Republican Viewpoints on National Healthcare

re human beingsan Views Towards wellness reverence Re nervous strain From the re e reallydayan viewpoint, any form of issueized or partly re human racealized everyday wellness cargon is unacceptable. Any general delivery brass depart limit for emolument unblock enterprise and thus vio freshs our form of organization. It testament increase measurees and the overall cost of health safekeeping. Publicly delivered health electric charge lead feat the fibre of trouble to go d throw by extinctright hindering the quantity of health distri stille suppliers as soundly as the spirit of c be rendered by remaining healthc atomic number 18 providers.republicans oppose a worldwide public health economic aid delivery canment primarily because of meshwork set down trade constitutional issues, financial issues and quality of c ar issues. notwithstanding organisation meddling in the occult lend unrivalledself of medicine and healthcare go come out of the clos et be detrimental to many Americans. In the 1990s, global issueized healthcare was proposed by the Clinton administration. The proposed law failed collectible to the fact that the Republican Party had gained delay of the dramatic art and senate for the first time in over fifty years.During the 2008 presidential election, one of President Obamas direct campaign promises was popular healthcare. The intent has bring ond a new national debate on the pros and cons of a universal healthcare outline. Proposals from the House and Senate vary greatly and testament save to be reconciled during the legislative reconciliation process. Interestingly, both parties favor some form of health care insurance reform plainly the concept of universal coverage offered with a single public compriseer or both private and public payer alternatives has founderd parameter.Republicans take a crap adamantly fence the public picking because it alters the free enterprise for profit healthcare system of rules currently and traditionally in existence in the Untied States. The public natural selection provide radically alter the environment of the core constituency of the Republican Party. Looking at the constituency of the Republican Party, there are certain positions that the Republicans should locate forward on the national healthcare debate to best face the partys core constituents. Traditionally, private practice physicians, for profit hospitals and pharmaceutic manufacturers have been a core constituency of the Republican Party.The Huffington Post late pointed out doctors traditional opposition to any form of expand organisation health care or fondized medicine. The AMA (American aesculapian association) has fought almost every major effort at health care reform of the last 70 years. The groups reputation on this matter is so infamous that historians pinpoint it with creating the ominous sounding phrase socialized medicine in the early decades of the 1900s . The AMA used it to mean any kind of proposal that tough an increased role for the government in the health care system. (The Huffington Post) The American Medical Association has gone on record as debate respective(a) provisions of the Houses current health care reform bill. Doctors, particularly private practice physicians, have long complained almost any form of socialized medicine because they know it volition advantageously reduce the economic viability of the practice. Likewise, for-profit hospitals have a long history of opponent any form of socialized medicine. The American Hospital Association recently put out a formal evokement on the house version of health care reform. Specifically, expanding the number of concourse in Medicaid course of study to 150 part of the poverty level is problematic at a time when states are struggling with bud labour shortfalls and fee rank for hospitals proceed to be cut. While a public option with negotiated rates for those to a higher place 150 percent of the poverty level is an improvement, we remain concerned that the program would still, in part, be ground on historically low Medicare rates. (Umbenstock) The American Hospital Association is concerned that any healthcare reform with an expanded public option may lower already low payment rates.Moreover, the American Hospital Association is also concerned that payment rates under an expanded public option will be based on previously minimal Medicare rates. For this reason, for profit hospitals have long lobbied for and sided with the Republican Party knowing that their profitability and ability to compete will be sluicetually dissolved if the pending public option is passed. pharmaceutical Manufacturers have been a traditional core constituency of the Republican Party because of the Partys past opposition to any form of nationalized or socialized medicine.The primary trade group for pharmaceutical manufacturers has also put forth a statement on the house health care reform bill. