HCR: new myths

HEALTH CARE

Since the health care debate began over a year ago, Republicans and their conservative allies have relied on distortions, fabrications, and outright lies in their attempt to kill reform. There were the alleged death panels that would "pull the plug on grandma"; the false claim that doctors would leave their profession if reform passed; and, of course, the myth that reform is a socialist "government takeover" of the health care system. As President Obama correctly noted yesterday, the recently passed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act bears resemblance to health reform bills proposed by Republicans in the past, so distortions were necessary to perpetuate the narrative that reform would ruin the health care system and harm the country. Now that health care reform is a reality, the right has moved on to a coordinated repeal campaign, and 14 state attorneys general have filed suit against the Act, falsely claiming it is unconstitutional. New myths have also emerged, distorting what the country will look like after the implementation of the health bill and the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act (SAFRA) that passed with it. Each of the old myths has been debunked, and these new ones are simply more distortions in attempt to mislead the American people.

IRS AGENTS 'BREATHING DOWN' OUR NECKS: Fox News and Republican lawmakers have been pushing a talking point claiming that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will need to hire more than 16,500 new agents to enforce the universal insurance mandates in the Affordable Care Act, and that the agency will impose harsh punishments on those who don't purchase insurance it deems worthy. At least a dozen Republican lawmakers pushed the meme, with Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) calling it a "dangerous expansion of the IRS's power and reach into the lives of virtually every American." Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) warned Fox News host Sean Hannity that "the IRS will be tasked with breathing down the neck of 300 million Americans every month to determine whether we have purchased governmentally acceptable levels of health insurance." Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and others attributed the 16,500 figure to "the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office," but as PolitiFact noted, the figure does not come from the CBO. It comes from a report prepared by the Republican staff of the House Ways and Means Committee, which used rough estimates from the CBO in order to fabricate the 16,500 figure. During a recent congressional hearing, IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman made it clear that these claims are nothing but "misconceptions." When asked whether the IRS would "verify if [Americans] have obtained acceptable health insurance," Shulman flatly said "no," adding that there "are not going to be any discussions about health coverage with an IRS employee." As for claims of draconian enforcement, including jail time, for those who do not buy insurance, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) noted on her web site, "The bill specifically prohibits the IRS from confiscating taxpayer assets, from using liens or levies, or imposing criminal penalties of any kind -- including jail time -- because of a lack of health care coverage."

CORPORATE WRITE-DOWNS: For months, Republicans and their allies like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have been claiming that health care reform would create huge new taxes that would hurt businesses. Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, AT&T, Caterpillar, John Deere and others have come out with a series of -- seemingly coordinated -- press releases announcing that the new bill will cost them billions of dollars. An association representing 300 large corporations is also urging Congress to change the part of the Act that is responsible for the charge. Republicans and the right-wing media latched onto the news of the writedowns as proof that the bill will lead to the "wholesale destruction of wealth and capital," as a Wall Street Journal editorial put it. This is "the exact opposite of what the president promised if we passed health care," Fox News host Sean Hannity said of the writedowns. But in reality, these writedowns are due to a big cut in corporate welfare. The Medicare Part D legislation -- passed under President Bush -- gives subsidies of about $1,300 per retiree per year to businesses that provide prescription drugs to their retirees. On top of that, it allows companies to deduct the value of the credit from their taxes. The new health care law, however, pays for itself, in part, by eliminating waste in the system and puts an end to this "double dipping." Companies will still receive the tax-free subsidy, but they'll no longer be able to take the tax deduction as well. As the Wall Street Journal notes, these charges are "noncash," and the cost of losing this exemption is relatively small. And the relevant change doesn't kick in until 2013. Moreover, is disingenuous for companies to suddenly complain about the charges, considering the change was a part of the draft bill that passed the Senate Finance Committee last year and several business groups complained about it in September. Finance Committee aides "were in close talks with employer groups" and it ultimately won approval from many, with the chairman of Business Roundtable saying "it's very closely aligned to [our] principles."

