Back to Basics

Hey, remember back in March when the Democrats’ chief inquisitor on Capitol Hill, Henry Waxman, announced plans to haul up corporate executives who dared to speak the truth about the dire cost consequences of the federal Obamacare mandate?

Flashback March 3,1 2010:

Now, Waxman is targeting the heads of Deere, Caterpillar, Verizon and AT&T with “invitations” they can’t refuse to testify at an April 21 hearing on their public statements regarding Demcare-caused writedowns. Waxman’s fishing expedition letters sent out last week “asked” the company heads to produce copious documentation.

Business execs are damned if they do disclose how the costs of the new federal health care taxes will hit their bottom line and damned if they don’t. If they stay silent, they’ll be violating Securities and Exchange Commission disclosure requirements passed by Congress after the Enron scandal. If they talk, they’ll be paraded in front of the camera like those poor tobacco heads Waxman waxed more than 15 years ago.

Who’s next? On Monday, Prudential said it would take a $100 million charge in the first quarter thanks to Demcare. In Colorado, the Steamboat Ski and Resort Corp. said the health care law will cost $2 million a year starting in 2014. AK Steel Corp., 3M and Valero Energy have all announced similar writedowns. At this rate, if Waxman insists on hauling up every last truth-teller in the marketplace, he’ll be holding an inquisition-a-thon a day.

And that would suit the Witch Hunter of Capitol Hill just fine. If he isn’t meddling, he isn’t working. And if he isn’t using his powers to bully, bulldoze or bankrupt his enemies, he is failing the gods of progressivism.

Waxman backed off, but as I warned, it was only a temporary reprieve.

The truth about Obamacare’s all-too-predictable, real-world consequences keeps coming out and it won’t be long before desperate Dems try to squelch the Obamacare revolt again.

Go ahead, Henry. Double-dog dare you.

Via the WSJ:

Health insurers say they plan to raise premiums for some Americans as a direct result of the health overhaul in coming weeks, complicating Democrats’ efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before the midterm elections.

Insurers say they plan to raise premiums on some Americans due to the health overhaul, complicating Democrats’ efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before elections. Janet Adamy and Evan Newmark discuss. Also, Justin Lahart discusses the two-track economy for American business, with global players getting boosts from fast-growing foreign markets, while companies focused on the U.S. market are hamstrung by recession-scarred consumers.

Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators.

These and other insurers say Congress’s landmark refashioning of U.S. health coverage, which passed in March after a brutal fight, is causing them to pass on more costs to consumers than Democrats predicted.

The rate increases largely apply to policies for individuals and small businesses and don’t include people covered by a big employer or Medicare.

Did I miss something in the new health care reform proposals?  When did the democrats’ proposals provide free office visits, free medications and free medical procedures to everyone?

I recently had a conversation with a friend that has a pre-existing medical condition and is very concerned about being able to obtain affordable health insurance.  He is currently insured and is paying what I would consider a very reasonable price for his monthly premiums (less than $200/month).  He must also take medications that run about $2000 per year.  Understandably he is concerned about health care issues.  He indicated a friend of his is on some government insurance plan (he didn’t specify which one) and that this friend is able to obtain all of his medical and dental treatments and medications at no cost to him.

It seems that some people in favor of the democrats government run proposals are assuming that this health care is somehow not going to cost them anything, other than maybe a monthly insurance premium.  They assume the cost of office visits, medical treatments, medications and dental services are going to be provided free of charge.

I read H.R. 3200 and have heard the reviews on the Baucus bill.  Nowhere would I interpret these bills as providing free medical and dental treatments for all, with the only obligation being a monthly insurance premium.  People with certain income levels could qualify for government assistance in paying for the monthly premiums and co-pays, but it certainly did not come with a free price tag.  In fact, I read some reviews on the Baucus bill indicating the co-pays and other costs the consumers would have to pay would actually make health care less affordable to middle-class Americans.

Until the health care reform became an issue, I assumed that once someone retired and was on Medicare that those medical premiums would also be free.  I found out otherwise when talking to my parents.  When on Medicare after you retire you pay a monthly insurance premium, which is taken out of your Social Security check to cover your Medicare health insurance.  Further, you continue have out-of-pocket expenses, like cost-sharing, for medical treatments received.  If you are on the government medication system you also continue paying a portion of the medication.  My grandmother was paying out of her own pocket $1200 a year for her medication and she was on Medicare and had a secondary medical insurance policy.

So you have to wonder if those in favor of the government health care actually understand the consequences of the program.  The government program would not be a free system – you will be paying for premiums, co-pays, and cost-sharing.  You will further be paying to supplement those who cannot afford insurance and the cost of medical treatment.  If you think your premiums and cost today are high, they will only go higher with government controlled plans.  As a bonus to the higher costs you will have no choice but purchase these plans because now it becomes a law that you must have insurance.  If you don’t, you will be penalized by the IRS, and may also face imprisonment.

