They call this reform? The state of Vermont is considering going to a socialized health care system within the state and yesterday a majority coalition of Democrats and Progressives in the House passed their version.
By a vote of 86-58 Thursday that fell along party lines, the House sent the Senate a bill that prescribes the steps that would lead to a state-financed health insurance program beginning in mid-2007.
This is what they are proposing to make the law in Vermont:
a tax-supported program guaranteeing preventive, primary and hospital coverage for every Vermonter beginning in 2007.
But critical decisions have been left for the future.
The bill acknowledges many decisions remain, such as what taxes would support the program, what benefits would be offered and what the economic impact might be.
So they, like, passed a bill mandating a state-financed health insurance plan (essentially a single payer government run health care system), which is the feel-good happy position to take, but left all the hard choices for the future. And then go away satisfied that they are responsible legislators.
What are you kidding me?
Just exactly how are we as voters supposed to debate among ourselves the usefulness of this proposal? How are we supposed to evaluate if the single-payer system being proposed is the best way to go if we don't know things like how much medical care is covered and how much it will cost us in taxes? Forget for a moment the philosophical question as to whether or not the State can do this more efficiently than the open market, just tell me when it is they will stop paying for medical care because it costs too much.
And there are subtleties that are hinted at but not fully acknowledged in the press coverage of this issue.
Rep. Tom Depoy, R-Rutland, wanted to replace the bill with Gov. Jim Douglas' health package and a handful of economic development measures. Depoy argued the business friendly package would attract new businesses and that would ease the health insurance crisis.
Business friendly. What this means is that businesses will no longer have to foot the bill for medical insurance. What this means is that businesses will no longer be allowed to provide medical insurance for their employees. And while this may be a boon for some smaller companies and businesses, larger ones like my employer or the state's largest private employer, IBM, may have some difficulty with this. Because a) it is not clear that larger businesses like IBM would actually see any benefit since as a corporation they have to provide health care benefits for everyone who doesn't live in Vermont anyway and b) they would have to pay more in taxes to operate in Vermont to cover health-care benefits the state will be responsible for.
And its not just large corporations that worry
Many in the business community shudder at the idea of higher taxes to pay for the new program and predict that Vermont would become a less competitive place to do business.
"I do worry about businesses leaving Vermont if they are forced to pay more," Beck said.
Fuller agreed. "I think you will see an exodus of business." He argued the private sector -- insurance companies, doctors, hospitals and businesses -- stand a better chance of finding ways to drive down health costs than government. "I just don't think we want this experiment in Vermont."
And if there is an exodus of businesses because the cost of doing business in Vermont is just too high (as we have seen with health care providers under the Dean Administration) who will pay for the legislatively mandated health care system then?
According to statistics given by the Burlington Free Press
58 percent of Vermonters have private health insurance;
31.5 percent have government-sponsored health coverage through Medicaid or Medicare;
10.2 percent have no health insurance.
So let's be clear, what they are saying is that the State of Vermont wants to completely restructure the way the health care system works here, without deciding how much coverage they can provide, without deciding how much they can spend, and clear in conscience that they can decide life-and-death issues all without any precedent to rely on (except maybe the failed health care systems of Canada, Britain and France) from the Ivory Tower in Montpelier all for 10.2 percent of the population?
Why don't they just focus on the solving the problem that the 10.2% have?
The Bill does call for
A legislative panel [that] would solicit public views on the proposed, state-financed health care system open to all Vermonters. Based on public reaction and other research, lawmakers would fine-tune the health reform plan.
and
The bill calls for several studies, including the plan's potential economic impact and an analysis of the financing options.
But the if people don't like the idea and the study shows the economic impact to be disastrously detrimental, it doesn't matter because
The bill proposes the state would provide primary and preventive care by July 1, 2007, and hospital care by Oct. 1, 2007. Additional "essential" services would be added by July 1, 2009.
And if passed by the Senate and signed by the Governor (or overridden), Vermont would have to do this regardless.
And people wonder why it is I say that the State of Vermont is to the Left of California?
It's precisely because we are.
Only soft-headed individuals who are more interested in advancing feel-good agendas than sitting down and dealing with the hard questions and realities and then doing what's best based on the data could possibly come up with this hair-brained scheme.