A NEW TAX ON STUDENT LOANS: While its inclusion with the health care bill has often been overlooked, legislation to streamline the student loan system has not escaped its share of right-wing fear mongering. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) told Radio Iowa that the plan "end[s] up taxing college students" because they'll be forced to pay more borrowing from the government directly than if they could shop around for a loan from private lenders. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) agreed, claiming that students will spend "$1,700 to $1,800 more during the life of their loan because of this surcharge." But both Grassley and Graham are ignoring the fact that it SAFRA does not change interest rates, meaning that students will pay the same amount as they did before. As PolitiFact notes, the interest rates are set by law and were not changed by SAFRA -- "there is no 'surcharge' in the bill." Grassley and industry lobbyists have also claimed that people employed by private loan companies will lose their jobs "at a time when our country can least afford to lose them." But as Campus Progress notes, "There will be no shortage of work for loan companies under the new reforms," as federal loans will still be serviced by private companies. "In fact, student loan giant Sallie Mae has announced it is in the process of bringing back 3,400 jobs from overseas. These jobs are returning to the U.S., at least in part, so that the company can be eligible for Department of Education contracts to service Direct Loans," Campus Progress adds.

Let The Sun Shine In......

Beware Authoritative "Inside Washington" Sources Who Say The Public Option Is Dead

Friday 28 August 2009

by: Robert Reich  |  Visit article original @ Robert Reich's Blog

In the US Capital, authoritative sources often fail to reflect the broader public opinion of the nation.

Washington, D.C. is an echo chamber in which anyone who sounds authoritative repeats the conventional authoritative wisdom about the "consensus" of inside opinion, which they've heard from someone else who sounds equally authoritative, who of course has heard it from another authoritative source. Follow the trail to its start and you often find an obscure congressional or White House staffer who has seen some half-assed poll number or briefing memo, but seeking to feel important hypes it a media personality or lobbyist who, desperate to sound authoritative, pronounces it as truth. In any other place on the planet it would be called rumor, gossip, or drivel. In our nation's capital it's called "inside information." The process would be harmless except that it creates self-fulfilling prophesies. Since most of our elected representatives would rather not stick their necks out lest they lose their heads, they tend to rush toward whatever consensus seems to be emerging - which, of course, is based on authoritative reports about the emerging consensus.
   

In the last few days authoritative sources have repeatedly told me that the public option is dead, that the President won't be able to get a comprehensive health care bill, and that the White House and congressional leadership already know the best they'll be able to do now is move incrementally - starting with insurance reforms such as barring insurers from using someone's preexisting health conditions to deny coverage - with the hope of more reforms in the years ahead. The rightwing media fearmongers and demagogues have won.
   

Don't believe it.

The other thing about Washington is how quickly conventional authoritative wisdom changes, especially when the public is still in flux over some large matter. Rightwing fearmongers and demagogues thrive only to the extent the mainstream media believes they're thriving. Although polls continue to show that while most Americans like the health care they're getting, they also dislike their insurance companies, worry that they or their families will be denied coverage, and are anxious about the increasing co-payments, deductibles, and premiums they're facing. Most are still eager for reform.
   

In addition, we've come to the point where health-care incrementalism won't work. To be sure, the health-insurance industry is powerful and will fight reforms that threaten their profits. But they won't fight if they know their profits will be restored when everyone is required to have health insurance. (This isn't just conventional authoritative wisdom; it's political fact.) Obviously, in order to require everyone to have health insurance, tens of millions of Americans will need help affording it. The only way the government can possibly pay that tab is to raise taxes on the rich while also getting long-term health-insurance costs under control. And one of the surest ways to get long-term costs under control is to force private insurers - which in most states and under most employer-provided plans face very little competition - to compete with a public insurance option that can use its bargaining clout with drug companies and medical providers to negotiate lower prices.
   

When you go through the logic, it starts to look a lot like comprehensive reform.


Years ago, as the story goes, Britain's Parliament faced a difficult choice. On the European continent drivers use the right lanes, while the English remained on the left. But tunnels and fast ferries were bringing cars and drivers back and forth ever more frequently. Liberals in Parliament thought it time to change lanes. Conservatives resisted; after all, Brits had been driving on the left since William the Conquerer's charriot. Parliament's compromise was to move from the left to right lanes - but incrementally, on a voluntary basis. Truckers first.
   

Lest anyone in Washington repeat this story authoritatively, it's a joke - but with a kernel of truth. Sometimes reform has to occur in a big way, everything or nothing, if it's to happen at all. That's the way it is with health care reform at this stage. Every moving piece is related to every other one. That's also why a public option is necessary.
   

So forget the authoritative sources. Mobilize and organize. We can get comprehensive, meaningful health care reform if we push hard enough. And we must.

    --------
    Robert Reich, professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and former Secretary of Labor under President Clinton, is the author of "Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life" (Alfred A. Knopf, 2007).

IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. PELICAN BLOGS HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR ARE PELICAN BLOGS ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON THIS BLOG MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Let The Sun Shine In......