Draft of Kennedy health bill released

[DrToast]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/health/policy/06health.html?ref=us

I know a lot of people are going to be disappointed it's not a single payer plan, but we don't need to have single payer to have a good health care system. Based on what I've read, if this was the plan that gets passed I'd be very happy. There will no doubt be more revisions ahead, but this looks good to me.

Edit: I'd add that this plan would lead to a future with either A) A mostly government system or B) Health insurance companies offering good coverage at a reasonable price. Either way, we'd win.

[vaberella]

1. Thank you for posting this DrToast. I'll read through it and post again.

Health Economics is a big interest of mine.

[DrToast]

2. If you really want to get wonky, you can read the actual bill

Download the bill here: http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/06/05/download-the-kennedy-healthcare-bill-here/

I tried reading it and it's pretty dry, as you can imagine.

[vaberella]

4. I thought that was a link to the bill. Okay sure, I'm going to read that after the article.

Thanks so much. Dry as it is, I love Health eco and policy.

[drm604]

3. It sounds promising.

Let's hope that it survives the Finance Committee.

[Thrill]

5. Thats a Progressive plan. Baucus and the other conservative Dems keep your fucking hands off of it

Its not single payer. But this sounds really good.

[DrToast]

6. It will likely be watered down a bit, but hopefully not TOO much.

[TheBigotBasher]

13. May be too late

Anthony Coley, a spokesman for Mr. Kennedy, said the legislative language circulated in Washington on Friday was “a draft of a draft.” Democratic members of the committee “are still actively talking among themselves and their Republican colleagues,” and “there is no final policy,” Mr. Coley said.

As expected, the Kennedy bill, called the American Health Choices Act, is to the left of one being written by the Senate Finance Committee, headed by Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana. Senate Democratic leaders said the two bills would be merged before going to the Senate floor — in July, they hope

[LooseWilly]

7. Good stuff

Why is it that it takes a Democrat with brain cancer to get something truly progressive on the table?...

[quantass]

8. For the U.S. this Path with eventually lead to "Single Payer" ... dont worry. American needs Baby

steps to get what it truly should be. America is hesitant as a whole and it doesnt help with republicans scaring the living bejesus out of everyone...the best course of action for "single player" is to get a plan in place that has a better shot at passing. I want "single player" for U.S. too but knwoing what i know about the U.S. and its history there is no chance it will pass if presented in one lump form....better to baby step it into passing.

When the American people get a taste of better healthcare human nature will kick in and like regular people, let alone American people, they will always want more -- greed and selfishness never changes but ironically works to the countrys benefit in the end --- Republicans will not see it coming.

[andym]

9. I think they do see it coming and will do everything they can to stop a public option

I think they do see it coming and will do everything they can to stop a public option. They know that once an effective government health care plan becomes reality, it will severely hurt their anti-government spending laissez faire platform.

[John Q. Citizen]

10. Why? Because it will be too expensive? or because everyone assumes it will?

This isn't a baby step. This is a massive change. But what's it cost a year to subsidize private health insurance companies?

Can you give a figure?

Or isn't that important?

It seem very important to me, since the reason so many people are uninsured is because we are currently being ripped off and paying far and away more than any one else in the world for less.

How does this control the rip off?

[DrToast]

11. How it controls the rip off

I'd try to explain it, but here's a good article that goes in detail: http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2009/06/medicare-reformmedpac-on-steroids-part-1-an-exciting-proposal.html

Short version: It will force health care reforms to eliminate waste and the insurance companies will have standards they have to meet if they want to sell plans on the exchanges.

[John Q. Citizen]

15. That sounds extremely optimistic. Is there a model out there that it's based on?

Or is this like dirivatives and don't worry, they know what they are doing?

I'll read the link, but I'm no where so quick to assume that just because they are optimistic that it will actually do the trick.

One reason I like single payer is there is a whole lot of experience in the real world that shows it works very well.

Also, if this is supposed to eventually lead to single payer, why wouldn't the insurance industry fight this just as hard as they would fight single payer?

And if they will fight this just as hard, why not just push for single payer since we already have about 60% of the country and 60% of the doctors on board for single payer?

[John Q. Citizen]

16. That has zilch to do with the Kennedy bill. In fact the recommendations in the

article would be far easier and quicker to achieve with a single payer system than with a multi-payer system.

So my original question is still, where is the cost savings in the Kennedy bill, and if there isn't how do we afford it?

[DrToast]

18. Please read the articles. The answers to your questions are in there

I'm not going to explain things that are in the articles. This has everything to do with the Kennedy plan.

Under Mr. Kennedy’s bill, the secretary of health and human services would establish a panel of experts, the Medical Advisory Council, to recommend a minimum package of insurance benefits. If Congress did not disapprove the recommendations, insurers would generally have to provide the benefits.

