• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Turner Lays Out the Case Against Obamacare

    Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, was among a number of experts who recently convened at The Heritage Foundation on a panel entitled “Beyond the Individual Mandate: Why Obamacare Must Be Repealed.” Turner is one of the authors of Why Obamacare Is Wrong for America, along with James Capretta, Thomas Miller, and Heritage expert Robert Moffit.

    At the panel, Turner highlighted a number of the law’s problems, including its constitutionality. Never before has the federal government required individuals to purchase a product, which as she says in her book, “makes one wonder what else Congress can make Americans do if it makes us buy health insurance.”

    The law’s mandate, she believes, also presents an economic problem. The legislation requires employers to provide insurance for employees or pay a penalty, forcing businesses to hire fewer employers, keep wages down, and reduce investments. As a result, business will suffer, which could translate into higher prices for consumers.

    In the book, Turner and her co-authors also point out that Obamacare unnecessarily expands centralized power and bureaucracy in Washington to the detriment of Americans’ health care. At the panel, she presented the following chart from the Joint Economic Committee, which illustrates the massive complexity of just a portion of the law (the whole thing wouldn’t fit on one chart):

     

     

    Turner discusses another example from the book, the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), which will enforce a new statutory limit on spending growth in Medicare without congressional approval. Because of restrictions in the law, the most likely tool IPAB will use is cutting reimbursements, which will reduce access to providers, creating waiting lines and indirectly rationing care for seniors—all due to the decisions of Washington bureaucrats.

    Turner and her colleagues also stress the need to reform Medicaid, whose existing problems will only be exacerbated by Obamacare. Medicaid, she mentioned at the panel, is the “worst health care program in America,” yet will provide coverage for one in four Americans after Obamacare’s expansion of the program. Adding so many more people to a broken program will cripple state budgets. Furthermore, Medicaid often pays providers less than the cost of providing their services, making it difficult or impossible to keep their doors open to its enrollees. With more patients reliant on this program, more Americans will be exposed to its lower quality of care.

    As authors of the book say, “The very real health care problems in the United States can be solved, but not with Obamacare. The key is to empower patients, not the government.” The only way to properly reform health care is to repeal Obamacare in its entirety and replace it with common-sense, market-oriented reforms that take power away from government bureaucrats and back into the hands of doctors and individuals.

    To listen to the entire event, click here.

    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to Turner Lays Out the Case Against Obamacare

    1. Bobbie says:

      the whole thing has to be repealed on the grounds of various forms of corruption and everything this country doesn't represent that being racism, favortism, discrimination and so broad much of it will be run by discretion. the transition is dangerous and cheating many people that cover their own costs, quality health care!

    2. Matthew F. says:

      We are obligated by ethics to provide emergency and catastrophic health services to all. Who should pay for that if that care is given to the uninsured? That's the point of requiring health insurance. It's pretty hypocritical that you criticize this provision when I don't hear you criticize the requirement by my state to have automobile insurance. I am deeply disturbed by the massive government intrusion, but I support requiring to health insurance. Tax deductible medical savings account would go a long way to help this situation.

    3. Rick W says:

      There are two fundamental flaws in your argument comparing the Federal Health Insurance Mandate with a State's requirement to require car insurance. 1) A state can constitutionally mandate this since the US Constitution does not specifically prohibit it (see Amendment #10). So, if a state wants to mandate car insurance or health insurance or whatever, they have that right. The federal govt cannot mandate it because it is not specifically identified in the Constitution (and don't give me any of that interstate commerce baloney). 2) Car insurance is something you only need to buy if you own a car. So if you want to enjoy the privilege of driving on the highways in a particular state, you must be insured. If you don't want to buy insurance, then don't own a car. The same can't be said for health insurance. You are forced to buy it simply based on your existence.

      • Bobbie says:

        Rick, people should have a choice in health insurance and liable to the expense whether they are insured or not! That will keep people more responsible to their lifestyles. As human life is born one at a time and from a womb of a woman, it's the responsibility of those whose actions conceive a human fetus and bring the human life into the world until that human life can take care of oneself. Why should it be anyone elses? As we know the history of governments why would we want the government involved at all with personal health care/decisions? Don't be fooled.

        The government should take no part in peoples' personal health care or subsidize it's costs. It's dangerously threatening and takes a lot of freedom and accountability away from us personally without accountability held to any government entity or health care provider when all is in their control and directly their responsibilities. You can't do anything when your father is given a medication that brings on pulmonary fibrosis and he dies of it two weeks later! NOTHING! sure can waste time, trouble and money trying but you'll never win when government appoints the judges that aren't of good judgment.

        Free market business competition where no one is favored by government with other peoples money, is trust worthy with accountability observed by their business ethics and the freedom of consumers choice.

    4. Rick W says:

      I understand the overall concern that Obamacare is trying to solve here, but this is not the solution. HSAs are the solution (or at least part of them). We need to get people to stop thinking that all health care should be free of charge and get insurance back to being insurance (i.e, no more $10 copays). Let's insure for catastrophic situations and let people be responsible for themselves. Of course, Medicaid and Medicare needs to exist as an option for the poor and elderly.

    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.

    ×