Congresswoman Bachmann is a strong opponent of government expansion into the health care industry. This includes the expansion of the SCHIP program, the 2009-2010 health care reform known as Obamacare, and provisions such as tobacco exclusion. To change the health care industry, Congresswoman Bachmann has introduced the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act. This legislation would make medical expenses, including health care premiums, 100% tax-deductible for all individuals, instead of just insurance purchased through employers. She also supports the expansion of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), the purchase of insurance across state lines, tort reform, and the creation of Association Health Plans (AHPs), which would allow small businesses to band together through trade associations to purchase health insurance for their employees at a lower cost.
In 2007, Congresswoman Bachmann referred to the reauthorization and expansion of SCHIP as a leap towards socialism. She noted that the program was expanded to cover vastly more people than the program was intended to cover.
As an ardent and vocal opponent of Obamacare, Congresswoman Bachmann noted that the program would lead to a government takeover of health care, which would lead to rationing. She also asserted that the program would lead to health care being allocated according to age and medical condition. She also opposes the public option, and a single payer program for health care.
In August of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann stated that she supported means testing for Medicare and subsidizing the purchasing of health insurance for low income seniors.
Leap Towards Socialism
In August of 2007, Congresswoman Bachmann spoke for one minute on the House floor in opposition to the reauthorization and expansion of SCHIP.
Mrs. BACHMANN. Madam Speaker, today the United States Congress will take up the full march towards socialized medicine here in the United States. This isn't mission creep, Madam Speaker; this is mission leap.
Imagine, under the Democrat plan, someone who is old enough to be able to run for the United States Congress would be considered a child and eligible for taxpayer-subsidized health care.
This is socialized medicine in its truest form. As a matter of fact, in Minnesota today, under the SCHIP proposal, fully 85 percent of all recipients are adults. Under the Democrat proposal in Minnesota, over 20,000 senior citizens in Minnesota will lose their Medicare Advantage.
Madam Speaker, this is mission leap towards embracing full socialized medicine, and I hope this United States Congress rejects this untimely proposal.
SCHIP Reauthorization Flawed
In January of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed discussing the reauthorization of the SCHIP legislation.
SCHIP Reauthorization Flawed 1/14/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
Any minute now, the House will be voting on H.R. 2, the Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act of 2009. While I support the goals of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), the bill on the floor reauthorizes it in a grossly irresponsible manner. At a time when the American people need responsible government more than ever, I can not in good conscience support this bill’s passage.
SCHIP was intended to ensure that children who have no means to obtain health care can gain access to it. The program was intended to cover those kids first and foremost. H.R. 2 makes no such provisions.
According to the non-partisan CBO, this bill will entice roughly 2.4 million people to drop their private insurance coverage in lieu of the taxpayer funded program. This is a serious problem, as SCHIP funds will be diverted from those low-income families who need it the most and will have the effect of making private insurance even more unaffordable.
Even worse, the sustainability of the bill depends on a very shaky revenue source. In fact, it’s a source that Congress is doing its best to get rid of all together – cigarettes. The bill is paid for primarily through a $0.61 increase in the federal tobacco excise tax, from $0.39 to $1.00. With less people smoking as a result of high taxes and health ramifications, how does the government plan to sustain funding for the program? Only Congress could produce such a flawed line of reasoning.
What we have in front of us today is a bill that was given very little opportunity for debate with absolutely no opportunity for amendment. If nothing else, it's another fine example of the Democrats' abysmal view of bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle.
Health Care Freedom of Choice Act
In January of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her support for the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act.
Bachmann Re-Introduces Crucial Health Care Legislation New Reforms Would Increase Patient Choice and Lower Health Care Costs
Washington, D.C., Jan 14, 2009 - Today, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann reintroduced the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act, a bill that would improve America’s flawed health care model by increasing patient choice, lowering costs and breaking down barriers that restrict access to care.
“There are few choices people make that are more important than securing health care coverage. Unfortunately, our current health care model in the United States is severely flawed. My Health Care Freedom of Choice Act would restore balance to America’s health care market by giving individuals and businesses alike the same tax deductions for health care expenses. This would encourage more competition and innovation in the health care industry and lower costs across the board.”
Under current law, businesses are allowed to deduct the cost of employee health care from their taxes, while individuals and families who purchase health care cannot make the same deductions. This bias against individual choice leads to higher health care costs and reduces accessibility to care.
Bachmann’s legislation would erase this bias and extend the same tax incentives to businesses and individuals alike. This would not only make health care more affordable for those who purchase it themselves, but by injecting choice and competition into the health care market it would lower prices for all Americans.
In an additional effort to protect America’s health care future, Bachmann also opposed today’s flawed changes to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. The SCHIP authorization bill presented to the House today included a regressive tax hike, spread coverage for illegal aliens, and shifted bebefits from low-income families to people earning over $80,000 a year. Bachmann backed an alternate SCHIP proposal that would have extended coverage for seven years without hiking taxes or diverting funds away from the children who need it most.
Fox Business Appearance
In July of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox Business and spoke about her opposition to the health care reform plan.
Floor Speech - Health Care Advisors
In July of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann spoke on the House floor about the people who are advising President Obama concerning health care.
Government Care Leads to Rationing
In July of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed stating that whenever government takes charge of health care, the inevitable result is rationing.
Government Run Health Care Inevitably Leads to Rationing 7/7/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
Today, the House of Representatives returns to work after a week of district work – outside of the beltway – and the next challenge facing the body will be making crucial reforms to our health care system. As the American people struggle to make ends meet, too many also live with the challenge of affording basic health care for themselves and their families. Any time a child or a parent goes without the care they need, it is a personal crisis for that family. However, there are two very different views emerging from the Democrats and Republicans as to the appropriate and most effective course to take in making these essential reforms.
Democrats are pushing for a government takeover of health care that sounds nice but would have devastating consequences for families and small businesses. A government takeover of health care will raise taxes, ration care, and let government bureaucrats make decisions that should be made by families and their doctors.
Republicans want to make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, and let those who like their current health care coverage keep it. Republicans support health care reform that puts patients and their health first, and protects the important doctor-patient relationship.
The Democrats' government-takeover of health care will deny access to medical care and life-saving treatments. An estimated 100-million-plus Americans would lose their current health care under the Democrats' government-run plan. Government mandates in health care already encourage waste, fraud and abuse that result in higher costs and more families without care. We cannot allow politicians and special interests to stand between patients and the care they need. The American people deserve the freedom to choose the health care that is best for their families.
