Health Reform: Rhetoric and Reality

by James Gelfand

There has been a lot of talk about misinformation in the health reform debate – fishy emails, conflicting statements by politicians, allegations. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce provides the following information to shed some light on the business perspective on the probable effects of the Affordable Health Choices Act.

Can you keep the plan you have? The President and Democrats in Congress (proponents) insist that their bills will let you keep the plan you have. However, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Lewin group found that millions of people will lose their employer-sponsored coverage. After 5 years, new government rules will apply to all plans, overseen by the Health Choices Administration. (1)

Will health reform lower costs? Everyone agrees lowering the rate of growth in health care costs is essential. Although the proponents and interest groups claim that health reform will lower costs, the CBO finds that the House and Senate HELP bills will increase health care costs. Initial estimates say the draft Senate Finance bill will lower costs – but the other bills would make the current unsustainable situation worse.

Will the government take over health care? Proponents say their bills will not lead to a government takeover. However, outside estimates say that a new government-run public option may eventually lead to a single-payer government-run health system. The President is on record saying he would prefer single-payer, and Reps. Barney Frank and Jan Schakowsky have said the public option will lead to single-payer -- so has Nobel laureate Paul Krugman -- videos here. Further, new government bureaucracies will have to approve health insurance policies, and all Americans may be funneled into a government-run "Exchange" after a five year "grace period." (1)

Will taxes be increased? Proponents say there will be no tax increases except on the wealthiest Americans. However, the House bill has a new $540 billion surtax that will apply to small businesses who file as individuals (at $280,000 income for single and $350,000 for joint filers), and there will be a new 2.5% tax on the uninsured. (2)

Will your health insurance be more "stable"? Proponents say so, but they don’t account for the fact that private and employer-sponsored health insurance costs will go up. Government-run health insurance will underpay doctors and hospitals, so hospitals and Doctors then will have to charge your insurance more – which will make your premiums higher (3). Plus, you will be required to purchase "government-approved" Cadillac plans that will be more costly than high-deductible/Health Savings Accounts plans, which may not qualify. (4)

Will you be able to keep your doctor? Doctors are increasingly hesitant to take any insurance (5) – many doctors already no longer accept new Medicare or Medicaid patients. The bills would create a new public plan that would underpay doctors, and also cut Medicare – so doctors may be forced to charge higher prices, or no longer see patients who have insurance that doesn’t adequately reimburse them.

Will there be more prevention to keep people healthy? Proponents claim so. However, the bills actually restrict wellness programs (6) – for instance, successful plans that reward employees for participating in wellness programs will be outlawed.

Is health reform "paid for"? Proponents say it is. However, according the CBO the House bill contains $239 billion that is not paid for, but because of budget gimmicks doesn’t count according to the House "pay-go" rules. Further, the taxes start before the program – meaning it is frontloaded, and after the first ten years, the deficit explodes (7). Taxes will have to be significantly increased.

Notes after the jump...

Note 1 - HR 3200, Division A, Title I, Subtitle A, Section 102 says plans may get a 5-year grace period, after which all plans are subject to Health Choices Administration and Health Benefits Advisory Committee qualification standards.

Note 2 - HR 3200 (See Division A, Title III, Subtitles A&B, and Division A, Title IV, Subtitle D):

Note 3 - HR 3200, Division A, Title II, Subtitle B, Section 223 directs that Medicare prices will be used, which guarantees to continue and expand the current effects of underpayment.

Note 4 - HR 3200, Division A, Title I, Subtitle C lays out the "essential benefits package" and establishes the new bureaucracy that will pile on to it. The actuarial requirements require a gold-plated plan.

Note 5 - Type "doctors" and "cash only" into Google or Lexis-Nexis to find countless reports on this phenomenon.

Note 6 - HR 3200, Division A, Title 1, Subtitle B, Section 113(a), outlaws varying insurance premiums based on anything except age, location, and family vs. individual.

Note 7 - Using CBO numbers: "17 percent of the spending comes in the first five years, while 83 percent comes in the second five years. What this means is that the American people see $1 trillion over 10 years and they think that means the bill would cost about $100 billion a year -- but the reality is more than double that. In the final year of the CBO estimates, 2019, the spending hits $230 billion."

Comments

[True Religion Clothing]

i like it very much ,and you ???

[Eric Kyle Schichl]

I have to make exception first of all the exchange is voluntary, meaning no one will have to comply with the exchanges rules unless they are in the exchange, NO ONE is required to JOIN the exchange!

