SOTU: ObamneyCare© MIA

Careful listeners might be forgiven if they missed the 44 words covering his signature legislative "victory" in President Obama's most recent State of the Union address. That's correct, 44 words in a speech which, oddly enough, barely qualified as Smarter than an 8th Grader.

Now why would the President elide over his stellar accomplishment?

Well, the fact that 44% of the public disapproves of it (versus 37% who think it's just Jim Dandy). The most hated part? Well, that remains the (Evil) Individual Mandate, which 54% believe (correctly) is unconstitutional.

Which is not to say that the Republicans should rest easy, either. In his rebuttal, Hoosier Gov Mitch Daniels gave the subject short shrift, as well. As Bob pointed out yesterday, the Republicans' plan is not exactly a barn-burner, either.

Still, one is left to wonder why the President was so uncharacteristically modest about the bill we had to pass to learn what's in it.

$howing us the money

Take a gander at this:

Put together by the folks at research biggie RAND Corporation, it "provides a graphical look at how accelerating health care costs have gobbled up the income gains made by American families over the past decade."

There's no question that the cost of health care, both its delivery and the financing thereof, has become an ever-increasing burden on the consumer. Although it's not the primary cause of the problem, ObamneyCare© has certainly exacerbated it, by decreasing consumers' "skin in the game" and choices, and increasing the cost of both health care (scarcity) and health insurance.

Americans are not stupid: they can see the disconnect every time they look at their pay stub or pay their insurance bill, or write a check at the doctor's office. Would that Washington actually understood this.

And couple that with this little tidbit:

"Just 1% of Americans accounted for 22% of health care costs in 2009"

Make of that what you will...

[Hat Tip: Warren Robak]

RepubliCare

We have Obamacare. The law no one bothered to read before voting on it (and many still haven't read it).

In spite of the fact it was never really embraced by the public and their disdain for the law continues to grow with each passing day, apparently we are stuck with this fiasco . . . at least for a while.

Comes now the Republican party that wants to replace Obamneycare with a monster of their own. For some reason, I doubt it will be a new, improved version.

The folks at The Hill wanted to let us know about this little gem.

Republicans have made good on their promise to try to repeal Obama’s healthcare law, but the “replace” part of their “repeal and replace” strategy has proved more difficult. Pitts said Republicans will be ready for the opening a Supreme Court ruling will provide — no matter what the justices decide.

If the court strikes down the law’s individual mandate, or the entire law, the GOP can present its plan as an alternative. If the court upholds the mandate, renewed attention to the issue could still give Republicans an election-season opening to argue that they have a concrete agenda on healthcare

.

It seems the Keystone Cops in the Republican party want to have SOMETHING to fill the void if the law is repealed even if that something is still flawed.

One positive thing (in my opinion) is the current practice of medically underwriting would be preserved under the Republican plan. Their solution is to allow "state based" risk pools where the sickest would go for insurance and have their premiums subsidized by taxpayers.

I don't have a problem with that per se, but about 40 states already have that in place in the form of risk pools or "guaranteed issue".

In other words, the "you can no longer be discriminated against by insurance carriers" under Obamneycrap was always a bit of a red herring any way. Most folks with pre-existing conditions have multiple options for securing health insurance if they really wanted it.

Along these lines, PCIP was one provision of Obamneycrap that I actually thought was a good idea, but one that was poorly implemented.

Georgia does not have a risk pool meaning some folks were disenfranchised from the system when they needed it more. We now have PCIP, federal edition, thanks to Obamneycrap.

All in all it isn't a bad plan and is priced right considering the benefit levels and "no underwriting" approach. However, it has not been well received because it isn't free.

Of course Obamneycrap isn't free either.

the committee will also send a bill to the floor this spring to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board, an expert panel tasked with cutting Medicare payments to doctors. Energy and Commerce could also renew its push to roll back a piece of the new law that prohibits states from cutting their Medicaid eligibility until 2014, when Medicaid is set to expand.

A hit and a miss here.

The IPAB, AKA "death panels" is a bad idea all around and should be eliminated. Why should we allow folks in DC to decide how our doctor should treat us?

Medicaid is already a massive hole in state budgets. Obamneycrap is only going to make it worse. States are attempting to salvage Medicaid by tightening the qualification rules.

I have no problem with that.

While I applaud the Republicans for doing something, the bottom line for me is, tell DC to keep their mitts off my health care. Washington does not have to micromanage every aspect of my life.

If I want to use 5 gallons every time I flush and burn 100 watt incandescent bulbs I will. It is my money and I will spend it the way I see fit.

Small Biz: RIP

As we've previously noted, one of the major victims of ObamneyCare© is "small business." Aside from affordability issues, there's the very real problem of uncertainty. That is, if would-be employers can't make at least an educated guess about the future of their business, they're going to be very reluctant to even consider new hires.

But don't just take our word for it:

"A new poll from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce reveals an increasingly frustrated small business community worried about the impact [ObamneyCare©] may have on their bottom line.

Nearly three-quarters ... say the new law is causing an impediment to job creation."

But why is that?

It's pretty simple, really:

"[Owners of small businesses] look at this bill as more of a tax bill wrapped up and packaged as a health care reform bill ...It really puts most of the cost and burden on small business owners."

