My problem with the bill is it doesn't solve pre-existing illness issues.  If you leave your employer you will be screwed.  Also, it doesn't have a way to fund the subsidies.

Obama has formed a committee to recommend cuts in spending, that means entitlements.  This thing is going to get cut before it gets started.  It's easier to cut a new program than social security or medicare.

Obama should of got the funding mechanism in place then went for the benefit.  Medicare for all is the cheapest and easiest system to implement.  Everyone that is working is already paying the tax, raise the tax.  If I am getting a benefit then I don't mind paying the fee.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 03/17/2010 10:21:34 PM EST

The bill does solve the pre-existing condition problem.  Any plan that operates on the exchange CANNOT do rescissions.  If you want to participate in the exchange, you have to follow the rules, and that is a mandatory requirement.  

But what about insurance outside the exchange - the plans employers buy for their full time employees?

First, one benefit of the bill that I haven't mentioned is that it requires employers to cover ALL employees - EVEN PART-TIMERS.  Right now, companies are scrambling to convert full timers to part time, so they don't have to pay for their health benefits.  This bill changes that - ALL employees must be covered or the employer pays a fine for each one.

But let's say the employer decides to pay the fine - it's cheaper than paying for coverage.  If your employer fails to offer coverage, you are now eligible to get insurance on the exchange.  NO DENIALS ARE ALLOWED.  You're covered.

What about paying for it?  CBO estimates that in 10 years, the bill will not only pay for itself, but will generate a $100 billion surplus.  And this is the case even if none of the future improvements to the current bill ever take place.

For people who don't get subsidies on the exchange, the government doesn't pay anything - it's still funded by premiums.

As for the increase in medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries, and the subsidies on the exchange, they're funded by cuts to medicare part D - the privatized supplemental program enacted by the Republicans during Bush.  This program has proven to be extremely wasteful, since it gives the money to private insurers who then run the program for-profit.

Huge savings also come from cutting administrative costs.  Private plans have 15%-18% administrative costs, while medicare boasts 3%.  

Finally, the surplus is money saved by giving people better preventative care throughout their life BEFORE they become eligible for medicare.  Right now, many people wait it out until they hit 65, and then dump the cost of cleaning up all their untreated illnesses onto medicare.  By insuring the uninsured or underinsured throughout their lives, medicare is no longer burdened with the cost of making up for illnesses that have gone untreated and the absence of preventative care.

by dotkommissar on 03/17/2010 10:46:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]

If the exchange gets all the rejects, then the average bill will be higher for participants.  First problem, most employers will dump people.  the fine is cheaper.  Second problem, those exchanges do not exist today.  Third problem, being in a good pool lowers the average cost, being in a bad pool raises the average cost.

CBO has only estimated. they have no idea what the response will be from employers in a dwindling economy.  Option 1, cover all your employees and lose money.  Option 2, cover none of your employees and make money.  timing is everything and this is not the time to dump an unfunded entitlement on America.

Instead, change the tax code, fund the program, implement the program.

 

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 03/17/2010 11:33:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]