Health care proposal mandates coverage, drops public option

Status
Not open for further replies.

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,232
Reaction score
19
The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee unveiled a summary of his long-awaited health care reform bill Wednesday, setting the stage for a legislative showdown on President Obama's top domestic priority.

Sen. Max Baucus will reveal his panel's compromise health care reform plan on Wednesday.
The bill crafted by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Montana, would cost $856 billion over 10 years and mandate insurance coverage for every American.

The bill -- released with no Republican support -- would not add to the federal deficit, Baucus said in a written statement.

The measure drops the public option favored by Obama and many Democratic leaders, according to a statement. As expected, the plan instead calls for the creation of nonprofit health care cooperatives.

As with other reform proposals, the bill would bar insurance companies from dropping a policyholder in the event of illness as long as that person had paid his or her premium in full. It would add new protections for people with pre-existing conditions and establish tax credits to help low- and middle-income families purchase insurance coverage.

Insurance companies also would be barred from imposing annual caps or lifetime limits on coverage. Individuals, however, would be fined up to $950 annually for failing to obtain coverage; families could be fined as much as $3,800.

The plan also would create health insurance exchanges to make it easier for small groups and individuals to buy insurance.

"The cost of America's broken health care system has stretched families, businesses and the economy too far for too long. For too many, quality, affordable health care is simply out of reach," Baucus said.

"This is a unique moment in history where we can finally reach an objective so many of us have sought for so long."

The Republican Senate leadership ripped the proposal, arguing it would impose unreasonable new tax burdens while cutting vital government programs.

"This partisan proposal cuts Medicare by nearly a half-trillion dollars and puts massive new tax burdens on families and small businesses to create yet another thousand-page, trillion-dollar government program," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky.

"Only in Washington would anyone think that makes sense, especially in this economy."

The Senate Finance Committee is the last of five congressional committees needed to approve health care legislation proposals before the topic can be taken up by both the full Senate and the full House of Representatives.

Various forms of the legislation proposed by Democrats have already cleared three House committees, as well as the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

The release of the bill comes a day after Obama delivered a fiery defense of his embattled plan to overhaul health care, telling a raucous union audience in Pennsylvania that "now is the time for action" and "the time to deliver."

"When are we going to say enough is enough?" he asked a national AFL-CIO convention. "How many more workers have to lose their coverage? How many more families have to go into the red for a sick loved one? ... We have talked this issue to death year after year, decade after decade."

Baucus has led months of negotiations with five other committee members -- three Republicans and two Democrats -- on what is considered the only proposal that could win bipartisan support in Congress.


GOP Sens. Olympia Snowe of Maine, Charles Grassley of Iowa and Mike Enzi of Wyoming -- the three Republicans involved in the so-called "Gang of Six" -- all still had concerns Tuesday that had not been sufficiently addressed, Snowe, Grassley and other Republican sources indicated.

GOP sources close to the senators stressed that they intend to keep negotiating and plan to offer amendments.

Wednesday morning Baucus said he was optimistic that the bill would ultimately win GOP votes.

"I think when we finally vote on the bill ... there will be Republican support," he told reporters on Capitol Hill.

"They'll become a little more familiar with it" in the days ahead, he said, and they will have several opportunities to offer amendments during the full committee's consideration of the bill.

Baucus also noted that it is "very similar" to the framework laid out by Obama during the president's speech to Congress last week.

In a statement issued Tuesday evening, Grassley said among the outstanding issues to be resolved are the costs to taxpayers, affordability for individuals, preventing taxpayer money from funding abortions, screening out illegal aliens, limiting medical malpractice lawsuits and lowering the overall costs.

Grassley also said he wanted assurances from Democratic leaders in Congress that the bipartisan measure under negotiation would remain unchanged after the Finance Committee passes it.

Meanwhile, Democratic Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia said he would oppose the Baucus proposal because it lacks a government-funded public health insurance option favored by Obama and liberal Democrats.

"By being against this bill, I am putting down a marker, which I think others should put down, too, who might feel the same way I do," Rockefeller said. He called the Baucus proposal an attempt to gain one or two Republican supporters, rather than a bill that would set good policy for the nation.

Baucus said the negotiators were tackling a range of controversial issues, including medical malpractice, ensuring a denial of benefits to illegal immigrants and expanding federal support for Medicaid.

Another of the Finance Committee negotiators, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-North Dakota, said the negotiators also considered a provision to specifically prohibit any provisions in the health care proposal from funding abortion.

One key sticking point between many Democrats and Republicans remains the question of whether to create a government funded public health insurance option.

Republicans unanimously oppose the public option as an unfair competitor that would drive private insurers out of the market, which they say would bring a government takeover of health care.

Democratic supporters reject that claim, saying a nonprofit public option would be one choice for consumers who also could sign up for private coverage.

Conrad has proposed creating nonprofit health insurance cooperatives as an alternative to the public option.

Obama, a supporter of the public option, also cited the idea of cooperatives as a possible middle-ground during his speech to Congress last week

Health care proposal mandates coverage, drops public option - CNN.com
 
now I'm feeling better but not there yet. Drop the mandatory coverage and I'm game.
 
Where's ban on pre-existing condition and remove the caps?
 
now I'm feeling better but not there yet. Drop the mandatory coverage and I'm game.

If we drop mandatory coverage and pubic option, how exactly is that reform? That is maintaining the status quo, and will not result in change.
 
