Baucus: We Can Accomplish Health Care Reform ‘Without’ Public Health Plan Option
Baucus: We Can Accomplish Health Care Reform ‘Without’ Public Health Plan Option
Gov. Howard Dean (D-VT) has argued that you can’t reform the health care system without forcing private insurers to compete with a new public option. “If we only get community rating and guaranteed issue that’s great insurance reform, but that is not health care reform and nobody should mistake it,” Dean explained.
But Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has recently indicated that the public plan is just a bargaining chip to “encourage the private health insurance industry to move in the direction it knows it should move toward—namely, health insurance reform, which means eliminating pre-existing conditions, guaranteed issue, modified community rating.”
Today, during an event at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, ThinkProgress caught up with Baucus and asked the senator if Dean was wrong in insisting that a public health plan is essential to achieving a more efficient health care system:
Let’s see what we come up with. I think we can accomplish the objective [Dean] wants without [a public plan]. We can, we’re going to have to work on it. But we may have to have it, [Dean] may be right. Just don’t know yet.
Watch it:
Dean believes that the public plan would improve system efficiency and quality, but Baucus is more interested in using the program as a political tool to bring insurers to the table and keep single payer advocates at the table. The public, however, supports the public option. According to a poll by Lake Research, “73% of voters want everyone to have a choice of private health insurance or a public health insurance plan while only 15% want everyone to have private insurance.”
13 Responses to “Baucus: We Can Accomplish Health Care Reform ‘Without’ Public Health Plan Option”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Wonk RoomContact Us
Donate
Of course Baucus would say “we”, he’s sponsored by numerous for-profit health care companies with no, as in zero, facilities in his state. Dirty Max is a for-profit healthcare Corporacrat. Rub that in, Max!
March 27th, 2009 at 3:14 pmWhat would a Canadian say if a Member of Parliament stood up and said they wanted to repeal single payer because the private plans must have learned their lesson? Baucus is pretending to live in a fantasy world without greed, even though he would admit that greed is what makes markets efficient. At this point I have to agree with StateOfTheD. that Baucus must be shilling for donors. Does he think he is facing a particularly rough election challenge? He might be in the primaries if he doesn’t start tuning up.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:57 pmWe have now seen what the overly rich, overly paid and overly influential financial leaders can do to the nation. They were quite willing to drive the nation to the ground, without any remorse or apologies -and collect a bonus.
Why does anybody think that if a company spends big money developing a drug but during testing they find it kills too many of the subject they would never take it to market?
The facts are that they did and years later, after many more died, and someone sue them and they lost, they took the drug out. No need to mention names, there are too many of them.
Would government health workers do worse than that?
Here is a new one. Suppose they find a drug that they test on the marginally sick and otherwise strong and healthy and they survive for a long time. Will they attribute that to the drug or to the health of the subject?
Here is Part B. The US spends far more, even 10 times more, per capita, than any other nation yet, in longevity, the only accepted standard, we rank 17th or 18th in the world.
In 1945, Mexicans had a longevity under 50 years, in recent years they extended to within a three months of the US. Remember, most natives never see a doctor until they die.
Final example, the human race has grown in numbers and longevity all over the world for the last 150,000 years. Most people never see a college graduated medical doctor.
Actually, a century ago, most depended only on herbal cures.
Q. Do you think the number of people increases at a faster or slower rate than the number of pharmacies in the world?
The Punch Line.
We can now see what excessive Capitalism can do to financial systems, why do we think the same financial leaders would support companies that make less profits? Of course, they would not want to know the details, they just buy shares on the most profitable hospitals.
Did you know that there are over 100,000 medical errors per year in American Hospitals?
Yes, computers would save lives and money. Would an Insurance company want that? Or, would an early demiss be profitable?
Even if it were more costly, a Single Payer System would remove any profits in letting patients die. Of course, you and I know doctors with Ethical Values.
