ICYMI: If Uncle Sam becomes your doctor

Health Care Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. Why do you oppose the current health care bill (H.R. 3962) being considered by the House?

I support health care reform. However, what the House Democrats are proposing goes far beyond fixing the problems we all know need to be addressed. That is why the bill lacks bipartisan support. In fact, there is bipartisan opposition to the House Democrats’ government take-over.

Here are five reasons why I oppose the bill:

Health care costs will go up for the government and everyone else, not down as the president promised.

As many as two out of three Americans will lose their current health coverage and be forced into the government-run plan.

Raising taxes on small businesses is the wrong solution.

The new government-run plan will lead to fewer choices and health care rationing.

The current health care proposal raises taxes on working Americans.

2. What did Republicans do to reform health care when they were in charge?

Republicans passed several bills that were signed into law when they were in the majority in Congress:

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and Tax Incentives for Health Care Coverage

Republicans passed several proposals to make health care more affordable. We expanded tax incentives to purchase affordable health coverage, including the creation of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). More than 8 million people are enrolled in an HSA plan today. The Republican Congress also advanced policies to increase the portability of health insurance, privacy protections, and transparency of health care costs, setting the stage for greater adoption of electronic health records, something that will help produce better outcomes at lower costs.

Expansion of Community Health Centers

Republicans substantially increased funding for Community Health Centers, the safety net of providers for Americans who don't have access to primary health care in rural and urban areas.

Fighting Entitlement Program Waste, Fraud, and Abuse

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 included a series of legislative proposals to rein in government over-spending, streamline payment policies, and reduce waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid.

NIH Medical Research

Republicans successfully doubled the budget of the National Institutes of Health, which will help fund research to develop future medical breakthroughs.

House Republican Reforms

House Republicans also moved legislation that would expand opportunities for small businesses to band together to purchase high-quality health care for their employees at a more affordable price. House Republicans also passed medical liability reform legislation to eliminate expensive defensive medicine. Unfortunately these proposals were blocked from consideration in the Senate.

3. What taxes will be raised in the House Democrat health care bill?

The House Democrat health care bill increases taxes on individuals and small businesses to offset over $1 Trillion in spending. In total, H.R. 3962 would impose $730 Million in new taxes and penalties.

Among the tax increases in the bill are:
New tax on individuals of 2.5% of income if they don’t purchase “government approved” coverage.

New 8% payroll tax on employers, forcing employers to offer “acceptable coverage” defined by the federal government or pay the tax.

New tax on health insurance premiums to fund comparative effectiveness research that will make coverage through every private health plan more expensive.

Limitations on existing use of Health Savings Accounts, Flexible Spending Accounts, and other health related accounts that will drive up health care costs for individuals using these plans.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that H.R. 3962 would create over $550 Billion in new taxes on individuals and small businesses.

CBO also estimates that this legislation will lead to $33 Billion in penalties on uninsured individuals and $135 Billion in penalties on employers under the government mandate requirements.

4. How many uninsured people are in the United States, who are they, and why are they uninsured?

Approximately 46 million people in the United States are uninsured for some period of time in a given year. However, this is a fraudulent figure. It includes:

12 million people who are already eligible for health insurance, but not yet enrolled in a safety net program like Medicaid or SCHIP.

10 million who are not U.S. citizens.

9 million who are only temporarily uninsured.

7 million who have incomes that are over 300% of the federal poverty level but choose not to purchase insurance.

The true target uninsured population of individuals who are citizens, low-income, and do not qualify for other federal assistance is about 8-10 million people.

5. What impact will this have on me as a senior citizen and Medicare?

In order to pay for this government takeover of health care, Democrats have proposed cutting nearly $450 billion in Medicare spending.

For example:

Payments for Medicare Advantage. More than 11 million seniors choose Medicare Advantage plans as the coverage that best meets their needs. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that provisions in H.R. 3962 would lead to a total of $170 billion in cuts being taken from Medicare Advantage plans that provide a choice of health care options to seniors.

6. Does the health care plan provide insurance to illegal immigrants?

Despite statements to the contrary, the Obama administration could force the American people to pay for the healthcare of millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S. The Democrats’ bill in the House, H.R. 3962, contains gaping loopholes that could allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. And these loopholes are no accident.

The non-partisan Congressional Research Service explained that H.R. 3962 “contains no express restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—accessing and paying for coverage available through the health insurance exchange.”

