“I Like Obamacare!”

If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. The Obama campaign today officially embraced the “Obamacare” epithet. The “I Like Obamacare” campaign includes an online petition, an #ILikeObamaCare Twitter hashtag, and a Facebook page that allows people to “like” Obamacare.

Today is the two-year anniversary of the Affordable Care Act. Since then, the law that almost everyone calls Obamacare has been doing exactly what the other side has hoped it wouldn’t do: It’s been working. It’s about time we give it the love it deserves. Let everyone know: “I like Obamacare.”

Progressive advocacy groups Colorado Health Access and Progress Now Colorado launched a similar campaign last fall:

House Bill 1297: Live Free or Die Uninsured

House Bill 1297 would block the Granite State’s best path to making free-market health insurance easily accessible, writes a noted health care management expert. The bill, which would prohibit the state from planning, creating, or participating in a state health care exchange, was approved by the House in a 219-94 vote.

Robert Field, senior fellow of the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics at the University of Pennsylvania and author of “Health Care Regulation in America: Complexity, Confrontation and Compromise,” says insurance exchanges are one of the least controversial aspects of health insurance reform.

In an exchange, individuals and small businesses can comparison shop for policies from multiple companies. Policy terms and rates are clearly displayed, and the purchasing process is greatly simplified.

This exemplifies the free market in action. Exchanges end the complexity and confusion that makes it difficult for many people to purchase health insurance in the private market today.

Proponents of the bill claim that refusing to participate in a state run exchange will send a message of opposition to the President’s federal health care reform. Field says they’re throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Even if the Affordable Care Act were struck down by the Supreme Court or repealed by Congress, an insurance exchange could turn a chaotic market into a smoothly functioning one. But this law would prevent even that.

The bill makes it more likely that many uninsured New Hampshire residents will continue to live free of health insurance. And also that some of them could die from lack of access to health care.

Point/Counterpoint: State Health Insurance Exchange

House Bill 1297 would prohibit the state from planning, creating, or participating in a state health insurance exchange. If New Hampshire’s exchange is not up and running by 2014, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will require the state to join a federal exchange.

House Speaker Bill O’Brien, House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt and GOP Rep. Andrew Manuse argue a state exchange “could be the nail in the coffin of the New Hampshire Advantage.”

“Yes, if we have a federal health insurance exchange all decisions would be made in Washington by federal bureaucrats in a central location. However, if we adopted a state exchange, regardless of what type, we still would end up answering to and obeying these same federal bureaucrats. 

“Let’s keep up our promises to voters by passing this law and prohibiting the state of New Hampshire from creating a state exchange that could be the nail in the coffin of the New Hampshire Advantage.”

Not so, respond a group of conservative business leaders, chambers of commerce and trade associations:

“Business owners, managers and senior executives believe a state-based exchange is the better option for New Hampshire. … New Hampshire would be able to shape and control, to a greater degree, the structure and function of a state-based exchange than it would a federally-imposed one. Business leaders have a real and vested stake in what a health insurance exchange would look like in New Hampshire since they may consider shopping in an exchange or sending their employees to an exchange to buy health insurance.”

— Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield in New Hampshire, Business and Industry Association (BIA), CGI Employee Benefits Group, City Fuel Co. Inc., Greater Concord Chamber of Commerce, Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce, Greater Nashua Chamber of Commerce, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care of New England, MVP Health Care, New Hampshire Association of Insurance Agents, New Hampshire Automobile Dealers Association, Northeast Delta Dental and Ski NH

HB 1560: The Dubious Plan to Kill Health Care Reform

Opponents of federal health care reform have seized upon a novel end-run around the law, an interstate Health Care Compact that would replace all federal health care programs — including Medicare and Medicaid — with block grants to the states.

The history of compacts goes back to the colonial period, and more than 200 are currently in force. Many coordinate activities between contiguous states, such as the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Others, such as the Driver License Compact and the Wildlife Violators Compact, offer reciprocal recognition of laws and licenses in member states.

The Health Care Compact, however, is the first one that attempts to shield states from a whole area of federal law. It is four pages long and would replace the current federal health-care system with block grants to the states. …

If a significant number of states pass the compact, supporters plan to submit it to Congress for approval in the same way that the body approves interstate compacts regulating commerce, transportation, and resource conservation and development.

And just like that, billions of dollars will be turned over to the states without any strings attached? Unlikely. Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer said “we will put a person on Neptune” before Congress approves the compact.

Nevertheless, the Health Care Compact initiative is backed by Tea Party Patriots, Americans for Prosperity and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which adopted it as model legislation.

HB 1560 is crafted verbatim from the ALEC model legislation. Its intent is clear. The preamble promises to give New Hampshire the “authority to enact state laws that supersede any and all federal laws regarding health care” within the state. The Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire describes it as “the vehicle that we must use to nullify Obamacare in New Hampshire!”

HB 1560 is sponsored by House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt and has been referred to the Constitutional Review and Statutory Recodification committee. The first public hearing is scheduled for January 24 at 10:00 a.m. in LOB 206.

