Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies at the CATO Institute gives recommendations for alternatives to the public option.

“If you reform the tax treatment to employer sponsored health insurance so that workers can control the $10,000 of their earnings that employers now control, and they can take that money and buy secure coverage from any source,” said Cannon. “If you let people purchase insurance from across state lines, that could cover one third of the uninsured, without any new taxes or new government subsidies.” (0:29)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:29m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, says that even with the opt-out provision, the public option will dominate the health insurance marked.

“It doesn’t matter when states have to exercise their opt-out method, and whether there’s an opt-in or opt-out method, it will take over the market place.” (0:37)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:37m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, denies that the trigger option is a fair compromise in the health care reform debate.

“The trigger option will set unrealistic, unattainable goals for private insurance, with the expectation that private insurance will not be able to meet it,” Cannon told TRNS. “It’s not a question of whether the trigger will be pulled, as when it will be pulled.” (0:38)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:38m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies at the CATO Institute blasted the public option Tuesday as a “ruse.”

“The President and his allies in Congress want to create a new government run option for people under 65, but it’s not a public option because the program will drive private insurers out of business, despite offering an inferior product,” said Cannon. “What they call a public option is not really an option. So it’s a ‘ruse.’” (0:42)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:42m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, condemned the recently proposed opt-out provision added the public option as ‘political suicide’ for state officials.

“What Governor or state official is going to say, ‘I know you’re tax dollars are subsidizing this government program, but I’m not going to let you get your tax dollars back by participating in that program?’ That would be political suicide for state officials,” Cannon told TRNS (0:42)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:42m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

By Laura Smith – University of New Mexico/Talk Radio News Service

Michael Cannon, Director of Health Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, said today that it would be “political suicide” for states to choose to opt-out of the public option plan.

Democrats in Congress, led by Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), are pushing for an opt-out provision within the public option, or government-run health insurance plan, as a way to demonstrate to states that they will not be forced to partake in the plan.

Referring to the public option plan as “Fannie Med,” Cannon said that Reid and others are using the opt-out provision as a way of putting pressure on states to subscribe.

“The taxpayers in each state are going to have to be subsidizing Fannie Med. And what Governor or state official is going to say ‘I know your tax dollars are subsidizing this government program, but I’m not going to let you get your tax dollars back by participating in this program?’ That would be political suicide for state officials. And supporters of Fannie Med know it would be political suicide,” Cannon said.

Cannon argued that supporters of an opt-out provision are merely interested in finding way for the government to seize more control of the nation’s healthcare system, and nothing more.

“They are counting on this to get their proposal through Congress and they know that it’s not going to inhibit the new government program’s ability to drive private insurers out of business,” Cannon said.

Cannon said even proponents of the public option plan are aware that it would crush competition in the marketplace, and echoed the theory that President Barack Obama favors the public option plan because it would lead to single-payer health insurance in the U.S.

“What they call public option is not really a public option. That’s a ruse,” he said.

By Aaron Richardson-Talk Radio News Service

Michael Tanner, CATO’s Head of Health Care and Social Security Research is unhappy with the most recent draft of the bill that will eventually pave the way for health care reform in the U.S.

During a discussion today on Capitol Hill, Tanner voiced his opposition to many of the bills provisions such as: tax on employer provided insurance, a payroll tax hike, a income tax surcharge on people who make 250,000 dollars or more and the proposed soda and beer tax.

According to Tanner, those with less income will be specifically harmed by the beer and soda tax since those in that demographic tend to purchase these products with more frequency.

CATO’s Director for Health Policy Michael Cannon, who appeared alongside Tanner, suggested letting employees choose their insurance providers instead of employers. Cannon noted that this would result in higher salaries for workers.

“The $620 billion in employer premium contributions does not come out of the employers’ pockets, it is actually from workers’ wages,” said Cannon.

“If the employers weren’t providing health benefits to those workers the employers would have to return that $4,000 or $9,000 dollars back to those workers and add it to their salaries” added Cannon.