Can We Really Afford the Risk of a Complete Overhaul of Healthcare in America?

The WV Conservative Foundation strongly opposes the massive proposals to overhaul healthcare that are being debated in the House and Senate and promoted by the White House. After studying the facts and reading the proposals, the risks that our healthcare system will actually be worse after passage of either of the massive bills is simply too great to warrant the risk. West Virginians cannot afford the risk of the proposals. While we could support an effort focused squarely on state-based and state-specific reform, tax equity for families with insurance, and sound financing, the proposals being debated provide none of the three.

Admittedly, our healthcare system is not perfect. Fixes are needed to ensure that families are not forced into bankruptcy as the result of an unanticipated catastrophic illness, to ensure that insurance is portable from one employer to the next, and to ensure that a pre-existing condition cannot preclude a person’s ability to obtain insurance. What we do not need, however, is a massive and complete overhaul of the healthcare system, the growth of new and expensive government programs, and the insertion of government between me and my doctor.

A public health care plan would not improve the current health care situation and would likely make matters worse. In fact, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the proposals being debated in the House and Senate would cost at least $1 trillion over ten years and one Democrat aide suggested the total cost may exceed $1.5 trillion. Far from saving enough to cover the uninsured, it would increase the cost of covering even the presently insured at the current standard of care. A public plan could reduce overall spending only at the cost of substantial harm to patients.

All of us, including physicians, want to see the American health care system become as good as it can be, and most are willing to make sacrifices to achieve that goal. However, according to the Heritage Foundation, at least a dozen state, local, and specialty societies — representing more than 45,000 physicians — have expressed opposition to the current House and Senate reform proposals, and others remain undecided pending further discussion of key issues.

According to a non-partisan health care consulting firm, when fully implemented the number of enrollees in the public plan is likely to be 103.4 million, and an estimated 88.1 million of these enrollees would be shifted out of their current employer-based coverage and into the public plan. Between Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, and a large enrollment of Americans in the new public plan, the government could control the health care of well over 200 million Americans.

In West Virginia, the average employer subsidizes the costs of the uninsured. If a government sponsored plan were available for West Virginia companies, why wouldn’t every company shift their employees to the government system at a lower cost? While the Obama Administration promised that no citizen would be forced out of their current insurance plan, most Americans are at the mercy of the decisions of their employer despite promises from Washington.

Although the current administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress seem determined to overhaul healthcare, before throwing the baby out with the bathwater, shouldn’t we at least consider the advice of experts that have reviewed the plans? According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), none of the bills contain “the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount.” This sentiment has been echoed by Michael O. Leavitt, the former secretary of health and human services, and a former official in the Clinton Administration who worked on the ill-fated Clinton health plan.

In addition to the absolute uncertainly of any cost-containment from the current proposals, as unemployment continues to rise, it is unfortunate and surprising that the House version of the bill would actually reduce employment. The large tax increases in the healthcare overhaul proposed by House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) would harm over a million small businesses, making them less likely to expand and hire new workers. The surtax included in the bill is 1 percent for joint filers over $350,000, 1.5 percent for joint filers over $500,000, and 5.4 percent for joint filers with over $1 million in adjusted gross income ($280,000, $400,000, and $800,000 for individuals, respectively). The House Joint Tax Committee estimates that the Rangel surtax will raise $543.9 billion over the next 10 years. That’s $543.9 billion out of the economy, unable to be invested in growing business, and at a time when unemployment is soaring.

While our healthcare system is not perfect, rather than a complete overhaul through a 1,000 plus page bill filled with sweeteners for the special interests, doesn’t it make more sense to deal with the shortfalls in the system on a case by case basis in smaller, more limited proposals? There is bipartisan support for ensuring family’s a financial safety net due to an unexpected catastrophe, to allow for portability, and to protect the insurability of those with pre-existing conditions. Let’s start with the basics before possibly destroying the most remarkable health system the world has ever known.

Please contact your representative in Congress today and tell them to leave your insurance alone and to stop spending your money on unproven plans.

Senator Rockefeller – 202-224-6472

Senator Byrd – 202-224-3954

Congressman Mollohan – 202-225-4172

Congressman Rahall – 202-225-3452

Congresswoman Capito – 202-225-2711