Nation debates faults and controversies surrounding proposed health care bills | by SHAUGNESSY MILLER
The government is reviewing several sharply debated health care bills. Many groups have created these bills with the general consensus that health care must be more available and affordable.
However, many details in the thousands of pages that outline the reform are in dispute. Mr. Robert Laszewski, president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, Inc. (HPSA), explained the agreed upon objectives of proposed health care bills in a powerpoint presented to private insurers this summer in Kansas City.  Laszewski created HPSA in 1992 to assist health related companies, such as insurers and hospitals, through the changes in health care policies.
According to Laszewski, common points in all bills include:
- The policy will provide insurance to those without coverage
- The policy should begin to control costs of health care
- The policy must pay for itself within 10 years
- The policy requires employers to continue to provide insurance for employees
Laszewski mentioned four key controversial issues involved in the plan . These issues are named and further explained in the boxes below.
This complex issue has many more key points and controversies involved. The President addressed the nation Sept. 9 in hopes to rally support and pass a bill before the Christmas holidays.
How much it will cost and who will pay for it
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) provides congress with nonpartisan, timely analyses of budgetary decisions covered by the federal budget. CBO predicts that federal spending will increase by $1 trillion over ten years if the new plan is installed. This conflicts with President Obama’s statement that spending will decrease by $2.2 trillion.
According to Laszewski, plans to pay for this increase in spending include:
- reduced government spending on Medicare and Medicaid
- a variety of tax increases and elimination of tax exemptions based on income levels.
Public option, or government run health care
President Barack Obama supports the creation of a public option to drive private insurance prices down. He reasons that insurance companies’ prices are too high, causing more limited access to insurance.
Opponents of the public option argue that the government would have the ability to lower their own health insurance prices by paying the doctors and hospitals significantly less than private insurers.  According to the Independent Insurance Agents of America, ‘A government run health insurance plan would create an inherently unlevel playing field that would drive private insurers out of the market over time and dismantle the employer-based health care system.’Â
Employer mandate, or requirement of employers to provide health insurance
Factcheck.org, a nonpartisan online website, states that the bill ‘requires employers either to offer private health insurance coverage or pay a percentage of their payroll expenses to help finance a public plan.’Â
The National Center for Policy Analysis, a nonpartisan public policy research organization, counters that some employers will take the cost of health insurance out of their employees’ paychecks, ‘forcing employees to accept health insurance… in lieu of wages.’Â
Tax dollars funding abortion, requirement of all medical facilities to perform abortions
President Obama has stated that taxpayer funds will not be used to pay for abortions. However, according to factcheck.org, ‘As for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a ‘Ëœpublic plan’ and newly subsidized private plans to cover all abortions.’Â
Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann and Bishop Robert W. Finn expressed a concern in their joint pastoral letter that ‘a huge resource of professionals and institutions dedicated to care of the sick could find themselves excluded, by legislation, after health care reform, if they failed to provide services which are destructive of human life, and which are radically counter to their conscience and institutional mission.’Â
