Health Care Reform (the real post)

I've been sitting here for the better part of two hours now, trying to figure out how to approach this topic. I'm starting to have some serious sympathy for lawmakers, because the sheer scope is daunting as all get out.

I found the text for the actual bill passed by the House a few days ago. I knew the bill would be too big and unwieldy for me to really read. I didn't realize then my half formed thought would be the understatement of the week. Just digging through the table of contents to see the highlights (Public option, rescission abuse reform, exchanges, standards, etc etc) took me just about a half hour. That's without clicking any of those links to try and untangle the legalese.

Are you seriously suggesting those guys up on Capitol Hill actually read this thing (or any other bills) before voting on it?

Title I is all about the immediate reforms Congress wants to address. Prohibiting rescission, getting the uninsured high risk citizens taken care of under a temporary program, pre-existing condition exclusions prohibition, extension of dependent coverage for uninsured young adults, eliminating domestic violence as a pre-existing condition, post retirement reduction of benefits, lifetime limit elimination are all included. All things that needed to be dealt with sooner than when the new law is fully up to speed.

Title II is a key element. It's protections and standards... the pre-existing condition exclusion is specifically outlawed, as is rescission for anything but non-payment of premiums. Rules for rates are laid out, parity in benefits for mental health and substance abuse problems are called for, and essential benefits are defined and required from insurers. An independent Health Choices Administration with a commissioner appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate is established. The rest of the section fits the new changes into the existing framework of government (where attorneys general fit in, the Federal Trade Commission, etc).

Title III covers health care exchanges, and the public option. It establishes both of them, and defines the rules and regs for them.

Title IV is all about responsibility, a split between personal and employer based. Looks like tax penalties if you don't have coverage.

Title V is where they work in the penalties/off sets into the tax code.

This is where the text gets funky...it starts over with Title I again, this time labelled "Improving Health Care Value." Looking down the bullets, it looks like Medicare reforms.

Now, I'd link you to the interactive document that Thomas provides...but the site deletes search results after so many hours, creating a broken link. So I'm gonna link you to their search option...

http://thomas.loc.gov/bss/111search.html

And tell you to punch in 3962. From those results, you want the third entry...the one that was passed on 11/07/09.

On the whole, I'm not sure what's wrong with the bill. I'm really pretty baffled and growing more and more angry when I consider how close this came to not passing. I think it's time to write some letters.

Post on the Health Care Bill in the House Coming...

I promise. It'll be up by this afternoon.

Election Results!

As my Statcounter account tells me, there were a lot of you who stopped in on Wednesday and Thursday, probably looking to find out what happened in the election. I apologize, profusely, for not having anything up. Long story short, wrapping up one job and starting another will take blogging time away from me.

Here are some results from the Issue elections (with some commentary)... if you're still curious about various municipal, judicial, and school board elections, the Franklin County Board of Elections has the full (unofficial) results posted here.

State Issues

#1, Veterans Bonus: Passed with 72.15% of the Vote.

#2, Livestock Care Board: Passed with 63.66% of the Vote.

#3, Casino Authorization: Passed 52.97% of the Vote.

County Issues

#4, Children's Services Levy: Passed with 61.60% of the Vote.

Local Issues

See the unofficial results page for the full rundown on your local issues.

Recap:

Essentially, all the big issues passed. Franklin County turnout was 30.70% (really? Seriously? What the hell were you doing that was more important than voting on a Tuesday in November?? We can't all have screwed up registration like me!) and statewide it was 40.29%. All I gotta say is not many people have a right to complain when the government starts doing what it wants without a sense of accountability.

I'm disappointed in Issue 1 passing. I've said it before, I have a lot of respect for the members of the Services and don't feel the government does enough for them...but the year we're closing libraries, and schools, and other humanitarian services because the state is BROKE isn't the right time to throw money at anyone.

I'm also disappointed about Issue 2. I don't feel it'll really serve anyone's best interest, except the ones who already have money and influence. Hopefully I'm wrong, and just being cynical...but I'm not sure about that.

I'm pretty ambivalent about the casinos. I can see it being a good thing, I can see it being a not so good thing. I don't think anyone really thought this out...they just wanted to put together something the voters would authorize, and left a lot of things open ended or full of loopholes. Now we see if that is abused or rectified, I suppose...

At least the Children's Services levy passed. The job of taking care of kids in need, whether foster care or those needing to be checked up on by social workers, is really too big for the resources we allocate to it. I would've been a little sick if voters had shot this down.

And that's all she wrote this time. Starting next week I'll be starting to look forward to next year's election...the big 2010 "referendum" on the Obama "revolution."

Election Day!

Today is an off-off election! Here in Ohio we've got a variety of municipal and school board races, a mess of levies for schools and the like, not to mention the casino issue and the proposed livestock board.

Head on out an get your little sticker, kids, and celebrate the fact you can do it and not get blown up.

Ohio State Issue 3: Casinos

So yet again, there is an issue on the ballot with a goal of legalizing gambling in Ohio. This time around it'll put a casino each in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, and Toledo.

There are a lot of numbers about how much money this proposal would bring into Ohio in both up front fees and tax revenue. Not to mention how it'll keep gambling dollars in Ohio, instead of to all the neighboring states and Canadian provinces (oh yes, because I totally go to Toronto to play my Texas Holdem). They also point out how the primary backers are prominent Ohioans with interests in the state.

Yes On Issue 3.com (Pro)

The opposition points out some good points, like how the deal isn't good enough for Ohio (taxes are capped lower than in other states, cash betting slips under the tax radar, the hidden cost of infrastructure). I am less concerned about the lack of "Buy Ohio" rules written into the bill...that's capitalism, baby. If Ohio business can't compete, then it's not up to Columbus to make up the difference. At the same time...we shouldn't be screwing ourselves just so we don't have to drive as far for a slot machine. I do like the arguments about "net job creation," which points out some good facts on how studies aren't always what they seem.

Truthpac.org (Against)

Final Amendment Language (Informative)

Official Argument For (Informative)

Official Argument Against (Informative)

My take? We've gotten along just fine without casinos, and I don't think this is the best way to go about introducing them now. I'm not sure this is a good deal for Ohio, and really...that's all we should be looking at, not convenience, not short term budget problems. I'd vote no.

Ohio State Issue 2: The Livestock Care Standards Board

In addition to the comment on Thursday's comment by the Buckeye Voice, I've heard some disturbing things about the Livestock Care Standards Board proposal from the Ohio Statehouse News Bureau.

1. The board would be appointed. The distance from the public it's supposed to serve bothers me, 'cause that's when the lobbyists can work best.
2. The money is very, very lopsided...millions of dollars raised to support the amendment, as opposed to a few thousand raised to oppose it. That smacks of corporate interest to me.
3. Small, "niche" farmers are feeling threatened all over the state. At first, I figured that wasn't a big deal (if you aren't up to snuff you go out of business, fact of life)...until I listened to the interview with a farmer who delivers fresh (within 48 hours) milk to his customers with a minimum of processing. I can see why big farmers would want him shut down, and could use the new board to make this farmer comply to standards that eliminate his competitive edge and skyrocket his costs.
4. The supporters don't seem to be proposing this to correct problems. They seem to just want to put another regulator into the stream of business to "make sure everything is well and good"...and that just sounds fishy to me.
5. It's an amendment to the state constitution, making it very, very hard to undo once put into law. Why be so permanent about this?

At first blush, it makes a lot of sense. "Let's put some vets and farmers on a board to figure out how to take care of the animals!" Until you realize...this isn't solving a problem or addressing specific concerns. There's no real voice for the opposition. And the board would be appointed and thus safe from any feedback the public has.

The more I think about this one, the less I like it. But it's YOUR vote, dammit, so decide for yourself. Here are some links...

Safe Local Food.org (Pro)

Human Society (Against)

Columbus Dispatch (Informative)

PDF of the Amendment (Informative)

Check it out. Do some digging. Decide if I'm being paranoid or am on to something.

PS: Sorry for the late post!