Here, is the other part about rising costs that is not addressed if Health Insurance Costs are rising at twice the rate of inflation inflation being about 2% so 4% rise the rate of increase in premiums for insurance is as sited earlier by one small business owner is 26.7% the average being 4 times the rate of inflation or 8% as an employee when was the last time you saw a 4% jump in your wages, Never. Worst of all it does not account for how much an employee lost in buying power because of increases in co-pays I think these adress the concerns of the average business owner. Now what is really misleading is if the Chamber really had proof of this it would lead the exact section of the bill not to the bill itself where you would see everything they said is an exageration or an out right lie.
What do you expect when they want all the workers in america to have the same standard of living as those in Mozambique.

[Robert]

I find it laughable that you believe propaganda about health care reform from the corporation whorehouse has any credibility.

[Brian Hunter]

We are a small business around 150 employees. We just received our Health Insurance Renewal with an increase of 26.7%. We also received a proposal from a far eastern company to do our manufacturing. Their proposal, adjusting for inventory, lost tax incentives, shipping, etc is a significant savings when I factor in my higher insurance costs. If our Health insurance costs increased at the rate of inflation it would be cost effective to keep manufacturing locally. So what do you think US Chamber of Commerce, lay off 85 people, cancel company sponsored health insurance for all 150, or reform health care to make it affordable again?

[A Woerner]

Your opposition to health care reform indicates, what I've often suspected, your organization is great for those in business, but those who avail themselves of their services cannot depend on being aided in any way. Basically, you are saying three cheers for business people and let the buyers be damned.

[Grizz]

I find it laughable that you quote the Lewin Group as a independent source. They are not a non-partisan group, but rather owned by UHC (since 2007).

Many small businesses in this country are going out of business because of escalating costs, specifically health insurance coverage for their employees. Healthcare reform is the only chance these companies have to stay in business. If they don't get help soon, there won't be many left to worry about.

Shame on you for acting like you are an organization that is out to protect the small business owner. You are nothing more than another prostitute bought and paid for by the large corporate interests. Actually, I'm sorry I said that, it puts prostitutes in a bad light. They would never sell out like the Chamber has.

[Robert]

Your deceptive attempts to derail health reform is proof positive that The Chamber only represents the interests of large corporations such as health insurance corporations. A robust public option that would be available to everyone would rescue smaller businesses from having to pay the increasingly crippling cost of health care for their employees.You play small business owners for fools with the distortions in your ads. You take their money, then screw them in favor of the big cartels that have bought your allegience.The worst part is that you know what is right, but personal gain means more to you.All that money spent lying in those ads could have been put to much better use for your members.Don't bother responding, after I post this I will not return to your site.

[Bonnie Barone]

I have read comments on health reform news on Yahoo. I think Yahoo leans slightly left. However, about 90% of comments oppose health reform. None of the comments here disagree with the points made by the writer. I doubt they are actually small business owners. Unless employees of ACORN are small business owners.

[Joe]

As a small business owner, the single largest expense I have is health insurance for myself and my employees. It is also one of the most time consuming burdens I have to deal with on a monthly and yearly basis. Health insurance was also the single largest barrier for me when I decided to start my own business. Plus, because I'm a small business, my rates are astronomically high.

Because of this, I can't see why the C of C would oppose health care reform. I would think the C of C would complain that the current reforms do not go far enough! Rather, the C of C should lobby for a single-payer system and take the cost and burden off employers completely. Why would they be against something that makes starting and running a small business easier?

And it's not just small business that would benefit. In 2005, health care cost added an average of $1500 to each car produced in Detroit. Is it any wonder now that more cars are produced across the river in Canada?

If the US really wants to compete in a global economy and keep jobs in the US, we have to have a more efficient health care system.

I'm not sure whose voice the Chamber is representing, but it certainly is not mine.

[John More]

Let's face it...Access to healthcare is denied by the profit motive. Until we admit that we are OK with 44,000 people a year a dying in the name of margin maintenance and shareholder return. Right now I am OK with it, covered and no preexisting conditions. Rather selfish but it is a free country.
By the way how does small business pay the current increases of 12%-30%. We can always give up the insurance I guess; and get that previous number to 50,000' after all bigger is better.

[Robert Folkerts]

@Jeff Davis

You really need to look at how the rest of the world organizes health care. Your statement, "One would have to be a lunatic to believe that the Government can provide health insurance more affordably and efficiently than the private sector. " is dogmatic. An empirical response would involve looking at other systems to see if there is anything to learn from them. France does provide proof that a national government can provide health insurance more affordably than the US private sector. Of course, if you call all empiricists 'lunatics' because they look for evidence, then I guess you can hold to any belief you see fit since you don't need to support your claims with real evidence. Just don't think you will convince anyone who doesn't share your brand of dogmatism.

