Read about ObamaCare from Peter Ferrara at The Heatland Institute: Rationing, Higher Taxes, and Lower Quality Care. The pdf of the entire study can be found here. Print it out, read it, move it forward. The report is a scathing and frank overview of ObamaCare. Peter Ferrara’s bio can be found on Limit Taxes:

Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Institute for Policy Innovation, and General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under the first President Bush. He is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School.

From The Heart Land Institute article introduction:

President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats are rushing to enact legislation that would overhaul the way health care is financed and delivered in the United States. It would dramatically increase the role of government in virtually all aspects of health care. Such an initiative should be carefully studied to determine whether it actually solves problems in the health care arena or makes them worse.

National health plans similar to what President Obama is proposing have been adopted in other countries. They always start out promising universal access and free or reduced-price health care. But they end up with massive institutional bureaucracies whose purpose and function are to deny health care and medical services. Often they fail to control spending despite resorting to withholding care to politically weak groups.

President Obama insists that his plan to fundamentally restructure health care is needed to reduce costs. He has touted a report from his Council of Economic Advisors that specifies exactly how that would be done. That report, however, elaborates a policy of thorough government health care rationing achieved through government control of the financing and delivery of care.

This study will explain how the health policy changes President Obama and Congressional Democrats support would cause millions of Americans to lose their choice of doctors and insurance coverage, require that access to care be strictly rationed, and cause the quality of care to deteriorate. Despite all this sacrifice, nationalizing health insurance in America would require major tax increases, slow economic growth, and increase the national debt.

Part 2 of this study describes the Obama health plan as it is presented in legislation being debated in Congress. Part 3 explains how the Obama health plan would result in the loss of freedom of choice. In particular, it shows how you would not be free under President Obama’s plan to keep your current health insurance because employers would “dump”millions of people into a one-size-fits-all government-run program. Part 4 explains how the Obama plan would give government the power to ration health care, including the power to deny access to the elderly, who need it the most.

Part 5 explains how, despite rationing, the Obama health plan would increase health costs. Part 6 describes the intractable entitlement crisis America already faces based on the undeliverable promises made for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Obama health plan would recklessly add yet another unfunded middle-class entitlement program, this one giving subsidies for families earning $88,000 per year and more.

Part 7 discusses the health policy reforms America should adopt, based on expanding patient power and choice in a market-based health care system. These reforms would provide a true health care safety net that would ensure no one suffers without essential health care while reducing costs and preserving those parts of the current health care system that work. Part 8 presents a brief summary and concluding remarks.

Today, Americans enjoy the best health care and medical services in the world, an important part of our high standard of living. President Obama has said “my view is that health care reform should be guided by a simple principle: fix what’s broken and build on what works.” But that is not what his plan would do. Instead, he would tear down what is good about the current system and replace it with old-fashioned and outdated socialized medicine policies adopted by other countries, reflecting their lower living standards. It would be a terrible mistake.

Move it forward.

Related: Read My Discussion With Lewis K. Uhler – How 5 Republican Senators May Hold The Future Of Healthcare In Their Hands. Lewis K. Uhler held many positions under Ronald Reagan and is the Founder and President of the Limit Taxes organization. I cannot express the importance of getting this information out there. Call Sean, Rush, or Glenn and get the message out not only of the information in the post concerning Mr. Uhler, but the above information from Peter Ferrara as well. Send it as a tip to your favorite mega-blogger.

Get. The. Word. Out.

In other news and opinion:

White House: You’re not un-American, but you are still corporate shills so just pipe down

Be careful: DOT inspector general challenges O’s stimulus spending.

Overflow crowd at Maryland town hall.

Obama Kabuki theater in Portsmouth; crowd chants “YES, WE CAN!;” little girl laments “mean things” on protest signs; O lies about single-payer supportin-portsmouth/

Correcting misinformation about ObamaCare

You have got to be kidding me. Obama: Government health care will be like, um, the post office.

More here (emphasis mine):

In a just-completed New Hampshire town hall meeting, President Obama stated that he never said he supported a single-payer health care system. But as clearly evidenced by this video, in 2003, he declared: “I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care plan.”

Meanwhile, at another point of today’s town hall meeting, Obama was pushing back against the idea that the creation of a new government-run plan would drive private insurers out of business, and he said that UPS and FedEx were doing fine, but “it’s the post office that’s always having problems.” Oops!

The gaffe arose from the inherent contradiction of those arguing for the introduction of a government government-run plan. On the one hand, Obama and other supporters of the idea argue that we need to have a strong government plan to create more efficiency, drive down prices, and “keep private insurers honest.” Yet at the same time, they have to make it appear weaker to push back against those of us who argue that it will threaten private insurance and move us toward a single-payer system. So then you get statements in which Obama, in the course of arguing for a government-run system, takes a shot at the government-run post office.

And Obama makes our case for us. Case closed and thanks Barry!

Another Obamian slip.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 11th, 2009 at 1:52 pm and is filed under Health Care. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.