Interesting Development: Congress Wants to Rebrand the Public Option As Medicare.
By Susie Madrak Wednesday Oct 21, 2009 11:00amJacob Hack, the policy wonk who was the architect of the public option idea, talks about opening Medicare instead.
It's a concept that many people in the netroots resist on the basis that Medicare is a public insurance system, and the public option... isn't. (They point to Medicare Advantage as the perfect example of misleading branding.)
But the idea is picking up steam because it solves several problems. It offers political cover for Blue Dogs and even Republicans who want to support the plan. It also makes it more likely that at some point, the public option will be rolled into the traditional Medicare plan:
House Democrats are looking at re-branding the public health insurance option as Medicare, an established government healthcare program that is better known than the public option.
The strategy could benefit Democrats struggling to bridge the gap between liberals in their party, who want the public option, and centrists, who are worried it would drive private insurers out of business.
While much of the public is foggy on what a public option actually is, people understand Medicare. It also would place the new public option within the rubric of a familiar system rather than something new and unknown.
The idea has bubbled up among House Democrats and leaders in the past week, most prominently in a caucus meeting last Thursday.
Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.) spoke out last week in favor of re-branding the public option as Medicare, startling many because he has loudly proclaimed his opposition to a public option.
[...] Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) planned to unveil a proposal to her caucus Tuesday night that would include the public option favored by liberals in the healthcare bill Democrats want to bring to the floor, according to two House sources.
The plan, called the “robust” option or “Medicare Plus 5” in the jargon that has emerged on Capitol Hill, ties provider reimbursement rates to Medicare, adding 5 percent. Leaders are planning to roll the bill out next week, and are hoping to vote the first week in November
Some Democrats say there’s no need to rename a legislative concept that’s gained steadily in support since being lambasted as a “government takeover” in August. A Washington Post-ABC poll published Tuesday showed 57 percent of the public supports the idea — up five points since August — while 40 percent opposes it.
“It keeps polling better and better as a public health insurance option,” said a senior Democratic aide. “I don’t think it’s changing.” Polling experts, however, have documented that many people don’t know what a public option is, and that small changes in language can cause poll results to vary widely. An August poll by Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates showed that only 37 percent of those polled correctly identified the public option from a list of three choices.
“Before this year, few people had ever heard of the term ‘public option,’ ” Ross said last week.
It’s not clear exactly how the new Medicare idea would work. Some want to expand Medicare itself to uninsured people under 65. Others want to simply rename what is now called the public health insurance option.
Lots more, go read and tell me what you think.
Login or Register to post comments.
The right will imediately reply, But medicare is going broke.
This is sounding closer to what Rep Weiner has been talking about and making more sense than anyone else in DC.
keep pushing the robust PUBLIC OPTION....Just more to argue over the nit pics...No more giving the repubs and blue dogs another excuse!
Medicare part E, E for everybody. I like it.
One problem here - Medicare pays so poorly that many clinics won't accept it any more. Not just Beverly Hills rich folks clinics, but clinics in small town America. I really hope they fix Medicare before they expand it. Of course, the Republican A-holes are preventing this.
As they are really going to follow the same type of principles as Medicare or a REAL public option...
I hope this will not be another name given,, so they can pass their co-op private health option they have been trying to substitute for a public option..
If the democrat finally start growing a backbone , maybe it will be due to the fight from persons like Grayson.....
I find it hard to believe after the blue dogs and other democrats have received billions of dollars from the health and drug companies they will create a real option for them to compete against..
I've been talking about this with friends for months.
Howard Dean has been advocating this for months, and even wrote his latest book about it.
He's also appeared on every news program to talk about it, including that infamous interview where the giant cockroach walked across the back projection screen of the New York skyline. The giant bug got more publicity than his suggestion about Medicare.
Why haven't any Democrats in Congress paid attention? I can only assume that Dean's idea makes too much sense, and Dean is just too damned good at politics for the Democrats to put up with. That's why they kicked him out as DNC Chair. He actually WON an election with a 50 State strategy! They can't have that, it's countrary to the Democratic Party brand. If they're not fretting over half point margins in swing states, and wandering around dazed and confused over policy details in Congress, or shivering in fear of threats from PACs and lobby groups, you wouldn't recognize them as Democrats.
... Medicare pays 80% and seniors are required to cover the remaining 20%, usually via 'Supplemental Insurance'.
Before they talked about Medicare +5, which would have been 'Single Payer' where they would pay 85%, but the insured would still need to come up with 15%.
My Medicare (retiree) bills me monthly $96 for the 80% which comes to $24 per 20% coverage.
My Supplemental charges me $164 for the 20% they cover.
