Stop Doing Studies

The slow drip of unintended consequences of the new health care law keeps going. The only fix for the drip is repeal it would seem.

What's the latest? Another study showing that the promise that "if you like what you have you can keep it" isn't going to be true.

Employer Survey Sees Health Costs Rising points out what those of us who've spent our lives in the real world, not government or academia said during the debate. Costs are going to go up, and companies are going to cut something to keep the bottom line healthy. The cuts will come at the expense of employees.

How certain are the cuts? Well the survey looked at 661 companies with a median workforce of 5600 employees; these aren't "small businesses", they are the big guys. 74 percent said they were going to have to cut employee benefits, or raise their employees direct costs because of the fiscal impact of the law.

43 percent that provide retiree health care said they would be cutting or completely eliminating those benefits.

Now I'm pretty sure if someone in the media actually asked the White House about all the studies showing that most every promise made during the debate will be broken the White House response would be to quit doing studies.

Read The Full Post!

There is Some Good Everywhere

You know, the one thing the last month has me is that you can find some beauty anywhere if you look. Well, anywhere but my 401(k) since every company in it has decided the new health care law is going to require them to take a bath.

For instance, Peoria, Illinois is not my favorite city. I remember seeing it years ago with a dull gray haze hanging over it. They've cleaned it up quite a bit since those days, but the city still suffers from horrible unemployment, and has many areas that could use some sprucing up.

But when you see it from East Peoria across the river, with the sun starting to come down, it looks completely different.


It's my metaphor for the whole heart attack incident. From one angle it sucks; new diet without a lot of my favorite things. Can't really sit around and hammer beers; need to start working out. None of those are things that really make me happy.

Then there is the flip side. I'm here and get to play with my grandson John. Dylan, my daughter's first born will arrive any day now, and I'm going to be able to travel and visit them. I'm not crazy about giving up my morning donuts, but I've got no complaint about the 15 pounds I've given up by not having them.

It's also reminded me how important a lot of folks in my life are to me. After you spend enough time with people you start to take them for granted. Then when you really need them you realize why you've stuck with them for so long; and you are glad they stuck with you.

Read The Full Post!

Wacky Health Care Video

Thanks to James T. over at the National Conversation for this one.

Read The Full Post!

Change the Subject!

So, now we hear of the poor Democratic members of Congress, complaining people are harassing them, and maybe even threatening violence.

Here's my guess folks, they are getting the same number of those e-mails and crank calls today as they did last Friday. The difference, today they are good fodder to change the subject from the Health Care Takeover Act to anything else.

Why? Well, the facts are getting out, and the heat is getting turned up. No one told the folks who work at Caterpillar, John Deere and Verizon that their companies would take a hundred million dollar tax hit this year, and have to lay off thousands to compensate. Those thousands are probably going to be mad as hell.

Why are they taking that tax hit this year? Well, they did the right thing a few years back and provided their retirees with prescription drug coverage. For that, they get about $665 per year from the feds; which trims the government cost for drugs by over $550 per retiree. So it's a win -win the government saves money by giving the subsidy, and the retirees end up with better prescription drug coverage.

Now, though, under the new law, that subsidy is considered business income, and taxed at 35%. So the companies will take a huge hit, and be required to restate earnings because of it. But; to them; there is an easy way out. They are going to drop the drug coverage for the retirees, quit taking the subsidy, and not have the tax burden of it. Instead, the tax payers get the full hit for the retiree drug coverage, and the retirees have to enroll in the Medicare plan now.

This will of course increase the cost of the Health Care bill by billions, and everyone in DC will say "Never saw that coming".

So much for keeping what you've got if you like it. Just another example of how Congress understands no law it passes; and no lawyer can litigate the law of unintended consequences.

So remember, when you hear Congressman Dorkus D-Wherever whine about threats, it's not really about a new threat, it's to get folks to quit talking about the piece of crap bill he or she voted for.

Read The Full Post!

Health Care Reform Facts

The first big sticker shock of the new ObamaCare era will happen later this year, when the community rating guidelines become final and binding. Suddenly, a whole lot of people under age 62 are going to see higher healthcare premiums and wonder why that is.

