bachus's bill includes no public option

I've been looking forward to the Senate Bill... It will be interesting to debate its positives and negatives.
 
Sen. Max Baucus on Wednesday released the much-awaited Senate version of an American health-system remake — a landmark $856 billion, 10-year measure that starts a rough ride through Congress without visible Republican backing.



The bill by Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee, would make major changes to the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system, including requiring all individuals to purchase health care or pay a fine, and language prohibiting insurance company practices like charging more to people with more serious health problems.

"This is a unique moment in history where we can finally reach an objective so many of us have sought for so long," Baucus said. "The Finance Committee has carefully worked through the details of health care reform to ensure this package works for patients, for health care providers and for our economy."

Consumers would be able to shop for and compare insurance plans in a new purchasing exchange. Medicaid would be expanded, and caps would be placed on patients' yearly health care costs. The plan would be paid for with $507 billion in cuts to government health programs and $349 billion in new taxes and fees.


RELATED LINKS
Current DateTime: 07:09:46 16 Sep 2009
LinksList Documentid: 32875886
Kudlow: The Government-Insurance Option Is DeadThousands March to US Capitol to Protest SpendingBlog: Pharma's Market
The bill fails to fulfill President Barack Obama's aim of creating a new government-run insurance plan — or option — to compete with the private market. It proposes instead a system of nonprofit member owned cooperatives, somewhat akin to electric co-ops that exist in many places around the country. That was one of many concessions meant to win over Republicans.

Baucus is still holding out hope for GOP support when his committee actually votes on the bill, probably as early as next week.

The bill represents the most moderate health care proposal in Congress so far, compared to legislation approved by three committees in the House and the Senate's health panel.

Democratic leaders are aiming for votes in the full House and Senate this fall.
 
Does it create those same crappy levels of coverage on the exchange or will the companies be able to truly compete by offering differing plans?

The article leaves much to the imagination.
 
So after democrats cave in to republican demands and offer a watered down weak ass no serious reform bill that was paid for with THREE MILLION DOLLARS to Baucus in donations .. still NO REPUBLICANS WILL SUPPORT IT.

I did say before this debate began that there would be no public option.

Is there anything less useless than a democrat?
 
Topspin said:
it's just a snipet released on cnbc, I'm looking at the insurers windfall.
Click to expand...
M'eh... IREA doesn't get a "windfall" and overpayment is returned to me every year. Collectives don't seem to be all that bad and if they are actually allowed to compete they'll keep costs down.
 
it's beyond description how weak they appear with both party's and the pres.
My take is after a decade in the minority it's thier turn to get paid, and brother they are getting paid as you know.
 
Topspin said:
it's beyond description how weak they appear with both party's and the pres.
My take is after a decade in the minority it's thier turn to get paid, and brother they are getting paid as you know.
Click to expand...

We exist in the Matrix .. and noone wants to take the real pill.
 
Baucus Plan An "Absolute Gift" To Health Insurance Industry
They got what they paid for.

Speaking before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee Tuesday, former health insurance industry executive-turned-whistleblower Wendell Potter warned that if Congress "fails to create a public insurance option to compete with private insurers, the bill it sends to the president might as well be called the Insurance Industry Profit Protection and Enhancement Act."

Potter also struck back against one of the key arguments made against the public option: that it would have an unfair competitive advantage over private insurers.

'Contrary to the misinformation being disseminated by the health insurance industry and its allies, the public insurance option would not have a competitive advantage over private plans," Potter told the committee. "It would have to meet the same benefit requirements and comply with the same insurance market reforms as private plans. "

Potter, who was previously a vice president of communication at Cigna, also sharply criticized Democratic Senator Max Baucus' health care reform bill in a conversation with reporters Monday, calling the plan an "absolute gift to the industry."

Potter said the proposal would not provide affordable coverage. It gives the industry too much latitude to charge higher premiums based on age and geographic location, fails to mandate employer coverage, and pushes consumers into plans with limited benefits, Potter said.

-- full text at link
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/15/wendell-potter-public-opt_n_287733.html
 
blackascoal said:
So after democrats cave in to republican demands and offer a watered down weak ass no serious reform bill that was paid for with THREE MILLION DOLLARS to Baucus in donations .. still NO REPUBLICANS WILL SUPPORT IT.

I did say before this debate began that there would be no public option.

Is there anything less useless than a democrat?
Click to expand...

I fear the only thing that will come from this will be that everyone will be legally required to purchase healthcare.

According to the demand curve, the prices will go up.


The state cartels will stay in place. everything thats shitty will stay in place.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I fear the only thing that will come from this will be that everyone will be legally required to purchase healthcare.

According to the demand curve, the prices will go up.


The state cartels will stay in place. everything thats shitty will stay in place.
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that. This was on front page of boston.com today
Health costs to rise again
Insurers to boost rates about 10%; Shift of expenses to workers likely

The state’s major health insurers plan to raise premiums by about 10 percent next year, prompting many employers to reduce benefits and shift additional costs to workers.

