Baucus plan costs triple in second decade

posted at 11:36 am on October 14, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The Baucus plan passed by the Senate Finance Committee yesterday amounts to a massive middle-class tax increase, according to one columnist today, and a dishonest shell game on taxes according to another.  Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former CBO director, argues that the Baucus plan will hit consumers with a deluge of taxes, many of which deliberately lack transparency, and 90% of which hit the middle class:

The bill creates a new health entitlement program that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates will grow over the longer term at a rate of 8% annually, which is much faster than the growth rate of the economy or tax revenues. This is the same growth rate as the House bill that Sen. Kent Conrad (D., N.D.) deep-sixed by asking the CBO to tell the truth about its impact on health-care costs.

To avoid the fate of the House bill and achieve a veneer of fiscal sensibility, the Senate did three things: It omitted inconvenient truths, it promised that future Congresses will make tough choices to slow entitlement spending, and it dropped the hammer on the middle class. …

Most astounding of all is what this Congress is willing to do to struggling middle-class families. The bill would impose nearly $400 billion in new taxes and fees. Nearly 90% of that burden will be shouldered by those making $200,000 or less.

It might not appear that way at first, because the dollars are collected via a 40% tax on sales by insurers of “Cadillac” policies, fees on health insurers, drug companies and device manufacturers, and an assortment of odds and ends.

But the economics are clear. These costs will be passed on to consumers by either directly raising insurance premiums, or by fueling higher health-care costs that inevitably lead to higher premiums. Consumers will pay the excise tax on high-cost plans. The Joint Committee on Taxation indicates that 87% of the burden would fall on Americans making less than $200,000, and more than half on those earning under $100,000.

This should not be news to Hot Air readers.  Most already understand that corporations don’t really pay taxes; they pass the costs to consumers in the form of higher prices or in lost jobs and economic opportunities.  While populists love to see Congress stick it to corporate America, in essence this is nothing more than a form of economic masochism.

In this case, as with the coming cap-and-trade bill, those costs get borne across the board because everyone accesses medical care.  Taxes on pharmaceuticals, providers, and medical devices will get paid by consumers regardless of their income levels.  The federal government will provide subsidies for families up to $88,000/year income level, but those subsidies come basically from the higher taxes imposed on the industry.  The result will be an escalation of premiums and service prices that will either negate a large chunk of the proposed subsidy levels, or force the government to spend money from elsewhere to make up the difference — which would turn into a huge deficit explosion in a short period of time.

How short?  According to Jeffrey Anderson in the New York Post, that could be immediately, thanks to the shell game Baucus created to hide the real costs of his plan:

Baucus’ most elementary trick was to have the bill’s “first 10 years” include several years when it hadn’t really kicked in. It was scored for 2010 to 2019, yet it wouldn’t be in full swing until 2015 — when its costs would exceed those of its first five years combined.

In fact, the bill wouldn’t cost anything in 2010. In its real first decade (2011-20), it would cost more than $1 trillion.

Furthermore, the CBO projects that, by the end of 2030, the Baucus bill would have cut spending on Medicare and other existing health programs by more than $2.6 trillion.

But the real shell game, and the real danger to patients, comes in Medicare reimbursement cuts:

As the CBO notes, his bill would cut Medicare payments to doctors by 25 percent in 2011, then hold them at that level perpetually. In other words, given inflation, Baucus proposes endless cuts in what the program pays physicians and others.

Assuming 3 percent annual inflation, by 2014 doctors’ real incomes from Medicare payments would be cut by a third from 2010. By 2025, they’d be cut in half.

If Baucus’ cuts actually go through, physicians’ willingness to see Medicare patients would dwindle alongside their pay. But if the cuts don’t actually get made, Baucus’ plan would explode the federal deficit.

Without the savings from Medicare and related programs, the CBO projects that the bill would raise our deficits by $1.3 trillion over the next 20 years — and rising.