They shouldn't worry though, they will be getting subsidies to help with those premiums; ooops, not until 2013 or 2014; sorry to make it looks like this thing saves money they will only collect taxes for four years, not give you the subsidy you were promised.

As for all of you folks that are cheering because pre-existing conditions are now covered, that doesn't happen until 2014. Until then you can (and will) still be rejected unless they are willing to pay big.

Hey, like your current plan, aren't you glad you get to keep it. Maybe... Well if it has a flexible spending account or an HSA as part of it, you don't really get to keep it. Those don't fit the new guildelines for proper insurance, so you'll have to find something else. Sorry if it costs more.

Do you work for a small business, that treats you really well with insurance. Sorry to say that you have about a 1 in 3 chance of having your policy cancelled and being told to buy from the "exchange". Why? Easy, the fine for most businesses to not cover you is much cheaper than buying you insurance. Sorry, you don't get to keep what you have either.

Sorry to piss on your parade, just thought a few facts might be good to have. But look on the bright side, at least McDonalds will be required to post the nutritional info on their drive through board. That's worth the trade-offs, right.

Read The Full Post!

Whats Next?

So, now that the Democrats can either crow that they got their landmark legislative accomplishment passed, or cry because they'll be losing their jobs come November, what's next?

Here's a few guesses. First, huge parts of this law are going to get gutted by the courts before most of it goes into effect.

There are probably three things that will be subjected to a lot of legal challenges.

1) The Individual Mandate. This will probably get thousands of individual court challenges, in every district of the Federal system. That's going to make it the funnest part of the whole thing. The 9th is going to find some reason that it's constitutional, the 4th is going to laugh and put a stay on enforcement, and DC is going to spin like a top trying to figure out what to do.

My guess is that it will be fast tracked and in the next 18 months end up in Robert's hands at the Supreme Court, where it will die a 5-4 death.

That decision, though, will doom private insurance. The mandate is the only reason they are behind this bill. Without it there is no chance they can make money with the other insurance restrictions on the bill.

2) Individual "Sweetheart deals" that some states got to get votes. While the reconciliation bill killed the Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana is still getting $100 billion to 300 billion in extra cash, Florida seniors keep Medicare Advantage while everyone else loses it, one town in Montana gets it's Medicare paid for.

Many state AG's threatened to sue over those provisions in December when the Senate passed the bill. Expect it to happen shortly after the signing. The Florida medicare advantage clause may well be the one that dooms a bunch of the bill.

3)While many states are going to scream about the hundreds of billions in unfunded mandates, they don't have much standing to do anything about the bill. Unfortunately for them (and us) the courts have upheld the federal government's ability to pass costs to the states many times.

My guess is that at least one state will be able to say the new Medicaid costs will bankrupt them, and threaten to file a Chapter 9 petition for bankruptcy unless the Feds pick up more of the cost. By the way, Illinois, my state, would be a perfect fit. Unfortunately, our lackeys in Springfield think this is a good idea.

Read The Full Post!

Idiot On Parade

Barack Obama considers himself the smartest man in the room most days. Of late, though, he's proving to be much less so, in fact, he's like an idiot on parade.

Why do I say this? Well the renewed health care push this week brought it back to the forefront, but he's had a slew of "wow, I'm dumber than a stump" moments lately.

Let's start with the KSM trial in New York. When it was announced the administration said it was a thoroughly vetted plan. Within days other politicians; especially the folks in New York; were asking "WTF, over?". Evidently 'well vetted' means running it around the dinner table with the kids but not asking the people in charge in New York.

Then we get to the budget. In two years he's going to run up more debt than George Bush managed in 7 of his 8 years in office. When folks freaked out about the $1.9 trillion in debt, what did he do? He appointed a panel to figure out how to reduce the debt. Here's an idea, Mr. Smart guy, DO NOT SPEND SO MUCH! Not rocket science, not even close. 3rd grade math, maybe, but rocket science, no.

