If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. BTW I have some beach property
By debrakcarey
@debrakcarey (19887)
United States
August 31, 2009 1:17am CST
Marion Edwyn Harrison, Esq.
One ordinarily would not rely upon a partisan political statement for factual information. However, the Republican Study Committee has a high accuracy level, as manifested in its public releases. Its most recent release, posted yesterday, deals with one aspect of the highly controversial health-care proposal espoused by President Barack H. Obama. By more than sheer coincidence, the Committee Chairman is a knowledgeable M.D., Representative Tom Price, of Georgia. The statements in the press release independently can be verified.
Cleverly avoiding the highly arguable view that the legislation is an attempt at socialized medicine, the President a number of times has stated that anyone who likes his present medical plan could retain it were the sweeping new Federal legislation enacted into law. In a recent New Hampshire presentation the President stated that “. . . if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. If you like your health-care plan you can keep your health-care plan . . . .”
Provisions of the pending legislation if enacted into law would implement the reverse. Some examples:
1.Within five years of enactment of the law all health-care plans would be required to comply with a Federal statutory definition of qualified. H.R. 3200, Section 102(b).
2.Health-care savings accounts, as they commonly are termed, would not qualify. Section 122(c)(3).
3.Any change in an employer-provided plan or substitution of one plan for another within the ensuing five years would require Federal bureaucratic approval.
4.Change in the terms of a plan by the insurance company providing the plan would require Federal approval.
5.An employer would have the option to switch an employee to the Federal Government plan if the cost to the employer would be less.
There also is reasonable conjecture that the Feds in due course would dominate the formerly commercial insurance market. So much for one’s private insurance plan.
It is no wonder that so many town meetings and other gatherings during the August Congressional recess have attracted such a large quantum of antagonized people. While the shouting, screaming and other abuses of decorum and civility are unfortunate, the level of opposition is significant and the proponents of Federal usurpation should have anticipated vibrant opposition. Most pundits now are predicting the 111th Congress will enact either nothing or some so-called “co-op” version of the pending legislation. The latter may be almost as socialistic as the basic scheme.
Marion Edwyn Harrison is President of, and Counsel to, the Free Congress Foundation.
http://www.alainsnewsletter.com/read/401/politics/misrepresentation-of-one-of-numerous-risks-in-the-healthcare-reform-legislation/
1 response
@SomeCowgirl (32189)
• United States
1 Sep 09
In effect, it makes me think, that those who are employed to an employer who (if this law is passed) may choose to go the cheaper route, would (the employee that is) be forced in no uncertain terms, to stay with said corporation if in fact they would wish to keep their benefits.
Socialism? Most definitely.


