Baron Hill Does Q & A with Madison Courier; Admits Congress Keeps Its Health Care

Readers of the Madison Courier were able to submit questions to Baron Hill. He "answered" them, or at least he sent back replies to their questions (as we will see, he didn't do a lot of answering).

Q: First, I thank you for slowing down this runaway legislation so there is time for it to be properly looked at. In the paper you were quoted as saying it would take up to 10 years to totally implement. With that in mind, why don't we take all the time we need to make it as good as we know how? Why the panic to get it done right now?

In your comments on health care cost, you have said that the legislation must be deficit neutral. How do you propose we do that? Our record at controlling government programs is not good.

Can a way to avoid having a government-run public option be found and can we get that through Congress? Almost any alternative would be better than having a government-run program and would almost certainly be less costly.

Larry Owens, Madison

Hill: With an issue of such widespread impact and importance, I believe it's essential we take our time and give health care reform the attention it merits. I'm glad you agree. As for the ten-year timeframe, that is simply a reference to how I believe the policy should be implemented in phases and allow for the flexibility to go back, review, and address any problems that arise.

I believe we can find ways to make this legislation deficit neutral. More attention needs to be paid to finding waste and fraud in our current system to offset the costs. That needs to be step one before we talk about other ways of paying for it.

This legislation is very much a work in progress. The public option has been proposed as a way to increase competition among health insurance providers, and thus, drive down costs.

Hoosier families have seen their premiums rise four times faster than wages over the last several years. Health care costs are growing at nearly twice the rate of inflation, and this trend is unsustainable for our government and consumers. This needs to be addressed in some manner. What this entails exactly remains to be seen.

Mr Owens submitted a series of thoughtful questions. Baron, in his rambling response, effectively avoided answering any of them.

Q: I appreciate the opportunity to ask questions through The Madison Courier on health care reform.

I would first like to make a note that not everyone was a protester when Mr. Hill came to town. I knew by reading the paper that he was going to be there and thought I would at least go hoping for the opportunity to ask some questions. I hope for good, in-person discussions soon.

I preface my questions knowing there are several bills to still be worked out. Please take all proposals into account when answering these questions.

• Can you promise me that I will not lose my current plan and doctor?
• Can you promise that you and your family will enroll in the public plan?
• Can you promise that this health care reform will not lead to higher deficits in the long term?
• Can you promise that government bureaucrats will not ration health care for patients on the public plan?
• Can you promise me that my tax dollars will not fund abortions?
• Will you oppose any health care reform bill that in any way promotes euthanasia?
• How can government promise to do more with less?
• Will you oppose any health care reform bill that in any way limits my access to health care or medicines recommended by my doctor?
• Do you believe bureaucrats can make better decisions than me about what kind of health insurance I should have? And will you guarantee that any health care reform bill passed by Congress will always allow me to choose my own doctor?
• Will there ever be a time with this reform that there would be no need for a health insurance agent?

Once again thank you for taking my questions and I look forward to your responses. I realize this is a difficult time and tough decisions need to be made. May God bless you and may we all bless God with our decisions.

Anthony Kasper, Madison

Hill: I share your desire for productive back-and-forth discussions. Does that often entail impassioned disagreements? Yes, and I welcome that. What I don't find fruitful are occurrences where folks cannot ask questions and/or answers cannot be heard. I'm pleased I can address some of your questions and concerns through this forum.

You stated your awareness of the several health care reform bills currently pending before Congress. This is a very fluid process, and the bill will change significantly before it comes to the full House for a vote. As such, I cannot make any promises based on hypothetical legislation.

To that end, I often recount the story of a meeting I had with a prominent Southern Indiana businessman. His first words to me were, "Will you sign this no tax increase pledge?" I said, no, I can't realistically do that as I have no idea what will transpire. A grin crossed his face and he told me to sit down. He believed that no practical politician can make such pledges. Will I work in good faith to address your concerns? Yes, I will absolutely keep them in mind as this process evolves.

Again, Baron (quite blatantly and by his own admission) didn't answer any of the questions. He refused to make any pledges (promises are something that Baron doesn't like to make, and he never keeps the ones that he makes; just ask Hillary Clinton supporters).

I'm starting to get the feeling that Baron didn't really answer any of these questions. They're just a hodgepodge of the mealy-mouthed non-answers his staff type up in form letters for constituents.

You'll also notice that Baron is getting asked a lot of the same questions in these letters; he's not answering any of them (though his responses to them sometimes border on being contradictory).

Q: Since Congress has shown itself to be inept at managing the U.S. post office, Amtrak, Medicare, and Social Security, congressional oversight committees failed to prevent the mortgage and financial meltdowns, what assurance can you give me that a government-run health care plan won't meet similar fate?

Also, if whatever plan is enacted, will you and your colleagues continue to exempt yourself, government employees and unions from participating?

John Branigan, Madison

Hill: I would respectfully disagree about Congress' track record. I know quite a few Southern Indiana folks who are quite content with Medicare and Social Security. Can they be improved? Certainly, and there are valuable lessons to be learned from how they have been and currently are managed.

The proposed health care reform, however, is in no way a government takeover. If it were, the legislation would read like a single-payer system.

Your second statement is one I hear often and can hopefully dispel.

Congress and federal employees participate in a program called the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan (FEHBP) that offers an array of private plans from which individuals can choose, depending upon what type of coverage they want, how much they can afford to pay in monthly premiums, etc. Just like all other private insurance plans - in regards to the House-proposed health care reform bill - they will not be touched.

Let me repeat this: If you have private insurance and you like it, you can keep it and will not be affected by this bill. And, the folks you listed are in no way exempted from the bill.

That last bit is a very telling admission; one of few in this set of questions and "answers." No, Baron, his staff, and those on the Congressional medical plan won't be affected by this bill.

I guess in this whole series of questions, we got only one answer. No, Baron won't be subjecting himself to the same health care as everyone else. He's going to keep the health care he has. And you can bet that--unlike your health care, which will slowly be devoured into ObamaCare--the plan enjoyed by Congress will never change.