AMERICAN ISSUES PROJECT

Unlike our President and many of our representatives in Congress, I've tried to read the 1000+ page health care bill a few times this week. As a lawyer, I'm used to dealing with tedious and confusing legal jargon, yet this monolithic bill is still too hard for me to understand. It proposes drastic reforms that are couched in vague terms, offering little in the way of specifics. Take Section 100, Paragraph 4 for example. It states that the bill will "institute health delivery system reforms both to increase quality and to reduce growth in health spending so that health care becomes more affordable for businesses, families, and government". House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement today that echoes this sentiment, stating that the bill will cap your costs, but not your benefits.

Just how will the government accomplish this? Once again, the administration and liberals supporting this bill are using the same language they used to quickly push the stimulus bill through - it has to be done, and it has to be done now. But this time, 53% of Americans are opposed to the legislation. Americans are now questioning the health care reforms liberals are lauding because the numbers just don't add up. The goal of the health care legislation, stated up front in the bill, is to "provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending". How can the government possibly reduce the cost of health care without changing the quality of health care that we have come to know? It certainly cannot do it by creating a federal commission that will decide which treatment is appropriate for which patients, what research is and isn't worthy and engage in "comparative effectiveness studies" that determine which patients are worth giving medical treatment to and which are too old, sick or generally undeserving of medical attention. 

In a recent blog post here on AIP, Jimmie Bise linked to a great piece that explains why health care costs are on the rise (or rather, do not deflate in the same way as other costs), and as Jimmie points out, why they will continue to do so - even under ObamaCare. There is almost nothing the government can do to cut costs without affecting the quality of care available. I say almost because there are some options including tort reform and lowering taxes for medical professionals among others. The less doctors pay for malpractice insurance or to Uncle Sam, the lower they can set their fees.

Fortunately, some Democrats are more concerned about cost than a government takeover of the health care industry and are standing up to voice their concerns. One source said this about the President:

"We appreciate the rhetoric and his willingness to ratchet up the pressure but what most Democrats on the Hill are looking for is for the president to weigh in and make decisions on outstanding issues...Members would like a little bit of clarity on what he would support - especially on how to pay for his health reform bill."

As Catherine Favazza of AIP points out, forty-two House Democrats are not willing to support the bill.

With all these unanswered questions about how the system would work, how much it would cost and how it would be paid for, why is there such a rush to pass this bill before the end of the month? Even the President has admitted that he is unfamiliar with at least part of bill, and that's being kind and giving him the benefit of the doubt.

But President Obama and his administration know that any delays will kill this bill. And instead of looking out for the best interest of the American people, just like with the stimulus, liberals are using scare tactics and pressure to pass this NOW. The longer this bill is out there and the issues scrutinized by the American public, the greater the chance of it failing because like Speaker Pelosi's promise to cap costs not benefits, it just doesn't add up.