Quote of the Day: We Don’t Buy It

Romney has distanced himself from his signature achievement, arguing that while near-universal health care was right for Massachusetts, it is not right for the nation and individual states should decide what is best for their citizens. We understand the political need for him to say this, but we don’t buy it. Reducing the number of uninsured in Massachusetts made good economic sense for the Bay State and it makes good sense for the nation.

— Portsmouth Herald editorial endorsing Mitt Romney for GOP presidential nomination.

Thanks Obamacare!

“Obamacare,” used as an epithet by opponents of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, is now being embraced by supporters. Progressive advocacy groups Colorado Health Access and Progress Now Colorado have launched a campaign to call attention to the benefits of — Obamacare.

Health Care Reform: “The Sky Did Not Fall In”

Former Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter looks back at the contentious battle to pass health care reform — and where it stands today.

The sky did not fall in. People kept their doctors. Seniors get free preventive care and get a 50 percent discount on brand-name drugs if they have hit the so-called “donut hole.” Small businesses are now eligible for tax credits. Being female is no longer considered a pre-existing condition. Children with pre-existing conditions are covered, and we stopped annual or lifetime limits. So many families were hurt in the past by those limits, and I was pleased that these provisions were included.

There are still legal challenges being played out in courts, and there are still many questions and controversies to settle. But the initial results look good, and the provisions already in effect have been a great help to the people who need health care in this country. And that includes all of us. Providing access to health care was morally and economically the right thing to do, and the sky didn’t fall in after all.

Guinta’s Two-Faced Community Health Center Policy

While touring the Manchester Community Health Center yesterday, Congressman Frank Guinta repeated his goal to repeal last year’s historic health care reform act.

New Hampshire 1st District Rep. Frank Guinta on Wednesday said community health centers could be an alternative to the Obama health care plan.

An alternative? The Affordable Care Act provides $11 billion to support and expand community health centers over the next five years, including new centers in underserved areas and expanded services at existing centers.

This increased funding will help nearly double the number of patients seen by New Hampshire community health centers. It will benefit the 57 existing centers as well as providing support for the construction of new centers.

In January, Guinta voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and the funding for community health centers. Where’s this alternative he’s promoting?

State Rep. Urges House Speaker to Defy Supreme Court

Today, in a unanimous decision, the New Hampshire Supreme Court declared HB 89 unconstitutional. Following that ruling, Rep. Andrew Manuse arrogantly urged the Speaker to ignore the decision and defy the Supreme Court. 

“So, this is just clearly the wrong ruling. It’s a political ruling, I don’t think that we as a body should stand for it. I think we should continue with ‘shall’ and I will urge the Speaker to do that.’

Manuse was last in the news for threatening to repeal the Catholic Church’s tax exempt status over the “pedophile pimp” comment controversy.

h/t Granite State Progress

Bonus Quote of the Day: Unconstitutional

[W]e conclude that HB 89, which removes entirely from the executive branch the decision as to whether to join the State as a party to litigation, would usurp the executive branch’s power to execute and enforce the law. Therefore, in our opinion, HB 89, as passed by the House, violates the Separation of Powers Clause and is unconstitutional. That being the case, it follows that HB 89 does not “fall within the broad grant of authority to the general court set forth in Part II, Article 5 of the New Hampshire constitution.”

— The Supreme Court of New Hampshire, in a unanimous ruling that a bill requiring the state attorney general to join a lawsuit challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional

Mitt Romney on the Individual Mandate

At the state level, the individual mandate is a humane, cost-effective tool for rationalizing the health care market. At the federal level, it is the greatest threat to freedom in American history.

OK, I’m paraphrasing … and I stole it from Jonathan Chait.

Pawlenty, Romney Disavow Previous Policy Initiatives

Last night we were treated to the embarrassing spectacle of Republican presidential candidates denouncing their own policy initiatives. In the GOP’s zeal to oppose everything proposed by Pres. Obama, the party has abandoned many of its best ideas from the past. Republican orthodoxy requires policy makers who supported and implemented those ideas to now disavow them.

Exhibit #1: Cap-and-trade. This was originally a Republican market-based plan to protect the environment by raising the prices of pollutants to better account for their costs.

President George H.W. Bush wanted a solution that relied on the market rather than on government regulation. So in the Clean Air Act of 1990, he proposed a plan that would cap sulfur-dioxide emissions but let the market decide how to allocate the permits. That was “more compatible with economic growth than using only the command and control approaches of the past,” he said. The plan passed easily, with “aye” votes from Sen. Mitch McConnell and then-Rep. Newt Gingrich, among others.

In 2007, Tim Pawlenty endorsed cap-and-trade policies and signed into law a plan to aggressively reduce Minnesota’s greenhouse gas emissions. That was then, this is now. Last night he apologized.

Asked in a public question-and-answer session about his past support for a cap-and-trade-like program limiting carbon emissions, Pawlenty answered: “It was a mistake, it was stupid and I’m sorry.” And then he kept going. “I don’t try to defend it. Everybody’s got a couple of clunkers in their record,” Pawlenty continued, repeating: “I don’t try to defend it. It was dumb.”

Read More