From the Palatine Tea Party…
In response to the letter Melissa Bean wrote to the constituents in district 8 dated April 16, 2010. We will respond to each of her statements Melissa Bean made based on emotion with factual responses where she stated the following:
“This law ensures that no insurance company or government bureaucrat interferes with doctor and patient decisions.”
The fact that this legislation contains more than $500 Billion in Medicare cuts is a PERFECT example of government bureaucrats INTERFERING with doctor and patient decisions. The 21% reduction in payments to physicians who accept Medicare will most certainly guarantee less doctors accepting Medicare. This will have a DIRECT affect on both the quality of care that our seniors enjoy now and the ABILITY to even OBTAIN care. Add to that the SWEEPING powers given to the Secretary of Health & Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius (an ATTORNEY NOT A PHYSICIAN) and we are GUARANTEED to see a reduction in services based on cost.
Insuring millions of more people without establishing ANY MEASURES to fix our current doctor shortage is another PERFECT example of government bureaucrats INTERFERING with doctor and patient decisions. We need only look to the State of Massachusetts for proof of that.
Speaking of Massachusetts, the recently established Romney Care has incorporated a “no pre-existing clause in it’s State Health Insurance mandates. However, it does not require proof of prior insurance coverage as the current HIPAA portability laws do (for Group coverage only). Because of this, there is no impetus to CONTINUE remaining insured. For this reason, millions of Massachusetts residents are “gaming the system” by buying a health insurance policy when they are sick, receiving treatment and then “dumping” the policy shortly after their treatment has been received. This has left Massachussets with a MASSIVE deficit in their program for which they are seeking EVEN MORE “relief” from the U.S Tax payer. As it stands now, HALF of their health insurance program is subsidized by the U.S. Tax payer.
Since the criminal prosecution for NOT purchasing health insurance was REMOVED from the final health care “reform” legislation prior to passage. There is now no impetus for ANYONE to purchase health insurance until they get sick. There is also no impetus for anyone to STAY insured under this new legislation. Consider a healthy single man of thirty-five who earns $35,000 a year. Under the new legislation, he would have a choice of enrolling in a subsidized plan at an annual cost of $2,700 or paying a fine of $875. He will MOST LIKELY just take his chances, and report to the local emergency room if he gets really sick. (E.R.s will still be legally obliged to treat everyone.) If this happens, as it does NOW in Massachusetts the new insurance exchanges will be deprived of the healthy people they need in order to bring down prices. Who will pick up the tab? The U.S. Tax Payer! JUST LIKE we do NOW in Massachusetts.
You also stated that under the new Exchanges consumers will have “reduced risk”. This is also not the case for many consumers since the Exchange will subject policy holders to the same maximum out of pocket costs that are allowed now under current HSA laws. For example, the
The Bronze plan which will pay 60 percent of medical costs
The Silver plan which will pay 70 percent of medical costs
The Gold plan which will pay 80 percent of medical costs
The Platinum plan which will pay 90 percent of medical costs.
However, all family members will still be subjected to the maximum out of pocket costs that are allowed for an HSA qualified plan now. How much is that? $11,600. That is MUCH more risk than many families are carrying now, most especially those who are insured on Traditional (Non HSA qualified plans).