Politics: Some head shaking details of health care "reform"

The idea of extending health insurance to more folks has some merit.

But as the saying goes, "the devil is in the details;" far more than can be discussed in 59 seconds.

I don't have time to read 2000+ pages of legislation and I doubt any Senator or House member has done so either. Instead, they rely on staff to do the reading and writing of legislation and that is when things get slipped in.

And, inevitably, when some items are brought to the light of day, there may be outrage.

I suppose there are web pages that post some of the little "gems" buried in that legislation that if widely known should spark head shaking wonder at what the heck these people on the Hill are thinking?

Here are a few things I have heard that I wonder, if true, who the dickens put that into the bill and confirms the worst suspicions I have about the legislative process.

* the botox tax - There are actual medical reasons why some neurologists use the stuff on patients and indeed, if someone is using it for cosmetic purposes, that is their business. Why not tax cosmetic sales at Macys?

UPDATE: This tax appears to have been pulled out. See Tanning Bed Tax below.

* the Cadillac insurance tax - The Feds will tax insurance polices above a certain value. Again, if someone wants to buy more health insurance that is their business just like if someone wants to spend more money buying a car. Why not tax Jaguars and BMWs and Cadillacs?

* the tanning bed tax - Looks like the dermatology lobby is stronger than the vitamin D lobby! The dermatologists are concerned about skin cancer so tanning beds are evil. The vitamin D advocates believe tanning beds if used properly can help raise vitamin D levels which benefit immune health. Again, what business does the Federal government have taxing a specific industry?

Disclaimer: I work in a vitamin D research lab investigating the molecular mechanisms of vitamin D regulation of the immune system. I wonder if some Congressional staffer had called our lab head (or a handful of other senior level vitamin D researchers in the USA) would they have been convinced to pull that provision from the bill?

* profit regulations on the private insurance industry - How much profits does a company "deserve?" Well, the Federal government will now regulate how much these companies can make. Where is the outrage at the "excessive" profits of Intel or Apple computers? Where is the anger at the "exorbitant" salaries that lawyers make? Do actors and athletes deserve to make 8 figures are year?

* using cuts in Medicare to pay for extension of coverage - Medicare is going broke and they want to cut Medicare? Sure sounds like robbing Peter to pay Paul except, in this case, Peter is running out of cash.

Probably many more "rewards" and "punishments" delivered by the whim of Congressional staffs writing these bills.

Beginning to think listening to the details of health care "reform" can make one sick?

UPDATE: I hope to post some thoughts on what I think health care reform should look like rather than just complain about the negatives.

UPDATE: "Hidden gems" in the health care bill ...

Washington Examiner finds Section 3403.
Excerpt:
Beginning on page 1,000 of the measure, Section 3403 reads in part: "... it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection."

In other words, if President Obama signs this measure into law, Reid intends that no future Senate or House will be able to change a single word of Section 3403, regardless whether future Americans or their representatives in Congress wish otherwise.

Note that the subsection at issue here concerns the regulatory power of the Independent Medicare Independent Advisory Board to "reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending."

That is precisely the kind of open-ended grant of regulatory power that effectively establishes the IMAB as the ultimate arbiter of the cost, quality and quantity of health care to be made available to the American people. And Reid wants the decisions of this group of unelected federal bureaucrats to be untouchable for all time.

And then there is the vote buying.
Excerpt:
To hold together his 60 Senate Democrats, Reid simply dispensed favors -- eternal Medicaid financing for Ben Nelson's Nebraska, a hospital grant for Chris Dodd's Connecticut, more rural health money for Byron Dorgan's North Dakota and Montana's Max Baucus.

And then there will likely be a "ping pong" play to get a secretly negotiated bill through opposition.
Excerpt:
Conferences involving members from both houses are messy things. They are usually conducted in public and often televised, and can produce a compromise version of the bill that leaves rank-and-file members tempted to vote against the final version. That could be perilous in the case of health care since it's likely to pass without a vote to spare in the Senate and the House's version passed by only five votes.
.....
Rather than appoint members to a public conference committee, those measures were "ping-ponged" -- i.e. changes to reconcile the two versions were transmitted by messenger between the two houses as the final product was crafted behind closed doors solely by the leadership. Many Democrats grumbled at the secrecy. "We need to get back to the point where we use conference committees . . . and have serious dialogue," said Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama at the time.

But serious dialogue isn't what Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid are interested in right now. Look for the traditional conference committee to be replaced by a "ping-pong" game in which health care is finalized behind closed doors with little public scrutiny before the bill is rushed to the floor of each chamber for a final vote.