On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee will hold a long-awaited vote on Sen. Max Baucus’ America’s Healthy Future Act. What is most surprising may not be that this bill is finally getting a vote after months of negotiations and holdups, but that it may be the bill that finally makes its way out of Congress and on to the President’s desk all by the end of this year.
Sen. Baucus Meets with Treasury Secretary Geithner
Don’t get me wrong, the Baucus bill has its critics (including yours truly). However, the fact that the bill came out of a series of bipartisan negotiations that angered those on the left and the right has to say something about the overall substance of the bill.
The Baucus bill aims to expand coverage to more Americans via Consumer Operated and Oriented Plans (co-ops) and an individual mandate with available tax credits and subsidies. When it comes down to sheer numbers, it would lower the amount of uninsured Americans to 29 million (form a staggering 47 million last year) by the end of the next decade.
In terms of coverage, the Baucus bill makes great strides. In terms of the President’s outline for reform, it meets all mandatory points.
The Baucus bill would put into place a new set of consumer protections that would prohibit insurance companies from denying patients coverage due to pre-existing conditions and also would prohibit them from dropping patients when they get sick. It also focuses on requirements for preventative care and capping certain out-of-pocket expenses.
The down side to the Baucus bill is that it abandons the idea of a public option, and instead favors a co-op health plan. Co-ops would be fine if we could trust insurance companies to price their premiums at market value, but there is no mechanism in the bill to keep their feet to the fire other than a government commission that will likely be given little power. We need to look no further than Blue Cross Blue Shield to see a co-op gone bad, and that is what scares me about this bill.
So far, so good for the Baucus bill. It gets fairly decent marks from me. Additionally, it gets fairly decent marks from a number of former GOP leaders like Bob Dole, Bill Frist, and Chuck Hagel, and the bill doesn’t even cover Bob’s Viagra. But here comes the biggest selling point. The Baucus bill is estimated to reduce the federal deficit by $81 billion over the next decade.
That’s right. I said reduce. And I also said that number is $81 billion (with a “B”).
The key to any voter’s heart lies deep in their pocketbook. This plan will pass through Congress not only because it will make America physically healthier, but because it brings down cost, too.
I said earlier that I am not the biggest fan of this plan. It’s true. I prefer a public option. However, it is clear that such a plan has some Democrats in tough election cycles scratching their heads and has every Republican screaming on Fox News. The Baucus bill meets almost all goals set forth for health care reform and will insure 94 percent of Americans. Those numbers are better than today’s, and I’m happy to support a bill that can pass and improves that number as opposed to one that will fail and leave us back where we started. This debate truly is about America’s Healthy Future, and if we can improve that outlook I’m on boar
Mr. Morgan,
I hate to be particularly blunt, but a reduction of $81B over the next ten years seems a little irrelevant when the Senate Finance Panel’s version of the bill is set up for $829B. Also, the bill itself has met with harsh criticism from industry insiders (don’t worry, my cynic/skeptic meter is red-lining as well) that the bill, in its present form, could as much as double premiums.
My question to you is this sir: isn’t it about time someone took a look at why there is such an incredible cost in this country for health-care and why other countries spend a lesser percentage per capita of their GDP on health care? It seems prudent to me to examine cost reduction from the pre-care side as much as from the current focus.
Mr. Lincoln
It isn’t the bill that will double health insurance premiums–its the system.
The problem with the health care in America is that individuals don’t really see their bills (and if they do see them they don’t give it a second thought because their insurance covers it) and nobody else is working to contain those costs because in the end it is the patient that is paying (just via a long and convoluted route). Employer based coverage means that our bosses take a cut of our checks to pay our premiums and we can get just about whatever we want without having to see the tab. Unknowingly the average American creates wasted spending with unnecessary tests, procedures, and medicine which doctors can push because they know the people making the decision don’t have to worry about the dollar signs.
Eliminate health care waste and we don’t have that problem.
Is it likely to happen with the Baucus bill? More likely than without it. But the best way to lower premiums is to introduce true competition into the marketplace and breakup the health care oligopoly. A robust public option would do just that. It would keep doctors, hospitals, and insurance providers honest and almost automatically keep costs down (and much lower than on the current pace).
This is exactly why I support the Senate HELP Committee’s plan over Baucus.
However, it is my belief that Baucus is the most politically viable option (like I said, it lowers the deficit under the current scoring). If health care reform can pass this year (in any form) that’s a huge step that I believe can be used to move toward a robust public option in the future.
Bottom line: something needs to pass.