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