The Senate Finance Committee approved a bill to overhaul how we administer and pay for health coverage. Here’s what’s in the bill, where it’s headed, and the consequences for businesses and individuals.
Who’s covered: An estimated 94 percent of Americans. Illegal immigrants would not receive government benefits.
Cost: $829 billion over 10 years.
How it would be funded:
- A fee on employers whose workers receive government subsidies to help them pay premiums.
- Fees on insurance companies, drugmakers, medical-device manufacturers.
- A tax on insurance companies amounting to 40% of total premiums paid on plans costing more than $8,000 annually for individuals and $21,000 for families.
- Cuts in Medicare and Medicaid.
- Fines on people who don’t purchase coverage.
Requirements and costs for individuals: Except for a few hardship exemptions, everyone would have to get coverage through an employer, individually or some type of subsidized plan. Individuals and families would pay no more than 8% of their income in premiums.
Mandates on the insurance industry:
- No denials or higher premiums based on preexisting conditions or gender, but some increases in premiums will be allowed based on age and family size.
- Limits on allowable copays and deductibles.
The Senate plan drops the so-called public option — the government-run alternative to private insurance.
The chronology of where it’s headed
- Members of the Finance Committee will meet with the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which also presented a bill earlier. The two sides will hash out a compromise.
- A floor debate will take place in the Senate the week of Oct. 26, when amendments will be proposed.
- The Congressional Budget Office will report on the finance effects of the bill.
- If the bill passes in the full Senate, there will be a conference committee with members of the House, who have their own bill and likely will seek a compromise.
- The Senate and House would then vote on the final bill and send it to the White House.
- Expected deadline: probably early December.
BusinessBrief.com delivers the latest business news once a week to the inboxes of over 180,000 executives.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to BusinessBrief!
advertisement
Tags: health, House, Medicaid, Medicare, public option, Senate
October 15th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
The bill is crap and needs to include real cost saving measures. How about tort reform for a start.
October 15th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Ahhhh, no, this article isn’t accurate. There is no bill! What the comittee agreed on is that there should be one. They went into conference with Rahm Emanual yesterday (Wednesday) to see if they could combine the two bills in consideration into one. Therefore there can be no estimates of what it will cost or what the provisions are. You are doing your readers and the counrty a great disservice by continuing this farce.
October 15th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
President Obama and government need to stay out of our lives and business and focus on cleaning up their own house. I don’t want government to decide what I need. Go back to Chicago Obama and leave us alone to make our own decisions.
October 15th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Gary:
In fact, what is before the Senate does meet the definition of a “bill” (which of course is a proposal for a law). Your own words verify that: “They went into conference with Rahm Emanual yesterday (Wednesday) to see if they could combine the two bills in consideration into one.” One of the “two bills” to which you refer is the one cited in the story. And in fact the Finance Committee has put a price tag on the bill — though of course that’s open to debate. We’re just reporting the figure the Finance Committee provided.
Jim Giuliano
Managing Editor
BusinessBrief.com
October 15th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
I thought the idea was to make health care more affordable and better. From what I hearing it will cost more. Congress is the same as it has been for years they cant get nothing done for fighting
with each other. I think everyone in congress should have the same pay and health care coverge
as your average american worker. I heard on the news this morning that wall street is back to its games 140 billion paid out in bonuses this year. Can nothing be done about this ?. Do we have anyone in congress that cares about this county and the american people if so then do something good that will help us. One more thing the credit card companies told everyone in congress they need more time to prepare before the new rules come out and you all agreed so they used this to raise everyones rates. Can nothing be done about this ? .
October 15th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Jim, Thanks for the response. I do question any ‘findings’ though on a bill where the provisions are still in flux and where even a slight wording change can change the cost by many millions of dollars. This entire process has been very ‘loosey goosey’. Nailing this administration down on anything is like trying to nail down jello.
I’ll wait until there is agreement on the final terms of the bill, and the final wording before I even will consider any of the CBO budget estimates. I think you should too. The public, and your readers need to know the unvarnished truth, and the truth is that there is nothing to report or price yet.
