National Health Reform and You (Part VI)
Sep 24 2009
Action in Congress heated up this week as the Senate Finance Committee began considering more than 500 amendments to Chairman Max Baucus’ (D-MT) draft legislation.
Meanwhile, a group of 7 bipartisan moderates (Senators McCaskill, D-MO; Ben Nelson, D-NE; Collins, R-ME; Lieberman, I-CT; Snowe, R-ME; Landrieu, D-LA; and Wyden, D-OR) who have various concerns with the Baucus bill are collectively considering options to reshape health reform legislation once it reaches the Senate floor for action.
In the House, leaders are negotiating to try to build a compromise plan from three different bills approved by three different committees.
MOAA contacted members of Sen. Baucus’ staff on Wednesday about a provision in his plan that would assess a fee on insurers offering “cadillac” plans. We received assurances that this initiative would explicitly exclude TRICARE, TFL and VA coverage.
A knowledgeable White House official we contacted Thursday morning offered a similar assurance that “The President is committed to ensuring that any national health reform plan that may be enacted will explicitly exclude any changes for TRICARE, TRICARE For Life, or VA programs or beneficiaries.”
Further, in a colloquy between House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Veterans Affairs Ranking Minority Member Steve Buyer (R-IN), Waxman reassured Buyer that the House bill will not disadvantage veterans or military beneficiaries, and agreed to various modifications proposed to make those protections explicit.
2 Responses to “National Health Reform and You (Part VI)”
Assurances “that the House bill will not disadvantage veterans or military beneficiaries” is not reassuring. Such dialog presupposes static analysis. Let’s be clear, massive structural change is the intent. If the health industry is turned upside down, the ground on which military retirees and veterans depend for care gives way. When price controls reduce medical professionals to blue-collar workers, talented people will no longer go into medicine. When doctors, as we know them today, are gone, protecting programs is meaningless.
I am surprised that any military member and especially any retired member would accept spoken “assurances” from political officials without something specified in writing. We need language in the bill or a specific amendment to reference and support, not a blind following based on verbal assurances.
I was assured by my recruiter I would have free healthcare for life too!
How many times have we heard throughout our careers, “it’s not in the regulation” or “where specifically in the AF Instruction does it say that? ”
Remember, once the bill has passed, regardless of what assurance you have gotten verbally, it is the written law that will dictate.
Remember trying to change a law is MUCH more difficult than changing a bill before it is signed into law.