Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • Tags
  • RSS Feed


  • Advertise on RightMichigan.com


    NEWS TIPS!

    Get the RightMighigan.com toolbar!


    RightMichigan.com

    Buzz

    Who are the NERD fund donors Mr Snyder?

    Raise the curtain.

    GOP health care card


    By TimWalberg, Section News
    Posted on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 04:15:10 PM EST
    Tags: (all tags)

    (Promoted by Nick... Welcome back, Congressman!)

    Families in Michigan and throughout America are concerned about the rising cost of health care. Costs continue to rise, emergency rooms are filled with the uninsured, and many Americans continue in jobs they may not enjoy just to keep their health insurance. Our current health care system is fatally flawed, and right now more than 47 million individuals find themselves without coverage and millions more are underinsured. Now is the time to step forward with solutions that make health care more affordable and accessible, and place health-care decisions with medical professionals and patients.

    Families in Michigan and throughout America are concerned about the rising cost of health care. Costs continue to rise, emergency rooms are filled with the uninsured, and many Americans continue in jobs they may not enjoy just to keep their health insurance.

    Our current health care system is fatally flawed, and right now more than 47 million individuals find themselves without coverage and millions more are underinsured. Now is the time to step forward with solutions that make health care more affordable and accessible, and place health-care decisions with medical professionals and patients.

    For too long, according to polling data, the Republican Party has been "losing" the health-care issue to the Democrats. This should not be the case, as Republicans are pushing for real common-sense solutions and credible reforms. I for one will not allow the Democrats to claim health care as their issue, especially since most Democrats support a government-run and taxpayer-funded single provider system in which Washington, D.C., bureaucrats would have ultimate decision making authority over every American's medical coverage.

    Supporters of this government-run health care approach claim it will provide every American with a level of health care coverage, but fail to elaborate on the actual quality of care that will be provided.

    Government-run health-care programs all over the world are failing to meet the needs of those who need coverage. According to Britain's Department of Health, nearly 900,000 Britons were waiting for admission to National Health Service hospitals at a given time in 2006. In other European countries with government-based health care, people can wait for weeks, months and even years for important, specialized treatments, such as heart surgery or chemotherapy.

    Empowering bureaucrats through a "Hillary-Obama Care" approach would provide the same level of compassion and customer service we have come to expect from the Internal Revenue Service. This kind of one-size-fits-all, Washington-based approach is wrong, and America needs a patient-centered health-care system that gives consumers direct control and choice over their health-care decisions.

    With that goal in mind, recently I introduced the Making Health Care More Affordable Act (H.R. 5995). We hear a lot of radical promises from the other side, this bill offers common sense solutions that ties together six core reforms to make patient-centered, market-driven health care more affordable and accessible to all Americans:

    (1) Provide a health-insurance tax credit: If Congress provides such tax credit of up to $2,500 for individuals and $6,000 for a family of four, health insurance will become more affordable for more Americans, and families will be able to take their health insurance with them when they switch jobs. Providing these tax credits will expand the health insurance market, make the current system more equitable, reduce the number of uninsured Americans and increase the available options, while using the market to bring down health insurance costs.

    (2) Create association health plans: These plans allow small businesses to band together to increase buying power in the market. Such a reform would lower overhead costs for small businesses and reduce health care prices for employees.

    (3) Make insurance purchasable across state lines: This will help create a national market for health insurance by having consumers, not bureaucrats, find the coverage that best suits consumer needs. Consumers should have access to all benefits and services available throughout the United States and this reform will allow a more efficient individual market.

    (4) Build on Health Savings Accounts: These HSAs allow people to take control of their health-care decisions, make health insurance more affordable and increase choice. Though relatively new, HSAs offer consumers a wide range of benefits and are becoming increasingly popular as more Americans learn about how this individual ownership plan works. The number of Americans with HSAs increased 35 percent last year, meaning more than 6 million Americans are now seeing the benefits of consumer-based health care. HSAs will let more families build health care "nest eggs."

    (5) Stop lawsuit abuse: Frivolous lawsuits are driving up costs of health care, thus limiting the number of physicians pursuing careers in certain specialties and forcing doctors to practice defensive medicine. My bill places a $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages and provides guidelines on how punitive damages are determined. For too long, trial lawyers have lined their own pockets by driving up health-care costs.

    (6) Encourage health information technology: High-tech efficiencies, such as electronic health records, increase health care productivity, lower costs and reduce the potential for medical errors. In fact, a study by the nonpartisan Rand Corp. revealed widespread implementation of Health IT could save $162 billion in health-care costs and prevent 2.2 million undesired adverse drug reactions.

    Democrats are not the only party discussing the lapses in coverage, high costs and bureaucratic red-tape American families are dealing with every day. Republicans are offering real reforms so important health-care decisions can be made by families, not HMOs or the whims of Washington, D.C., bureaucrats.

    The GOP should rally around a consumer-based heath-care plan like the one I introduced to counter the draconian command-and-control plans of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. My legislation will improve quality of care, empower people to take control of their own health care and create a positive, consumer-driven alternative to free up our health- care system from heavy handed government mandates.

    Passing the Making Health Care More Affordable Act will bring necessary reform to our broken health-care system and provide needed, high-quality health coverage to more Americans.

    < Part-time campaign wrong for Michigan | Wayne State Law Professor Robert Sedler Is Wrong on Catholic Officeholders & Abortion >


    Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit


    Display: Sort:
    nothing new here (none / 0) (#1)
    by whatever on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 08:32:56 PM EST
    the gop is losing this fight because all the fancy solutions boil down to the same thing: fix the problem on the backs of hard-working americans. i know what'll fix this! a tax credit (lo)! and health savings accounts where americans must shovel aside money (after of course they keep our economy humming by buying, buying, buying "stuff").

    lame. and americans see that.