October 15th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
How do you fine someone without a job (payroll deduction) and who refuses to pay for insurance? Also, if someone is self employed, does this tax them if they do not provide insurance for themselves? If they have one or several employees, is the employer or the employee taxed if there is not insurance provided?
October 15th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Washington needs to quit trying to solve the so-called health care crisis. The only crisis is Washington is already doing more than it can afford, and thereby increasing cost to everyone. Free anything is used poorly, free health care, housing, food stamps, etc. Help, which will always be needed by some on occasion, should be voluntary and local. Mandated assistance led by dislocated government desk-jockeys will not qualify, quantify or meet the need at hand, nor be efficient in whatever it does. Imprudent use of mandated extractions of earnings (taxes) by the government, which propagates poor behaviors in the recipients thereof, is not remotely similar to the ‘Robin Hood’ symbolism many want to attribute to such. Our government is not restoring what was “taken through taxation” from the poor common person, but taking from the productive to give to the unproductive. Charity is a great virtue, but true charity is more than mere giving to others deemed less fortunate, but involves willfully offering “what is lacking” to thereby empower the less fortunate to improve their own status. I have spent over 15 years in HR field, and routinely reject the notion offered by some applicants: “Just give me a chance!” I clarify by stating I offer no chances, only opportunity. Difference: Chance is like pitching dice, the results is not based on personal input. Opportunity is what ones makes of it. We need to stop federally mandating unending chances for housing, food, health care, etc. Offer an opportunity, and let them live with the results. If they chose poorly, they will learn to do better with the next opportunity they find.
October 15th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
I pay $230 a month for a health savings account for a healthy family of four. I better not be paying over $2760 a year after this bill passes. Can you imagine that insurance companies actually charge people $21,000 a year!
A good bill would contain tort reform.
I vote that EVERYONE in this country pay some tax too. How come 50% of us are paying taxes and the other 50% are not?????
October 15th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
If we are to reform health care and insurance in this country to make it affordable and accessible to ALL American citizens, then lets do it! I say universal health coverage! Call it solcialized medicine if you want or any other derrogatory, BUT it makes perfect sense. Everyone will be treated as equals in regard to health care. We have enough inequalities and disparrities between the working class and the wealthy, healthcare should not be put into that catagory of social class.
October 15th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Question. This says nothing about raising taxes to fund the program. True?
October 15th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
This amounts to insurance reform not healthcare reform and while there is little doubt that health insurance could use reforming the basic problem is cost. We spend 50% more in real terms than any other industrialized country for a system that is in the middle to bottom of the peer group in terms of outcomes. Solve the cost problem and coverage problem becomes infinitely easier to manage.
Unfortunately you can’t legislate your way out of a problem that you legislated your way into. The only way to get inefficiency out of the healthcare system is to let the free markets back in. A functioning market cannot exist in an information vacuum. By all means pout in a safety net payment system, then mandate transparency of pricing and quality information from providers and drug companies, remove the artifical restrictions on competition (like the prohibition against the practice of corporate medicine in Texas), remove the unfunded mandates that distort the free market (like EMTALA), and then get out of the way. The “system” will fix itself.
October 15th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
How’s that “Hope and Change” working out for everyone?
October 15th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
I spotted three errors in the first two paragraphs. This was not a bill; it was a health care plan put to a vote before the Senate Finance Committee. Illegal immigrant US residency status would not be checked at point of service; therefore, they might indeed receive government benefits. There is no way this plan will cost less than $1 trillion over 10 years, and only then if funded by ENORMOUS tax increases to the middle class in addition to increasing the tax burden on the wealthiest. I don’t think I’ll bother reading the rest of the so-called article.
October 15th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Rosanne, If we were to provide “universal health care for everyone” as you propose, then it becomes a ‘right’ of every citizen. I contend that it can’t be your ‘right’ if it creates an obligation for me. Imagine if you will babies being born; do you slap half of them on the butt and declare they have the right to free healthcare, and slap the other half in the face and tell them that providing the ‘free’ health care is going to be their obligation?