The Congressional Research Service has issued their report regarding the treatment of noncitizens in H.R. 3200. There has been a lot of debate over this topic, with the president and democrats saying illegals are not covered, while those opposed to the bill saying they are. A number of loopholes in the bill, including no provisions for checking immigrations status, prove illegal immigrants can and will be covered by the bill, at the taxpayers’ expense.  The Summary of the report is include below.  If you would like to read the entire report, please click on CRS Report.

August 25, 2009
Treatment of Noncitizens in H.R. 3200
Congressional Research Service

Summary

This report outlines the treatment of noncitizens (aliens) under H.R. 3200, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. In particular, the report analyzes specific provisions in H.R. 3200, and whether there are eligibility requirements for noncitizens in the provisions. Within the bill, noncitizens are treated differently in several provisions. In 2008, there were approximately 37.3 million foreign-born persons in the United States. The foreign-born population was comprised of approximately 15.1 million naturalized U.S. citizens and 22.2 million noncitizens.

H.R. 3200 includes an individual mandate to have health insurance, with tax penalties for noncompliance. Individuals who do not maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for themselves and their children would be required to pay an additional tax. Some individuals, including nonresident aliens, would be exempt from the individual mandate. “Nonresident alien” is a term under tax but not immigration law. For federal tax purposes, alien individuals are classified as resident or nonresident aliens. In general, an individual is a nonresident alien unless he or she meets the qualifications under a residency test. Thus, legal permanent residents, and noncitizens and unauthorized aliens who qualify as resident aliens (i.e., meet the substantial presence test), would be required under H.R. 3200 to have health insurance.

In addition, under H.R. 3200, a “Health Insurance Exchange” would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option. The Exchange would provide eligible individuals and small businesses with access to insurers’ plans, including the public option, in a comparable way. Individuals would only be eligible to enroll in an Exchange plan if they were not enrolled in other acceptable coverage (for example, from an employer, Medicare and generally Medicaid). H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange – whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently. Nonetheless, only aliens who could be classified as resident aliens would be required under the bill to have health insurance.

In 2013, under H.R. 3200, some individuals would be eligible for premium credits (i.e., subsidies based on income) toward their required purchase of health insurance. To be eligible for the premium credits under H.R. 3200, individuals must be lawfully present in a state in the United States, excluding most nonimmigrants (i.e., those in the United States for a specific purpose and a specific period of time). The exceptions for nonimmigrants who could obtain premium credits under H.R. 3200 would be trafficking victims, crime victims, fiancées of U.S. citizens, and those who have had applications for legal permanent residence (LPR) status pending for three years.

I am truly amazed as I continue to read through the bill how anyone could interpret this bill as one that would not increase medical costs, insurance premiums and taxes.  Each section only adds more responsibility to the government, which falls again upon the taxpayer.  This section alone creates a whole new welfare system intended to not only support people requesting assistance, but the bill actually calls for the government to recruit (by identification methods) people to in order to assist them, even when they have not asked for it!

Employers must offer health insurance to all employees, full and part-time, or face penalties, often for actions out of their control.  The pressure on employers could cause adverse consequences in the workplace.  Does the employer start basing hiring decisions on the likelihood that a candidate may or may not participate in the company offered insurance plan?  Will part-time employees now become less of an asset to employers since they too will require benefits?  How does this impact the job market and availability of jobs when the country already has high unemployment?  What appeared to be fairly straightforward (what was I thinking!) turned into many “what if “scenarios.  I’m sure you will develop your own.  If you have any questions regarding the bill, please contact your representatives.

This portion of the bill covers how individuals who cannot afford health insurance coverage or their portion of cost-sharing (co-pays, deductibles) will receive medical insurance and care.  Ultimately these costs have to be absorbed by someone.  The government is going to expand the medical welfare system and pay for premiums, as well as any out of pockets expenses for medical treatment, in the form of affordability credits.  Since it is a known fact that people who have insurance will use medical services more often, then one might expect an increase in medical treatment for newly insured individuals covered by the taxpayer – financed by increased premiums for those who can purchase insurance and higher taxes.

The bill will give eligible individuals affordability credits consisting of affordability premium credits to be applied toward the cost of insurance premiums purchased through the Health Insurance Exchange, and affordability cost-sharing credits to reduce the cost-sharing responsibility of these individuals.

Individuals can apply to the Commissioner for these credits through the Health Insurance Exchange.  The Commissioner can further deem individuals eligible on the basis on information otherwise obtained.  It doesn’t specify what information or how it will be obtain, but somehow the Commissioner is going to get information on individuals without their application or consent, to determine if they may also qualify for affordability credits.  The Commissioner must also establish effective methods that ensure individuals with limited English proficiency are able to apply for affordability credits.  Interpreted by many as a means of providing health insurance and related costs to illegal immigrants or amnesty immigrants – all at the taxpayers expense.

The Commissioner may also determine that a State Medicaid agency has the ability of determining eligibility for affordability premiums and credits, and if that agency does so they will be reimbursed for the costs in conducting those determinations.  So now the intrusion into our private lives is being expanded, not only to the Federal government,.