Concerning Health Care Reform

The current hot topic on Capitol Hill is health care reform, with a wide variety of plans being floated around.
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) and Finance Committees have their own proposals, while the House is working on a draft bill assembled by a tri-committee of the Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means and Education and Labor Committees. It is well known that some legislators would like to like to complete the health care reform debate before the August recess. In my opinion, that would provide too little time for debate on an issue that will have an enormous impact on all Americans. It also worries me that the resulting legislation will most likely be so complex that few, if any, legislators will actually read through the entire document, much less comprehend the impact of the proposed changes on American businesses.

Personally, I expect to see some form of government-run insurance plan. While some legislators see this as a way to force the private insurance companies to become more completive, I view it as a way for the government to slowly force the private sector out of business and expand its role in health care. How do I feel about that? Well, I spent the first half of my life in Canada and still have family living there. The Canadian Universal Health Care System has its own problems, prompting many affluent Canadians to cross the border into the US and pay for their own medical treatment. I find it ironic that while Americans are debating the need for government health care, Canadians are debating the need for private health care. The situation calls to mind the old adage about the grass always looking greener on the other side of the fence. When you get to the other side, you might just find that it’s not what it looks like from a distance.

The debate on how to pay for health care reform includes everything from subsidies to tax breaks and exemptions. Legislation may also force employers to contribute to health insurance plans or face significant penalties for failing to comply. NUCA and the Small Business Coalition for Affordable Health Care oppose such mandates in favor of reforms to lower costs and create more competition in the private insurance sector.

The Healthy Families Act (HR2460/S1152) is also worrisome in that it would require employers with 15 or more employees to provide 56 hours of paid sick leave; this requirement would also apply to certain part-time employees. Since this would force employers to lower employee compensation to offset the mandate or force cuts in personnel, I fail to see how this is going to make America more competitive in a global environment or how such action is going to help our current economic conditions.

The aforementioned concerns are mine. What are yours? Whatever they are, I encourage you to remain vigilant during the legislative process and at the appropriate time voice your opinions and concerns to your state’s congressional delegation. As NUCA members have demonstrated time and time again, grassroots advocacy works!

Regards,


     Lyle Schellenberg