HS Dent | Americans Are Not Fearful Of Healthcare Reform, They Are Fearful Of Congress

The HS Dent Financial Blog

RSS

Americans Are Not Fearful Of Healthcare Reform, They Are Fearful Of Congress

By Rodney Johnson⋅ August 11, 2009 ⋅ ⋅ Post a comment

The healthcare system is flawed, no doubt. As a small business, we are on the front lines of how inept and expensive the system has become. Because we do not have group insurance (too few people), we buy individual policies, and therefore pay the highest rates. Not only are the costs astronomical, but so are the regulations as to who can offer us insurance and what form it can take.

So agreeing that healthcare needs reform is easy. What is not easy is understanding how the US government would be the best provider of such reform, because any reform would require a measure of cost cutting as well as cost bearing, and the judgment to determine who gets the short ends of those sticks. That’s where the problems lie and the shouting begins.

Look no further than today’s WSJ, p. A1 and A5. On A1, there is a story about Congress “retreating” on the purchase of several jets worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Apparently, before public outrage at the fact that Congress was requesting new jets in the teeth of a terrible economy, our esteemed legislators had no problem requesting these items. On A5 there is the continuation of the story, tucked underneath a story of where several Congressman are traveling during their summerbreak - Asia, Africa, etc. - all on our dime.

The reason these stories are instructive about healthcare is because they point to the most basic issue - there is a lack of trust that the US government, led by Congress, will be good stewards of our tax dollars on ANY program, much less one of monumental proportions and so dear to us individually as healthcare. The source of our skepticism is Congress itself, through actions such as the jets requisition and summer jaunts.

Our lack of trust is only heightened when we ask for very specific details of how such a plan would work and are given generalities.

On the side of how to pay for such a change as we are contemplating, we are told that much of it will come from “savings.” If that is true, then I have a charge for my Congress. I want them to spend the next 24 months pursuing those savings. In fact, I’m somewhat annoyed that if such savings are obvious, then why have they not pursued them previously. But back to the point, let’s go after those savings for two years, and at the end of the trial period we will have a clear understanding of exactly how much we have been able to trim from the budget and therefore how much we can count on for the remake of healthcare.

My guess is that we will find the total amount “saved” is nil, just as many people suspect. Which would mean that most if not all of any changes in healthcare would have to be paid for with increased taxes, right in the middle of the greatest downturn since the Great Depression. After such a plan is instituted there will be no turning back, no chance to unwind it. Taxpayers will be left holding the bag for the foreseeable future. That is the fear, and a well-grounded one at that.

Print this post

Discussion

5 comments for “Americans Are Not Fearful Of Healthcare Reform, They Are Fearful Of Congress”

Perfect!! You hit the nail on the head!!

Posted by revans9139 | August 11, 2009, 10:50 am
How about coming up with a basic health care safety net instead of full coverage for all. Provide coverage for all major injuries/illnesses with a high (maybe $5,000) deductible. Only cover what is absolutely necessary. If someone wants coverage for visiting the doctor for every sniffle or more “quality of life” procedures, let them get it on their own. That seems like something that most everyone would agree should be provided and the cost of that should be a lot less expensive than anything that is currently being considered.

Posted by tmiller@tmsolutionsgroup.com | August 11, 2009, 11:52 am
The preamble to the current state of ObamaCare includes the nationalization of Chrysler and GM, Citi and AIG, the establishment of numerous non-Congressionally approved “Czars”, and the demonstrated willingness of this government to incur unbelievable amounts of debt for bailouts that could just as well have been handled via established legal institutions such as Bankruptcy proceedings and FDIC, among others.

In addition, we have Nancy Pelosi calling dissent “un-American”, while a key White House operative (Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina) has advised Congressional Democrats that “If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard”. All this against the background of a President wanting health care legislation affecting 17% of the economy rushed through Congress and promptly passed with little presence of daylight.

Inherent in these developments is the specter of socialism and authoritarianism Americans have observed elsewhere, NOT individual freedom of choice and “government of the people, by the people, and for the people” they deeply believe in.

The American culture - both individualist and capitalist centric in nature - has performed remarkably well over the past two plus centuries. It has served Americans well, particularly in the medical realm. Assuming a major overhaul of the health care system is needed (that’s another issue), it must be founded upon that which has made America what it is … the strength of the individual and the individual’s ability to care for him/herself, NOT top down micro-management of the individual’s health care needs.

Any change to the health care system must therefore be “bottom up” – individualist - oriented, not “top down” mandates of government, thereby preserving the fundamental rights underlying Americanism - “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” - unimpeded by faceless, nameless government bureaucrats who must regulate pursuant to the dictates of politicians who make decisions based upon their, and their political party’s, political objectives.

When factoring in the demonstrated inability of the government to financially manage, with wisdom and prudence, so many of its own major undertakings, is there any question why there has been a strong adverse and growing reaction to the current health care legislation?

Posted by bazwm | August 11, 2009, 12:10 pm
I would recommend the Editorial in today’s WSJ “Obama’s Tone-Deaf Health Campaign”, page 17. He really doesn’t get middle America or the baby boomers. However, on CNBC on this morning’s Squawk Box former senator Frist (R, Tenn) said health care is a done deal as Obama will push it through the Senate with 50 votes and it will be more left than had it been bipartisan. The midterm elections will be something to watch. Depends on what the economy does and doesn’t do in the interim. It all seems very amusing from our perch here in the mountains of the SW.

Posted by mkern | August 11, 2009, 4:39 pm
If reform is so important, why are we not exploring options with insurance providers, doctors, patients, etc.? Why are we in such a rush? Why have numeropus members of Congress not read the bill? Why not hold hearings and have a public discussion? Why are there no specifics?

All government programs are filled with waste - they don’t have to make payroll and thus no driving force to move a bit quicker and find better ways to get from A to B. Healthcare reform or whatever they want to call it will be no different.

If congress is sold on this plan, they should be required to drop thier private plan and get in on the savings too? What’s good for the goose . . .

The entire mess stinks.

Posted by scotta48 | August 11, 2009, 4:53 pm