Does Joe Wilson Have A Case On Health Care, Illegal Aliens?
(AP Photo/Harry Hamburg)
Let's look at the facts. CBS News has posted the transcript of the president's speech, which says: "There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms -- the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally."
What the Obama administration is proposing is something of a moving target -- just look at the varying opinions about whether last night's speech abandoned the "public option" -- but the White House health care page offers a reasonable summary. Nowhere does it talk about illegal immigrants.
In an interview in July with CBS News, Obama said he didn't want to include illegal immigrants but indicated that American taxpayers could be required to pick up some health care bills for their children. That's not the same as all illegal immigrants, which is what Wilson, the South Carolina Republican, was talking about.
So that brings us to to the House Democrats' proposal, aka H.R. 3200. It's true that one portion, Section 246, limits "federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States." But H.R. 3200 is a large and complex bill and Section 246 is limited in scope; the overall bill contains far more moving parts than just affordability credits.
The Congressional Research Service, the legislative branch's research arm, took a close look at H.R. 3200 in a report dated August 25. It concludes that the bill's individual mandate to have health insurance (with tax penalties for non-compliance) would apply to legal residents and illegal aliens alike.
When the legislation's "Health Insurance Exchange" offering private and government-run plans would begin operation in 2013, CRS concluded would be no restrictions on illegal aliens buying government-offered insurance: "H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange -- whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently."
Now, there are reasonable arguments for and against allowing illegal immigrants to buy government-sponsored insurance. On one hand, they'd be covering much of the cost of their routine medical care and perhaps reducing unnecessary use of emergency rooms; on the other, if illegal immigrants require more expensive care than U.S. citizens and legal immigrants, Americans who play by the rules would end up subsidizing those who didn't. (Someone will be sure to dub this the "illegal immigrant tax," and depending on how the numbers work out, that might even be correct.)
If Democrats wanted to eliminate allegations such as Joe Wilson's, they could simply rewrite H.R. 3200 to say: No illegal immigrant can shop at the Health Insurance Exchange.
Rep. Dean Heller, a Nevada Republican, offered precisely that amendment during a House Ways and Means committee vote in July. It said that to "utilize the public health insurance option, an individual must have had his or her eligibility determined and approved" through two existing verification programs already used by the federal government. One is called SAVE, and checks immigration status, and the other is called IEVS, which is used in conjunction with Social Security.
In a party line vote, Democrats rejected Heller's amendment. After the vote, Heller said in a statement that: "If the majority party insists on moving forward with government-run healthcare plan, Congress should do everything within its power to curb abuse. Requiring citizenship verification for enrollment would ensure only citizens and legal residents receive taxpayer funded healthcare." (Here's a YouTube video of Heller.)
One likely reason why Democrats shot down Heller is that they're under pressure from the left to include -- or at least not explicitly exclude -- illegal immigrants. That would mean rejecting any requirement that applicants' eligibility as citizens or legal immigrants be verified.
Jennifer Ng'andu, deputy director of the National Council of La Raza's Health Policy Project, recently told the Associated Press that she believes any plan without coverage of illegal immigrants won't last. (Her group is the largest U.S. advocacy organization for Hispanics, especially Mexicans.) "If we don't talk about integrating communities that have been traditionally shut out, we're going to be talking about health care reform again in 15 years," Ng'andu said.
Added Elena Rios, president of the National Hispanic Medical Association: "We can't have the status quo. It's just a disgrace."
Which is why pointing only to H.R. 3200's section 246 -- which groups such as Factcheck.org have done -- is a bit misleading. Even the generally pro-immigration Los Angeles Times warned last month that: "The prospect of subsidized health benefits would raise the incentive for illegal border crossings. That's one reason insurance coverage for illegal immigrants should be addressed in the context of comprehensive immigration reform, not an overhaul of the healthcare system."
At least in Washington circles, this became a relatively high-profile debate last month, which is probably why Obama felt the need to respond to it yesterday. One example: Rep. Lamar Smith, the Texas Republican, wrote an opinion article for The Hill newspaper saying the National Council of La Raza and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus were responsible for blocking the verification amendment. "The Democrats' bill in the House, H.R. 3200, contains gaping loopholes that will allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. And these loopholes are no accident," Smith wrote.