Yet, they have not Demanded a reduction on Hospital errors, not even to save money that could be used for better care.
Put it another way, we all know that the wealthy can buy the votes of politicians, that is why Pres. Obama is against Lobby groups and “revolving doors”, you think medical doctors, trained to accept death as a normal part of daily work are immune? Rhetorical, of course. We owe much to our own private doctors.
Being a Vietnam Vet, I am very happy and at ease to see my VA Doctors, I know they have no vested interest on any medicine or treatment and they prescribe whatever is best. I wish my fellow Americans had access to VA Hospitals.
March 28th, 2009 at 9:51 pmMax Baucus must be stopped by showing the American public who pays for his lunches. This man’s politics is not only dangerous, it is outdated. The American people voted for change and Mr. Baucus is the old business as usual. Hopefully, it won’t take long before the public sees this guy for what he is: a paid political operative for the health insurance industry. I pity the Montana residents who have five more years in which they have to endure this man’s backwards legislative agenda.
March 29th, 2009 at 12:49 amMax Baucus is wholly-tied to the Insurance Lobby. Instead of doing his job by ‘REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE’, he’s only looking out for his own interests. How do we know this? Well, just look at the STATS below. NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND would come to the conclusion Max Baucus has come to, that the GOP has come to.
Max Baucus, and the GOP, DO NOT have the American People’s best interest at heart. Nor is all their ‘hot air’ about supporting ‘business’ either. What they support are ‘corporate conglomerates’, not the very core of America’s small and mid-sized businesses.
Fax Max Baucus today and tell him he DEAD WRONG! (202)224-9412
Need to know EXACTLY why Max Baucus is DEAD WRONG?
READ IT AND WEEP, AMERICA.
HEALTH CARE SPENDING:
Health Care Spending U.S. 2007: $2.4 trillion. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2007: $7,900 per person. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2008: Expected to rise 6.9%, two times the rate of inflation. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2008: 4.3 times the amount of national defense. (California Health Care Foundation. Health Care Costs 101 — 2005. 02 March 2005)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2012: Projected to $3.1 trillion. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
Health Care Spending U.S. 2017: Projected to $4.3 trillion. (Keehan, S. et al. “Health Spending Projections Through 2017, Health Affairs Web Exclusive W146: 21 February 2008)
EMPLOYER-WORKER:
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Costs will overtake profits by the end of 2008. (McKinsey and Company. The McKinsey Quarterly Chart Focus Newsletter, “Will Health Benefit Costs Eclipse Profits,” September, 2004)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Increased 120% since 1999. Cumulative Inflation 44% and Cumulative Wage Growth 29% for same time period. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Increased, on average, four times faster than workers’ earnings since 1999. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2007: Increased 5.5% for small employers. Increased 6.8% for employer’s having less than 24 employees. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2007: $2,992. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: Increased 5.0%, two times the rate of inflation. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Employer Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: Family $12,700. Single person $4,700. Annual premiums for family-coverage significantly eclipsed the gross earnings for a full-time, minimum-wage worker who earns $10,712 annually. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S.: Increased 120% since 2000. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Out-of-Pocket Costs U.S.: Increased 115% since 2000. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: Increased 12% from 2007. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
Worker Health Insurance Premiums U.S. 2008: $3,400. (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Employee Health Benefits: 2008 Annual Survey. September 2008)
GDP STATISTICS:
GDP U.S. 2008: 17% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP U.S. 2017: Projected to 20% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP Switzerland: 109% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP Germany: 10.7% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP Canada: 9.7% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
GDP France: 9.5% (Pear, R., “U.S. Health Care Spending Reaches All-Time High: 15% of GDP.” The New York Times, 9 January 2004)
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:00 pmNeed more? Here ya go:
__________________________________
POLLING:
Feb. 2009: Grove Insight Opinion Research– Proposals to expand Medicare to all Americans as an alternative to private insurance are met with widespread approval by voters nationwide.
