Coulter and Goodman agree: The Opt-Out plan sucks

Ann Coulter simply states the case:  a state can only opt out of the benefits of Obamacare;  every citizen will have to pay the costs of the opt-out healthcare plan for everyone else.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34179

For a more scholarly, academic but excellent evalution of the crapulous  opt out plan from economist John Goodman:   http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/the-baucus-bill-explained/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=emai

Heritage Foundation:

| |
|
:
:
:
:
Watch the video! FEATURED VIDEO
Heritage senior fellow in national security affairs Peter Brookes discusses Afghanistan and Iraq. More videos

October 28, 2009 | By Amanda Reinecker

‘Gigantic, unintelligible, unaffordable, over-regulatory, federal legislation’

After 13 days of secret, closed-door negotiations on health care legislation, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced Monday that he had reached an agreement with Senators Chris Dodd (D-MT) and Max Baucus (D-CT), and three top administration officials. Unfortunately, Senator Reid did not tell the American people much else.

Even many lawmakers remain in the dark regarding the outcome of this “secret deal that Senator Reid wants to get passed and signed into law ‘this year,'” writes Heritage Senate Relations expert Brian Darling. Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, summed it up: “It will be a thousand-page, trillion-dollar bill that raises premiums, raises taxes and slashes Medicare for our seniors to create new government spending programs. That’s not reform.”

Even as some of the final details of the bill do go public, it is likely that lawmakers won’t know in advance entirely what it is they are voting on. This is because the legislation the Senate Finance Committee “agreed” to — all 1,502 pages of it — is the most massive piece of legislation ever introduced by Congress.

paperweight

But length isn’t the only record the “America’s Healthy Future Act of 2009” claims, as Heritage health policy analyst Ed Haislmaier notes. “For the first time in fifteen years, [Congress] has set a new all-time division record for gigantic, unintelligible, unaffordable, over-regulatory, federal legislation.”

What we do know about Reid’s ‘secret deal’

Although Senator Reid did not go into great detail about the health care “reform” legislation, he did mention that bill includes a government-run health insurance “option” that would “compete” against private health plans.

In an attempt to gain much-needed support from skeptical moderates in both parties, liberals have added a new twist to the “public option”: a provision allowing states to opt out of the program. This would require states to pass legislation by 2014 rejecting participation in the federal government run plan.

But this new wrinkle is really more of the same, warns Heritage health policy analyst Nina Owcharenko. “This latest Senate ploy creates the illusion of an ‘option’ rather than making any fundamental changes to the controversial proposal.”

Owcharenko explains why this “opt-out” model is just another government-run plan that is guaranteed to fail:

  1. States can only opt-out of the government-run plan, not the entire bill. But the rest of the bill contains hundreds of provisions, such as the expansion of Medicaid, which will place major financial burdens on the states.
  1. It is still a government-run plan because the government will require non-participating states to meet federal conditions. These government-determined conditions could include the creation of state-level public options that mirror the federal plan.
  1. States will likely select the public “option” because of the bureaucracy and enormous administrative complexity required for a state opt-out. Federal conditions will limit states’ ability to create alternatives.
  1. State innovation will suffer under the massive health care proposal’s employer and individual mandates, and government micromanagement of an industry that represents one-sixth of our economy.

So even though the states would be able to “opt out” of the government-run health insurance program, the federal government will make it very difficult to do so. And for the few states that do succeed in withdrawing, the government will still dominate their health care systems.

A true state “opt-out” provision would allow states to opt out of the bill in its entirety, argues Owcharenko. “Any other opt-out is just another shell game that is intended to appear as a concession but in reality provides for greater federal control and blocks much needed structural changes.”

> Other Heritage work of note

  • “If Congress wanted to make real progress” on immigration reform, Heritage President Ed Feulner advises, “it should embrace the KISS principle: Keep it Simple, Stupid.” For example, rather than trying to completely overhaul immigration policy all at once, lawmakers should gradually introduce policies that would achieve real reform and advance America’s interests. Feulner recommends that Congress work to strengthen the E-Verify program, a cost-effective and proven way for employers to ensure that they are operating within the law by hiring only legal residents. And he urges lawmakers to consider a genuine temporary worker program — not just another form of amnesty — that would allow foreign workers to reside in the United States for a short period.
  • President Obama’s “plans for the Pentagon are awfully reminiscent of Carter’s defense program,” writes Heritage national security expert James Carafano. Unfortunately, many of Carter’s policies of soft diplomacy and military cutbacks made the U.S. a vulnerable target in the eyes of her enemies — and the danger is that we could face these dangers again today. “Unless the nation seems firmly committed to backing [rhetoric] with some hard muscle,” argues Carafano, “those with no love of America will interpret the rhetoric as the vapid mooings of a nation in retreat.”
  • “Because Fox dares to report news critical of the administration, President Obama has instituted a White House boycott of the network,” writes Heritage expert Brian Darling. And while the White House heaps abuse on its critics, the administration its heaping taxpayer money on its allies. For example, $250,000 from the so-called “stimulus” package has been assigned to a National Resource Center for Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Elders.
  • The Obama administration’s plan to send a $250 check to every senior — nominally to offset the lack of a cost-of-living increase — would cost future generations about $13 billion. “With [Social Security] already facing massive unfunded deficits in the decades ahead, the proposed giveaway is exactly the wrong approach,” writes Heritage President Ed Feulner.

> In other news

  • The United Nations is looking into pricey housing markets, such as those in New York City, and investigating whether such expensive locations violate the “right to affordable housing.”
  • Two suicide bombers struck Baghdad over the weekend, killing 155 people in the worst bombing in two years. Meanwhile, President Obama recently reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to withdrawing its troops from the country.
  • Conservatives still outnumber liberals and moderates, according to a Gallup poll. The most recent poll found that 40 percent of Americans identified themselves as conservative while only 20 percent said they were liberal.

Amanda Reinecker is a writer for MyHeritage.org—a website for members and supporters of The Heritage Foundation. Nathaniel Ward, the Editor of MyHeritage.org, contributed to this report.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , ,


%d bloggers like this: