It’s all been by design, from the get-go.
Weeks of closed-door deliberations with nary one public hearing. And now we are to believe time is of the essence for the Senate to pass the 142-page health care bill.
Public decisions made in private avoid scrutiny and accountability — exactly what the Senators wanted.
Again, to script.
This caginess is just one example of why Americans clamor, “Drain the swamp!” Get rid of this toxic cronyism that puts the interests of a special few at the expense of the majority.
Under the Senate’s plan the poor and elderly will be hit hardest. The plan has what the retirement group AARP refers to as an “age tax.” Insurance companies will be allowed to charge those age 50 to 64 five times the rate others pay for health insurance in addition to eliminating the tax credits that help make insurance affordable. Under the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) insurers were allowed to charge seniors three times as much.
The plan also would permanently restructure Medicaid, the 52-year cost-sharing program between the federal government and states, drastically cutting its funding by more than $800 billion over a decade.
To bring the discussion closer to home, the area’s three school districts — Marmaton Valley, Iola and Humboldt — rely on Medicaid funds to help provide services to students with special needs. Iola schools receive on average $100,000 a year in such funding, Marmaton Valley, $6,000, and Humboldt, $37,000.
ANW Cooperative depends on more than $300,000 a year in Medicaid funding to help pay the salaries of the multiple therapists and paraprofessionals needed to care for students with disabilities over its five-county area. ANW serves more than 1,200 students in eight school district.
Other services typically covered by Medicaid include long-term care costs for those in nursing homes and home-health services. Without Medicaid, the country’s nursing homes will be reserved for only the well-to-do.
Medicaid also pays prescription costs for the poor. It hardly needs saying that keeping an outbreak of hepatitis C at bay, for example, is a public service.
Under the Senate’s plan, 22 million would lose insurance by 2026, almost twice as many as under Obamacare. That puts at double the number of people who will go without routine care and be forced to use a hospital’s emergency room for cases that range from a sore throat to a broken arm.
Hospitals, needless to say, will not be adequately reimbursed for the additional workload.
SO WHO WINS?
You’re not going to like this, but it’s those who least need help.
For starters, health insurance companies can expect to be able to charge considerably more while providing less coverage. What good is coverage if your deductible is $10,000? Health economists refer to this as a “Hobson’s choice,” where no good alternative exists. Americans will have to choose between a plan with a premium they cannot afford, and a plan with an out-of-reach deductible.
Monday’s report by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates a 64-year-old with an annual income of $26,500 could expect to pay a premium of $6,500, compared to $1,700 under Obamacare. And the insurance would cover less.
Without the mandate to require all to sign on, it’s expected that the young and healthy will abstain. The result? Insurers will set rates on what it costs to cover that sicker and older pool.
The wealthy also come out smelling like a rose.
Under the Affordable Care Act, those who make $200,000 and above are taxed 2.35 percent to help pay for Medicare — the health care plan for seniors. For those high-income earners with investments, those earnings are taxed an additional 3.8 percent.
Under both the House and Senate plans those taxes will be eliminated.
With the federal deficit at its highest since World War II, this is not the time to give the wealthy such tax breaks.
And need we say it’s terrible PR.
When it comes to health care, there should be no winners or losers.
Instead, everyone should get a fair shake.
— Susan Lynn
