Health Insurance Reform — Where We Are Now

Filed in National by on September 8, 2009

One of the things that is true about the discussion about this reform effort is that too few people really understand what is currently in the bills drafted. Part of that is because we get distracted by the misinformation about death panels, government taking over medical care and the other litany of lies that fired up the teabaggers over the last month.

But the Washington Post has a great article that is a FAQ for the reform effort — 8 Questions About Health-Care Reform. And it is good. Go read the entire thing to see where the effort is right now (this was written before the Baucus bill was released). But here is a great summary of what is common to all of the bills:

  • Require every American to carry insurance, with discounts for people who cannot afford it and penalties for people who refuse to buy coverage.
  • Require most employers to contribute to the cost of employee coverage or pay into a health fund, while small firms would be exempt or receive tax credits to reduce the price.
  • Expand the Medicaid health program for the poor.
  • Provide insurance discounts for people earning less than 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $73,000 for a family of three.
  • Impose new restrictions on insurance practices, such as prohibiting the denial of coverage because of preexisting conditions.
  • Create a new marketplace, dubbed an “exchange” or “gateway,” for individuals and small businesses to comparison-shop for insurance.

What we are still hashing out is how to pay for it and the Public Option, basically.  And it is important to keep in mind  how far Congress has come so far.  Congress is also working on methods to pay for this — unlike the Medicare Part D (or any of the other BushCo initiatives) which was allowed to become part of the structural deficit.   All of these are important changes.  I am of the opinion that a Public Option is crucial to the long-term functioning of this reform, but there is no doubt that these are good steps forward.

Tags:

About the Author ()

"You don't make progress by standing on the sidelines, whimpering and complaining. You make progress by implementing ideas." -Shirley Chisholm

Comments (11)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Baucus released a copy his bill and it’s craptastic.

    1. No Public Option:

    2. Co-ops:

    Two of the Baucus measures reflect the group’s long-standing goal to find common ground on highly contentious issues. Instead of a government insurance option, the Baucus proposal would create a network of non-profit cooperatives — an alternative that Grassley, the lead Republican negotiator, has backed.

    3. Not even much of a trigger:

    Mr. Baucus’s proposal does not include a “trigger mechanism” of the type recommended by Ms. Snowe, who would offer a public insurance plan in any state where fewer than 95 percent of the people had access to affordable coverage.

    4. More people covered, but with worse coverage:

    Mr. Baucus’s plan, expected to cost $850 billion to $900 billion over 10 years, would tax insurance companies on their most expensive health care policies. The hope is that employers would buy cheaper, less generous coverage for employees, thereby reducing the overuse of medical services.

    5. Paid for through Medicare:

    In addition to the fee on high-cost plans, the proposal also would extract about $400 billion in cost-savings from Medicare, cuts that are stirring unease among lawmakers in both parties, due to the potential backlash among senior citizens, and Medicare’s own precarious fiscal state.

    6. Fewer subsidies for people forced to buy insurance, and companies required to offer worse minimum coverage plans now that they will be forced to accept all applicants:

    We will all now proceed to ignore it. Even Snowe is open to the public option (with “triggers”).

  2. pandora says:

    I’m beginning to think, in the end, Baucus decided to make this bill stink so it couldn’t possibly be taken seriously by anyone BTW, I am NOT defending him in any way.

  3. I’ve seen a lot of back and forth about the Baucus bill and people thought the important thing was the price tag (since it’s Senate finance). They were worried if it was underfunded a lot of subsidies in other versions of the bill would go away.

    BTW, I think the way Baucus is financing is awful. It’s a tax increase for middle class people. I’d much rather have a millionaire’s tax.

  4. cassandra_m says:

    I saw someplace over the weekend a draft of Baucus’ original wish list for this bill from a year or so back — a list that looks like the HELP Bill I think.

    Personally, I think Baucus got rolled by the Rs on his committee — who kept promising to join him on something, he just had to keep moving the goalposts to get there. And I think Baucus kept playing so he could be the savior of health care reform and because I think that he believed in the Senate process of working together. Too bad most of his R counterparts did not.

  5. Dana says:

    From the original article, which said that this was common to all of the bills:

    What we are still hashing out is how to pay for it and the Public Option, basically.

    Mrs Isotope added:

    BTW, I think the way Baucus is financing is awful. It’s a tax increase for middle class people. I’d much rather have a millionaire’s tax.

    Well, y’all are going to have to pay for it somehow! The millionaires don’t owe you health care coverage; that’s your responsibility.

    That’s a big part of the problem with your (plural) positions: too many of you want something for nothing, want your health care coverage, but want somebody else to pay for it.

    Yet, y’all are shocked, shocked! when some people don’t want to sign on to a bill you don’t know how you’re going to fund. Most people would say that buying into something you have no idea how you’ll pay for is irresponsible.

  6. cassandra_m says:

    Most people would say that buying into something you have no idea how you’ll pay for is irresponsible.

    Quite right — which is why they are working hard to pay for it. Unlike the Republican-pushed initiatives your party endorsed — tax cuts (part 1 and part 2), Medicare Part D, The Iraq War, the Afghan War, NCLB — were all left for deficit financing.

    So you can’t be complaining that the responsible thing — paying for it — is actually getting done. Because you people still haven’t figured out how to pay for the last 8 years of disaster.

  7. Of course it has to be paid for. One of Obama’s pledges was “deficit neutral,” since we all know that only Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility.

    Plus, what cass said.

  8. Dana says:

    From te Associated Press:

    Hoyer’s comments followed a 180-degree turn by Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., who took the lead in July in negotiating changes to House Democrats’ health overhaul bill to make it more palatable to moderates. He voted for the legislation in committee with a public plan.

    But Ross said Tuesday that after hearing from constituents during the August recess he could not support a bill with a public plan.

    I wonder if it’s possible, just possible, that the public really don’t support this?

  9. anon says:

    Two things:

    One, any reform that doesn’t include a public option will fail. It will not be able to control costs because it will not have added competition. That is the single reason why insurance companies are fighting so hard. Their free ride is over if the government forces competition.

    Two, from Huffington Post.

    Army Spc. Gregory James Missman died in Afghanistan after suffering wounds from an improvised explosive device in July.

    Missman, 36, re-enlisted in the military after being laid off from his job as a computer consultant. Missman served in the Army 11 years earlier.

    According to Missman’s father, health care is what pushed his son back into service. After losing his job, Missman’s young family, a wife and son were no longer insured.

    Now I wonder if these so-called patriotic Americans, tea whores will be marching on DC anytime soon for something that really matters?