@ChamberPost

Why stoop to a personal attack? Did you run out of coherent counter arguments?

[LaserDan]

While I totally support the Chamber's strategy of running ads opposing bad healthcare reform legislation, I must criticize the content of the ads. The ads the sound just like the NEGATIVE ads at election time. What a turn off. Instead of using pure scare tactics why don't you pick a topic and each ad can actually EDUCATE the public on various topics. Also, don't just attack. Come up with some positive proposals for healthcare reform that you do support. That will do far more to sway public opinion than the scare tactics you are using. Yes, eductation can occur in a 60 second ad.

[Donna]

Wow, the Obama attack machine against the Chamber of Commerce is so well represented in the comments. It sure looks like an orchestrated plan to bash the Chamber. Whoah to anyone who opposes this administration!

[Jonathon G. Dewald, MD]

I am a solo primary care doctor, therefore a small businessman, who cannot afford healthcare insurance for my employees. I never dreamed that the Chamber would spend so much opposing reform as well as environmental legislation. In both areas our "business" success is so woefully bad compared to the rest of the "developed" nations I am ashamed. I'm also amazed that there is so much resistance to change. The Chamber is apparently riddled with the mentality of General Motors and the thousands of mortgage brokers whose greed set in motion a crippling blow to the economy so bad that we may not yet recover. I plan to avoid doing business with your supporting members and have now made a decision about joining my local Chamber. The latter had a board member, a local attorney and (former) friend, call me in my hospital bed (preparing to become wheelchair bound) and ask for a last minute financial commitment that I could not afford. He offered as explanation, for being so crass, that there was a membership drive deadline and HE "needed" just one or two more to reach a specific goal. I was still considering joining to support local business but I now see a pattern and mentality deserving of my best resistance. I'll avoid national and local businesses as a matter of principle.

[Gerry Moran]

I think those ads your are running incessently on TV are both annoying and vague. Instead of bitching about "government control of healthcare" and "increased taxes", it would make more sense for you to cooperate in putting together a reasonable bill.

Gerry Moran

[Bob Hampel]

I appreciate your current TV campaign opposing health care reform. You seem to be long on criticism and short proposals. Fortunately we have the great unwashed masses who scare easily. Keep up with the scare tactics instead of solutions.

[Brian W.]

According to a report from the Assistant Secretary of Planning and Evaluation for the Department of Health and Human Services, the rise in health care costs have led to less wage increases and fewer employment opportunities as businesses pay increasing premiums or shift these costs to employees.

A Democratic ploy to distort the facts you say?

Nope. It was written in February 2005 on the watch of Michael J. O'Grady, previously employed by Senate Committee Chairs during the early Republican majority years and presumably appointed by none other than former President Bush, he served from 2003 to late 2005.

Why would the Chamber oppose legislation, including the Senate Finance bill that the CBO estimates will reduce health spending, which would lead to larger business profitability?

[Greg Fletcher]

Pushing Health Care Reform (October 2009)

add the following to your proposals:

require that all policies have co-insurance and deductible components which will increase the probability that individuals will shop for the most effective medical care.

permit (and encourage) the availability of catastrophic policies for those willing to pay their own medical bills up to a point (from the premium reductions). this will reduce the paperwork load on the insurance industry and all providers of health care.

restrict the size of insurance companies, hospital groups, and other appropriate elements of the health care industry that could lead to oligopic pricing.

if a "public option" is incorporated in the legislation, forbid the use of public funds and/or price controls on providers to keep it afloat (e.g., Medicare).

controlling these costs requires pressure from the users (the patients) to force competition among all providers.

[ms. pacman]

Yet more right wing insurance company sponsored crap!

[John Griffin]

Who paid off the c of c? Sen. Blanche Lincoln is certainly on board, much to my chagrin. While my family of 4 pays roughly $1,300 for uncomprehensive health insurance coverage every month, that would be available savings that I already pay to contribute to the system to cover everyone.
We don't have health care in America if everyone is not covered.
I think Chamber of Greed would be more fitting.

[Phil Blackwood]

You neglect to correct the most common fallacies and distortions presented in the debate over reform. And thus present yet another biased viewpoint, doing nothing more than supporting the status quo. I don't find the status quo acceptable, and I don't find your analysis helpful in assessing the current proposals.

[Small Business in the NW]

What ever happened to the "challenge of the marketplace", and the "efficiency of capitalism". It is clear that corporate interests have taken control of the healthcare market, and through crony politicians locked out competition.

