• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • WaPo: "Legislative Sausage" Health Care Plan Could Lead to Single-Payer Insurance

    Today’s Washington Post editorial page takes a critical look at Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) latest “compromise” health care bill, which it describes as 11th-hour “legislative sausage” that was “made on the fly” and includes ideas dating “at least to the Clinton administration.”

    Most significantly, though, the Washington Post sees Sen. Reid’s bill as a “dramatic step” toward a single-payer health care system, even if the public option is not on the table:

    [T]he last-minute introduction of this idea within the broader context of health reform raises numerous questions — not least of which is whether this proposal is a far more dramatic step toward a single-payer system than lawmakers on either side realize.

    In a nutshell, Sen. Reid’s latest compromise allows uninsured individuals over 55 to buy into Medicare. As we wrote on The Foundry today, that policy brings with it numerous problems, the core of which are higher costs to taxpayers, squeezing individuals out of their private coverage (including retiree coverage from a former employer), and adding costs to an already-unsustainable Medicare system.

    Why would costs skyrocket? As The Washington Post notes, sicker seniors “might flock to Medicare,” thinking that the government will be more likely to approve their treatments, which “would raise premium costs and, correspondingly, the pressure to dip into federal funds for extra help.” In other words, sicker seniors would move into the public pool, costs would go up, and so too would taxpayers’ bills.

    There are more questions than answers, as The Washington Post points out, regarding reduced reimbursements to health care providers and further expansions of Medicare:

    Presumably, the expanded Medicare program would pay Medicare rates to providers, raising the question of the spillover effects on a health-care system already stressed by a dramatic expansion of Medicaid. Will providers cut costs — or will they shift them to private insurers, driving up premiums? Will they stop taking Medicare patients or go to Congress demanding higher rates? Once 55-year-olds are in, they are not likely to be kicked out, and the pressure will be on to expand the program to make more people eligible.

    There are other serious concerns, too, as detailed elsewhere on The Foundry, including even more unintended consequences of Sen. Reid’s bill. The Washington’s Post final analysis is on point:

    The irony of this late-breaking Medicare proposal is that it could be a bigger step toward a single-payer system than the milquetoast public option plans rejected by Senate moderates as too disruptive of the private market.

    This marks not the end of the public option, but the beginning of single-payer health care.

    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to WaPo: "Legislative Sausage" Health Care Plan Could Lead to Single-Payer Insurance

    1. J.C. Hughes, Texas says:

      It's been made clear time and again that a nationalized single payer system is what the left has pushed hard for. How they get there doesn't really matter. For most American's, however, it's a matter of a federal government trespassing on constitutional boundaries. The present congressional majority and administration are completely out of bounds. A person has to be an absolute fool to believe government knows best and therefore should be granted total control over people's business and personal affairs. Maybe such brainwashed idiots could enjoy an extended vacation in a country subjugated to communism or other form of tyrannical rule. Contrary to the message our leftist president spreads around the globe, America does not fit the latter. Of course, with Obama's guidance, we're quickly headed in that direction.

    2. Pingback: New Senate Bill Is Reason to Re-Set the Clock | Step Down Obama

    3. Claire, Belleville, says:

      It is pretty obvious that single payer is the end goal.

      First take citizens 65 and over; then children from birth, if they're lucky enough not to have been aborted, under S-Chip; then raise the "child" age to 26(!); then put 55-64-yr-olds under Medicare; Medicaid already covers children to 18 or 23 or so, and adults to 65 … only now it will be til 55 so they can jump onto Medicare and get better coverage.

      I've watched this stuff for 45+ years, and it still amazes me that liberal Democrats can be so blasted patient! I thought surely they'd overreach and be brought up short. They've overreached okay, but they were right: This is their year! Heaven help us all.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.