States are in the way of national health care

by YankeeJim | March 1, 2011 at 03:54 am
59 views | 0 Recommendations | 0 comments

Photos

Federalist

Federalist

see larger image

uploaded by YankeeJim

View from a Federalist

The system of having states administer health care in some trickle down distribution system is wasteful and disruptive. A national system should comprise: 1) a Federal healthcare bank account, 2) a system of means testing, 3) contracting with private health care providers. Cut out the states as a middle administrator. When the laws and regulations are properly engineered, the system should work smoothly with the federal government providing quality assurance checks and checking for insurer and provider abuses.

“Obama offers states more flexibility in health-care law

By Amy Goldstein and Dan Balz

Washington Post Staff Writers 
Tuesday, March 1, 2011; 12:29 AM

President Obama sought to defuse criticism of the new health-care overhaul Monday by saying he is willing to give states an earlier opportunity to opt out of certain key requirements - but only if they can find their own ways to accomplish the law's goals.

The announcement was met with skepticism by many Republican governors who said they need to learn more about the details.

If Congress approves the plan, states could gain exemption by 2014 rather than 2017 from some central and controversial elements of the law: that most Americans carry health insurance, that many employers offer their workers coverage, and that states create insurance marketplaces to help individuals and small businesses buy health plans that meet federal rules.

To win that freedom, though, Obama reminded the governors at a White House meeting that states would have to prove to federal officials that they could still achieve the law's objectives. Specifically, they would need to demonstrate that insurance benefits would be as affordable and as comprehensive, that the same number of residents would gain coverage, and that the alternate approach would not deepen the federal deficit.

With a majority of states trying to overturn the law in the federal courts and Republican governors complaining that it gives federal regulators too heavy a hand, the president sought to move the debate onto new ground by forcing the law's critics to prove that their vision for the nation's health-care system could work.

"Many of these states contend they can do more with less if they get the flexibility to be more creative," said Drew Altman, president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health policy group. "This puts the onus back on them and calls that into question."

In taking this new tack, the White House is endorsing a proposal introduced late last year by a bipartisan trio of senators. The bill, sponsored by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.), would accelerate a provision in the law that would allow states to ask federal health officials for "innovation waivers" starting in 2017 that would free them to devise ways to improve health care. The legislation would move up the date to 2014.

The change in timing is significant, because 2014 is when the provisions in question are to go into effect, so states could - in theory, at least - get permission early enough to avoid the requirements.

"I think that's a reasonable proposal. I support it," Obama told the governors who convened at the White House on Monday as part of the National Governors Association's semi-annual meetings. "It will give you more flexibility more quickly, while still guaranteeing the American people reform. If your state can create a plan that covers as many people as affordably and comprehensively as the Affordable Care Actdoes - without increasing the deficit - you can implement that plan. And we'll work with you to do it."

Although the president has endorsed the idea, Congress would still have to approve the change for states to get relief by 2014. If it did, Health and Human Services officials would then need to write rules defining specifically how states could meet criteria for a waiver.

The immediate reaction - among the governors and on Capitol Hill - was mixed.

The governors said Obama's willingness to release them earlier from some of the law's requirements was welcome. But most stopped short of embracing the idea fully, with Republicans sounding especially wary.

"A number of our fellow governors would be very interested in supporting this," said Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire (D), the NGA's chairman. "We need to talk to them to see if we can put our support behind that bill as the National Governors Association."

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, who opposed the health-care legislation as a member of the Senate, said Obama's proposal doesn't negate what he and other Republicans consider a fatally flawed law that they will continue to challenge in the courts. "This offers a little bit of flexibility, which I think is a positive thing," he said, "but it doesn't change the overall objection to the bill."

Other Republicans were equally cautious. "The devil's in the details," said Mississippi Gov.Haley BarbourSen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah) called Obama's new timetable a "gimmick" that would not provide genuine relief.”

Advertisement

Comments (0)

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

NowPublic on Facebook

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

These members have powered this story:

Related Stories

 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from