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of American (PhRMA) policy statement says The 1,990-page House draft bill, which we are currently reviewing, contains a number of problematic provisions for seniors, long-sufferings, and the continued emergence of new therapies that not solitary(prenominal) improve or save lives, but ultimately help reduce the burden of health care be in America (Johnson).Democrats have long vilified Pharmaceutical companies for their for profit bloodline practices and commercial interests. Thus, Pharmaceutical companies are one of the largest campaign donors to the Republican Party. some(prenominal) portions of the currently proposed bill will dramatically limit their profit and accordingly their ability to participate in and compete with new health care products. Universal health care is inconsistent with the traditional American private, for profit, free enterprise system based health care business model.From a ph ysicians perspective, a system of universal health care could be compared to indentured servitude. The government would be in complete restrain of whom the physician treats, what modalities they use to treat the patient, and how much they are paid. Moreover, for the individual health care proletarian, limiting or mandating the service contracts would limit the workers freedom to do business in a free market. The New England Journal of medicine recently conducted a survey of physician views on new public insurance option and Medicare expansion.The survey was a statistically disarrange sampling based on 5,157-physician questionnaire responses. The survey presented three methods of expanding coverage, including expanding the current public provider Medicare along with private options, private options only and public options only. Ninety-two percent of private practice physicians (practice owners) oppose socializing all health care into one single public option. Thirty-two percent of private practice physicians (practice owners) favor abolishing all public options which would presumably include Medicare.Over half(a) of all of the physicians in the study favored expanding care through private options and the, expansion of Medicare to include adults between the ages of 55 and 64 years (Keyhani). The randomized physician survey demonstrates that physicians are extremely skeptical of any public option beyond expanding Medicare. Physicians fear a public option will reduce their personal income as tumesce as their ability to inspire and deliver a full range of medical checkup services. Physicians are well aware of the longstanding low Medicare reimbursement rates and limitations of coverage.Physicians do not motivation to see to a greater extent of the same with a public option that will throw out lower the add together paid for care and limit the nitty-gritty of care that the government will pay, despite a patients actual medical needs. Pharmaceutical Manuf acturers and for profit hospitals also are powerfully concerned that any public option beyond a supple expansion of Medicare will effectively put them out of business. PhRMA says that, the Congressional work out Office (CBO) has warned that the House bill would ultimately lead to a 20 percent increase in Part D premiums paid by beneficiaries.Whats more, according to CBO, distinguished a mandatory rebate on Part D prescription drugs would reduce inducings to ornament in the question and development of new discoveries for diseases (Johnson) Simply put, pharmaceutical manufacturers will not invest if it is not profitable. For-profit hospitals are also concerned that a public option will ultimately translate to less coverage and lower reimbursement rates. The American Hospital Association, which has over 5000 member hospitals, has stated that the bill will further cut reimbursement rates. AHA) The current bill also specifically restricts physicians from owning hospitals and refer ring their office patients to their own hospitals. This directly feigns their profit as well as raising free enterprise and trade issues. Historically and culturally, the United States health care system has been based on a for profit private enterprise. The public option puts government in what has traditionally been a private for profit enterprise. serious fifty years ago, Americans would have screamed communism at the concept of national socialized medicine.In 1961 when the idea of Medicare came along American Medical Association spoke out against it through Ronald Reagan. Reagan said One of the traditional methods of imposing state-ism or socialism on a people has been through medicine. It is very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly cant afford it. (The Huffington Post). Essentially, he was stating that the most common way of inflicting socialism is throug h a government run healthcare.Legally, restrictions that limit the free market may be see as a violation of the constitution. The American Bar Association states, some(prenominal) President Obama and the Congress decide to do with health care reform, they essentialiness do within the constitutional limits off their respective branch and our nations courts will ensure that those limits are respected (Lamm). Although health care insurance companies are not subject to antitrust (monopoly) laws as state laws govern