One would think the Chamber of Commerce would be screaming to reform a bloated and inefficient system, that spends more than double per person than it's "socialist" counterparts around the world. The great irony is in states and counties that spend more in the US, the results are actually worse. This system is broken. The healthcare Insurers have consolidated into four or five major players and enjoyed a 300% increase in profits.

Small business owners cannot afford this misallocation of capital and neither should the Chamber.

[Barbara Nelson]

For those who want real health care reform I recommend the following article - excerpted as follows:

The status quo in American health care is indefensible…What that calls for, however, is not more layers of regulation and complicated mandates…we need…a few simple rules.
[F}irst… Make all medical services, insurance and personal savings for such expenses exempt from all …income and payroll taxes…if we cannot afford medical care, we…cannot afford to pay taxes on the money we set aside for it.
[S]econd… Allow … tax deduction equal to double the value of the service for all charity care by medical care providers. At one time America had a vigorous network of private charity care … largely destroyed by the government barging in…
[T}hird… Pass legislation…that would give every individual or business the ability to purchase insurance in a national market …
{F}ourth… Allow … basic health insurance with high deductibles and low premiums…in conjunction with tax-free accounts for out-of-pocket expenses, such as deductibles…
[F]ifth… Broaden … Medicare Advantage, but allow for additional tax-deductible premiums to be paid by those seniors…
[S]ixth… Allow Medicare patients…Health Savings Accounts to pay for services from their Medicare physicians. This could bring thousands of doctors back into the Medicare program overnight…
[S]eventh… Limit non-economic or punitive damages in all malpractice or other litigation against medical providers…
The effect would be a reduction in the cost of medical care and insurance for everyone…these changes would result in more efficient, affordable and uncomplicated health care... uphold the rational alternative-freedom and personal choice-which can improve the quality and affordability of health care without government spending

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5175
Seven Simple Rules for Health Care Reform
by Richard E. Ralston (April 30, 2008)
Richard E. Ralston is Executive Director of Americans for Free Choice in Medicine.

Views expressed are author's and not necessarily CapMag's.

[Dotsconnectors]

Affordable Health Care – If Others Can… Why Can’t We?

T.R. Reid’s, most recent book, The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper and Fairer Health Care is a hard hitting follow-up to his Frontline documentary, Sick Around the World. Both beg the question: Affordable Health Care - If Others Can … Why Can’t We?

According to Sick Around the World, American’s consume 15.3% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on health care versus 11.6% for Switzerland, a highly capitalist nation which recently top the U. S. as the world’s most competitive country. This 3.7% gap is approximately 75% of what American consumers have spent in excess of their earnings over the last 10 years. If the reform opportunity was not squandered in 1994, but a public option was embraced like in Switzerland; Americans very well could have lived within their means over the last decade. The current critics of the public option use the same superstitious arguments, as their 1994 predecessors, to keep voters in a psychological “comfort zone”. Americans will remain prisoners of a dysfunctional health care system so long as voters allow themselves to remain prisoners of the anti-reformer’s status-quo thinking.

It’s the System, Stupid.

W. Edwards Deming is widely credited with improving U.S. armament production during World War II and best known for transforming Japan into an innovative high-quality producer and economic power. He taught that 85+% of a system’s problems are the responsibility of the system’s leaders, because only those in leadership positions have the authority to change the system. The foundation of his blueprint for “continual improvement” is that a system, to be effective, must have an aim that is communicated and understood by all stakeholders. The Deming Library Vol. 26 contrasts the health care aim of “eliminating illness and death" with the broader aim of “reducing the burden of illness”. The burden of illness holistically encompasses the physical, psychological, financial and quality of life issues. Over the last 40 years, how well has our health care system” reduced the burden of illness”?

Advocates of public option would do well to call anti-reformers to account for squandering the opportunity that the Swiss seized in 1994. With trust near an all-time low, both sides of the reform issue have a credibility challenge. Trust in advocates can be greatly enhanced by documentaries from highly regarded independent sources, like PBS. Since 2008, PBS has aired the following health care related documentaries that are highly supportive of the “Yes, We can” health care reform message:

Money-driven Medicine, Maggie Mahar, August 2009

Sick Around the World, T.R. Reid, April 2008

The aforementioned documentaries should be available to local PBS stations for rebroadcast, through December 2009. Anti-reformers and their special interest allies are spending tens of millions of dollars promoting Adam’s Smith’s 230+ years old ideology, that unbridled self-interest invisibly serves the common interest. Sick Around the World’s message is that the common interest is better served by the coordinated interaction of the stakeholders. Health care reformers can seize a golden opportunity, i.e. the rebroadcast of the aforementioned documentaries through the end of 2009 Emails, telephone calls and letters to local PBS stations, by viewers and PBS members, requesting their rebroadcast can more than counter the anti-reformer’s advertising. Contact information for your locate PBS station(s) can be obtained by visiting: PBS Station Finder and entering your zip code or state.

