The newly ascendant Republican party, especially its Tea Party fringe, in a couple of months will be positioned to show off at least one of the horses most of them rode to Washington on—the repeal and replacement of the health care reform bill. Actually, they’ll be in a position to VOTE for repeal and replace, not to in fact do it. President Obama and the Democrats can still sustain a veto.
I recall being surprised a little during the debate on health care reform at the unanimity of the Republican caucus in opposing it. Why did that surprise me? Because the health insurance industry is one of the major bankrollers of Republican members of congress (it gave over three times as much to Republican candidates as it did to Demcorats). But what’s surprising about that, you might ask? Surely, the insurance industry was bitterly opposed to the health care bill.
The question that kept nagging at me was simple. Why would the insurance industry oppose a bill that significantly strengthens the employer-based insurance system that has been a gold mine for it for decades, AND guarantees them billions in new premium revenue once the requirement that everyone have insurance (known as the individual mandate) kicks in 3 years from now? The answer to that question, it now appears, is equally simple—the industry in fact supported a bill that included an individual mandate but excluded a public option.
In a Newsweek article based on his book, Deadly Spin, Wendell Potter—who was one of the industry’s spinmeisters for over two decades (he was a leader in killing the Clinton health reform, the patients’ bill of rights and was one of the leaders in prepping industry lobbyists on how to “guide” construction of Obama’s bill), leads off the article by saying,
Conservatives who voted for congressional candidates because they
Pledged to repeal and replace the health-care reform law are in for
a rude awakening. Once those newly elected members of Congress
have a little talk with the insurance company’s lobbyists and
executives, they will back off from that pledge.
The reason they will be counseled to back off is that the health-care reform bill, as presently constructed, will be a tremendous financial boon to the insurance industry. The backing off may well have already started. Have you noticed how the loud noises about the individual mandate being unconstitutional aren’t coming from Republican congressmen anymore (except of course for Tea Party wingnuts like Rand Paul), but from Republican state Attorneys-General, who, because they aren’t concentrated in Washington, are much harder for the industry to control?
In his article, Potter argues that the industry’s only real fear about the health reform bill was that it might contain a public option which would have the effect of constraining the degree to which it could engage in premium-gouging.
Lest one come away with the silly notion that the insurance industry backs health reform altruistically, Potter also notes that what it will be expecting its Republican friends to do is chip away at the consumer protection clauses of the bill that adversely affect the bottom line. The industry is not happy about no longer being allowed to refuse coverage based on pre-existing conditions; it’s very unhappy about no longer being able to cancel policies when people actually get sick; it’s even more unhappy that it can no longer set annual and lifetime limits on benefits; it’s virtually livid about the requirement that, henceforth, 80 cents out of every premium dollar must go toward actual medical care; and its nearly apoplectic over the provisions that severely cut back on the billions of dollars the government has been overpaying the industry for its participation in private Medicare plans.
As Potter puts it, “Be on the look-out for a death panel-like fearmongering campaign to scare people into thinking, erroneously, that Granny and Pawpaw will lose their government health care if Congress doesn’t restore those ‘cuts’ to Medicare.”
My guess as to what will happen in January? The Republicans in the House will hold hearings stocked with “expert witnesses” from conservative propaganda mills like the Heritage Foundation, and Republicans in both houses of congress will take to the floor for C-Span moments to rail against the bill. Ultimately, and with as much fanfare as they can generate, they will toss a final piece of red meat to the lunatic fringe by introducing a bill to repeal the law that they have no intention of passing.
Then they’ll get down to the serious business of eroding or eliminating as many consumer protections as possible.
PERSONAL NOTE: You may have noticed that my postings have become less frequent of late. Much to my chagrin, circumstances have required me to "unretire" till mid-December, so I don't at the moment have as much time for blogging as I'd like. That should change in January when my rambling rants will return in force.
No comments:
Post a Comment