I Am Challenging the Public-Option

I have read this bill... The bill itself, in all actuality, reminds me of when I myself had to take the exam for my Series 6 & 63 licensing. In recent memory, I have heard much criticism on behalf of Republicans in the Senate, a sense that this bill promotes a "socialist agenda for government-runned healthcare". I would like to set the record straight here tonight, THIS IS A HEALTHCARE REFORM BILL. In all actuality, when I went back myself and took to detail the facts stated in the appropriate bill, I found myself reading out of a PASS book (all my brokers know what I mean).

Now that this issue of a National HealthCare Plan is scratched, the au fait incumbent president still has some explaining to do. A lot of criticism is coming from the left, in which Mr. Obama and the current administration have met on the issue of scratching the Public-Option Plan. Yet, is cost REALLY the only effective call on abandoning the Public Option? Many are scratching their heads, but I would like to point to a "cubbyhole" in the Public-Option legislation that will leave the American people at awe...

I am not denying the fact that cost and deficit spending will significantly reduce the chances of getting a Public Option passed through the Senate. On the contrary, it is the exact cost savings that will propel health-insurance reform through the Senate rather than a Public Option in the Congress. However, I allude to the fact(s) stated in Section 113 - Insurance Rating Rules of the Health Reform bill which states: IN GENERAL. - The premium rate charged for an insured qualified health benefits plan may not vary except as follows... (subsections(1)(2)(3)(b)Study-Reports). Executed in Y1 (which stands for year 1 in 2013), there will be an 18 month probation period initiated on the Public Option "experimentation period, toward reform agenda".

None of this makes sense, and quite frankly, I'm having a hard time beginning to understand why is there a fail-provision in place just in case the plan does not even begin to get off the ground? There is an 18-month probation period in effect after 2013, to monitor results of a 2 to 1 expense ratio or "expense reductions" enacted by the so-called affordable public option. I see loopholes everywhere in the legislation, meaning I can once again begin to discriminate against coverage along with profittaking at the borderlines of how much to charge as far as premiums are concerned within a Public Option or insurance which is exchange-qualified.

There is more... Section 222. - Premiums and Financing - parts (a)(1)(A)(B)(i)(ii)(2)(A)and(B). Quote: "IN GENERAL. - The Secretary shall establish geographically-adjusted premium rates for the public health insurance option in a matter..." When does this Public Option begin to become affordable to the Average Joe? Why is it in the government's power to control costs and businesses around the United States, at the expense of those who cannot even AFFORD IT! 

It gets worse... Section 223. - Payment Rates for Items and Services: (B) Exceptions - (i) Practitioner's Services. - Payment rates for practitioners' services otherwise established under the fee schedule under section 1848 of the Social Security Act shall be applied without regard to the provisions under subsection (f) of such section and the update under subsection (d)(4) under such section for a year as applied under this paragraph shall be not less than 1 percent. Please read subsection (f)http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title18/1848.htm#act-1848-g-2 of section 1848 of the Social Security Act and this will shed light to the "appropriations" of costs and expenditures WHICH ARE EXCLUDED IN THIS PUBLIC OPTION BILL AND BENEFITS PHYSICIAN DOCTORS TO A GREATER EXTENT BY SIMPLY IMPLYING A LIMIT OF LESS THAN 1 PERCENT; TO A DOCTRINE ON LEGISLATION SET FORTH UNDER SECTION 1848 OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, STATING FROM 80 TO 115 PERCENT LIMITS ON PHYSICIANS COLLECTING PAY FOR SERVICES?! How is the working-class American supposed to AFFORD THIS?!!

I am pointing toward H.R. 3038 now, a bill which was introduced July 12, 2007 by the Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama to amend section 1848 of the Social Security Act to establish standards for growth in Medicare expenditures for physicians services based on categories of services. Where is the bi-partisanship the Obama administration boasted along during the 2008 elections? Did they purposely scratch Mr. Session's proposal off the table because of his inexplicable calls on being a racist and a Republican to boot? I am here just to tell the facts; growing up in a not-so-privileged neighborhood I know what it is like being ostracized and shunned out of the so-called "elite-group" or not fitting in because I am ethnic, but I am bigger for that... Nevertheless, Democrats in power are in a hurry to seize control at the expense of you and I the taxpayer.

All in all prescription drugs, initial incentive periods, and deficit spending will derail the Public Option to abeyance. There is no way I can support healthcare reform in its present state, with so much structural spending and emergency backdoor legislation attached, succeeding a plan in which probably will not get off the ground. I am challenging the Public Option face-to-face, and nevermind hiding behind ideology. I know the facts.

P.S. - Look what happened to "cash-for-clunkers", nevermind the fuss a Public-Option will bring to surface...

Here is a copy of H.R. 3200 (America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009):

• http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

Here is a copy of H.R. 3038:

• http://www.statesurge.com/bills/17287-hr3038-federal
• http://www.thomas.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h3038_ih.xml

Here are Compilations of the Social Security Laws:

• http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title18/1854.htm
• http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title18/1848.htm

Here is H.R. 676 (United States National Health Care Act)

• http://www.pnhp.org/docs/nhi_bill_final1.pdf