Dems Finding Plenty To Dislike About Baucus Plan

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Dems Finding Plenty To Dislike About Baucus Plan stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

ERICA WERNER | 09/17/09 09:35 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., talks with reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 17, 2009, following a meeting with Democrats to discuss health care legislation. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

WASHINGTON — Unhappy Senate Democrats on Thursday found plenty to complain about in the fine print of the latest health overhaul bill, particularly a tax provision they fear would hit hard at middle-class Americans, from coal miners in West Virginia to firefighters in New York.

The opposition sprang up a day after Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., unveiled long-delayed legislation that would transform the nation's health care system, requiring almost everyone to buy insurance, making insurance companies cover people with pre-existing medical conditions and reining in spiraling health care costs.

The bill has given fresh momentum to President Barack Obama's top domestic priority of extending health coverage and controlling costs.

To pay for the 10-year, $856 billion bill Baucus wants to tax high-value insurance plans, those worth $21,000 for a family and $8,000 for an individual. Baucus says those are "Cadillac plans" enjoyed by a small minority of Americans. Aides said about 10 percent of plans and 8 percent of taxpayers could be affected.

But other Democratic senators fear that the tax would reach deep into middle-class pocketbooks, and labor unions are upset. Two Democrats on the Finance Committee, Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, along with other senators, say they want to limit the tax before signing off on the bill.

"We need to make it fairer to working people so that working folks don't get dragged into this at a level where they just don't have the incomes to support it," Kerry told reporters after a closed-door committee meeting to discuss the bill. The panel will begin voting on the bill Tuesday.

Rockefeller, who met privately with Obama on Wednesday, said the proposal "could prevent workers in high-risk professions from getting the health benefits that they need, particularly coal miners," a significant constituency in his state.

Insurers and business groups also oppose the new tax and other fees in the bill, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is wasting no time making its objections known. The chamber announced it will begin airing a new TV ad Friday in more than a dozen states lambasting "Washington politicians" who "want new taxes on health care companies – taxes that will get passed on to you."

Story continues below
advertisement

The insurance tax was one of several concerns raised Thursday by Democrats, forecasting contentious debate when Baucus' committee acts on the bill and during later votes in the Senate. Beyond the question of how the legislation would impact working-class Americans, liberal lawmakers are concerned about the absence of a new government-run insurance plan.

Instead of the so-called public plan, Baucus went with nonprofit cooperatives.

Although he failed in his monthslong quest to get Republican backing for his bill and now faces a host of Democratic concerns, Baucus defended his efforts Thursday.

"I don't think there will be any changes in the core provisions of the bill," Baucus said.

At a campaign-style rally at the University of Maryland on Thursday, Obama called reinventing health care a "defining struggle of this generation," though he barely mentioned Baucus' bill. For many of the students, after graduating they would be faced with the requirement to buy health insurance under the Baucus plan.

The high-value insurance plan tax, which Obama embraced in his speech to Congress last week, is a major source of revenue for Baucus' bill, bringing in an estimated $215 billion over 10 years.

If it's changed, Baucus would have to raise revenue elsewhere, which is not easy. Baucus and other supporters of the measure, including Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., say it would have the positive effect of driving down health care costs over the long term by encouraging companies to move toward cheaper health plans and workers to use less care.

Conrad, who was part of the six-member negotiating team Baucus led for months to try to reach consensus on a bill, said numerous health policy experts had advised that the tax was a good way to go. Baucus initially had supported taxing employer health benefits before he dropped the idea for political reasons; the idea was proposed during last year's presidential campaign by GOP nominee Sen. John McCain, and Obama campaigned against it.

The 35 percent tax levied on insurance plans is a different approach, though unions and employers contend it will end up being passed along to workers. Conrad acknowledged the criticism but said it was a necessary step.

"Does that create some pain? Yes, it does," Conrad said. "People want to see real pain, stay on the current course" – with health care costs rising unchecked, he said.

The House bills have no insurance plan excise tax and instead propose raising taxes on the highest-earners. The Senate's No. 2 Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois, said Thursday he thought that was a better way to go.