Indeed.

La plus ca change...

Thanks to FoIB Holly R, we learn that the bill we had to pass to learn what's in it has accomplished, well, see for yourself:

In point of fact, the overall rate of uninsured has been increasing despite [ed: more likely, because of] ObamneyCare©.

Feel better now?

Cavalcade of Risk #149: You'll need a #2 pencil...

Nothwithstanding offers a unique, indeed unprecedented, version of the Cavalcade of Risk: a test. For each entry, you'll be asked a question, and offered a set of possible answers. Go ahead, give it a go!

[High scores win a coveted one-year subscription to the CoR Newsletter. If and/or when we ever decide to do one]

GrandRounds Today

Grand Rounds makes its MSM debut today, as FoIB Dr Val Jones hosts the premier roundup of medblog posts at USAToday. It's an ambitious project: dozens of entries in 4 separate posts.

Whew!

Kudos to Dr Val for putting this together, and for the opportunity to reach a larger audience.

High and Dry with the MVNHS©

Hungry? Thirsty? Best not count on the Much Vaunted National Health System to bail you out:

"Four patients are dying hungry and thirsty on hospital wards every day ... 1,316 deaths were linked to or directly caused by dehydration and malnutrition in 2010."

This is of a piece with a post Bob wrote earlier this month:

"We need to get the basics right. Patients need to get the food and drink they need."

The scariest part of this is that the Brits' health system is one of the primary models on which our own ObamneyCare© is based. Why is this scary?

Well, let's let the chief executive of the Patients Association, Katherine Murphy, explain:

"These figures are a terrible indictment of our precious National Health Service."

Coming soon to a hospital near you...

Obamacare Techno Version

One of the little discussed aspects of Obamneycare is the loss of personal service. Insurance agents: Love them or hate them, agents perform a service in helping the consumer navigate their options, help them find a plan that suits their needs and budget and advise them of potential pitfalls of one plan vs. another.

Agents also save you from the morass of home office non-service and the dreaded "Press 1 for English".

Home office staff costs money. Salaries, overhead, benefits all have a cost. Home office staff is paid regardless of whether they are productive or not. Even worse, the answers they provide don't even have to be accurate or helpful.

By contrast, agents are not compensated until after you make a purchase and are satisfied.

But all that is about to change.

Come 2014 "Exchanges" will be where many American's buy insurance. You will be encouraged to go online or call an 800 number and pick a plan. You will discuss your needs with salaried navigators that are unlicensed and unregulated.

This is something like PCIP, only bigger.

PCIP, the health insurance program for those with pre-existing medical conditions, was supposed to capture 4 million uninsured citizens in the first two years.

So far fewer than 30,000 have signed up, many states have run out of money and states like California will put you on a waiting list if you call.

And the Exchange is supposed to serve over 200 million people.

Maybe it is just me, but I sense a problem brewing.

Meth Burns Sinking Hospitals

Uncompensated care is a major problem for hospitals. Burn units are closing due to an overwhelming number of burn injuries caused by "cooking" methamphetamine.

An Associated Press survey of key hospitals in the nation's most active meth states showed that up to a third of patients in some burn units were hurt while making meth, and most were uninsured. The average treatment costs $6,000 per day. And the average meth patient's hospital stay costs $130,000 — 60 percent more than other burn patients, according to a study by doctors at a burn center in Kalamazoo, Mich.

Uncompensated care leads to higher health care costs which creates higher health insurance premiums.

Slippery Slope?

Building on Bob's post from yesterday, reporting that health insurance policies will now have to offer first-dollar coverage for birth control, we learn that the MVNHS© (upon which Obamneycare© is based), has a glimpse of the next step:

"Six children in Britain will be given jabs to delay the puberty on the NHS because they are convinced they were born the wrong sex... It will also make any sex-change operation far easier should they decide to permanently swap gender."

This will come as no surprise to regular IB readers:

"The number of sex change operations carried out on the NHS has almost tripled in the last eight years."

As with IVF, neither birth control nor sex-change procedures are medically necessary, but (as we've pointed out again and again), all of these mandated "benefits" add to the cost of health insurance.

But hey, they're "free," right?

Higher Health Insurance Premiums

Santa Claus is coming to town. It is Christmas in August and all the good (and bad) girls are going to get free contraceptives.

Obama want's to be re-elected and he is handing out freebies like it is going out of style.

Of course it isn't his money, so why worry?

Most healthcare plans will be required to cover birth control without charging co-pays or deductibles starting Aug. 1, the Obama administration announced Friday.

The final regulation retains the approach federal health officials proposed last summer, despite the deluge of complaints from religious groups and congressional Republicans that has poured in since then. Churches, synagogues and other houses of worship are exempt from the requirement, but religious-affiliated hospitals and universities only get a one-year delay and must comply by Aug. 1, 2013.

“This decision was made after very careful consideration, including the important concerns some have raised about religious liberty,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement. “I believe this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services."

So what't the issue?

It isn't free.

The drug companies won't be giving away the prescriptions, some costing $150/month, so where does the money come from?

Health insurance premiums . . .

Isn't Obamneycrap wonderful?