Healthcare Update 8 (This is not reform… this a MADOFF style scheme)

November 25, 2009

The Senate healthcare bill that passed cloture and is now up for debate in the Senate floor is NOT healthcare reform by a long shot. 

This is more like a PAY NOW HEALTHCARE LATER. The tax proposals in this bill will take effect as soon as it is passed but the healthcare benefits will not kick in until 2014. 

What does that mean to you? 

It means that you are still going to be paying your premium and deductibles from your private insurance while your taxes are going up to pay for your healthcare. DOUBLE WHAMMY!

 Besides that, as soon as this bill becomes into law, all your medical supplies will cost more because of the new taxes on them. BAM! SCREWING YOU BOTH WAYS!

 How about the elderly? They are getting screwed in every orifice in their bodies. CUTS IN MEDICARE, HIGHER TAXES, MORE EXPENSIVE MEDICAL SUPPLIES.

 This Democrat controlled Congress sure is creative in raising our taxes but very inept in cutting the spending. By the way, the cost estimate they did would make Bernie Madoff proud. Like I pointed out earlier this is a pay now healthcare later scheme. The first five years, 2010-2014, is not factored in the cost calculation because YOU ARE PAYING FOR NOTHING. But on 2014 the real cost of the bill will hit the fan.

 From NY Post:

The CBO reports that, in their true first 10 years, the House bill would cost $1.8 trillion, and the Senate bill would cost $1.7 trillion. Pelosi would raise Americans’ taxes by $1.1 trillion over that period, while Reid would hike them by $1 trillion.

And the House bill would siphon about $800 billion from Medicare to spend it elsewhere, while the Senate bill would suck out about $900 billion.

So the financial bottom lines are almost the same.

And if we discount the bills’ claims to divert hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare (which is already on the edge of insolvency), the CBO says the House bill would raise our national debt by about $650 billion in its real first decade, while the Senate bill would up it by $740 billion

Read more:

The Democrat controlled Senate bill by the numbers: 

2,074 — pages in the bill

$1.2 billion — cost to taxpayers per page

70 — new government programs authorized by the bill

1,697 — times the Secretary of Health and Human Services is given authority to create, determine, or define things in the bill

24 million — people left without health insurance

$8 billion — taxes levied on uninsured individuals

$25 billion — additional Medicaid mandates placed on states

$28 billion — new taxes on employers not providing government-approved plans

$118 billion — cuts to Medicare Advantage

$465 billion — total cuts to Medicare

$494 billion — revenue from new taxes/fees levied on American families and businesses

$2.5 trillion — cost for the first ten years of full implementation of the legislation

  Numerous Government and Private Studies Have Confirmed that Premiums and Costs Will Go Up Under the Majority’s Health Care Plans

 1. CBO Letter to Sen. Baucus on September 22, 2009, on premiums

 Additional, Updated CBO table sent October 9, 2009

  “Premiums in the new insurance exchanges would tend to be higher than the average premiums in the current-law individual market.”

  “People with low expected costs for health care, however, would generally pay higher premiums (all else being equal).”

 2. JCT Memorandum on the high cost plans excise tax, September 29, 2009

  “The staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the excise tax would be mainly passed along through increases in premiums, and that many consumers respond by reducing their demand for insurance above the excise tax cap.”

  “The imposition of the excise tax on insurers can be expected to lead health insurance providers and consumers to take measures to minimize their burden from the tax. As insurers pass along the cost to the consumer by increasing price, the cost of employer provided insurance will increase.”

 3. CMS Office of the Actuary Memorandum, October 21, 2009

  “In aggregate, we estimate that for calendar years 2010 through 2019 national health expenditures would increase by $750 billion, or 2.1 percent, over the updated baseline projection that was released on June 29, 2009. As a result, the NHE share of GDP is projected to be 21.3 percent in 2019, compared to 20.8 percent under current law.”

