After reading the CBO’s letter to Sen. Evan Bayh, there’s no way I can call the Democrats’ legislation health care reform without feeling like I’m being dishonest. Here’s the first part of the letter that jumped out at me:

In addition, the proposal would: establish a mandate for most legal residents of the United States to obtain health insurance; set up insurance “exchanges” through which certain individuals and families could receive federal subsidies to substantially reduce the amount they would pay to purchase that coverage; make a public insurance plan available through those exchanges in certain states; penalize certain individuals if they did not obtain insurance coverage and penalize certain employers if their workers received subsidies through the exchanges; provide tax credits to certain small employers that offer coverage to their workers; significantly expand eligibility for Medicaid; substantially reduce the growth of Medicare’s payment rates for most services (relative to the growth rates projected under current law); levy an excise tax on insurance plans with relatively high premiums; impose fees on insurers and on manufacturers and importers of certain drugs and medical devices; and make various other changes to the federal tax code and to Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs.

First off, I’m betting that the individual mandates won’t become law because they’re unconstitutional. Never in American history have the courts ruled that a person has to buy something. The Roberts Court won’t let those provisions stand.

Next, the Democrtas’ health care legislation will expand Medicaid, which will bankrupt the states, forcing them to raise their taxes to pay for their share of the costs. I’ve said before that Medicaid expansion is the mother of all unfunded mandates. It will put states in worse financial straits than they’re already in.

BTW, the fact that more Democratic governors aren’t complaining about this budget-busting measure should speak volumes about whether there’s a Democratic governor that’s serious about being fiscally responsible. We already know that there aren’t any Democrats with a spine in Washington. One-by-one, all the so-called moderates have been bought off in the name of giving President Obama a victory. BTW, Amy Walters’ post is highly instructive on the matter of Democrat moderates:

Democratic insiders I’ve talked to on the Hill don’t sense a coming intraparty battle between frustrated moderates and the more liberal wing of the party. An off-the-record conversation with a senior Blue Dog member elicited no scorn for Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

During various blogger conference calls this year, Republican leadership has stated unequivocally that they don’t think there is such a thing as a moderate Democrat. The GOP leadership says a number of them cast themselves as centrists, which isn’t the same as being a centrist.

Back to the matter at hand. I don’t give a damn whether President Obama gets a victory if the price of victory means higher unemployment, higher state and federal taxes and penalizing people for buying insurance policies that the federal government now deems unacceptable.

HSAs have been around awhile. People who’ve used HSAs like them for the most part. While they aren’t THE SILVER BULLET SOLUTION to health care, they’re certainly an important component of reform. That the Democrats’ legislation contains a penalty for HSAs should tell you that the Democrats’ legislation isn’t about reforming health care or health insurance, that it’s about controlling people’s lives.

The Democrats’ legislation also includes massive new taxes on pharmaceutical companies and medical device manufacturers. Those tax increases will certainly be passed onto consumers, driving health care costs skyward.

Rather than actually reducing health care costs, the Democrats’ bill hides the rising cost of health care with taxpayer-subsidized subsidies on health insurance premiums. The Democrats’ legislation doesn’t reduce health care costs. It just hides them with mirrors and trickery.

That isn’t reform. It’s just doing whatever’s needed to impose government control on our lives.

This analysis proves that this bill doesn’t reduce health care costs. It just masks them artificially:

Nongroup Policies
CBO and JCT estimate that the average premium per person covered (including dependents) for new nongroup policies would be about 10 percent to 13 percent higher in 2016 than the average premium for nongroup coverage in that same year under current law. About half of those enrollees would receive government subsidies that would reduce their costs well below the premiums that would be charged for such policies under current law.

Here’s the important point to take from this: If we did nothing, nongroup policies would be cheaper than they’ll be if President Obama signs this bill into law. Again, that isn’t reform. Let’s remember, too, that those subsidies aren’t free. They’re paid for with major tax increases.

Average premiums would be 27 percent to 30 percent higher because a greater amount of coverage would be obtained. In particular, the average insurance policy in this market would cover a substantially larger share of enrollees’ costs for health care (on average) and a slightly wider range of benefits. Those expansions would reflect both the minimum level of coverage (and related requirements) specified in the proposal and people’s decisions to purchase more extensive coverage in response to the structure of subsidies.

This paragraph should frighten people.

TRANSLATION: The federal government will impose on everyone insurance that they deem important. That means We The People don’t get to make that decision.

This paragraph also says that it’s the paragraph that says that health care costs will jump. It tells us that because there’s more things covered. Anytime that a consumer doesn’t feel the cost of doing something, the tendency is to overuse it.

It’s like going to a buffet and eating until you’re stuffed. People in that situation tell themselves that they’re gonna eat alot because they’re going to get their money’s worth. Whether it’s doing something healthy is irrelevant. All that matters is that the extra plates of food seemingly don’t cost extra. The trick is to realize that it’s already ‘baked into’ the price at the cash register.

Average premiums per policy in the nongroup market in 2016 would be roughly $5,800 for single policies and $15,200 for family policies under the proposal, compared with roughly $5,500 for single policies and $13,100 for family policies under current law.

This is just another reminder that the Democrats’ plan doesn’t lower costs without raising taxes to ’subsidize’ health insurance premiums. Any plan that relies on raising taxes to make a government-mandated product affordable is a red flag. It says that, surprise surprise, costs aren’t being contained. Instead, they’re still rising.

A Broader Scope of Benefits Would Increase Nongroup Premiums
Under the legislation, new nongroup policies would cover a broader scope of benefits than are projected to be covered by such policies, on average, under current law. In particular, the legislation would require all new nongroup policies to cover a specified set of “essential health benefits,” which would be further delineated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) and would be required to match the scope of benefits provided by typical employment-based plans. As a result, new nongroup policies would cover certain services that are often not covered by nongroup policies under current law, such as maternity care, prescription drugs, and mental health and substance abuse treatment. Moreover, nongroup insurers would be prohibited from denying coverage for preexisting conditions, so premiums would have to increase to cover the resulting costs.

According to the CBO’s analysis, the HHS Secretary would be authorized to define what our “essential health benefits” are without additional approval from Congress. This is Congress abdicating its responsbility as the balance to the executive branch’s check. If this legislation is passed, the HHS secretary won’t need to justify his/her actions before taking action.

It isn’t reform when the legislative branch cedes to the executive branch authority to impose changes without the executive branch first getting the consent from the legislative branch.

The other little secret that the Democrats don’t want people to know is that the tax increases contained in their legislation will likely trigger the next round of layoffs. Just when the economy is showing signs of showing signs, the Democrats appear prepared to dump this job-killer in our laps.

That isn’t reform. It’s a tool of economic destruction.

The bad news for Democrats is that it’s the starting point to the counter-revolution.

Technorati: CBO, Health Care, Health Insurance, Premiums, Tax Increases, Mandates, Subsidies, Unemployment, Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, Democrats

Cross-posted at California Conservative