Responses to Health Reform Proposals

America's Health Insurance Plans:

AHIP Statement on the Status of Health Care Reform by AHIP President and CEO Karen Ignagni

“The nation needs a systematic, comprehensive process to ensure that health care costs are brought under control and that coverage becomes and remains affordable for all Americans. That means looking closely and continually at all of the areas that make our health care system unaffordable. The refusal to fundamentally address underlying medical costs leaves policymakers with two financing options: cutting Medicare and raising taxes. The American people are understandably very concerned about that approach. They want-and our country needs-health care reform that reduces the rate of growth of health care costs."

American Enterprise Institute:

A Better Prescription: AEI Scholars on Realistic Health Reform

After a year of political wrangling and two thousand-page bills that promise more than they can deliver, it is time for a more prudent approach to health care reform.The better prescription requires that we rethink both the goals and methods of health reform. Market-based health reform provides the tools by which the health system can become more effective, more efficient, and more responsive to patient needs. It relies on financial incentives rather than central direction and control, and it recognizes that a one-size-fits-all approach will not work in a country as diverse as ours. Unlike a top-down approach, market-based reform fosters accountability throughout the health system.

Americans for Tax Reform:

Obamacare Plan Breaks $250,000 Tax Pledge

ATR provides a breakout of all the net taxes from the Obamacare plan which fall (or easily could fall) directly on families making less than $250,000 per year. Their analysis finds that the "working families tax hike" subset is a ten-year tax increase of $136 billion on these households. Of course, the rest of the tax hikes will affect all families in the form of lower wages, higher prices, and less economic growth. This list is simply those which are in direct violation of President Obama's oft-made promise not to raise "any form" of taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year.

Americans United for Life:

Statement from Americans United for Life Action President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest on President Obama's health care proposal

"The President promised the American people that 'no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.' Incredibly, his health care proposal doesn't contain a single mention of the Life issue. As I made clear to the White House in a meeting last fall, unless they include specific legislative language banning the use of federal funds for abortion, they will be establishing taxpayer funding for abortion. Today was the President's opportunity to keep his word."

Catholic Medical Association:

Open Letter to President Obama and Members of Congress

The Catholic Medical Association (CMA), the largest association of Catholic physicians in the United States, has been carefully monitoring the health-care reform debate. Now, given the clear lack of support from the American people, and given the substantial flaws that exist in House and Senate bills, we believe the most responsible course of action is to pause, reflect, and then begin the legislative process anew, working in a more deliberate and bipartisan manner. It is more important that health-care reform be done right than to finish the legislative process by a date certain.

Cato Institute:

Price Controls by Any Other Name

Yesterday, the president proposed giving the federal government the power to regulate insurance premiums. Undoubtedly, this will be politically popular -- at least, in the short term. Insurance companies aren't exactly America's most loveable industry. Recent premium hikes will result in real hardship for many Americans. There is, of course, a certain arrogance in the assumption that Obama, Nancy Pelosi and a bevy of government bureaucrats know exactly what something should cost. But more important, attempts to control prices by government fiat ignore basic economic laws -- and the result could be disastrous for the American health-care system.

ObamaCare 3.0: Higher Implicit Taxes, Quicker Death Spiral

The health care proposal that President Obama released yesterday essentially splits the difference on most areas of disagreement between the [House and Senate] bills. Here are the maximum financial incentives to drop coverage that each plan would create for families of four:

• Senate bill: $8,000
• House bill: $7,800
• Obama plan: $9,900

The President’s Unhealthy Proposal

The president's health care reform proposal would put the federal government in control of health insurance (which is not at all the same as health care). It would make it a federal crime for people to not buy insurance, or for insurers to offer plans that did not meet expensive federal mandates (such as insuring “children” up to the age of 26). The only families who would remain in control are those exempted from compulsory insurance because they can’t afford it (which was supposedly the reason why people are not insured today). And the only small businesses that would remain in control are those who take care to not hire more than 50 people (one of many unexpected consequences).

Meet the New Plan, Same as the Old Plan

This morning, President Obama released his latest health care blueprint, which he hopes will breathe life into his moribund effort to overhaul one-sixth of the U.S. economy. The new blueprint is almost exactly the same as the House and Senate health care bills that the public have opposed since July. It mostly just splits the difference between the two. One new element, however, is the president’s proposal to impose a new type of government price control on health insurance premiums. If anything, those price controls make the president’s new plan even more bureaucratic and government-heavy.

