So, in response to the United States Senate version of Obamacare repeal, I am simply running out of ways to breathe new and fresh life into the term “mean-spirited.”
Let me get this right. The United States Senate takes the House version of Obamacare repeal – already saddled with a scorching CBO review of far worsening numbers of uninsured Americans, as well as a sub-30 percent approval rating with the public – and presents an approximately similar version of THAT proposal? The very same legislative proposal that, paraphrasing a conservative columnist in the New York Times recently, fundamentally looks like “a lousy piece of tax reform policy disguised as a lousy piece of health reform policy”?
So we are now to understand that replacing Obamacare with “something better” means raising the numbers of uninsured Americans, and cutting Medicaid and other safety net programs to help pay for tax cuts for wealthier Americans, the pharmaceutical industry, and health insurers? Seriously?
I have a new shorthand name for the entire “exclusion” narrative which the White House and GOP leadership seemed to have cloaked themselves in since the terribly divisive Presidential election campaign : “Cruella, Inc.”
For the non-Disney fans among you, Cruella de Vil is the notorious film character in 101 Dalmatians who has gone on to, in a Wikipedia description, become a “pop culture type epitomizing a person who is very, very mean.” Even more bizarre is that President Trump himself mentioned wishing for a Senate repeal proposal that was less “mean” than the preceding House version. But we got more of the same from the Senate anyway. The objective of Cruella’s energies was to turn 99 Dalmatians into material for a new fur coat. Congressional leaders appear hell-bent on turning health funds for the poor into tax cuts for the wealthy.
The independent Congressional Budget Office’s assessment of the Senate GOP proposal observed that the bill would increase the ranks of America’s uninsured by 22 million people by 2026 and decrease the numbers of Americans benefitting from the Medicaid program by 15 million people. Yes, the cost of the average insurance premium would go down by around 20 percent, but the tradeoff there is that our nation returns to the skimpy, skinny benefit insurance packages that bring higher deductible payments for families, along with the unwelcome surprises from the insurer about what the plan doesn’t cover once you get sick. In other words, the Senate bill brings us back to the good ol’ days: more uninsured Americans, skimpier and incomprehensible benefit packages, more medical bankruptcies for families, and lower tax rates for the pharmaceutical industry, health insurers, and the wealthy.
Serious-minded, thoughtful policy direction from our legislative leaders would subvert scorched-earth, hyper-partisan political objectives in favor of a path that continues to reduce the numbers of uninsured Americans AND curb the trajectory of rising health costs concurrently. This would be the most compassionate and morally responsible path.
At the conclusion of Disney’s 101 Dalmatians film, the evil Cruella’s plan crashes and burns, and she is detained and carted off to receive mental health services. Similarly, I wish no evil outcome for leaders in Congress -- just compassionate therapy. And ideally, covered by their health insurance.
Robert K. Ross, MD