I am against HR 193, the legislation co-sponsored by Reps. Stark,
Schakowsky, Ellison, and Blumenauer (all D), the so-called "AmeriCare"
plan. It is my belief that this is the wrong way to go on for the United States.
Under this plan both employers and patients would be penalized financially
if they rejected coverage, a patently unfair and high-handed way of
forcing coverage and the costs attached thereto upon businesses and
patients, especially working people, who may consider health insurance
unaffordable. In addition there are privacy concerns as more and more
records about our health issues are kept in the computers of faceless
bureaucrats, who have an unfortunate tendency to fail to maintain adequate
What about using incentives and changes in the law to cut costs instead?
That would make coverage more affordable and encourage more people and
more employers to buy coverage, while still retaining freedom of choice as
consumers in the marketplace. I can think of a few -- limit malpractice
and pharmaceutical product lawsuit damages to $250,000 per count, cut
patent coverage for new drugs back to seven years, and speed FDA approval
of new drugs. For a bottom income tier of society unable to otherwise
afford coverage, money could still be funnelled to states to provide for
their health departments as they see fit (as is already done, in fact),
without adding more bureaucracy to the Federal Government.
I'm sure lawmakers have the capacity to research and propose many other
cost-cutting ways to make it easier for patients and employers to get
coverage. High taxation and penalties only make it harder and more
expensive. I say NO to HR 193 "AmeriCare."