 4. Oliver Wyman Analysis, October 14, 2009

 Assuming 89 percent of the total population has health insurance, Oliver Wyman expects:

 Ø Claims in the individual market could be 50 percent higher than they are today; claims are expected to be even higher in some states, ranging between 60-73 percent higher than today.

 Ø This translates into premium increases of roughly $1,500 a year for single coverage and premium increases of roughly $3,300 a year for family coverage.

 Ø Premiums for small businesses could be 19 percent higher.

  Will federal subsidies help individuals and families afford the premium increases?

 Ø YES, for the 8 million current individual market members and 25 million uninsured earn between 100 and 400 percent of poverty and will have access to subsidies in the exchange which will help offset these cost increases.

 Ø NO, for the 18 million people, including currently uninsured and existing individual market members, are NOT eligible for subsidies through the exchange.

  The bills before Congress require certain minimum benefit levels that are higher than the average of what people are purchasing in the market today. Experts estimate 50 percent of the individual market policies purchased today and about 20 percent of the small business policies purchased today have actuarial values that are lower than what the bills mandate, which means all of those Americans will be forced to buy richer plans.

  Compliance with just these “actuarial value” benefit requirements could cause premiums for Americans purchasing coverage on their own to increase by about 10 percent; premiums for small businesses will increase by about 3 percent.

 Additional analysis released by Oliver Wyman on age rating analysis, September 28, 2009

 The bills restrict the ability of health plans to provide age discounts to young members by specifying certain age bands. Oliver Wyman estimates that in most states, premiums for the youngest-healthiest third of individuals would increase by 69% in Year 1 compared to reform with 5:1 age bands.

  “Age rating is widely used by insurers in setting premiums today to encourage young individuals to purchase insurance. A substantial number of young individuals do not purchase coverage even at premiums that are often under $100 per month in states that permit flexibility in age rating. Over 40% of all the uninsured are ages 18-34. Young people ages 21-24 have uninsured rates more than triple those of people aged 55-64. Too often young people think they are healthy and invincible and do not need insurance.”

 5. PriceWaterhouseCoopers Report, October 2009

  Eventually the “Cadillac Plans” tax will start hitting Chevys and Buicks—not just Cadillac’s. PWC estimates that in many metropolitan areas, the lowest option “bronze” plan under the Finance Committee bill would be considered a so- called Cadillac plan as early as 2016.

  Public programs such as Medicare and Medicaid reimburse less than the cost of care for hospitals. The net effect of the bills before Congress will make the cost shift even more severe, raising the cost of private insurance premiums for large employers by $255 a year between 2015 and 2019. (This statistic only estimates the impacts of cost shifting from hospitals; including the impact on physicians will make the increased cost shifting even more severe.)

 6. HayGroup Analysis, October 5, 2009

  Proposals such as the various excise tax provisions on various industries that raise average premiums in the market. Because of these taxes would be non-deductibility (rare for excise taxes), for every $1.00 in tax more than $1.00 would need to be passed to consumers.

 7. Milliman Analysis, July 13, 2009

(no link; study attached)

 8. Wellpoint Data on State Specific Premium Increases

 9. Office of the Actuary at CMS Memorandum, November 13, 2009, estimate of HR 3962

  Speaker Pelosi’s bill would bend the cost curve in the wrong direction: National Health Expenditures would increase by a net 1.3 percent in 2019. The coverage provisions increase NHE by 3.4 percent in 2019 and the Medicare/Medicaid cuts reduce NHE by 2.1 percent in 2019. (Of course, the net 1.3 percent may be greater because the Actuary later notes that the reality of the Medicare cuts happening may be “unrealistic.”) While America spends 17 percent of our GDP on health care today—more than any other country in the world—the Pelosi bill increases that to 21.1 percent by 2019.

 Speaker Pelosi’s purported cost-savings policies won’t work: “…we estimate that most of the provisions of H.R. 3962 that were designed, in part, to reduce the rate of growth in health care costs would have a relatively small savings impact.”

