The new health care bill is fiscal insanity.
We, as a nation, have a 5 TRILLION dollar unfunded social security liability and a 38 TRILLION DOLLAR unfunded Medicare liablilty. When these programs were enacted, the country was far more fiscally sound and no one could have envisioned the financial train wreck ahead. Instead of addressing these real and urgent matters, we did what? ADDED ANOTHER ENTITLEMENT.
Please, please don't tell me anyone really believes that this will decrease the national deficit. The Democrat party tweaked every variable that they could to get the package under CBO's trillion dollar 10 year projection, including taking in 10 years worth of revenue and only paying out 6 years in benefits. Nice trick, huh? They also included $500 billion in Medicare cuts/savings that haven't been enacted or "found", and double counted the savings.
One of the effects of this law will be to add about half the newly insured (about 15 of the 30 million) to the Medicaid rolls. This insurance is partly funded by the states--of whom 46/50 are running deficits now. My own state was looking to cut medicaid reimbursements to providers by 10%--and that was BEFORE the new federal legislation was passed!!! This is another unfunded mandate handed down from the feds on high to states that can't print their own money or borrow from China to get themselves out of fiscal insolvency.
Physicians are losing money now on Medicaid reimbursement. That is a fact. Many won't accept it as insurance and won't see those patients. Walgreens Inc., shortly before the health care vote, announced that it will no longer accept Medicaid for presciptions. And Medicare reimbursements to physicians under the new legislation will drift downward as well. One ironic effect of the new health care legislation will be this: More and more people will have insurance that pays less and less, so fewer doctors will accept either Medicare or Medicaid. Guess where these people will land? IN THE EMERGENCY ROOMS where hospitals legally can't turn them away. Ironic, don't you think?
I heard today that the first year penalty for not getting insurance is $95, which increases to almost $700 in several years. Of course, now that you can't be excluded for preexisting conditions, that sounds like a pretty good deal. $700 a year until you get cancer, THEN buy insurance. Anybody see a problem here?
Of course, small businesses employing more than 30 people and not covering their employees will be penalized much more heavily than the individual. I'm sure that will have a positive effect on job creation. But wait--I failed to take into account the 15,000 new IRS jobs that will be created to monitor--AND ENDFORCE--that everyone buys insurance!! Sheesh. Just what we needed. 15,000 new IRS agents to improve health care.
The problem in a nutshell is this: We as a country have overpromised and underfunded. We cannot go on spending money and offering goodies to voters. Existing benefits--both social security and medicare--have to be scaled back, and we have to QUIT SPENDING SO MUCH MONEY. Taxing the rich isn't going to do it, folks. The top 1% already pay over 40% of the income taxes; the top 10% pay over 70%. The lower 50% pay--get ready for this--less than 3% of federal income taxes collected. How much more "redistribution" do you want?
Did anyone notice the only bipartisanship in this bill was the bipartisan opposition? The cynical side of me truly believes the Democrats wanted this bill just to create a permanent voting majority for their party. In doing so, the country they have purchased with this legislation is both BROKEN and BROKE.
ETA: Here are the original estimates for Medicare cost projections: "In 1967, the House Ways and Means Committee predicted that the new Medicare program, launched the previous year, would cost about $12 billion in 1990. Actual Medicare spending in 1990 was $110 billion—
off by nearly a factor of 10."
http://jec.senate.gov/republicans/pu...ly_31_2009.pdf
Still think that the new entitlement will cut the deficit?
Hybrid Mode