If the best defense is an offense, its time to challenge the anti-reformer’s credibility, on the following:

• Their complacency about America’s unaffordable, forth-rate health care system

• Their under-estimation of Americans’ creativity and ingenuity, to match and surpass the value-add health care achieved by other major capitalistic democracies

• Their special interest focus that runs counter to the common interest, especially the interest of middle-class Americans

• Their unwillingness to take responsible and account for the 1½ decades lost, by not addressing health care reform since 1994

No economic system is perfect. The value added health care that is enjoyed by citizens of numerous other capitalistic democracies hasn’t been matched by the United State’s 100% free markets system. The free market cheerleaders, who are unwilling and unable to defend the current system based on its merits, resort to the favorite tact of propagandists, namely, fear mongering to created the paranoia necessary to promote the resistance to change.

“No one has to change. Survival is optional.” --- W. Edwards Deming

[ChamberPost]

"Universal health care means that everyone recieves the best care possible regardless of social standing or personal wealth."

If you truly believe this Mr. Sprague please contact me immediately, I have a transaction of mutual benefits, which I would like to share with you. It involves a Nigerian business partner of mine who has a very huge amount of money (fifteen millions Pounds) which I like to acquire with your help and you will be compensated adequately upon your readiness to proceed with me. After the successful transaction, we shall share in ratio of 30% for you and 70% for me. There is no risk for you. (BP)

[Robert Sprague]

In a recent trip to the U.S., I had an opportunity to speak with a number of people about our(Canadian)health care system. I was amazed at the misinformation US citizens were recieving about our system. Universal health care means that everyone recieves the best care possible regardless of social standing or personal wealth. A profit based corporation does not determine how much health care I am to recieve or how much medical attention I am worth. In short if you get sick, you go to the hospital, you get well, you don't recieve a bill. No one in Canada wants to change this except the insurance companies who see people as profit centres rather than human beings.

[Jeff Davis]

One would have to be a lunatic to believe that the Government can provide health insurance more affordably and efficiently than the private sector. Common sense dictates that in order to do so there would have to be some degree of rationed care, and a decision making bureacracy that chooses who gets what kind of care. We would be idiots to give people we don't know or trust (ie; Washington politicians) the power to make life and death decisions for ourselves and our families. It's true there has to be affordability in health insurance, but not by giving the Government that much power over every aspect of our lives.

[Joleen]

I would suggest if the Chamber of Commerce has all the answers, that they go to Washington and present their case. Instead, you put out these negative adds and I feel you don't have an argument in your favor. Stop the negatives and get behind the people who are TRYING to make things better. I always had respect for your organization but you are close to the bottom on truthfulness. I think you should be asked to prove some of your statements in your adds.

[HOWARD]

As a small metal products manufacturing company we are constantly fighting for our survival. We have been successfully re-inventing ourselves for the past twenty years. We live lean manufacturing.But now I am worried.
We just received our medical insurance renewal. The increase is almost 20%. We don't know how we are going to deal with this increase. We have tried to streamline to keep from eliminating jobs and/or benefits but this is the last straw.
I am particularly upset because everyone over 45 years of age is getting "whacked' harder and harder every year. It's becoming a distinct competitive disadvantage to maintain older employees (I'm 60).
Something must be done about healthcare insurance. I came here to try to find out why the Chamber is so against it. I found no answers but there seems to be a definite pro insurance and Fox news influence.
Insurance costs for small businesses are costing jobs, growth and even survival.Our customers are asking for pricing concessions, speculation is pushing up metal commodity prices and health insurance needs 20% more.It seems that our only alternative is to let the employees fend for themselves..........being a decent employer puts you at a competitive disadvantage......this is not what I got in business for.
Why don't we start asking the right questions when we are polling. Do you like your present plan? yes. Could you pay for it on cobra if you lost your job or your employer couldn't afford to provide it? Of course not. The second part makes a big difference in the debate.
Must the future always be, may the cheapest company win.
I don't understand the Chambers' position. It makes no real business sense to me. The government would have to tax me a very, very great deal to make some type of public option look bad. I'm not a big pro government guy but when things are out of control we need to look to each other (sometimes in the form of gov't) for an answer.We all call the police when we're getting mugged. We don't do it all on our own. It's our health. It's our government. I'm sure we can get it right.