I changed my mind about preventive care. I think people are healthy enough to cover it themselves. and that they should be responsible for their own health, unless you don't mind If I eat donut, get fat, and expect my doctor to keep curing my diseases due to overweight while you, who get eat healthy and get plenty of exercise, havepay for my healthcare cost.

The ones who need free healthcare are the ones who can't work due to their health. Which some of us already do that with medicare and medicaid.

so mandatory insurance to cover preventive care and emergency is a good idea.
 
Nobody wants a govt telling them which health insurance they can or cannot buy. Or whether not buy any insurance of their own. It's about choice and freedom in making their own financial and insurance decisions. Nobody wants a dictator-in-office.
 
Nobody wants a govt telling them which health insurance they can or cannot buy. Or whether not buy any insurance of their own. It's about choice and freedom in making their own financial and insurance decisions. Nobody wants a dictator-in-office.

Sigh...The choices are still there in the bill.
 
Sigh...The choices are still there in the bill.

sigh... even Barney Frank and Rahm Emanuel admitted this plan will lead to a single payer plan. Obama has a history of support for a single payer plan. The simple fact that this HR 3200 provides stringent requirements on what required from businesses in carrying health insurance.

Another thing, how can you all of sudden have enough doctors to cover 47 million more with "better quality care at lower cost" if this bill passes? this would cause an 18% increase in workload (and no incentives to work harder or to earn more money).
Concepts Series - Supply and Demand - the simple view

This would encourage doctors on quitting the profession.

This is a poorly, poorly thought out plan that deserves to be placed in an incinerator.
 
Eh? You haven't even read the bill, so how would you know?
 
If we drop mandatory coverage and pubic option, how exactly is that reform? That is maintaining the status quo, and will not result in change.

there are dozens of other reforms in the bill. I support that, not mandatory coverage and public option. it's better that way than taking an incredibly huge, costly risk. step by step first.
 
Nobody want a government telling them which..... ..Nobody????? is this fact???? or another statement intended to be passed off as fact??? Perhaps you should look at your view of people.....and learn that not everybody thinks the way you do....and that you don't speak for everyone....or are you in fact a debate-dictator-in-office???
Obama dictator-in-office?????how so???? Congress writes the laws.....the prez only signs them into effect. but you seem bent on attacking in any form you can. How is this only about Obama. I think your hate for him has blinded you to anything he would try to do in 4/8 years.
and yes our present congress was elected by the people.......so how do you figure 'nobody'. Seemslike a good percentage to me.
It is as though you are talking to yourself. Easy crowd to manipulate.


Nobody wants a govt telling them which health insurance they can or cannot buy. Or whether not buy any insurance of their own. It's about choice and freedom in making their own financial and insurance decisions. Nobody wants a dictator-in-office.
 
there are dozens of other reforms in the bill. I support that, not mandatory coverage and public option. it's better that way than taking an incredibly huge, costly risk. step by step first.

Why you do not support mandatory coverage and public option?

Do you think medicare for all is the best solution if you are not for mandatory coverage and public option?


I don´t see anything the reason why you do not support mandatory since we have mandatory health insurance here in Germany. Could you please help me to understand why you do not support mandatory coverage?
 
Nobody wants a govt telling them which health insurance they can or cannot buy. Or whether not buy any insurance of their own. It's about choice and freedom in making their own financial and insurance decisions. Nobody wants a dictator-in-office.

Did you read Obama´s speech last week?
 
Why you do not support mandatory coverage and public option?

Do you think medicare for all is the best solution if you are not for mandatory coverage and public option?


I don´t see anything the reason why you do not support mandatory since we have mandatory health insurance here in Germany. Could you please help me to understand why you do not support mandatory coverage?

why should I explain it again? Several of us explained the reasons many times in several threads and we have to explain it to you again? It is evident that you're never going to understand our reasons anyway. Don't forget - what works for you in Germany does not mean it will work for America.

You have not answered my question in other thread. The answer to my question can be an answer to your question - Do you agree that there are more than 1 solution for this health care problem?
 
why should I explain it again?

Not really, you changed your posts a quite alot. It confused us.


Several of us explained the reasons many times in several threads and we have to explain it to you again?

I can see that you have no good patience. From now I will not ask you in the future. If I want to ask then google myself, ask ADers or ask my co-workers... :) They have no problem to answer my questions. You made different posts over healthcare in several threads a quite a lot. This is a confusion.

Don´t worry, I read Americans´ first hand experience comments a lot and know a lot about US healthcare system thru their comments, TV, factcheck, politifact, snope.com and a few reliable medias.

I only want to try to understand why because I have a hard time to understand why Americans said nothing about Bush spend trillions on war and whines that Bush do nothing for his people and country. They act immaturity childish and accuse Obama as facist, Nazi, Hitler, Socialist, and go on.... without realize how work hard Obama is for his people and America. I convince what Obama said in his speech last week but cannot understand why Obama´s speech doesn´t convince Americans.. It look like that they don´t understand.


It is evident that you're never going to understand our reasons anyway.

See above, that´s why I have a hard time to understand why Americans oppose Obama´s healthcare plan because its about protect your life.

Don't forget - what works for you in Germany does not mean it will work for America.

How do you know?


You have not answered my question in other thread. The answer to my question can be an answer to your question - Do you agree that there are more than 1 solution for this health care problem?

Thank you for remind me. Yes, you will get my answer tomorrow... It´s time for me to go bed now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top