Provider flight from Medicare has been in motion for years already.  This reimbursement plan would turn that from a steady flow to a stampede.  What would that mean for Medicare patients?  They would have very few choices in providers and long wait times to access them.  And if the Senate sticks a public option tied to Medicare reimbursement rates into the package, that problem will expand to include massive numbers of Americans who like the coverage they have now, but will get thrown out of it by employers taking advantage of the cost savings between rising premiums and a fixed penalty for non-coverage.

The Baucus plan is both dishonest and a disaster.  Blame the 14 Senators who voted for this pig in a poke without demanding actual legislative language before passing it out of committee.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

of course they do. . . and remember everyone, because it doesn’t have a public option. . . the Baucus plan is the CHEAPEST PLAN POSSIBLE from this government bill.

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 11:38 AM

That news is going to hurt. Our job is to make sure it hurts the Senators that support the various versions of PlaceboCare more than it hurts us.

steveegg on October 14, 2009 at 11:39 AM

Any plan that is only ‘deficit neutral’ by using taxes over ten years to cover spending for six years was already suspect to those of us with critical thinking skills.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM

This is a lie. Obama has stated repeatedly that National Healthcare will be budget neutral, not raise taxes and be absolutely free to us.

Therefore this study is false. /MSM Propaganda

Holger on October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Have gun, will travel. So which state will resist first because that’s where I’m moving.

Bishop on October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Don’t worry. La Snowe will vote the right when “when history calls” again.

SouthernGent on October 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM

it promised that future Congresses will make tough choices to slow entitlement spending,

When was the last time Congress made the tough choice and slowed any kind of spending?

sammypants on October 14, 2009 at 11:43 AM

But the economics are clear. These costs will be passed on to consumers by either directly raising insurance premiums, or by fueling higher health-care costs that inevitably lead to higher premiums.

The politics are clear as well: this is a long-term plan to destroy private insurance. The mathematics are also clear: those of you currently insured will pay much more for far less coverage in the future.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 11:43 AM

The libs pushing this now, those of the general population, won’t believe any of this until the costs hit their own pocketbooks and wallets. By then it’ll be too late.

Liam on October 14, 2009 at 11:43 AM

So not only will by insurance cost more with this ‘bill’ than without but my taxes will go up significantly as well. At this point we might as well just abolish personal property. It would be more efficient that way.

gwelf on October 14, 2009 at 11:44 AM

This plan will massively raise taxes AND provide a lower standard of health care over all. Just compare US and UK healthcare and living costs. Living costs are dramatically higher and the standard of medical care is demonstrably lower.

Hey, at least it allow the government more scope to run our lives. Because we need that, clearly. Don’t trust us peons.

This is a disaster for America in the making. Statist lunacy forged out of lies.

Anders on October 14, 2009 at 11:44 AM

Have gun, will travel. So which state will resist first because that’s where I’m moving.

Bishop on October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Gov Perry of Texas – a couple of weeks ago.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 11:44 AM

Oh, forgot to mention one way this can be done without necessitating an increase in insurance costs or taxes – severe rationing. Yay for government intervention!

gwelf on October 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM

I really like Doug. He is one of the reasons I supported MAC.

we are so screwed if we dont sweep house in 2010

ginaswo on October 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM

The Dirty Tricks brigade is at it again.

What a complete and utter farce the Baucus Bill is!

Say goodbye to the America we know if this BS passes.

Ogabe on October 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM

Keep in mind the Baucus bill is just a skeleton that still has to get the meat added to it. Once it gets turned into the bill that will be voted on by both the House and Senate it will be far larger and more expensive.

jsulman on October 14, 2009 at 11:45 AM

As the CBO notes, his bill would cut Medicare payments to doctors by 25 percent in 2011, then hold them at that level perpetually. In other words, given inflation, Baucus proposes endless cuts in what the program pays physicians and others.

Assuming 3 percent annual inflation, by 2014 doctors’ real incomes from Medicare payments would be cut by a third from 2010. By 2025, they’d be cut in half.

We are so worried about quality of care, but if there are no doctors still practicing medicine, quality wont be an issue.

sammypants on October 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Baucus’ most elementary trick was to have the bill’s “first 10 years” include several years when it hadn’t really kicked in. It was scored for 2010 to 2019, yet it wouldn’t be in full swing until 2015 — when its costs would exceed those of its first five years combined.