Rights are things that don’t directly create an obligation for someone else. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness can be rights. Health care, by my definition, cannot be.
October 15th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Andrew, hear hear!! “Solve the cost problem and the coverage problem becomes infinitely easier to manage”. This bill does nothing to reduce the actual costs of health care which I believe to be primarily due to overconsumption and malpractice insurance costs. Introduce tort reform; give people the chance to choose the level of insurance they need, instead of the tiny palette offered by their employer (if they have one); remove the hidden subsidies to Medicare/Medicaid; and abolish the mandates for emergency room freebies for uninsured. Then costs have a shot at coming down. This bill will only increase consumption, snarl the system even further, and soon require even more legislative intervention to correct/adjust/bail out. Remember the bread lines in the centrally planned economy of the old USSR?
And while we’re at it, why fine someone for not buying insurance? In the real world the penalty for not buying insurance is having to foot the costs if you need care. That should be incentive enough for most. Do we really need the Feds checking into our health care choices?
October 15th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
At least some of you must have voted for this Guy. Wake up! You’ve elected a Communist/Socialist nutcake surrounded by his cronies. What else would you expect? Maybe recognition by the SPCA?
October 15th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Smoke & Mirrors. A useful article must do more than report the superficial talking points from the advocates.
Bill really kicks in after next Presidential election. Smart move.
Revenue benefits kick in years before the costs start making it through. Look at the deficit expectations for the second ten years.
Several behind the scenes issues on illegals, in or out. One is constituional requirement that may mandate coverage, another is anticipating that step two is converting millions from illegal to legal status as the President has suggested, third is no identification requirement to verify legality or not. What is the hidden cost of this?
Cost is covered by reduction of billions in medicare outlays to be figured out later. Entitlements today in exchange for a promise of what some future congress will do. That is an empty promise. Wimpy said to Popeye, ” I would be glad to pay you on Tuesday for a hamburger today” Even as kids watching cartoons, we knew where that led.
All appears to be strategic as a Trojan Horse toward a public option, as a Trojan Horse into a single payor system. Control and parlay to political supporters the financial system, the auto business, the insurance business, healthcare, energy . . . could this be a pattern? Where might is be intended to take us?
Oh yeah, from where are the doctors to serve the new patients to appear? Especially when the incentives seem to be for the existing healthcare providers to cut back or go home.
Shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the economics. Other commenters have said it well.
The problem is spiriling cost and the proposed solution is all about adding customers, higher benefits, and increasing services with costs to be borne by others. Smoke and mirrors.
October 15th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
2 comments: 1. Tort reform will not reduce health care costs by any appreciable amount. The problem is fee-for-service medicine that incentivises doctors to do more and more. 2. Gary doesn’t believe that he has an “obligation” to help anyone less fortunate. A society with that attitude will not last very long. I was one of the last of the draftees, obligated to serve two years so that young men in higher income brackets could go to school and get on with their careers. What I learned is that you take care of the guy next to you and don’t leave anyone behind.
October 15th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Only in Congress can you spend $879B on the conservative end and call it cost savings. Congress needs to open the insurance market so that you can buy health insurance across state lines and develop tort reform so malpractice premiums come down.
October 15th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
As a self-employed individual I had to pay exorbitantly high premiums every month for health insurance with high deductibles and co-pays, even though I was healthy. Last year I was thrilled to turn 65 and become eligible for Medicare. Medicare has been an amazing cost-savings to me and provides a lot more benefits than my private insurer. I still get to choose the same doctors and hospitals.
Medicare works and has proven itself for decades. Oh, did I mention that Medicare is a GOVERNMENT RUN program! We all need more not less government run programs in our lives. Remove the profit motive from the calculus and the rest of us are all better off. It’s that simple!
October 16th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Government is THE primary reason that med costs are so high in the first place!
Let’s look at drugs for a starter. Thanks to your government, in the form of FDA regulations, it now costs over $800,000,000 (that’s 800 million dollars) and takes 12+ years, to get a new drug approved.
Yet we are supposed to believe that this same bloated bureaucratic government is going to fix health care?!
