House health care reform bill fails on crucial points

After months of deliberation, the House voted yesterday on its version of a health care reform bill. Titled the Affordable Health Care for America Act, H.R. 3962 is an expansive bill that contains significant changes and reforms to our health care system. I voted against the bill.

My vote against H.R. 3962 was not a rejection of health care reform; it was a rejection of a bill I believe fell short on some of the goals agreed upon by members of both parties and the president. In his address to a joint session of Congress, President Obama correctly stated that the number one problem our health care system faces is its unsustainable cost. We cannot expect to fully address our health care crisis unless we deal with the rising cost burdens on the federal government.

The House version of the health care bill would actually increase the federal government's budgetary commitment to health care after 2019, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. As it stands, our spending on health care is set to expand exponentially, rising to approximately 30 percent of our entire budget within the next 30 years. By all accounts, this is unsustainable.

Reducing the rate of spending growth is immensely effective. For example, if we reduce the rate of growth for health care expenditures by a mere percentage point, then health care as a portion of Gross Domestic Product will be reduced by 4 percent in that same 30-year timeline. Frankly, we've missed our mark and missed a real opportunity to address a serious problem.

The vote by the House is just one step in a long process. Each house of Congress must pass its own legislation, iron out their differences, and then pass the exact same bill before the president signs it into law. The final product could be much different, but I don't like what I've seen so far. Many in my district have spoken strongly against it as well.

Aside from the bill's failure to address cost, it has other serious problems. For example, one of the main reasons the bill is so costly is due to its inclusion of a public option. I am opposed to a public option because I believe in a free market approach to health care reform. A public option would have far-reaching and severe implications to an already overburdened health care system.

Additionally, H.R. 3962 would levy new taxes on individuals and small businesses during a time in which more than 10 percent of Americans are out of work. Though there are some signs that the economy is improving, these signs bring little solace to people who have been unemployed over the last year. This is certainly no time to place additional burdens on our citizens and the small businesses which will bring us to a full economic recovery.

The bill mandates coverage for both individuals and small businesses, leaving Americans with no choice about whether they even want health insurance. We are a fiercely independent people and are right to be suspicious whenever the government mandates anything. People should be able to choose -- or not choose -- the type or amount of health insurance they want to have without the government's involvement in that decision.

Without question, we do need health care cost containment. Our country spends too much money on health care for tens of millions of Americans to be uninsured. But we have to get it right and not pass a bill to simply say we've done something.

There are some basic reforms I think would achieve some of these goals. Discrimination based on pre-existing conditions and the arbitrary dropping of coverage should be prohibited. I support allowing businesses and individuals the opportunity to purchase insurance from entities beyond their state lines to help meet our goal of greater competition. Medical liability reform should also be seriously addressed in any health care reform.

In Alabama, especially in rural areas, we have a serious problem with access to primary physicians. Health care reform should incentivize physicians to specialize in primary care, especially in ways that encourage them to move to rural, underserved areas to practice medicine.

Moreover, I believe that health care is also about personal responsibility. Healthy behavior should be rewarded not only as a benefit for individuals, but as a way to lower long-term costs and make the country healthier.Health care reform must help ease the burdens on small businesses rather than increase them. Employer-sponsored health care premiums have increased more than 130 percent in the past decade alone and are projected to double in the next 10 years. Many are faced with an untenable choice between dropping coverage for their valued employees and cutting their workforce, or in some cases, closing their doors all together. This must change.

Finally, a strong health care bill should contain restrictions on funding for abortions and prohibitions on illegal immigrants obtaining government-subsidized plans. As a pro-life and anti-illegal immigration member of Congress, these are absolute must-haves.

In closing, a health care bill needs to be bipartisan. For Americans to have confidence in legislation which directly affects them, it shouldn't appear as a purely partisan exercise. Nearly every significant bill that has been signed into law in our nation's history was passed with the support of members of both parties. Unfortunately, and without laying blame on either party, this entire process has been mired in partisanship. Historic health care reform supported by both major parties is a great opportunity to change the climate in Washington.

I will remain a firm "no" on any health care bill that does not address these goals and concerns.