Emerging Medicare buy-in program “could have costly unintended consequences”…
…writes the WaPo in a spasm of rare thoughtfulness:
Presumably, the expanded Medicare program would pay Medicare rates to providers, raising the question of the spillover effects on a health-care system already stressed by a dramatic expansion of Medicaid. Will providers cut costs — or will they shift them to private insurers, driving up premiums? Will they stop taking Medicare patients or go to Congress demanding higher rates? Once 55-year-olds are in, they are not likely to be kicked out, and the pressure will be on to expand the program to make more people eligible. The irony of this late-breaking Medicare proposal is that it could be a bigger step toward a single-payer system than the milquetoast public option plans rejected by Senate moderates as too disruptive of the private market.
The WaPo has noticed that this proposal is a shell game. But I wonder why it is that the paper considers that these consequences would be unintended.
Virtually every non-public-option Democratic suggestion for health care reform so far has been an effort to look like it will—as President Obama has been so fond of saying—preserve the private insurance arrangements most Americans already have and like. But every one of them has been a Trojan horse that contains, hidden within it, the mechanism of that system’s destruction.
This cannot be an accident. One can only conclude it’s a plan.
[NOTE: If you really want some depressing reading about health care reform, try this. And then send it to everyone you know.]
I guess this falls under the category of boiling the frog by putting him in cold water and turning up the heat. The next thing will be to extend the Medicare “option” down to 45, and then include other needy groups like pregnant women. We know how the Dems tried to expand S-CHP to individuals besides children and the indigent. It’s the same BS in a different wrapper.
The law of unintended consequences will have terrible effects indeed.
I believe the Left is doing us dirt but even they will be surprised at the outcome.
The consequences are not unintended. Congressman Anthony Weiner, (D-NY) (a major supporter of single payer) said this proposal was not just a camel’s nose under the tent, but the whole head and neck. He later withdrew that appraisal, when he realized he inadvertently let the cat out of the bag. The goal is single payer and this is the route to it. AAAAARRRGGHHH!!!
FYI–Everyone: Robert Tracinski’s clear, informational, knock-out piece for TIA Daily and posted this a.m. at Realclearpolitics.com: “You WILL Lose Your Private Health Insurance”.
It’s a Knockout.
Our country simply cannot afford to let this heinous legislation pass. And if perchance it does, surely it would be tested in the courts. I cannot imagine this can be constitutional.
As an addendum to my prior content, ther’s this:
“As for the actual deal struck last night–to expand Medicare coverage to Americans aged 55 to 64–here are some deeply apprehensive thoughts: Medicare is not a bad thing, per se, but it is inefficient, costly, and fraud-ridden. If fully costed, no one would prefer a Medicare policy to a private plan. If subsidized, everyone would, and employers will tilt to make sure their employees subscribe to it. If so, this incremental Medicare approach would raise government-sponsored health insurance from about 60 percent (Medicare, Medicaid, veterans, and government employees) to 70 percent or more. So Republicans, libertarians, and others, beware: Much more than the camel’s nose in now under the tent. (In truth, the camel–ever a provocative beast–has pushed into the tent rump-first.)
Read the whole thing:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-12-09/long-live-the-public-option/
Harry Reid is trying to “create momentum”, a sense of urgency. They will do anything to get this passed. It is so fraudulent! They are going to take 1/2 trillion out of Medicare by cutting fees to Drs., Hospitals, Service Providers and taxes on everything from crutches to pacemakers. Then only the taxes and fees take effect until the whole thing kicks in in 2015.
That makes it look like it comes in at under $900,000 billion for the first decade as Obama requires. But they can’t keep the cuts for Drs. and hospitals, or they would quit. So they will put the money back in a separate bill, but the health-care bill will still look cost-effective. Actual cost for a full decade is $2.5 trillion. And on top of that they want to open Medicare to early “buy ins” for people 55 or 60 — potentially 20 to 30 million. But Medicare is scheduled to go broke by 2017, and nobody is doing anything whatsoever to fix it!! There is no attempt to fix the fraud and waste in Medicare.
They just want to pass something, anything, to get it firmly in government control, and they’ll tinker with it later. Tom Daschle has been a big Obama adviser on health care, and he is a great admirer of the U.K.’s NHS, and even NICE which is killing off the old and inconvenient.