Last month when speaking to the American Medical Association, President Obama praised countries that "spend less" than the U.S. on health care. For instance, the British system is often touted as spending half as much per capita on health care as here in the U.S. But as the Wall Street Journal explained today, you get what you pay for. The very real consequence in the U.K. is the rationing of specific drugs, tests, and treatments dictated by a government-regulatory body known as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).
As the WSJ notes:
"Mr. Obama and Democrats claim they can expand subsidies for tens of millions of Americans, while saving money and improving the quality of care. It can't possibly be done. The inevitable result of their plan will be some version of a NICE board that will tell millions of Americans that they are too young, or too old, or too sick to be worth paying to care for."
Clearly, this isn't the path to effective reform we should be choosing.
The Private Option
In July of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed discussing Republican efforts to expand choice in health care, and the inability to choose your own plan under the proposed legislation.
Taking Away the Private Option 7/17/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
Yesterday, I came across a great piece in Investor's Business Daily about how the House Democrats' Health Care Reform bill released earlier this week would mark the end of individual private medical insurance if signed into law.
I've posted a part of it for you below, and I encourage you to read the entire piece. The bill as it's written would kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the government option becomes law.
As I've mentioned in previous posts, Republicans want to expand access to affordable health care and give families the freedom to choose the health care that fits their needs – without imposing a job-killing tax hike on small businesses and working families. From what we’ve seen from the Democrats – they want to take those choices away.
It's Not An Option
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, July 15, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Congress: It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.
When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.
It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:
"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.
So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.
Treatment Determined by Age
In July of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed discussing the dispurse of funds for treatment depending on age and condition.
Age and Medical Condition Will Determine Your Treatment 7/27/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
Betsy McCaughey, founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former New York lieutenant governor has blown the lid off of President Obama's vision of health care reform, revealing the real life ramifications of how one's age and level of ability will determine the kind of care and treatment they receive. To be blunt, the ramifications for senior citizens, the disabled, and the very sick are downright damning.
"THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the decisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They'd decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.
"Yet at least two of President Obama's top health advisers should never be trusted with that power.
"Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. He has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research.
"Emanuel bluntly admits that the cuts will not be pain-free. 'Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change,' he wrote last year (Health Affairs Feb. 27, 2008).
"Savings, he writes, will require changing how doctors think about their patients: Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, 'as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost or effects on others' (Journal of the American Medical Association, June 18, 2008).
"Yes, that's what patients want their doctors to do. But Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.
"Many doctors are horrified by this notion; they'll tell you that a doctor's job is to achieve social justice one patient at a time.
"Emanuel, however, believes that 'communitarianism' should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those 'who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia' (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96).
"Translation: Don't give much care to a grandmother with Parkinson's or a child with cerebral palsy.
"He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: 'Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years' (Lancet, Jan. 31)."
Health Care and Illegal Immigrants
In July of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed discussing the coverage of citizens of other nations living within the US.
Health Care Bill to Cover Illegal Immigrants 7/28/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
One of the hot points of contention throughout the health care debate has been whether coverage will extend to illegal immigrants.
Roll Call reports that last Friday, leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) met with Speaker Pelosi to "reiterate that illegal immigrants should be covered under health care reform legislation" that comes out of the House.
"Asked if CHC leaders will ask Pelosi to specifically spell something out in the bill to address illegal immigrants, [one] Member said no. Rather, the Member said the CHC simply wants to make sure the bill — as drafted — doesn’t prohibit illegal immigrants from accessing care. 'Sometimes if you don’t say something, something happens,' said the Hispanic lawmaker."
Interesting. Especially when you put it in the context of the House Ways and Means Committee's party-line vote to reject a commonsense amendment that would have ensured that illegal immigrants are not covered. The amendment, offered by Nevada Republican Dean Heller, would have simply required that the same citizenship verification mechanisms used to screen welfare recipients be used to screen health benefits recipients.
The relationship between illegal immigrants and our nation's health care system is one that cannot be overlooked. In 2006, the Census Bureau reported that there were 46.6 million people without health insurance of which about 9.5 million were not United States citizens. The expense of illegal immigrants' health care in California, for instance, has become so unbearable that many municipalities had to eliminate this benefit to save tens of millions of dollars. Texas estimates that illegal immigrants cost hospitals there $1.3 billion in 2006 alone.
It's clear that a bill that is silent on eligibility means a bill that includes illegal immigrants.
Coops
In July of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed discussing the use of the word "coop" in health care reform. She asserts that she is in favor of private coops that consist of bundles of companies, but not a new insurer.
What Do They Mean By A Co-op? 7/31/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
There's no way around it - support for the so-called "public option" in health care is flat lining. So now we're hearing from the Senate about a "consumer cooperative" or "co-op" as an alternative to the government plan.
However as the Heritage Foundation notes, if this “co-op” is not run and controlled directly by consumers, then it's simply a government-plan under a different name.
"If by health care 'co-op' Congress means allowing private associations to collectively buy health insurance for their members or operate a health insurance exchange, or allowing people to buy health insurance from a non-profit, member-owned private insurer, then those would be positive, pro-consumer developments.
"However, simply slapping the word 'cooperative' onto a new 'insurer,' but then specifying that the government — not the policyholders — picks the board of directors (as Sen. Schumer wants), or that taxpayers will subsidize it, or that it has to pay doctors and hospitals at Medicare rates, would just be an exercise in trying to disguise a 'public plan.'"
The American people won't be sold by smoke and mirrors. There's too much at stake here. And while it's not clear that the President and many Members of Congress are reading the bills, the people are.
Taxing the Middle Class
In August of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed discussing the taxing of the middle class to pay for health care reform.
Taxing the Middle Class to Pay for Health Care 8/4/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
One of the more notable promises from the campaign trail by President Obama back in 2008 was his promise not to raise taxes by one single dime on anyone making less than $250,000 a year. Cap-and-trade and expiring tax cuts aside, it's taken only six months for the President to publicly consider reneging on his campaign pledge.
As the Wall Street Journal points out:
"Asked about raising taxes on the middle class on Sunday on CBS’s 'Face the Nation,' White House economist Larry Summers wouldn’t repeat Mr. Obama’s pre-election promise. 'It is never a good idea to absolutely rule things out no matter what,' Mr. Summers said—except, apparently, when his boss is running for office. Meanwhile, on ABC’s 'This Week,' Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner also slid around Mr. Obama’s vow and said, 'We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically. And that’s going to require some very hard choices.'
"These aren’t even nondenial denials. The Obama advisers are laying the groundwork for taxing the middle class while claiming the deficit made them do it."
It must also be noted that Democrats have already raised the cigarette tax and the House has passed a cap-and-trade bill at the President's urging that will directly raise the costs Americans pay for their energy. But perhaps worst of all is a proposal being floated directly by the Obama Administration of a value added tax (VAT).
