[Medpatient]

Sen. Max Baucus unveils his healthcare overhaul plan

Baucus' proposal would require all Americans to get insurance, but it does not include a public option. Key Republicans reject the plan.
Sen. Max Baucus


Reporting from Washington - Amid fresh signs of tensions among Democrats over healthcare, a leading senator today released the last major proposal that Congress will consider as it attempts to refashion the American healthcare system, a $856-billion bill that includes a mix of sweeping new insurance regulations but no new government insurance plan.

The legislation from Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) fell short of his goal of charting a legislative course that could bring Republicans and Democrats together for the most ambitious overhaul of the health system since the 1960s.

Under the bill, nearly everyone would be required to get insurance or pay a penalty. But insurers, in turn, would not be able to deny coverage to people with preexisting medical conditions or to cancel policies after people got sick, as happens in the current system.

And the federal government would offer subsidies to help lower-income people buy coverage.

Three key GOP lawmakers who had been working with Baucus for months have rejected his bill, all but ensuring that any healthcare legislation that passes this year will win no more than one or two Republican votes.

There are also signs that Baucus' proposal faces trouble among liberal Democrats, who have demanded that Congress allow the government to offer health insurance plans to the public in competition with private insurers.

The completion of Baucus' bill marks the end of one phase of the healthcare debate in which senior congressional Democrats developed a series of three healthcare proposals -- one in the House and two in the Senate. Now, Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill will work to unify their party behind a final bill that could pass the House and Senate and make it to President Obama's desk.

Baucus today touted his plan as a road map for agreement.

"We worked to build a balanced, common-sense package that ensures quality, affordable coverage and doesn't add a dime to the deficit," the senator said. "Now we can finally pass legislation that will rein in healthcare costs and deliver quality, affordable care to the American people."

Few expect that will happen with much GOP support.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) blasted the Baucus bill. "Americans don't think a bigger role for government in healthcare would improve the system," he said. "Yet despite this, every proposal we've seen would lead to a vast expansion of the government's role in the healthcare system."

Many Democrats already believe that Baucus' bill does not have enough of a role for government, arguing that a government-sponsored health plan would be the best way to ensure that consumers who are not covered through work will be able to find an insurance plan they can afford.

Healthcare bills developed by senior House Democrats and by the Senate health committee both include provisions to create a so-called public option.

The Baucus bill instead would create of a series of private health insurance cooperatives, which Baucus and other centrist Democrats say could offer the same protections as a new government plan.

Other debates are flaring over how to penalize employers who do not provide coverage, how much aid the government should give to consumers to help them buy insurance and how to pay for the final package.

To help pay for his bill, Baucus is proposing a series of new excise tax on insurance plans worth more than $8,000 for singles and $21,000 for families, and new fees on insurers, drug makers, device makers and clinical labs.

In contrast, House Democrats rely heavily in their healthcare legislation on a new surtax on high-income taxpayers.

Despite some substantial differences with the other Democratic health bills, however, Baucus' proposal also underscores the broader consensus about how to revamp the nation's ailing health system to expand coverage and tackle rising costs.

The Baucus legislation -- like the other two Democratic health bills -- is designed to largely preserve the current system of employment-based health coverage.

Layered on top of that system, the legislation would create a series of highly regulated, state-based insurance marketplaces, or exchange, where millions of people who do not get coverage from their employer or from the government would be able to shop for insurance.

These people would be able to select from a range of plans offered by private insurers, as well as one potentially offered by a member-owned cooperative.

Like other legislation, the bill would also substantially expand eligibility for Medicaid, the 44-year-old state-federal health insurance program for the poor, which in some states currently covers only poor children and their families.

Under all the Democratic bills, Medicaid would be opened to all of America's poorest residents, regardless of their family status.

Provisions in Baucus' bill would also set up a series of new initiatives in Medicare to make that gargantuan federal program more efficient, including incentives for hospitals to reduce re-admissions and for doctors to do more to coordinate their patients' care.

These initiatives, though the least controversial parts of the healthcare legislation, are seen by many experts as crucial to reducing the growth in Medicare spending, which threatens to essentially bankrupt the program by 2017.

================================================== ========

All I can say is this guy is tripping. Mandate that people purchase health insurance or face fines. Well hell why don't we just go to a communistic government form as this would be a start.