2010 is when the taxes kick in – that’s why it was scored that way. Otherwise, it would have been seen for what it really is.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Only triple you say???? What a steal.

//s

ted c on October 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Snowe is going down.

upinak on October 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM

we have an opening for a gov here sadly I have a checkered past and can not apply :)I dont pass the ‘pass’ test what with my record of voting in every election since I turned 18, but I have pesky associations with wildlife groups AND the NRA! I will be whitelisted on BOTH sides of the aisle, HA!Go figure!

anywho, in AZ our legislature is humming along with the trifecta on our 2010 ballot, anti affirm action, anti card check and anti fed health care.

all we need is a governor now

ginaswo on October 14, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Is the ObamaCare Martyr’s Brigade now forming up?

How many Dem Senators will seal their career off by voting for this monstrosity? There will be blood and these guys are going to go through the grinder. Get on the horn to them. I’ve already emailed both Senator Webb and Warner and challenged both their manhood and statesmanship in this regard.

ted c on October 14, 2009 at 11:48 AM

America is quickly becoming the Evil Empire.

Leia Sarrahcuda is our only hope.

Holger on October 14, 2009 at 11:48 AM

I have the feeling that sometime within my lifetime the Midwest, some Western States and several Southern States will literally become a “flyover country” for the coasts and some rust belt States.

Yakko77 on October 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM

Snowe is going down.

upinak on October 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM

Unfortunetly Snowe cannot hear you…her head is stuck so far up Obama’s a$$…

right2bright on October 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM

Put some pressure on Snowe so she becomes a democrat like Specter!

deidre on October 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM

If Baucus’ cuts actually go through, physicians’ willingness to see Medicare patients would dwindle alongside their pay.

Really?? I don’t think so….Just wait till doctors drill down into the final bill and find out that they MUST accept Medicare patients. And if the bill does not specifically say so, there will be a government tool or vehicle hidden within the bill to easily do so.

PatriotRider on October 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM

It’s amazing that people know these numbers are lies, yet put them out there as reality. Then you have people who actually support reform (liberal trolls) ignore any sort of reality when parroting them. Fantasy land.

lorien1973 on October 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM

even more costly, Schumer is trying to repeal McCarren Ferguson, which I have wanted done for eons now! it excepts insurance form Fed regulation under interstate commerce

of course I wanted it repealed to help interstate competition, Schumer wants it repealed to apply antitrust to insurers.

what morons they were thinking they could cut a deal

ginaswo on October 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM

Who is fooling whom. This bill is disastrous and nothing can make it better. It must die.

rjoco1 on October 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM

So the Dems wanna force this health care debacle on us, while also granting amnesty for illegals, and passing crap-and-betrayed, and card check, and adding a VAT, and letting the Bush tax cuts expire? Even if they only got half of that agenda through, we’re looking at Great Depression II: The Wrath of Con(gress).

Are these people insane? And that’s not even factoring in the $50+ trillion we own in Social Security and Medicare payments in the years to come.

Doughboy on October 14, 2009 at 11:51 AM

So the key here is to reduce your income to exactly $88k and not a penny more.

Not that your income level will matter anyway, the doctors are going to flee the field so fast that people will die before getting help anyway.

Bishop on October 14, 2009 at 11:52 AM

Any plan that is only ‘deficit neutral’ by using taxes over ten years to cover spending for six years was already suspect to those of us with critical thinking basic math skills.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM

fixed that for ya.

UltimateBob on October 14, 2009 at 11:52 AM

I can see why they wanted an unwritten bill voted on without discussion in August.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 11:53 AM

I am wondering what other kind of back door deals are going to ooze out of the toilets of DC?.
Keep up the Good Fight!!!
God Bless

hawkman on October 14, 2009 at 11:53 AM

I am not surprised by these findings.
The republicans should be running ads on tv about this disaster.

I hope that in 2010 a lot of these idiots are voted out of congress but I just don’t see that happening. I hope I am wrong.