"So waiting in the wings is the biggest middle-class tax increase of them all: a European-style value added tax, or VAT. This tax would apply to every level of production or service, and it is beloved by politicians in Europe because it raises so much money so easily without voters noticing. Ezekiel Emanuel, a White House aide and brother of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has advocated a 10% VAT to finance national health care. Look for a VAT to be one of the prominent options when Mr. Obama’s tax reform commission issues its report later this year."
At the end of the day, someone has to pay for the President's health care overhaul, and sadly it's looking more and more that it will be middle-class America picking up the tab.
Bipartisan Health Care Reform
In August of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an article discussing health care reform that she would support, and that she believed would be bipartisan.
St. Cloud Times: Bipartisan health care reforms exist
St. Cloud, MN, Aug 30, 2009 -
Health care reform is on everybody’s mind. And with good reason.
We have the highest quality health care in the world. Look no further than Minnesota’s Mayo Clinic, which is a world-class destination for care. But high costs put health care out of reach for millions of Americans, especially middle-class families that make too much for government subsidies but struggle to pay the bills. Similarly, small-business owners struggle because they cannot use big business’ economies of scale to get affordable coverage.
We must do something to contain costs and make the high-quality care we have more accessible to everyone.
While the government-run approach, also known as the public option or co-op, is getting the most notice, there are actually a number of less dramatic alternatives that can really make a big difference. Moreover, while some in Washington are talking about what’s being called the “nuclear option,” or a Democratic Congress and White House joining together to pass their reform proposals with no Republican input, many of these lesser-known alternatives individually have broad bipartisan support.
We shouldn’t get lost in the glamour of big overhauls and look past meaningful reforms, like association health plans that let small businesses bond together to reduce coverage costs or health savings accounts that let you save for care tax-free. Bigger is not necessarily better.
Changes to the tax code, for instance, would make care and coverage more affordable while preserving consumer choices.
I’ve introduced the bipartisan Health Care Freedom of Choice Act to put patients in charge of their health decisions by tweaking the tax code. Under current law, businesses are allowed to deduct the cost of employee health care from their taxes, while individuals and families cannot. This bias in favor of employer-provided coverage leads to higher costs overall and reduces accessibility to care.
My legislation would erase this bias and extend the same tax incentives to businesses and individuals alike. From co-pays and premiums to long-term care, vision and dental, your high out-of-pocket costs would no longer be a barrier to care.
I’ve also cosponsored the Empowering Patients First Act, which puts the focus of health care decisions back on the patient, where it belongs. This legislation includes a sliding scale refundable tax credit for lower income Americans. It also covers pre-existing conditions and protects employer-sponsored insurance.
The bill would increase consumer choice by allowing individuals to shop for their health insurance across state lines, similar to how we purchase auto insurance, creating competition and giving Americans the greatest value for the coverage that best fits their needs.
Allowing consumers to cross state lines to purchase insurance would apply positive pressure to end the burgeoning number of health insurance mandates. If you don’t want to pay for hair prostheses in your coverage, you shouldn’t have to, but one in five states mandates that you do.
According to a study by the Council for Affordable Health Insurance, each mandate typically increases the cost of health insurance coverage by up to 3 percent. And, they identified 1,961 mandates in 2008.
Another provision in this legislation would rein in the money wasted on frivolous lawsuits.
Malpractice awards alone drive up the annual cost of U.S. health care by $20 billion to $40 billion a year. But even worse is the cost of defensive medicine, or responses a doctor utilizes primarily to avoid liability.
One study by the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons puts the cost of defensive medicine at as much as $178 billion per year. We must have tort reform so that doctors can be doctors without fear of frivolous, career-ending lawsuits.
And we must have tort reform so that doctors don’t abandon difficult specialties because their medical malpractice insurance makes it cost prohibitive. Increasing numbers of obstetrician-gynecologists, for instance, won’t deliver babies any more; it’s just too costly. Patients — particularly in underserved areas — are the ones who lose when doctors are forced to drop these important specialties.
These are just a few of the health care proposals we can enact that won’t break the bank and can pass quickly and with broad bipartisan support.
Our nation’s deficit and debt are at all-time highs. Medicare and Medicaid are broke. Social Security is broke.
Can we really afford to trust Washington when it asks you to entrust them with your health care saying it will not only reduce costs, but increase both accessibility and efficiency for all Americans?
Fox News Appearance
In September of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox News and spoke about her opposition to the plans being put forth by President Obama and the Democrats.
Opposition to Senate Passage of Health Care Reform
In December of 2009, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her opposition to the passage of health care reform legislation through the Senate.
Bachmann: Democrats' rhetoric does not mirror reality
Washington, D.C., Dec 21, 2009 -
(Washington, D.C.) U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06) released the following statement after the U.S. Senate voted to cut off debate on the government take-over of health care:
“The Democrats touted they would run the most transparent Congress, and President Obama even claimed the health care debates would take place on CSPAN for all the American people to watch,” said Bachmann. “Instead, after introducing 383 pages of changes, the Senate voted to end debate in the middle of the night, the weekend before Christmas when the rest of the federal government was shut down due to a snow storm."
"Our constituents were not even given the chance to contact their elected representatives to express their views about the bill during this late night vote. Not only have Democrats ignored the will of the American people, their rhetoric has once again failed to translate into reality,” said Bachmann.
Representative Bachmann will be available today and tomorrow for further comments.
Call for Transparency
In January of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement calling for transparency in the health care reform debate.
Rep. Bachmann Supports Effort to Bring Transparency to Ongoing Health Care Negotiations
Washington, D.C., Jan 14, 2010 - U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06) today issued the following statement in support of House Resolution 847, the “Sunshine Resolution,” which would ensure public access to the ongoing health care negotiations:
“My constituents in the 6th District of Minnesota and citizens across the nation have demanded transparency in the health care reform process. And despite President Obama’s promises to provide open and transparent proceedings, Democrats continue to meet behind closed doors, out of view, away from the American people.
“In order to ensure that American citizens receive the open process Democrats promised throughout this health care reform debate, my colleagues and I have introduced legislation that would require public access to negotiations on the final bill.
“In addition to ensuring the American people have a seat at the table, I will continue to fight to implement common-sense health care reforms that Minnesotans can support that will lower costs and increase accessibility without taking over one-sixth of the United States economy.”
Declaration of Health Care Independence
In January of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her support for the Declaration of Health Care Independence.
Bachmann Unveils Declaration of Health Care Independence
DHCI Presser
Washington, D.C., Jan 27, 2010 - U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06), along with several Republican colleagues, formally unveiled and signed today the Declaration of Health Care Independence at the U.S. Capitol.