Republicans offered several amendments to close this loophole in the previous Health Care bill. The amendments would have required verification using the existing methods that are already in place to verify eligibility for other federal benefits programs. House Democrats rejected these amendments. If President Obama is committed to ensuring that illegal immigrants do not benefit from this bill, why not include verification?

The bill provides that “[e]xcept as the Commissioner may otherwise provide, members of the same family who are affordable credit eligible individuals shall be treated as a single affordable credit individual eligible for the applicable credit for such a family under this subtitle.” This suggests that if one member of a family is legally eligible, every family member will be considered eligible.

7. How will the health care plan impact those enrolled in VA health care or TRICARE?

All of the concerns about legislative language in the bill that could harm veterans’ health care have not been addressed.

In its current form, H.R. 3962 could classify certain veterans enrolled in VA health care as not meeting “acceptable” health coverage standards, exposing veterans to punitive new taxes under the “acceptable” insurance definition in the bill. I would support an amendment that would make it clear that VA health care is “acceptable” coverage and ensure that veterans enrolled in VA health care would never be subject to a two and a half percent penalty tax for failing to have “acceptable” health coverage.


8. I have heard that my health coverage choices will be limited under the Democrats’ plan. Is this true?

Yes, a new unelected, government employee, the “Health Care Commissioner,” would have unprecedented authority to determine what will be “acceptable” health care coverage and set all the rules for what health care coverage must include in addition to what treatments patients could receive and at what cost.


9. Why can’t we get the same type of health care that’s available to Members of Congress?

Members of Congress are eligible to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). The FEHBP does not include a “government run” plan. Members of Congress and federal employees have the choice of several different options, ranging from Health Savings Accounts to more extensive plans with varying co-pay and deductible requirements. Republicans support providing Americans with affordable coverage options. However, a government-run plan, in which providers are paid below market-Medicare rates, will drive other options out of business. Independent studies agree a government-run plan will cause as many as two out of three Americans to lose their current coverage.

If Congress passes legislation, which includes a public option, I believe Members of Congress who support it should agree to participate in the government run program. That is why I am a cosponsor of H.Res. 615. This legislation urges Members of Congress who vote in favor of the establishment of a government run health insurance option to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and agree to enroll under that public option.


10. What plan is there to help me if I am unemployed and have no health insurance?

Congress recently approved legislation that expands COBRA coverage (allowing you to continue to pay premiums to a former employer to retain coverage) and provides additional tax credits to unemployed workers for this often expensive coverage. Depending on your length of unemployment, you may still be eligible for federal assistance.


11. I've heard that health care will be rationed under the Democrats’ plan. Is this true?

Yes, the current health proposals under consideration in Congress place too much control in the hands of government employees who ultimately will be able to decide what is “acceptable” coverage, including what health care services and treatments may be covered and at what cost.

Furthermore, as part of their economic stimulus bill, Democrats created a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research that has the power to greatly influence and potentially decide coverage decisions about what treatments may be offered to patients based on cost.

Comparative effectiveness has already resulted in rationing in Europe. In 1999 the British created their comparative effectiveness organization called the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). As the Heritage Foundation has noted NICE has routinely used cost to deny patients needed care.

During the Committee mark-ups of the House Democrats bill, Democrats defeated Republican amendments to prevent rationing.

12. Do House Republicans have a health care plan?

Yes. I agree that health care in America is too expensive and too many families don’t have access to affordable, high-quality health care. In contrast to the Democrats’ approach that costs too much, covers too few, and forces too many to lose the coverage they currently have, House Republicans have a common-sense plan to reduce costs, expand access, and increase the quality of care in a way that America can afford. H.R. 3400, the House Republican health care plan will:

Change federal laws to help families keep their health insurance regardless of a change or loss of a job, and encourages new and existing local programs to ensure all Americans have access to affordable health care.

Give states the tools to design innovative programs that make health care coverage more affordable for everyone.

Let small businesses band together to purchase high-quality health care for their employees at a more affordable price, just as large corporations and unions do.

Make it easier for Americans to find a health plan that fits their needs by using easy to understand health-plan finders for those Americans working in jobs that don’t offer health benefits.

Focus on prevention and wellness programs to help avoid serious – and costly – illnesses.

Rein in junk lawsuits that make health care more expensive for everyone.

Improve Medicare and Medicaid by rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse that costs taxpayers billions of dollars every year.

Continue to encourage the development of advances in treatment that help people live longer, healthier lives, while the Democratic plan will shut down research into new cures.


13. Is there a new health commissioner or “czar” being appointed by the President?

This legislation gives unprecedented power to a new federal employee, the “Health Choices Commissioner.” Instead of giving more choices to the American people, this legislation will allow a government employee to make choices that should be made by families and doctors. The new commissioner will have the power to:

Decide which treatments patients could receive and at what cost.

Decide which private plans would be allowed to participate in the Exchange.

Regulate all insurance plans, both in and out of the Exchange.

Determine which employers would be allowed to participate in the Exchange.

Determine how many and which Americans will be allowed to choose health coverage through the Exchange.

Decide which physicians and hospitals participate in the government-run plan and in private plan provider networks.

Override state laws regarding covered health benefits.

Determine how trillions of taxpayer and employer dollars would be spent within the Exchange.

That is why I am a cosponsor of the “Czar Accountability and Reform (CZAR) Act of 2009” which withholds funding from any task force, council, or similar office that is established by the President but not confirmed by the Senate.


14. Will taxpayers and private insurance companies be forced to subsidize abortions under the Administration’s health care plan?

H.R. 3962 does not contain any explicit limitation on federal funds authorized or appropriated in the bill from being used to pay for elective abortion or to subsidize the purchase of insurance coverage of elective abortion. The bill further requires that at least one health insurance plan offered through the health insurance exchange in each market covers abortion.

The bill defines what would be deemed an “essential benefits package,” or in other words what the government sets as benefits or services that must be covered by an insurance plan. However, this legislation contains no explicit exclusion or prohibition from abortion being deemed part of an essential benefits package. Without such exclusion, the bill leaves open the possibility of federally mandated coverage of abortion as an essential benefit.

History reveals the consequences of abortion coverage not being explicitly excluded from federal programs. The administrators running the Medicaid program from 1973-1976 funded as many as 300,000 abortions per year until the Hyde amendment (Medicaid prohibition of abortion funding) was enacted in 1976. In a 1996 ruling upholding the Hyde Amendment, a federal appeals court clearly stated that abortion would be included as a covered medical service if Congress did not prohibit the inclusion: “Because abortion fits within many of the mandatory care categories, including “family planning,” “outpatient services,” “inpatient services,” and “physicians’ services,” Medicaid covered medically necessary abortions between 1973 and 1976.”

Among its many provisions, the bill establishes a new government health board called the “Health Benefits Advisory Committee” to recommend minimum federal benefit standards and cost-sharing levels. The Committee in conjunction with the Health and Human Services Secretary would provide federal bureaucrats with the power to define health insurance, the purchase of which would be required by the bill, and impose new mandates—which could include a mandate to obtain and provide abortion coverage—on individuals and insurance carriers.

15. Why aren’t the Democrats talking about medical liability reform?

If the president is serious about reducing healthcare costs, rather than increasing taxes or rationing care, he needs to address medical liability reform, which is one of the biggest sources of waste and added cost. Frivolous lawsuits force physicians to practice defensive medicine and carry expensive malpractice insurance, the cost of which is passed on to patients. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, defensive medicine adds between $70 billion to $126 billion to health care costs each year. Defensive medicine is when doctors perform tests and prescribe medicines not because they’re necessary for health, but in order to avoid frivolous lawsuits that claim they didn’t do everything possible for the patient. Uncapped lawsuit awards paid by insurance companies also get passed on to patients as higher premiums. The Manhattan Institute estimates that the annual direct cost of such litigation is over $30 billion a year.

The Empowering Patients First Act (H.R. 3400), which was introduced by Rep. Tom Price, reforms the medical liability system. Also, the cost of the plan is completely offset through decreasing defensive medicine, savings from health care efficiencies, eliminating waste and fraud and abuse.

I am also a cosponsor of the “Help Efficient, Accessible, Low Cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act.” This legislation reduces the excessive burden the liability system places on health care providers. As a result, patient access to health care services and the quality of medical care will be improved. According to Congressional Budget Office, “CBO estimates that, under [the HEALTH Act], premiums for medical malpractice insurance ultimately would be an average of 25 percent to 30 percent below what they would be under current law.” This legislation is included as Title V of the “Empowering Patients First Act” (H.R. 3400).