Blogger Tele-Conference with Reps Blunt and McMorris-Rodgers

Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO)

Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-WA)


Today, I participated in a blogger tele-conference with Republican Representatives Roy Blunt (MO) and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA) on the subject of the Republican plan for health care reform. I, along with about 20 or so other bloggers, had received an invitation to participate.

The conference began with short remarks by each representative explaining why their version of health reform was preferable to the Democratic plan. Less government control, the fact that the Democratic plan would result in government crowding out smaller private insurance companies and longer waits for critical treatment a'la Canada, etc. Then the lines were opened for questions. About six or seven questions were taken including a couple by me.

Prior to the call, I read the proposed Republican plan, which runs 3-4 pages. It is certainly preferable to the Democratic plan which entails a complete government takeover of health care and insurance-and makes sure you and I get insurance at the risk of paying more taxes.

Yet, I did note in the Republican plan that government would be involved in certain aspects of health care. There were (rather vague) references to;

"Make quality health care coverage affordable and acceptable for every American regardless of pre-existing health conditions." (How specifically?)

"Improve Americans' lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases." (How, specifically?)

It also talks about "providing immediate substantial financial assistance, through new refundable and advancable tax credits to low and modest income Americans."

It would "implement comprehensive medical liability reform that will reduce costly defensive medicine practiced by doctors trying to protect themselves from overzealous trial lawyers. (I like that but how are they going to get that through a Democrat-controlled Congress?)

Gives financial help to caregivers who provide in-home care for a loved one. (Careful, we are having a lot of abuse in California in that area.)

There is a lot more, but as they say, "You can look it up yourself-on the Internet".

The point is, which I raised to Rep. Blunt. was that in the Republican plan, the government still had its hands in it-if only as a facilitator-and was that the proper role of government? In his response, Blunt pointed out that ever since Medicare and Medicaid, government has been involved in health care, which is true. His point was that he wanted consumers to be able to choose from different competing options for health care insurance. He added that regardless of what President Obama has said about people being able to keep the insurance they were happy with, the eventual effect would be akin to the elephant in a room full of mice. The mice that don't leave the room are crushed by the elephant. The point is that the government is incapable of competing fairly. As a follow-up, I asked about the idea of tort reform, to which Rep. McMorris-Rodgers responded that that was certainly in their plan to drive down health care costs.

In all, the tele-conference was quite short-about 40 minutes. How many bloggers actually called in and whether they all had a chance to ask their questions, I have no idea.

What I would recommend to everyone is that they read the Republican plan as well as the Democrat plan. When you read the Democrat plan, ask yourself: How many new government bureaucrats and secretaries are they going to have to hire to administer all this stuff? Can you imagine all the forms you and your doctor are going to be filling out and sending to Washington before you can have that MRI? It seems the task of the Republicans is to convince the few sane Democrats to use some common sense. It's an uphill climb.