Obamacare is only exit strategy

By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER   Friday, Aug. 28, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT
 

— Obamacare Version 1.0 is dead. The 1,000-page monstrosity that emerged in various editions from Congress was done in by widespread national revulsion not just at its expense and intrusiveness but at the mendacity with which it is being sold. You don’t need a Ph.D. to see that the promise to expand coverage and reduce costs is a crude deception, or that cutting $500 billion from Medicare without affecting care is a fiction.

But there is an exit strategy. And a politically clever one, if Democrats are smart enough to seize it.

(1) Forget the public option. Whatever the merits, and they are few, it is political poison. It dies by the Liasson Logic, the unassailable observation by NPR’s Mara Liasson that there are no liberal Democrats who will lose their seats if the public option is left out, while there are many moderate Democrats who could lose their seats if the public option is included.

(2) Jettison any reference to end-of-life counseling. People see (correctly) such Medicare-paid advice as subtle encouragement to voluntarily refuse treatment. People don’t want government involvement in a process they consider the private province of patient, family and doctor. The Senate is already dropping it. The House must follow.

(3) Soft-pedal the idea of government committees determining “best practices.” President Obama’s Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research was sold as simply government helping doctors choose the best treatments. But dozens of medical journal review articles do just that. The real purpose of FCCCERs is ultimately to establish official criteria for denying reimbursement to less favored (because presumably less effective) treatments—precisely the triage done by the NICE committee in Britain, the Orwellian body that once blocked access to a certain expensive anti-blindness drug until you went blind in one eye.

(4) More generally, abandon the whole idea of Obamacare as cost-cutting. True, it was Obama’s original rationale for creating a new entitlement at a time of a sinking economy and a bankrupt Treasury. But, as many universal-health care liberals complain, selling pain is poor salesmanship.

(5) Promise nothing but pleasure—for now. Make health insurance universal and permanently protected. Tear up existing bills and write a clean one—Obamacare 2.0—promulgating draconian health-insurance regulation that prohibits (a) denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, (b) dropping coverage if the client gets sick, and (c) capping insurance company reimbursement.

What’s not to like? If you have insurance, you’ll never lose it. Nor will your children ever be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions.

The regulated insurance companies will get two things in return. Government will impose an individual mandate that will force the purchase of health insurance on millions of healthy young people who today forgo it. And government will subsidize all others who are too poor to buy health insurance. The result? Two enormous new revenue streams created by government for the insurance companies.

Here’s what makes it so politically seductive: The end result is the liberal dream of universal and guaranteed coverage—but without overt nationalization. It is all done through private insurance companies. Ostensibly private. They will, in reality, have been turned into government utilities. No longer able to control whom they can enroll, whom they can drop and how much they can limit their own liability, they will live off government largesse—subsidized premiums from the poor; forced premiums from the young and healthy.

It’s the perfect finesse—government health care by proxy. And because it’s proxy, and because it will guarantee access to (supposedly) private health insurance—something that enjoys considerable Republican support—it will pass with wide bipartisan backing and give Obama a resounding political victory.

Isn’t there a catch? Of course, there is. This scheme is the ultimate bait-and-switch. The pleasure comes now, the pain later. Government-subsidized universal and virtually unlimited coverage will vastly compound already out-of-control government spending on health care. The financial and budgetary consequences will be catastrophic.

However, they will not appear immediately. When they do, the only solution will be rationing. That’s when the liberals will give the FCCCER regulatory power and give you end-of-life counseling.

But by then, resistance will be feeble. Why? Because at that point the only remaining option will be to give up the benefits we will have become accustomed to. Once granted, guaranteed universal health care is not relinquished. Look at Canada. Look at Britain. They got hooked; now they ration. So will we.