Brat4life on October 14, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Snowe is brain dead. Her buffoonery is gonna cost us dearly.

WordsMatter on October 14, 2009 at 11:53 AM

meanwhile in another paen to big Pharma US Antitrust just approved the merger of Pfizer and Wyeth, but dont let Aetna or United try to pass costs onto consumers thru higher premiums, no that would be WRONG

frakkers

ginaswo on October 14, 2009 at 11:54 AM

The Baucus plan is both dishonest and a disaster. Blame the 14 Senators who voted for this pig in a poke without demanding actual legislative language before passing it out of committee.

Is it okay to spread my blame a little more liberally? Those 14 Senators are merely enablers to those who forsee adding on even more expensive provisions, such as a public option while forcing through repugnant services like federally funded abortions.

highhopes on October 14, 2009 at 11:54 AM

anyone want to get on board with my sooper ingenious plan to all become veterinarians ?

trust me under Obamacare, we will get lots of midnight calls for treatment off the books for humans!

and we can give them xrays and everything without a 2 yr wait!

like in my vampire and werewolf romance books, lol

ginaswo on October 14, 2009 at 11:56 AM

doughboy

DHS cut off AZ 287G ICE powers but wants to house the illegals they wont let us arrest in hotels until their hearings, this as half of AZ is foreclosed upon…

bizarro world without the cool goatees

ginaswo on October 14, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Snowe is brain dead. Her buffoonery is gonna cost us dearly.

WordsMatter on October 14, 2009 at 11:53 AM

I would have passed with or without her. The idea that a single GOP vote makes that thing bipartisan is absurd. The goal here is to make it cost her dearly. By challenging her re-election, demanding she not get GOP campaign funds, and by making all her committee assignments irrelevant should the GOP take control of the Senate. Bottom line, she betrayed this nation with her vote as did those 13 Democrats, but her vote wasn’t really all that critical.

highhopes on October 14, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Let’s take this trought the steps….

There is No Bill however, the CBO was able to magically put numbers to a round table discussion and a few ideas scribbled down on napkins! The Senate Finance Committee approves it now they will begin to write the legislation and then the Bill?

No Bill, CBO Numbers approved by Senate Finance Committee, are members of the Senate Finance Committee idiots? Will this Bill be voted on before the actual Bill is complete? If so, those who approve that Bill or any Bill at this point is clearly not working in the best interest of their constituents and should be Re-Called!

BigMike252 on October 14, 2009 at 11:59 AM

Numerous times the idea of selling health insurance across state lines has been put forward but I have yet to see a politician address why this is or isn’t a good idea.

Cindy Munford on October 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM

We are witnessing nothing than the destruction of America, and this is just another aspect of it. It’s awe inspiring on a negative level. Is this all going to finish up in bloodshed…the historical record says yes.

cjk on October 14, 2009 at 12:02 PM

It’s gonna hurt Medicare, paging Michael Steele.

Apologetic California on October 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM

I was making notes last night about how taxes are being hidden from us — buy fuel at the pump and the receipt tells you gallons and price per gallon – but shows no taxes – same with a grocery store receipt – shows taxes after the total cost of goods – Seems to me Health Care cost will be a hidden tax — if we could get a law to show the tax on every item similar to listing the ingredient and percentage of vitamins on all goods — That would start a lot of trouble for our politicians .

wheels on October 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM

It’s about freaking time someone pointed this out. Don’t you think it would have been wise to make a fuss about this the moment the CBO came out with that bogus report?

Daggett on October 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM

Assuming 3 percent annual inflation…

Another example to apply the When you assume saying.

WashJeff on October 14, 2009 at 12:04 PM

Have gun, will travel. So which state will resist first because that’s where I’m moving.

Bishop on October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Texas first, no question.

Patriots only, of course.

TXUS on October 14, 2009 at 12:05 PM

Can you believe CBS did this story on congressional health insurance? Quite damning.

WashJeff on October 14, 2009 at 12:06 PM

This is one surgeon who will not practice for any less then I am doing it for now. And if the thugs in DC think they can force me to treat people I will happily relinquish my license…………

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:08 PM

Folks, its ALL about the taxes…

See, it will be cheaper for your employer to pay the penalty, than to pay for your coverage.

This will put the Insurance burden on YOU, to pay with AFTER tax dollars, making the tax base larger.

If you don’t buy insurance, you get hit with a tax penalty, once more increasing the tax revenue…

Either way, Gov gets more Tax revenue…. at least short term.

Romeo13 on October 14, 2009 at 12:10 PM

Where did all the headlines GO?

upinak on October 14, 2009 at 12:11 PM

I wonder where my doctor will practice next year. I hope it’s The Bahamas. I love going there and lots of direct flights from my nearest airport.

angryed on October 14, 2009 at 12:11 PM

Paging Ms. Snowe….

angryed on October 14, 2009 at 12:12 PM

Senate Democrats are also erecting new barriers to middle-class ascent. A family of four making $54,000 would pay $4,800 for health insurance, with the remainder coming from subsidies. If they work harder and raise their income to $66,000, their cost of insurance rises by $2,800. In other words, earning another $12,000 raises their bill by $2,800—a marginal tax rate of 23%.

Should have known. A Demokratic bill that punishes success/achievement.

The above excerpt from the WSJ article just further demonstrates that the Demokrats are in fact the party of dependency.

anglee99 on October 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM

Harvard University pollster Robert Blendon said public opinion remains mixed.

“Most people are afraid these bills are going to raise their costs, so this could raise public anxiety,” he said. “At the same time, the health insurance industry is at the bottom of the scale of people’s trust.”

Well, not quite the “bottom” Mr. Blendon:

Congressional Job Approval: 25% approve–66% disapprove

Rovin on October 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM

This is one surgeon who will not practice for any less then I am doing it for now. And if the thugs in DC think they can force me to treat people I will happily relinquish my license…………

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:08 PM
If the government can force you to take the H1N1 shot, it’s very likely that they can force you treat people….

Just let me know your new address in Costa Rica… :-)

PatriotRider on October 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM

This is one surgeon who will not practice for any less then I am doing it for now. And if the thugs in DC think they can force me to treat people I will happily relinquish my license…………

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:08 PM

And you are not alone, of course. Was at my doctor’s yesterday and she said the same thing, but in some rather stronger language.

I told her, however, not to worry about a license since there’s going to be a whole new underground medical service industry if this crap passes…

And, since it’ll be cash only, she’ll make twice as much.

It was good to see her smile.

TXUS on October 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM

What else are they hiding?

I call for a body cavity search of all Dems in congress.

CNN can carry it live.

fogw on October 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Numerous times the idea of selling health insurance across state lines has been put forward but I have yet to see a politician address why this is or isn’t a good idea.

Cindy Munford on October 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM

The problem is jurisdiction. The primary reason it is difficult for a federal insurance plan is that the plans are regulated at the state level. No commissioner of insurance in the state capital is going to want to give up jurisdiction to DC.

State politicians say they are ‘protecting’ their residents by forcing regulations on insurance provided in their states. NY regulators impose HUGE costs on insurers. If NY residents want to buy a plan from Iowa, it wouldn’t follow the stringent guidelines that NY politicians require.

Conversely, if I live in Iowa, and I have people in NY buying plans and FILING EXPENSIVE CLAIMS IN NY, then my rates in Iowa will go up and I’d be mad.

Health insurance and the industry is very complex and complicated. It’s about a lot more than the premiums you pay or your employer pays. But when politicians get involved, the discussion centers around how much people pay in premiums – which is a reflection of the cost, not a cause of it.

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM

And you are not alone, of course. Was at my doctor’s yesterday and she said the same thing, but in some rather stronger language.

I told her, however, not to worry about a license since there’s going to be a whole new underground medical service industry if this crap passes…

And, since it’ll be cash only, she’ll make twice as much.

It was good to see her smile.

TXUS on October 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM

WoW!! Now there is an idea for a good investigative piece or editorial column.

