leftist bases back home. Just ask the left’s new whip for the public option, Michael Moore. Speaking to women’s groups and unions in Washington, DC, yesterday, Moore warned: (more…)

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