And I didn't say this would lead to single payer, so I don't know why you're asking me that question.

[John Q. Citizen]

20. A benefit package and re-embursement under the rockefeller bill are two differnt things

The link you provided was to a blog that discussed the Rockefeller bill.

Not the Kennedy bill.

We know single payer works well and it controls costs.

Why re-invent the wheel so that taxpayers can subsidize private health insurance companies?

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

22. Excellent post. I agree completely.

[blueclown]

12. This is the best plan I've seen that isn't single-payer.

I'm beyond impressed with Senator Kennedy's proposal. Let's hope it stays intact as Baucus gets his slimy hands on it.

[John Q. Citizen]

17. How much will this cost, and where are the cost savings?

[liskddksil]

14. Keep the blue-dogs as far as away as possible from this

because they will ruin it if they get their way.

[eridani]

19. We only need single payer to be able to AFFORD a good system n/t

[andym]

21. A very informative post!

Reading the article explains useful points like some of where the cost savings come from.

For example, "The new government-run program would pay doctors and hospitals at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. "

The private insurers would have to compete for funds at the "interchanges" AND "private insurers would have to pay out a specified percentage of their premium revenues in benefits."

Again a lot of the devil's in the details, but an interesting start!

[mvd]

23. It's not a bad start except for the financial penalties

I'd rather that people who didn't buy insurance just defaulted into the public plan.

I assume the waiver would help people afford insurance?

[Kdillard]

24. Sounds very good just keep the usual vultures away from it.

[Hellataz]

25. I'm all for a hybrid plan, but people thinking that $300-400 a mnth for a person to pay is not right

Watching last night's Real Time, some women on the panel said her health insurance was like 7-8 hundred and she wanted it down to reasonable 3-4 hundred a month. That is no way reasonable! The majority of americans' live below the poverty line making no more then $30,000 a year if that. And extra $300-$400 a month on top of their bills is asking too much and if that's what they think is reasonable and they are going to force us to pay for it or get fined, then sign me up for the fine.

They need to have a plan that makes the insurance companies compete with medicare rates. That's the only way to make them lower premiums, give people the option to stay with their ins company or move to medicare.

[andym]

27. These concerns are addressed in Kennedy's bill

First, "the majority of americans' live below the poverty line making no more then $30,000 a year" is not true. About 34% of American houesholds make 30,000 or less. The median US household income in 2007 was $50,233.00. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States. For individuals about 49.5% of individuals make 30,000 or less.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States#Income_distribution


The bill will raise the poverty level for Medicaid:
"Mr. Kennedy’s bill would also expand Medicaid to cover uninsured people with incomes up to 150 percent of the poverty level ($16,245 for an individual and $33,075 for a family of four). That could open Medicaid to millions of people who do not now qualify."

For those making more (but still not wealthy)
"the government would subsidize premiums for people with incomes up to 500 percent of the poverty level ($110,000 for a family of four)"

As for limiting costs (to hold down the price):
"The new government-run program would pay doctors and hospitals at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. "

The private insurers apparently would have to compete for funds with the public plan at the "interchanges" AND "private insurers would have to pay out a specified percentage of their premium revenues in benefits."

[Raine1967]

26. Thanks you for this!

K&R for important information.

[SpartanDem]

28. I'm very impressed

[Akoto]

29. Curious ... Are you a real doctor, or a Doctor of Toast? :) n/t

[DrToast]

30. Haha....no. I guess I should have said that

I speak from no medical authority. The "DrToast" is a just an old nickname from long, long ago that ended up being my online name.

[Ex Nihilo]

31. I posted this in the other Kennedy thread...

His plan is going to be a huge burden on small businesses.

My dad owns a small business. He is not some major capitalist screwing over his workers. He can't afford health insurance for himself even, or any of us in his family. Out of every $125 in sales they do, his product and labor costs $109. It's going to take 20 years to pay himself back for the costs of even starting the business, but he loves his work. If he has to start providing even partial coverage to his workers his business will go under. Period. That's 12 - 20 guys out of work (depending on the time of year).

Is it crappy that he can't provide health insurance to his workers? Absolutely. And he feels bad about it, and that he can't provide it for his family either but there is not a lot of work around where I live so if he has to close up shop, these guys aren't going to find some mythical job around here (southern kentucky) that is going to do any better for them. They just won't have jobs. This plan is going to kill many other small businesses out there like his, and the level of unemployment is going to SKYROCKET.

[andym]

32. In the bill, smaller businesses will be excluded

It appears that in section 3113 of the proposed bill, small businesses of some size (left blank) will not be required to pay. Also, all small businesses that do participate will get a credit payment equal to 50% of their costs back from the government.