Response from John Linder Re Health Care Reform

Dear Mr. Shirk:



Thank you for contacting me to express your views about President Barack Obama's health care reform proposals, and in particular, H.R. 3200. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.



As you may know, H.R. 3200 is a $1.3 trillion bill written entirely by House Democrats in consultation with the Obama Administration that will turn our health care system over to government bureaucrats. Instead of developing an initiative that would bolster the doctor-patient relationship, provide incentives for private insurance companies to make health insurance more affordable, maintain proper care for Medicare beneficiaries, and allow individuals to choose for themselves the type of care that is best for them, House Democrats -- led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and President Barack Obama -- have committed themselves to a government-run health care monopoly administered by appointed bureaucrats, number crunchers, and paper pushers who will serve the bottom line before addressing the real world needs of American taxpayers.



That is why I was proud to vote against this bill on July 16, 2009, when it was considered by the House Ways and Means Committee, and why I will continue to oppose it in the future.



Make no mistake; H.R. 3200 will bankrupt the United States. Even the head of the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) agreed that H.R. 3200 is financially unsustainable and would increase yearly deficits and our national debt for the foreseeable future. No matter for whom you voted last November, skyrocketing debt, higher taxes, and a multigenerational financial burden is certainly not the type of change that any American believes in.



For all the President's talk about bringing fiscal responsibility to Washington, D.C., H.R. 3200 is nothing more than old-fashioned taxing and spending. When you and I go shopping, we carefully compare prices and ensure that we buy exactly what we can afford, even if it's not precisely what we were hoping to get. For the President, however, nothing less than his dream health care plan will do, regardless of how much it costs the American taxpayer or how much crushing debt our grandchildren will have to deal with fifty or sixty years from now. In order to pay for his dream plan, the President has advocated raising over $800 billion in taxes on small businesses, high income earners, and even those making under $10,000 a year. Nobody is safe from this tax increase.



It would seem that raising $800 billion in taxes should be more than sufficient to fund any program, but once again, when shopping with the President, price tags are meaningless. As such, President Obama has called for massive Medicare and Medicaid cuts totaling roughly $500 billion; cuts coming mostly from Medicare Advantage, skilled nursing facilities, hospice care, home health programs, and hospitals. Apparently it's not just the "filthy rich" and the successful small businesses that need to pay their "fair share;" the sick, aged, poor, and dying will pay as well.



Of course, once we all pay, we should expect to get the best care imaginable, right? Wrong. Government-run health care systems in other countries have long waiting lists for access to doctors and life-saving medical procedures. Waiting lists are so ubiquitous in Canada that the country's Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that access to a waiting list did not equal access to quality health care.



Health care programs in Europe are governed by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who tell doctors what treatments can and can't be prescribed based solely on a simple cost-benefit analysis of how much a person's life is worth. In order to control costs in Great Britain, the country's bureaucrats have placed a price on life: 30,000 pounds, or roughly $48,000, per year. If a revolutionary cancer drug costs more than that to save a person's life, it's simply not worth the money to the British government. While I accept that cost containment is necessary, this type of life and death decision should never be made by a nameless, faceless government worker. It should be made by doctors, patients, and family members who have the best interests of patients in mind.



Finally, I am concerned about the lightning quick timeline that the President and Speaker Pelosi have committed themselves to. H.R. 3200 is over 1,000 pages, costs an estimated $1.3 trillion, has yet to be fully examined by the CBO or any Member of Congress, and will have untold implications for decades to come. Legislation that completely transforms our nation should have more debate and consideration then a mere four weeks. The House Ways and Means Committee, on which I serve, had a paltry one day to consider the final version of this bill. Our democracy demands that we spend more than one day, and the American people should be outraged at this total disregard for essential civil discourse. Our Founding Fathers would be appalled by this miscarriage of democracy.



That being said, I am more than willing to work with my colleagues in the House of Representatives, President Obama, and Speaker Pelosi to slow this process down and allow the American people to fully understand what H.R. 3200 will mean for their lives. I can only hope that the President and the Speaker will answer the call of the American people and carefully consider H.R. 3200 without bowing to special interests and artificial timelines.



Thank you again for contacting me. If I may be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to call on me.


Sincerely,

John Linder
Member of Congress