So now we get to health care, where to start. The election of Scott Brown wrecked the filibuster proof majority he wasted in the Senate to try and get health care passed. The public disapproved of the Senate plan by a 2-1 majority. So, if you are the smartest man in the room, what do you do? You double down on the Senate plan by making it worse, the tax increases higher, the government intrusion more intrusive. And, since you are so smart, you release it 3 days BEFORE you are going to hold a "bi-partisan" meeting on the subject, which pretty much ruins any chance of saying the other guys won't play nice.

Oh wait, you aren't done being "smart" yet. You also tell the Senate to ram it through using the "Nuclear Option". For those who don't understand, that option is to use the budget reconciliation process to get a bill through the Senate on a straight majority vote. Technically, it's only to be used to pass a spending bill. So the Senate would tack health care reform onto a budget item it considers imperitive to get passed, and then use the reconciliation vote to do it.

If it sounds vaguely familiar to you, it's probably because in the years the GOP held the Senate there were occasional thoughts of using such an option to pass legislation. or get jammed nominees to the Senate floor.

This was always; not occasionally, but always; met by Democratic cries that it would destroy the Senate and what it stands for. Here's a nice LA Times op-ed piece on why the Nuclear Option is a bad idea; or at least was when the GOP threatened to use it. I'm wondering if they'd publish it today and replace each reference to judicial nominations with health care reform.

So, if you considered yourself the smartest man in the room, how much of the above would you try?

Read The Full Post!

Can Health Care Reform Be Saved?

If you regularly read my irregular blog posts, you are probably wondering about this one, considering the title. I've written a number of things critical of what's going on in Congress concerning health care reform, most of it unflattering to Congress.

The truth is, we do need some reform, which I've occasionally mentioned. What we didn't need was the House's wholesale take over, or the Senate's hodge-podge of payoffs and hush money to get anything passed. We need some common sense things done.

Now that political reality has set in for Nancy Pelosi, it might be possible. Tuesday night she was telling us that Scott Brown's election did nothing to change what was going to happen. Then she talked to her caucus and pronounced the Senate version of health care reform dead in the House. That was really the only way they were getting anything to the President's desk before his State of the Union address.

So, how do they save Health Care Reform? The best way would be to get 4 Senators and 4 Congressmen from each party together and work on ideas they can all agree on. Here's a few that shouldn't cause too much pain.

1. Portability. Decouple health care from the job, and to the person. Allow employers to pay for it if you wish, but have the insurance follow the person.

The "insurance exchange" idea would actually work for this. Employers buy from the exchange, in the employee's name. When they leave the company the insurance goes with them. The next employer can pick up the tab, if they wish, or the individual can do it on their own.

2. Taxes. Give employees the same break as employers when it comes to paying for health insurance. It's a crazy thing that if I get my own insurance unless I meet a threshold I get no tax break, but if my boss pays he gets a big one. Now if the person from example 1 decides to leave to start their own business, they aren't penalized for buying their own insurance.

3. National coverage standards. Right now we have 50 states with 50 different coverage standards. A minimum coverage policy in Kentucky is about 400% less than in New York. Set a national standard for coverage, so that insurance isn't locked into what state you are living in. We've become mobile, our insurance should be too.

4. Pre-existing conditions. They should be covered. The problem with both the House and Senate versions is that they want to exist in a fantasy world where your pre-existing condition shouldn't mean you pay more for coverage. It's funny that two bodies will one day lecture the banking industry about their fiscal irresponsibility for getting into hedge funds, and the next chastise insurers for charging more to people who it costs more to service.

5. Tort Reform. This gets the Democrats skin crawling, because trial lawyers are one of their biggest donor groups. The truth is that there needs to be some reform. A basic one that would be hard to vote against would be limiting the amount the lawyers in malpractice cases can be paid. Democrats would throw a hissy fit, but the truth is, if it's okay to limit bankers pay and bonuses, as they'd like to do, why not lawyers?

Mandatory arbitration in front of a panel of experts would also be a nice spot to start. Lawyers would be less likely to file frivolous malpractice suits if a group of doctors were going to hear the case first, instead of a jury of laymen. Make the results eligible for appeal to a judge and jury, but also make the panel's findings usable as evidence.

6. Uniformity of paperwork. Want to have fun, go to a doctors office with two different insurance policies. Watch the admin folks twitch as they try and figure out which is primary, which is secondary, and what form to use for each.
Want a headache? Have them get it wrong.