“The Declaration of Health Care Independence is a commitment to protect the rights of the American people to make their own health care decisions, reduce bureaucratic red-tape, decrease intergenerational debt, and includes 10 common-sense principles that must be included in future health care reforms,” said Bachmann. “This is not a bill, but rather a roadmap of the rules going forward.
“I believe the majority of Washington supports these 10 principles, and I invite members on both sides of the aisle to sign the Declaration so we can move forward and implement reforms that are good for the American people. The people have spoken, and they have overwhelmingly rejected what’s been put forth so far. It’s time to get back to the drawing board,” said Bachmann.
A copy of the Declaration of Health Care Independence is below:
Declaration of Health Care Independence
In order to retain the Blessings of Liberty as secured to us by our Founding Fathers and as expressed in our Constitution, We the People reject the imposition upon us of a new, Washington-controlled system of government-run health care. We demand Constitutional protection of the right to make our own health decisions and our own health care choices free of government denials, bureaucratic red-tape, and greater intergenerational debt.
A Washington takeover of American health care will
1) Deny fundamental personal and economic liberties and indisputably violate the Principle of Limited Government as established by the Constitution; 2) Impose increased costs and taxes upon individuals, families, and businesses, as well as taxpayers at the federal, state, and local levels; 3) Irreparably cripple the American economy, at the cost of jobs, businesses, productivity, and quality of life; 4) Create an inescapable new tax by imposing individual and employer mandates; 5) Institutionalize a massive, ever-expanding federal bureaucracy that is impersonal and impractical; 6) Empower bureaucrats to interfere in the doctor-patient relationship, undermine the quality of care, limit choice, and increase the cost of health care.
We have appealed to the decency of the elected majority to respect the rights of all Americans, but their leaders have been deaf to the Voice of the People. We are appalled by their cavalier disregard of the Constitution and of the demands of the People. We are repulsed by their blatant political bribes and kickbacks.
We, therefore, the People and Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, do solemnly Publish and Declare that health care reform, as a matter of principle must
1) Protect as inviolate the vital doctor-patient relationship; 2) Reject any addition to the crushing national debt heaped upon all Americans; 3) Improve, rather than diminish, the quality of care that Americans enjoy; 4) Be negotiated publically, transparently, with genuine accountability and oversight, and be free from political favoritism; 5) Treat private citizens at least as well as political officials; 6) Protect taxpayers from funding of abortion and abortion coverage; 7) Reject all new mandates on patients, employers, individuals, or states; 8) Prohibit expansion of taxpayer funded health care to those unlawfully present in the United States; 9) Guarantee Equal Protection under the law and the Constitution; 10) Empower, rather than limit, an open and accessible marketplace of health care choice and opportunity.
Response to Health Care Summit
In February of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox News and spoke about President Obama's announcement that he wanted a health care summit.
Health Care Freedom of Choice Act
In March of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act.
Rep. Bachmann's Health Care Freedom of Choice Act
Washington, D.C., Mar 8, 2010 -
Jan 14, 2009 - Introduced in House. This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill currently available on GovTrack.
HR 502 IH 111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 502
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to improve health care choice by providing for the tax deductibility of medical expenses by individuals.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 14, 2009
Mrs. BACHMANN (for herself, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. PAUL, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. SESSIONS, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. ROHRABACHER, and Mr. SCALISE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Committee on Ways and Means
A BILL
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to improve health care choice by providing for the tax deductibility of medical expenses by individuals.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Health Care Freedom of Choice Act’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds the following:
(1) Current law confers a tax benefit for health insurance provided as an employee fringe benefit, but no similar tax benefit for health insurance purchased by individuals. Similarly, current law confers a tax benefit on third-party payment of medical expenses, but no similar tax benefit for most individuals’ direct payment of medical expenses. This has effectively promoted employer-provided third party payment systems and effectively discouraged direct doctor-patient relationships.
(2) The current tax treatment of medical expenses has significantly curtailed competition for both health insurance and health care services generally. This has effectively increased the cost of health care and health insurance, which in turn has exposed people to greater health risks and made it more likely that individuals will go without needed care.
(3) The current tax treatment of medical expenses has restricted the freedom of individuals to exercise direct control over their health care dollars. The exclusion from gross income for employer-provided health care plans with no corresponding tax benefit for health insurance and health care obtained by individuals (except the self-employed) constitutes a strong preferment for health care provided through employers’ group plans as compared to health care that individuals purchase for themselves. This is why 90 percent of Americans under age 65 with private health insurance receive it through their employer.
(4) Providing a tax benefit for employer-provided plans, but not for individually purchased health care, discriminates against individuals who work for companies that do not provide health benefits, individuals who are temporarily employed, and the disabled.
(5) In many cases, employers are not able to offer their employees a variety of health insurance plans. The Tax Code’s provision of benefits for mostly employer-provided health insurance has discriminated against individuals who work for these employers, especially small businesses. This is why 90 percent of American businesses that provide health insurance offer employees the ‘choice’ of only one health care plan. Americans who work for businesses with fewer than 25 employees are half as likely to have health coverage as those working for companies with 1,000 or more employees.
(6) The Tax Code’s preferment of employer-provided group plans has triggered a marketplace response reflected in the significant increases in large group health care delivery, and the creation of a few health care conglomerates in lieu of thousands of competitive providers of medical services and health insurance. This has increasingly placed medical decisions in the hands of health care bureaucracies, and significantly eroded the doctor-patient relationship. Medical decisions should be returned to doctors and their patients. This will result in higher quality treatment and more patient protection.
(7) Consumers should have the freedom to purchase the health insurance of their choice, to choose their own doctors, and to make their own decisions about their health care.
(8) By putting the medical choices made by individuals on an equal footing with the medical choices made for them by their employers and third parties, the Tax Code can encourage greater choice and competition, thereby reducing the cost of necessary insurance for all Americans. This will enable millions more Americans to obtain needed health coverage, to make their own choices about which doctors to see, and to have access to the quality care they deserve and expect.
SEC. 3. TAX DEDUCTIBILITY OF MEDICAL EXPENSES FOR INDIVIDUALS.
(a) In General- Section 213(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to the treatment of medical and dental expenses) is amended to read as follows:
‘(a) Allowance of Deduction- There shall be allowed as a deduction the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or a dependent (as defined in section 152, determined without regard to subsections (b)(1), (b)(2), and (d)(1)(B) thereof).’.
(b) Effective Date- The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after the calendar year which includes the date of the enactment of this Act.
Quid Pro Quo
In March of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox News and spoke about the deals used to garner votes for the health care reform legislation.
Reaction to Executive Order on Abortion
In March of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on Fox News and spoke about President Obama's plan to issue an executive order on abortion and health care reform.
