Here Are The Main Points to Watch In Healthcare Compromise Plan
(h/t Heather.)
First of all, I'd like to reiterate that yes, a bill without a public option can serve the same purpose as the public option: namely, to force efficiency and competition. So yeah, I do see this as a win - and so does Nate Silver. And I don't buy the insurance company "we won" mantra just yet, because the Medicare buy-in proposal is a real threat to them. After all, the 55+ group is very profitable for them.
It seems clear the most important component of a plan lacking a public option is a mandated medical-loss ratio. But here's the most important detail of a requirement that companies spend 90 percent of each premium dollar on care: Who will be responsible for enforcement? In order to work, it's got to be the feds.
This is the most important part of the argument, because insurance companies (and their PACs) have enormous influence in state markets - and in state legislatures. State insurance commissioners are usually (not always) hired from the ranks of the industry, and are famous not only for rubber-stamping rate increases, but for far too often turning a blind eye to insurance company abuses.
What we want to watch in the Medicare buy-in is, are they going to take premiums (subsidies, whatever form it finally takes) into the Medicare trust fund? Believe it or not, it would be a very good thing if they did. A younger, healthier population would actually lessen the strain on the Medicare system. But I'm betting Republicans will shamelessly present it as "an assault on Medicare."
We also have to look at who gets to buy in - and why. Under the current proposal, people 55+ get to pick Medicare through the new exchanges in 2014. But what do we do until then? Well, they plan to allow them in starting in 2011.
Is this only for high-risk patients? Because it would really be a drain on the Medicare system (if the premiums went into the same system) if it was. It would be a bad idea anyway, because it would be too difficult to sustain if it was all people with pre-existing conditions.
Will the new Medicare members be charged the full cost? At 65, you're heavily subsidized for most of the cost, paying about $100 a month. The real cost is closer to $500. So will there be subsidies to purchase Medicare? Definitely, in 2014.
In the meantime? Not clear. This is one of the areas on which you want to lobby Congress.
You probably already know the problems with triggers - namely, that they're usually written in such a way as to make it highly unlikely they ever kick in. (That's why Queen Olympia loves them.)
As you might expect, we'll be watching closely.
to people on the Hill today who think the bill is better than we first thought, but work is still going on. Remember, this is not the final bill. We have more rounds to follow. There are a lot fo moving parts. We caa only keep the pressure up.
Option:
http://rawstory.com/2009/12/health-care-stock...
This doesn't look too good, now does it???????
(Well, unless you happen to be RICH!!!)
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
You shouldn't read too much into the stock market reactions to daily news. Every rube with an index finger can and does buy stock based on daily news, usually without knowing anything about it.
If you want to see what the industry thinks of this you have to look at the Options Market, since the majority of people who play the Options Market are professionals, vs the Stock Market, which is at least 50% amateurs.
I haven't looked, but does anybody know what Options are doing for UNH or the other HMOs on this development?
The activists on the left have gotten shut out of this health care debate because the left has refused to attack the financial backers of conservatives in both parties with consumer boycotts.
So they have reaped what they have sown.
http://WWW.DEMOCRATZ.ORG
And people are still paying 30% APR on their credit cards. I don't trust them. They should be finishing up on HCR, and they scrapped the plan and started over.
Louisville Lawyer
bitter and watered down I guess....
let the spin begin. LOL
some say. Others like their tea green. Put doctors on the government payroll with salary caps plus bonuses for patient outcomes.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
You are such a socialist. This sounds like something they do in a socialized country like Canada or England. ;)
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
all my adult life. I just don't proselytize and don't threaten to turn my back on those who, while not following the same ideology, are generally preferable to others who do insist their views are holy writ. Nor do I pretend doctors aren't the best paid profession, but then I am married to a librarian.
Thanks for asking.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
No doubt that most of the homes built on very expensive sand along the ocean here are owned by local doctors. My own doctor once owned one of those beauties until hurricane Frances had a go at it and he decided it wasn't worth it to re build a zillion dollar home on the edge of an ocean.
I do believe my views are holy writ, but it's funny how others just don't seem to agree with me on that point. ;)
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
ricky is on your ignore list
LOL you are sad...
I am sad? Ricky is on my ignore list? No one has ever been on my ignore list, nor will anyone ever be. I think it's rude to ignore anyone's opinion so I don't. Everyone is welcome to their opinion and I feel I would be kind of a snob if I said I was going to ignore anything they had to say. How can I learn if I limit to whom I listen?
As for Ricky, I find his comments fun and a really nice change from all the bitching and moaning that often clouds the comments. If you want to ignore him then that is your choice. Hell ignore me too if you like. That too is your choice.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
some people ought to keep in mind:
"Simple fact: Tens of millions of Americans voters are very “non-scientific.” They don’t believe in evolution; they don’t believe in global warming. They do tend to believe in a series of portraits about society’s sneering elites—the kinds of portraits they constantly hear advanced on programs like Hannity’s. But then, they have heard these portraits advanced, quite aggressively, over the past fifty years.