Republicans also pointed out over the summer that House Energy and Commerce Committee Democrats killed a GOP proposal requiring states to keep illegal aliens off of Medicaid. Rep. Nathan Deal of Georgia said afterwards that the "reason for the amendment is that the underlying bill would require millions of people to be automatically enrolled in Medicaid without any guarantees that these new enrollees are United States citizens or legal residents."
The Congressional Research Service says that as of early 2008, there were approximately 37.3 million foreign-born persons in the United States, including legal and illegal immigrants. The foreign-born population was divided into about 15.1 million naturalized U.S. citizens and 22.2 million non-citizens. Some estimates put the number of illegal non-citizens at 11 million; Texas estimates illegal immigrants cost its hospitals $1.3 billion in 2006, and California put the figure at $1.4 billion in 2004.
For his part, after apologizing in a phone call to the White House, Wilson stuck to his critique of H.R. 3200 on Thursday. (See my colleague Charles Cooper's article on the political fallout.)
This brings us back to Obama's speech last night. It's true that the Democrats haven't explicitly called for illegal immigrants to be covered by H.R. 3200, but by voting down two amendments that would have verified participants' legal status, they seem to have implicitly allowed it. It's no crime in Washington to say one thing and do another, especially when you're under pressure from influential special interest groups, but it should still be a bit embarrassing for politicians discovered to be doing it.
So while Joe Wilson may not have chosen the best way to express it, he did have a point. As the president might have said, the Republican politico's outburst has turned into one of those teachable moments.
Declan McCullagh is a correspondent for CBSNews.com. He can be reached at declan@cbsnews.com. You can bookmark the Taking Liberties site here, or subscribe to the RSS feed.
Popular in Politics
- Obama prom pictures surface 111 Comments
- Is President Obama ending the war on terror? 72 Comments
- IRS official Lois Lerner placed on leave 113 Comments
- Now, some unions upset over Obamacare
- Protester heckles Obama during counterterrorism speech Play Video
- Obama: America at a "crossroads" in fighting terrorism
- Rep. Jo Bonner to resign from House for university job
- Obama to tour Jersey Shore with Gov. Christie
However, the following will make a major difference in the cost of health care. Please take note how Obama tends to skip over the subject of TORT REFORM when this is mentioned as one of the solutions to the cost of health care! Why? Because besides being our President he's also an attorney, that's why!
Health insurance costs started rising around 1976 when the legal profession here in the United States was allowed to start advertising. Attorneys will only file a CIVIL law suit against parties who have the ability to pay, or against those who have an insurance company that's most likely to settle out of court. Because of this the medical profession is a prime target for lawsuits, primarily because of the money to be gained by the legal profession from the medical facilities malpractice insurance company. After a law suit has been filed against a medical facility, the attorney for the plaintiff will seek an out of court settlement from the medical facilities malpractice insurance company. The malpractice insurance company has two options: (1) Settle out of court or: (2) Go to court and face the cost of a very expensive trial by jury. Why a trial by jury? As per the 7th Amendment of the US Constitution:
?In Suits at Common Law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried to a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the Common Law?.
Due to the 7th Amendment, either party to a CIVIL law suit can request a trial by jury, the other party to the law suit has NO LEGAL right to object to a trial by jury, this is where the Medical profession gets had! Here's a hypothetical example: The dollar amount stated in the law suit could be for any amount of money above twenty dollars, the cost of a trial by jury could be in the area of perhaps $250,000. The plaintiffs attorney would then offer to settle out of court for perhaps $100,000, an amount far less than the cost of a trial by jury, the insurance company would most likely take the offer without the case going to trial because the out of court settlement offer is the least expensive of the two. This is why as much as 50% of the medical facilities gross income is paid out for malpractice insurance, because of these out of court settlements! This added cost is then passed on to the public in the form of higher medical insurance premiums. On the other hand, if the case were tried by a judge (no trial by jury) the case would either be thrown out or a REASONABLE judgment entered.
