Examining the High Court Health Care Ruling
Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) joins Alan to discuss the potential impact of the health care ruling.
- Duration 10:24
- Date Jun 26, 2012
Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) joins Alan to discuss the potential impact of the health care ruling.
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Michael Burgess of Texas our guest.
Visiting New -- during all these media appearances.
All over the place.
You were -- Obviously your position you know BGY and you believe the Supreme Court will overturn the Affordable Care Act and if they did what -- replace it with a what do we do about the tens of thousands of people.
Who have preexisting conditions that's one of the most popular parts of the law not to punish people for pre existing condition.
You know one thing I do feel obligated to point out -- in New York today because.
I thought the Supreme Court will give us our answer today so -- I tell you know hopefully we'll be thrown out and bear in mind and coming to Cuba not a great track record of William and Supreme Court activity within two days.
Like you know on the -- Oh on what happens today say the whole thing were thrown out of what happens -- day after and the three things you hear people focus on -- as you said people preexisting conditions.
You hear people talk about the closing of the coverage gap the so called donut hole when part -- Medicare and hear people talk about kids on the parents' interest -- 16.
Those last two.
Would not even require congressional action -- that is congress does not have to do a thing.
Kids are more on their parents' insurance company or covertly -- the plan year which for most plans is going to be November December.
And even at that insurance companies last couple weeks have several of them come forward said.
Elect maybe this is a good policy after all well we're looking at just continuing get and -- in congress.
Actually doesn't have to get involved the marketplace is making the correct decision.
On the cover cement in to the coverage gap in in Medicare part.
I've done a lot of work looking into the -- secret deals and cut down the White House literally three years ago -- in July of 2009.
And farm in the White House got a big deal -- -- -- in the doughnut hole.
Pharma paid eighty billion dollars to keep reimportation language out of the Affordable Care Act.
And that eighty billion dollars was used -- a donut hole -- on concern its contractual arrangement that predated the signing the Affordable Care Act.
That's still stays in place now almost come back our committee and renegotiate then I'm I'm I'm ready to listen but for right now that doesn't require immediate attention.
And then leave people with preexisting conditions and that does require some some careful handling.
Now interestingly enough remember when the debates were all going on we were told there were what eight to twelve million people.
Roaming the country's pre existing conditions looking for interest but in fact employer sponsored insurance has an open enrollment period.
Preexisting conditions do not exist in that environment -- -- people in the individual and small group market who have gotten caught in that trap.
We the federal government created.
Under Obama care of this the federal pre existing -- Which really they shouldn't have done.
They should have built on existing state risk pools state reinsurance programs.
Other state but that doesn't provide for a lot of people in Minnesota -- -- a statement will the reason it doesn't is because of the funding that states are able to come up with what if there was a federal subsidy that was also available -- friends on -- -- assets expending money we don't have money to spend.
But I'll submit to use spending 225 billion dollars on a pre existing program.
There's a lot cheaper than mr.
and have trillions already in favor of a federal program to -- -- parliament I would be in favor of originally it should have been devolved to the states like Senator McCain -- hostility of subsidy the federal government gives the states -- -- -- that program and not just a federal subsidy I think the private sector needs to come in with something either premium cap or or some additional help I think in drag and enforce a private sector to do that well insurance commissioners across the several states have the ability.
No one sells insurance in their state without them the permission from the state insurance commissioners say -- had doesn't actually have the right to forcing insurance companies in the states have had this equity for a long time again I don't know wide.
It was not.
Incumbent upon people to explore what was available -- state level before you created this new federal program.
All the money that was spent on federal bureaucrats on office space on computers and -- players you could have used that money to help the people with preexisting conditions.
By -- that excel out -- augmenting what was available.
At the -- I don't think they get conservatives to say okay when -- we agree with that expenditure and -- -- -- would -- you know before the signing of Affordable Care Act.
That might have been -- untenable position.
The problem is now there's 62000 people who sign up and 9260 -- -- its -- it's about out of money so we're gonna have to even if the Affordable Care Act -- and it goes forward.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Yeah I can't I do want to have a real -- -- can there's.
I do the four wheel -- got insurance but what I'm able to get insurance.
For years and now that obamacare.
Boy I got insurance but what can you do make the -- and -- I -- -- insurance.
Well that's the progress the discussion that mr.
Gomes and -- are having right now and now when I talk about this -- I.
I acknowledge we are going to have to do something with the sixth 2000 people who are contained within what's known as a piece -- program.
You if that if the Supreme Court pulls the rug out from under all of this.
I think that that is one action the congress is going to have to take.
I don't like the fact that we're having to take this action I consider myself as -- first responder.
I'm doing a high and high water rescue for people who have been washed overboard.
By an out of control administration.
It would have been far better if the federal government network with the state of Ohio to provide you that type of program with them with in the state confines.
It didn't happen that way and here's the difficulty.
We can't just say now you go find this in your state risk pool because most at risk pools that do exist.
Require you to be uninsured for six months time before your be eligible so that -- then you get caught of that tonight what.
You change states and you've got a whole new set -- laws -- -- doing -- state to state.
And it could be a distant nightmare to try to win here certainly that's something that a person would have taken to consider -- got to be a federal law -- I -- -- let -- bring precisely the reason it shouldn't be a federal law.
They're war you know straight that I -- little Jew that will ensure -- what district you're in contention.
I don't know whether Ohio has a risk -- reinsurance.
The 35 or 36 states do.
Of those that don't have won it again my opinion -- far better way to go about it.
Would have been to help those states set up -- risk pool -- reinsurance program or some other program if they.
If that's true -- Pre existing pool is low in his state.
And their perhaps sort of be a way to to to use Medicaid to it to take those people into the but the existing Medicaid program.
I wouldn't rule that out.
But you know there was a far better way to do this and now people like yourself -- -- here hanging in the balance.
If the Affordable Care Act is found unconstitutional and look I'm just -- -- country doctor your president is constitutional scholar he's someone who should have known miss.
I'll have glossy he may be right when he's maybe the court -- in his favor -- an ankle and -- Minnesota hello.
So look nobody think view addressed our terrible August congressman here this.
The question or are you as you were to approach the US was that government for the people by the people Kate take care and it helps our nation.
Dot questions -- doing didn't with the health care right we want to.
Why do senators and congressmen have a -- percent sorry socialized medicine for themselves their children of their children's children.
When it's not good enough for us in the -- -- people in this country.
Everyone who's employed would have the same type of insurance -- I have which is -- health savings account.
My premiums are very low my deductible is very high and I'm very cost conscious about any health -- that I consume because I am paying the first dollar coverage.
And yet I do have I do have a backstop if something really bad happens.
That is what I would wish on.
For 80% of the country.
This would be a very acceptable -- there -- -- and people would make the decision about how to controller health care costs not federal government because if you leave it up to us there.
What will we do.
Waiting lines rationing but you've got a federal plan is -- congressman.
Well you are federal plan covers every single thing you have to -- -- I think it was -- our own federal plan.
Look if they want to take -- federal employee health benefits program away from the United States congress.
Which actually was a bill ninety degrees and years ago and I gonna do that you know that's that's fine with me again I have a health savings account the cost is very low.
I'd pay a very high deductible I rarely -- -- Look at would you also entitled to an account you get as a congressman which is what he's saying in many Americans -- said give me what I'll have what they have.
We have an honest Kelsay -- is far better deal because he -- put money away tax deferred -- grows for you overtime and have you announced our panel.
Double talk that's double talk or -- get to a point -- your benefit as congress and journalists I -- and I know little you know little niche and a little bit.
Jack I don't get a response I don't disagree with that but I -- the same if the same type of plan that I have is what we could provide 80% of the country.
It is because so well they want the congressional -- thank -- well what about renouncing your.
Congressional plan that went and did not take that well why unilaterally disarm again I -- what -- well right.
I introduce legislation to take away from everyone who thought for a uninsured would be much more believe it away and NSA I don't want this I want to tell Clinton like I gave up a lot to run for congress and hide and will not -- -- just always there when I used to -- as a doctor but it's a lot less than -- a congressman.
But again I cost the federal government to pittance every month.
People who have a high option PPO.
That's expensive health care.
And everyone on the federal employee health benefits -- ought to have -- -- -- -- -- -- we gonna go back to practicing medicine you -- -- -- -- -- all right you're up for reelection likely be really doesn't make a decision every two years I mean it's and it's not you know founding fathers had it right we need we need to be reapply every two figures are limited.
Now well I personally don't think so but you know somebody must pass constitutional amendment televised the rules but that the term limit as the election.
Thank you guns in the book is called document has that your latest book comes in Michael Burgess -- -- -- you think he's here tonight and we're coming right.