More than 6-in-10 (64%) support federal legislation to create this public health plan option.
__________________________________
Feb. 2009: New York Times/CBS News Poll– Americans are more likely today to embrace the idea of the government providing health insurance than they were 30 years ago.
59% say the government should provide national health insurance, including 49% who say such insurance should cover all medical problems.
__________________________________
Nov. 2008: Ballot initiative question in Massachusetts– ‘Should the representative from this district be instructed to support legislation creating a cost-effective single payer health insurance system that is available to all residents, and oppose laws penalizing those who fail to obtain health insurance?’… local ballot initiatives supporting single payer and opposing individual mandates passed by landslide margins in all ten legislative districts where they appeared.
With almost all precincts tallied, roughly 73% of 181,000 voters, in the ten districts, voted YES.
__________________________________
Apr. 2008: Quinnipiac Poll in PA, FL, OH– ‘Do you think it’s the government’s responsibility to make sure that everyone in the United States has adequate health-care, or don’t you think so?’
In Pennsylvania; Yes–> 65%. No–> 31%. NA/DK–> 4%.
__________________________________
Apr. 2008: Annals of Internal Medicine, Study of Physician Support of National Health Insurance– (Includes a comparison of 2002 and 2007 surveys.)
59% of them support government legislation to establish national health insurance, while 32% oppose it. and 9% are neutral.”
__________________________________
Dec. 2007: AP – Yahoo Poll– ‘Which comes closest to your view?’
34%–> The United States should continue the current health insurance system in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance.
65%–> The United States should adopt a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers.
2%–> Refused/Not Answered’
__________________________________
Dec. 2007: New Hampshire Medical Society, Survey of New Hampshire Physicians– Two thirds of New Hampshire physicians, including 81% of primary care clinicians, indicated they would favor a simplified payor system in which public funds, collected through taxes, were used to pay directly for services to meet the basic healthcare needs of all citizens.
__________________________________
May 2007: CNN/Opinion Research Poll– ‘Do you think the government should provide a national health insurance program for all Americans, even if this would require higher taxes?’
Yes–> 64%. No–> 35%. No opinion–> 2%.
__________________________________
Feb. 2007: New York Times/CBS News Poll– ‘Do you think the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans, or isn’t this the responsibility of the federal government?’
Guarantee–> 64%. Not responsibility–> 27%. DK/NA–> 9%.
‘If you had to choose, which do you think is more important for the country to do right now, maintain the tax cuts enacted in recent years or make sure all Americans have access to health care?’
Cutting taxes–> 18%. Access to health insurance–> 76%. Neither–> 1%. Both–> 2%. DK/NA–> 4%.
__________________________________
Feb. 2007: Minnesota Medicine Magazine, Poll of Minnesota 390 Physicians–
64% favored a single-payer system. 25% HSAs. 12% managed care.
The majority of physicians (86%) also agreed that it is the responsibility of society, through the government, to ensure that everyone has access to good medical care.’
__________________________________
Oct. 2005: The Harris Poll ‘Please indicate whether you support or oppose the policy’.‘–
Universal health insurance 75%–> Strongly/Somewhat Favor. 17%–> Strongly/Somewhat Oppose.
__________________________________
Oct. 2003: Washington Post/ABC News Poll– ‘Which would you prefer–> The current health insurance system in the United States, in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance; OR, a universal health insurance program, in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that’s run by the government and financed by taxpayers?’
Universal–> 62%. Current–> 33%. No opinion–> 6%.”
