With medical care a subject of tremendous importance to all of us, it is a shame that both Senate and House of Representatives versions for socialized ObamaCare are terrible.
They are alike in that they are bad, but differ in important provisions.
They are both bad because they would impose government dictation, taxes, fees, and costs in the neighborhood of a trillion dollars — while our federal budgets already are running more than a trillion dollars in the red, despite too-high taxes.
Who’ll pay? “You,” directly and/or indirectly.
Don’t thank ObamaCare would be “free.” Don’t think it would meet all medical needs. It would bring tremendous new programs, economically and medically.
* The guesstimate for the cost of the Senate bill is $871 billion.
* The cost guesstimate for the House bill is $1.06 trillion.
* The Senate bill would cover 94 percent of legal residents under 65 years of age.
* The House bill would apply to about 96 percent of legal residents under 65.
* The Senate approach would cut Medicare and Medicaid and increase payroll taxes for high-income earners; impose a 10 percent sales tax on tanning salons; impose fees on drug companies, medical device manufacturers and medical insurers; fine some employers, and impose penalties — all of the costs inevitably being passed on to the people in various ways.
* The House approach would cut Medicaid and Medicare, put an added tax on couples earning more than $1 million and singles earning above $500,000, put fees on medical device makers, limit contributions to flexible spending accounts, and provide various penalties.
* The Senate bill would force insurance companies to begin in 2014 to accept all comers, with no denial for pre-existing conditions, but allow no higher charges for gender, age or family size; with no lifetime caps, while including children up to 26 on family plans.
* The House version would allow no denial of coverage beginning in 2013, with no higher cost for pre-existing medical conditions, and no higher premiums based on gender or age.
* The Senate bill would force drug companies to “contribute” $80 billion over 10 years for prescription drug coverage.
* The House bill would phase out a gap in Medicare drugs by 2019, and have the Health and Human Services secretary “negotiate” drug prices.
* The Senate bill would not have a government “public-option” socialized insurance plan, but the House version still seeks one.
There are, of course, many more complex provisions, that are understood and not understood, in both versions of bills running about a couple of thousand pages, with differences that would have to be reconciled for eventual passage.
Does anyone really believe the eventual bill would cost Americans “less” while covering millions more people for more ills, having government dictate more, or really improve medical care by adding a trillion dollars in forced taxes, fees and other direct or indirect costs?
Watch out! Once socialized government ObamaCare is imposed, the controls and costs inevitably would rise, adding to current disastrous federal red ink and reduced choice of medical care.