These people are your neighbors, your fellow citizens. It’s their country too. They vote—and they won’t be going away. Their beliefs are a fundamental part of American political culture, and will be for decades to come. If we want to effect certain types of “progressive” change, we have to work with those beliefs—for example, by trying to change them."
Oh, I think Tyler was trying to remind me he put me on HIS ignore list. Sometimes he comes back four hours after I comment to refute a point of mine he ignored.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
I corrected my error and apologized to Tyler. However, that does not change the way I feel about your comments or your humor. I welcome it in a sea of complaints.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
reply hierarchy before going off, Patricia. Because it could not possibly be that my reply was for ricky, right?
Cheers.
As per the ignore list, there are like 3 people in it: that concerned canadian dude, evet, and ricky. And IMHO the readability of the list increased significantly.
I do have difficulty with whose reply is to whom. I sincerely apologize for the error.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
It gets a tad confusing to keep track of the branches in the reply tree. A dirty martini with extra olives as penitence! ;-)
their imagined intelligence entitles them. If you check the reply hierarchy, the response was from a third party to a conversation you and I were having and you were quite justified in being misled by it.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
of my reply, she can let me know. And if she indeed found my reply unacceptable in tone, then I would apologize profusely... because that would be the last of my intentions, and she knows damn well that to be indeed the case. Internet communication, being what it is leads itself to some misunderstandings, since it can be problematic to infer tone from asynchronous written replies.
So here is the deal, you don't like what i have to say and I don't care about reading your passive aggressive snarky jabs (the fact that you still hold on to stuff I wrote half a year ago is not healthy dude, just a friendly advice).
Some people dig the whole Dennis Miller-turned-DLC-shill routine, and that is cool... for tastes there are colors. So just cater and tune your routine for them, or don't. But once again, I guess this is the monthly polite reminder to let's just go our separate ways... I know your need for attention won't make it last long. But this is just for old times sake I guess... my last week in this joint so I figure it would be cool to give the good traditions one last go...
Cheers!
Dang I thought I would have made that list by now.
... you will
passes joint of Diamond Kush to Tyler to stave off rejection one more day
..now I actually do feel left out.
and you are ON! ;-P
That's where the public option has it over merely regulating the insurance industry: those devils will be all over the details like termites on timber. And you can be sure that some of the loopholes will be preexisting conditions slipped in by a paid shill Senator or two or ...
What they were calling a public option had no teeth at all left in it. This is much better than that. Ask Bernie Sanders, he was one of the people working on this.
A former award-winning journalist and lifelong class warrior, keeping a jaundiced eye on the Washington elite.
The Democrats proposed "the public option"
The Democrats weakended "the public option" and
the Democrats ultimately scrapped the Public Option.
If we get a crappy bill, the Democrats are responsible for it.
Louisville Lawyer
When reform passes Bernie Sanders sniff test - then I'm on board.
*
If the basis of any aspect of this bill is "the private industry will have to do X and if they fail to to X then we, the government, step in and do something", then we're screwed.
Remember, this is the same government that failed to catch Bernie Madoff or MCI/Worldcom or Enron or the S&L guys or Goldman Sachs. This is the same government that consistently underfunds the sections of the IRS that focus on enforcement of existing tax law, so as low as taxes are for the rich, THEY AREN'T EVEN PAYING THAT!
So who on Earth would be stupid enough to think that a consistently underfunded government agency would be able to spot rule-breaking WHEN (not if) it occurs on the part of private industry?
You got it
Will the new Medicare members be charged the full cost? At 65, you're heavily subsidized for most of the cost, paying about $100 a month. The real cost is closer to $500. So will there be subsidies to purchase Medicare? Definitely, in 2014.
Actually the average cost for a Medicare recipient is closer to $1,000 a month. But keep in mind this is for the oldest age group and includes care through end of life where the vast majority of one's lifetime health care costs are.
We're in out early (OK, mid) fifties, and between the premiums, copays, and deductables (this is for an LDHP HSA) we're at $1,000 a month already. That's each, not for a couple. Harvard Pilgrim in Hew hampshire. I often wonder how they can get away with rates like this without a gun. Then I remember they own the government.
If they DO open up Medicare, as soon as we're eligible, no matter what the cost, WE'RE IN !
No it isn't. That is when things start to go downhill. It is my understanding that there will be no subsidies for those at that age who opt into Medicare, and that the cost will be possibly over $7K a year plus co-pays and deductibles. That is without drug coverage, which will need to be paid out of pocket or through one of the Medicare Part D rip-off plans with the big donut holes.
Do you know who processes Medicare claims? A private contractor named "National Government Services." The post office is run by private contractors. The military is being converted into a paid force. What exactly do government workers do all day?
Insurance companies use the claim record of the 55+ group to charge much more than it actually costs to service their claims. IIRC, they charge 500% for people in that age group. How do you think they turn profits?
