KeithHennessey.com

Yesterday President Obama sent an email on health care reform to the White House mailing list. Respectfully, here is my counterpoint.

Because the proposed new health spending would grow faster than the proposed new income tax increases, the House health bill would increase the long-term deficit. Since the President has said he would not sign a bill that increases the long-term deficit, the bill is dead in its current form. Any tax increase that would grow more slowly than the proposed new spending faces the same irreconcilable problem. The only way to solve this problem and meet the President’s long-term goal is to cut other health spending or tax employer-provided health insurance.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Rep. George Miller write in today’s Wall Street Journal in favor of their pay-as-you-go, aka “paygo” rule. I have a different perspective and offer it here in response.

Is “paying for” a new health care entitlement good enough? Does the President have a plan to slow private sector health cost growth? Will everyone who wants to keep their health plan be able to do so? Are opponents of Kennedy-Dodd defenders of the status quo? Will private sector reforms offset an 11% expansion in federal health entitlement spending? Will a government option drive private insurers out of business? Is a government option negotiable for the President?