 Speaker Pelosi’s bill could increase costs and hurt access to care: “The additional demand for health services could be difficult to meet initially with existing health provider resources and could lead to price increases, cost-shifting, and/or changes in providers’ willingness to treat patients with low-reimbursement health coverage.”

 Speaker Pelosi’s $1.2 trillion bill could increase the deficit because her offsets are “unrealistic”: OACT notes that the net $571 billion in cuts to the Medicare program would increase the solvency of the Trust Fund until 2022. Then OACT quickly points out that the estimated savings may be “unrealistic,” and “In addition, the longer term viability of the Medicare update reductions is doubtful.”

 10. Long-Term Cost of the America’s Healthy Future Act of 2009; As Passed by the Senate Finance Committee, October 30, 2009.

  “the cost of the excise tax payments will be passed on to employers and consumers in premiums”

 “…most of the cost of the new excise taxes is passed back to employers and consumers in the form of higher premiums. In 2011, this would add $13.4 billion to premiums for private firms that continue to offer coverage.”


Are you dumb, America? Part 2

November 16, 2009

Stimulus bill saved or created how many jobs?


Are you really this dumb, America?


Let’s see how dumb you are, America…


The Obama administration claimed:


–         Southwest Georgia Community Action Council saved 935 jobs but only 508 actually work there.

–         Administration for Children and Families at Health and Human Services saved 14,506 jobs but the money from the stimulus were used to give 9,300 of those employees raises.

–         In Colorado the stimulus money of $2.6 billion created or saved 8,094 jobs. WOW! That is $321,226 per job. WHERE IS THE PAY CZAR ON THIS ONE?

–         Colorado Head Start program reported 269 jobs saved or created…. Actual = 3

–         In a North Chicago school district a claim of 473 teachers were saved, the problem is the district only employs 290 teachers.


This is interesting to note:

            “Chicago’s omission from the stimulus data is not without irony. The federal overseer of school stimulus spending is U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who until early this year was the CEO of the Chicago schools.”


Are you really this dumb, America, to believe in this fuzzy math?


Are you really dumb, America, to believe that giving someone a pay raise is equivalent to “job saved” while millions of Americans will just settle for a job that pays?


Are you really dumb, America, to believe that 640,000 jobs were “saved and created” with $215 billion of the stimulus money spent?


My fuzzy math tells me that is $335,937 per job. WHERE IS THE PAY CZAR ON THIS ONE, TOO?!


Are you really dumb, America, to believe that the stimulus is really saving and creating jobs when unemployment is at over 10% the highest in 26 years?


Are you dumb, America?






Healthcare Update 7

November 11, 2009

Want to hear a little good news? Thanks to the efforts of Policy Patriots just like you, we’ve sent more than 210,000 letters to Congress in the last three weeks against government run health care. In this public policy war of attrition, a sustained campaign – in the form of hundreds of thousands of letters and a petition supported by 1.34 million Americans – is what will ultimately win the fight against government-run health care. Thanks for your continued support and let’s keep up the fight!

Poll Deaf. If you feel ignored by the House of Representatives, you’re not alone. A Rasmussen Reports poll this week reaffirmed that more Americans oppose (52%) health care legislation than favor (45%) it. Nevertheless, as last Saturday’s legislative spectacle attests, Speaker Pelosi is still singing the health care tune.

Go Directly to Jail. As you know, in the 1,990-page bill that squeaked (220-215) out of the House on Saturday there’s plenty of bad policy to fill this letter (and several more). What you may not know is that failing to comply with the new requirements in this legislation could land you in jail – for up to five years!

The most appalling effect of the Affordable Health Care for America Act is the extent of control which the federal government would exercise over individual health care decisions. The legislation requires you to purchase health insurance, whether you need it or want it, and dictates the parameters of your policy. What’s more, failure to purchase insurance would result in a slew of fines and, as this letter from the Joint Committee on Taxation makes clear, failure to pay the fines would result in criminal penalties including “a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.”