A way to avoid this legalized EXTORSION and reduce the cost of medical coverage is to modify the 7th amendment to the US Constitution. The modification would state that BOTH the plaintiff(s) and the defendant(s) in a CIVIL law suit must consent to a trial by jury before a jury trial could take place, otherwise the case would tried by a judge. In most cases trial lawyers won't bother filing a law suit if the consent of the defendant and plaintiff was a requirement for a trial by jury because they wouldn't be able to use the threat of a trial by jury to obtain a QUICK out of court settlement. This example applies ONLY to CIVIL law suits and WOULD NOT be applicable in criminal cases. In criminal cases the defendant would still be entitled to a jury trial.
With the modification to the 7th amendment in place lawsuits across the nation would drop off drastically, especially when it comes to the medical profession. After the change to the 7th Amendment the cost of malpractice insurance will drop accordingly, thus GREATLY reducing the cost of health insurance to the public! The only real problem with getting this modification to the 7th amendment passed is a good percentage of our congressional leaders are attorneys (including President Barrack Obama) who will fight this change to the very end, because it would make it far more difficult for them to EXTORT the public once they leave office and resume their primary profession as attorneys. It's time for TORT REFORM by modifying the 7th amendment and chasing the FOX out of the hen house once and for all, and give the American public back affordable health coverage that they once had prior to 1976.
Please forward this message to everyone you know, including your congressional representatives.
Patrick
However, the following will make a major difference in the cost of health care. Please take note how Obama tends to skip over the subject of TORT REFORM when this is mentioned as one of the solutions to the cost of health care! Why? Because besides being our President he's also an attorney, that's why!
Health insurance costs started rising around 1976 when the legal profession here in the United States was allowed to start advertising. Attorneys will only file a CIVIL law suit against parties who have the ability to pay, or against those who have an insurance company that's most likely to settle out of court. Because of this the medical profession is a prime target for lawsuits, primarily because of the money to be gained by the legal profession from the medical facilities malpractice insurance company. After a law suit has been filed against a medical facility, the attorney for the plaintiff will seek an out of court settlement from the medical facilities malpractice insurance company. The malpractice insurance company has two options: (1) Settle out of court or: (2) Go to court and face the cost of a very expensive trial by jury. Why a trial by jury? As per the 7th Amendment of the US Constitution:
?In Suits at Common Law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried to a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the Common Law?.
Due to the 7th Amendment, either party to a CIVIL law suit can request a trial by jury, the other party to the law suit has NO LEGAL right to object to a trial by jury, this is where the Medical profession gets had! Here's a hypothetical example: The dollar amount stated in the law suit could be for any amount of money above twenty dollars, the cost of a trial by jury could be in the area of perhaps $250,000. The plaintiffs attorney would then offer to settle out of court for perhaps $100,000, an amount far less than the cost of a trial by jury, the insurance company would most likely take the offer without the case going to trial because the out of court settlement offer is the least expensive of the two. This is why as much as 50% of the medical facilities gross income is paid out for malpractice insurance, because of these out of court settlements! This added cost is then passed on to the public in the form of higher medical insurance premiums. On the other hand, if the case were tried by a judge (no trial by jury) the case would either be thrown out or a REASONABLE judgment entered.
A way to avoid this legalized EXTORSION and reduce the cost of medical coverage is to modify the 7th amendment to the US Constitution. The modification would state that BOTH the plaintiff(s) and the defendant(s) in a CIVIL law suit must consent to a trial by jury before a jury trial could take place, otherwise the case would tried by a judge. In most cases trial lawyers won't bother filing a law suit if the consent of the defendant and plaintiff was a requirement for a trial by jury because they wouldn't be able to use the threat of a trial by jury to obtain a QUICK out of court settlement. This example applies ONLY to CIVIL law suits and WOULD NOT be applicable in criminal cases. In criminal cases the defendant would still be entitled to a jury trial.
With the modification to the 7th amendment in place lawsuits across the nation would drop off drastically, especially when it comes to the medical profession. After the change to the 7th Amendment the cost of malpractice insurance will drop accordingly, thus GREATLY reducing the cost of health insurance to the public! The only real problem with getting this modification to the 7th amendment passed is a good percentage of our congressional leaders are attorneys (including President Barrack Obama) who will fight this change to the very end, because it would make it far more difficult for them to EXTORT the public once they leave office and resume their primary profession as attorneys. It's time for TORT REFORM by modifying the 7th amendment and chasing the FOX out of the hen house once and for all, and give the American public back affordable health coverage that they once had prior to 1976.
