The Adobe Flash Player is required to view this multimedia interactive. Get it here.

GOP health care stance poses risks

Is your “unlimited” data being throttled?
New 4 min. ago
Kasich wants 100 gigabits per second state network, smarter smartphones
Updated 29 min. ago
Cracker Barrel manager accused of embezzling $2K
New 29 min. ago
Benefit dinner held for girl who died in car accident
2:00 p.m.
Wright-Patterson relatively unscathed in Obama defense budget
1:46 p.m.
> More headlines

By Jack Torry, Staff Writer Updated 11:50 PM Saturday, January 16, 2010

WASHINGTON — As congressional Democrats edge closer to a final vote to overhaul the health care system, Republicans are poised to oppose the measure while insisting they had better ideas all along.

But there is a drawback: Independent analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office as well as health care experts say plans championed by such GOP lawmakers as Steve Austria of Beavercreek and Jim Jordan of Urbana would extend insurance to only a fraction of the 46 million people currently uncovered.

For Republicans, the political stakes are enormous. Although polls show large numbers of Americans oppose the sweeping overhaul of health care favored by Senate and House Democrats, President Barack Obama has made clear he is fully prepared to portray Republicans in the fall elections as opposed to any serious changes.

Throughout the past year House Republicans have presented a series of market-oriented ideas on health care, such as limiting the financial damages from malpractice lawsuits. They want smaller companies to band together in an effort to find less expensive insurance policies. And they want Americans to funnel more pretax dollars into health savings accounts, which can be used to pay for medical expenses and deductibles.

Local GOP remarks

“I believe that a bill I could have supported would have been focused on the fundamental concern of lowering the cost of health insurance, and making it more affordable and accessible,’’ Austria said. “The bill we passed out of the House did the opposite,” referring to the original House bill passed in November.

Jordan complained that Democrats “probably never were going to take our approach seriously.” But he insisted the GOP proposals would “help with costs. We think it’s credible and we also think it’s one the American people like.”

In a letter last November to House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, the Congressional Budget Office concluded that the Republican plan would reduce medical malpractice costs. But in a blow to Republicans, the CBO also calculated that by 2019, the Republican plan would extend insurance to just 3 million people. That would leave 52 million nonelderly residents without coverage.

By contrast, the final compromise version that Senate and House Democrats likely will agree on will extend coverage to 31 million people at a 10-year price tag ranging from $871 billion to $1 trillion.

Nonpartisan points

Ken Thorpe, a professor of health policy management at Emory University in Atlanta who served in the Clinton administration, said Democrats folded in some of the Republican ideas. He pointed out that the final bill will create large health care exchanges where the uninsured can select from a number of private plans that save them money. He said that accomplishes in a different way the Republican demand that small companies band together to buy less expensive policies.

But Republicans steered away from requiring small companies to insure their workers, mandating that individuals buy insurance, and providing federal financial assistance to middle income people. They warn that small companies fear new financial penalties on health care, as well as the likelihood at the end of this year of higher taxes when the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire.

Share this article