More reasons to hate the House health insurance "reform" bill
The New York Times’s David Leonhardt lists six specific failures of the House bill. Paraphrasing his more detailed arguments:
Failing to require or even incentivize hospitals to easily prevent “about 100,000 [deaths per year] from preventable infections they contract in a hospital”
Failing to provide funds for research into the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of various treatments
Failing to empower a commission to set Medicare reimbursement rates, rather than let politicians take lobbyists' bribes to set high rates
Failing to require that hospitals incentivize doctors to provide quality care rather than expensive, high-profit care
Failing — despite their rhetoric — to provide a “public option,” i.e., a government-run insurance program that is an option available to the public. The “public option” will only be an option for a tiny fraction of Americans.
Failing to tax gold-plated insurance policies. Why does this matter? “If the Senate’s tax on so-called Cadillac plans were enacted, the average household would be making an additional $1,000 every year (in today’s dollars) by 2019.”
Posted by James on Wednesday, November 11, 2009