Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Pass the Bill to Find Out What's in It

(First, a clarification: I saw Juan Williams on The O'Reilly Factor equating opposition to Obama policies with racism. In my last post I guessed that it was on Hannity's show.)

Surprises regarding the health care evil continue to trickle out. In today's NYTimes is an article detailing some of those little nuggets. Here are a couple (from the article):

"For a year after giving birth, nursing mothers must be allowed breaks on the job to express breast milk as often as necessary, and a private place to do so that’s not a bathroom." (This is for all businesses with more than fifty employees.)

Sounds great, right? Couldn't be ANY problems with this, could there? All businesses, after all, have plenty of extra space that they can turn into a "private area" that nursing mothers can use "as often as necessary." I'm sure this won't have any effect on small businesses....

I've often wondered why anyone would go to a tanning salon, but I have a couple of young friends who do (incidentally, indoor tanning before the age of 35 increases the risk of developing melanoma by 75%). Beginning in July, indoor tanning salon treatments will be taxed at a rate of ten percent. But, you know, the economy isn't struggling or anything so I'm sure this won't have any effect on those small businesses...

Beginning next year employers will have to spell out the monetary value of health benefits on W-2 forms. Great. That extra accounting won't be any problem at all. I'm sure this won't have any effect on small businesses...

And there's more. Much, much more.

(Hat tip to Ed Morrissey at Hot Air.)

More later...

8 comments:

  1. I think the greatest monetary impact is going to be felt as the insurance industry re-adjusts. As you know (and I will link to for others: http://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=3673) the fine for not having insurance is unenforceable. This means, when coupled with the fact insurers will no longer be able to deny coverage because of an existing condition, that there will be no reason for anyone to have insurance unless they are already sick, as insurers see plummeting profits the market is going to take a major dive. Insurance companies are among the largest players in the financial market (few hundred billion or so) and the demise of an industry wreaks of bad tidings for us all.

    And hey! how about some posts regarding the disconcerting number of doctors we have ALREADY seen leave their posts because of this new law?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually, I don't think Obamacare will sink the "markets", as Alex prognosticates. The insurance companies insure a great deal more than health and the public will be made aware of impending financial doom before it occurs. The markets are efficient. If you are thinking it right now, the market has already factored it in to the current price.

    As for only signing up once you get sick, that is easily remedied by existing open enrollment policies. Unless a person (or family member) gets sick during this open enrollment period, planning to sign up to take care of a specific malady is probably not a great plan.

    Don't start digging the hole for the insurance industry quite yet.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here's my question. What about people who don't sign up for health insurance during an open enrollment period but who then get sick or have an accident and need insurance? I've looked and looked and can't find any explanation on how they will be handled.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Such people won't exist mom. Everyone will sign up!

    Why on Earth would there be non-compliance with a law passed by our government? I mean, can you cite any examples of non-compliance with any other law?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Since there is little enforcement written into this hastily and poorly written bill, I suspect this will be one of the fixes that will have to be worked out before 2014. My guess is, if this monstrosity has not been repealed by then, that they will receive treatment but at great financial cost to themselves... not to exceed 2.5% of their annual income unless they earn more than $200,000, in which case not to exceed 25% of their gross earnings. Of course this is purely speculation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Can't we just wait a year to see how this whole thing works before we get our panties in a twist? Even Ted Kennedy gave No Child Left Behind a little time.

    Either way, I will enjoy a few more years on my parent's health care while I volunteer. Thanks for the free time, Obama.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You know Kennedy sponsored No Child Left Behind, right?

    ReplyDelete
  8. We don't have a year. On January 1st, I can no longer use my HSA card to buy non-prescription items. In 2013, I can only add $2500 to my HSA. My wife is handicapped and we max out our $6150 deductible by March every year.

    By reducing the HSA, I will now have to come up with $6150 by March every year instead of having all year to contribute to the HSA.

    Yes it is wonderful that my daughter can stay on my insurance until she is 26. I like that very much. The HSA part and the non-prescription items part are BOTH changes to my existing plan (despite The One's promise that our existing plans will remain unchanged if we want). They also represent new out of pocket expenses. (Another broken promise). The more I learn about this plan, the worse it gets.

    ReplyDelete