AARP: Abandoning Seniors, Advancing AARP. In apparent disregard for the interests of senior citizens, the AARP supported the House health care bill, including the following provisions:

  • $500 billion in overall budget cuts for Medicare.
  • $170 billion in budget cuts for Medicare Advantage-the program’s entire budget-leaving 12 million American seniors with fewer health care options.
  • A 20% cut in doctor’s pay, forcing doctors to take on more patients and spend less time with each person in their care.

Why would the AARP endorse legislation which so clearly hurts the interests of senior citizens? You decide! For facts on how you will be affected by this legislation, click on this link to get the facts.

FIGHT BACK! The next stop on the runaway train known as ObamaCare is the floor of the United States Senate. Help us derail Ms. Pelosi’s health care legislation by writing your Senators. The American people deserve better than what’s coming down the tracks and you can help put a stop to it. Click on the link below and send a letter to Congress telling them to JUST SAY NO to health care legislation.

Already sent a letter? No problem – a new letter is on the website, ready for your signature!

The NCPA maintains a wealth of educational and resource material including better alternatives to government-run health care:

John Goodman’s Health Care Plan:

Health Care Solutions:

Five Steps to a Better Health Care System:

Dr. John Goodman’s Blog – Current, up-to date information on the debate:

Heartland Institute’s Health Care Solutions:

Thank you again for your support of the “Free Our Health Care NOW!” and for fighting against government-run health care. This is a fight worth fighting and a fight we can win!

Health Care Reform UPDATE 6 (CBO Assessment of Republican Alternative Bill)

November 5, 2009

Health Care Reform UPDATE 6 (CBO Assessment of Republican Alternative Bill)


The Republicans in congress offered an alternative bill to reform health care in America. The CBO has made a preliminary assessment of the bill on its costs and viability.


Here is the outline of the CBO’s assessment of the Republicans’ alternative bill:

  • reduce federal deficits by $68 billion over the 2010-2019 period
  • increase rates of insurance coverage by reducing its costs (premium)
  • Limits on costs related to medical malpractice (“tort reform”)
  • An increase in funding for HHS investigations into fraud and abuses
  • Changes to health savings accounts (HSAs) to allow funds in such accounts to be used to pay premiums
  • Make health insurance portable
  • Allow Americans to buy health insurance across state lines
  • premiums per enrollee in the United States, relative to what they would be under current law-by 7 percent to 10 percent in the small group market, by 5 percent to 8 percent for individually purchased insurance, and by zero to 3 percent in the large group market.


Read full text of CBO Director’s blog:

Healthcare Update 5 – “THE WORST BILL EVER” (WSJ)

November 3, 2009


In a rational political world, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 1,990-page health care reform bill released last Thursday would have been derailed months ago.  With spending and debt already at record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over time.  Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually all medicine will be rationed via politics, says the Wall Street Journal.

The spending surge:

  • The Congressional Budget Office figures the House program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above the $829 billion net cost that Pelosi fed to credulous reporters is still a low-ball estimate.
  • Most of the money goes into government-run “exchanges” where people earning between 150 percent and 400 percent of the poverty level — that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four in 2016 — could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to income.
  • The government would pay for 93 percent of insurance costs for a family making $42,000, 72 percent for another making $78,000, and so forth.

At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose employers don’t provide insurance or work for small businesses with 100 or fewer workers.  The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not for this “firewall” — which is sure to cave in when people see the deal their neighbors are getting on “free” health care.   Pelosi knows this, like everyone else in Washington, says the Journal.

Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in additional costs with budget gimmicks, says the Journal:

  • It “pays for” about six years of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs concentrated in the second five years.
  • The House also pretends Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5 percent next year and deeper after that, “saving” about $250 billion.
  • ObamaCare will be lucky to cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that.

Source: Editorial, “The Worst Bill Ever,” Wall Street Journal, November 2, 2009.

For text:

For more on Health Issues: