News outlets try to help people sort through what's real and what's not in the health overhaul debate.
The New York Times reports in a "primer on the details of health reform" that Republican criticism of a government-run insurance plan to compete with private health insurance as "socialized medicine" "seems overblown," it reports. "The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that, under the House bill, the number of people with employer-sponsored insurance would climb to 162 million in 2016, which is 3 million more than expected under current law. Further, it said, enrollment in the proposed public plan might total 11 million, far lower than estimates cited by Republicans."
The Times reports on blaming insurers: "Most Americans do not know the full cost of their employer-sponsored insurance. And it is easier for Democrats to paint insurers as greedy than to explain the complex math that shows current health care spending is unsustainable."
And it also reports on the facts behind how reform will affect the deficit: "The Congressional Budget Office has yet to issue cost estimates for the latest versions of the bill approved by three House committees. But it has warned that the legislation 'would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits' beyond 2019, in part because health costs are rising faster than the rate of inflation and proposed new taxes would not keep up" (Pear and Herszenhorn, 8/9).
The Los Angeles Times examines the claim that the legislation includes "provisions to encourage senior citizens to commit suicide:" "This has become one of the most misleading, inflammatory claims made in the healthcare debate. … The House bill would give seniors on Medicare the choice to sit down with a doctor for an 'advance care planning consultation' every five years to discuss options should they become seriously ill or unable to make medical decisions. Topics could include the development of a living will and directives for care."
It is unclear if the government would start paying for abortions, however, the LA Times reports. "Neither House nor Senate versions of the healthcare legislation contains any requirement that federal funding be made available for abortions. … The legislation is short on many details. Depending on how regulations are written, some women who got federally subsidized insurance might be able to buy plans that cover abortions" (Levey, 8/10)