them, a ederal option, which is included with universal health care, may create unfair competition and violate anti trust laws as well as the commerce clause of the constitution. Interestingly, the proposed bill mandates that every American must pay a tax for free health insurance dismantle Americans that dont want health insurance coverage. The groin route Journal says that, the requirement in the plan laid out by Max Baucus, that every American have health insurance , makes current proposals unconstitutional. non just unconstitutional, mind you, but profoundly unconstitutional (Jones).Republicans must do all in their power to preserve constitutional rights that will be affected by a public healthcare option. The way that national health care is set up could be financially disconfirming if the bill, H. R. -676, were to be passed. As Avery Johnson states in the Wall street Journal, Tenn dish out runway be show that the public health-insurance proposal by House Democrats could bankrupt the federal government. (Johnson, Tennessee). Tennessees arranged a public insurance program that was interchangeable to a statewide health care to insure those without insurance.It started in 1994 and by 2005 Tennessee was forced to shut the program down due to high expenses. Basically, Tennessee well-tried to have a statewide health insurance system like to national health care and they went bankrupt. This is a reasonable model of what would eliminate on a more widespread scale. There are bigeminal financial reasons that cause a universal health care system to not work. To achieve the amount of notes to make it possible to have a universal health care system there are many sacrifices that must be made. Payroll tax, which is a 7% social security tax that we pay when we buy something, will go up.Income tax will also go up dramatically, affecting many lives. In fact, there may have to be new taxes set into place just to be able to maintain the universal healthcare or the required payments will go down. This will in turn affect the doctors by decreasing incentive. Another factor that will affect their incentive is coverage benefits. Coverage benefits will be decreased as a result of universal healthcare. For example, insurance will not cover elected care treatments, much(prenominal) as breast augmentations, cosmetics, chiropractics, etc.Payment to the specialists, such as brain surgeons, heart surgeons, etc. , will be let down dram atically. Progression in the field of medicine will dwindle due to a lack of money for clinical research. A physician to fancy more about a procedure or to experiment normally does clinical research. It takes a lot of money and time and is not funded by the government it comes from the physicians pocket. If the physicians pay lowers by so much they will not be able to do research. All of this will lead to a diminishing rate of medical progression that may ultimately come to an absolute halt.Furthermore the government will provide us, if the bill passes, with inexpensive generic drugs. This will cause the name brand companies to lose customers and money and will prevent them from ontogenesis any new prescription medicine. When funding inevitably runs low, rationing of people will begin to occur. Old people wont get care because they are old, and smokers wont get lung surgery because they are smokers. This rationing is unethical in many different ways but would be unavoidable. Even m ore unethical, is that insidious rationing, that happens in Canada, would come into play. baneful rationing is hidden rationing where, for example, a cancer patient would hold off for treatment because they were about to die. The cancer patient would wait long decent that death occurred before the needed chemotherapy. Sadly, this often occurs in Canada, due to their system of universal health care. If this happens in the United States, it would be too late to take back the legislation. However, if properly informed, there would be less supporters of the health care bill because the general populace would be unwilling to place to a plan that denied them needed coverage.Likewise, instituting torte form will partly generate expenses for this costly health plan. This is a lawsuit cap used in some other countries. If a drunken doctor accidentally cuts a healthy patients leg off, the doctor will only be able to be sued for a low set amount of money. This will save the government a minu te amount of money that would be used to support everybodys health care, while that patient would be handicapped forever without adequate compensation.Even so, Tim Foley has stated the unbiased Congressional Budget Office in 2004 conceded that the legislation for tort reform, even if it instituted a federal cap, would barely dent health care cost (Foley). The cause and effect impact on health care worker profitability including nurse pay, private practice physician pay, for profit hospitals, for profit health care insuring systems, pharmaceutical companies and other health care workers and entities will be enormous. No doubt lawyers will litigate for years the constitutionality of various healthcare reform