__________________________________
http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 pmStill not enough? Okie, dokie…
HARVARD STUDY LINKS BANKRUPTCY TO MEDICAL BILLS
http://www.amazon.com/tag/politics/forum/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg7?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1S3QSZRUL93V8&cdPage=7&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx21GBKQVVVTSKY
“FEBRUARY 3, 2005
PROFESSOR ELIZABETH WARREN, Leo Gottlieb Professor of Law, Harvard
Nearly half of all Americans who file for bankruptcy do so because of medical expenses, according to a new study released jointly by researchers at Harvard Law School and Harvard Medical School this week. The study, which is based on surveys of 1,771 individuals filing for bankruptcy, is the first of its kind to gather extensive information on the correlation between medical conditions and expenses and bankruptcy.
‘Both doctors and lawyers care about how health care is financed, but it was only when we put our heads together that we could probe further,’ explained Elizabeth Warren, professor of law and author of ‘The Two-Income Trap’. ‘We discovered that in 2004 about two million men, women and children were swept through the bankruptcy system in the fallout of a medical problem. Good educations, decent jobs, and health insurance were no guarantee that a person wouldn’t be wiped out by an illness or accident. We believe the current policy debates are overlooking a critical problem: A broken health care finance system is bankrupting middle class America.’
‘Our study is fairly shocking,’ explained Steffie Woolhandler, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, in an interview with the Chicago Tribune. ‘We found that, too often, private health insurance is an ‘umbrella that melts in the rain’.
The study, published in the journal Health Affairs, has been reported in stories in The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal (subscription required), the Chicago Tribune, and others. To learn more, read the full study online at Health Affairs.”
________________________
http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2005/02/03_bankruptcy.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9447-2005Feb8.html
Elizabeth Warren bio:
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:24 pmhttp://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/index.html?id=82
And, yes, there’s more…
MEDICAL BILLS LEADING CAUSE OF BANKRUPTCY, HARVARD STUDY FINDS
FEBRUARY 3, 2005
Illness and medical bills caused half of the 1,458,000 personal bankruptcies in 2001, according to a study published by the journal Health Affairs.
The study estimates that medical bankruptcies affect about 2 million Americans annually — counting debtors and their dependents, including about 700,000 children.
Surprisingly, most of those bankrupted by illness had health insurance. More than three-quarters were insured at the start of the bankrupting illness. However, 38 percent had lost coverage at least temporarily by the time they filed for bankruptcy.
Most of the medical bankruptcy filers were middle class; 56 percent owned a home and the same number had attended college. In many cases, illness forced breadwinners to take time off from work — losing income and job-based health insurance precisely when families needed it most.
Families in bankruptcy suffered many privations — 30 percent had a utility cut off and 61 percent went without needed medical care.
The research, carried out jointly by researchers at Harvard Law School and Harvard Medical School, is the first in-depth study of medical causes of bankruptcy. With the cooperation of bankruptcy judges in five Federal districts (in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Texas) they administered questionnaires to bankruptcy filers and reviewed their court records.
Dr. David Himmelstein, the lead author of the study and an Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard commented: ‘Unless you’re Bill Gates you’re just one serious illness away from bankruptcy. Most of the medically bankrupt were average Americans who happened to get sick.’
Today’s health insurance policies — with high deductibles, co-pays, and many exclusions — offer little protection during a serious illness. Uncovered medical bills averaged $13,460 for those with private insurance at the start of their illness. People with cancer had average medical debts of $35,878.
‘The paradox is that the costliest health system in the world performs so poorly. We waste one-third of every health care dollar on insurance bureaucracy and profits while two million people go bankrupt annually, and we leave 45 million uninsured,’ said Dr. Quentin Young, national coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program.
‘With national health insurance (’Medicare for All’), we could provide comprehensive, lifelong coverage to all Americans for the same amount we are spending now and end the cruelty of ruining families financially when they get sick.’”
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:34 pmHow about this? Just how does America, the greatest nation in the world, (according to all those GOP fascists), rank in the world?