PatriotRider on October 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM

“When history calls, history calls”

I’ve been thinking about this quote, and beyond the surface ridiculousness of it, there’s something that’s been bugging me.

History is filled with “events”, and a vast, vast majority of those “events” are of a negative consequence to mankind. Historical events rarely include great sweeping victories for mankind, but rather center mainly around destructive catastrophic calamities and tragedies.

Postive moves forward are rarely “historical”, they are slow plodding moves by individuals or small groups of individuals and over time, they develop into positives.

If Snowe’s vote was “historical”, I put it right up there with the “historicals” of Pearl Harbor, the Inquisition, the General Slocum or Chernobyl.

The only good that will come of this calling of history will be when the people take small steps to overcome this historical event.

Jason Coleman on October 14, 2009 at 12:21 PM

People if passed this will be the perfect storm in the next decade or two. I mean come on, a 25% reduction in Medicare payments up front and no inflation adjustments forever? Older folks are going to be pi$$ed about that no matter how AARP spins it. Add that onto the default of Social Security by 2019 and a whole heap of seniors are going to into bankruptcy because of medical costs.

You know it seems to me as if Obama and Co. are out to destroy the economy of the US as quick as possible.

Johnnyreb on October 14, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Why do the Democrats think they can get away with concealing and lying about this plan and manipulating the cost numbers?

Loxodonta on October 14, 2009 at 12:23 PM

TXUS, trust me I have much stronger language which I am declining to use. Suffice it to say that where the feds can certainly throw me in jail for not treating someone depending on whatever language is in this crap sandwich of a bill, they CANNOT drag me out of bed at 2am and force me to remove a ruptured appendix…………

I would be happy to make 90% less and do it freely in the Caribbean……

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:24 PM

I wonder where my doctor will practice next year. I hope it’s The Bahamas. I love going there and lots of direct flights from my nearest airport.

angryed on October 14, 2009 at 12:11 PM

Forget the direct flights. I’m taking a one way flight until this is over.

Chaz706 on October 14, 2009 at 12:26 PM

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM

I know its a much less complex Insurance plan, but how do car insurance companies get past that hurdle?

Romeo13 on October 14, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Why do the Democrats think they can get away with concealing and lying about this plan and manipulating the cost numbers?

Loxodonta on October 14, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Because it has always worked in the past.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 12:26 PM

I know its a much less complex Insurance plan, but how do car insurance companies get past that hurdle?

Romeo13 on October 14, 2009 at 12:26 PM

I think that they have to have an address in the state to get insurance in the state. I don’t know for sure. So if you want auto insurance in NC (like a lot of people get because it is cheap here), I think people just get an NC PO Box.

However, I don’t do auto insurance. All I know is that I’d rather not have to get 50 different state licenses and pay 50 different fees every year just to sell health insurance to residents of the state.

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 12:28 PM

I would be happy to make 90% less and do it freely in the Caribbean……

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Roger that, but would encourage you to give Texas a look when we secede.

And believe me, bro, it could well happen if this crap passes, not to mention if Cap and Tax does too.

TXUS on October 14, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Texas is high on my list before I have to leave the country. Not to mention you guys passed kick ass tort reform a couple of years ago which is putting the screws to maggots and parasites in the trial bar and has resulted in lower malpractice premiums and an influx of doctors……..

Shocking how tort reform is missing from Obamacare……

/s

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:36 PM

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM

I am more than willing to admit that it is more complex than my understanding but all of these insurances are accepted in whatever state it is needed. It’s ridiculous for some states to only have one or two choices. I have also heard that in the Baucus Bill exempts several states from the new provision required or is giving those states extra money to cover the cost of those provisions. If the federal government must get involved wouldn’t it be better to stipulate national requirements for health insurance, I can’t get really worked up about a turf war while I am watching the entire nation get shafted.

Cindy Munford on October 14, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Come on insurance industry! Come on unions! Come on big pharma! I don’t care why you oppose this bill, just OPPOSE IT! Run your newspaper ads, buy advertising time on tv, smear members of congress, scare seniors, whatever it takes, just KILL THIS BILL!!!

parteagirl on October 14, 2009 at 12:41 PM

Roger that, but would encourage you to give Texas a look when we secede.