What we need is a Medicare +20 (perhaps as an option). In my case they would bill me $120 (hell give them another $24 and make it $144),
If they don't, Insurance companies would still be free to rape people for coverage of the 15%.
BTW: For some procedures the Insurance companies will not even pick up the 20% for me.
It sounds good except for the part you caught here. I'm wondering if that's the opening for ins. cos. to continue to stick it to people.
I still would like to know how this is going to bring health care costs down overall. I understand competitive pricing, but I don't get how this is the same thing as a public option. I'm also wondering how many donut holes lobbyists will succeed in getting into this now or later.
Check out the Baucus bill:
"BENEFITS PACKAGE: The government would set four benefit categories ranging from coverage of around 65 percent of medical costs to about 90 percent."
Catch that? The Baucus bill would permit private health insurance companies to offer "insurance" that leaves the individual responsible for 35% of the cost. Gee, I wonder which direction the health insurance companies will go with their anti-trust exemption? 65% or 90%?
This is not really health insurance at all, and this 800 pound gorilla is lurking in the the Senate bill that is considered the only "serious" and "bipartisan" bill by the MSM.
Unfortunately, a lot of people hear Public Option and immediately think government will control their health care and that's as far as their thought process goes.
It also makes it more likely that at some point, the public option will be rolled into the traditional Medicare plan:
Reeeeally. And how do you make that assumption. It's more likely that it opens the way to "reforming" Medicare into a quasi private cooperative that is underfunded and neutered and ultimately shrunk down to a point that it can be drowned in a bathtub.
In an argument I had with a conservative friend who was against the public option, I asked if he was okay with Medicare, and of course he was.
I then said, "What if they opened up Medicare to people under 65, where they could pay to get Medicare coverage? Would that bother you?"
He said, "No, not if people are paying for it."
"Okay... THAT'S the public option!"
Of course he wouldn't come around to saying he would support it, but it brought the argument to a halt. I wish they'd done this from the beginning.
Even when you finally get them around to understanding what they are arguing about, they still tend to believe Glenn Beck more that the facts in front of their face. And why we need Grayson to keep up the pressure on other Democrats to stop looking for a bi-partisan bill. He just announced his Names of the Dead website, that puts the moral argument to the forefront as it was during the elections, without calling it a holocaust this time.
http://which-ways-up.com/2009/10/alan-grayson...
You're right. It's like the fact that they keep saying Obama's going to raise their taxes - when he's already lowered their taxes. They are actually cashing bigger paychecks than they used to, but they still don't see it. They believe Rush Limbaugh over their lying paycheck.
When they ask if I want a bureaucrat between my Dr. and me, I reply, "No, I want to keep my profit-motivated insurance rep between me and my Dr."
I don't know why more people don't hit on that theme more often!
That and the fact we already have "death panels".
said to me, "I certainly don't want socialized medicine, do you?"
I replied, "Since I no longer have any health care at all, (divorce and the cost of Cobra took care of that), I'd be thrilled with socialized medicine."
She just gave me that deer-in-the-headlights look that conservatives get when the cognitive dissonance sets in.
that private insurers in 39 states are allowed to tell women capable of bearing children who have had a c-section can be declined for insurance, unless they get sterilised. I'll bet that hag that lives next door is all about anti choice.
I don't think a government bureaucrat working for a socialised system in this country would DREAM of suggesting a heinous thing like that.
Brilliant. You could even position it as a way of funding Medicare.
Allow anyone to participate regardless of employment status, income level, etc.
and the righties would call it a bestiality bill.
just don't call me late for dinner! nyuck nyuck.
Gosh, you mean somebody in Congress is finally "suggesting" what Howard Dean has been advocating FOR THE LAST SIX MONTHS??? The ineptitude of the Democrats in Congress never ceases to amaze me.
..... but the whole Dean episode is a festering sore spot with me.
Not sure what, exactly caused this dust up, but I'm pretty sure the stubby-fingered ex-sandwich maker (Rahm) is behind it. I think he (Rahm) knew Dean would be hell on wheels to his beloved Blue-Dogs.
for what we cannot logically blame on Bush.
Wasn't he instrumental in the copyrighting and distribution of the patented John Dean Victory Holler™?
You are not alone Rascalcat .
Rahm Emanuel
veggie sandwiches.
a winner!
because Dean isn't 'corporate' enuf.
“You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.”
"The strategy could benefit Democrats struggling to bridge the gap between liberals in their party, who want the public option, and centrists, who are worried it would drive private insurers out of business."
Right - 57% of the country want the public option - those crazy liberals! The rest (a minority) are the level-headed centrists. Guess the conservatives don't have an opinion...
Why would they, they're the party of idea(l)s.
They don't have an opinion (wedge issue) unless its about God, Guns and Gays
people still seem to cling to some faint glimmer of hope that Washington will do the right thing.
Actually, at this point I think we're all hoping they can be BULLIED into doing the right thing.
I pay nearly 450 dollars a month for health care, provided by my husband's employer. (He gets his for a nominal fee, like 2% of what I pay.)
Just yesterday we received notice that our premiums are going up, again. My coverage will be going up about 11%, to nearly 500 dollars.
I need the insurance. I'm diabetic, and have sleep apnea, and I'm on everything but skates in terms of medications. I would gladly pay premiums to a Medicare-type system and drop the coverage from my husband's company, even if it cost the same amount. But odds are it would cost less, and that extra few dollars would surely come in handy.
make medicare available to everyone to buy into, JUST LIKE OUR CONGRESS HAS! by the way.... not free, but a reasonable rate and make the pool include everyone, even the twenty somethings that think they dont need health ins.. it would cost less than that stinkin iphone you all carry around for two hundred bucks a month...
lets get real.
Pluribus Unum... Has a nice, familiar ring of... Liberty to it... I like it. I like it a lot!
I live in Minnesota and AHIP is running an ad that asks -
Is it right to ask 10 million Medicare Advantage seniors to pay more than their fair share?
Advantage to who exactly? Medicare Disadvantage is a more appropriate name to trick those on Medicare to sign up for another scam created by Insurance Companies.
Here is the ad that has Missouri at the end instead of Minnesota.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AfmJlTFq-w&fe...
Back in August, I attended a "Town Hall" held by a local Republican Congressman.
Before-hand, I spoke to one attendee that was insistent on turning our polite talk int a screaming match.
One thing he complained of was "the creation of a whole new bureaucracy". "Why not just open up Medicare to let anyone buy in?" he shouted at me.
I shook his hand and said, "Absolutely! I agree with that!"
If Medicare was used as the basis for a new program, it could potentially strip away just enough Republicans to make any reform look "very bi-partisan".
"I think that renaming the public option with the name medicare for everyone is a great idea," said Prince formerly the artist formerly known as Prince (but used to have a funny symbol for his name, but is now back to just Prince).
"A rose by any other name...yada yada yada," quoteth William Shakespeare.
"Great idea!" exclaimed Liz Taylor Hilton Wilding Todd Fisher Burton Warner Fortensky
... was to call it Healthcare Reform.
That is NOT what it is.
It should have been called then, as well as now, 'Health Insurance Reform'.
Health CARE is not being reformed --- the mechanism to pay for it is.
Amen
Don't like my terms. Eat it. When you have some sicko running an insurance company for profit, I really and truly don't care if he is living in streets in his car with his family tomorrow.
These people aren't humans, they have no place at the table. On the street.
Why is Bernie Madoff's wife not pushing a shopping cart around Manhattan with a sign saying "Bernie's wife and a fellow piece of shit."
The plutocrats really don't care, people. They can buy every single stinking elected official in America for less than their goddamn bonuses and you still are sick enough to think that this is a democracy?
Yeah, I'm going over the edge. Do I fly to the US and cash out what little I have in emergency funds and pay for someone that I DO NOT know personally's chemotherapy or do I pretend to be an american and let her die?
Your country and mine is turning into a piece of unrepentant filth.
Hey, Senor Obama stick that Nobel Peace Prize where the sun doesn't shine. PS I'd rather see you meet and greet the disabled at Walter Reed than your twists and shoves on the basketball court, capice asshole? I lived through that freaking ass Bill Clinton.
And you lived through Gee Dubya too.
I can't really contest what you've said here.
With the exception of Bill Clinton. He certainly wasn't perfect. None of us are. But he did leave the country in the black with a 158 billoin $ surplus. And that ain't bad.
When Gee Dubya was selected, I honestly wondered if I was going to live long enough to see him leave.
Luckily I did.
But my favorite line from Gee Dubya is" Here, watch this drive."
While he set the world on fire.
And the walking into the false doors in China. That one cracks me up. The look on his face is priceless.
The " No weapons of mass destruction here?" That one just showed his depravity.
And then the soft shoe. Worst President Ever.
Is the best way to single payer in the shortest time. And the folks say Republicans like this (they do!)? I've had debates with crazy right wing assholes who immediately get this. They can't stomach "Public" evidently.
What's more important though is that Blue Dog Mike Ross wants this / proposed it. It really is about branding and I know the libs have been grinding their teeth wanting to go here for long time. IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO!
Login or Register to post comments.