Charles Krauthammer is a columnist for the Washington Post. His e-mail address is letters@charleskrauthammer.com.




reader COMMENTS (10)
janesvillean
Aug 29, 2009 at 11:17 a.m.
Suggest removal

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health...
http://www.rollcall.com/news/36394-1.htm...
http://www.examiner.com/x-5738-Political...
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollRepo...
.
That's four separate polls showing support for a public option. Oh, I suppose I could also believe that three major respected news organizations are involved in a conspiracy and that I should listen to a channel founded and run by a Republican strategist. But that would be dumb.

vatoloco
Aug 29, 2009 at 12:57 a.m.
Suggest removal

Pete-I could not agree more. Less government is the answer.

wisconsingirl52
Aug 28, 2009 at 3:29 p.m.
Suggest removal

janesvillean - what polls are you talking about? You may want to recheck your numbers and watch a news show other than ABC, CBS or MSNBC to get an unbiased accounting of the lack of support for this abomination of a health care insurance bill. Trying to shove this bill down our throats is an embarrassment!

R1234
Aug 28, 2009 at 1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal

Hi, proartist. I certainly can understand how you feel regarding this but not everyone in the country has a managed care system in a private facility such as Mercy. There are very many states who have private physicians who operate their own offices and practice at public hospitals. At these places, the same care is delivered at a much reduced rate and is more affordable. Recently, going east to a wedding, four of us came down with a stomach virus. Our relative called her private physician who came to the house to examine us all for the ridiculous charge of $40.00 (10.00 for each of us). We would never have gotten that service here. Asking about rates for office visits in that area, we were told that office visits run $60 to $75 depending on what services were needed. So, you see, with rates like that, fancy and high cost insurance like Managed Care facilites command are not needed and are not that popular because the frills it offers are affordable in other places. Managed care was first practiced as a way to cut costs by providing wellness care which was supposed to save money in the long run by avoiding major expenses to treat advanced illness. However, it doesn't appear to have worked that way. Managed care, with all it's supposed savings and wellness treatment is costing more than ever. Doctors are making less, they don't last more than a couple of years before they move on, very few can even remember or know why you are in their exam room (not all are that way but many are). So.....will this bill make things better? I think not. Those who really, to this date, have great family doctors of more than 20 years, will suffer. You, as a patient, will become nothing more than a body that passes through the office getting only services permitted by an unknown entity set up by Washington Bureaucrats. As our tax money goes though the quagmire of the many administrative offices of the government, I wonder just how much will be returned to us in the form of healthcare. I believe our Congress and Senate already know it will be disastrous for patients or they would not have exempted themselves.

proartist
Aug 28, 2009 at 11:46 a.m.
Suggest removal

"No one's trying to scare people [on health care]." -- RNC Chairman Michael Steele, 8/27/09

VERSUS

"It has been suggested that the government could use voter registration to determine a person's political affiliation, prompting fears that GOP voters might be discriminated against for medical treatment in a Democrat-imposed health care rationing system. Does this possibility concern you?" -- RNC survey mailer, 8/24/09

garyprimer
Aug 28, 2009 at 11:14 a.m.
Suggest removal

I am appalled at the recent horror stories from Canada and Great Britain about patient care. My first thought is to wonder how much truth there is to the story. My second thought is that all that you've got? You will not have to look far to find stories ten times worse in this country, but that is conveniently overlooked. The truth is with millions of patients and mere human oversight, there will always be enough horror stories to go around. To dig up a couple of stories from countries with national health care and cite them as the reason not to try to improve health care in this country is pathetic. The pathos lies in the effectiveness.

janesvillean
Aug 28, 2009 at 11 a.m.
Suggest removal

Polls show the public option is approved by 90% of the public and even 60% of Republicans. It isn't a matter of who loses seats, but who loses cushy insurance industry money. Krauthammer is such a dishonest shill I wonder why he still has a syndicated column, and why the Gazette continues to run it. It's an embarrassment.

proartist
Aug 28, 2009 at 9:57 a.m.
Suggest removal

"They got hooked; now they ration." .... The point? As if disease (NOT health) care in the US is not already rationed? As if we already cannot choose our doctors and care when employers mandate what program is available to employees who cannot afford prohibitively expensive private plans? Come on, get real.

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT