Committee Dems Release Cheaper, Better Public Health Care Bill

Sen. Ted Kennedy's Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee released details of its plan Thursday to expand access to health insurance, create a public option that consumers could buy into and reduce health care costs over the long haul.

The Congressional Budget Office evaluated the proposed bill, estimating that it would cost slightly more than $600 billion over ten years, considerably less than earlier predictions. The CBO score was also released by the health committee Thursday.

A Medicaid expansion that is likely also be included in the overhaul is not part of the HELP committee's jurisdiction, but it could add several hundred billion dollars to the cost (that estimate doesn't account for potential savings.) The dollar amount also omits some other costs that come from areas outside the committee's jurisdiction, but it also doesn't rely on savings that are expected.

The overall cost is still looking to be roughly a trillion dollars over 10 years -- the target amount -- but the health committee bill shows that number is still possible while still providing accept to a public health care option to everybody.

An indication of the direction the committee took is given by the reaction of the reform lobby Health Care for America Now, which strongly backs a public health care option.

The health care reform lobby, Health Care For America Now, which strongly backs a public health care option, is pleased with the direction that the committee has taken.

"The HELP Committee's bill will give Americans all across this country what they want -- a choice of a strong public health insurance option that will provide lower costs and keep the insurance companies honest. The public health insurance option included in the HELP bill will be available on day one, giving Americans a new alternative to the private insurance industry. It will also encourage the delivery of better health care at a lower cost. The public health insurance option, combined with other key sections of the HELP Committee legislation, makes this bill a good prescription for health care reform. More specifically, the bill invests enough resources to make good, affordable health care available to middle-class families and includes strict rules to stop insurance company abuses," said Jacki Schechner, an HCAN spokeswoman, in a statement.

An earlier CBO score had spooked Democrats when came in higher than expected without providing substantially more coverage. And without a public option. The current bill, which does include the public option, is expected to cover to 97 percent of the population within ten years.

Story continues below

advertisement

"The original numbers were kind of crazy because they increased all the expenses without including any cost control," said economist Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "That wasn't a serious projection of the costs of the bill. Now this is taking a fuller look."

The cost is relatively small. "As a measure of the share of GDP that's less than four-tenths of one percent (.04) of GDP," he said of the $600 billion estimate. "It's not trivial but it's not huge in the grand scheme of things. The Iraq war was over 1 percent of GDP."

The committee on Wednesday released a set of documents providing background on the bill. The documents and the full bill are below. If you have thoughts on the proposal or anything jumps out at you, write to [e-mail].

The bill itself.

A letter from Kennedy and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), to colleagues, outlining the proposal.

A summary of the public option proposal.

Budget estimates.

An outline of employer responsibility, which a senior committee aide said is key to the bill's ability to reduce costs.

Jeff Muskus contributed reporting.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[weslenforever]

Here's one of the best articles on the health care debate I've read yet.

unknownnew­s.org/0906­-26CD.html

[steel71]

Lets get this eugenics agenda started. Government health care for all!!!

[jbarelli]

Somehow, the folks complaining that President Obama isn't pushing for a single-payer plan must have been asleep during the election. Either that, or they believed what the Republicans said about him, that he's really some sort of closet socialist, determined to eliminate private health insurance.

Like it or not, this is what he said he'd do. Make health insurance more available, with a public option to keep the private insurers honest, but not drive them out of business.

There was a candidate that advocated single-payer health care. No, not Hillary. It was Dennis Kucinich, and he lost, in spectacular fashion. Blame "corporate media" all you like, but he couldn't even manage to connect in the small, early caucuses. The voters have spoken.

People that want health care reform have two options. They can support the President, realizing that Senator Kennedy's plan is the best they're likely to get, or they can take their ball and go home, insuring that nothing will change. The latter is what the insurance companies want, because while the plan under consideration won't put them out of business, it will cut into profits.

The plan on the table isn't perfect, but it's better than the status quo. Folks need to decide which is more important. Ideological purity, or improving the health care system. A single-payer plan may be better than the current bill in every way but one.

That one deficiency is that it isn't going to get enacted any time soon.

[oldwhitewomantoo]

You are spot on correct on all points -- thank you for a cogent posting!

[tompoe]

If their plan is not single payer, it's useless. We need universal healthcare, and their plan excludes millions. Why are they not proposing a single payer plan? By the way, how much did the insurance industry pocket as profits last year? Was it billions? By George, I think it was.

[SamKnause]

I don't know any simpler way to say this to all of our elected officials, "The only acceptable choice for health care is single payer", period. We know what other countries have and that is what we want. We don't want any of your compromises. You have proven time and time again that you always side with the big corporations and insurance lobbyists. Only single payer will do.

[barkrudedog69]

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/newsandevents/news/6241.aspx

This is what you want?

[foreffectivegovernment]

Why would anyone trust Ted Kennedy to change Healthcare for the better after this?

Richard Nixon's explanation of HMOs. "… the less care they give them, the more money they make."
Transcript of taped conversation between President Richard Nixon and John D. Ehrlichman (1971) that led to the HMO act of 1973:
Ehrlichman: "Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for profit. And the reason that he can - the reason he can do it - I had Edgar Kaiser come in - talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because -"
President Nixon: [Unclear.]
Ehrlichman: " the less care they give them, the more money they make."
President Nixon: "Fine." [Unclear.]

This is how it was foisted on the American people.
In the Senate, (Ted) Kennedy, author of the HMO Act, also encouraged its passage: ``I have strongly advocated passage of legislation to assist the development of health maintenance organizations as a viable and competitive alternative to fee-for-service practice. This bill represents the first initiative by the Federal Government which attempts to come to grips directly with the problems of fragmentation and disorganization in the health care industry. I believe that the HMO is the best idea put forth so far for containing costs and improving the organization and the delivery of health-care services.''
Single-Payer is the only way to go!

[x004Ronin]

...
You do understand that "lower costs" = "deliver less care."
There's no way to increase the number of medical services a person consumes while decreasing costs, because services cost money.

The good news is that when you compare what we do to what people in France do, it's pretty clear that Americans are consuming too much healthcare. People with good health insurance consume too much because they can afford to. People with no health insurance avoid coming in for check-ups and preventative care, and so they only get treated when their medical problems worsen (and are therefore harder to fix).

[cuchulain]

Not true at all.

If we took private insurance out of the picture, we could reduce costs at least 3o% immediately. With one, non-profit insurer, we would have the power to reduce costs tremendously. Big Pharma jacks up prices to Americans more than any other country on earth. We pay several times as much for the same medicines. Medicare for all would have the ability to end that.

We can keep the same level of care and reduce prices dramatically, simply by going with a true Single Payer system. Medicare currently runs at 3% overhead, and they cover the sector of the population most in need of care. Private insurers, at best, come in at 30% overhead, and they have the most profitable pool of customers to choose from.

One of the biggest reason that they add unnecessary costs? Look at their salaries:

http://blogs.webmd.com/mad-about-medicine/2007/08/ceo-compensation-who-said-healthcare-is.html

Some examples:

# United Health Group
CEO: William W McGuire
2005: 124.8 mil
5-year: 342 mil

# Forest Labs
CEO: Howard Solomon
2005: 92.1 mil
5-year: 295 mil

# Caremark Rx
CEO: Edwin M Crawford
2005: 77.9 mil
5-year: 93.6 mil

# Abbott Lab
CEO: Miles White
2005: 26.2 mil
5-year: 25.8 mil

# Aetna
CEO: John Rowe
2005: 22.1 mil
5-year:57.8 mil

[Samalabear]

Send this to everyone you know. Petition to the three networks -- ABC, NBC and CBS -- to include single-payer coverage -- i.e. putting all the issues on the table:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/592/t/9039/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=1993

[littlechuckie]

It's only 175 pages double spaced with bold letters. Should be easy to read in acouple of hours and what the heck, have debate in the Senate. Wait, wait,,,,,, guess the repubs will not have time to read, so, FILIBUSTER - just say no.
Sure'd be nice to see a debate vs. all the crappy, unimformed discussion and 'news' stories.

[cruisepuppy7452a]

The public cannot buy what it cannot afford. Hello, we are in a depression as in people lost thier jobs, ability to pay for anything. How do they expect the public to afford healthcare if they cannot afford thier rent? I am starting to wonder here who the real Looney Tune is, Ted Kennedy, who once had a heart and a brain towards the public, or Obama for trying to force this down the public's throat. This is political suicide. Its not rocket science, they want affordable healthcare, end the damn war, get the troops home and out of harms way, take the money madoff stole, that Bush and Cheney stole from the public, freeze those assets and use them to pay for single payer. Gee, that would be a real affordable means wouldn't it. Duh, I refuse to back off any member of congress who is willing to go along with this totally crimminal healthcare reform bill forcing the public to accept what is NOT in thier best interest. TREASON.

[2garen]

You are right, single payer now.It is amazing how they tell us something is affordable or not. The example that comes to mind is the Drug option for Social Security. After the fact we were told it was going to cost 100s of billions more that was first thought.That was talked about in 2005 and how many talking points are talking about that now? This is the same plan that refused to let the Government negotiate with pharmas.
A friend of mine gets migranes. The pills cost 350 per one pill in the United States. The same pill costs 35 in Mexico. That is why the projected figures are biased and distorted. If we had single payer we could negotiate and get some of those costs to come down.Why does that pill cost 350 here and everywhere else it is cheaper? Explain it to all of us.

[Samalabear]

Here is a video during the Sebelius confirmation hearing. I believe she is asked about the cost of pharmaceuticals and she talks about Canada and the worry about re-importing the drugs from Canada and the bogus safety issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxpQpqNqBy0&feature=related

Of course, the whole thing is bogus. We wouldn't have to import drugs from Canada at all if we had single payer. Clearly what is happening here when U.S. citizens cross the border to get medications is they simply benefiting from Canada's single-payer health care. Common sense, folks. And what is this about that safety thing? That's also a rhetorical question.

[Lasnoe]

HMO's were Kennedy's idea..... Why do we allow people to keep making bad ideas and still stay in office?

[Jer1957]

How ironic.

The Obama Admin. health-care "reform" includes an emphasis on the elderly being refused (rationed) medical care or being pressured to sign directives limiting emergency care.

Did Obama ask the 76 year old terminal patient Sen. Kennedy to sign such a directive? Or will the arrogant president wait until after the "reform" is voted on to pull Ted's plug??

[jmpurser]

With all the REAL problems in this bill you STILL had to go and make something up.

[Jer1957]

You need to lose your fantasies about the Goldman Sachs-sponsored 'progressive' Obama. (Goldman Sachs is a major share-holder in several HMOs.)

He did his 'reform' speech in Green Bay because that is where the most concerted program of pressure on the elderly exists. And that of course saves HMOs $.

Criticize this phony progressiv­e--Obama--­not me. Euthanasia is not reform.

[cruisepuppy7452a]

Those advanced directives, ie, comfort measurers, DNR's, are nothing more than murder. They are not in the patients's best interest, its for the insurance companies to no longer have to pay for care for the sick and elderly. I bet none of you realizes, when you place mom and pop in nursing homes, the first thing they demand is proof of a DNR. Unless you have a durable power of atty to protect you, yes, they expect you to have a DNR. I would know as I worked for one of the homes in my state. Obama's bill does not protect you or your loved ones. This bill is nothing more than genocide. Hell, why not just say, ok, the short, brunette and heavy people do not apply. This bill is horrible and they know it. I would like to know when Obama sold us out and for how much? Lying to the public on such a serious matter is grounds for treason. This is a lot worse than the blue dress. It violates the oath of office he took. Impeach.

