Healthcare Reform?

Is action always better than inaction? Is movement for movement sake valuable? The answer to both questions is emphatically NO! During the contentious healthcare reform debate Democrat after Democrat claimed that “inaction is not an option” and that “anything is better than nothing.” While these clichés and bits of rhetoric might work well with their political base it seems impossible to deny that their action is nothing more than a political notch on the post of Barack Obama. Legislatures claim that the bill will bring millions of uninsured under coverage, drive down healthcare costs, and reform a broken system; however, common sense disagrees.

 Instead of addressing legitimate issues that need reform in the healthcare sector this bill allows the federal government to usurp liberty and prosperity from millions of Americans, while continuing to spend America off an economic cliff. This bill is supposedly going to be funded in three basic ways. First, new taxes will be imposed on those making $200,000 or more. Secondly, new taxes will be imposed on health insurance companies, and finally, taxes will be levied against the -creators of life-saving healthcare equipment. These revenue streams for the government again border on the insane. During an economic recession and with individuals, businesses of every size, and state and local government struggle to make ends meet Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama have decided to again take more money from the job creating class. Although increasing taxes on wealthy Americans is easy, it takes more discretionary income out of the system which could be reinvested in economic expansion. The increased taxes on healthcare companies is short-sighted because like every business, increased taxes are an increased cost of doing business and usually result in the consumer seeing the cost passed along to them. Another problem is that this healthcare bill has put new requirements on the insurance companies such as: forcing them to treat people with pre-existing conditions, forcing them to allow dependents to stay on the parents insurance until the age of 26, and finally requiring them to provide preventative treatments at no cost. These new requirements are unfunded mandates on private companies who rationally will have to either increase fees, decrease benefits or both to fund the cost influx.  The increased tax on creators of health equipment again is idiotic at best, taking more taxes from those who are innovating and attempting to keep American’s healthcare technology and equipment at the forefront. They should not be harassed with higher taxes which inhibit expansion, growth and continued innovation.

 Even with these new taxes, those in power know that this bill will lead to sky-rocketing costs for both the federal government and in the cost of healthcare. In fact, the federal government will be collecting taxes to fund the law; however, the real crux of the new law doesn’t take effect for almost four full years. This political slide of hand still does not meet the financial burden as the CBO estimates that the law will increase our nation’s deficit by $940 billion dollars over 10 years.  Much of the governmental costs will be in the form of subsidies to those who cannot afford healthcare. It is an economic imperative that people are going to be more apt to use a service they do not have to help pay for, which will again drive the cost of healthcare up. The ineffective, inefficient, and burdensome federal government’s track record is anything but reassuring as they, in the name of good intentions, continue to weaken our economy stability and prospects for growth. It only seems logical that a government that takes a step back, spends less, and allows citizens to keep more of what they make will be more successful. The more individuals are able to keep the more they can efficiently reinvest in their communities, local businesses, entrepreneurial endeavors, all without the costly administrative costs of the government. Many entrepreneurs and business owners will tell you that a changing business environment requires adaptation, but that they can adjust to the changing needs of consumers; however,  what really worries them is the often times irrational governmental burdens which  are forced upon them and hinders their ability to be flexible, lean, and continue to expand or innovative in their field. When a government starts to hinder the success of those people they are entrusted to serve it is time for a recall of all the legislatures who failed to make any positive contribution beyond pleasing the President. It is unfortunate that the President decided that his personal accomplishments should be given precedent over the millions of Americans who are now burdened by the governments’ sporadic movement for movements’ sake.