[BrattonBasher]

This whole thing is a lesson in politics and $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. All this so-called bipartisanship and wrangling by the "gang of six", and not a single Republican is going to support this. Most of the Democrats are going to reject this too. If there is no public option, there is no reigning in the powerfull health insurance companies. And I agree, nobody should get fined for refusing to carry insurance.

[VooDoo Chile]

I'm now living in a fantasy world in which this bill is merely a prototype.

I'll be spending the next few days clicking my heels together, chanting, "There's no bill without a public option, there's no bill without a public option...."

In all seriousness, a huge portion of my generalized political optimism died today.

[BrattonBasher]

That 3 million dollars the health industry has donated to Baucus has reaped them HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[VooDoo Chile]

Yeah, for real. Of course, they wouldn't waste that 3 million if they weren't sure he'd come through for them in the end.

Excuse me while I projectile vomit.

BTW, did y'all happen to see Baucus complaining about a month ago about people bringing "the youtubes" to his town hall meeting? By "the youtubes," Mr. Baucus meant camera phones.

[superface13]

Every one of these scumball maggot sucking motherfuckers need to be voted out of office!!! EVERY ONE OF THEM!!!

[contract.dude]

Originally Posted by superface13

Every one of these scumball maggot sucking motherfuckers need to be voted out of office!!! EVERY ONE OF THEM!!!

yep, and some of them come up for re election soon

[LocalBud]

the gop has done nothing but argue since the election.
they act as if they had won.
the carl rove play book is in effect.
It would have been my desire that they would be humane and help fix
america.
but instead they disrupt, create problems, breed fear and encourage hatred.
And all that act that way should be ashamed...

now back to our regularly scheduled reality

[gopers]

Dorkhead Reid is looking like he may loose in Neveda!

[contract.dude]

Originally Posted by LocalBud

the gop has done nothing but argue since the election.
they act as if they had won.
the carl rove play book is in effect.
It would have been my desire that they would be humane and help fix
america.
but instead they disrupt, create problems, breed fear and encourage hatred.
And all that act that way should be ashamed...

now back to our regularly scheduled reality

um democrat pres, um democrat Congress, um democrat senate...

the democrats don't have all the democrats on board, that needs to be understood....

Republicans and democrats alike are asking questions that are valid.

[BrattonBasher]

Originally Posted by contract.dude

um democrat pres, um democrat Congress, um democrat senate...

the democrats don't have all the democrats on board, that needs to be understood....

Republicans and democrats alike are asking questions that are valid.

The Dems might disagree with details, but they are not trying to just KILL all the reform like the Repubs are. That much is clear. Feel free to point out any Republican proposal in this regard.

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by BrattonBasher

The Dems might disagree with details, but they are not trying to just KILL all the reform like the Repubs are. That much is clear. Feel free to point out any Republican proposal in this regard.

I think the Blue Dogs are trying to kill reform whilst making it look like they're not. That's the only explanation I can come up with for the Baucus bill.

But, yeah, the Republicans have contributed absolutely nothing to this conversation, aside from OMFG! IT"S TEH SOCIALISMS!!!!!!!!!!

[Medpatient]

Originally Posted by VooDoo Chile

I think the Blue Dogs are trying to kill reform whilst making it look like they're not. That's the only explanation I can come up with for the Baucus bill.

But, yeah, the Republicans have contributed absolutely nothing to this conversation, aside from OMFG! IT"S TEH SOCIALISMS!!!!!!!!!!

you hit the nail on the head with that one.

quick question.

Have the republicans supported anything obama has pledged so far.

[BrattonBasher]

Originally Posted by Medpatient

you hit the nail on the head with that one.

quick question.

Have the republicans supported anything obama has pledged so far.

Yes. When Obama said that Cheney and the CIA should not get investigated for torture, they agreed.

[Medpatient]

Originally Posted by BrattonBasher

Yes. When Obama said that Cheney and the CIA should not get investigated for torture, they agreed.

LOL well I guess we cant say that they arent bipartisan then LOL.

[gopers]

Originally Posted by BrattonBasher

The Dems might disagree with details, but they are not trying to just KILL all the reform like the Repubs are. That much is clear. Feel free to point out any Republican proposal in this regard.

Uh, I think that allowing insurance co's to cross state lines would be a good start. The tort reform is another, but that is a small portion of the overall cost. Letting companies create nationwide co-ops is another. But, one way of driving down cost is called preventative care. Go to this link and look at the leading causes of deaths amongst male and females. I see about almost half could be preveted.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005110.html

Originally Posted by Medpatient

you hit the nail on the head with that one.

quick question.

Have the republicans supported anything obama has pledged so far.

Yes, Afghanistan.

Originally Posted by BrattonBasher

Yes. When Obama said that Cheney and the CIA should not get investigated for torture, they agreed.

Thats because the skeletons in the closet have Dem. and Rep. labels on them.

Just wait until the justice department starts to dig a little harder. I'll bet anyone in here in the next 12 months, Obama pulls Holder over to side and shuts him down on that crusade.

Now off to work I go. Hi Ho

[contract.dude]

the Republican party does not agree with giving health care to everyone (as far as i know), why would they put out a bill supporting that course? that does not make since, why come up with a plan if they dont want it... the plan seams to say no.. don't it appear that way?

they all agreed on tarp and giving GM a second or was that a third bailout.. as a whole the bunch they agree on a lot of stuff.. they agreed at punishing the"you lie" dude.. um money for the wars.. um idk what else.. they also seam to be heading to giving the federal government a higher debt level also... you have to go look at there votes, some just present instead of yes or no though..

they agree on keeping tax cheats within their fold...A few of them are.
one group does not pay their taxes, they are protesting.. another group does not claim property, money or other assets and they called congressmen or senators..

[BrattonBasher]

Originally Posted by gopers

Uh, I think that allowing insurance co's to cross state lines would be a good start. The tort reform is another, but that is a small portion of the overall cost. Letting companies create nationwide co-ops is another. But, one way of driving down cost is called preventative care. Go to this link and look at the leading causes of deaths amongst male and females. I see about almost half could be preveted.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005110.html



Yes, Afghanistan.



Thats because the skeletons in the closet have Dem. and Rep. labels on them.

Just wait until the justice department starts to dig a little harder. I'll bet anyone in here in the next 12 months, Obama pulls Holder over to side and shuts him down on that crusade.

Now off to work I go. Hi Ho

Those are soundbites, not proposals. The insurance crossing State lines is a terrible idea because each State has their own insurance rules and regs. In Arizona and other States you have little or no oversight of these thieves, I mean insurance companies. Tort reform is NEEDED, but I have not heard specifics from the Repubs because it is considered taboo to work with the Dems.

And c'mon Gopers, my friend, don't buy the Nancy Pelosi talking point about knowing about torture!!! Torture was illegal, immoral, and was perpetrated by Cheney, Bush, and their yes-men at the Office Of Legal Council. It is not going to "lead to Democrats"!!! Just come to grips that some evil men ran our country for eight years. Bush NEVER worked with or consulted with democrats on any issue, let alone torture!

[contract.dude]

looks like they agree on acorn

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 718 (Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined)
H R 3221 RECORDED VOTE 17-Sep-2009 2:06 PM
QUESTION: On Motion to Recommit with Instructions
BILL TITLE: Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009
Ayes Noes PRES NV
Democratic 172 75 2 6
Republican 173 5
Independent
TOTALS 345 75 2 11

Originally Posted by VooDoo Chile

In all seriousness, a huge portion of my generalized political optimism died today.

It's about time...

[contract.dude]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_290639.html

not sure if this is a news site..could be propaganda.

Baucus Bill Sticks To Pharma Deal That Supposedly Wasn't Struck


Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_290639.html

The bill unveiled by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has been blasted as a major giveaway to insurance companies. But the even bigger winners are the drug makers.

That's because the Baucus bill matches up, nearly to the letter, with the secret deal that he, the White House and Big Pharma struck over the summer -- a deal the various parties roundly denied had been struck when it went public. I don't believe it.. this is not true!

In August, the Huffington Post published a memo that outlined exactly what each side was going to do for the other. And Big Pharma was getting a lot more than they were giving up. Probably from the birthers

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America senior vice president Ken Johnson said that the outline "is simply not accurate." White House spokesman Reid Cherlin concurred: "This memo isn't accurate and does not reflect the agreement with the drug companies."

