In other Indiana news, Gov. Mitch Daniels takes to the pages of the Wall Street Journal to lay out how the states could enact genuinely helpful heath-care reform if Obamacare is neither repealed nor ruled unconstitutional.
Lest anyone suggest this line of thinking represents an acquiescence to the permanence of Obamacare, Daniels makes his views on the law pretty clear:
Unless you’re in favor of a fully nationalized health-care system, the president’s health-care reform law is a massive mistake. It will amplify all the big drivers of overconsumption and excessive pricing: “Why not, it’s free?” reimbursement; “The more I do, the more I get” provider payment; and all the defensive medicine the trial bar’s ingenuity can generate.
All claims made for it were false. It will add trillions to the federal deficit. It will lead to a de facto government takeover of health care faster than most people realize, and as millions of Americans are added to the Medicaid rolls and millions more employees (including, watch for this, workers of bankrupt state governments) are dumped into the new exchanges.
Daniels’s list of fixes includes state flexibility to decide which insurers can operate in their state, the waiving of benefit mandates, removal of portions that discriminate against health savings plans, state freedom to use new approaches to Medicare, independent audits of reimbursement rates, and more realistic projections of how many Americans will end up in state-operated “exchanges.” He has written to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius with this proposal, and 20 other states have joined Indiana in signing the same letter.
So, rather than let people freely decide the kind of health insurance they want, the status quo before ObamaCare in states with decent health care regulation, we are now to accept reforms that are an improvement because the state, rather than the federal government, gets to dictate care?
Maybe we should hold the applause.
And why should states have the freedom to use new approaches to Medicare? Is that a misprint that should be replaced with Medicaid?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy does Mitch think that repealing Obamacare would be a "miracle"?
Does Daniels think that repeal of Obamacare would be a miracle because he thinks a Republican is unlikley to win the White House in 2012? Does he think Republicans would be unwilling to repeal ObamaCare if Americans entrust the GOP with opportunity to do so?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI thought it said Medicaid. States have zip to do with Medicare.
The ruling in Florida gave Mitch a chance to actually play Chicken. Just ignore it.
Even if ultimately reinstated, the feds will not be in position to act unless the states are. Even the 2014 deadline won't be met.
I would like to see more coordination with the Wisconsin AG - ignore the law since it has been invalidated. If 26 states or so stopped work, the feds would have to appeal the ruling and ask for an order reinstating the Act. They won't get it through the 11th Circuit (I think that is Florida's number) so it will expedite the SC ruling.
Be bold!
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse