|
“I have not said that I was a single-payer
supporter.” This is
directly contradicted by candidate
Barack Obama’s own website which quotes Obama at
a rally in Ames, Iowa form 2008: “If I were designing a
system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer
system. … So what I believe is we should set up a series of
choices….Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to
such a system.” So there you have in one paragraph the true
purpose of Obama’s public option: a vehicle to slowly
transition all Americans out of private coverage and into a
government-run single payer health care system. This Trojan
Horse view of the public option has been reaffirmed by
Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA),
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein,
and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.
“Under the reform we’re proposing, if you like your
doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health
care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”
This statement is also plainly false. Again, as demonstrated
above, the true purpose of Obama’s public option is to move
Americans out of their private coverage and into government
run health care.
Independent, non-partisan analysis
from the Lewin Group has confirmed the House
bill, H.R. 3200, will do exactly that: About 88.1 million
workers would see their current private, employer-sponsored
health plan go away and would be shifted to the public plan.
“That’s what the health exchange is all about, is
that you — just like a member of Congress — can go and
choose the plan that’s right for you.” This
statement isn’t false, but it is misleading. Members of
Congress do purchase their health care through a health
exchange: the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP).
Through the FEHBP 283 private plans compete
for federal employees’ health care dollars.
The Heritage Foundation has long been
a supporter of health reform that empowers consumers to
utilize a FEHBP like system. But Obamacare is
nothing like the FEHBP system. There is no government run
public option competing with private plans in the FEHBP. So
whenever Obama says that a health exchange already “drives
down costs” he is right … but remember that this cost
reduction is achieved purely by private health coverage
without any “competition” from a government run public
option. “We have the AARP on board because they know
this is a good deal for our seniors.” This is just
plain false. The AARP released a statement late yesterday
directly contradicting the President: “While the
President was correct that AARP will not endorse a health
care reform bill that would reduce Medicare benefits,
indications that we have endorsed any of the major health
care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress
are inaccurate.” “I just want to be clear, again:
Seniors who are listening here, this does not affect your
benefits. This is not money going to you to pay for your
benefits; this is money that is subsidizing folks who don’t
need it.” Under the current system, more and more
seniors are discovering that it is becoming harder and
harder to find and keep doctors who will accept Medicare
patients. A
2008 survey found that 29%
of the Medicare beneficiaries it surveyed who were looking
for a primary care doctor had a problem finding one to treat
them. Obamacare will only make this problem worse by
cutting $313 billion in Medicare reimbursements to health
care providers over the next 10 years. This will
only force more doctors to stop seeing Medicare patients.
Obama also mentioned yesterday that he wants to pay for
subsidized health care by killing the Medicare Advantage
program.
Medicare Advantage plans cover all of
the traditional Medicare benefits and much more,
including coordinated care and care-management programs for
enrollees with chronic conditions as well as additional
hospitalization and skilled nursing facility stays. 22% of
all Medicare patients, which translates to 10.5 million
seniors, are currently enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans.
“I said I won’t sign a bill that adds to the deficit
or the national debt. Okay? So this will have to be paid
for.” That is a nice promise, but so was Obama’s
October 2008 promise that he would enact a
“net spending cut.”
We all know how that has turned out.
The reality is that the Senate still has not figured out how
to pay for their bill and the House bill would increase the
budget deficit by $239 billion over the next ten years. CBO
director Doug Elmendorf has said:
“In sum, relative to current law, the
proposal would probably generate substantial increases in
federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current
10-year budget window.” “My belief is, is
that [Obamacare] should not burden people who make $250,000
a year or less.” Both the House and Senate bills
partially pay for Obamacare by imposing “employer mandates”
or “pay or play” provisions that require employers to pay
higher taxes if (a) they do not offer health insurance, or
(b) they offer it but have employees who decline it and
instead use the government system.
Multiple
studies have shown that
such provisions cause both lower wages and lost jobs for
low-income workers. And these are just some of the
falsehoods and misinformation peddled by President Obama
yesterday. It doesn’t even include his choice to sell
Obamacare as
The “Post Office” of Health Care Plans.
No wonder so many Americans are skeptical. |