WORLD RANKINGS:
1 France
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:37 pm2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
38 Slovenia
39 Cuba
Still not convinced? Try this…
Physicians for HR-676—->
‘Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP)’: Dr. Oliver Fein, President: (who was invited to President Obama’s Healthcare Summit along with Rep. John Conyers– who actually wrote HR-676 and of which the PNHP fully backs) http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php
‘The American Medical Students Association’: http://www.amsa.org/
‘The American College of Physicians’ (the 2nd largest group of physicians in the US): http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2007/12/24/gvsa1224.htm
‘The Annals of Internal Medicine’ (trade journal) poll: 59% of US physicians support legislation to support a single-payer national health insurance program: http://cdm-mcrp.blogspot.com/2008/04/majority-us-physicians-support-single.html
‘The California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee’: http://www.calnurses.org/legislative_advocacy/
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:43 pmAs if all the above is not enough, here is what LOCAL GOVERNMENT has to say about Single-Payer HR-676, which puts Max Baucus and his fascist GOP face-down in the dirt:
“THE U.S. CONFERENCE OF MAYORS
76th Annual Meeting
June 20-24, 2008
Miami
2008 ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE ACT (H.R. 676)
WHEREAS, every person deserves access to affordable quality health care; and
WHEREAS, the number of Americans without health insurance now exceeds 47 million; and
WHEREAS, millions with insurance have coverage so inadequate that a major illness would lead to financial ruin, and medical illness and bills contribute to one-half of all bankruptcies;and
WHEREAS, proposals for “consumer directed health care” would worsen this situation by penalizing the sick, discouraging prevention and saddling many working families with huge medical bills; and
WHEREAS, managed care and other market-based reforms have failed to contain health care costs, which now threaten the international competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers; and
WHEREAS, administrative waste stemming from our reliance on private insurers consumes one-third of private health spending while the single payer Medicare system has administrative costs of less than 5%; and
WHEREAS, U.S. hospitals spend 24.3% of their budgets on billing and administration while hospitals under Canada’s single payer system spend only 12.9%; and
WHEREAS, Harvard researchers estimate that more than $300 billion could be recovered by replacing private insurance companies with a single public payer, enough to cover the uninsured and to improve coverage for all those who now have only partial coverage; and
WHEREAS, entrusting care to profit-oriented firms diverts billions of dollars to outrageous incomes for CEOs and threatens the quality of care; and
WHEREAS, The United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676) would assure universal coverage of all medically necessary services, contain costs by slashing bureaucracy, protect the doctor patient relationship, assure patients a completely free choice of doctors, and allow physicians a free choice of practice settings; and
WHEREAS, most polls show that the majority of Americans support universal health care; and
WHEREAS, as of the date of this resolution, the majority of American physicians (59%) believe that Single Payer is the best method of securing universal health care; and
WHEREAS, The United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676) will guarantee every mayor that all residents and employees of his/her city will be fully covered for health care and save millions of taxpayer dollars now spent on premiums to provide less than full health insurance coverage for government employees; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the United States Conference of Mayors expresses its support for The United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676), and calls upon federal legislators to work towards its immediate enactment, and further urges the adoption of a process by which health care will be required to justify any increases to health care costs.”
http://www.usmayors.org/resolutions/76th_conference/chhs_03.asp
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:50 pmI am grateful to all the Mayors for having the courage and compassion to recognize the urgent need for HR-676 to be passed and enacted upon as soon as possible. When will the leaders deciding this issue listen to all of the people?
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:36 pm70% and more are in favor of a public health plan. It seems to me the question is not what anymore, but how do we now implement the program. How can americans be a proud nation when we rank 37 out of 39 in health among other nations?
As an 88 year old retired physician, and a member of physicians For A National Health Program, I feel that there is but one solution and that is universal, single payer health care, per Rep. Conyer’s HR 676 in the House or Sen. Bernie Sander’s bill in the Senate.
Sen. Baucus receives more in campaign contributions from the insurance (HMO) industry and pharmaceutical industry than any Senator save John McCain.
I have covered this 9in a series of articles on The Rag Blob.
April 7th, 2009 at 1:30 pm