Our response to the New York Post column entitled “Perils of Obamacare: The Three Big Lies“.

Lie #1 – Millions of Americans will be FORCED to change insurance plans

Truth: No one will be forced to change insurance plans. The House bill sets forth specifics for the insurance exchange, and includes the public option as one of those exchange plans. The specifications for the insurance exchanges are parallel to current industry standards.

Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell knows this. Listen to his office admit that no one will be forced into any plan:

(via The Political Carnival)

More Resources:
Investors’ Business Daily Lied To You!

Lie #2 – You will pay more

Truth: We don’t know what the true costs and savings will be. There are only predictions and best guesses. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates have ranged from 1 Trillion to deficit-neutral. The most recent estimate shows deficit neutrality, which would suggest no add-on to the deficit and possibly even a surplus from the savings in how doctors’ payments are calculated for Medicare.

However, there are some generally accepted principles when it comes to pooled risk (which is what health insurance is).

Principle #1: The higher the number participating in the risk pool, the less expensive it is to provide benefits. In other words, covering the 46 million people not covered by health insurance right now actually decreases the cost per person. This is insurance 101 — even the health insurers agree on this one.

Principle #2: Without competition, prices will rise unreasonably. Right now, major insurers enjoy a competition-free market. They know this. As a result, premiums have risen 100% over the last 10 years. Those dollars limit employers’ ability to hire new employees. Out-of-control insurance costs will continue as will the insurers’ control over those who receive access without a plan that everyone can access.

Lie #3: Quality will suffer

Truth: Their lie presumes that we have quality health care now. The fact is, we do not, no matter how many times you hear the words “Canadian system” sneered on national television. Right now, today, we spend more per person on health care than nations with universal coverage. Our infant mortality rate is higher, over half of adults do not receive care their doctors recommend, and our chronic disease management system is in shreds. Diabetes and heart disease outcomes are extremely poor when compared to other countries, errors and infections are on the rise, and prescription medication costs are spiralling out of control. (See also: The Economist: Reforming American health care: Heading for the emergency room)

When you start with a badly broken system, fixing it can only improve outcomes, which will improve quality. The legislation crafted by the house offers incentives for medical educations and has a focus on primary care providers, a physician group rapidly dwindling in our current system.

For more information, please see our Glossary of Health Care Reform Definitions.

The Lie

Investor’s Business Daily’s latest salvo comes in the form of an editorial claiming that private insurance is eliminated.

When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

Unfortunately, IBD was just a little bit incorrect about the analysis and the reporting. I suppose, though, that characterizing it as an editorial might exempt them from actually reporting facts.

The Truth

Background: Page 16 defines what coverage will be considered “grandfathered coverage”; that is, coverage in existence today which would not be in compliance with new standards imposed by the law.

What it says: Any individual insurance policy (as opposed to a group insurance policy) that is in effect today will be permitted to remain in effect; however, any new policies issued after the law becomes effective will be required to comply with the standards set out in the section relating to policies offered via the new Health Insurance Exchange.

What it does: The purpose of the provision is to bring policy offerings into line with the minimum benefit tiers and provisions required under the new law. Here are those requirements:

1. Must offer “Basic Plan Benefits”, which means the following: No pre-existing condition exclusions, covers hospitalization, outpatient hospital and outpatient clinic services, physicians visits, supplies, equipment, prescription drugs, rehabilitative services, mental health and substance abuse treatment, preventive services, maternity, well baby and well child care, vision and dental for children under 21.
2. Has co-payments and deductibles not more than $10,000 per year, indexed for inflation.

On page 19, the bill clarifies the grandfather provision further by specifying that any individual health insurance coverage that is NOT grandfathered (e.g. products introduced after effective date of the law), will have to conform and be offered as an exchange-eligible plan.

This is all the grandfather provision does. Nothing more, nothing less. It allows existing products to die a natural death while requiring new products to conform to the basic standards. Those products are still offered by insurers. The public plan that has them all in an uproar is simply one among other offerings.

Why the lie? This provision effectively forces the insurers to sit down and craft policies that compete with each other and the public option in terms of benefits and accessibility. Recissions will be far more difficult and subject to three levels of review. Pre-existing conditions will be a dead term. All of this is great for individuals covered, but for insurers, it shuts down their gravy train. They’ll actually have to use one risk pool instead of tiered risk pools.

They don’t want to do that. They like making record profits while the rest of us are bankrupted. They understand that there will be reform; they just want it to be reform that benefits them instead of the rest of us. To that end, they recruit publications friendly to their cause like Investors’ Business Daily to publish ‘editorials’, which can then be spread via social networks and blogs to scare you into opposing ANY reform.

Now you have the facts. Straight out of the proposed legislation, from a person who has read the actual text of the legislation — all 1,018 pages of it — twice, and has a strong background in how these laws are shaped and come into being.

Do not let them scare you. Arm yourself with the facts.

The full text of the House Bill can be downloaded here. (PDF)

…and shoots across the bow of obstructionists in Congress. Expanded SCHIP benefits were widely supported on a bipartisan basis and sailed to President Obama’s desk where he signed it into law with a flourish and a warning.

The flourish:

This is not who we are. We are not a nation that leaves struggling families to fend for themselves. No child in America should be receiving her primary care in the emergency room in the middle of the night. No child should be falling behind at school because he can’t hear the teacher or see the blackboard. I refuse to accept that millions of our kids fail to reach their full potential because we fail to meet their basic needs. In a decent society, there are certain obligations that are not subject to tradeoffs or negotiation – health care for our children is one of those obligations.

The Warning

President Obama made it clear that he views his Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Plan as a key first step toward comprehensive health care reform.

Think about this – if Congress passes this recovery plan, in just one month, we’ll have done more to modernize our health care system than we’ve done in the past decade.

We’ll be on our way to computerizing all of America’s medical records, which won’t just eliminate inefficiencies, save billions of dollars and create tens of thousands of jobs – but will save lives by reducing deadly medical errors. We’ll have made the single largest investment in prevention and wellness in history – tackling problems like smoking and obesity, and helping people live longer, healthier lives. And we’ll have extended health insurance for the unemployed, so that workers who lose their jobs don’t lose their health care too.

He also made it clear that he was committed to getting this work done, and that he was not going to tolerate politics as usual with regard to Americans’ futures:

Now, in the past few days I’ve heard criticisms of this plan that echo the very same failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis – the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems; that we can address this enormous crisis with half-steps and piecemeal measures; that we can ignore fundamental challenges like the high cost of health care and still expect our economy and our country to thrive.

I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change. So I urge members of Congress to act without delay. No plan is perfect, and we should work to make it stronger. But let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the essential. Let’s show people all over our country who are looking for leadership in this difficult time that we are equal to the task. Let’s give America’s families the support they need to weather this crisis.