02/23/10
From
Wall Street Journal
ObamaCare at Ramming Speed
The White House shows it has no interest in compromise.
A mere three days before President Obama's supposedly bipartisan health-care
summit, the White House yesterday released a new blueprint that Democrats say
they will ram through Congress with or without Republican support. So after
election defeats in Virginia, New Jersey and even Massachusetts, and amid
overwhelming public opposition, Democrats have decided to give the voters what
they don't want anyway.
Ah, the glory of "progressive" governance and democratic consent.
"The President's Proposal," as the 11-page White House document is headlined, is
in one sense a notable achievement: It manages to take the worst of both the
House and Senate bills and combine them into something more destructive. It
includes more taxes, more subsidies and even less cost control than the Senate
bill. And it purports to fix the special-interest favors in the Senate bill not
by eliminating them—but by expanding them to everyone.
The bill's one new inspiration is a powerful federal board that would regulate
premiums in the individual insurance market. In all 50 states, insurers are
already required to justify premium increases to insurance commissioners, who
generally have the power to give a regulatory go-ahead, or not. But their
primary concern is actuarial soundness and capital standards, making sure that
companies have enough cash to pay claims.
In the News
Obama Health Plan Costs $950 Billion Over 10 Years
Obama's Health Plan Adds $75 Billion to Senate Bill
The White House wants to create another layer of review that will be able to
reject any rate increase that is "unreasonable or unjustified." Any insurer
deemed guilty of such an infraction by this new bureaucracy "must lower
premiums, provide rebates, or take other actions to make premiums affordable."
In other words, de facto price controls.
Insurance premiums are rising too fast; therefore, premium increases should be
illegal. Q.E.D. The result of this rate-setting board will be less competition
in the individual market, as insurers flee expensive states or regions, or even
a cascade of bankruptcies if premiums are frozen and the cost of the care they
are expected to cover continues to rise. For all the Dickensian outrage about
profiteering by WellPoint and other companies, insurance is a low-margin
business even for health care, and at least 85 cents of the average premium
dollar, usually more, is devoted to actual health services.
Price controls are always the first resort of national health care—i.e.,
Medicare's administered prices for doctors and hospitals. This new White House
gambit is merely a preview of ObamaCare's inevitable planned medical economy,
which will reduce choice and quality.
The coercive flavor that animates this exercise is best captured in the section
that purports to accept the Senate's "grandfather clause" allowing people who
like their current health plan to keep it. Except that "The President's Proposal
adds certain consumer protections to these 'grandfathered' plans. Within months
of legislation being enacted, it requires plans . . . prohibits . . . mandates .
. . requires . . . the President's Proposal adds new protections that prohibit .
. . ban . . . and prohibit . . . The President's Proposal requires . . ." After
all of these dictates, no "grandfathered" plan will exist.
Meanwhile, the new White House plan further vitiates the remnants of
cost-control that remained in the House and Senate bills. Now the highly vaunted
excise tax on high-cost insurance plans won't kick in until 2018, whereas it
would have started in 2013 in the Senate bill, and this tax will only apply to
coverage that costs more than $27,500.
Very few plans ever reach that threshold, and sure enough, this is the same $60
billion deal the White House cut in December with union leaders who have
negotiated very costly benefits. Now it is extended to all to avoid the taint of
political favoritism.
While the White House claims to eliminate the "Cornhusker Kickback," the
Medicaid bribe that bought Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson's vote, political
appearances are deceiving. As with the union payoff, what the White House really
does is broaden the same to all states, with all new Medicaid spending through
2017 and 90% after 2020 transferred to the federal balance sheet. Governors will
love this ruse, but national taxpayers will pay more.
And more again, because the White House has adopted the House's firehose
insurance subsidies. People earning up to 400% of the poverty line—or about
$96,000 for a family of four in 2016—will qualify for government help, and,
naturally, this new entitlement is designed to expand over time.
The Administration also claims to have discarded the House's
5.4-percentage-point surtax on joint-filers earning more than $1 million a year,
but it sneaks it back in by expanding the Senate's expansion of the 2.9%
Medicare payroll tax to joint income about $250,000. The White House would now
apply that tax for the first time to income from "interest, dividends,
annuities, royalties and rents," details to come.
---
The larger political message of this new proposal is that Mr. Obama and
Democrats have no intention of compromising on an incremental reform, or of
listening to Republican, or any other, ideas on health care. They want what they
want, and they're going to play by Chicago Rules and try to dragoon it into law
on a narrow partisan vote via Congressional rules that have never been used for
such a major change in national policy. If you want to know why Democratic
Washington is "ungovernable," this is it.
* * * * *

Altogether now: "We are SO SCREWED!!!"