Christian Medical Association:

Christian Doctors Oppose Obama Health Care Overhaul Plan

Dr. David Stevens, who heads the Christian Medical Association, says he is concerned that President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, which many thought was dead, appears to have been resurrected. Stevens said he fears that Mr. Obama's plan would provide inadequate conscience protection for medical professionals who oppose abortion. He said a survey of 2,800 faith-based doctors, nurses and pharmacists found that 95 percent of them would quit medicine rather than violate their consciences. Stevens also said he objects to dropping the tougher House language barring federal funding of abortions. Stevens said the president's proposal is too expensive, and fails to rein in malpractice lawsuits that drive up the cost of medicine.

Committee for Justice:

Letter on ObamaCare Legal Issues

Our concerns about the constitutionality of the bills center on the individual health insurance mandate. Attorneys among us have analyzed the issue and concluded that requiring Americans to buy health insurance does not fall within the powers granted to Congress by the Constitution. Moreover, our analysis indicates that if the House or Senate bill were to be enacted and upheld by the courts, the result would be a trial lawyer-driven explosion of health care and insurance litigation. In other words, not only do these bills fail to constrain trial lawyers’ drain on the health care system, they actually make the problem substantially worse.

Concerned Women for America:

Obama's Plan Same As the Old Plan: Statement from Concerned Women for America's President Wendy Wright

"Obama's plan is a re-hash of the Senate and House bills with a higher price tag -- and will force Americans to pay for abortions. It would put the U.S. government in the abortion business, reduce health care for patients, raise costs, and create more bloated agencies. It puts each American's health under the control of a federal commission that will decide what care we can receive. Americans who choose something other than a government-approved plan will be forced to pay a fine."

Freedom2Care:

Statment of Jonathan Imbody

"This morning President Obama unveiled his health overhaul proposal, which looks a heck of a lot like the Senate-passed bill--only more expensive and Government-intrusive, if that's imaginable. The President offers yet more of the same old rejected ideology, intrusion and inflation, and with a new anti-free market power grab thrown in. With polls and elections all pointing to trashing the radical overhaul approach, it remains unclear what part of "No" the White House can't understand from the American people."

Galen Institute:

Obama’s Health Reform: Tax. Spend. Regulate. Mandate.

Instead of offering a genuinely fresh approach, Mr. Obama split the difference between two bad bills that are hugely unpopular with the American people. He would continue to mandate that both individuals and employers pay for health insurance or face fines and penalties. He would expand Medicaid, the most dysfunctional health program in the country. And he would increase fees on insurers and other health companies — fees that will be passed along to consumers in the form of higher premiums.

The Heartland Institute:

Obamacare's Last Stand

President Obama unveiled what may be his last ditch attempt to present a government-run health care proposal that can pass the Senate and House this morning in Washington, just a few days in advance of a health care summit where he will likely attempt to cast his opponents on Capitol Hill as obstructionists. Unlike prior bills introduced, this plan is owned by the president alone -- it is not the result of a Senate or House approach, and as such, can honestly be referred to as "Obamacare." Much of this proposal is just about framing -- more political change than policy change -- and attaching Republicans at the hip to insurers who, ironically, had supported the health care legislation before the House and Senate, and forcing them to make the perhaps unpopular case against government price controls.

The Heritage Foundation:

A First Look at the President’s Health Summit Proposal: Liberal Proposal Number Three

The President describes his proposal as a set of policy changes that would “ bridge the gap” between the unpopular House and Senate health care bills. The President stresses that his proposal “… adds new provisions to crack down on waste, fraud and abuse.” He also says that his proposal “puts American families and small business owners in control, of their own health care.” This latter claim is, in point of fact, disingenuous. Americans would have less control over health care decisions today, what kind of plans and benefits they get, and Washington would exercise even more control over health care financing and delivery than it does today.

New But Unimproved: Abortion Funding in the White House Health Plan

The new health care outline posted by the White House this morning appears to aggravate concerns about a new abortion funding scheme that is not covered by any limitation, including the traditional Hyde amendment governing annual appropriations to the Department of Health and Human Services and the Stupak-Pitts amendment adopted by the House of Representative last November in its version of health reform. Instead, the White House plan would invest $11 billion in an expansion of Community Health Centers, others known as Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), with no limitation at all.

The Jeffersonian Health Policy Foundation:

Statement of John A. Lanzalotti, M.D., CEO and Policy Director, The Jeffersonian Health Policy Foundation

President Obama said he wanted recommendations about Health Care Reform. My recommendation is start over. I read his plan on line today. His plan is very expensive, almost one trillion dollars. It destroys health care as we know it. It raises taxes. It usurps state's rights, It gives the federal government more power and control. It does nothing to correct the many cost drivers of the current system. It claims to lower insurance premiums without telling us how or describing an actuarially sound way to reduce premiums.

Louisiana Family Forum:

Statement of Gene Mills, President, Louisiana Family Forum

President Barack Obama's irrational commitment to government subsidized abortion makes the newest iteration of health care reform just as deadly , dangerous and unacceptable as the first.