Insurance companies should be able to come up with an industry wide standard for claims forms, so that a doctor or clinic doesn't need two file cabinets and an extra person to chase paper. A standard system for policy numbers, similar to the VIN on your car would also be helpful. Then it would be pretty easy to develop software that works reliably for any companies claim.

None of this is really rocket science, and except the argument you'll get over tort reform, none of it is horribly controversial. However, it would all lower costs, make insurance easier to get and keep, and result in a happier, probably healthier public.

Read The Full Post!

Biting Dogs?

So, after last nights earthquake in Massachusetts, one has to start wondering if the block of "Blue Dog Democrats" will finally find their teeth.

The Blue Dogs are supposed to be the fiscally conservative wing of the Democrats, especially in the House. However, what they've proven to be is an easily bought off group who has let every spending bill go through in exchange for some kibbles and bits.

Last night, however, might have provided the impetus for them to actually grow some teeth and stand up to Nancy Pelosi. Unlike Martha Coakley, who lost in a state that has been solidly Democratic since 1972, the Blue Dogs mostly come from conservative districts and got their jobs promising the fiscal conservatism that Republicans forgot about from 2002-2006. So for them, last night has to be a shocker, and a wake up call. If they want to keep their seats, they may well have to dump Pelosi's ideas on health care and demand a true bipartisan effort.

The idea of "ping ponging" an unabridged Senate health care bill through the House to get it to Obama's desk is something that the Blue Dogs should resist, if they want to stay in office come November. Since Pelosi will have no ability to bribe for votes offer amendments to gain favor with them, they are now in control of the health care debate, if they wish to be.

As the leadership in their party spends the next few days to a week deciding what to do with ObamaCare, it will become evident to the rest of us what is more important to that leadership, maintaining their majorities in 2011, or getting an unpopular bill passed.

Read The Full Post!

Even Stewart is Laughing At Him

A lot of conservatives hated Jon Stewart during the Bush years, thinking him a tool of the left. Now, that may be changing. He's actually proving to be what he's always purported himself to be, a topical humorist.

Much to the chagrin of the left, over the last year he's done what good humorists do, he turned his sights on the guy who's currently in office. He's becoming the anti-Bill Maher, a guy who can't let go of the past, and refuses to believe the current President has any flaws.

Need a good laugh, check out this recent clip from Jon's "Daily Show", where he beats down the Prez on his CSPAN promise. He still gets a few jabs in at the last guy, but the premise of the clip is obvious.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Stealth Care Reform
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Read The Full Post!

Calling Out The Democrats

Remember about 15 months or so ago, when "Candidate Obama" promised all of us that the health care debate was going to be televised on CSPAN?

Well, if you've paid attention the last few days you know that instead, the Democrats have decided to hold leadership only meetings with members of only their party to come up with the "conference committee" bill to reconcile the House and Senate differences.

Now someone is complaining. Who? The CEO of CSPAN. He wants the negotiations televised, just like Mr. Obama said they would be.

Jack Tapper at ABC has a great piece up explaining the whole thing.

(edit) Also, WSJ has a nice piece about how this move by the Democrats is probably going to help Tom DeLay's image more than it will give the public confidence in the Democrats.

If you want to know where my money is, I'd put it on not seeing any negotiations on CSPAN. In fact, there is a better chance of Brian Lamb, the CEO being investigated by Congress, than Congress actually being transparent on this.

Read The Full Post!

Wither the Public Option

House Democrats are already conceding that the public option will have to die to get the Senate to pass a final version of health care reform.

1-The public option had two purposes, the first was the (supposedly) create more competition for insurance companies, because the 1200 or so already selling health insurance don't have enough.

2-The more covert purpose, was to get enough people enrolled to make it a quasi universal plan. That was Joe Lieberman's objection to it.

So if number 1 is off the table, how does the government get to number 2? That's actually pretty easy. The choke hold of regulation. The Senate version of health care reform puts so many new regulations, from administrative overhead restrictions to documentation and litigation that they hope to drive insurance companies out of business.