Please forward this message to everyone you know, including your congressional representatives.
Patrick
I think it was Steny Hoyer, Democrat Congressman from Maryland, that proposed this week that any individual audited by the IRS and found without insurance should be fined $3800.
Any of you smart Democrats know how, if you can't afford health insurance, being fined on a yearly basis will help any individual? ! bzzz! trick question. It won't, but it will add a quick $3800 to the cost of paying for all those illegals being treated down at the friendly, local emergency room.
This does not say that illegal aliens will not be covered in HR 3200, they are completely eligible as I have shown on page 38, page 50, page 73, page 91, and page 148. As long as a person is an Exchange-eligibe individual, enrolled in an approved plan, and employed everyone including illegal aliens is included in HR 3200--there will be no discrimination. The sticking point is being employed. Every one
and every illegal alien is included repeat every one.
Section 246 merely states that the government will not pay the affordability credit for an unemployed illegal.
Obviously if you had read HR3200, and you understood the difference between an affordability premium credit and an affordable credit individual, you would know that nothing in HR 3200 denies coverage to illegals, and you would know that there are numerous specific references throughout the bill that neither insurance companies nor employers can discriminate in any way against illegal aliens; and that they must make every effort to describe their health insurance plans in simple, clear English. So every single illegal in the country will get health coverage paid for by American business owners and taxpayers to the tune of at least 65% per individual. The Government really, really ,really wants the employer to pay that minimum 65% for every individual or 72% for a family. Where Uncle Sam FINALLY draws the line is when an UNEMPLOYED, illegal who hasn't bothered to establish proof of legal presence might want to get the government to pay X - 1/12Y out of the Health Insurance Trust Fund. That's the Deal Breaker.
Boy, it amazes me that people, who clearly have not actually read HR3200, have a very weak grasp of its meaning; and are relying for their information on the carefully worded, out of context, Soros funded, throughly partizan organization like FactCheck.org for their facts, are so convinced that they can tell everyone about HR3200. I know it's difficult to download HR3200 from the Government Printing Office website, and if you get the html version you can hardly discuss it intelligently because it has no page numbers. The PDF is version has page numbers, but the index does not, so if you want to find anything you still have to look at every page #$%*&() ! I am not a lawyer, HR 3200 is in plain English and has very little legalese, it's major fault is that it constantly refers to Section of the US CODE, Sections in Social Security legislation, etc. which is a shorthand for simply writing out the full meaning.
But all you Liberals that assume anybody who dares to disagree with what you believe the document says, and think every such person is a red-neck, Nazi--Remember the Democrats haven't changed one word, or added any amendments, and this is the bill that Obama has begged, beseeched, nagged, exhorted, lectured, harangued the Congress to pass - without reading -- before the August recess. But even after Hitler conquered the whole Europe - which nobody else in all of history has accomplished-- had devastated lands throughout the North Africa, had troops on the outskirts of Moscow, and 60 million people dead over a five year period, and we saw the ruin of Pearl Harbor nobody expected Congress to pass thousands of pages of legislation with out reading the freaking bill. Aren't you even a little suspicious of a bill that the Obama and his crew tried to slip through with out any debate in Congress or among us nobodies out in fly-over country?
from HR3200
page 143 Title 3 Shared Responsibility
Subtitle B Employer Responsibility
line 20 Section 311 Health Coverage Participation Requirements
An employer must do all of the following:
(1) Offer of Coverage the employer must offer each employee individual and family coverage under a government plan or an employment-based plan.
page 145
line 8 3) The employer supplies information concerning employee coverage to the Health Choices Commissioner, the Sec. Of Health and Human Services, the Sec. of Labor, the Sec. of the Treasury, and the IRS.
line 15 4) Auto Enrollment of Employees
to paraphrase- the employer must automatically enroll a new employee into an employment-based or public health insurance plan
!! no choice !! for individual coverage with the lowest applicable employee premium.
page 148 line 12 Notice Requirement--
Each employer will furnish written notice of employee's rights and obligations relating to automatic enrollment in comprehensive detail and clear language.
