This IS Socialism

If I told you the government was going to pass a law outlawing private business unless that business was approved by the government and the only other option available was one provided by the government what would you call that?  I'd call it socialism.

Welcome to Obama's America.

The new Health Care Reform bill brought to you by the Democrat's in Congress does just that, it outlaws private health insurance.

You can read this monster HERE, but here's the key quote taken from page 16 of this bill:

(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

So effective on the first day of the year when this bill passes it will become illegal for a PRIVATE insurance company to offer you their product.

And they've put this on the fast tract giving Congress two weeks to review, debate and vote on it.  Two weeks which also happen to fall right at the same time as when the media is focusing on the Sotomayor lying... er I mean hearing.  If you think this wasn't planned to pull a fast one on the American public then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Comments

[NoNameJames]

It does NOT outlaw private insurance. This is just the newest right-wing smear e-mail.

Pathetic of you to keep repeating this lie.

[Rick Barnes]

NoNameJames, when a private company can no longer enroll someone new what do you call it? I quoted the bill verbatim, there's no spin there... that's what it says.

[NoNameJames]

Now that HR3200 has been formally introduced in the House, the right wing is going through it with a fine-tooth comb looking for lines they can take out of context to scare people with. They believe they've found it in the parts of the law that move regulation of private health insurance from McCarran-Ferguson to ERISA: "ObamaCare outlaws private health insurance!"

The deal is that the actual bill is over 1,000 pages long, it is written in legalese rather than English, and it is set in the middle of a large array of other legislation that it must work around without destroying. This necessarily means that it does some nifty tricks to side-step some of the implications. For example: For employer-provided health insurance meeting requirements for deduction as health care coverage under federal law, federal regulation already applies via ERISA. But private plans (those individually purchased) are regulated by the states under the provisions of the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945, which places private health insurance under state control.

So the question is how to enforce the mandates upon insurers -- the must-issue and the flat-rate-pool mandates -- without overturning McCarran-Ferguson. Neither Congress nor the majority of states want the Federal government to be in the business of regulating insurance in general. Simply amending McCarran-Ferguson to exclude health insurance as a state-regulated class doesn't work either, because it's not all health insurance that Congress wants to regulate, just primary health insurance. Supplemental policies are of supreme disinterest to Congress and they're quite happy to let the states continue regulating those. Besides, insurers could raise some legal actions if Congress tried to regulate already-issued insurance that was issued under McCarran-Ferguson.

So the solution that the wonk assigned the task of making this happen arrived at was to create a new ERISA-eligible group for all future private insurance to be offered through -- the Health Insurance Exchange. This starts on page 72 of the bill. Since it is an ERISA-eligible group, it can be regulated through ERISA without touching McCarran-Ferguson in general. But then comes the task of how to make all private insurance be offered via the Exchange. And the solution the wonk devised was to outlaw the issue of new private policies that were Exchange-eligible, which is done on page 16, which would force all new private policies to be issued via the ERISA-regulated Exchange rather than via the state-regulated McCarran-Ferguson private market. In short, it's a work-around for McCarran-Ferguson which avoids the necessity to have to actually change McCarran-Ferguson -- existing private insurance policies can still be regulated by the states, it's just that new private insurance that meets primary insurance requirements must go thru the Exchange where it can be regulated under federal ERISA rules instead. [b]And wingnut heads explode upon reaching page 16, and they erupt shouting "ObamaCare outlaws private insurance!" without ever getting to page 72. [/b]


[b]This points to a major problem wingnuts have with a 1000+ page bill -- you have to read the whole darn thing to know exactly how page 16 relates to page 72, you have to know the legal background of health insurance beforehand to understand how the pieces relate to the other major pieces of federal regulation like ERISA and McCarran-Ferguson, you have to have basic literacy in the legalese involved in this massive piece of wonkery, and wingnuts lack the patience, background, or the reading comprehension to do this. The bill does not outlaw private insurance, of course. It just shifts its issuance to the Exchange so it can be regulated under ERISA rather than McCarran-Ferguson. [/b]But to someone who suffers from legal illiteracy and a case of the paranoids, taking page 16 out of context means you arrive at the erroneous conclusion "ObamaCare outlaws private insurance!", which was boldly published in a national forum without the slightest attempt to validate the conclusion with, well, somebody who knows even the tiniest bit about health insurance regulation and how the new bill interacts with the current regulatory framework.

