Over the last month I have been preaching about the Obama Healthcare Proposal and its intent to create a monopoly on the free market in the healthcare system. For those who remember, Sen. Obama preached during the final presidential debate that the uninsured could have “the same health plan that Sen. McCain and I enjoy”. This plan is supported by the free market and is not as government controlled insurance company. Rather it is a private nonprofit company that negotiates their contracts annually with the government as part of the competitive free market. This is not a government agency and does not currently operate under government oversight.
The current proposal submitted by Sen. Baucus creates a national insurance exchange, which was not a part of the Obama platform. This insurance exchange, under the heavy government regulation will “allow” private plans to compete with a public insurance option. In other words, the Obama plan will create a government monopoly within the free market health care sector of the American business market. The proposed model for this plan is Medicare, which currently sets the curve for medial care prices and reimbursement. Current estimates for this plan are skimmed over as roughly an investment of $150 billion dollars per year, and do not consider the cost of creating an oversight office, the cost of the new employees, the associated union benefits, and pensions.
For those with low incomes, the government supplies a subsidy to make the cost “affordable”. Businesses that don’t supply health coverage will now have a payroll tax to support the plan. During the final presidential debate, Sen. Obama went on record as saying “there will be no fine” for employers who do not provide health coverage; however, he circumvented the American people by substituting a payroll tax for a fine. He obfuscated the truth with two simple one syllable words, fine and tax. Sen. Baucus oversees the finance committee, which as we pointed out oversees half of all government spending and taxes. At this juncture, the tax amount escapes even a ballpark estimate.
The final blow to the American people is the post election platform change of the words voluntary and mandatory. Again, the same number of syllables, unfortunately, they are autonyms. This platform change applies to the individual and not the business or employer. It mandates that all individuals buy into the healthcare program. Individuals and individual families eligible for government subsidies to purchase the health package would be permitted to earn 400% above the poverty level. A family of three making $66,000 per year would qualify for a subsidy, with higher incomes in Alaska and Hawaii.
Now, at the crux of the proposal, aside from the deviations from the campaign plat form, is the inability of the government to reign in the spending practices of the current program model, Medicare. Additionally, the government seeks to control both the newly created public market and regulate the private companies that currently compete in the free market. This creates another regulatory agency that owns the product and supervises the competing agencies. In short, this will create a monopoly in the health care industry and devastate the current dismal economic outlook for the nation.
Let’s remind ourselves what happened when the government “owned” two of the largest mortgage companies. We now require a bailout of the banking industry with taxpayers dollars on the assumption that the taxpayers will see a return on their investment and the markets will rebound. Now, the incoming administration plans to own all of the checkers the health insurance market, and shrink the size of the playing board. At the same time, the government and Obama promote the concept of government run health care as being efficient, which just creates one more oxymoron for the English language.
Based on the current trends in medical education and practice, the medical profession practicing primary care and internal medicine is conversely shrinking in proportion to the number individuals seeking actual primary care. Although the legislation believes that government has the authority to legislate mandatory healthcare and control the market, it is unlikely that government will legislate itself the authority to mandate sufficient professionals into the medical field to meet the needs of the masses.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122714181668742739.html