S. 334 Bennett Health Bill: The Facts, Pure and Simple

Sins of Commission and Omission

in reporting about this bill:

There is a lot of misinformation about this bill. There are a lot of overlooked facts about how this bill works also. I have read through the bill and am detailing the most pertinent facts that Americans should know about it. At the end of this report will be commentary on the bill. In this way, you may choose to ignore the opining, or take it in, which ever suits you.

First, one of the misfired facts about this bill is that it will cost 2.2 trillion in government dollars. Not so. That figure was picked up by someone who skimmed through the document rather than reading it carefully to understand the number. In the Findings—the opening arguments of a bill to support its existence, it is stated that health care in America costs an annual amount of 2.2 trillion dollars. This is NOT government costs, but the cost in the entire health care industry. One is not the other. The government’s costs are included inside that number. It is not that number on its own.

“Personal responsibility for one’s health should include purchasing one’s own private health care coverage.”

There are a number of issues not readily explained for the public to understand about this bill. First, and foremost, it is compulsory. Period. All Americans 19 years and older MUST comply. One of the Findings to support this compulsory injunction states, “(4) Personal responsibility for one’s health should include purchasing one’s own private health care coverage. [Pp 5, S.334 IS]” How is it mandated? If one does not comply, the penalty is explicit. Penalties include the back pay of premiums of each month missed and 15% of the total of those defaulted months. Sound familiar?

Another Finding states that this should be a “shared” responsibility between the government, individuals and employers. Another Finding states that the main purpose of the bill is to encourage healthy lifestyles that prevent health problems, rather than treating the problem once it exists and is a serious medical and financial burden.

Another piece of misinformation I have read, as perhaps you have as well, is that the bill, as well as the Obama bill does not allow choice. Well, to the extent that it is compulsory, that is true. But within that framework, each state is required to provide at least two options for citizens of their state.

A family must be double the poverty level to qualify for assistance in the mandatory program.

What about those who cannot afford to be in the plan? The bill offers the solution through “Subsidies” for which they must qualify. A family must have a gross income that is 100% greater than the poverty line.

There are a number of performances required within this system as part of this “insurance plan” that are also compulsory. Added to those already mentioned above, are these: You must have a Primary Care Provider to “monitor” your health. No definition of “monitor” was provided in the bill. Additionally, to comply with the Findings that this bill is justified to actuate “preventive” medicine, your Primary Care Provider, upon your first visit, must lay out a “care plan” to “maximize” the individual’s wellness. [Pp18 S334 IS]

The bill has several sections covering incentive programs for the various parts and kinds of insurance to reward good behavior. Those that take better care of themselves, may receive “incentives” tantamount to a tax break.

Fifteen people will have more influence over the future health management of 300 million people than the people themselves.

One of the charges against this bill is that it is a government run insurance. Bennett says it is not because the bill provides providers from the Private sector. So does Medicaid but that doesn't make it private insurance any more than paying taxes means your money is going into a retirement fund. Fact: While changes to the Act inevitably fall to the Congress to make, fifteen people will, after enactment, control the entire system through recommendations to Congress each year as to what should be done. This committee will be in charge of any changes to the program after it becomes law. Fifteen people will have more influence over the future health management of 300 million people than the people. Along with this added Administration are added services. The bill provides opportunity for school districts to create wellness centers for children. Services are provided, according to the bill’s directive, at the consent of the parents.

The IRS Code will be modified to add power to collect for health insurance.

The Bennett Health Act is to be managed by the combined efforts of the state and the IRS. The IRS code is to be modified by this act in Chapter 24A to include power to collect for health insurance. Medicaid and Medicare will also be modified and eventually supposedly change to SCHIPs only.

And finally, one more very important fact about this bill: Each state will be compelled to do a number of duties as part of its responsibility to the program. One of these is to “collect data and to maintain a database containing information on the health insurance enrollment status of all State residents [pp118 S.334 IS],” which is to be sent to the Federal Government. In other words, your health is to be monitored and recorded by the Fed.

COMMENTARY:

There isn’t enough that can be said in defiance of this bill, except that it isn’t Obama’s bill. Hear me clearly: This is a very bad bill. I will only be giving a very brief synopsis of some of the arguments against it.

First it is compulsory. This is totally un-American. The basic premise of the bill is that because American medicine is expensive and not everyone can afford it, and it is selective, in that not everyone is treated the same depending on whether they have insurance or not, let’s go full bore, and make it a huge monstrosity rather than going in reverse. Granted there are problems. But that does not mean going forward in making what we have and where we are headed bigger—even gigantic. That is simply bad math!

Reversing the situation so that there is NO managed care, but only catastrophic insurance, as once was the case—real insurance—the playing field would again be even, with everyone paying out of pocket for health care. The magic here is that without the middleman, the HMO (and if Bennett or Obama have their way, another middleman, the Government), the cost will significantly go down, making health affordable to the average person in America. This is simple Economics 101 that is missing in the bill, big time.

Adding anything more for the IRS to manage is an insult to every taxpayer. There are serious questions about the Constitutionality of the IRS in the first place. In the second, their management style is harsh and insensitive at best. Where this bureaucracy has the inappropriate and unconstitutional power to seize all property without due process, imagine what could potentially go wrong with someone’s health involved. The bill mandates that states must find a proper way to enforce the provisions of the Act, but without withholding the insurance in doing so. But I could not find anywhere in the bill where the IRS was held to the same stipulation.

Adding a 15-member committee to provide recommendations to the Congress in every year’s review is a two-edged sword. On the one side, we have 15 people telling Congress how to take care of 300 million people. Here again the Federal Government is taking control out of our hands, and in this case, starting with a measly panel to direct our affairs. Pardon me, but I’m not particularly interested in 15 people telling me when I should brush my teeth and get a check up. And what that check-up should include, to boot!

But on the other hand, this is how bureaucracies are born. We see the start of one right here. Pretty soon this committee will be recommending pay, a larger panel to oversee interim studies, division into groups to handle specific medical issues that need to be addressed before Congress, and before you know it, Congress is authorizing an entire new Federal Health Department!

There are so many arguments against this bill based upon the huge potential for Federal Government infringement of just about every right available to us, that it is overwhelming. Here are just a few: School medical centers providing care with parental consent. Hello! Is it Groundhog Day? All over the country we have parents’ rights being ignored and trampled by states that have birth control and AIDS devices readily available to children. It is an insult that the sponsors, who must surely be aware of the circumstances around the country in this regard, could possibly think that this part of the bill will be honored. Even the very idea that Americans must be forced to take better care of themselves as defined by two, and possibly a few hundred legislators over 300 million of the rest of us smacks of omnipotence and omniscience, at least. There is no mistaking that we could and should be taking better care of ourselves. That is not to say this is the best method of accomplishing that end. The best incentive would be in freeing up the system from Government involvement altogether.

I could opine on every fact above, and then some. But the problems of many of the facts presented above are evident. I will close with just one more serious problem. Privacy.

The bill mandates states monitor their own citizenry through the collection of date, which is then sent to the Federal Government. I have only one thing to say about this. With all due respect to the authors of this bill, I sure hope they never have a highly personal and sensitive health issue they don’t want put in a databank—like ED, or all their colleagues are likely to know about it.