[Jennifer]

"Note 5 - Type "doctors" and "cash only" into Google or Lexis-Nexis to find countless reports on this phenomenon."

Now that is true research. As a physician, I am not necessarily in favor of national healthcare, but it is clear that reform is vital. As a small business,if my patients cannot obtain affordable insurance then I won't even have a business. This ad campaign is ridiculous and when I read supportive documentation suggesting that I "google" something to find support of the statement-your credibility went right out the window. SHAME ON THE US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. I am furious that I support three local chambers of commerce who are members of such a slanted organization.

[Melissa]

Apparently there are a lot of Obama supporters who saw the commercial and decided to post here. The comments regarding how successful the VA and Medicare are are laughable. We have a large VA Hospital and facilities locally and retired vets avoid them like the plague unless they are destitute since the care provided is substandard in their estimation. Medicare is losing money everyday. The Post Office is looking at shutting hours.

How will all of this be paid for since even the CBO has contradicted Obama's claim of no addition to the deficit? When asked if taxes will be increased to pay for this (beyond the claim of "wealthy only taxed)on a recent TV news program, David Axelrod stuttered a few times and then tried to change the subject. His non-answer said it all.

I suggest everyone read the Bill of Rights and Constitution to see what is "guaranteed" if you are a citizen. Won't find Healthcare there. Maybe the money wasted on Acorn can be used to pay for insurance for those unable. Just don't ask me to pay for your healthcare.

My husband and I have to pay for our own Healthcare insurance but it's better than being a slave to the government whim. God bless the Chamber for standing strong on this issue. It's the reason I joined.

[Andrew Sands]

Chamber of Commmerce is getting paid from insurance companies to run there propaganda campaign. We have proof. I have health insurance but groups are forming and if someone gets deathly ill I feel sorry for leaders that are against universal health care. These people will kill them before they go out. Eye for a eye.

[Bonnie Barron]

Looks to me that The Chamber of Commerce is completely wrong in every aspect to its oppostition to the current healthcare reform proposals. You are promoting lies and propaganda on every "point" in your misinformation. For example, stating that Obama's proposal for healthcare reform will affect small businesses negatively and mandate coverage. On the contrary, 95% of all small businesses would be exempt because they don't meet the size or narrow profit margin. It will actually allow more small businesses to afford competitive healthcare coverages for their employees through the insurance exchange so they SAVE money. You no longer represent the original mission of the Chamber of Commerce to small businesses in The United States. You are bought and paid for by politicians and global corporations especially the insurance companies like United Healthcare Corporation (for whom the Lewin Group consults!) What a pity! I'm glad my deceased father is not here to see what you have become ...he was so proud of being the president of the local Chamber of Commerce and of its support and development for the local small businesses, the foundation of this great country. You have sold America out and are so out of touch with the real American people. Shame on you!

[Jim Jones]

Realtors have to pay for our own health care and insurance. The rates are ridiculous (%1500 a month for a husband wife policy} It does appear to me that the decision makers at the Chamber of Commerce have Chamber paid health care and a "I,ve got mine, to heck with you" attitude. One sixth of the gross natioonal product now goes for health care dragging down every other part of the economy including every type of commerce one can think of.

"You lie" is the wrong answer for this problem and you will eventually be replaced by an organziation that represents its members and the American enconomy and citizens.

[Michael Dunn]

I have worked with our local Chamber of Commerce and have served on the visioning committee of the State Chamber. I believe in economic growth and free enterprise and have enjoyed these roles. But now I write to strongly object to the ad you are currently running on TV (CNN) against health care reform. It is dishonest, misleading, and dispicable. I strongly suspect that this does not represent your grass roots membership but is strongly influenced by contributions from the insurance industry. Please change your policy. I will not work with the regional chambers of commerce in the current circumstances.

[Robert]

I agree with many of the comments listed below. The Chamber has taken the low road on this issue. They are definitely part of the problem. The TV ads are insulting to all of our intelligence and do a disservice to the Americans they claim to be so concerned about. Particularly puzzling is how they can push such idiotic TV ads like that when there are plenty of nice intelligent people who work at the USCOC. I am disappointed in them.