This means so that anyone for whom English is a second language an illegal will be able to understand the document.
page 151 Section 314 Authority Related to Improper Steering ...
page 153 (b) Periodic Investigations to Discover Non-compiance
The Secretary (of Health and Human Services) will regularly audit
employers and their group health insurance plan to seek evidence of non-compliance.
Now let me see if we all get this.... The Employer who provides health insurance to his employees as part of their compensation now has to report to and suffer periodic audits from any of 5 federal agencies operating singly or as a group at a time of their choosing. The five agencies are the new Health Choices agency, Health and Human Services, Treasury, Labor, and the IRS. When will the employer find time to do actually operate his business to do the specific jobs it was designed to do?
Bear in mind that the employer has the option of simply paying 8% of his payroll times the number of his employees, but he no longer has to cope the expenses for the extra employees to handle enrollment status, new hires, filing, accidents and hospital forms, etc. And the presence of the 5 agencies attempting to exercise oversight will be vastly diminished.
For all of you that believe Obama when he says you can keep your health insurance, I have one question: how many audits will the average employer endure before he flips out, starts screaming, "Screw it, screw it, screw it! Just screeeeww it! It's not worth it!" He cancels the insurance program. And every employee is forced to get insurance from the government plan?
page 167 Title 4 amendment to internal Revenue Code of 1986
line 18 Section 59B Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage
line 20 ( a ) Tax Imposed- any individual who does meet the requirements of .... at any time of the year will have a tax imposed equal to 2.5% of the excess of ( 1 ) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year....
line 24 (ii) Failure to Provide Coverage for More than One Individual to paraphrase- any individual who doesn't buy health insurance for all the members of his family will be fined 2.5% times the number of uninsured family members.
page 170 line 1 to paraphrase- this does not apply to non-resident aliens a transient or non-resident alien will be treated, but not taxed.
Any non-resident alien is exempt from individual taxes---like in an alien traveling on vacation. Part of the difficulty here is that it is difficult to establish the difference between a non-resident alien , and an undocumented alien without legal presence; the non-resident alien may be in the USA once in a life-time for two weeks on vacation and may need emergency treatment, while the alien without legal presence may drift throughout the USA without paying taxes and using free health care treatment at any emergency room indefinitely.
As of this very moment it is the Law of the Land that anyone can go to the local emergency for treatment, and he cannot be turned away. He doesn't even have to pay, and those unpaid costs are paid by every other person through his insurance or cash payments to the hospital if you are self-insured. (Americans will pay)
country?
(a) Definition
(1) In general-the term affordable credit individual is an individual lawfully present (drivers license, pays bills, taxes and has receipts, has residence with address, etc.) in a State in the USA who is enrolled under an Exchange-participating health benefits plan, but is not enrolled...as an employee or a dependent...through an employer (I can only read this to mean an individual who is underemployed or unemployed...)
page 133 (B) ...with a family income below 400% FPL (federal poverty level)
(C) ...who is not Medicaid eligible, etc. (has assets worth more than $4000.)
page 135 Section 243 Affordability Premium Credit
line 13 (a) in general- the affordability premium credit...for an affordable credit eligible individual...is an amount equal to the amount...by which the premium for the plan...exceeds the affordable premium specified in subsection (b) for the individual.
(b) Affordable Premium Amount-
(1) In general- the affordable premium amount specified in this subsection... for monthly premium in a plan year shall be equal to 1/12 of the product of...
page 136 ...
(B) the individual's family income for such plan year.
...
page 143 Section 246 No Federal Payment For Undocumented Aliens
line 5 Noting in the subtitle shall allow Federal Payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
please note this is all there is to Section 246. Nothing is left out.
now, what all this section said is that to qualify for affordability credit;
1) an affordable credit individual has to be enrolled in a health insurance plan offered/sold through the Health Exchange
2) and is lawfully present (drivers license, pays bills, taxes and has receipts, has residence with address, etc.) in the USA
3) and might be underemployed, unemployed, perhaps down in his luck, sick, between jobs, experiencing some kind of family crisis. etc. This is not clearly defined; but the important point is that, if he were employed, the employer is required to pay at least 65% of the plan premium while the employee pays the remaining balance---see Subtitle B Employers Responsibility
page 146 lines 3 through 13.