So it goes. In wingnut land, ignorance is strength. And on that basis, they must be mighty dadburned strong, doncha think?!

[NoNameJames]

The bill does not outlaw private insurance, of course. It just shifts its issuance to the Exchange so it can be regulated under ERISA rather than McCarran-Ferguson.

But to someone who suffers from legal illiteracy and a case of the paranoids, taking page 16 out of context means you arrive at the erroneous conclusion "ObamaCare outlaws private insurance!", which was boldly published in a national forum without the slightest attempt to validate the conclusion with, well, somebody who knows even the tiniest bit about health insurance regulation and how the new bill interacts with the current regulatory framework.

[NoNameJames]

Richard, you're just another shameless right-wing hack, You read this ridiculous right-wing smears and regurgitate them to the masses.

Just another deliberate attempt by the right-wing to spread stupid lies and smears.

[Rick Barnes]

"For example: For employer-provided health insurance meeting requirements for deduction as health care coverage under federal law, federal regulation already applies via ERISA. But private plans (those individually purchased) are regulated by the states under the provisions of the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945, which places private health insurance under state control."

Using your own explanation NoNameJames, this shifts power to the federal government. Its a federal power grab, plan and simple.

[NoNameJames]

It does NOT outlaw private insurance, which was your argument. You were wrong and you are guilty of shameless smear tactics.

[Rick Barnes]

NoNameJame, I quoted the bill directly. The bill states:
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

You can read into that whatever you want but disallowing an insurance company from enrolling new individuals outlaws it.

Also if you are going to steal someone else's argument as a defense point, don't take credit as if it were your argument. Your post above was taken verbatim from http://blog.badtux.net/
You copied and pasted right down to the insults at the end. That's sad.

I came up with an original article that I wrote myself, and the best you can do is to copy and paste claiming that I"m the one using the talking points. Doesn't get better then that.

[NoNameJames]

You were caught red-handed in a blatant lie. You should actually do some research before you pass on ridiculous right-wing smear attempts.

[Rick Barnes]

NNJ, you were caught plagiarizing. I quoted the bill directly. Which of us is lying???

You're stolen argument bases around the fact that page 72 ties back into it, then conveniently claims you must know the legalize of the health insurance business to understand it. Well I've worked in the health care industry and I know some of that legalize and this does not explain the quote from page 16.

Here's ALL of page 72:
72
TITLE II—HEALTH INSURANCE
EXCHANGE AND RELATED
PROVISIONS
Subtitle A—Health Insurance
Exchange
SEC. 201. ESTABLISHMENT OF HEALTH INSURANCE EX-
CHANGE; OUTLINE OF DUTIES; DEFINITIONS.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT
.—There is established within
the Health Choices Administration and under the direction of the Commissioner a Health Insurance Exchange in order to facilitate access of individuals and employers,
through a transparent process, to a variety of choices of
affordable, quality health insurance coverage, including a
public health insurance option.
(b) OUTLINEOF
DUTIESOF
COMMISSIONER
.—In accordance with this subtitle and in coordination with appropriate Federal and State officials as provided under section 143(b), the Commissioner shall—
(1) under section 204 establish standards for,
accept bids from, and negotiate and enter into con-
tracts with, QHBP offering entities for the offering
of health benefits plans through the Health Insurance Exchange, with different levels of benefits required under section 203, and including with respect
to oversight and enforcement;

(2) under section 205 facilitate outreach and enrollment in such plans of Exchange-eligible individuals and employers described in section 202; and
(3) conduct such activities related to the Health
Insurance Exchange as required, including establishment of a risk pooling mechanism under section 206
and consumer protections under subtitle D of title I.
(c) EXCHANGE PARTICIPATING HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN DEFINED
.—In this division, the term ‘‘Exchange-
participating health benefits plan’’ means a qualified
health benefits plan that is offered through the Health Insurance Exchange.

Read that slowly... basically your private health insurance that you chose will be replaced under the exchange with the options the government wants you to have. As your plagiarized piece put it we are doing away state laws that govern health insurance and shifting to a plan controlled by the federal government. Private business is no longer free.

So I ask you, how is what I said a lie?