It's OK if You Are Confused about Health Care Reform

There are very good reasons to be confused about what kind of health care reform Congress is debating right now. The health reform plans keep changing. Even in the committees of jurisdiction, only part of each bill is being considered because the rest of the bill has not been drafted. And when it gets drafted, it has to be scored (its cost to the taxpayer determined) by the Congressional Budget Office. The scores have been so high, ranging from $1.6 trillion to $2.4 trillion in the U.S. Senate and $3 trillion in the U.S. House, that the crippling price tags are causing further changes. Until the Democrats decide whether or not to have a government health plan option, the delays and confusion will continue. On one hand, three of the most influential House Democratic caucuses have demanded a public/government plan option. On the other, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Medical Association and the Association of Health Insurance Plans have all come out four-square against a government plan. When the leaders of the employer, doctor and insurance communities unite to oppose a specific legislative item, it becomes very difficult to pass. Moreover, President Obama has said that there is "no line in the sand" on a government plan, but House Speaker Pelosi says she cannot pass health reform in the House without a government plan. If you are confused about what is happening on health care reform, don't worry, so are members of Congress.

ObamaCare: Open Wide and Say, 'Nah!'

Plenty of people tuned in to yesterday's White House infomercial on health care, but were Americans buying what the President was selling? ABC sure hopes so, since it turned over a full day of programming to the administration in an amazing co-opt of one of the country's biggest media outlets. In last night's primetime town hall, one of the audience members asked the President how he can justify a plan that limits the treatments for people with terminal disease.

"My mother... has terminal cancer," Robert Wasson said, " [and] she deserves to be treated to the best of [doctors'] abilities. To say it's expensive is not right. I just don't think you can put a price tag on quality time with loved ones, especially at the end of their lives."

The President tried to tackle the end-of-life issue with his plan, particularly the criticism that under the government option, people would be denied certain treatments or procedures. "...[W]e're not going to solve every difficult problem in terms of end-of-life [questions]... But what we can do is make sure that at least some of the waste that exists in the system that's not making anybody's mom better, that is loading up on additional tests or drugs... that is not necessarily going to improve care, that at least we can let doctors know and your mom know that, you know what? Maybe this isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery but taking the painkiller."

If anyone's going to need painkillers, it's the taxpayers who would be forced to finance this treatment-lite plan. In an interview yesterday with Joe Scarborough, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) estimated that the House's radical version of "reform," a bill that includes a funding mandate for abortionists, could cost upwards of $3 trillion. Unfortunately, that number doesn't mean much to most Americans.

After the stimulus, omnibus, and bailouts, the country seems almost immune to the administration's black hole of spending. Let me put it in perspective. You would need to spend one dollar every second--going all the way back to 30,000 years before Christ--to reach a trillion dollars. Think about it. The federal government's first trillion dollar annual budget was just 19 years ago. Now we're talking about just one program that could cost three times that!

Insurance Includes No Assurance on Life

President Obama, fresh from a government takeover of General Motors, now has his sights set on your medical coverage. On Saturday, he told Congress it was "time to deliver" on his massive health care overhaul. One version of the President's plan, crafted by Sen. Ted Kennedy's (D-Mass.) Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, was circulated throughout the Hill on Friday. In it, all Americans are guaranteed some form of basic health care, and employers are ordered to provide coverage--or else. Of course the biggest hiccup is that Kennedy's committee has no idea how Congress would pay for such a plan, particularly since the U.S. is already borrowing almost 50 cents for every dollar it spends.

The chief complaint against ObamaCare, apart from the trillions it would cost, is that this plan would force taxpayers to provide abortion coverage for the first time in U.S. history. There are some Senators that are concerned that the President wants to make "reproductive health care," including abortion, an essential part of his government-controlled system.

While the administration would force you to pay for abortions, it also leaves relatively no options for those faced with having to perform or promote them. The current plan lacks any clear conscience protections for medical workers, leaving the health care field exposed to even greater attacks. If the bill refuses to address the freedom of conscience, more of our doctors, nurses, and pharmacists will be forced to choose between their convictions and their careers.