[Samalabear]

Here is a paragraph from something I stumbled upon a while back and would love to find this verified or debunked. I think LPAC is right-wing, but not sure. I try my best when I do research to find something that doesn't have a major axe to grind, as in party politics, but I'm sure everybody knows how difficult that can be. Here's the quote:

"Think we’re exaggerating? Take the case of a paper entitled “What Are the Potential Cost Savings from Legalizing Physician-Assisted Suicide?” It sounds like something that might have been written by Jeremy Bentham, or Aldous Huxley, or maybe Nazi doctor Karl Brandt, but it was actually co-authored in 1998 by “bio-ethicist” Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a leading advisor to Obama’s budget director Peter Orszag, and a member of the 15-person Federal Coordinating Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, the group which has been designated to prepare the list of which medical procedures will henceforth be permitted, and which will not. Emanuel’s co-author, Margaret Battin, has written other papers promoting suicide and selective refusal of medical treatment...."

http://www.global-elite.org/node/965.

[modwiz]

This HELP plan is complete crap. It raises my blood pressure just to read about it. It is the Massachusetts plan including the fine for non-compliance. More slop in the troughs for corporate pigs. I am disgusted with this plan and Sherrod Brown is is health industry lackey that just exposed himself by writing in the HuffPost telling us how wonderful it is. Lets have a beer party and guess who could be the potty?

[jmpurser]

This is exactly what the "public option" was always going to be. It's why those of us championing "Single Payer" have been so utterly unwilling to accept this as health care reform.

Let Bernie Sanders know is you support his efforts to bring us a Single Payer system now.
http://sanders.senate.gov/petitions/index.cfm?uid=7fd59f2e-88e1-477a-8eaf-762a5b050809

[Jer1957]

I agree.

And please note that the DOJ is targeting single-payer advocate (HR 676) Conyers and his family.

Given Obama's unflinching adherence to the Wall St bailout and cost-cutting agenda, it is unwise to trust anything the self-absorbed fool says.

He is for insurance premiums to be paid by all--the Romney /Massachusetts subsidy to HMOs-- not medical care for all.

Big difference.

[treetracker]

I've already commented on the whitehouse.gov site. This bill is garbage. It will do little to help the majority that are under insured under their employer based plans. Their companies will be subsidized for their share of the premium, which in effect subsidizes the insurance companies. And for the uninsured who will be able to get coverage (premium yet undetermined), they will have a 24% co-pay up to 7.5% (or more, depending on their plan) of their adjusted gross income. The poor will be subsidized. The rest will still face incredible bills. Meanwhile, for those of us on employer based plans, will not get the promised choice to opt for the public plan --- only our employers will be able to make that choice. And who gets paid the premium you ask? The insurance companies. The states will be the gatekeepers to get people into the "community health insurance option" - meaning an insurance company. Looks to me we should be getting the agency commission for pimping their policies. If this is the public option, it's not worth the paper it was written upon.

[Chaimirija]

BUMP

http://www.prwatch.org/node/8441

"Obama's false friends in health care reform"

[PaxEterna]

Kennedy is only concerned about Kennedy.

For a guy who has supposedly been working on health care for all Americans since he entered the Senate, this is a shabby, shameless bill.

He should - and does - know better. He should, at this late date, be leading the calls for SINGLE PAYER, the only solution that provides for everyone fairly and can be sustained over the long haul.

instead, we have some 685 pages of lousy thinking and deep compromises that WILL NOT HELP THE PEOPLE.

Why is he so weak when it comes to advocating for others what he enjoys at their expense?

Oh, I forgot, this is the way Kennedys operate. They are, um y'know, above us all.

[johnsonc20]

This was mean-spirited. The guy is dying and this bill is by far the most progressive of the options being offered by actual Senators. The health companies and the Republicans are right - offering the public option is creeping single-payer. The private companies won't be able to compete and will be relegated to the wealthy who can afford, and want, additional coverage beyond the public plan.

Be nice - and be smart.

[jmpurser]

It may have not been sugar coated but he's quite correct. We're not getting health care reform. We're getting a placebo who's main effect will be to force people to become customers of the parasitic insurance industry.

[jmpurser]

Get ready for a boat ride folks. We've been sold down the river. Single Payer is STILL the only real health care reform package that will make a real difference.

[Chaimirija]

not if the word gets out