How many people do you think die during that 12 year approval process, waiting for that life saving drug to be approved? And how many drugs for “minor diseases’” never are made available to the public because of the cost?
Oh, by the way, did you see where the FDA is now claiming that Cheerios is a drug and subject to FDA control? Yep, your tax money at work!
Tax those nasty corporations to pay for this program!
Just one little problem with that approach, … Corporations do NOT pay taxes! Taxes are just one more business expense that must be covered in their product pricing. Add a tax and you add to the price the consumer pays. ALL taxes are paid by the end consumer.
The Bad News, however, is that Foreign companies won’t have this added tax.
Adding a corporate tax simply makes U.S. companies that much less competitive. Gee. I wonder why everyone’s “going offshore” for their production?
October 16th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Would you like a case study on government controlled health care, right here in the USA? How about the VA? Just ask a veteran about the delays, and the quality of care. Two month wait for an “emergency cat scan,” is a typical example. And just how often do you hear about someone choosing the VA because they wanted the very best doctors?
BTW, the American Indians have been on a socialized healthcare plan for decades. Check out their results sometime.
And, oh by the way, aren’t these the same guys that ran Freddy-Mac and Fanny-Mae? At least that turned out well. And, Just a note: the Department of Energy was set up under Jimmy Carter to “reduce our dependence on foreign oil”. We now spend 25 BILLION dollars per year on this one department which maintains 115,000 employees. Have you seen any oil independence yet?
What about the long term Quality of Health Care?
In a capitalistic society, the people decide the value of a product or service with their “dollar votes”. You can think of capitalism as economic democracy. The best products get more “votes” and therefore can increase price or sell more products.
In the medical field, the very best doctors typically charge the highest fees. This fact, of course, incentises other doctors to become the “best”. Take away this incentive, i.e. with socialized medicine, and mediocrity pays the same as excellence. Now there’s a proven incentive system!
Which doctor will I get?
So what, exactly, will decide which doctor you get when the price that a doctor can charge is set by the government?
You got it, … POLITICS will decide.
Are you an active supporter of the correct politicians? No? Then you get the new green doctor, fresh out of medical school, or the one that doesn’t speak English, or ….
As every socialistic society has proven, time and again, some people are “more equal” than others.
October 16th, 2009 at 10:40 am
I wonder how much Will Creed will like his Medicare after Obama has gutted it by taking 500 billion from Medicare to pay for coverage for all of the breeders and slackers? And Ted Bean, I’m not without compassion, and neither are most Americans. In fact, Americans donated over 300 billion dollars last year to charity. The difference however is when the government takes money from you and I and redistributes it as they see fit. That’s pandering. That’s buying votes. And they are buying the votes of people who aren’t like you and me. They will simply continue to vote for whoever promises them the most out of the treasury.
When it is charity, I get to direct my money to causes and people I wish to help. And the majority of my money gets to those causes and people. When the government gets involved, there is graft and corruption, the ‘middle man’, the government ‘absorbs’ much of the money, and they give it to many who I consider completely undeserving. I’m good with providing a safety net, but many of the people on assistence have made that safety net into a hammock.
October 16th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
It is very simple…. really the money you earn is really yours…..no really…..when you get paid just empty your wallet and the goverment will tell you how it will be distributed.
October 16th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Of course that is after they get their share……….
October 16th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Yes, someone does pay over $21,000/year in health care premiums. Between my employer and myself, I pay $20,300 per year, of which I personally have to pay $9,200 out of my paycheck to cover myself and my husband. We each have a $2,000 annual deductible also, plus annual deductibles for medication before the plan kicks in anything. Our premiums have risen an average of 24% per year and are scheduled to increase in April, 2010. Yes, something needs to be done to keep health insurance premiums in line with the rest of the sinking economy. As for credit cards, I don’t know how in the world they are losing money when they charge 29.99% interest rate as Chase is charging me. I’ll never be out of debt at that rate unless I win the lottery. I’ll be working until I get fired for loss of memory or Alzheimer’s Disease sets in.