provisions.Another concern from the Republican viewpoint is the fiscal issue of how to pay for either universal health care or a public option. Simply put, where will the money come from to pay for healthcare particularly given the current economic crisis? Next, how will a univer sal public option effect access to care, quality of care and cost of care. As the financial aid towards funding universal health care bottoms out, the quality and accessibility of health care would go down. With government in control of health care and providing insurance for all they will have less money to spend on better quality hospitals.In the Tenn caveat experiment it showed before and after pictures of the work places that were used. Hospitals had turned into summing up trailers barely big enough for an examination room with outdated computers and equipment. heavy the Quality of facilities means the lowering of quality of care given to the patients thereby increasing the number of people who go to a doctor and are unable to receive quality treatment. Thus quality of life becomes worse, and one would hope proper treatment came quickly enough to evade more serious conditions and/or death.Access to patients is denied as the quality and quantity of health care providers is decr eased by the inadequate organization and funding of a public option. One such thing noted about doctors go about with a decision to participate in a public option is that often the ones who care for our most vulnerable patients are the most sternly impacted. In communities across this nation, physicians are faced with early retirement or leaving patients that need them. The bottom line access to care is compromised. (AHA). The Health vexation Associations of America view this is as a topic of controversy that would indeed change lives greatly.Many associations including the American Hospital Association, American nubble Association, and even the American Bar Association have spoke out against health care reform including universal health care and a public option. In Conclusion, the Republican Party views the aspects of a system of universal healthcare from a cynical viewpoint. It seems that free healthcare is to good to be true and they say it is. Universal healthcare or a publi c option is unconstitutional by violation of the free enterprise system. With the saving in its current recession it is believed, by reforming ealthcare, the government will financially cripple the United States permanently. Also, almost like reverting back to a primitive state, quality of care and the access thereof could decline to impermissible standards. Now the republicans uphold the struggle against any bill passing through senate. Works Cited AHA Issues Liability Reform. American Hospital Association. American Hospital Association, 15 Oct. 2009. Web. 3 Nov. 2009. . Foley, Tim. Avoid Tort Reform in the Health take Bill at All Costs Universal Health Care Change. org. Universal Health Care Change. rg. 17 Mar. 2009. 28 Oct. 2009 . GOP Health Care Talking Points. GOP. gov The Website of Republicans in Congress. N. p. , 11 May 2009. Web. 3 Nov. 2009. . Huffington Post, The. American Medical Association Trying To Torpedo Health Care Reform Again. http//www. huffingtonpo st. com/. N. p. , 11 June 2009. Web. 28 Oct. 2009. . Johnson, Ken. PHRMA PhRMA Statement on House Tri-Committee Health Reform Bill. PHRMA Home. N. p. , 14 July 2009. Web. 3 Nov. 2009. . Jones, Ashby. Is Health-Care Reform Unconstitutional (Part II) Law Blog WSJ. WSJ Blogs WSJ. The Wall path Journal, 18 Sept. 2009. Web. 3 Nov. 2009. . JOHNSON, AVERY. Tennessee Experiments High Cost Fuels Health-Care Debate WSJ. com. Business intelligence agency &038 Financial word The Wall Street Journal WSJ. com. 17 Aug. 2009. 28 Oct. 2009 . Keyhani, Salomeh , and Alex Federman. NEJM &8212 Doctors on Coverage &8212 Physicians Views on a New Public indemnification selection and Medicare Expansion. The New England Journal of medicament Research &038 Review Articles on Diseases &038 Clinical Practice. N. p. , 1 Oct. 2009. Web. 3 Nov. 2009. . Lamm, Carolyn. Our Constitution, Debate it, Discuss it, Understand it. ABAnow. N. p. , 16 Sept. 2009. Web. 27 Oct. 2009. . McArdle, Megan. Why I Oppose content Health Care The Atlantic Business Channel. The Atlantic Business Channel. 28 July 2009. 29 Oct. 2009 . National health insurance Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 6 Oct. 2009. 28 Oct. 2009 . Shear, Michael D.. Obama Pushes indemnification Reforms washingtonpost. com. washingtonpost. com nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines. 15 Aug. 2009. 8 Oct. 2009 . Umbenstock, Rich. AHA atmospheric pressure Release AHA Statement on House Health Reform Proposal. American Hospital Association. American Hospital Association, 29 Oct. 2009. Web. 3 Nov. 2009. . Time Magazine. Medicine Debate Over National Health Insurance TIME. Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews TIME. com. 12 Oct. 1970. 28 Oct. 2009 . Wall Street Journal. The Public Option Makes a Comeback WSJ. com. Business News &038 Financial News The Wall Street Journal WSJ. com. 22 Oct. 2009. 28 Oct. 2009 .