Maine has already driven the vast majority of insurers out of the state with their Dirigo plan. Regulation on "for profit" insurers has left the state with it's own insurance (who's cost has gone up about 175% faster than anticipated) and a few not for profits selling policies.

My guess (educated, but without insider info) is that the conference bill that comes to the House and Senate will be designed to drive for profit insurers and the"non-protected" (see Longshoremen) classes out of the insurance business by making it nearly impossible to sell insurance without losing the proverbial shirt.

After a few years of States seeing their medicaid rolls (except Nebraska, the feds will pay for theirs) swell with those who's private insurers stop writing policies, the States will scream for DC to fix a new "national health care crisis" that is of Washington's own making.

Keep in mind, most of the legislation that's supposed to help the consumer doesn't go into effect until the law is on the books for 3 years. The taxes and regulations start immediately. This gives Congress the ability to say that insurers aren't doing their part before they are actually required to do anything, and insurers will most certainly have to look for ways to save money in that three year period.

There is a problem with the waiting period, though. The Democrats have to hope they hold onto enough seats, preferably majorities, in both Houses to make it possible to bring up the public option down the road as the "savior of the masses".

The GOP regaining control of either house would probably kill that idea in it's track, and require (gasp!) meaningful reform to be negotiated between both parties. Who knows, maybe then the President would have to hold true on his promise to televise the negotiations on C-SPAN so everyone could see what's going on.

Read The Full Post!

Dear Senator Burris

I've sent the following to Senator Burris.

Mr. Burris,
A month or so ago you informed your senate collegues that you'd vote no on any health care reform legislation that didn't contain a public option.

This week you've gone back on that promise. Which isn't a surprise to most of us.

What I'd like to know is what was the pay off for Illinois? The Senate is tossing around $100 million dollar bribes left and right for yes votes on this bill, so I'd like to know what Illinois got that was good enough for you to go back on your principles.

I'm going to be very disappointed if you didn't hold your vote for some kings ransom for our state, too.

_____________________________________________________________

I'm pretty sure he got nothing for his vote. He has no principles, and doesn't seem smart enough to get one of the $100 million dollar bribes that Harry Reid was giving out.

He'll probably claim Gitmo North is our gift from the Senate for his vote.

Read The Full Post!

Hypocrisy

Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online has an excellent editorial in today's Chicago Tribune on the intellectual hypocrisy of the folks currently in charge.

His idea of the intellectual hypocrisy of the government is based on a JP Morgan chart, which shows the private sector experience of the President's appointees.

As you can see from the chart, Obama's cabinet doesn't fall a little short of others in "real world" experience, but about 2/3 short of previous least experienced cabinet (Kennedy).

His cabinet isn't made up of folks who've run things, and done things that they had to worry about the cost of. It's made up of people who've never managed an actual enterprise.

Goldberg's point is that folks who've never run everything are proposing to run basically everything from your health care to auto emissions to banks and auto makers.

Their record, by the way, isn't so good so far. They took over banks with TARP, and set rules for how they can pay people, and now the banks can't find experienced bankers to run them under the new rules.

And, since the banks are finding ways to meet the TARP repayment requirements early, and get out from under the government, the Fed now wants to change to rules so it can take over healthy banks it thinks might be a threat to financial stability. That change is sure to make it easier to get folks to work in the industry.

They took over GM, fired the old CEO, ousted his replacement, and now worry about finding anyone else who wants to run Government Motors. My guess is they won't find a senior level executive with experience in that industry to take the job.

I'll refer our friends in D.C. back to a book I read some 20 years ago, that explained exactly why the government was bad at running things. Command of the Seas by John Lehman; Regan's Secretary of the Navy; who wanted to get the government out of the shipyard business because they did a poor job of running them. Government regulations on compensation made it impossible to get anyone above the mid-manager level in the civilian sector to take on the job of managing any of the Navy's shipyards. Lack of experience led regularly to decisions that caused huge cost overruns, poor performance, and a lack of competitiveness with the civilian sector on nearly every job the government managed yards performed.