But now that the bill is out, let's fact check those denials. thats not a good idea..

1) The memo said that PhRMA would "[a]gree to increase of Medicaid rebate from 15.1 - 23.1%".

The finance bill, on page 56, increases the Medicaid rebates for patented drugs from 15.1 to 23.1 percent.

Check.
Story continues below

2) The memo said that the parties had agreed "to get FOBs done." FOBs refer to follow-on biologic drugs - vaccines and other drugs made from living cells that are the fastest growing field of pharmaceutical research.

PhRMA wants extended patent protections from generic biologic drug makers. A finance committee aide said that the Baucus bill doesn't address biologics, leaving that to the Senate health committee's bill. The health committee bill gives drug makers 12 years of market exclusivity -- five more than the White House proposed -- and allows a 12-year extension with a minor tweak to the drug. The protection is worth billions to drug makers and is entirely unnecessary to encourage research, according to the Federal Trade Commission, which recommended zero years of market exclusivity.

"Already biologics take up at least 30% of Medicare part B spending and this proposal has been rolled into the overall health care reform bill, which is meant create cost savings, which it will not do," Jane Andrews, a medical student at the Johns Hopkins University and a member of Universities Allied for Essential Medicines, wrote in an e-mail to HuffPost. "It's simply a giveaway to BIO/PhRMA from Congress supported by the American Association of Universities."

Check (more or less.)

3) PhRMA agreed to "Sell drugs to patients in the donut hole at 50% discount." This one's not in dispute: All parties had previously announced that this was part of the deal. There it is on page 124.

Check.

4) "Companies will be assessed a tax or fee that will score at $12 billion. There was no agreement as to how or on what this tax/fee will be based."

Here the memo is off.

The $12 billion, stretched over 10 years, would have amounted to a tax of $1.2 billion per year. Instead, the Baucus bill hits Big Pharma with nearly double that -- a $2.3 billion annual fee, according to page 216 of the bill -- but they still did much better than industry counterparts who didn't reach a deal with the White House. Health insurers got hit with $6 billion in annual fees in the bill, and medical device makers got dinged for $4 billion a year.

The memo also listed four things the committee and the White House agreed to keep out of the bill.

1) Drug makers wanted Baucus and the White House to block Democratic efforts to allow cheaper drugs to be shipped in from Canada. There's nothing in the finance bill that allows that.

Check.

2) Some Democrats wanted PhRMA to give the federal government rebates for what it considered past excess charges; the memo says the White House agreed to oppose those rebates, and the bill doesn't include any.

Check.

3) As agreed, the bill does not overturn a GOP law -- pushed originally by chief pharmaceutical lobbyist Billy Tauzin, when he was in Congress -- that bans the government from negotiating for cheaper prescription drug prices.

Check.

4) Democrats wanted to shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Part D, a move PhRMA opposed because it would reduce reimbursement rates. The administration agreed not to include that provision, according to the memo, and it's not in the Baucus bill.

Check.

PhRMA's Johnson told HuffPost in an e-mail that the deal should be abided by and should not exceed the agreed-upon $80 billion price tag. After running circles around the health care industry competition, he's earned the ink for the full quote:

Our unprecedented agreement to provide $80 billion in health care savings will provide immediate relief for seniors and disabled Americans who hit the coverage gap, cutting their out-of-pocket costs in half. That's a huge commitment which will force our companies to make some very tough choices moving forward. With the economic recession and ongoing challenges of discovering and developing new life-saving medicines, they are already feeling immense financial pressures.


The idea that you can squeeze more and more out of our industry without consequences is seriously flawed and short sighted. Squeeze too hard and you run the risk of catastrophic job losses in a fragile economy and driving critically-important research and development overseas. We have analyzed this very closely. If our contribution to health care reform exceeds $80 billion, as some critics today suggest, you reach a point where you risk sacrificing someone's job for someone else's health insurance. How does that make things better?

For health care reform to be successful, we agree that there must be a shared sacrifice. Yes, saving money is important but so is saving lives.

Jeff Muskus contributed reporting

lets get this guy and report this website for spreading lies!!!!!

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_290639.html

sigh.. what is acceptable anymore

[VooDoo Chile]

IMHO, the Baucus bill is completely unacceptable.