Loophole Closure
In March of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting legislation that had been introduced to eliminate exemptions.
Bachmann and House Colleagues Introduce Legislation to Close Absurd Health Care Loophole
Washington, Mar 25, 2010 - Today, U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06) along with 15 House colleagues introduced legislation that would eliminate the exemption contained within the recently passed health care overhaul for Congressional staff that helped craft the legislation. This legislation amends the bill signed into law by the President on Wednesday, which required some staff to participate in the new health care exchange created by the law and allowed others to remain in the existing system. This bill ensures that all employees of the Legislative Branch of our federal government are moved into the new health care exchanges.
“It’s absurd that the Democrats’ health care overhaul contained special provisions for some, while relegating others to the new law passed this weekend,” Bachmann stated. “What an insult to the American people. It leaves one thinking that this legislation isn’t at all cracked up to what the Democrats are deeming it to be. After all, they don’t even want to be in it. This bill, if passed, would change all that, and the American people expect nothing less.”
Specifically, the legislation would close the loophole so that all Legislative Branch employees are required to get their health insurance from the health care exchanges. This would include all leadership, committee and joint staff as well as officers of the House and Senate and their employees. All other Legislative Branch employees would be included as well.
Opposition to Passage of Health Care Reform
In March of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her opposition to the passage of health care reform legislation.
Congress Ignores the American People and Passes Health Care Overhaul
Washington, D.C., Mar 21, 2010 -
U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06) issued the following statement tonight as House Democrats passed their trillion-dollar health care bill despite the American people's overwhelming objection to it:
“On August 13, 1800, Thomas Jefferson wrote the following:
"‘Our country is too large to have all its affairs directed by a single government. Public servants at such a distance, and from under the eye of their constituents, must, from the circumstance of distance, be unable to administer and overlook all the details necessary for the good government of the citizens, and the same circumstance, by rendering detection impossible to their constituents, will invite the public agents to corruption, plunder and waste. And I do verily believe, that if the principle were to prevail, of a common law being in force in the United States…, it would become the most corrupt government on the earth…What an augmentation of the field for jobbing, speculation, plundering, office-building, and office-hunting would be produced by an assumption of all the State powers into the hands of the General Government.’
“Poignant words, and as our federal government expands its grip over one-sixth of our nation’s economy with the passing of this legislation, maybe now President Obama and Speaker Pelosi will finally take the time to find out what’s in it.
"This past year, the President and Democratic leaders in Congress gathered in back rooms away from the American people and twisted arms to get just enough votes through deals and handouts to pass their legislation. They broke promises of open debate and transparency, and instead of working with Republicans and implementing common sense reforms that wouldn’t break the bank, they went it alone and spent more money we just don’t have.
"Future generations will pay the price for our government’s arrogance and recklessness, and the American people won’t ever forget the irresponsible actions of this Administration and Congress. After all, government answers to the people, not the other way around, and the fight for the soul of this nation continues on.”
Legislation to Repeal Health Care Reform
In March of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her support for legislation to repeal the health care reform legislation.
Bachmann Introduces Legislation to Repeal the Democrats' Health Care Bill
Washington, D.C., Mar 22, 2010 -
U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06) issued the following statement today after introducing legislation to repeal the Democrats' government takeover of health care:
"It's no secret, President Obama and Democrat leaders have ignored the will of the people and have chosen to ram through their trillion-dollar health care bill despite the American people's overwhelming objection to it.
"It's future generations, our children and grandchildren who will pay the price for our government’s arrogance and recklessness, and the American people won’t ever forget the irresponsible actions of this Administration and Democratic Majority. After all, government answers to the people, not the other way around. I'm asking my colleagues to join me in repealing this monstrosity of a bill.”
Medicare and Single Payer
In October of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann wrote an op-ed discussing recent comments that Medicare could be used as a single-payer program which would allow everyone to "buy in" to the system.
Medicare is Going Broke, So Let's Give it to Everyone 10/22/2009 | Email Michele Bachmann | All Posts By Blogger
The Treasury Department has reported that America faces a $43 trillion unfunded obligation in Social Security and Medicare benefits with 77 million retiring baby boomers and rising health care costs.
According to the CBO, paying for the promised benefits will eventually force Congress to impose a 63% income tax on the middle class and an 88% tax on the “wealthy.”
Yet, even as we try to figure out how to meet our current obligations, the President wants to create an additional health care entitlement and further increase spending elsewhere in the budget.
The Social Security trust fund will be exhausted by 2037, and the Medicare hospital trust fund will become insolvent by 2017 according to a report by the trustees of the two programs.
In fact, next year – 2010 – Social Security’s costs will exceed it’s income.
Medicare has an unfunded liability of $36 trillion over the next 75 years, or about $317,000 per U.S. household, and in just the next 5 years, by 2013, Medicare’s unfunded liability is projected to grow by 33 percent, to $48 trillion – or about $412,402 per household.
When Social Security and Medicare are taken together, the total unfunded liability is $40 trillion, or about $353,000 per household. By 2013, that total will grow to $54 trillion, or $474,077 per household.
So let me ask you this: When we can't afford the public health plan we have already, does it make sense to expand it? That’s exactly what the Democrats want to do with their health care overhaul. The public option by another name is just “Medicare for All.”
The system is already broken, yet they want to compound the problem. With math like this, it’s no wonder we have a debt nearing $12 trillion and our country is running record deficits. This is real money we’re talking about here, and real people’s futures. Let’s get serious.
Reaction to Ruling Obamacare Unconstitutional
In December of 2010, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her support for a ruling that stated that the 2009-2010 health care reform known as "Obamacare" was unconstitutional.
Bachmann Reacts to Lawsuit Ruling Obamacare Unconstitutional
Washington, Dec 13, 2010 - Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06) issued the following statement upon learning a federal lawsuit is allowed to move forward challenging Obama’s health care reform legislation as unconstitutional:
“For decades the government has grown uninhibitedly, with no visible signs of returning to the limited form of government intended at our nation’s founding. The United States is almost $14 trillion in debt and this Congress continues to pass bills vastly expanding the scope and control of the federal government. Such is the case of Obamacare, in which the government goes so far as to mandate individuals purchase health care.
“The United States was founded on freedom, and requiring citizens to purchase something against their will violates that fundamental value. I am pleased Federal Judge Henry E. Hudson recognized today Obamacare’s unconstitutional mandate is outside the authority of Congress as Virginia’s lawsuit moves forward.
“I am committed to defunding and repealing Obamacare in the 112th Congress as we continue to see its far-reaching and adverse effects on individuals, families and businesses. The unconstitutional individual mandate is just one example of why Obamacare must be done away with.”