4) and with a family income below 400% FPL
5) and if the monthly premium for his plan exceeds 1/12th of his total family income then
6) The Commissioner will pay the difference between the actual premium X and the individual's yearly family income Y divided by 1/12. So the Commissioner will pay X - 1/12Y out of the Health Insurance Trust Fund.
from HR3200
page 37 Subtitle D Additional Consumer protections
...
page 38 Section 133. Requiring Information Transparency and Plan Disclosure
(a) Accurate and Timely Disclosure
1) ...shall comply with standards established by the the Commissioner (of Health Choices, a whole new agency established by HR 3200) for the accurate and timely disclosure...
page 39 ... of plan documents, terms and conditions, claims payments polices and practices, financial disclosures, enrollment data, dis-enrollment, number of claims denials, etc. ....
line 11 (2) Plain Language- In this subsection, the term "plain language" means language that the intended audience, including individuals with limited English proficiency, can readily understand and use because that language is clean, concise, well-organized, and follows other best practices of plain language writing.
This means people who know English as a second language and would likely be confused by a document filed with idioms, contractions, fancy multi - syllable words, jargon, acronyms, in-jokes, etc. Read it to mean illegal aliens.
from HR3200
page 49 Subtitle F Relation to Other Requirements;Miscellaneous
Section 151. Relation to Other Requirements
page 50 Section 152 Prohibiting Discrimination in Health Care
line 22 In general...all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to to provisions of high quality health care or related services.
Read it to include illegal aliens
page 72 Title 2 Health Insurance Exchange and Related Provisions
Section 201. Establishment of Health Insurance Exchange; Outline of Duties; Definitions
to paraphrase- the Government is creating an organization that will act as a "clearing house" for all the health insurance companies and the government plan. It may only exist in cyber-space as a website, but it will be part of the new agency Health Choices Administration with al the normal powers of control and enforcement.
page 73 Section 202. Exchange-Eligible Individuals and Employers
to paraphrase- essentially everyone. "exchange-eligible means an individual eligible to be enrolled through the Health Insurance Exchange in an exchange-participating health plan. Under this law either you are an adult capable of holding a job therefore you are exchange-eligible, or you must be somebody's dependent, and you must be covered under a family health care policy, and you are not exchange-eligible.
page 91 line 4 (7) Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services and Communications--the entity (the Health Exchange) shall provide for culturally and linguistically appropriate communications and health services.
Read it to include illegal aliens. The various resident cultural groups like American Indians and Hawaiians are not defined in any way as aliens, and may already have their own Tribal governmental group health plans mentioned in H R 3200 page 9 defined under section 733(a)(1) Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and further defined under chapter 89 of title 5 United States Code.
If you check you will find that Hawaiians descended from the original ethnic populations have recently been granted the same status as mainland American Indians complete with their own tribal lands.
from HR3200
page 128 Subtitle C
Individual Affordability Credits
Section 241. Availability Through Health Insurance Exchange
(a) In general-an affordable credit individual (has to be) enrolled in an Exchange-participating health benefits plan. (that is it has got to be offered through the Health Exchange see page 72)
page 129 (1) The individual shall be eligible for affordability credit consisting of--
(A) an affordability premium credit under Section 243 to be applied against the premiums for the Exchange-partcipating health benefits plan in which the individual is enrolled, and
(B) an affordability cost-sharing credit under Section 244 to be applied as a reduction of the cost-sharing otherwise applicable to such plan, and
(2) The Commissioner shall pay QHBP (Qualified Health Benefit Plan the specific insurance plan in which the individual is enrolled) offering entity that offers such a plan. The payment will be drawn from the Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund.... ((see Title 2 page 119 (1) Establishment--There is established in the Treasury Dept. of the US an account (on the day HR 3200 is signed into Law) for the receipts and disbursements to the operations of the public health insurance option (government health plan), including start-up funding...an amount of $2,000,000,000.))
...