Senate HELP Committee passes health reform bill, House starts markup, we're moving
Posted on July 15th, 2009 by Jason Rosenbaum in Solutions that Work|
|
The Senate HELP Committee has just passed their health reform bill. As Jon Cohn noted yesterday, this isn't quite historic, as HELP's predecessor committee passed a bill out during the health reform fight under Clinton, but taken in context, health reform is moving in a way it never has before.
As a review, here's what HELP was discussing, and likely what just passed (I'll have an update once I've seen all the amendments):
The individual mandate: If you have affordable coverage available to you — and I don't know exactly how, or if, "affordable" is defined — and you don't purchase it, HELP envisions a penalty of not less than half the price of the coverage.
The Health Insurance Exchanges: States would run them. They would be available for the uninsured, people on the non-group market, and small businesses. There would be a so-called "firewall" preventing larger employers from using the exchanges. In the scenario where employees of a large employer are not offered coverage meeting the minimum standards and costing less than 12.5 percent of their income, then and only then can they go to the exchange. (For more on health insurance exchanges, see this primer.)
The public plan: In a slightly weird turn of events. HELP is calling its public option "the Community Health Insurance Option." You have to wonder if that's not an effort to steal some of Sen. Kent Conrad's co-op compromise thunder. It's a level-playing field style plan, and it's available on only the health insurance exchanges.
Yesterday, the House unveiled their tri-committee health reform bill and the Education and Labor Committee will start marking it up today. That bill contains:
- Generous subsidies, available to people making up to 400 percent of the poverty line
- Expansion of Medicaid to cover people making less than 133 percent of the poverty line
- Guarantees of solid benefits for everybody, with limits on out-of-pocket spending
- Strong regulation of insurers, including requirements that insurers provide insurance to people with pre-existing conditions without higher rates
- An individual mandate, so that everybody (or what passes for everybody in these discussions) gets into the system and assumes some financial responsibility
- A public plan, one that appears to be strong, although I'll reserve judgment on that until I hear from the experts
- Choice of public and private plan, at first just for individuals and small businesses, but later for larger businesses and–possibly–eventually for everybody
- Efforts at payment reform, if not necessarily as strong as they could be
- Investment in primary care and prevention, which is not sexy but potentially important for general health.
So, let's review the political space. The Senate HELP Committee has just referred a bill to the floor of the Senate with a strong public option. The House is starting in on a bill that meets all of Health Care for America Now's principles for actually achieving quality, affordable health care for all in this country. And the President and his grassroots army are out there pushing for strong reform by the August recess.
Yes, we've got one more committee that has yet to start in on their work, the Senate Finance Committee, but overall, reform is moving forward like it wasn't in the 1990s. There's no Harry and Louise on the air. Republicans can barely muster a response. Progressives are united behind real reform, and we've actually got something in Congress we can support. It's really happening, folks.
I'm paying for my own, myself and family. It is expensive but for now it is not rationed as soon will be the case. Allow Uncle Sam to insure those who cant get or afford it, but leave the rest of us alone. By the way if you tax existing health care that some have you will only be removing money from the soon to be deceased economy. Oh yeah won't our beloved congress be subscribing to this health plan as well? Hummm
Has any analysis been done before stating that the HELP bill contains a "strong" public option. From reading it
The parameters of the "public option" are determined by the exchanges such that it can be made noncompetitive with private for-profit insurance.
The secular nature of the health insurance exchanges, by state, appears to be designed to be captive by the insurance industry and does not rectify the near monopolies that health insurers enjoy within each state. This issue is even highlighted on this site.
Employers may still select a tier of insurance plans from among the insurers in an exchange, so there is no freedom of choice. In fact, employees are not allowed to choose the public option as their insurance coverage.
People are penalized for refusing for-profit insurance when they are not elegible for a public option or the public option is non-competetive. This promotes a transfer of wealth to for-profit insurers. Public funds will be provided to high actuarial risk insurers, again, transferring public wealth to for-profit insurers.
Minimum qualifying coverage does not relieve initial out-of-pocket expenses that frequently create barriers to seeking preventive/primary care. Because preventive care effects the greatest overall health care savings this bill is remiss in creating mandates for long-term savings by eliminating all preventive/primary care out-of-pocket expenses.
It sure doesn't look like a strong public option to me. Who has done a thorough analysis?
I can't think of a better deal for America than a public health care plan that's available to all. It is also the right thing to do.
Under the proposed legislation - if we can get Congress to pass it - you are free to keep or get non-public health insurance, which may even become less expensive as a result. What you have is a new option, that is high quality, affordable, and available to all.
For some people, that will be the only option. A public health care plan is not only a question of financial sense, it is, above all, a question of fairness.
Jerry, With a public option and better oversight, your premiums should decrease. Medicare has 3% admin costs while private eats 20% for admin. Your premiums are also higher now due to all the uninsured. This can work, and when it does, I wonder if you'll change your tune.
Does anyone have a bill number for the Senate HELP Committee's Affordable Choice Legislation?
Kennedy's HELP bill is here: http://help.senate.gov/Maj_press/2009_07_15_b.pdf