Health Care Repeal Vote
In January of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting her support for repealing the 2009-2010 health care reform legislation and the importance of the vote to do that.
Bachmann Says Obamacare Repeal Vote is "Not Symbolic"
Washington, Jan 19 - Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-6) delivered the following remarks today on the floor of the House of Representatives:
“Obamacare, as we know, is the crown jewel of socialism. It is socialized medicine.
“The American people spoke soundly and clearly at the ballot box in November and they said to us, Mr. Speaker, in no uncertain terms, ‘Repeal this bill.’ So today, this body will cast a vote to repeal Obamacare. And to those across the United States who think this may be a symbolic act, we have a message for them: this is not symbolic. This is why we were sent here and we will not stop until we repeal a President and put a President in the White House who will repeal this bill, until we repeal the current Senate, put in a Senate that will listen to the American people and repeal this bill.
“Because what has been the result, Mr. Speaker? It's been this: it's been job loss, it's been increases on cost to the American people. I've seen everything from 26 percent increases on health insurance to 45 percent increases on health insurance. This will break the bank, and we won't let that happen to our country.
“So make no mistake, Mr. Speaker, we are here to stay and our resolve is firm. We will continue this fight until Obamacare is no longer the law of the land and until we can actually pass reform that will cut the cost of health care.”
Fraud in Obamacare
In March of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann released a press statement noting that funding within the Obamacare legislation was meant to circumvent the appropriations process.
Bachmann Exposes Legislative Fraud in ObamaCare
Washington, Mar 4 - Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06) brings light to the $105 billion in government spending that was buried in the ObamaCare legislation which became law last March. Bachmann released the following statement:
“This is a case of legislative fraud of the highest order. We now know that the ObamaCare bill contained advanced appropriations for use in implementing this massive government takeover of health care. This year alone, the provisions are already in place to spend $5 billion on ObamaCare, and another $100 billion will be spent over the next eight years, even without any appropriating actions by Congress.
“More and more we are seeing what Nancy Pelosi meant when she said the bill would have to be passed in order for the American people to find out what was in it. The Obama Administration has already added about 6,000 pages of regulations to ObamaCare, and this funding shows a clear intent to circumvent the appropriations process and make it much more difficult for future Congresses to repeal ObamaCare. When it was passed, Democrats knew they would lose the gavel. But this funding ensures they will not lose their prized government takeover of health care because it’s already well-funded.
“With this information, I am vowing to vote ‘no’ on future Continuing Resolutions to fund the government unless there is specific language included to defund ObamaCare and rescind the funding that has already been appropriated. Defunding ObamaCare, along with defunding Planned Parenthood, must be non-negotiable planks in our budget negotiations.
“I also want to offer a public word of gratitude to former Representative Ernest Istook of Oklahoma, who worked hard to uncover this startling new information about how ObamaCare’s sponsors included several years’ worth of current and future appropriations for the health care takeover.”
New Hampshire Debate
On June 13, 2011 Congresswoman Bachmann participated in a Republican Presidential debate in New Hampshire. She was asked about the repeal of Obamacare and noted that she introduced the legislation to repeal it.
QUESTION: Yes. As a journalist who's written frequently about health care and medicine for both newspapers and for corporate publications, I'm very concerned about the overreach of the massive health care legislation that was passed last year. My question is, what would each candidate do? What three steps would they take to de- fund Obamacare and repeal it as soon as possible? Thank you.
KING: Congresswoman Bachmann, let's start with you on that.
BACHMANN: Thank you, John. Sylvia, thank you for that great question. I was the very first member of Congress to introduce the full-scale repeal of Obamacare. And I want to make a promise to everyone watching tonight: As president of the United States, I will not rest until I repeal Obamacare. It's a promise. Take it to the bank, cash the check. I'll make sure that that happens.
This is the symbol and the signature issue of President Obama during his entire tenure. And this is a job-killer, Sylvia. The CBO, the Congressional Budget Office has said that Obamacare will kill 800,000 jobs. What could the president be thinking by passing a bill like this, knowing full well it will kill 800,000 jobs?
Senior citizens get this more than any other segment of our population, because they know in Obamacare, the president of the United States took away $500 billion, a half-trillion dollars out of Medicare, shifted it to Obamacare to pay for younger people, and it's senior citizens who have the most to lose in Obamacare.
Official Website Statements
Health Care Reform
All Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. Sadly, there are more than 42 million Americans without health care coverage. Many of these individuals find health insurance to be unattainable, unavailable, and unaffordable. With health care costs rising and unemployment escalating, it is more important than ever to address the issue of the uninsured.
Policies that will increase competition and individual choice in the healthcare marketplace are essential to achieving greater efficiency and affordability for everyone. My bipartisan legislation, H.R. 502, the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act, would make medical expenses, including health care premiums, 100% tax-deductible for all individuals. Under current law, health insurance is tax-free for those who receive it through their employers. My bill would give this same tax benefit to people who buy their own health insurance or pay for medical care “out-of-pocket.” This would give all Americans the freedom to purchase the health plan of their choice, to pick their preferred doctors and to make their own medical decisions.
Additionally, I support the expansion of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) which currently allow Americans to save a limited amount of money for medical expenses tax-free. I also advocate the creation of Association Health Plans (AHPs), which would allow small businesses to band together through trade associations to purchase health insurance for their employees at a lower cost. Finally, the flood of frivolous lawsuits in our nation must be addressed to curb the rising cost of health care. Frivolous lawsuits impose extremely high costs on physicians, causing doctors to abandon certain areas of practice or even leave certain regions, making health care less accessible.
As your representative, I will continue to fight for competitive reforms designed to lower costs, increase accessibility and improve our country’s overall health care system.
Campaign Website Statements
Healthcare
American healthcare is the best in the world, but rising costs make it inaccessible to many. In fact, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, between 2000 and 2006, premiums for family coverage increased 87%, making the average annual premium for families more than $12,000.
A big part of the problem has roots in the Tax Code, which favors employer-provided health insurance. My Health Care Freedom of Choice Act would provide full tax deductibility for individual health expenses, including medical care, dental care, long-term care and insurance premiums.
We’ve seen from the other side of the aisle that the White House and Democrat majority in the Congress favor a government-run option that would only contribute to our already record-breaking deficits and high unemployment numbers, all the while putting bureaucrats between you and your doctors and leading to rationed care. Taxing small business is not a smart approach to health care reform. We need to expand access to affordable health care and give families the freedom to choose the health care that fits their needs – without imposing a job-killing tax hike on small businesses and working families.
Bill O'Reilly Appearance
On August 8, 2011 Congresswoman Bachmann appeared on the O'Reilly factor and spoke about entitlement reform. She states that she supports means testing for Medicare and social security.