Lehman found those problems not only at the yards, but in every part of the Department of the Navy that was run by career civil servants. He also found the one thing that could stop any government reform from working as designed; Congress. As hard as anyone would try to fix something, someone in one chamber or the other would find it a threat to a constituency and get a rider passed in a bill that undid the reform.

Anyone that thinks health care reform or cap and trade is going to work any different doesn't understand the culture of government, and the hypocrisy of their intellect.

Read The Full Post!

Is it Much Ado About Nothing?

The AP has a story out today asking if the uproar over the "Public Option" in the current health care reform bills is much ado about nothing. If you read only the public option portion of the bill, you'd probably have a hard time disagreeing with that assessment.

The reason they give for believing it's a lot of hot air over a little thing is the CBO estimates of the number of people who will opt for the public insurance program. The CBO says only about two percent of the population would take the public option. In the current House bill you can't get into the public option if you are covered by a plan through your job. To be eligible you'd have to work for a small enough company that the rest of the bill doesn't compel it provide coverage, or already be buying insurance on your own.

I think the CBO has done a good job in point out costs associated with all of the health care legislation, but as always, they do it with static numbers. They assume that no individuals or businesses will change their habits based on the new law. That's where the problem lies with their current estimate. I also understand that it would be nearly impossible for the CBO to run dynamic computer models on behavior in the short amount of time Congress gives them to review legislation. I often wonder if that isn't by Congressional design.

History has already shown in Maine, Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey that the guaranteed issuance and group rating methods drive private insurance companies out of the markets after raising costs to the point they can't be profitable. Both the House and Senate bills contain each of these provisions in them, and I doubt that history will suddenly undo itself, and they'll work without raising costs.

The result will be (as it has been already) that as costs go up insurance companies will drop out of the exchange program, and choices will dwindle to a few not-for profit companies and the public option. Don't think so, go online and try and get a health insurance quote in Maine. There are about 5 companies left doing business there.

Another cost driver in the bill, which seems innocuous at first, is the rescission rules. We all get to hear the breathless stories on the news of the woman who had her insurance dropped right before she started treatment for cancer. "Oh those heartless insurance companies!" the anchor will opine. What the news doesn't tell you is that for every one person who is wrongfully dropped about two hundred and fifty are rightfully dropped for fraudulently obtaining insurance.

The House fix for this is to compel insurance companies to pay for care for anyone they want to drop until a mediator has decided if it's a case of fraud where the person should be dropped. That sounds fair enough, if you are the patient. However, if you are the insurance company, you now get legal bills and medical bills for the 99% of people you can legally drop for fraudulently obtaining insurance. How much of that money does anyone think will be recouped from the fraudster? Who do you think will make it up to the insurance company? Congress isn't going to pay them for it, which means the folks who are legit will get higher premiums to pay for both the care, and legal bills of someone else.

I also think this is going to end up one of the bigger legal entanglements of the bill. Guaranteed issuance says you can't be denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition, and community ratings say you can't be charged more because of it, but the proposed law also says if you don't reveal it you have obtained insurance fraudulently. I'm pretty sure this will end up in court about as fast as any other provision in the bill.

Read The Full Post!

Health Care Reform Act

Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has made the house version of "health care reform" available for reading and download (pdf format). I hope you have a lot of time, as it is 1,990 pages long, since your legislators want to vote on it next week, I'm pretty sure most of them won't have time to read it.

If you think 1,990 pages of legislation is incomprehensible, and and it's contents unknow even to those who claim to be the authors, you are probably right. Just perusing through it the bill is a mish-mash of amendments and revisions to existing codes. My guess is that if it were to be gone through completely it probably contains dozens, if not hundreds, of entaglement problems, where one section orders one thing, another section the opposite, or something substantially different.

Considering Dingell, Rangel, George Miller and Henry Waxman are the principle authors, you can rest assured that they have included plenty of pay-offs to their favored groups. I doubt any of them have passed legislation that didn't.

Have a good read.

Read The Full Post!

Higher Insurance Rates, Coming Soon!

The Wall Street Journal once again points out the failure of a state (New York) to insure more people, give great choice in policies, and cut insurance costs through mandates and controls.

The insurance companies released their report saying that prices will go up about 20% if the Baucus Bill passes. But the WSJ article points out that New York's rates have doubled since the state decided that they should mandate coverage types, rates, etc.