[EP_VET]

The Chamber came out in opposition to all of the republican and democratic proposals. How does the Chamber expect this crisis to be solved?
The government runs the largest hospital system in the nation (VA) and has implemented electronic medical records so that specialists can see the medical history and test results and not have to repeat them. The government operates the largest health insurance system in the nation with Medicare and would have been able to negotiate reduced drug and procedure prices if congress had not specifically prohibited it.
I changed HMOs from George Washington to Kaiser and the best they could do with my medical record is to print and give me over 600 pages. I tried to give them to Kaiser and they asked "What do you expect me to do with this?" My medical life now begins in 2001 vs. 1947.
We have the infant mortality rate of a third world country, worse than Cuba and a tie with Slovenia? Also, 41 countries have better longevity than the US, including Jordan, the Caymen Islands and Guam. To top it off, our health care costs over twice as much as the NEXT highest country in the world.

[Steve Bucholz]

"may" "Possibly" "Likely" "outside sources" The Lewin Group?!!!! You have the core issues right but it simply makes sense that the businesses you are representing would be better served if nothing changed in the health care arena. Your mission is in the advocacy of business and in the matter of health care, this position is diametricly opposede to the long term welfare of the citizens you are pretending to champion.

[Bonney Ginett]

Dear Chamber of Commerce:
With all due respect: NO NO NO NO! I am a former small business owner who could never get either myself or my 4 person staff covered. Your organization is relentless in it's opposition to universal health care. I notice that the White House stopped talking about a single payer option, a Medicare for all option; next the media stopped talking about it too. Now, even the most watered down public option is under fire. Why is Olympia Snowe going to make my health care policy when the vast millions of people without insurance need it now? Why are people like so-called Democrat Max Baucus and other "conservative" dems, holding up the whole process, when every other committee has excellent bills?I'm really mad as hell, and I don't have much recourse except to write letters while I'm still healthy enough to do so. I speak from a personal level: I have heart arrythmia for the past 6 years, haven't had health insurance for 12 years, can't qualify for Medicaid because I still live in a decent apartment, can't qualify for Medicare because I'm only 54, and the only health care I get is going to the ER when I have chest pains. Oh, and I forgot to mention, I ration my heart meds, which leads to stress, which is not good for the heart. THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. Health is not something to be bargained away. Every day that goes by without Medicare for all is another day that someone will die or get sick and go to the ER. And who pays for that? That ought to be your focus, since you are all for long term savings; instead you scream about universal health care costing too much. Medicare, which is what each and every citizen will be eligible for, is a government run program. Everyone likes it. End of story. I have an older sister who has breast cancer, has health insurance, and who is spending all her free time between chemotherapy fighting her insurance company. She has to be a lawyer first and a patient last. She also had to find and pay for a very expensive cancer drug from Canada because of the prohibitive cost here. These are the true stories of actual people, not the well insured people in Congress, none of whom have to worry, and all of whom have a very good GOVERNMENT run health care plan.It would be a terrible shame to weaken something so important, which is in fact, literally a life and death matter.
Sincerely, Bonney Ginett

[EMT]

It's my opinion that you are traders to your country. You have sold out to Insurance companies, HMO's and other big businesses that are afraid of loosing their blood money. Your commercials give half-truth republican scare tactics laced with unsubstantiated claims and known outright lies. You sell out the American People for a buck, knowing it will mean many will die without help. I will pass out a list of all your members/supporters to every blog I can and run it on twitter so everyone will know the businesses that support death for dollars instead of health for our nation. We need grassroots support for the health bill. I will aim at starting a grassroot boycott of all your supporters products, shows you sponsor, and magazines you advertise in. Freedom of Speech runs both ways ; >

[Emily]

There is a plan out there that could solve America's health care crisis it is called the F.A.I.R Health Plan (how appropriate), check it out for yourself www.fairhealthplan.org

[Alan D]

The Chamber's TV ads really offend me. Rather than clarify a critical issue they play on the ignorance so many of Americans suffer and unfairly caricature conscientious members of congress as sleazy fly-by-night wheeler-dealers. Congressional advocates of reform have been the most honest participants in this debate.

I must suspect that the Chamber is being wholly disingenuous in applying the focus group proven slogan "slow down, reform health care the right way." There is noting in what they publish that indicates that they are looking for a fair hearing, rather they just want to preserve the failed status quo.

[Alan D]

I find the US Chamber of Commerce TV ads and this summary of the issues to be extremely biased and completely unbecoming of any organization that strives for the public's respect.

Just look at your language "outside estimates say that a new government-run public option may eventually..." On this basis you conclude that a public option will result in a government take-over? It looks like demagoguery, paranoia and self-serving to me. Please reconsider your members interests taking into account the costs for small employers to provide health insurance in the present marketplace and the consequences of personal bankruptcies caused by heath care costs of uninsured and underinsured people.