October 16th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
To Beth Sanders, I can certainly imagine that insurance companies charge over $21,000 per year. I pay it. My policy costs about $27,000 per year. My “Cadillac plan”? – no dental or glasses, and limited prescription coverage. My covered family is just my wife and I and we are pretty healthy. Why is my plan so “Cadillac” expensive but not so much in benefits? I am 64 and my wife is 62. Unfortunately, any public options will take place after I and maybe my wife are covered by Medicare.
While I’m absolutely for healthcare improvements, I get alarmed when the talk is always about taxing the “Cadillac” plans which would raise my insurance even further! Sometimes the premiums aren’t for exotic benefits but because of age.
Regarding having the government decide on my healthcare options, I can’t help but think an unfeeling bureaucrat might still be better than a profit greedy insurance company.
Before I’m flamed for being a Communist, let me just say I own a small (just me – trying to be for profit) business.
October 18th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Roseanne: Too many disparities between rich and poor??? In other words, you want this country to become communistic, wherein (theoretically only) all people would be equal in pay and living conditions regardless of what they put into the system? Whether they work or not? Come on, you can’t just pick health care coverage…go all the way like Obamadolf wants you to. Why stop at healthcare? I sure want a private jet, a maid, an in-ground pool, no mortgage, etc. etc. (sarcasm intended)
October 18th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Chris Hall: It definitely says a 40% !!!!! tax on insurance companies. What will that do? It will put insurance companies out of business, because their profit isn’t even 40%. Can you do the math? It definitely says a fine (read TAX) will be mandated on those that don’t join up, whether you have the money or not, which is probably the reason those that don’t have insurance don’t have it–no money–can’t afford it. How will they afford a $3,000 fine????
October 18th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Ted Bean: “Less fortunate”???? or Lazy, good-for-nothing, dropping out of school, making bad life choices, doesn’t want to work??? No consequences for them, Ted? We should all just pick up the slack for the slack-minded? I don’t think so. Yes, there are always some people who have bad fortune, accidents, etc. This is not who I am talking about. As for tort reform: Do you really think that letting all these greedy lawyers sue for millions of dollars because someone was stupid enough to put a scalding hot cup of coffee between her legs? Really? And how do you think the premiums for medical insurance are figured out? By how many people are suing you for so-called ‘malpractice’ leading doctors to request more and more tests for every little thing, which raises costs for claims. How about going after so-called ‘non-profit’ hospitals who charge you $10 for a bandaid or an aspirin?? How about insurance companies auditing hospital bills and asking the patients who supposedly received those services if in fact they really did receive those services??? That would cut down on the fraudulent charges. Why isn’t the so-called health reform plan checking into these things instead of mandating buying insurance or facing a stiff fine and/or going to jail for it? Ridiculous!!
October 18th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Will Creed: Except that Medicare (and Social Security) are and have been in trouble for years. Notice how a lot of doctors won’t accept Medicare or Medicaid because they know their fees will be practically cut in half or not paid for years??? The only way they keep Medicare and Social Security going is by enrolling more and more workers in the system who pay in now so old bills from others can be paid out. NONE of our Social Security money is being invested as it should (like a 401K). It is money in, money out. Even Obamadolf has stated that he (!!!!) has found FIVE HUNDRED B -I-L-L-I-O-N DOLLARS in fraud in Medicare. Are you seriously kidding me????? All of a sudden, he’s found this huge fraudulent amount of money and that’s how he’s going to pay for his splendiferous new healthcare reform bill? Come on. Why hasn’t he announced that he is going after these frauds RIGHT AWAY???? And why is the so-called reform bill not going to be enacted until AFTER the next presidential election??? He – is – still – campaigning! That’s why. Can anyone not see this?
October 18th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Jack Harrison: I agree with you all the way.
Gary Layton: I agree with you, also.
October 18th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Also, to follow up, if there is already $500,000,000,000 (that’s BILLIONS) in fraud in Medicare, who is running the Medicare system? The Government?????? Hellooooo. And you want them to run the whole national healthcare system? Are you kidding me? People need to get their heads out of the sand and use some logic.