Congresswoman Bachmann: We would make sure that all senior citizens would know they aren't going to be scared any more. Their current benefits, both on Medicare and Social Security, will be paid. However, from there, with all members of Congress, I would let them know that the time for entitlement reform is now. Not in the future, we have to have entitlement reform now.
O'Reilly: OK, but what's your idea about that? What's your idea about Medicare, because costs are exploding. What's your idea to get costs under control so that the nation can afford to pay the bills of people who have paid into Medicare for their whole working lives. I mean, it's not really an entitlement - Medicare - and I know that people always say that and their right. They say "you know, we pay into this system." But then the government does what it usually does and puts the money here and there and they don't have enough money to cover ... and all that. So how do you get the Medicare costs under control? What do you do?
Congresswoman Bachmann: Well, it needs to be tied more to the market right? Because it isn't now. Right now, it's on a fee for service program and President Obama has himself said that this program isn't working and that has to change. There have been good suggestions that are out there.
O'Reilly: Like what?
Congresswoman Bachmann: People who do not have sufficient income could have their health insurance subsidized. And for those people who do have sufficient income, they would purchase their own health insurance. So, it would be means tested as to who would need assistance ...
O'Reilly: OK, so the wealthy people, the affluent people who declare a certain amount of income every year, if they are over a certain level, they are not gonna get as much Medicare help. So, people are gonna be teed off about that so OK. .. Would you raise the age for Medicare, would you raise the age for social security?
Congresswoman Bachmann: Well again, number one, everyone has to be crystal clear. No one that is a current recepient of benefits would be impacted.
Reagan Debate
In September of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann participated in the Republican debate at the Reagan library. She talks about the need to end Obamacare and states if it is not repealed this year, socialized medicine will be with us for good.
TEA Party Debate
In September of 2011, Congresswoman Bachmann participated in the Republican TEA Party debate. She talks about her support for continuing programs such as medicare.
BLITZER: Good question. Let me begin with Michele Bachmann. Congresswoman, how do you do that? How do you go ahead and change, reform Social Security, Medicare, while at the same time getting votes?
BACHMANN: Well, one thing that we need to let senior citizens know is, for those who are currently on the Social Security system, the United States government made a promise to senior citizens, and we have to keep that promise to them.
But we also need to know that for those who are not yet on the system, the system simply has to be reformed in order for it to work. The same goes with Medicare. We know that President Obama stole over $500 billion out of Medicare to switch it over to Obamacare. We also know that Medicare hospital trust fund will be bankrupt within nine years. These are programs that need to be saved to serve people, and in their current form, they can't.
So we need to have someone who understands these programs, who -- who understands the solutions to these programs. I'm a person that's had feet in the private sector and a foot in the federal government. I've been there long enough to know the problems, but not long enough to become a part of the system. I know what to do, and I have the core of conviction to be able to make the changes that senior citizens can count on.
Dartmouth Debate
On October 11, 2011 Congresswoman Bachmann participated in the Dartmouth debate. She was asked about Medicare and discussed the relation of the issued with Obamacare and the need to repeal it.
TUMULTY: Well, Congresswoman Bachmann, of course no one wants the government to come between a doctor and a patient. But do you think that Americans are getting the most for their money in Medicare spending? And how can we make sure that the money that is being spent is being spent on the treatments and the preventive treatments that do the most?
BACHMANN: We have a big problem today when it comes to Medicare, because we know that nine years from now, the Medicare hospital Part B trust fund is going to be dead-flat broke, so we’ve got to deal with this issue. I was in the White House with President Obama this summer. We asked him not once, but three times, “President Obama, what is your plan to save Medicare?”
And the president mumbled and he didn’t give an answer the first time, the second time. And the third time the president said something very interesting, Karen. He said Obamacare.
I think that senior citizens across the country have no idea that President Obama plans for Medicare to collapse, and instead everyone will be pushed into Obamacare.
And just like Newt Gingrich said, the way that Obamacare runs, there’s a board called IPAB. It’s made up of 15 political appointees. These 15 political appointees will make all the major health care decisions for over 300 million Americans. I don’t want 15 political appointees to make a health care decision for a beautiful, fragile 85- year-old woman who should be making her own decision.
Michigan Economic Debate
On November 10, 2011 Congresswoman Bachmann participated in the Michigan economic debate. She discussed her health care plan.
BARTIROMO: Congresswoman.
BACHMANN: The main problem with health care in the United States today is the issue of cost. It's just too expensive. And President Obama said that's what he would solve in Obamacare, we'd all save $2,500 a year in our premiums.
Well, we have Obamacare, but we didn't have the savings. So what I would do to replace it is to allow every American to buy any health insurance policy they want anywhere in the United States, without any federal minimum mandate. Today there's an insurance monopoly in every state in the country. I would end that monopoly and let any American go anywhere they want. That's the free market.
Number two, I would allow every American to pay for that insurance policy -- their deductible, their co-pay, their pharmaceuticals, whatever it is that's medical-related -- with their own tax-free money.
And then, finally, I'd have true medical malpractice liability reform. If you do that, it's very simple. People own their own insurance policies, and you drive the costs down, because what we have to get rid of is government bureaucracy in health care. That's all we bought in Obamacare, was a huge bureaucracy. That has to go away.
2012 Presidential Campaign Website Statements
A Healthier America
Do you have your Obamacare waiver yet? The Administration’s possibly illegal granting of more than 1400 waivers to favored parties underscores the phony claims of cost savings and better access to care behind this legislation.
Studies have found that 30 to 50 percent of employers may drop health plans covering tens of millions of workers – adding $1 trillion or more to Obamacare’s cost. Not to mention the looming shortage of physicians, hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to Medicare, and the panels of unelected bureaucrats who will determine your level of care. The CBO studies that show Obamacare will reduce in the death of 800,000 jobs. And of course, the unconstitutional infringement on your freedoms from the individual mandate and centralized government care.
That’s why my number one priority is to repeal Obamacare. At the same time, we need to stabilize Medicare, which faces $25 trillion in unfunded obligations under the most optimistic projections. I recently voted for the Ryan Plan to make sure that Medicare is secure for future generations – those now under 55 who are affected by the blueprint. In fact, I’ve argued that we should call it “the under-55 plan,” since everyone that age or older will have their current benefits fully protected. But the Ryan Plan is just the very first step on health reform, and I voted for it with an asterisk with further reforms in mind.
As President, I will work to unleash the power of medical innovation and personal choices. Because a cure is always better and cheaper than care – after all, it was once predicted we would spend billions a year on polio. I will empower your families and doctors, not unelected bureaucrats, to make the right decisions about the shape and form of your health insurance, your quality of care and your course of treatment. And I will push for greater competition in the healthcare market.