[Maurice]

I have seen your sponsored ads for health care reform several times, each time trying to detect in them some semblance of a rational attempt at discussing this vital issue on merit...don't see it...not even close. It is disappointing, and somewhat saddening (though not really surprising considering your financing), to see your organization reduced to this. At least do more than the Republicans in congress have done...if you disagree with the merits of the plan, offer an alternative. Health care costs are out of control...we all will pay for them, one way or another. Enough with the irresponsible lies, please...too much to ask?

[Dan]

It's refreshing to see the Chamber make the logical decision to reject H.R. 3200. It's common sense for business as it is for individuals. Why break a system for 100% of the public when the problem affects roughly 10%? Government BROKE the system, can't run Medicare, Medicaid or the VA properly and now we want to reward them for their failures? NO!!! It's laughable to think there are those that believe they will end up keeping their current care and not end up with government care in the end. What choice will you have then? None. This truly is about keeping our freedom and liberty by rejecting such government intrusion, rationed and poor quality care in H.R. 3200. If we don't now, we may get stuck with the likes of Cuban care with bed sores and black market toilet paper. The advocates for such demonstrative health care plans give no thought to the unintended consequences or unfunded mandates this would cause. Why even Princess Diana had to wait over 1 1/2 hours before being allowed into the hospital following her crash because of the 'uniform' care where nothing is treated according to levels of urgency. Does anyone think she may have had a chance in our so-called 'poor' system if she were admitted immediately upon reaching the hospital? Of course she would.

[Lori Grant]

Disappointed that the chamber of commerce has taken a stand against what is good for everyone. Universal healthcare cost so obviously will bring costs down OR why else would big business and the insurance industries be against it. USUALLY you can tell what a piece of legislation will do or won't do by noting who is for it and who is against it. Never has that be truer than on this issue.

As a small business owner, I cannot afford to provide to insurance to my employees, and of my 10 employees the only ones who have insurance are the ones who have it thru their spouses employers. Universal healthcare would be such a benefit to small businesses. I have had good people who wanted to work for me cause we treat our employees with respect and pay well but they couldn't work somewhere that didn't offer the benefit of health insurance. They PREFERRED working in a small business where they are treated like an individual instead of a number. What I see in the passage of universal healthcare is a lot of people who will change employers once that "carrot" is taken away from the big guys. The Chamber should wholeheartedly indorse universal healthcare with the government option as it will help small business, and it will make big business a little more flexible or they bleed employees who are looking for greener pastures, or better yet they leave the big corporations to start their own businesses.

That is the outcome I see in universal healthcare, freedom and choice and liberty.

[tl]

Thank you for standing against HR 3200. This bill will kill small businesses. I am amazed by many of the comments posted saying otherwise.These are obviously not comments made by business owners with employees. We have the best medical care in the world and congress needs to keep their hands out of it. Let doctors take care of us, not government! Keep standing firm.

[Kurt J Gary]

I have a small business and I find your analysis counter productive to solutions to the health care crisis. You are effectively defenders of the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. We as a country spend more on health care and get worse results. This is not opinion-it is verifiable fact.A government option may not be the answer, but the answer is not going to come from the insurance industry.

[David Z]

Mr. Gelfand:

Thank you for this opinion piece. Although I do not agree with your analysis completely, it did make me think. I am very particularly grateful for the link to HR 3200 - which I am reading.

I do think that citing George Will's opinion column is not the same as citing the Washington Post. The latter implies a news item supported by reliable sources following the rules of journalism - not just an opinion piece. Similarly, citing the Lewin Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of United Healthcare is not really an independent review source. Finally, the section on keeping ones current insurance implies that this will not be possible after 5 years. It will, so long as the policy meets the minimum standards of the defined standard policy. If it is a sub-par policy, relative to the standard policy, why should it be exempted? To exempt a sub-par policy opens up the can of worms we now have - different policies, debates and negotiations about what is and is not covered, administrative costs to adjudicate these controversies, different sets of forms to fill to make a claim etc., That is just waste.

Unlike the Canadian system, it is my understanding that under HR 3200 one can purchase additional insurance, to cover services above the standard plan. So there is clearly room for private insurance. Given the budgetary limitations this plan is constrained by, I expect the private standard + plans will flourish.

Again, thanks for your stimulating presentation. DZ

[sue kaveny]

I have decided not to be a member of the Chamber of Commerce anymore. It is clear to me that you don't care if I die from lack of preventative medicine that I can't afford and my current employer based insurance won't pay for, like regular cancer screening. I am ashamed for you.