National Association of Manufacturers:

The Manufacturers Call President Obama’s $1 Trillion Health Care Proposal ‘Disappointing’

We are disappointed that the President’s proposal includes hundreds of billions in new taxes and fees but does nothing to contain costs for America’s manufacturers and job creators. Health care reform needs to be first and foremost about reducing costs, not adding burdensome new costs and taxes on employers. Manufacturers want the health care debate to move forward, but with a focus on long-term savings that will make health care more affordable for everyone.

The National Center for Public Policy Research:

Statement of the National Center for Public Policy Research Regarding President Obama's Health Care Proposal

The President's new health care proposal could be summed up as: Meet the new plan, same as the old plan. Same liberty-crushing mandates that individuals buy insurance or face government sanction; same budget-busting, multi-trillion dollar burdens shifted onto future generations; same ruinous expansions of Medicaid on already financially distressed states; same billions in new taxes.

National Retail Federation:

NRF Asks Congress to Reject Fast-Track Vote on Health Care

The National Retail Federation strongly opposed and key voted against both the House and Senate-passed bills. The President’s latest outline fails to solve our concerns. We remain adamantly opposed to legislation that will drive up unemployment through higher labor costs. We also strongly oppose efforts to ram health care reform into law by the thinnest of margins through arcane procedures such as Budget Reconciliation. Health care represents one-sixth of the U.S. economy. Good health care policy deserves and should easily command an overwhelming majority in the Congress and widespread support among the public.

Pacific Research Institute:

Statement of Sally Pipes, President and CEO, Pacific Research Institute

"President Obama's health care proposal released today in advance of the Feb. 25 Summit is more of the same. It relies on increased taxes, mandates, subsidies, and regulation. It will not achieve the goal of affordable, accessible, quality health care for all. The cost estimate will greatly exceed the $950 billion over 10 years and will most likely be in excess of $2 trillion. All Americans will face higher taxes and quality will decline. Ultimately, this will set the stage for a total government takeover of our health care system-a single-payer, Canadian style system which I believe is the long-term goal of the President."

Small Business Coalition for Affordable Healthcare:

Small Business Healthcare Coalition letter sent to the House

As Congress reassesses its role in the healthcare reform discussion, we urge you to listen closely to the input of those on Main Street in towns and cities across the United States of America – our small businesses. Regardless of political party or philosophical persuasion, there is overwhelming agreement that small business owners and their employees are trapped in a broken insurance marketplace with no choices and high costs. While they have expressed opposition to both the House-passed “Affordable Health Care for America Act” (H.R. 3962) and the Senate-passed “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (H.R. 3590), they remain steadfast in their commitment to continue advocating for policy solutions that lower healthcare costs, but do not increase the overall cost of doing business.

StartOver! (A 10-member business coalition, including the National Association of Manufacturers, National Retail Federation, Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, and U.S. Chamber of Commerce):

An Open Letter to the President of the United States

We suggest specific consensus strategies to reduce the cost of care and thus increase coverage now and make possible future reform progress as well. These strategies (the precise details will be critical) include:

• Insurance Market Reform – the individual and small group markets are in need of national reforms to help address the cost and availability of coverage. Care must be taken to avoid precipitous rate increases and to ensure timely enrollment.
• Tax Parity – health insurance premium costs should receive comparable tax treatment whether purchased by a self-employed individual, a small business or large employer, regardless of industry or union status.

Susan B. Anthony List:

SBA List President: Obama’s Health Care Proposal Deaf to the Voices of American Taxpayers

In a last gasp to save his top domestic priority, President Obama is taking a new approach to health care: ‘bipartisanship.’ Yet his proposal released today missed the mark on the most significant area of bipartisan agreement: limiting public funds for abortion. Over seventy percent of Americans oppose funding abortion through health care reform legislation. And last fall, one quarter of the President’s own party joined Republicans to support the consensus Stupak-Pitts Amendment to exclude abortion coverage in the House. In the face of obvious bipartisan consensus against abortion funding, the President remains deaf to the voices of American taxpayers. President Obama’s most precious domestic priority is on life support, but he still refuses to jettison abortion coverage. It appears that abortion ideology is more precious to this president than his top domestic priority.

Washington Policy Center:

Obama's Health Care Plan

Unlike the House and Senate bills, the President's [health reform plan] places more federal regulation on insurance company pricing. This would lead to government price control of the insurance industry and would force many companies out of business. Obviously, as more people are forced out of private insurance, the enrollment in the government plans would skyrocket...In short, the President's plan breaks no new ground in the health care debate. It greatly expands the government role in our health care, does nothing to control costs (except for the obligatory rationing that will occur), and further isolates the patient from health care spending and decision making.