In a Bachmann Administration, more ingenuity, more options and more competition – not more bureaucracy and control from Washington – will truly produce better outcomes at a lower cost.
Official Website Statements
Health Care Reform
All Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. Sadly, there are more than 42 million Americans without health care coverage. Many of these individuals find health insurance to be unattainable, unavailable, and unaffordable. With health care costs rising and unemployment escalating, it is more important than ever to address the issue of the uninsured.
Policies that will increase competition and individual choice in the healthcare marketplace are essential to achieving greater efficiency and affordability for everyone. My bipartisan legislation, H.R. 502, the Health Care Freedom of Choice Act, would make medical expenses, including health care premiums, 100% tax-deductible for all individuals. Under current law, health insurance is tax-free for those who receive it through their employers. My bill would give this same tax benefit to people who buy their own health insurance or pay for medical care “out-of-pocket.” This would give all Americans the freedom to purchase the health plan of their choice, to pick their preferred doctors and to make their own medical decisions.
Additionally, I support the expansion of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) which currently allow Americans to save a limited amount of money for medical expenses tax-free. I also advocate the creation of Association Health Plans (AHPs), which would allow small businesses to band together through trade associations to purchase health insurance for their employees at a lower cost. Finally, the flood of frivolous lawsuits in our nation must be addressed to curb the rising cost of health care. Frivolous lawsuits impose extremely high costs on physicians, causing doctors to abandon certain areas of practice or even leave certain regions, making health care less accessible.
As your representative, I will continue to fight for competitive reforms designed to lower costs, increase accessibility and improve our country’s overall health care system.
Voting Record
Repeal of Health Care Reform
In early 2011, the House voted on repealing the 2009-2010 health care reform legislation, called "Obamacare" by its opponents. Michele Bachmann voted in favor of repealing the health care legislation.
Michele Bachmann voted in favor of repealing the health care legislation.
2009-2010 Health Care Reform - Amendments
There were three significant votes on the health care reform legislation in the house. The first passed the house version, the second passed the reconciliation bill, and the third passed a bill to address "problems" in the original bills. This vote passed amendments to address the problems with the reconciliation bill. Michele Bachmann voted against the health care amendments for the House and Senate bills.
Michele Bachmann voted against the health care amendments for the House and Senate bills.
Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
In March of 2010 the House voted on the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. The legislation was to pass the health care reform through the reconciliation process. No Republicans voted for the legislation and 22 Democrats voted against the bill. The bill passed 220-207. Michele Bachmann voted against the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.
Michele Bachmann voted against the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.
2009-2010 Health Care Reform - Reconciliation
After a separate version of health care reform passed in the Senate, the Democrats lost the 60 seats they needed to break a Republican filibuster. To pass the reform bill, the House passed a reconciliation bill that would allow the House and Senate versions to be combined without a separate verion passing the Senate. Michele Bachmann voted against the health care reconciliation bill.
Michele Bachmann voted against the health care reconciliation bill.
2009-2010 Health Care Reform Bill
The Affordable Health Care for America Act (HR 3962) was the version that passed the House. It was supported by most Democrats and only 1 Republican. Michele Bachmann voted against the original health care reform bill.
Michele Bachmann voted against the original health care reform bill.
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act sets up health requirements for tobacco products, sets labeling guidelines, requires tobacco companies to report the content of their products, and prescribes punishements for violating any rules. The measure passed the House 298-112. Michele Bachmann voted against the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
Michele Bachmann voted against the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
SCHIP
In addition to attempting overall health care reform, congress re-authorized SCHIP in 2009. SCHIP is a program to provide children with health care and fund it through tobacco taxes. The program passed with the full support of Democrats and roughly 1/4 of the Republicans. Michele Bachmann voted against SCHIP.
Repeals the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, effective as of its enactment. Restores provisions of law amended by such Act. Repeals the health care provisions of the Health Care and Education and Reconciliation Act of 2010, effective as of the Act's enactment. Restores provisions of law amended by the Act's health care provisions.
Repeals the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, effective as of their enactment. Restores provisions of law amended by such Acts.
Amends the Internal Revenue Code to repeal a provision (added by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) that extends to corporations that are not tax-exempt the requirement to report payments of $600 or more.
Prohibits any funds appropriated or otherwise made available to any federal department or agency from being used to implement or enforce any federal mandate to purchase health insurance.
Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) allow a tax deduction from gross income for the cost of health insurance coverage for individual taxpayers, their spouses, and dependents; (2) permit holders of health savings accounts (HSAs) and their spouses who are age 55 or older to make additional (catch-up) contributions to a joint HSA; (3) increase the allowable amount of the tax deduction for contributions to HSAs; (4) combine individual and family deductibles under high deductible health insurance plans; (5) allow for increased rollovers from flexible spending arrangements (FSAs) or health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) into HSAs; (6) allow the payment of premiums from HSAs for high deductible health plans; and (7) treat as medical care for purposes of the tax deduction for medical expenses certain exercise equipment and fees for physical fitness programs.
Amends the Internal Revenue Code to repeal a provision (added by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) that extends to corporations that are not tax-exempt the requirement to report payments of $600 or more.
Prohibits the Committee on Rules from reporting a rule or order that provides for disposition of the Senate amendments to H.R. 3590 (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA]) unless it provides for: (1) at least one hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and the minority leader; and (2) a requirement that the Speaker put the question on disposition of the Senate amendments and that the yeas and nays be considered as ordered thereon.
Amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to prohibit federal funds from being to used to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion services. (Currently, federal funds cannot be used for abortion services and plans receiving federal funds must keep federal funds segregated from any funds for abortion services.) Requires any qualified health benefit plan offered through an Exchange that includes coverage for abortions to also offer a qualified health benefit plan through the Exchange that is identical in every respect except that it does not cover abortions.
Declares that no funds are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, and any amendments made by either such Act.
Urges Members of Congress who vote in favor of the establishment of a public, federal government run health insurance option to forgo their right to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and agree to enroll under that public option.
Prohibits any funds appropriated or otherwise made available to any federal department or agency from being used to implement or enforce any federal mandate to purchase health insurance.
Amends Internal Revenue Code provisions relating to health savings accounts (HSAs) to: (1) allow HSAs to incorporate flexible spending and health reimbursement arrangements; (2) increase the annual HSA contribution limitation; (3) permit the use of HSAs to purchase health insurance; (4) allow the payment of certain medical expenses incurred before the establishment of an HSA; (5) allow veterans eligible for service-connected disability benefits to establish an HSA; and (6) allow spouses to make increased catch-up contributions to a single HSA.
