Sen. DeMint’s health care proposal
Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) has proposed an alternative to the Obama administration’s socialized healthcare approach and it’s worth looking at. The quick summary points from his announcement are these:
The Health Care Freedom Plan:
- Protects the right of Americans to keep their employer-based plan without having to pay additional taxes on those benefits.
- Provides Americans without employer-based coverage with vouchers of $2000 for individuals and $5000 for families to purchase health insurance. The premium for the average private policy sold in the individual market in 2007 was $1,896 for an individual and $4,392 for a family (Source: eHealthInsurance)
- Allows Americans with Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to use their HSA funds to pay for insurance premiums, encouraging employers to contribute to their employees’ HSAs.
- Creates a nationwide market for health insurance by allowing individuals to purchase health insurance plans in any state.
- Provides block grants to states to develop innovative models that ensure affordable health insurance coverage for Americans with pre-existing health conditions.
- Reduces predatory and frivolous malpractice lawsuits against physicians and hospitals.
- Assures that every health care consumer has access to price information prior to treatment so they can make informed decisions about their care.
- Repeals financial bailouts (TARP) to ensure that the plan does not add to the deficit.
This approach provides healthcare coverage for those who don’t have it already without the creation of a massive government bureacracy that would, by its entry into the private sector’s market, kill off the private insurers that are handling the healthcare needs of Americans today. It also keeps the federal government out of the doctor-patient relationship (or at least doesn’t make it worse) and continues to keep the individual in charge of their healthcare needs. This is definitely a superior approach. I’ll be looking at it in more detail to see if it answers all the questions.
Comment from Bob James
Time June 24, 2009 at 10:24
* Protects the right of Americans to keep their employer-based plan without having to pay additional taxes on those benefits.
Good.
* Provides Americans without employer-based coverage with vouchers of $2000 for individuals and $5000 for families to purchase health insurance. The premium for the average private policy sold in the individual market in 2007 was $1,896 for an individual and $4,392 for a family (Source: eHealthInsurance)
Useless information. There’s no additional context to determine if these plans are worth having. If the *only* thing you’re trying to cover is basic services in the event of catastrophic illness or injury, then these plans might suffice, assuming the illness wasn’t protracted or the injury didn’t require extensive rehab. *Might*, since there is no data provided as to what these plans covered.
* Allows Americans with Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to use their HSA funds to pay for insurance premiums, encouraging employers to contribute to their employees’ HSAs.
Incurring a tax upon withdrawal from the HSA, unless that exemption is specifically provided under the law.
* Creates a nationwide market for health insurance by allowing individuals to purchase health insurance plans in any state.
Which will require insurers to create national plans in order to properly underwrite the risk. At present, there are very, very few who will or can provide a competitive plan with national reach at an affordable price. One of those is the government.
* Provides block grants to states to develop innovative models that ensure affordable health insurance coverage for Americans with pre-existing health conditions.
Note the language: “to states”. Obviously, this plan is intended to push the pre-existing condition folks onto the state high-risk plans (which are supported by state taxes) and off of the private insurers, thus protecting the latter from the costs. This is a obviously to the benefit of the corporations, and not the citizen.
* Reduces predatory and frivolous malpractice lawsuits against physicians and hospitals.
Which amounted to how much? The answer isn’t easy to obtain, because whether a malpractice suit was predatory/frivolous or not is a judgment call. This provision is bone thrown at you conservatives, intended to garner your support while providing almost nothing tangible. In fact, the actions of the courts over the last 15 years have steadily restricted individuals’ rights to pursue redress through the courts. The vast majority of cases that do make it to court are decided in the corporation’s favor.
* Assures that every health care consumer has access to price information prior to treatment so they can make informed decisions about their care.
The only decision that you can make from this information is whether you can pay for it out-of-pocket or not. The price paid by your insurer for your care is typically not a concern to you; if it’s covered, it’s covered. If it isn’t, then the information can be used to decide if the condition you seek treatment for can be fixed without bankrupting your family, or whether you just have to live with it.
* Repeals financial bailouts (TARP) to ensure that the plan does not add to the deficit.
Amusing. To ensure that this plan doesn’t add to the deficit, we’re going to rip the money out of a program we don’t agree with. Legislating by backstabbing the funding of another. How would you feel about this provision if it said that, in order to prevent adding to the deficit, we’ll deduct the cost from the Homeland Security budget? Or from road maintenance?
This “plan” isn’t worth looking at all. It could have been written by the insurance industry, and it probably was.