    Unfortunately, I agree... (none / 0) (#2)
    by KG One on Thu Jun 05, 2008 at 09:27:29 PM EST
    ...but for different reasons.

    The problem with health costs can to traced to three main reasons:

    1.) Lawyers. Turn on a TV anywhere in the nation (yes, I've tried this outside of Michigan, it does work) during the mid-day and early morning and get bombarded with commercials for ambulance-chasers telling you:

    a.) How screwed you are...but it's not your fault.
    b.) What a great lawyer they are.
    c.) With their help, you'll get what you deserve.

    I prefer seeing a system where the loser and their lawyers pay regardless of their circumstances.

    Frivolous lawsuits...history.

    2.) Bad Doctors. I've read too long about bad doctors who go from hospital to hospital, state to state to continue practicing medicine. I would recommend holding hospitals accountable for doing an abysmal job of hiring bad doctors.

    Jail time for hospital admins is a wonderful incentive to do your homework on who gets hired.

    3.) The federal government. Remember way back around 1986? Something called the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 got passed (interesting history for those interested). Well, in it, is this little blurb about hospitals not being able to turn away people unwilling to pay their bills. According to a recent study, approximately 55% of certain care in US Hospitals goes unpaid.

    Guess who gets stuck with that bill?

    Fix those three problems (Congressman), and you will have fixed the so-called health care "crisis" in America.

    KG One... explain... (none / 0) (#3)
    by Doctor Detroit on Sun Jun 08, 2008 at 02:51:58 AM EST
    How are "Bad Doctors" one of your three foundations of fixing health care costs or coverage for Americans?  Do you have any fiscal data for this? Are "Bad Doctors" even a rampant problem in this country where our physicians are routinely looked to as arguably the best trained in the world?  What or who defines what makes a "bad doctor?"  ...Sounds like babble that most won't bat an eye at but really lacks substance as a point of attack.  

    Separately, do you know that on average, physicians are reimbursed for approx. 33% of their costs by even the best insurance?  As Americans, we feel that we all are ENTITLED to the best cutting edge diagnostics and treatment.  (I am one of them.)  Because of our country's current expenditure on health care, it is profitable for corporations (big pharma and biotechnology) to invest money in research here.  Because there is money for research, we draw some of the best minds in the world to execute this research.  Their efforts spurn new and better technologies for diagnosis and treatment (read: MRI and Minimally invasive surgical techniques, HAART treatment for HIV, cardiac stents, cholesterol/blood pressure meds... and on and on... I'll bet you've benefitted from one of these, I have...) and they deserve society's rewards for doing so (don't forget, we are capitalists, this is what we believe, isn't it?).  These diagnostics and therapeutics then are costly to pay for their creation and reward their creators.  

    We think EVERYONE deserves it because it is available, BUT N O O N E WANTS TO PAY FOR IT!  

    That is one facet or example of the problem within health care itself, and it IS INDEED a very real problem in the truest sense, a conundrum.  It's not wrong.  It's not bad.  In fact it's all pursuant to our societal values, but herein these values conflict with themselves.  What DO we do about it?  I don't have the answer to that, and it won't stop, and it shouldn't.  Don't we want to keep looking for the cure for cancer?  Sure!  Who will pay for it though?  Inevitably the answer is those of us who work and work hard because we have money to take.  Mind you, I am not pointing fingers at the rich, the poor, or the middle class.  I am instead trying to illustrate the objective facts and inevitable logic between them so that we can get away from thoughtless blame, and focus on a problem challenging enough without partisan blame or classism.  What do we do?

    By the way, what is the professional background of most legislators?  Law, am I right?  Lawyers?  It is naturally pursuant that it would be difficult to get members of a profession to legislate against their own economic interests re: tort reform.  I agree, it would help lower costs however.  

    Additionally, to any this applies:  remember before writing off the AMA's efforts to lobby for universal coverage that this equals physicians trying to legislate for their own pay cuts.  A single payer system will not be kind to physicians.  If you are familiar with how medicare/medicaid reimburses (or doesn't, rather) with their "take it or leave it" philosophy (which, by the way then sets the precedent for what the other insurance payers reimburse... think collusion), then you know where physician revenues are headed with true single payer insurance.  In light of the commitment to an academic monk-like life that would be physicians endure for 11 to 16 years while in training typically during the most vital years of their lives and then the average $150,000 debt they begin practice with, we will watch the number of new physicians shrink like the numbers of new teachers after university students saw how the government does them.

    By the way, in earnest, I like the proposed plan Congressman.

    Easy enough. (none / 0) (#5)
    by KG One on Mon Jun 16, 2008 at 11:57:49 AM EST
    The material that I was sourcing came from here and here.

    Obviously there is a spread in the numbers cited, but it is there.

    I don't disagree with your statement about the quality of medication and testing equipment driving up the costs. It is a valid argument, but unfortunately because of the disconnect between the cost of a service (health insurance) because of who is paying for it (companies vs. individuals) thanks to a throw-back system set up in WWII, people don't recognize this increase.

    And I agree with your point about it being highly doubtful that Lansing or Washington will curtail lawyers.

    That makes about as much sense as "Christians against Christ".

    Display: Sort:

    Login

    Make a new account

    Username:
    Password:
    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!

    Related Links

    + Also by TimWalberg
    create account | faq | search