Toomey for Senate

November 11, 2009

By Pat Toomey
Philadelphia Daily News
 
This past weekend, the House of Representatives voted for the largest possible government takeover of health care, despite bipartisan opposition.  Thirty-nine House Democrats, including two Pennsylvania Democrats, joined 176 Republicans in opposing this massive $1.2 trillion change in our health care system.
 
Fortunately, the rashness of the House Democrats is not being matched in the Senate.  A few Senate Democrats have wisely put the breaks on this move toward national bankruptcy.  After promising a vote on health care legislation by autumn, top Senate Democrats are now saying their legislation could be delayed into 2010.
 
The Senate Democrats’ apprehension is good news.  Voters made their voices heard in New Jersey and Virginia last week.  Months of frustration and concern over the economy, the unemployment rate, and the rising debt culminated in an electoral rebuke, and at least some Democrats in Washington are starting to listen.
 
But this new standstill should not be an excuse for doing nothing.  Too often, Washington is plagued by a “my way or the highway” mentality that does little to solve our nation’s problems.
 
Our health care system badly needs to be reformed.  Over the past thirty years, health care costs have soared past inflation, and many hard-working Pennsylvania families simply cannot afford to buy insurance. 
 
In the spirit of bipartisan health care reform, there are a number of sensible reforms that Congress can rally around that will go a long way towards bringing down the cost of health care and health insurance.  And these reforms will neither bankrupt the country nor force people to lose their current, private coverage as the House bill would.
 
First, we should eliminate the unfair discrimination against individually-purchased health insurance inherent in our tax code.  Currently, employers are able to deduct the cost of health insurance they buy for their employees, while individuals are not permitted to deduct the cost of buying their own health insurance.  This makes insurance much more expensive for those whose employers do not offer it.  We can eliminate this unfairness by providing individuals with the same tax deduction that employers get when buying health insurance.  This idea should not be controversial.  Both Democrats and Republican can agree that it’s unfair to penalize people simply because they don’t have employer-provided insurance.
 
Second, we should allow individuals to buy health insurance across state lines.  Currently, consumers are captive to the limited options available in their state.  This system limits competition and breeds monopoly, fewer choices, and exorbitant prices.  In Pennsylvania, for example, BlueCross/BlueShield occupies over 50% of the health insurance market.  When a single male buys insurance in the Commonwealth, he is forced to pay for 52 mandated coverage areas, even if he has no interest in, say, maternity coverage or a marriage therapist.  Allowing Pennsylvanians to buy a health insurance plan that best fits their needs—regardless of what state they come from—will inject a shot of badly needed competition into the system at no cost to taxpayers.
 
Third, we should pass reasonable tort reform.  According to a 2005 study, 93% of high-risk specialist doctors in Pennsylvania practice defensive medicine like ordering unnecessary tests and procedures in order to diminish the risk of being sued.  This raises health costs dramatically. In addition, a 2006 report demonstrated that Pennsylvania is losing full-time physicians due to rising insurance costs.  Tort reform can help stem this tide.  President Obama has expressed interest in this reform, and hopefully, that will mean congressional Democrats who have frequently buckled under pressure from the deep-pocketed and well-organized trial lawyers will have a change of heart.
 
Fourth, we should allow small businesses and organizations to band together and form associations that would be able to purchase health insurance under federal regulation on behalf of their members.  Association health plans create a larger risk, driving costs down, and allowing associations to preempt costly state regulations.  This will allow small businesses to compete with larger corporations when it comes to providing their employees with health insurance.
 
Fifth, we need to make health care costs more transparent.  The best way to keep costs down is to make the costs visible.
 
These reforms may not be as radical as a government takeover, but they will go a long way toward helping hard working Pennsylvanians reduce their health care costs and gain insurance coverage for many of the uninsured.  They don’t rely on massive new government spending, debt, or tax increases that would kill jobs, and they wouldn’t drive anyone off the private coverage plans with which they’re now satisfied.  And these commonsense reforms should be able to pick up the bipartisan support needed to move our country forward on health care in the kind of unified way that was missing from last weekend’s House vote.