So, since it's failed in New York the obvious thing to do is have the whole country try it, right?

Read The Full Post!

Advice to Insurance Companies

So I'm reading the news, and see Nancy Pelosi is pissed that insurance companies are telling the truth about the Senate health care reform bill. That truth, your premiums are going to go up, considerably.

This bothers the left because they (desperately) want you to believe that health care reform is going to be a free lunch. They want you to believe that because the truth, as it's played out everywhere that has used community rating, guaranteed issuance and zero waiting has been the opposite.

My advice to insurance companies isn't to shut up so that they'll stop adding ideas to their already bad plan. Just the opposite. Keep getting louder, so they add more.

Why, pray tell, would I suggest that? Easy, the worse the bill gets the easier it will be for insurance companies to exit the market before it takes effect. They will be going out of business once it does, anyway. So hasten your own death, and allow the feds to pick up the entire tab for their folly.

If things work out right, they'll make being an insurance company so onerous at implementation time that no on in the public (other than the "Obama Stash" crew) will blame you... But they will blame congress.

Read The Full Post!

Lessons from the States

Peter Suderman has a great article in the Wall St. Journal's opinions page about lessons we've learned from the states when it comes to health care reform and mandates.

The Lesson of State Health-Care Reforms points out some inconvenient truths; to borrow a phrase; about health care reform. Specifically, those things that we are being told from Washington will reduce our costs have done just the opposite in the states.

He points out numerous states, New York, Maine, Kentucky, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Jersey that have tried things like community rating (rates based strictly on age, not risk) and guaranteed issuance (pre-existing conditions ignored) and mandated coverage. What they found is that each of them, in their own way, increased the cost of insurance, and didn't significantly decrease the number of uninsured.

Sounds counter intuitive that mandated coverage wouldn't decrease the number of uninsured, but, as Massachusetts has found out, if the penalty isn't big enough to be a problem, people will still ignore the mandate. They've also found out that with community rating and guaranteed issuance many people buy coverage when they find out they are sick, then drop it when the treatment ends.

Wisconsin was added to the list of failed state initiatives this week, when it's Badgercare Plus, for childless adults announced it couldn't afford to let anyone else into the program after this Friday. Like "Cash for Clunkers" it ran out of money long before anticipated, three months instead of a year.

While Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle says that Badgercare Plus's problem shows we need national health reform, he doesn't mention that we should probably multiply the cost estimates by four to actually have enough money to pay for it. Then again, that's probably a wise thing to ignore. If folks were told we'd need 4 trillion over ten years, or even 3.4 trillion for the Senate package, everyone would be at the tea parties.

Read The Full Post!

McConnell Blasts Government Over Gag Order

McConnell Blasts Government Over 'Gag Order' on Private Health Care Provider - Political News - FOXNews.com

What's that about? Humana evidently sent a flyer out to it's Medicare Advantage customers telling them that HR 3200 and the Senate Finance bill by Max Baucus threatened their benefits. Baucus, in a hissy fit, order Medicare's oversight folks to investigate Humana for doing it, claiming they were misleading and confusing seniors.

AARP, who's spending millions advertising to support such legislation; with just as confusing language; and who runs a Medicare Advantage program, hasn't been asked to stop what they are doing.

Mitch McConnnell has hoisted the BS flag, and asked why the government is trying to gag companies from providing information about legislation, other than to protect themselves from being discovered as liars.

The CBO has come out and basically sided with Humana, saying millions of seniors will either lose Advantage coverage completely, or see a decline in benefits due to the cuts Baucus is proposing in the program in his bill, and the House in there version.

If you look at actual facts about Advantage, you'd have to wonder why it's the targets of so many cuts. It provides service for about 20% cheaper than standard Medicare, and the folks who use it rate it much higher for customer service than Medicare.

It seems if Congress were serious about cutting Medicare costs they'd expand enrollment in Advantage, not try and cut it. Except Advantage uses private health insurers to provide it's service, and we all know they are evil, just ask Nancy Pelosi and the President.


Posted using ShareThis

Read The Full Post!