Kerry, who originally proposed the idea of taxing the high-value plans, said he would offer an amendment next week to raise the value of the plans being taxed to $24,000 for a family plan and $9,800 for an individual plan. He said this would make a difference in exempting some union plans and focusing the tax on wealthier workers.

The average cost of an insurance plan is around $14,000 for a family of four and $7,200 for an individual, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Several critics said the tax would disproportionately impact union retirees and workers, particularly in the manufacturing sector.

Also Thursday, the Obama administration announced $25 million in grants for states and health care systems to experiment with alternatives to costly medical malpractice lawsuits, an issue that long has divided Washington.

___

Associated Press writers Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Charles Babington in Washington and Matt Gouras in Montana contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Unhappy Senate Democrats on Thursday found plenty to complain about in the fine print of the latest health overhaul bill, particularly a tax provision they fear would hit hard at mi...
WASHINGTON — Unhappy Senate Democrats on Thursday found plenty to complain about in the fine print of the latest health overhaul bill, particularly a tax provision they fear would hit hard at mi...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
18
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- hollybork I'm a Fan of hollybork 64 fans permalink

I do not understand why Baucus and others have supported a provision to tax "cadillac" health plans when it has so many problems. Obama campaigned on financing national healthcare with an elimination of the Bush tax cuts, a tax on family incomes above $250k and a tax on excessive corporate pay and closing the loop hole on income derived from options trading and derivatives among the super super rich hedge fund managers. The middle class public will not be touched by these tax changes.

Why is Baucus doing this? He is trying to re design the wheel when the plan Obama promised us is viable and would have no negative impact on 95% of the population. That result is the most desirable to the greatest number of people.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:33 PM on 09/23/2009
photo

WYDEN-BENNETT = WHAT ALL AMERICANS NEED:

0BAMA="Cho­ice+Compet­ition+Port­ability" = Quality+Affordable Coverage+A­ccountabil­ity

Current 5 Bills now = Over 85% are legally prohibited from choosing a public option?

Wyden = “Free Choice Proposal” = Empower Consumers to make GOOD CHOICES

0BAMA often said = "You should get the same deal that members of Congress get"

Wyden = Universal coverage model like members of Congress+Fed employees

Private&Public Choices=Co­mpetition=­Lower Cost+Negotiate Fair Provider Pricing

An Internet Health Coverage Exchange so 100% of Americans (including the 180 Million with Employer Coverage) can simply Compare&Rank 1,300 Insurers+Medicare Public Option on Total Annual Cost, coverage, deductibles, co-pays, etc. Then make a choice! STRONGEST Medicare Public Option is HR 676 Medicare Choice OPTION!

If Medicare Public Option is ranked with the 1,300 Insurers by ANNUAL COST then Medicare will frequently be the Best Plan (Near Top in the Sorted List) so competition will be the key to having a market!

Put Consumer in the driver seat = Turn Tables on Insurers

Wyden+Bennett of Utah, Republican co-sponsor is not backing off from his support

Senator Bennett = he needs the choices and competition for the private sector

Wyden-Bennett Bill = Stabanow + Cantwell + Merkley on board

Insurers lower prices+increase coverage to compete =Best way to insure Innovation

Accountability= If insurer rips you off in Sept 2009 then Jan 2010, you CHANGE

INTERNET EXCHANGE =1,300 Insurers (ZIP state allowed)+Strongest Public Option

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 AM on 09/22/2009
photo

What is WR0NG with BAUCUS?

Puts Burden on Midd1e-C1ass

No Competition + No Public Option

Wrong on 1NCENTIVES + TAXES + PENALT1ES

Insurance Lobby = Baucus Bill ="status quo" for 180+ million without choices

Insurers = Call all the sh0ts because people don't have choices or accountability

Insurance model=Cherry p!ck hea1thy people and sending s!ck people to gov programs
1nhumane and 1ndefensible

Employers and insurers=Pa1s + Love Status Quo=1nsurer Profitable& employer agrees

But current bills = DO NOT give people the dea1 the President talked about

Increasing pool of customers by forcing purchase of coverage requires but no Competition to keep quality high and prices low