Increases will range from 7 to 12 percent, capping a decade of consecutive double-digit premium increases, according to a Globe survey of the state’s top health insurers. Actual rates for 2010 will depend on the size of the employer and the type of coverage, with small businesses and individuals expected to be hit hardest. Overall, premiums are more than twice as high as they were 10 years ago.

The higher insurance costs undermine a key tenet of the state’s landmark health care law passed two years ago, as well as President Obama’s effort to overhaul health care. In addition to mandating insurance for most residents, the Massachusetts bill sought to rein in health care costs. With Washington looking to the Massachusetts experience, fears about higher costs have become a stumbling block to passing a national health care bill.

“It’s all about medical costs going up,’’ said Brian Pagliaro, senior vice president at Tufts Health Plan in Watertown, which predicts an average increase of 9.5 percent for 2010. “The dollar you’re paying now will be $1.09 for the same service next year.’’

Tufts has about 720,000 members in Massachusetts.

Insurers predicted many employers, perhaps a majority, will seek to trim costs by instituting “cost sharing,’’ which boosts copayments for doctor visits, or by offering less comprehensive coverage. That means the effective premium rate increases could fall more on employees than their companies.

If the H1N1 flu proves to be worse than expected this winter or the US government taxes insurers as part of health care overhaul, the state’s premium rates - already the nation’s steepest for family coverage - could rise by even more than 10 percent, insurers warned.

Health care professionals attribute the premium increases to several factors, including greater use of medical services by aging baby boomers and higher bills from doctors using more costly technology and prescribing more expensive drugs.

Some insurers say the Massachusetts law mandating coverage has added to the cost burdens on the health system. At least initially, they said, it encouraged newly enrolled members to flood the offices of primary care physicians and specialists to receive physicals and other exams.

A special state commission studying changes to the payment system has recommended insurers scrap their practice of paying doctors and hospitals fees for individual visits or procedures and instead offer a set amount to cover patients’ care for a year.

“Health insurance is increasingly unaffordable for average working people and for employers, especially small employers,’’ said Drew Altman, president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit research group in Menlo Park, Calif. “It underscores the need to reach a consensus on how to reform health care and provide some help for low- and moderate-income people who can’t pay their insurance bills.’’

The foundation yesterday released a national survey showing the cost of family health premiums reached $13,375 in 2009, up 5 percent nationally in a year when inflation fell by 1 percent.

Over the past decade, premiums surged 131 percent, more than three times the increase in worker wages, the survey said. Altman projected premiums would climb 5 to 7 percent across the country in 2010, less than the increase in Massachusetts.

Despite being dominated by not-for-profit health plans, Massachusetts had the highest family coverage premiums in the nation - an average of $13,788 - in 2008, the most recent year for which figures were available, according to the Kaiser foundation. That included employer contributions of $10,425 and $3,363 from employees.

A large portion of those costs can be traced to the Boston area, where world-class medical centers perform expensive operations that elsewhere are handled for less money at community hospitals. In an effort to stem the rate of increases, health insurers have begun to roll out “quality’’ plans that pay doctors or hospitals at fixed rates with incentives for favorable outcomes.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts, the state’s largest health plan with 2.5 million members, predicted that its average premium rates will rise 10 to 11 percent before any employer “buydowns’’ - changes in coverage that push some of the added costs to employees. But for self-employed individuals and small businesses, which are pooled in the same market segment, premium rates could rise even more.

“State health care reform has had some unexpected results,’’ suggested Tim O’Brien, senior vice president at Blue Cross Blue Shield’s headquarters in Boston. “The actual costs have been much higher than what were anticipated when health care reform went into effect in 2007.’’

O’Brien said health insurers were looking for payment reform to “flatten the rate of increase’’ in coming years. “Double-digit rate increases are unsustainable for businesses,’’ he said.

At Harvard Pilgrim Health Care in Wellesley, which has more than 800,000 members in Massachusetts, executives forecast average premium increases of 6 to 11 percent before buydowns, about the same as last year’s increases. But there are two “wild cards’’ that could send premiums higher, said senior vice president Vin Capozzi.

“If the H1N1 flu strain were to mutate into something more serious, then we would all have an expense problem,’’ Capozzi said, referring to the swine flu. “And if the folks in Washington decide to tax us, we would have to pass on some of those costs.’’
http://www.boston.com/business/heal...health_insurers_plan_10_rise_in_rates?mode=PF
 
AssHatZombie said:
I fear the only thing that will come from this will be that everyone will be legally required to purchase healthcare.

According to the demand curve, the prices will go up.


The state cartels will stay in place. everything thats shitty will stay in place.
Click to expand...

Your fear on this is well-founded.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I fear the only thing that will come from this will be that everyone will be legally required to purchase healthcare.

According to the demand curve, the prices will go up.


The state cartels will stay in place. everything thats shitty will stay in place.
Click to expand...
If it doesn't remove the State Enforced Monopolies then there is no cost reform.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top