Tag Archives: Regulation

Senate Democrats contemplating new $40 billion tax on health care innovation

TigerHawk has a post about a tax being considered for medical device companies. (H/T Lex Communis)

Excerpt:

As we have long predicted on this blog, the health care “reformers” propose to finance at least part of the “savings” or new benefits — it is impossible to know which — by decreasing the rate of return on medical technology. There are many ways in which this might be done, but the Senate Democrats are proposing to do so directly, by levying a “value added tax” on medical device companies according to their proportion of U.S. sales. This tax would be without regard to profitability, so it would amount to a capital tax on start-ups and a massive income tax surcharge on profitable companies, varying as net margins do. In the case of my own mid-sized company, the tax would be the equivalent of a roughly 20% surcharge on our net income (in all likelihood raising our economic tax rate well above 50%) or 50% of our research and development budget, depending on how you want to look at it.

Any way you look at it, the proposed tax is a calculated effort to divert capital from the medical technology industry to other uses in the economy, because new medical technology drives costs that are now going to be assumed by the government (or at least will be if the Senate leadership gets its way). Of course, innovative medtech also extends and saves lives, and makes them more comfortable and more productive. Which is, after all, the point of medicine.

Know what would be great? If a bunch of silver-spoon bureaucrats invented something that might actually save lives instead of meddling in the financial affairs of medical innovators.

Some of the companies that would be affected are listed in this Wall Street Journal article.

If government can’t fix health care, then who can?

Story from the New York Post. (H/T Right Klik via Neil Simpson)

Excerpt:

The state is trying to shut down a New York City doctor’s ambitious plan to treat uninsured patients for around $1,000 a year.

Dr. John Muney offers his patients everything from mammograms to mole removal at his AMG Medical Group clinics, which operate in all five boroughs.

“I’m trying to help uninsured people here,” he said.

His patients agree to pay $79 a month for a year in return for unlimited office visits with a $10 co-pay.

[His] plan landed him in the crosshairs of the state Insurance Department, which ordered him to drop his fixed-rate plan – which it claims is equivalent to an insurance policy.

He says he can afford to charge such a small amount because he doesn’t have to process mountains of paperwork and spend hours on billing.

“If they leave me alone, I can serve thousands of patients,” he said.

Government doesn’t like it when private businesses solve problems. Government only wants solutions they can control and regulate. After all, if there is no (government-caused) health care crisis, then these commies would be out of a job. They have to cause the crisis and then market themselves as the only solution.

Right Klik also has a handy list of the problems caused by government.

* “Community Rating” laws, which limit insurers’ ability to charge different prices to different customers, raise prices by 20.3% for individual policies and 27.3% for family policies

* Mandated benefits raise the expected price of an individual policy by approximately 0.4% per mandate. For family policies the increase is approximately 0.5% per mandate. The typical state has about 20 mandates (with a range from 6 to 48) so a reduction from 20 to 10 mandates would imply a 4% decrease in price for individual policies, and a 5% decrease for family policies.

* “Any-Willing-Provider” laws, which limit insurers’ ability to exclude hospitals and doctors from their networks, raise prices by 1.5% for individual policies and 5.3% for family policies.

* Federal law places limits on the discounts employers and insurance companies can provide for healthy, cost-saving behaviors.

* Twelve million Americans go without health insurance because the Federal Government does not allow people to purchase insurance across state lines.

The way insurance works is that people need to pay premiums that take into account the likelihood that they will make claims. The people who make a lot of claims need to pay more. This is what encourages people to take fewer risks and keep costs down. When government gets involved to equalize outcomes regardless of risks, then there is no incentive to live responsibly. The result is a shortage caused by high demand for medical care, and low supply.

How about we just let the free market work instead?

In Oregon’s government-run health care system, lobbyists prioritize treatments

See, this is one of the major problems with government-run health care. Whenver government runs anything, private businesses are going have to spend lots of money trying to influence government to favor their interests. That money would normally be spent pleasing customers, in the free market. But as soon as government gets involved in regulating anything, then lobbyists are hired.

Consider this video posted at Stop the ACLU about Oregon’s health care system. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

As it happens, each year politicians get together to decide what illnesses will get priority funding. Naturally, once the politicians (not doctors, but politicians) decide what “deserves” to be funded by Oregon’s government run healthcare system, the lobbyists flood in and begin to agitate for their own priorities.

The result is that often times serious illnesses end up pushed down this list as the political needs of lobbyists get pushed up to be funded first.

Ever wonder why socialized systems cover breast implants, sex changes, elective abortions, and in vitro fertilization?

Lobbying for illegal immigrants to be covered

Here’s some more lobbying going on right now about Obama’s plan.

ECM also send me this story from the Chicago Tribune, via Secondhand Smoke.

Immigration activists say it is “immoral” for hospitals and doctors, as well as a nation, to deny health care to the seriously ill, no matter their legal status. “Those of us with good health insurance just don’t have to live with because we can go get the medication,” said Jennifer Tolbert, a policy analyst at the non-profit Kaiser Family Foundation.

[…]”Concerns over the financial burden have led other hospitals to make…decisions denying treatment”, said Julie Contreras, an organizer in Chicago for the League of United Latin American Citizens.”These people, some of them are going to die,” Contreras said. “When a hospital denies treatment to any human being … this is flat-out immoral.”

Who is going to pay for this compassion? It isn’t free.

Anti-male discrimination

And don’t forget about anti-male discrimination in socialized systems, which I documented in a previous post.

Breast cancer mortality in Canada is 9 percent higher than in the United States, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher, and colon cancer among men is about 10 percent higher.

More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a prostatespecific antigen (PSA) test, compared to fewer than one in six Canadians (16 percent).

Why males vote Democrat is beyond me.