Baucus health plan released

Analysis of the key issues-

Pre-existing conditions are eliminated. Okay, that's a no-brainer.

Businesses are not mandated to provide coverage but instead must defray the cost of its employees share. This seems to be a potential administrative nightmare for small businesses. I'll need to look into this very closely. Shouldn't reform make it easier on businesses? What is the encourage ment for them to join the co-ops?

Public Option is nixed- Instead Baucus proposes nonprofit consumer-owned cooperatives. This is a non-issue if they pay the contracted doctors a salary instead of on a fee-for-service basis and put LEAN processes in place. But, why do I have a nagging feeling that they'll get this wrong and set up EVERYTHING on a fee reimbursement basis? Fee reimbursement would only cause health care costs to skyrocket at an even faster pace than we've seen before?

Penalty for non-purchase of health insurance- The devil is in the details on this as I have to research how this will interplay with the non-profit coops. What are the eligibility standards for getting into the co-op insurance, for instance?

Republicans- Every indication appears that few Republicans will support the Baucus plan yet it offers numerous concessions and seriously waters down true reform. The fact that there is no business mandate but instread allows defraying of employee costs just seems ridiculous on its face and thus requires me to do a lot of digging.

As always, stay tuned-in and please provide your feedback to your legislators. I really believe the next three months will be the most important in congress since the mid-60's when we saw the Civil Rights Act and the Great Society legislation.
------- ------- -------- --------

Soure: Politico.com
Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) proposed an $856 billion plan Wednesday to overhaul the health care system, releasing a bill after months of bipartisan negotiations without any immediate Republican support.

The bill forces insurance companies to change the way they do business, such as prohibiting them from dropping or denying coverage based on preexisting conditions. To force competition with private insurers, Baucus chose creating nonprofit consumer-owned cooperatives over the public insurance option, which most Democrats prefer.
“This is a unique moment in history where we can finally reach an objective so many of us have sought for so long,” Baucus said in a statement. “We worked to build a balanced, common-sense package that ensures quality, affordable coverage and doesn’t add a dime to the deficit.”

The long-awaited bill sets off a battle over what could be the shape of a health reform deal that wins at least one or two Republicans votes in the Senate. By trying to add measures to appeal to some Democrats and some Republicans, Baucus has managed to upset all sides. But what he came up with could be viewed as the kind of balanced approach that threads the needle to achieve a final compromise.
None of the three Republicans involved in the bipartisan negotiations have signed onto the bill, saying there are outstanding issues that need to be resolved. But they said they would continue talking with Baucus and the other two Democrats in the so-called Gang of Six.
The lack of Republican support — at the outset, at least — suggests Democrats will need to make more concessions if they hope to produce a bipartisan bill. Otherwise, the Senate leadership may have to use a last-ditch procedural maneuver known as reconciliation to move the bill through the chamber with 51 votes.

The absence of Republicans could also damage President Barack Obama's efforts to convince Americans that his reform plan has broad support.

The Finance Committee markup is expected to begin Tuesday. Baucus will meet Thursday with the full committee, and amendments will be due Friday at 5 p.m.
The Baucus plan is a more conservative approach than those produced by three committees in the House and by the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, but it tracks closely with the concepts that Obama promoted in his speech to Congress last week. The bill is deficit neutral and fully paid for, and less costly than bills approved by other committees.

Baucus chose an alternative to the public insurance option – nongovernmental consumer cooperatives – to provide competition with private insurers.

The bill requires individuals to buy insurance, or else face penalties as high as $3,800 for a family. It would not mandate businesses to provide coverage for their employees – as the House bills do – but it would require them to defray the cost of any government subsidies for which their employees would qualify.
To pay for the overhaul, the legislation calls for imposing a 35 percent excise tax on high-end insurance plans, assessing fees on industry players, including device manufacturers, insurers and clinical laboratories, and making a series of tax code changes.
The bill expands Medicaid coverage to include adults whose incomes are 133 percent above the poverty line, and requires states to pick up more of the tab for the federal-state cost-sharing program. Government subsidies would be available to families between 100 percent and 300 percent of the poverty line to purchase insurance plans through a new marketplace known as an exchange.

For families with incomes 300 percent and 400 percent of poverty, their annual premiums would be capped at 13 percent of their income. It’s a level that Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) says is too high, but it would be less than the current average cost of a family insurance plan, which is $13,375, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), the likeliest Republican to support the bill, said she is waiting for cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, which she has not yet seen.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released a statement Tuesday that was silent on his ultimate decision, but the tone of his message does not bode well for Baucus’s hopes of bringing him on board.
He ticked off a long list of concerns, saying the bill “does not meet the shared goals for affordable, accessible health coverage,” and it does not resolve outstanding issues dealing with abortion and illegal immigration. He suggested the bill does not include his alternative proposal to the individual mandate, nor does it include stronger medical liability reform measures he had pushed.
“We’ve been clear from the start that we’re willing to stay at the table,” Grassley said. “There’s no reason not to keep working until we get it right. In the end, legislation that impacts every American should have strong bipartisan support.”