Baucus has it WRONG = Isolates 180 Million people have no Private+Public CHOICES

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 AM on 09/22/2009
- skatoolaki I'm a Fan of skatoolaki 89 fans permalink
photo

Wait...and please correct me if I'm wrong because this sort of thing tends to confuse me...their answer to fixing the uninsured Americans problem is by forcing them to have "mandatory insurance" and taxing those that are already working with insurance benefits? How does this solve anything? The insurance companies, in this for profit, naturally, are simply going to move any extra expenses onto the consumer's shoulders. How does this bill help the American people at all?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 PM on 09/21/2009
- hollybork I'm a Fan of hollybork 64 fans permalink

It doesn't help. It is a scam by the health insurance lobby. It cannot be allowed to go through. It is not what Obama promised us. The health insurers will own every one of us, lock, stock and barrel to the head if this goes through as Baucus has written it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:36 PM on 09/23/2009
photo

Two myths d!ed Wednesday with Baucus Bill making it more likely liberals will get REAL reform:

Myth 1. It's possible to reach a bipartisan deal on health care -not enough middle ground to split the difference. So the Democratic approach is the one.

Myth 2. That every significant Bill must first pass through Senate Finance Committee!

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/liberals-more-likely-to-get-way-on-health-care-2009-09-17?pagenumber=2

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 AM on 09/19/2009

At least they're raising the value of the plans being taxed so people who can't afford it won't have to pay for a level of insurance that they can't afford.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:38 AM on 09/18/2009
- janeycat I'm a Fan of janeycat 74 fans permalink
photo

this is discrimination against everyone.n­ow the fight starts in closed sessions.b­ut they will work it out,i just hope its to public option and something for everyone.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:59 PM on 09/17/2009
- tompoe I'm a Fan of tompoe 21 fans permalink

Interestingly, every single concern raised by these idiots that call themselves legislators goes away, if Single Payer is proposed. A whole lot of make-believe show and tell, at taxpayers' expense.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 PM on 09/17/2009
- einstein10 I'm a Fan of einstein10 43 fans permalink

Right! WHAT A WASTE OF TIME & MONEY!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:58 PM on 09/18/2009
- Tiff1977 I'm a Fan of Tiff1977 2 fans permalink

If they would only pull their collective heads out of their asses then they would see that single payer is the best and easiest option

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:45 PM on 09/18/2009
- hollybork I'm a Fan of hollybork 64 fans permalink

The public does not support single payer. There is, however, 76% of the public that support having a choice in whether to go with national health insurance or a private plan. That should not be ignored. The people want a choice.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:37 PM on 09/23/2009
- tompoe I'm a Fan of tompoe 21 fans permalink

Your claim that the public does not support single payer is nonsensical. We're the only country in the world that does not have some form of Single Payer health care system. Of those, 36 countries not only protect their citizens' right to health care, but they do so at a fraction of the cost of what we're paying for private insurance coverage. Worse, we provide our citizens with inferior health care compared to those 36 countries. Single Payer is all about choice, because a single payer relies on absolute choice of doctors to deliver the health care.

Do you now understand just how silly your claims are, hollybork?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 09/23/2009

"The average cost of an insurance plan is around $14,000 for a family of four and $7,200 for an individual, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce."

This is a form of discrimination against single adults who have no children.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 PM on 09/17/2009
- einstein10 I'm a Fan of einstein10 43 fans permalink

The cost is totally ridiculous for EVERYONE!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:59 PM on 09/18/2009
- Rickmud I'm a Fan of Rickmud 8 fans permalink

Yeah, wag the dog on steroids.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:21 PM on 09/18/2009

Why should an individual plan cost more than half as much as a family plan? The insurance companies are soaking single people worse than they are soaking married couples with children. They are able to do this because there is no organized lobby to speak out for single people.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 PM on 09/18/2009
- Tiff1977 I'm a Fan of Tiff1977 2 fans permalink

It is crap!! If you listen to progressive radio they will tell you that the Chamber of Commerce and the Better Buisiness Bureau are nothing more than a place that the parasitic corporations go to have "government backing" of their crap!! The BBB is the worst!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:51 PM on 09/18/2009
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect