Los Angeles, CA - Dr. Gideon H. Lowe, III, MD, FACS, who is a Board Member of the Americanism Education League and a practicing opththamalmologist, recently spoke to the League's Board of Directors' meeting held in the Jonathan Club in downtown Los Angeles on the most pressing national issue of the day - Obamacare. 

As a member of the Los Angeles County Medical Association's (LACMA) "Ad Hoc Committee" on healthcare, Dr. Lowe helped analyze proposed health care legislation now found in HR 3200, which bill is largely mirrored in the so-called Pelosi version.  The senate version - called the "Baucus Bill' and the Pelosi version are collectively known nationwide as "Obamacare". 

Dr. Lowe presented a summary version of the LACMA Ad Hoc Committee's analysis of the Obamacare bill, entitled the "Report of the LACMA Healthcare Ad-Hoc Committee", which can be downloaded by clicking the link, below.

Nationally, Republicans have argued against Obamacare because of the government control it would give over every facet of healthcare - a result that will certainly stifle competition, act as a chilling factor to medical innovation and, like all government programs in the history of the United States, certainly end up costing trillions more than the administration claims. 

Republicans also cite that every state has a different set of rules for healthcare insurance companies that, collectively, act as a barrier to competition and are in many cases highly protective of health insurance companies.  Instead of forging a new government monopoly that have never worked efficiently before (for example, our Post Office), Republicans argue that healthcare is now a matter of national importance and, thus, it should be subject to national control.  Thus, state laws impeding interstate competition between the 1,300 health insurance companies located in the United States must be removed and competition between them allowed.  Both the Republicans and the Democrats are clearly responsible for the current national mish-mash of state anti-competitive laws but now that health costs are consuming such a great part of our nationwide budget, it is time to get over politics and back to caring about what is in the best interest of the country as a whole.

Mr. Obama has rejected "Interstate Competition" of health insurance companies out-of-hand because, apparently, his fear that this competition would result in costs so much lower than proposed in Obamacare that, ultimately, nationalized medicine would eventually disappear. 

One such proposal for nationwide competition comes from Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty who recently invited the other 49 governors to join him in creating an “Interstate Health Insurance Compact” that would make it easier for consumers to purchase insurance across state lines, thus increasing competition and choice.

“Health insurance is an area that would benefit from a consistent set of standards to enable true market competition to flourish nationally,” Pawlenty wrote in a letter to fellow governors. “Those standards should be informed by the collective wisdom of those closest to consumers — states and their insurance regulators.

“Our citizens will benefit from more robust competition, leading to increased choices and better values.”

Turning now to Dr. Lowe's speech before the League's Board Meeting, following is a summary of his speech (in italics):

Throughout his campaign, and even in to the first few months in office, President Barack Obama repeatedly promised the American people that his healthcare plan would reduce their health insurance premiums by $2,5100 a year.

He has made twin promises of extending coverage to millions of uninsured Americans while also curbing health-care costs.

The Senate Finance Committee bill written by Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) (the Baucus bill) first drives up the cost of health insurance for all Americans and then forces everyone to buy it or face tax penalties or jail time.

It is a 10-year, $829 billion piece of legislation. While the Baucus bill does cap out-of-pocket costs based on a person's income, the effect on American families is still staggering.  According to the Center for Data Analysis, the Baucus bill would:

• For individuals making $34,140 (three times the Federal Poverty Level) the Baucus health care proposal could mandate up to $4,097 in annual premiums, sum which could have been spent on over nine months of food, almost four months of housing or well over a year of utilities.
•  
• For a family of four making $69,480 (300°/0 above poverty) the Baucus bill mandates annual health insurance premiums of $8,338, which would be worth the equivalent of over ten months of food, four months of housing or almost two years of utilities.
•  
• For individuals earning $45,520(400% above poverty) Baucus mandates $5,462 for health insurance, or over a year of food, four months of rent or a year and a half of utilities.
•  
• For families earning $92,640 (400% above poverty) Baucus mandates $1 1,117 in health premiums, the equivalent of over a year of food, five months of housing or two years of utilities.
•  
• And those numbers include the subsidies for health insurance in the Baucus bill.
•  

To pay for all this new health care spending, plus the massive expansion of Medicaid, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Baucus bill will collect $4 billion in fines from those who do not purchase insurance, $200 billion taxing health insurance companies with generous health plans, and $25 billion in taxes on employers. Not to mention the billions in cuts to Medicare payments to hospitals this will result in significant cost shifting to consumers.

PricewaterhouseCoopers has done a study on what all these new taxes and regulations will do to Americans health insurance premiums and the results are not pretty.

Instead of reducing the average family's health insurance premiums by $2,500 per year, as President Obama promised, the Baucus bill would actually raise them by $4,000 more than they would have been without reform.

The Baucus bill spends at least $1 trillion, fails to cover all Americans, taxes employers for creating jobs, and inflicts higher out-of-pocket health care costs on all Americans.

Comments from all readers are invited and the RMC PAC is hoping for a lively and spirited discussion of both Obamacare and the Interstate Competition options.