TXUS on October 14, 2009 at 12:33 PM

If you can secede without Dallas, Austin and S.A. I’m there. If you keep those 3, no thanks.

angryed on October 14, 2009 at 12:43 PM

The AMA should be hanging their heads in shame. They endorsed this crap over a promise of increased payments to doctors of 200+ billion……….SUCKERS

They certainly don’t represent me…….

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:43 PM

I hope the insurance companies, drug companies and the folks who come up with all the helpful fantastic ideas that help people are doing what they can to come up with cost saving ideas. Although I am sure that government regulations casue I many of their problems, they should be more proactive with what are universal complaints about their industries. It’s easier to stand up for them when they appear to be cooperative.

Cindy Munford on October 14, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Question to the docs here: If you decide to go to a 100% cash practice, can you? No insurance, no medicare, no medicaid. Just operate like any other business where payment is expected for service rendered.

Is that even allowed these days?

angryed on October 14, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Cindy Munford on October 14, 2009 at 12:40 PM

It makes you wonder why the federal government can impose laws concerning Medicaid as well. Medicaid is run by states and paid for out of state budgets. . . but the federal government determines the level that states have to provide Medicaid benefits.

The only national health plan is Medicare – everyone pays for it with federal taxes, so the federal government controls it.

The reason that there are some states with just a few insurers is usually because they do a good job keeping costs low. It usually is the non-profit blue cross plan that has been in the state for 80 years or so. For profit companies look at the state, look at the available rates, and determine if they can make enough money to go into the market.

When there are few competitors, it is generally because one company has lowered rates to the point that others can’t compete.

It happened in NC. There were a TON of plans in the mid 90′s. Then Blue Cross came out with a plan that increased benefits and slashed premium rates (through the trick of offering maternity benefits as an option rather than automatically including it). As a result, the for profit companies couldn’t compete so they left the market.

Fast forward to today. . . Blue Cross has the same plan, but with no competition, they abused their near monopoly and raised premiums (new CEO who has done good, but not like the old days when they tried NOT to make a profit). Now there are a TON of plans available that are just as good and lower priced than Blue Cross. It’s the free market. It works, and it works well – ESPECIALLY in health insurance.

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 12:47 PM

angryed………it IS allowed today and some practice that way(ie Plastic surgeons, etc)………the likelihood is that in this new legislation licensure will be tied to whether or not one chooses to participate in Medicare or the government option……..No par, no license, no job………..in this country that is

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:48 PM

I would also warn that the Leahy bill that Schumer wants added to the final bill is exceedingly deceptive. Anytime he says, “You guys (conservatives) should like this,” you know you need to take a good hard look. He wants the anti-trust exemption for health insurance companies removed. But what this would do is make it impossible for private insurance companies to compete against what would be an ever-growing government monopoly on healthcare. And as I said earlier, what the WH refers to as an “exchange” would be nothing but a buffet consisting of banana bread, chocolate-covered bananas, banana splits, and banana cream pie. In the end, it’s all just bananas.

Connie on October 14, 2009 at 12:51 PM

for sure a black market will develop………not to sound racist………..which I already am since I oppose Barry’s DeathCare

Paul Revere on October 14, 2009 at 12:51 PM

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Thanks for the insider info. Very helpful. The other place to look might be the Federal Employee Health Insurance. It covers people all over the country and I don’t want to make is sound like there are tons of options but there are certainly more then there use to be. Sometimes the coverage varies from state to state but it ususally balances out. I think the premiums are 50/50.

Cindy Munford on October 14, 2009 at 12:54 PM

meanwhile in another paen to big Pharma US Antitrust just approved the merger of Pfizer and Wyeth,

ginaswo on October 14, 2009 at 11:54 AM

anti-trust was never more than a scam by politicians to get more donations from corporations.
The only way a monopoly can form is when govt creates one.

