Ever since 1986 – the year I first joined the National Forensic League – I’ve always taken great joy in watching the media attempt to interpret the inner-workings of the legislative process for the benefit of their audiences. Admittedly, it is a relatively arrogant feeling, but enjoyable nonetheless.
The reason for it is that thanks to the NFL, I learned very quickly that bills and resolutions are written in the most convoluted language – standard rules of grammar and usage are meaningless to the diligent workers in the offices charged with drafting them. Often called legalese by the public, I’ve always considered it “intentionally-written-in-the-most-illogical-form-possible-to-keep-the-public-from-understanding-a-single-word” style.
As for process, legislators write something that says in Standard American English what they want a bill or resolution to do, and then the busy little bees in the office in charge of drafting legislation turns it into a mass of easily misunderstood text. If they are successful at it, the legislator’s original intention is met in a body of work that is much larger than what was written in the first place – typically by an order of at least 500 times as long. That said, it is easy to understand why bills go unread – but that might not be so bad, assuming that the legislators read what their colleagues originally wrote before it was translated into the larger work.
Now that I’ve given a very abbreviated explanation about how we end up with 1000 plus page pieces of legislation, I’m going to take a stab at the part of the process that the legislators actually do – the short form. Buzz words abound on the health care debate, including “public option”, “co-op”, and “illegal aliens.” The majority of the problem is coming from the health care insurance industry lobby, so bear in mind that my little wish list is intended for any legislator who has the nerve to tell them where to shove it.
1. Open market on insurance – if an insurance company does business in a given state, any citizen of that state may purchase from that company.
2. Residency-based insurance groups – no more insurance groups based on place of employment. Where a citizen lives determines what insurance group he is in.
3. No pre-existing condition clauses – self-explanatory.
4. Premium caps – Middle and low income citizens may not be charged more than a given percentage of their standard net income for their insurance premiums. (In case that isn’t clear, people should never have to choose between a roof over their heads and food on their tables and insurance.)
5. Insurance bundling – No more separate dental, mental health and vision coverages.
6. Mandatory reinvestment – Cap insurance industry profits by percentage. If an insurance company exceeds the cap on profits, the extra profits will be reinvested to defray costs for unemployed and poverty level citizens.
7. “Free” coverage for unemployed and poverty level citizens – Paid for primarily by insurance industry.
8. Mayo clinic rules for providers – Penalties for unnecessary testing, wasteful spending, as well as adopting all other “best practices” from the Mayo clinic in all health care facilities.
9. Mandatory reinvestment, take two – Cap health care facility profits by percentage. Reinvestment in facilities, equipment, and personnel training.
10. Pharmaceutical company caps – Cap promotions budgets and profits. Reinvestment in free prescription programs and research.
11. FDA reciprocity – Drugs accepted by countries with reasonably similar standards will automatically be accepted by the FDA.
12. Sensible tort reform – Caps on malpractice settlements without loopholes that benefit attorneys or insurance companies. Caps on attorneys fees in malpractice cases.
13. Malpractice insurance caps – Particularly in high risk sectors like OB/GYN. By percentage of income as well, to encourage physicians to take on clinic work in low income areas, amongst other reasons.
I think that about covers it. Note that there is no mention of a “public option” because there isn’t a need for one. If everyone is paying what they can actually afford, and there is a plan to cover those who can’t in the private sector, there is no need to have the government manage care for anyone. Wow! What a novel concept! Also note that there isn’t anything about the government legislating how health care is delivered (other than insisting on efficiency and high standards of care.) Yes, Virginia, it is possible to approach health care sensibly, without scaring the hell out of the masses!
Now lets see if someone on the Hill has the nerve to propose something like this!
Tags: health care reform
Secured by