Let's Look At The Bill, Shall We?

HR 3200 is the House bill, and here's how it starts: "To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes."

Do we have a problem right off the bat? YES. Where in the Constitution is there anything about the federal government giving everyone health care? Where is it government's job to control growth in health care spending? Do you understand how unbelievably nebulous that statement actually is? And here's the worst of all: "and for other purposes". We MUST stop letting Congress use a bill for one thing and tack on a hundred completely unrelated amendments! It must stop NOW!

Okay, working down the document we see the marketed "purpose" includes Insurance Reforms and Health Delivery Reforms. This involves a "Health Insurance Exchange" [pronounced: EXPENSIVE GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACY THAT FORCES INSURANCE COMPANIES TO DO ANTI-CAPITALISTIC THINGS]. It also "initiates shared responsibility between employer, employee and government". Again, the government has no business being in the middle of it, nor should it be forcing employers to provide nor employees to subscribe. This is fascism.

It then goes on to mandate prohibition of pre-existing conditions exclusions, guaranteed issue and renewal, insurance rating rules, nondiscrimination of benefits, insuring adequate provider networks and ensuring value and lower premiums.

The next subtitle takes on coverage of essential benefits, defines essential benefits package, creation of the Health Benefits Advisory Board [more government cost and bureaucracy], adoption of benefit standards.

Let's jump down to the Governance subtitle. We have the Health Choices Administration and it's Commissioner; "Consultation and coordination"; Health Insurance Ombudsman.

Subtitle F gives us "Prohibiting discrimination in health care" and "construction regarding collective bargaining" [pronounced UNIONS].

Subtitle G has "ensuring value and lower premiums", "ending health insurance rescission abuse", "administrative simplification" [uh, really? With ANYthing run by government?], and "reinsurance program for retirees".

So, what is "acceptable coverage". Well, Section 202 lists some examples, but then adds a general statement indicating that the Commissioner ultimately has to approve said coverage. This is substantiated by Section 101, which basically says that you cannot seek coverage by private insurance after initiation of this legislation unless it fits the "qualified" status established by the Commissioner. This takes the choice away from you.

Section 113(b) mandates a study whereby the government will examine, among other things, employers who self-insure with the purpose of seeing of the rules they put in place actually encourage self-insurance rather than using their option.

Section 123 describes the 25 member board that are mostly appointed by the President, the rest by Comptroller. They are responsible for establishing what the "benefits standards" are, what cost sharing is allowed. This also includes what limitations will be covered.

Section 142 talks about the Commissioner, who will approve and establish "qualified plan standards" and initiate audits of said plans. Guess who pays for these invasive audits? THE PROVIDERS. That's like paying someone to rape you.

By the way, do you understand what the Exchange is? It's the funding pool that participating insurers/providers receive payments from for the individuals that are enrolled. So, even if you're happy with your insurer or provider, but the government isn't happy with something they're doing, they can fine the entity, disenroll YOU, and stop all payments to them.

There's much more to come, so stay tuned!