MarkTheGreat on October 14, 2009 at 12:54 PM

If you can secede without Dallas, Austin and S.A. I’m there. If you keep those 3, no thanks.

angryed on October 14, 2009 at 12:43 PM

When you consider the massive influx of conservative American immigrants we’d get upon secession, even those areas will turn right or, at worst, be neutralized.

Also, you could make book that the current illegals would be shipped home, on the other side of what will be built and called the Great Wall of Texas.

TXUS on October 14, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Because it has always worked in the past.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Has it? Perhaps I’m remembering wrong, but I don’t recall it being this bad before. I think the news media were either more impartial during the Democrats’ administrations or more adversarial during the Republicans’ administrations than they are now. And then, the media would keep beating the drum. Today, such news stories are headlined by only a few outlets, get buried or not covered at all by the rest, and then the stories just disappear. So, if an average voter isn’t paying very close attention, they may never know about it.

Loxodonta on October 14, 2009 at 12:56 PM

Where did all the headlines GO?

upinak on October 14, 2009 at 12:11 PM

Bad girl, no headlines for you.

MarkTheGreat on October 14, 2009 at 12:56 PM

I call for a body cavity search of all Dems in congress.

fogw on October 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Who could you force to carry out such a search?

MarkTheGreat on October 14, 2009 at 12:59 PM

The problem is jurisdiction.

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM

This is the actual reason why the commerce clause was written. So that congress could step in when the states begin waging trade wars with each other.

MarkTheGreat on October 14, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Why do the Democrats think they can get away with concealing and lying about this plan and manipulating the cost numbers?

Loxodonta on October 14, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Because they got away with it the previous 20 or 30 times?

MarkTheGreat on October 14, 2009 at 1:02 PM

I didn’t leave my country, my country left me.

(apologies to Ronald Reagan)

MarkTheGreat on October 14, 2009 at 1:04 PM

The other place to look might be the Federal Employee Health Insurance.

The Federal Employee plan is actually just like a self-insurance plan that huge companies have. For example, there are companies with employees in each state. Where it is domiciled is the jurisdiction, but employees all over the country can be covered on it.

So the Federal plan is basically a self insurance plan by the Federal government for its employees just like a larger company would have for its employees.

But it’s really all about numbers. And as I said before, the PREMIUMS are a REFLECTION of costs. Until the debate about health care reform acknowledges that, nobody will debate in good faith. Medicare COSTS have gone up even with the restrictions imposed on doctors and hospitals. Medicare for all won’t keep costs from going up. Not paying doctors and hospitals will. . . but they’ll go out of business.

ThackerAgency on October 14, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Can we look up the members of Congress when the second decade kicks in? Bet no one will take credit for this Heath Scam when this all hits the fan.

yoda on October 14, 2009 at 1:09 PM

I call for a body cavity search of all Dems in congress.

fogw on October 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM

There are a handful of pretty hot looking babes in the House, which I’ll take.

You get Bawny Fwank, Henry Waxman, Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Barbara McCulskey, etc.

TXUS on October 14, 2009 at 1:10 PM

Has it? Perhaps I’m remembering wrong, but I don’t recall it being this bad before. I think the news media were either more impartial during the Democrats’ administrations or more adversarial during the Republicans’ administrations than they are now.

Loxodonta on October 14, 2009 at 12:56 PM

They were just as bad years ago, but there was no alternative for the public to see it. It used to be called the silent majority, and we are not silent anymore. That’s what really bugs the liberals.

Vashta.Nerada on October 14, 2009 at 1:11 PM

Keep your panties up. The left hates this bill too.

If it went to an up or down vote, it’d probably be defeated by a bipartisan coalition.

There is no compromise the left can put forth that can attract the moderates to pass healthcare at this time.

Their only chance for a health care reform bill is a giant crap bill that angers everyone. No public option, huge taxes on the middle class, no reduction in health care pricees, and a metric tonne of pork loaded in to buy off oposition.

I still don’t think it will happen. Though I am a bit confused on the fillibuster legalesse if someone could clear that up I’d appreciate it. I’m having a hard time understanding it in this case.

jhffmn on October 14, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2