And the Hill version is very likely to include subsidies.
A former award-winning journalist and lifelong class warrior, keeping a jaundiced eye on the Washington elite.
The bill sucks and it is the smell of desperation and a willingness to settle for anything at all that has caused this mess. Kill the bill and start over putting single payer out there. Let them fight against that. This has been handled badly from the start, and has revealed so much about the process. But thankfully for them, nothing will be done about that.
When Medicare is an option on the exchanges in 2014, it will definitely be subsidized. What we don't know right this minute is if it will be subsidized next year.
A former award-winning journalist and lifelong class warrior, keeping a jaundiced eye on the Washington elite.
Very important. Medicare is a single person plan. There is no family plan. When we start talking premiums of $500/mon that could be for each mom and dad. Thus, you are looking at $12,000/yr for the one family unit. No bargain at all.
co-pays, and deductibles. All administered by a private contractor. If you have children that you have to cover, add private insurance for them. That saying is holding well: The most terrible thing one can hear is this--I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Run! Run like the wind!
That's concern trolling.
I can say THAT, can't I?
First of all, I'd like to reiterate that yes, a bill without a public option can serve the same purpose as the public option: namely, to force efficiency and competition. So yeah, I do see this as a win - and so does Nate Silver.
No. It. Can't. The WHOLE ENTIRE POINT of a true National Health System is to make sure that EVERYONE is covered. Period.
The rest of the industrialised world already figured this out.
From a national system like France to a supremely regulated might-as-well-be-govt system like Switzerland to hybrids like Canada, they all have one thing in common: EVERYONE IS COVERED. PERIOD.
No, Suzie, this is NOT a win. This is a terrific failure of nerve on the part of the Obama administration andthe jellyfish who call themselves the Democratic Party LEadership (viz Reid and Pelosi).
PATHETIC.
It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.
-George Carlin
Screw efficiency and competition! I don't give a rat's ass about efficiency or competition. How very Senate-centric. The so-called public option, itself a pathetic shadow of the universal health care we need, is the only goal. Without public option, there's nothing. I want challengers in the next Democratic primaries.
This bill does very little to control costs for anyone, for those under 55 or those 55+. It's just another corporate giveaway by our bought-and-paid-for Congress and President. And now there are hints that the Medicare buy in is in trouble! This country is almost beyond redemption.
Robert Reich, Meet your new health insurance company overlords
Gov't programs will get more of the aged and indigent, and private insurance companies get to keep healthy premium payers. This is BS.
Did anyone catch what Mathews finished the segment? "The party that believes most in govenment needs to govern" truer words have seldom been spoken. If the dems don't grow a pair right quick, gridlock will set in and after the first of the year they'll all be out shilling for votes.
Really. I'm tired of the caving. It's time to give up on Obama and the Democrats. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well join the Republican Party. There is no room for spin on this issue. A lot of these so-called "progressive" bloggers are beginning to sound a lot like the Villagers. Pathetic indeed.
Does Batman cave?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qE8E_2JRtU
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Representative Congress, GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
As far as I am concerned, THEY ARE ALL WHORES, (With the exception of a few like Sanders and Kucinih). Think about it, we work like hell to get Obama elected and now have the MAJORITY X2 to pass health care but the lobbyists still have more influence (lining the pockets for reelection campaigns)over the country than the Voters!
*** As for how the insurers getting rid of the 55+ is good, its NOT. This is a BIG win for them as they spend more for this group than middle aged people, think about it!
I Love and respect C&L but you are Wrong on this one John.
PS, I will NEVER vote Democrat AGAIN!!!
...I have the urge to point and laugh at the US. In these tough ecomomic times, being a Canadian with no job, I still have healthcare if needed. Why the US people can not see what a great thing socialized medicine is, is beyond me.
Commie!
fascist!
compare to America's and whether corporations are regarded as people, etc. That would no doubt explain a lot.
I can tell you that our elections, upon being called usually last about 6 weeks. Thats our federal elections. The total cost is around $300 million or about 2/5ths of what Obama's presidential run cost. The government here, covers a large percentage of campaign costs.
Here is a succinct article on the difference between Canada and US presidential campaigns:
http://election.globaltv.com/indepth/usvscana...
I think this explains to a large extent why Canada's healthcare system serves the people, and America's serves the corporations.
You know, the corporate masters and their damn need to make money for themselves.
But when I see the insincere congress people on my teevee they seem like bad actors in a cheap theater. Corporate media gives them the platform for their kabuki.
Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity. Albert Einstein
portions of Americans only make or have to live on $12,000 a year!!!
hot new cancer treatment drug called Folotyn, made by a small drug company named Allos Therapeutics. It costs $30,000 a month. That's a thousand dollars a day, mathematically speaking.
Let me guess, the insurance will pay for it.
the triggers fail to kick in and do what they're designed to do that's when you start pressing congress to move the goal posts a little closer. Inch by inch if necessary.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
don't wait until the ink is dry.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Comments are closed on this entry